Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
×




Details

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

Stats

Views
5,411 (18 today)
Favourites
71 (who?)
Comments
28
Downloads
74
×
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: Alternative History Series: USSR 1958
-------------------------------------------------------------------

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:
 
:iconwarsie:
Warsie Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
No Sami SSR? And furthermore, no Occitania/Bretagne/etc SR? Also lol, Iberian Federation
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Edited Nov 27, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Taking over Europe is not a game. Like I have said, nations had to be catered to in order to gain local support. If you alienate everybody, how can you rule them? In our timeline, there has not been much talk of a Sami state, and I'd imagine there would not have been in this timeline.

As for Bretagne, occitania etc, I think would be an absurd idea. Besides, as mentioned before, the trend in the UES was to have few and large SSRs, while it was the other way around in the Russian dominated USSR. 
kuusinen.deviantart.com/art/Eu…
Reply
:iconwarsie:
Warsie Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Well, it -is- a game. Also, I am/war pretty sure some of the people I mentioned did have local movements for independentism. 

Also, why did Croatia get screwed over with the drawings? They should get as much of the Muslim parts of Bosnia given the Bosniak muslims were considered Croats by the Ustasha.
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
By the Ustase yes, but don't you think the Serbs would also have claimed this land, at least Serbian groups at par with extremists like the Ustase? I like to think that the Russians (patron) were on better terms with the Serbs (client) than the Croats, and thus they wanted to reward them. That can be for cultural reasons, but also given that the Germans occupied Yugoslavia and established the Independent State of Croatia just like they did in OTL. I would suggest t'd be plausible to think the Soviets would benefit from giving the Serbians the whole of Bosnia.
Reply
:iconwarsie:
Warsie Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Yeah, but the thing is it may have been claimed by Serbs to some extent, but given the Bosniaks felt more 'croatian' and in general were treated as such by the Ustasha, this seems less of "rewarding serbs due to shared cultural bonds' and more of 'giving the Serbs some nasty shit' or 'accidentally fucking the Serbs over' (i.e. a white elephant). But then again, Bosniak identity was 'fluid' enough then that perhaps they can accept Serb rule. Though I dunno how nice a communist Serbian state would be re. minorities like Bosniaks who were reportedly pretty ok with NDH. They may be communist, but they're still Serbs who had bad treatment from Croats, so I can see some problems with the borders drawn.
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
All right, let's just hope they all get along nicely :D
Reply
:iconwarsie:
Warsie Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Give them all cookies and hot chocolate :p
Reply
: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 Digital Artist
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
Add a Comment: