It was Soviet-occupied since the Russian Civil War and I don't expect that to change.
Would KMT China become a bigger super power than CCP China is today?
- Thread starter sirjackalot
- Start date
It was Soviet-occupied since the Russian Civil War and I don't expect that to change.
RousseauX
Donor
Nationalist China otl had good relations with the USSR, and Stalin was always pretty pragmatic with "internationalist" Communist movements in other coountries. In the 1920s Stalin basically took the side of the KMT over the Chinese Communists. Even after Stalin died the Soviets were pretty pragmatic about working with non-Communist powers even when they suppressed Communists domestically. Also, ironically, without Mao and Maosim relations between China and the USSR would lack the crucial personality and ideological spats which otl more than anything else led to the Sino-Soviet split.
The model for a nationalist China is really India: vaguely pro-Soviet, sometimes vaguely pro-US but ultimately a non-aligned power.
Last edited:
The ROC could have achieved economic prosperity and geopolitical importance much earlier than the PRC, if Chiang Kai-shek could rein in the warlords and continue with centralizing authority and building institutions.
A lot of people point to the successes of the PRC in eradicating infectious disease, illiteracy and so on to contrast the CCP's early competence favorably with the KMT, but we must'nt forget that many of the PRC's programs were started in the republican era, with the main people behind them being educated in the republican era as well. The reason for the PRC's successes where the KMT fell short was probably eight parts due to the fact that the country was at peace and only two parts because the CCP was a totalitarian Marxist-Leninist organization with a large supply of political will.
From 1911 to 1949 the ROC never enjoyed a time where there wasn't some serious internal conflict, or a foreign invasion ravaging the country. Until 1928 the warlords had top-level control; from 1928 to 1932 Chiang Kai-shek repelled rebellions by the warlords in the central plains, and Japan invaded in the Northeast and Shanghai, having already played a detrimental role in Chinese political centralization for over a decade prior. Despite multiple conflicts between the CCP and the KMT in the 1930s, the Nanking Decade still managed to grow the Chinese economy and industry significantly, until that too (and all of the state-building efforts of the KMT) was cut short by the Second Sino-Japanese War.
World War II set back the KMT by a decade, as it could not do political and institutional reform when the most productive third of China was occupied. It still managed to roll out a new constitution and an electoral system during the KMT-CCP civil war years. The press under the KMT during this time was also freer than it would ever be under CCP control, meaning that the KMT, had it won, would likely have maintained a certain level of open society and thus made continued innovation and commerce possible.
Without the CCP being a factor ITTL, the progressive segments of Chinese society would certainly push back against KMT corruption and agitate for reforms all across the board. Civil society in republican China had developed rapidly despite the political chaos of the era.
A lot of people point to the successes of the PRC in eradicating infectious disease, illiteracy and so on to contrast the CCP's early competence favorably with the KMT, but we must'nt forget that many of the PRC's programs were started in the republican era, with the main people behind them being educated in the republican era as well. The reason for the PRC's successes where the KMT fell short was probably eight parts due to the fact that the country was at peace and only two parts because the CCP was a totalitarian Marxist-Leninist organization with a large supply of political will.
From 1911 to 1949 the ROC never enjoyed a time where there wasn't some serious internal conflict, or a foreign invasion ravaging the country. Until 1928 the warlords had top-level control; from 1928 to 1932 Chiang Kai-shek repelled rebellions by the warlords in the central plains, and Japan invaded in the Northeast and Shanghai, having already played a detrimental role in Chinese political centralization for over a decade prior. Despite multiple conflicts between the CCP and the KMT in the 1930s, the Nanking Decade still managed to grow the Chinese economy and industry significantly, until that too (and all of the state-building efforts of the KMT) was cut short by the Second Sino-Japanese War.
World War II set back the KMT by a decade, as it could not do political and institutional reform when the most productive third of China was occupied. It still managed to roll out a new constitution and an electoral system during the KMT-CCP civil war years. The press under the KMT during this time was also freer than it would ever be under CCP control, meaning that the KMT, had it won, would likely have maintained a certain level of open society and thus made continued innovation and commerce possible.
Without the CCP being a factor ITTL, the progressive segments of Chinese society would certainly push back against KMT corruption and agitate for reforms all across the board. Civil society in republican China had developed rapidly despite the political chaos of the era.
Last edited:
marathag
Banned
I disagree, I feel that KMT China would align closely enough to be part of whatever *SEATO takes form as, and China will be under the Nuclear umbrella as much as the UK,France or Italy was, as soon as the Iron Curtain and NATO forms. No Korean War, either things are set on the 38th
Without Red China, Communism won't be seen as being on the march, just sitting on Eastern Europe, so there is even possibility of far better relations with the USSR once Stalin is out.
This makes a lot of sense, I think. IOTL the USSR's posturing, while not lacking in the least in aggression and subversion, was mostly defensive following the Second World War.
Could the Central Plains War be prevented? The conflict was incredibly destructive and weakened China's ability to defend itself, which would have consequences in the Japanese invasion of Manchuria and then the rest of China years later.
Assuming said conflict is avoided, Chiang would have more resources and time to reform the army, and may be able to crush Mao in the Long March. Though he probably wouldn't manage to keep the Japanese away from Manchuria, the military would be in much better shape by the time of the final showdown against them.
Assuming said conflict is avoided, Chiang would have more resources and time to reform the army, and may be able to crush Mao in the Long March. Though he probably wouldn't manage to keep the Japanese away from Manchuria, the military would be in much better shape by the time of the final showdown against them.
Maybe if the U.S. under Truman would have continued Operation Beleaguer to fight against the CCP, the KMT would have a chance. However this will be a costly part for the U.S. which was still recovering from World War II. (separate thread on Operation Beleaguer here)
Thomas1195
Banned
Or have Chiang delaying Communist purge, which occurred in 1927 IOTL, by a year, allowing for a more successful Northern Expedition with more warlords curbed than IOTL.
Thomas1195
Banned
Have Chiang delaying the OTL 1927 Communist Purge by one year could enable a more successful Northern Expedition taking out more warlords.
Thomas1195
Banned
If you want a revolutionary government, the left KMT had they won the power struggle could have done the things that the CCP did with much less bloodshed.
I doubt it. I reckon they would preserve the World heritage site and even reintroduce Buddhism into the area.
Hell, I see China Republic backing the monarchy to modernize them
Depends on when the POD is, I guess, but I don't think they would try to antagonize the KMT too much. I wouldn't be too surprised if we saw a Sino-American split ITTL, since Chiang would definitely try to pursue his own agenda and then play off the two superpowers against each other.
marathag
Banned
But you share borders with only one of them.
With an unfriendly USA, you have to rely on the good nature of the USSR to stay out of your business.
Chiang could see what happened at best to Finland, a near puppet allowed 'Freedom' as long as those actions did no oppose what the USSR wanted done, or the actual puppets in Eastern Europe and closer to home, the Mongolian People's Republic.
China is way, way too big to fall into that sort of relationship, and would be stronger still without the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. Chiang would likely keep both superpowers at an arm's length while framing himself as a leader of the non-aligned nations, a position he would contest with whoever governs India.
Last edited: