Was it possible for the Chinese Nationalists to win the Chinese Civil War?
- Thread starter AshiusX
- Start date
The Nationalists enjoyed sizable advantages over the Communists in military resources and technology early on in the civil war. The Communists, on the other hand, enjoyed popular support due to being perceived as new, less corrupt, and trendier than the Nationalists.
If the Nationalists had been a much less corrupt organization, and also utilized their superior military forces more effectively, they could very well have crushed the Communists in several decisive battles that would have turned the tide.
If the Nationalists had been a much less corrupt organization, and also utilized their superior military forces more effectively, they could very well have crushed the Communists in several decisive battles that would have turned the tide.
TL;DR version: yes. L;R version: got a book on that issue, will have to dig it out.
Marc A
I think that the Soviets were probably in a much better position and more motivated to supply and support the Communists than the United States was to maintain the Nationalists. I can be proven wrong on this, but that would be one of my guesses.
The big big problem is how do you make the Nationalists a 'much less corrupt' organization. That's kind of a world wide, history wide problem. Once corruption takes deep root, it seems impossible to get rid of, and a corrupt apparatus or organization will preserve its corruption even at the cost of its own survival.
Yes of course, however as several posters have alluded to they require a number of issues to be attended to.
Before 1937 the Nationalists were immensely superior - even with all the deficits. The fight against Japan drew too much of their strength while the weaknesses remained. After 1945 the communists enjoed much more soviuet support and could operate out of the "secure fortress" of Manchuria. But even the if the NAtionalists decide to contain the ommunits instead of attacking them a Nationalistz Mainland China is possible - but only as a 2 nations solution (Manchuria a Communist state)
Not really. Nationalist forces had driven the Communists from the southern half of Manchuria when Marshall demanded Chiang to make a truce with Mao.
Get rid of Chiang early on, and have the KMT be not quite to corrupt and incompetent.
1932 Mukden incident doesn't happen. The junior officers of the Japanese military lead b tojo are arrested by Japanese high command for going against orders and jailed. Ergo no sino Japanese war part 2. Without that war Nationalists will wipe the floor with commis and KMT will retain power. OTL in WWII the nationalists bore the brunt of Japanese attacks and were greatly weakened.
Who replaces Chiang?
As to how not to have the KMT be corrupt and incompetent, that's the tough one.
As I understand it, they basically inherited a Chinese landscape where the state and official or formal channels had more or less broken down. Corruption, cronyism and grasping were basically the bread and butter making things function because the formal institutional order had failed.
So the KMT was essentially born corrupt, and incompetence, or the shortsighted pursuit of corruption and cronyism, local and personal advantage, in substitution of service delivery was part of that original fabric.
I don't know how they were going to shake that off. It's very had to 'reform' your way out of institutional corruption and incompetence. My impression is that it's usually more effective to burn the whole thing down and build a new structure from scratch.
Last edited:
From the looks of the article, what Marshall was saying is that the Communists could vacate those two cities, allowing the Nationalists to take them. Or they could try and hold onto them, and the Nationalists would destroy both the cities and the communists.
I appreciate all the Hate On for Marshall, but I'm not quite sure it was so cut and dried as Marshall handing China over to the commies. It smacks of those 'who lost china' blamefests from the 50's.
Complete victory? IMO, no. All the instances where Chiang was supposedly "on the verge" of wiping out the CCP--and never succeeded in doing so--make me skeptical.
What Chiang *might* have accomplished with US aid would be to hold control of China south of, say, the Great Wall. Instead of sending large numbers of troops to Manchuria, where they became bogged down and overextended, Chiang should (with US aid) have sought to consolidate his rule south of the Great Wall and introduce a broad program of reforms there, as Wedemeyer urged. The huge expense of the Manchurian campaign mandated impossibly high taxes and requisitions from the peasants, and when these failed, the regime resorted to finance by hyperinflation, which made things worse...
What Chiang *might* have accomplished with US aid would be to hold control of China south of, say, the Great Wall. Instead of sending large numbers of troops to Manchuria, where they became bogged down and overextended, Chiang should (with US aid) have sought to consolidate his rule south of the Great Wall and introduce a broad program of reforms there, as Wedemeyer urged. The huge expense of the Manchurian campaign mandated impossibly high taxes and requisitions from the peasants, and when these failed, the regime resorted to finance by hyperinflation, which made things worse...
That seems interesting and insightful. I would be very pleased if you could elaborate on your thoughts.
If Chiang had avoided the Manchurian campaign, could the regime have reformed?
Somewhat difficult to say. What stood in the way of reform was the disorganization and decentralization of Nationalist China. Nationalist China was more a confederation of warlord cliques and a central clique of Chiang's friends and relations. As such it was hard to stop corruption or remove corrupt officials, most of whom controlled armies and might have rebelled to prevent the loss of power. One of the reasons that this ended in Taiwan is that the warlords no longer controlled armies or the loyalties of the population-Chiang did.
RousseauX
Donor
The Soviets actively wrote off the Communists and supported the Nationalists for much of the period.
RousseauX
Donor
Yes, get rid of the Japanese invasion/intervention in China in the 1930s would do it. The KMT was on the verge of winning the civil war in the 1930s before Chiang was forced to cooperate with them against the Japanese by his own lieutenant.