"What if the Kuomingtang Won the Chinese Civil War? " Topic

"In The Collected What Ifs?, distinguished Professor Arthur Waldron of the University of Pennsylvania argues that in the spring of 1946, the Nationalists could have militarily defeated the communists under Mao Zedong. Late in 1945, after the Japanese surrender, Chiang had begun to airlift his battle-hardened, U.S.-equipped troops to Manchuria, where the Chinese Red Army (not to be confused with its Soviet namesake) had made its main base.

The communists resisted but, having avoided the worst of the fighting against the Japanese during World War II, were quickly defeated by Chiang's veteran troops. Many of these men had been fighting for several years in the China-Burma-India (CBI) campaign, and were led by well-trained (and, for a change, mostly non-corrupt) officers. The Nationalists were able to decisively defeat the Red Army at a month-long battle in Sipingjie in May 1946, occupying Southern Manchuria. Lin Biao, one of Mao's favorite generals, threw 100,000 conscripted factory workers into the path of the advancing Nationalist army, to little avail. The suburbs of Harbin, the gateway to the north, had been reached by the advancing Nationalist units by early June.

However, at the moment of victory, Chiang called a halt. This proved to be a fatal a mistake from which the Nationalists never recovered. Within three years, the communists reorganized and counterattacked, eventually pushing Chiang's forces out of China proper to Taiwan. The reason for this can be summarized in two names: U.S. President Harry Truman and George C. Marshall. Both these men were undoubtedly great statesmen, but had little experience in navigating the "snake pit of Chinese politics."…"
Full text here
link

Amicalement
Armand

I know very little of this war but I wonder if logistics might have been a problem for the Nationalists. Also, were the US still funding arming and training them??

No North Korea.

B

Something to consider was the endemic corruption of the Nationalist forces which eroded their popular support. Looting and raping will do that. The Red Army had a much cleaner reputation, which they managed to hold onto until Tienanmen Square ended that.

Agree!

Amicalement
Armand

Unless someone with true vision came along, the government would likely become mired in the same type of corruption and "government to help the wealthy get richer" that plagued much of post-war Africa, South America, and SE Asia. Most European countries had a history of democracy, and vast amounts of aid helped keep them stable. Countries without a democratic history tended to see their aid siphoned off, so even vast amounts of aid to China likely would not have helped. With the Soviets stirring the pot, revolution was more likely than reform, even if Mao's effort was not successful.

Instead of a Communist State we would have been dealing with a dictator. My money is that he would have picked a fight with the Soviet Union and dragged us into it (a la Vietnam or Korea). We know how both of those turned out.

Chiang was quite capable of kissing up to the Soviets before 1927. If he'd managed to beat Mao he might have done it again.

I think he also believed the US and the west in general had more power than they could/would really project that far. I'm reading a book about Shanghai 1937 and he sabotaged the Chinese offensive to avoid looking like the aggressor to the west. Cost him thousands of his best trained troops.

mwindsorfw

I had also always thought that the nations of Europe had more of a history of democracy, but reading 'Dark Continent' by Mark Mazower gave me some pause for thought.