Tinatawag niya akong Dao Ming Si. Gusto ko sana bumanat pag nakausap ko siya ulit in person

First, chatgpt summary. Below that, parts bolded for quick scanning:
During Joe Biden's visit to Israel, he didn't express concerns about Israel's impending invasion of Gaza, but his advisers were interested in post-war plans.
Israel's primary goal in the conflict is to remove Hamas from power in retaliation for a recent massacre in southern Israel.
Israel has four main options for Gaza's future, all of which are considered unfavorable.
The first option is a prolonged occupation of Gaza, similar to the one from 1967 to 2005, but this is unpopular due to the financial burden and potential casualties.
The second option is to decapitate Hamas through war and then leave Gaza, but this could lead to the rise of other undesirable groups.
The preferred outcome for Israel is the return of the Palestinian Authority (PA), but this path faces obstacles, including the reluctance of Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president.
If the PA were to return to Gaza, it would face security challenges from Hamas and other militants.
A fourth option is to establish an alternate administration in Gaza, but finding a suitable leader is challenging.
The Palestinians have been divided for two decades, with no clear path to reconciliation between Hamas and the PA.
Gaza's future stability and prosperity depend on a broader settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as an isolated Gaza statelet is unlikely to thrive.

Now the full Story

Israel’s four unpalatable options for Gaza’s long-term future
The public statements Joe Biden made during his lightning visit to Israel on October 18th did not suggest many misgivings about Israel’s impending invasion of the Gaza Strip. In private, however, the American president’s advisers hoped to press Israel’s leaders on an urgent question: what should happen after the war?
Israeli officials say they are focused on toppling Hamas from power, in retribution for the massacre it committed in southern Israel on October 7th. “Gaza will no longer be a threat for Israel,” says Eli Cohen, the foreign minister. “We will not agree that Hamas will have any power in Gaza.” Even after the risks of fighting in such a densely populated place were illustrated by a deadly blast on October 17th at Gaza’s Ahli Arab hospital, which Israel blamed on an errant Palestinian rocket, Israel’s stated war aims have not changed.
Four-way stop
But Israel’s post-war plans remain uncertain. It has four main options, all bad ones. First is a prolonged occupation of Gaza, like the one it undertook from 1967 to 2005. Israeli troops would have to secure the enclave and, in the absence of a Palestinian government, might have to oversee basic services as well.
This might please a segment of Israel’s religious right, which still fumes about the withdrawal in 2005 of all Israeli soldiers and settlers from Gaza as the abandonment of a sliver of the biblical homeland of the Jews. But no one else wants to see Gaza reoccupied, given the heavy financial burden and the likelihood of endless bad press and a steady trickle of casualties. Mr Biden warned on October 15th that a lasting occupation would be a “big mistake”. Most Israeli strategists agree.
The second option is to wage a war that decapitates Hamas and then leave the territory. This is arguably the worst way forward. Some of Hamas’s leaders and supporters would probably emerge to reconstitute the group. Even if they did not, some other undesirable force would take its place. The Middle East has a history of radical groups taking advantage of ungoverned spaces.
The best outcome, from Israel’s perspective, would be the return of the Palestinian Authority (pa), which governs parts of the West Bank in co-ordination with Israel. But that path is littered with obstacles. The first is that Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, is loth to do it. “I don’t think anybody can be that stupid and think he can go back to Gaza on the back of an Israeli tank,” says Ghassan al-Khatib, a former Palestinian minister.
Even if Mr Abbas were able to take power that way, he may not want to. Yasser Arafat, the previous president of the pa and longtime figurehead for Palestinian nationalism, had a fondness for Gaza; he lived there for a time after being allowed to return to Palestine in 1994. People close to Mr Abbas say that he, in contrast, views Gaza as a hostile place.
Gaza would almost certainly be hostile to Palestinian police sent to secure it. The pa employs around 60,000 people in its security services, which have authority in roughly a third of the West Bank (see map). It cannot control even that limited area: parts of Jenin and Nablus, cities in the northern West Bank, are so restive that the pa’s forces dare not patrol them lest they be attacked. Morale is low. If Palestinian police returned to Gaza, they would be a target for the remnants of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other militants. Hamas and the pa fought a bloody civil war in Gaza after Hamas won parliamentary elections in 2006. Hamas eventually prevailed and ejected the pa from the strip in 2007.
Nor is security the only question. After Hamas came to power, Mr Abbas told bureaucrats in Gaza to stop working. Hamas hired tens of thousands of supporters to fill the civil service instead, while the pa continued to pay its workers to sit at home. Keeping that bureaucracy would mean working with around 40,000 people hired for their ideological loyalty to Hamas; dismissing it would repeat the mistake of America’s “de-Baathification” programme in Iraq, which threw legions of angry, unemployed men on the streets.
A fourth option would be to cobble together some sort of alternate administration, composed of local notables working closely with Israel and Egypt. Israel relied on that sort of arrangement until the 1990s, before the pa began to take over civil functions in the occupied territories.
There has been talk of trying to enlist Muhammad Dahlan, a former pa security chief who grew up in Gaza, to take the reins after Hamas. But Mr Dahlan has spent the past decade in Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates (uae). He has fallen out with the pa; in 2016 a Palestinian court convicted him of corruption. There is also bad blood between him and families in Gaza: he led the fighting against Hamas in 2007. “I think that’s an illusion,” says Michael Milstein, a reserve colonel in the Israeli army and an analyst at the Moshe Dayan Centre, a think-tank in Tel Aviv. “I’m not even sure he’d want to come back. He’d be worried people would want him dead.”
The case of Mr Dahlan points to a larger problem. The Palestinians have been divided for almost two decades. The split is largely their fault: though Hamas and pa leaders meet every couple of years to pay lip service to reconciliation, neither party wants to compromise. But the schism has also been exacerbated by the divide-and-rule policy of Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, who thought it a useful tool to stymie the Palestinian dream of an independent state. “Netanyahu had a flawed strategy of keeping Hamas alive and kicking,” says Ehud Barak, a former Israeli prime minister.
Both Hamas and the pa rule their statelets as one-party authoritarian regimes. In 2021 Nizar Banat, a critic of Mr Abbas, was beaten to death by Palestinian police at his home in Hebron. Those who oppose Hamas in Gaza risk torture and execution. Most Palestinians choose to keep silent, shunning politics and focusing on their day-to-day struggles.
The most recent poll from the Palestinian Centre for Policy and Survey Research (pcpsr) found that 65% of Gazans would vote for Ismail Haniyeh, the leader of Hamas, in a head-to-head presidential race against Mr Abbas (who would lose the West Bank as well). Hamas would win 44% of the vote in Gaza in a parliamentary ballot, whereas Fatah, Mr Abbas’s faction, would take just 28%.
Between a rock and a crock
At first glance this would suggest enduring support for Hamas. But such polls offer only a binary choice between militants and incompetents. Fully 80% of Palestinians want Mr Abbas to resign. Hours after the hospital explosion there were protests in cities across the West Bank, where demonstrators chanted: “The people demand the downfall of the president.” He is 87 and has no clear successor. None of his would-be replacements inspires much enthusiasm.
In a hypothetical race between Mr Haniyeh and Muhammad Shtayyeh, the pa’s colourless prime minister, the former would win by a 45-point margin in Gaza and 21 points in the West Bank. Again, this is less a testament to Mr Haniyeh’s popularity than to Mr Shtayyeh’s lack of it: a poll in 2019, after his first 100 days in office, found that 53% of Palestinians did not even know he was the prime minister.
Open-ended questions yield more telling results. When the pcpsr asked Palestinians to name their preferred successor to Mr Abbas, a plurality said they did not know. The second most popular answer, in both the West Bank and Gaza, was Marwan Barghouti, a member of Fatah serving multiple life sentences in an Israeli prison for orchestrating terrorist attacks in which Israeli civilians were killed. Several of the other top choices, such as Mr Dahlan and Khaled Meshal, a former Hamas leader, do not even live in the Palestinian territories.
Exiles, prisoners—or no one: Palestinian political life is moribund. Palestinians blame this sorry situation on Israel, arguing that the lack of meaningful peace talks has deprived the pa of its raison d’être. “I think Mr Abbas will be the last Palestinian president,” says Mr Khatib. “The whole idea of the Palestinian Authority is that it’s a transition towards a Palestinian state. If there’s no political horizon, then the whole pa becomes irrelevant.”
Israelis contend that the PA has undermined itself through rampant graft. Billions of dollars in foreign aid have been siphoned off over the past three decades to buy plush villas in Jordan and to pad bank accounts in Europe. Asked to name the main problems in Palestinian society, more people cite their own government’s corruption (25%) than Israel’s continued occupation (19%).
There is blame enough to share. The result, though, is that Fatah is probably irredeemable in the eyes of most Palestinians, a liberation movement turned ossified and decadent. In recent years even some Israelis had begun to wonder if Hamas could become an interlocutor, following the same path Fatah did decades earlier, from violent militants to pliable bureaucrats.
Not only had Hamas appeared focused on trying to improve Gaza’s economy, some of its leaders also seemed amenable to a two-state solution. That would have been a remarkable shift for a group whose charter used to call for Israel’s destruction. Last year Bassem Naim, a member of the group’s political leadership in Gaza, told your correspondent that it was willing to accept “a state on 1967 borders”. Ghazi Hamad, another political official, said much the same a year earlier.
Such thoughts now seem naive. Mr Milstein was one of the few prominent Israelis who warned, well before the massacre, that Hamas’s apparent pragmatism was just a ruse. His view, vindicated by awful events, is now a near-universal one in Israel. Even if Hamas were willing to take part in peace talks, an angry, grieving Israeli public would not be a willing partner: the vast majority of Israelis want to obliterate Hamas, not reward it.
Two other questions will shape Gaza’s future. One is what role Arab states will play. In private conversations over the past week, several Arab officials floated the idea of a foreign peacekeeping force for the enclave—but most quickly added that their country was not eager to participate.
Egypt is not popular in Gaza, both because it has joined Israel in blockading the territory and because of its prior history as Gaza’s ruler from 1948 to 1967. The uae would be hesitant to play a big role. “We don’t act solo,” says an Emirati diplomat. The same is probably true of Saudi Arabia.
Israel would probably veto any role for Qatar, one of the countries with the most influence in Gaza. For years the emirate has helped stabilise Gaza’s economy with Israel’s blessing, distributing up to $30m a month in welfare payments, salaries for civil servants and free fuel. But its support for Hamas—some of the group’s leaders live there—will now make it suspect. “The whole strategy of Israel during the last decade was to trust Qatar,” says Mr Milstein. “One of the lessons we should learn from this war is that we should not give Qatar any more involvement.”
Although Arab states do not want to secure Gaza, they may be willing to help rebuild it. After the last big war, in 2014, donors pledged $3.5bn for reconstruction (though by the end of 2016 they had disbursed just 51% of that). The bill will be even bigger this time.
The other question is what happens to the PA. Half of Palestinians tell pollsters it should be dissolved. Doing so would deprive many of them of an income (the PA is the largest employer in the West Bank) and probably lead to more violence. But it would also raise the costs of Israel’s occupation and, perhaps, force Palestine’s long-term future back onto Israel’s political agenda after two decades in which it was rarely discussed. “It’s the only card he has left,” says a former confidant of Mr Abbas.
There is no lasting solution for Gaza alone. Despite the long schism, Palestinians there still see themselves as part of a larger polity. Anyway, the strip is too small and bereft of natural resources to thrive by itself. Its economy depends on Israel’s: everything from strawberry farms to furniture factories relies on exports to its wealthier neighbour. Whoever takes control, Gaza will be neither stable nor prosperous as an isolated statelet.
The only way to bring enduring quiet to Gaza is through a broader settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. If the prospect of a negotiated solution evaporates completely, warns Mr Khatib, “with it, moderate leadership will vanish.” Israel can decapitate Hamas. But it is far less clear that anything better will take its place.

felt like doing a thought exercise. you can't edit any of the episodes, but you can only pick 10 per season.
--cheat: the 'previously on' doesn't change, so you can use footage from an episode not in your list
here are my choices.
Season 1:

1. Pilot (E1) - obvz
2. Proportional Response (E3) - Bartlet learning military leadership, stellar use of Fitz, we meet Charlie!
3. Enemies (E8) - fun intro ("we should take a field trip!") and closing. really good Hoynes use.
4. In Excelsis Deo (E10) - great Toby acting / character development. good Mrs. L usage.
5. Lord John Marbury (E11) - great story line, intro of HoF role player Lord John
6. He Shall, from Time to Time (E12) - "the reveal" first happens here, I believe
7. Take This Sabbath Day (E14) - great moral debate episode. love the powerful final scene of the most powerful man on earth undergoing confession. plus Joey Lucas debut!
8. 20 Hours in LA (E16) - a palate cleanser, fun hang episode

White House Pro-Am / Six Meetings Lunch / Let Bartlet be Bartlet / Mandatory Minimums / Lies, Damn Lies all merge together in my head. all fairly Inside Washington Politics nitty gritty, IMO.
9) Let Bartlet be Bartlet (E19) - I could have picked any of the five above
10) What Kind of Day Has it Been (E22) - love the "start intense", then lighthearted for most of episode until tension builds up to a 'Who Shot JR?' moment
Season 2 (my favorite season, and the toughest for me to pick 10)

1. In The Shadow of Two Gunmen (E1/E2) - this is HBO, so we can run an episode as long as we want
2. Midterms (E3) - a potluck of an episode, a bit of everything .... "psychics at..." ... crab puff
3. In This White House (E4) - the friggin' Ainsley introduction
4. Galileo (E9) - "I converted it in my head." LOL
5. Noel (E10) - just a world-class episode. Dr. Stanley. Yo Yo Ma. the music. sublime.
6. Bartlet's Third State of the Union / The War at Home (E13/E14) - "two" episodes in name alone .... great First Lady acting ... Ainsley as well. ... "smokeless"
7. Ellie (E15) - palate cleansers are great --- "you think anyone in this theater is going to shush me?" LOL

I really really like Going to Jail (Sam's best episode?) and Stackhouse is really good as well. S2 bangs so hard.
8) 17 People (E18) - a camping trip to Killington, Vermont, with a quick stopover in.... .... also, love the classic trope of having something silly (writing jokes) contrasting with something so serious
IMO Bad Moon Rising / Fall Kill You / 18th Potomac are more or less one long episode, so I'll go with ...
9) 18th and Potomac (E21) - really great intro scene, crushing closing scene .... brilliant use of visuals with no dialogue
10) Two Cathedrals (E22) - the West Wing's best episode, IMO .... young Mrs. Landingham is absurdly charming, IMO
Season 3
not a big fan of the of this season

1. Manchester (E1/E2) - I don't particularly care for this episode, but we need a landing after the transcendence of Two Cathedrals
2. Gone Quiet (E6) - Hal Holbrook! - fun seeing the White House on a weekend day, if I recall correctly
3. Bartlet for America (E9) - Leo's past revealed more
4. 100,000 Airplanes (E11) - really good Sam episode, inspiring. good Vanity Fair reporter.
5. Night Five (E13) - I'm a sucker for therapy TV ('In Treatment' ftw!) and greatly Dr. Stanley work, love how he treats El Presidente as a normal dude ///// $375 bucks an hour!
6. Hartsfield's Landing (E14) - really not a season 3 fan, so don't have particularly strong memories of this .... the chess scenes are cool
7. U.S. Poet Laureate (E16) - meh, not a huge fan. just trying to fill out this season
8. Enemies Foreign and Domestic (E18) - sure, why not?
9. We Killed Yamamoto (E20) - stellar Fitz acting
10. Posse Comitatus - the whole Simon getting shot thing was entirely unnecessary. 'Hallejulah' playing is cheesiness defined. ... I enjoyed 'Victorious in Peace' performance, but, this was a bit of a fart-sniffing episode, IMO.

Season 4
not a big fan of this season - viewership ratings fall around 10-20% over the course of this season

1. 20 Hours in America (E1/E2) - "i *love* dry rub" ... "how much did we decide on, a half hour?" ..... "freak"
2. Game On (E6) - Will Bailey introduction, I generally liked his character.
3. Election Night (E7) - certainly an important facet of the story of the Bartlet Administration, but don't remember much of the episode itself
4. Holy Night (E11) - sure, why not?
5. The Long Goodbye (E13) - a nice palate cleanser, a break from the norm
6. Inauguration (E14/E15) - an important part of the Bartlet presidency. not necessarily great TV.
7. Evidence of Things Not Seen (E20) - Matthew Perry premiere
8. Life on Mars (E21) - VP scandal
9. Commencement (E22) - I liked the techno scene, but I really really loved Amy asking Donna, "Are you in love with Josh?" as the techno music and dark lights filled the scene. Being forced to confront a truth you don't want to confront is one of the most powerful human experiences.
10. Twenty Five (E23) - similar to the prior's season's finale, a bit melodramatic. but necessary to the story of the Bartlet administration.

Season 5
oh man, this will be a bit of a struggle

1. Jefferson (E3) - dumb plot line wrapped up
2. Han (E4) - an old school, moral dilemma style episode. solid.
3. Disaster Relief (E6) - I liked the scene of Bartlet speaking to the woman washing dishes. I liked CJ standing up to the president and pushing him to lead ('you're taking up much-needed hotel rooms", etc.).
4. Abu el Banat (E9) - a decent Christmas episode. nice to see Liz / the Bartlet grandkids.
5. An Khe (E14) - impressive Leo acting and storyline. cool to see him outside of The West Wing.
6. Full Disclosure (E15) - how many of us have actions we took that we wish we never had taken? really good Hoynes / CJ storyline.
7. The Supremes (E17) - just a really great, old-school TWW episode. could've been in season 1. great stuff.
8. No Exit (E20) - bit of a 'murder mystery' vibe. cool to see people crammed together. good Kate moments.
9. Gaza (E21) - more of an action drama than a normal TWW episode, but good
10. Memorial Day (E22) - Camden Yards moment is cool.

Season 6

1. The Birnam Wood (E2) - good diplomacy episode. cool Camp David use.
2. Liftoff (E4) - intro to Matt Santos
3. The Dover Test (E6) - Leo's nurse, Santos. solid episode.
4. A Change is Gonna Come (E7) - James Taylor, 'I can't see out of my right eye', etc. solid. Hoynes trying to seduce Josh.
5. Impact Winter (E9) - paralyzed Bartlet diplomacy in China. good episode.
6. 365 Days (E10) - a good old-fashion 'do gooders' episode
7. King Corn (E11) - cool storytelling device of telling the stories 3 different ways. love seeing both sides of hotel life. love showing how miserable business travel can be. good episode.
8. Freedonia (E15) - good look at the desperate nature of on-the-ground small state primary politics in the US as Santos tries to get into the NH debate
9. A Good Day (E17) - an old-fashioned, 'do gooders' episode. some fun political hi-jinks.
10. 2162 Votes (E22) - political convention episode. good stuff. good Bartlet usage.

Season 7

1. The Ticket (E1) - 'three years into future' was an amusing plot device
2. Here Today (E7) - Babish!
3. Undecideds (E8) - I enjoyed the elevator scene at the beginning and the church scene at the end.
4. Internal Displacement (E11) - Danny and CJ!
5. Duck and Cover (E12) - disaster episodes usually make for good entertainment
6. The Cold (E13) - a kiss we've waited for for seven years
7. Welcome to Wherever You Are (E15) - a reminder of how dreary and boring and repetitive campaign life can be. sounds miserable.
8. Election Day (E16/E17) - major plot point episode. has to be here.
9. Institutional Memory (E21) - character ponder their future. good light-hearted episode.
10. Tomorrow (E22) - "when was the last time anyone was late for us?" / "want to go to a movie?"

So many people in my life, online, friends, family all believe this to varying degrees. Some hold this as a personal spiritual belief which, while I disagree, I can tolerate because they keep it to themselves. But then there's people who vehemently insist that the Ramayana and Mahabharata really happened, that a natural land-bridge between Indian and Sri-Lanka was actually built by an army of monkeys commanded by Lord Rama and that the Astras were actually nuclear tech. I've even heard people say this garbage in public celebrations. I was taught this shit by my teachers, supposedly educated professionals.
I've also seen so many people attack feminist/contemporary retellings of the Ramayana and Mahabharata because it offends their sensibilities and is "distorting our history". Most recently I saw a comment under a reel reccomending the book Kaikeyi by Vaishnavi Patel in which some Sanatani was trying to play off of people's religious tolerance and explain how "this book doesn't reflect the authentic view of Hindus" or is "offensive to Hindu culture" by using the language of the progressive left and simultaneously deriding "woke brown South Asian baddies". Then these same people complain ki "bro humari mythology se kuchh kyun nahi banate itna west se kyun inspire hote hai".
Its stupid and its frustrating that so many educated and otherwise sensible people lack the critical thinking and media literacy to separate fact from fiction.

I am writing this currently at 3 am kasi mga ganitong oras tayo nagkakilala and usually ganitong oras ka gising palagi. I am always amazed kung paano mo nagagawa magpuyat pero mas gising ka pa sa akin sa umaga. I remember nung nasa first month pa lang tayo ng paguusap natin, I told you at this same hour na may pasok ako ng 7am. Around 6:58 am, I woke up and I got shocked sa mga missed calls and chats mo, you were waking me up. Although you were harsh through words, I felt warmth.
Sometimes, you remind me of my dad, which is not a good thing. My dad, aside from hitting us, is also verbally abusive. He would comment on my looks and curse at me a lot, but what hurts the most is when he calls me tng, bb, or eng*t. Maybe because I always worked hard to impress him when it comes to academics but it was never enough. So whenever you would call me words like that, I would instantly get hurt. I would think of ghosting you because I never want to end up with someone like my dad. But, I was wrong. You are far from him. I confronted you one time that I don’t like how you talk, and you said sorry. Sinabi mo na that’s just how you really are, specially with your friends. I thought that’s silly. But I’m no saint, I also say some degrading words sometimes. But as time passed by, I can tell that you became cautious and the words I didn’t like lessen. Again, I felt warmth.
Most of the times, we would talk about our common interests - dogs, coffee and Fern. We would also talk about school and each others friends. I love how wholesome our conversation goes most of the time, which is opposite of what I experienced sa site where I met you. I found myself waking up and immediately checking your messages, and getting disappointed if there’s none. It’s silly how my day would depend on you. I became attached with you.
Dahil attached na ang ferson, forda banat malala na. I would go on and tell you that I want to be with you and I like you. But you would always say the same thing “ayoko magcommit”. I asked you a lot of times why, pero tinatamad ka magkwento sabi mo. I thought maybe di ka pa nakamove on. We decided to meet up, I bribed you with coffee and doon ka pa lang nagtalk. I finally understand why ayaw mo na magcommit, if I was on your situation I would definitely feel the same. You also have family problems and you said na ayaw mo ng iba pang problema. I let the idea of us dating go. I realized that what we are is something that should not to be romantic. But that doesn’t change the fact na I am attached to you. As difficult it may seem, I tried to detached. However, all those late night talks and our momol during the meet up wasn’t helping. I think I just fell deeper.
During the times that we were talking, I also saw how difficult your life is. I did my best to find ways to help you, to show you that relationships shouldn’t be a burden. I want to change your perspective when it comes to love. I want to let you realize that I can love you without hurting you. Na kahit lalaki ka, you deserve to be spoiled with gifts. I want you to know that you deserve to receive acts of services, that even though I am super burnt out with my own school works, I am willing to help you write those long ass differential equation solutions. You deserve words of affirmation, not just because I want to flatter you, but because you are really cute.
Right now, I realized that all of these doesn’t matter. I spent a good amount thinking what’s wrong with me but now I know it isn’t me. It’s not because nagkulang ako sa pamimilit (just like what you said HAHAHAH nung kulang na lang lumuhod ako sayo para samahan mo ako sa UP Fair), but because you just don’t want it. I can see you are happy without anyone. I’m a bit sad kasi nasanay ako na nandyan ka, sayo ko binuhos yung love and care ko tapos di na tayo nag-uusap. But I’m also happy that you are doing fine. Maybe you’re still not ready or maybe you want someone else but WHATEVER IT IS, I’m rooting for your happiness. You were a blessing to me. You may not be aware pero whenever I was anxious, small talks from you take my anxiousness away. You also inspired me to not give a f*ck. Always take care and I’m glad you liked my last gift. Alagaan mo yung yearbook ni Chaeyoung. May it remind you na you should be treated like a gold. Syempre, ikaw na yan eh HAHAHAHAH
See you when I see you, hopefully not in Pureza.

I know a lot of people argue that video games companies target certain audiences, such as Americans where most of their sales come from, by putting their faction into the game.
But there are plenty of battles and campaigns that minor countries participated in that could make for interesting maps and operations. It would give us more insight into what happened on the Eastern Front and within Romania & Bulgaria, allowing BF1 to not only examine the Western Front, which has been the most explored part of the war in WW1 media, but show us a side of the war often ignored.
It would bring attention to people who fought and died alongside the rest of the Entente and Central Powers but are often forgotten in most conversations regarding WW1 today.
Having them in the game would allow these countries that most WW1 media seems to forget existed during the war to have a presence.
The DLC will add:

1. New Entente Faction: Romania
2. New Central Powers Faction: Bulgaria
3. New Campaign: Katherine, the Heroine of Jiu (real life event).

Katherine's Story:
In 1914 Romania was a nation of 8 million people.
And another 8 million Romanians living outside Romania in Transylvania, Bukovina and Bessarabia.
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-aab76cabddeaeb2e7ec061ec7fccb7f8
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-fd9302d1bf45c7f951a3058f39961506
This caused Romania to join the Great War on the Entente's side in 1916.
The battleplan called "Plan Z" was to defend in the south against Bulgaria while attacking in Trasnylvania against Austria-Hungary.
The initial push was succesful and Romania occupied 1/3s of Transylvania.
But then German Empire was called in support, led by Generals Mackensen, Ludendorff and a young Erwin Rommel, they managed to push Romania back.
German and Bulgarian forces also started pushing in the south, first in Dobruja and later in Vlasca, near Bucharest.
The push of three Central Powers was too much for Romania and by Winter 1916 Bucharest has fallen.
Only the region of Moldavia was left standing.
This caused the French Military Mission in Romania, where the French sent military equipment, trained officers and a general who already fought in the Great War for 2 years.
General Henri Berthelot, who would soon be fondly nicknamed by Romanians "General Burtica" meaning "General Fatty" in Romanian.
https://editiadedimineata.ro/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/10-generalul-Berthelot.jpg
Berthelot managed to turn the Romanian army into a fighting force.
And when a new Central Powers began in 1917 to knock Romania out of the war, the Romanians defeated them repeatedly at Oituz, Marasti, Marasesti and took back 500km^2 of land.
Eventually, the Central Powers troops would be transfered to Italy and those left in Romania would only take a defensive position.
"After fighting with the Rumanians in 1916, I thought the Rumanian army had disappeared, that it did not exist in 1917 when I had to make a new effort to conquer the rest of Rumania. But when the battles started in Mărăşeşti, Mărăşti, Oituz, I was told that in front of me was the Rumanian army that I was convinced had disappeared. But the Rumanian army has risen from its ashes like the Phoenix bird. The attacks on the bayonet scared everyone, and they were running, the Germans, who didn't usually run, this time they were running" - General August von Mackensen
But the victory was short-lived as the Russian Civil War began and Romania was left alone on the Eastern Front.
This eventually resulted in an armistice where Romania gave up Dobrjua but its union with Bessarabia who previously declared independence from the Russian Empire was recognized.
Before leaving General Henri Berthelot said "France will not abbandon Romania!"
If it wasn't for those victories at Oituz, Marasti and Marasesti and the armistice that followed, Austria-Hungary had plans to incorporate all of Romania under Austria-Hungary, basically whipping it from existence.
Despite being defeated, Romania began to secretly rearm, and re-declared war on the Central Powers on 10th of November 1918, a day before the Central Powers would surrender.
In the aftermath of the Great War, all regions of Austria-Hungary were given self-determination by the Entente based on US president Wilson's 14 points.
The Austro-Hungarian regions of Bukovina, Transylvania and Banat voted for union with Romania in national assemblies with representatives elected by the population.
This event came to be known as "The Great Union" where the Romanian provinces of: Bessarabia, Bukovina, Banat and Transylvania united with Romania in the same year.
Uniting all Romanian provinces under a single banner was the national dream known as "the great ideal" for centuries since Romanians were always occupied by different nations.
The era of Romanians living in different countries was over.
After the war, General Henri Berthelot said "I used to have one motherland, but now I have two, France and Romania" as he grew fond of the people and the place, he would frequently visit Romania until his death in 1931.
How Katherine fits into all of this:
She was born in a large family in rural Romania, having 5 brothers and 2 sisters. After she graduated school in 1909 she went to Bucharest to become a teacher. But when Romania joined the Great War in 1916 she became a nurse on the frontline.
Eventually, 4 of her brothers were killed in action and her father was taken prisoner. It was then that she asked the commander of the division to be transfered to a combat unit.
Her last remaining brother, Nicolae, would teach her how to use a weapon. However, they would fight very little together, as he would be killed in action shortly after this.
When she found her brother's body, she kissed him on the cheek and said “I will avenge you brother” and took his rifle.
It was an unusual decision for a woman of that epoch, she was sent to the front rather reluctantly after a lot of insistace from her and her brother.
However, she quickly proved her worthiness as a soldier, in her first major battle.
1. 10th of October 1916, the first battle of Targu Jiu took place (defend a city mission and push the enemy over the bridge) -> The 1st Romanian army under the command of general Ion Dragalina defeated a powerful Central Powers offensive and soldier Ecaterina Teodoroiu was in the first line where she distinguished herself with her bravery.
During the battle, the Central Powers captured a key bridge in Targu Jiu taking the Romanian forces by surprise. Katherine with a few soldiers rushed to the bridge shouting "At the brige! at the bridge! Don't let the Germans enter the city!", they all shouted in every direction out of desperation, civillians and a police commissar with a company of 150 cops joined them.
When the Germans crossed the bridge, they were met with fire from all sides, eventually the "bridge brigade" managed to defeat and push the Germans back to the other side of the bridge until reinforcements arrived. After that battle she got the nickname "Eroina de la Jiu" (The she-hero of Jiu).
2. 18th of October 1916, Escape at Carbunesti (escape from prison mission) -> Following the defeat in the second battle of Targu Jiu, during the retreat a German encirclement took Katherine and her platoon prisoners and sent them to Carbunesti. At Carbunesti, she managed to shoot the German that guarded her and her platoon's commander using a hidden revolver and escape with other Romanian prisoners, being shoot in the leg while she was running.
3. 6th of November 1916, Battle of Filiasi (recovered from wounds during escape, came back to fight, wounded again, came back to fight again, wounded again, went to hospital) -> After her escape and recovery, she returned to her unit and continued fighting around the city of Filiasi. During the Battle of Filiasi, she was wounded again the the right leg by 2 enemy bullets. After 9 days of recovery, she returns to the battlefield, only to be wounded again more severely in the left leg, this time more severly. While the Romanian army was retreating to Moldova, she was sent to hospitals in Craiova, Bucharest and eventually Iasi.
At one point during the Battle of Filiasi, when her squad was encircled she would raise a white flag and shout "we surrender" in German (she knew German), when the Germans let their defensive positions to take them prisoner, the Romanians began to shoot back.
At the hospital, hearing her story, on how she defended Targu Jiu with a group of civilians and policemen, how she was caputred and escaped, how she came back to the frontline after she recovered, only to be wounded again and then come back again, only to be sent to a hospital when she literally couldn't walk, Queen Maria of Romania personally visited her and offered her the Military Virtue medal and gave her the rank of Sublieutenant.
During her hospitalization, she never departed from her rifle, which was the rifle of her brother Nicolae before his death, keeping her next to her bed. In a press interview, she said that her motivations are purely personal not patriotic, she wanted to avenge her family's death.
She was described as more of a vengeful spirit than a patriot. She was not described as physically strong or woman with imposing presence. Instead, she was described as rather frail even for a woman, emanating energy, enthusiasm and youth. Which ran in a stark contrast with her vengeful desires.
4. 20th of August 1917, Battle of Marasesti (the largest battle on the Romanian theatre during the Great War, with up to 1.000.000 troops present on both sides) -> After she got out of hospital in the summer of 1917, she returned to the front on 20th of August, right in the middle of the Battle of Marasesti, the largest battle Romania had during World War I. This time, leading her own plutoon.
On 22th of August, during a counter-attack of the 40th Reserve German Regiment that was pushed back by the Romanian army, Katherine dies heroically, being shoot in the heart while being in the front of her plutoon that she was leading as Sublieutenant. Her last words were "Forward boys! don't give up! you are with me!".
General Henri Berthelot called Katherine "the Joan of Arc of Romania".
NOTE: I know it's late to the party but it's worth a shot. If not for this game at least as inspiration for future projects.

Serbia have "Ustanička Srbija" between 1804 and 1809. Serb uprising of 1848-49 was in Hungary (Bačka, Banat) and Croatia-Slavonia (Srijem), not in Serbia.
Is that inspired Ustaše and Communist Partisans to make terrible war crimes and genocides? What examples (messages) were West and East (Russian Empire, Ottomans) send to Balkan (especially Slovenia, BiH and Croatia) on 1878.? Croatia, Serbia and other nations were deffend theirself from invasion and aggresion of Ottoman Empire but not everyone was equal. Is Croatia really need Serbian help in World War 1? #nohardfeelings #nooffense #croatiandarkhistory #projectcroatia

thank you everyone for upvoting my comment, i got enough karma to post now
PLEASE PURA PADHNA DOSTO, KUCH LEARNINGS MERSE LELO TAAKI TUM VO GALTI NAHI KARO! KABHI MAT KARNA VO GALTI JO MAINE KARI THI
18 March 2020 ek acha din tha, apna class 10 ka aakhri exam dekar aaya thar, chill tha, siblings ke saath movie download karke dekhi thi bada majha aaya tha. Papa se baat kari thi ki Allen Kota jaake padhunga.. Sabko bahut pride that mere per.. meri family, mere naniyal vale bhi, meri dost log aur teachers ko bhi, lekin fir aa gaya humara Covid! Mere saare plans fail kardiye aur main iss umeed mai reh gaya ki covid khatm hote hi Kota jaunga.
Lockdown mai family ke saath khub enjoy kiya 2-3 mahine Mahbharat-Ramayan sab dekhi, bahut majha aaya leking kisko pata that, vo mere aakhi majhe the abhi tak ke, June tak pata chal gaya tha ki Covid nahi jaane vaala, toh Allen Kota join karli Online vaali, pura josh tha, leking meri pichle 2-3 mahine mai ek buri adat lag gayi thi ki main internet per din bhar surf karta aur software piracy seekhta tha. Main ek tech-nerd tha aur abhi bhi hoon. Tech mai itna majha aata tha ki pure din laptop pe inventions, coding, AI ke baare me seekhta rehta. Iss aadat ki vajeh se mai kabhi coaching ke lectures attend nahi karta, porn dekhta aur tests mai cheating karta. Mujhe meri mummy ka hotspot lena padta tha, unko lagta main man lagake padhai karta, leking Yt aur software cracking karta rehta tha.. Mummy ka net khatm ho jata tha toh Papa ne meri online classes ke liye broadband lagvaya... jiska main sirf games khelne aur faaltu ke videos dekhne main wate karta...
10th main mere 94 bane, jo thik the, main hamesha apne aap se high expectations rakhta tha aur plans banata rehta tha ki backlogs kaise pure karu, lekin kabhi pure nahi kiye... 11th main fail hote hote bacha.... Papa-Mummy humesha mujhe support karte aur Papa mere liye plans banate, strategies banate even tho vo CA hai.. unhone 7 degrees kari hai aur main chutiya ek college entrance ke liye bhi dhange se nahi padh pata... dekhte dekhte din nikalte rahe, sabko lagta tha... mere saare relatives ko ki main padhta tha dinbar.. sabko high expectations thi.. lekin yeh gandi aadat kahan jaane vaali thi, pure din laptop pe depressed betha reta.. kabhi reddit toh kabhi omegle... kabhi youtube toh kabhi games...
12th ke term 1 aa gaye aur main puri tarah chud gaya.. last exam dekar aya aur maine term 2 mai best deni ki thaani...lekin mai sabse bada OVERCONFIDENT banda that.... apni small sister ko humesha gusse mai demotivate karta aur arrogant banta... karma ne faad di meri, term 2 main bhi kat gaya mera... baad mai jab result aaya mere 83 bane... meri sister 10th mai uske 95 bane the.. bahut khusi ka mahol tha lekin same day 12th ka result aaya that.. aur mai roh diya... mere parents khush bhi the aur dukhi bhi... meri sister ne bola koi baat nahi bhaiya, mains main phod donge aap.. main uss din room main band karke roh diya..
Main mai pehle attempt mai 79 aaye toh ussi din ghar aakar socha ki abse padhunga leking ek din waste jaane ke baad bhi mujhe lagta 'ek din hi toh waste hua hai, isse kuch nahi hoga', mains 2 mai mere 80%ile.. Advanced tak ke liye qualify nahi hua... mere itna lode lag gaya.. bahut sapne dekhe the INMO, InPhO, KVPY qualify karunga 11th beginning... NTSE nahi crack ker paane ki aag lagi huyi thi... lekin dekho ab main kahan aagaya..
Maine drop laine ka socha, 1 mahina ho chuka hai mains ke result aaye, ab advanced ka result bhi aane vaala, kuch bhi nahi padha abhi tak.. meri sister 11th mai agayi aur mai dropper(13th main hoon).
Jab vo merse apne doubts poochti, mujhe bahut guilt feel hoti ki main uske doubts bhi solve nahi kar pata.. usko ab merse jyaada ata hai bhali vo JEE-NEET ki tayaari nahi kar rahi....vo mujhe apna inspiration maanti lekin usko kya pata main padta nahi tha bas time waste karta tha aur abhi bhi kar raha hoon, papa din raat mere baare main sochte rehta, kehte ki VIT- ya koi private main chalaja... lekin maine pichle 2 saal sirf IIT ke sapne dekhe the.... usse fixate kar rakha tha... aur mujhe pata tha agar mai mehnat karun toh achieve kar sakta hoon... isliye maine unhe mana kardiya ki main drop leke ek aur try maarunga.. papa-mummy ne bhi pura support kiya... mere failures ko bhi chupaye relatives se... mummy merko dekhkar ro deti.. lekin pichle 2 saalo main maine saare emotions kho diye hai... bas ek chutiya jo reddit par baithkar lurk karta hai aur gyaan chodta hai... kabhi-kabhi man karta hai Himalayas main jaake beth jaun akele, lekin life main kuch bada karne ka bhi urge hai.. lagta hai abhi haar gaya toh baad mai kya karunga jindagi main.. parents ko dekta vo apni tension ko bhi kaise handle karte hain aur family ki bhi... unko dekhkar cry aata hai aur josh bhi... ab main faaltu strategy videos bhi nahi dekhta... mere dada bhi merse bahut pyaar karte hai.. unko lagta ki main ek din jarur kuch bada karunga (vo mere past ke achievements 9-10th se bahut influenced hai)
Main sabke expectations ko toda hai.. lekin abhi bhi main ek shaant sher ke bhaati chup bhetha hoon..mehnat nahi kar raha... bahut depressed feel karta hoon lekin mujhe lagta hai ki mujhe inn sabse se uthkar aage badna hoga... aur jo galti pehle ki vo drop lekar fir naa karun, apne drop year ko successful karun... aur meri yeh last post ke baad, main fir aaunga, kyunki main zinda honn!!!.... jee23 ke baad.. apna experience share karne... jarur aaunga.... i love you homies.....

Game Information

Game Title: Xenoblade Chronicles 3
Platforms:

• Nintendo Switch (Jul 29, 2022)

Trailers:

• Xenoblade Chronicles 3 - Overview Trailer - Nintendo Switch
• Xenoblade Chronicles 3 Direct - Nintendo Switch
• Xenoblade Chronicles 3 - Direct Teaser Trailer

Developer: MONOLITHSOFT
Publisher: Nintendo
Review Aggregator:
OpenCritic - 87 average - 94% recommended - 50 reviews

Critic Reviews

ACG - Jeremy Penter - Buy

Video Review - Quote not available

CGMagazine - Zubi Khan - 9 / 10

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is an exemplary JRPG on the Nintendo Switch, improving on the already great titles that came out before it while still welcoming newcomers.

Cerealkillerz - Nick Erlenhof - German - 9.1 / 10

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is imposing, takes itself seriously and is simply fun. The story stands on its own and is therefore also very suitable for newcomers. The characters grow on you and are surprisingly realistic. There are tons of activities and completionists will again have over 100 hours to look forward to. Everyone else will enjoy what might be the best role-playing game for the Switch this year.

ComicBook.com - Christian Hoffer - 4 / 5

While I've joked while playing that Xenoblade Chronicles 3 was a great series of cutscenes with some fighting in between, the game gets away with its glut of cutaways because the story is quite good. Sure, people can see some of the twists coming from a mile away, but the core mystery is so intriguing and weird that you really want to keep playing to figure out just what the heck is going on.

Console Creatures - Recommended

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 delivers one of the best games the series has ever offered to players and thrusts you into a volatile world paired filled with excellent writing and characters.

Daily Mirror - Eugene Sowah - 4 / 5

Quote not yet available

Destructoid - Chris Carter - 9.5 / 10

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 didn’t need to do a whole lot to keep me invested, as I was all-in very early on. The cast, the weight of the story, and the freedom of party composition are the power trio that won me over.

Dexerto - Lloyd Coombes - 8.5 / 10

Small foibles aside, Xenoblade Chronicles 3 might just be the Switch’s prettiest and grandest game of 2022. With a deep combat system and surprisingly effective story, along with quality of life improvements over the prior game, it’s a true spectacle whether you’re playing in handheld mode or docked. It really is a must-buy for JRPG fans.

Digital Trends - Jess Reyes - 4 / 5

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 might be too frustrating for some, but its worth fighting through tedious systems for the RPG's stellar storytelling.

Digitally Downloaded - Matt Sainsbury - 5 / 5

Taken by itself, Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is a spectacular example of an epic JRPG. Yes, the combat system is a little too overcooked for its own good, but the developer holds your hand nicely so that by the 40th hour the explosion of numbers, flashy attacks, and intertwined systems somehow makes sense. Aside from that, though, it’s a game that, for its size, is one of elegance and maturity. And that’s when you take it by itself. Philosophical, humorous, emotional, dramatic and always entertaining, Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is going to be better remembered not for being its own entity, but rather like the third chapter in any great trilogy; as the perfect escalation of over a decade of storytelling to an enormously satisfying and appropriately epic conclusion.

Enternity.gr - Pavlos Papapavlou - Greek - 7.5 / 10

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is easily one of the best JRPGs of 2022, even though it comes with some serious issues, which the hardware may be to blame for.

Eurogamer - Martin Robinson - Essential

Monolith Soft closes out its loosely connected trilogy of epic RPGs with its most adaptable, malleable and high-spirited adventure yet.

Game Informer - Jason Guisao - 7.3 / 10

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is a double-edged sword that needs a bit more sharpening.

GameSpot - Jacob Dekker - 8 / 10

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is another heartfelt adventure paired with some of the best combat in the series.

GameXplain - Tris Valbuena - Loved

Video Review - Quote not available

Gameblog - Tiny_Ellie - French - 8 / 10

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is a satisfying conclusion to the two previous games. It's a game you devor like an exciting novel, you constantly want to come back, have more. Carried by a mature and captivating scenario, an artistic direction super effective and a refined and complex combat system, the license seems to have finally found its winning formula.

God is a Geek - Adam Cook - 9 / 10

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 changes things up in a good way, offering a twist on the most unique combat out there. It's lengthy, engaging, warm, and probably the best RPG of the year. The best one yet, for sure.

Hobby Consolas - Álvaro Alonso - Spanish - 93 / 100

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 combines all the good things from previous games into one colossal, complex and (almost) infinite JRPG that we aren't going to forget anytime soon.

IGN - Travis Northup - 8 / 10

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 can take some meandering detours across its massive 150-hour campaign, but great characters and addictive tactical combat make it all well worth the time.

IGN Italy - Biagio Etna - Italian - 9.1 / 10

While not reinventing the genre, Xenoblade Chronicles 3 stands out as one of its most valuable exponents-a truly remarkable game.

Metro GameCentral - Michael Beckwith - 9 / 10

Another major success for Monolith Soft; Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is a contender for the Nintendo Switch's best role-playing game and one of its most impressive technical achievements.

NintendoWorldReport - John Rairdin - 9 / 10

Regardless of how you came to Xenoblade, either through one of many incarnations of the original, or through its sequel, Xenoblade Chronicles 3 strives to satiate all audiences and it is largely successful in this endeavor while also presenting something entirely new. This is not just Xenoblade meets Xenoblade 2. In many ways it is greater than the sum of its parts and those parts already added up to quite a bit.

PCMag - Will Greenwald - 3.5 / 5

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is a massive JRPG with a unique story and deep combat that's tempered by all-too-familiar gameplay mechanics.

Post Arcade (National Post) - Chad Sapieha - 7 / 10

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 earns a modest thumbs up. It’s undeniably huge, delivering good bang for your RPG dollar, and has some interesting ideas on its mind. It’s no Final Fantasy or Zelda, but fans of sophisticated combat and Japanese storytelling should be well served.

Press Start - Steven Impson - 8 / 10

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is another great entry in the long-running series. Combat is complex, but well enough explained to readily understand and feels fantastic to play with. It has interesting characters, an intriguing world and an engrossing storyline that had me always wondering what was going to happen next. Whether you're new to the series or a veteran, Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is stylish, intriguing, super fun, and well worth checking out for RPG fans.

RPG Site - Josh Torres, Adam Vitale - 10 / 10

Between an exceptionally well-written cast, a deeply satisfying combat system, and an amazing adventure that remarkably earns its very long run time, Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is a JRPG masterpiece.

Screen Rant - Cody Gravelle - 5 / 5

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 collects, iterates, and perfects JRPG mechanics.

Shacknews - TJ Denzer - 9 / 10

Between a compelling story, beautiful music, and deep combat system, Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is an awesome adventure for longtime fans and newcomers alike.

Stevivor - Matt Gosper - 8 / 10

My time with Xenoblade Chronicles 3 was overwhelmingly positive. I’ve clocked a hundred hours at this stage, with the main story completed and PLENTY of side content still to go. If you want a big, meaty RPG to dedicate plenty of time, this game’s the one. But remember, soldiers only have ten years on the battlefield – and you might need that whole decade to see everything Aionios has to offer.

The Independent - Jasper Pickering - 9 / 10

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is the strongest entry into the series yet, while simultaneously managing to bridge the themes and mechanics of the first two games in a meaningful way. Even after the credits roll close to the 60-hour mark, each of the character’s personal journeys are fulfilling and memorable, while contending with heavier subject matter than the series has been known for.

TheSixthAxis - Dominic Leighton - 9 / 10

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is another impressive and entertaining RPG experience from Monolith Soft. Its ever-deepening mystery plays out across one of the most beautiful fantasy landscapes of recent years, while its approach to party building and classes means that the experience continually evolves. For a game that asks questions about how you spend your time, you won't want Xenoblade Chronicles 3 to finish.

TrustedReviews - Ryan Jones - 4 / 5

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is a great action RPG with an outstanding story. The characters are likeable with engaging arcs, while the cut scenes offer jaw-dropping spectacle.

Twinfinite - Omar Banat - 4.5 / 5

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is an absolute must-buy for Switch owners who are looking to pick up their next game. No matter if you’re a longtime fan of the franchise or a first-timer, this game is one of the best RPGs on the Switch that can easily last hundreds of hours for players who never want to leave the world of Aionios.

Unboxholics - Γιώργος Πρίτσκας - Greek - Worth your time

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is a journey of epic proportions and scale that reminded me of these experiences that are great and epic in terms of ambitions. Sometimes it can be melodramatic and talkative in an old fashioned way but that sense of grandeur is all that matters. With a rich narrative in terms of ideas, concepts and twists along the way, you'll find that the heart of it is in its characters. If you're a JRPG fan this is the game that you must play.

VGC - Matthew Castle - 5 / 5

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 delivers a massive world, and more than enough story and character to fill it, combined with the series’ most reactive combat system to date. While certainly a monster commitment, Aionios is an incredible place to live for a month or two.

Video Chums - A.J. Maciejewski - 9.1 / 10

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 continues the series' grand-scale story-telling in a masterful way. With its endearing cast of characters, awe-inspiring sense of exploration, and a soundtrack that will blow you away, this is yet another top-notch offering from Monolith Soft.

1870-72: The Old Catholic schism widened, deepened, and in a few years created a split of the Catholic community only comparable to the Eastern Schism or the Reformation. Liberal and nationalist outrage for the Pope’s blatant partisanship in political matters gave momentum to the Old Catholics. The movement soon claimed the allegiance of most Catholics in Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Hungary-Croatia, the United States, and Argentina. Although it claimed to represent authentic Catholic doctrine against Ultramontane deviations, the Old Catholic movement attracted almost all the liberal thinkers and leaders within the Church. Consequently, it soon developed an increasingly liberal and progressive outlook in political, social, and doctrinal matters. It effectively abolished the Papacy and the College of Cardinals and developed an Episcopal structure.
Its differences with the Anglican and Lutheran denominations gradually diminished considerably, pretty much up to nothing as it concerned the Anglicans. This won the Old Catholics more and more sympathies in Northern Europe, Britain, and North America, and eventually allowed them to establish full communion with the Anglicans. Old Catholic, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox propaganda successfully labeled the Ultramontane denomination as the ‘Papal’ Catholics, or ‘Papists’ in a more derogatory sense. The label stuck in secular public opinion even if its targets bitterly opposed it and claimed to be the true Church beset by yet another heresy. As a rule, the Papal Catholic denomination remained dominant in France, Iberia, Ireland, Poland, and Brazil. Over time, it became more and more reactionary in political matters and conservative in social and doctrinal ones. Other areas, such as the rest of Latin America became ideological battlegrounds of the schism, with liberals filling the ranks of the Old Catholics and conservatives throwing their allegiance to the Papal Catholics.
Due to the militant role of the Pope in the war and the uprisings in Ireland and Poland, the European powers (Germany, Italy, Britain, and Russia) were seriously concerned about his ability to threaten the stability of Europe. They agreed to deem him unfit to reside in any territory they controlled and there were doubts about the wisdom of letting him stay in Europe at all. There were concrete proposals to exile the troublesome high priest someplace in South America (most likely Brazil) since the Americans were radically hostile to his presence in North America. Yet there were also concerns not to anger the countries that still gave him allegiance by such an extreme action. In the end, France and Spain proposed a compromise solution that the other powers accepted. It gave him administration of the Principality of Andorra under nominal Franco-Spanish co-sovereignty. Although the Pope kept claiming the Papal States, in practice he accepted the deal. Concerns about the political effects of his presence however turned out to be justified; the Holy See in Andorra soon became a powerful source of support for reactionary forces in France and Iberia.
Russia suppressed nationalist and religious unrest in the former PLC lands. It exploited France’s powerlessness and the support of Germany and Italy to denounce the clauses of the 1856 Paris Peace Treaty that bound it to military limitations in the Black Sea. After the end of the war with France and restoration of order in Poland, Germany, Italy, and Russia were free to address the instable situation in Hungary-Croatia. All three powers wanted to keep influence in the region, yet given their good relationship they were not ready to fight for exclusive control. Germany wanted to ensure the highest protection possible for ethnic Germans in the region, since geography made annexation of their territories troublesome. The Russians wanted to uphold the rights of the Slavs and the Orthodox as a tool to advance their expansionist agenda in the Ottoman Balkans. However, they were not much interested to pick sides for one nationality over another. All three powers wanted to prevent anything that would look like a bad example for their own subject nationalities.
Germany, Italy, and Russia eventually forged a compromise and imposed it by a joint declaration backed by the implied threat of military intervention. It affirmed the neutral status of Hungary-Croatia and its role as an effective co-client of Berlin, Rome, and St. Petersburg. It enacted a constitutional and political reform that substantially curtailed political instability in Hungary-Croatia and the infighting of its ruling elites. Germany annexed Fiume, turning it into its main Mediterranean port. Italy got a few more Adriatic islands. Serbia and Romania got a few border areas. Such transfers were minor in scope and H-C kept most of its lands. An ethnic German principality that included southeastern Transdanubia, northern-western Banat, and central Transylvania got a large degree of autonomy and the Hungarian Germans became essentially immune to Magyar cultural assimilation policies. In comparison, the Slovaks, Serbs, and Romanians that stayed under Hungarian-Croat rule got many less concessions; Germany and Italy opposed them for various reasons and the Russians did not care enough to object.
The success of their triple intervention motivated the Germans, Italians, and Russians to sign the Vienna Pact in order to co-ordinate their future actions in the Balkans, as well as other issues like common trade or infrastructure projects. Unlike the pact between Berlin and Rome, the treaty did not establish any sort of official military alliance, in order to lull the Ottomans and the British in a false sense of security. In fact, its public version did not say anything at all about the Ottoman territories. The secret clauses allowed Russia to attack Turkey and invade the Ottoman Balkans, with a few compensations for Germany and Italy.
The war stopped construction of the Suez Canal, but after its conclusion, the new owners resumed and completed it. Despite a few initial financial and technical difficulties, it soon became an enormous commercial success, thanks to its immediate and dramatic positive effect on world trade. Combined with the transcontinental railroads that the Americans built in the same period, it allowed circling the entire world in record time. Its success greatly heightened the interest in America and Europe for building a similar inter-oceanic canal in Central America. The British got somewhat annoyed by German and Italian control of the Suez Canal Company but not radically so, since its previous French owners had been no better friends of Britain. The British government asked Germany and Italy to share control of the Suez Canal. After some negotiation, the three powers agreed to divide their shares in equal parts, with the secret provision to do likewise if any of them were to gain control of the Egyptian share in the future.
Political instability and conflicts between monarchist reactionaries, centrist moderates, and republican radicals continued to plague both France and Spain after the war. After defeat in the civil war, the French far left had to go underground or it was still licking its wounds. Defeat discredited the Bonapartists. Papal Catholic clergy and activists mobilized to try to mold France and Iberia in the conservative stronghold of the “true Church” in Europe. The Spanish elites briefly considered members of the Hohenzollern and Savoy royal families for the throne of Spain but soon turned them down due to the political effects of the Old Catholic schism. Much like the parallel French situation, a fragile Spanish republic became the default solution but by no means an effective check to political instability. Problems for Spain only increased with the start of a pro-independence rebellion in Cuba that became a widespread uprising.
With the end of the war in North America, Britain was able to deploy the main part of its regular army in Ireland. Large-scale sweeps and internments of IRB personnel and suspected sympathizers took place, and allowed the British forces to disrupt the IRB network and score several successes in clashes with the insurgents. The end of US weapon smuggling and increasingly successful British counterinsurgency actions left most IRB units critically short of both weapons and ammunition, with a resulting reduction of guerrilla attacks. The Irish insurgency gradually died down and it was over by the early 1870s. It left a huge pool of resentment in the Papal Catholic population of Ireland against British rule and its brutal methods of repression. On the British’s part, the insurrection enhanced previous anti-Catholic prejudice into widespread fear and distrust of Papists and Irish nationalists.
After victory in the Franco-German-Italian War, the Italian government decided to change the army organization so that each battalion included men from the same region, as in the Prussian model. Up to then, they had included a mix of recruits in every unit from all over the country, to combat regionalism. Italian elites felt confident that regionalism was no more a serious political concern thanks to the boost in national self-consciousness. They thought the regional model would further improve the already good efficiency of the army, completing its transition to the Prussian model. The government decided to set up a public school system modeled on the German system and make strong investments to boost literacy and spread knowledge of national language among the Italian citizens.
After the war, Germany and Italy experienced a prevalent atmosphere of self-confidence, optimism, and fulfilment. They largely turned into satisfied powers and focused most of their energies into post-unification nation-building and economic development. Decisive success of their alliance in the last two wars, compatible and often complementary strategic interests, and persistent threat of a vengeful France drove Berlin and Rome to confirm and strengthen their partnership. The two powers renewed their military alliance for 30 years. Germany and Italy established their economic integration through a series of treaties that first created a Central European free-trade area, and then gradually enhanced it with a customs and monetary union. The so-called ‘Berlin-Rome Pillar’ seemed headed to become a stable feature of European politics and diplomacy.
Like the pre-existing Latin monetary union, the Central European monetary union established a bimetallic (gold and silver) standard. It required that all contracting states strike freely exchangeable gold coins and silver coins according to common specifications. France, Belgium, Italy, Switzerland, and Spain had first established the LMU in the 1860s. However, it lost a lot of its importance when Italy withdrew from it, and Belgium and Switzerland disappeared, because of the FGIW. The two systems had similar features but for political reasons they remained separate and rival. Their example was a major reason the USA stuck to bimetallism in its postwar monetary policy and hence avoided some serious economic trouble that could have otherwise manifested. Other states later adopted one or the other standard, sometimes even when they did not formally accede to the LMU or CEMU treaties. In the CEMU’s case, informal adoption might often be justified by the wish to avoid joining its customs union.
The formation of a Central European trade bloc was another reason for the late 19th century economic boom in Germany and Italy. Germany was allowing its economic potential to bloom and quickly evolving into the industrial giant of Europe while Italy was becoming an industrialized great power. The Italians reaped the fruits of economic reforms and foreign investments with steady growth of industry in the northern regions and modern agriculture and tourism in the southern ones. Only the parallel ongoing transformation of the United States into an economic superpower surpassed the frantic pace of industrialization in the German-Italian bloc.
Military and economic achievements sustained a positive mood on both sides of the Alps. It did not mean Germany and Italy had no serious domestic issues. Besides the necessary nation-building effort, both countries faced the typical social and political tensions caused by industrialization. Reforms, economic growth, and foreign-policy successes however kept such tensions at a manageable level for the ruling elites. A pre-unification legacy of social backwardness still burdened Italy but the young nation seemed headed to cast it off in short order. Conversion of most German and Italian Catholics to the Old Catholic denomination also helped foster political stability. It greatly eased a peaceful inclusion of Catholic masses into mainstream politics and toned down potential antagonism between northern and southern Germans.
German and Italian positive mood found a typical expression in the sumptuous celebrations the Italians staged for the official transfer of their capital to Rome. The Italian government had spent some serious effort to renovate the city and cancel signs of the Popes' obscurantist misrule. The festive mood created by recent successes only got sobered for a while by death in an accident of crown prince Umberto. In due time, however, his younger brother Amedeo was to prove himself a good King that favoured Italy’s liberal evolution. Another iconic expression of the friendly and celebrative atmosphere in the Pillar countries was the twin set of giant statues the Germans and the Italians built in Berlin and Rome to celebrate their victories. The statues, inspired by Overbeck's painting "Italia and Germania" with a more martial pose, represented Germany and Italy as shield-maidens with swords pointing to the ground, one holding the torch of truth and the other the scales of justice. The statues soon became a popular landmark in both capitals. They became the model for a colossal and even more famous version that Germany and Italy gifted to the USA in the 1880s to stand in New York Harbour. The Statue of Liberty was to become an iconic symbol of America.
Russia was eventually recovering from its defeat in the Crimean War and its financial troubles thanks to the reforms of Tsar Alexander II throughout the 1860s. He was the most important Russian reformer and one of the greatest Tsars since Peter the Great. His greatest achievement in the first phase of his reign was the emancipation of serfs in 1861. He was also responsible for numerous other reforms including reorganizing the judicial system, setting up elected local judges, abolishing corporal punishment, promoting local self-government through the ‘zemstvo’ system, imposing universal military service, ending some of the privileges of the nobility, and promoting the universities. The Tsar was not an overly belligerent leader and sought peaceful co-existence with Germany and Italy. However, Alexander II acknowledged the terminal weakness of the Ottoman ‘sick man of Europe’ and deemed his duty to fulfil the long-standing aspiration of Russia to expansion in the Balkans and the Near East. Demise of Austria, eclipse of war-torn France, and friendly relations with Berlin and Rome made circumstances optimal for such an expansionist policy. Russian agents got busy in the Balkans stirring up anti-Ottoman unrest among the Christian nationalities of the region.
After President Lincoln won two wars, led the first phase of Reconstruction, and got an unprecedented third term, a fanatic white supremacist shot and killed him in the third year of his last term. By the end of his life, the American people universally acknowledged him as one of the greatest US Presidents and national heroes, the man who preserved the Union, defeated Confederate rebellion and British-Mexican aggression, abolished slavery, doubled the country’s size, charted the path to national reconciliation, strengthened the federal government, and modernized the economy. His assassination only enhanced his legend by adding the crown of martyrdom for his people and he was enshrined as the equal of Washington in American culture. His Vice President succeeded him to complete his term and Ulysses S. Grant, the best US general of two wars, was elected President the following year; both vowed to continue the work of the late great leader.
The USA was war-weary but reinforced and made confident in its destiny by victory against Southern secessionists and British imperialists. Albeit at a terrible price, the American republic had affirmed its national unity, ended slavery, won a lot of valuable new land, and forced the British superpower to accept US hegemony of North America. The war left the Americans proud and elated for victory in Canada and Mexico but suspicious of European (especially British) encroachment in the Western Hemisphere and the Pacific. They resented persistent British imperial influence in their chosen turf but understood the USA had achieved more or less the best possible result during the conflict in the light of British naval supremacy.
The American people remained wary of big standing armies, so the wartime land forces were demobilized. However, the war, lingering hostility with Britain, and distrust of Mexico imprinted the need for strong armed forces in the US public. The Americans took care to learn the lessons of the last two wars and keep military equipment, the officer corps, the regular army, state militias, and the coastal defence system at a high level of quality and efficiency. US coasts and the southern border remained much more militarized than they had been before the war. The goal of US military policy was to guarantee effective defence of North America by peacetime forces and quick mobilization of a vast army of good quality to fight anywhere in the Americas. An ambitious naval building program aimed to ensure US naval supremacy in the Western Hemisphere and build a US Navy that could fight the Royal Navy as an equal in the Atlantic and the Pacific. The Americans were determined not to suffer another serious threat to their continental security or freedom of trade ever again.
Security concerns aside, America turned to focus on its own reconstruction and internal development. Soon after the peace, US economic situation turned to the better and blossomed into a boom fuelled by fast-paced industrialization. The boom quickly remedied the damage of wartime British blockade and allowed America to digest the financial burden of the last two wars. In its relationship with the Southern states and the Canadian territories, the Union tried to balance a spirit of reconciliation with a need to preserve the outcome of the conflict. The former goal found expression in a generous program of economic relief and infrastructure development for the Southern and Canadian sections as well as widespread enfranchisement of Confederate veterans and Canadian settlers. They made an effort to restore the Southern states to a normal status within the Union and grant statehood to settled Canadian territories soon after pacification. Decisive suppression of all organized resistance to Union rule enforced the outcome of the war, and so did its enshrinement in the US Constitution with a set of amendments that banned slavery and guaranteed civil and voting rights of American citizens.
The Reconstruction amendments created new federal civil rights that federal courts could enforce and protect, guaranteed the Federal war debt would be paid (and promised the Confederate debt would never be paid), and stripped the right to hold office from former Confederates who had previously sworn loyalty to the US Constitution by holding federal or state offices. The most far-ranging provision was extension of the rights guaranteed by the US Constitution to the states and empowerment of Congress to legislate and protect these rights. They also decreed that the federal government or the states could not deny the right to vote or hold office to citizens because of race, color, ethnicity, language, creed, or previous condition of servitude or because of the failure to pay poll taxes. The amendments also prohibited establishment of a national language and guaranteed the states could keep a legal system that did not conflict with the US Constitution, as conciliatory measures for the Franco-Canadians.
On the other hand, the Congress went out of its way to avoid including in the Amendments anything that could represent an obstacle to resettlement of the freedmen in Africa. Therefore, it kept definition of citizenship its sole prerogative. The Amendments also clarified that the civil rights granted by the Constitution only applied to citizens, although the Congress could extend them to other people. In fact, after an inevitable stop during the war with Britain and Mexico, the resettlement program resumed with increased vigor as the vast majority of American public opinion came to regard it as one of the best ways to purge the country of the legacy of slavery and ensure national reconciliation. The Americans accepted its logistic, economic, and humanitarian costs as a necessary price.
Such vast support meant generous public and private investment to support the program; it also meant the American people tolerated no obstacles to its fulfilment. Federal and state governments did not take “no” as an answer from freedmen that refused to go and tried to stay in the USA. Most of them went willingly, or at least deemed collaboration was the best course in these circumstances. US security forces rounded up recalcitrant Blacks and forced them to embark. In the end, only a small minority of the wealthiest, most educated, and most light-skinned individuals that could pass as another race were allowed to stay. Assassination of Lincoln drove the Congress to create a federal law enforcement agency to ensure effective application of the criminal laws of the United States, repression of domestic violence, and protection of the President.
The Anglo-American war dramatically showed the great strategic importance of efficient and reliable intra-continental logistics in North America and inter-oceanic connection with the Pacific. Timely completion of the first transcontinental railroad had greatly helped avoid a British-Mexican occupation of the West Coast. That line followed the so-called ‘Central’ route to California. The war persuaded the Congress to finance the building of two other ‘Northern’ and ‘Southern’ routes across the Northwest and the Southwest respectively. The southern transcontinental railroad pleased the Southern states and was an infrastructure hallmark of national reconciliation. It also greatly eased settlement and Americanization of the Southwest and the newly acquired northern Mexican territories.
Much the same way, a strategic imperative to get the Northwest and Western Canada settled as soon as possible to consolidate US rule over the region drove building of the northern railroad, and it was quite effective at that. It also became rather important to conciliate the Canadian section and foster its integration in the Union. For this reason, they effectively duplicated it into two parallel branches that mostly followed the old Oregon Trail and the Saskatchewan River system respectively. Because of similar strategic concerns, they also decided to build a branch of the southern railroad that would run through the Gulf Coast region and connect New Orleans with Tampico. The federal government also made an earnest effort to rebuild and improve infrastructure in the Southern and Canadian sections and ensure efficient northern-southern logistic integration across US North America.
The transcontinental railroads substantially accelerated settlement and development of the US Frontier. This came at the price of more violent conflicts between Amerindian tribes and American settlers backed by the US army. The American effort to keep the regular army and state militias at a good level of efficiency ensured the Indian Wars were a string of US victories and American colonization ruthlessly suppressed all native resistance. All attempts of diehard British loyalists and Mexican nationalists to fight US rule in the Canadian and northern Mexican territories met the same fate.
Strong interest for an inter-oceanic canal in Central America was another expression of US strategic drive for efficient and secure continental travel. A number of surveys before and after the last two wars led to the conclusion the two most favorable routes were those across the Panama department of Colombia and across Nicaragua, with a route across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec in Mexico as a third option. The Nicaragua canal appeared easier to build than the Panama one and US diplomacy engaged the Nicaraguan government into talks for a deal. In this context, the Americans came to regard their exclusive control over an inter-oceanic canal as a strategic imperative. For the same reason, they got very interested in expanding their control across the Caribbean and Central America and limiting European influence in the region as much as possible.
This attitude drove the USA to ratify annexation of the Dominican Republic when its government offered it to get protection from a possible Haitian invasion. For similar reasons the Americans supported the anti-colonial rebellion in Cuba. They smuggled a considerable amount of US weapons, supplies, and money to the Cuban rebels. US support for the rebellion prolonged the conflict and kept it in a stalemate as Spanish weakness and rebel disorganization balanced each other. Interest for the acquisition of Cuba did exist in the USA but the Americans were still too war-weary to accept an intervention in the conflict. American help however made many Cuban rebels develop a pro-US stance.
The outcome of the Anglo-American war split Canadian society between a practical majority of supporters of North American continentalism and an ideologically driven minority of loyalists to the British Imperial or Franco-Canadian causes. The former sympathized for the US system out of liberal or republican leanings, deemed its unification of North America would grant greater opportunities for peace and prosperity, or at least understood US hegemony of North America was inevitable and American democracy and federalism made it tolerable. Under the leadership of this faction, the Canadian section fairly quickly made itself at peace with its new destiny as part of America and found its place in the US political game, much the same way the South did after its failed secession bid. The same pattern showed up in the religious field, since Catholics who wished to integrate in US society typically converted to Old Catholicism.
Others were too conservative, too bound to their British or Franco-Canadian identities, or too loyal to Papal Catholicism to accept the new status quo. The vast majority of them chose to immigrate to Britain, France, or South America as circumstances and their sympathies dictated. A minority of Southerners that were too loyal to the Confederate cause to accept Reconstruction in good faith joined them. Immigrants from Europe or other parts of America soon replaced them and then some. Union with the USA caused the Canadian section to experience substantial population and economic growth, easing its assimilation in the Union.
The outcome of the war in North America, the uprising in Ireland, and the 1860s changes in Europe left Britain in a wary and frustrated mood. They were able to defeat Irish separatism and the British Empire kept its top rank among the great powers. Loss of Canada meant a significant humiliation and loss of resources for Britain, but in practice, it essentially just confirmed and extended the outcome of the American Revolutionary War. North America was a lost cause for British imperialism and from its ashes, a powerful rival had arisen that seemed determined to stake its claim for supremacy in the Western Hemisphere and the Pacific. British interests in these areas appeared too valuable to concede victory to America without a struggle. A mix of imperial pride, fear, greed, and stubbornness drove Britain to defy the rising American challenge that loomed on the horizon.
The post-Napoleonic balance of power in Europe was experiencing dramatic changes with the demise of Austria, the lessening of France, the impetuous rise of Germany, the ascent of Italy, and the resurgence of Russia. Impetuous industrialization and modernization of the ascendant powers in comparison to the prosperous but mature and relatively static status of Britain compounded the global challenge the British Empire faced. It was still the top superpower but its power, influence, and authority were no more absolute and at the serious risk of long-term decline. Pax Britannica was over and the future would present serious challenges from many sides to British interests.
The pre-war unrest of the Canadian colonies and their failure to unite, the war with the USA, and the uprising in Ireland made the British elites suspicious of any project to grant substantial autonomy to any portion of their empire. They suppressed all mainstream political talk of Home Rule for Ireland as an encouragement to Irish nationalist and Papist subversion. The British also became largely hostile to self-rule claims for their remaining settler colonies. They mostly kept their pre-existing levels of autonomy and responsible government out of political inertia and precedent but further developments were frozen. Britain essentially focused its colonial policy on maintenance of central control and imperial unity, economic development and exploitation of the colonies, and defense of strategic holdings.
The killing of Lopez in battle ended the Paraguayan War. Its outcome was the devastation and utter defeat of Paraguay with the death of the vast majority of its adult male population. Re-emerging tensions between Brazil and Argentina for division of the spoils and political conflicts within Argentina and Uruguay caused a second phase of the Plate River conflict, the Second Platine War. The war between Brazil and Argentina resulted in Argentina’s decisive victory. The outcome was annexation of Uruguay by Argentina; the latter country’s consolidation as a federal union with the federalization of Buenos Aires and Montevideo; and partition of Paraguay at the Rio Paraguay line between Brazil and Argentina. The war affirmed Argentina’s dominance in the River Plate region.

1870-72: The Old Catholic schism widened, deepened, and in a few years created a split of the Catholic community only comparable to the Eastern Schism or the Reformation. Liberal and nationalist outrage for the Pope’s blatant partisanship in political matters gave momentum to the Old Catholics. The movement soon claimed the allegiance of most Catholics in Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Hungary-Croatia, the United States, and Argentina. Although it claimed to represent authentic Catholic doctrine against Ultramontane deviations, the Old Catholic movement attracted almost all the liberal thinkers and leaders within the Church. Consequently, it soon developed an increasingly liberal and progressive outlook in political, social, and doctrinal matters. It effectively abolished the Papacy and the College of Cardinals and developed an Episcopal structure.
Its differences with the Anglican and Lutheran denominations gradually diminished considerably, pretty much up to nothing as it concerned the Anglicans. This won the Old Catholics more and more sympathies in Northern Europe, Britain, and North America, and eventually allowed them to establish full communion with the Anglicans. Old Catholic, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox propaganda successfully labeled the Ultramontane denomination as the ‘Papal’ Catholics, or ‘Papists’ in a more derogatory sense. The label stuck in secular public opinion even if its targets bitterly opposed it and claimed to be the true Church beset by yet another heresy. As a rule, the Papal Catholic denomination remained dominant in France, Iberia, Ireland, Poland, and Brazil. Over time, it became more and more reactionary in political matters and conservative in social and doctrinal ones. Other areas, such as the rest of Latin America became ideological battlegrounds of the schism, with liberals filling the ranks of the Old Catholics and conservatives throwing their allegiance to the Papal Catholics.
Due to the militant role of the Pope in the war and the uprisings in Ireland and Poland, the European powers (Germany, Italy, Britain, and Russia) were seriously concerned about his ability to threaten the stability of Europe. They agreed to deem him unfit to reside in any territory they controlled and there were doubts about the wisdom of letting him stay in Europe at all. There were concrete proposals to exile the troublesome high priest someplace in South America (most likely Brazil) since the Americans were radically hostile to his presence in North America. Yet there were also concerns not to anger the countries that still gave him allegiance by such an extreme action. In the end, France and Spain proposed a compromise solution that the other powers accepted. It gave him administration of the Principality of Andorra under nominal Franco-Spanish co-sovereignty. Although the Pope kept claiming the Papal States, in practice he accepted the deal. Concerns about the political effects of his presence however turned out to be justified; the Holy See in Andorra soon became a powerful source of support for reactionary forces in France and Iberia.
Russia suppressed nationalist and religious unrest in the former PLC lands. It exploited France’s powerlessness and the support of Germany and Italy to denounce the clauses of the 1856 Paris Peace Treaty that bound it to military limitations in the Black Sea. After the end of the war with France and restoration of order in Poland, Germany, Italy, and Russia were free to address the instable situation in Hungary-Croatia. All three powers wanted to keep influence in the region, yet given their good relationship they were not ready to fight for exclusive control. Germany wanted to ensure the highest protection possible for ethnic Germans in the region, since geography made annexation of their territories troublesome. The Russians wanted to uphold the rights of the Slavs and the Orthodox as a tool to advance their expansionist agenda in the Ottoman Balkans. However, they were not much interested to pick sides for one nationality over another. All three powers wanted to prevent anything that would look like a bad example for their own subject nationalities.
Germany, Italy, and Russia eventually forged a compromise and imposed it by a joint declaration backed by the implied threat of military intervention. It affirmed the neutral status of Hungary-Croatia and its role as an effective co-client of Berlin, Rome, and St. Petersburg. It enacted a constitutional and political reform that substantially curtailed political instability in Hungary-Croatia and the infighting of its ruling elites. Germany annexed Fiume, turning it into its main Mediterranean port. Italy got a few more Adriatic islands. Serbia and Romania got a few border areas. Such transfers were minor in scope and H-C kept most of its lands. An ethnic German principality that included southeastern Transdanubia, northern-western Banat, and central Transylvania got a large degree of autonomy and the Hungarian Germans became essentially immune to Magyar cultural assimilation policies. In comparison, the Slovaks, Serbs, and Romanians that stayed under Hungarian-Croat rule got many less concessions; Germany and Italy opposed them for various reasons and the Russians did not care enough to object.
The success of their triple intervention motivated the Germans, Italians, and Russians to sign the Vienna Pact in order to co-ordinate their future actions in the Balkans, as well as other issues like common trade or infrastructure projects. Unlike the pact between Berlin and Rome, the treaty did not establish any sort of official military alliance, in order to lull the Ottomans and the British in a false sense of security. In fact, its public version did not say anything at all about the Ottoman territories. The secret clauses allowed Russia to attack Turkey and invade the Ottoman Balkans, with a few compensations for Germany and Italy.
The war stopped construction of the Suez Canal, but after its conclusion, the new owners resumed and completed it. Despite a few initial financial and technical difficulties, it soon became an enormous commercial success, thanks to its immediate and dramatic positive effect on world trade. Combined with the transcontinental railroads that the Americans built in the same period, it allowed circling the entire world in record time. Its success greatly heightened the interest in America and Europe for building a similar inter-oceanic canal in Central America. The British got somewhat annoyed by German and Italian control of the Suez Canal Company but not radically so, since its previous French owners had been no better friends of Britain. The British government asked Germany and Italy to share control of the Suez Canal. After some negotiation, the three powers agreed to divide their shares in equal parts, with the secret provision to do likewise if any of them were to gain control of the Egyptian share in the future.
Political instability and conflicts between monarchist reactionaries, centrist moderates, and republican radicals continued to plague both France and Spain after the war. After defeat in the civil war, the French far left had to go underground or it was still licking its wounds. Defeat discredited the Bonapartists. Papal Catholic clergy and activists mobilized to try to mold France and Iberia in the conservative stronghold of the “true Church” in Europe. The Spanish elites briefly considered members of the Hohenzollern and Savoy royal families for the throne of Spain but soon turned them down due to the political effects of the Old Catholic schism. Much like the parallel French situation, a fragile Spanish republic became the default solution but by no means an effective check to political instability. Problems for Spain only increased with the start of a pro-independence rebellion in Cuba that became a widespread uprising.
With the end of the war in North America, Britain was able to deploy the main part of its regular army in Ireland. Large-scale sweeps and internments of IRB personnel and suspected sympathizers took place, and allowed the British forces to disrupt the IRB network and score several successes in clashes with the insurgents. The end of US weapon smuggling and increasingly successful British counterinsurgency actions left most IRB units critically short of both weapons and ammunition, with a resulting reduction of guerrilla attacks. The Irish insurgency gradually died down and it was over by the early 1870s. It left a huge pool of resentment in the Papal Catholic population of Ireland against British rule and its brutal methods of repression. On the British’s part, the insurrection enhanced previous anti-Catholic prejudice into widespread fear and distrust of Papists and Irish nationalists.
After victory in the Franco-German-Italian War, the Italian government decided to change the army organization so that each battalion included men from the same region, as in the Prussian model. Up to then, they had included a mix of recruits in every unit from all over the country, to combat regionalism. Italian elites felt confident that regionalism was no more a serious political concern thanks to the boost in national self-consciousness. They thought the regional model would further improve the already good efficiency of the army, completing its transition to the Prussian model. The government decided to set up a public school system modeled on the German system and make strong investments to boost literacy and spread knowledge of national language among the Italian citizens.
After the war, Germany and Italy experienced a prevalent atmosphere of self-confidence, optimism, and fulfilment. They largely turned into satisfied powers and focused most of their energies into post-unification nation-building and economic development. Decisive success of their alliance in the last two wars, compatible and often complementary strategic interests, and persistent threat of a vengeful France drove Berlin and Rome to confirm and strengthen their partnership. The two powers renewed their military alliance for 30 years. Germany and Italy established their economic integration through a series of treaties that first created a Central European free-trade area, and then gradually enhanced it with a customs and monetary union. The so-called ‘Berlin-Rome Pillar’ seemed headed to become a stable feature of European politics and diplomacy.
Like the pre-existing Latin monetary union, the Central European monetary union established a bimetallic (gold and silver) standard. It required that all contracting states strike freely exchangeable gold coins and silver coins according to common specifications. France, Belgium, Italy, Switzerland, and Spain had first established the LMU in the 1860s. However, it lost a lot of its importance when Italy withdrew from it, and Belgium and Switzerland disappeared, because of the FGIW. The two systems had similar features but for political reasons they remained separate and rival. Their example was a major reason the USA stuck to bimetallism in its postwar monetary policy and hence avoided some serious economic trouble that could have otherwise manifested. Other states later adopted one or the other standard, sometimes even when they did not formally accede to the LMU or CEMU treaties. In the CEMU’s case, informal adoption might often be justified by the wish to avoid joining its customs union.
The formation of a Central European trade bloc was another reason for the late 19th century economic boom in Germany and Italy. Germany was allowing its economic potential to bloom and quickly evolving into the industrial giant of Europe while Italy was becoming an industrialized great power. The Italians reaped the fruits of economic reforms and foreign investments with steady growth of industry in the northern regions and modern agriculture and tourism in the southern ones. Only the parallel ongoing transformation of the United States into an economic superpower surpassed the frantic pace of industrialization in the German-Italian bloc.
Military and economic achievements sustained a positive mood on both sides of the Alps. It did not mean Germany and Italy had no serious domestic issues. Besides the necessary nation-building effort, both countries faced the typical social and political tensions caused by industrialization. Reforms, economic growth, and foreign-policy successes however kept such tensions at a manageable level for the ruling elites. A pre-unification legacy of social backwardness still burdened Italy but the young nation seemed headed to cast it off in short order. Conversion of most German and Italian Catholics to the Old Catholic denomination also helped foster political stability. It greatly eased a peaceful inclusion of Catholic masses into mainstream politics and toned down potential antagonism between northern and southern Germans.
German and Italian positive mood found a typical expression in the sumptuous celebrations the Italians staged for the official transfer of their capital to Rome. The Italian government had spent some serious effort to renovate the city and cancel signs of the Popes' obscurantist misrule. The festive mood created by recent successes only got sobered for a while by death in an accident of crown prince Umberto. In due time, however, his younger brother Amedeo was to prove himself a good King that favoured Italy’s liberal evolution. Another iconic expression of the friendly and celebrative atmosphere in the Pillar countries was the twin set of giant statues the Germans and the Italians built in Berlin and Rome to celebrate their victories. The statues, inspired by Overbeck's painting "Italia and Germania" with a more martial pose, represented Germany and Italy as shield-maidens with swords pointing to the ground, one holding the torch of truth and the other the scales of justice. The statues soon became a popular landmark in both capitals. They became the model for a colossal and even more famous version that Germany and Italy gifted to the USA in the 1880s to stand in New York Harbour. The Statue of Liberty was to become an iconic symbol of America.
Russia was eventually recovering from its defeat in the Crimean War and its financial troubles thanks to the reforms of Tsar Alexander II throughout the 1860s. He was the most important Russian reformer and one of the greatest Tsars since Peter the Great. His greatest achievement in the first phase of his reign was the emancipation of serfs in 1861. He was also responsible for numerous other reforms including reorganizing the judicial system, setting up elected local judges, abolishing corporal punishment, promoting local self-government through the ‘zemstvo’ system, imposing universal military service, ending some of the privileges of the nobility, and promoting the universities. The Tsar was not an overly belligerent leader and sought peaceful co-existence with Germany and Italy. However, Alexander II acknowledged the terminal weakness of the Ottoman ‘sick man of Europe’ and deemed his duty to fulfil the long-standing aspiration of Russia to expansion in the Balkans and the Near East. Demise of Austria, eclipse of war-torn France, and friendly relations with Berlin and Rome made circumstances optimal for such an expansionist policy. Russian agents got busy in the Balkans stirring up anti-Ottoman unrest among the Christian nationalities of the region.
After President Lincoln won two wars, led the first phase of Reconstruction, and got an unprecedented third term, a fanatic white supremacist shot and killed him in the third year of his last term. By the end of his life, the American people universally acknowledged him as one of the greatest US Presidents and national heroes, the man who preserved the Union, defeated Confederate rebellion and British-Mexican aggression, abolished slavery, doubled the country’s size, charted the path to national reconciliation, strengthened the federal government, and modernized the economy. His assassination only enhanced his legend by adding the crown of martyrdom for his people and he was enshrined as the equal of Washington in American culture. His Vice President succeeded him to complete his term and Ulysses S. Grant, the best US general of two wars, was elected President the following year; both vowed to continue the work of the late great leader.
The USA was war-weary but reinforced and made confident in its destiny by victory against Southern secessionists and British imperialists. Albeit at a terrible price, the American republic had affirmed its national unity, ended slavery, won a lot of valuable new land, and forced the British superpower to accept US hegemony of North America. The war left the Americans proud and elated for victory in Canada and Mexico but suspicious of European (especially British) encroachment in the Western Hemisphere and the Pacific. They resented persistent British imperial influence in their chosen turf but understood the USA had achieved more or less the best possible result during the conflict in the light of British naval supremacy.
The American people remained wary of big standing armies, so the wartime land forces were demobilized. However, the war, lingering hostility with Britain, and distrust of Mexico imprinted the need for strong armed forces in the US public. The Americans took care to learn the lessons of the last two wars and keep military equipment, the officer corps, the regular army, state militias, and the coastal defence system at a high level of quality and efficiency. US coasts and the southern border remained much more militarized than they had been before the war. The goal of US military policy was to guarantee effective defence of North America by peacetime forces and quick mobilization of a vast army of good quality to fight anywhere in the Americas. An ambitious naval building program aimed to ensure US naval supremacy in the Western Hemisphere and build a US Navy that could fight the Royal Navy as an equal in the Atlantic and the Pacific. The Americans were determined not to suffer another serious threat to their continental security or freedom of trade ever again.
Security concerns aside, America turned to focus on its own reconstruction and internal development. Soon after the peace, US economic situation turned to the better and blossomed into a boom fuelled by fast-paced industrialization. The boom quickly remedied the damage of wartime British blockade and allowed America to digest the financial burden of the last two wars. In its relationship with the Southern states and the Canadian territories, the Union tried to balance a spirit of reconciliation with a need to preserve the outcome of the conflict. The former goal found expression in a generous program of economic relief and infrastructure development for the Southern and Canadian sections as well as widespread enfranchisement of Confederate veterans and Canadian settlers. They made an effort to restore the Southern states to a normal status within the Union and grant statehood to settled Canadian territories soon after pacification. Decisive suppression of all organized resistance to Union rule enforced the outcome of the war, and so did its enshrinement in the US Constitution with a set of amendments that banned slavery and guaranteed civil and voting rights of American citizens.
The Reconstruction amendments created new federal civil rights that federal courts could enforce and protect, guaranteed the Federal war debt would be paid (and promised the Confederate debt would never be paid), and stripped the right to hold office from former Confederates who had previously sworn loyalty to the US Constitution by holding federal or state offices. The most far-ranging provision was extension of the rights guaranteed by the US Constitution to the states and empowerment of Congress to legislate and protect these rights. They also decreed that the federal government or the states could not deny the right to vote or hold office to citizens because of race, color, ethnicity, language, creed, or previous condition of servitude or because of the failure to pay poll taxes. The amendments also prohibited establishment of a national language and guaranteed the states could keep a legal system that did not conflict with the US Constitution, as conciliatory measures for the Franco-Canadians.
On the other hand, the Congress went out of its way to avoid including in the Amendments anything that could represent an obstacle to resettlement of the freedmen in Africa. Therefore, it kept definition of citizenship its sole prerogative. The Amendments also clarified that the civil rights granted by the Constitution only applied to citizens, although the Congress could extend them to other people. In fact, after an inevitable stop during the war with Britain and Mexico, the resettlement program resumed with increased vigor as the vast majority of American public opinion came to regard it as one of the best ways to purge the country of the legacy of slavery and ensure national reconciliation. The Americans accepted its logistic, economic, and humanitarian costs as a necessary price.
Such vast support meant generous public and private investment to support the program; it also meant the American people tolerated no obstacles to its fulfilment. Federal and state governments did not take “no” as an answer from freedmen that refused to go and tried to stay in the USA. Most of them went willingly, or at least deemed collaboration was the best course in these circumstances. US security forces rounded up recalcitrant Blacks and forced them to embark. In the end, only a small minority of the wealthiest, most educated, and most light-skinned individuals that could pass as another race were allowed to stay. Assassination of Lincoln drove the Congress to create a federal law enforcement agency to ensure effective application of the criminal laws of the United States, repression of domestic violence, and protection of the President.
The Anglo-American war dramatically showed the great strategic importance of efficient and reliable intra-continental logistics in North America and inter-oceanic connection with the Pacific. Timely completion of the first transcontinental railroad had greatly helped avoid a British-Mexican occupation of the West Coast. That line followed the so-called ‘Central’ route to California. The war persuaded the Congress to finance the building of two other ‘Northern’ and ‘Southern’ routes across the Northwest and the Southwest respectively. The southern transcontinental railroad pleased the Southern states and was an infrastructure hallmark of national reconciliation. It also greatly eased settlement and Americanization of the Southwest and the newly acquired northern Mexican territories.
Much the same way, a strategic imperative to get the Northwest and Western Canada settled as soon as possible to consolidate US rule over the region drove building of the northern railroad, and it was quite effective at that. It also became rather important to conciliate the Canadian section and foster its integration in the Union. For this reason, they effectively duplicated it into two parallel branches that mostly followed the old Oregon Trail and the Saskatchewan River system respectively. Because of similar strategic concerns, they also decided to build a branch of the southern railroad that would run through the Gulf Coast region and connect New Orleans with Tampico. The federal government also made an earnest effort to rebuild and improve infrastructure in the Southern and Canadian sections and ensure efficient northern-southern logistic integration across US North America.
The transcontinental railroads substantially accelerated settlement and development of the US Frontier. This came at the price of more violent conflicts between Amerindian tribes and American settlers backed by the US army. The American effort to keep the regular army and state militias at a good level of efficiency ensured the Indian Wars were a string of US victories and American colonization ruthlessly suppressed all native resistance. All attempts of diehard British loyalists and Mexican nationalists to fight US rule in the Canadian and northern Mexican territories met the same fate.
Strong interest for an inter-oceanic canal in Central America was another expression of US strategic drive for efficient and secure continental travel. A number of surveys before and after the last two wars led to the conclusion the two most favorable routes were those across the Panama department of Colombia and across Nicaragua, with a route across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec in Mexico as a third option. The Nicaragua canal appeared easier to build than the Panama one and US diplomacy engaged the Nicaraguan government into talks for a deal. In this context, the Americans came to regard their exclusive control over an inter-oceanic canal as a strategic imperative. For the same reason, they got very interested in expanding their control across the Caribbean and Central America and limiting European influence in the region as much as possible.
This attitude drove the USA to ratify annexation of the Dominican Republic when its government offered it to get protection from a possible Haitian invasion. For similar reasons the Americans supported the anti-colonial rebellion in Cuba. They smuggled a considerable amount of US weapons, supplies, and money to the Cuban rebels. US support for the rebellion prolonged the conflict and kept it in a stalemate as Spanish weakness and rebel disorganization balanced each other. Interest for the acquisition of Cuba did exist in the USA but the Americans were still too war-weary to accept an intervention in the conflict. American help however made many Cuban rebels develop a pro-US stance.
The outcome of the Anglo-American war split Canadian society between a practical majority of supporters of North American continentalism and an ideologically driven minority of loyalists to the British Imperial or Franco-Canadian causes. The former sympathized for the US system out of liberal or republican leanings, deemed its unification of North America would grant greater opportunities for peace and prosperity, or at least understood US hegemony of North America was inevitable and American democracy and federalism made it tolerable. Under the leadership of this faction, the Canadian section fairly quickly made itself at peace with its new destiny as part of America and found its place in the US political game, much the same way the South did after its failed secession bid. The same pattern showed up in the religious field, since Catholics who wished to integrate in US society typically converted to Old Catholicism.
Others were too conservative, too bound to their British or Franco-Canadian identities, or too loyal to Papal Catholicism to accept the new status quo. The vast majority of them chose to immigrate to Britain, France, or South America as circumstances and their sympathies dictated. A minority of Southerners that were too loyal to the Confederate cause to accept Reconstruction in good faith joined them. Immigrants from Europe or other parts of America soon replaced them and then some. Union with the USA caused the Canadian section to experience substantial population and economic growth, easing its assimilation in the Union.
The outcome of the war in North America, the uprising in Ireland, and the 1860s changes in Europe left Britain in a wary and frustrated mood. They were able to defeat Irish separatism and the British Empire kept its top rank among the great powers. Loss of Canada meant a significant humiliation and loss of resources for Britain, but in practice, it essentially just confirmed and extended the outcome of the American Revolutionary War. North America was a lost cause for British imperialism and from its ashes, a powerful rival had arisen that seemed determined to stake its claim for supremacy in the Western Hemisphere and the Pacific. British interests in these areas appeared too valuable to concede victory to America without a struggle. A mix of imperial pride, fear, greed, and stubbornness drove Britain to defy the rising American challenge that loomed on the horizon.
The post-Napoleonic balance of power in Europe was experiencing dramatic changes with the demise of Austria, the lessening of France, the impetuous rise of Germany, the ascent of Italy, and the resurgence of Russia. Impetuous industrialization and modernization of the ascendant powers in comparison to the prosperous but mature and relatively static status of Britain compounded the global challenge the British Empire faced. It was still the top superpower but its power, influence, and authority were no more absolute and at the serious risk of long-term decline. Pax Britannica was over and the future would present serious challenges from many sides to British interests.
The pre-war unrest of the Canadian colonies and their failure to unite, the war with the USA, and the uprising in Ireland made the British elites suspicious of any project to grant substantial autonomy to any portion of their empire. They suppressed all mainstream political talk of Home Rule for Ireland as an encouragement to Irish nationalist and Papist subversion. The British also became largely hostile to self-rule claims for their remaining settler colonies. They mostly kept their pre-existing levels of autonomy and responsible government out of political inertia and precedent but further developments were frozen. Britain essentially focused its colonial policy on maintenance of central control and imperial unity, economic development and exploitation of the colonies, and defense of strategic holdings.
The killing of Lopez in battle ended the Paraguayan War. Its outcome was the devastation and utter defeat of Paraguay with the death of the vast majority of its adult male population. Re-emerging tensions between Brazil and Argentina for division of the spoils and political conflicts within Argentina and Uruguay caused a second phase of the Plate River conflict, the Second Platine War. The war between Brazil and Argentina resulted in Argentina’s decisive victory. The outcome was annexation of Uruguay by Argentina; the latter country’s consolidation as a federal union with the federalization of Buenos Aires and Montevideo; and partition of Paraguay at the Rio Paraguay line between Brazil and Argentina. The war affirmed Argentina’s dominance in the River Plate region.

This TL combines and develops a few AH ideas I am fond. They include a WWII with an Allied victory that does not really divide or mutilate the Axis powers; a Cold War that turns out more beneficial to the West, more damaging to its enemies, and a springboard for federal unification of Europe; and a widespread perception in the Western world that Stalinism and Salafist terrorism were just as bad as Nazism. Unfortunately, the latter two story themes do require Communism and Islamism to become even more murderous and destructive than OTL.
The initial PoD occurred in the 19th century with Meji modernization of Japan being slightly earlier and even more successful than OTL. This enabled Japan to defeat China and Russia in the last quarter of the 19th century and exploit victory to annex Greater Manchuria, Sakhalin (renamed Karafuto), Korea, Taiwan, and Hainan. Such a success in turn enabled a more thorough and successful political and cultural assimilation of the overseas territories in the Japanese Empire. It also prevented any large-scale Chinese and Russian settlement in these territories, and the relatively few Han that had previously come through got expelled and replaced by Japanese and Korean settlers.
Events outside Northeast Asia largely stayed the same as OTL up to the onset of WWII. ITTL Roosevelt died by an early stroke in 1939, and after James Garner completed his term, one among Cordell Hull, James Farley, or Thomas Dewey became President in 1940. Although the new President followed an internationalist foreign policy broadly similar to FDR, he was much more suspicious of Stalin and more willing to grant a lenient peace deal to the Axis powers, although he still aimed for their surrender and military occupation. The botched attempt of Britain and France to intervene in the Winter War and deny Germany access to Swedish iron supplies caused the German occupation of Sweden, the Anglo-French bombing of Baku, and a state of war between the USSR and the Allies.
Hitler reluctantly accepted Stalin as an ally - even if he planned to attack the Soviets once the British were defeated - and the Axis alliance expanded to the USSR. The Soviets attacked and overrun Turkey, Persia, and Afghanistan, while Germany did the same to Western Europe and forced France to surrender. Because of the Soviet co-belligerence, Germany and Italy agreed to cooperate and pursue a Mediterranean strategy, while Spain and Vichy France joined the Axis. Charles de Gaulle died during the Fall of France. Therefore, no equivalent of Free France ever arose and the Allies deemed France an enemy power.
The Axis forces occupied Portugal, Gibraltar, and Malta, overrun North Africa, drove the British out of the Middle East and the Horn of Africa, and made inroads into western India and East Africa. The British Empire was with its back to the wall, despite the generous Lend-Lease support of the USA, when Hitler and the Japanese changed the picture. Hitler deemed the war against the British was all but won, so he decided to attack the USSR. This turned WWII into a three-way conflict, and the strategic equation further turned against the Axis when Japan’s pre-emptive attack on the US fleet at Pearl Harbor brought America in the war.
They decided to seize the European colonies in Southeast Asia to secure a steady supply of resources against the American embargo of Axis countries that was strangling their economy. Trade with the USSR in the co-belligerence period considerably ameliorated the situation, but it turned bad again when Germany attacked the USSR. Unluckily for the Axis, the Japanese did not trust their invasion of Southeast Asia to succeed without eliminating the potential threat of the Philippines and the US Pacific Fleet on their flank. Although the initial Japanese rampage swept everything up to New Guinea and eastern India, US intervention turned the tide of the war thanks to the mobilization of vast American demographic and industrial resources.
The initial success of the Axis offensives in Russia and Southeast Asia and the bad military situation of the Allies before American mobilization could make its effects felt made the Allies and the Soviets potentially willing to make a compromise peace and an alliance of convenience against the Axis. Uneasy negotiations established a truce between the Western Allies and the USSR. By its terms, the Soviets kept control of Turkey, northern Syria and Iraq, and Iran, but pulled out from the rest of the Middle East, including Arabia, the Levant, Mesopotamia, and Afghanistan. A full peace treaty proved impossible, since the Western Allies demanded that the USSR relinquish all the territories it had conquered since 1939 and Stalin adamantly refused. Although the Allies and the Soviets became nominal co-belligerents, trust and cooperation were non-existent between them. Either player planned to backstab the other if possible, suspected the same from its nominal ally, and did not mean to let it get an inch more than necessary. Of course, in these circumstances nobody in the West gave a thought to let the USSR get Lend-Lease aid.
American build-up enabled the Allies to push Axis forces out of India, gradually roll back the Japanese in the Pacific, and conquer the Horn of Africa, Arabia, North Africa, Arabia, the Levant, and Mesopotamia. US power also turned the tide in the Battle of the Atlantic and the air war in Europe. After these successes, the Americans made a decision to give priority to conquest of Western Europe and defeat of the Euro-Axis rather than liberation of the Balkans and the Near East, despite the contrary wishes of the British. Allied landings in Iberia, Italy, and later France and Scandinavia were successful. After an initial vast success, the war in the Eastern Front eventually turned bad for the Axis after an initial vast success because of the major distraction created by engagement in these other theaters. However, the Soviets paid a terrible price for their victories. The harrowing experiences of WWII and a mild stroke Stalin suffered during the war significantly altered his personality: he more reckless ambitious, and even more paranoid and brutal. However, the stroke also drove him to take better care of his health, making him live longer.
Deeming the war lost, the military component of the German Resistance managed to overthrow the Nazi regime. The anti-Nazi faction was able to organize adequately and get sufficient support in the Wehrmacht because they were confident of getting a lenient deal from the Allies if they were successful. The military coup in Germany soon inspired and triggered similar political changes in the other Euro-Axis countries. After they took over, the new leaders made diplomatic feelers for peace negotiations with the Allied governments. Although their requests for anything less than surrender were quickly and decisively shot down, they were able to get Allied assent to a peace deal (nominally unconditional surrender, de facto a conditional one) that ensured Germany and its allies lenient terms.
The Allies guaranteed preservation of the national integrity of Axis countries (no forced political division), their internationally recognized prewar borders (even if the Allies reserved the right to make a few adjustments for the sake of international security), and their economic base (no forced deindustrialization or unsustainable reparations). Moreover, they also gave guarantees about eventual restoration of a liberal-democratic political system, political independence, and a free-market economy after a clearing out of fascist elements.
Due to the role the Axis militaries played in bringing the war to an early conclusion, the Allies also gave an informal guarantee that their prosecution of war crimes and crimes against humanity would essentially target fascist leaders, people directly involved in atrocities, and high-ranking members of the fascist parties, paramilitary militias, and secret police. Military and civilian personnel otherwise involved with fascist regimes because of their jobs or involved in planning and waging an aggressive war would suffer no mass punishments or prosecutions.
On their part, the Allies got a chance to win the war without much further effort, freedom to occupy the Axis countries and reform them to their liking within the terms of their pledge, and an opportunity to contain Soviet expansion in Europe as much as possible. The bargain looked convenient enough to the Allied elites that the urge to deal an especially punitive peace settlement to the Axis nations quickly dwindled to insignificance.
Germany, its allies, and the Anglo-Americans agreed to these terms. The Axis forces started a general pullout from the fronts (France, Iberia, Italy, and Scandinavia) where they were fighting the Allies. They let the Allied forces advance without opposition across Europe, while they concentrated on the Eastern front to make a last stand. Their objective was to stalemate the Red Army as much as possible before the Anglo-American troops would reach Eastern Europe.
As soon as Stalin got notice of this deal, he ordered the Red Army to press on and advance as much as possible against the Axis forces, no matter the cost in men and material. He feared an expanded conflict with the Allies, since he knew the USSR was close to exhausting its resources in the struggle against the Axis. However, he hoped to win the USSR a favorable compromise peace by threatening and if necessary trying to exhaust the Americans with attrition war. To further this goal and maximize Soviet war gains, he aimed to grab as much land as possible before the Allied reached the Eastern front. The last phase of WWII in Europe turned in a race to establish facts on the ground favorable to the Allied or the Soviets. The Axis forces bitterly resisted the Soviet offensives in a last stand sustained by the hope to avoid Soviet occupation of their countries.
In the end, the Red Army was eventually able to clear the Wehrmacht out of Soviet territory and conquer Finland, the Finnmark, the Baltic states, East Prussia, eastern Poland, Slovakia, eastern Hungary, and Romania. The Soviets were also able to exploit their control of Turkey and the support of Yugoslav and Greek Communist partisans to seize Serbia, Bulgaria, Albania, and mainland Greece. However, the Red Army eventually got stalemated on a line that followed the eastern border of Sweden and the Vistula, Danube, Bosna, and Neretva rivers, long enough for the Allied troops to reach the Eastern front lines, disarm and disband the Axis forces, and deploy before the Soviet troops. The Allies exploited their superior naval power to occupy insular Greece. Tensions between the Allies and the Soviets run high, and war restarting between them was a serious possibility, but eventually both sides agreed to extend their truce indefinitely with a few minor adjustments of the ceasefire line. An uneasy peace settled down on war-torn Europe as the Americans redeployed the bulk of their war effort (minus what seemed necessary to keep the Red Army at bay) in the Pacific to finish the job with Japan.
This occurred because the Americans decided to give priority to victory in the Pacific against Japan, and seriously overestimated the residual war making abilities of the Soviets. They also were unwilling to break the truce on their own initiative. They reluctantly deemed the outcome good enough with the liberation of most of Europe, even if their maximum goal of pushing the Soviets back into pre-war borders had escaped their grasp. The British were more reluctant to leave a sizable chunk of Eastern Europe, the Balkans, and half of the Near East in Soviet hands but they too were hesitant to break the truce on their own initiative, and more importantly unable to prosecute the war without full American support and commitment. On his part, Stalin knew America was more powerful and much less exhausted by the war than the USSR, which had been reaching the bottom of its manpower barrel to conquer half of Eastern Europe and was teetering on the brink of economic collapse.
Nonetheless, since he deemed Soviet war gains unsatisfactory, he doubled down on his determination to maximize them by using the last few resources of the Soviet war machine to intervene in the Far East. A series of Allied offensives in the Pacific pushed the Japanese all the way back to their homeland, although they paid a harsh price due to fanatical Japanese resistance. The Red Army attacked the Japanese in Manchuria and northern China. The IJA put up an effective resistance and made the enemy pay a harsh price for their gains, although Soviet pressure slowly but inexorably pushed them further and further back. To maximize their defense on the Manchurian front, the Japanese soon had to pull out from China proper. The Soviet exploited the resulting strategic vacuum to intervene in the Chinese Civil War and support the CCP. This resulted in an undeclared state of war between the Red Army and the KMT.
As the Allies and the Soviets got closer and closer to the Japanese Home Islands and Korea, realization of their country’s hopeless military situation dawned on the moderate elements of the Japanese ruling elites, together with a determination to save what remained of their Empire. With the support of the Emperor, they organized a coup that overthrew the nationalist-militarist extremists and petitioned the Allies for a lenient peace on the same terms the other Axis countries got. Despite the vindictive mood lingering from Pearl Harbor, the Americans ultimately turned open-minded to the idea, because of the European precedent, a wish to avoid the vast casualties expected from an armed conquest of Japan, and the desire to contain Soviet expansion in East Asia as much as possible. The Anglo-Americans and the Japanese agreed to a peace deal (nominally unconditional surrender, de facto a conditional one) similar to the one the Euro-Axis countries got. Thanks to it, the American forces landed and occupied the Japanese Home Islands, Korea, Karafuto, the Kuril and Ryukyu Islands, Taiwan, and Hainan without opposition, deploying before the Soviet troops on the Yalu.
The US government demanded the Soviets to stop their advance in China or the Americans would restart the war against them in Europe and the Far East. Stalin agreed, leading to a tense ceasefire between the Red Army, their CCP allies, and the KMT on the Quinling-Huhaihe line. Because of the relatively high casualties that the Americans had suffered in the last phase of the Pacific War, and the unexpected windfall of the war against the Axis coming to an early and victorious end, a mood that combined satisfaction, tiredness, and a wish for restoration of peacetime normalcy settled in the US public opinion. The American public balked at the high price that they expected was necessary for a decisive victory against the USSR. Pressure grew to conclude the war, and this drove the US government to start peace negotiations with the Soviets.
The Allies and the USSR signed a truce with indefinite duration that established the existing frontlines in Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia as the demarcation line between the Western world and the Soviet bloc – soon to be dubbed the “Iron Curtain”. However, the Allied powers refused to sign a formal peace treaty with the Soviets unless they agreed to withdraw from all the territories they had occupied since 1939. Nuclear weapons only became available to the Americans after they formalized the truce was formalized, so they could not be used as a tool to extract greater concessions from the Soviets at the peace table. The Allied powers balked at breaking their recent word with an unprovoked attack once they got their first nukes. Moreover, they did not realize the USSR was much weaker than they thought. The Soviets were on their last legs after their effort to defeat the Axis powers, and they would have quickly folded if faced with an American conventional offensive. Due to the subsequent actions of Stalin, the Western world was to bitterly regret and widely criticize this decision during and after the Cold War. It became infamous as the ‘Western Betrayal’ of the peoples forsaken to Stalinist tyranny and genocide.
The Cold War quickly unfolded in Europe. The Axis states and the countries they had conquered were subject to Allied military occupation for a while. They underwent a process of reconstruction, democratization, rehabilitation, and re-education aided by generous US economic support. It turned them into functional liberal democracies and unleashed a robust economic recovery that soon exploded into an industrial boom. The process also was the basis for the start of the European integration process. The Western bloc in Europe came to include Britain, Scandinavia, Spain, Portugal, France, the Low Countries, Germany, West Poland, the Czech Republic, West Hungary, Italy, Slovenia, Croatia, and Insular Greece. Germany, Italy, France, and Spain mostly kept their 1938 borders. So did most other European states the Axis had conquered. The war caused serious ethnic antagonism between the Flemish and the Walloons that destabilized post-war Belgium. Consequently, the Belgian parties and the Allies eventually agreed to a partition between France (Wallonia), the Netherlands (the Flanders), and Germany (Eupen and Malmedy). The Brussels area proved a controversial issue for a while. Eventually an solution that made everyone content emerged by making it the capital district of the EU. For similar reasons, Luxemburg agreed to join France after a referendum. East Prussia was lost to the Soviets that expelled its German population and replaced it with Polish settlers. Croatia merged with western Bosnia under a federal bond. Ireland and Switzerland maintained their tradition of neutrality; Sweden dropped it due to the experience of Axis occupation and the Soviet threat on its eastern border.
The Soviet bloc grew to include Finland, the Baltic states, East Poland, Slovakia, East Hungary, Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria, Albania, North Macedonia, mainland Greece, Turkey, and Iran. Stalin was disappointed with the Western bloc having gotten so far in the Eastern Europe as it had. Therefore, besides reasserting Soviet control on the territories he had gotten in 1939-41, he decided it was safer to bring the portion of Europe he had conquered mostly under direct Soviet control. Finland, the Baltic states, East Poland, Slovakia, East Hungary, and Romania became SSRs. To compensate the Poles for the division of their country, he allowed the Polish SSR to keep Lvov and annex East Prussia. For similar reasons, he also allowed the Hungarian SSR to keep northern Transylvania and the Romanian one to reunify with Bessarabia. The Finnish SSR got the Finnmark and East Karelia.
For various reasons (less compelling strategic concerns, wish to avoid burdening the Soviet Union with too many new subjects), he instead allowed Serbia, Bulgaria, mainland Greece, Turkey, and Iran to become Communist client states of the USSR. However, he still let Soviet Russia claim its share of the booty by annexing eastern Anatolia, northern Syria and Iraq, and northwestern Persia. He partitioned these territories between the Armenian, Azeri, and Kurd SSRs, mostly expelling Turks, Arabs, and Persians and replacing them with Soviet settlers. Brutal repression of resistance and purges during and after Soviet conquest cowed the new leaders of Bulgaria, Albania, Turkey, and Iran into utter subservience to Soviet leadership. The Communist leaders of Serbia and Greece however showed willingness to resist Moscow’s will. Serbia annexed eastern Bosnia and Montenegro. Soviet control of the Balkans prompted the Western powers to reinforce White Greece by allowing it to annex Cyprus. Its Turkish population mostly got resettled in various Middle Eastern states.
In East Asia, the USSR annexed Xinjiang (renamed East Turkestan), Greater Mongolia, and Greater Manchuria as various SSRs. Their Japanese-Korean and Han population mostly got deported to North China (in the Han case) or Central Asia (in the Japanese-Korean case) and replaced with Soviet settlers. Stalin set up the PRC in North China as a client state of the USSR. Much like the Serb and Greek Communists, however, the Maoist leadership of North China showed willingness to defy Moscow’s will. The Japanese Empire kept the Japanese Home Islands, Karafuto, the Kuril islands, Korea, the Ryukyu islands, Taiwan, and Hainan. The Americans rebuilt and democratized it in a way much similar to Western Europe. It transformed into an East Asian Federation (EAF) with Japan, Korea, Karafuto, Taiwan, and Hainan as its top components, although Japanese prefectures and Korean provinces also got important autonomy and representation. The new state also got commonly known as Japan-Korea due to the prevalent influence of these nationalities in the union. Emperor Hirohito abdicated, and the Japanese Yamato and Korean Yi Imperial families were strongly encouraged to intermarry and join ranks to form a single royal house. Just like Western Europe, American aid and integration in the Western bloc triggered and supported a very successful reconstruction process in the EAF that soon blossomed into an economic boom.
The experiences of WWII and a mild stroke he suffered during the war changed Stalin’s personality for the worse: he became more reckless and ambitious, and even more paranoid and brutal. However, the stroke also drove him to take better care of his health; this extended his life up to the early 1960s. He became even more fanatically persuaded the only way to ensure the survival of the USSR and his own absolute power was to forge the Communist bloc into a monolithic engine and ruthlessly destroy any real or imagined threat to his authority. Within a few years after the war, he started a new large-scale purge expanded to the entire Soviet bloc. It was a replica of the Great Terror and killed millions of Soviet and Eastern European citizens. The leaders of Serbia, Greece, and North China resisted the extension of the purge to their territories; however, this just caused Stalin to become even more suspicious of their loyalties.
He took special care to target those minorities that he had come to suspect of disloyalty, such as the Jews, Northern Caucasians, and Tartars. As a result, the purge annihilated the vast majority of the Soviet Jews, Northern Caucasians, and Tartars, and their territories became subject to extensive Russification. Even the Central Asian peoples suffered sizable losses, although Stalin later switched to a more lenient policy towards them because of the Sino-Soviet conflict. He showed leniency to Georgians, Armenians, Kurds, and Azeri, since he perceived them as a useful demographic tool to ensure Sovietization of the Near East. The Second Great Terror expanded to Eastern Europe and the Near East, leading to an even greater loss of life. All anti-Soviet resistance in the Baltic lands, Belarus, Ukraine, Finland, East Poland, Slovakia, East Hungary, Romania, Turkey, and Iran was brutally crushed with extensive use of scorched-earth tactics, massacres, and chemical weapons.
After the fall of the USSR, evidence emerged to suggest Stalin planned to expand the Soviet genocides and ethnic cleansings to an even higher degree across Eastern Europe to consolidate Soviet control of the region and enact its extensive Russification. However, the severe demographic losses that Soviet Russia had suffered because of the war and the purges, and the other population changes the USSR had already enacted drove him to postpone these projects. Moreover, subsequent events in Balkans, China, and the Middle East kept him distracted until the end of his life. Stalin’s whim led him to deport a large number of Manchurian Japanese and Koreans into Central Asia instead of killing them or expelling them to the EAF. His motivations to do so are not entirely clear: perhaps he aimed to use them as hostages to influence the behavior of Japan-Korea. More likely, he wanted to exploit them as a captive workforce to help colonize Central Asia until Russian settlers could replace them and allow their elimination. In any case, just as for Eastern Europe, subsequent distractions and events ultimately prevented the Soviet regime from realizing these plans.
He perceived the attempts of Serb and Greek Communists to keep their autonomy as treason, ideological heresy, and an intolerable challenge to his authority. Therefore, after diplomatic and ideological pressure failed to make them submit, he sent the Red Army to occupy Serbia and Greece. Soviet armed forces and secret police brutally crushed all Serb and Greek attempts to resist by means of guerrilla warfare, with the same ruthless means used to quell anti-Soviet resistance in the rest of the Soviet bloc. After an extensive repression and purge that brought the Second Great Terror to the entire Balkans, Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece, and Albania merged into a Communist Balkan Federation under the control of cowed Stalinist loyalists as a means to consolidate Soviet control on the region. To punish rebel nationalities and reward loyal ones, Stalin allowed Bulgaria to get most of North Macedonia and West Thrace, and Albania to get most of Kosovo and northwestern North Macedonia. Much the same way, the Hungarian and Romanian SSRs partitioned Vojvodina, with the Hungarians getting Backa and the Romanians getting the Serbian Banat. As per the usual Stalinist M.O., forced population changes consolidated these new borders.
Soon after the end of WWII, China became the battleground of a proxy war between the Western and Communist blocs. Even if American opposition had restrained direct Soviet intervention in East Asia, Stalin had not given up his ambitions about China. He decided to put aside his distrust of Mao for the moment and use the CCP as a proxy. The Soviets re-equipped and refitted the Chinese Communist forces with plenty of their own and captured Japanese equipment. The CCP broke the fragile truce with the KMT and restarted the Chinese Civil War. Stalin correctly assumed that the Americans might be reluctant to commit their own forces in a civil war and a major land war in Asia after returning to peacetime demobilization and being busy with the reconstruction of Western Europe and Japan-Korea. The CCP soon got the upper hand, despite the best efforts of the KMT forces. The Americans indeed hesitated too long about intervention – a decision bitterly regretted later - and failed to turn the tide before the Chinese Communists broke the back of the KMT and gained irresistible strategic momentum. The CCP conquered mainland China and established the PRC. The defeated KMT remnants fled to Burma, Indochina, Taiwan, and Hainan.
It seemed for a short while the USSR and the PRC were destined to become major partners in the Communist bloc, but this was not to be. The Maoist leadership of the CCP and Stalin mutually distrusted each other since before the war, and the PRC had ambitions of autonomy and equality that the USSR was unwilling to tolerate. Such ambitions only increased since the major CCP success in the Chinese Civil War. Moreover, conflicting territorial claims (heightened by the Soviet annexations) and economic issues acted as a serious irritant, and Soviet intervention in the Balkans considerably increased mutual distrust. In a few years, distrust grew into alienation and bickering, then an overt Sino-Soviet split, border incidents, and eventually a war between the USSR and the PRC. Stalin decided to crush and purge the Maoist upstarts just as he had done with unruly Serb and Greek Communists and re-establish his unquestioned hegemony of the Communist bloc.
The Red Army invaded northern and western China. Although it got very successful in its initial offensive thanks to its vast weapons and organization superiority, the Soviets soon faced the same strategic quagmire the Japanese had experienced during WWII. The Chinese made extensive recourse to guerrilla tactics and put up a stubborn resistance, making advantage of their demographic superiority. The Soviets soon resorted to extreme brutality to quell Chinese resistance, quickly making themselves as hated as the Japanese. However, they lacked the military resources to occupy all of China, even more so after the serious demographic losses the USSR had suffered because of WWII and Stalinist purges and genocide. Moreover, Soviet economy was still painfully struggling with postwar reconstruction and the Second Great Terror purges did not help. Stalin also feared a vast deployment of the Red Army in East Asia would leave the USSR vulnerable to a Western attack in Europe. However, he was just as unwilling to suffer a humiliation in his Chinese adventure.
Out of frustration, Stalin decided to use WMDs to crush the Chinese, building on the precedent of the Red Army successfully using chemical weapons to eliminate rebels in the Soviet bloc. The Soviets launched a vast nuclear, chemical, and biological attack on Chinese territory using nukes, nerve gas, and smallpox. The attack did bring China to its knees, punished its rebellion, and eliminated it as a serious threat to Soviet hegemony for the foreseeable future. It also sealed Stalin’s place in history as the worst mass murderer ever. The war, the Soviet NBC attack, famine, and the collapse of the PRC state combined to kill or displace about one-tenth to one-fifth of the Chinese population. Mao’s untimely launch of his crazy “Great Leap Forward” campaign of rapid industrialization and collectivization just before the war admittedly worsened the situation significantly. China became a failed state and collapsed into a new warlord era.
China got divided between pro-Soviet and anti-Soviet factions of Chinese Communists, a Taoist extremist group, countless emergent warlords, various separatist ethnic groups, endemic banditry, and a resurgent KMT. Tibet seized independence without much difficulty. The devastation created by the Soviet WMD attack and the collapse of the Chinese state persuaded the surviving PRC leaders to depose Mao and surrender to Stalin who ruthlessly purged the anti-Soviet faction of the CCP. The Soviets harnessed the PRC remnant into a cowed client entity of strict Stalinist loyalty. It got the collaboration of a minority of Chinese that were terrified into obedience or desperate enough for survival and order to cooperate out of pragmatism.
However, the vast majority of the Chinese came to hate the Soviet destroyers of their homeland even more than they had European colonialism and Japanese invaders, extending their hostility to the CCP stooges. Only the dire conditions of China considerably limited their ability to turn their feelings into organized anti-Soviet resistance, at least until the RoC rose again. Emboldened with apparent success Stalin became even more determined in his late years to reassert Soviet hegemony over China. He committed a sizable amount of Soviet troops in northern and western China to occupation and repression duties. The Red Army and the CCP tried to extend their control across China, but logistic difficulties, devastation of Chinese territory, warlord resistance, and widespread popular hostility made their efforts a failure. Much like the Japanese before them, the Soviets came to face hard strategic limits about their abilities to conquer and control China at large.
Abundant American help allowed the KMT remnants in Burma, Indochina, Taiwan, and Hainan to re-organize, re-equip, and project into Southern China to restore order and Nationalist rule across the region. Thanks to generous US economic and logistic support, the reborn RoC was gradually able to expand entrench its control in the southern and eastern provinces. Their success opened the way to generous humanitarian and economic aid provided by the Western powers and allowed to restore some degree of order, decent government, and acceptable living conditions in the region. Consequently, the resurgent KMT harnessed an ever-greater degree of support in the vast majority of the Chinese population. The Chinese people came to regard the Nationalists as the saviors of China, previous flaws of their rule being forgiven and forgotten. American, European, and Japanese-Korean humanitarian and economic aid also did a lot to improve the image of Western-aligned foreigners in the Chinese collective mind, including toning down resentment for past misdeeds. The Chinese people instead turned to regard Communism as a horrible mistake that had destroyed their country, and the Soviets as their worst enemies.
No matter how much popular support and external aid the Nationalists got, however, the internal conditions of China were dire enough that consolidation and expansion of KMT control, not to mention reconstruction, was a slow, difficult, and painful process. In a similar way, albeit less successfully and more costly and painfully, the Stalinist PRC and its Soviet overlords struggled to assert its rule and restore order in Northern China. The USSR was rather less able than America and its allies to provide abundant and high-quality assistance, and it faced much greater resistance. As usual for the Stalinist M.O, it tended to compensate for its shortcomings with ruthless brute force. As the Nationalists and the Communists struggled to expand their influence from the areas they controlled, the rest of China remained a disaster area trapped into famine, civil war, and warlord chaos. A flood of millions of starving and diseased Chinese refugees swept Southeast Asia.

This TL combines and develops a few AH ideas I am fond. They include a WWII with an Allied victory that does not really divide or mutilate the Axis powers; a Cold War that turns out more beneficial to the West, more damaging to its enemies, and a springboard for federal unification of Europe; and a widespread perception in the Western world that Stalinism and Salafist terrorism were just as bad as Nazism. Unfortunately, the latter two story themes do require Communism and Islamism to become even more murderous and destructive than OTL.
The initial PoD occurred in the 19th century with Meji modernization of Japan being slightly earlier and even more successful than OTL. This enabled Japan to defeat China and Russia in the last quarter of the 19th century and exploit victory to annex Greater Manchuria, Sakhalin (renamed Karafuto), Korea, Taiwan, and Hainan. Such a success in turn enabled a more thorough and successful political and cultural assimilation of the overseas territories in the Japanese Empire. It also prevented any large-scale Chinese and Russian settlement in these territories, and the relatively few Han that had previously come through got expelled and replaced by Japanese and Korean settlers.
Events outside Northeast Asia largely stayed the same as OTL up to the onset of WWII. ITTL Roosevelt died by an early stroke in 1939, and after James Garner completed his term, one among Cordell Hull, James Farley, or Thomas Dewey became President in 1940. Although the new President followed an internationalist foreign policy broadly similar to FDR, he was much more suspicious of Stalin and more willing to grant a lenient peace deal to the Axis powers, although he still aimed for their surrender and military occupation. The botched attempt of Britain and France to intervene in the Winter War and deny Germany access to Swedish iron supplies caused the German occupation of Sweden, the Anglo-French bombing of Baku, and a state of war between the USSR and the Allies.
Hitler reluctantly accepted Stalin as an ally - even if he planned to attack the Soviets once the British were defeated - and the Axis alliance expanded to the USSR. The Soviets attacked and overrun Turkey, Persia, and Afghanistan, while Germany did the same to Western Europe and forced France to surrender. Because of the Soviet co-belligerence, Germany and Italy agreed to cooperate and pursue a Mediterranean strategy, while Spain and Vichy France joined the Axis. Charles de Gaulle died during the Fall of France. Therefore, no equivalent of Free France ever arose and the Allies deemed France an enemy power.
The Axis forces occupied Portugal, Gibraltar, and Malta, overrun North Africa, drove the British out of the Middle East and the Horn of Africa, and made inroads into western India and East Africa. The British Empire was with its back to the wall, despite the generous Lend-Lease support of the USA, when Hitler and the Japanese changed the picture. Hitler deemed the war against the British was all but won, so he decided to attack the USSR. This turned WWII into a three-way conflict, and the strategic equation further turned against the Axis when Japan’s pre-emptive attack on the US fleet at Pearl Harbor brought America in the war.
They decided to seize the European colonies in Southeast Asia to secure a steady supply of resources against the American embargo of Axis countries that was strangling their economy. Trade with the USSR in the co-belligerence period considerably ameliorated the situation, but it turned bad again when Germany attacked the USSR. Unluckily for the Axis, the Japanese did not trust their invasion of Southeast Asia to succeed without eliminating the potential threat of the Philippines and the US Pacific Fleet on their flank. Although the initial Japanese rampage swept everything up to New Guinea and eastern India, US intervention turned the tide of the war thanks to the mobilization of vast American demographic and industrial resources.
The initial success of the Axis offensives in Russia and Southeast Asia and the bad military situation of the Allies before American mobilization could make its effects felt made the Allies and the Soviets potentially willing to make a compromise peace and an alliance of convenience against the Axis. Uneasy negotiations established a truce between the Western Allies and the USSR. By its terms, the Soviets kept control of Turkey, northern Syria and Iraq, and Iran, but pulled out from the rest of the Middle East, including Arabia, the Levant, Mesopotamia, and Afghanistan. A full peace treaty proved impossible, since the Western Allies demanded that the USSR relinquish all the territories it had conquered since 1939 and Stalin adamantly refused. Although the Allies and the Soviets became nominal co-belligerents, trust and cooperation were non-existent between them. Either player planned to backstab the other if possible, suspected the same from its nominal ally, and did not mean to let it get an inch more than necessary. Of course, in these circumstances nobody in the West gave a thought to let the USSR get Lend-Lease aid.
American build-up enabled the Allies to push Axis forces out of India, gradually roll back the Japanese in the Pacific, and conquer the Horn of Africa, Arabia, North Africa, Arabia, the Levant, and Mesopotamia. US power also turned the tide in the Battle of the Atlantic and the air war in Europe. After these successes, the Americans made a decision to give priority to conquest of Western Europe and defeat of the Euro-Axis rather than liberation of the Balkans and the Near East, despite the contrary wishes of the British. Allied landings in Iberia, Italy, and later France and Scandinavia were successful. After an initial vast success, the war in the Eastern Front eventually turned bad for the Axis after an initial vast success because of the major distraction created by engagement in these other theaters. However, the Soviets paid a terrible price for their victories. The harrowing experiences of WWII and a mild stroke Stalin suffered during the war significantly altered his personality: he more reckless ambitious, and even more paranoid and brutal. However, the stroke also drove him to take better care of his health, making him live longer.
Deeming the war lost, the military component of the German Resistance managed to overthrow the Nazi regime. The anti-Nazi faction was able to organize adequately and get sufficient support in the Wehrmacht because they were confident of getting a lenient deal from the Allies if they were successful. The military coup in Germany soon inspired and triggered similar political changes in the other Euro-Axis countries. After they took over, the new leaders made diplomatic feelers for peace negotiations with the Allied governments. Although their requests for anything less than surrender were quickly and decisively shot down, they were able to get Allied assent to a peace deal (nominally unconditional surrender, de facto a conditional one) that ensured Germany and its allies lenient terms.
The Allies guaranteed preservation of the national integrity of Axis countries (no forced political division), their internationally recognized prewar borders (even if the Allies reserved the right to make a few adjustments for the sake of international security), and their economic base (no forced deindustrialization or unsustainable reparations). Moreover, they also gave guarantees about eventual restoration of a liberal-democratic political system, political independence, and a free-market economy after a clearing out of fascist elements.
Due to the role the Axis militaries played in bringing the war to an early conclusion, the Allies also gave an informal guarantee that their prosecution of war crimes and crimes against humanity would essentially target fascist leaders, people directly involved in atrocities, and high-ranking members of the fascist parties, paramilitary militias, and secret police. Military and civilian personnel otherwise involved with fascist regimes because of their jobs or involved in planning and waging an aggressive war would suffer no mass punishments or prosecutions.
On their part, the Allies got a chance to win the war without much further effort, freedom to occupy the Axis countries and reform them to their liking within the terms of their pledge, and an opportunity to contain Soviet expansion in Europe as much as possible. The bargain looked convenient enough to the Allied elites that the urge to deal an especially punitive peace settlement to the Axis nations quickly dwindled to insignificance.
Germany, its allies, and the Anglo-Americans agreed to these terms. The Axis forces started a general pullout from the fronts (France, Iberia, Italy, and Scandinavia) where they were fighting the Allies. They let the Allied forces advance without opposition across Europe, while they concentrated on the Eastern front to make a last stand. Their objective was to stalemate the Red Army as much as possible before the Anglo-American troops would reach Eastern Europe.
As soon as Stalin got notice of this deal, he ordered the Red Army to press on and advance as much as possible against the Axis forces, no matter the cost in men and material. He feared an expanded conflict with the Allies, since he knew the USSR was close to exhausting its resources in the struggle against the Axis. However, he hoped to win the USSR a favorable compromise peace by threatening and if necessary trying to exhaust the Americans with attrition war. To further this goal and maximize Soviet war gains, he aimed to grab as much land as possible before the Allied reached the Eastern front. The last phase of WWII in Europe turned in a race to establish facts on the ground favorable to the Allied or the Soviets. The Axis forces bitterly resisted the Soviet offensives in a last stand sustained by the hope to avoid Soviet occupation of their countries.
In the end, the Red Army was eventually able to clear the Wehrmacht out of Soviet territory and conquer Finland, the Finnmark, the Baltic states, East Prussia, eastern Poland, Slovakia, eastern Hungary, and Romania. The Soviets were also able to exploit their control of Turkey and the support of Yugoslav and Greek Communist partisans to seize Serbia, Bulgaria, Albania, and mainland Greece. However, the Red Army eventually got stalemated on a line that followed the eastern border of Sweden and the Vistula, Danube, Bosna, and Neretva rivers, long enough for the Allied troops to reach the Eastern front lines, disarm and disband the Axis forces, and deploy before the Soviet troops. The Allies exploited their superior naval power to occupy insular Greece. Tensions between the Allies and the Soviets run high, and war restarting between them was a serious possibility, but eventually both sides agreed to extend their truce indefinitely with a few minor adjustments of the ceasefire line. An uneasy peace settled down on war-torn Europe as the Americans redeployed the bulk of their war effort (minus what seemed necessary to keep the Red Army at bay) in the Pacific to finish the job with Japan.
This occurred because the Americans decided to give priority to victory in the Pacific against Japan, and seriously overestimated the residual war making abilities of the Soviets. They also were unwilling to break the truce on their own initiative. They reluctantly deemed the outcome good enough with the liberation of most of Europe, even if their maximum goal of pushing the Soviets back into pre-war borders had escaped their grasp. The British were more reluctant to leave a sizable chunk of Eastern Europe, the Balkans, and half of the Near East in Soviet hands but they too were hesitant to break the truce on their own initiative, and more importantly unable to prosecute the war without full American support and commitment. On his part, Stalin knew America was more powerful and much less exhausted by the war than the USSR, which had been reaching the bottom of its manpower barrel to conquer half of Eastern Europe and was teetering on the brink of economic collapse.
Nonetheless, since he deemed Soviet war gains unsatisfactory, he doubled down on his determination to maximize them by using the last few resources of the Soviet war machine to intervene in the Far East. A series of Allied offensives in the Pacific pushed the Japanese all the way back to their homeland, although they paid a harsh price due to fanatical Japanese resistance. The Red Army attacked the Japanese in Manchuria and northern China. The IJA put up an effective resistance and made the enemy pay a harsh price for their gains, although Soviet pressure slowly but inexorably pushed them further and further back. To maximize their defense on the Manchurian front, the Japanese soon had to pull out from China proper. The Soviet exploited the resulting strategic vacuum to intervene in the Chinese Civil War and support the CCP. This resulted in an undeclared state of war between the Red Army and the KMT.
As the Allies and the Soviets got closer and closer to the Japanese Home Islands and Korea, realization of their country’s hopeless military situation dawned on the moderate elements of the Japanese ruling elites, together with a determination to save what remained of their Empire. With the support of the Emperor, they organized a coup that overthrew the nationalist-militarist extremists and petitioned the Allies for a lenient peace on the same terms the other Axis countries got. Despite the vindictive mood lingering from Pearl Harbor, the Americans ultimately turned open-minded to the idea, because of the European precedent, a wish to avoid the vast casualties expected from an armed conquest of Japan, and the desire to contain Soviet expansion in East Asia as much as possible. The Anglo-Americans and the Japanese agreed to a peace deal (nominally unconditional surrender, de facto a conditional one) similar to the one the Euro-Axis countries got. Thanks to it, the American forces landed and occupied the Japanese Home Islands, Korea, Karafuto, the Kuril and Ryukyu Islands, Taiwan, and Hainan without opposition, deploying before the Soviet troops on the Yalu.
The US government demanded the Soviets to stop their advance in China or the Americans would restart the war against them in Europe and the Far East. Stalin agreed, leading to a tense ceasefire between the Red Army, their CCP allies, and the KMT on the Quinling-Huhaihe line. Because of the relatively high casualties that the Americans had suffered in the last phase of the Pacific War, and the unexpected windfall of the war against the Axis coming to an early and victorious end, a mood that combined satisfaction, tiredness, and a wish for restoration of peacetime normalcy settled in the US public opinion. The American public balked at the high price that they expected was necessary for a decisive victory against the USSR. Pressure grew to conclude the war, and this drove the US government to start peace negotiations with the Soviets.
The Allies and the USSR signed a truce with indefinite duration that established the existing frontlines in Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia as the demarcation line between the Western world and the Soviet bloc – soon to be dubbed the “Iron Curtain”. However, the Allied powers refused to sign a formal peace treaty with the Soviets unless they agreed to withdraw from all the territories they had occupied since 1939. Nuclear weapons only became available to the Americans after they formalized the truce was formalized, so they could not be used as a tool to extract greater concessions from the Soviets at the peace table. The Allied powers balked at breaking their recent word with an unprovoked attack once they got their first nukes. Moreover, they did not realize the USSR was much weaker than they thought. The Soviets were on their last legs after their effort to defeat the Axis powers, and they would have quickly folded if faced with an American conventional offensive. Due to the subsequent actions of Stalin, the Western world was to bitterly regret and widely criticize this decision during and after the Cold War. It became infamous as the ‘Western Betrayal’ of the peoples forsaken to Stalinist tyranny and genocide.
The Cold War quickly unfolded in Europe. The Axis states and the countries they had conquered were subject to Allied military occupation for a while. They underwent a process of reconstruction, democratization, rehabilitation, and re-education aided by generous US economic support. It turned them into functional liberal democracies and unleashed a robust economic recovery that soon exploded into an industrial boom. The process also was the basis for the start of the European integration process. The Western bloc in Europe came to include Britain, Scandinavia, Spain, Portugal, France, the Low Countries, Germany, West Poland, the Czech Republic, West Hungary, Italy, Slovenia, Croatia, and Insular Greece. Germany, Italy, France, and Spain mostly kept their 1938 borders. So did most other European states the Axis had conquered. The war caused serious ethnic antagonism between the Flemish and the Walloons that destabilized post-war Belgium. Consequently, the Belgian parties and the Allies eventually agreed to a partition between France (Wallonia), the Netherlands (the Flanders), and Germany (Eupen and Malmedy). The Brussels area proved a controversial issue for a while. Eventually an solution that made everyone content emerged by making it the capital district of the EU. For similar reasons, Luxemburg agreed to join France after a referendum. East Prussia was lost to the Soviets that expelled its German population and replaced it with Polish settlers. Croatia merged with western Bosnia under a federal bond. Ireland and Switzerland maintained their tradition of neutrality; Sweden dropped it due to the experience of Axis occupation and the Soviet threat on its eastern border.
The Soviet bloc grew to include Finland, the Baltic states, East Poland, Slovakia, East Hungary, Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria, Albania, North Macedonia, mainland Greece, Turkey, and Iran. Stalin was disappointed with the Western bloc having gotten so far in the Eastern Europe as it had. Therefore, besides reasserting Soviet control on the territories he had gotten in 1939-41, he decided it was safer to bring the portion of Europe he had conquered mostly under direct Soviet control. Finland, the Baltic states, East Poland, Slovakia, East Hungary, and Romania became SSRs. To compensate the Poles for the division of their country, he allowed the Polish SSR to keep Lvov and annex East Prussia. For similar reasons, he also allowed the Hungarian SSR to keep northern Transylvania and the Romanian one to reunify with Bessarabia. The Finnish SSR got the Finnmark and East Karelia.
For various reasons (less compelling strategic concerns, wish to avoid burdening the Soviet Union with too many new subjects), he instead allowed Serbia, Bulgaria, mainland Greece, Turkey, and Iran to become Communist client states of the USSR. However, he still let Soviet Russia claim its share of the booty by annexing eastern Anatolia, northern Syria and Iraq, and northwestern Persia. He partitioned these territories between the Armenian, Azeri, and Kurd SSRs, mostly expelling Turks, Arabs, and Persians and replacing them with Soviet settlers. Brutal repression of resistance and purges during and after Soviet conquest cowed the new leaders of Bulgaria, Albania, Turkey, and Iran into utter subservience to Soviet leadership. The Communist leaders of Serbia and Greece however showed willingness to resist Moscow’s will. Serbia annexed eastern Bosnia and Montenegro. Soviet control of the Balkans prompted the Western powers to reinforce White Greece by allowing it to annex Cyprus. Its Turkish population mostly got resettled in various Middle Eastern states.
In East Asia, the USSR annexed Xinjiang (renamed East Turkestan), Greater Mongolia, and Greater Manchuria as various SSRs. Their Japanese-Korean and Han population mostly got deported to North China (in the Han case) or Central Asia (in the Japanese-Korean case) and replaced with Soviet settlers. Stalin set up the PRC in North China as a client state of the USSR. Much like the Serb and Greek Communists, however, the Maoist leadership of North China showed willingness to defy Moscow’s will. The Japanese Empire kept the Japanese Home Islands, Karafuto, the Kuril islands, Korea, the Ryukyu islands, Taiwan, and Hainan. The Americans rebuilt and democratized it in a way much similar to Western Europe. It transformed into an East Asian Federation (EAF) with Japan, Korea, Karafuto, Taiwan, and Hainan as its top components, although Japanese prefectures and Korean provinces also got important autonomy and representation. The new state also got commonly known as Japan-Korea due to the prevalent influence of these nationalities in the union. Emperor Hirohito abdicated, and the Japanese Yamato and Korean Yi Imperial families were strongly encouraged to intermarry and join ranks to form a single royal house. Just like Western Europe, American aid and integration in the Western bloc triggered and supported a very successful reconstruction process in the EAF that soon blossomed into an economic boom.
The experiences of WWII and a mild stroke he suffered during the war changed Stalin’s personality for the worse: he became more reckless and ambitious, and even more paranoid and brutal. However, the stroke also drove him to take better care of his health; this extended his life up to the early 1960s. He became even more fanatically persuaded the only way to ensure the survival of the USSR and his own absolute power was to forge the Communist bloc into a monolithic engine and ruthlessly destroy any real or imagined threat to his authority. Within a few years after the war, he started a new large-scale purge expanded to the entire Soviet bloc. It was a replica of the Great Terror and killed millions of Soviet and Eastern European citizens. The leaders of Serbia, Greece, and North China resisted the extension of the purge to their territories; however, this just caused Stalin to become even more suspicious of their loyalties.
He took special care to target those minorities that he had come to suspect of disloyalty, such as the Jews, Northern Caucasians, and Tartars. As a result, the purge annihilated the vast majority of the Soviet Jews, Northern Caucasians, and Tartars, and their territories became subject to extensive Russification. Even the Central Asian peoples suffered sizable losses, although Stalin later switched to a more lenient policy towards them because of the Sino-Soviet conflict. He showed leniency to Georgians, Armenians, Kurds, and Azeri, since he perceived them as a useful demographic tool to ensure Sovietization of the Near East. The Second Great Terror expanded to Eastern Europe and the Near East, leading to an even greater loss of life. All anti-Soviet resistance in the Baltic lands, Belarus, Ukraine, Finland, East Poland, Slovakia, East Hungary, Romania, Turkey, and Iran was brutally crushed with extensive use of scorched-earth tactics, massacres, and chemical weapons.
After the fall of the USSR, evidence emerged to suggest Stalin planned to expand the Soviet genocides and ethnic cleansings to an even higher degree across Eastern Europe to consolidate Soviet control of the region and enact its extensive Russification. However, the severe demographic losses that Soviet Russia had suffered because of the war and the purges, and the other population changes the USSR had already enacted drove him to postpone these projects. Moreover, subsequent events in Balkans, China, and the Middle East kept him distracted until the end of his life. Stalin’s whim led him to deport a large number of Manchurian Japanese and Koreans into Central Asia instead of killing them or expelling them to the EAF. His motivations to do so are not entirely clear: perhaps he aimed to use them as hostages to influence the behavior of Japan-Korea. More likely, he wanted to exploit them as a captive workforce to help colonize Central Asia until Russian settlers could replace them and allow their elimination. In any case, just as for Eastern Europe, subsequent distractions and events ultimately prevented the Soviet regime from realizing these plans.
He perceived the attempts of Serb and Greek Communists to keep their autonomy as treason, ideological heresy, and an intolerable challenge to his authority. Therefore, after diplomatic and ideological pressure failed to make them submit, he sent the Red Army to occupy Serbia and Greece. Soviet armed forces and secret police brutally crushed all Serb and Greek attempts to resist by means of guerrilla warfare, with the same ruthless means used to quell anti-Soviet resistance in the rest of the Soviet bloc. After an extensive repression and purge that brought the Second Great Terror to the entire Balkans, Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece, and Albania merged into a Communist Balkan Federation under the control of cowed Stalinist loyalists as a means to consolidate Soviet control on the region. To punish rebel nationalities and reward loyal ones, Stalin allowed Bulgaria to get most of North Macedonia and West Thrace, and Albania to get most of Kosovo and northwestern North Macedonia. Much the same way, the Hungarian and Romanian SSRs partitioned Vojvodina, with the Hungarians getting Backa and the Romanians getting the Serbian Banat. As per the usual Stalinist M.O., forced population changes consolidated these new borders.
Soon after the end of WWII, China became the battleground of a proxy war between the Western and Communist blocs. Even if American opposition had restrained direct Soviet intervention in East Asia, Stalin had not given up his ambitions about China. He decided to put aside his distrust of Mao for the moment and use the CCP as a proxy. The Soviets re-equipped and refitted the Chinese Communist forces with plenty of their own and captured Japanese equipment. The CCP broke the fragile truce with the KMT and restarted the Chinese Civil War. Stalin correctly assumed that the Americans might be reluctant to commit their own forces in a civil war and a major land war in Asia after returning to peacetime demobilization and being busy with the reconstruction of Western Europe and Japan-Korea. The CCP soon got the upper hand, despite the best efforts of the KMT forces. The Americans indeed hesitated too long about intervention – a decision bitterly regretted later - and failed to turn the tide before the Chinese Communists broke the back of the KMT and gained irresistible strategic momentum. The CCP conquered mainland China and established the PRC. The defeated KMT remnants fled to Burma, Indochina, Taiwan, and Hainan.
It seemed for a short while the USSR and the PRC were destined to become major partners in the Communist bloc, but this was not to be. The Maoist leadership of the CCP and Stalin mutually distrusted each other since before the war, and the PRC had ambitions of autonomy and equality that the USSR was unwilling to tolerate. Such ambitions only increased since the major CCP success in the Chinese Civil War. Moreover, conflicting territorial claims (heightened by the Soviet annexations) and economic issues acted as a serious irritant, and Soviet intervention in the Balkans considerably increased mutual distrust. In a few years, distrust grew into alienation and bickering, then an overt Sino-Soviet split, border incidents, and eventually a war between the USSR and the PRC. Stalin decided to crush and purge the Maoist upstarts just as he had done with unruly Serb and Greek Communists and re-establish his unquestioned hegemony of the Communist bloc.
The Red Army invaded northern and western China. Although it got very successful in its initial offensive thanks to its vast weapons and organization superiority, the Soviets soon faced the same strategic quagmire the Japanese had experienced during WWII. The Chinese made extensive recourse to guerrilla tactics and put up a stubborn resistance, making advantage of their demographic superiority. The Soviets soon resorted to extreme brutality to quell Chinese resistance, quickly making themselves as hated as the Japanese. However, they lacked the military resources to occupy all of China, even more so after the serious demographic losses the USSR had suffered because of WWII and Stalinist purges and genocide. Moreover, Soviet economy was still painfully struggling with postwar reconstruction and the Second Great Terror purges did not help. Stalin also feared a vast deployment of the Red Army in East Asia would leave the USSR vulnerable to a Western attack in Europe. However, he was just as unwilling to suffer a humiliation in his Chinese adventure.
Out of frustration, Stalin decided to use WMDs to crush the Chinese, building on the precedent of the Red Army successfully using chemical weapons to eliminate rebels in the Soviet bloc. The Soviets launched a vast nuclear, chemical, and biological attack on Chinese territory using nukes, nerve gas, and smallpox. The attack did bring China to its knees, punished its rebellion, and eliminated it as a serious threat to Soviet hegemony for the foreseeable future. It also sealed Stalin’s place in history as the worst mass murderer ever. The war, the Soviet NBC attack, famine, and the collapse of the PRC state combined to kill or displace about one-tenth to one-fifth of the Chinese population. Mao’s untimely launch of his crazy “Great Leap Forward” campaign of rapid industrialization and collectivization just before the war admittedly worsened the situation significantly. China became a failed state and collapsed into a new warlord era.
China got divided between pro-Soviet and anti-Soviet factions of Chinese Communists, a Taoist extremist group, countless emergent warlords, various separatist ethnic groups, endemic banditry, and a resurgent KMT. Tibet seized independence without much difficulty. The devastation created by the Soviet WMD attack and the collapse of the Chinese state persuaded the surviving PRC leaders to depose Mao and surrender to Stalin who ruthlessly purged the anti-Soviet faction of the CCP. The Soviets harnessed the PRC remnant into a cowed client entity of strict Stalinist loyalty. It got the collaboration of a minority of Chinese that were terrified into obedience or desperate enough for survival and order to cooperate out of pragmatism.
However, the vast majority of the Chinese came to hate the Soviet destroyers of their homeland even more than they had European colonialism and Japanese invaders, extending their hostility to the CCP stooges. Only the dire conditions of China considerably limited their ability to turn their feelings into organized anti-Soviet resistance, at least until the RoC rose again. Emboldened with apparent success Stalin became even more determined in his late years to reassert Soviet hegemony over China. He committed a sizable amount of Soviet troops in northern and western China to occupation and repression duties. The Red Army and the CCP tried to extend their control across China, but logistic difficulties, devastation of Chinese territory, warlord resistance, and widespread popular hostility made their efforts a failure. Much like the Japanese before them, the Soviets came to face hard strategic limits about their abilities to conquer and control China at large.
Abundant American help allowed the KMT remnants in Burma, Indochina, Taiwan, and Hainan to re-organize, re-equip, and project into Southern China to restore order and Nationalist rule across the region. Thanks to generous US economic and logistic support, the reborn RoC was gradually able to expand entrench its control in the southern and eastern provinces. Their success opened the way to generous humanitarian and economic aid provided by the Western powers and allowed to restore some degree of order, decent government, and acceptable living conditions in the region. Consequently, the resurgent KMT harnessed an ever-greater degree of support in the vast majority of the Chinese population. The Chinese people came to regard the Nationalists as the saviors of China, previous flaws of their rule being forgiven and forgotten. American, European, and Japanese-Korean humanitarian and economic aid also did a lot to improve the image of Western-aligned foreigners in the Chinese collective mind, including toning down resentment for past misdeeds. The Chinese people instead turned to regard Communism as a horrible mistake that had destroyed their country, and the Soviets as their worst enemies.
No matter how much popular support and external aid the Nationalists got, however, the internal conditions of China were dire enough that consolidation and expansion of KMT control, not to mention reconstruction, was a slow, difficult, and painful process. In a similar way, albeit less successfully and more costly and painfully, the Stalinist PRC and its Soviet overlords struggled to assert its rule and restore order in Northern China. The USSR was rather less able than America and its allies to provide abundant and high-quality assistance, and it faced much greater resistance. As usual for the Stalinist M.O, it tended to compensate for its shortcomings with ruthless brute force. As the Nationalists and the Communists struggled to expand their influence from the areas they controlled, the rest of China remained a disaster area trapped into famine, civil war, and warlord chaos. A flood of millions of starving and diseased Chinese refugees swept Southeast Asia.

Game Information

Game Title: Cyber Shadow
Platforms:

• PlayStation 4 (Jan 26, 2021)
• Nintendo Switch (Jan 26, 2021)
• Xbox One (Jan 26, 2021)
• PC (Jan 26, 2021)

Trailers:

• Cyber Shadow Release Date Trailer
• Cyber Shadow Story Trailer
• Cyber Shadow Trailer

Developer: Mechanical Head Games
Publisher: Yacht Club Games
Review Aggregator:
OpenCritic - 79 average - 83% recommended - 18 reviews

Critic Reviews

Destructoid - Chris Carter - 7.5 / 10

Cyber Shadow is a bit disjointed at times, but right when it's chugging, it begins to crescendo and pick back up again. Despite the modern design concessions (which are within reason and don't betray the core of the game) it's not going to appeal to everyone, and that's OK. Even with a few misgivings, I'm anxious to see this world explored again with the power of hindsight.

FingerGuns - Greg Hicks - 9 / 10

It’s absolutely nails to begin with, but stick with Cyber Shadow and it will be your new favourite platformer. There will be tantrums and swearwords, but when a game looks this cool you can’t stay mad at it.

Game Informer - Marcus Stewart - 7.5 / 10

Equal parts fun and infuriating, Cyber Shadow isn't for the weak of heart

Game Revolution - Michael Leri - 5.5 / 10

Shovel Knight was an example of an indie platformer that did hold up its end of the deal on both ends and that comparison doesn’t work in Cyber Shadow’s favor. Its boss fights and soundtrack can compete with other modern indie greats, but the rest of its gameplay inherits many of the antiquated parts that have been stripped out in other thoughtful throwbacks. This dichotomy makes Cyber Shadow a lot like its protagonist as it is made up of parts both old and new. But unlike Shadow, Cyber Shadow is made up of obsolete pieces, resulting in a rusty, defective cyber ninja that’s stuck in the wrong time period.

GameSkinny - Thomas Wilde - 8 / 10 stars

Cyber Shadow is a beautiful, lovingly-crafted gut-punch of an experience. Get ready to throw some controllers.

God is a Geek - Lyle Carr - 9.5 / 10

With perfect control, epic boss fights and a banging soundtrack, Cyber Shadow is a superb action platformer that you don't want to miss.

Hardcore Gamer - Kyle LeClair - 4 / 5

There's no better way to sum it up than just by getting straight to the point: Cyber Shadow is a fun action-platformer and one that expertly emulates the NES classic of yore.

Hey Poor Player - 4 / 5

While I’ve spent a lot of time covering what Cyber Shadow does right, there’s a lot more I could talk about. But since that would cross into spoiler territory, I’ll let you discover for yourselves why this is one of the best games of the new year. There’s a lot of replay value here, too, thanks to Yacht Club implementing a whole host of achievements, regardless of whether you play the game on Steam or consoles. Though it can get more than a bit challenging at times, I’d heartily recommend this to any fan of the classics. Even if you don’t appreciate NES games of yore, this is still a tremendous adventure full of mystery and danger. Kudos to Mechanical Head Games on developing Cyber Shadow, and many thanks to Yacht Club for helping it reach its full potential.

Hobby Consolas - David Martinez - Spanish - 83 / 100

Cyber Shadow pays homage to classic ninja games such as Shinobi or Ninja Gaiden. It has a great "improved" 8 bit style, huge difficulty levels, and a satisfying 2D platform and combat gameplay.

NintendoWorldReport - Neal Ronaghan - 9 / 10

undefined.Through it all, Cyber Shadow knows why people have fond memories of NES-era action platformers, whether it's the thoughtful level layouts, unforgettable boss battles, or eye-catching visual embellishments. This is not a game for the faint of heart, but more for the persistent. I came away from this retro romp satisfied, primarily because it harkens back to the classics while still carving out a distinctive game that rightfully deserves to enter the pantheon of stellar 2D ninja games that includes the likes of Ninja Gaiden and The Messenger.

Noisy Pixel - Ian Goudelock - 9 / 10

Cyber Shadow is a beautifully crafted retro action experience complete with formidable enemies and crushing precision platforming. Abilities like the bullet deflect and dash strike provides the classic ninja experience without overloading on reused mechanics. On top of that, the length and replayability options give players a healthy serving of content tosing more time into refining their skills.

Push Square - Stephen Tailby - 8 / 10

Cyber Shadow isn't afraid to just be what it is: an unapologetic, retro-inspired action game. Steady upgrades mean you'll be introduced to new mechanics for most of the adventure, keeping things interesting all the way. An old-school challenge awaits, and while it's mostly a fair fight, checkpoints can be a little far apart, and some bosses might stop you in your tracks. Still, if you're looking for a rock solid side-scroller, this is absolutely worth your time

Shacknews - Ozzie Mejia - 8 / 10

For anyone looking for a challenge, Cyber Shadow is going to make their day. This would have fit in like a glove with the old NES library, next to Ninja Gaiden, Contra, and Castlevania. Those who remember those days and remember nearly getting an aneurism over how crushingly difficult those old games were, maybe sit this one out.

TechRaptor - Tyler Chancey - 9 / 10

A glorious love letter to retro ninja action, Cyber Shadow is a must for fans of high-speed fun and delicious 1990s cheesy camp.

The Thirsty Mage - David Lloyd - 9 / 10

Most fall short of this lofty goal, but every so often a game like Cyber Shadow manages to capture that special feeling of 8-bit gaming so perfectly. Made by a single developer, Aarne Hunziker, and with the help of a publisher who also managed to capture the NES magic in a bottle in Yacht Club Games, Cyber Shadow is just as enjoyable as any of the legendary titles in two-button gaming.

Twinfinite - Omar Banat - 3.5 / 5

In the end, the positives are strong enough to make Cyber Shadow a fun adventure for indie platformers fans, NES Ninja Gaiden fans, or even gamers who just like tons of challenging boss fights.

Video Chums - A.J. Maciejewski - 7.5 / 10

Cyber Shadow is definitely a genuine old-school experience which mostly works in its favour although it can be a frustrating test of patience at times. No matter which way you slice it, if you enjoy old-school 2D action games, playing Cyber Shadow is a must.

cublikefoot - Chase Ferrin - Recommended

Cyber Shadow is an incredibly well-polished NES throwback, with fun combat, responsive controls, and some nice art and music backing it up. Well worth a look for fans of games from that era.

This is an information report by the CIA on the Kosova situation for the US military and US government officials.
The full report consists of 120 smaller reports going from 1913 - 1953 on the Kosova situation.
I summarized the key information and only added contextual information or locals (Pec = Peja, Dakovica = Gjakova, etc).
I hope this will give a different perspective to Albanians and will shatter some misconceptions that plague us to this day.
Part 1.
https://www.reddit.com/kosovo/comments/dny340/information_report_by_the_cia_on_kosova_part_1/
Part 2.
https://www.reddit.com/kosovo/comments/dpk3dt/information_report_on_kosova_part_2_communists/.
Part 3
https://www.reddit.com/albania/comments/dr5e3information_report_on_kosova_by_the_cia_part_3/
Part 4
https://www.reddit.com/albania/comments/dxvc04/information_report_on_kosova_by_the_cia_part_4/f819zwb?context=1000
Part 5
https://www.reddit.com/kosovo/comments/e7jzok/information_report_by_the_cia_on_kosova_part_5/
24)
All volunteer nationalist forces opposing Communism gathered in mountain hideouts under the leadership of Ymer Berisha, Mulla Idriz and Luan Gashi.
In 1944 the nationalist volunteers of Kosova were defeated by the 3,5,7 and the 17 Brigades of the Albanian Army under the command of Shefqet Peci. All the cities of Kosova were occupied by these aforementioned brigades, which were guided or led by independent groups of kosovar partisans.
The entire population of the occupied regions was automatically conscripted, by partisan military order, into the "Army of National Liberation".
Only on fifth of the able-bodied men, the nationalist volunteers of Kosova, who remained in the mountains, escaped conscription and mobilization.
25)
The albanian 5,7 and 17 brigades pursued the withdrawing German forces to Banat.
These albanian brigades encountered epidemics such as typhus and many lost their lives. Only 25% of those forces returned.
During that time Shaban Polluzha of Drenica received orders to form a new Kosovar brigade which would join the albanian brigades in pursuit of the retreating Germans.
Numerous nationalist were to be found among the men recruited by Polluzha.
On 16 January 1945 Professor Ymer Berisha of Drenica dispatched his men to persuade the nationalists to stay at home.
When the revolt had sufficiently matured, Berisha appeared among the revolters and gave a fiery patriotic speech against joining the Albanian Brigades.
He argued that Kosova was being cowardly abandoned to the Serbians and Montenegrins.
The Serbians and Montenegrins were getting rid of the Albanians by sending them after the Germans. All joined Berisha against the Serbians.
26)
The battle in favor of the Communists initiated under Shaban Polluzha against Kosova evolved into a national epic.
The insurrection of the nationalists was set off in Drenica and Llapia. The inhabitants of those regions were the most loyal to the nationalist spirit of Xhafer Deva. Militants from all of Kosova joined the insurrection.
Once again battles by the Albanians against the Serbians were fought on the rough cold mountain ranges.
600 Kosovars fell during that time but the Serbians paid for it with 2500 dead of their own.
Three major battles were fought at Drenica, Gjilan and Ferizaj.
27)
The nationalists put up a fierce fight at Drenica.
Endless lines of carts crowded the roads through Kosova. They were transporting ammunition and food to the front. The wounded and sick were transported to hospitals in Prishtina, Mitrovica and Peja.
The joint command of the 7 Brigade was aware that the Kosovars would fight till death, so it invited Mufti Asim Luzha to meet with them and negotiate. The Mufti was shot on the spot.
After this murder the fighting in the mountains intensified. Shaban Polluzha, who saw through the lies of the Yugoslavs eventually and switched sides, died there.
28)
The revolt in Gjilan was led by Mulla Idriz Gjilani. He inspired and encouraged his men by citing verses by Pasha Vaso Shkodrani, specifically "The religion of the Albanian is Albania (to be Albanian)".
In the spring of 1945 nationalist forces attacked and conquered the town of Ferizaj. The victory was however short lived. The lack in ammunition, a weakening of discipline and lack of strategic planning took their tool. As more and more communist forces were freed after the retreat of the Germans, they attacked the city from all sides.
Ferizaj and Gjilan resisted fiercely and approximately 1000 enemies died in battle, while nationalists lost around 200.
When the communists resorted to massacres of the population, as a revenge for their losses, the nationalists were forced to give up their struggle.
Next time:
The traitor Koçi Xoxe - so traitorous, even the Yugoslavia were stunned.

This is an information report by the CIA on the Kosova situation for the US military and US government officials.
The full report consists of 120 smaller reports going from 1913 - 1953 on the Kosova situation.
I summarized the key information and only added contextual information or locals (Pec = Peja, Dakovica = Gjakova, etc).
I hope this will give a different perspective to Albanians and will shatter some misconceptions that plague us to this day.
Part 1.
https://www.reddit.com/kosovo/comments/dny340/information_report_by_the_cia_on_kosova_part_1/
Part 2.
https://www.reddit.com/kosovo/comments/dpk3dt/information_report_on_kosova_part_2_communists/.
Part 3
https://www.reddit.com/albania/comments/dr5e3information_report_on_kosova_by_the_cia_part_3/
Part 4
https://www.reddit.com/albania/comments/dxvc04/information_report_on_kosova_by_the_cia_part_4/f819zwb?context=1000
Part 5
https://www.reddit.com/kosovo/comments/e7jzok/information_report_by_the_cia_on_kosova_part_5/
24)
All volunteer nationalist forces opposing Communism gathered in mountain hideouts under the leadership of Ymer Berisha, Mulla Idriz and Luan Gashi.
In 1944 the nationalist volunteers of Kosova were defeated by the 3,5,7 and the 17 Brigades of the Albanian Army under the command of Shefqet Peci. All the cities of Kosova were occupied by these aforementioned brigades, which were guided or led by independent groups of kosovar partisans.
The entire population of the occupied regions was automatically conscripted, by partisan military order, into the "Army of National Liberation".
Only on fifth of the able-bodied men, the nationalist volunteers of Kosova, who remained in the mountains, escaped conscription and mobilization.
25)
The albanian 5,7 and 17 brigades pursued the withdrawing German forces to Banat.
These albanian brigades encountered epidemics such as typhus and many lost their lives. Only 25% of those forces returned.
During that time Shaban Polluzha of Drenica received orders to form a new Kosovar brigade which would join the albanian brigades in pursuit of the retreating Germans.
Numerous nationalist were to be found among the men recruited by Polluzha.
On 16 January 1945 Professor Ymer Berisha of Drenica dispatched his men to persuade the nationalists to stay at home.
When the revolt had sufficiently matured, Berisha appeared among the revolters and gave a fiery patriotic speech against joining the Albanian Brigades.
He argued that Kosova was being cowardly abandoned to the Serbians and Montenegrins.
The Serbians and Montenegrins were getting rid of the Albanians by sending them after the Germans. All joined Berisha against the Serbians.
26)
The battle in favor of the Communists initiated under Shaban Polluzha against Kosova evolved into a national epic.
The insurrection of the nationalists was set off in Drenica and Llapia. The inhabitants of those regions were the most loyal to the nationalist spirit of Xhafer Deva. Militants from all of Kosova joined the insurrection.
Once again battles by the Albanians against the Serbians were fought on the rough cold mountain ranges.
600 Kosovars fell during that time but the Serbians paid for it with 2500 dead of their own.
Three major battles were fought at Drenica, Gjilan and Ferizaj.
27)
The nationalists put up a fierce fight at Drenica.
Endless lines of carts crowded the roads through Kosova. They were transporting ammunition and food to the front. The wounded and sick were transported to hospitals in Prishtina, Mitrovica and Peja.
The joint command of the 7 Brigade was aware that the Kosovars would fight till death, so it invited Mufti Asim Luzha to meet with them and negotiate. The Mufti was shot on the spot.
After this murder the fighting in the mountains intensified. Shaban Polluzha, who saw through the lies of the Yugoslavs eventually and switched sides, died there.
28)
The revolt in Gjilan was led by Mulla Idriz Gjilani. He inspired and encouraged his men by citing verses by Pasha Vaso Shkodrani, specifically "The religion of the Albanian is Albania (to be Albanian)".
In the spring of 1945 nationalist forces attacked and conquered the town of Ferizaj. The victory was however short lived. The lack in ammunition, a weakening of discipline and lack of strategic planning took their tool. As more and more communist forces were freed after the retreat of the Germans, they attacked the city from all sides.
Ferizaj and Gjilan resisted fiercely and approximately 1000 enemies died in battle, while nationalists lost around 200.
When the communists resorted to massacres of the population, as a revenge for their losses, the nationalists were forced to give up their struggle.
Next time:
The traitor Koçi Xoxe - so traitorous, even the Yugoslavia were stunned.

The art never stands passive on the side block indifferent to the changes that affect the community, and touch the circumstances and the quality of life of the human individual.
Lena Chamamyan is an artist who is aware of her responsibility in bringing to light the critical issues and causes of her country.
In her new song “Yakhi Ana Souriyeh” Chamamyan demonstrated the trouble that some people go through in international airports just because they are nationals of certain countries, influenced by unfair prejudice and political conflict.
This is not the first song in which Chamamyan highlights humanitarian issues, but it is the first time her team decides to produce a video clip of the song, the scenes of which were shooted in four different cities: Damascus, Beirut, Istanbul, and Paris. This initiative also gathered the artist Lena Chamamyan with Damsco Events in a first collaborative project between them sponsored by Damsco. In the context of this collaboration, Damasco Media conducted a delightful interview with Lena Chamamyan.
There have been extensive talks about the theme of the song, but will Lena Chamamyan continue embracing such issues in her songs or this is going to remain a single initiative born as a result of your airport encounter?
“YakhiAna Souriyeh” is not the first song in which I convey an issue of this kind, I have two albums “Ghazl El Banat” and “Lawnan” in which I sang about the suffering of the refugees and the oppressed, compelled to entrust their trembling lives to the roaring sea to escape affliction and war. We see new issues such as this emerging in the world every day.
How did the audience react with this song?
Initially, the first performance of the song was during the Tunisian summer concerts, and the reaction of the audience and the Tunisian media was awesome. Then came the tours in Europe and Canada with a wonderful reaction too. I realize that many people are touched by the song, because, it represents their situation as Palestinians, Iraqis, Libyans, Tunisians, and other Middle Eastern nationals.
This song is a bit different from your previous ones. Tell us about the technical challenges that an artist faces when adopting a new singing style.
Often, the crowds would like to trap the artist in a certain genre mould, and as soon as you try to escape this type, a heap of reactions onsets. Generally, I am not afraid of change; I even embrace it. “Yakhi Ana Souriyeh” is the first song in which I come this close to the folk genre, but, the musical style of my last two albums was much different from that of the previous ones: “Hal AsmarEllon” and “Shamat”. I will always try to rebel against myself and break the stereotypes imposed upon me either by myself or by others, at the same time, faithfully maintaining my standards in the music and the lyrics.
Do you entertain the idea of writing and composing again?
Sure, as long as I am inspired. I also like working with other writers and composers as long as their words and music are after my own heart.
What can you tell us about your first video clip experience? How will you describe it?
Different, beautiful, and exhausting. I am a stage person, and I love the stage extravagantly. I also studied acting during my opera studies, so, I did not feel a stranger in front of the camera. Probably, the working team also helped me feel comfortable. I like it when the video clip adds to the taste of the song. I also adore stories; that is why I decided to record a video clip that adds an element to the song performance.
How would you evaluate your collaboration with Damsco Events especially that it is the first one you undertake together?
The most beautiful thing in working with Damsco is the warmth and friendliness they embrace you with which makes you feel at home. This feeling of passion and warmth is absent in the western world. In Damsco you genuinely feel that you are a Syrian. I also sensed gentle compassion and noble thought much different from what is common in production companies today. It is delightful to meet people who give heed to the quality, and are not only interested in the profit. I wish they will continue to develop and flourish venturing out to try new things that are authentic and different.
Do you have plans for other collaborative projects with Damsco Events in the near future?
I would much like that. Many projects resemble me and Damsco, representing depth, authenticity, distinction, and innovation, as well as attaining an intimate relationship with the audience and winning the heart of the masses.
What do you think about the role of the Syrian entrepreneurs in supporting the Syrian refugees? Is it possible for large investment companies to have an influential role in humanitarian issues?
We appreciate anyone who can help afflicted humanity and rescue the oppressed. Those of us who are more fortunate, need to help bring some justice to our cause, for which the public opinion remains ignorant. As artists and entrepreneurs, we need to raise public awareness and introduce to the world who we are, what we went through, what we have lost, and what we can give. Arts may convey this to the world, while, entrepreneurs may support such arts. Of course, they can also help Syrians by creating decent job opportunities, for most Syrians are looking for more than mere financial aid, they are looking for opportunities to thrive, create, and achieve.
Will the crowd of your GCC fans, specifically in the United Arab Emirates have an opportunity to attend your concert there in the near future?
I sincerely wish that. I am longing to meet them, and hope that a new collaboration with Damsco Events will regather me with the beloved in the Gulf and UAE.