AHC/WI?: Zapadnoslavia?

Hrvatskiwi

Hrvatskiwi

After WWI, the Kingdom of Yugoslavia was formed as a means to unite South Slavs.

What if, instead of independent Polish and Czechoslovak states, there was a single state established for West Slavs, Zapadnoslavia?

How would such a state develop politically? Would the Poles or Czechs dominate? Would neither? What effect would this have on Russia and Germany?
 

Arkenfolm

Poles far outnumbered the Czechs, who outnumbered Slovaks, who outnumbered other West Slavic-speaking peoples. You'd need to break down the Polish ethnicity into smaller groups with a stronger Kashubian, Silesian, Masovian, etc. identities.
 
Histor32

Histor32

i would wager the same result.. just further north .. these people while similar, live in separate nations for a reason :) even the Czech's and Slovaks said .. eh.. separate rooms please.

if you were going to do something like this you would have to include Belarus and Ukraine. which then creates a second problem unto itself.

I would say you could have southern Slavic state.. Russia, and then the others decide to team up. on the other hand in between you have Romanians and Bulgars and Magyars who are each a bit not so Slavic. oh and toss in some Tatar and other minority groups.
its not impossible, but you need to balance Poland and make what ever this super middle European Slavic state be .. be a kind, gentle democratic place, which considering the times.. eh...
 

David T

The concept of a "Serbo-Croatian" language was controversial, and the concept of a "Czechoslovak language" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czechoslovak_language has long been abandoned--but nobody could even speak of a "Polish-Czech" language; Polish was just too different from Czech and Slovak.

Even apart from linguistic differences,

"If Poles knew anything about Czechs during the interwar period, it usually was a figure of the ‘Prussians of Slavdom’ which on one hand presented some admiration towards Czech organization and economic development, but on the other hand presented contempt towards brutal Czech policy towards other nationalities of the region, naturally including Poles. But Czechs were, generally, no better. Most important Czech politicians, Tomas Masaryk and Karel Kramar treated Polish state as a kind of ‘temporary state’.

"One way or another, it is stunning to what extent mutual mistrust fed with misunderstandings may lead to disaster. This is basically the story of Polish-Czech relations in the interwar period..." https://www.historycampus.org/2017/...ypes-mistrust-misunderstandings-put-practise/
 
Histor32

Histor32

David T said:
The concept of a "Serbo-Croatian" language was controversial, and the concept of a "Czechoslovak language" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czechoslovak_language has long been abandoned--but nobody could even speak of a "Polish-Czech" language; Polish was just too different from Czech and Slovak.

Even apart from linguistic differences,

"If Poles knew anything about Czechs during the interwar period, it usually was a figure of the ‘Prussians of Slavdom’ which on one hand presented some admiration towards Czech organization and economic development, but on the other hand presented contempt towards brutal Czech policy towards other nationalities of the region, naturally including Poles. But Czechs were, generally, no better. Most important Czech politicians, Tomas Masaryk and Karel Kramar treated Polish state as a kind of ‘temporary state’.

"One way or another, it is stunning to what extent mutual mistrust fed with misunderstandings may lead to disaster. This is basically the story of Polish-Czech relations in the interwar period..." https://www.historycampus.org/2017/...ypes-mistrust-misunderstandings-put-practise/
Click to expand...

stunning is not the word choice I was going to use.. but it politically sensitive and obviously less colorful than the paragraph of Detroit riddled language I would use to describe how screwed up most policies between any one of these nations and even interanally against their very own citizens were ( and I will be nice and just say .. during this time frame ;) )
 

Some Bloke

Sounds a lot like a Yogoslavia situation minus the religious tensions, so it'll be touch and go if it falls apart like OTL's Yugoslavia. Assuming it stays together through the '30s, European policy research: Germany could turn out to be very different.
 

Polish Eagle

There was a proposed Polish-Czech Union, but not until after WWII broke out, and then it was suppressed by the Soviets.

After WWI, it’s really not possible. The Czechs would not have wanted it, and there was no significant movement in Poland in favor of it (except as a component of Miedzymorze). The Endeks would have opposed any introduction of non-Poles into Poland, the Pilsudskiite faction was more interested in Ukraine, and Benes himself wanted nothing to do with Poland.

You’d need a much earlier POD—as early as the 18th century. You’d need to essentially annihilate the ties of Polish romantic nationalism to the Commonwealth, allowing a much more ‘Slavic’ Polish identity to evolve. You’d also want all of Poland under either German or Austrian rule to facilitate that, both to economically tie it to Prague and to prevent ‘panslavism’ from becoming an obscenity (as it was under the Russians, to whom it was an excuse to repress any Pole who didn’t worship the Tsar as the fourth person of the Trinity).
 

David T

There were negotiations for a Polish-Czechoslovak confederation during the Second World War, but ultimately Stalin's opposition made this impossible. (And Benes was always lukewarm about the idea anyway; at best, he saw it as a way to induce Poland to give back the territory it had gained from Czechoslovakia after Munich. He was insistent that such a confederation not be seen as directed against the Soviet Union, whereas for the Poles, establishing a unit large enough to stand up to the Soviets was pretty much the point...) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish–Czechoslovak_confederation
 

garabik

Well, a situation where the Central powers lose WWI, Russia does not collapse and thus no independent Poland, but for whatever reason does not annex Galicia (or just the eastern half). A-H disintegrates as per OTL, and Polish-speaking Galicia realizes it cannot function as an independent country (à la OTL Subcarpatian Ruthenia) and joins Czechoslovakia. Of course, there is the little problem of a big Polish speaking chunk of Russia just across the border...
 
Histor32

Histor32

Hvalrossen said:
Are not Belarus and Ukraine East Slavic countries not West Slavic like Poland?
Click to expand...
uhm.. I would consider them middle Slavic nations .. western parts of Belarus are failry catholic .. large swaths of Ukraine are catholic no? whats the dif?

btw.. how much difference between Poland and Kyiv or minsk.. each are different in their own way. culturally similar, linguistically in the ball park, some share history .. match made in heaven no. match.. yes


eh.. not so much

primary and obvious orthodox/catholic split.
the rest.. eh.. not so much.
 

Hvalrossen

Histor32 said:
uhm.. I would consider them middle Slavic nations .. western parts of Belarus are failry catholic .. large swaths of Ukraine are catholic no? whats the dif?

btw.. how much difference between Poland and Kyiv or minsk.. each are different in their own way. culturally similar, linguistically in the ball park, some share history .. match made in heaven no. match.. yes


eh.. not so much

primary and obvious orthodox/catholic split.
the rest.. eh.. not so much.
Click to expand...
Linguistically Ukraine and Belarus are closer to Russia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Slavs
 

Polish Eagle

Hvalrossen said:
Linguistically Ukraine and Belarus are closer to Russia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Slavs
Click to expand...

Even so, they have a cultural and economic continuity with Poland that Poland does not have with Czechoslovakia. Minsk and Kiev were once part of a Polish state, and all of them suffered under the Russian yoke. There was an overlap in shared anti-Russian sentiment, in religious practices, and in trade.

The last time Poland and Czechoslovakia were United was under Vaclav II. The two countries had diverged a lot further than is implied by language alone by 1772, let alone 1918.
 

David T

One reason that there was no "West Slav-ism" comparable in importance to Yugoslavism in the pre-World War I era is that there already was a South Slavic state--Serbia--to which other South Slavs (above all the Croats) could look as the "Piedmont" of South Slavic unification. There was no analogy with the West Slavs--Poland as an independent state did not exist (and the Poles were divided among three different empires). So there was no reason Czechs or Slovaks should look to Poland for inspiration.
 

Hvalrossen

Polish Eagle said:
Even so, they have a cultural and economic continuity with Poland that Poland does not have with Czechoslovakia. Minsk and Kiev were once part of a Polish state, and all of them suffered under the Russian yoke. There was an overlap in shared anti-Russian sentiment, in religious practices, and in trade.

The last time Poland and Czechoslovakia were United was under Vaclav II. The two countries had diverged a lot further than is implied by language alone by 1772, let alone 1918.
Click to expand...
Was there not a Polish yoke too?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmelnytsky_Uprising

This is not current politics i hope.
 
thezerech

thezerech

Histor32 said:
uhm.. I would consider them middle Slavic nations .. western parts of Belarus are failry catholic .. large swaths of Ukraine are catholic no? whats the dif?

btw.. how much difference between Poland and Kyiv or minsk.. each are different in their own way. culturally similar, linguistically in the ball park, some share history .. match made in heaven no. match.. yes


eh.. not so much

primary and obvious orthodox/catholic split.
the rest.. eh.. not so much.
Click to expand...

Speaking for Ukraine, since I know little about Belarus, Ukrainian Catholicism, or Greek/Uniate Catholicism, is eastern rite Catholicism. They are Orthodox who recognize the Bishop of Rome, so to speak. They still retain liturgy in Ukrainian rather than Latin and iirc their priests can still marry. IOTL Western Ukraine was, and still is, the most Nationalistic region of Ukraine and during the interwar period their was still a great deal of resentment and conflict with the Polish state. Kyiv and the rest of Ukraine would also not accept the Poles as overlords, even if they were willing to ally with them. You could theoretically get an Intermarium confederation though that would be an extemely difficult historical feat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top