With any POD post-1900, have an independent Tibetan state survive to the present day.
Also, how would such a state look today?
Also, how would such a state look today?
AHC: Independent Tibet
- Thread starter LostCosmonaut
- Start date
1911, when Xinhai Revolution succeeded and proclaimed ROC, Mongolia and Tibet declared Independence simultaneously.
So Britain and Russia will agree in principal and accept Independence or being under British Crown and Russian Empire respectively.
Then after WW II, Tibet becoming Independent.
I think they will look more like bigger Bhutan.
Why not have an unreformed China fragment into a number of successor states, one of which includes Tibet?
It was unreformed state and did fragment but nominally stayed as one country, which led to unified China under Communists. So if 1911 plays out as OTL I don't see divided China.
E.Ransom
Banned
I don't see how this could realistically be done.
Britain would have to issue some kind of guarantee of independence to Tibet, and China would have to decide to NOT call that bluff. That it would be a bluff, is certain. Britain does not have the ressources post-WW2 to hold on to India, much less face conflict with China, over a territory that has been in China's sphere of influence for centuries.
Ironically, an Axis victory in WW2 might do the trick, as China would be sufficiently weak and fragmented into multiple warring states; that is, those states that weren't Japanese puppets.
Britain would have to issue some kind of guarantee of independence to Tibet, and China would have to decide to NOT call that bluff. That it would be a bluff, is certain. Britain does not have the ressources post-WW2 to hold on to India, much less face conflict with China, over a territory that has been in China's sphere of influence for centuries.
Ironically, an Axis victory in WW2 might do the trick, as China would be sufficiently weak and fragmented into multiple warring states; that is, those states that weren't Japanese puppets.
Well if we use the Xinhai Revolution in 1911 as our point of departure then I'd say the UK certainly does have the resources and attitude to add Tibet as part of their unofficial Empire similar to Bhutan, Nepal and Sikkim at that point. Immediately post-WW2 the Chinese are too busy with the Nationalist-Communist civil war and after 1947 India could take over protective duties like they still semi-do with Bhutan I believe. It would certainly make any prospective Sino-Indian wars interesting.
E.Ransom
Banned
Thing is, though: Would India have knowingly antagonized China in that way, for very little gain?
Also: A melting pot as India is, there are still cultural and, importantly, some sort of religious similarities within India. The "Hindu-Muslim" divide is a big enough problem as it is; adding "Tibetan Buddhist" to the mix isn't going to do anyone any favors.
When Britain Empire dissolves Tibet will be independent. IT will be after PRC founded. I don't think PRC would outright conquer them with Indian troops stationing there. There might be some minor border adjustment and small clashes, but not outright annexation of Tibet by Chinese. Tibet will be internationally recognized state and Chinese act will be seen as aggression.
not too likely, or if they would, they wouldn't have time to establish themselves before KMT annexes Tibet.
Could well do, having it become a British protectorate was the only way I could see an independent India continuing the position which in turn is one of the few ways I could think of keeping them independent after the Chinese civil war has finished. Certainly couldn't see them entering into a brand new kind of relationship like that. I don't think either the communists or nationalists would accept an independent Tibet and simply send troops in without someone supporting the Tibetans.
Another alternative is of course that the Russians either conquer the place or make it a protectorate. Now Britain and Russia had agreed to recognise Tibet as a part of China but it was fears of growing Russian influence that triggered the Younghusband expedition, and the Russians certainly never had any problems with expanding into Central Asia of the Far East. Perhaps they decide to try and prise Mongolia and Xinjiang away from China, and from Xinjiang it's a short hop to Tibet.
The Qing Empire included a lot of non-ethnic-Chinese territories that had been "in China's sphere of influence for centuries". Some of them, like East Turkestan and Tibet, would later be annexed or re-absorbed. Mongolia, however, managed to break away and make it stick.
Part of the reason why was because the Soviets managed to incorporate Mongolia was, of course, that they were willing to use violence to achieve their goals. However, it's not as though the Soviets massed large military forces in Mongolia perpetually in order to fend off a Chinese attack. And, after the USSR fell, China has not tried to re-annex the territory. The reason why is simple: Mongolia has been accepted by the world community as a sovereign state. China cannot risk simply invading it.
That's all that is needed for Tibet to stay independent. We don't need the British or the Indians to station troops in Tibet forever and ever. We simply need the British to take an interest in Tibet in the crucial period, when they declared independence in 1912, and keep them there for a decade or so. By the time the British Empire falls apart, Tibet's independence will be a fact recognized around the world. China won't be able to plausibly argue that it is simply wrapping up unfinished business if Tibet has been functioning as an independent nation for decades. In the end, it's not military force than would make Tibet independent. The world simply has to recognize it as such.
I agree with this completely.
katchen
Banned
The British will have to
A. Declare Tibet a Protectorate after the 1906 Younghusband Expedition and permanently station troops in Lhasa during the Raj
B. Build a railroad to Lhasa and points beyond, probably via the Shipki La (the Sultej Valley to the upper Tsangpo and down the Tsangpo fault line to Shigatse and Lhasa with a branch line to the gold deposits at Gartok and another to the tin deposits in the Thangla Mountains.
(Perhaps the Tibet Railroad finally becomes the beginning of the railroad from India to China, much proposed by British colonial planners but never built due to most proposals centering around building through the rainforested mountains of Burma and Yunnan which were too difficult in grade, had too many forested canyons to cross and were too prone to both landslides and malaria. A railroad across Tibet either reaching Sinkiang and the traditional Silk Road at Soche (Yarkand) and proceeding east or crossing the arid permafrost (it IS easier to build railroad on permafrost than highway due to the fact that one is building railroad on crushed rock) to the Huang Ho Valley in Tsinghai) would be far more feasible. The current Lhasa Kaerhmu lLine OTO probably requires too much tunnelling to be built with early 20th Century technology. Then again, perhaps the rails stop at Lhasa. But Lhasa via the Sultej is definitely feasible given the railroads already built in Peru and Bolivia OTL).
C, Great Britain grants Tibet independence in 1947 at the same time India and Pakistan get their independence--before the Communists take power in China. Nationalist China recognizes Tibet as does the USSR, leaving the Communists with a fait accompli and Indian troops guaranteeing Tibet's indepandence, just as it does Nepall's.
It means a very different Tibet that in many ways is just another Vajrayana Buddhist developing nation. And probably one with a big argument with Pakistan over whether Ladakh should be Pakistani or Tibetan.
A. Declare Tibet a Protectorate after the 1906 Younghusband Expedition and permanently station troops in Lhasa during the Raj
B. Build a railroad to Lhasa and points beyond, probably via the Shipki La (the Sultej Valley to the upper Tsangpo and down the Tsangpo fault line to Shigatse and Lhasa with a branch line to the gold deposits at Gartok and another to the tin deposits in the Thangla Mountains.
(Perhaps the Tibet Railroad finally becomes the beginning of the railroad from India to China, much proposed by British colonial planners but never built due to most proposals centering around building through the rainforested mountains of Burma and Yunnan which were too difficult in grade, had too many forested canyons to cross and were too prone to both landslides and malaria. A railroad across Tibet either reaching Sinkiang and the traditional Silk Road at Soche (Yarkand) and proceeding east or crossing the arid permafrost (it IS easier to build railroad on permafrost than highway due to the fact that one is building railroad on crushed rock) to the Huang Ho Valley in Tsinghai) would be far more feasible. The current Lhasa Kaerhmu lLine OTO probably requires too much tunnelling to be built with early 20th Century technology. Then again, perhaps the rails stop at Lhasa. But Lhasa via the Sultej is definitely feasible given the railroads already built in Peru and Bolivia OTL).
C, Great Britain grants Tibet independence in 1947 at the same time India and Pakistan get their independence--before the Communists take power in China. Nationalist China recognizes Tibet as does the USSR, leaving the Communists with a fait accompli and Indian troops guaranteeing Tibet's indepandence, just as it does Nepall's.
It means a very different Tibet that in many ways is just another Vajrayana Buddhist developing nation. And probably one with a big argument with Pakistan over whether Ladakh should be Pakistani or Tibetan.