I would say that it's not only my bargaining but many years of readership that caused the players of the game to be more sympathetic to Turkey than their scorecards warranted. I'm very happy with how things went, with the exception of the wording of the tripartite agreement. I would've loved to create a South German Confederation, would have looked neat on the map
This rings true re Turkey, and I'll comment later on
@nuclearslurpee 's comment regarding whether it should even have been voted on as to why the 'prior to the Great Liberation War' conquests were included in the Geneva Conference.
Cantons of Switzerland or States of USA aren't puppets but integral parts of their countries, so that's what I'm aiming here for the hypothetical future Turkey. A democratic confederation in which states don't have to love each other in order to cooperate and trade.
This is an admirable ideal, no doubt. And one I'll use to guide my eventual write-up of the immediate post-war period. But it may be harder to achieve than to visualise.
A little more discussion of that below.
This was the round I never really understood why we had it. Maybe Romania's status was worth an evaluation, but the rest of these territories I think Turkey had taken before joining the GW2 so I did not understand why they were treated in the peace treaty. After all we did not vote on whether Japan could keep Chinese states or Italy could keep Ethiopia (albeit in their now rather less powerful and independent form of polity).
So, my head canon saw this as Turkey trying to legitimise both its previous (to the GLW) and more recent conquests in a general settlement that followed the war. Much like Versailles in 1919: in effect, Rounds 1 and 2 ended the remnant of the war with Japan. Everything after that I saw as setting up the new world order and the immediate future settlement of everything, under the revived LN. Geneva was more than just a peace treaty conference, it sought to settle everything following the recent years of upheaval and change.
I'd also say that in effect, there was a vote on whether Japan kept Manchukuo and Mengukuo, which was either a vote for peace on terms realistic for an ongoing war (to stop it) rather than to settle one that have been won. Also, Japan started with that territory in game, whereas Turkey did not for its conquests, so (without thinking it through quite so specifically) I roughly had in mind sorting and confirming what the game/AAR had done. I didn't even think about Ethiopia, as Italy no longer existed and my assumption is that Ethiopia will simply revert to independence.
I think the difference between the UGNR and the United States, at least, is that most of the US states were colonized rather than conquered and annexed. Not to put too fine a point on it, but it is somewhat easier to forge a unitary superstate when all of the member states have WASPy sorts in charge politically. The UGNR has member states basically divided along (very rough) ethnic lines, and ethnic minorities historically have objections to being ruled over by a different ethnic ruling class. Not to say it cannot be done, there are plenty of examples of this to varying degrees of success, but it is a tricky balance, and a loose democratic confederation sounds nice but the questions of centralization inevitably raise their ugly heads.
I think this is true. At some point, be it sooner or later, I think Turkey will have trouble with
all these territories that are still legally within the UGNR (rather than as puppets). Some will be nastier than others. Any thpought that the former Yugoslavian states or Greece (for just a couple of examples) would meekly submit without resistance and strife is very implausible. Keeping the puppet states obedient will be hard enough, let alone the occupied territories, from Iran to Italy to North Africa. This will all be in mind for the epilogue.
@nuclearslurpee, not to mention that they have a significant history of being controlled by Turkey/Ottomans and are
vehemently against that vassalage.
Quite. Though in this sense, I'll be borrowing from OTL history of the same period and Turkey will probably tend more towards a Warsaw Pact style attempt to control things. It may well prove a turbulent and even chaotic post-war period.
it'll be quite decentralized in my headcanon. There'll be 3 Balkan, 3 Anatolian, 3 Iranian/Azeri, 1 Arab/Bedouin, 3 African/Caribbean/Oceanic, 3 North Italian and 3 South Italian cantons which are all comprised of 7 districts each. Everytime there's a federal or local election, any town/village/neighborhood closer than 100km to an internal border will have the right to join to the other side. Each of the 133 districts will be free to do as they please internally. Every district will select 51 representatives to the canton parliament (357 seats) and likewise every canton will select 51 representatives to the federal parliament. Federation will handle finance, standardization, inspection, high judiciary, military. critical infrastructure and foreign relations, cantons will handle economics and districts will handle everything else including policing, education, judiciary, health, infrastructure etc.
As above, I'll try to factor that in to the epilogue, but there could be twists, turns, pushback (from occupied zones and internally), etc. There's also the issue of how long Inonu will maintain control and what rival factions or successors may try to do down the track, plus the wider world power balance.
That and I just didn't believe the UGNR could hold sway over the border buffer states AND keep the balakns integrated under TURKISH and ITALIAN dominance.
It will be incredibly decentralised at best, and that plays into my head canon's internationalist Comintern quite well.
Mind you, I also wanted someone to try and keep order in the balkans, so Turkey actually succeeding would have been a win for the world and the Soviets anyway.
We'll also see how long the 'marriage of convenience' wartime Comintern lasts post-war. Much of which will depend on the continued influence and relationship of the wartime leaders and what happens as the international situation develops and that generation is succeeded by those who may have different objectives and approaches.
From my perspective, with no deals in place there was nothing to be gained in voting against the UK's most favourable outcomes, but these were just the kind of peripheral rounds where I could readily have made compromises if the Soviets/Turkey hadn't managed to get everything settled so neatly.
Yes, that voting arrangement did limit the manoeuvre room of the Allied camp considerably.
This was the one where I was hoping there might some sympathy for Romania. Sadly that wasn't to be.
Same, but at least remaining a friendly and valued puppet of Turkey and a significant contributor to the Comintern effort during the war will still give them considerable autonomy, more than conquered former-Axis puppet states. And Romania will also need much post-war reconstruction, given how heavily its land was fought over. The main outcome here will be they will go with whatever direction Turkey decides on post-war, whether sticking with the USSR/Comintern, swinging towards the Allies, non-alignment or a new 'Kemalist' game bloc.
Given how well the war went for Turkey, I find this a very reasonable outcome. The question is how the Balkans will look in say ten or twenty years' time, because this part of the world certainly has the potential to become very difficult for Turkey to handle.
Yes, agree. Per above, Turkey wanted to have its whole new set up effectively endorsed at the Conference ... given how hard it will be to keep it all together post-war, even
without serious international opposition.
I suspect I may have tried with the UK a bit more if they weren't so utterly rubbish in the war and therefore already a sinking ship rather than a potential other option aside from the US.
I think there was a bit of that with a few of the countries (for good or ill) and was in keeping with the vibe from the game. Even if it made it harder for the people representing those countries, it probably remains true enough to the way the game panned out and the relative power relationships.
Had there been a separate Romanian player, I certainly would have gotten them the same deal Spain got, unless they wanted to go one way or the other. Of all the puppet nations, those guys will probably have a pretty good post war, with good feelings all round and a pretty huge country to invest itself in.
I agree with that. They will definitely have a 'puppet+' or 'puppet with benefits' status compared to most of the others.
I admire
@diskoerekto's noble vision of post-war Turkey. I suspect that Turkey will have to hit the 98 percentile (almost everything perfect) outcome bar to survive twenty-five years with all its current European possessions. My realistic floor (20 percentile) would be Turkey being the Islamic World's leader with territorial gains from Bulgaria and Greece.
Again, pretty fair comment there. I do have percentile dice left over from my old D&D days and I may well be giving them a workout in the post-war period for various decisions and road-forks!
Wow...you think out of all their possessions they're going to hold GREECE???
Not all of Greece, but some islands and border adjustment in Thrace/Macedonia.
Less "hold", more "things we're not allowed to discuss on this forum".
Even more that had the simulation been better, Greece would have long been a hotbed of discontent throughout the game.
Well,
yairs!
But I'll keep it clean enough for forum guidelines!
