NationStates Jolt Archive


Speculation: 21st Century New Dictatorships

Ice Hockey Players
08-02-2006, 04:07
OK, so there seems to be a great number of World War III threads, but most of them seem to be geared toward what current nation in their current status is likely to begin World War III. The Israel-Iran conflict is certainly a possibility, as is China-Japan, India-Pakistan, or North Korea-anyone with functioning brain cells. However, the last World War didn't turn out as as people might have thought it would play out after World War I, especially since most Allied nations didn't really wanted to fight.

Naturally, with the World War II parallels, I came upon three nations to be this speculation's Germany, Italy, and Japan, and the three nations actually sort of fit the mold. For Nation One, they fit the mold of a powerful, strong nation with a history of decisive victories and a few frustrating defeats; they also feel as though the world isn't giving them a fair shake. The leadership is democratically elected but is more than willing to take liberties with the process, including, perhaps, doing away with the democratic process. This nation is our Nazi Germany.

Nation Two is a nationalistic land that has, historically, fared less than spectacularly in warfare but has, nonetheless, brought about great leadership upon whose ideals and history the pro-war movement will rely. Nation Two has had its disagreements with Nation One, but under new leadership, they are willing to forget about such squabbles if Nation One is able to get them the living space they desire. This nation is our Fascist Italy.

Nation Three? A bit more of a stretch, but there are parallels. After years of turmoil, a new regime turned Nation Three into a secretive society. Previously changing ideals, even a possible opening up of society, is thwarted by a strict dictatorship that doesn't allow its citizens to leave. Due to forces beyond its control, it is forced to open its borders and trade with the West, but in large part, reform doesn't come easily. Many are resistant and even resentful toward the West, and an ambitious leader vows to smite Westerners - with the exception of Nation One and Nation Two. This nation is our Imperialist Japan.

By now, it's obvious who these nations are, I am sure.

Nation One is the United States of America, led by the Bush administration. Many will argue that his rise to power was under less-than-clean circumstances, he's made no bones about tapping phones, and they wanted war with Iraq at all costs. Surely they wouldn't be able to get away with staying in power beyond 2008 without some external circumstances, but if there are no external circumstances, the Bush administration could easily make some. One possibility is that a hurricane destroys Washington D.C. in late 2008, and the federal government decides that setting up a temporary government in another city is more important than electing a new government. Except in affected areas, local elections proceed as normal, but with no federal elections, turnout is at an all-time low. Some state leaders threaten secession, but that's seen as infeasible and, for some, it's political suicide. Eventually, all 50 states go along with it, and federal elections are brought about in 2009 to placate citizens - but there is no place to vote for a President, and no third-party candidates are on the ballot. At the same time, threats of terrorist activity, or perceived terrorist activity, are pervasive in some major cities, and it all comes out against Muslims and members of liberal third parties. Given time, the Constitution is either amended for Bush's purposes or dissolved altogether, the federal government goes along with thhe administration's agenda, and even state governments don't have a prayer against the will of the rest of the country. Under intense pressure, even the most liberal states in the U.S. go against their previously liberal ideals to please the Bush administration. By 2015, homosexuality is criminalized, the death penalty is in full force, wire-tapping is commonplace and accepted, abortion is illegal, and the work week is long and hard with working conditions not a priority. Bush even finds a way to deal with pesky gun-owners - a pseudo-conscription scheme in which those who are skilled with guns are offered money, education, and a better life to become soldiers...whether or not the government intends to honor these promises is another story.

OK, now for Nation Two. This one is also pretty obvious...I refer, of course, to France under Jean-Marie Le Pen. It starts in 2006 with a nationalist mood. Jacques Chirac finishes third in the Presidential voting - Le Pen is second and a socialist is first. Thanks to some more rioting in France, there is anger at immigrants, and the immigrant-hating, racist Le Pen is elected, along with other National Front members. Immigrants, naturally, don't take too kindly to this news, and rioting continues. Le Pen's solution involves cracking down on immigration to the point where France's broders are closed and any immigrants within France are deemed criminals and sentenced to hard labor. Working French citizens watch as their 35-hour work week is lengthened, their lengthy vacations disappear, and by 2015, they work as hard as Americans in similar conditions. By this point, all parties except the National Front are outlawed, Le Pen only has to get re-elected in 2010, and the French military is no longer a punch line. After invading Algeria, they are seen as an angry force that takes what they want and runs with it. No one tries to stop them ilitarily, mainly because they don't want to, but the French also argue the Doctrine of Pre-Emption, since Algeria elected a fundamentalist government again and France saw this as a threat to their anti-immigrant policies.

OK, off to Nation Three. They sound an awful lot like Russia...that's because they are. Russia, led by Vladimir Putin, tries to revise history to argue anything from the idea that the USSR's defeat in the Cold War was due to Glasnost and Perestroika to the ridiculous notion that the Russians actually WON the Cold War. The press has long since been censored, and the Russians have a Muslim group to use as a scapegoat - the Chechens. By this point, Putin feels he doesn't have to impress anyone and flat-out starts rounding up Chechens and throwing them into gulags. Also, Putin starts picking on the Ukraine again, mainly since it needs the resources, and he decides to send in the mobilized Russian milotary to invade the Ukraine when they refused to cooperate with them. Unlike in previous ward, however, the Russians get more up-to-date than some of their neighbors in warfare, since, as the aggressors, they kind of have to. Given time, Putin suspends elections, of course, and starts up a modern version of Pravda as a government press tool. By 2015, the Russians have broken Chechnya, overrun the Ukraine, and are threatening the Middle East just as much as the Americans and French are.

Offhand, the targets of the Axis Powers (named for lack of a better name) is the Middle Eastern and Islamic nations. Russia is after all of its former republics and then some, though they don't seek another invasion of Afghanistan a la 1980. A nuclear Iran might factor in here, as would a nuclear Pakistan, which makes India a wild card. China would enter the war on the side of the Muslim nations if they felt their security threatened, especially by Russia. Japan would likely remain neutral, even if the U.S. tried to prod them into militarizing. In a situation like this, I could even see Israel remaining neutral, as they wouldn't dream of aligning with the Muslim nations but would hardly think much of a dictatorial and overambitious USA; also, the Muslim alliance would have bigger fish to fry than Israel, and in a war for their survival, they would have to behave somewhat rationally.

The biggest question mark is the European Union. They would be without France at this point, so France and Russia would be their main focal point. If the EU mobilized, they could knock France into next week, and with China's assistance, they could probably handle Russia, but assuming they rebuild the defeated nations with something similar to the Marshall Plan, they still have an angry USA to deal with. So it's 2020 and Europe is in shambles while the USA is terrorizing the Muslim world. China wants no part of it, and meanwhile, North Korea has taken to even more desperate measures to try to get attention. By now, they have tested hydrogen bombs, and Kim Jong-chul, son of Kim Jong Il, who died in 2019 of cancer, is looking to make North Korea a power player in the world. He follows in his father's footsteps, and some would say he's batshit crazy. Neither the USA nor the EU wants to deal with North Korea and basically give them what they want. Naturally, Kim learns that the world is happy to appease North Korea, which is taking steps in turning their ongoing conflict with South Korea into another hot war.

OK, for those of you who have stayed with me this far, I have this for you:

If the USA, France, and Russia form a strategic alliance, who stands against them and what provokes them? What of Japan, India, and the possibility of Israel remaining neutral? What will North Korea do to turn attention to them and gain concessions? Can anyone stop a fierce, imperialist USA? What about a defeated and newly internationalist France and Russia? Who uses nukes first? Last? Does the world end? Does anyone even fire a nuke, or do we see a newer, possibly deadlier weapon?

Speculate. Go on, speculate. No sources are necessary; the only source I used was Kim Jong Il's biographical information.
Santa Barbara
08-02-2006, 04:12
I think the USA is in real danger of turning into a de facto dictatorship this century. Another 9/11 or something of the sort, maybe two more, and people will be afraid and happily vote the government to have more power just to make them feel safer and to console their anger.
Ritlina
08-02-2006, 04:13
Your're Right. Except That North Korea Will Join The Axis. There Can Be No Doubt. They're Becoming More And More Militaristic. By The Time WWIII Starts, They Will Be Wanting Land. They Will Be In The Axis, No Matter Who Is In The Axis. Your're Right About China Though. They'd Probably Want To Stay Neutral. But Israel Is, Unfortuantetly, The US's Bitch. So, They'd Be Forced Into The Axis. France, Ehh, Not So Sure. But France Has Been A Wild Card Throughout The Years. Who Knows.
Altusha
08-02-2006, 04:19
OK, so there seems to be a great number of World War III threads, but most of them seem to be geared toward what current nation in their current status is likely to begin World War III. The Israel-Iran conflict is certainly a possibility, as is China-Japan, India-Pakistan, or North Korea-anyone with functioning brain cells. However, the last World War didn't turn out as as people might have thought it would play out after World War I, especially since most Allied nations didn't really wanted to fight.

Naturally, with the World War II parallels, I came upon three nations to be this speculation's Germany, Italy, and Japan, and the three nations actually sort of fit the mold. For Nation One, they fit the mold of a powerful, strong nation with a history of decisive victories and a few frustrating defeats; they also feel as though the world isn't giving them a fair shake. The leadership is democratically elected but is more than willing to take liberties with the process, including, perhaps, doing away with the democratic process. This nation is our Nazi Germany.

Nation Two is a nationalistic land that has, historically, fared less than spectacularly in warfare but has, nonetheless, brought about great leadership upon whose ideals and history the pro-war movement will rely. Nation Two has had its disagreements with Nation One, but under new leadership, they are willing to forget about such squabbles if Nation One is able to get them the living space they desire. This nation is our Fascist Italy.

Nation Three? A bit more of a stretch, but there are parallels. After years of turmoil, a new regime turned Nation Three into a secretive society. Previously changing ideals, even a possible opening up of society, is thwarted by a strict dictatorship that doesn't allow its citizens to leave. Due to forces beyond its control, it is forced to open its borders and trade with the West, but in large part, reform doesn't come easily. Many are resistant and even resentful toward the West, and an ambitious leader vows to smite Westerners - with the exception of Nation One and Nation Two. This nation is our Imperialist Japan.

By now, it's obvious who these nations are, I am sure.

Nation One is the United States of America, led by the Bush administration. Many will argue that his rise to power was under less-than-clean circumstances, he's made no bones about tapping phones, and they wanted war with Iraq at all costs. Surely they wouldn't be able to get away with staying in power beyond 2008 without some external circumstances, but if there are no external circumstances, the Bush administration could easily make some. One possibility is that a hurricane destroys Washington D.C. in late 2008, and the federal government decides that setting up a temporary government in another city is more important than electing a new government. Except in affected areas, local elections proceed as normal, but with no federal elections, turnout is at an all-time low. Some state leaders threaten secession, but that's seen as infeasible and, for some, it's political suicide. Eventually, all 50 states go along with it, and federal elections are brought about in 2009 to placate citizens - but there is no place to vote for a President, and no third-party candidates are on the ballot. At the same time, threats of terrorist activity, or perceived terrorist activity, are pervasive in some major cities, and it all comes out against Muslims and members of liberal third parties. Given time, the Constitution is either amended for Bush's purposes or dissolved altogether, the federal government goes along with thhe administration's agenda, and even state governments don't have a prayer against the will of the rest of the country. Under intense pressure, even the most liberal states in the U.S. go against their previously liberal ideals to please the Bush administration. By 2015, homosexuality is criminalized, the death penalty is in full force, wire-tapping is commonplace and accepted, abortion is illegal, and the work week is long and hard with working conditions not a priority. Bush even finds a way to deal with pesky gun-owners - a pseudo-conscription scheme in which those who are skilled with guns are offered money, education, and a better life to become soldiers...whether or not the government intends to honor these promises is another story.

OK, now for Nation Two. This one is also pretty obvious...I refer, of course, to France under Jean-Marie Le Pen. It starts in 2006 with a nationalist mood. Jacques Chirac finishes third in the Presidential voting - Le Pen is second and a socialist is first. Thanks to some more rioting in France, there is anger at immigrants, and the immigrant-hating, racist Le Pen is elected, along with other National Front members. Immigrants, naturally, don't take too kindly to this news, and rioting continues. Le Pen's solution involves cracking down on immigration to the point where France's broders are closed and any immigrants within France are deemed criminals and sentenced to hard labor. Working French citizens watch as their 35-hour work week is lengthened, their lengthy vacations disappear, and by 2015, they work as hard as Americans in similar conditions. By this point, all parties except the National Front are outlawed, Le Pen only has to get re-elected in 2010, and the French military is no longer a punch line. After invading Algeria, they are seen as an angry force that takes what they want and runs with it. No one tries to stop them ilitarily, mainly because they don't want to, but the French also argue the Doctrine of Pre-Emption, since Algeria elected a fundamentalist government again and France saw this as a threat to their anti-immigrant policies.

OK, off to Nation Three. They sound an awful lot like Russia...that's because they are. Russia, led by Vladimir Putin, tries to revise history to argue anything from the idea that the USSR's defeat in the Cold War was due to Glasnost and Perestroika to the ridiculous notion that the Russians actually WON the Cold War. The press has long since been censored, and the Russians have a Muslim group to use as a scapegoat - the Chechens. By this point, Putin feels he doesn't have to impress anyone and flat-out starts rounding up Chechens and throwing them into gulags. Also, Putin starts picking on the Ukraine again, mainly since it needs the resources, and he decides to send in the mobilized Russian milotary to invade the Ukraine when they refused to cooperate with them. Unlike in previous ward, however, the Russians get more up-to-date than some of their neighbors in warfare, since, as the aggressors, they kind of have to. Given time, Putin suspends elections, of course, and starts up a modern version of Pravda as a government press tool. By 2015, the Russians have broken Chechnya, overrun the Ukraine, and are threatening the Middle East just as much as the Americans and French are.

Offhand, the targets of the Axis Powers (named for lack of a better name) is the Middle Eastern and Islamic nations. Russia is after all of its former republics and then some, though they don't seek another invasion of Afghanistan a la 1980. A nuclear Iran might factor in here, as would a nuclear Pakistan, which makes India a wild card. China would enter the war on the side of the Muslim nations if they felt their security threatened, especially by Russia. Japan would likely remain neutral, even if the U.S. tried to prod them into militarizing. In a situation like this, I could even see Israel remaining neutral, as they wouldn't dream of aligning with the Muslim nations but would hardly think much of a dictatorial and overambitious USA; also, the Muslim alliance would have bigger fish to fry than Israel, and in a war for their survival, they would have to behave somewhat rationally.

The biggest question mark is the European Union. They would be without France at this point, so France and Russia would be their main focal point. If the EU mobilized, they could knock France into next week, and with China's assistance, they could probably handle Russia, but assuming they rebuild the defeated nations with something similar to the Marshall Plan, they still have an angry USA to deal with. So it's 2020 and Europe is in shambles while the USA is terrorizing the Muslim world. China wants no part of it, and meanwhile, North Korea has taken to even more desperate measures to try to get attention. By now, they have tested hydrogen bombs, and Kim Jong-chul, son of Kim Jong Il, who died in 2019 of cancer, is looking to make North Korea a power player in the world. He follows in his father's footsteps, and some would say he's batshit crazy. Neither the USA nor the EU wants to deal with North Korea and basically give them what they want. Naturally, Kim learns that the world is happy to appease North Korea, which is taking steps in turning their ongoing conflict with South Korea into another hot war.

OK, for those of you who have stayed with me this far, I have this for you:

If the USA, France, and Russia form a strategic alliance, who stands against them and what provokes them? What of Japan, India, and the possibility of Israel remaining neutral? What will North Korea do to turn attention to them and gain concessions? Can anyone stop a fierce, imperialist USA? What about a defeated and newly internationalist France and Russia? Who uses nukes first? Last? Does the world end? Does anyone even fire a nuke, or do we see a newer, possibly deadlier weapon?

Speculate. Go on, speculate. No sources are necessary; the only source I used was Kim Jong Il's biographical information.


I think that if USA and Russia team up, with the USA's military might and the Russian's large nationalism, seen in places such as Stalingrad in WWII, they will absolutely win, especially if either Britain, India or Cjina teams up with them.
H N Fiddlebottoms VIII
08-02-2006, 04:33
Yes, brilliant! The US, Russia and France will all ally together, nevermind the fact that they hate each other, to take over t3h w0rld!
No, wait, I'm confusing "brilliant" and "completely batshit insane" again. I could go through the long list of reasons that the US is absolutely nothing like Nazi Germany (lack of a treaty of versailles, for one), but I'm lazy and have better things to do (like sell crack to school children).
Good night and good luck.
Posi
08-02-2006, 04:47
What about Canada? Brazil? Chile? Latin America? Cuba? Africa? Venezuela?

I think that the US would either try to take over Cuba, or reppeal the trade embargo so they can make some more money to fund their war.

I think Canada would either change similarly to the US (but nowheres near as much as the US) or start to become more like what is left of the EU (France will be a big loss for the EU).

I think that most of Latin America (perticularly Mexico) will be allied with the US only economically. They will realize that the US economy will need some reinforcement, and Latin America will try to take advantage of that in order to profit from it when the war is over.

Venezuela, I think, will be taken over by the US. All the oil available in Venezuela will be refined and used for the war. This will happen very early in the war. The US govt will probably offer the people of Venezuela some sort of compensation if they can get oil production to xxx barrrels per day. If Venezuela is successful, I see the US living up to its agreement so show their allies will be rewarded for their help (hopefully making them more loyal). The US will brag about paying back Venezuela alot, ALOT.

The other contries I am not too sure about, but they may end up playing significant roles in the war.
Finterland
08-02-2006, 05:12
Naturally, with the World War II parallels, I came upon three nations to be this speculation's Germany, Italy, and Japan, and the three nations actually sort of fit the mold. .


Well, THERE you go. There is no reason on this good earth WHY the next great world conflict would be patterned after those previous.None what so ever.

Here is my prediction.

Israel Israel Israel. It will happen something like this:

After the USA gets tired of pharting around over there, we come home, and all heck breaks loose between contending Arabic factions.

Israel sticks it's zionist nose into the mess, and causes the Arabs to realize they have a common foe much more worthy of their angst than each other, and all attack Israel.

Israel starts to lose and breaks out the nukes, under some BS excuse that they are only defending themselves from the latest halocaust,...and then China gets retaliatory on their axe. No more Israel (sorry folks, but it HAS to be)

Thus forcing the US and China into a stand off.That Korea will do everything in it's power to provoke into a full scale conflict.
Kaneiro
08-02-2006, 05:14
Latin america would be, like the other two World Wars, neutral, it has been turning left-winged whit the time so they will no accept to join a nationalistic right-wing dictatorship, but they wouldn´t join against them because of the economical risk. Maybe as some latin american countries in WWII, like Chile, they would declare war on the axis on the last years of the war.

Sorry for my english it´s not my language
Novoga
08-02-2006, 05:31
I believe the goal is by the end of the 21st Century no dictatorships will exist.
La Habana Cuba
08-02-2006, 05:31
What about Canada? Brazil? Chile? Latin America? Cuba? Africa? Venezuela?

I think that the US would either try to take over Cuba, or reppeal the trade embargo so they can make some more money to fund their war.

I think Canada would either change similarly to the US (but nowheres near as much as the US) or start to become more like what is left of the EU (France will be a big loss for the EU).

I think that most of Latin America (perticularly Mexico) will be allied with the US only economically. They will realize that the US economy will need some reinforcement, and Latin America will try to take advantage of that in order to profit from it when the war is over.

Venezuela, I think, will be taken over by the US. All the oil available in Venezuela will be refined and used for the war. This will happen very early in the war. The US govt will probably offer the people of Venezuela some sort of compensation if they can get oil production to xxx barrrels per day. If Venezuela is successful, I see the US living up to its agreement so show their allies will be rewarded for their help (hopefully making them more loyal). The US will brag about paying back Venezuela alot, ALOT.

The other contries I am not too sure about, but they may end up playing significant roles in the war.

USA embargo on Cuba, what embargo?

Cuba trades with the European Union Nations, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Mexico, Venezuela, China and others.

While Cuba does not sell products to the USA, it buys hundreds of millions of $ Dollars worth of goods from the USA each year on a cash as you buy basis.

The only thing left of the so-called embargo is a lack of American loans and credits and American tourists, while Cuba receives loans and credits from other nations of which it owes billions of $ Dollars worth to those nations.

Over two million tourists visit Cuba each year, mostly Europeans, Canadians, and Latin Americans.

And the Cuban people still have to ask their Cuban American and European overseas living relatives to send them hard currency money, medicine, eyeglasses and even toilet paper, i am not exsagerating, even toilet paper.

A one nation embargo cannot work, but guess what,
trade, tourists and diplomatic relations have not worked either.

It has not changed the ways of the dictatorship government of President dictator Fidel castro for life of Cuba of over 47 years and counting.
Lacadaemon
08-02-2006, 05:36
How's a hurricane going to destroy DC. That's just no plausible. Last I looked most of it was fairly well protected by land and the delmarva pennisula. It's also above sea-level.

Honestly, people should look at a map.
Korrithor
08-02-2006, 06:02
My prediction:

Europe goes into a severe crisis sometime in the first half of the 21st century. Lavish social policies combined with collapsed post-Christian fertility rates of 1.2-1.5 have resulted in increasing expenditure on welfare with a shrinking tax base. Economic depression occurs as emigrants flock to Australia and America to avoid having to pay high taxes supporting Europe's geriatrics. Radical, militant Islamist groups make massive headways due to increasing unemployment.

Around the 2030's-40's Islamist political parties make major gains in European legislatures. This increases tensions between Europe and America.

Speaking of America. Relations with the US and Canada are still chilly (get it? because Canada is cold! Ha! Ah nevermind...). The US still has an economic embargo on Cuba at this time, though the President and the 149-year-old Fidel Castro are in talks to loosen it up. America and China continue their trading relationship, not going to war over Taiwan, which China was clever enough to seize and terrorize during a Democratic administration.

Iran develops a nuclear weapon, despite UN wristslapping, and gives it to a terror group. Islamist revolts have by now overthrown the royal families of Jordan and Saudi Arabia, so the terror group has no trouble getting their nuke on a truck, and coordinating an effort at getting it accross the Isreali border. Tel-Aviv is suicide-nuked.

Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Palestine (which has been a terrorist state since the late-oughts) swarm into Isreal in the confusion and proceed to butcher and pillage. The US sends a force to fend off the aggressors, but European nations (with large minorites of Islamists in their legislatures) decline to help, citing the questionable aims of the "Imperialist Crusaders". Indeed, the main debate in the parliaments of Europe is whether or not to intervene on the side of the Arabs. In the end they decide not to.

The large war of the next century is therefore in Isreal. Isreal and America win, but the country is devastated and never recovers. America bombs the infrastructure of the beligerant Arab nations to nothingness, and Europe suspends economic relations with America. The US then tactically nukes all known Iranian military facilities.
Ice Hockey Players
08-02-2006, 06:02
Yes, brilliant! The US, Russia and France will all ally together, nevermind the fact that they hate each other, to take over t3h w0rld!

Gee whiz, do the words "alliance of convenience" mean anything to you? The U.S. and USSR didn't much care for each other...same for the British and Soviets, but they united to defeat the Nazis and Japanese. For that matter, the Italians and Germans were enemies in World War I but were allies in World War II...and even then, they had their differences. Hitler had to go against a lot of his racist beliefs to invite Japan into the Axis, labeling the Japanese "honorary Aryans" to make them fit into the Nazis' plans. For the Americans, French, and Russians to cooperate isn't that crazy, provided all three become dictatorships.

No, wait, I'm confusing "brilliant" and "completely batshit insane" again. I could go through the long list of reasons that the US is absolutely nothing like Nazi Germany (lack of a treaty of versailles, for one), but I'm lazy and have better things to do (like sell crack to school children).
Good night and good luck.

Treaty of Versailles = OK, you got me, though it may not be necessary.
Hitler's election = election of 2000, as many people though Gore won or that there should have been a revote.
Burning of Reichstag = in this case, a natural disaster, though as I stated, a terrorist attack is just as plausible, even one that the Bush administration helps happen.

The biggest obstacle Bush has is how to become a dictator without the people and everyone around him kicking his ass into jail; that plus he probably doesn't need the headache of armed civilians. This is not a direct parallel, but there are similarities. The only "completely batshit insane" thing in this scenario is North Korea.
Vespertilia
08-02-2006, 17:53
Eu without France would be quite different. There are many possibilities of its development, like becoming a loose common market confederacy instead centralizing itself. It can also mean empowering countries like Britain, Scandinavian ones or those from Central Europe; Germany could as well gain as loose its position. Also, no one would be telling minor ones to be quiet;)

Talking about the possible war fronts, French betrayal'll probably mean fighting on two (duh) fronts, one roughly (that is, maybe several hundreds kilometres here or there, but rougly ;) ) on French borders and the second from Finland through Poland to western Ukraine, with Baltic states taken by Russians.