Alternate History Map Thread

[WolfBear]

That sounds bloody and very, very disruptive, especially with that level of refugees. A lot would depend on how the junta rules and also how stable the democratic government is after 2002 but Indian development is likely to be set back and could be seriously retarded. Not sure some of those small states, especially in the NE and Khalistan are going to be economically viable, let alone avoiding pressure from bigger neighbours - China and Pakistan respectively - to become little more than puppets.

China's and Pakistan's main role in states such as Khalistan would be to serve as security guarantors--though of course China could also be a very fine source of investment for them.

 

[VictortheMonarch]

China's and Pakistan's main role in states such as Khalistan would be to serve as security guarantors--though of course China could also be a very fine source of investment for them.

China has claims on the Northern provinces of Kashmir, so they could very much be an Invasionary force.

 

[WolfBear]

China has claims on the Northern provinces of Khalistan, so they could very much be an Invasionary force.

The Chinese can compromise on this if necessary, no?

 

[VictortheMonarch]

The Chinese can compromise on this if necessary, no?

The Chinese? Compromise? nah, more of "We are definitely strong and can totally whoop your ass, give us our claims bitch", and then sissy out because they know their weak af.

 

[WolfBear]

The Chinese? Compromise? nah, more of "We are definitely strong and can totally whoop your ass, give us our claims bitch", and then sissy out because they know their weak af.

The Chinese were willing to compromise on the MacMahon Line in 1962.

 

[Sārthākā]

That sounds bloody and very, very disruptive, especially with that level of refugees. A lot would depend on how the junta rules and also how stable the democratic government is after 2002 but Indian development is likely to be set back and could be seriously retarded. Not sure some of those small states, especially in the NE and Khalistan are going to be economically viable, let alone avoiding pressure from bigger neighbours - China and Pakistan respectively - to become little more than puppets.

Khalistan and Assam and Sikkim are in and of themselves pretty viable themselves, being centers of their regional economies. Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram, Nagaland will fall into Chinese, Bangladeshi and Burmese economic orbits though yes.

 

[Sārthākā]

China has claims on the Northern provinces of Khalistan, so they could very much be an Invasionary force.

They don't. China does not claim any part of the Punjab region in either Pakistan or India.

 

[VictortheMonarch]

They don't. China does not claim any part of the Punjab region in either Pakistan or India.

There have been numerous conflicts between India, and China, from the Sino-Indian war of '62, to the more recent Border Skirmishes. While most don't occur in the Punjab region, China does claim some territories in the region, those claims going into Pakistan, though they don't push them seeing as India is a main rival in the region.

Besides that, are you ಸಾರ್ಥಕ ? If so do you intend to bring any of those juicy af stories from AH.Net over to the Seitch? I'd read them there but I kinda got banished after plenty of unsavory stuff on part of their admins.

 

[Sārthākā]

There have been numerous conflicts between India, and China, from the Sino-Indian war of '62, to the more recent Border Skirmishes.

All of them are derived from the Qing Dynasty and 1912 Republic of China, which controlled Aksai Chin and through Tibet which controlled Arunachal until 1904. The PRC asserts that the 1900 Qing Border, with the exceptions of Mongolia & Tuva are the borders of modern-day china. It's written in the very second article of their constitution. And if one looks at the map of Qing China in 1900, China does not control Punjab.........not even a 0.1 mm.

While most don't occur in the Punjab region, China does claim some territories in the region,

Again, they don't. This map from wiki articules all of India's territorial disputes:-

As you can see, China does not claim an inch of Punjabi soil, either in Pakistan or India. To claim to do so is outright factually wrong.

those claims going into Pakistan,

Uh no. Pakistan also does not claim Indian Punjab. The Partition of Punjab was both mutually agreed to by Congress and the Muslim League in 1946-47 and happened on both of their terms. Pakistan only disputes the Indian authority over Kashmir & Ladakh officially and Junagarh unofficially. See above. Again, that is quite literally false.

Besides that, are you ಸಾರ್ಥಕ ? If so do you intend to bring any of those juicy af stories from AH.Net over to the Seitch? I'd read them there but I kinda got banished after plenty of unsavory stuff on part of their admins.

I am a British (Scottish) Nepali.

 

[VictortheMonarch]

All of them are derived from the Qing Dynasty and 1912 Republic of China, which controlled Aksai Chin and through Tibet which controlled Arunachal until 1904. The PRC asserts that the 1900 Qing Border, with the exceptions of Mongolia & Tuva are the borders of modern-day china. It's written in the very second article of their constitution. And if one looks at the map of Qing China in 1900, China does not control Punjab.........not even a 0.1 mm.


Uh no. Pakistan also does not claim Indian Punjab. The Partition of Punjab was both mutually agreed to by Congress and the Muslim League in 1946-47 and happened on both of their terms. Pakistan only disputes the Indian authority over Kashmir & Ladakh officially and Junagarh unofficially. See above. Again, that is quite literally false.

I am a British (Scottish) Nepali.

ahh, I assumed the name was from the Tamil-Kannada language. Besides that I never mentioned Punjab specifically, merely Indian and Pakistani Territories. Punjab is a rather large stretch for China to Reasonably take. Perhaps if they were to win a few wars and Sinicize the populations steadily, but a complete annexation ah la British Raj is Impossible. Though I did mix up Kashmir and Khalistan, so perhaps that is what you are refering to?

 

[Sārthākā]

ahh, I assumed the name was from the Tamil-Kannada language. Besides that I never mentioned Punjab specifically, merely Indian and Pakistani Territories. Punjab is a rather large stretch for China to Reasonably take. Perhaps if they were to win a few wars and Sinicize the populations steadily, but a complete annexation ah la British Raj is Impossible. Though I did mix up Kashmir and Khalistan, so perhaps that is what you are refering to?

Khalistan is the Sikh name for Punjab.

 

[VictortheMonarch]

Khalistan is the Sikh name for Punjab.

Yes, and I got Khalistan and Kashmir mixed up. It's late at night (or was at least, it's morning now and I've yet to actually go to bed) and in my tired rambling got the K's mixed between. Besides that, Khalistan is indeed the Sikh name for Punjab, I prefer calling it Khalistan due to my leaning towards the Sikhs (I've several Sikh friends living in that area), and from them referring to Punjab as Khalistan 24/7.

 

[WolfBear]

 

[Sārthākā]

Stereotype Map of Surviving Qing China

Basically this is a stereotype map of a Qing China that managed to reform in the late 1700s and early 1800s and survive as a result. Thoughts?​

 

[WolfBear]

Stereotype Map of Surviving Qing China

Basically this is a stereotype map of a Qing China that managed to reform in the late 1700s and early 1800s and survive as a result. Thoughts?​

Will a bridge connecting Sakhalin to mainland China eventually be built in this TL?

 

[WolfBear]

 

[Sārthākā]

The Franco-British Union State

​

As the Battle of France ended in disaster in 1940, the French Government was in tatters and on the verge of surrender. Prime Minister Reynaud in June 1940 refused to sign an armistice under German auspices and dispatched Rene Pleven, his deputy in a last-ditch attempt to secure continued French support for the Allies in the War. The proposal of a Franco-British Union. An idea that had reached its peak during the Anglo-French wars of the Plantagenets but one that had died afterward. Prime Minister Churchill was ecstatic at the idea [Major PoD] and agreed to it and on 16 June 1940, the British Cabinet voted to accept the offer. On the 18th of June, 1940, both the French and British Parliaments voted in majority for the proposal, and the next day, history changed, as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the French Third Republic ceased to exist - in its place, the Franco-British Union State arose. Mainland France fell not soon afterward, but the new haphazardly made Union State continued the fight against the Germans until the German Surrender in 1945. Despite much skepticism, the Union survived after the war, and is today considered to be one of the greater powers of the world - as in not strong enough to be a Superpower, but not weak enough to be designated as a simple great power.

A/N: Unlikely scenario, but still thoughts?

 

[stevep]

The Franco-British Union State

​

As the Battle of France ended in disaster in 1940, the French Government was in tatters and on the verge of surrender. Prime Minister Reynaud in June 1940 refused to sign an armistice under German auspices and dispatched Rene Pleven, his deputy in a last-ditch attempt to secure continued French support for the Allies in the War. The proposal of a Franco-British Union. An idea that had reached its peak during the Anglo-French wars of the Plantagenets but one that had died afterward. Prime Minister Churchill was ecstatic at the idea [Major PoD] and agreed to it and on 16 June 1940, the British Cabinet voted to accept the offer. On the 18th of June, 1940, both the French and British Parliaments voted in majority for the proposal, and the next day, history changed, as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the French Third Republic ceased to exist - in its place, the Franco-British Union State arose. Mainland France fell not soon afterward, but the new haphazardly made Union State continued the fight against the Germans until the German Surrender in 1945. Despite much skepticism, the Union survived after the war, and is today considered to be one of the greater powers of the world - as in not strong enough to be a Superpower, but not weak enough to be designated as a simple great power.

A/N: Unlikely scenario, but still thoughts?

To the best of my knowledge Churchill was actually very eager with the idea but it eventually failed because the French government ending up signing an armistice. [One problem I could see, since France would be occupied for an indeterminate but possibly very long period with the war continuing a lot of French leaders may have seen it as a move to have Britain take over the French empire. Possibly not realising it was initially suggested by a Frenchman.

Actually checking wiki see Franco-British_Union_1940, Churchill was initially doubtful on the 15th June but quickly persuaded to support it - I think the following day but the article is unclear. Which then gained the support of French PM Reynaud. However some other French figures felt that it was a British attempt to steal their colonies. There was a meeting I think on the 17th of members of both governments to discuss it and

Other French leaders were less enthusiastic, however. At the 5 p.m. cabinet meeting, many called it a British "last minute plan" to steal its colonies, and said that "be[ing] a Nazi province" was preferable to becoming a British dominion. Philippe Pétain, a leader of the pro-armistice group, called union "fusion with a corpse". While President Albert Lebrun and some others were supportive, the cabinet's opposition stunned Reynaud. He resigned that evening without taking a formal vote on the union or an armistice, and later called the failure of the union the "greatest disappointment of my political career".[2]

The other issue is that I think it was intended to be a union for the duration of the war. Its difficult to see republican France and the constitutional monarchy of Britain, along with the differences in language, attitude to religion, system of government and standards for instance having a lasting union. Even without the traditional distrust between the two. Suspect if it had been set up and then a decision made to continue it post-war those differences would have quickly prompted the ending of the union.

Of course if it did somehow last until the current day then there would be huge butterflies. How would the two components react to colonial issues such as India [probably limited changes here] Vietnam, Malaya, Algeria, Rhodesia etc. To the idea of German rearmament - probably not too hostile as their combined strength would make them more confident - to relations with the US, the Commonwealth and assorted other areas? Would you get an EEC/EU. Would they be a single permament member of the UN in which case what 5th power might be selected to avoid a tie? When would the get nuclear weapons and what sort of deterrent would they maintain?

 

[WolfBear]

in which case what 5th power might be selected to avoid a tie?

India post-independence?

 

[VictortheMonarch]

The Franco-British Union State

​

As the Battle of France ended in disaster in 1940, the French Government was in tatters and on the verge of surrender. Prime Minister Reynaud in June 1940 refused to sign an armistice under German auspices and dispatched Rene Pleven, his deputy in a last-ditch attempt to secure continued French support for the Allies in the War. The proposal of a Franco-British Union. An idea that had reached its peak during the Anglo-French wars of the Plantagenets but one that had died afterward. Prime Minister Churchill was ecstatic at the idea [Major PoD] and agreed to it and on 16 June 1940, the British Cabinet voted to accept the offer. On the 18th of June, 1940, both the French and British Parliaments voted in majority for the proposal, and the next day, history changed, as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the French Third Republic ceased to exist - in its place, the Franco-British Union State arose. Mainland France fell not soon afterward, but the new haphazardly made Union State continued the fight against the Germans until the German Surrender in 1945. Despite much skepticism, the Union survived after the war, and is today considered to be one of the greater powers of the world - as in not strong enough to be a Superpower, but not weak enough to be designated as a simple great power.

A/N: Unlikely scenario, but still thoughts?

the only part of this that is far out the park is the Christianity part- Europe as a whole is where the majority of the Atheist sects tend to linger. Otherwise it's possible as it was suggested multiple times in WWII.