Is 1949 too late to save China?

Could heavy American intervention after the Pingjin Campaign have stopped the CCP?

The nationalist military was in a state of complete collapse following the Pingjin Campaign and OTL were basically driven before the Communists for the next year without serious resistance. I’m interested if anyone thinks American intervention could have stopped the rout, or if by that point it was too late?
 

kernals12

Banned
Could heavy American intervention after the Pingjin Campaign have stopped the CCP?

The nationalist military was in a state of complete collapse following the Pingjin Campaign and OTL were basically driven before the Communists for the next year without serious resistance. I’m interested if anyone thinks American intervention could have stopped the rout, or if by that point it was too late?
You'd probably start World War 3 like that.
 
You'd probably start World War 3 like that.
Stalin didn’t support Mao’s continued offensives. He actually wanted them to halt at the Yangtze and form a unity government with the Nationalists. Mao ignored him and carryed on. Would Stalin really go to war for Mao?
 

trajen777

Banned
Yes they could have been saved. Massive air interdiction and weapon support. However you needed a break for recovery , could air without ground troops have saved things.
 
Stalin didn’t support Mao’s continued offensives. He actually wanted them to halt at the Yangtze and form a unity government with the Nationalists. Mao ignored him and carryed on. Would Stalin really go to war for Mao?

He will be doing a little jig that the US is essentially going to be feeding full mobalization level resources in an extended slog to prop up the Nationalists and so giving him more or less free reign to do as he pleases elsewhere. In that case, any number of things could flare up into a standoff between the US and USSR
 
What is the required level of intervention? Can massed air support and military equipment do anything, or does it need to be ground troops?
 
What is the required level of intervention? Can massed air support and military equipment do anything, or does it need to be ground troops?

This has been the pipe dream of armchair generals since the Wright brothers first got off the ground, but fundimentally you need loyal and compitent boots on territory in order to hold and police it. The Nationalists need forces who think they can and ought to suppress the Reds and it's worth risking their lives to do so, and convince the population at large that they are more legitiment and provide a life they prefer to what the Reds are offering. The only other option is terror,which only works for short periods unless you "drain the lake" the rebel "fish" swim in by implimenting... concentration tactics at minimum
 
If KMT takes control of all of China by 1950, than world trade will be very different. The most important reason why Japan, South Korea, and the Asian tigers boomed post war is because the US opened up its markets, giving them unprecedented access. This was a way to keep them on side since China became communist. Since China was a key export market for Japan, South Korea, and the Asian tigers, a communist china could potentially force those countries to live and let live in exchange for business opportunities. A KMT China will give the US more control over market access. The US will gradually open up its markets with each GATT negotiation round step by step. KMT China will be an investment destination for Japan, Korea, and the Asian tigers so they do not have to solely rely on the US for exports.

It was too late to save KMT China by 1949. Chiang should have kept attacking the Communist post 1945 until they went to Manchuria. The KMT would then have to consolidate their hold over the rest of China, implement reform, and root out CCP spies within their ranks. Post 1945 will be difficult to save them.
 
The Chinese Civil War had really been decided by 1944, when the Chinese Communists had solidified their political credentials with the Chinese populace through land reform whereas the Nationalists had blown it all through their corruption and incompetence. Subsequent Communist military victory was thus preconditioned by this political victory, essentially turning Clausewitz's old dictum on it's head. Overt American intervention in 1949 on behalf of the nationalist regime, or earlier for that matter, would have just ended up for the US being an early-Vietnam multiplied by China and, as FillyofDelphi pointed out, would overstretch American resources to a degree that compromises their ability to thwart Soviet adventures elsewhere.

It was too late to save KMT China by 1949. Chiang should have kept attacking the Communist post 1945 until they went to Manchuria.

That's precisely what Chiang did. The result was that the armies he sent were cut-off and many of them switched sides.
 
Last edited:

kernals12

Banned
If KMT takes control of all of China by 1950, than world trade will be very different. The most important reason why Japan, South Korea, and the Asian tigers boomed post war is because the US opened up its markets, giving them unprecedented access. This was a way to keep them on side since China became communist. Since China was a key export market for Japan, South Korea, and the Asian tigers, a communist china could potentially force those countries to live and let live in exchange for business opportunities. A KMT China will give the US more control over market access. The US will gradually open up its markets with each GATT negotiation round step by step. KMT China will be an investment destination for Japan, Korea, and the Asian tigers so they do not have to solely rely on the US for exports.

It was too late to save KMT China by 1949. Chiang should have kept attacking the Communist post 1945 until they went to Manchuria. The KMT would then have to consolidate their hold over the rest of China, implement reform, and root out CCP spies within their ranks. Post 1945 will be difficult to save them.
No it's not. It was because they adopted Western technology and practices to raise their productivity to first world levels. All the Toyotas and Samsung phones may be the most visible part of Japan and South Korea's economic rise, but they are a tiny portion of the story.
 
No it's not. It was because they adopted Western technology and practices to raise their productivity to first world levels. All the Toyotas and Samsung phones may be the most visible part of Japan and South Korea's economic rise, but they are a tiny portion of the story.

Japan was industrialized before world war 2. Their post war boom was export based. The US opened up their markets to Japanese exports, the US gave Japan lots of tech transfers, and Japan protected their domestic markets. In addition to that, the majority of Zaibatsus were created before world war 2. Japan also subsidized their exports to the US and used industrial policy to get foreign companies to transfer their technology.

South Korea used an export boom to transition from an agricultural society to a more developed one. Park Chung Hee took advantage of the US market openness while protecting the Korean market. South Korea also had a tech transfer policy and subsidized their exports. South Korea was initially viewed as a lost cause economically. The only US support package they received (money, tech transfers, etc) happened after Park sent troops to Vietnam. The main investor in South Korea in the 60s, 70s, and 80s was Japan. Park Chung Hee went to Japan to mend relations and seek investment....Samsung had its first joint venture with a Japanese firm Sanyo. South Korea, under Park, made Japanese companies share technology. The west was only interested in South Korea from the mid 80s and the US ramped up their investments from 1990 onwards.

Both South Korea and Japan benefited from unprecedented market access from the US. This is why their export strategies worked. Yes, both governments post war used effective domestic policies but access to an open market, esp a big one like the US is the MOST IMPORTANT factor. Without open markets, Japan and South Korea will proceed much more slowly.
 
Last edited:

kernals12

Banned
Japan was industrialized before world war 2. Their post war boom was export based. The US opened up their markets to Japanese exports, the US gave Japan lots of tech transfers, and Japan protected their domestic markets. In addition to that, the majority of Zaibatsus were created before world war 2. Japan also subsidized their exports to the US and used industrial policy to get foreign companies to transfer their technology.

South Korea used an export boom to transition from an agricultural society to a more developed one. Park Chung Hee took advantage of the US market openness while protecting the Korean market. South Korea also had a tech transfer policy and subsidized their exports.

Both South Korea and Japan benefited from unprecedented market access from the US. This is why their export strategies worked. Yes, both governments post war used effective policies but an open market access esp a big one like the US is the MOST IMPORTANT factor. Without open markets, Japan and South Korea post war will proceed much more slowly.
Industrialization is not a binary category, it's a continuum. Japan was less industrialized before World War 2 than the US or Western Europe.
 
Industrialization is not a binary category, it's a continuum. Japan was less industrialized before World War 2 than the US or Western Europe.

Perhaps Japan was less industrialized before world war 2 compared to the West but it was still pretty developed. However, the post war export boom carried them from 1945 to today. That export boom was only possible because of US open markets.
 
It was too late. The KMT were screwed for a while now. You’d have to go back and have the KMT be purged of corruption.

Ironically enough, modern China resembles more Kai-Shek’s vision than Mao’s
 
It was too late. The KMT were screwed for a while now. You’d have to go back and have the KMT be purged of corruption.

Ironically enough, modern China resembles more Kai-Shek’s vision than Mao’s


The KMT did not even control all of China before the war with Japan. They were SLOWLY handling corruption and consolidating control when Japan came in guns blazing. Modern China is closer to what Chiang wanted than Mao. Chiang would not like the censorship of the Great Firewall. He would also run a slightly more liberal economy. Modern China today, economically, reminds me of Taiwan and South Korea in the late 80s.
 
Top