America Be Watching With The Popcorn: A Sino-Soviet War TL

I am pretty sure a non-nuclear power attacking a nuclear power head on, even when it is massively distracted is a very very suicidal idea. Basically everyone in Taiwan except Sheck wrote the PRC away after they tested their nuclear weapons.
Also the manner in which the rebellions are going on is very unrealistic.
I would like to point out that until the 1970 Chinese economic liberalization program, East Turkestan was one of the most loyal autonomous region in the PRC, and the ETIM was basically dead for two decades until it became revived in the late 70s and early 80s, before truly gaining traction in the late 90s. The East Turkestan People's Party was basically a few exiles in Moscow raving whilst the actual peoples in East Turkestan ignored them. And the rebellions. Much of the rebel 'controlled' territory is.....desert. Worthless lands where no one lived. The major cities all had several PRC garrisons of over 3,000 or 5,000 or at max 7,000-7,500 men all well equipped. This was done due to Xinjiang's closeness to India incase of a war between the PRC and India.
And the Tibetan uprisings. Tibetan independence is a whole lot more plausible here than the East Turkestan one you have written, however the places you have depicted are over 6500m himalayan mountain ranges. Also, Nepal has multiple places in the north which are tibetan majority and in 1965 told Mao that Nepal would enter any combat against Tibetan separatists. This will be interesting considering Nepal's independence guarantor and great power ally is Great Britain who supplied nepal with modern arms and equipment until the nepalese civil war.
 
I am pretty sure a non-nuclear power attacking a nuclear power head on, even when it is massively distracted is a very very suicidal idea. Basically everyone in Taiwan except Sheck wrote the PRC away after they tested their nuclear weapons.
Also the manner in which the rebellions are going on is very unrealistic.
I would like to point out that until the 1970 Chinese economic liberalization program, East Turkestan was one of the most loyal autonomous region in the PRC, and the ETIM was basically dead for two decades until it became revived in the late 70s and early 80s, before truly gaining traction in the late 90s. The East Turkestan People's Party was basically a few exiles in Moscow raving whilst the actual peoples in East Turkestan ignored them. And the rebellions. Much of the rebel 'controlled' territory is.....desert. Worthless lands where no one lived. The major cities all had several PRC garrisons of over 3,000 or 5,000 or at max 7,000-7,500 men all well equipped. This was done due to Xinjiang's closeness to India incase of a war between the PRC and India.
And the Tibetan uprisings. Tibetan independence is a whole lot more plausible here than the East Turkestan one you have written, however the places you have depicted are over 6500m himalayan mountain ranges. Also, Nepal has multiple places in the north which are tibetan majority and in 1965 told Mao that Nepal would enter any combat against Tibetan separatists. This will be interesting considering Nepal's independence guarantor and great power ally is Great Britain who supplied nepal with modern arms and equipment until the nepalese civil war.
"East Turkestan Rebels" is just Moscow's front, mostly propaganda uses. Rest assured, most of the fighting is 'Russian Volunteers'

As for Nepal and the Tibetan rebels, this isn't a 'david (tibetans) vs goliath (china)' story. This is a 'David vs Goliath but David is backed by an even more powerful Goliath'.
 
"East Turkestan Rebels" is just Moscow's front, mostly propaganda uses. Rest assured, most of the fighting is 'Russian Volunteers'

As for Nepal and the Tibetan rebels, this isn't a 'david (tibetans) vs goliath (china)' story. This is a 'David vs Goliath but David is backed by an even more powerful Goliath'.
Nah, all nepal proposed in the case of a separatist war was that Nepalese troops would enter tibet, defeat the rebels, and put them in handcuffs and go home with the permission of the PRC. If the PRC wants to send more troops to the Soviet front, then they would probably accept the 1965 deal.
 
Since the USSR was invaded, could the Warsaw Pact nations declare war as well? I could imagine expeditionary forces of every Pact nations (like a East German MiG squadron, or a Hungarian tank brigade) :3
 
Would there even be any surviving railway for the Chinese to supply millions of troops against the Soviet Heavy Bomber force.

The Soviets would have Zhukov who has extensive experience in Manchuria against Asiatic opponents.

The Soviets would not attempt massive encirclements like the Germany, it has deep battle doctrine. The extensive number of ww2 veterans of Manchuria would make initial straight up battles one sided for the Soviets.
 
The Warsaw Pact nations will be needed to hold their forces in Europe; NATO is a threat. That said, symbolic deployments--a fighter squadron here, a small troop deployment there might well be in order to show Socialist fraternity.
 
It's worth noting that the Vietnam War is ongoing in 1969 and that's going to do interesting things to the United States' ability to respond to this...
Only the oldest B-52s were involved with SEAsia, plenty of newer ones, and B-58s for a short time, plus all the ICBMs for WWIII
 
Only the oldest B-52s were involved with SEAsia, plenty of newer ones, and B-58s for a short time, plus all the ICBMs for WWIII
That's assuming it escalates to WWIII, which everybody is going to want to avoid. Vietnam sucking up the US' conventional military strength is going to severely limit their options to do something short of full nuclear annihilation.
 
That's assuming it escalates to WWIII, which everybody is going to want to avoid. Vietnam sucking up the US' conventional military strength is going to severely limit their options to do something short of full nuclear annihilation.
Seapower. It will hurt the Russians.
 
RIKKO. The Americans lesson learned.
With what aircraft and weapons? Their tactical inventory is tied up in Vietnam, the strategic bombers aren't getting released, and the MPAs are only able to use lightweight ASW torpedoes with the Harpoon still years out. Bombs, rockets, and Bullpups are not the weapons you take into a maritime strike fight. Maybe the US could call back its retired B-47s, but without standoff weapons they're going to be flying into the teeth of the PVO if they want to actually hurt the Russians.
 
With what aircraft and weapons? Their tactical inventory is tied up in Vietnam, the strategic bombers aren't getting released, and the MPAs are only able to use lightweight ASW torpedoes with the Harpoon still years out. Bombs, rockets, and Bullpups are not the weapons you take into a maritime strike fight. Maybe the US could call back its retired B-47s, but without standoff weapons they're going to be flying into the teeth of the PVO if they want to actually hurt the Russians.
Phantoms. Vladivostok is first. Then work over the Maritime Province. Unsinkable aircraft carrier next door. The PVO is not going to be a problem. The SAMS might be.
 
Didn't the US tried to gain Soviet support for a Pre-emptive strike to cripple Chinese nuclear capability?
 
Top