HOME | DD

Silas-Coldwine β€” Swords and Scimitars

#alternatehistory
Published: 2017-05-18 03:47:24 +0000 UTC; Views: 2481; Favourites: 30; Downloads: 23
Redirect to original
Description A quick world map version of myΒ Four Scimitars map. Β Quite self-explanatory, I think, if you combine both maps. Still, I'll outline the very basics:

-Derg Ethiopia appears as a rogue, not as pro-Soviet. The regime met continued Soviet support, wich was later cut not out of ideological shift, but sheer neccesity, as supplying it was expensive and not strategically valuable anymore. Now, the regime, more repressive than ever, stands on its own.

-The Arab World, with its muscle-flexing energetic power, moves under an international strategy that combines regional development with divide and conquer. This pushed the global superpowers closer together by need, the true enemy being something else.

-The Soviet Union fell rather behind but didn't fully collapse, going hardliner instead. The opposition to the tripolar world, AKA "The Trifecta", has taken the form of a much more expansive, Third-Worldist anti-Globalism. Still, the Global South and the Soviets form a marriage of convenience.
Related content
Comments: 6

BagelBagelBagel [2017-05-23 19:10:58 +0000 UTC]

How do the Arab powers compare in terms of living standards and personal freedom?

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

Silas-Coldwine In reply to BagelBagelBagel [2017-05-23 19:28:06 +0000 UTC]

Morocco: Economically like Jordan, but great disparities between regions. Personal freedom is virtually the same.
United Arab Monarchies: Economically like the United Arab Emirates. Personal freedoms vary, but near the bottom end.
Arab Islamic Republic: Economically like pre-war Libya, politically like Algeria.
Federation of Arab Republics: Economically like Egypt, politically like pre-war Syria.

Living standards, from worst to best: Morocco, FAR, AIR, UAM.
Freedom, from worst to best: UAM, FAR, AIR, Morocco.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

QuantumBranching [2017-05-19 02:08:01 +0000 UTC]

One would imagine US support for Israel is a rather raw spot in US/Arab powers relations.Β 

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

Silas-Coldwine In reply to QuantumBranching [2017-05-19 10:33:29 +0000 UTC]

Sure it is, same as IOTL.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

QuantumBranching In reply to Silas-Coldwine [2017-05-23 00:55:27 +0000 UTC]

I _was_ wondering why all the Arab powers are in the Trifecta, none being with Op-For. (Speaking of which, what exactly is the relationship between the Soviets and the GSPC, and what does Op-For mean?)

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

Silas-Coldwine In reply to QuantumBranching [2017-05-23 01:38:39 +0000 UTC]

Their relationship is a marriage of convenience. Op-For means Opposition Forces. More or less taken from Call of Duty. I know, I deserve the pits of Hell.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0