WI: Republic of China (Yunnan)

@ Eternal Cynic

Either I'm very dumb or your are total ignorant.

We are here not to judge OTL. Here we to discuss ATL. read the OP.
You just say the destiny of KMT was pre-determined whatever case.
What I'm trying to do is just making my point to help OP to construct its TL.
ITTL - KMT will survive and control Yunnan, Guizhou, Guangxi and Hainan and Taiwan. So it means there had some altered events and PoDs.
For example: Maybe KMT didn't have colossal loss of Huahai river. Maybe they just defeated battle but could retain bulk of forces. Maybe they had retreated (like Kutuzov did during Napoleon invasion of Russia) or whatever reason they ended up in Southwestern China with sizable force. So it means ITTL situation could be a lot different than OTL.
 
It's possible. But then again, the KMT entered the war with a 4 to 1 advantage in manpower and far greater advantages in training, funding, and equipment. Logically it shouldn't have even been a fight. So they were completely and totally lacking in competence. And perhaps Chiang could have salvaged the situation with a decisive victory at Huaihai. But after he lost the bulk of his fighting force there and then lost the Yangtze Delta in quick succession, he was toast. In that case a north-south division of China is plausible, but still foreign powers will find it hard to restrain either side from launching provocations.

But with a PoD well after the proclamation of the PRC, it's well to late to salvage anything on the mainland. Hainan perhaps, and maybe some small islands off the southeast coast, but not the mainland.
 
EternalCynic and Rousseau are spot on in this thread. The KMT was broken throughout its entire existence, due to various problems. That's why it couldn't fight the Japanese effectively and that's also why it succumbed to the Communists. The point about power asymmetry is also really good. If it is part of China, roughly speaking, and can be walked into, it will be taken, unless there is a balance of power between Nationalist and Communist forces to create a stalemate (possibly helped by US and Soviet pressure), which there wasn't.

You need a PoD in the early stages of WW2, I think for the KMT to survive on mainland China and even then it would require some drastic changes.
 
EternalCynic and Rousseau are spot on in this thread. The KMT was broken throughout its entire existence, due to various problems. That's why it couldn't fight the Japanese effectively and that's also why it succumbed to the Communists. The point about power asymmetry is also really good. If it is part of China, roughly speaking, and can be walked into, it will be taken, unless there is a balance of power between Nationalist and Communist forces to create a stalemate (possibly helped by US and Soviet pressure), which there wasn't.

You need a PoD in the early stages of WW2, I think for the KMT to survive on mainland China and even then it would require some drastic changes.
I think it's still possible for the KMT to survive even with a post-WW2 PoD. Chiang could have just ignored Marshall's plea to form a coalition government. Or just arrange an "accident" when Mao was travelling to Chongqing. And then he must grab control of all these warlords, which admittedly is most difficult (perhaps offering diplomatic posts in Paris or Rome, etc). But a KMT-ruled China will most likely be a semi-fascist and still insanely corrupt military dictatorship like Burma. Perhaps Chiang will be equally as paranoid of Americans and of his generals as Mao IOTL and launch a Cultural Revolution of his own...
 
I think it's still possible for the KMT to survive even with a post-WW2 PoD. Chiang could have just ignored Marshall's plea to form a coalition government. Or just arrange an "accident" when Mao was travelling to Chongqing. And then he must grab control of all these warlords, which admittedly is most difficult (perhaps offering diplomatic posts in Paris or Rome, etc). But a KMT-ruled China will most likely be a semi-fascist and still insanely corrupt military dictatorship like Burma. Perhaps Chiang will be equally as paranoid of Americans and of his generals as Mao IOTL and launch a Cultural Revolution of his own...
On second thoughts, you're probably right.

I don't think Chiang would have done anything near as thorough as the Cultural Revolution, but some sort of purge is certainly possible, probably inevitable, even. Mao was more brutal than Chiang. We have the fates of people like Peng Dehuai, Lin Biao, or Liu Shaoqi to look at, whereas Chiang spared Zhang Xueliang after the Xi'an incident.
 
The problem with this is that morale of the Nationalist forces are extremely low at this point and likely to run away or defect. The PRC, unlike Japan, can win over the population of the rest of China. Remember that the PRC was being backed by the Soviet Union with supplies. ROC isn't. Once PRC forces are able to cross the Yangtze, it is no longer possible for any part of mainland China to be held.

Taiwan could be held because there is enough of a sea barrier to allow the KMT to recover. And there is very good reason to think without the Korean War and the subsequent decision to interpose the US 7th Fleet between the mainland and Taiwan, even Taiwan would not have been held.

If you are looking for a realistic division of China, it probably requires the Nationalists to be able to hold the Yellow River leaving the Communists all of Manchuria and northern China. Of course, to enable the Nationalists to do that, you need to change a lot (primarily some of Chiang's decisions in regards to Manchuria and the economy, plus greatly increase American aid to Nanking).
 
We didn't trying to discuss OTL, we are doing ATL here.
1. OP says KMT would survive in Yunnan. My argument here is Yunnan alone won't be enough. They need sea outlet to receive massive supply from US. It requires control of Guangxi. I thought Pearl Delta region. But that would be huge Front line and will too overstretch KMT force. So I choose Leizhou and Guangxi.
2. KMT will have control of Leizhou Peninsula and Hainan. That would help defend Beihai. Without Naval and Air superiority conquering Port is very hard IMO. One thing is disrupting supply from Port to Front (it can be done) another thing is conquering it. Number is not advantage when you are in bottleneck.
3. Again its not destroying PRC. It means co-existing with them. They existed in OTL in Taiwan. North and South Korea still existing. Why does two China can't exist? Do you have any strong argument or just repeating legitimacy "Mandate of Heaven" thing and so on. Then stop this argument. That's too cheap.
4. PLA didn't have superior equipment. What PLA had was unlimited human supply. They could throw canon fodders. But without proper equipment supply it won't be won easily. And if War drags out for long period it will be burden to CCP. There will be dissatisfaction among Chinese too.
5. Again without massive US assistance KMT have no chance to survive. It is essential part. And having superior US equipment will negate PLA human advantage. And if you have air superiority guerrilla battle alone won't win the War.


3. Saying that shows you do not understand modern chinese history. Mao or Chiang would never co exist because if China is divided it is weak and is vulnerable to foreign domination.

4. 7/10 bloodiest wars in history was fought in China. Losing a couple of million people is unthinkable in the states but in China it is normal
 
3. Saying that shows you do not understand modern chinese history. Mao or Chiang would never co exist because if China is divided it is weak and is vulnerable to foreign domination.

While I generally agree with the points that the PRC would easily run over any KMT enclave on its soil, I think it's worth noting that the need to re-unite the country would contribute to more, not less conflict, since that was the genesis of the civil war (to reunite the country on their own terms).

A divided China did not exist because the KMT was incapable of holding onto any significant amount of Mainland China. I'm rather certain that Chiang would rather that his faction held half of China rather than just Taiwan, if only he could.
 
It's possible. But then again, the KMT entered the war with a 4 to 1 advantage in manpower and far greater advantages in training, funding, and equipment. Logically it shouldn't have even been a fight. So they were completely and totally lacking in competence.

Yes I agree with you. If KMT was competent there would not be question. But they wasn't. So ITTL now they fight for survival, instead of domination. OTOH, PRC fighting for domination.

So if I understand correctly, in order to survive KMT in mainland they need to tear up Chiang rule and place more competent one. So that man is more sane and who is not against co-existing with PRC.
 
Last edited:
So if I understand correctly, in order to survive KMT in mainland they need to tear up Chiang rule and place more competent one. So that man is more sane and who is not against co-existing with PRC.

But when? Any time after WW2 will only accelerate the KMT's disintegration (because nothing destroys a crumbling army's morale like political infighting). No one not under Japan's pay can challenge Chiang during WW2. And any PoD before that causes dramatic butterflies.

And who is "they"? Given the sometimes mindbogglingly stupid decisions by Washington I won't be surprised if Truman engineers a coup against Chiang, leading to the PLA waltzing into Taiwan by early 1950.

In any case merely replacing the man at the top doesn't change the KMT's lack of unity or the sheer corruption of its officers. A large reason why the KMT lost was because its officers were not reporting casualties to HQ, enabling them to receive the pay of ghost soldiers. A division with 10000 troops on paper in reality only had 7000 troops, with most their equipment pilfered or stolen, while its commander pocketed the pay of the 3000 missing troops. HQ gave orders assuming a strength of 10000 well-equipped troops; hence, they lose. Why will KMT officers stop this practice if their leader of 20 years is removed?
 
But when? Any time after WW2 will only accelerate the KMT's disintegration (because nothing destroys a crumbling army's morale like political infighting). No one not under Japan's pay can challenge Chiang during WW2. And any PoD before that causes dramatic butterflies.

And who is "they"? Given the sometimes mindbogglingly stupid decisions by Washington I won't be surprised if Truman engineers a coup against Chiang, leading to the PLA waltzing into Taiwan by early 1950.

In any case merely replacing the man at the top doesn't change the KMT's lack of unity or the sheer corruption of its officers. A large reason why the KMT lost was because its officers were not reporting casualties to HQ, enabling them to receive the pay of ghost soldiers. A division with 10000 troops on paper in reality only had 7000 troops, with most their equipment pilfered or stolen, while its commander pocketed the pay of the 3000 missing troops. HQ gave orders assuming a strength of 10000 well-equipped troops; hence, they lose. Why will KMT officers stop this practice if their leader of 20 years is removed?

You are really eternal cynic. :rolleyes:

Look, you say possible but what you say is CPC wank.
And of course you will never accept the division of China. (as I saw in lot of other threads)
 
You are really eternal cynic. :rolleyes:

Look, you say possible but what you say is CPC wank.
And of course you will never accept the division of China. (as I saw in lot of other threads)

It's not really cynicism, it's just fact that the KMT was a mess in the late 1940s.
 
EternalCynic and Rousseau are spot on in this thread. The KMT was broken throughout its entire existence, due to various problems. That's why it couldn't fight the Japanese effectively and that's also why it succumbed to the Communists.

Well, I think a more accurate point is that it scouldn't beat Japan because it didn't have an industrialized war machine, not that they were "broken."

I still like the Hainan idea for what it's worth. If you get to a point where Mao end's up feeling secure enough to undertake something similar to the boneheaded campaigns he spearheaded throughout the 50's and 60's it would be nice to see the KMT come rolling in from he south to put an end to the Chairman's hysteria.

Before the Sino-Soviet Split, this leads to World War III. After... it probably does, but China is a nuclear power.
 
Look, you say possible but what you say is CPC wank.
And of course you will never accept the division of China. (as I saw in lot of other threads)

The last plausible PoD for a divided China is a KMT victory at Huaihai *and* a CPC Pyrrhic victory at Tianjin and Beiping, leading to a split along the Huai River. And even then foreign powers will find Chiang and Mao harder to restrain than in Korea.

The entire KMT strategy after that point was to retreat to a smaller, defensible area, and then *wait* for WW3 (which would be sparked in Central Europe, not Asia) to begin, and then receive US assistance. And even then there was bitter infighting between Chiang and Li over its implementation.
 
Top