Tibet Under Nationalist China

Nationalist China wins the Chinese Civil War and crushes the Communists. Afterwards they take over Tibet anyway since it's historically Chinese and they are after all "Nationalists". So what would a Tibet under Nationalist Chinese rule look like?
 
Well I think it depends on how much of a dictatorship the Nationalists have. There will probably be less cultural destruction in any case, but depending on how ruthless the KMT is with its own people there will be a varying amount of discrimination towards Tibetans.
 
Well I think it depends on how much of a dictatorship the Nationalists have. There will probably be less cultural destruction in any case, but depending on how ruthless the KMT is with its own people there will be a varying amount of discrimination towards Tibetans.


With no Cultural Revolution there's definitely less destruction of monasteries. The Dalai Lama might well never go into exile, depending on the factors LeoXiao cites. This might have significant impacts on the Western counterculture if Tibetan Buddhism mainly remains in Tibet and doesn't gain the exposure it did in OTL. Zen would probably be the form of Buddhism most familiar to Westerners.
 
Well the nationalist were on pretty good terms with the Muslims, so even if they were an all out dictatorship even worst then otl they probably would just have tibet be another one of the many provinces. Even less of micromanaging then the Communists. Lets see collect taxes every once in awhile appoint one of the president/prime ministers friends as govener and then just leave tibet alone. Of course the Dalai Lama wouldent be able to play a role in the tl's politics but thats obvious.

Its a bunch of mountains and yaks, the KMT would only care that Tibet uses the nationalist flag and pays taxes then they would leave them alone.
 
It could be better, could be worse.

Certainly the excesses of the Cultural Revolution would not have scarred Tibet. Nor would the US back Tibetan uprising in the late 50s. However the Communists did somethings well that the Nationalists may not do.

The first is during the takeover in 1950. The Communist army was highly disciplined and managed to takeover with minimal bloodshed/destruction. The Tibetan people were well treated and things generally went smoothly. The Nationalists OTOH had been fighting a Tibetan invasion of Sichuan in the 30s and their expedition would certainly be headed by these old Tibet hands. Which probably would've led to violence and looting by the Nationalist troops from the beginning. If this mishandling triggers a revolt, the Nationalists can be quite ruthless, i.e. the massacre in Taiwan.

The second is the Communists made a lot of improvements to the lives of the Tibetan poor in areas of health care, education, land ownership. To this day it substantially subsidize welfare to placate the locals. OTOH the aristocracy and religious elites were targeted for destruction. The Nationalists would likely co-opt the elites and ignore the poor. Whether this would be a recipe for stability is unclear to me.
 
Top