The North Star is Red: a Wallace Presidency, KMT Victory, Alternate Cold War TL

Timeline is going great; I am definetely following. Are the Soviets going to annex parts of Xinjang? Also, do not forget to about threadmarks, please.
 
Well, I am definitely interested. Chiang and Stalin are definitely the great winners TTL so far, and Japan and Mao will cry a lot.

Watched. It's not everyday to see such TLs about two Chinas and two Japans.

I have one question, why not North China include Mongolia?

Why should Stalin allow it? To fortify Mao somehow? Mongolia is red and loyal to Moscow, after all. Mao can surely try, but nobody in the Soviet Union will hear its pleas. If else would only solidify the Mongolian support, and there is also that part of outer Mongolia... if the PRC will do something which will piss the USSR, they can say goodbye to that region and Chiang and the KMT would likely approve it to weak their northern neighbour...

This is one of the best outcomes for the USSR - Soviet Russia restored its domain on Manchuria since and after 1905. And the PRC can't do nothing if Moscow will say no. Well, Mao will be lucky if Stalin won't tell him to jump and howl like a dog...

Now, Korea and Indochina would be the focal areas in the next immediate years...

Timeline is going great; I am definetely following. Are the Soviets going to annex parts of Xinjang? Also, do not forget to about threadmarks, please.

I think so. I don't see Stalin gave those lands to Mao and could simply claim those are strategic for the USSR's border defense.

interesting, how this affects the situation in Tibet and India?

Generally in various TLs Chiang or mediates with Tibet or renounces to it. About India, for first we need to see how the British will left the country first, in short for first if there would be the partition or not TTL or going different.
 
Why not "recycle" one of the flags of the Chinese Soviet Republic?

I considered that, but I figured that would actually annoy the Soviets - not because they wouldn't be flattered (they would be), but because the USSR has a vested interest in not looking too "expansionist" to the Western powers - and random countries popping up with the word Soviet in their name hurts that.

IIRC a significant portion of the intelligentsia were rather pro-Communist throughout the Chinese civil war.

Yes, especially the urban ones. However, I get the feeling OTL Communist victory didn't really feel "real" to most people until 1949-ish. So I actually don't think a lot of them would follow to the North to what looks like a doomed enterprise.

Timeline is going great; I am definetely following. Are the Soviets going to annex parts of Xinjang? Also, do not forget to about threadmarks, please.

Ah, thank you. I just learned about threadmarks now. Anyways, yes, if you look at Chapter Two, you can see that the USSR is occupying some of the majority-Kazakh areas where the Ili Rebellion (2nd Republic of East Turkestan) was situated. The rest of Xinjiang however, prefers the KMT over the USSR.

Well, I am definitely interested. Chiang and Stalin are definitely the great winners TTL so far, and Japan and Mao will cry a lot.

Why should Stalin allow it? To fortify Mao somehow? Mongolia is red and loyal to Moscow, after all. Mao can surely try, but nobody in the Soviet Union will hear its pleas. If else would only solidify the Mongolian support, and there is also that part of outer Mongolia... if the PRC will do something which will piss the USSR, they can say goodbye to that region and Chiang and the KMT would likely approve it to weak their northern neighbour...

Generally in various TLs Chiang or mediates with Tibet or renounces to it. About India, for first we need to see how the British will left the country first, in short for first if there would be the partition or not TTL or going different.

Yes, broadly speaking, Chiang and the Soviet bloc are winners.

Well, I'd also say there isn't a huge "land grabby" mood in the PRC. I mean, Mao didn't want Mongolia OTL either. There are more Mongols in the PRC than in Mongolia. And Mongolia seems to be a relatively friendly regime (at least right now). The PRC is very much uh, preoccupied with the ROC threat.

Also with regards to Tibet, I guess we'll see what happens in...two more updates? :) With regards to India, I don't think Indian partition would go differently based on the POD unless someone else has a good rationale for why they would. Just because the partition was in 1947 and in OTL 1947, the KMT still looked like it was winning.
 
Last edited:
Chapter 5 - The Wallace Administration at Home
The Wallace Administration at Home
The honeymoon ended fairly quickly. Henry Wallace, having served as President for only a few months, began his domestic agenda with nearly a 80% approval rating. It was not to last very long. The Wallace Presidency was dominated by his goal of pushing for a "Second Bill of Rights", where the federal government would guarantee social security, housing, employment, and education to all Americans. In particular, Wallace was attuned to the plight of African-Americans, both in the South and the urban North. However, both of these goals were dead on arrival in Congress, where both pro-business Republicans and moderate Democrats balked. In particular, his universal healthcare plan drew scorn from both sides of the aisle. As a result, the Wallace Presidency was forced to make its dent on America via executive order.

First, Wallace refused to issue an executive order lifting price, wage, and rent controls that had been active during World War II, fearing that this would spawn runaway inflation, especially in essential goods used by American workers. However, the inability of the American economy to shed excess capacity ruined immediate incentives for American companies to hire. Two million Americans lost their jobs almost overnight after the Japanese surrender due to the immediate obsolescence of several war industries. It was believed that private industry would hire most of these workers. That did not happen.[1] Confronted with skyrocketing employment, Wallace passionately argued in his first State of the Union that the Congress absolutely had to pass his proposal on full employment. The Full Employment Act of 1946 was heavily watered down as it passed through Congress, but upon a personal plea of President Wallace to prominent Southern Democratic leader Senator Russell, the goals of the act, to authorize the President to utilize "compensatory spending to guarantee full employment" was only watered down to utilizing "compensatory loans to promote full employment" instead of totally excised.[2]

The price was heavy. Wallace more or less traded off one and a half Supreme Court picks to Russell. The first Wallace appointee was former Attorney General and Governor of Georgia (and rival of Russell), Ellis Arnall. Arnall was a strong supporter of Wallace in the 1944 Democratic National Convention and a supporter of African-American civil rights. Russell okayed the pick merely because it got Arnall out of Georgia, removing Russell's biggest rival. However, Russell demanded the next pick be a "hardcore Southerner". In another compromise, Wallace selected Louisiana Supreme Court judge Robert F. Kennon, who was known to be planning a primary challenge to Senator Russell B. Long (one of Russell's closest allies in Congress).

The second issue was that in addition to rising unemployment, labor struggles exploded across America. An unprecedented wave of strikes swept America, led by John Lewis of the CIO, a close supporter of Henry Wallace. Similarly, Wallace condemned large businesses for refusing to accept the demands of the CIO, officially throwing his support behind the strikes. In exchange for his support, the railroad unions accepted Wallace's pleadings to not strike, averting what was to expected a nationwide shutdown of the railways.[3] Most outrageously to many Southern politicians was not Wallace's support of African-American civil rights, but actually his official support of the CIO's Operation Dixie, their plan to expand trade unionism in the US South. When local policemen attacked labor organizers, Wallace called in the National Guard to defend them. Wallace's hardline attitudes towards promoting organized labor had an interesting polarizing effect in the South. Southern Democrats splintered not on their attitudes towards Civil Rights (almost all were opposed), but rather on their attitudes towards organized labor. Several Southern Democrats with more left-wing economic views, such as Louisiana's Long, actually became vocal supporters of Wallace despite what they called a "dreadful record on race." As a result, Operation Dixie was largely viewed as a success by the CIO.[4]

Finally, the real red hot potato of the Wallace Administration was obviously civil rights. As any civil rights agenda was viewed as dead on arrival in Congress, President Wallace had to act almost entirely through executive order, many of which he ordered. Wallace not only issued an order abolishing racial segregation in the army, but he barred any federal building, including those in the South, from segregating its facilities (Jim Crow laws could not be applied to any "federal buildings" per the 11th Amendment, which outraged many Southern politicians). In addition, he barred discrimination in federal contracts, federal hiring, and sought to appoint way more African-Americans than ever to the federal government (primarily in non-confirmation required positions). Wallace however, did demure from any executive order that would have required contractors with the government to desegregate their workforce, viewing that both as a redline that even his closest Southern supporters wouldn't tolerated and as an overreach of government power. Wallace was a strong believer in using the government for good, but he disliked government action that seemed coercive/authoritarian. He was unwilling to inflict punitive actions on businesses that opposed his agenda and was actually a believer in states' rights, which surprisingly mollified some of his Southern supporters, who saw him as a wingnut bleeding heart leftist, but not an existential threat to "their way of life."

Going into the 1946 elections, Wallace was dealing with rising unemployment, high crime rates (due to millions of young men returning home), labor unrest (and thus outrage from business), as well as a minor political rebellion in the South against his federal racial integration policies. The results were a massacre. Wallace's approval rating had dropped to 39%, as the President was remarkably polarizing. Republicans narrowly seized control of the House of Representatives, making serious gains in the Senate.[5] However, the new Congress was incredibly unproductive, almost as unproductive as the last Congress. Aware of organized labor's growing power in the US South, Wallace's begging (and promise of far more pork barrel spending towards the US South), enough Southern Democratic Senators turned against the proposed Taft-Hartley Act to uphold President Wallace's presidential veto, as the veto override failed by a narrow 62-33 margin in the Senate.
---
[1] OTL, Truman lifted most of the controls, which spurred runaway inflation (leading to the GOP landslide of 1946).
[2] OTL, both compensatory spending and full employment were totally removed.
[3] OTL saw a devastating 1946 railway strike, that Wallace stops.
[4] OTL, Operation Dixie was viewed as a total failure, causing the CIO to affiliate with the AFL.
[5] This is actually better than OTL, because Truman angered both left and right and had a 32% approval rating, and Wallace is only really angering the right here.
 
Last edited:
Well, I kinda smile how both the West (Americans above all, which is unsurprising, but also the Soviets which technically should be more aware) have such a distorted perception over "the two Chinas" because geographically the real China is blue and an historically fringe region is perceived as "China" as well.

I think Chiang has two main issues to present his China as the true and only China in the world, despite on a geographical matter he would be on his right. 1) the five banners = one China, five peoples which was one of the founding bases of the republic, which was in truth based over the will to pretend to rule a Qing size China in Republican sauce. The point is if Chiang would abolish the doctrine - which would mean, let Tibet be free, definitely acknowledge Mongolia and so on - but could work otherwise to present the world "China is the land of the Han and the PRC is Manchuria so we are the only ones which we can call ourselves China and the PRC is a border province of former invaders of China" and so on. But in part for prestige issues, in part because the cold war split would be more incisive in the planet, and also for certain cultural ignorance towards Chinese history in the West, it would be difficult to let not acknowledge the two Chinas is a false axiom like OTL post 1949... but after all Manchuria is also bigger than Taiwan and therefore Chiang would fight more to let prevail this orientation. But he does have the ONU seat... and we can believe would never lose it. And I have the feeling Chiang will be a great supporter of the UN. Not to support the Wallies but for China's own prestige.

Changing subject, I guess it was more harder for MacArthur to impose over South Japan respect to ruling all the archipelago as OTL...
 
I imagine Ho chi Minh is screwed in this scenario given he won't have access to Southern China as bases or Soviet and Chinese arms.
 
Well, I kinda smile how both the West (Americans above all, which is unsurprising, but also the Soviets which technically should be more aware) have such a distorted perception over "the two Chinas" because geographically the real China is blue and an historically fringe region is perceived as "China" as well.

I think Chiang has two main issues to present his China as the true and only China in the world, despite on a geographical matter he would be on his right. 1) the five banners = one China, five peoples which was one of the founding bases of the republic, which was in truth based over the will to pretend to rule a Qing size China in Republican sauce. The point is if Chiang would abolish the doctrine - which would mean, let Tibet be free, definitely acknowledge Mongolia and so on - but could work otherwise to present the world "China is the land of the Han and the PRC is Manchuria so we are the only ones which we can call ourselves China and the PRC is a border province of former invaders of China" and so on. But in part for prestige issues, in part because the cold war split would be more incisive in the planet, and also for certain cultural ignorance towards Chinese history in the West, it would be difficult to let not acknowledge the two Chinas is a false axiom like OTL post 1949... but after all Manchuria is also bigger than Taiwan and therefore Chiang would fight more to let prevail this orientation. But he does have the ONU seat... and we can believe would never lose it. And I have the feeling Chiang will be a great supporter of the UN. Not to support the Wallies but for China's own prestige.

Changing subject, I guess it was more harder for MacArthur to impose over South Japan respect to ruling all the archipelago as OTL...

Well, like OTL, there's only one China to both the US and USSR. Their China.

As an FYI, OTL Chiang Kai-Shek actually used the "illegitimate Manchu invaders" argument against the Communists...in the 1950's. He depicted his regime as a successor to Koxinga, the Ming pretender on Taiwan who opposed the Qing.

I imagine Ho chi Minh is screwed in this scenario given he won't have access to Southern China as bases or Soviet and Chinese arms.

I...don't know what to do about that yet. As far as I can see...it's pretty complex.
 
Last edited:
I imagine Ho chi Minh is screwed in this scenario given he won't have access to Southern China as bases or Soviet and Chinese arms.

Well, like OTL, there's only one China to both the US and USSR. Their China.

As an FYI, OTL Chiang Kai-Shek actually used the "illegitimate Manchu invaders" argument against the Communists...in the 1950's. He depicted his regime as a successor to Koxinga, the Ming pretender on Taiwan who opposed the Qing.



I...don't know what to do about that yet. As far as I can see...it's pretty complex.

Of course USA and USSR would pretend that. Doesn't mean, at least for Moscow behind the lines, that in truth won't know Nationalist China is the real China and the PRC is a Soviet satellite, Manchurian melting pot state. Which also means, there would be a different as opposite than OTL divide between China and USSR. Which means, Nationalist China must or likely should work for a reapproachment with the Soviets (whereas we all know China OTL turned towards the US), which could only happen if Nationalist China will distance considerably from US politics. In short I am suggesting that while the West will accept to keep the "Two Chinas" facade at every level (diplomatic as for ideologically), the USSR on an underground level can't afford that. Stalin can bash in the glory of having revenged 1905 and Portsmouth, but at the end of the day they have a hostile China on their eastern flank - a logistical and strategic nightmare in case of WWIII.

Ho Chi Min OTL turned at a certain point to Nationalist China... Chiang apart from ideological differences wasn't too hostile to him as an indipendent Vietnam was surely appealing to him... too much. And because the Vietnamites hated the Chinese not less than the French, Ho Chi Min opened a negotiation with France, which naturally decided to screw it up until ending to Diem Pien Bu. But even if Ho Chi Min will win as OTL, he would still have to deal with China, doesn't matter if blue or red... so again in short: Chiang may help Ho Chi Min depending from what a free Vietnam (ideology in that case wouldn't mind much from both cases, OTL as TTL) but he had the advantage he is the winner in the civil war and Ho Chi Min can't deny that.

If else, Chiang is officiously allied with France - through Britain and the US - and could be pressed from Washington and London to support Paris. But if the French will screw, the Americans could change plans as OTL and allow China to meddle in saving the salvageable... I agree, the situation in Vietnam is more fluid. If else I wonder how the Soviets will perceive the Indochinese situation TTL. Positive bullets: 1) would be still a new brother country on their side in case of Red victory 2) would open them the doors of Southeast Asia 3) would be a thorn in the southern belly of China. Negative bullets: 1) harder logistical issues in aiding them 2) in case of war the Chinese may easily overcome them so could be a waste of resources 3) would raise tensions with China more than ever but as I said is expected to be so is not a big deal. But could be a tenous point later in case of attempted Chinese-Soviet reapproachment.
 
This is going to be a good opportunity for the VNQDD become the main nationalist force in Vietnam.

Of course USA and USSR would pretend that. Doesn't mean, at least for Moscow behind the lines, that in truth won't know Nationalist China is the real China and the PRC is a Soviet satellite, Manchurian melting pot state. Which also means, there would be a different as opposite than OTL divide between China and USSR. Which means, Nationalist China must or likely should work for a reapproachment with the Soviets (whereas we all know China OTL turned towards the US), which could only happen if Nationalist China will distance considerably from US politics. In short I am suggesting that while the West will accept to keep the "Two Chinas" facade at every level (diplomatic as for ideologically), the USSR on an underground level can't afford that. Stalin can bash in the glory of having revenged 1905 and Portsmouth, but at the end of the day they have a hostile China on their eastern flank - a logistical and strategic nightmare in case of WWIII.

Ho Chi Min OTL turned at a certain point to Nationalist China... Chiang apart from ideological differences wasn't too hostile to him as an indipendent Vietnam was surely appealing to him... too much. And because the Vietnamites hated the Chinese not less than the French, Ho Chi Min opened a negotiation with France, which naturally decided to screw it up until ending to Diem Pien Bu. But even if Ho Chi Min will win as OTL, he would still have to deal with China, doesn't matter if blue or red... so again in short: Chiang may help Ho Chi Min depending from what a free Vietnam (ideology in that case wouldn't mind much from both cases, OTL as TTL) but he had the advantage he is the winner in the civil war and Ho Chi Min can't deny that.

If else, Chiang is officiously allied with France - through Britain and the US - and could be pressed from Washington and London to support Paris. But if the French will screw, the Americans could change plans as OTL and allow China to meddle in saving the salvageable... I agree, the situation in Vietnam is more fluid. If else I wonder how the Soviets will perceive the Indochinese situation TTL. Positive bullets: 1) would be still a new brother country on their side in case of Red victory 2) would open them the doors of Southeast Asia 3) would be a thorn in the southern belly of China. Negative bullets: 1) harder logistical issues in aiding them 2) in case of war the Chinese may easily overcome them so could be a waste of resources 3) would raise tensions with China more than ever but as I said is expected to be so is not a big deal. But could be a tenous point later in case of attempted Chinese-Soviet reapproachment.

I don't want to spoil too much, but I think you're right in the sense that on the topic of Soviet-ROC rapprochement, the Soviets aren't the stumbling block here. That, and the PRC can act independently. Soviet satellites weren't purely loyal cadets. After all, Romania did all kinds of things to annoy the USSR.

On the topic of Vietnam, it's complicated because it seems Ho Chi Minh has already purged the VNQDD - that the ROC withdrew from Vietnam and got tons of concessions from France in return. And there isn't a solid reason for the KMT to get involved on either side, but they might be dragged in anyways...
 
Chiang may help Ho Chi Min depending from what a free Vietnam (ideology in that case wouldn't mind much from both cases, OTL as TTL) but he had the advantage he is the winner in the civil war and Ho Chi Min can't deny that.
I doubt Chiang would support Ho Chi Min as a Communist Vietnam would lead to China being surrounded by Communist powers.
 
I don't want to spoil too much, but I think you're right in the sense that on the topic of Soviet-ROC rapprochement, the Soviets aren't the stumbling block here. That, and the PRC can act independently. Soviet satellites weren't purely loyal cadets. After all, Romania did all kinds of things to annoy the USSR.

On the topic of Vietnam, it's complicated because it seems Ho Chi Minh has already purged the VNQDD - that the ROC withdrew from Vietnam and got tons of concessions from France in return. And there isn't a solid reason for the KMT to get involved on either side, but they might be dragged in anyways...

True but Manchuria isn't Yugoslavia... too vital to Soviet interests - economically even more than strategic - to play its own game. If Mao will dare to protest Stalin, but also his successors, the PCR will be invaded in a blink. At the same time, the USSR will do everything to prevent the PCR to go nuclear.

I doubt Chiang would support Ho Chi Min as a Communist Vietnam would lead to China being surrounded by Communist powers.

Fine, but in the end would be more a clash among nationalisms rather than ideologies in the area, because for Chiang's China Vietnam would be still Vietnam no matter if communist or democratic or fascist or whatever and with the French collapse in the area, destined to be again the back garden of the Middle Country. No matter any alliance with the USSR Ho Chi Min could have if he won, Vietnam would have to deal with Nationalist China no matter what. Especially if by any case would win TTL but Vietnam ending split in the end. Same concern would have Bao Dai or who will arrive to rule in his stead. In short, any Vietnam doesn't have much chance if won't keep Chiang in a good way. In a certain sense also a split Vietnam would be a boon for China TTL, because weaker. But the North would be isolated and the South falling dependent from Chinese or US assistance. And in that case, any chance for Vietnamite unification won't pass without Chinese involvement. So... Ho Chi Min's best bet is making a deal with Chiang even if repulsing him.
 
but in the end would be more a clash among nationalisms rather than ideologies in the area
But Chiang would view it that way or as a new southern front of communist expansion

Chiang's China Vietnam would be still Vietnam no matter if communist or democratic or fascist or whatever and with the French collapse in the area, destined to be again the back garden of the Middle Country.
His preference would for non-communist Vietnam


In short, any Vietnam doesn't have much chance if won't keep Chiang in a good way. In a certain sense also a split Vietnam would be a boon for China TTL, because weaker.
regardless of split or not. A communist lead part of Vietnam would still be a second front

So... Ho Chi Min's best bet is making a deal with Chiang even if repulsing him.
The thing is Chiang holds all the cards if he wanted Vietnam he could have taken it in 1946 but he didn't. Anything he does want he can get but going to France and United States and demanding it in exchange for supporting the state of Vietnam and Bao Dai.
 
True but Manchuria isn't Yugoslavia... too vital to Soviet interests - economically even more than strategic - to play its own game. If Mao will dare to protest Stalin, but also his successors, the PCR will be invaded in a blink. At the same time, the USSR will do everything to prevent the PCR to go nuclear.

Well, I think my point was that there's just a spectrum of deviation from Soviet policy. There are substantive differences between Yugoslavia, Albania, Romania, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, etc. etc.

Hungary's 1956-policy led to a Soviet invasion, but Goulash Communism didn't. Czechoslovakia's Socialism with a Human Face led to a Soviet invasion, but Ceausescu's National Communism didn't.

I'd say the OTL Sino-Soviet Split was not just about ideological differences - a huge part of it was geopolitical (ie. both the PR. China and USSR wanting a "leadership position" with regards to the global Communist movement).

My sense is that the OTL USSR was mostly okay with minor domestic deviations from Soviet ideological orthodoxy, but demanded 1) a one-party Marxist-Leninist system and 2) total diplomatic/military alignment with the USSR. Presumably, OTL, this means Romania, Cuba, and Vietnam all got to be Soviet friends, but the 1968 Czechs, Maoist China, 1956 Hungarians, and Yugoslavs all went on the Soviet naughty list.
 
Chapter 6 - The 1948 Chinese Elections and the Renewal of War
Someone asked what happens with Tibet, and well, here we go again.
---
The 1948 Chinese Elections and the Renewal of War
The first elections after the Hurley Agreement were largely foregone. Chiang Kai-Shek was elected President almost unanimously by the National Assembly, with his hand-picked Vice President, Sun Fo, elected by a smaller margin.[1]

In practice under the Constitution, the Republic of China was a representative democracy. However, the system of government was so complex with its five branches and the National Revolutionary Army so strong, the executive branch was very much an “Imperial Presidency.” Although local warlords and corrupt interests held most power outside of the central government, no one could truly challenge Chiang Kai-Shek within the central government.

Fearing a possible KMT defeat in the Civil War, the United States approved the China Aid Act of 1948, establishing the Joint Committee on Rural Reconstruction. American-funded rural reformers traveled the countryside, spreading agronomics and mechanized agriculture. [2] Although the countryside never completely quieted down and the program was nowhere near as successful as any of its supporters assumed it would be, the KMT slowly grew to be accepted, albeit not loved in the countryside. However, extreme inequity in land distribution grew to be an increasing source of discontent.

The KMT had to deal with an incredibly large and diverse nation, still reeling from a World War. A revolt in Taiwan almost spiraled into mass bloodshed before the meditation of Sun Fo, who headed off the worst by agreeing to some minor local autonomy (Chiang Kai-Shek was not happy with the "weak" response, but accepted the deal struck by his ally).[3] The government still had no major presence in much of the tribal Southwest. Furthermore, the Tibetan question immediately came to a head, sparked by a widely publicized and fatal fight between a Muslim merchant and Tibetan policeman.

Hui Muslims were some of the staunchest supporters of the KMT, with many imams declaring Jihad against Japan during the Sino-Japanese War. Furthermore, Hui-Tibetan relations were extremely poor.[4] Nanking cared relatively little about Tibet itself (besides understanding that some sort of sovereignty over Tibet was good for nationalist legitimizing purposes), but it did seek to keep its loyal Hui supporters happy. When angry Muslims set a police station on fire in retaliation, anti-Muslim riots broke out in Lhasa. The ROC sent an ultimatum to Lhasa, to both quell any violence and to submit to Chinese sovereignty.

The Ganden Phodrang government in Tibet looked for British help, but the United Kingdom’s stance was to recognize Chinese sovereignty over Tibet if some autonomy was preserved.[5] The KMT position was to accept Tibetan self-rule under ROC sovereignty, with the condition that Tibet complied with the Constitution’s freedom of religion provisions. However, the Ganden Phodrang refused, with riots intensifying and burning down dozens of mosques, many after local Muslims had been shoved inside.[6] Although the Tibetan government condemned the violence and cracked down on the rioters, this incident inflamed the KMT.

The next morning, President Chiang Kai-Shek signed an executive order extending martial law (currently only in effect on the Communist areas) to the provinces of Tibet and Xikang, defining the Ganden Phodrang as “Communist bandits to be eradicated.” The Republic of China was at war again.
---
[1] OTL, Sun Fo actually lost. Kai-Shek is basking in victory though and muscles his man through.
[2] OTL, this was more successful in Taiwan, but still not useless on the Mainland.
[3] As opposed to the OTL 2-28 Incident, the KMT takes a lenient approach, because Taiwan is a rather minor part of their nation (instead of their last bastion).
[4] Lamaist Tibet fought multiple wars against Muslim warlords and anti-Muslim sentiment is still widespread in OTL Tibet.
[5] India is currently embroiled in a struggle over Kashmir with Pakistan (as in OTL).
[6] The Tibetan government actually resists the ITL ROC much more than it resisted the OTL PRC, largely because it associates the ITL ROC with the cause of Islam. That and Mao’s OTL offer to Tibet was actually more generous...it just didn’t last.
 
Someone asked what happens with Tibet, and well, here we go again.
---
The 1948 Chinese Elections and the Renewal of War
The first elections after the Hurley Agreement were largely foregone. Chiang Kai-Shek was elected President almost unanimously by the National Assembly, with his hand-picked Vice President, Sun Fo, elected by a smaller margin.[1]

In practice under the Constitution, the Republic of China was a representative democracy. However, the system of government was so complex with its five branches and the National Revolutionary Army so strong, the executive branch was very much an “Imperial Presidency.” Although local warlords and corrupt interests held most power outside of the central government, no one could truly challenge Chiang Kai-Shek within the central government.

Fearing a possible KMT defeat in the Civil War, the United States approved the China Aid Act of 1948, establishing the Joint Committee on Rural Reconstruction. American-funded rural reformers traveled the countryside, spreading agronomics and mechanized agriculture. [2] Although the countryside never completely quieted down and the program was nowhere near as successful as any of its supporters assumed it would be, the KMT slowly grew to be accepted, albeit not loved in the countryside. However, extreme inequity in land distribution grew to be an increasing source of discontent.

The KMT had to deal with an incredibly large and diverse nation, still reeling from a World War. A revolt in Taiwan almost spiraled into mass bloodshed before the meditation of Sun Fo, who headed off the worst by agreeing to some minor local autonomy (Chiang Kai-Shek was not happy with the "weak" response, but accepted the deal struck by his ally).[3] The government still had no major presence in much of the tribal Southwest. Furthermore, the Tibetan question immediately came to a head, sparked by a widely publicized and fatal fight between a Muslim merchant and Tibetan policeman.

Hui Muslims were some of the staunchest supporters of the KMT, with many imams declaring Jihad against Japan during the Sino-Japanese War. Furthermore, Hui-Tibetan relations were extremely poor.[4] Nanking cared relatively little about Tibet itself (besides understanding that some sort of sovereignty over Tibet was good for nationalist legitimizing purposes), but it did seek to keep its loyal Hui supporters happy. When angry Muslims set a police station on fire in retaliation, anti-Muslim riots broke out in Lhasa. The ROC sent an ultimatum to Lhasa, to both quell any violence and to submit to Chinese sovereignty.

The Ganden Phodrang government in Tibet looked for British help, but the United Kingdom’s stance was to recognize Chinese sovereignty over Tibet if some autonomy was preserved.[5] The KMT position was to accept Tibetan self-rule under ROC sovereignty, with the condition that Tibet complied with the Constitution’s freedom of religion provisions. However, the Ganden Phodrang refused, with riots intensifying and burning down dozens of mosques, many after local Muslims had been shoved inside.[6] Although the Tibetan government condemned the violence and cracked down on the rioters, this incident inflamed the KMT.

The next morning, President Chiang Kai-Shek signed an executive order extending martial law (currently only in effect on the Communist areas) to the provinces of Tibet and Xikang, defining the Ganden Phodrang as “Communist bandits to be eradicated.” The Republic of China was at war again.
---
[1] OTL, Sun Fo actually lost. Kai-Shek is basking in victory though and muscles his man through.
[2] OTL, this was more successful in Taiwan, but still not useless on the Mainland.
[3] As opposed to the OTL 2-28 Incident, the KMT takes a lenient approach, because Taiwan is a rather minor part of their nation (instead of their last bastion).
[4] Lamaist Tibet fought multiple wars against Muslim warlords and anti-Muslim sentiment is still widespread in OTL Tibet.
[5] India is currently embroiled in a struggle over Kashmir with Pakistan (as in OTL).
[6] The Tibetan government actually resists the ITL ROC much more than it resisted the OTL PRC, largely because it associates the ITL ROC with the cause of Islam. That and Mao’s OTL offer to Tibet was actually more generous...it just didn’t last.

Check out my post on KMT post war economy, politics, society, and foreign relations. It will open a lot of eyes
 
Top