No Korean War/No Chinese Intervention In Korea

[Marius Mazzini]

A POD that has been relatively unexplored in my opinion is that of North Korea not invading the South in the summer of 1950 and/or a quick conclusion of the war in Allied victory without the Chinese intervening (which may involve either the Allies voluntarily stopping themselves at the 38th Parallel or possibly the Chinese simply deciding not to get involved even as the Allies push up to the Yalu).

The biggest effect this would have would be on the domestic political scene-without the firing of MacArthur and the stalemate in Korea, President Harry Truman would be in a stronger political position for 1952 allowing him to run for another term in office. The Republican opponent in this case probably wouldn't be Eisenhower as an apolitical general like him wouldn't want to tarnish such an imagine by running against an incumbent President. In that case would Dewey have been nominated yet another time or would Robert Taft have clinched the nomination? Furthermore could Truman have won another term after 20 years of Democratic rule but otherwise in a stable international situation and a good economy? If Truman had won again, would he have been able to push through more legislation such as his national health insurance scheme?

This probably also has some effects on South Korea and Japan although I'm not sure what.

 

[Richard V]

Bruce Cumings' book on the war is I think the best on the subject. The war didn't start in 1950, rather the violence started from 1945. There have always been cross border fighting between the two since partition and both states were highly unstable. South Korea in particular was carrying out extremely bloody massacres against Communist sympathizers and this was a cause for the North's sense of urgency in carrying out an invasion.

The war was inevitable. If it didn't start in 1950 it'll happen at a later date. South Korea was just as eager to unify the pennisula under its rule.

 

[Maeglin]

Some possibilities from No Korean War:

- Truman runs and wins 1952 against Taft. It doesn't do him much good, as the conservative coalition blocks him in Congress.

- The UK Labour Party avoids a massive internal division, and Bevan never quits cabinet, because there's no need to implement charges for spectacles. Attlee likely wins 1951, and improving economic conditions keep Labour in power until the 1960s. This strangles the Suez Crisis in its cradle, so the UK has a greater international presence. On the other hand, when the Tories (finally) return, it's just in time for Vietnam.

- This screws over New Zealand, by decreasing demand for wool exports.

- M*A*S*H is never made.

 

[MichaelF]

Bruce Cumings' book on the war is I think the best on the subject. The war didn't start in 1950, rather the violence started from 1945. There have always been cross border fighting between the two since partition and both states were highly unstable. South Korea in particular was carrying out extremely bloody massacres against Communist sympathizers and this was a cause for the North's sense of urgency in carrying out an invasion.

The war was inevitable. If it didn't start in 1950 it'll happen at a later date. South Korea was just as eager to unify the pennisula under its rule.

Cummings is an apologist for North Korea. Nobody's disputing Kim and Rhee were both bastards but they needed that support of their patrons to launch a major invasion of the other state. If Stalin had refused (which isn't ASB- Truman denied Rhee the weaponry he needed to conquer the North and Stalin could be cautious on other occasions), there's no Korean War.

 

[Nanwe]

The European economy will take much longer to recover. The Korean War (more than the Marshall Plan) led to the recovery of the European economy and from there til 1973 you had the non-stop growth.

 

[Richard V]

I think Cumings should be given credit for being the only writer willing to explore the motivation of the North beyond the simplistic standard narrative. Though he may be shining the spotlight more on Rhee's pre-war atrocities, it does provide needed context to how much a powder keg it all was before the official starting date for the war.

The Korean War was a civil war not one instigated by outside powers. Like all civil wars you have deep internal tensions that aren't going to be pursaded and managed away. It's a brutal situation where people were willing to take up arms against their own family members. Try imagining how much hate would be required for that to happen in the society you live in. In 1950 Truman and Stalin could thwart a war, but in the longer term they can't prevent it any more than the UNSC could stop any number of civil wars around the world.

 

[Amakan]

The European economy will take much longer to recover. The Korean War (more than the Marshall Plan) led to the recovery of the European economy and from there til 1973 you had the non-stop growth.

[citation needed]

Seriously though. This is the first time I have heard this.

 

[Marius Mazzini]

[citation needed]

Seriously though. This is the first time I have heard this.

I can understand if he means just Japan, but I doubt most of Europe's economies were impacted in anyway by Korea.

 

[Nanwe]

I can understand if he means just Japan, but I doubt most of Europe's economies were impacted in anyway by Korea.

No, and in particular Germany's economy was aided by the Korean War thanks to the global shortage of goods that allowed the European economies to start exporting and providing goods to the world market. The Korean War was really important for the starting phases of the economic miracle of Western Europe of the 50s and 60s.

 

[MichaelF]

I think Cumings should be given credit for being the only writer willing to explore the motivation of the North beyond the simplistic standard narrative. Though he may be shining the spotlight more on Rhee's pre-war atrocities, it does provide needed context to how much a powder keg it all was before the official starting date for the war.

The Korean War was a civil war not one instigated by outside powers. Like all civil wars you have deep internal tensions that aren't going to be pursaded and managed away. It's a brutal situation where people were willing to take up arms against their own family members. Try imagining how much hate would be required for that to happen in the society you live in. In 1950 Truman and Stalin could thwart a war, but in the longer term they can't prevent it any more than the UNSC could stop any number of civil wars around the world.

Yeah, you could say that Kim was motivated in his invasion by Rhee's pre-war atrocities. But you could also say that Rhee was motivated by a fear of Communism that was a result of Stalin's mistreatment of Koreans in the USSR. And so forth. At a certain point that kind of argument gets us nowhere.
The larger point is that the North and the South were dependent on their patrons for permission to attack. If neither the US or the USSR gives permission (which is not ASB as both of them were afraid of being nuked) a full-scale war could have been avoided for the duration of the Cold War, as happened with West Germany and East Germany. And after decades of "peace", nobody wants to upset the status quo.

 

[Usili]

[citation needed]

Seriously though. This is the first time I have heard this.

I forget the page, but its discussed in Postwar: A History of Europe by Tony Judt. I need to find my copy, and I can probably find it for you.

 

[Richard V]

Yeah, you could say that Kim was motivated in his invasion by Rhee's pre-war atrocities. But you could also say that Rhee was motivated by a fear of Communism that was a result of Stalin's mistreatment of Koreans in the USSR. And so forth. At a certain point that kind of argument gets us nowhere.
The larger point is that the North and the South were dependent on their patrons for permission to attack. If neither the US or the USSR gives permission (which is not ASB as both of them were afraid of being nuked) a full-scale war could have been avoided for the duration of the Cold War, as happened with West Germany and East Germany. And after decades of "peace", nobody wants to upset the status quo.

That's why Cuming's work is important for understanding the origins of the war. The Koreas were entirely different from West and East Germany. The Germans were not eager to kill eachother and neither aggitated their patrons for a war of unification. On the contrary the threat of war in Europe was imposed on them. I've said the superpowers had the leverage to stop a Korean war in 1950, but in the long run neither would need permission to carry out their national goals.

The US couldn't prevent Chiang Kai-shek from launching an invasion of north China in 1946, and Stalin couldn't retrain Mao from invading south China. It's hard to conceive of the North Vietnamese giving up using the Vietcong to undermine South Vietnam from within, due to lack of permission from the Communist world. Rhee's obsession with massacring leftist of all stripes is an indication of the kind of war he was expecting, even absent an outbreak of war in 1950.

 

[MerryPrankster]

My high school history textbook theorized that Kim might have actually surprised Stalin by attacking when he did, but the Soviets were sure to support the North once the war was on.

 

[David T]

My high school history textbook theorized that Kim might have actually surprised Stalin by attacking when he did, but the Soviets were sure to support the North once the war was on.

If that's what your high school textbook says, it was probably written a long time ago. The idea that Kim "jumped the gun" has long since been discredited. He constantly bombarded Stalin with requests to let him unify Korea by force, and Stalin finally reluctantly agreed--although significantly he said that Kim would first have to get Mao's agreement (which he did). https://books.google.com/books?id=Re8pJnCXvWoC&pg=PA19

 

[freivolk]

[citation needed]

Seriously though. This is the first time I have heard this.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korea-Boom

The page is only in german, but the Korea Boom was definitly a thing for starting the Wirtschaftswunder. The american economy was forced to partially switch´to war production again, which opened a gap in civilian demand the german Industrie could fill.

I don´t know if no Korea war prevent the eurpean recovery, but it would take surly some more time to take off.

Without Korea no Military NATO-Organisation, no massive rise of the US.miltary Budget from 15 to 60 billions and propably no massive nuclear superiority the USA in the Fifties and early Sixties. Later and different German and Japanese rearment. In the end the West wouldn´t form this massive anti-soviet containment bloc we got in OTL. So in some way with Korea the Soviets created the Monster which would wear them down in the end.

 

[MichaelF]

That's why Cuming's work is important for understanding the origins of the war. The Koreas were entirely different from West and East Germany. The Germans were not eager to kill eachother and neither aggitated their patrons for a war of unification. On the contrary the threat of war in Europe was imposed on them. I've said the superpowers had the leverage to stop a Korean war in 1950, but in the long run neither would need permission to carry out their national goals.

The US couldn't prevent Chiang Kai-shek from launching an invasion of north China in 1946, and Stalin couldn't retrain Mao from invading south China. It's hard to conceive of the North Vietnamese giving up using the Vietcong to undermine South Vietnam from within, due to lack of permission from the Communist world. Rhee's obsession with massacring leftist of all stripes is an indication of the kind of war he was expecting, even absent an outbreak of war in 1950.

But that's the point- the North Koreans invaded PRECISELY because they didn't think a guerilla war would be successful. There's nothing an outside power can do to stop a guerilla war (which is what the conflict in Vietnam was, and what the Chinese Civil War was largely). However, there was never a major conflict between Taiwan and China after 1953 because the guerilla phase of the conflict was over. Would both North Korea and South Korea try to foment guerilla warfare within each other's borders if there was no invasion? Yes. But these attempts would have probably been crushed with relative ease after 1950 and eventually both sides would have given up.

 

[Apollo 20]

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korea-Boom

The page is only in german, but the Korea Boom was definitly a thing for starting the Wirtschaftswunder. The american economy was forced to partially switch´to war production again, which opened a gap in civilian demand the german Industrie could fill.

I don´t know if no Korea war prevent the eurpean recovery, but it would take surly some more time to take off.

Without Korea no Military NATO-Organisation, no massive rise of the US.miltary Budget from 15 to 60 billions and propably no massive nuclear superiority the USA in the Fifties and early Sixties. Later and different German and Japanese rearment. In the end the West wouldn´t form this massive anti-soviet containment bloc we got in OTL. So in some way with Korea the Soviets created the Monster which would wear them down in the end.

Thanks for posting that. I had no idea that the Korean War jump-started the German postwar economy in such a substantial way.

You raise an interesting point with respect to NATO, which was in its infancy when the Korean War broke out and which became a far more overtly military organization during the early 1950s. While I think the existence of a Soviet military and nuclear threat would have resulted in some sort of military alliance, I think you may have a good point about NATO evolving into something a bit different from what it became. An interesting "what-if" is whether these events could prevent West German accession to NATO in 1955.

 

[zeppelinair]

If that's what your high school textbook says, it was probably written a long time ago. The idea that Kim "jumped the gun" has long since been discredited. He constantly bombarded Stalin with requests to let him unify Korea by force, and Stalin finally reluctantly agreed--although significantly he said that Kim would first have to get Mao's agreement (which he did). https://books.google.com/books?id=Re8pJnCXvWoC&pg=PA19

I have also heard that.