Was Churchill right about Balkans and Turkey

  • 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.
Considering what the guerillas did to the germans I don´t think UK would have na easy time there :) Not to mention war exhaustion meant that people would have trouble backing Churchill in yet another intervention.

Besides, using force would be all or nothing - either they would get a very sympathetic regime (after further bloodshed), or lose and get one that was VERY anti-West. Splitting the country in Croatia and Serbia would also generate complications due to how aligned with the nazis the croats were... the serbs would certainly align VERY closely with Moscow.

Except their were royalist guerrillas too, and if they were bolstered by having the British army march through Belgrade and liberate the capital....
 
Translation for those who are not from Yugoslavia:

If you let in any immigrants or allow people to move around then the racial, ethnic, religious and national character of the various regions of Yugoslavia will become more open and accepting of one another and it will no longer be the unique place that people there love and cherish. For people willing to kill each other off because 1,000 years ago their ancestors pronounced their last names with a different accent such a change of values would amount to a genocide.

It's unlikely that a forumite with a Romanian handle is talking about Yugoslavia.
 
Except their were royalist guerrillas too, and if they were bolstered by having the British army march through Belgrade and liberate the capital....

Perhaps, but then you probably would have either a civil war or a very bloody repression, and I don´t know if the brits would really like that. Churchill, probably :)

Also, I bet it would be noticed by many brit politicians that fighting for a balkanic country is hardly worth it (see WW1 for reference heh), so why do it again? Greece at least was much more strategical.

How divided were the serbs in 1945?
 
The amount of hatred for power politics in this thread disturbs me.
 
The amount of hatred for power politics in this thread disturbs me.

Cynicism in politics is the reason we need cynicism in politics. If only the cynics would stop, but then we wouldn't be able to stop the other side's cynics.
 
The amount of hatred for power politics in this thread disturbs me.

Power politics is always worth hating. It may be right, and it may be valuable and useful but that doesn't make it pleasant. In fact that's pretty much the definition of power politics. Not doing things that seem morally right or pleasant in order to reap other types of rewards.
 
Power politics is always worth hating. It may be right, and it may be valuable and useful but that doesn't make it pleasant. In fact that's pretty much the definition of power politics. Not doing things that seem morally right or pleasant in order to reap other types of rewards.
Power politics doesn't have to be about doing nasty things. It can also be about threatening to do nasty things.

I detest politicians who claim they want to govern without power politics, because it makes them look like fools. Being aware of and understanding power politics should be important for every politician - because they need to recognize that there ARE nasty things people can do to each other, and recognize that other people will definitely resort to them if pressed, or if that promises an advantage.

It's like during the cold war - there was always the specter of war hanging over everyone's head. Successful politicians, especially those from weak nations, understood how the game worked, what the power-political logic of any given situation was, and adapted accordingly even if they did not (or could not) actually play that game and invade other countries, order assassinations, or fund horrible guerilla movements.

Rejecting something always carries the danger that you also refuse to understand. That's why people should study how power politics works, and put themselves into the minds of someone capable of carrying out such nasty things. Understand the other side and anticipate its moves, and then plan your moves accordingly.
 
Power politics doesn't have to be about doing nasty things. It can also be about threatening to do nasty things.

I detest politicians who claim they want to govern without power politics, because it makes them look like fools. Being aware of and understanding power politics should be important for every politician - because they need to recognize that there ARE nasty things people can do to each other, and recognize that other people will definitely resort to them if pressed, or if that promises an advantage.

It's like during the cold war - there was always the specter of war hanging over everyone's head. Successful politicians, especially those from weak nations, understood how the game worked, what the power-political logic of any given situation was, and adapted accordingly even if they did not (or could not) actually play that game and invade other countries, order assassinations, or fund horrible guerilla movements.

Rejecting something always carries the danger that you also refuse to understand. That's why people should study how power politics works, and put themselves into the minds of someone capable of carrying out such nasty things. Understand the other side and anticipate its moves, and then plan your moves accordingly.

Agree completely. It's the basics of diplomacy.
 
Perhaps, but then you probably would have either a civil war or a very bloody repression, and I don´t know if the brits would really like that. Churchill, probably :)

Also, I bet it would be noticed by many brit politicians that fighting for a balkanic country is hardly worth it (see WW1 for reference heh), so why do it again? Greece at least was much more strategical.

How divided were the serbs in 1945?

Britain did not really fight in that part of the Balkans in WW1 and ATL Britain has had the recent experience of victory. Keeping the communists out would be high priority, for with Yugoslavia in the British orbit most of the Balkans, including Albania (presumably Bulgaria) Greece and possibly even Hungary are being kept out of the communist orbit.