if it were still around i guess that means Gorbachev's 2 policies would have worked. issue 1 in a nutshell USSR was bleeding money with no way to make it. they used their industrial might for the production of weapons which they gave(to allies for political leverage) and not into manufacured goods. No economy and what they built they give to their allies along with cold hard cash .they made a dollar and spent 2 fifty. 2nd issue no one loves the soviet union. its citizens are always complaining that communism sucks, their allies (poland Ukraine and other countries in the soviet block composing the USSR and not Iraq or the like) were always changing their laws. laws to leave the warsaw pact( think NATO but for the USSR side), laws to give more rights, express themselves, which would later turn into dissent. To prevent their allies from leaving the USSR implemented tough love . They had tens of thousands of soldiers with their tanks and aviation machines stationed in their allies home countries. Any revolt by the people or even political leaders over reaching themselves and the army strucked. 2nd issue was that no one or at most the majority of the countries composing the USSR didnt want to but were forced to be a part of it. The alliance was kept by force causing mini conflicts and any threat to Russia could crumble the "alliance".
his 2 plans were simple 1 decrease military size ,military spending. no more giving away weapons, spend less on new war technology research and development, stop giving away so much money away .and to create money use their industrial might to produce goods. Japan has toyota ,US has Ford, Germany Mercedez create exports, goods for foreign markets to use as well as domestic use. 2. to solve the loss of love problem they would have to stop using so much tough love.it was time to stop being the wife beater and instead love their neighboor. This meant giving limited freedoms to their citizens .allow them to express their feelings through painting,music and to some degree literature and the media. Allow their allies( soviet block countries not cuba, Iraq,Syria etc) to rule themselves . no more cracking down on their policies because it could potentially harm the Soviet regime.
I believe he was on the right track and with time and right order it could have worked, but he used both his plans at once. problem was
he gave freedoms to his citizens and their allies while at the same time demilitarizing the whole of the USSR . everyone complained openly , political leaders who were once jailed were let go and allowed to gather support. All the while the tanks came back home to Moscow. The budget crisis wasnt solved but he did managed to cut the biggest spender the military the same force that had kept the alliance togethere. So the soviet block countries left, Russia's cotozens saw their lives not improved but could voice their disaproval and the Soviet Union fell.
in this alter world The USSR did not fall because Gorbachev implemented his plan without calling in his troops. The USSR would keep its iron hand over everyone but the hand had a looser grip. The tanks stayed in Poland but this time their griefs about workers rights were heard. Other countries were allowed to implement communism in whatever matter they saw fit. Each country could now rule itself without the USSR, but their military pressence would still be there. Back home citizens also got rights , and even jobs after USSR changed their industrial production's focus. After a few years of rights and economic stability and even prosperity for some, the soldiers in the soviet block come back home. The military becomes smaller the budget for new weapons was cut as soon as the plans were put into motion but money for the size of the army stayed. With some amount to rights the masses dont see a need to leave, by allowing countries to rule themselves so long as they stay in a communist path
this is what allowed the USSR not to fall apart less money to foreign allies and military, with some limited rights .now how could this change the world of today? first off the war on terror it would have happend but ISIS might now have formed. Osama Bin Laden envisoned the army of the west invading the middle east. And upon the west's arrival millions of loyal believers would see the west as imperial forces marching to take over ,and from all around the middle east they would volunteer to fight them ( this is actually a little bit of what he believed would have happened or wanted to happened after 9/11 a call of sort of holy war,jihad, west anti alliance). Osama wanted a war with the west I dont know if the USSR (which is east and west)could be seen as the embodiment of the west by Osama or other Alqueda leaders. So i think the attack would still have happened on US soil and not USSR. Although 911 would take place the war on terror might have ended there. During the war of Iraq and Iran in the 80's the USSR was allied to both and provided weapons to both while claiming neutrality, but then chose Iraq. Because of that alliance the US would not have invaded Iraq, as Iraq was during its day a key part to the USSR into middle east. Since it did not collapse it would continue to be a critical ally in the middle east to the USSR. The persian gulf war might not even have happened either(the first US-Iraqui war). Although the USSR would have cut back on its military it still has nuclear weapons , a navy,and an air force so its still a force to be reckoned. By the 2000's if things picked up economically they probably started re arming themselves.
Ukraine crisis of today would have not happened . If the Ukraines government was ousted by the people then the USSR would have sent its military. Its old president was a tool to Putin so who ever was in power in Ukraine in this alter time line would probably also be a tool. When the people out the president, the USSR to keep their soviet block from going to NATO could argue that it did not recognize the legitimacy of the new goverment .and could send its forces to aide their allies and place order back to the country. or not care about cause and simply send the military once the communist gov. was ousted. free rule so long as its communist. maybe the Ukraine people would simply put a new communist leader to avoid an invasion, but one who didnt have ties so close to moscow.
Syrian civil war. The soviets and Syria go back to the 70's .Assad's father received 2 billion in military aide from the soviets yearly. Although reduced the current president who is the son of the former ruler would still receive military aide. With more than 30 years giving the USSr would not let Assad be toppled. As soon as the civil war started the USSR would have sent it troops or to save money sent its air strikes from day 1. maybe gave the Assad ruler some tanks to use to go along with the bombing. without a crippling civil war ISIS would not have gained a leg in Syria where it got strong and started to matter. but even with a long civil war ISIS would not have existed
ISIS today would still only be known as that one egyptian god. ISIS started as a sister group started by Alqueda in Iraq. After Hussein was ousted Iraq seemed like the right place to set up a new terrorist cell by Alqueda since there was no longer a strong government. However with Hussein being an ally to the USSR the US would not have invaded Iraq and risked WWIII .......
US is attacked by a terrorist cell and invades afghanistan. later learns that the dictator Hussein helped and decides Iraq will pay. Diplomatic talks emerged from the USSR insisting that proof be brought up against Hussein. Proof of this of that more tense relations and the US decides now is a good time as any to end the cold war. we are no longer alive right now.
Log in to comment