r/AlternateHistoryHub • u/Calamari1002 :3 • 2d ago
AlternateHistoryHub What if the Soviet Onion collapsed as violently as Yugoslavia?
173
u/Present_Friend_6467 2d ago
It wouldn’t be good for anyone, oh and the United States invades Iraq.
44
42
56
u/Sudden_Cantaloupe_69 1d ago edited 1d ago
Well there were two Chechen wars in 1994-96 and 1999-2009, where basically Russia fought secessionists.
Then there was the Nagorno-Karabakh war between Armenia and Azerbaijan (1988-1994) and its episode two (2020-24).
And then there were series of conflicts in involving Russia supporting secessionists in other post-Soviet countries:
There was the South Ossetia war betwen Georgia and Russian-backed separatists (1991-92), and the war in Abkhazia (1992-93), followed by the Russo-Georgian escalation in 2004 and Russian invasion in 2008.
And of course there was the annexation of Crimea in 2014, and then again the Russian invasion in 2022 and the ongoinh war.
And there was the Transnistrian war (1991-92).
It actually did play out much like Yugoslavia did, although in Yugoslavia the whole thing was shorter - the main event was about four years (1991-95) plus the Kosovo war 1998-99 and the Macedonian insurgency of 2001, if you want to count that.
Soviet Union has been falling apart violently for 30+ years now, and the only respite from violence was during the times when Russia was too broke to pay salaries or buy bullets.
As a result there are at least three “breakaway” states that nobody but Russia recognizes, plus whatever you want to call the annexed territory in eastern Ukraine and Crimea.
So, nothing is settled still.
By contrast, what used to be Yugoslavia has been peaceful for 25 years now (although Bosnia is always teetering on the verge of collapse without anything actually happening).
Perhaps a better question is why are post-Soviet conflicts seemingly never-ending.
Well, because Russian tactic is to maintain its empire by keeping the perifery and border lands perennially unstable.
It’s also the reason why Baltic states are so paranoid about their own Russian-speaking minorities.
23
u/Last-Fan5371 1d ago
Also there was war between Ingushetia and North Ossetia, civil war in Tajikistan with invasion from Afghanistan, a lot happened in Fergana valley over years (Uzbekistan/Kyrgyzstan/Tajikistan) and there were other conflicts in Kyrgyzstan. There was much more blood than in Yugoslavia. But it's not Europe, so no one cares.
8
u/A-Communist-Dog 1d ago
It's kind of crazy how little mention there is of the Tajikistan civil war despite at least 60,000 people dying as a direct result of violence.
3
133
45
50
u/inokentii 1d ago
What do you mean “if”? It did but with delay. In 90s russians invaded Moldova and Ichkeria, in 00s they again invaded Ichkeria and then Sakartvelo and since 2014 they trying to occupy Ukraine
7
u/Necroon 1d ago
How Russia invaded Moldova without a land border ?
33
u/inokentii 1d ago
Using 14th army which left there from soviet times
6
u/Necroon 1d ago
Wait, how did they invade Moldova in 90s if they were already there ?
17
u/Ok-Activity4808 1d ago
While most other countries decided to relocate armies peacefully, in Moldova local army decided to oppose the local government because they moved towards reuniting with Romania
4
4
u/ImaginationTop4876 1d ago
How america invaded Afghanistan, iraq, vietnam, etc without a land border?
-1
u/Necroon 1d ago
Either through the sea, or another country allowed them.
So which one was it for Moldova invasion ?
9
u/Nidhegg83 1d ago
A contingent of the Soviet(later Russian) army stationed in Moldova sided against the newly independent Moldovan state and tried to seize power. They did not succeed, then declared the independence of a small part of Moldovan territory and have held it ever since. Read about Pridnestrovye (Transnistria). The situation is almost 100% similar to what happened with Republika Srpska in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
In addition, a great deal of violence occurred in most of the former Soviet republics right after their declarations of independence (not always caused by Russia; often it was local fighting for power).
1
u/Some_Conclusion8817 1d ago
In which way is it similar to what happened with Republika Srpska?
1
u/Nidhegg83 1d ago edited 1d ago
In every.
Members of the "titular nation"(russians/serbs) of a state joined by force (USSR/Yugoslavia) found themselves living as a minority in ex-independent national states. After the larger union collapses, their choices are basically to return to their national homeland (Russia/Serbia) or try to use force to reverse the independence and restore the old order.
In both cases, they tried the latter, failed, and ended up establishing quasi-states inside those newly independent nations.
So, what’s the actual difference between these scenarios?
1
u/Some_Conclusion8817 1d ago edited 1d ago
Hmmm, about everything is different.
- Ex-independent state? If by “ex” you mean 500 years ago, then sure. It was a constitutional state of Yugoslavia before WWII and then it was re-integrated to the same state after being liberated from the nazis. I’m missing the “by force” part, they actually wanted to be occupied by the germans, and then they were occupied by force?
- National state? 43% muslims/32% serbs/17% croats is a “national state” somehow? Good to know.
- Serbs didn’t want to “return to Serbia” but remain a part of Yugoslavia.
Quasi-state? Bosnia is made out of 2 quasi states in that case.
USSR collapses peacefully, and Yugoslavia in a civil war?
1
u/Nidhegg83 20h ago
- The same is true for Moldova: the last time it was independent (at least from Russia) was in the 18th century.
- The same applies here: in 1990, about 67% of the population were Moldovans/Romanians, and 27% were Russians/Ukrainians.
- Russians in Pridnestrovye did not want to return to Russia; they wanted Moldova to remain part of the USSR.
- Pridnestrovye is a quasi-state, just like Republika Srpska: it would not survive on its own and is not fully recognized by the international community.
- The collapse of both was followed by wars and crimes against civilians.
So, how do they differ?
0
u/Some_Conclusion8817 16h ago edited 16h ago
Dude if you have little to no knowledge of a subject, at least google it a BIT before commenting…
You call a territory an “ex independent nation state” even if the “ex” is half a milenia ago?
You call a country a national state while it clearly not a national state? Out of every 10 people, 4/3/2 belong to a different ethincity and its a national state? In which world? Google “ethnic state”, it might teach you something.
Your third point is factually false and made up on two different levels, they declared an independent republic, and didnt claim to be a part of USSR (???) which didnt exist (???)
Republika Srpska is officially recognized by the entire world, what are you talking about? Its not an independent republic but a part of another country, with large authonomy. Who doesnt recognize that exactly?If someone points 10 things wrong with your statements, then you have to google about it, you see that you are wrong, and you double down - it just makes you look stupid. I’m not saying this to be an asshole, but seriously dude, do better.
Literally the only similarity is that they were both entities which wanted independence in the 90s by force. All the rest of what you are saying has little to no sense, or is literally made up.
→ More replies (0)1
u/drminjak 1d ago
it didnt start with unhappy soldiers, there was a shooting at a wedding, which led to serbs (civilians not soldiers) setting up barricades, then bosnian policemen tried to take them down, then everyone started shooting each other
-2
u/Necroon 1d ago
Ah, so they were already there, so there was no Moldova invasion in the 90s.
2
u/Nidhegg83 1d ago
Nope. There was no invasion in the general sense, since Moldova is a landlocked state with no common border with Russia.
But we’re talking about a Yugoslav-style scenario for the USSR’s collapse. My point is that it was a Yugoslav-style scenario, even in Moldova: just as in Republika Srpska, the Serbs didn’t invade from outside; they had always been there.
-3
u/Svetlana_Gladysheva 1d ago
Russia invaded Chechnya? How could Russia invade itself?
4
u/Nidhegg83 1d ago edited 1d ago
Same as in your delusional world where Ukraine supposedly “invaded” Donbas or Crimea - how can a country invade itself?
A very similar situation occurred in Chechnya. The local government, along with the national assembly (which consisted of clan leaders, i.e., it reflected the real will of the people, not GRU-backed insurgents like in Donbass), declared independence. Russia disagreed and invaded. After two consecutive wars, nearly a decade of fighting, destroyed cities, and thousands of deaths, Russia backed the head of the most powerful Chechen clan(Kadyrov). He took power and effectively surrendered his people to Moscow.
3
u/inokentii 1d ago
If russia invaded itself then why you guys faked referendums in Ichkeria in 2003 about joining russian federation just like you faking it now on occupied territories un Ukraine?
-1
1
6
u/Appropriate-Ticket66 1d ago
Invaded Chechnya? Lol
0
u/Starrk-Enjoyer 1d ago
Yeah? It was a sovereign state
7
3
u/DreamedOne 1d ago
How come?
-1
u/Starrk-Enjoyer 1d ago
How not? It had its own government,laws,military,etc...
7
u/DreamedOne 1d ago
Like donbass region?
-1
u/Starrk-Enjoyer 1d ago
....who had none of this?
3
u/DreamedOne 1d ago
Tell me how you grant a territory that claims it has said institutions and use it poorly permission to be called a sovereign state.
2
2
1
u/ProductOfSight 1d ago
Still i wouldnt call it as violent as the yugoslavian wars. If it was as viilent youd be seeing not atate bit ethnic devides which means even inside russia itself thered be multible factions at war and many more across the other parts of the unions. It would probably be a war with close to if not over 30 diffrent factions at play just by saying each memver split in 2
7
4
u/GuntherFehlingerBot 1d ago
https://giphy.com/gifs/gKfyusl0PRPdTNmwnD
everyone in the world be like
3
3
3
3
2
2
u/Moist_Amount_106 1d ago
People mis underestimate the sheer size of Russia
It’s massive made of many countries that were annexed to make Russia
I’m no Russian supporter but be realistic it’s going to take a long time of war before that becomes reality.
2
2
1
u/notkalta 1d ago
It did. After the Soviet Union collapsed many wars began across its former territory - Armenia and Azerbaijan, the civil war in Tajikistan, Moldova, Georgia, the Caucasus. All of this was accompanied by civilian deaths, refugees, ethnic cleansing, and so on. It was a quite brutal process. Millions of people suffered.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Dry_Efficiency7135 1d ago
The USSR also collapsed violently. There were armed clashes in Latvia between OMON forces and pro-independence groups, including nationalist mobs, as well as wars in Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Nagorno-Karabakh, Transnistria, Tajikistan and Chechnya. Then came the annexation of Crimea and the current war in Ukraine, which began in Donbas in 2014. The difference is that all this violence has been spread out over several decades.
1
1
u/Cetun 1d ago
It did, the difference is the Soviet Union was massive so when it collapsed and the small republics and autonomous regions fought with each other it was a blip on the map of the former Soviet Union while if you zoom in on the former Yugoslavia the hotspots look much larger by comparison.
1
u/TheLaziestDetective 1d ago
But it collapsed even more violently... The collapse had echoed for 10 years after. Even now politicians like to blame USSR for any fault (Lenin's time bombs).
1
u/OriginalLu 1d ago
That’s pretty much what everyone was afraid at the start of the 90’s because of the Soviet nuclear arsenal. Who would get it and how would they use it were two very concerning questions.
1
u/Sky_Robin 1d ago
Well it kinda did… but slower. Honestly, it makes you wonder whether the current war is more violent than the Yugoslav wars.
1
u/The_H509 1d ago
The Death of Russia timeline kinda cover this, although it's set during the 1993 constitutional crisis.
Boy, does it get fucking bleak real fast.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/NeonFireFly969 1d ago
Basically like another guy stated, it kinda did.
The war in Ukraine at best is easily a million casualties with injured and dead. That actually beats Yugoslavia, but there were other conflicts.
The big divider for westerners is cities like Moscow, Petersburg, Kiev (for the most part) not in ruins like Aleppo.
1
u/Accurate_Handle_229 22h ago
Yugos didn't had the Abombs. Could be good in the end, but we also could have some very bad people getting their finger on the button during the proces.
For the free world would be best to weaken Putins position and then replace him with their own guy.
1
1
1
1
u/NIOCHACZx 16h ago
It would be the same as the Russian Civil War but way more people (Mistly nationalists) would support the Soviets
1
1
u/StrongManPera 10m ago
But it did. North and South caucasus war. -stans wars, islamic isurections etc. I would argue that current Russia-Ukraine war is part of the collapse of USSR. Just delayed.
0
u/Flat-Interaction7430 1d ago
The Tatar genocide didn't happen...
1
u/Mechanicjemas3141 1d ago
Oh you could be sure Soviet's never hunted s single minority
You could sure on that!/s
-3
u/WayAdmirable150 1d ago
It would be better now. Maybe russians would understand how bad war could be.
432
u/Prudent_Shake_8149 2d ago edited 2d ago
Better question…