Sino Indian war with no partition?

Discussion in 'Alternate History Discussion: After 1900' started by HistoricalArthropod, Nov 30, 2019.

  1. HistoricalArthropod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2019
    If India became independent as one piece and remained stable and united, would a war with China still happen? If so, who would win? Would it be larger than otl?

    And what effect would this have on the region and the world at large? Here are some things that may or may not happen.

    1. More global support for the Tibetan cause from Muslims

    2. More tight cooperation between Uyghurs and Tibetans

    3. Stronger non aligned movement, if India wins

    What do you think?
     
    Zagan likes this.
  2. Noscoper Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2015
    Location:
    Internet
    The terrain keeps any conflict from going beyond small scale clashes and favors the otl Chinese gains.

    Why?
    Why? also Tibetans have a negative view of Muslims given the actions of Muslim KMT generals and large Hui community that settled in Tibet with the PRC.
     
  3. HistoricalArthropod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2019
    That's just against hui. Doesnt China make a strong distinction between Hui and Uighurs? In fact, the Hui and Uighurs have had many conflicts between them. Uighurs and Tibetans may cooperate.

    Also, there being no Pakistan would have huge effects in the region.
     
  4. SealTheRealDeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2017
    Well an India that isn't dealing with the chaos of the partition and isn't fighting Pakistan over Kashmir is an India with the power to do many things, including take measures to ensure it inherits the privileges Britain had enjoyed with Tibet. A couple Indian brigades north of the Himalayas could deter China from trying anything. If the Indian government decides that this will be a nation building project it could probably put in the road work to be able to support a far more substantial force, maybe even matching OTL's Chinese force at Chamdo.

    However, (at least by the time of independence) the INC was pretty anti-imperialistic, and would probably never dream of doing such.
     
  5. Sardar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2018
    Yes, but it ATL India's leaders would also probably recognize that Tibet was probably the most strategically important regions in the world, being the source of most of Asia's major rivers. Having Tibet as a puppet state, or even an ally, would be a top priority for India without the wars with Pakistan.
     
    Zagan likes this.
  6. Noscoper Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2015
    Location:
    Internet
  7. Noscoper Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2015
    Location:
    Internet
    China did fight the United States over Korea. given the Himalayas would prevent a large amount of Indian troops or supplies, China is going to overrun Tibet regardless.
     
  8. SealTheRealDeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2017
    with well over a million men. Logistic routes into Tibet from China were also pretty awful at that time, IIRC the Chinese invasion force was rather modest by Chinese standards.
     
  9. HistoricalArthropod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2019
  10. aaronupright Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2019
    ATL United India will have its hands full with the Afghan frontier. And the very near USSR.
     
  11. HistoricalArthropod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2019
    The pashtun frontier was actually a Congress stronghold otl
     
  12. SsgtC Ready to Call it a Day

    Joined:
    May 14, 2017
    Modest by Chinese standards is most likely going to be a larger force than anyone else could get into the region
     
    Noscoper and USS_Ward like this.
  13. SealTheRealDeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2017
    Fair enough.
     
  14. HistoricalArthropod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2019
    Could India win?
     
  15. Frank Hart Be Who You Want To Be

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2017
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Hui are essentially Chinese Muslims with a separate cultural identity. Chinese and Hui aren't that different, and in fact both don't like Uyghurs.
     
    TimTurner and EnvarKadri like this.
  16. HistoricalArthropod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2019
    Exactly that's my point. So could we see closer cooperation between Tibetans and Uyghurs, and more Indian support for Uyghurstan?
     
  17. jsb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2013
    This is the biggest question IMO? Would a united India be sufficiently anti Soviet as to ensure US/UK support, such as selling them V bombers and the bombs to go with them?
     
  18. SsgtC Ready to Call it a Day

    Joined:
    May 14, 2017
    Doubtful. Both the US and UK, despite being huge arms dealers, were very reluctant to sell nuclear capable strategic bombers to anyone. IIRC, the US offered to sell B-47s to Canada and Australia and only sold F-111s (kinda straddling the line between strategic and tactical bomber) to Australia and the UK. India would have to have a very close relationship with the US and UK for either to even consider it. It's not impossible, but I just don't see even a United India being willing to go that far into the Western Camp. Maybe 30% chance of it happening?
     
  19. HistoricalArthropod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2019
    Could a whole India lead the non aligned movement better?
     
  20. Father Maryland Enemy of Neo Secesh Everywhere

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2007
    Location:
    The Grand Duchy of the Chesapeake
    A whole India isn't necessarily a more powerful or successful India. It's also quite possible that the lack of Partition leads to increased domestic instability and infighting with various insurgencies. A combined India/Pakistan may end up being poorer, less stable, and weaker then what either country ended up being in OTL.