2008 Pacific States To 1958

  Depends on how you define panic.  Could be anything from a return to Lenin/Stalin type excesses and hunkering down, bitter infighting between assorted groups, an attack on western Europe to try and make use of their strength before 08 technology and knowledge undermines that or goes nuclear.  Suspect you mean one of the last two.

a)  In a largely conventional war in Europe, probably using chemicals but assuming no nukes, then the Soviets are likely to overrun Germany and the Low countries and possibly Italy as well depending on how quickly they can get through Austria and the Alps.  Very likely France as well which would make supplying Italy very difficult and whether the allies could keep them out of Iberia, which would mean an awkward alliance with Franco would be up in the air.  Assuming no one goes  nuke then after a prolonged war the Soviets are driven back and possibly their regime is forced to collapse. - Nearly assumed that their nuclear forces would prevent the allies going into eastern Europe then remembered that they don't have ballistic nukes yet.  By the latter stages of a war they wouldn't have much of an air force either, especially given what the 2008 US could bring to the war given a bit of time.  In short most of Europe gets heavily trashed and a lot of people die.

b)  In the latter just about everybody dies. 

  Agreed it wouldn't be that wise but it might be seen by Moscow as the best option.  While the US is distracted by the PS appearing make a quick grab for W Germany at least then hope/expect that the west would be unwilling to fight a long war to get it back or risk a full scale nuclear exchange.  Given them more resources and a prestige victory before the weight of the PS technology and knowledge comes into play.  Since the PS are 50 years more advanced, plus the knowledge they will bring including the news that the Soviet empire will fall there is going to be a pressure to do something and that could result in something very rash.

  Can't remember if the west was still in tripwire stance at the time, with relatively few forces in central Europe so could be a hell of a risk but would mean they could crush resistance on the ground very quickly.  France isn't a nuclear power yet so they can try and drive into France as well.  Holding pretty much all the continent could look a useful boost.

  Apart from the reaction of their fellow down-timers in the west since nuclear deterrents is still based largely on bombers at this point and I don't think they had any ICBMs yet their plan could fall apart quickly.  Once the western powers start building up air power, especially with the addition of the PSs and the Soviet forces could find their deterrent gone and the allies in a position to start using nukes to force a surrender.

  The only way of influencing it I can see would be a stick and carrot approach -saying that the US, including the PS would accept the Yalta agreement and the division of Europe - although that might be hard for many ib the PS especially to swallow.  Subtly leaving unsaid that if they did do something stupid, like invade western Europe, the gloves would come off.  Of course whether the Americans realise this warning is necessary and whether the Soviets would heed such a message is another factor.

  On the plus side the Soviets are led by Khrushchev, who is somewhat more moderate that his successors in relations with the west.  Plus possibly some information could be passed to him on how he was deposed in 1963 which might lead to a clearing out which keeps the Soviets busy.

  The problem is that the news of the fall of the Soviet Union and spread of democracy to most of eastern Europe while welcome to most people is going to be very destablising and how those in power in the east accept it and what they think they can do to prevent it is difficult to tell.

  Agreed that Deng and others who later led the partial reform of China are likely to be in for a very bad, quite possibly fatal time.  Mao is just starting the so called Great Leap Forward, which was so disastrous that it did briefly loosen his control, until he regained it again with another disaster for China in the cultural revolution.  He did purge Deng at least once and this time could decide to remove him permanently.  Also he might seek to secure his legacy by boosting the position of his wife and other hard liners.

  Of course it could be that some elements, finding out in more detail about how terrible Mao's rule was for China and how much better things became after his fall that you could see attempts to remove him.  However its likely to be Mao and his supporters who will have most access to and control of news from the outside world, including what comes out of the 2008 PS.  Therefore I fear a deeper repression is more likely.

  Well it depends on the actual timing as to whether the GLF has actually started and what happens in China.  I fear that a lot of the OTL post-76 reformers are going to have a much shorter life but it could see Mao displaced or some very bloody infighting even a civil war.  However given Mao and his supporters are likely to have a strong control over what the rest of the population in China hears I suspect he will come out on top.  Especially since he is already the centre of a personality cult, if not possibly as much as later.

  There's still an hope, especially if as a result the situation in China in his final years is even worse causing serious problems and a reaction.  Plus I'm working on what is the most probable result here but I could be wrong and another result could occur.