What if the Nationalists had won the Chinese Civil War? - Page 3




 
--
 
April 28th, 2010  
RollingWave
 
There is too much assumption that must go into this, the Nationalist lost due to huge and complex reasons that is deeply tied to how they came to be in the first place, it was hardly just the case of CCP army flat out beating the KMT army on even terms, if they overcame the CCP at that particular point in time something must have changed dramatically.


But if we look pass that, and purely in terms of possible geo politics implications...

Taiwan wouldn't be seperated, because it was given back to the KMT in the first place, and was really the one place the CCP couldn't touch (seriously) to begin with.

North Korea probably won't exist, and the Vietnam war probably would have not happened in the same matter, in both war efforts the logistical backing from China was abosalutely essential.

as for Tibet, most likely still part of China though maybe in slightly different circumstances (like the Dalai not going into exile etc), the KMT, and basically every central government that existed after the 1911 essentially consider that they inherit whatever land the Qing dynasty held, unless more modern official treaty declared otherwise.

One possibility is Mongolia, since it officially gone independent during the civil war period with a large large dose of USSR manipulation involved, if the KMT had won they might have made a more serious attempt to retake it.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

With that said, even as a residence of Taiwan (or maybe because I'm a resident of Taiwan), looking at this part of history , it really offered very very little chance for the KMT to succeed in the civil war, they had made way too many comprimises in their desperate attempt to retake power from the warlords, and was stuck with a completely war shattered country that was very very poor to begin with, the hyper inflation that hit was completely inevitable and they didn't have the tools to do much about it (it hit almost everyone, but China being unstable to begin with made it much worse).

In military terms, they miiiight have done a little better but it was really just stalling the inevitable, in real outcome the KMT was so inflitrated by CCP spies or KMT officers who were simply disillusioned that it was basically like Mao was playing Chang in a RTS game with map hack on.
April 30th, 2010  
Botak
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jj51o
I believe everyone is overstepping the main point and obstacle of this argument. We are discussing the possibility of a strong Nationalist Chinese Government under KMT, we have to look at specific figures and state of China at the time.

1. Yuan Shikai was the General of the most powerful Chinese army post 1st Sino-Japanese war. His Beiyang army was modernized to Japanese standards and was the only reason for Chinese unification while overthrowing the Qing Dynasty. The Qing Dynasty and KMT all asked for his allegiance, in the end he joined KMT with their promise to make him president. His actions in power was the most important events and changes that led to the downfall of the KMT.

- Yuan's dumb ass broke all KMT policies and reforms, by reinstating his generals as military governors of each province. That in effect created warlords, instead of a unified governmental and military system that belonged to the people. If the military belonged to the KMT's government's senate, than there would not have been so many warlords swearing allegiance to the communists and effect siding their army with them.
- Yuan also saw the rising power and influence of Sun Yat-Sen. Yuan assassinated Sun's followers and bribed a number of their cabinet. This mistake led to the widespread media's depiction of KMT being corrupt and unfit to govern.
- Yuan made himself Emperor. China lost it's crucial baby years of reform after revolution to Yuan's greed. This effect gave more reason for people to discredit KMT as being a suitable government, even after KMT took back China from Yuan's empire.

2. Sun Yat-Sen is regarded as China's George Washington. He was well educated and influential. Studied in Hawaii and earned a degree. Influenced by Franklin, Washington, and Lincoln. His ideas implemented the 'Three Principles of the People' that was similar to Lincolns. Records say that the Nationalists called him a nationalistic, socialists called him a socialistic, and anarchists also favored him.

- If he had not been kicked out by Yuan, then China would have saved any distrust of KMT because of being led by Sun. His ideas were favored by all parties withing communists and nationalists. With majority of Communists, Nationalists and Anarchists all on KMT's side would have turned the 2nd Civil war into a mere small conflict.
- Also, by imitating ideas and policies learnt in America, Sun would have built a strong central government. In times of chaos, 1000 leaders would bring chaos, but 1 leader like Sun could have had the nation pointing one direction. If Yuan had not kicked Sun out, Sun would have had at least 10 more years to implement his policies and build a strong government. The fall of KMT was when Sun died and Chaing Kai-Shek (an able military leader but not politically) took over. The few decades that Sun was alive could have been spent on China instead of being in exile-- KMT would have been strong and unified by upholding Sun's Americanized philosophies and policies.

3. Japanese invasion. Japan was already in Korea and Manchuria during China's revolution. Some of you stated that 2nd Sino-Japanese war might not have happened-- bull, they still would have attacked. Japanese planned take-over of first Korea, then the highly industrialized Manchuria, and rest of China. Manchuria was their platform and base for the attack of China. The reason why China could not successfully fend off their attack was the lack of coordination between armies, industries, and logistics. If KMT fended of the Japanese quickly, they would have saved most of their industry and most importantly their soldiers. KMT lost a total of 3 million men fighting the Japanese. Communists lost about 500 thousand. Imagine if KMT used the 3 million men to fight the communists??

-Coordination was lacking because of Yuan's implementation of regional military powers (warlords). Having warlords was also detrimental to logistics because they did not prepare the rails and logistics to support each other-- they were more concerned about their own survival. If it was centralized and turned warlords into national generals, while having civilians govern themselves, then the fight against the Japanese would have been better coordinated and concentrated.

----------------------CONCLUSION---------------------
In conclusion, if all these mistakes had not happened, then China would have been a greater power and more peaceful than it is today. Yuan's recreation of warlords, Sun's wasted time in exile that should have been spent in reform, and disunity in the fight against Japan are the main factors that needed to have changed; everything else would have fell in place with Sun's policies and projection of KMT's trustworthy and uncorrupted image. Remember, KMT didn't lose the civil war because of military losses... it was because half the army switching sides to the communists.

China would have been larger than it is today, incorporating all of it's provinces like outer-mongolia and tibet. Just like U.S.A., there would be no separating a union.

Korea would be democratic because of China's support of South Korea. There is a good chance that USSR would have attacked China for supporting U.S.A. and South Korea militarily and/or supplies.

Vietnam would have not had the 300,000+ rifles and millions of tons of food and ammunition supplied by China. Vietnam would have lost to the Americans.

Cambodia would be invaded by Vietnam and China to overthrow the Kmher Rouge, instead of just the Vietnamese.

India and China would have probably not have the conflicts, because of mutual similarities in governmental processes gain each other's trust for further negotiations.

Don't forget, U.S.A. and China would have even closer ties because U.S.A. would set up funding and military bases within China's northern boarder that are strategic importance as a defense against U.S.S.R.

Anime would be Chinese. Honda's would be Wong's. And the movie 'The Last Samurai' played by Tom Cruz would instead called 'The Last Shaolin Monk' and Tom Cruz would have to shave his head.

Also, since China boarders Afghanistan, U.S. Led NATO operations in the afghan war would be based mainly in China instead of paying off Saudi Arabia, Iran, and UAE due to the historical close ties in Korean and Vietnam war between U.S. and China. China would have been more closely tied to U.S.A. than any of the current middle eastern nations.


I hope you guys are still alive since this thread is 5 years old. I'd love to hear your opinions and responses.

God Bless America
Quoted for truth. I'm somewhat familiar with 20th Century Chinese history myself, and I can attest to the vast majority of the above.

I'd also heartily agree with a previous post about Taiwan being a modern progressive society having only a little to do with the GMT/KMD of the 1940s/50s. Jiang Jieshi (That's Chiang Kai-Shek to those who prefer the old fashioned Wade Giles spelling to Pinyin) was an *******, and Yuan an ******* before him. If Dr Sun had been allowed to fulfil his vision for China, it'd be a much stronger nation today.

Having said that, Sun was also a firm and devout Nationalist. In such a hypothetical scenario, a modern day China we're hypothetically describing would definitely not be in a one-way friendship with anyone. It'd be very much a case of not asking for respect, they'd demand it, and woe betide the country that pissed in their pocket.

If anything China would probably be a true superpower on truly equal footing with the US. From the American point of view, it may actually be beneficial to America's long term supremacy that China did develop historically the way that it did, rather than have it grow, evolve and develop earlier and more efficiently in terms of culture, social advances and economics.
April 30th, 2010  
RollingWave
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botak
Quoted for truth. I'm somewhat familiar with 20th Century Chinese history myself, and I can attest to the vast majority of the above.

I'd also heartily agree with a previous post about Taiwan being a modern progressive society having only a little to do with the GMT/KMD of the 1940s/50s. Jiang Jieshi (That's Chiang Kai-Shek to those who prefer the old fashioned Wade Giles spelling to Pinyin) was an *******, and Yuan an ******* before him. If Dr Sun had been allowed to fulfil his vision for China, it'd be a much stronger nation today.

Having said that, Sun was also a firm and devout Nationalist. In such a hypothetical scenario, a modern day China we're hypothetically describing would definitely not be in a one-way friendship with anyone. It'd be very much a case of not asking for respect, they'd demand it, and woe betide the country that pissed in their pocket.

If anything China would probably be a true superpower on truly equal footing with the US. From the American point of view, it may actually be beneficial to America's long term supremacy that China did develop historically the way that it did, rather than have it grow, evolve and develop earlier and more efficiently in terms of culture, social advances and economics.
Ehhh, i doubt that, the state of China at that time was the equivalent of a medevial castle, suddenly morphed into the modern times, the adjustments they have to make was made much harder by their impressive castle, which would be hard to just to tear down. and attempts to try to bring in modern furnish without tearing down the castle itself, only make things even worse in the longer run.
--
June 7th, 2010  
chukahleong
 
 
If the Nationalists had won the Chinese Civil War, the China we know today won't be called the People's Republic of China, that's for sure, since communism in China is fully suppressed and its supporters defeated militarily.

But then, a possible aftermath of the victory will be that Stalin, still alive and reigning at that time, won't be happy with the new Chinese government and continue to view Chiang Kai Shek's new nation with increased hostility, which definitely isn't good for the weak China at that time. Who knows? Maybe the Soviets will get aggressive again and stage an invasion of China so as to restore Mao to the president's palace. And maybe the Americans, as the defenders of democracy, will also intervene and will escalate the situation into an all-out war.

If the Nationalists had taken control of China, the North Koreans would be dead, literally, since South Korea and UN troops can happily invade North Korea without any further military reinforcements and reunite both Koreas together.

The Cold War would be dealt a heavy blow then, since China, as a vital nation in Asia, has successfully succumbed itself into democracy. The Soviets would be hugely humiliated.
June 7th, 2010  
fuser
 
 
I am totally amazed by seeing the great hypocrisy in this post....
People are blaming communist china for asia not being as peaceful as it should be...

Rather than thinking that nationalist should have won for more peaceful asia....
I have a better idea.may be USA/NATO should hadn't shown its aggression towards the region.......

Don't invade vietnam... don't need gate at 38th parralel.... Plz don't support khmer rouge.... Don't bomb the hell out of a neutral country...

And the region would have been peaceful rather than with a nationalist china
June 8th, 2010  
fuser
 
 
If nationalist would had won (which was highly unlikely) never would such a high number of people would had got out of poverty.... China would haven't been as powerful as it is today.....
American hegemony and threat would have been a danger to much larger area and population......