Some thoughts on Stalin and his goals, by Lavrenti Beria's son.

 Some of the stuff I've been digging up for basic background stuff for the setting I'm working on - Cold war in Spaaaaace ! (intro here).

Lavrenti Beria was , by 1953, the number two man in the USSR, and had been in charge of the Soviet Atomic Bomb project.  Here is part of an interview  with his son on the subject of the beginning of the cold war and Stalin's goals (do visit the site, the whole interview is quite interesting).  As ever, it is just one mans report regarding two dead people, long after the fact, but.....jeeeeze.  That's some serious evil overlord stuff and it's real...

Q: Let us speak about the appearance of the atomic bomb in the Soviet Union, in connection with the Korean War.

A: The war in Korea broke out on Stalin's initiative. When the Soviet troops came back to this country, Stalin began the new policy. He was of the opinion that on the basis of the communist development, we must organise small local wars in different places of the world. It was begun in Greece, then in China, then in Vietnam, and finally in Korea. That is one of the examples of these local wars. In two weeks, the Soviet troops managed to fight; they were very good. And at that time, Stalin wanted the Soviet troops to fight with rockets; that was the rockets against the ships. They had two types of heads: atomic head and trotyl head. Stalin wanted the Soviet fleet to destroy three or four American military ships; and they told Stalin that after that, the American side would fight with the atomic bomb. Stalin wasn't afraid of this atomic bomb; he said, "Then we'll give our atomic bomb, too." At that time we had very good military aeroplanes; that's why Stalin was ready to begin a very big war. But our military specialists told him that we had no equipment which could catch the American aeroplanes, and Stalin gave the order to build such equipment. And later on, this task was fulfilled. During all the sittings of the Government, he said that the third world war would take place, and that this war had to take place during his life. That's why the military industry in the Soviet Union was very much developed at that time. We got a lot of tanks and rockets and ships, and I think that if Stalin had lived five years longer, we would have had this third world war. (emphasis mine)

Q: Was it planned to use the nuclear bomb in Korea from the Soviet side too?

A: Yes, Stalin had such plans, and my father was very much afraid of these plans. Such a fact(?) took place, and maybe it's not very good that I speak about this now. My father was even against the preparation of this bomb, and he understood that if the Soviet Union got this bomb, nothing would be able to stop Stalin in his wish to conquer the whole world.(emphasis mine)

Q: The last question: if nobody knew that Stalin was so dangerous, and if people had some plans to stop Stalin.

A: Yes, of course, a lot of people understood that Stalin had such dangerous plans and that they must do their best in order to stop him and his plans. But Stalin was very clever, and he understood everything. He felt all these spirits of people who surrounded him. When he felt that somebody was dangerous for him, he immediately killed them. He protected himself from the enemies, and it was very simple for him to do this. (emphasis mine) And if he hadn't died in 1953, it seems to me that he would have killed all the members of the Politburo. Bulganin, Malenkov, Khrushchev and my father would have been killed - I am sure of this fact. There are even some documents in which it's written that...

(No more recorded. End.)

1984: Red Stars and Rockets : Q&A

I thought I'd take a moment to clarify a key question.

Kobold said...


Oh wow, you've headed off in a different direction from where I thought you were going in your earlier post.
An atomic war that humanity could survive makes sense if you're limited to aircraft-dropped A-Bombs - even off honking great B-36s.
How did the UN remain viable and then become independent, if the traditional major donar, the US, was so locked in a Cold War? I would have thought that at the first sign of activism, the US would have walked, as was the fate of the League of Nations.
No trying to pick holes, except in a helpful way to strengthen the narrative.

Not a problem at all, it’s a great question, and one that I’m delighted to pontificate on, and greatly appreciate the input. Just note that I reserve the right to alter any of the dates as needed, and that this is just a first pass at a solution.

The practical gaming reason for the UNPD was because I wanted some more factions in addition to the the West and The East. Essentially, I'm postulating that a UN that was seen as more pliable by the west was less hamstrung but also allowed it to drift to neutrality while they were distracted; and that the main developing states suffered less than the two superpowers, allowing them more leverage in shaping the post-stalemate world. Essentially, no one had funding for the UN after 1951, but everyone had an interest in funding the Pacification Directorate as a way to grab breathing space (USA and USSR) or to keep the big boys from wrecking what was left of the world.



The more detailed discussion involving history and stuff.
I’d say that the cause is rooted in three different sources. First, I’d suggest that the more belligerent Stalinist USSR generated more pushback, and generated much less of the “fair play for Russia” support that was included in lots of the foundation of our UN. For instance, no extra seats in the assembly for soviet republics, and security council seating, etc. Specifically, one fundamental change involved restructuring in the Veto process; allowing a mechanism for overriding a great power veto. The short-term effect was to remove much of the later soviet influence on the structure of the UN, a process which was to be magnified by later events in point two, making it less of a pawn in superpower politics; conversely, it also allowed much more of a neutral attitude to pervade the administration due to a more complacent US policy which saw the UN as a benign alloy in the fight against world communism.


Second, in this timeline, the Korean war started abruptly about 18 months earlier , and while the USSR hadn’t walked out (as in this TL), their veto of the intervention resolution was blocked, at which point they did walk out. For a variety of reasons, mainly involving the production timetable of soviet nukes, north Korea was deprived of the support it had from the USSR, and the PRC – which was still on the ropes fighting the Nationalists. The Korean intervention effectively stopped the Northern offensive, and then occupied the North by late 1949. Occupation and moves towards reintegration of the two Koreas was a major factor in the eventual Soviet decision to attack western Europe. The reintegration of the Koreas was handled by a newly founded United Nations Pacification Directorate, which was largely handled by US commerce and Non-aligned nation UN administrators. Pay attention to this, it’s crucial. The UNPAD was created before the big war, and was seen by the US Government and populace as a wholly approved and safe pro democratic institution.

Finally, the UN was paralyzed by the onset of WW3, first in Europe, then in Asia. Initially, the NATO/SEATO block (also formed a bit earlier) passed an intervention resolution, specifically aimed at holding the fort in Asia while the “real war” in Europe was decided. While this was somewhat successful, the UN forces used in china lacked significant Strategic assets, and were resisted by the nationalists, and took horrendous casualties fighting the Red Chinese and Soviet support , rather souring the contributor nations (India, South America, Thailand) on fighting as proxies for either side. By ~1953, Both sides in the war were fought to exhaustion, and the UN was refusing to support either side with military forces. As the stalemate solidified, both sides needed some way to enforce the ceasefire without losing the war by further fighting – both sides desperately needed a respite, and with the main battlefields destroyed, any attempt to actively attack either homeland would likely win, but also ruin the victor. Plus, Stalin was dead (more on this later) A neutral and independent UN was the best and quickest answer, and was pushed for by the non-aligned nations who had gained in clout relative to the exhausted major powers. The UNPAD was brought in almost unilaterally by India and Brazil, and given freestanding funding and national status in the form of administering the wrecked and refugee choked Benelux area and given the mandate to police the European and Asian Exclusion zones. In reality, the UN as a whole largely collapsed by 1952; all that emerged from the war was what in many ways was a private corporation run by the remnants of the UN administration, and initially funded by the major non-aligned states plus the revenues of Benelux & eventually, much of Asia. This was what evolved into an independent supranational body with a remit to stop major conflicts on the earth, wherever possible. 

How does that work ?

1984: Red Stars and Rockets. A cold war solar system for Traveller.

1984: Red Stars and Rockets*

A retro-gritty setting for Traveller, exploring a lower tech, nonFTL cold war solar system.

( * Alternately, "Reds and Rockets", "Blows against the Evil Empire", "Spaceforce 1984" . any preferences ? )

What if: Most of the dreams of solar system travelling ships designed by the buzz-cut engineers of the 1950’s came true on the timelines they planned ? What if: Man on the Moon by 1960, moonbase by 1965, mars by 1970, inner and outer planets exploration by the 1980’s. What if the engine that drove this wasn’t science or exploration, but rather the conflict of a simmering cold war, and the death struggle between the two superpowers and their ideologies ?

It is 1984. Space travel is real, extensive and highly militarized. Nukes shove the big Orions between planets, Gemini and Soyuz duel in orbits across the solar system, and elite forces fight on mars and the moons of Jupiter. Space is the battlefield of the cold war where Nukes are allowed. What happened ?

Having a few spare minutes last night, I actually got some writing done, so lookout world, here it comes !
You'll note my ongoing projects list includes "Red star and Rockets", billed as a retro traveller setting. In fact, what I'm hoping to create is a gritty late cold war in space, inspired by some plans for Orion Nuclear Space Battleships and a recent reread of the book "Blind mans Bluff", an excellent history of the cold war from the point of view of the submariners of USA and USSR.

The overall goal is to try to build the setting with minimal “magitech” intrusion (Such as the old chestnut of Nikolii Tesla  and/or zero point energy), producing a timeline that may push the envelope of likelihood, but not puncture it.

Consider it as rather like the endless “what if every single plan from WWII germany worked, was practical, successful, and could be put into actual production” alternate histories. Only (hopefully) not as ridiculous as the idea of a corrupt, broken, bankrupt economically crippled and war torn medium sized nation (Nazi Germany) suddenly producing and deploying orbital stations, next generation aircraft carriers and battleships, Antarctic bases and nuclear weapons (up to and including first generation fusion devices), land cruisers, supertanks, orbital bombers, stealthed jet interceptors and flying disks…..in two years. (Luftwaffe 1946 I’m looking at you, here).  The focus would be on what would logically follow given the hard nosed plans of the actual engineers  rather than this would be cool.(because, in fact, their plans were pretty damn cool.)

Secondarily, I want to severely limit anachronistic alternate future references. After the divergence point everything starts changing, so no, we wont see the same people born afterwards in New and Different Jobs for yuks as many alt histories love(“Justin Bieber, Space ranger”, then, is right out, although Richard Nixon, Spy hunter has some shine….)..

One rule in the SF business is that one is allowed three free handwaves (a.k.a. lies, damned lies, and FTL). What would those be for this setting ?

1.  Improvement in cold war materials technology which would allow most designs for nuclear population to be produced and deployed, in particular: Orions, Salt NERVA.
2. A survivable, low grade nuclear war in 1950’s, and much warmer cold war as a result.
3. Major advances in “man in microgravity” handling.

Scientifically, I may add a solar system consistent with 1960’s knowledge –mainly with regard to Jupiter, cause I like it better with less radiation (unlike RRS Earth, which has somewhat more).  Finally, and this is just for my own dogheaded preferences, for a change, lets posit a space based military force without nautical Hornbloweresque wooden ships and iron men Space Navy sensibilities ‘fer heavens sake. The United States Aerospace Force vs. the Soviet Rocket Forces. No cruisers, admirals, dreadnaughts, marines, bridge, boatwains, etc.

Game Parameters

• A few BIG ships and lots of Small Ships. Most player type ships will use smallcraft rules.
• Reaction/nuclear propulsion for the big ones, reaction for the small ones.
• No Grav. tech
• Minimal Stealth.
• Chargen focuses on the spaceforces of the various factions, plus some civilian agencies.( Western, Soviet,UN, Non-aligned, UNASA and “other”.)
• Tech is solidly 1980's, but focused on defense production, with much less consumer development.

More to come.  some history.  Stuff.

Feel free to comment.