North and South China?

WI Chinag had managed to hold on to his tenous position in Southern China and keep it intact aquiring the island of Taiwan. What would be the effect on history if China was divided on the Yangtze river with the Communists on the North and Nationalist on the SOuth
 
North china much less influential than ever. South China (Nationalist) would still hold a seat on the security council, tipping it anti comunist more. Perhapds china does its own "Korean Miracle" and booms, while North China is much more attached to the soviet union.
 
Maybe, just maybe, a free tibet. Oh and a south china, probably means a longer civil war and after that, more border guarding, so maybe less chinese intervention in the Korean war.
 
Constantinople said:
Anyone!?! Hmm...

I think the problem with a Yangtze boundary its that its more of a central link than a nature separator. I could see a different border point either north or south but think that is possibly the wrong place for a border with modern technology.

Not sure how close Chiang came to winning the civil war as reports differ so much. However something which ends the Pacific war earlier, better management of forces in the civil war or possibly US support could see him secure a position in the south. That would probably markedly intensify the cold war as you would have Russia and the US each supporting their China and it probably not emerging as a 3rd player. Also with the nature of both rulers, Chiang and Mao I suspect at least one of them would fancy a return match and if either 'protector' got drawn in....:eek:

Steve
 
With no land link, the Communists in Vietnam are not going to receive supplies from the Soviet Union and Red China. Am not sure that the French can still win their war against the Viet Cong, but the American might win theirs!!!!!!!!!!!:eek:
 
Well, if my memory isn't playing tricks on me, Stalin wasn't too happy about unified China, Communist or else - so it's possible that after cease-fire between Communists and Kuomintang (sth like Korea from 1953 till today) he will support People Republic of China only to an extent that it would make it survive, but not possible to conquer South... ;)

Oh, 'bout Vietnam - most people doesn't seem to know that Ho Shi Minh was more of a nationalist than comunist and till US started helping French in Indochina was a definite pro-American. So I was thinking - maybe US will not have supported French in Indochina (maybe because Kuomintang was prompting US so) and, subsuquently, we have a pro-American Ho Shi Minh regime in the whole of Vietnam:cool:
 
Michael B said:
With no land link, the Communists in Vietnam are not going to receive supplies from the Soviet Union and Red China. Am not sure that the French can still win their war against the Viet Cong, but the American might win theirs!!!!!!!!!!!:eek:

Well, this could´ve turned really nasty, but imagine no Vietnam war.

Instead you have the China war starting 1969 or something like that. It would be a whole lot worse than Vietnam.
 
Wendell said:
Could the Soviets try to absorb North China?

No, in any way. At best they could annex Manchuria and Liaoning to snatch an access to the Yellow Sea, grant Inner Mongolia to Mongolia proper, and organize "independent" Uighuristan and Tibet as puppets.

In this scenario of divided China it is an interesting hypothesis that of a free, neutral Sichuan - a sort of eastern Switzerland refusing to side with each of the rivals and acting as a buffer. Would it be eternally torn by a simil-Vietnam insurgency or would it prosper?
 

Hendryk

Banned
CCA said:
WI Chinag had managed to hold on to his tenous position in Southern China and keep it intact aquiring the island of Taiwan. What would be the effect on history if China was divided on the Yangtze river with the Communists on the North and Nationalist on the SOuth
The problem is, after the disastrous 1947 Manchurian campaign the dice were cast, and once the Communists started pouring out of their Northern strongholds the bottom fell out for the Nationalists. The last chance for a "divided China" TL was the one suggested by Arthur Waldron in Robert Cowley's collection What If?: no attempt by Chiang to crush Mao's forces in Manchuria, instead settling for a partition of the country. The war in 1948 and 1949 was one long retreat by the Nationalists, and at no point did they manage to hold a position for any significant amount of time until the final evacuation to Taiwan. It has been suggested on this forum that, perhaps, the KMT might--just might--have managed to hold on to Hainan as well as Taiwan, but even that is far from certain.

That's barring outside intervention, of course. In OTL, Taiwan remained out of the Communists' grasp because the Truman administration included the island in the US strategic sphere following the beginning of the Korean War. If the US has a similarly compelling reason to provide direct support to the Nationalists before 1949, Chiang might, with sizeable American military backup, retain control of part of the mainland. But the potential for escalation makes this a high-risk scenario indeed.
 
What if Stalin decided to knock off Mao and replace him with someone more "acceptable"? Would that hamper the Chicoms sufficiently to allow Chiang to turn things around?
 
Here's a map I made for a different TL (notice the shattered Indonesia, etc.) but it did have a north China (communist independent from the Soviet Union), Manchuria and a few others as Soviet puppet states, and an independent South China under the Kuomingtung.

Far East-Pacific-1963.PNG
 
Shadow Knight said:
Here's a map I made for a different TL (notice the shattered Indonesia, etc.) but it did have a north China (communist independent from the Soviet Union), Manchuria and a few others as Soviet puppet states, and an independent South China under the Kuomingtung.
Why is Indonesia divided? Just curious.
 
Gedca said:
Why is Indonesia divided? Just curious.

Well if IIRC the TL right it had to do with the USSR getting less territory in Europe (less satellite states to exploit) and Stalin in response compensated by expanding in Asia (Thus the Soviet puppet state of Manchuria and all of Korea). One of the Soviet plots was to support the large communist surge in Java during the decolonization of the Dutch East Indies. This procipitated in a fracturing of Indonesia. With different parts getting sponsered by the different power blocs.

[edit] A link to the aforementioned TL

Sadly it did not get much attention. :(
 
Fearless Leader said:
What if Stalin decided to knock off Mao and replace him with someone more "acceptable"? Would that hamper the Chicoms sufficiently to allow Chiang to turn things around?
Such a move would make ideological sense. As the Russsian "knew" from their own revolution, you organised the cities for the great leap forward. To eliminate Mao and replace him with a leader who organise an urban revolution would be to advance world Communism.

Victory for the Communists in the north would naturally vindicate the action as if Mao had remained in command the imperialist Nationalists would have controlled all of China and probably invaded the Peoples' Republic of Korea as well.

It would have been another great triumph by Stalin. :D
 
Shadow Knight said:
Well if IIRC the TL right it had to do with the USSR getting less territory in Europe (less satellite states to exploit) and Stalin in response compensated by expanding in Asia (Thus the Soviet puppet state of Manchuria and all of Korea). One of the Soviet plots was to support the large communist surge in Java during the decolonization of the Dutch East Indies. This procipitated in a fracturing of Indonesia. With different parts getting sponsered by the different power blocs.

[edit] A link to the aforementioned TL

Sadly it did not get much attention. :(
Can you explain the United India, and United Indochina?
 
Wendell said:
Can you explain the United India, and United Indochina?

Here I'll just post the part concerning Asia )the link in my post above takes you to the rough draft of the TL which as I said kind of died from lack of interest...

Shadow Knight said:
Part 2: Asia

The Far East

I'm not an expert on the Far East so I might need some help naming some new countries or just help explaining what I had in mind (and of course correcting anything to outrageously wrong).

The map posted below has some obvious changes in Asia that have taken place. First I'll deal with the Soviet Union and its puppets.

What I had in mind is Stalin feeling he didn't get all he wanted in Central and Eastern Europe (He was pretty paranoid as far as I can tell so a reaction in the Far East to disappointments in Europe I feel is somewhat plausible.) so he makes some moves in Central and East Asia during the closing days of WWII.

In addition to his invasion of Manchuria (as in OTL) an invasion and subsequent annexation of Sinkiang also took place (You might ask why not Manchuria instead or also than Sinkiang. Well I guess saying just because it looked cool on the map doesn't qualify as a decent answer around here I'm going to have to go with Stalin feeling he could get away with it and he has a plan for Manchuria--different than in OTL). Pushing his commanders to make it to the Pacific (i.e. coast of Korea) before the Americans can get there (an implied threat of do it or end up in Siberia for the remainder of your short life does much to encourage them) sees all of Korea end up in the Soviet sphere. Soviet forces also end up in China proper much to the chagrin of Chang Kai-Shek (Mao is not exactly happy either particularly when Stalin refuses to give up Manchuria to him, but is mollified when the Soviet armies in China leave behind much of their equipment.). Later demands by the US to remove their forces in China back to Manchuria are met but the absence of Soviet equipment is not noted by Western Intel units for some time.

In 1949 the Soviet Satellite states of the People's Republic of Korea (think North Korea but applied to the whole of Korea) and the People's Socialist Republic of Manchuria (A better name is needed I know, anyone got any suggestions?) are declared and Soviet armed forces are removed with the exception of a few advisors and the Soviet naval port at Port Stalin (Port Arthur). While Mao's displeasure about Manchuria is great the supplies and arms the Soviets funnel to him (Initially captured Japanese equipment and the left over heavy equipment left by several Soviet armies leaving China, however, as time went on additional Soviet equipment is sent via Manchuria and Mongolia.) let the civil war in China continue until a peace deal is brokered by the US and the Soviets in New Delhi in 1959 where the People’s Republic of China (PRC) controls Northern and Central China where the Republic of China (ROC) controls a swath of territory in the South.

At the same time the Warsaw Pact is signed the Harbin Pact (I'm pretty sure that is what the capital of Manchuria was called, but if anyone else has a better suggestion feel free to speak up.) is created in the East. (The reason for a separate pact being the Eastern Europeans satellite states not wanting to have to fight in a war in Asia.)

Soviet diplomacy and espionage however had a mixed bag of results. Their success in getting a communist government to declare in Batavia/Jakarta (The Democratic People’s Republic of Java and Sumatra—better name anyone?—Harbin Pact 1962) failed to create a united communist Indonesia but instead the former Dutch colony fractured into five major states. (Some recommendations for them would be nice; right now I was thinking the Islamic Republic of Aceh, Republic of Papua Guinea, Borneo, Celebes, and the aforementioned Democratic People’s Republic of Java and Sumatra.)

Next I’ll turn to former British colonies particularly India and to why it is whole. With the Soviet Union now having a direct border to the North (no matter that the logistics of a Soviet attack into India from their new state of Sinkiang would be difficult even in the best of conditions) the British work harder and stay a bit longer to ensure a united India that is friendly to the West. However after the British leave India slowly drifts into a state similar to OTL (socialist but still a democracy with ties to the Soviets). In the early sixties India is a rising power bloc, neutral amongst the superpowers but with some regional power particularly over Nepal and Bhutan who are allied to India.

Burma initially remained close to India but in the late fifties a military coup (a ROC backed general) ousted the sitting government when it appeared that they were going to declare a communist government. Since them Burma has remained within the ROC orbit and therefore nominally within the US sphere much too India’s consternation.

A new federation under the name of Malaysia was formed in 1963 through a merging of the Federation of Malaya and the British crown colonies of Singapore, North Borneo (renamed Sabah), and Sarawak, the latter two colonies being on the island of Borneo. The Sultanate of Brunei, eventually joining the Federation, after opposition from certain segments of the population and as wrangling over the payment of oil royalties came to a mutually beneficial conclusion. Malaysia has at the onset come under the wing of the ROC due to the ethnic ties of immigrant Chinese who fleeing from the civil war and the overcrowding of the southern coastal cities

Many of the Pacific Islands held by the UK (France and the US also) have yet to find independence. With the increase interest of the Soviets in Asia particularly the former Dutch colony of Indonesia these islands have found themselves just as important as they were in WWII to keep an open on the shipping lanes and Soviet submarines that frequent the area on route back from the Soviet ports of Vladivostok and Port Stalin to their client state of Java.

The former Dutch colony of Indonesia was at one time a united and independent nation however a successful plot by Soviet agents to install a communist government in Jakarta in 1961 by supporting a coup against the Indonesian president Sukarno. However their plot was not complete and saw various areas break off (in some cases a few islands were even annexed by Australia namely the part of Timor not Portuguese). The US and its allies during a session of the UN where the Soviets were protesting the actions of NATO and absent were able to declare support for several factions resisting fighting the communist government in Jakarta. However due to regional factionalism and the declaration of independence by several factions not wanting to be part of Java dominated Indonesia the UN was forced to recognized these new states including Democratic People’s Republic of Java and Sumatra (the Soviet governments condition on recognizing the others and reigning in their new puppet). The Democratic People’s Republic of Java and Sumatra did not officially recognize these other new states until early 1963 when after a poorly aimed missile strike against the USS Nimitz and its taskforce delivering peacekeepers (US Marines based out of the Philippines and Australian army units) resulted in a sustained aerial campaign that brought the Javanese to the negotiating table (this was before the UN recognition and the Soviet agreement to reign in their client state).

The Democratic Republic of Indochina under President Ho Chi Minh successfully navigated a relatively peaceful independence from France several years after WWII. US support of Ho during WWII and soon after to prevent further Soviet gains in Asia led him to think rather highly of the US. France was disappointed but with the US promising additional money to develop Algeria (which still succeeded anyway) mollified the French, if barely.

As mentioned above the civil war in China ended in 1959 with the peace in New Delhi. The PRC while much weaker than the one in OTL continues along roughly the same path as in OTL but some of the more extreme policies of Mao are not enacted due to the continued civil war. The ROC is quickly recovering from the civil war but still has a long way to go. At this time the ROC has yet to sign onto the Pacific and East Asian Treaty Organization (1954) but does have its independence guaranteed by the US (as the PRC does with the Soviets). However recent changes in leadership with the untimely death of Chang Kai-Shek and his wife in an automobile accident outside Shanghai (1961) has seen the ROC pull back from the US seeing too much control from Washington as a threat as the US has pushed for more democratic reforms since the civil war has ended.

Map Legend for the map above (Far East)

Orange - Neutral
Brown - Independent Communist (PRC)
Yellow – Republic of China
Light Yellow – ROC satellite or aligned nations.
Dark Green - NATO aligned countries
Light Green - PEATO
Dark Red - USSR
Dark Pink – Harbin Pact Countries

It was kind of a rough draft and needed probably a good scrubbing to get what I wanted. Still I thought it viable.

I'd imagine also that the Cambodian region of the united Indochina would be rather prone to revolts, but the Vietnamese with US backing should have been able to maintain control. Laos should be also easy for the larger Vietnam to have maintained control.
 

The Sandman

Banned
Give it fifteen or twenty years and we still might get to see this. A modern-day Chinese civil war is definitely possible.
 
Top