Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
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:
 
:iconyazackak:
yazackak Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2016  Student Writer
Darn commies...
Reply
:iconwarsie:
Warsie Featured By Owner Nov 22, 2015  Hobbyist General Artist
I just realized. Turkestan SSR has a little of Tadjikistan in it - not in the 'Afghan' SSR. also god no Transcaucasian SSR. Who decided to ressurrect that bad idea? Also, it's different than kuusinen.deviantart.com/art/1-… which is in 1958 also
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2015  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Yes that is because the borders in this map are outdated. I found out later that Transcaucasian SSR was a bad idea so I fixed it in the later maps. As you can see Turkestan is an SFSR there too, having eaten up Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgistan. I reversed this in the later maps as you can see.
Reply
:iconwarsie:
Warsie Featured By Owner Dec 2, 2015  Hobbyist General Artist
Ok, cool. Turkestan SSR (well SFSR) is better, as that apparently was a bit 'legitimate'.

I do wonder how Tatar-Bashkir relations are, given some people (mainly Tatars) wanted to annex Bashkorostan - which could count as turning it into a SSR.
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Dec 3, 2015  Hobbyist Digital Artist
What do you mean Turkestan SSR was "a bit legitimate"?
Reply
:iconwarsie:
Warsie Featured By Owner Dec 3, 2015  Hobbyist General Artist
The Jadidists in that region which became part of the USSR wanted a pan-turkic SSR, and the Soviets apparently suppressed them because pan=-turkism was bourgoeise nationalism. Though, apparently the Turkestan SSR could have included KAzakstsn.
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Dec 3, 2015  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Well you tell me things I never knew :) How come you are so well-read on these matters?
Reply
:iconwarsie:
Warsie Featured By Owner Dec 3, 2015  Hobbyist General Artist
I have an interest in national bolshevikism, Eurasianism and the Soviet Union so I looked up those topics online. It's also funny, as I have a physical copy of 'Affirmatie Action Empire' which talks about soviet ethnic policies right by me now.

i.e. why I was talking to you about alternative ways Iran and Afghanistan could have been chopped up last year :p
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Dec 4, 2015  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Interesting :)
Reply
:iconthe-polybius:
The-Polybius Featured By Owner Edited Feb 26, 2015
Ussr the great failure. Good riddance
Reply
:icontotalturtletaco:
TotalTurtleTaco Featured By Owner Dec 25, 2014  Hobbyist Filmographer
About the first map i've seen that actually changed Switzerland O-o
Reply
: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
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Sep 2, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
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 Digital Artist
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 Digital Artist
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 Digital Artist
Hmm what do you mean?
Reply
:iconamongthesatanic:
AmongTheSatanic Featured By Owner May 8, 2014  Hobbyist Artist
Well, historically "Persia" covered a more extensive area then modern Iran.
Reply
:iconmenapia:
menapia Featured By Owner Mar 14, 2014
Brilliant style, it looks like it could have come out of one of those 1950's National Geographic magazines
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Mar 15, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Well thank you friend
Reply
:iconzireael07:
Zireael07 Featured By Owner Feb 25, 2014  Hobbyist Writer
I love the map style!
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Feb 25, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thanks!
Reply
:iconk-haderach:
K-Haderach Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2014
And speaking of pro-socialist alternate timelines, I have one of my own that I am (slowly) developing, with a point of divergence in 1918-19 as opposed to 1939-40.
k-haderach.deviantart.com/art/…

Unfortunately, my map-making skills are nowhere as good as yours. I really wish I could make better-looking maps.
Reply
:iconk-haderach:
K-Haderach Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2014
Outstanding! Amazing! I love it! :)
+fav

The world needs more pro-socialist alternate timelines.
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Well thank you :) Indeed, the world is drowning in diverse German timelines and i think Russia/USSR too offers good prospects for alternative timelines because of their huge national interests accross two continents and with regards to socialism, pan-slavism and traditional Russian expansionist imperialism
Reply
:icondarklord86:
darklord86 Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2014
Cool!
Reply
:iconkyuzoaoi:
kyuzoaoi Featured By Owner Jan 26, 2014  Student Artist
Britain and Ireland stands alone in Europe.
Reply
:iconkuusinen:
Kuusinen Featured By Owner Jan 26, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Pretty much, however, the USSR and the UES do not have any outstanding issues with the UK for the moment. Although the British have been quite isolationist and introvert since since the war's conclusion, they have been opening up a little bit to approaching US officials, who view the UK and Ireland as an extremely important strategic location event of World War III. And likewise, if the emerging cold war gets hotter, the Russians are just as much aware of the UK's strategic location as are the Americans.
Reply
:iconwarsie:
Warsie Featured By Owner Nov 22, 2015  Hobbyist General Artist
Why Ireland isn't going pro-Soviet, I dunno. Given Ireland had pretty strong pro-soviet alignments at founding, so I think they'd be cool with being part of the European Soviets.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×




Details

Submitted on
January 24, 2014
Image Size
3.3 MB
Resolution
1671×1101
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
11,104 (8 today)
Favourites
85 (who?)
Comments
40
Downloads
106
×