Was the Sino-Soviet split inevitable?

Maybe a little later, but not much. The problem was there can be only one #1 and both Russia and China wanted it.

More like Mao wanted it. I’m not buying the idea that other Chinese leaders had any desire to lead the Communist bloc. To be fair Khrushchev was also a hothead and that had something to do with it. Without Mao, China would be lead by Liu Shaoqi, who’s politics was much more in line with Khrushchev. They’d probably get along fine. But I do agree falling out was inevitable. The Soviet Union was a super power next door whereas after the Vietnam War, it would become obvious the US was the lesser threat.

And that's not considering how the Soviets actually backed the KMT over the CCP most of the time until basically after WWII...

Also, as for today, remember the whole SCO kerfluffle between China and Russia over those breakaway republics, and that China didn't recognize the Russian annexation of Crimea...

That’s mostly because China cannot accept the precedent of Crimea unilaterally declaring independence. Also, China is rather fond of Ukraine.
 
Last edited:
And that's not considering how the Soviets actually backed the KMT over the CCP most of the time until basically after WWII...

Also, as for today, remember the whole SCO kerfluffle between China and Russia over those breakaway republics, and that China didn't recognize the Russian annexation of Crimea...

This, there was a great deal of distrust between Mao and Stalin from the start that poisoned the relationship.
 

Lusitania

Donor
This, there was a great deal of distrust between Mao and Stalin from the start that poisoned the relationship.
The Russian diplomatic “slap in face” to Mao was when Mao visited Moscow for first time after the Chinese had won the civil war. Expecting to be welcomed as a hero and an equal but yes Nostradamus he was treated as any other regular 3rd world leader. Staying at old hotel and dismissed by Stalin and Soviet officials.

So angry was he that when Stalin successor, Khrushchev, visited China Mao ordered the Russians to be ignored and to be setup at old hotel without air conditioning. Mao then went out of his way to belittle Khrushchev.
 
Isn't this Sinification largely a myth?

For now, at least. Russia is trying to restrict immigration from China. But that hasn't stopped Russians from being spooked over the issue. I mean, it's 109 million Chinese citizens living in Northeast China alone vs 25 million Russian citizens in the entire Far Eastern and Siberian Federal Districts. It won't be that hard to overwhelm the frontier with migrants under open immigration.

And then there's the economic aspect as well, with Russia forced to cut cheap trade deals with China due to Western sanctions. I mean, it's not a sure thing for Siberia to become Chinese in future, but the likelihood is there.
 
Last edited:

Lusitania

Donor
For now, at least. Russia is trying to restrict immigration from China. But that hasn't stopped Russian from being spooked over the issue. I mean, it's 109 million Chinese citizens living in Northeast China alone vs 25 million Russian citizens in the entire Far Eastern and Siberian Federal Districts. It won't be that hard to overwhelm the frontier with migrants under open immigration.

And then there's the economic aspect as well, with Russia forced to cut cheap trade deals with China due to Western sanctions. I mean, it's not a sure thing for Siberia to become Chinese in future, but the likelihood is there.
Even during the Soviet Union the Slavic leaders were worried about the “yellowing” of the nation as the Muslim groups higher birthdate was causing some concern in Moscow.
 
The sino-soviet split was mostly a split over ideological and strategical differences. However the soviets had ideological differences with other socialist allies, aswell (like Vietnam, Romania, Hungary, North Korea, etc.). The problem with the chinese was, that Mao completely rejected the idea of economic reform on one side, and peacefull coexistence with the west on the other. So Kruchchev called him a warmongerer, and on the other hand, Mao called Kruchchev a state-capitalist. The CPC started the Great Leap forward, the rapid expansion of agruculture and industry at once, which contradicted the soviet form of socialism. At the same time the chinese were at war with soviet alligned India, over border disputes. The soviets saw the chinese as aggressors, and supported the Indians, aswell as withdraw their advisors from China. At this point the two nations drifted more and more appart, untill they were bitter enemies.

But the sino-soviet split was not inevitable. And this 'Uh, there cab only be only socialist superpower', totally misses point. There can be two capitalist superpower working together, two monarchies, etc. And untill 1957, they were very close allies actually (though some ideological differences existed between Mao and Stalin, aswell).

The sino-soviet split came to be in OTL, after a lot of poor diplomacy and dispute over minor details. A bit more cautious talking by one side, there would never have been this domino effect with drew a wedge between the two nations. After all, the two nations had the same ideology, the same goals and the same enemies.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
If the split was inevitable how come China and Russia have been able to get along pretty well since 1990 in OTL?
 

Lusitania

Donor
The sino-soviet split was mostly a split over ideological and strategical differences. However the soviets had ideological differences with other socialist allies, aswell (like Vietnam, Romania, Hungary, North Korea, etc.). The problem with the chinese was, that Mao completely rejected the idea of economic reform on one side, and peacefull coexistence with the west on the other. So Kruchchev called him a warmongerer, and on the other hand, Mao called Kruchchev a state-capitalist. The CPC started the Great Leap forward, the rapid expansion of agruculture and industry at once, which contradicted the soviet form of socialism. At the same time the chinese were at war with soviet alligned India, over border disputes. The soviets saw the chinese as aggressors, and supported the Indians, aswell as withdraw their advisors from China. At this point the two nations drifted more and more appart, untill they were bitter enemies.

But the sino-soviet split was not inevitable. And this 'Uh, there cab only be only socialist superpower', totally misses point. There can be two capitalist superpower working together, two monarchies, etc. And untill 1957, they were very close allies actually (though some ideological differences existed between Mao and Stalin, aswell).

The sino-soviet split came to be in OTL, after a lot of poor diplomacy and dispute over minor details. A bit more cautious talking by one side, there would never have been this domino effect with drew a wedge between the two nations. After all, the two nations had the same ideology, the same goals and the same enemies.

The Soviet - Chinese split had its beginning at the Soviet treatment of Mao and the Chinese delegation at Stalin's 75 birthday celebration. Having just defeated the Nationalist China and captured all of Mainland China he expected to be treated as a hero and as equal to Stalin and China regarded as equal to Soviet Union. Instead he was treated like all other guests including those from Africa and such. Mao was incensed and that started his animosity with Soviets. Did not help that Soviets made the Chinese pay for all the Soviet hardware the Chinese used in the Korea war after China put its soldiers in battle.
 
If the split was inevitable how come China and Russia have been able to get along pretty well since 1990 in OTL?

Because while the Cold War may have ended, they still had desires in matching the USA and they were all kinda trying to play nice.

A lot of bad blood existed between China and Russia and while they may be trying to get along, it wouldn’t last forever.

And just because they were socialist nations, doesn’t mean they’d get along. Stalin was a guy who used socialism as a means for power and while I can’t say the same for Mao, I wouldn’t put it past him either.
 
China in 1990 is very different from Mao's China and Russia is definitely not the same as USSR. The world moved on.

Also, there's still some differences they have...
For instance, I mentioned about years back when China rejected those breakaway states being SCO members...
Also, Russia is closer to India, while Pakistan is closer to China, and there's the Central Asia stuff...
 
Also, there's still some differences they have...
For instance, I mentioned about years back when China rejected those breakaway states being SCO members...
Also, Russia is closer to India, while Pakistan is closer to China, and there's the Central Asia stuff...

And Kazakhstan being the regional power of Central Asia, is friendly to everyone, but bows to no one.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
And just because they were socialist nations, doesn’t mean they’d get along. Stalin was a guy who used socialism as a means for power and while I can’t say the same for Mao, I wouldn’t put it past him either.

Actually, I think you're right here, and the evolution and weakening of socialist ideology probably made it *easier* rather than harder for Russia and China to get along.

The more detail I read about the Sino-Soviet split, the more I think it was about ideological debate and Mao's megalomania, and less about an immutable clash of national interests.

It seems the PRC and Soviet Union were *divided* by a common ideology more often than not; Russia and the PRC have been able to get along better for longer since 1989 in part because China now only pretends to care about Marxist ideology, and Russia doesn't even pretend to care about it since Putin is doing his own thing.

The other big part is simple balance of power, as long as Washington has the power and gumption to challenge Beijing and Moscow at the same time, America is a bigger problem to them than they are to each other. To use an American football analogy, America took a great bit of "yardage" in the international field from Russia at the end of the Cold War, Central Europe, the Balkans and Baltics. The Russians came to resent that. Meanwhile China did not take any "yards" from Russia. For China, despite US diplomatic commitment to the one China policy since 1971, the U.S. has de facto been impeding China's ability to win the yards it wants in Taiwan. And, from 1989 and Tiananmen, America became the bigger ideological threat.
 
Allies is kind of an exaggeration. Friendly is a better term. They did solve the border dispute (which, much to the disdain of ordinary Russians, were more in China's favour with Russia giving up occupied lands), and they're not exactly trying to force each other into regime change as America has. But take away America, and issues like the Sinification of the Russian Far East becomes far more obvious.

Interesting enough, the opposite view is common among the ordinary Chinese.
 
Actually, I think you're right here, and the evolution and weakening of socialist ideology probably made it *easier* rather than harder for Russia and China to get along.

The more detail I read about the Sino-Soviet split, the more I think it was about ideological debate and Mao's megalomania, and less about an immutable clash of national interests.

It seems the PRC and Soviet Union were *divided* by a common ideology more often than not; Russia and the PRC have been able to get along better for longer since 1989 in part because China now only pretends to care about Marxist ideology, and Russia doesn't even pretend to care about it since Putin is doing his own thing.

The other big part is simple balance of power, as long as Washington has the power and gumption to challenge Beijing and Moscow at the same time, America is a bigger problem to them than they are to each other. To use an American football analogy, America took a great bit of "yardage" in the international field from Russia at the end of the Cold War, Central Europe, the Balkans and Baltics. The Russians came to resent that. Meanwhile China did not take any "yards" from Russia. For China, despite US diplomatic commitment to the one China policy since 1971, the U.S. has de facto been impeding China's ability to win the yards it wants in Taiwan. And, from 1989 and Tiananmen, America became the bigger ideological threat.

Russia and China have had historical bad blood though and Stalin also contributed to it.

I do think it would be inevitable if the USA and NATO were t as much of a threat, but still
 
No. China was weak and backwards but acted like it was stronger and better than the USSR. China got too big for its britches and ended up isolated from the Communist Bloc. Isolated from the west and the Soviet Bloc...only the CCP could achieve this disaster. China was lagging behind the Soviets economically and technologically. You cannot expect to be treated as an equal if you were never one to start with. China needed to learn humility, take advantage of Soviet tech transfers, and behave. Bide your time.
 
It’s hard

For a nation that has spend over a hundred years under western imperialism, Soviet Union’s economic and military dominance over China in the 1950s seemed too reminiscent of that old age.

Since the Russians have spend the past 400 years as a colonial power other than a colonized country, it’s hard for them to think from China’s perspective.

If you read professor Wen Tiejun’s description about the relationship between the Soviet investor and China, it looks suspiciously similar to the United States’ relationship with Latin American banana republics: i.e. the investor is the one who decide what sort of political system the developing country should have.

The Russians only withdrew their fleet from China in 1955, in its place, they proposed a “combined fleet” in 1956. When this was rejected, the Russian terminated investments to China in 1956. Matter of fact, the Russian leadership only wanted vassals, whom they could militarily dominate, as a part of the communist planned economy system, they did not want equal partners.

It’s not a question of who should be the boss of the communist bloc, it’s a matter of whether the hard-fought independence of China could be kept.
 
Last edited:
Top