Page 1 of 1 [ 3 posts ] 


Joined: 2 Aug 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 723
Location: Kent, UK

23 Aug 2022, 12:37 pm

I've read about how in World War 2, Nazi Germany and the Japanese Empire had ''puppet'' states in countries they occupied like Vichy France and Manchukuo in Manchuria, China. I have come across other names to describe states that are subordinate to another powerful state such as a client state, a satellite state, or a vassal state. I don't want to seem like an idiot but I seem to struggle to understand what the difference is with some of these descriptions.


User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,756
Location: Outter Quadrant

23 Aug 2022, 1:12 pm

Well I don’t think there is much difference except the degree of Autonomy other countries or States are allowed.
Brings to mind the late USSR , and it’s subordinate countries . Or maybe let’s think for a moment that the UN is a USA creation . And all it’s members . No.. no. Not never . Not the USA.Geez , I wonder if after we have supported the Ukraine with enough money to buy the entire country prior to the War ,imho. If their leader whom we helped install a few years ago. Will feel beholden to the USA . And of course WE Will help rebuild the country , all of this fully funded by the US taxpayer. For a Country whose leader wears T shirts to most every press Breifing I have seen.Oddly enough this country still has its own starving children . For this reason or the other.
At least this is what my media here in the Midwestern USA broadcasts between Free TV shows.

Diagnosed hfa
Loves velcro,
where ever you go ,there you are


User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 30,738
Location: temperate zone

23 Aug 2022, 1:14 pm

The distinctions are made confusing on purpose for propaganda reasons.

But ideally a nation with a government freely inviting a greater power in to solve some problem would be a "client state" of that power. But in practice can be the judge if there is a real difference..

South Vietnam, Afghanistan (after 9-11 but pre Biden), and post Saddam Iraq, could all be described as "client states" of the US. Because in theory they all were free acting allies of the US inviting the US and its military in.

But as Jakki said...the US ...ofcourse would NEVER have "satellite countries". Lol!

But a country with a native ruler - that was handpicked by the foreign power- to run that country so that country can actually be dominated by the power- would be "puppet government". Quisling was a puppet of Nazi Germany to run Nazi occupied Norway. Marshal Petain was the equivalent for the southern part of France (the north was directly ruled by Nazi Germany, the south had the quasi independent but Nazi backed Vichy government).

All of postwar Eastern Europe (the Iron Curtain countries) were "satellites" of the Soviet Union because they all had puppet governments (east germany, poland, Hungary, etc). But the Soviets would NEVER actually refer to these nations as their "satellites", but as "our allies". Like I said - the distinctions are made purposely muddy for propaganda.

The ancient Persians conquered a huge swath of the ancient world. And they started the practice of appointing local yokels as their puppet rulers of the conquered nations - and called these "satraps". Hence the modern term "satrapy" for the practice of appointing "quislings" (after the aforementioned Norwejian) as your "stooges" to run conquered countries.