How could Central Asia become majority Slavic(atleast 80%) by 1900? Central Asia defined as present day Ural District Russia, Siberia District Russia, Kazakstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan.
Last edited:
AHC Slavic Central Asia
- Thread starter Hvalrossen
- Start date
TruthfulPanda
Gone Fishin'
I can imagine the northern part of that area becoming Slavic - simply have Russia start the conquest of the steppe in late XVIth century - but not the south.
Kazakhstan can have a Slavic majority pretty easily. That was the case in OTL til the Kazakh birth rate caught up with the Russians.
Kyrgyzstan is a little harder. Maybe a plurality of Slavs is possible. Turkmenistan could have its Caspian coast with a Slavic majority due to immigration.
The rest is harder because you have a desert in the way between north central Asia and the habitable southern part. I doubt anyone would want to make the trip before 1900. Of course Russia might not be giving these "immigrants" a choice where they go. A Katorga type system being set up in central Asia would be your best bet. That means that its more likely Poles and other minorities of the Empire that will be sent first and if they start founding successful towns and villages, other settlers might begin trickling in.
Kyrgyzstan is a little harder. Maybe a plurality of Slavs is possible. Turkmenistan could have its Caspian coast with a Slavic majority due to immigration.
The rest is harder because you have a desert in the way between north central Asia and the habitable southern part. I doubt anyone would want to make the trip before 1900. Of course Russia might not be giving these "immigrants" a choice where they go. A Katorga type system being set up in central Asia would be your best bet. That means that its more likely Poles and other minorities of the Empire that will be sent first and if they start founding successful towns and villages, other settlers might begin trickling in.
About the only way i can see more than one third of Turkestan becoming Slavic is with a post-1900 PoD -- have the Nazi Germans win WW2, annex Russia west of the Urals and predictably continue with their atrocities, and a massive wave of Slavic refugees will be flooding the Central Asian states, which, at the time and context, would seem more attractive than barren Siberia. But that's after 1900.
Before 1900, i could see Slavic governors and satraps estabilishing domain over Central Asia, but about the only region suitable for Slavic settlement would be Kazakhstan and the major urban centers, i'm afraid. Russian influence over Afghanistan, in particular, only began to really filter through at the time of the Communist regime. A very early PoD is needed, thus.
Before 1900, i could see Slavic governors and satraps estabilishing domain over Central Asia, but about the only region suitable for Slavic settlement would be Kazakhstan and the major urban centers, i'm afraid. Russian influence over Afghanistan, in particular, only began to really filter through at the time of the Communist regime. A very early PoD is needed, thus.
Last edited:
Marc
Donor
First, Where would you go with this scenario? And why, pray tell.
Second, short of genocide it is rather hard to imagine that many ethnic Slavs actually successfully settling in large enough numbers, for enough centuries, to become 80%(!) of the population. While total numbers fluctuated, from my reading, it was hardly trivial. and until the Russians established direct rule - you'd probably be looking at religious massacre after economic massacre, on both sides.
Second, short of genocide it is rather hard to imagine that many ethnic Slavs actually successfully settling in large enough numbers, for enough centuries, to become 80%(!) of the population. While total numbers fluctuated, from my reading, it was hardly trivial. and until the Russians established direct rule - you'd probably be looking at religious massacre after economic massacre, on both sides.
The thing is, Uzbekistan is big, it's got a third of the population of Russia, and it would be very hard to resettle that many people. And Tajikistan (and I think Turkmenistan) just don't have enough going on to encourage either the Russian government or Russians to move there. So it's kinda complicated.
Uzbekistan is huge and the most populous Central Asian state but it only has around one-fifth of Russia's population.
In my opinion, it is really hard to make all of Central Asia 80%+ Slavic without the government deliberately moving people and participating in genocide. Kazakhstan, as previously stated, is extremely easy to get a majority Russia but even then 80%+ seems to be pushing it without Russia heavily encouraging migration to the region. The only way I see Central Asia as a whole gaining Russia pluralities or majorities is with an early POD. For example, the Khiva Expedition in 1717 is successful and results in an early Russian foothold in Central Asia which snowballs into early Russian conquest of Central Asia. More Russians there earlier combined with discriminatory policies and tribal warfare can get you to the point where the Russians are the majority ethnic group in the region but no where near 80%.
TruthfulPanda
Gone Fishin'
Uzbekistan's population is is mostly along the Amu. When expanding irrigation bring in Slavic settlers?
Some possibilities/factors that can facilitate ethnic shift without being fullscale murder.
- Lower Mortality Rates
- Higher Fertility Rates
- Higher Child Survival Rates
Maybe we could see a Cossakisation of Central Asia similar to the earlier Turkification?
The Poles are Slavic while not Russian. Perhaps the Poles could be assimilated into Russian Slavdom? Then some(likely a majority) of the intermarried couples will become orthodox while a minority will be catholic. That way you get a Russian catholic church.
There are quite a few people with Polish ancestry that are still living in Siberia even today.
I wonder if a more open and liberal Tsarist Russia would not be a way to get there. For most of its history, Russia was a very localized society, with serfs tied to the land, and regulated by internal passports even after emancipation. If Russia, from the eighteenth century onward, were more open (perhaps abolishing serfdom much sooner), one might get accelerated settlement of southern Siberia, a larger and wealthier population, and fewer insurrections by Poles. This could drive settlement of Central Asia without the need for forced settlement (as was done from Peter to Stalin). Greater wealth would enable more investment, creating a settlement pattern more like that of the US.
Mind you, a more liberal Russia does not mean a more humanitarian one. They could be just as brutal to the Turkic peoples as IOTL.
Mind you, a more liberal Russia does not mean a more humanitarian one. They could be just as brutal to the Turkic peoples as IOTL.
Considering you had Siberia and the Ural regions it shouldn't be that hard, just have earlier conquest of the Steppes(maybe a century earlier by have Russia being stronger in the late 16th and early 17th century), earlier industrialization and railway, earlier abolition of serfdom and then heavy support for settlements in the region.
Also take in mind that Russia was more affected by wars and famines OTL than Uzbekistan. Uzbekistan also started the demographic transition later than Russia. This means that historically the population of Uzbekistan has been smaller than a fifth of Russia's. Russia could also call upon other East Slavs(Ukrainians, Belarusians) to settle.
How could the Khiva expedition succeed?
Here is a graph showing the progression of TFRs in the area of former Soviet Union.
Perhaps a different pattern of development more focused on Central Asia in addition to migration from Slavic area of Soviet Union could make Central Asia much more Slavic than in OTL?
Perhaps a different pattern of development more focused on Central Asia in addition to migration from Slavic area of Soviet Union could make Central Asia much more Slavic than in OTL?