Quebec Referendum

[Benjamin]

Given that both versions of T2K were written prior to Oct. 1995, I was wondering something.

What if in October of 1995, given that the economic situation in the t2K universe seems to have been a bit worse than that in our own universe, Quebec had voted for independence with a 50.6% "yes" and 49.4% "no" result. Also remember that the Sino-Soviet War had been going on for about two and a half months already. This too may have contributed to a nervous feeling in Quebec that would push them away from pro-NATO Canada. So by the end of 1995 Canada is falling apart as global tension rises. I could see France making all to provocative announcements recognizing Quebec sovereignty and thus angering Canada and by proxy the US and UK. This in turn could be the issue that sparks the final collapse of NATO as France sides with Quebec but the US prevents (at least until the nuclear exchange in late 1997) France from sending material aid to Quebec.

This could also explain why canon, the NATO Vehicle Guide, gave Canada such a wimpy contribution to the war effort in Europe. What do you guys think?

Thanks
Benjamin

As an aside... my T2K turned directly into a 2300AD game by way of some Morrow Project like cryo-sleep technology. I was never happy with the way that Canada, and a few other countries, was handled in 2300AD. The US had three different players in the old Great Game (MilGov, CivGov and New America) while Canada was reformed automatically and had one player. What happened to Quebec? And the Western Provinces? And the Northern Natives? All of these groups were de facto independent by 2000. In my personal game I had Quebec part of the French Empire, Newfoundland Island part of the UK (kind of replacing Ireland which had united) and everything else part of the US. The Northern Inuit lands had autonomy within the US as did several other Native areas.

[waiting4something]

I like your twist. ;) I always wondered, what if Quebec was more loyal to France than England.

[Adm.Lee]

And, what if, after 2000, France came to Quebec and made them a reconstruction offer they couldn't refuse?

[Webstral]

I like the idea. I like it a lot.

Webstral

[HorseSoldier]

I can't see France playing brinksmanship with NATO over the issue of Quebec in 1995 for fear of massive backlash from the entire Western world. When you're hunkered down watching a gunfight down the street and wondering if you're going to get into it, no one likes the guy who thinks its cute to toss lit firecrackers.

I can see them helping out Quebec with reconstruction in 2000. (And share the question on why Canada, and various other countries, started the 2300AD Great Game with unified governments when they certainly did not have them in the Twilight 2000 universe.)


This could also explain why canon, the NATO Vehicle Guide, gave Canada such a wimpy contribution to the war effort in Europe. What do you guys think?

Canada's army isn't very large, and their reserves aren't maintained for quick mobilization. Supplying battle casualty replacements to the two brigades in contact in Europe (personnel and vehicles) and working to flesh out their cadre sized reserves to surely slows them down getting more troops to Europe. And I don't think Canada had war stores even in the 1980s to generate another mechanized brigade, at least not the tanks to do it.

(Lack of tanks makes utility in Central Europe questionable, but might make them very appealing in Korea . . . and Canadian troops equipment is similar enough they could piggy back a lot of stuff off US logistics if a two front war exceeds available sea/air lift.)

Anyway, my guess would be that even if they had some guys on the other side of the Pacific, they were mostly just getting their reserves really ready to go at a D+180 kind of time frame, right about the time Soviet heavy forces start landing in Alaska. While the GDW take on the war in AK is kind of incomprehensible (involving, apparently, a cross Strait landing in Nome and then a forced march across roadless wilderness to try and take Fairbanks????), the Canadians would have been throwing troops at that fire rather than sending guys to Europe, I think.

[Benjamin]

Yes, but the NATO Vehicle Guide V.1 gave the Canadians only the 4th Mech. Brigade in Germany and the Special Service Force in Norway. As this was written prior to the reorganization of 1989 that never got completed, I understand why the proposed 1st Canadian Division is not mentioned. But given that there are at least two full months between the West German invasion of East Germany and the US committing forces to the war, I can't understand why the 5th Brigade (a primarily Quebec brigade) was not sent to Europe as was the plan. Of course if Quebec is acting up this could explain why it was not sent overseas.

As for France's reaction to the Quebec vote, I think once the initial fear of nuclear war is over...say one month after the initiation of hostilities between the Soviets and Chinese, things in the west would calm down a bit. The referendum was held on Oct. 30 so this gives the fear of nuclear war more than enough time to abate. The US though is focused on the war and is sending aid to China, Britain too is focused on Asia (do to fear of damage to Hong Kong) thus giving Germany (we know how that turns out) and France breathing space from their domineering "ally" America. Besides France can always claim they're just supporting the will of the people and with global tensions rising America may be reluctant to piss off an important NATO ally and nuclear power.

The question is what would the American and Canadian responses to a yes vote be? I know from my time in college that my Professor of Canadian and Australian Politics at Penn State, who was from Winnipeg, was tired of the French Canadians and wanted to see them go. This same view was held by my relatives living in Toronto and pretty much all of my Canadian friends in college. (The only one who wanted Quebec to remain part of Canada was dating a girl from Quebec.) Would Canada let Quebec go? What happens to the Cree? What becomes of NAFTA?

Of once the bombs drop its all moot.

Benjamin

[HorseSoldier]

I don't think the fear of nuclear war really diminishes after the first month -- after it doesn't go immediately nuclear, political and military leaders are going to watch those Soviet armored columns creeping down across the map and wonder what the tipping point for the Chinese leadership is as they get increasingly desperate. The major arms shipments to the PRC mentioned in the T2K timeline are probably at least as much about propping up the Chinese government and giving them non-nuclear options as it is about hammering the Soviets (though, obviously, that's nice, too . . .).

I'd question the pay off for France, too. Their general ambition for years has been to play a larger leadership role in Europe. A surprise gang raping of Canada doesn't really do anything to advance that goal, just makes them look like a pariah state even without adding in the tension of the Sino-Soviet War.

Of course that doesn't mean people in French politics wouldn't make statements supporting Quebecois separatists, and doesn't mean that might not sway some voters, even if the official French position is neutral or opposition. Also doesn't mean that in the T2K universe the KGB wouldn't be pumping money into Quebec politics discretely and more directly into fringe groups willing to bomb an occasional symbol of Anglophone oppression. Could be dangerously provocative from the Soviet position as well, but perhaps the cost is deemed worth it -- supporting all those European Marxist terrorist groups in the 1970s was very provocative too, after all.

[Fusilier]

Yes, but the NATO Vehicle Guide V.1 gave the Canadians only the 4th Mech. Brigade in Germany and the Special Service Force in Norway.

I'd say that is because the 5th was withdrawn from central Europe with OP Omega as per the challenge articles related to Canada. And that's all we can maintain in WW3.

We aren't built for much more than that. Thinking we can field more than what is listed already is "gamey" in my opinion.

[Benjamin]

I'd say that is because the 5th was withdrawn from central Europe with OP Omega as per the challenge articles related to Canada. And that's all we can maintain in WW3.

We aren't built for much more than that. Thinking we can field more than what is listed already is "gamey" in my opinion.

Yes, but the NATO Vehicle Guide is set in July 2000, months before OP Omega. And yet it still does not mention the 5th. On the other hand the Challenge magazine article regarding Canada (set in early 2001 IIRC) has a handful of francophone units which are listed as recently returned from Europe. Which of course makes this yet another case where two sources of T2K/2300AD canon material conflict. Long time fans of GDW will note that this happened a lot.

We could reconcile this by saying that the beginning of the Sino-Soviet War (mid-August) put NATO on high alert. Canada, as per pre-war plans, began to deploy elements of the 5th to West Germany. Once the referendum occurred this was halted. Not wanting to pour more fuel on the fire Canada with the insistence of the US and UK kept those reinforcements in Europe instead of returning them to Canada. When the fighting broke out along the IGB these extra battalions, some of which were francophone, were rolled into the 4th Brigade which became vastly over-strength. Once OP Omega rolled around the distinction between anglo and francophone units had been lost and all Canadian units were withdrawn. Unfortunately, the ongoing Canadian Civil War tested loyalties and some of the francophone units deserted to the French backed Quebec government.

How does that sound?

[pmulcahy11b]

We aren't built for much more than that. Thinking we can field more than what is listed already is "gamey" in my opinion.

That's true of all unit strengths listed in T2K canon. For one, I think in general that more vehicles would have survived the war in general, but that's probably just a personal bias, I'll admit. However, the T2K canon unit strengths list only tanks, a few light tanks, and APCs and IFVs. There are a LOT more vehicles in the various divisions and brigades in the world, ranging from jeeps, trucks, and unarmored tracked carriers ATGM vehicles, SAM vehicles, and tank destroyers. There are HORDES of vehicles NOT accounted for in T2K canon unit strengths.

[Dogger]

In my game, it's around mid 2004. By this time Quebec as declared independence (soon after the nukes fell) and has joined the French Republic, hoping to receive economic and reconstruction aid which France has sent a little.

Currently, Quebec houses a French infantry division & Quebecois and French troops are "stabilizing" large areas of the US New England states.

My players are still down in Texas (and Australia...I'll explain how that happen at some other time.;)) so most of what they're hearing is rumors of "French occupation" of New England. I'm kind of setting the stage for a future game arc where Civgov & Milgov may join forces to 'repel' the invaders and thus start down the road to eventual reconciliation.