Es Geloybte Aretz Continuation Thread

[Athelstane]

It's not that the Ottomans would not want to support the anticolonial movements in Malaysia, it is that Malaysia's post-colonial government is too concerned over foreign influence of any kind to allow much of it. They see the Ottomans and the Chinese as equally welcome and equally problematic, try to maintain good relations with both, but prevent either from being too powerful. So they will use Ottoman influence to counterbalance Chinese, then Chinese to counterbalanbce Ottoman, then Australian and Indian to counter them both...

Can you clarify a little - unless you already did, and I missed it - just what Malaysia and Singapore's trajectory and status have been?

I suppose my sense has always been that a world where WW2 never happens slides the timelines there a generation to the right; if there is no Great War, either, then things get even fuzzier. Without the Soviet or Maoist experiments, I can't see a communist revolt happening, which creates some considerable butterflies all by itself; but this doesn't mean we would not see (as you seem to be implying, at least) some sort of glide path to greater self-governance, but with both polities still tied in formally to Empire/Commonwealth defence, with naval, air and ground forces stationed there in some significant way. It is hard to see Britain pulling back from "East of Suez" here, nor indeed that Singaporean and Malayan leaders would even *want* them to do so.

But, I am not to be writing your timeline here, Carlton!

 

[Jürgen]

Can you clarify a little - unless you already did, and I missed it - just what Malaysia and Singapore's trajectory and status have been?

I suppose my sense has always been that a world where WW2 never happens slides the timelines there a generation to the right; if there is no Great War, either, then things get even fuzzier. Without the Soviet or Maoist experiments, I can't see a communist revolt happening, which creates some considerable butterflies all by itself; but this doesn't mean we would not see (as you seem to be implying, at least) some sort of glide path to greater self-governance, but with both polities still tied in formally to Empire/Commonwealth defence, with naval, air and ground forces stationed there in some significant way. It is hard to see Britain pulling back from "East of Suez" here, nor indeed that Singaporean and Malayan leaders would even *want* them to do so.

But, I am not to be writing your timeline here, Carlton!

Yes, I can’t help but think that the post-British Empire will be radical without the World Wars. Some thing will be the same I can’t see Indian history ending up much different, Africa I would also expect following a similar pattern just two decades behind OTL and a bigger white population in Kenya, South Africa and South Rhodesia.

The most interesting factor will be the relationship with Australia, New Zealand and Canada, but also Suez, the British possessions on the Arabian pennsula [1], Singapore and Malaysia [2].

[1] UAE and Qatar are almost empty of a native population, while South Yemen and Oman have very low population, so the British could easily keep them as protectorates.

[2] The Malysian political structure would make it easily for the British monarch to stay king of Malaysia, honestly he could do the same with the Arabic possessions.

 

[Stendhal]

Question so what is Germany version of the Oppenheimer film in this TL like?

Copenhagen (2002) ?

Really Malaysia and Indonesia. I thought Aceh would have strong Ottoman support. Also Malaysia Muslim monarchies I assumed would support Ottomans.

“Right, right,” assented Babalatchi; “but you have not seen her near. Her mother was a woman from the west; a Baghdadi woman with veiled face. Now she goes uncovered, like our women do, for she is poor and he is blind, and nobody ever comes near them unless to ask for a charm or a blessing and depart quickly for fear of his anger and of the Rajah’s hand. You have not been on that side of the river?”

Yes, I can’t help but think that the post-British Empire will be radical without the World Wars.

Carlton, absent the ascent of the Flügelmächte, I never quite understood where the impulse for de-colonialzation in this timeline stems from ?

 

[Athelstane]

Africa I would also expect following a similar pattern just two decades behind OTL and a bigger white population in Kenya, South Africa and South Rhodesia.

Oh, in a world where Britain does not take part in either world war, I could see some British colonies in Africa sticking around into the 21st century, easy...

 

[1962strat]

How does the survival of Prussian/German militarism through two victories in arguably defensive wars impact German modern society at all levels? From political influence of the General Staff, to conscription and popular views of military service?

Also, what's the modern status of Alsace-Lorraine inside the German Empire?

 

[Athelstane]

Also, what's the modern status of Alsace-Lorraine inside the German Empire?

I thought somewhere he said they were still Reichsland (though maybe a little better governed?).

If Wilhelm III were smart, though, he'd do what Bismarck had urged, and turn them into their own, fully-fledged polities, complete with their own royal houses. "The more they feel like Alsatians, the less they'll feel like Frenchmen."

 

[1962strat]

I thought somewhere he said they were still Reichsland (though maybe a little better governed?).

It would be a bit strange (and generate no small amount of outrage from resentment from the population, French and German alike) if past a century after the Franco-Prussian war and no significant tensions with France they still were governed by a governor appointed by the Central Government.

 

[carlton_bach]

Indonesia IOTL founders are very concerned with separatist movements and spend the entire 1950s-1960s, even now in the present day in Papua New Guinea, stomping out independence movements. With extreme prejuice/warcrimes. I don’t see why in this alternate timeline Indonesia will give a shit about what Istanbul wants when the Turks can’t even get their shit together. Aceh for all intents and purposes in Jakarta eye, is an Indonesian province.

Malaysia is… complicated. The various sultans technically held power but it’s mostly ceremonial now with even the powerful Johor sultan being cowed by KL decades ago. In this alternate timeline the same thing will played out with the sultans , especially Johor trying to preserve their power while the political elites of the country wrestle away what little political control the monarchy have behind the scene

Indonesia also is a Dutch colony, whicvh means the Ottomans were never very engaged in its struggles. It was not politically opportune.

I have kleft decolonisation vbaguze because I haven't had the time to do any reading (I'm actually writing a book alongside a day job and can't really do anything much for this TL). But I envision Malaysia (or its constituent states) to retain some level of administrative ties with Britain. With Indonesia I am not that sure. But certainly they do not look kindly on anyone questioning their national territorial integrity.

 

[carlton_bach]

Considering the focus that France ITL has on Northern Africa and Western Africa, and considering their animosity and fear of a German led Mittleeuropa, I think that the Algeria question is going to be even more awful and messy than OTL. Algeria will see more immigration from France proper, and Italy who they ally with, both of which didn't lose any citizens to WWI or WWII. The Sahara and Atlas mountains provide raw materials, and especially fossil fuels, which they will consider strategically vital. This timeline also doesn't have the same taboo of eugenics and some of the really nasty stuff that WWII basically ended.

I seriously envision France wanting to sterilise those with "criminal genes", and if those criminals happen to be terrorists demanding independence, that's just a happy coincidence.

I had the idea of a partition, with France retaining some territory on the coast. With all the attendant horrors of such things, because colonial warfare is horrific anyway, and here it's very much a matter of national pride. When IOTL we speak with horror of the "Berlin Wall" as the image of such violent separation, ITTL it is the "mur metropolitain"

 

[Athelstane]

But I envision Malaysia (or its constituent states) to retain some level of administrative ties with Britain.

Hell, it might not even be Malaysia. There was an awful lot of Malaysia's formation in 1961-63 that was very contingent on developments at the time in both Malaya and East Asia generally.

But, I agree, that the odds greatly favor all of these territories in question (Singapore included) remaining associated with the British political project - whatever we might wish to call it in the late 20th century of this timelime. The Raj will come to an end at some point, but the imperatives are quite different in Malaya and Borneo.

 

[carlton_bach]

Can you clarify a little - unless you already did, and I missed it - just what Malaysia and Singapore's trajectory and status have been?

I suppose my sense has always been that a world where WW2 never happens slides the timelines there a generation to the right; if there is no Great War, either, then things get even fuzzier. Without the Soviet or Maoist experiments, I can't see a communist revolt happening, which creates some considerable butterflies all by itself; but this doesn't mean we would not see (as you seem to be implying, at least) some sort of glide path to greater self-governance, but with both polities still tied in formally to Empire/Commonwealth defence, with naval, air and ground forces stationed there in some significant way. It is hard to see Britain pulling back from "East of Suez" here, nor indeed that Singaporean and Malayan leaders would even *want* them to do so.

But, I am not to be writing your timeline here, Carlton!

I have had to leave it vague for want of time, but I expect with the ideology of national self-determination strong and Socialism still a powerful political presence, colonialism is doomed eventually. It will take longer, and depending on the situation and country, it can go fairly smoothly or very badly, but in the end, most large colonies will become independent to some degree. Britain AFAIK had such plans in principle and will likely implement them once it can no longer be averted, so something like a Commonwealth with a much stronger financial and military centre is the likeliest outcome. France also had ideas about a Francophone alliance system, but will fight like hell for Algeria which is, after all, technically its national territory. Spain, Portgual, I'm not sure. Germany is going to be nasty, but likely to go comparatively quickly. I suspect they will work out some face-saving legal fiction of dependence. They may keep Südwest in some semi-independent status, like Denmark does Greenland. But it's still fairly nebulous.

 

[carlton_bach]

Carlton, absent the ascent of the Flügelmächte, I never quite understood where the impulse for de-colonialzation in this timeline stems from ?

Ethnic nationalism. Basically, nobody likes to be a colonial subject.

 

[carlton_bach]

Oh, in a world where Britain does not take part in either world war, I could see some British colonies in Africa sticking around into the 21st century, easy...

I suspect outright colonial dominance would only work in a few smaller territories. Britain will still be a power with global reach, but it cannot dominate its empire to the same degree when India alone can outproduce the motherland in almost any kind of industrial output. I can certainly see some smaller possessions - and certainly major ports - benefiting from remaining directly affiliated with Britain. Singapore, Zanzibar, Brunei, and similarly situated places could function sort of like Hong Kong did.

 

[Athelstane]

The most interesting factor will be the relationship with Australia, New Zealand and Canada, but also Suez, the British possessions on the Arabian pennsula [1], Singapore and Malaysia [2].

Suez bears reflecting on - well, I mean, to the extent we want to do so, since it is obviously outside the area Carlton really wanted to explore (Poland-Russia-Germany). Because without the Arab Awakening triggered by the Great War . . . and without the political pressure that was driven by American and Soviet interests in the Cold War in OTL . . . and with a considerably greater enduring British interest in maintaining military and economic power in the Far East deep into the late 20th century and beyond, the dynamic is going to favor Britain making greater efforts, for longer, to keep control of Suez.

Ironically, the endurance of the Ottoman Empire in the bulk of Arabia may actually help this dynamic. Egyptian nationalism will grow (with or without the Khedivate), but it will also feel more keenly the long-standing rivalry with the Turks. Keeping the British in a role in the Canal may well be seen as advantageous, a counterbalance to Turkish political power in the Arab World. Even if it would remain a project with some real tensions.

 

[carlton_bach]

How does the survival of Prussian/German militarism through two victories in arguably defensive wars impact German modern society at all levels? From political influence of the General Staff, to conscription and popular views of military service?

Huge question. In brief, it changes almost everything compared to IOTL West German culture. Germany ITTL has the kind of unbroken national identity that Britain or France do, and the military is central to the nation. Veterans are respected, though the status is not exceptional since, with conscription going on to today, almost every man is technically a veteran. The military is an important career option for young people, and many ex-full timers pass into civil service positions. The nation has a reserve system in place that connects many men with the military experience until their mid-forties, and has ceased to be exclusive. It is not uncommon that your schoolteacher, your middle manager, your doctor and dentist hold reserve commissions and go on exercises every year or two.
The military's politicalk influence is great, though the Konservative Revolution soured people on generals playing politics directly. It's considered poor form to play up military rank in elections (a good part of the Reichtsag are or were reservist NCOs or officers) and against regulation to campaign in uniform. But beyond that, its arm reaches into every part of the body politic. There is very little opposition to this - after all, this organisation saved the country.
Which is not to say Germans gladly serve their conscription term or love their Feldwebel. They like the military in the abstract.

Also, what's the modern status of Alsace-Lorraine inside the German Empire?

It was made a reghular state within the Empire. I originally had the children of Franz Ferdinand be made grand dukes, but with Wilhelm's marriage into the Habsburg family, I think that would be too much. Maybe a Welf instead? And the place will vote itself a very liberal constitution once it is allowed to.

 

[1962strat]

And the place will vote itself a very liberal constitution once it is allowed to.

Sounds about right. I see a lot of people in this site cut a perfect line between French and Germans as two different, heterogeneous groups, but all I've read about it points exactly in the other direction. An Alsatian identity definitely existed, and the national lines were blurry at best. I could definitely see the "German" part of the population supporting laws that respect the French speakers.

Speaking of, has the portion of people that speak French as a native tongue been reduced? Or does it hold to more or less the same number?

 

[Athelstane]

It was made a reghular state within the Empire. I originally had the children of Franz Ferdinand be made grand dukes, but with Wilhelm's marriage into the Habsburg family, I think that would be too much. Maybe a Welf instead?

Possibly.

There are Hohenzollern-Sigmaringens floating around, available, too . . . and they are Catholics, and rather more liberal and culturally "adjacent," being Swabian, which would make them a better fit, perhaps.

I think there is something to be said for making each part a separate duchy, grand duchy, or whatever, given how distinct each part is (linguistically, culturally, etc.), but....

And the place will vote itself a very liberal constitution once it is allowed to.

Oh, most certainly. It is baked in to the local political culture there.

 

[carlton_bach]

Suez bears reflecting on - well, I mean, to the extent we want to do so, since it is obviously outside the area Carlton really wanted to explore (Poland-Russia-Germany). Because without the Arab Awakening triggered by the Great War . . . and without the political pressure that was driven by American and Soviet interests in the Cold War in OTL . . . and with a considerably greater enduring British interest in maintaining military and economic power in the Far East deep into the late 20th century and beyond, the dynamic is going to favor Britain making greater efforts, for longer, to keep control of Suez.

Ironically, the endurance of the Ottoman Empire in the bulk of Arabia may actually help this dynamic. Egyptian nationalism will grow (with or without the Khedivate), but it will also feel more keenly the long-standing rivalry with the Turks. Keeping the British in a role in the Canal may well be seen as advantageous, a counterbalance to Turkish political power in the Arab World. Even if it would remain a project with some real tensions.

A Panama analogue makes sense. Certainly formalising this could be part of the concessions required for greater Egyptian independence.

 

[Athelstane]

A Panama analogue makes sense. Certainly formalising this could be part of the concessions required for greater Egyptian independence.

Yeah. And speaking of, I suspect Panama remaining under some degree of U.S. control for longer is likely another butterfly here...

But yes....the Turks are still going to be sitting there, just a hundred miles away from Port Said and Suez. The Turks will be building up their infrastructure in the Levant. This may focus certain minds in Cairo. Might evolve into more and more of a joint arrangement over time.

 

[carlton_bach]

Sounds about right. I see a lot of people in this site cut a perfect line between French and Germans as two different, heterogeneous groups, but all I've read about it points exactly in the other direction. An Alsatian identity definitely existed, and the national lines were blurry at best. I could definitely see the "German" part of the population supporting laws that respect the French speakers.

Speaking of, has the portion of people that speak French as a native tongue been reduced? Or does it hold to more or less the same number?

It has been reduced a little, mostly by a kind of Brownian motion (Germanophone outsiders can find Jobs in Alsace-Lorraine, Francophone Alsatians can find jobs in France). But there is still a significant French-speaking minority. And I don't see the German speaking locals bearing them ill will, so the constitution will include protections and, more importantly, policy implementation will. Policing and almost all public order administration is handled at the state level.

Possibly.

There are Hohenzollern-Sigmaringens floating around, available, too . . . and they are Catholics, and rather more liberal and culturally "adjacent," being Swabian, which would make them a better fit, perhaps.

I think there is something to be said for making each part a separate duchy, grand duchy, or whatever, given how distinct each part is (linguistically, culturally, etc.), but....

I can't quite see either. The Hohenzollern emperor giving their cousins a grand duchy would not be received well, and splitting up the two would produce a territory with a large French-speaking population, I think even the local majority.

On the other hand, I guess people will be upset no matter who Wilhelm gives it to, so might as well be H-S.