• 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.
179px-Paul_von_Hindenburg_%281914%29_von_Nicola_Perscheid.jpg

Collapse of the Müller Government
And Hindenburg's Appointee
Hermann Müller had been Chancellor in 1920, but more notably from 1928 into early 1930 at the head of a broad, centrist coalition. From the onset, this coalition was built on shaky ground, its unity requiring the direct intervention of Gustav Stresemann who would die by 1929. Müller was the subject of attack by the right, both as a Social Democrat and as one who laid the foundation for concessions to the Allied Powers. The far-left was likewise antagonistic, as evident by the May Day violence between his cabinet and Thälmann's communists. KPD rhetoric decried Müller and the Social Democrats as "Social Fascists", thus severing any notion of cooperation among the left.

The Müller Government oversaw a number of reforms to insurance, but such goodwill was quickly evaporated by the economic ruin beginning in 1929. Increased coverage in a time of a failing economy required an injection of taxpayer money, which rarely curries political favor. Furthermore, the governing coalition fractured in disagreements over how precisely to raise the funds; though Müller himself was ready to concede to Heinrich Brüning's centrist compromise, the parliamentary Social Democrats vetoed such measures.

No doubt contributing to the decline of this coordination was the unfortunate health of Müller, whose very life was threatened by illness for several months throughout 1929. Communication broke down and he lacked the status and backing to wrangle the chaotic happenings of Weimar politics. Perhaps more importantly, Müller lacked a relationship with President von Hindenburg, who had already prepared to distance himself closer to the right.

Through the authority of the presidential office, Hindenburg could have secured for Müller the ability to enforce his plans, maintaining some sense of stability at the expense of democracy. At the behest of his advisers and of his own thoughts, Hindenburg denied Müller this support. Without any other recourse, Müller was forced to resign March 27, 1930.

Already, President von Hindenburg and his cabal of advisers had prepared for this inevitability. As early as August 1929, Heinrich Brüning had been approached by Kurt von Schleicher, a military man who wielded the immense influence of the army and Hindenburg. By his own hand, von Schleicher had helped organize a number of intrigues that accelerated the implosion of the Müller Government. Brüning was contacted numerous times before the fall of Müller, with the plan being that Müller would be discarded after becoming essentially the fall man in instituting the unpopular Young Plan.

President von Hindenburg himself had not spoken to Brüning until February 1930, at the recommendation of von Schleicher. Hindenburg was impressed, chiefly by Brüning's experience as a machine gun officer. More practically, Brüning held sway among centrists, especially within his own party of Zentrum, and was a trained economist. Brüning offered solutions to the immediate problems of Germany, namely those of economic importance, speaking on the necessity of liberating the nation from the intense burdens imposed by foreign nations as well as balancing the disastrous budget left by Müller.

Only two days following the resignation of Müller, President von Hindenburg appointed Heinrich Brüning as chancellor. Tasked with the unenviable hardship of lifting Germany from its languish, at a period of intense political polarization, Brüning prepared to propose his policies to a hostile parliament, while Hindenburg and his advisers readied themselves to implement a system that would shore up their ideal state.
 
248px-Royal_Coat_of_Arms_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png

THE FINAL REPORT
of the
INDIAN STATUTORY COMMISSION


Dated, 5 May, 1930.

Members

The Rt. Hon. Sir John Simon, KCVO, MP: Chairman
The Viscount Burnham, GCMG CH
The Lord Strathcona and Mount Royal
The Hon. E. C. G. Cadogan, CB, MP
The Rt. Hon. V. Hartshorn, MP
Colonel the Rt. Hon. G. R. Lane Fox, MP
Major C. R. Attlee, MP
A SUMMARY OF MEMORANDA from the REPORT
IN CONCLUSION.

—In summary of this report the Commission, noting all aforementioned facts and evidences relevant to the purpose and investigations of the Commission:
—It is agreed to by the members of this Commission that the current climate within India will not long accept the political and economic status of Crown rule as it now stands and, furthermore, that current Crown rule is insufficient to nurture the development, economic and political, of India and the United Kingdom.
—That the large majority of Indians with postsecondary education oppose the current status of Crown rule in India, and that popular opposition to Crown rule being a growing trend, will be conducive only to social discord and chaos in the future; and that the continued organization of powers and duties of the Crown and His Majesty's Government would not be conducive to the general peace and stability in India.
—The following is thereby recommended by this Commission to His Majesty the King and His Majesty's Government:


—That, after a period of governmental transition and adjustment, Crown rule in India be totally dissolved;
—That from direct rule in India a dominion be created, the monarch of which shall be His Majesty King George the Fifth, and responsible government introduced;
—That this dominion maintain a federal character owing to the great linguistic and cultural differences of the regions of India, as well as the differing needs and demands of those groups;
—That democratic and representative government within India, after the dissolution of Crown rule there, be perpetually supported;
—That, owing to religious and cultural conflicts within India, the federalization of India and the creation of its status as Dominion be delayed for a short period, as a guarantee of continued and improved social and political stability;
—That, nonetheless, responsible local government be introduced at the earliest possible convenience among the provinces and native states.
 
7x2jphSAo0gmz_T6LtRatq64ErSQW21A60QXVnQ5o2842ayaeSwILU0MNgJbQl_ctnccqMY_3Qtmn8a5N6JripaFRLZBG5-aNn5_0fWoizxaQsBRbALQdEfUvu5eFq_KTY6s1dE


From The Office of the Secretary of State for India
Addressed to the Viceroy of India

TOP SECRET
Your Excellency,

The Right Honourable Sir John Simon has produced the results of his investigation and commission into the future of India in the British Empire to His Majesty's Government, who in turn has instructed me to inform you that the results of the commission are to become the official policy of His Majesty's Government towards India. Attached is a copy of the final report of the Indian Statutory Commission. As you can see, His Majesty's Government desires to enact responsible local government in India by the year 1934, with India being established as a Dominion state in the vein of both Australia and Canada by the year 1937. Parliament is currently drafting a bill that would establish a transitional period in which responsible local government can be established in India.

Additionally, His Majesty's Government has instructed me to inform you that you shall be the one who will deliver the news of the ISC to the Indian people. This matter is of paramount importance to the preservation and maintenance of the British Empire, and to His Majesty.

Respectfully,
William Wedgewood Benn, Secretary of State for India
 
ef264bf3cbaacec14c9ee5a7cec4946e.png

Introducing of the new Turkish alphabet in Kayseri, on September 20, 1928.

Inkılâp

İleri Marşı

“The revolutionaries are those who are capable of understanding the real aspirations in the mind and the conscience of the people whom they desire to orient towards the revolution of progress and renovation.”
- Mustafa Kemal
“Hâkimiyet bilâ kaydü şart milletindir. Sovereignty belongs to nation without any reservation or condition.” The first article of the constitution enacted by the Grand National Assembly clearly stated that the Turkish state was to be built on self-determination and government by the people. But according to the Koran, it is clear that in a true Islamic state, sovereignty belongs to Allah alone. The meaning of these simple words was thus clear. The new Turkey forged by Mustafa Kemal and his associates wouldn’t be an Islamic one like the failed Ottoman Empire, but rather a country of the Turkish nation. Even though the constitution that ruled Turkey from 1921 to 1924 didn’t officially comment on the type of government, the Grand National Assembly already effectively acted as a republican government. The Republic was only officially proclaimed after the Ankara government had received its last needed legitimacy by concluding the Great Attack, with Mustafa Kemal becoming the first president of the Turkish Republic. The Sultan in his bid to fight back against the Nationalists had conspired with reactionary forces, even acquiring a fatwa from the Şeyḫ-ül-Islām‎ declaring the Nationalists to be un-Islamic. But by actively co-operating with the British and the Greeks he had lost his legitimacy even in the eyes of the most devout Muslims of the Empire. Initially, to further national unity, the National Assembly seemed willing to allow a place for the Caliphate in the new regime, agreeing to the appointment of Mehmed's cousin Abd-ül-Medjid II as Caliph upon Mehmed's departure. In one of his letters to the Caliph, Mustafa Kemal fiercely attacked the age-old Islamic institution. “Your office, the Caliphate, is nothing more than a historic relic. It has no justification for existence. It is a piece of impertinence that you should dare write to any of my secretaries!” But when foreign Muslims, members of the Indian-based Khilafat Movement started to rouse the population of Turkey against the new government by urging them to preserve the Ottoman Caliphate for the sake of Islam, Mustafa Kemal had had enough. Decrying the foreign intervention that according to him was an insult to the hard-fought sovereignty of the Turkish nation, he had the National Assembly abolish the Caliphate on March 3, 1924. To make the political, cultural and religious break between the Sultanate and Republic clear the Grand National Assembly listed 150 members of the old elité and the House of Osman as personae non gratae.

Turkey thus conclusively abandoned the theocratic order of the Sultan based on the rules of the Koran, to a rational administration based solely on human “national will”. Turkey, from a community based on Islamic solidarity, the umma, opted for the modern societal life based upon the Turkish nation, which the Turks themselves had started to discover under the Kemalist banner during the War of Independence. Mustafa Kemal, a republican and secularist was both anti-Ottoman and anti-clerical; and as a nationalist who only fought to save his country, he had naturally an anti-imperialist stand. Explaining his dismissal of the imam assigned to the Turkish Grand National Assembly, Mustafa Kemal stated. “We did not win the war with prayers, but with the blood of our soldiers.” Definitely, the political order was far more socially advanced and progressive than the Turkish society; it was not a spontaneous outcome of the then existing conditions, but rather, a choice imposed to the people by the new ruling elité. Had there been a referendum, one could have easily predicted the Sultan’s victory in keeping his title, despite the military victory of the Kemalist republican forces against the occupying powers and by extension those of the Ottoman order. Mustafa Kemal and his friends knew this; that is why the Sultanate had only been abolished in November 1922, immediately after the decisive victory against the Greek troops on the Afyonkarahisar battlefield in late August. However, this also forced the new government to pursue reforms slowly, as heavy backlash from the conservatives could easily be predicted. A cornerstone in garnering legitimacy for the endeavor was the public support won in the War of Independence, which as showcased in the previous quote was used to legitimize the actions of the Grand National Assembly. The new Turkish Constitution, based on the principle of national sovereignty adopted in April 1924; the “new order” now had its legal frame. Shariah courts were abolished in the new constitution, and work began on a new progressive legal system based on Western examples. The religious orders and their premises were banned during the same month. The formerly all-powerful Sufi tarikas were gone, greatly reducing the level of organization of the conservative forces. On February 25, 1925 parliament passed a law stating that religion was not to be used as a tool in politics.

The parliament in Ankara was composed of different types of deputies. To have a harmony among his followers, Mustafa Kemal and his colleagues had formed the Müdafaa-ı Hukuk grubu, “the group of Defence of the Law”. In January 1923, Mustafa Kemal announced that this group would be transformed to a Party named “Halk Fırkası” or People's Party. In May 1923, the parliament called a bill for new elections, most probably because Mustafa Kemal and his colleagues wanted to guarantee the passing of the soon-to-be finished peace treaties negotiated at Lausanne. The People's Party was officially founded only after the 1923 elections. The 1923 elections were definitely the victory of the forthcoming Party, because of its leaders reputation after the military victory of the War of Independence, effectively eliminating opposition groups from the assembly. The founding ideology of the People’s Party came to be known as Kemalism, and its tenets were represented by the six arrows of the party emblem: Republicanism (cumhuriyetçilik), Populism (halkçılık), Nationalism (milliyetçilik), Secularism (laiklik), Statism (devletçilik), and Reformism (inkılâpçılık/devrimcilik). The principles came to be recognized as unchangeable and sacrosanct. In fact, the Arabic-originating word “inkılâp” is one of the most difficult in Kemalist vocabulary to find a precise equivalent for in Western languages. Some translate inkılâp as "reform", while others prefer "revolution". However, as a matter of fact, the word “ihtilal” corresponds to “revolution”. In the short speech that Mustafa Kemal delivered on November 5, 1925, on the occasion of the inauguration ceremonies of the new Law School of Ankara. Mustafa Kemal started by asking “What is the Turkish inkılâp?” And without waiting for an answer from others, he went on to say that: “Inkılâp, other than its immediate meaning of revolution, implies a much more extensive transformation.” This principle advocated the need for fundamental and continuous social change through revolution as a strategy to achieve a modern society, there was no possibility of return to the old systems because they were deemed backward.

Ironically enough, serious and organized political resistance towards the reforms of Mustafa Kemal only began once he pressured his colleagues to create an opposition party in order to establish a tradition of multi-party democracy to the Turkish Republic. “Terakkiperver Cumhuriyet Fırkası” (Progressive Republican Party) was established by Ali Fuat Paşa, Kâzım Karabekir, Refet Paşa, Rauf Bey and Adnan Bey upon President Mustafa Kemal’s request on 17 November 1924. Following this, the People’s Party changed its name to the “Republican People’s Party”. On domestic policy, the new opposition party supported a liberal democracy, but was blamed by the government for being the vehicle of Islamists in attempting to subvert the newly established government and its reforms. It was unclear to which extent the leaders of the party, who included many war heroes such as general Karabekir, were involved with the actions of the infiltrators. Nevertheless, soon after the establishment of the party the former Ottoman Hamidiye irregular soldiers, consisting mostly of Kurds and Zazas, rebelled in the East under a Zaza Nakşbendiyye Sufi leader named Şeyh Said and an assassination attempt was made on Mustafa Kemal in İzmir. The Islamist revivalists laid siege to Diyarbakır in March, and the situation remained extremely tense in the Southeast. In these circumstances the existence of an opposition party, especially one with Islamist sympathies could not be allowed. The Progressive Republican Party was closed on June 5 1925 by the government, and its leaders court-martialed and sentenced to prison, albeit some were swiftly released due to their high status and. Şeyh Said was captured in June after a short guerilla war and executed. The destruction of the revolt and other organized resistance to reforms meant that Mustafa Kemal could push even further with them. In November 1925 Western headgear was officially adopted with the “Hat Law”. The day before the Hat Law was passed in parliament; a group of protesters in the eastern city of Erzurum flocked to the governorship building and threw stones at the lodgings of the state-assigned governor. Three people died when soldiers fired at the crowds to protect the building. Soon afterward martial law was declared and the army corps was deployed to the city. A new civil code, inspired by the Swiss code was enacted in February 1926, transforming the legal basis of marriage, family and property. The code granted expanded civil rights to women and prohibited polygamy, to the great shock of many conservatives in a country where polygamy had been extremely widespread. Also, a new penal code, following the existing Italian penal code, and a new code of civil obligations were adopted, respectively in March and April of the same year. On the other hand, the greatly controversial extraordinary Independence Tribunals were abolished in March 1927. These had been armed with extraordinary powers against army deserters and suspected “enemies of the revolution”. On April 10 1928, Article 2 of the Constitution of 1924, which stipulated that Islam was the official religion of the Turkish State, was annulled. Furthermore, despite of heavy criticism from conservatives, the first female lawyers and judges of Turkey began their work by 1929, and the new municipal law enacted on April 3 1929 enabled women to participate in municipal elections; both as candidates and voters. This was no longer progressive only on standards of an Eastern, Islamic country, but also when compared to the Western world.

Mustafa Kemal very well knew that military success alone could not solve the social problems faced by the country. He thought that, one who “conquers with a sword” will be losing before one who does it “with a plough”. The country should be developed by all means, not only socially but also economically in order to guarantee the future and broad public support of the progressive regime. After the nationalization of the extremely limited and undeveloped petroleum and steel industry in 1926, a new law was enacted in 1927 to encourage industrialization, offering incentives to the private sector. But given the circumstances, state's intervention in the economy, which is a state-capitalist model of development, was necessary. Economic statism would give priority to private enterprise and to individual activities, but at the same time, see that the needs of the masses were satisfied. Since there was a lot to accomplish in this domain, state-owned enterprises would control the key sectors of the Turkish economy. Mustafa Kemal believed that a national bourgeoisie would in the long run come into being, but meanwhile feared that the deterioration of the world's economic conditions on the aftermath of the 1929 crisis would seriously affect Turkey. Mixed-economy was indeed the optimal solution, where the private sector lacked enough capital and foreign investment was still hesitant, following the abolition of the traditional “capitulations” and a series of nationalizations of some enterprises and public services owned or controlled by Europeans. The most important of these were the railways, and priority was given to their nationalization into the State Railways of the Republic of Turkey (TCDD). The TCDD was also given enough funds and support from Turkish Army engineers to quickly complete the unification and standardization of the railway network, so that it could be used as a tool to help private industrialists and merchants to move their goods around the country, which still mostly relied on internal trade as the basis of economic activity.

Furthermore, Mustafa Kemal regarded education as the force that would galvanize the nation into true and lasting social and economic development. With the changes to constitution and several other laws Turkey initiated a most ambitious program of schooling children and adults. From grade school to graduate school, education was made free, secular, and co-educational. Religious schools, the medrese were banned with the “Tevhid-i Tedrisat Kanunu” (Law of Unification of Education). Primary education was declared compulsory. The Turkish Armed Forces played such an important part in the construction of new schools and the spread of literacy that Mustafa Kemal came to herald them as the “Army of Enlightenment”. With pencil or chalk in hand, he personally instructed children and adults in schoolrooms, parks, and other places, coming to be regarded not only as the leader, but also as a teacher and a father of the entire Turkish nation. The most difficult change in any society is probably a language reform. Under Mustafa Kemal’s leadership, Turkey undertook the world's swiftest and most extensive language reform to date. In 1928, in order to bring the Turkish Republic decisively to the modern Western world, Mustafa Kemal decided that the Arabic script, which had been used by the Ottomans and their predecessors for a thousand years, should be replaced with the Latin alphabet. Mustafa Kemal asked the experts: “How long would it take?” Most of them replied: “At least five years.” The answer was: “We shall do it. Within five months.” As the 1920s came to an end, Turkey had fully and functionally adopted a new writing system with 29 letters (8 vowels and 21 consonants). The simplifying language reform in fact enabled children and adults to read and write within a few months, and to study Western languages with greater effectiveness. This of course presented a problem to the government. The Koran, the sacred book of Islam was written in Arabic, and the mere act of translating it was considered sacrilegious by Islamic law. Protests had erupted in Istanbul in 1924 over a translation, and parliament-approved projects of the Directorate of Religious Affairs had been cancelled after resistance from conservatives or by the very translators themselves. Not only was the religious language of Turkey tainted with foreign influence, but also the written official language used by the administration, newspapers and the entire public sphere. Thousands of words, and some grammatical devices, from the Arabic and Persian, however still held a tight grip over Ottoman Turkish. In fact over 80 percent of the written language in 1920s was loanwords, mostly from Arabic and Persian and to a lesser extent French. To further such a development of the Turkish language back towards its roots, Arabic and Persian courses were abolished by a new law in September of 1929. Much still remained to be done, not only in the field of education, but also with broader culture and society. And above all the Turkish economy, which had barely been reformed so far, had to be addressed.

“He is a weak ruler who needs religion to uphold his government; it is as if he would catch his people in a trap. My people are going to learn the principles of democracy, the dictates of truth and the teachings of science. Superstition must go. Let them worship as they will; every man can follow his own conscience, provided it does not interfere with sane reason or bid him against the liberty of his fellow-men.”
- Mustafa Kemal
 
Last edited:
A Few Months Later

summer-2004-hoover-microphones-m%5B1%5D_1.jpg

"The sudden threat of unemployment and especially the recollection of the economic consequences of previous crashes under a much less secured financial system created unwarranted pessimism and fear. It was recalled that past storms of similar character had resulted in retrenchment of construction, reduction of wages, and laying off of workers. The natural result was the tendency of business agencies throughout the country to pause in their plans and proposals for continuation and extension of their businesses, and this hesitation unchecked could in itself intensify into a depression with widespread unemployment and suffering.

I have, therefore, instituted systematic, voluntary measures of cooperation with the business institutions and with State and municipal authorities to make certain that fundamental businesses of the country shall continue as usual, that wages and therefore consuming power shall not be reduced, and that a special effort shall be made to expand construction work in order to assist in equalizing other deficits in employment. Due to the enlarged sense of cooperation and responsibility which has grown in the business world during the past few years the response has been remarkable and satisfactory. We have canvassed the Federal Government and instituted measures of prudent expansion in such work that should be helpful, and upon which the different departments will make some early recommendations to Congress.

I am convinced that through these measures we have reestablished confidence. Wages should remain stable. A very large degree of industrial unemployment and suffering which would otherwise have occurred has been prevented. Agricultural prices have reflected the returning confidence. The measures taken must be vigorously pursued until normal conditions are restored."

-Excerpt from President Herbert Hoover's State of the Union Address, December 3, 1929

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The effects from the October crash still resonate within America in the months following. Though early efforts were undertaken to limit the effects of the crisis, the federal government's policy was to not have it be too involved with recovery, leaving it up to the states and private businesses. However, those initiatives were doomed from the start. President Hoover's insistence on ensuring that the federal government does not get too involved with recovery prevented certain federal programs from achieving what was expected of them. However, all hope is not lost. Congress has unveiled new plans and bills to aide in recovery and to ensure that American jobs and industry is protected through the crisis.

One such way that Congress planned on ensuring protection of American jobs and industry was through a new tariff. This belief was championed by the Republican Senator from Utah, Reed Smoot. Smoot believed that a new tariff was the best way to help protect America from the possibility of an international economic crisis, and wrote "The world is paying for its ruthless destruction of life and property in the World War and for its failure to adjust purchasing power to productive capacity during the industrial revolution of the decade following the war." His co-sponsor was a Republican Representative from Oregon, Willis C. Hawley. As such, the proposed act to increase tariffs was called the "Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act". The basic idea of the act was to increase tariffs on over 20,000 imported goods, both agricultural and industrial.

330px-Smoot_and_Hawley_standing_together%2C_April_11%2C_1929.jpg

(Hawley (left) and Smoot (right))

However, President Hoover was opposed to the Act in general. While he supported the increase of tariffs on agricultural products (as seen in his campaign promises), he also supported a decrease of tariffs on industrial products, something that the bill contradicts. In fact, after being elected, Hoover asked congress to pass his tariff plan. When congress responded with the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, Hoover expressed his opposition by stating that the Act was "vicious, extortionate, and obnoxious", and as a threat to international cooperation in a time of economic uncertainty. Many economists also voiced concern over the Tariff Act, stating it would harm the US greatly if passed.

Even though the President and many economists opposed the Tariff, the Republican party was adamantly in support of the Act. In May of 1929, the House bill passed with 264 votes for and 147 votes against (244 of the votes for were Republican representatives). The bill was then sent to the Senate, where it is currently being debated upon.
 
148px-Badge_of_the_Viceroy_of_India.svg.png

A Statement by the Office of the Viceroy of India
His Majesty's Government has informed me that the Indian Statutory Commission has come to the decision that India shall be receiving responsible local government. His Majesty's Government is fully prepared to grant India the status of a Dominion, and is already preparing to do so. Local elections shall be held in India no later than 1934, and His Majesty's Government is fully wiling to grant Dominion status to India upon successful local elections and the establishment. His Majesty wishes for peace and prosperity for His Indian subjects, and asks that all violent protests cease, as to ensure a smooth and successful transfer of power to the Indian people in the coming years.
 
"Having just received word from the office of the Viceroy, I am more than ecstatic that Britain has finally recognized the inevitable, the desire and wish of the Indian people, and taken the path which can only lead to a better future between our two people. The provincial elections will form an important step towards the freedom of India, our right to self-rule and our right to decide our own future. While I applaud the British government their newest decision in response to the Salt March, then I do so with hesitation.

While the British government has promised that by 1934, there shall be provincial elections taking place across India, then the same promise have not been given in regards to national elections or the date which the transfer of Dominion status shall occur. A clear date must be announce so that we can plan accordingly, so that India can prepare to take its place as a proper dominion. The expressions and words of which the Viceroy used in his statement, is too vague. We cannot have our right and desire to self-rule, depend on the political winds within Westminster, to be decided at later points by British politicians when they deem India ready. We have been down that path many times, and every time it has led us here. A proper date, at which no matter what may occur in between, India will receive the status of dominion and self-rule shall happen.

The Viceroyalty has asked that all protest cease against British rule following this announcement. To that we shall agree on the condition that all political prisoners are released, if India is to charter a new path, then we must do so as a nation, with no politicians in British jails and a pardon for their offenses.

Finally, it must be recognized that it must be India itself that leads the charge into this new future. We cannot once again have a similar occurrence to the Indian Statutory Commission, where the future of India is decided by a commission made up of Englishmen, without a single Indian representative. The draft of laws, administration and so forth must be decided by Indians for the future of India. Britain will have a say, will have its voice and its place at the table, but the charge and responsibility must be with India. The new status of Dominion for India cannot be given with good prospects if its laws which govern it conduct, rule its people and its constitution is decided far away in Britain, by those whom shall not live under it. It must be India that makes the final decisions in regards to our government, administration, judicial system, our military and all the ways in which we govern ourselves."

-Jawaharlal Nehru
 
GM NOTE: Reminder orders are due in LESS THAN 4 HOURS from now. Please get them in.

Also want to announce (lately, in some cases) minor roster changes:

Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes: @Luftwafer
Republic of Austria: @Mikkel Glahder
United Mexican States: @luc124

________


United Mexican States
Politics & Economy
Government: Authoritarian federal constitutional republic
Leader(s): President Emilio Portes Gil
Ideology: Social democracy
Alignment: None
Capital: Mexico City
Political stability: 49%
Population: 17.175 m. (1.77% growth last year)
GDP: $ 27,787 m. (-6.30% growth last year)
Economic status: Agrarian, depression, mixed economy, $ 1,618 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 2,750 m., 18.99% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 3,312 m.
Balance: $ - 562 m.
Treasury: $ - 15,935 m.
Infrastructure: (4/5) Poor
Administration: (3/5) Poor
Education: (5/5) Poor
Health & Welfare: (1/5) Poor
National Defense
Manpower: 139,551
Army: (3/5) Poor, 1924 technology
6 infantry divisions, 1 cavalry division, 0 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (5/5) Failing, 1920 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 1 pre-dreadnought, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 0 light cruisers, 0 destroyers, 0 submarines
Air Force: (4/5) Failing, 1916 technology
1 fighter wing, 0 attack wings, 1 bomber wing
Player: luc124
 
The Italian-Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes treaty of Friendship

Recognising the decline in relations between the two sovereign nations both kingdoms agree to the following provisions:

1) Both nations accept the border demarcations set out by previously agreed upon treaties and endeavour jointly to apprehend and subdue any forces that seek to damage the integrity of these agreed upon borders.

2)Both nations agree to settle any future disputes in accordance with the League of Nations, and in the spirit of the Kellogg–Briand Pact.

3) Both nations agree to remove barriers to trade through joint cooperation in a council of ministers, and endeavour to encourage mutually beneficial commerce and greater investment.

Signed
[X] Vojislav Marinkovi
[ ] Italian representative​
 
The Italian-Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes treaty of Friendship

Recognising the decline in relations between the two sovereign nations both kingdoms agree to the following provisions:

1) Both nations accept the border demarcations set out by previously agreed upon treaties and endeavour jointly to apprehend and subdue any forces that seek to damage the integrity of these agreed upon borders.

2)Both nations agree to settle any future disputes in accordance with the League of Nations, and in the spirit of the Kellogg–Briand Pact.

3) Both nations agree to remove barriers to trade through joint cooperation in a council of ministers, and endeavour to encourage mutually beneficial commerce and greater investment.

Signed
[X] Vojislav Marinkovi
[ ] Italian representative​

[X] Dino Grandi
 
640px-Flag_of_Mexico.svg.png


UNITED MEXICAN STATES
Estados Unidos Mexicanos

Emilio_Portes%2C_portrait.jpg


His Excellency, Emilio Portes Gil, President of the United Mexican States
 
640px-Flag_of_Mexico.svg.png


UNITED MEXICAN STATES
Estados Unidos Mexicanos

Emilio_Portes%2C_portrait.jpg


His Excellency, Emilio Portes Gil, President of the United Mexican States

OOT: We all know CALLES is the real Presidente :D:D:D
 
482px-Seal_of_the_Government_of_Mexico.svg.png
To General Secretary Stalin,

Saludos Camarada! It is an immense honour to, in the name of the Mexican nation and all its people, address such a hero as yourself. Many Mexicans, including many within my political party, look up to the great doings of the Russian Revolution and the great men who propelled the Soviet Union to the great political and economic status that it enjoys today, such as Comrade Lenin and most definetly yourself. The Mexican nation was rocked by political instability for many years, yet our new government has with great success been able to revert the misery of decades past into newfound prosperity, with the Soviet Model serving as great isnpiration to us all. While discussions will intensify in the future, the Mexican government would like to express to the Soviet Union the respect that it holds towards the work of the Communist Party, and its will to establish a larger degree of cooperation between our two nations. Mexico has great plans, to reform the agrarian sector, to nationalise industry and make our society a fairer and more egalitarian one. We hope, with all strenght of our heart, that the Soviet Union will support us and together, fight for a better world.

Sincerely,


Emilio Portes Gil
President of the United Mexican States
 
Reino de España

395px-Full_Ornamented_Royal_Coat_of_Arms_of_Spain_%281931%29.svg.png


330px-Rey_Alfonso_XIII_de_Espa%C3%B1a%2C_by_Kaulak.jpg

His Most Catholic Majesty,
Alfonso XII
King of Spain, King of Castile, of León, of Aragon, of the Two Sicilies, of Jerusalem, of Navarre, of Granada,
of Seville, of Toledo, of Valencia, of Galicia, of Sardinia, of Córdoba, of Corsica, of Murcia, of Jaén, of the Algarves, of Algeciras, of Gibraltar,
of the Canary Islands, of the East and West Indies, of the Islands and Mainland of the Ocean Sea; Archduke of Austria; Duke of Burgundy,
of Brabant, of Milan, of Athens and Neopatria; Count of Habsburg, of Flanders, of Tyrol, of Roussillon, and of Barcelona;
Lord of Biscay and of Molina de Aragón; Captain General & Supreme Commander of the Royal Armed Forces;
Sovereign Grand Master of the Order of the Golden Fleece and of the orders awarded by the Spanish state.

Reign: 1886 - present

None yet.
None yet.
None yet.
 
Last edited:
1929
Europe

Amid the economic crisis, and following the recommendations of the Simon Commission, the House of Commons adopted the Government of India Act 1930, which, after months of drafting and various proposals, turned out to be the longest Act of Parliament ever. Burma was separated from the British Raj and retained its status as being under Crown rule; the Commons also established the Indian Federal Court and the Indian Electoral Commission, the latter being a joint British-and-Indian body which would lay out the process of local (and eventually national) elections in the soon-to-be Federation of India. Included on the commission were Bacha Khan, Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhai Jhaverbhai Patel, and Mohandas Gandhi. There were fierce debates regarding how to divy up the various electoral districts, as well as to the actual size of the electorate, and these debates would continue for a period far after the year was over. Britain had, however, followed through with its word: India was on the path to self-government. [Process of Indian self-government begun]

The Depression in the United Kingdom worsened with each passing day. Tens of thousands were losing their jobs monthly, national production was down, revenue was falling, and government spending was increasing. The Prime Minister seized upon the opportunity to follow through with Labour’s campaign promises, requisitioning funds to construct thousands of new homes for the homeless, and directing, with Liberal support, new regulations to increase pension pay to widows and to restrict the work week of miners in northern England. Production continued to fall, however, and at the October Labour Party conference, a young man named Oswald Mosley, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, proposed a far greater government involvement, wherein key industries and companies would be nationalized, increased tariffs to protect British jobs, and a great public works program in order to attack unemployment. MacDonald, having pledged to balance the budget and cut expenses, was worried that the “Mosley Memorandum” would inflate the Pound and destroy any efforts at balancing the budget for at least a decade. He was supported by Philip Snowden, an ardent socialist who still supported a more laissez-faire approach to economics. Clement Attlee, a Member of Parliament and of the Simon Commission, gave an impassioned speech in favor of the Memorandum, noting that most other countries were doing very little to combat the worldwide depression, or were doing some things, but not as vigorously as was required. No country had dedicated itself to such a strong endorsement of government intervention in the economy save, perhaps, the Soviet Union. By a simple majority vote, the conference adopted the Memorandum, with the exact number in favor needed to ensure its adoption. This coup propelled Mosley to the forefront of the Party, and MacDonald now had to contend with a new party platform which endangered his own electoral and personal agenda. [Mosley Memorandum adopted, -4% political support to UK]

hqdefault.jpg

Oswald Mosley defending his famous Memorandum at the 1930 Labour conference.

Just two weeks prior to Tardieu’s resignation of the premiership on 10 February, he managed to put through the national legislature the final bill directing funding for the construction of the Maginot Line. The eponymous Minister of War oversaw the laying of the groundwork, with the foundations for a great number of forts on the Franco-German border being laid before the year was out. Having abandoned their occupation of the Rhineland, the French needed a secondary assurance that they would be fine in the event the Germans decided to abrogate their treaty obligations. The Maginot Line, if completed, would be the most formidable earthworks in the world. [Maginot Line begun]

Frances-Maginot-Line-1.jpg

A perhaps slightly inaccurate representation of the planned Maginot Line in an English publication.

The French political system took a stronger hit than the previous year. Tardieu, ill from an unknown sickness, resigned in early February, feeling he could not complete his duties as Prime Minister. He was replaced by radical Camille Chautemps, who himself resigned in mid-April due to disagreements over funding of the Line and the proper monetary and fiscal policy as the rest of the world -- and France, too -- was dragged down due to the great depression engulfing what seemed to be every country. Tardieu, his illness gone, assumed the premiership once again, but started to face increasing hostility from those on the right, as monarchists, fascists, and general nationalists accused him of skipping on his duties to defend the French nation; others still attacked him for the economic slide. [-8% political support to France]

Hermann Müller’s resignation as economic catastrophe began to set in forced President Hindenburg to appoint a new Chancellor; he found this in the person of Heinrich Brüning, a Catholic Centrist. Brüning’s economic policies of reining in the expansion of the money supply and cutting spending, however, proved enormously unpopular, and by autumn what support he had among the people and in the Reichstag had mostly evaporated. When he asked President Hindenburg for the power to rule by decree in a joint-presidential government, he hesitated and later denied the request, forcing Brüning’s resignation. General Kurt von Schleicher, one of the ranking officers of the Reichswehr, suggested against naming Wilhelm Marx, a relatively successful Zentrum chancellor during the period of hyperinflation less than a decade previous, and instead named Franz von Papen, a conservative Catholic deputy from the Prussian state legislature who would make “sound policy” to address the economic crisis and keep the country together. Papen was quickly made Chancellor, and he, in turn, named Schleicher the new Defense Minister.

PapenSchleicher0001.jpg

The new Chancellor and Minister of Defense.

Papen, hoping to portray himself as an even-handed chancellor, dissolved the Reichstag and called for new elections. Hitler’s NSDAP swept the elections, rising to the place of second-largest party in the federal legislature with over one-hundred seats; they were rejected the plurality only by Otto Wels’ SPD, which lost a considerable number of votes to the KPD, which was engorged by radicalized leftists and young voters upset at the current economic and political climate. Rumors of a Zentrum-DNVP-NSDAP-BVP-WP minority coalition to support Papen were brought to a halt when Hitler’s leadership of his party was unsuccessfully challenged via an attempted coup by using men of the party’s paramilitary militia, which was countered by the actions of the extremely loyal bodyguard detachment named the Schutzstaffel. Though Hitler appeased the attempted ouster by expanding party funding for the SA, he quietly put a loyal lackey, Ernst Röhm, in place as the organization’s chief of staff. Through his friendship with Schleicher, Papen developed a strong working relationship with the President; and through Papen and Schleicher both, Hitler gained access to Hindenburg. Ernst Thälmann protested the “imminent fascist autocracy” about to extend over all of Germany and called for new elections, declaring the previous ones invalid; there were various riots, particularly in the troublesome Rhineland, which did not end until the president promised himself “wholly in all my word” to the constitution and its provisions. [Franz von Papen appointed Chancellor, -2% political support to Germany]

The Austrian government hoped to counteract the effects of the depression before it came, in full force, to Austria. Chancellor Seipel oversaw a general increase in tariffs to “protect our own producers”; however, the fact that Austria was not as industrialized as many would have liked did not aid in preventing the economic collapse. Government revenues faltered, and, exacerbating the crisis, the banking sector neared collapse in mid-July. Urged by many of the Social Democrats, Seipel bailed out the nation’s largest bank, Creditanstalt, nearly bankrupting the government itself. The government collapsed and Seipel resigned leadership of the Christian Social Party, triggering a new election. Disappointment in Seipel’s bailout, but with equal anger at the Social Democrats, voters returned a reduced majority to the right; the Christian Social Party remained the second-largest party of the legislature and the largest party of the government coalition. President Miklas appointed Johann Schober, two-time Chancellor, to the post again. In his cabinet were the young and brilliant firebrands Kurt Schuschnigg and Engelbert Dollfuß, serving as Minister of Justice and of Agriculture, respectively. Meanwhile, leftist discontent with continued right-wing rule and control of the government as the depression deepened only exacerbated political and social tensions across the country. [Johann Schober is Chancellor, -3% political support to Austria]

Having avoided what could have been a national disaster, Prime Minister Rivera, essentially the dictator of Spain, was already beginning to suffer on the daily due to his rather severe case of diabetes. In his seventh decade of life, he requested permission from the king to recommend a successor and to be allowed to retire to public life; Alfonso granted it, and after several weeks Rivera gave a public radio announcement declaring his departure from public life, and that the King had appointed General Jose Sanjurjo in his stead. Sanjurjo was a populist, a conservative, a devout Catholic, and a thoroughbred military man and veteran who perhaps attracted even more popularity than Rivera in his heyday early in the 1920s. Hoping to temper the fires of anger of the left with extensive public works programs and social reforms -- as his predecessor had done for most of the decade -- Sanjurjo announced a “culling” of the “ancient” bureaucracy of men who were too old to properly serve; performance reviews were held and many found incompetent or “lacking in enthusiasm” were kicked to the curb. Alongside the civil service “reform” came the establishment, through the rubber-stamp legislature set up by his predecessor, of an investment bank to acquire and put back on the market the assets of failing businesses. Gold was held in reserve in a bid to mirror the relative early successes of the Hungarian government; the investment bank experienced trouble attempting to sell acquired assets back to other companies and required repeated injections of capital by the government in order to stay afloat. [+2% political support to Spain, Sanjurjo appointed Prime Minister]

220px-Jos%C3%A9Sanjurjo.jpg

The new premier of Spain, on whose shoulders high hopes for the monarchy were placed.

At the dictate of il Duce, the italian government announced its formal recognition of the Pope’s sovereignty over Vatican City, a micro-country within the confines of Rome, settling a decades-long issue by paying hundreds of millions of Lira to the Pope directly and several billion more via bonds. WIth this massive propaganda victory, however, Mussolini was faced with a new problem: the global depression had come to Italy. Banks began buying out failing businesses, which in turn threatened much of Italy’s banking system with collapse; Mussolini instructed Antonio Mosconi, the Minister of Finance, to orchestrate the government acquisition of these businesses and banks. As private businesses continued to go out of business and unemployment rose, the Prime Minister sought a mass-government takeover of many industries, including medicine. The National Institute of Health, created by decree in August, received a great amount of funds to begin constructing new hospitals, subsidizing the education of new doctors and nurses, researching and putting to trial new medicines and surgical/medical equipment, while improving counseling and on-demand care in certain situations. In a speech to the people and the national legislature, Mussolini proudly said, “As of this moment, over one-half of all industry and firms in the nation, agricultural and otherwise, belong to the state -- and all for the better!” [+1% political support, +1 health & welfare in 1 turn, +1 health & welfare in 4 turns]

Mussolini.gif

Prime Minister Bethlen hoped to continue his efforts to keep Hungary out of the massive depression now gripping and bringing down every major economy in the world. With a blank cheque from the Regent, due mostly to his inflationary measures that had seemed to stem the tide of economic contraction (at least for the time being), Bethlen instructed the Ministry of Agriculture to implement a policy of forced scarcity of crops and food by farmers in order to keep the prices of crops stable. A subsidy was introduced to encourage this policy of artificial scarcity, and, like Bulgaria to the southeast, the farm subsidy was supported by a new tax levied on the food processing industry. Though the prices of these crops remained relatively stable, if slipping slightly, national grain exports continued to fall, and with rising unemployment, the country finally slipped into a recession. [+1 health & welfare to Hungary, -4% political support to Hungary]

President Masaryk continued to try and implement his “New Era” policy, in spite of the increasingly severe economic downturn. As railway construction slowed due to difficult economic circumstances, he helped to introduce legislation to continue the expansion of educational benefits and spending, particularly in Slovakia. While Slovak legislators were overjoyed, Czech nationalists and even government conservatives were none too pleased. Bickering led to a far more watered-down version of the bill passing, as government revenue continued to fall with businesses declaring bankruptcy nationwide and more and more people falling into poverty. In August the Brno-Bratislava Railroad, nearing bankruptcy, asked the government for a bailout, which was provided; however, as the economic crisis worsened, it was soon realized that the bailout was not enough, and, facing bankruptcy a second time in October, President Masaryk ordered the nationalization of the railway entirely. Public expenditures shot through the roof, and, with most large industrial companies barely hanging on (somewhat through the sale of minor amounts of industrial equipment to the Soviet Union), the conservative government now faced rising ethnic tensions and greater and greater disapproval of its handling of the depression. [-12% political support to Czechoslovakia, +1 education in 4 turns]

The highly-controversial law restricting Italian freedoms in the Serb kingdom from the previous year having nearly ignited a European war in the middle of a massive worldwide depression, King Alexander gave informal assent to a new government policy to quietly cease enforcing the law, mostly in a move to appease the Italians and avoid war. Hawkish Croatians and Serbs were upset at the decision, and were further enraged when the government began to sink money into a project to connect various small port towns and cities on the coast to the larger inland cities. The economic collapse and rapidly growing budget deficit did little to assist the image of the government in the people’s minds, and with every mistake that the government made, the reputation of King Alexander was damaged even further. [-7% political support to SCS, +1 infrastructure in 2 turns, +1 infrastructure in 4 turns]

The economic tumble in Bulgaria gradually slowed down throughout the year; wishing to quickly pull the economy out of the gutter, restore economic growth, and return to being a net exporter of cereal, the Bulgarian prime minister forced through the National Assembly a subsidization package for farmers, who were suffering the most, in an effort to improve production and shorten the country’s trade deficit. Taxes were levied on non-Christians -- that is, Jews and Muslims -- in order to pay for the subsidy, which ended up proving rather burdensome to the Bulgarian governmental budget. Even aside from the increase in tax rates, government revenue increased, and most of the increase to the budget deficit from the previous year was removed by late December. [Increased taxes in Bulgaria, +2% political support to Bulgaria, +1 health & welfare]

6814602047_8d53e953c2.jpg

Sofia became the epicenter of a very slow reclamation of economic growth in Bulgaria.

Having dedicated much of his energies the previous year to the protection of Romanian industries in the cities, Prime Minister Maniu turned back to his primary constituency -- farmers -- and set up a program to match farmer investments by dumping money into a fund to purchase the most modern agricultural equipment and technologies from the Western manufacturing sectors to improve agricultural production and maintain the incomes of farmers. However, under the increased strain under which European banks began to suffer, as well as decreased demand for oil exports, the Romanian economy began to contract, and the budget deficit continued to increase. Proposals for expanding the infrastructure program of the previous year were rejected as spending skyrocketed and deflation began to set in. [-22% political support to Romania]

The Czechoslovak-Soviet Agreement stipulated that industrial experts and engineers from both countries would be traded in order to glean new knowledge from the techniques and practices of the industries of the other nation. The Soviet team departed Czechoslovakia after a three-month stay; two weeks later, the Central Committee deemed Czechoslovakia “industrially backward”, a country which placed “the repression of the proletariat” over industrial productivity. By December, tools and machines often used for the mining of coal and iron in Czechoslovakia began to appear in various Soviet factories, mines, and quarries, though, when asked, Soviet officials were almost certain to say they were entirely designed and built by Soviet methods and hands. This only helped to further contribute to the continued rapid expansion of Soviet industrial capabilities, owed largely to the genius of Comrade Stalin and the Politburo of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

With perhaps the last great economic legacy of Comrade Lenin swept aside by the new need to rapidly collectivize Soviet agriculture, tens of thousands of people, deemed counterrevolutionary for their possession of wide swathes of land and other private property, were rounded up and sent to be re-educated in the far northern reaches of Siberia, as a part of the government’s campaign to liquidate foreign infiltration and spies throughout the country and return the control of it to the people. The assets and lands were quickly redistributed and collectivized; what the government did not realize, however, was the sudden fall in agricultural production.

As the Soviet Union began to crack down on the OUN insurgency in Ukraine, further dissent sprouted up in the Caucasus when several hundred Cossacks gathered together to protest Soviet political and economic policies. They were met with repression by the central government; some were summarily executed while the rest were shipped east to be re-educated because of their coutnerrevolutionary beliefs. This relatively minor incident, somewhat typical of the Soviet Union, exploded into international controversy when General Semyon Timoshenko came forward with documents, supposedly taken from one of the bodies of the Cossacks, proving that the Polish government had had a direct hand in organizing and radicalizing the protesters. Red Army activity along the Polish border was stepped up and local army units were strengthened with new reservists and troops from other regions. Daily Soviet army exercises -- often within sight of Polish border defenses -- continued throughout the year, and were stepped up even further as winter came.

640px-Red_army_soldiers%2C_end_of_1920s-beginning_of_1930s.jpg

A propaganda photo of Soviet soldiers standing ready to fight “any provocation” on the Polish border.

The Coal Trunk-Line, mandated by a 1928 law signed by the Polish president, received renewed attention as 1930 passed by, in the hope that newly-unemployed workers could find jobs working on the expansion of the railway, which would provide much-needed raw materials to the Baltic for international trade and open up cities deep in the country to that trade. With international trade continuing to collapse, however, the supposed positive effects of the railway’s completion were called into question. A great amount of government funds were dumped into the project, angering some, particularly those on the left. [-7% political support to Poland, +1 infrastructure in 2 turns, +1 infrastructure in 5 turns]

The November elections were rather uneventful; the Pilsudski-backed Nonpartisan Bloc had delivered on promises of national strength, particularly in standing up to the Soviets and in reforms and improvements to the readiness of the army, and they gained in their share of the vote, securing dominant positions in the national legislature. Prime Minister bartel resigned, and was replaced by Walery Slawek, a committed nationalist and veteran of the Polish-Soviet War. He was faced with a shrinking economy and an increasingly-provocative Soviet military on his border. [Walery Slawek elected Prime Minister]

Asia

Intent on pursuing continued modernization as a part of his own personal ideology, President Kemal oversaw the passage of the Law on Public Hygiene in a bid to centralize health and medicine regulations under the government and standardize practices and procedures in hospitals and clinics nationwide. As railroads slowly expanded and were otherwise bought out by the Turkish State Railways, new bureaus were created in Ankara, with offices in every major city throughout the country, to oversee the purification of water via the creation of new plants, and clinic-and-hospital planning committees to erect new health centers and staff new and existing hospitals with the equipment necessary to function to a modern standard. Other initiatives included providing aid to existing medical training schools to increase the graduation rate of medical students and, perhaps more importantly, improve their proficiency in diagnosing and treating patients. The bureaucratic undertaking was certainly great, but national unity and centralized government would ease the transition and quicken the approach to modernity to a great degree. [+1 health & welfare in 2 turns, +2 health & welfare in 5 turns to Turkey]

Prime Minister Hamaguchi’s persistent efforts to cut military spending and maintain the Yen on the gold standard did little for any sort of planned economic recovery. Unemployment continued to rise as exports fell off a cliff, causing numerous bankruptcies and for hundreds of small businesses to shutter their doors. Hamaguchi similarly failed in his bid to push a legalization of the right for women over the age of twenty-five to vote with their husband’s permission. The bill’s failure was a death-blow to his ministry, and several days later, just days before the slated election, most of the cabinet resigned. Home Minister Adachi Kenzo, a well-known nationalist and member of Rikken Minseito, broke ranks and harshly criticized Hamaguchi’s ministry in Yomiuri Shimbun, one of the largest national papers and a bastion of conservative support. He roundly attacked liberals -- and politicians in general -- and praised the military as a rock of honor and stability in such a tumultuous period for Japanese politics and society. Expelled from the party, he formed, alongside several partisan army officers, the Kokumin Domei, or National Alliance. Minseito rapidly began to fracture, as it bled many key supporters and members to Kokumin Domei, thus handing Rikken Seiyukai, and its leader, Inukai Tsuyoshi, a comfortable victory in the Diet elections. The Emperor quickly appointed Inukai Prime Minister and tasked him with forming government. [Seiyukai forms government, +3% political support to Japan]

375px-Inukai_Tsuyoshi.jpg

Prime Minister Inukai Tsuyoshi.

Chiang Kai-shek, no longer high off his victory in the great Northern Expedition of 1928, was dealing with a recent defeat at the hands of the Soviets and increasing tensions between the Nanking government and the northern and southern warlords. Preparing the National Revolutionary Army for the worst, on 10 May Chiang received word of a joint proclamation by Yan Xishan, Li Zongren, Feng Yuxiang, and others that the Nanking government was “illegal” and unrepresentative of the will of the Chinese people. The NRA immediately sprung into action; though some units defected toward the coalition, Chiang still faced an army roughly twice the size of his own, and with many NRA units performing garrison duties in far-flung parts of the country and in the consolidated KMT base along the Yangtze, he was, relatively speaking, strapped for manpower. Yan Xishan, before he could even give the order to advance, was attacked near Shangqiu, and was driven north toward the Yellow River, where he halted the KMT offensive at Kaifeng. Chen Cheng, in the West, came under heavy assault from troops loyal to Feng, and suffered heavy casualties in Lanzhou and Tianshui, and was forced to retreat toward Xi’an, which was in a precarious position strategically. Bai Chongxi led Guangxi troops into southern Jiangxi, while Li Zongren, taking the spot of overall commander in the South, defeated Hu Zongnan at the decisive battle of Hengyang on 26 May. As this was happening, and as KMT forces in the South fled north, Communist guerrillas, emboldened by the general chaos throughout the region, established greater positions for themselves throughout Jiangxi, Hunan, and Hubei. With newly-acquired arms, equipment, and other necessary supplies, the communists made their new base of operations the city of Ruijin, intent on bringing communism to the country.

As fighting and destruction erupted across the country, there were two sets of startling news from the north. Zhang Xueliang, previously expected to have joined the KMT’s efforts in quelling the rebellion and restoring order to the country, declared his neutrality in the new conflict that now ravaged the central plains and her cities. Yan Xishan and his allies held out hope that Zhang would remain neutral, or even declare his support for the anti-Nanking coalition, but it was not meant to be. Following Chiang’s surprise victory at Jinan along the Yellow River on 18 July, a farmer’s dispute between Korean and Manchu farmers increased tensions along the Sino-Japanese border. Relations remained tense until 18 September -- after Chiang won another surprise and bloody victory in retaking Changsha, the provincial capital of Hunan, on 10 September -- when a bomb was exploded along the South Manchuria Railway near Mukden in Manchuria. The owners of the Japanese railroad were furious, and very quickly the Kwantung Army became involved. Reports reached Seoul of a battle near Changchun between Japanese troops and aggressive Chinese nationals, prompting Generals Honjo Shigeru and Tamon Jiro to mobilize their armies and surge across the border to come to the aid of their comrades in arms. Japanese soldiers themselves were surprised to find very little in the way of resistance, especially after a local Chinese military officer, Zhang Haipeng, committed himself and his soldiers to the Japanese cause. The troops of Zhang Xueliang gave little in the way of resistance -- owing mostly to the fact that the majority of his troops were on the southern border, prepared to intervene on one side or the other of the ongoing civil war in China -- and Harbin fell on 2 October. General Hayashi Senjuro, commander of the brigade that marched into the city, rose the flag of the Rising Sun over the city hall himself. Within a matter of weeks, tens of thousands of Japanese troops swarmed all over Manchuria, coming to within less than fifty miles of Peking, the capital of the Yuan and Qing. What had started as a retaliation against a supposed attack by an enemy army had turned into a relatively unopposed occupation of a massive swathe of land belonging, ostensibly, to a foreign country.

ija_forces_in_manchuria.jpg

Japanese troops marching through Harbin on 2 October 1930.

News of the Japanese invasion ground the coalition-Nanking conflict to a halt. Chiang and Yan reached an armistice agreement on 21 September; however, by that point, Zhang Xueliang had already fled Manchuria with most of his army, refusing to give battle to the Japanese and incite more conflict. The Chinese “government” sat and pondered what to do; already a great number of men and supplies had been thrown away in the fighting since the late spring, and Chiang and the other warlords, governors, and generals did not believe they could win in a one-on-one confrontation with the Japanese. Their best bet was to hunker down on the current defacto border and make an international plea to oust the Japanese under threat of force of arms of a joint coalition intervention. While the Japanese people were content with how revenge had been enacted, the government was virtually speechless; there were rumors the Prime Minister was going to resign, and liberals both in the Diet and in the streets were outraged by the government’s refusal, until the end of the year, to openly address what exactly had happened. [+4% political support to Japan, +2% political support to China]

A snap election was held in New South Wales in April, returning the popular Jack Lang to the premiership of that state with a large majority in the legislative assembly. His promises not to cut state spending and the civil service while also supporting plans for new minimum wage laws and the temporary cancellation of interest payments on debts to the United Kingdom proved incredibly popular -- and served as a guiding light for Scullin and his ministry. Scullin announced the injection of millions of dollars into the economy in a desperate attempt to keep credit flowing and expand the money supply. However, Liberals in the national legislature were terrified of such a move, afraid of runaway inflation -- the same phenomenon that had brought Germany to its knees less than a decade ago -- that would devastate national finances. The cash injection did little to stave off the increasing slip into a large contraction, and Labor now had to decide to push all the way for further action -- facing potential rejection by Liberals -- or to try a new path that would prove not as controversial. [-4% political support to Australia]

Americas

The Liberal campaign effort in the upcoming federal elections continued to perform far below expectations. Prime Minister King was hard-pressed to defend his actions -- or lack thereof -- as the worldwide depression sent the economy into a deeper and more severe spiral, and was prone to several outbreaks of anger which were eagerly jotted down by journalists and printed in daily papers across the country. Bennett’s Liberal-Conservative Party and its message of hope and government action in the face of nationwide economic disaster inspired a great number of Canadians to go to the polls in July and vote in favor of a change in government. Third parties were heavily drained of their votes and seats; and though Bennett only one approximately one-hundred and fifty-thousand votes more than King and his Liberals, he gained over forty seats in ridings across the country, notably picking up support in Quebec, Manitoba, and other provinces in the West. In just several weeks, Bennett was in office, but his policies immediately came under criticism from many of the same people that had sent him to 24 Sussex.

1394964430773

R. B. Bennett shortly after taking office.

Tariff increases, passed just days after the Liberal-Conservatives formed government, did little to promote increased trade with other dominions and subjects of the United Kingdom, and served only to exacerbate the economic crisis. The prairie farmers of the West -- many of whom had actually flipped and contributed greatly to the new Liberal-Conservative majority -- suffered perhaps more than any other group in the country, with food prices collapsing and farmers rapidly becoming destitute. Bennett turned to his cabinet for assistance and began to lay out the foundations for new ways to turn around the depression and bring prosperity back to the country. [Liberal-Conservatives elected, +5% political support to Canada]

President Hoover was, like most world leaders, facing an increasingly poor economic outlook and an economy that was continually contracting and letting go hundreds of thousands of workers and laborers all across the country. The President was faced with the possibility of raising tariffs on manufactured goods as much as on agricultural products, a proposal he himself termed “vicious” and “obnoxious”. He had been elected on a platform of raising agricultural tariffs, but not those on manufactured goods; he was worried about triggering a beggar-thy-neighbor situation, in which retaliatory tariff policies would complete the destruction of international trade. He was then presented with the Smoot-Hawley Act, a bill which would raise US tariffs to their highest position since the Morrill Tariff of 1861. The bill had already passed with a near-two-thirds majority in the House; it went to the Senate and passed in March, just several seats short of two-thirds. Knowing a veto would likely kill the bill entirely, Congressional Republicans and business executives pressured the President to sign; various esteemed economists and bank executives implored him to veto and kill it. In the end he decided upon the latter; the vote was brought back to the House, where it passed the two-thirds necessary by one vote, but then failed in the Senate.

Hoover sought economic recovery via different means. Government funds were requisitioned for the planned dam on the Colorado River in southern Nevada, with the stipulation that funds be minimal so as to preserve the budgetary surplus. Construction began in boiling summer heat and amid a collapsing economy. As this happened, Hoover issued repeated calls for businesses to maintain stable wage schedules if at all possible, but it did little, and it reflected in the polls in November. Republican policies had been increasingly unpopular, and the split between Hoover and Congressional Republicans over the Smoot-Hawley bill ruptured their majority in the House, falling to 217 seats, just one shy of a majority. Republicans held onto control of the Senate by just one vote as well; Hoover now had to fight an accelerating depression with a stunningly divided Congress. [-12% political support to US]

h037a.jpg

The “Hoover Dam” being constructed.

Facing the risk of massive monetary inflation, President Campo enacted a policy of artificial deflation, mandating that all mayors and local administrators lower their spending. He coupled this with decreases in government spending on education and welfare; government subsidies to various companies were ended, and grants to various municipalities were cut or abandoned entirely. Conservatives supported the move as one that was unfortunate but necessary to avoid a bank-breaking government budget deficit; the left was not nearly as elated. [-6% political support to Chile, -2 education, -1 health & welfare]

The previous year’s policies being extremely detrimental to the Argentine economy’s ability to keep itself afloat, the increasingly unpopular President Yrigoyen bowed to internal pressure by issuing a call for tax decreases on various firms in the infrastructure and agricultural sectors. To use up the continued government surplus, he then proposed a public works program, in an attempt to improve internal commerce between industrial centers and newly-integrated states and towns, as well as to create jobs. The Argentine military disapproved of this program, wishing more funds for themselves, and pressed the old president for an increase in their own funds, drawn from the government surplus. General Jose Felix Iriburu, the most prominent of the clique of high-ranking officers demanding a change in government policy, applied so much pressure that he was promoted from Inspector General to Chief of the Army General Staff and essentially gained free rein over the military. Yrigoyen’s program was slow to implement, and the trend of economic depression continued, and so did a decreased faith in the federal government. [+1 infrastructure in 3 turns to Argentina, -5% political support]

Jos%C3%A9_F%C3%A9lix_Uriburu.jpg

General Iriburu, now one of the most important men in all of Argentina.

With coffee with milk politics on the verge of collapse, and facing fears of a potential socialist revolution against the central government in the lead-up to the election, President Luis began a crackdown on socialist and communist unions and organizations, painting them as a threat to economic prosperity and electoral and political peace. Julio Prestes, the nominee of the Republican Party of Sao Paulo, supported the move in the name of national security and safety. Getulio Vargas, a former lawyer and soldier in the army, and Luis’ financial minister for two years, ran against Prestes in a fierce campaign; however, as election day drew near, people on the right, as well as the left, worried that President Luis’ anti-leftist police initiative was simply an excuse to repress all opposition and ensure Prestes would be elected. On 1 March Prestes was elected with almost sixty-percent of the vote, but this decisive victory proved anything but reassuring for Brazilian political stability. Vargas and his supporters immediately contested the results; several weeks later, the governor of Paraiba was assassinated, and a bomb was detonated in the state assembly house of Bahia, killing and wounding several. Vargas, governor of Rio Grande do Sul, began collaborating with opponents of the central government, and on 10 October Vargas and his allies moved into action. With a wide degree of support among the military -- despite many having benefitted from its expansion by President Luis the previous year -- revolutionary groups overthrew various state governments, particularly in the northeast, while militias and army units in the South mobilized and moved toward the capital. Several small skirmishes were fought west of the city, but Vargas’ troops were overwhelmingly successful, and he entered the city on 1 November. President Luis acknowledged the legitimacy of the revolution, and on 3 November named Vargas his successor and resigned. Vargas’ first step was to suspend the constitution and dissolve the national legislature, setting in motion the beginnings of a dictatorship -- with the people’s interest at heart, of course. [Vargas succeeds in the Revolution of 1930, +11% political support to Brazil]

640px-Revolu%C3%A7%C3%A3o_de_1930.jpg

Getulio Vargas and his supporters shortly after arriving in Rio.

____________________
Central Plains War

Gansu Campaign (Coalition victory)
Coalition losses: 14,210 soldiers
Nationalist losses: 19,384 soldiers, 2 aircraft

Henan Campaign (Coalition victory)
Coalition losses: 22,483 soldiers, 4 aircraft
Nationalist losses: 25,388 soldiers, 10 aircraft

Three Provinces Campaign (Coalition victory)
Coalition losses: 25,392 soldiers
Nationalist losses: 33,568 soldiers, 3 aircraft

Eastern Huang He Campaign (Nationalist victory)
Coalition losses: 45,103 soldiers
Nationalist losses: 36,389 soldiers

TOTAL CASUALTIES
Coalition losses: 107,188 soldiers, 4 aircraft
Nationalist losses: 114,729 soldiers, 15 aircraft

Japanese Invasion of Manchuria

Seven Days Offensive (Japanese victory)
Chinese losses: 988 soldiers
Japanese losses: 359 soldiers

Battle of Harbin (Japanese victory)
Chinese losses: 817 soldiers
Japanese losses: 741 soldiers

TOTAL CASUALTIES
Chinese losses: 1,805 soldiers
Japanese losses: 1,100 soldiers
 
Last edited:

Argentine Republic

Politics & Economy
Government: Federal constitutional republic
Leader(s): President Hipólito Yrigoyen
Ideology: Social democracy
Alignment: None
Capital: Buenos Aires
Political stability: 55%
Population: 12.090 m. (1.95% growth last year)
GDP: $ 47,222 m. (-5.22% growth last year)
Economic status: Semi-industrial, depression, market economy, $ 3,906 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 5,421 m., 15.04% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 6,264 m.
Balance: $ -843 m.
Treasury: $ - 13,173 m.
Infrastructure: (2/5) Average [+1 in 3 turns]
Administration: (1/5) Average
Education: (4/5) Poor
Health & Welfare: (1/5) Poor
National Defense
Manpower: 174,096
Army: (5/5) Poor, 1920 technology
6 infantry divisions, 2 cavalry divisions, 0 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (1/5) Average, 1922 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 2 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 6 armored cruisers, 2 light cruisers, 9 destroyers, 3 submarines [+2 heavy cruisers in 1 turn (Italy)]
Air Force: (2/5) Poor, 1922 technology
2 fighter wings, 0 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: jacob-Lundgren

Commonwealth of Australia
Politics & Economy
Government: Federal parliamentary dominion
Leader(s): King George V / Governor-General John Baird / Prime Minister James Henry Scullin
Ideology: Social liberalism
Alignment: None (British Dominion)
Capital: Canberra
Political stability: 68%
Population: 7.883 m. (1.11% growth last year)
GDP: $ 31,104 m. (-7.67% growth last year)
Economic status: Semi-industrial, depression, market economy, $ 3,946 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 3,485 m., 14.51% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 4,168 m.
Balance: $ - 683 m.
Treasury: $ - 3,539 m.
Infrastructure: (4/5) Poor
Administration: (2/5) Average
Education: (4/5) Average
Health & Welfare: (2/5) Poor
National Defense
Manpower: 95,790
Army: (3/5) Average, 1924 technology
4 infantry divisions, 1 cavalry division, 1 marine division, 0 mountain divisions, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (3/5) Poor, 1917 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 3 light cruisers, 12 destroyers, 3 submarines
Air Force: (2/5) Poor, 1918 technology
3 fighter wings, 1 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: Gorganslayer


Republic of Austria

Politics & Economy
Government: Federal constitutional republic
Leader(s): Federal President Wilhelm Miklas / Chancellor Johann Schober
Ideology: National conservatism
Alignment: None
Capital: Vienna
Political stability: 59%
Population: 6.700 m. (0.24% growth last year)
GDP: $ 22,518 m. (-7.63% growth last year)
Economic status: Semi-industrial, depression, market economy, $ 3,361 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 2,357 m., 14.87% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 2,793 m.
Balance: $ - 436 m.
Treasury: $ - 27,381 m.
Infrastructure: (1/5) Average
Administration: (2/5) Average
Education: (4/5) Poor
Health & Welfare: (3/5) Failing
National Defense
Manpower: 100,940
Army: (5/5) Poor, 1921 technology
3 infantry divisions, 1 cavalry division, 0 marine divisions, 1 mountain division, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (1/5) Failing, 1918 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 0 light cruisers, 0 destroyers, 0 submarines
Air Force: (5/5) Failing, 1920 technology
0 fighter wings, 0 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: Mikkel_Glahder


Provisional Government of Brazil
Politics & Economy
Government: Authoritarian “federal” “republic”
Leader(s): President Getúlio Dornelles Vargas
Ideology: Left-wing nationalism & populism
Alignment: None
Capital: Rio de Janeiro
Political stability: 64%
Population: 34.173 m. (1.86% growth last year)
GDP: $ 35,262 m. (-0.46% growth last year)
Economic status: Semi-industrial, recession, market economy, $ 1,032 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 2,897 m., 10.94% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 3,521 m.
Balance: $ - 624 m.
Treasury: $ - 6,058 m.
Infrastructure: (4/5) Poor
Administration: (3/5) Poor
Education: (5/5) Poor
Health & Welfare: (5/5) Failing
National Defense
Manpower: 257,286
Army: (5/5) Poor, 1920 technology
11 infantry divisions, 2 cavalry divisions, 0 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (5/5) Poor, 1919 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 2 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 1 armored cruiser, 3 light cruisers, 11 destroyers, 4 submarines
Air Force: (4/5) Failing, 1917 technology
1 fighter wing, 0 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: Terraferma


Kingdom of Bulgaria
Politics & Economy
Government: Unitary constitutional monarchy
Leader(s): Tsar Boris III / Prime Minister Andrey Tasev Lyapchev
Ideology: Authoritarian centrism
Alignment: None
Capital: Sofiya
Political stability: 64%
Population: 6.050 m. (0.77% growth last year)
GDP: $ 7,012 m. (2.68% growth last year)
Economic status: Agrarian, expansion, market economy, $ 1,159 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 763 m., 12.10% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 800 m. [+ $ 96 m. for 6 turns]
Balance: $ - 37 m.
Treasury: $ - 2,598 m.
Infrastructure: (2/5) Poor
Administration: (2/5) Average
Education: (1/5) Average
Health & Welfare: (4/5) Failing
National Defense
Manpower: 105,979
Army: (5/5) Poor, 1920 technology
2 infantry divisions, 0 cavalry divisions, 0 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (3/5) Failing, 1918 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 0 light cruisers, 0 destroyers, 0 submarines
Air Force: (4/5) Failing, 1917 technology
1 fighter wing, 0 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: Arrowfiend

Dominion of Canada
Politics & Economy
Government: Federal parliamentary dominion
Leader(s): King George V / Governor-General Freeman Freeman-Thomas / Prime Minister WRichard Bedford Bennett
Ideology: National conservatism
Alignment: None (British Dominion)
Capital: Ottawa
Political stability: 62%
Population: 10.312 m. (1.49% growth last year)
GDP: $ 43,759 m. (-11.13% growth last year)
Economic status: Semi-industrial, depression, market economy, $ 4,244 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 4,994 m., 15.22% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 5,957 m.
Balance: $ - 963 m.
Treasury: $ - 15,769 m.
Infrastructure: (1/5) Average
Administration: (3/5) Average
Education: (4/5) Average
Health & Welfare: (3/5) Poor
National Defense
Manpower: 177,209
Army: (2/5) Good, 1924 technology
3 infantry divisions, 1 cavalry division, 0 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (3/5) Poor, 1920 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 0 light cruisers, 4 destroyers, 0 submarines
Air Force: (1/5) Poor, 1921 technology
1 fighter wing, 1 attack wing, 0 bomber wings
Player: oxfordroyale


Republic of Chile
Politics & Economy
Government: Unitary constitutional republic
Leader(s): President Carlos Ibáñez del Campo
Ideology: Centrism
Alignment: None
Capital: Santiago
Political stability: 49%
Population: 4.318 m. (1.30% growth last year)
GDP: $ 11,960 m. (-9.55% growth last year)
Economic status: Semi-industrial, depression, market economy, $ 2,770 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 1,103 m., 14.14% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 1,307 m.
Balance: $ - 204 m.
Treasury: $ - 8,933 m.
Infrastructure: (2/5) Average
Administration: (5/5) Poor
Education: (4/5) Poor
Health & Welfare: (5/5) Failing
National Defense
Manpower: 81,096
Army: (1/5) Average, 1921 technology
3 infantry divisions, 1 cavalry division, 0 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (1/5) Average, 1924 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 1 battleship, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 2 armored cruisers, 3 light cruisers, 7 destroyers, 5 submarines
Air Force: (1/5) Failing, 1918 technology
0 fighter wings, 0 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: DeMarchese


Republic of China
Politics & Economy
Government: Authoritarian presidential republic
Leader(s): Chairman Chiang Kai-shek / Premier Tan Yankai
Ideology: National populism & conservatism
Alignment: None
Capital: Nanking
Political stability: 48%
Population: 491.326 m. (0.40% growth last year)
GDP: $ 283,417 m. (2.06% growth last year)
Economic status: Agrarian, expansion, market economy, $ 576 per capita [Nanking reforms]
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 20,793 m., 9.57% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 20,391 m.
Balance: $ 402 m.
Treasury: $ - 52,573 m.
Infrastructure: (2/5) Poor [+1 in 1 turn, +1 in 3 turns]
Administration: (2/5) Poor [+1in 1 turn]
Education: (2/5) Poor [+1in 2 turns, +1 in 3 turns]
Health & Welfare: (1/5) Failing [+1 in 2 turns, +2 in 3 turns]
National Defense
Manpower: 3,105,174
Army: (3/5) Poor, 1921 technology [+1 in 2 turns]
58 infantry divisions, 17 cavalry divisions, 0 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (3/5) Failing, 1916 technology [+1 in 3 turns]
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 6 light cruisers, 3 destroyers, 0 submarines
Air Force: (2/5) Failing, 1917 technology [+2 in 2 turns]
2 fighter wings, 2 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: Watercress

Republic of Cuba
Politics & Economy
Government: Unitary constitutional republic
Leader(s): President Ramon Grau San Martin
Ideology: National liberalism
Alignment: None (US protectorate)
Capital: Havana
Political stability: 58%
Population: 3.851 m. (1.44% growth last year)
GDP: $ 5,718 m. (-4.67% growth last year)
Economic status: Agrarian, depression, market economy, $ 1,485 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 381 m., 7.82% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 441m.
Balance: $ - 60 m.
Treasury: $ - 443 m.
Infrastructure: (3/5) Poor
Administration: (3/5) Poor
Education: (4/5) Poor
Health & Welfare: (2/5) Failing
National Defense
Manpower: 86,599
Army: (3/5) Poor, 1919 technology
2 infantry divisions, 1 cavalry division, 0 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (2/5) Failing, 1910 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 0 light cruisers, 0 destroyers, 0 submarines
Air Force: (3/5) Failing, 1916 technology
0 fighter wings, 0 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: Shebedaone


Czechoslovakia
Politics & Economy
Government: Unitary constitutional republic
Leader(s): President Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk / Prime Minister Milan Hodža
Ideology: National conservatism
Alignment: Little Entente
Capital: Prague
Political stability: 65%
Population: 14.054 m. (0.55% growth last year)
GDP: $ 38,903 m. (-5.07% growth last year)
Economic status: Semi-industrial, depression, market economy, $ 2,768 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 4,210 m., 13.90% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 4,711 m.
Balance: $ - 501 m.
Treasury: $ - 13,789 m.
Infrastructure: (5/5) Average [+1 in 2 turns]
Administration: (2/5) Average [+1 in 1 turn]
Education: (5/5) Poor [+1 in 2 turns, +1 in 4 turns]
Health & Welfare: (3/5) Poor
National Defense
Manpower: 208,965
Army: (3/5) Average, 1928 technology
8 infantry divisions, 1 cavalry division, 0 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (1/5) Failing, 1918 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 0 light cruisers, 0 destroyers, 0 submarines
Air Force: (1/5) Average, 1925 technology
4 fighter wings, 3 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: Julius Maximus


Republic of Finland
Politics & Economy
Government: Unitary constitutional republic
Leader(s): President Lauri Kristian Relander / Prime Minister Oskari Mantere
Ideology: Liberalism
Alignment: None
Capital: Helsinki
Political stability: 74%
Population: 3.471 m. (0.65% growth last year)
GDP: $ 9,210 m. (-0.99% growth last year)
Economic status: Agrarian, recession, market economy, $ 2,653 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 1,192 m., 16.15% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 1,283 m.
Balance: $ - 91 m.
Treasury: $ - 5,994 m.
Infrastructure: (3/5) Poor
Administration: (4/5) Poor
Education: (5/5) Poor
Health & Welfare: (5/5) Failing
National Defense
Manpower: 103,410
Army: (4/5) Poor, 1923 technology
7 infantry divisions, 1 cavalry division, 0 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 1 armored brigade
Navy: (1/5) Poor, 1920 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 0 light cruisers, 2 destroyers, 0 submarines [+4 submarines in 1 turn]
Air Force: (4/5) Failing, 1919 technology
1 fighter wing, 1 attack wing, 0 bomber wings
Player: alexander23

French Republic
Politics & Economy
Government: Unitary constitutional republic
Leader(s): President Pierre-Paul-Henri-Gaston Doumergue/Prime Minister Andre Pierre Gabriel Amedee Tardieu
Ideology: Conservatism
Alignment: None
Capital: Paris
Political stability: 64%
Population: 41.627 m. (0.50% growth last year)
GDP: $ 188,753 m. (-3.15% growth last year)
Economic status: Industrial, depression, market economy, $ 4,534 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 27,132 m., 16.99% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 28,374 m.
Balance: $ -1,242 m.
Treasury: $ - 121,067 m.
Infrastructure: (1/5) Good
Administration: (3/5) Average
Education: (2/5) Good
Health & Welfare: (5/5) Poor
National Defense
Manpower: 738,573
Army: (3/5) Good, 1926 technology [Maginot Line (1/8)]
34 infantry divisions, 5 cavalry divisions, 2 marine divisions, 3 mountain divisions, 10 armored brigades
Navy: (1/5) Good, 1925 technology
0 fleet carriers, 1 light carrier, 9 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 3 heavy cruisers, 4 armored cruisers, 7 light cruisers, 71 destroyers, 43 submarines [+2 heavy cruisers in 1 turn, +1 light cruiser in 1 turns]
Air Force: (2/5) Average, 1924 technology
30 fighter wings, 5 attack wings, 2 bomber wings
Player: Fingon888

German Reich
Politics & Economy
Government: Federal constitutional republic
Leader(s): President Paul von Hindenburg / Chancellor Franz von Papen
Ideology: Conservatism
Alignment: None
Capital: Berlin
Political stability: 54%
Population: 65.460 m. (0.61% growth last year)
GDP: $ 238,621 m. (-6.43% growth last year)
Economic status: Industrial, depression, market economy, $ 3,645 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 26,401 m., 16.42% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 31,053 m. [+ $ 450 m. per year for 58 turns]
Balance: $ - 4,652 m.
Treasury: $ - 177,980 m.
Infrastructure: (3/5) Average
Administration: (2/5) Average
Education: (1/5) Good
Health & Welfare: (2/5) Poor
National Defense
Manpower: 106,918
Army: (4/5) Poor, 1919 technology
6 infantry divisions, 2 cavalry divisions, 0 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (3/5) Poor, 1924 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 6 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 4 light cruisers, 7 destroyers, 0 submarines [+1 light cruiser in 3 turns]
Air Force: (1/5) Failing, 1918 technology
0 fighter wings, 0 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: Noco19

Kingdom of Hungary
Politics & Economy
Government: Unitary constitutional “monarchy”
Leader(s): Regent Miklós Horthy de Nagybánya / Prime Minister István Bethlen de Bethlen
Ideology: Authoritarian conservatism
Alignment: None
Capital: Budapest
Political stability: 71%
Population: 8.706 m. (0.84% growth last year)
GDP: $ 20,925 m. (-1.66% growth last year)
Economic status: Semi-industrial, recession, market economy, $ 2,404 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 2,512 m., 18.55% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 2,591 m.
Balance: $ - 79 m.
Treasury: $ - 12,969 m.
Infrastructure: (4/5) Poor
Administration: (5/5) Poor
Education: (4/5) Poor
Health & Welfare: (4/5) Failing
National Defense
Manpower: 99,755
Army: (5/5) Poor, 1922 technology
4 infantry divisions, 1 cavalry division, 0 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (1/5) Failing, 1918 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 0 light cruisers, 0 destroyers, 0 submarines
Air Force: (1/5) Failing, 1918 technology
0 fighter wings, 0 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: DutchGuy


Kingdom of Italy
Politics & Economy
Government: Fascist dictatorship
Leader(s): King Vittorio Emanuele III / Duce & Prime Minister Benito Amilcare Andrea Mussolini
Ideology: Italian fascism
Alignment: None
Capital: Rome
Political stability: 96%
Population: 41.127 m. (0.90% growth last year)
GDP: $ 122,562 m. (-4.18% growth last year)
Economic status: Semi-industrial, depression, mixed economy, $ 2,980 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 21,202 m., 24.97% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 22,100 m.
Balance: $ - 898 m.
Treasury: $ - 109,597 m.
Infrastructure: (4/5) Average
Administration: (5/5) Average
Education: (5/5) Average
Health & Welfare: (2/5) Poor [+1 in 1 turn, +1 in 4 turns]
National Defense
Manpower: 540,746
Army: (3/5) Average, 1925 technology
28 infantry divisions, 6 cavalry divisions, 1 marine division, 2 mountain divisions, 4 armored brigades
Navy: (2/5) Good, 1926 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 4 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 2 heavy cruisers, 3 armored cruisers, 10 light cruisers, 79 destroyers, 27 submarines [+1 light cruises in 1 turn, +2 destroyers in 1 turn]
Air Force: (4/5) Poor, 1924 technology
15 fighter wings, 2 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: Harpsichord


Greater Japanese Empire
Politics & Economy
Government: Unitary constitutional monarchy wherein the military does not care about the government
Leader(s): Emperor Showa / Prime Minister Inukai Tsuyoshi
Ideology: National conservatism
Alignment: None
Capital: Tokyo
Political stability: 61%
Population: 64.835 m. (1.28% growth last year)
GDP: $ 122,050 m. (-0.61% growth last year)
Economic status: Semi-industrial, recession, market economy, $ 1,883 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 13,871 m., 14.02% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 18,780 m.
Balance: $ - 4,909 m.
Treasury: $ - 117,398 m.
Infrastructure: (3/5) Average
Administration: (5/5) Average
Education: (3/5) Good
Health & Welfare: (2/5) Poor
National Defense
Manpower: 806,798
Army: (1/5) Good, 1927 technology
24 infantry divisions, 4 cavalry divisions, 3 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 2 armored brigades
Navy: (1/5) Excellent, 1928 technology
2 fleet carriers, 1 light carrier, 6 battleships, 4 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 8 heavy cruisers, 3 armored cruisers, 20 light cruisers, 116 destroyers, 49 submarines [+1 battleship in 2 turns, +2 battleships in 3 turns, +1 battleship in 4 turns, +2 battlecruisers in 2 turns, +2 battlecruisers in 3 turns, +4 heavy cruisers in 1 turns, +3 light cruisers in 1 turn, +5 light cruisers in 2 turns, +2 light cruisers in 3 turns, +10 destroyers in 1 turn]
Air Force: (1/5) Average, 1926 technology
12 fighter wings, 3 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: Maxwell500

United Mexican States
Politics & Economy
Government: Authoritarian federal constitutional republic
Leader(s): President Emilio Portes Gil (until 5 February) / President Pascual Ortiz Rubio (after 5 February)
Ideology: Social democracy
Alignment: None
Capital: Mexico City
Political stability: 49%
Population: 17.470 m. (1.72% growth last year)
GDP: $ 26,673 m. (-4.01% growth last year)
Economic status: Agrarian, depression, mixed economy, $ 1,527 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 2,585 m., 18.99% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 3,296 m.
Balance: $ - 711 m.
Treasury: $ - 16,570 m.
Infrastructure: (4/5) Poor
Administration: (3/5) Poor
Education: (5/5) Poor
Health & Welfare: (1/5) Poor
National Defense
Manpower: 141,923
Army: (3/5) Poor, 1924 technology
6 infantry divisions, 1 cavalry division, 0 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (5/5) Failing, 1920 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 1 pre-dreadnought, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 0 light cruisers, 0 destroyers, 0 submarines
Air Force: (4/5) Failing, 1916 technology
1 fighter wing, 0 attack wings, 1 bomber wing
Player: luc124

Republic of Poland
Politics & Economy
Government: Unitary constitutional republic
Leader(s): President Ignacy Mościcki / Prime Minister Walery Jan Sławek
Ideology: National conservatism
Alignment: None
Capital: Warsaw
Political stability: 65%
Population: 31.727 m. (1.46% growth last year)
GDP: $ 55,668 m. (-4.85% growth last year)
Economic status: Semi-industrial, depression, market economy, $ 1,755 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 5,933 m., 14.01% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 6,261 m.
Balance: $ - 328 m.
Treasury: $ - 15,783 m.
Infrastructure: (5/5) Poor [+1 in 2 turns, +1 in 5 turns]
Administration: (1/5) Average
Education: (2/5) Average
Health & Welfare: (4/5) Failing
National Defense
Manpower: 630,228
Army: (2/5) Average, 1926 technology [+1 in 1 turn]
17 infantry divisions, 5 cavalry divisions, 0 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 2 armored brigades
Navy: (2/5) Poor, 1926 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 0 light cruisers, 2 destroyers, 3 submarines
Air Force: (2/5) Poor, 1925 technology
5 fighter wings, 0 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: aedan777

Kingdom of Romania
Politics & Economy
Government: Unitary constitutional monarchy
Leader(s): King Michael I / Regents Prince Nicholas & Patriarch Miron / Prime Minister Iuliu Maniu
Ideology: Agrarian conservatism
Alignment: Little Entente
Capital: Bucharest
Political stability: 58%
Population: 14.239 m. (0.93% growth last year)
GDP: $ 16,071 m. (-0.90% growth last year)
Economic status: Agrarian, recession, market economy, $ 1,129 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 1,465 m., 11.80% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 1,944 m.
Balance: $ - 479 m.
Treasury: $ - 10,955 m.
Infrastructure: (4/5) Poor [+1 in 1 turn]
Administration: (1/5) Average
Education: (4/5) Poor
Health & Welfare: (3/5) Failing
National Defense
Manpower: 216,770
Army: (1/5) Average, 1924 technology
9 infantry divisions, 2 cavalry divisions, 0 marine divisions, 2 mountain divisions, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (1/5) Poor, 1919 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 0 light cruisers, 4 destroyers, 0 submarines
Air Force: (3/5) Poor, 1926 technology
4 fighter wings, 1 attack wing, 0 bomber wings
Player: Riccardo93


Kingdom of Spain
Politics & Economy
Government: Unitary “constitutional” monarchy
Leader(s): King Alfonso XIII / Prime Minister José Sanjurjo y Sacanell
Ideology: National conservatism & authoritarian centrism
Alignment: None
Capital: Madrid
Political stability: 61%
Population: 23.541 m. (0.64% growth last year)
GDP: $ 63,024 m. (-1.85% growth last year)
Economic status: Semi-industrial, recession, market economy, $ 2,677 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 8,519 m., 16.99% tax rate
Expenditures: $ $ 9,783 m.
Balance: $ - 1,264 m.
Treasury: $ - 33,507 m.
Infrastructure: (3/5) Average
Administration: (5/5) Poor
Education: (3/5) Poor
Health & Welfare: (1/5) Poor
National Defense
Manpower: 168,256
Army: (3/5) Poor, 1926 technology
6 infantry divisions, 1 cavalry division, 1 marine division, 0 mountain divisions, 1 armored brigade
Navy: (3/5) Poor, 1922 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 2 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 1 armored cruiser, 7 light cruisers, 10 destroyers, 16 submarines
Air Force: (3/5) Failing, 1919 technology
0 fighter wings, 0 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: Cloud_Strife


Republic of Turkey
Politics & Economy
Government: Unitary constitutional republic
Leader(s): President Mustafa Kemal Atatürk / Prime Minister İsmet İnönü
Ideology: Kemalism
Alignment: None
Capital: Ankara
Political stability: 90%
Population: 15.154 m. (1.43% growth last year)
GDP: $ 19,130 m. (2.40% growth last year)
Economic status: Agrarian, expansion, market economy, $ 1,262 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 2,648 m., 20.54% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 2,490 m.
Balance: $ 158 m.
Treasury: $ - 14,972 m.
Infrastructure: (3/5) Poor [+1 in 1 turn, +1 in 4 turns]
Administration: (1/5) Average
Education: (3/5) Average
Health & Welfare: (1/5) Poor [+1 in 2 turns, +2 in 5 turns]
National Defense
Manpower: 222,523
Army: (2/5) Average, 1923 technology
12 infantry divisions, 3 cavalry divisions, 0 marine divisions, 2 mountain divisions, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (2/5) Poor, 1917 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 1 battlecruiser, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 4 light cruisers, 3 destroyers, 2 submarines
Air Force: (3/5) Failing, 1921 technology
3 fighter wings, 1 attack wing, 0 bomber wings
Player: XVG


Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes
Politics & Economy
Government: Unitary constitutional monarchy
Leader(s): King Aleksandar I / Prime Minister Anton Korošec
Ideology: Liberalism
Alignment: Little Entente
Capital: Belgrade
Political stability: 63%
Population: 14.548 m. (1.35% growth last year)
GDP: $ 19,108 m. (-1.38% growth last year)
Economic status: Agrarian, recession, market economy, $ 1,314 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 1,910 m., 12.91% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 1,926 m.
Balance: $ -16 m.
Treasury: $ - 7,776 m.
Infrastructure: (3/5) Poor [+1 in 2 turns, +1 in 4 turns]
Administration: (4/5) Poor
Education: (3/5) Poor [+2 in 2 turns]
Health & Welfare: (2/5) Failing
National Defense
Manpower: 182,089
Army: (1/5) Average, 1924 technology
9 infantry divisions, 2 cavalry divisions, 0 marine divisions, 1 mountain division, 0 armored brigades
Navy: (2/5) Poor, 1923 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 0 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 1 light cruiser, 4 destroyers, 4 submarines
Air Force: (3/5) Poor, 1923 technology
4 fighter wings, 2 attack wings, 0 bomber wings
Player: Luftwafer

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
Politics & Economy
Government: Communist dictatorship
Leader(s): General Secretary Josef Vissarionovich Stalin
Ideology: Stalinism
Alignment: Comintern
Capital: Moskva
Political stability: 99%
Population: 177.460 m. (1.54% growth last year)
GDP: $ 256,483 m. (3.88% growth last year)
Economic status: Semi-industrial, boom, command economy, $ 1,445 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 197,960 m., 73.48% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 205,344 m.
Balance: $ - 7,384 m.
Treasury: $ - 265,875 m.
Infrastructure: (1/5) Average
Administration: (5/5) Good
Education: (2/5) Average
Health & Welfare: (3/5) Poor
National Defense
Manpower: 2,652,510
Army: (1/5) Good, 1925 technology
69 infantry divisions, 14 cavalry divisions, 1 marine division, 0 mountain divisions, 12 armored brigades
Navy: (5/5) Poor, 1923 technology
0 fleet carriers, 0 light carriers, 3 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 0 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 2 light cruisers, 14 destroyers, 33 submarines [+1 light cruiser in 1 turn, +1 light cruiser in 2 turns]
Air Force: (2/5) Poor, 1926 technology
14 fighter wings, 1 attack wings, 1 bomber wings
Player: Shynka

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Politics & Economy
Government: Unitary constitutional monarchy
Leader(s): King George V / Prime Minister James Ramsay MacDonald
Ideology: Social liberalism
Alignment: None
Capital: London
Political stability: 63%
Population: 45.951 m. (0.36% growth last year)
GDP: $ 236,866 m. (-4.21% growth last year)
Economic status: Industrial, recession, market economy, $ 5,155 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 39,706 m., 15.27% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 42,324 m.
Balance: $ - 2,618 m.
Treasury: $ - 399,568 m.
Infrastructure: (2/5) Good
Administration: (2/5) Good
Education: (3/5) Good
Health & Welfare: (4/5) Poor
National Defense
Manpower: 311,591
Army: (2/5) Good, 1926 technology
17 infantry divisions, 2 cavalry divisions, 3 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 8 armored brigades
Navy: (2/5) Excellent, 1928 technology
0 fleet carriers, 6 light carriers, 16 battleships, 4 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 11 heavy cruisers, 0 armored cruisers, 42 light cruisers, 165 destroyers, 56 submarines [+2 submarines in 1 turn]
Air Force: (1/5) Average, 1924 technology
16 fighter wings, 4 attack wings, 2 bomber wings
Player: Korona

United States of America
Politics & Economy
Government: Federal constitutional republic
Leader(s): President Herbert Clark Hoover
Ideology: Liberalism
Alignment: None
Capital: Washington, DC
Political stability: 61%
Population: 124.529 m. (0.87% growth last year)
GDP: $ 710,388 m. (-8.28% growth last year)
Economic status: Industrial, depression, market economy, $ 5,705 per capita
Government Spending & Services
Receipts: $ 54,625 m., 8.25% tax rate
Expenditures: $ 56,888 m.
Balance: $ - 2,263 m.
Treasury: $ - 308,812 m.
Infrastructure: (1/5) Good
Administration: (4/5) Average
Education: (3/5) Good
Health & Welfare: (3/5) Poor
National Defense
Manpower: 1,368,359
Army: (3/5) Average, 1924 technology
10 infantry divisions, 2 cavalry divisions, 2 marine divisions, 0 mountain divisions, 4 armored brigades
Navy: (1/5) Excellent, 1928 technology
2 fleet carriers, 1 light carrier, 18 battleships, 0 battlecruisers, 0 pre-dreadnoughts, 5 heavy cruisers, 3 armored cruisers, 10 light cruisers, 298 destroyers, 86 submarines [+3 heavy cruisers in 1 turn]
Air Force: (5/5) Poor, 1927 technology
24 fighter wings, 5 attack wings, 2 bomber wings
Player: naxhi24
 
Last edited:
The White House
Washington

July 10, 1931

Hon. Louis L. Emmerson
Governor of Illinois
Springfield Ill.

My Dear Governor Emmerson:

No matter what improvement there may be in our economic situation during the fall, we shall unquestionably have considerable continuance of destitution over the winter. I am wondering if it would not be advisable for us to get the machinery of the country into earlier action than last year in order that there may be provision for funds substantially made before the winter arrives.

Your organization last winter was one of the most admirable in the whole country and I had some thought that if all organizations were to begin their appeals for funds some time in October and run them over Thanksgiving we could make it more or less a national question and thereby support each state committee more effectively.

This, however, is just thinking aloud on the general situation and I would like your views.

I wish again to express my appreciation for the fine courtesies we received at the hands of Mrs. Emmerson and yourself and with kind regards to you both, I am

Yours Faithfully
192px-Herbert_Clark_Hoover_Signature.svg.png
 
((Joining as Finland as Mastah Cheef said Finland's available))

1800px-Flag_of_Finland.png

The Republic of Finland
800px-Coat_of_arms_of_Finland.png


Form of Government: Parliamentary Republic
Head of State: President Relander
Head of Government: Prime Minister Mantere
Minister of Foreign Affairs: Hjalmar Johan Fredrick Procopé
Ruling Party: Agraian League


IC Directory:
Domestic Affairs


Foreign Affairs
 
vYsIAiH.jpg

Şehit Asteğmen Mustafa Fehmi Kubilay

Menemen Incident

“Those who were against the republic wanted to overthrow it to re-establish the old order. However, they dissolved at their every attempt as the great majority was determined to protect the republic. The Menemen Incident was one of these attempts. Derviş Mehmed, a person affiliated with the Nakşbendiyye order, and ignorant people who gathered around him, came to Menemen on 23 December 1930. They began an uprising for the sake of religion. They martyred Kubilay, a teacher and second-lieutenant who tried to stop the uprising, by cutting his head off. Soldiers were sent to the town as soon as the event was heard of. The uprising was appeased. Rebels were caught, tried in military court and punished.”
- Excerpt from a Turkish secondary school textbook
The Menemen Incident occurred in December 1930, seven years after the proclamation of the Turkish Republic, ruled by the party-government of Republican People’s Party, devoted under Mustafa Kemal to a complete transformation of society, a shift from Eastern to Western civilization. One of the main tenets of the new state ideology was secularism (lâiklik), and Kemalist reforms aimed to speed up the process of secularization. Kemalist secularism didn’t only aim to break the link between the religious and political scenes, but to also to an extent bring religion under state monopoly, so that it couldn’t be used as a tool against the state and its reforms. During the Kurdish rebellion of Şeyh Said, driven by religious conservatives and disillusioned ex-Ottoman irregulars, the Ankara government had declared martial law and enacted the Law on the Maintenance of Order (Takrir-i Sükûn Kanunu), giving it dictatorial powers to squash opposition, both in terms of religious organizations and opposition groups. The Sufi orders (tarikat), seen as the principal organization and motivators behind the conservative Islamist unrest in the East were outright banned. At first, resistance was merely passive as the movements withdrew underground. As the controversial law was removed in 1929, new parties again appeared following encouragement from Mustafa Kemal, among them the Free Republican Party (Serbest Cumhuriyet Fırkası), headed by Ali Fethi. However, the party was quickly embraced by the conservatives who saw it as an opportunity to reverse the reforms of Atatürk, particularly regarding secularism, and was personally dissolved in November 1930 by its founder. The party had been notoriously successful in the region of İzmir and its hinterland which was the Turkish region most decisively hit by the worldwide economic crisis that so far had worried the government in Ankara only negligibly. The party had even won seats in the local elections in the region, and enjoyed wide support from peasants and merchants, but also from reactionaries opposed to secular reforms. Incidentally, Menemen was among the few towns were the Free Republicans had won seats.

The core group of the uprising was seven men from Manisa, led by the Sufi Derviş known as Giritli Mehmed, an immigrant from Crete. The other attackers were mostly illiterate young men, milkmen, shoe makers or shepherds. They had already been active in Manisa, were Mehmed had been a known rabble-rouser and street preacher, interpreting dreams and ordering his followers to perform the zikir. Slowly they started to provoke the people of Manisa against the government, Mehmed declaring that state officials who allowed their wives and daughters to wear “un-Islamic and inappropriate” clothing were infidels. The group left Manisa on 6 December, staying at nearby villages and further agitating the peasantry against the government. He promised that he and his men would march to Menemen, send telegrams to Istanbul to Sheikh Esad, seize Ankara and restore the Sufi lodges in every village and town. When he finally arrived to the town, Mehmed declared himself the Mehdi, and claimed he would restore the Caliphate. They raised a green banner, declared rebellion and gathered in the town square for zikir. Gendarmes demanded them to disperse, and a scuffle began, with the gendarmes soon forced to retreat. Reinforcements were called for from a nearby military barracks, and Second Lieutenant Mustafa Fehmi Kubilay was placed in charge of quelling the uprising. At first he tried to negotiate with the Derviş, unarmed, but was shot and later beheaded, his head placed on top of a green banner. The crowd watched and applauded. Further reinforcements arrived to the town later the same day, and two further village guards were killed in action, and the leaders of the uprising were arrested.

The incident immediately became a national issue, as the government was extremely disturbed by the fact that the rebels had enjoyed wide popular support. Mustafa Kemal’s message to the Chief of the General Staff Fevzi Çakmak was published in papers: “The nation will certainly regard this attack against the young and heroic officer, in a region which had a bitter experience of occupation, as a conspiracy against the Republic itself, and will pursue the perepetrators accordingly.” A state of emergency was subsequently declared and Menemen placed under martial law. Courts-martial headed by Gen. Mustafa Muğlalı were quickly set-up which handed out sentences ranging from death at the gallows or life imprisonment to one year’s confinement. There were also several acquittals. Sufi members were arrested around the country. The government claimed the event to have been a part of a wider conspiracy instigated by Sheikh Esad, who was executed along with Derviş Mehmed and numerous other sheikhs. The government, which previously had allowed religion to mostly move along its own course save for more secretive and organized conservative groups, now vigorously increased the efforts of forced secularization. The process of translating the Koran from Arabic to Turkish to Turkify religion was ordered to be hastened, and in general the government started to promote Turkic history and Turkish nationalism over Islamic culture and nostalgia of the Ottoman Empire. The martyrdom of Kubliay was recounted to the people by government press, portraying the rebels as savages and reactionaries. Mustafa Kemal himself declared that “Kubilay’s pure blood will refresh and strengthen the vitality of the Republic.” Many young and progressive citizens of the republic could identify with the young teachers, and especially intellectuals were open in their support for harsh government action.
 
New-York-Times-Logo.jpg

Governor Roosevelt Re-elected in Landslide Victory!
The Gubernatorial Election in New York has concluded with the re-election of incumbent Governor Franklin Delano Roosevelt to Albany. Governor Roosevelt secured a second term after defeating his Republican opponent, Charles H. Tuttle, by a margin of 14%. Many cite the growing dissatisfaction with Republican policy during the economic depression as a major factor in Roosevelt's victory, showcasing the shift in the electorate towards the Democrats. Governor Roosevelt's victory by such a large margin in New York has also seemingly opened new paths for the Governor to explore in 1932[...]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PH4yIbY.png

Governor Long Elected to Senate, will remain as Governor
Governor Huey Long, after a long period of campaigning across Louisiana, has successfully won his campaign for Senator by a margin of 14.5%. After defeating his opponent, then Senator Joseph E. Randsell (an Alexandria native), Governor Long has declared he would leave his seat in Washington vacant until his term as Governor expired in 1932. His reasoning for this is that a vacancy for this period of time would not hurt Louisiana, and "with Ransdell as Senator, the seat was vacant anyway." This victory also has shown support for Governor Long's policy, due to Governor Long stating at the start of his campaign that a victory here would show that the public supports his programs. With the public seemingly in support of the Governor, many wonder what he plans on doing next[...]