We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Once applied to the total votes and converted into a proportional allocation of seats, this once again gave the Giraudists the very narrowest of majorities after an overall 0.2 swing away.
After the results from the Departments were counted, in the 320 seat upper chamber the Giraudist Coalition again managed to eke out a very small majority (161 seats against a combined opposition of the Second Popular Front and the MRP of 159).
In a larger voter response than for the assembly elections, both Giraud and the Second Popular Front’s representative Vincent Auriol (SFIO) got healthy support in their favour. But again, the MRP underperformed, meaning Giraud secured a clear majority of 51.4% of the votes cast in the first round and would remain President, no longer provisional but now the inaugural President of the Fourth Republic.
These knife-edge results in France are quite remarkable! Once again the Giraudists retain control and keep France in the Allied camp, but it could all fall apart if they fail to hang on to their fragile majority in either house.
Giraud insisted on a rebuilding of the French Armed Forces to the extent that a currently constrained budget would allow. And he ensured France remained firmly within the Allied orbit and began courting the few remaining continental nations that were still in the Allies to see if further common economic and political ties might be forged.
The King David Hotel in Jerusalem was bombed on 22 July by the Zionist terrorist group Irgun, collapsing a section of the building and killing 91 people.
In a speech at Zürich on 19 September, former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill proposed what would eventually become the European Community. Churchill suggested "a remedy, which, if generously and spontaneously adopted by a great majority of the people of many lands, would, as if by a miracle, transform the whole scene and make Europe as free and happy as Switzerland is today... We must build a kind of United States of Europe."
Such a European Community probably wouldn't amount to much in this timeline, unless over time it managed draw in the UGNR and the Bucharest Pact countries perhaps?
Otherwise, limited rationing continued and Attlee tried to maintain the UK’s standing as the leader of the Allies while overseeing a rapid demobilisation of the British Army and exploring de-colonisation opportunities.
Such a European Community probably wouldn't amount to much in this timeline, unless over time it managed draw in the UGNR and the Bucharest Pact countries perhaps?
Lots more detente and economic cooperation here than OTL, so I do think Churchill's common market will get merged with a similar proposal from Turkey and the Soviet bloc. Europe as a whole relies a lot on trade, especially coal and steel. France and Germany get a lot more out of a common trade agreement than not, and everyone is trying to woo France.
So yes, I think the common market will happen in some form, and it will have comintern, allied and independents in it (thinking Portugal, Spain, France, Germany, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands...maybe Italy as a distant member partner, and same with Poland?).
End goal or utopian hope would be having everyone from the UK to Turkey to Russia in a European common market. Might even happen if the UK decolonisation happens (which it still should) and the Soviets continue their lukewarm to warm actions in Europe.
His task was to supervise the formulation of the new Indian constitution – but how would the Muslim League respond to any unilateral Congress-led process? The issue would drag over, unresolved, into 1947.
India remaining unpartitioned seems very unlikely by this point, but perhaps a deal might still be possible to achieve an amicable split if the parties at least keep talking to each other?
The first public ‘announceable’ outcome of these US-Japan negotiations concerned the sore point of the Philippines, formerly a US protectorate and assigned to Japanese control at the 1944 Geneva Peace Conference. Japan agreed to release the Philippines as an independent country with a self-determined and elected government.
In search of partners and/or proxies in this, both China and Japan were seen as key potential front-line opponents of Soviet and Communist Chinese designs in Asia on a number of fronts. But how could the mutual antagonism between China and Japan be reconciled and the elephant in the room of Occupied China be acknowledged and dealt with?
The working model was that China would first annex Shanxi into the Republic, then the US would broker talks between China and Japan aimed at seeing the territories occupied by Japan since 1937 returned to Chinese rule. Japan would receive guarantees from China, as ‘witnessed’ by the US, than their puppet states of Manchukuo and Mengkukuo would remain within the Japanese sphere as puppet states.
This would represent yet another huge retreat for Japan and even this arrangement would be unlikely to work for the Chinese over the longer term, I would think.
The Emperor and his new reformist government would have to either persuade or force any resistant Army factions that may be determined to continue its old expansionist policies in China.
Just how much will the Japanese military be prepared to tolerate? Japan already made big concessions at Geneva, and the new government is now proposing to concede the Philippines and China! Is there a danger of this policy precipitating a military coup in Japan?
So yes, I think the common market will happen in some form, and it will have comintern, allied and independents in it (thinking Portugal, Spain, France, Germany, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands...maybe Italy as a distant member partner, and same with Poland?).
India remaining unpartitioned seems very unlikely by this point, but perhaps a deal might still be possible to achieve an amicable split if the parties at least keep talking to each other?
I think the problem, as per otl, was that India is still a super artifical construct kept intact purely through colonial need. If the state itself, not departing overlords, start Dividing up the country, there are a lot more divides to consider than just Muslims and Hindus. There is so much difference between the south and the north that a divide is inevitable if its up to them right now, as it is with east and west.
We might be looking at a series of federal republics in a coalition, a United States of India, or a collapse into individual Prince states and republics.
Just how much will the Japanese military be prepared to tolerate? Japan already made big concessions at Geneva, and the new government is now proposing to concede the Philippines and China! Is there a danger of this policy precipitating a military coup in Japan?
They've done nothing but retreat from their point of view since the war, which they were winning (from their POV). They and the navy are going to be pissed at rhe civilian government, whom now has contorted with communists, sidelined the Emperor and started dealing with the Chinese and amercians as semi-equals again.
And there are a thousand revolts in the colonial empire to put out.
Yes...with the Japanese navy and army largely intact, I think rhey are going to snap at some point in the future...and I suspect it will either be in China, against the new US partnership in the Philippines, or most suicidal, against Mongolia and the Soviets.
I'm thinking by the late 50s it's going to be very necessary. They really do need a coal and steel arrangement between France and Germany no matter what, as they share the coal fields and steel Mills along their border regions. Stalin will be dead, Churchill will be long gone, and France will be a bit more secure in itself and more open to dealing with all of its neighbours.
1) East Asia. OTL China, Indochina and Korea plus Japan still occupying areas.
2) India. I agree with @TheButterflyComposer that there will probably be cultural divisions as well as the OTL Hindu/Moslem divisions.
3) Jewish state. With Turkey on security council, I do not foresee the League approving a Mideast Jewish state. Could Britain forge a Jewish state in either Australia, Canada or southern Africa? South Africa would probably welcome a Jewish state. Would a non-Mideast state be acceptable to the Zionist terrorists?
Longer term:
1) Breaking up the British and French empires in Africa, Asia and Caribbean to independent states.
2) Minority cultures in Soviet Union and Turkey demanding more self-representation.
I am amazed that India (both in OTL and TTL) have not had greater divisions along cultural/linguistic lines. Is the Hindu/Muslim division so great that everything else is secondary and minor? Thank you
The next episode will deal in detail with India's independence, so some of these issue will be coming up. The cultural/linguistic differences are there, of course, and still are. But they seem not to have become as politicised as with the religious demography. So I guess, yes, the non-religious factors do seem to have been secondary to the players at the time. Of course, whether there should have been a partition and how it was (mis)handled are active debates.
I suspect both Turkey and Soviets want China as fractured as possible into big chunks rather than unified, esepcially if those chunks are friendly or allied.
The Japanese (and somewhat tepid US) obsession with keeping Mongolia is going to be their undoing. They cannot possibly hold it, and with China slipping out of their hands and Vietnam and Korea closer to home, they really do need to withdraw. If not, it's going to go quite badly for them.
As for South East Asia itself, the US has shown back up again, and seems to be trying to reclaim their Pacific empire on the cheap. Philippines and (hopefully) Japan becoming liberal democracies will help, but intervening in China is going to be expensive, no matter which way they chose to do it. With the chance of getting a friendly Vietnam gone (probably forever, given the 'First' Vietnam War descriptor), Korea and Vietnam are going to be huge thorns in the side of Japan and the amercians for decades to come.
That could well be. There may be a 3-way (at least) tug-of-war over Sinkiang. Mongolia may or may not be their undoing - the problem is bigger than Mongolia alone, so from there perspective they may as well hang onto as much buffer state as possible. The Soviets don't need the Mongolia spat to do what they will.
In SEA, the US are making a tentative re-emergence, but have bailed from Vietnam (for now) and the Philippines foray is limited: the Phils remains with Japan's sphere for now, though with a greater degree of independence than before and some US commercial access. Yes, Korea and Vietnam are both likely to be very thorny for Japan: can they extract themselves or will they be caught?
These knife-edge results in France are quite remarkable! Once again the Giraudists retain control and keep France in the Allied camp, but it could all fall apart if they fail to hang on to their fragile majority in either house.
The Allies certainly need France to be stronger... and not to look like a soft target!
Things in Palestine go from bad to worse and I can't see it ending well, sadly.
Such a European Community probably wouldn't amount to much in this timeline, unless over time it managed draw in the UGNR and the Bucharest Pact countries perhaps?
The UK needs to be careful about demobilising too much without an Atlantic alliance to rely on.
It really has worked out to be very close in France, especially as they have the proportional system in play in the lower house. Would a coaltion expand but remain stable, or would it all fall apart (as you say) if the Giraudists lose that razor-thin majority? And either way, Franc eis even more important to what remains of the West in TTL, given how much of Europe now lies with the two Comintern Pacts.
Palestine does seem to be descending into a fiery mess - but there's always a slim chance something might change that in TTL.
An EC for now would be very limited and completely dominated by the UK and (in second place) France. Germany and Italy absent in particular really shrink it. But all the more reason for banding together? Three 'Pacts' for Europe?
The UK is now ploughing it all in to building the Allied nuclear deterrent. The regular forces are going to shrink quickly, especially with austerity and some economic doldrums in play (though maybe not as bad as they were in OTL).
Lots more detente and economic cooperation here than OTL, so I do think Churchill's common market will get merged with a similar proposal from Turkey and the Soviet bloc. Europe as a whole relies a lot on trade, especially coal and steel. France and Germany get a lot more out of a common trade agreement than not, and everyone is trying to woo France.
So yes, I think the common market will happen in some form, and it will have comintern, allied and independents in it (thinking Portugal, Spain, France, Germany, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands...maybe Italy as a distant member partner, and same with Poland?).
End goal or utopian hope would be having everyone from the UK to Turkey to Russia in a European common market. Might even happen if the UK decolonisation happens (which it still should) and the Soviets continue their lukewarm to warm actions in Europe.
I still have my doubts about the feasibility of merging Soviet-aligned and Western capitalist economic blocs any time soon. Turkey and its bloc is another matter, but they must balance the Allies, the Soviets and the US (which is only informally Western for now).
India remaining unpartitioned seems very unlikely by this point, but perhaps a deal might still be possible to achieve an amicable split if the parties at least keep talking to each other?
This is a big concession by the Japanese - but the IJA hardliners might not be happy about this retreat?
That is the conundrum, isn't it? How can China and Japan hope to reconcile so long as Japan continues to occupy large tracts of Chinese territory?
This would represent yet another huge retreat for Japan and even this arrangement would be unlikely to work for the Chinese over the longer term, I would think.
Just how much will the Japanese military be prepared to tolerate? Japan already made big concessions at Geneva, and the new government is now proposing to concede the Philippines and China! Is there a danger of this policy precipitating a military coup in Japan?
The World War may have ended, but the number of regional conflicts seems to be ever growing.
You will soon see what happens with India, where the likelihoods are balanced by a whole range of % dice event chains surrounding independence and the new settlement there.
Japan is taking a different tack here, but the hardliners are being forced to face reality - and also given some substitute things to play with. The main question is will the Government be able to keep letting them down gently enough to keep them below boiling point, or will there be a coup attempt at some point? Also, the Japanese have not completely conceded the Philippines, though they have loosened the reins a bit to create bargaining chips with the US.
Regional conflict in Asia will likely be just as a more spicy than it was in OTL.
I think the problem, as per otl, was that India is still a super artifical construct kept intact purely through colonial need. If the state itself, not departing overlords, start Dividing up the country, there are a lot more divides to consider than just Muslims and Hindus. There is so much difference between the south and the north that a divide is inevitable if its up to them right now, as it is with east and west.
We might be looking at a series of federal republics in a coalition, a United States of India, or a collapse into individual Prince states and republics.
They've done nothing but retreat from their point of view since the war, which they were winning (from their POV). They and the navy are going to be pissed at rhe civilian government, whom now has contorted with communists, sidelined the Emperor and started dealing with the Chinese and amercians as semi-equals again.
And there are a thousand revolts in the colonial empire to put out.
Yes...with the Japanese navy and army largely intact, I think rhey are going to snap at some point in the future...and I suspect it will either be in China, against the new US partnership in the Philippines, or most suicidal, against Mongolia and the Soviets.
I'm thinking by the late 50s it's going to be very necessary. They really do need a coal and steel arrangement between France and Germany no matter what, as they share the coal fields and steel Mills along their border regions. Stalin will be dead, Churchill will be long gone, and France will be a bit more secure in itself and more open to dealing with all of its neighbours.
Per above, more on India soon. The accession process post-partition was not smooth in OTL and that kind of friction will be reproduced in TTL, with the trusty % dice to hand.
Japan got off very luckily in Geneva, as we have see: had the war continued, they would have been obliterated within a year or so, and they probably realise it. They are now in the game of trying to get what they need without having to fight for it, and if that means conceding some stuff they don't really need and would have trouble holding onto, then the pragmatists are holding sway at the moment.
It's not really a new US partnership in the Philippines, per above; it remains within the GEACPS and the Japanese have retained basing rights. For them, the Soviets are the existential threat. China (not including the Japanese puppet states) is a problem they don't need and the moderates would really like to make go away, especially if they can reach a detente or even partnership (enemy of my enemy) arrangement with the Chiang Kai-Shek and rapprochement with the US, perhaps even reentry into the international trade system with the rest of the West.
For France, so long as they can get their resources from some market, even the Comintern, they'll be happy. And the Soviets will probably want the foreign exchange.
1) East Asia. OTL China, Indochina and Korea plus Japan still occupying areas.
2) India. I agree with @TheButterflyComposer that there will probably be cultural divisions as well as the OTL Hindu/Moslem divisions.
3) Jewish state. With Turkey on security council, I do not foresee the League approving a Mideast Jewish state. Could Britain forge a Jewish state in either Australia, Canada or southern Africa? South Africa would probably welcome a Jewish state. Would a non-Mideast state be acceptable to the Zionist terrorists?
Longer term:
1) Breaking up the British and French empires in Africa, Asia and Caribbean to independent states.
2) Minority cultures in Soviet Union and Turkey demanding more self-representation.
East Asia is going to be a wild ride. India, we shall soon see (in the short term, anyway). Palestine/Jewish state: not sure where that is going yet. Per @diskoerekto below, Turkey may not be as opposed as one might think. Until quite recently, they had pretty close relations with Israel, so who knows?
Yes re British de-colonialism, but France doesn't really have any empire left to pull out of. Japan got Indochina and Turkey got most of the rest, so more of a problem for them. And agree, it may take a while to emerge and do so inconsistently, but those polyglot pseudo-empires will no doubt get fractious.
The first Constituent Assembly of India had convened in December 1946 but was boycotted by the elected Muslim League members. Nehru’s Hindu-based Congress Party had wanted a unified Indian state, Jinnah’s Muslim League insisted on the creation of a separate Muslim state of Pakistan.
The deadlock continued as Britain offered to again mediate. Rioting in Bombay in late March exacerbated tensions. Under pressure to act before the situation exploded, the British offer was accepted by both Nehru and Jinnah. On 23 May Britain sent Lord Louis Mountbatten as a Special Commissioner [Viceroy in OTL].
Jinnah (left), Mountbatten (centre) and Nehru confer over the partition proposal, June 1947.
---xxx---
British Arbitration Plan for Partition
Mountbatten’s plan was to partition India into two states, one Muslim and one Hindu, basically as Jinnah had been demanding. Early reports suggested that the political leaders there had agreed to work with the plan: Nehru could see the difficulties of trying to create a unitary state where a substantial proportion of the population was determined to gain independence on sectarian lines.
On 15 June the Indian National Congress met to consider Jawaharlal Nehru's recommendation that plan to partition India be accepted. Nehru was confident of victory, but there was an outside chance that hardliners within Congress might rebel: if a majority demanded the unitary state position be pursued in defiance of their leader, then chaos or conflict may ensue.
The die roll to decide this was a simple yes, no or undecided to endorsement:
1-95% = Yes
96-98% = No
99-100% = Indecisive, back to the bargaining table.
By a comparatively narrow but still decisive vote [88% die roll] the Congress endorsed Nehru’s recommendation. Naturally, Jinnah endorsed this solution quickly [no die roll needed], the following day. But would the rest of former British India endorse this?
Three elements were sources of possible resistance: the Princely States, the Sikhs and religious-ethnic resistance within states that acceded. The Princely States had not participated in the Constituent Assembly election of 1946, so each would need to make its own decision.
---xxx---
Princely States – General Position and OTL Events in 1947
At the time of the British withdrawal, 565 princely states were officially recognised in the Indian subcontinent, apart from thousands of smaller zamindari estates and jagirs. In 1947, princely states covered 40% of the area of pre-independence India and constituted 23% of its population.
The most important states had their own British political residencies: Hyderabad of the Nizams, Mysore and Travancore in the South, Jammu and Kashmir, Sikkim in the Himalayas, and Indore in Central India. The most prominent among those – roughly a quarter of the total – had the status of a salute state, one whose ruler was entitled to a set number of gun salutes on ceremonial occasions.
The accession process was largely peaceful in both India and Pakistan, except in the cases of:
Jammu and Kashmir (whose ruler decided to accede to India following an invasion by Pakistan-based forces, resulting in a long-standing dispute between the two countries).
Hyderabad State (whose ruler opted for independence in 1947, followed a year later by the invasion and annexation of the state by India).
Junagarh and its vassal Bantva Manavadar (whose rulers acceded to Pakistan but were annexed by India).
Kalat (whose ruler declared independence in 1947, followed in 1948 by the state's accession to Pakistan).
Nehru declared that any princely state in India which refused to join the Constituent Assembly would be treated as an enemy.
In the period following the acceptance of the partition plan, most princely states acceded either to India or Pakistan in the allocated zones. India used military force to integrate Junagadh, Hyderabad State (Operation Polo) and Kashmir (Instrument of Accession) to India in the period following the 1947 partition. In the ATL, a variation on these themes will be explored for some selected regions.
---xxx---
Hyderabad
Hyderabad was majority Hindu with a sizeable Muslim minority and a Muslim ruler, Mir Osman Ali Khan. He leaned towards maintaining independence, though of course Nehru and the Indian Congress was unlikely to accept this.
Mir Osman Ali Khan, Asaf Jah VII of Hyderabad (b. 5 or 6 April 1886).
Accede to India: 1-75% Yes, 76-100% No.
If Yes to accession: roll for armed civil unrest from the Muslim minority 1-30% Unrest, 31-100% no further action.
If Unrest, roll once per month until resolved: 1-80% suppressed - no further action; 81-95% continue rolling until outcome; 96-100% long term guerrilla activity, no further immediate action.
If No to accession, mandatory Indian military response, die roll of 1/12 each month until intervention occurs, from July 1947. Once activated, result per month until resolved: 70% annexed, 25% continue rolling until outcome, 5% independent (India retains a casus belli)
On 20 June, the Mir of Hyderabad ended up taking the confrontational option [92% die roll] and refused to accede to the Indian state. India repudiated this declaration and began secret planning for Operation Polo, though it was unclear how soon the newly formalised Indian Army would be prepared to move. In the meantime, Hyderabad remained an independent princely state outside the Indian federal state.
---xxx---
Jammu and Kashmir
This potential flashpoint had a mostly Muslim population overall, with sizeable Hindu and Buddhist populations and a Hindu ruler, Maharaja Sir Hari Singh. It was his unenviable task to try to trace a path through competing Pakistani and Indian claims.
Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir Sir Hari Singh (b. September 1895).
Ruler Accedes to India: 1-60% Yes, 61-100% No.
If Yes: roll for armed Pakistan intervention to oppose accession into India: 1-75% Intervene, 76-100% No further action.
If No to accession, armed Indian intervention: 1-90% Intervention, 91-100% No intervention.
Then roll for armed Pakistan intervention to claim for Pakistan: 1-60% Intervention, 61-100% Nointervention.
Reaction by India to any Pakistan intervention (if India not already intervening after a No to accession): 1-90% India intervenes, 91-100% No intervention.
Outcomes
1. If one side intervenes but the other does not, all of state goes to the intervening country, as cost of ongoing unrest from the other side and triggering a casus belli for the losing state.
2. If neither intervenes, then original decision re accession stands. A No would result in Kashmir becoming independent, with both Pakistan and India having a casus belli.
3. If both intervene:
3a. War between India and Pakistan: 1-10%.
3b. Partition along the OTL demarcation line: 11-70% (both sides gain casus belli).
3c. LNSC arbitration sought: 20% (to be pursued later).
The Maharaja decided to accede to union with India on 22 June [45% die roll]. Surprisingly, neither Pakistan nor local militants supporting it contested this decision [95% die roll]. For the short term at last, the whole state would become part of India and, though there was local unrest among the significant Muslim population there was no immediate escalation to armed insurrection.
Kashmir as decided in the 1947 TTL partition and accession protest. While resolved for now, this would remain a flashpoint and susceptible to future separatist action by Muslim pro-Pakistan elements, especially in the north.
---xxx---
Kingdom of Mysore
The Kingdom of Mysore was mainly Hindu, with sizeable Muslim populations and Hindu ruler, the relatively young Maharaja Jayachamarajendra Wadiyar.
Maharaja Jayachamarajendra Wadiyar of Mysore (b. 18 July 1919).
Accedes to India: 1-90% Yes, 91-100% No.
If Yes roll for armed civil unrest from Muslim minority: 1-15% Unrest, 16-100% no further action.
If Unrest, roll once per month until resolved: 1-80% suppressed - no further action; 81-95% continue rolling until outcome; 96-100% long term guerrilla activity, no further immediate action.
If No to accession, mandatory Indian military response, die roll of 1/12 each month until intervention occurs, from July 1947. Once activated, result per month until resolved: 70% annexed, 25% continue rolling until outcome, 5% independent (India retains a casus belli).
The headstrong Maharaja [94% die roll] went against most expectations and on 24 June asserted the continued independence of Mysore from the Indian union. As with Hyderabad, this decision would not be accepted by Nehru and the majority of the Indian Congress. Operation Golf, like Polo for Hyderabad, was added to the Indian Army’s ‘to do’ list for July 1947.
---xxx---
Gwalior State
Gwalior State was chiefly Hindu, with a sizeable Muslim population and a young Hindu ruler, Maharaja Jivajirao Scindia. Although Gwalior had seemed likely to accede to India in the lead-up to the June 1947 decision process, the recent defiance of Hyderabad and then Mysore had the new Indian central government wondering whether separatism was gaining momentum among the larger princely states.
Maharaja Jivajirao Scindia of Gwalior (b. 26 June 1916).
Accedes to India: 1-90% Yes, 91-100% No.
If Yes roll for armed civil unrest from Muslim minority: 1-15% Unrest, 16-100% no further action.
If Unrest, roll once per month until resolved: 1-80% suppressed - no further action; 81-95% continue rolling until outcome; 96-100% long term guerrilla activity, no further immediate action.
If No to accession, mandatory Indian military response, die roll of 1/12 each month until intervention occurs, from July 1947. Once activated, result per month until resolved: 70% annexed, 25% continue rolling until outcome, 5% independent (India retains a casus belli).
Maharaja Jivajirao was indeed sorely tempted to jump onto the separatist bandwagon [89% die roll] but was prevailed upon by his counsellors to avoid confrontation and accede to the union with India.
---xxx---
Junagarh and Bantva Manavadar
The Nawab of Junagadh, Muhammad Mahabat Khanji III, a Muslim whose ancestors had ruled Junagadh and small principalities for some two hundred years, wanted Junagadh to become part of Pakistan. He argued that Junagadh joined Pakistan by sea, much to the displeasure of many of the people of the state, an overwhelming majority of whom (around 80%) were Hindus. His decision was bound to be contentious, one way or the other.
In OTL, the Nawab acceded to the Dominion of Pakistan on 15 August 1947. Jinnah waited for a month to accept the Instrument of Accession. When Pakistan accepted the Nawab's Instrument of Accession on 16 September, the Government of India was outraged that Jinnah could accept the accession of Junagadh despite his argument that Hindus and Muslims could not live as one nation.
India offered Pakistan time to reverse its acceptance of the accession and to hold a plebiscite in Junagadh. Meanwhile, tensions were simmering in the regional areas and in major cities such as Bombay against Nawab's decision. 25,000 - 30,000 people belonging to Saurashtra and Junagadh gathered in Bombay, proclaiming to "liberate" Junagadh from the Nawab's regime.
Eventually, India ordered the forcible annexation of Junagadh's three principalities. Junagadh's state government, facing financial collapse and lacking forces with which to resist Indian force, invited the Government of India to take control. A plebiscite was conducted in December, in which approximately 99.95% of the people chose India over Pakistan.
The annexation was seen as part of a wider programme by the Indian state of getting the rulers of princely states to accede into a unified post-colonial India.
Accede to Pakistan: 1-50% Accede to India: 51-80%; Attempt independence 81-100%.
If accedes to Pakistan or attempts independence: armed intervention from India: 1-85%, no Indian response: 86-100%.
If accedes to Pakistan and India intervenes: 1-10% war, 11-100% no Pakistan military response but refers to the LNSC (to be actioned later).
If India intervenes and no Pakistan military response: armed civil unrest from Muslim minority:1-15%. Result per month until resolved: 1-80% suppressed, 81-95% continue rolling until outcome, 96-100% long term guerrilla activity.
In the end, on 26 June the Nawab of Junagadh was pressured into acceding to India [59% die roll] in the face of widespread Hindu agitation. Another flashpoint with Pakistan had been de-escalated.
Sir Muhammad Mahabat Khanji III Rasul Khanji of Junagarh, (b. 2 August 1898).
---xxx---
The Sikhs
The Sikhs in Eastern (Indian) Punjab had the centre of their traditional lands in Amritsar, with a recent contentious history with the British Raj. A possible independent state of Khalistan was being mooted, where the Sikhs might try to carve out a sub-section of the wider Eastern Punjab that had been provisionally allocated to the Indian side in the partition talks.
There was no formal accession process to be followed here, as the Punjab was not a princely state and had been part of the Constituent Assembly elected in 1946. In [TTL] 1947, there was a moderate chance Sikh separatists may try to create an independent Khalistan as a small enclave on the Pakistan-India border.
Armed civil unrest from Sikhs demanding independent state: 1-20%, no further action: 21-100%.
If there is armed unrest, India will intervene in July 1947. Result rolled once per month until resolved: 1-70% suppressed, 71-90% continue rolling until outcome, 5% long term guerrilla activity; 5% independence (Indian casus belli).
But there was insufficient support for a militant stance [66% die roll], so no widely recognised Sikh leader emerged to challenge the union with India.
---xxx---
India on 30 June 1947
The rejection of accession by Hyderabad and Mysore and the partition of Pakistan from the former Raj left the map of India looking as follows by the end of June.
---xxx---
Pakistan – Kalat
The Khanate of Kalat had existed from 1512, located in the centre of the modern-day province of Balochistan, Pakistan.
Its ruler Ahmad Yar Khan, as the head of this princely state, was faced with the decision of whether to accede to Pakistan or not. [In OTL, he waited until 27 March 1948 to accede.]
Khan Mir Ahmad Yar Khan Ahmedzai of Kalat (b. 1902), commonly referred to as "Yar Khan".
Accede to Pakistanimmediately: 1-25%; delay accession 26-100%.
Pakistan Reaction
If accession chosen, no further action.
If delay accession: peaceful persuasion 1-80%; armed intervention 81-100%.
If peaceful persuasion chosen: 1/12 chance per month of resolution roll:
1-90%: accession to Pakistan(no further action)
91-100%: independence asserted (Pakistan reacts)
If independence asserted:
1-95%: armed Pakistan intervention then each month 1-70% suppressed, 71-90% continue rolling until outcome, 91-95% long term guerrilla activity; 96-100% independence(Pakistan casus belli).
Yar Khan was in no hurry to accede [87% die roll], stalling Jinnah for time. This would be another case of post-partition uncertainty on the Indian sub-continent that would drag on into the second half of 1947.
---xxx---
Ceylon (Sri Lanka)
On the independence of India, the Colony of Ceylon (as it was then known) continued separately under direct British rule. However, Attlee’s Labour government was set on granting in independence as part of the wider de-colonisation process. This was planned to occur some time in early 1948.
---xxx---
India – Ethnic Make-up
Of course, as some have already observed, India was not just divided along religious grounds. It was, and remains, richly diverse in ethnic and language terms, even though it was primarily the religious divide that became institutionalised and politicised in 1946-7. Below is one map of (in India only) that portrays that diversity. There are naturally other ways of defining these.
Korea is so close and such a cornerstone of Japanese imperialism that losing it more than anything else is unacceptable. It would be a recognition that Japanese imperialism was effectively dead. So I expect Japan to go all in with Korea, at the expense of Vietnam and anywhere else that requires miktiary presence.
Note: there’s some kind of formatting problem with the spoilers near the end I’m finding impossible to fix on my iPad and I’m travelling tomorrow. I may try fixing them again in a day or so.
To stop from Pakistan and India fighting over here, it can be jointly administered as a mandate by UGNR and East Turkestan
Also, I see there are Balochs in Pakistan and we already have a Balochistan (proposed by me at least) so maybe they'll want to join the democratic and prosperous UGNR?
Aforementioned Thorium reserves are in the entirety of the southeast coast, from Travancore to West Bengal, which all are with India proper. If they want they can send some bright students to study nuclear engineering with us.
Excellent work on India. Will we have democratic elections (die roll) in Aksai Chin (all three residents could vote )? Turkey will have a bigger role in Pakistan and other Muslim related questions in this TTL as Turkey is the undisputed leader of the Islamic nations instead of OTL Egypt/Saudi Arabia. Butterfly wings flap causing ripples causing waves causing tsunamis. Thank you
Interesting, I'm not up on Indian history aside from the tension that existed between the Raj and London over independence after the first war and in the interbellum period, this was certainly very interesting to read.
As an aside, if anyone is interested, there's a great write up about the new TF-X fighter (aka, the Turkish F22) here at the War Zone.
On 20 June, the Mir of Hyderabad ended up taking the confrontational option and refused to accede to the Indian state. India repudiated this declaration and began secret planning for Operation Polo, though it was unclear how soon the newly formalised Indian Army would be prepared to move. In the meantime, Hyderabad remained an independent princely state outside the Indian federal state.
The headstrong Maharaja went against most expectations and on 24 June asserted the continued independence of Mysore from the Indian union.
The Maharaja decided to accede to union with India on 22 June. Surprisingly, neither Pakistan nor local militants supporting it contested this decision. For the short term at last, the whole state would become part of India and, though there was local unrest among the significant Muslim population there was no immediate escalation to armed insurrection.
The Maharaja has handled this one very well indeed, so far. Let's hope he continues to do so as this certainly threatens to be one of the worst flashpoints if it's at all mishandled.
Maharaja Jivajirao was indeed sorely tempted to jump onto the separatist bandwagon but was prevailed upon by his counsellors to avoid confrontation and accede to the union with India.
Of course, as some have already observed, India was not just divided along religious grounds. It was, and remains, richly diverse in ethnic and language terms, even though it was primarily the religious divide that became institutionalised and politicised in 1946-7. Below is one map of (in India only) that portrays that diversity.
Public Service Announcement: Hi everyone, I’ve been ‘on the road’ playing at a cricket tournament interstate for the last week, so it will take me a few days to get back on top of my various AARs (playing, writing up and doing comment responses), plus I got an EU4 bundle during the recent Steam sale so have been playing that a bit, not having played the game before.
So, just advising that normal programming will begin to resume over the next few days.
Korea is so close and such a cornerstone of Japanese imperialism that losing it more than anything else is unacceptable. It would be a recognition that Japanese imperialism was effectively dead. So I expect Japan to go all in with Korea, at the expense of Vietnam and anywhere else that requires miktiary presence.
For now, Korea is the least 'progressed' of the hot spots. Yes, it is far more immediate and important to them than Vietnam, Mongolia or the Philippines and is an area they have held for decades, as opposed to the couple of years they have occupied the others following their seizure in GW2.
They don't have to make any final decision yet, but will want to retain control for as long as they can if they're trying to hang onto Manchuria and Inner Mongolia too. But the Soviets may well get nasty about it.
To stop from Pakistan and India fighting over here, it can be jointly administered as a mandate by UGNR and East Turkestan
Also, I see there are Balochs in Pakistan and we already have a Balochistan (proposed by me at least) so maybe they'll want to join the democratic and prosperous UGNR?
Aforementioned Thorium reserves are in the entirety of the southeast coast, from Travancore to West Bengal, which all are with India proper. If they want they can send some bright students to study nuclear engineering with us.
Turkey will have a bigger role in Pakistan and other Muslim related questions in this TTL as Turkey is the undisputed leader of the Islamic nations instead of OTL Egypt/Saudi Arabia. Butterfly wings flap causing ripples causing waves causing tsunamis. Thank you
I do have something broadly in mind for Turkish influence in Pakistan and Palestine depending on where they gets to. There may be a chance of intervention. In Palestine the Arabs will also want to have their own voice, so there could be some dispute over (secular Kemalist) Turkey's supposed leadership of the Islamic world.
Interesting, I'm not up on Indian history aside from the tension that existed between the Raj and London over independence after the first war and in the interbellum period, this was certainly very interesting to read.
It was interesting to read about and discover, too. There will be a bit more to come, not just resolving the various anti-integration situations in Pakistan and India, but also the final resolution of their borders, which has not yet been done. In OTL, the British superintended that via the much-maligned Radcliffe Line. In ATL, the two countries need to resolved that between them, with or without LN mediation. That (as in OTL) will happen in the second half of 1947.
The Maharaja has handled this one very well indeed, so far. Let's hope he continues to do so as this certainly threatens to be one of the worst flashpoints if it's at all mishandled.
I don't think either side can be fully happy long term, whatever way it is handled. But how it is handled could determine whether it becomes the flashpoint it has in OTL.
Chapter 259: The Western Hemisphere – January to June 1947
The United States
The State of the Union
On 6 January 1947, US President Thomas Dewey gave the State of the Union address, telling the Democrat-dominated House that they would have to work with him and the newly Republican-dominated Senate for the common good. It was the first State of the Union address to be televised live.
President Dewey pictured as his 1947 State of the Union speech is broadcast on television.
In the speech, Dewey publicly articulated his new Dewey Doctrine for the first time: "it will be the policy of the United States to support free people who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures." The nature, degree and circumstances under which such support would be provided was left deliberately vague [probably still less inclined to overt military support than under the OTL Truman Doctrine]. The Vandenberg faction, which leaned more to the interventionist school of thought than the pro-isolationist conservative view expounded by Secretary of State Robert Taft, had prevailed. This now left Taft in a difficult position. He would ultimately resign a few weeks later.
Senator Vandenberg was asked to become the new Secretary of State: his alternative was to remain in the Senate to become the influential Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. [In OTL, he took the Chair position in 1947 In that position, he cooperated with the Truman administration in forging bipartisan support for the Truman Doctrine, the Marshall Plan, and NATO.] He duly accepted the President’s offer and took the reigns of US foreign policy, with a decided shift towards alignment with the newly coalescing Western Alliance.
Robert Taft (r) handing over responsibilities as Secretary of State to Arthur Vandenberg(l) in January 1947. Vandenberg’s own “conversion from isolationism to internationalism”, which he had declared in a speech to the Senate in January 1945, would now be adopted more widely in the governing Republican administration.
On 21 March, the US Congress passed the Twenty-second Amendment to the United States Constitution, setting a term limit for election and overall time of service to the office of President. Many of the Republican legislators had campaigned on the issue of presidential tenure following Roosevelt's three consecutive terms and attempted fourth in 1944, declaring their support for a constitutional amendment that would limit how long a person could serve as president, the issue was given priority in the 80th Congress when it convened in January 1947. The ratification process by the states would take until February 1951, with two states (Oklahoma and Massachusetts) rejecting the amendment, while five (Arizona, Kentucky, Rhode Island, Washington, and West Virginia) took no action.
---xxx---
Un-American Activities
In the first half of 1947, a series of well publicised arrests of alleged Soviet spies and provocateurs in the US provided the backdrop to the increasingly anti-Communist trend of US foreign policy. In February, German-born Communist Gerhart Eisler was arrested at was brought before the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) in Washington two days later. He was charged with conspiracy to overthrow the US government, among other charges.
A HUAC hearing, March 1947.
In March, during a hearing before the House Labor Committee, the US Secretary of Labor suggested the Communist Party be outlawed in the United States, explaining that he could see no reason why they should be allowed to run for office when their purpose "is to destroy this Government." Soon after, the HUAC began hearings in Washington on a bill to outlaw the Communist Party. In May, the HUAC chaired by J. Parnell Thomas convened in Hollywood to investigate allegations of communism in the film industry.
---xxx---
The Vandenberg Plan and Foreign Relations
Secretary of State Vandenberg suggested in a speech at Harvard University in May that the United States would help Western Europe solve its economic problems provided the non-Communist European countries themselves adopted a joint economic recovery program. This idea would become the basis of the Vandenberg Plan [Marshall Plan in OTL]. It was made clear in the speech that The US did not consider Turkey, the UGNR or its satellite states in the Bucharest Pact to be Communist, despite their current Comintern faction membership; so they could, if they desired, explore participation in the Plan.
Henry A. Wallace completed a nationwide speaking tour in Washington, D.C. in mid-June with a speech urging a meeting between Dewey and Stalin to counteract "the present suicidal course toward war and depression." He also indicated that he was ready to run as a third-party candidate in the 1948 election.
Henry Agard Wallace (b. 7 October 1888) was an American politician, journalist, farmer, and businessman who served as the 33rd vice president of the United States under President Franklin D. Roosevelt from 1941-45. He had been aligned with the more liberal wing of the Democratic Party.
Wallace had earlier broken with Democrat policies in September 1946 when he delivered a speech in which he stated that "we should recognise that we have no more business in the political affairs of Eastern Europe than Russia has in the political affairs of Latin America, Western Europe and the United States". Wallace's speech was booed by the pro-Soviet crowd he delivered it to and even more strongly criticised by former President Truman and leading Republicans Robert A. Taft and Arthur Vandenberg.
During this period, the US continued to pursue its interests in Asia, including relations with China and Japan and other ‘hot button’ regional issues in Vietnam, Korea, Indonesia and elsewhere. Those will be covered later in the Eastern Hemisphere chapter.
---xxx---
Nuclear and Missile Research
The US completed its theoretical research for the flying bomb on April and began researching strategic rocket theory. Atomic bomb research was completed on 21 June, with continued research effort were maintained on civil and bomb nuclear development. By 1 July 1947 the US would have completed 10% of its first device, being assembled at Los Alamos.
---xxx---
The Western Alliance
British Army Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery arrived in Moscow on 6 January for a five-day visit to the Soviet Union. Montgomery told Soviet radio that the purpose of his visit was to "establish friendly contact with the Soviet Army and I hope that from that friendly contact there may develop and grow a mutual understanding, a mutual confidence, a happy relationship between our two armies which will be for the mutual benefit of us all."
Montgomery and Stalin meet in Moscow, January 1947.
As Britain’s de-colonisation drive gathered pace, Prime Minister Clement Attlee announced on 27 January that British troops would be withdrawn from Egypt.
On 4 March France and the United Kingdom signed the Treaty of Dunkirk, a pact of alliance and mutual assistance. And in May, a "united Western Europe" meeting was held at the Royal Albert Hall in London. Winston Churchill spoke in favour of a European union and urged Britain and France to take the lead. Despite their differing political philosophies, the French and British governments agreed that they needed to stick together and hoped this would be the beginning of a new Western Alliance, which they now had hopes of eventually persuading not only the other liberal democracies of Western Europe, but also the US to join.
The Treaty of Dunkirk signature ceremony, March 1947.
Under the Vandenberg Plan, France hoped to receive US support for rebuilding their Armed Forces, even as they tried to maintain cordial relations with both the Warsaw and Bucharest Pacts and Communist Spain to their south.
At the same time, Britain continued its conventional military draw down, even as it sunk its main effort into creating its own nuclear deterrent. The centre for that research was the Atomic Energy Research Establishment, headed by Sir John Cockcroft and established in 1946 at Harwell. Their main initial task was to complete the very expensive first British nuclear reactor, which in January Cockcroft reported should be completed in September.
Such was the interest in nuclear power and the priority devoted to it in those days that the first reactor, GLEEP, was operating by 15 August 1947 (a very similar timeline to the ATL). GLEEP (Graphite Low Energy Experimental Pile) was a low-power (3 kilowatt) graphite-moderated air-cooled reactor. The first reactor in Western Europe, it operated until 1990.
---xxx---
Palestine
The security situation in British Mandatory Palestine continued to deteriorate in the first half of 1947. In January, a Jewish insurgency Stern Gang member drove a truck full of explosives into the central police station compound in Haifa and detonated it, killing 5 and wounding 140. On 31 January the British High Commissioner for Palestine LTGEN Alan Cunningham ordered all "non-essential" British civilians to evacuate the province.
In February British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin announced that Britain had given up trying to solve the Palestine problem and would put the issue before the League of Nations. During March, there was a series of incidents: Irgun operatives blew up a British officers' club in Jerusalem, killing 16. Three more British soldiers were killed that night in subsequent violence. The next day the British Army imposed martial law on a wide area of Palestine and made 60 arrests in connection with the previous day's violence.
In April the Jewish insurgency kept up the pressure, with four British policemen killed and six others wounded in an explosion at the police barracks in Sarona, Palestine. The bombs were thought to have been planted by the Stern Gang. On 28 April the LN General Assembly met to consider the issue of Palestine.
The Acre Prison break occurred in Acre on May, when the Irgun broke through the prison's walls and freed 28 incarcerated Irgun and Lehi members. On 15 May LN General Assembly formally established an 11-nation committee of inquiry into the Palestine question with a decision in expected in the second half of 1947.
The aftermath of the Acre Prison break, following the Irgun raid in May 1947.
---xxx---
Global and International
International Monetary Fund became operational on 1 March. On 10 April the United States and Britain agreed to support France's claim on the Saarland. The next day, Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov refused to agree to hand over the Saarland to France. The Saarland would stay within the borders of the DDR.
On 15 April, a 90-minute meeting took place in the Kremlin between Joseph Stalin and US Secretary of State Arthur Vandenberg. Also in attendance for the Soviets were Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov and Ambassador to the US Maksim Litvinov and on the American side the US Ambassador to the USSR, former General Walter Bedell Smith.
General Walter Bedell "Beetle" Smith (b. 5 October 1895), US Ambassador to Moscow.
Vandenberg expressed a deep concern at the extent of the rift between the US and Soviet sides that had been made apparent during the ongoing Moscow conference, but Stalin did not think the situation so serious and explained that after people had exhausted themselves in dispute, they then recognised the need to compromise.
Following the meeting, the mutual consensus was that while disagreements and tension between the Soviets and the West continued and may do so for the foreseeable future, it should not be something that would trigger a war between the erstwhile wartime allies, ‘cold’ or otherwise. The same may not be true regarding the increasingly heated and unstable situation in Asia, but that did not seem to augur a direct confrontation there between the Soviet Union and the West.
---xxx---
The Soviet Bloc
Parliamentary elections were held in Poland on 19 January, the first since Great War II. According to official results, the Democratic Bloc headed by Communist leader Bolesław Bierut gained 80.1% of the vote. But the US State Department accused the Polish government of failing to carry out free elections.
A voting location in Poland, 19 January 1947, in elections where the West considered widespread rigging had been engineered by the Soviets and Polish communists.
The next month, the Voice of America began making radio broadcasts to the Soviet Union. Then on 22 February several hundred Germans were arrested by the Soviet occupation authority on suspicion of having established an underground Nazi organisation. Over 100,000 trade unionists and their supporters gathered to protest food shortages in Hamburg in May.
A group of State Department announcers huddle around the microphone after the initial shortwave broadcast in Russian to Russia from New York City, 17 February 1947.
By the end of June 1947, the Soviets had built their atomic weapon stockpile to two complete devices, with a third around 70% finished. Not wishing to rely solely on the ‘borrowed’ German program, the Soviets recommenced their own civil nuclear research program and by the end of June 1947 it was well advanced, with the next level due to be achieved in August.
The Soviet program had been led by Igor Kurchakov since 1943. The Soviet research was being conducted at Sarov in the Gorki Oblast (now Nizhny Novgorod Oblast), on the Volga, under the title Arzamas-16.
Igor Vasilyevich Kurchatov (b. 12 January 1903), leader of the revived Soviet nuclear research program as well as supervisor of the existing joint German-Soviet atomic weapon program.
Stalin did not think the situation so serious and explained that after people had exhausted themselves in dispute, they then recognised the need to compromise.
Yeah, I get that vibe. With a lot more international cooperation on UN organisations, such weighted Soviet advantage in Eastern Europe and a much larger comintern, there's more to be gained from friendship or at least mutual respect than a cold war. If it keeps up, the US will become more socialised, and the comintern will liberalise (eventually).
The same may not be true regarding the increasingly heated and unstable situation in Asia, but that did not seem to augur a direct confrontation there between the Soviet Union and the West.
That's more because the Japanese empire still exists and is self combustibg. Similar to how the Spanish empire limping into the 1890s forced a lot of countries into opposite camps purely because a lot of land was up for grabs and they had to compete.
Once this gets resolved, at least in China and South East Asia (Manchuria, Korea and Japan itself may be an issue for a lot longer), rhe US and everyone else should be able to come to a new reloaded and relaxed sphere agreement.
