Shop More Submit  Join Login
×




Details

Submitted on
January 24
Image Size
3.3 MB
Resolution
1671×1101
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
4,414 (3 today)
Favourites
69 (who?)
Comments
21
Downloads
65
×
The USSR and Soviet-Dominated Europe 1958 by Kuusinen The USSR and Soviet-Dominated Europe 1958 by Kuusinen
This image is part of the alternative history series: USSR 1958. For more information see: kuusinen.deviantart.com/journa…
-------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a 1958 political map of Europe and Asia as seen from the perspective of Moscow - the economical and political center of Eurasia - in an alternative timeline.

The continent is dominated by the USSR since the Great Class War (Second World War). Western and Southern Europe (UES), excluding the British Isles, form a union of soviet republics based upon the Russian model, as are the Scandinavian soviet republics and the Atlantic islands (NSSU). The former colonies of North Africa and the Middle East have been formed into two federations posing as protectorates of the USSR and the UES. The Democratic Republic of Turkey and the People's Republic of Xinjiang are pro-Soviet socialist states.

In the Far East, one can see the Republic of China and Tibet. The former is not the Koumintang republic familiar to us in our timeline, but a Japanese-dominated puppet state established during the war. China, Japan and the USSR have regognized the indepentent state of Tibet since it, along with Xinjiang and India, provides a buffer zone between the USSR and the Japanese Co-Prosperity Zone. The Republic of India broke from the British Commonwealth in the early 1950s.

The political status quo is not as stable as it seems. Cold War tensions between the socialist world and the USA have reached the highest peak since the conclusion of the war, as are relations between the USA and Japan and the USSR and Japan at a historical lowpoint. The socialist world is neither as monolithic as it was meant to be. Since the death of Stalin in 1952 and following economic growth in Western Europe during the 1950s, Russian influence and control over the UES has declined slightly.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconskinny22:
Skinny22 Featured By Owner Aug 20, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
What's with Bosnia in Serbian SSR, when only 1/3 of population are Serbs?
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Aug 20, 2014  Hobbyist
Guess I was trying to make it run aong ethnic lines without giving everyone an SSR. Like I have said, there has to be some winners and some losers in such a setting. To keep the Serbs happy with the new arrangement, their supremacy over Bosnia was continued, so they would not revolt. After all, the dissolution of Yugoslavia must have diminished their power and prestige.
Reply
:iconskinny22:
Skinny22 Featured By Owner Sep 2, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
History doesn't remember this ''serbian supremacy over Bosnia'' you speak of. Hmmm
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Sep 2, 2014  Hobbyist
Not during 1918-1945? Wasn't Yugoslavia just a glorified Greater-Serbia until it exploded?
Reply
:iconskinny22:
Skinny22 Featured By Owner Sep 8, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
You mean 1918-1941? Actually, no. First Yugoslavia was corrupt, with an incompetent government and king, it didn't manage to exploit natural resources, let alone ''the London agreement''. The army and secret police gave the power to the king, and outside of serb-majority areas he had no power at all. And he knew it! Well, you'd say that answers the question, but no: Serbs in bosnia were mixed with muslim extensively so the power of the crown was never high.

The important thing to understand is that the idea of Yugoslavic unity was not serbian, but croatian, and upper classes of croats upheld the first YU more than the idea of independent Croatia.

Read about Banovina Hrvatska 1939. treaty with which the King efectively acknowleged the croatian claim to major parts of Bosnia; Herzegovina and Posavina.
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Sep 9, 2014  Hobbyist
Very well then. 
Reply
:iconamongthesatanic:
AmongTheSatanic Featured By Owner Apr 14, 2014  Hobbyist Artist
With Poland and Persia both SSR's in the Union, I think they'd keep calling it Iran so as to not mix up the acronyms :P
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Apr 18, 2014  Hobbyist
Good point. However, since Iran was sliced down, the "persian" name was thought to be more representative of the actual ethnic group living there, while Iran was more a mixed state of ethnicities.
Reply
:iconamongthesatanic:
AmongTheSatanic Featured By Owner Apr 21, 2014  Hobbyist Artist
Persia was a far more heterogenous state then Iran.
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner May 8, 2014  Hobbyist
Hmm what do you mean?
Reply
Add a Comment: