CoDominium World?
- Thread starter Superdude
- Start date
Blaine Hess
Banned
I think this is a Jerry Pournelle Universe. Perhaps an arrangement could have been made if FDR survived. He was less hostile to Communism than Truman.
Even then I doubt it. The Soviets would have to hide all their skeletons from view for a time. Maybe If these things could be kept quiet until Stalin dies in 1953 the alliance would hold.
Its a thin possibility and I think this is the only time. Once Truman gets in the hot seat, forget it.
Even then I doubt it. The Soviets would have to hide all their skeletons from view for a time. Maybe If these things could be kept quiet until Stalin dies in 1953 the alliance would hold.
Its a thin possibility and I think this is the only time. Once Truman gets in the hot seat, forget it.
Maybe the Americans and Russians do what the Spanish and the Portugese did in the 15th Century. Making an exception the democracies of Western Europe, the Americans get everything to the west and the Russians get everything to the east. Both countries agree that they will not interfere with the other country's sphere of influence.
Well, the US is not really in the world-conquering business. "World dominating", perhaps, but actually establishing a US-run world government, even with the USSR helping out, is far too much work and would be a terribly messy business.
Now, an informal "keep a global peace" alliance with the Soviets is not inconcievable, _if_ we can find a common threat serious enough, and a more live-and-let live attitude between the US and USSR.
A common problem is not too hard to imagine. Say a more successful Islamic terrorism (successful use of nuclear terrorism vs both the "Greater Satan" and the "Lesser".), leading to a joint US-Soviet occupation of large parts of the middle east. Throw in a China which remains a hard-line Maoist dictatorship (N. Korea in the Large Economy Size), requiring containment and perhaps a joint approach to managing it's likely very messy collapse. Heck, let's throw in Fascist France (Very Bad fallout from the Algerian situation).
The second problem is more serious: an earlier "Detente" may have been possible, if Kruschev had been able to avoid some of his more provocative silliness, and the US had avoided involvement in Vietnam. [1] Some historians argue that there were some hopeful signs near the end of Eisenhower's term in office, before the U-2 incident blew up in everyone's face. But it's hard to see this going very far with the amount of firepower being aimed west and east in the heart of Europe.
The real problem is Eastern Europe. This is going to be a permanent ideological stumbling block, since the Soviet Union cannot pull out without the local regimes collapsing, with the legitimacy of the Soviet government taking a terrible blow, and cannot remain without maintaining governments of a sort highly unpopular to any American who cares anything about democracy (not to mention pissing off every US voter of eastern European descent). Any ideas on this one?
best,
Bruce
[1] Some might argue that it was precisely the shock of the disaster in Vietnam which made OTLs moves towards Detente possible, but a relaxation of the cold war contest based on feelings of weakness after a defeat by a Communist government could never be anything but half-hearted and resentful on the part of the US, especially with Soviet activities in Africa and elsewhere in the 70's. Things would probably have become confrontational with or without the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
Now, an informal "keep a global peace" alliance with the Soviets is not inconcievable, _if_ we can find a common threat serious enough, and a more live-and-let live attitude between the US and USSR.
A common problem is not too hard to imagine. Say a more successful Islamic terrorism (successful use of nuclear terrorism vs both the "Greater Satan" and the "Lesser".), leading to a joint US-Soviet occupation of large parts of the middle east. Throw in a China which remains a hard-line Maoist dictatorship (N. Korea in the Large Economy Size), requiring containment and perhaps a joint approach to managing it's likely very messy collapse. Heck, let's throw in Fascist France (Very Bad fallout from the Algerian situation).
The second problem is more serious: an earlier "Detente" may have been possible, if Kruschev had been able to avoid some of his more provocative silliness, and the US had avoided involvement in Vietnam. [1] Some historians argue that there were some hopeful signs near the end of Eisenhower's term in office, before the U-2 incident blew up in everyone's face. But it's hard to see this going very far with the amount of firepower being aimed west and east in the heart of Europe.
The real problem is Eastern Europe. This is going to be a permanent ideological stumbling block, since the Soviet Union cannot pull out without the local regimes collapsing, with the legitimacy of the Soviet government taking a terrible blow, and cannot remain without maintaining governments of a sort highly unpopular to any American who cares anything about democracy (not to mention pissing off every US voter of eastern European descent). Any ideas on this one?
best,
Bruce
[1] Some might argue that it was precisely the shock of the disaster in Vietnam which made OTLs moves towards Detente possible, but a relaxation of the cold war contest based on feelings of weakness after a defeat by a Communist government could never be anything but half-hearted and resentful on the part of the US, especially with Soviet activities in Africa and elsewhere in the 70's. Things would probably have become confrontational with or without the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
Superdude
Banned
Blaine Hess said:
Oops, my bad about the Larry Niven. Just a slip of the mind.
Hmm, perhaps Carter successfully rescues the hostages in Iran and wins a second term, and the Soviets never invade Afghanistan? I think that could set the USA and the Soviet Union on a course towards something like both powers are allied to keep the little guys down, and eventually it results in some sort of union.
Either that, or we get a megalomaniac for president who wants to conquer the world, and sees an allaince with the Soviets as the best opportunity.
that would mean a complete 180 from US policy post WWII (both toward USSR and colonalism)
eschaton said:
Pournelle and Niven collaborated on a bunch of stuff. ( http://www.biblio.com/authors/221/Larry_Niven_Biography.html ).
The Co-Dominum was developed by Pournelle on his own, but formed part of the historical background of the "Mote" books which they wrote together.
Bruce
Glen
Moderator
Having said that, first you need to avoid Welfare reform to see the world of CoDominium come about. Then you need to keep rather cynical leaders in charge of both nations.
Also perhaps ramp up fear of MAD, so that the superpowers agree to cooperate in a status quo arrangement rather than risk armageddon.
Need to prop up the USSR's economy somewhat.
As part of the whole fear thing also need to start artificially curtail research, especially that with foreseeable military applications.
The Alderson Drive....would require that there was something big Einstein forgot to mention about the universe that is something you could apply 'easily' once stumbled upon, but only usually can be found through dumb luck....
Probably having Carter get reelected would be a good start for this. No Ronald Reagan would help.
Probably also no Gorbachev.
Best bet is a POD starting around 1980, with lots of butterflies from there.
Also perhaps ramp up fear of MAD, so that the superpowers agree to cooperate in a status quo arrangement rather than risk armageddon.
Need to prop up the USSR's economy somewhat.
As part of the whole fear thing also need to start artificially curtail research, especially that with foreseeable military applications.
The Alderson Drive....would require that there was something big Einstein forgot to mention about the universe that is something you could apply 'easily' once stumbled upon, but only usually can be found through dumb luck....
Probably having Carter get reelected would be a good start for this. No Ronald Reagan would help.
Probably also no Gorbachev.
Best bet is a POD starting around 1980, with lots of butterflies from there.
Blaine Hess
Banned
eschaton said:
My turn to say oops!
Kind of tough. I know Pournelle wrote some CD stuff alone. Now that you mention it the Mote books were Niven/Pornelle. Dont think Niven alone wrote any.
Superdude
Banned
Michael B said:
Alright, this would require multiple PoD's in the 1970s. Here's some ideas:
First PoD: The USSR starts to liberalize its economy, kind of like China is doing now.
Second PoD: Jimmy Carter manages to fix the hostage crisis, and manages to get re-elected
Third PoD: No Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan
Fourth PoD: Massive increase in Islamic fundamentalism throughout the ENTIRE Muslim world, and add that to increased Pan-Arabism.