- Location
- Meycauayan, Bulacan, Philippines
They can have some desalination plants built with Russian help, with all materials imported from Russia?
Victoria Falls Worldbuilding Thread
- Thread starter PoptartProdigy
- Start date
- Worldbuilding
They can have some desalination plants built with Russian help, with all materials imported from Russia?
Russia does not have the technology now to build desalination plants on that scale, and India would not willingly remain dependent on a foreign country during the Collapse. And IRL there are already two desalination plants supplying the city of Chennai in India, with a third proposed.
But desal plants are not going to be enough if you have significant stretches of farmland drying up; their water output is generally not in the order of magnitude required. Basicaly the GM says ingame climate change is no different due to literally heroic efforts on the part of Alexander.
Take it for what it is.
The problem is more... Complex
It's not perennial dryness but problems from weak or late monsoon.
Chennai’s ‘Man-Made’ Water Crisis
The upcoming monsoon may end the immediate crisis, but the city’s serious infrastructure problems will be back.
thediplomat.com
So, Chennai has floods from the monsoon. But it relied on the monsoon to relieve it reservoirs and rivers for the dry months. A weak monsoon followed by a strong one can cause drought and flood in the same year.
This has caused a massive debt crisis in Indian rural farms, even their OPIUM farms got hit with this because of secondary effects from credit and inflation.
Leading to sky high Indian suicides.
Inside India’s water crisis: Living with drought and dry taps
Villagers and farmers in Maharashtra’s Beed district are among those worst affected by ongoing severe water shortages.
Desalination can help.
Minjur Seawater Desalination Plant - Wikipedia
Inland towards the Himalayas, Indian water scarcity is being driven by exhaustion of aquifiers (well, so is Chennai in the south. ) The breadbasket of India is heavily reliant on the other monsoon wind to provide water for crops.
A Desalination drive will be one of the most ambitious projects ever, even if we consider that everywhere along the route, villages will be drawing water from the pipe.
In theory, good infrastructure can mitigate much of the problems. But good infrastructure projects during the collapse ???
Also short term decisions taken to prevent famine and disaster could well have long term consequences such as the extinction of Indian fisheries. Or desertification of arable land because of intensive agriculture to make up for inpoet losses.
As it is, the drought has already caused imports to emerge after decades of Indian autarky.
Reuters | Breaking International News & Views
Find latest news from every corner of the globe at Reuters.com, your online source for breaking international news coverage.
in.reuters.com
There's some interesting story hooks.
For example, is India now dependent on Russian food imports? Is there a terrorist insurgency in the borders with Pakistan targeting said water tankers ?
Last edited:
dinomannitro6
all your gender is belong to us
- Location
- The Land Where The Sunflowers Bloom
Poptart closed polity submissions a while ago so I'm posting this here rather than in the main thread but I needed to get the ideas I had out of my head, hopefully something here will serve as good inspiration for poptart.
the first idea is a way of being able to justify a combination communist-retroculture ideology (kinda)
so this idea came from thinking about what a leader using specifically Kansan nationalism to shore up support would hype up, and realizing that the only notable stuff Kansas has done was lefty stuff around the civil war and in the late 1800s. So this polity would have to be leftist, and wants to go back to the ideas of an earlier period. This is when the cursed idea appeared.
So some polity has a communist revolution happen, this usually means that the people want a government that will help them live quality lives. This is something that will get you targeted by Victorians pretty quickly. Retroculture however is something vics like polities having, and is not conducive to producing states that will threaten Victoria, however the people will probably not like you making their polity retroculture. But what if you could get some of the benefits of communism while still being able to present as being retroculture to visiting Victorians.
[Enter good name for ideology here] posits that modern technology separates people, and that going back will allow people to once again experience unity, cooperation and prosperity.(the fact that it encourages much better treatment of various minorities than was ever the case historically, and modern tech is actually pretty good at bring people together is unimportant) It glorifies farmers for working themselves to grow the essentials of life, and for farming being a very collaborative job. Most of the non-military parts of government are agriculture based, such as distributing communal farming supplies and moving food surpluses to places where it is needed.
I was going to put this polity in Liberal, Kansas because putting a polity with such non-Liberal views there amuses me, the fact that there is a town named Moscow nearby is even better. It also would put it near the edges of Victoria's range which would make it easier for them to claim to be retroculture without them noticing that they are also pretty socialist. I was going to have the warlord before the revolution be rivals with a warlord in Guymon, and after he took most of his army to go fight with him and got trashed, the people who were fed up with him took advantage of the weakness and revolted. The leaders of the vanguard thought about the things I mentioned earlier and managed to mostly convince the population to follow their new perfectly reasonable ideology. They then used the Guymon warlord as a boogeyman whenever they needed to shore up support, or when they really needed one they used the Landry Corporation in Amarillo.
idea 2
Warlord in Hays that grew up speaking german in the house decides for shits and giggles and just to prove that he can, to make the population of his domain start speaking german as their main language. He also decides to go monarchist because it also amuses him, and pledges vassalage to the german emperor in exile. As far as anyone knows the emperor doesn't even know he exists, let alone about his vassalage, but never the less there is a rumor that russian spies will use the place as a base when needed because of this which he is not concerned about dispelling. All of this is just for his amusement so he is willing to dispense with it if necessary but he enjoys the feeling of power that forcing people to do these completely unnecessary things gives so he does it whenever he can get away with it.
this is all just a justification for me to make the nice alliterative title König von Kansas
there were some other polities I had but they were all pretty standard so that the standard actually had a basis in something. and while they werent boring there was nothing unique enough about them that whatever poptart might create would work just as well. but hopefully these two were interesting enough for your time.
the first idea is a way of being able to justify a combination communist-retroculture ideology (kinda)
so this idea came from thinking about what a leader using specifically Kansan nationalism to shore up support would hype up, and realizing that the only notable stuff Kansas has done was lefty stuff around the civil war and in the late 1800s. So this polity would have to be leftist, and wants to go back to the ideas of an earlier period. This is when the cursed idea appeared.
So some polity has a communist revolution happen, this usually means that the people want a government that will help them live quality lives. This is something that will get you targeted by Victorians pretty quickly. Retroculture however is something vics like polities having, and is not conducive to producing states that will threaten Victoria, however the people will probably not like you making their polity retroculture. But what if you could get some of the benefits of communism while still being able to present as being retroculture to visiting Victorians.
[Enter good name for ideology here] posits that modern technology separates people, and that going back will allow people to once again experience unity, cooperation and prosperity.(the fact that it encourages much better treatment of various minorities than was ever the case historically, and modern tech is actually pretty good at bring people together is unimportant) It glorifies farmers for working themselves to grow the essentials of life, and for farming being a very collaborative job. Most of the non-military parts of government are agriculture based, such as distributing communal farming supplies and moving food surpluses to places where it is needed.
I was going to put this polity in Liberal, Kansas because putting a polity with such non-Liberal views there amuses me, the fact that there is a town named Moscow nearby is even better. It also would put it near the edges of Victoria's range which would make it easier for them to claim to be retroculture without them noticing that they are also pretty socialist. I was going to have the warlord before the revolution be rivals with a warlord in Guymon, and after he took most of his army to go fight with him and got trashed, the people who were fed up with him took advantage of the weakness and revolted. The leaders of the vanguard thought about the things I mentioned earlier and managed to mostly convince the population to follow their new perfectly reasonable ideology. They then used the Guymon warlord as a boogeyman whenever they needed to shore up support, or when they really needed one they used the Landry Corporation in Amarillo.
idea 2
Warlord in Hays that grew up speaking german in the house decides for shits and giggles and just to prove that he can, to make the population of his domain start speaking german as their main language. He also decides to go monarchist because it also amuses him, and pledges vassalage to the german emperor in exile. As far as anyone knows the emperor doesn't even know he exists, let alone about his vassalage, but never the less there is a rumor that russian spies will use the place as a base when needed because of this which he is not concerned about dispelling. All of this is just for his amusement so he is willing to dispense with it if necessary but he enjoys the feeling of power that forcing people to do these completely unnecessary things gives so he does it whenever he can get away with it.
this is all just a justification for me to make the nice alliterative title König von Kansas
there were some other polities I had but they were all pretty standard so that the standard actually had a basis in something. and while they werent boring there was nothing unique enough about them that whatever poptart might create would work just as well. but hopefully these two were interesting enough for your time.
Last edited:
Second Draft On the Middle East
- Location
- Rockford, USA
- Pronouns
- They/Them
Overview
All right, folks, final draft before settling! Overall shape remains the same: First wave is Alex sweeping through to tear down oil producers so that he+allies can establish a monopoly over the market, allowing them to heavily meter oil supplies according to their whims. This includes attracting or shoring up client states and destroying liabilities. Second wave is him firmly establishing his desired order in the region and making the best of the last of the world's distraction to harden it against interference. Third wave is through today, and consists of him maintaining his desired state of affairs.
This'll be the last check; I'm more solid on this now. Still welcoming of feedback, but I'm eager to move on to other regions soon, so let's wrap this up!
Iran
Iran dealt with the collapse of the oil market poorly. Tensions in the country, long-dormant, boiled over, and while there was not outright civil war to start, there was civil strife. Refugee flows from an imploding Pakistan -- Alexander's work, very delicate, quite a 5D chess move to get the nukes without something going pop -- did not help, as the country was stretched already at the time. Alexander, seeking a good ally to open the way to the Middle East, took the opportunity. He supported one of the factions willing to work with him, and that faction used that support to its advantage in suborning or eliminating other factions. Iran never came to civil war, but the existing regime did fall -- either in a coup or under less violent pressure ultimately doesn't matter. It did through force of foreign-backed politics.
Iran has been Alexander's willing and eager ally -- they are too small to threaten him, naturally balance against several of his other allies, and are well-positioned to project much influence over the Middle East. They made an absolute killing riding the death of oil, and with Alexander's encouragement, used the funding to diversify their economy so they could survive the end of the ride. Despite momentary friction, they are generally pleased with their alliance. Iran in the modern day will comprise of all of their modern territory, plus any bits of Iraq, Pakistan, and the Persian Gulf they felt like taking (open to suggestions). At minimum, I expect that they know own the Strait of Hormuz and some border regions in Iraq.
Iraq
Dead and gone.
Kuwait
Dead and gone.
Saudi Arabia
Dead and gone. Alexander sponsors a client in the Hijaz in order to exercise control over the Red Sea and avoid the global clusterfuck that would be the Muslim pilgrimage sites being threatened. The client is not what we conventionally understand to be viable, absent outside support. That's deliberate.
United Arab Emirates
Dead and gone.
Qatar
Dead and gone.
Bahrain
Dead and gone.
Yemen
Stabilized into a Russian client ideal for control over the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, with a proven and excellent trade harbor. Very Russian loyalist. Economy entirely dependent on servicing Russosphere trade.
Oman
Either dead and gone, or serving as an Iranian puppet for the improved control over the Hormuz. Open to suggestions, but not the most critical question to answer.
Syria
Long a Russian client, and that has not changed. The insurgencies, absent foreign aid, are long-dead.
Lebanon
Russian-aligned, albeit meaningfully independent. Interested in diversifying foreign interests in their nation, if practical, but a bit strapped for options.
Israel
Russia kept them alive out of fear of them touching off a nuclear spitestorm in Russia's backyard. The extent of this, "support," is telling Alexander's clients not to fucking start shit if they want to keep their arms subsidies. Alexander is tracking down the nukes so that he can address Israel more permanently.
Jordan
Arguments in the thread and elsewhere have convinced me to spare Jordan. Phosphate exports and the fact that constant refugee flows from across the Middle East will help to keep the nation locked down mean that Russia doesn't particularly come gunning for them. He makes sure to dominate the market -- the money keeps them alive and dependent, and gives him leverage to make sure they never even think of trying to crack for shale oil, even if they were to have the cash for it. Jordan's economy turns inwards as the food sector goes to soaking the refugees, and the phosphates get dominated by Russia. It is alive -- more than many others could say.
Turkey
The Bosporus Strait must remain open.
This has been one of the truisms for Russias throughout the centuries: the Bosporus must remain open. Via the Black Sea, Russia connects to the Mediterranean -- the greatest trade artery in the world. Russian trade must have access to that artery. Russian warships, for a superpower, must be able to contest for control of that Sea.
The Strait must remain open.
When Russia was utterly alone at the top, they ensured that message came through, loud and clear. Turkey became a Russian-aligned state.
But it can't all be stick. Alexander's reconquest of ex-Soviet territories obliterated the Turkic nations that Turkey held sway in; there needed to be some payoff. Thus, Alexander offered Turkey the strategic depth they sought throughout the Middle East, serving as a middleman between Turkey and Levantine states to ensure that relations remained friendly and cooperative. Furthermore, Alexander supported Turkey in resolving the political situation on Cyprus, to Turkey's advantage (I don't care about specifics, they aren't relevant, all that matters is that Turkey got what it wanted at the time).
In short, Alexander resolved Turkey's longstanding issues with diplomacy in its immediate neighborhood by offering it free entry to the Russosphere on favorable terms -- with the stick of the Russian military ever hoisted overhead.
Egypt
To be covered fully in the African debate, as our point of entry, but suffice it to say that Egypt remains a thing. Thousands of years of existence as a coherent state broken only by foreign occupation. The Suez Canal. The Nile. So much food. The support of the African Union -- and my canonical stance that Alexander simply did not have the resources to do what it took to really square up with the African Union. In some way, shape, or form, Egypt is still there. We will determine the finer details when we cover Africa.
Given my revised treatment of Jordan, it occurs that a friendly Egypt would complete a Russian encirclement of Israel -- in addition to a friendly Egypt simply being strategically vital to Russian interests. Egypt would certainly be a high priority. The specifics, however, will have to wait.
Kurdistan?
I am wavering towards an independent Kurdistan under very specific conditions. My imagination is that the Kurds would have proactively reached out to Alexander once he aligned Iran (possessed of foresight or opportunism; which isn't relevant). They pledged support in Alexander's invasion of Iraq in support for his support for their own state. He agreed, but only on the condition that they agree to very strict terms regarding territorial claims in Russia's allies with Kurdish populations, i.e., the Kurdish state would completely renounce said claims. Alexander would be willing to support the Kurdish state as a homeland for the Kurds, and to present it as a release valve for restive populations in his allies, but would not hesitate to abandon Kurdistan if it caused problems for him. A heavily-restricted state being better than none, the Kurds accepted.
Still not sure about this, but seems the only possible way for this to happen without deeply alarming Iran, Turkey, and Syria. Given Turkey and Syria's recent issues, they might even find the idea of a release valve committed to not wanting their land appealing. Still, not completely certain, and open to final workshopping. Alternative is that they just don't have a state and hoo boy are they not doing well.
All right, folks, final draft before settling! Overall shape remains the same: First wave is Alex sweeping through to tear down oil producers so that he+allies can establish a monopoly over the market, allowing them to heavily meter oil supplies according to their whims. This includes attracting or shoring up client states and destroying liabilities. Second wave is him firmly establishing his desired order in the region and making the best of the last of the world's distraction to harden it against interference. Third wave is through today, and consists of him maintaining his desired state of affairs.
This'll be the last check; I'm more solid on this now. Still welcoming of feedback, but I'm eager to move on to other regions soon, so let's wrap this up!
Iran
Iran dealt with the collapse of the oil market poorly. Tensions in the country, long-dormant, boiled over, and while there was not outright civil war to start, there was civil strife. Refugee flows from an imploding Pakistan -- Alexander's work, very delicate, quite a 5D chess move to get the nukes without something going pop -- did not help, as the country was stretched already at the time. Alexander, seeking a good ally to open the way to the Middle East, took the opportunity. He supported one of the factions willing to work with him, and that faction used that support to its advantage in suborning or eliminating other factions. Iran never came to civil war, but the existing regime did fall -- either in a coup or under less violent pressure ultimately doesn't matter. It did through force of foreign-backed politics.
Iran has been Alexander's willing and eager ally -- they are too small to threaten him, naturally balance against several of his other allies, and are well-positioned to project much influence over the Middle East. They made an absolute killing riding the death of oil, and with Alexander's encouragement, used the funding to diversify their economy so they could survive the end of the ride. Despite momentary friction, they are generally pleased with their alliance. Iran in the modern day will comprise of all of their modern territory, plus any bits of Iraq, Pakistan, and the Persian Gulf they felt like taking (open to suggestions). At minimum, I expect that they know own the Strait of Hormuz and some border regions in Iraq.
Iraq
Dead and gone.
Kuwait
Dead and gone.
Saudi Arabia
Dead and gone. Alexander sponsors a client in the Hijaz in order to exercise control over the Red Sea and avoid the global clusterfuck that would be the Muslim pilgrimage sites being threatened. The client is not what we conventionally understand to be viable, absent outside support. That's deliberate.
United Arab Emirates
Dead and gone.
Qatar
Dead and gone.
Bahrain
Dead and gone.
Yemen
Stabilized into a Russian client ideal for control over the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, with a proven and excellent trade harbor. Very Russian loyalist. Economy entirely dependent on servicing Russosphere trade.
Oman
Either dead and gone, or serving as an Iranian puppet for the improved control over the Hormuz. Open to suggestions, but not the most critical question to answer.
Syria
Long a Russian client, and that has not changed. The insurgencies, absent foreign aid, are long-dead.
Lebanon
Russian-aligned, albeit meaningfully independent. Interested in diversifying foreign interests in their nation, if practical, but a bit strapped for options.
Israel
Russia kept them alive out of fear of them touching off a nuclear spitestorm in Russia's backyard. The extent of this, "support," is telling Alexander's clients not to fucking start shit if they want to keep their arms subsidies. Alexander is tracking down the nukes so that he can address Israel more permanently.
Jordan
Arguments in the thread and elsewhere have convinced me to spare Jordan. Phosphate exports and the fact that constant refugee flows from across the Middle East will help to keep the nation locked down mean that Russia doesn't particularly come gunning for them. He makes sure to dominate the market -- the money keeps them alive and dependent, and gives him leverage to make sure they never even think of trying to crack for shale oil, even if they were to have the cash for it. Jordan's economy turns inwards as the food sector goes to soaking the refugees, and the phosphates get dominated by Russia. It is alive -- more than many others could say.
Turkey
The Bosporus Strait must remain open.
This has been one of the truisms for Russias throughout the centuries: the Bosporus must remain open. Via the Black Sea, Russia connects to the Mediterranean -- the greatest trade artery in the world. Russian trade must have access to that artery. Russian warships, for a superpower, must be able to contest for control of that Sea.
The Strait must remain open.
When Russia was utterly alone at the top, they ensured that message came through, loud and clear. Turkey became a Russian-aligned state.
But it can't all be stick. Alexander's reconquest of ex-Soviet territories obliterated the Turkic nations that Turkey held sway in; there needed to be some payoff. Thus, Alexander offered Turkey the strategic depth they sought throughout the Middle East, serving as a middleman between Turkey and Levantine states to ensure that relations remained friendly and cooperative. Furthermore, Alexander supported Turkey in resolving the political situation on Cyprus, to Turkey's advantage (I don't care about specifics, they aren't relevant, all that matters is that Turkey got what it wanted at the time).
In short, Alexander resolved Turkey's longstanding issues with diplomacy in its immediate neighborhood by offering it free entry to the Russosphere on favorable terms -- with the stick of the Russian military ever hoisted overhead.
Egypt
To be covered fully in the African debate, as our point of entry, but suffice it to say that Egypt remains a thing. Thousands of years of existence as a coherent state broken only by foreign occupation. The Suez Canal. The Nile. So much food. The support of the African Union -- and my canonical stance that Alexander simply did not have the resources to do what it took to really square up with the African Union. In some way, shape, or form, Egypt is still there. We will determine the finer details when we cover Africa.
Given my revised treatment of Jordan, it occurs that a friendly Egypt would complete a Russian encirclement of Israel -- in addition to a friendly Egypt simply being strategically vital to Russian interests. Egypt would certainly be a high priority. The specifics, however, will have to wait.
Kurdistan?
I am wavering towards an independent Kurdistan under very specific conditions. My imagination is that the Kurds would have proactively reached out to Alexander once he aligned Iran (possessed of foresight or opportunism; which isn't relevant). They pledged support in Alexander's invasion of Iraq in support for his support for their own state. He agreed, but only on the condition that they agree to very strict terms regarding territorial claims in Russia's allies with Kurdish populations, i.e., the Kurdish state would completely renounce said claims. Alexander would be willing to support the Kurdish state as a homeland for the Kurds, and to present it as a release valve for restive populations in his allies, but would not hesitate to abandon Kurdistan if it caused problems for him. A heavily-restricted state being better than none, the Kurds accepted.
Still not sure about this, but seems the only possible way for this to happen without deeply alarming Iran, Turkey, and Syria. Given Turkey and Syria's recent issues, they might even find the idea of a release valve committed to not wanting their land appealing. Still, not completely certain, and open to final workshopping. Alternative is that they just don't have a state and hoo boy are they not doing well.
Last edited:
- Location
- Illinois
Hmm, so I know Alexander avoided Afghanistan, but did the Islamic Republic survive the Collapse without Alex's direct involvement? I'm really just wondering if it should be considered "Broken non-entity" or "somewhat functional nation" in some sense. I would bet the former but...
- Location
- Rockford, USA
- Pronouns
- They/Them
I don't have a great sense of the extent to which Afghanistan is capable of addressing its own internal issues, nor of how able it would be to survive absent the international markets. Open to suggestions, although I don't foresee them coming up much.
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
If there is a Kurdistan, then that's a flashpoint just waiting for Russia's attention to drift and grip to loosen. I'm not saying that Alex wouldn't make the country, I'm just saying that is a war just waiting to happen.
Which honestly, I just like the idea of Alexander's legacy being an explosive house-of-cards.
Which honestly, I just like the idea of Alexander's legacy being an explosive house-of-cards.
- Location
- Illinois
Probably broken would be my guess, but maybe Iran took some parts of the country? It might fit with their long-time relationship. Honestly though, it only matter in terms of a world map.
SneakyWalrus
Is the Water Free?
Man, Alex really is a kid in a sandbox, kicking over everybody's castle except his own.
This is a bit confusing. Is the ultimate outcome that Jordan got hammered hard, but not quite to the point of destruction?
Godwinson
"Well, I've got nothing."
Entirely absent any other political concerns, the primary issue facing any Iranian territorial desires in Iraq is that there's no good natural boundary as your border until you hit the Mediterranean. This was the bane of basically every Persian Empire in history, because while the Iranian heartlands are basically impossible for anyone to take and hold (except, wait for it-- the Mongols), holding anything westwards is a continual invitation to overstretching what their heartlands can support control over. The fact that both Egypt and Turkey are at the other end of the Fertile Crescent, with each one inevitably having territorial ambitions of their own in the region, just guarantees an inevitable clusterfuck.
Taking into account the Sunni-Shia religious divide, about the only way that I see Iran holding much of anything outside of, well, Iran, is with extensive ethnic cleansing of some sort or another.
Furthermore, the Fertile Crescent is the region which has already shown the most sensitivity to the already-existent levels of climate change, with the revolution in Syria being driven in no small part by complete crop failures due to drought and heat. It's entirely possible that during the bad days of the 2030s to 2050s (before the carbon-capture counterattack really got going in its impact) that there were times where the wet-bulb temperature could exceed the levels where humans can survive.
Taking into account the Sunni-Shia religious divide, about the only way that I see Iran holding much of anything outside of, well, Iran, is with extensive ethnic cleansing of some sort or another.
Furthermore, the Fertile Crescent is the region which has already shown the most sensitivity to the already-existent levels of climate change, with the revolution in Syria being driven in no small part by complete crop failures due to drought and heat. It's entirely possible that during the bad days of the 2030s to 2050s (before the carbon-capture counterattack really got going in its impact) that there were times where the wet-bulb temperature could exceed the levels where humans can survive.
- Location
- Rockford, USA
- Pronouns
- They/Them
Derp. Wrote the new ruling in parallel with the old, forgot to delete the old.
I'm mostly envisioning Iran tidying up existing and pressing territorial disputes, if any remain. Do you know if there are any?
And...yes, I am envisioning significant messiness. 😕 Alex wouldn't tell 'em no.
First, a disclaimer: I am coming at this assuming that Russia is about as strong as Russia is right now (in 2020), and is just lucky in that the factors weakening and disorganizing the rest of the world effect them much less. In other words, that Russia's apparent power comes from giving already collapsing jenga towers a push, claiming credit and then moving on to the next tower before people question the aura of power. If Russia is somehow powerful enough that it can quickly mount sequential major invasions or invade several places at once that's a bit different.
I am dubious that Iran would be likely to fall into civil war, there is that saying that every place is three meals away from revolution and Iran, much as the rest of the region is vulnerable if food imports either become hard to get or just too expensive. But just who is backing the factions in this civil war? It just seems to me that whoever could command a modicum of legitimacy and the loyalty of the army would come out on top fairly quickly. So bad civil unrest, coups, perhaps a short series of revolutions and counter-revolutions but actual civil war seems less likely to me, requiring either the dedicated focus of Russia or the army to be split on who is the legitimate authority.
So I am doubtful about the civil war part. Otherwise, it seems reasonable to me.
The way you talk about nukes gives me the impression that this Iran doesn't have the bomb, and IMO, it probably would. Especially with Pakistan falling into chaos - Pakistan has a certain ideological interest in making sure some Muslim state has nuclear weapons, is right next to Iran and the pair have had a warm and close relationship since Pakistani independence. But it may be Iran has a strong nuclear industry that could be weaponized quickly if they needed to, or has nuclear weapons that probably work but hasn't officially become a nuclear power in a similar way that Israel either could quickly become nuclear-capable or already is but doesn't announce they are because of diplomatic considerations.
Given Iran's history with Russia (pretty bad between 1747 and 1979) and the way Alexander treats other states, I imagine even the most friendly Iranian regime would feel better if they could wipe Moscow off the map if they needed to.
Well... A great deal of Afghanistan's issues are due to being a warzone for almost 50 years. If they've had relative peace for the last 40-50 years they'd be doing OK. It would still be a landlocked country but it could look alot like Jordan today does - relatively stable and with a good international reputation, but still very poor and struggling with the refugee problems that the disintegration of Pakistan and the Russian invasions of their northern neighbours would cause.
Things could go either way of course, but I would have thought that Afghanistan would actually be a surprisingly peaceful place if likely to be languishing under a government whose most important job is to be a good sycophant for Russia, Iran and India.
Maybe I am just too optimistic.
So, does Russia have basing rights on the Dardanelles, or is Turkey fully in control of the straits here?
This implies that Cyprus is no longer a major offshore banking destination for Russia (since I can't see Alexander giving Turkey the ability to manipulate his oligarch class). It further implies that Alexander was not a friend to the oligarchs who had offshored their money here. Together with Britain being imploded (and likely London property prices along with that), maybe Alexander rose to power in Russia by selling himself as Alexander, crusher of oligarchs. (At least until he'd installed his own cronies as a new oligarch class.)
What's the status of Greece again? In civil war currently? Does one of the factions allow Russian bases?
No suggestions for this part, I just think it has real interesting implications for the Commonwealth's foreign policy down the road...
Soooo. The Kurds get support for having a state in Iraqi Kurdisatan, in return for staying shtum as Syria and Turkey ethnically cleanse their parts of Kurdistan and drive refugees into what was Iraq?
...
Sounds depressingly plausible to me.
So, there's a few places that are covered under this. I am guessing most of them outside of Russia's Hedjaz protectorate are Iranian protectorates. But what about Pakistan? I can imagine Baluchistan being some sort of Iranian conquest or protectorate. I can see the North West frontier being made part of Afghanistan in order to give some Russophile Pashtun nationalists to secure some sort of legitimacy to rule Afghanistan. But what about the most populated parts? I can't see Iran or Afghanistan trying to claim any part of the Indus valley itself. And while maybe you could get really dystopian by making it a zone of Indian occupation, it would be kinda crazy for an Indian government to try treating over 200 million people like they do the Kashmiris...
I suspect that Pakistan would exist in some rump form. Probably a rump that has close but low-key relations with Iran.
Iraq used to be the Persian heartland for 2000 years - from the conquest of Babylonia until the Ottomans took the region. (Though its importance did decline after the Arab conquests, most of the dynasties that held the Iranian plateau also held Iraq and it was still the wealthiest part of the empire every time they held it.) And judging from where the Persian border usually ended up, I'd say the natural border was the Euphrates. On the East bank, the economic pull is towards the Persian Gulf, on the West bank, the economic pull its towards the Mediterranean.
I think if the new Iranian regime is smart, it will have a friendly Iraqi client it supports. But if they are dumb, I don't think it would be as bad as you are thinking.And
@PoptartProdigy hopefully this feedback helps.
fasquardon
I am dubious that Iran would be likely to fall into civil war, there is that saying that every place is three meals away from revolution and Iran, much as the rest of the region is vulnerable if food imports either become hard to get or just too expensive. But just who is backing the factions in this civil war? It just seems to me that whoever could command a modicum of legitimacy and the loyalty of the army would come out on top fairly quickly. So bad civil unrest, coups, perhaps a short series of revolutions and counter-revolutions but actual civil war seems less likely to me, requiring either the dedicated focus of Russia or the army to be split on who is the legitimate authority.
So I am doubtful about the civil war part. Otherwise, it seems reasonable to me.
The way you talk about nukes gives me the impression that this Iran doesn't have the bomb, and IMO, it probably would. Especially with Pakistan falling into chaos - Pakistan has a certain ideological interest in making sure some Muslim state has nuclear weapons, is right next to Iran and the pair have had a warm and close relationship since Pakistani independence. But it may be Iran has a strong nuclear industry that could be weaponized quickly if they needed to, or has nuclear weapons that probably work but hasn't officially become a nuclear power in a similar way that Israel either could quickly become nuclear-capable or already is but doesn't announce they are because of diplomatic considerations.
Given Iran's history with Russia (pretty bad between 1747 and 1979) and the way Alexander treats other states, I imagine even the most friendly Iranian regime would feel better if they could wipe Moscow off the map if they needed to.
Well... A great deal of Afghanistan's issues are due to being a warzone for almost 50 years. If they've had relative peace for the last 40-50 years they'd be doing OK. It would still be a landlocked country but it could look alot like Jordan today does - relatively stable and with a good international reputation, but still very poor and struggling with the refugee problems that the disintegration of Pakistan and the Russian invasions of their northern neighbours would cause.
Things could go either way of course, but I would have thought that Afghanistan would actually be a surprisingly peaceful place if likely to be languishing under a government whose most important job is to be a good sycophant for Russia, Iran and India.
Maybe I am just too optimistic.
So, does Russia have basing rights on the Dardanelles, or is Turkey fully in control of the straits here?
This implies that Cyprus is no longer a major offshore banking destination for Russia (since I can't see Alexander giving Turkey the ability to manipulate his oligarch class). It further implies that Alexander was not a friend to the oligarchs who had offshored their money here. Together with Britain being imploded (and likely London property prices along with that), maybe Alexander rose to power in Russia by selling himself as Alexander, crusher of oligarchs. (At least until he'd installed his own cronies as a new oligarch class.)
What's the status of Greece again? In civil war currently? Does one of the factions allow Russian bases?
No suggestions for this part, I just think it has real interesting implications for the Commonwealth's foreign policy down the road...
Soooo. The Kurds get support for having a state in Iraqi Kurdisatan, in return for staying shtum as Syria and Turkey ethnically cleanse their parts of Kurdistan and drive refugees into what was Iraq?
...
Sounds depressingly plausible to me.
So, there's a few places that are covered under this. I am guessing most of them outside of Russia's Hedjaz protectorate are Iranian protectorates. But what about Pakistan? I can imagine Baluchistan being some sort of Iranian conquest or protectorate. I can see the North West frontier being made part of Afghanistan in order to give some Russophile Pashtun nationalists to secure some sort of legitimacy to rule Afghanistan. But what about the most populated parts? I can't see Iran or Afghanistan trying to claim any part of the Indus valley itself. And while maybe you could get really dystopian by making it a zone of Indian occupation, it would be kinda crazy for an Indian government to try treating over 200 million people like they do the Kashmiris...
I suspect that Pakistan would exist in some rump form. Probably a rump that has close but low-key relations with Iran.
Iraq used to be the Persian heartland for 2000 years - from the conquest of Babylonia until the Ottomans took the region. (Though its importance did decline after the Arab conquests, most of the dynasties that held the Iranian plateau also held Iraq and it was still the wealthiest part of the empire every time they held it.) And judging from where the Persian border usually ended up, I'd say the natural border was the Euphrates. On the East bank, the economic pull is towards the Persian Gulf, on the West bank, the economic pull its towards the Mediterranean.
I think if the new Iranian regime is smart, it will have a friendly Iraqi client it supports. But if they are dumb, I don't think it would be as bad as you are thinking.And
@PoptartProdigy hopefully this feedback helps.
fasquardon
- Location
- Rockford, USA
- Pronouns
- They/Them
Indeed, which is why I specifically note that there was civil strife but no civil war. 😜
Per the background folders on page one, on fire. Civil war. None of the factions permit Russian basing, but that's fine with Turkey in the Russosphere. Basing aplenty.
1) Iran are a nuclear threshold state today, and would have been next door to Pakistan when the Indians and Russians fucked them.
Pakistani research and nuclear establishment would have primarily gone to Iran, with fewer scientists to Egypt and Turkey. I'd bet on their having the bomb, even if they are pulling a modern day Israel with neither confirm nor deny.
Probably not relevant to the story.
They don't seem to be territorially expansionist either; influence yes, but not annexation. And I expect them to be smart enough to stay the fuck out of Pakistan, with both Russian and Indian presence there.
2)I dont know enough about Kurdish issues to give any sort of detailed commentary.
And I think I've said all I want to say on the Israeli issue. Unless it has further
3) Turks are prickly enough that I doubt there are any Russian military bases on their territory.
And after seeing what happened to Pakistan, with damn good reason. Passage rights yes. But actually having a permanent Russian military presence is probably not going to happen, and Turkey is a big enough country to make that stick. Not that the Russians need it if they invaded all the Central Asian republics bordering Turkey, and have either invaded or control most of the nations on the Black Sea.
If I had to bet, Russia's Mediterranean basing remains in Syria. Maybe Libya as well.
I can't honestly see the Turks pushing further into Cyprus and seeking even more direct confrontation with the EU.
But unless Turkish-EU relations are relevant to the story in the future, it doesn't need fleshing out.
4)Its worth noting that a lot of ME countries have substantial sovereign wealth funds, that even if they took a battering in the Collapse
Enough to sustain a significant diaspora population on the east coast of Africa, say, or in other parts of MENA.
Qatar has 330k citizens and a sovereign wealth fund of 340 billion dollars.
The UAE has 1.4 million citizens and a combined sovereign wealth fund of 1.3 trillion dollars. Kuwait has 1.3 million citizens and a combined sovereign wealth fund of 574 billion dollars. Saudi Arabia has ~19 million citizens, but a SWF of only ~900 billion dollars.
I dont expect you intend to spend much time on the Middle East, but these would make for interesting complications if you choose to
Even assuming those funds took 90% haircuts in the Collapse, that's still a fair amount of capital floating around, attached to the remnants of zombie govts in some instances and supporting populations in diaspora. Or just some filth rich billionaires.
5)I have opinions about Africa, so I'll say nothing in the meantime about Egypt there.
Last edited:
- Location
- Queensland, Australia
Africa is going to be... Fun to resolve. I fully expect that the African nations of today are very different from what exist in the quest. On one hand, there's likely less internal tension because the nation's splintered into cultural and tribal groupings or ethnically cleansed their territory. On the other hand there's a lot more border disputes due to legacy claims on territory thanks to the splintering and 'legitimate' 'successor' governments. Also retaliation attacks due to ethnic cleansing of one tribal grouping in a nation where they were a minority only for the neighbouring nation that had them as a majority to take a dim view of it.
Really hope we have some people with a first hand view or extensive study to help hash it out.
Really hope we have some people with a first hand view or extensive study to help hash it out.
1) Africa is BIG. Judging the second largest continent by what happened in Rawanda and Sudan is like judging all of the Americas by what happened in Guatemala and Colombia.
2) States are tough, odds are that the map is mostly the same.
3) To a great degree the level of development in a modern economy depends on education level and population density. Both things that will be much higher in the Africa of the 2070s than they are today - through sheer momentum of work that has already been done if nothing else.
4) Most of Africa is a long way from Russia.
I am fairly confident that most of Africa is wealthier per capita than the Commonwealth is at this point. Nigeria is likely a major regional power or minor superpower, countries like Ethiopia and Angola are likely middle-income powers like 2020s Turkey. Egypt and South Africa have very good odds to be prosperous and powerful. I am sure there are parts of the continent that are doing relatively poorly too - especially if Lind's talk about Victorian armies going on crusade with Russia in North Africa is given the canon seal of approval. There could be some really delightful Victorian-Russian "crusader states" along the coast from Morocco to Libya.
Exactly how rosy the picture is depends on how well disease control efforts have gone, how well appropriate agricultural advances have spread, how much more roads and railroads 2070s Africa has compared to 2020s Africa, how levels of trust have evolved through the crises of more than 50 years of history. All of these will vary country by country.
fasquardon
- Location
- Rockford, USA
- Pronouns
- They/Them
Thus why I deliberately left the specifics of the resolution of Cyprus unstated.
Turkey got what it wanted. If this happened today, that would not mean a Turkish conquest. It doesn't have to mean that here, either. It just means that Turkey was able to dictate terms for the situation with Russian support and a lack of coherent opposition (the EU having been on fire at the time). Does Collapse-era Turkey support a two-state solution? Do they support a unified, federal Cyprus? Something more exotic? It doesn't actually matter because Cyprus is of negligible significance on its own.I said:
One thing I am fairly certain of is that they wouldn't have been interested in an annexation, specifically because they'd have been looking long-term.
Nothing of what Alexander has set up in the Middle East is stable, after all. To one degree or another, I expect most his sphere there has been keeping their options open.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
It occurs to me that the Russians may very well have enlisted the aid of Victorian sepoys, if you will, as proxies in various conflicts elsewhere in the undeveloped world. However, the actual Victorian Army is kept very busy brutalizing North America, and their doctrine is kind of shit even if they're fighting relatively mediocre opposition (e.g. I'm pretty sure the Algerian army could put up as good or better a fight than the Commonwealth did, soldier-for-soldier).
So any such activity would have to take the form of the Russians recruiting from other Victorian military-age males not enlisted in the army, and probably paying both the recruits and the Victorian government to do so.
I'm not sure if that would happen. It's not inconceivable to me, but it's not inevitable.
- Location
- Academy City
- Pronouns
- They
I'd expect any Victorian Sepoys to be CMC units. They're in theory the most elite, their equipment is better - Cold War era equipment is still very cheap for Alex and far more capable, and if he needs to uparm them for a given conflict it's less retraining -, they don't have the same duties of stomping American successor states to take them away from, and they all know who calls the shots; he doesn't have to worry about Joe Victoria actually believing they're allied countries and blowing off his orders if something happens to the chain of command.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
That might actually explain a lot- and help to explain how the Waffen CMC have been able to maintain a higher qualitative edge despite presumably not seeing combat in North America as often.
EDIT:
On the other hand, if the Crusaders, as you say, "know who calls the shots," I have to wonder why they haven't fallen in line along with the Inquisitors behind Blackwell. If they're fanatical enough to rebel against Blackwell, are they really aware enough to listen to the Russians?
EDIT:
On the other hand, if the Crusaders, as you say, "know who calls the shots," I have to wonder why they haven't fallen in line along with the Inquisitors behind Blackwell. If they're fanatical enough to rebel against Blackwell, are they really aware enough to listen to the Russians?
Last edited: