• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

Divided China after World War II

R

Ricardolindo

Well-known member
Location
Portugal
What if China had been divided after World War II? For this, we need to get rid of Chiang Kai-Shek, who was never interested in partition. This isn't hard, as he was almost killed in Burma in 1942. Say he was and Chen Cheng succeeded him. Unlike Chiang, I doubt he would have have tried to retake Manchuria, saving the Kuomintang's best forces. So, what happens with a rump Communist Manchuria and a Kuomintang government in the rest of China?
 
Last edited:
There is no way that any KMT leadership wound have accepted a divided China diplomatically. The only way to bring it about would be a stagnant military quagmire. That isn't going to happen though either as neither side had the means to maintain a drawn out fight. The KMT had to go on the offensive in Manchuria or their army, specifically those parts that weren't the "elite" we're going to fall apart.
 
It's far easier to divide China up before WWII then after it. Go back to the Northern Expedition, that's what set the stage for full unification.
 
Japhy said:
There is no way that any KMT leadership wound have accepted a divided China diplomatically. The only way to bring it about would be a stagnant military quagmire. That isn't going to happen though either as neither side had the means to maintain a drawn out fight. The KMT had to go on the offensive in Manchuria or their army, specifically those parts that weren't the "elite" we're going to fall apart.
Click to expand...

It was pretty much impossible for the Kuomintang to retake Manchuria. Even before the Soviet invasion, the CCP was strong there. I doubt Chen Cheng, who was a reformer, would have tried to retake it.
 
Ricardolindo said:
It was pretty much impossible for the Kuomintang to retake Manchuria. Even before the Soviet invasion, the CCP was strong there. I doubt Chen Cheng, who was a reformer, would have tried to retake it.
Click to expand...
Then the KMT forces collapse and he or anyone else is overthrown. And no it was not impossible, difficult because of continual US efforts to stop it but not impossible. The real problem is that it will then into a mess of partisan warfare if they do take the whole thing.
 
Japhy said:
Then the KMT forces collapse and he or anyone else is overthrown. And no it was not impossible, difficult because of continual US efforts to stop it but not impossible. The real problem is that it will then into a mess of partisan warfare if they do take the whole thing.
Click to expand...

Why would the Kuomintang collapse if it did not try to take Manchuria? It would have kept its best forces, which, in our timeline, were destroyed in Manchuria.
 
Ricardolindo said:
Why would the Kuomintang collapse if it did not try to take Manchuria? It would have kept its best forces, which, in our timeline, were destroyed in Manchuria.
Click to expand...

The KMT's biggest problem was it was corrupt as hell and lacked any widespread popular support, not just had its best forces sent off on a jolly. It had also been hollowed out as the CCP had done its best to ensure any Japanese offences had hit the KMT not the Communists.

Sooner or later its going to collapse like a bad souffle.
 
If the American's had provided some more support (Naval bombardment, lend-lease, air support), could they have maybe have held onto Hainan, or even a few coastal towns?
 
Artaxerxes said:
The KMT's biggest problem was it was corrupt as hell and lacked any widespread popular support, not just had its best forces sent off on a jolly. It had also been hollowed out as the CCP had done its best to ensure any Japanese offences had hit the KMT not the Communists.

Sooner or later its going to collapse like a bad souffle.
Click to expand...

As late as 1948, the Kuomintang had more soldiers than the CCP.
 
As a general rule, ceding a large part of your territory to another power is a bad idea. It tells everyone that you don't have the capacity to maintain order or hold off threats. It's particularly bad when the people you're ceding territory to are a domestic insurgency, since that basically says that they'd be better at managing things than you. It's hard to imagine the KMT being able to maintain its popularity (which as other posters mention was already falling) and maintain the morale of their army in this scenario.

The other thing that we have to consider is the CCP. They also wanted to control all of China, and controlling Manchuria gives them a good base to do so. I see no reason for them to just stop.
Ricardolindo said:
As late as 1948, the Kuomintang had more soldiers than the CCP.
Click to expand...
Because as we all know, the side with the most soldiers always wins. Morale, training, and skill of command have nothing to do with who wins, just raw numbers.
 
Ricardolindo said:
Why would the Kuomintang collapse if it did not try to take Manchuria? It would have kept its best forces, which, in our timeline, were destroyed in Manchuria.
Click to expand...
Because they were corrupt and their forces bled away when the pressure was gone as a result.
 
Torten said:
If the American's had provided some more support (Naval bombardment, lend-lease, air support), could they have maybe have held onto Hainan, or even a few coastal towns?
Click to expand...
Not unless we had deployed Ground Troops at that point and there wasn't the political will for that.
 
napoleon IV said:
As a general rule, ceding a large part of your territory to another power is a bad idea. It tells everyone that you don't have the capacity to maintain order or hold off threats. It's particularly bad when the people you're ceding territory to are a domestic insurgency, since that basically says that they'd be better at managing things than you. It's hard to imagine the KMT being able to maintain its popularity (which as other posters mention was already falling) and maintain the morale of their army in this scenario.

The other thing that we have to consider is the CCP. They also wanted to control all of China, and controlling Manchuria gives them a good base to do so. I see no reason for them to just stop.

Because as we all know, the side with the most soldiers always wins. Morale, training, and skill of command have nothing to do with who wins, just raw numbers.
Click to expand...

Thing is, Stalin may prevent Mao from attacking the Kuomintang. He may prefer a rump Communist Manchuria, which would be dependent on him, to a fully Communist China, which could defy him.
Regardless, regarding the numbers, I only said that to support that, unlike others in this thread have said, the Kuomintang wasn't doomed.
 
Last edited:
Ricardolindo said:
Thing is, Stalin may prevent Mao from attacking the Kuomintang. He may prefer a rump Communist Manchuria, which would be dependent on him, to a fully Communist China, which could defy him.
Regardless, regarding the numbers, I only said that to support that, unlike others in this thread have said, the Kuomintang wasn't doomed.
Click to expand...
No point in leaving a Western Aligned KMT on his Asian flank. Always easier to put Mao and power and worry about disputes later. Not that it was obvious there would be a split in 1946.
 
Japhy said:
No point in leaving a Western Aligned KMT on his Asian flank. Always easier to put Mao and power and worry about disputes later. Not that it was obvious there would be a split in 1946.
Click to expand...

Yeah the split really came out of the post Stalin settlement in the USSR, and even then, it could have been healed if leadership struggles had gone differently after Mao was removed.
 
Looking back at this thread of mine, remember Chen Cheng was a reformer. He would have implemented reforms that would have made the KMT more popular.
Also, historian Arthur Waldron in his "China Without Tears" chapter in the 1999 book "What If?" deals with a Kuomintang China and a CCP Manchuria, which indicates to me it's plausible. Certainly, the US did not think Manchuria was necessary for the Kuomintang.
 
I wonder what would happen if China was divided between a west china that was a democracy and and east that was communist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top