Map Thread XXII

Maybe I can quite understand logic behind Lebanon and Myanmar, but since when India and Brazil become "West's enemies"? I thought they were one of the biggest US-NATO allies in the southern hemisphere!
Fehlinger is a... um...
Interesting fellow to say the least.

Very, VERY pro NATO and can very quickly switch between calling a country a fellow member of the West and an evil anti-NATO villain which needs to be blown up.
He loves NATO. really loves Kosovo for some reason. really, REALLY wants Austria to join NATO. Basically thinks every 5 seconds about destroying Serbia. Basically thinks every 10 seconds about blowing up Russia and a lot of other really... radical things.

He also likes trains and to make a thumbs up on pics.


So yeah.
Not sure if mentally unwell or just a giant troll.
 
Fair enough

Japan but not Russia? Certainly not how Id arrange it but to each their own. Including Japan makes sense, big economic influence, but still, Russia may not be a superpower but it easily is at least equal to Japan and Germany in global influence IMO. Hmmm.

Prior to the war I would have, however given the current war has shown Russia to be a military joke, has seen it's influence outside some third world countries basically disappear and that even before it's economy was only comparable to Italy it does not fulfill my criteria to be considered a power.
 
Maybe I can quite understand logic behind Lebanon and Myanmar, but since when India and Brazil become "West's enemies"? I thought they were one of the biggest US-NATO allies in the southern hemisphere!

BRICS I guess..?

Also, I am pretty sure Pakistan is generally considered more of a US ally than India, despite many reason one could probably give for why opposite should be true.
(Pakistan is officially a major non-NATO ally, thought a bill to remove that was suggested back in January. India is a "major defense partner" but this apparently isn't considered as close as major non-NATO ally status.)

(Thought Brasil is considered one such major non-NATO ally.)
 

Beatriz

Gone Fishin'
Map of common Languages of west africa (not my own)

Challenge: linguistic nation-states in west Africa?
1701534504359.jpeg
 
Another map that took me way too long to actually complete (I started it in March 2021), and my second attempt at making a QGIS map. Behold, Amish New England:

HRDPW0Q.png
 
Honestly, I think I prefer the 2012 version because it's willing to follow the contours of the continental plates at the expense of country shapes, which leads to cool scenarios like the maritime Iran and China having a random colony in the south.
 
Map of common Languages of west africa (not my own)

Challenge: linguistic nation-states in west Africa?
View attachment 872954

Could be doable, if decolonization had been handled by an international organization of some kind; a hypothetical Hausa-Fulani union has the potential of being an incredibly influential state in the continent, perhaps second only to an union of those regions where the Swahili language was the lingua franca since pre-colonial times.
 
Could be doable, if decolonization had been handled by an international organization of some kind; a hypothetical Hausa-Fulani union has the potential of being an incredibly influential state in the continent, perhaps second only to an union of those regions where the Swahili language was the lingua franca since pre-colonial times.

The thing is you can't view Africa that way, the same language group can and will (especially historically) have major differences that would prevent any sort of language based polity.

A historical European example would be imagine trying to unify the German speaking part of the HRE during the 1600's when people were still warring against each other because they were the wrong kind of Christian.

In general the entire Modernist European idea of Ethno-Nations does not work for Africa (or a lot of other places for that matter) since the idea of ethnicity in general is not important or seen as a universal aspect of community identity outside of a few groups.
 
A historical European example would be imagine trying to unify the German speaking part of the HRE during the 1600's when people were still warring against each other because they were the wrong kind of Christian.

In general the entire Modernist European idea of Ethno-Nations does not work for Africa (or a lot of other places for that matter) since the idea of ethnicity in general is not important or seen as a universal aspect of community identity outside of a few groups.
Well, it isn´t working flawlesly even in Europe, just look at Yugoslavia
 
Well, it isn´t working flawlesly even in Europe, just look at Yugoslavia
Yeah and even where religion isn't an issue, it hasn't worked. Look at Russia and Ukraine and Belarus. This is NOT current politics because Russian princes and Ukrainian cossacks have been at it for centuries. Or look at Portugal fighting a war to break free from Spain, who share the same religion and have an extremely similar language. Ditto with Sweden breaking free from Denmark, and Norway.
 
Yeah and even where religion isn't an issue, it hasn't worked. Look at Russia and Ukraine and Belarus. This is NOT current politics because Russian princes and Ukrainian cossacks have been at it for centuries. Or look at Portugal fighting a war to break free from Spain, who share the same religion and have an extremely similar language. Ditto with Sweden breaking free from Denmark, and Norway.
The narcissism of small differences?
 
The first map in the thread looks beautiful, but goddamn it almost crashed my PC three times because of how big it is, and because people also replied to it in quotes.
 
BRICS I guess..?

Also, I am pretty sure Pakistan is generally considered more of a US ally than India, despite many reason one could probably give for why opposite should be true.
(Pakistan is officially a major non-NATO ally, thought a bill to remove that was suggested back in January. India is a "major defense partner" but this apparently isn't considered as close as major non-NATO ally status.)

(Thought Brasil is considered one such major non-NATO ally.)
Cold war hangovers, I suspect. India after WWII was not a US ally, but a member of the Nonaligned movement, and later in the 1970s established an "understanding" of sorts with the USSR, if not a full alliance. (India was pretty lefty back before the 1990s, if democratic.).The US, in the meantime, cozied up to Pakistan to reestablish ties with Red China, Pakistan being one of the few non-communist states with diplomatic relations with "mainland" China. Pakistan was also our Good Buddy in the 1980s as the principal conduit of weapons for the anti-Soviet fighters in Afghanistan.
 
The thing is you can't view Africa that way, the same language group can and will (especially historically) have major differences that would prevent any sort of language based polity.

A historical European example would be imagine trying to unify the German speaking part of the HRE during the 1600's when people were still warring against each other because they were the wrong kind of Christian.

In general the entire Modernist European idea of Ethno-Nations does not work for Africa (or a lot of other places for that matter) since the idea of ethnicity in general is not important or seen as a universal aspect of community identity outside of a few groups.

Best example is Yugoslavia.

Not just the same language group but the SAME LANGUAGE, at least among the groups that hate each other most, barring Albanians, the groups that actually spoke different languages left easily with either just 10 days of war or none.
Serbs, Bosniaks, and Croats, live in the same villages, speak the same language, often (if they're from the same area) the same specific dialect of that language, and we can't go 50 fucking years without brutally slaughtering each other. Apart from how embarrassing it is on our part, it's a pretty common issue. The Muslim-traditional religion-Christian divide in West Africa I think happens inside some language groups. HUGE problem for relations. Very similar to Serbs, Bosniaks, and Croats.

Nonetheless a cool map AH idea and hey, the conflict of such states in and of itself would make for cool AH, and a somewhat unrealistic utopian pan national vision would be interesting in the exact opposite way.
 
120423v1.png

Well, that's the northern half of the world, and also Latin South Africa. I might've made the Kazakh border worse.

Also, a question: how should I represent the Pearl Delta SEZ? Here I have it as a corporate-colored subdivision with the West Chinese outline, but should it be the other way around?
 
Last edited:
1862 PARTITION OF POLAND/1862 TEILUNG POLENS/1862 РАЗДЕЛ ПОЛЬШИ/ROZBIÓR POLSKI 1862
The most affected nation by the Franco-Prussian War turned out not to be anyone who participated. As the French Republic collapsed into a civil war, Poland found itself isolated aside from Austria, who was slipping off Great Power status at the moment. So when Germany and Russia signed an agreement to split Poland, Austria saw the writing on the wall and abandoned their alliance with Poland, and actually signed the Partition Agreement as well. Poland-Lithuania called out for help, but no one wanted to fight both Russia and Germany over a buffer state. The Commonwealth's only allies had either collapsed or betrayed them, and the surrendered to the agreements with some autonomy concessions (which would be eventually disregarded). The German Part would be converted into a series of Vassal Kingdoms loyal to Germany, Russia would annex them outright, and Austria-Hungary would give its part to the Austrian Crown with high autonomy.
View attachment 872806
ANATOLIAN WAR/ΑΝΑΤΟΛΙΚΟΣ ΠΟΛΕΜΟΣ/جنگ آناتولی/ANADOLU MÜHARİBƏSİ/ANADOLU SAVAŞI/ԱՆԱՏՈԼԻԱԿԱՆ ՊԱՏԵՐԱԶՄ/ŞERÊ ANATOLIYÊ/جەنگی ئەنادۆڵ/ანატოლიის ომი/АНАДОЛСКА ВОЙНА/
1860-1863
At the same time as the Partition of Poland, another 'Partition' was going on in the Near East. The United Republics of Anatolia, now the United Republics of the Middle East, had recently gotten over its troubles, and it wanted to reconquer all of Anatolia and the Middle East. So it started pushing for Neo-Byzantine Anatolia, something Neo-Byzantine would absolutely not accept. Since the pushes started happening, the States of the Balkans and Middle East were starting to align themselves with either or. Georgia and Bulgaria allied to the UR, and Azerbaijan and Assyria allied to Neo-Byzantium. And it finally ignited when UR crossed into Ionia. They fully expected Neo-Byzantium and her allies to simply give up to avoid conflict. However, the Allies had a trick up their sleeve- Persia. See, the Kurdish Territories in Persia had rebelled a while back, and they were annexed into the Republic of Kurdistan, part of the UR. Whilst Persia did not fight back, they were now ready to retake their lost lands (even if it meant fighting with the breakaway Azeris). And after the Battle of Constantinople, where both UR and Bulgaria were forced to flee, the collapse of the UR was imminent. While Bulgaria and Georgia gave minor concessions, the UR was almost carved up, with all parties taking large chunks of land, including the rebounding Ottoman Empire. what was left in the Anatolian Interior did not last long, and the United Republics collapsed, with Ethnic Separatists and squabbling Greek and Turkish warlords. Unlike the rest of the Ottoman Empire, the Anatolian Interior would remain a geopolitical wasteland for quite some time...
While it is likely Russia would've gotten involved, they were too busy with the American Civil War.
Anatolian War.png

The General Landscape of the Collapse looked like this:
BCHK/URGC - The Remaining Government forces, who want to seize back control from the factions and the Warlords.
Ottoman Empire - Former Ruling Authority wishing to capitalize on the Anatolian Collapse.
MET/Front for the Expulsion of Turks - A Greek Ultra-Orthodox Force who want to Re-Hellenize Anatolia with any possible methods. Also have a party in the Neo-Byzantine Parliament but with no seats.
YRSKK - Monarchist Forces who want to restore the Old Sultanate of Rum
TRK - A Kurdish Separatist Force who has control over some Assyrian Territories
TKO - A Turkish Separatist Force who want to regain control over the Turkish Speaking World
HMS - Armenian Separatist Marxist Supporters who want Armenia to be the first Marxist Republic
HDC - Armenian Democratic Separatists who want Armenia to be a Democracy
HMU - Armenian Separatist Force who want to place the old Armenian Monarchy back in power.
ADP - Pontic Separatist Force who wants Pontus to gain Independence.
ANATOLIAN CIVIL WAR.png
 
Top