AH Challenge: Two Turkeys

Xen · Apr 20, 2009

This is not your traditional carve up the Turkey thread, that is not my intentions in the least bit. I am looking at this in the context of the Cold War where we had two German nations, two Vietnamese nations, two Korean nations, and of course there were others but you get the jist. What is the most likely scenario that we get two Turkey's?

Lets say a pro-Soviet Peoples Republic of Turkey with its capital in Ankara and a pro-American Republic of Turkey with its capital in Istanbul

The POD should be after 1946, bonus points if Greece remains pro-western and undivided

Geekhis Khan · Apr 20, 2009

Were there any naceint pro-Communist movements in Turkey at the time that could be exploited? If so have the Soviets sponsor an uprising. NATO supports the old regime. Eventual treaty lines result in a Thrace/Dardanelles/Smyrna "West" and an Anatolian "East".

Abdul Hadi Pasha · Apr 20, 2009

This is extremely difficult with such a late POD, as this would have caused WWIII.

If you go from WWI, the Entente maintains the Ottoman Empire, which retains the Straits zone, but the Nationalists retain Anatolia and become Soviet clients.

yourworstnightmare · Apr 20, 2009

Or Turkey is lead by some screw ups during WW2 who joins the Axis. USSR invade, but Britain and later US secure Western Turkey for their side.

Christopher Marlowe · Apr 20, 2009

I think it would have gone a little more like this. The Allies carve up Turkey after WWI giving half of the current Turkey to Armenia and the other half to the new republic of Turkey. Armenia would also inclde some territory Russia had been claiming. When WWII comes around, The Soviets invade Armenia along with the Baltic states. In turn, this over extends them slightly, and a Nazi-backed Turkey invades the former Armenia and occupies it, as Hitler's armies are marching across the Russian fronteir. Then, during the Final years of the war, allied troops occupy Turkey as Russia re occupies Armenia. During the peace negotiations it is decided that Turkey should be split between a republican Turkey, and a communist People's Republic of Turkish Armenia, or PRTA.

yourworstnightmare · Apr 20, 2009

Giving half to Armenia would be a little to much. There were not many Armenians left anyway due to "forbidden topic" and they had not been a majority in such a large area.

False Dmitri · Apr 20, 2009

Agree with AHP - a better PoD would be during the war rather than after it, since a PoD after the war would have led to escalation and open conflict between the superpowers.

Actually, before 1948 or 49, Russia would have been without the Bomb. So open conflict over Turkey might not be so unfathomable.

The US thought that Turkey's democracy was fragile enough to warrant aid in 1948: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek-Turkish_Assistance_Act_of_1948. The policy began to be articulated in 1947. It may be a Nightmare Anticommunist scenario, but suppose President Truman did not push for Greek-Turkish aid, and the Domino Effect turned out to be real. The USSR swoops in, props up the Democratic Army of Greece to establish a Communist Greece,and for good measure begins to support Revolution in Turkey. Then the US has to get involved, and the end result is a small Soviet sphere in western Turkey and an American one in the east.

Commence picking that scenario apart now. I haven't conducted anything beyond the most trivial research and am only making a suggestion.

Abdul Hadi Pasha · Apr 20, 2009

Benkarnell said:
Agree with AHP - a better PoD would be during the war rather than after it, since a PoD after the war would have led to escalation and open conflict between the superpowers.

Actually, before 1948 or 49, Russia would have been without the Bomb. So open conflict over Turkey might not be so unfathomable.

The US thought that Turkey's democracy was fragile enough to warrant aid in 1948: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek-Turkish_Assistance_Act_of_1948. The policy began to be articulated in 1947. It may be a Nightmare Anticommunist scenario, but suppose President Truman did not push for Greek-Turkish aid, and the Domino Effect turned out to be real. The USSR swoops in, props up the Democratic Army of Greece to establish a Communist Greece,and for good measure begins to support Revolution in Turkey. Then the US has to get involved, and the end result is a small Soviet sphere in western Turkey and an American one in the east.

Commence picking that scenario apart now. I haven't conducted anything beyond the most trivial research and am only making a suggestion.

The aid wasn't due to the fragility of democracy in Turkey - I doubt we gave a rat's ass - so long as Turkey stayed pro-West. The aid was to prevent Turkey from falling under Soviet influence or control.

I don't think it's really possible to have a divided Turkey this late - the Soviets aren't strong enough to deal with the USA if it intervenes. The Soviets don't have sufficient power-projection capability into Turkey due to the terrain and logistics, but the US does. This is a much more vital interest than Korea or Vietnam - control of Turkey means control of the Middle East.

Christopher Marlowe · Apr 20, 2009

Good point. This is a challenge. There really isn't much reason the allies would have split Turkey, unless perhaps the POD was with a faction of Young Turks promoting communism? or something to that effect. A Communist movement in Turkey, but even that is hard to fit in with the actual real world timeline.

Atreus · Apr 20, 2009

Maybe hitler experiments with some sort of mediterranean strategy, to threaten the british hold on the middle east. Turkey gets drawn in, out of fear or offers to help reestablish their power (or, turkey just kets dragged in during barbarossa). Around 1943 or so, a Soviet front starts grinding through the caucasus and towars anatolia, matched by eventual allied landings in the southeast (possibly coinciding with a liberation of greece). Postwar, no reunification (maybe the soviets decide they want to control the straits, and the allies oppose this). thus, divided turkey.

Dont think that this is too plausible, but it doesnt seem incredibly far-fetched.

Grey Wolf · Apr 21, 2009

If the Nazis had taken Baku and established themselves there, Turkey may well have been coerced into entering the Axis. With their defeat, you could get what you ask for

Sorry, I knew what I was going to write when I began the above, then had to go and do something, then on my return my brain was absent

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

wormyguy · Apr 21, 2009

Abdul Hadi Pasha said:
If you go from WWI, the Entente maintains the Ottoman Empire, which retains the Straits zone, but the Nationalists retain Anatolia and become Soviet clients.

The Ottoman Empire without Anatolia would be too fragile to maintain without permanent foreign intervention - it would be like trying to maintain the United Kingdom without England (except the northern industrial bits). Why would the Nationalists become Soviet clients willingly? I was under the impression that Ataturk was a pretty committed anti-Communist.

Alexius · Apr 21, 2009

Abdul Hadi Pasha said:
The aid wasn't due to the fragility of democracy in Turkey - I doubt we gave a rat's ass - so long as Turkey stayed pro-West. The aid was to prevent Turkey from falling under Soviet influence or control.

"Democracy" in the Cold War sense of being pro-American and capitalist.

Christopher Marlowe · Apr 21, 2009

I was under the impression that Ataturk was a pretty committed anti-Communist.

Then there's your POD. Instead of Ataruk, a Communist leader comes to power or perhaps challenges Ataruk's authority.

Michael B · Apr 21, 2009

Christopher Marlowe said:
Then there's your POD. Instead of Ataruk, a Communist leader comes to power or perhaps challenges Ataruk's authority.

Absolutely. The Communists with Kurdish assistance carve out a state in the east whilst Ataturk fends off a Greek invasion from the west. The latter as per OTL grinds to a halt, but it gives the People's Republic of Anatolia to get established. The Greeks supply it via Iskenderun in the south east and the Soviet Union via Samsun in the north.

On OTL the Soviet eventually backed Ataturk, but in this AH they don't. In addition the French follow history by not supporting the Greeks whom they saw as a British client. As for the British, they get more bogged in Iraq against the Shia and Sunni rebels and thus keep out of Turkey to avoid adding the Kurds to their problems.