AHC: Switch Korean and Vietnam Wars Outcome

This challenge is to switch the outcomes of Korean war and Vietnam war.
Let DPRK won Korean war and annexed entire Korean peninsular, while the Vietnam war ended by ceasefire and South Vietnam still exists to the present day.

Bonus if you make South Vietnam one of the most developing countries in Asia as OTL ROK. Also make DPRK an emerging country like OTL Vietnam.
 
Last edited:
North Korea did almost succeed at the Pusan perimeter. Furthermore during the southward drive, the North Korean forces paused too long after taking Seoul. They could very well have conducted the war better and occupied the south in 1950.

Without an enduring enemy, Communist Korea would likely mellow out much like Vietnam. Kim Il-Sung may not even be able to pass the throne to his son as OTL. Since Vietnam has only twice the per capita GDP of North Korea, getting this unified Korea Vietnam level economics is fairly easy without decades of unneccessary military overspending. They could actually have a better standard of living seeing as North Korea was pretty industrialized during Japanese rule. This was destroyed in the war from American bombing.

A swift conclusion in Korea means China and the US never go to war, and the Sino-Soviet alliance would never be as close. Mao would try to position himself like Tito to benefit from the rivalry between Washington and Moscow. US probably switch recognition to the PRC during Eisenhower's presidency.

The US will still be as determined to stop North Vietnamese infiltration of the south, but with China out of the Soviet camp, US could reach an agreement with China to maintain the status quo in Vietnam in exchange for help against the Soviets. This was in fact Nixon's strategy in OTL to contain Vietnam post US withdraw. China then fought a war with Vietnam from 1979-89. Had this deal been reached in the early 60s there wouldn't have been a Vietnam War as we know it.

Without Chinese assistance, North Vietnam could not prosecute the war. They could not risk an American invasion without promise of Chinese troops, nor could the Soviets send enough supplies by sea alone. South Vietnam's independence is assured. However getting South Vietnam to OTL South Korea's level of economic development is highly unlikely. Vietnam never had the level of education as Korea. The economic level of Thailand would be more reachable.
 
Last edited:
The problem is that if NK wins early (1950) US would get freaked out, even if no US forces are involved. With communist China seen as driving force behind that victory US would try to contain their influence, same as they did with SU. That means US would be more willing to aid French, though not with direct involvment. That could mean either french victory or containment of VM to berable levels. with that you don't get division of Vietnam so so Korea scenario.
 
The problem is that if NK wins early (1950) US would get freaked out, even if no US forces are involved. With communist China seen as driving force behind that victory US would try to contain their influence, same as they did with SU. That means US would be more willing to aid French, though not with direct involvment. That could mean either french victory or containment of VM to berable levels. with that you don't get division of Vietnam so so Korea scenario.

US would more likely see the driving force as Russian than Chinese. But even with greater support for France, Vietnam will still end up being divided with the Chinese supporting Ho Chi Min.
 
US would more likely see the driving force as Russian than Chinese.

Maybe. Though I think at that time there wasn't really a distinction in many minds

But even with greater support for France, Vietnam will still end up being divided with the Chinese supporting Ho Chi Min.

Not neccessary. If aid comes soon enough and enough of it French could defeat VM or at least reduce it to a nuisance.

If OTLish division happens once insurgency start in south US would likely act differently, with less restraint. All-out air assault on North. Without knowing too much of US domestic policy I'd still wager that with victory of communism in Korea and Vietnam against French US politicians would be more hawkish, hence no restraints on military. Once that happens North Vietnam would likely ask for terms, similar to what happend post-Linebacker.
 
Not neccessary. If aid comes soon enough and enough of it French could defeat VM or at least reduce it to a nuisance.

If OTLish division happens once insurgency start in south US would likely act differently, with less restraint. All-out air assault on North. Without knowing too much of US domestic policy I'd still wager that with victory of communism in Korea and Vietnam against French US politicians would be more hawkish, hence no restraints on military. Once that happens North Vietnam would likely ask for terms, similar to what happend post-Linebacker.

No amount of aid was going to save the French. China was prepared to drive the French out of Indochina with it's own troops. It was Ho Chi Minh who declined the offer because he figured that would leave China with too much influence in Vietnam and it was better to fight on with Chinese aid instead of troops.

If US-China relations do not improve by the 1960s, and US decide to retaliate against the Vietnamese insurgency by invading North Vietnam, the Chinese would no doubt respond in the same manner as they did in the Korean War. This scenario is a real possibility since in OTL it was due to the war with China in the Korean War that convinced American planners to avoid invading North Vietnam. We have to keep in mind that before the Korean War the West did not factor China as a serious military challenge.

So the Vietnam War could very well be a hot war fought between China and the US in addition to the guerilla campaign, with the likely result that the war ends in much the same way it did, except there would be a lot more deaths along the way, and once again, China end up in the Soviet camp.

The only problem with this scenario is the assumption that US-China relations would not improve during the Eisenhower years without them beng enemies in the Korean War. With better relations, the Johnson administration would have more options against North Vietnam than OTL.
 
Last edited:
No amount of aid was going to save the French. China was prepared to drive the French out of Indochina with it's own troops. It was Ho Chi Minh who declined the offer because he figured that would leave China with too much influence in Vietnam and it was better to fight on with Chinese aid instead of troops.

I don't know..... We are talking about POD in 1950 which means early 1950s will be very different. In 1950 French achieved some success and put pressure on VM. The problem was following it up due to non-military problems. Some of those could be overcome with US aid. Maybe by this time outright victory was not possible but marginalizing VM or confining them to remoter areas and keeping Delta safe may be possible.

If US-China relations do not improve by the 1960s, and US decide to retaliate against the Vietnamese insurgency by invading North Vietnam, the Chinese would no doubt respond in the same manner as they did in the Korean War. This scenario is a real possibility since in OTL it was due to the war with China in the Korean War that convinced American planners to avoid invading North Vietnam. We have to keep in mind that before the Korean War the West did not factor China as a serious military challenge.

That assumes war goes on as OTL until late 1960s? And if China counter invades it would be a blessing for US. Depending on size of US invasion force, Chinese would be smashed by lots of airpower. Going by standard alt-hist invasion (corps sized force) they could stand their ground while Chinese are pulverized by repeated air attacks.

This would give US a real victory. Chinese would have no Korean experience to draw on and their doctrine would suffer as a result

So the Vietnam War could very well be a hot war fought between China and the US in addition to the guerilla campaign, with the likely result that the war ends in much the same way it did, except there would be a lot more deaths along the way, and once again, China end up in the Soviet camp.

I'd question how effective guerilla war would be. You are not clear if you mean North only (against US invasion force) or including South. South would be cut off from supplies as there would be no means to get them South and would be needed North much more. I guess one could expect Tet-like offensive to draw attention and forces South.

The only problem with this scenario is the assumption that US-China relations would not improve during the Eisenhower years without them beng enemies in the Korean War. With better relations, the Johnson administration would have more options against North Vietnam than OTL.

Why would they improve? Chionese would have little incentive to do it and Us would still see them as communist first. I guess it all depends how Chinese react to destalinization and how fast they do it. Even then it would take time for them to seek common ground with US and US to be responsive.
 
I don't know..... We are talking about POD in 1950 which means early 1950s will be very different. In 1950 French achieved some success and put pressure on VM. The problem was following it up due to non-military problems. Some of those could be overcome with US aid. Maybe by this time outright victory was not possible but marginalizing VM or confining them to remoter areas and keeping Delta safe may be possible.

My point is if the Viet Minh fail to overthrow the French, the Chinese will do it for them. There's no way US aid can keep the French in Indochina. Perhaps the US will send troops to back the French up, but this is not Korea, I'm skeptical US would fight a ground war to preserve the French Empire in Asia. More likely US would support a four state solution to Indochina, much like OTL.

That assumes war goes on as OTL until late 1960s? And if China counter invades it would be a blessing for US. Depending on size of US invasion force, Chinese would be smashed by lots of airpower. Going by standard alt-hist invasion (corps sized force) they could stand their ground while Chinese are pulverized by repeated air attacks.

This would give US a real victory. Chinese would have no Korean experience to draw on and their doctrine would suffer as a result

China had no experience fighting the US in before Korea either, and it managed a stalemate then. By the 1960s China would also be in much better shape for war than 1950. A US invasion of North Vietnam would therefore be neutralized by a Chinese counterinvasion, meanwhile you've still got the guerilla war in South Vietnam.

I'd question how effective guerilla war would be. You are not clear if you mean North only (against US invasion force) or including South. South would be cut off from supplies as there would be no means to get them South and would be needed North much more. I guess one could expect Tet-like offensive to draw attention and forces South.

I mean the hot war would end in stalemate like Korea, but unlike there the VC would continue their guerilla war after the superpowers draw down.

Why would they improve? Chionese would have little incentive to do it and Us would still see them as communist first. I guess it all depends how Chinese react to destalinization and how fast they do it. Even then it would take time for them to seek common ground with US and US to be responsive.

Both sides would have lots of incentive to improve relations. They have a mutual enemy in the Soviet Union. The US saw China as part of a monolithic Communist Bloc in large part due to Chinese intervention in the Korean War. Without that Mao would be much more worried about the Soviets than the Americans.
 
Top