Why did the United States have a love-hate relationship with the KMT and how could it have been repaired to prevent the rise of the PRC?

What is says on the tin.

What caused this rift between Truman and Chiang?

How could the U.S. and the KMT reset relations so that the ROC would not lose control of the mainland?
 
What is says on the tin.

What caused this rift between Truman and Chiang?

How could the U.S. and the KMT reset relations so that the ROC would not lose control of the mainland?
Kill Joseph Stillwell before that moron runs his loose mouth and gets millions killed in a terribly planned offensive.
 
Didn't US have a large occupation force in China that they chose to pull after only a few months of Japanese surrender, and didn't a lot of captured Japanese troops want to actually continue fighting on the side of the KMT but the US denied it? Maybe leaving the occupation force and allowing the Japanese soldiers to fight could have tipped the scale.
 
Didn't US have a large occupation force in China that they chose to pull after only a few months of Japanese surrender, and didn't a lot of captured Japanese troops want to actually continue fighting on the side of the KMT but the US denied it? Maybe leaving the occupation force and allowing the Japanese soldiers to fight could have tipped the scale.
The U.S. did under Operation Beleaguer from 1945 to 1949. They were mostly there to see the repatration of Japanese citizens to make sure Mao's armies did not cross the Yangtze. However, because the U.S. was still reeling from the Second World War and casualties from the communists were increasing, they ultimate pulled out.

Not sure if some IJA stragglers wanted to join the KMT. I'm sure the KMT denied them. The same thing was different for Indochina and Indonesia where Japanese soldiers and even civilians volunteered to join the Viet Minh and the pro-Indonesian independence fighters to continue their fight against Westerm imperialism. Irony is that the IJA in Vietnam were fighting the VM who they saw as communist enemies only to join them after the surrender.
 

Paradoxer

Banned
The U.S. did under Operation Beleaguer from 1945 to 1949. They were mostly there to see the repatration of Japanese citizens to make sure Mao's armies did not cross the Yangtze. However, because the U.S. was still reeling from the Second World War and casualties from the communists were increasing, they ultimate pulled out.

Not sure if some IJA stragglers wanted to join the KMT. I'm sure the KMT denied them. The same thing was different for Indochina and Indonesia where Japanese soldiers and even civilians volunteered to join the Viet Minh and the pro-Indonesian independence fighters to continue their fight against Westerm imperialism. Irony is that the IJA in Vietnam were fighting the VM who they saw as communist enemies only to join them after the surrender.
If US demands the Europeans to promise independence and pull out of Asia that might do a lot to win Chinese and asian support in general.

It will piss them off greatly but after war the US especially as Marshall Plan aid comes in to repair war torn Europe have them by balls economically. In movement this might seem unwise given circumstances and “legacy” of European power(even some Americans if not good bit recognized their time in sun was done). But this benefits US greatly and ironically Europeans too especially if US promise to stay out of Africa(they let Europeans keep that or at least longer if they concede in Asia).

ho Chi Minh was originally nationalist that came to Americans for support for his cause. If US demands Europeans immediately at least set up dominions in places like Indonesia or Indochina they cut reconstruction aid to Europe. The dominions eventually have referendums on their status and government to decide how to move forward.

If Americans make it more clear like Soviets did they are not “ancien regime” or imperial colonial power like Europeans but more of economic hegemony of superpower that aren’t just going to cater to Europeans then many Asians become less open to communism or Soviets or Mao.
 

marathag

Banned
ho Chi Minh was originally nationalist that came to Americans for support for his cause
He was a Communist first, and used the Nationalism argument to get as many Vietnamese under his Red banner, and willing to kill multitudes of Vietnamese civilians who didn't see things his way.
Look up his 'Land Reform'
 

Paradoxer

Banned
He was a Communist first, and used the Nationalism argument to get as many Vietnamese under his Red banner, and willing to kill multitudes of Vietnamese civilians who didn't see things his way.
Look up his 'Land Reform'
Him coming to US for aid first always made me think he wasn’t too attached to socialism label outside of general anti colonialism and “screw imperialism” found and often promoted within it.

If US backs him I see South Korea dictatorship during early decades. Best case they develop like South Korea did. Worse they end up like Asian version of banana republic or Latin America level
 

marathag

Banned
Him coming to US for aid first always made me think he wasn’t too attached to socialism label outside of general anti colonialism and “screw imperialism” found and often promoted within it.
But he was. Read on the time he spent in the USSR, and then how the North was run till his death
 
Him coming to US for aid first always made me think he wasn’t too attached to socialism label outside of general anti colonialism and “screw imperialism” found and often promoted within it.
He was a communist since the 1920s and even fought alongside the CCP during Chinese civil war .
 

Paradoxer

Banned
But he was. Read on the time he spent in the USSR, and then how the North was run till his death
My point is more so if Americans are at least more vocal about anti colonialism stance towards Europeans in Asia(more so Far East) the more possibilities they have for building local support bases/fractions and give legitimacy to whoever they fund.

The US does not always need to send direct aid outside of navy and Air Force.
 
He was a Communist first, and used the Nationalism argument to get as many Vietnamese under his Red banner, and willing to kill multitudes of Vietnamese civilians who didn't see things his way.
Look up his 'Land Reform'
Most of the death from land reform was lynching from ordinary Vietnamese peasants - decades of poverty, famine and basically anti-landlord altitudes lead to unfair deaths for many landlords. Viet Minh would prefer them reduced to a peasant - after all landlords were often literate.
 
Him coming to US for aid first always made me think he wasn’t too attached to socialism label outside of general anti colonialism and “screw imperialism” found and often promoted within it.
It was a marriage of convenience. Ho needed guns and advisors, the OSS needed a new source of HUMINT after the Japanese did away with the Vichy government (which was heavily infiltrated by Free French agents). That's about the extent of the "alliance".
 
He was right in that the KMT was utterly corrupt, feckless, with weak legitimacy, and they were oppressive to their own people to boot.
Looking at other US allies, at least he could handle the communists.
Plus the moron lost allied troopsincluding some of the best KMT troops
and the fact the KMT survived in Taiwan suggests they could actually rule
 
Their rule in Taiwan was at the cost of 140,000 Taiwanese in jail, 3-4,000 executed, 38 years of martial law, and the worst riot according to the Guinness Book of World Records.
 

marathag

Banned
Most of the death from land reform was lynching from ordinary Vietnamese peasants - decades of poverty, famine and basically anti-landlord altitudes lead to unfair deaths for many landlords. Viet Minh would prefer them reduced to a peasant - after all landlords were often literate.
It wasn't the base that led to the excesses that the Party itself later regretted, but top down.
Local officials had to make quotas that were set far above their level
 
The US didn't like the KMT that much because despite extensive US support they weren't all that great of a fighting force, due to heavy corruption.

From what I remember Chang Ching-Kuo tried to do some anti-corruption efforts but it was just too much.

Chiang Kai Shek was a warlord ruler of warlords, his subordinates sold their rifles, sold heroin, and were more focused on the communists (at first) than the Japanese.

On paper, the chinese army in 1945 was very formidable.

It had millions of men deployed (true), millions of combat veterans (true), and had fought a great power to a standstill (true).

It's army was also made up mostly of poorly paid conscripts who were given little training, and non standardized equipment due to the government trying to scrounge together whatever it could get.

The army was exhausted from 8 years of constant fighting, and the corruption that had been endemic to the KMT had metastasized in the form of Chiang declaring martial law and permanently seizing executive power.

He had no commitment to democracy (not unusual for a nominally democratic US ally), but was not capable of holding together his country through an iron will, such as stalin had.

And there weren't any alternatives to Chiang, as the left wing of the KMT had defected to japan and treated accordingly after the war (read:shot).

The reds had meanwhile managed to keep their forces in tact through the war, and cracked down on corruption and drug trafficking (by murdering drug dealers and burning opium dens with their customers still inside, and seizing the means of production.). They acquired literals tons of military equipment left by the japanese, and faced a demoralized KMT that had no chance of resisting.

And sure enough, the CCP cut through the KMT like a knife through butter.
 
Top