On 17th February 1979, the Chinese army invaded Vietnam. The reasons for doing so basically summarise down to the fact that Cambodia/Kampuchea was an ally of China and the Vietnamese were in control of most of the country. Deng Xiaoping informed Jimmy Carter at the time that "[he intended] to spank the bottoms of little children", referring to Vietnam. 200,000 soldiers crossed the border were able to advance about 15 miles into Vietnamese territory and then abruptly left on 6th March.
So many possibilities and so many potential ramifications:
a) What if the USSR had come out in full support of her Vietnamese ally?
b) What if the Vietnamese had deployed more of her army (currently engaged in occupation duty) along the border with China?
c) What if the Chinese made more use of air power and sea power?
d) What if Deng decided to use a nuclear weapon on Hanoi?
e) What if the Chinese pushed on to Hanoi instead of withdrawing?
My take on the five scenarios depicted above:
a) The Sino-Soviet border becomes live with activity, outposts and crossings blown up. Full scale invasion with both Outer and Inner Mongolia as the battleground? Possibly. Nuclear weapons? Doubtful - the Americans were more pally with the Chinese but might look to see what Taiwan does first. Does Taiwan get sucked into the affair? Might India seek retribution for the 1962 war?
b) China might suffer a humiliating defeat - the Vietnamese are masters of jungle, asymetrical warfare and could give a second invading power a taste of its particularly nasty brand of medicine. Deng to be removed from office and a peace treaty sought?
c) China's invasion force made full use of its land forces but practically none of its naval or air power which meant that specuacular casualties could be inflicted by the Vietnamese. China's tactics were criticised as being woefully outdated too. Was this a symptom of overconfidence or calculated risk? If the USSR watched Chinese planes and boats bombing Vietnam, they might come to the conclusion that China were playing for keeps and invade. A purely land-based invasion could be interpreted as more of a "border-correction" exercise and is less likely to draw attention. Then you have a scenario (a) developing if the former.
d) This is speculative but there is always a chance that China could use a nuke on Hanoi if either things go bad or they elect to play for keeps. Although China adheres to a "no-first strike" rule, that doesn't meant to say they did so in the past and former cold war generals have sometimes written about the greater likelihood of China or India to use nuclear weapons in their regional conflicts rather than a war between the Warsaw Pact and Nato. Such an attack would have global ramifications as deployment would have definitely been agressive rather than defensive for one and for two, Cambodia would probably suffer as the bulk of the Vietnamese army are still in the south-eastern neighbour and could be turned loose on the population. Unlikely scenario but cannot be discounted.
e) Similar to (c), the ground war could have pushed on but to use a hackneyed phrase, this would have been a meat-grinder situation, most definitely akin to the Winter War of 1939-1940. Even if Hanoi were to fall, casualty rates would be appallingly high and would send a signal (whether right or wrong) that the Chinese army weren't as strong as analyists thought. The USSR and Taiwanese might get ideas as might the Tibetans and even those in the province of Xingjang.
Comments?
So many possibilities and so many potential ramifications:
a) What if the USSR had come out in full support of her Vietnamese ally?
b) What if the Vietnamese had deployed more of her army (currently engaged in occupation duty) along the border with China?
c) What if the Chinese made more use of air power and sea power?
d) What if Deng decided to use a nuclear weapon on Hanoi?
e) What if the Chinese pushed on to Hanoi instead of withdrawing?
My take on the five scenarios depicted above:
a) The Sino-Soviet border becomes live with activity, outposts and crossings blown up. Full scale invasion with both Outer and Inner Mongolia as the battleground? Possibly. Nuclear weapons? Doubtful - the Americans were more pally with the Chinese but might look to see what Taiwan does first. Does Taiwan get sucked into the affair? Might India seek retribution for the 1962 war?
b) China might suffer a humiliating defeat - the Vietnamese are masters of jungle, asymetrical warfare and could give a second invading power a taste of its particularly nasty brand of medicine. Deng to be removed from office and a peace treaty sought?
c) China's invasion force made full use of its land forces but practically none of its naval or air power which meant that specuacular casualties could be inflicted by the Vietnamese. China's tactics were criticised as being woefully outdated too. Was this a symptom of overconfidence or calculated risk? If the USSR watched Chinese planes and boats bombing Vietnam, they might come to the conclusion that China were playing for keeps and invade. A purely land-based invasion could be interpreted as more of a "border-correction" exercise and is less likely to draw attention. Then you have a scenario (a) developing if the former.
d) This is speculative but there is always a chance that China could use a nuke on Hanoi if either things go bad or they elect to play for keeps. Although China adheres to a "no-first strike" rule, that doesn't meant to say they did so in the past and former cold war generals have sometimes written about the greater likelihood of China or India to use nuclear weapons in their regional conflicts rather than a war between the Warsaw Pact and Nato. Such an attack would have global ramifications as deployment would have definitely been agressive rather than defensive for one and for two, Cambodia would probably suffer as the bulk of the Vietnamese army are still in the south-eastern neighbour and could be turned loose on the population. Unlikely scenario but cannot be discounted.
e) Similar to (c), the ground war could have pushed on but to use a hackneyed phrase, this would have been a meat-grinder situation, most definitely akin to the Winter War of 1939-1940. Even if Hanoi were to fall, casualty rates would be appallingly high and would send a signal (whether right or wrong) that the Chinese army weren't as strong as analyists thought. The USSR and Taiwanese might get ideas as might the Tibetans and even those in the province of Xingjang.
Comments?