Cold War without Red China

kernals12

Banned
Mao's victory in China was probably the most important event in those early crucial years of the Cold War. Before then, it was a conflict centered solely on Europe. But when China went Communist, the Cold War went global. It also inspired communist movements in Latin America, Africa, and the rest of Asia.

So, if the nationalists win in China, does the Cold War remain mostly an event centered on the Iron Curtain?
 
Aside from the Sino-Soviet border becoming a MAJOR source of tension (Manchurian Missile Crisis, maybe?), the Cold War is fundamentally changed. No Korean War, meaning the idea of fighting proxy conflicts doesn't take hold until much later. On a smaller note, the Korean War created a influx of Korean refugees to the United States, some of whom were married to American GIs, and they started up their own businesses, so in American society, the influence of Asian culture could be somewhat diminished.

But here's the big one. No Vietnam War, resulting from a loss of the First Indochina War. In our timeline, the Viet Minh took sanctuary in the PRC after 1949 and the PRC also gave them supplies such as food (including thousands of tonnes of rice), money, medics and medical aid and supplies, arms and weapons (ranging from artillery guns (24 of such were used at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu) to rifles and machine-guns), ammunition and explosives and other types of military equipment. 2,000 military advisors from the PRC and the Soviet Union trained the Việt Minh. On top of this, the PRC sent two artillery battalions to fight at the siege of Dien Bien Phu on May 6, 1954, with one battalion operating the Soviet Katyusha multiple-rocket launcher systems (MRLS) against French forces besieged at Dien Bien Phu's valley.

From 1950 to 1954, the Chinese government shipped goods, materials, and medicine worth $43 billion (in 2019 dollars) to Vietnam. From 1950 to 1956, the Chinese government had also shipped 155,000 small arms, 58 million rounds of ammunition, 4,630 artillery pieces, 1,080,000 artillery shells, 840,000 hand grenades, 1,400,000 uniforms, 1,200 vehicles, 14,000 tons of food, and 26,000 tons of fuel to Vietnam.

So, as you can see, the PRC effectively became the Viet Minh's primary supporter and supplier, which means if the PRC is butterflied away, then the Soviets have to pick up the slack and give the Viet Minh more material aid than they did in our timeline, but that is going to be next to impossible, since the supplies would have to come through Chinese territory, which is now controlled by an American friendly government.

So, the Viet Minh could lose the war. Ho Chi Minh either goes into hiding or is executed. France reinforces it's grip on Indochina, probably supported by the Americans as per the Truman Doctrine. Without the Vietnam War, Pol Pot never rises in Cambodia, so the Khmer Rouge is butterflied away. Asia is an entirely American-controlled area, aside from Mongolia.

The Soviet Union would be forced to invest more money in it's military at the expense of other essential areas, so it's possible that the Soviet Union could spend itself into oblivion, probably collapsing in the '70s or '80s.

But, the Vietnam War had some positives for the United States. The Vietnam War was the last war in which the US used the draft, so without the Vietnam War, the US military could still be using the draft system today. Also, aside from a bloody nose, the US also caught what was called 'Vietnam Syndrome' in which the US was extremely hesitant about getting involved in a war overseas unless a victory is quick and inexpensive. This 'syndrome' went away after the Gulf War, but had it never existed in the first place, the US would be involving itself militarily in other countries during the '70s and '80s.
 
South East Asia remains non-communist monarchies due to a lack of bases or supplies without a communist China. The Korean war doesn't happen due to threat from China or the Soviets decide for neutral Korea.
 
Sino-Soviet split aside, I think having a big nation like the PRC in the communist bloc added to its credibility as a threat OTL.

Without the PRC, perhaps there’s complacency from the West because they got the USSR “surrounded” from the West through Western Europe and the East through Kuomintang, Japan, and South Korea.
 
So, the Viet Minh could lose the war. Ho Chi Minh either goes into hiding or is executed. France reinforces it's grip on Indochina, probably supported by the Americans as per the Truman Doctrine. Without the Vietnam War, Pol Pot never rises in Cambodia, so the Khmer Rouge is butterflied away. Asia is an entirely American-controlled area, aside from Mongolia.
Seeing as that's among the first of the french colonies to go independant otl, with France able to put down the rebellion, how does that effect decolonization?
 
Non communist china may not be western aligned remember. It may very well play the USSR and the Americans off against each other and try to carve a sphere in asia.
 
With a non-communist China (possibly in tandem with a non-Soviet aligned India), would the Communist bloc have been forced to focus less on white elephant projects like the Stendal Nuclear Power Plant in favour of more affordable and practical infrastructure projects that would help it struggle along a bit longer?
 
Seeing as that's among the first of the french colonies to go independant otl, with France able to put down the rebellion, how does that effect decolonization?

I doubt there would be a war in Algeria, first and foremost. The Viet Minh's victory in the First Indochina War was a rallying cry for other native populations fighting against their colonial overlords. The National Liberation Front was made up of soldiers who had been drafted by the French to fight in Laos and Vietnam, where they mingled with the Viet Minh.

With France winning in Indochina in our timeline, then the Algerians may not be so willing to rise up against the French. Even if they did, they would probably lose, since by the late '50s in our timeline,, the French had control of all metropolitan locations and the National Liberation Front had been mostly driven under ground.

But here's the kicker. During the Algerian War, the French Fourth Republic was very unstable. Many people in the military feared that the French government would order a Indochina-style pull-out and sacrifice French honour for the sake of political expediency, so they launched an attempted coup against the government in May 1958. Long story short, it resulted in the rise of the Fifth Republic and the end of the war in Algeria with Algerian independence, despite the fact that the French had essentially won the conflict by 1959.

So France's control of Algeria depends on whether or not the Fourth Republic can stabilize itself enough for the French to completely crush the Algerian independence movement. With a French victory in Indochina, then maybe the Republic can hold itself together, but that's a bit of a unknown.
 
A lot of what Nathan said is true though I do wonder if this does mean the domino theory is discredited and therfore not as much action is taken. The US would still get involved in affairs, but sees it doesn’t have to. Perhaps this causes them to back off in other places
 
A lot of what Nathan said is true though I do wonder if this does mean the domino theory is discredited and therfore not as much action is taken. The US would still get involved in affairs, but sees it doesn’t have to. Perhaps this causes them to back off in other places

The domino theory was first proposed by Eisenhower a month before the fall of Dien Biuen Phu. His speech discussed the significance of Vietnam to the foreign policy of the United States. During the speech, he said
“You have broader considerations that might follow what you would call the ‘falling domino’ principle.” Eisenhower expanded on this thought, explaining, “You have a row of dominoes set up, you knock over the first one, and what will happen to the last one is a certainty that it will go over very quickly.” This would lead to disintegration in Southeast Asia, with the “loss of Indochina, of Burma, of Thailand, of the Peninsula, and Indonesia following.”

Had France won in Indochina, there is a slight chance Eisenhower would never have made that speech. I'm sure someone else would've (After all, Churchill came up with the concept of the 'Iron Curtain'), but had this concept never been put forward, then the US would've taken a relaxed approach to foreign policy when it comes to Asia.
 
The domino theory was first proposed by Eisenhower a month before the fall of Dien Biuen Phu. His speech discussed the significance of Vietnam to the foreign policy of the United States. During the speech, he said

Had France won in Indochina, there is a slight chance Eisenhower would never have made that speech. I'm sure someone else would've (After all, Churchill came up with the concept of the 'Iron Curtain'), but had this concept never been put forward, then the US would've taken a relaxed approach to foreign policy when it comes to Asia.

Also maybe the US would not be as batshit crazy as they were to Latin America >.<
 
Also maybe the US would not be as batshit crazy as they were to Latin America >.<

Oh dear God, yes. I'm not saying Latin America would be squeaky clean, but it would look a hell of a lot better. No Chavez in Venezuela, no military regime in Brazil, no Pinochet in Chile, etc. If Latin America was stabilized, then there would be little to no mass migrations of people trying to seek refuge in the United States.
 
Another butterfly is that North Korea may collapse and be annexed peacefully when the USSR collapses. Without Soviet and Chinese aid, combined by the fact that North Korea is now surrounded by hostile nations, the regime might collapse on itself. In OTL, North Korea went through the worst famine in recent memory and had a complete economic meltdown. A US leaning China might tip the balance and pressure the nation to accept reunification like Germany.
 
Would the USSR be risking major border clashes with the KMT China if the US signaled strong support via continuous supply of arms and aid?

Hell with the USSR encircled i can see their hostile posture diminish as any major war that erupts means they'll get gangraped on all sides by the West and China/Japan. Nukes mean they can defend their own sovereignty but offensive action with such a wide border to defend is suicide. A resurgent China im sure would love to get back their old Qing era lands and swipe everything east of Lake Baikal in the process.

I can totally see this chastised USSR decide to make nice with the West and overall tensions going down as a result. Might end up a much better world as no arms races and Cold War shenanigans screwing everything up.
 
Are we going with KMT control of all of China or does this scenario allow for a PRC-in-Manchuria as a "reverse Taiwan"?
 
Two words: Massive butterflies. Without the PRC's support, France could easily win in Algeria and Vietnam. Both North Korea and the Khmer Rouge were wiped out of existence. Eastern Europe and the Middle East would become the main hotspots of the Cold War instead of Asia and South America.
 
Top