WI: Nationalist Victory in the Chinese Civil War?

How plausible is this? How far back would the POD have to be?

One idea that I have is having the Communists be less successful in their war against the Japanese, leaving them in a weaker position to take advantage of the Japanese surrender. The Nationalists are then able to defeat the Communists and assume sole rule over China.

How plausible is this scenario?

What would be the long-term effects of a Nationalist China? Would China become a solidly US-aligned country or would they become more independent? The Korean War would likely be butterflied away, since a Nationalist China wouldn't intervene against the US. What other effects would there be?
 

Typo

Banned
China might be a bit more democratic, but in terms of wealth and economy, it's highly probable it will look the same as today.
 
In terms of POV, it would help the Nationalists considerably if the British didn't fritter away the last good German-trained Nationalist division in the Burma campaign. Those guys would have helped a lot in training the Nationalist army as it tried to rebuild. The Nationalists tried a major offensive in 1942, but it fizzled to the point that the Japanese barely noticed it. That might not have happened to the same extent if the German-trained troops had still been available.

It would have also helped considerably if the US had given priority to building up the Chinese army rather than to building up air assets in China in terms of the airlifts over the Hump. Getting the Burma Road reopened earlier might have helped even more. The Ledo Road probably wouldn't have helped much.

A Nationalist China would have probably been US allied, at least at first, but would have probably gone its own way on some issues. Historically the Nationalists gave the Viet Minh some weapons in the early going of their war against the French, and certainly the Nationalists were no friends of restored European empires in the Far East. For that matter, I don't know if the US would have gotten involved on the French side of their IndoChina adventure in the absence of a Communist victory in China.

What would a Nationalist regime look like? The Nationalists were a complex and often unstable mix of warlords and progressive and traditionalist central government factions. The warlords ranged from relatively competent and reasonably supportive of the Chinese war effort, though with a strong subtext of maintaining their own military autonomy (the Kunming faction) to for sale to the highest of most powerful bidder. The center lost much of its power when it lost most of the good German-trained divisions in the battle for Shanghai. It was rebuilding with US-trained and equipped divisions, but the US was primarily concerned with building a Chinese army to fight the Japanese, and didn't understand that the Nationalists were playing a complex chess game where strengthening some elements of what was formally the Chinese army would actually weaken the central government because those elements were of doubtful loyalty. In 1943 and 1944, much of the loyal part of the Chinese army was actually positioned to keep an eye on portions of doubtful loyalty, and (from old and possibly faulty memory) half a million of the best troops were keeping an eye on the Communists.

A Nationalist victory would imply that the US built up central government units to the point where they could keep the bulk of the warlords in line as well as beating the Communists. Defanging the warlords would probably be an ongoing problem though.
 
Nationalist victory doesn't even guarantee one China today. depending on how this "victory" is reached.
 
A Nationalist China Republic in 1949 ?
that's mean capitalist China !
with a economic miracle like Germany several years later in 1950's
will push ecologically Japan to be only a supplying industry for China economy
and in 1960's will USA have bigger Problem as with OTL Japan Imports

A Nationalist China Republic in 1949 ?
that's mean anti-communist China !
imagine a Korea or Vietnam War
were China soldiers overrun those communist country

intriguing who USA evolved without a U.S.<>Vietnam War!
and under China economic boom (ala OTL Japan only BIGGER) in 1960's
and USSR relationship with Nationalist China Republic ?

in 1980 Nationalist China Republic would ecologically state of today.
with technolgy of 1980, but with China innovation

why ?
It was Mao politics and communist dogmas who counter China for 30 years !
 

Hendryk

Banned
One idea that I have is having the Communists be less successful in their war against the Japanese, leaving them in a weaker position to take advantage of the Japanese surrender.
The Communists were only "successful" in their war against the Japanese in the sense that they left the heavy lifting to the Nationalists while they themselves coopted the partisan cells behind Japanese lines and generally saved their strength for the later civil war. Then the Soviets gave them Manchuria as a base of operations.

The civil war could have ended on a Nationalist victory or at least stalemate with a POD as late as 1947, but an earlier POD would be a safer bet.
 

Typo

Banned
A Nationalist China Republic in 1949 ?
that's mean capitalist China !
with a economic miracle like Germany several years later in 1950's
will push ecologically Japan to be only a supplying industry for China economy
and in 1960's will USA have bigger Problem as with OTL Japan Imports

A Nationalist China Republic in 1949 ?
that's mean anti-communist China !
imagine a Korea or Vietnam War
were China soldiers overrun those communist country

intriguing who USA evolved without a U.S.<>Vietnam War!
and under China economic boom (ala OTL Japan only BIGGER) in 1960's
and USSR relationship with Nationalist China Republic ?

in 1980 Nationalist China Republic would ecologically state of today.
with technolgy of 1980, but with China innovation

why ?
It was Mao politics and communist dogmas who counter China for 30 years !
This is basically a fantasy that ignores the real situation China was in in 1949, China was not West Germany circa 1949, and it also ignores the real contributions communism made to Chinese modernization
 
If you could somehow keep the Soviets out of the Pacific War then this could happen. The US wouldn't have allowed the Communists to entrench in Manchuria before giving it to the Nationalists like the Soviets did. But it would still be a tough fight for the Nationalists because of corruption and they couldn't recruit like the Communists could and any western intervention would do as much harm as good. So my guess is that the civil war would last longer then it did in OTL. This would also butterfly the Korean War for sure since the US would occupy all of Korea. Without the Korean War it would take Japan longer to rebuild.

As for alignment, it really depends. Most likely it would end up joining the Non-Alignment Movement with India and Yugoslavia.
 
This is basically a fantasy that ignores the real situation China was in in 1949, China was not West Germany circa 1949, and it also ignores the real contributions communism made to Chinese modernization

Very true. The Nationalists were an oppressive, corrupt regime. They would probably not be able to pull off the extensive modernization that the Communists acheived.

If the Nationalists win the war, how likely is it that the Communists set up their own state in Sinkiang with Soviet support? Given that Sinkinag was essentially independent during the war under a Communist government, I think there would not be too many obstacles for this.

Also, what would happen with Tibet? Would the Nationalists try to reconquer them? Could this lead to the USSR recognizing Tibet as independent to spite the West?
 
If the Nationalists win the war, how likely is it that the Communists set up their own state in Sinkiang with Soviet support? Given that Sinkinag was essentially independent during the war under a Communist government, I think there would not be too many obstacles for this.

The Sinkiang dictator eventually ended up as KMT's agriculture minister in Taiwan. True story dat.

But the USSR needs to either do better in Barbarossa, or replace Sheng prior to that. Which they didn't do because they nominally supported the One China stance and were pro-KMT.

Also, what would happen with Tibet? Would the Nationalists try to reconquer them? Could this lead to the USSR recognizing Tibet as independent to spite the West?

Potentially, although as I said, it took the deomonstrated incompetence of the KMT and the cunning and the sheer never-say-die of the CPC, as well as seven years of war, for the Soviets to finally offer the CPC something of substance (rather than just training) like they were offering the KMT throughout.

Basically, if KMT plays it smart, they could run their cleptocracy for a long while, playing off the Soviets vs. the Americans+Allies and going non-aligned. I don't know if it would be better than current China economically, but they'd avoid the Cultural Revolution, at least. Although I'm still expecting bloodshed in the respectable millions over the decades. If they were that smart, they wouldn't be the 40s KMT, however.
 

Markus

Banned
China might be a bit more democratic, but in terms of wealth and economy, it's highly probable it will look the same as today.

??? It wasn´t until the 80´s that the communists began making steps towards a capitalist economy. In the prevoius decades they did what commies do best: wreak havoc in their own economy.

Not even the OLT-KMT could screw up that hard(Cultural Revolution, Great Leap Backward ect.) And a KMT that manages to defeat the commies for good can not be as inept as the one from OTL. Therefore China would be better off, most likely much better.
 

Typo

Banned
Except for the growth rate in China from OTL 1949-1980 was nothing to sneer at either.

The cultural revolution was also not that disruptive form an economical point of view, that would be the Great Leap Forward. But in either case, the CCP was -very- good at...rooting out any opposition to modernization programs.

Remember, even under "capitalism" India and Philippines did not in fact pull off economical miracles earlier than China did. The idea that China could have being able to pull off what they did from 1980 on from 1950 on just because the KMT is in charge is laughable.
 
If the Nationalists win the war, how likely is it that the Communists set up their own state in Sinkiang with Soviet support? Given that Sinkinag was essentially independent during the war under a Communist government, I think there would not be too many obstacles for this.

Also, what would happen with Tibet? Would the Nationalists try to reconquer them? Could this lead to the USSR recognizing Tibet as independent to spite the West?

On Xinjiang, I think it's very unlikely that the CCP would be allowed to set up a state there. After Sheng Shicai's repudiation of the USSR in 1944 (1943?), Soviet-backed natives took the province over anyway, more or less. Given that Xinjiang is ethnically Uyghur and Muslim, it's hard to imagine the USSR letting Mao and the overwhelmingly Han CCP set up shop there, not when they had effective control of the region anyway - that would have made things unnecessarily messy. And in the case of a Guomindang China, they probably wouldn't have given it back. Instead, you might see the "Turkestan Soviet Socialist Republic," or the "Uyghur People's Republic" or some such.

Tibet is a more interesting issue. It's hard to see the GMD not intervening at some point to assert their prerogatives in a region that was generally considered to be under Chinese suzerainty. As for how that would look in practice, who knows?

The civil war could have ended on a Nationalist victory or at least stalemate with a POD as late as 1947, but an earlier POD would be a safer bet.

Yeah, I agree that if you're looking for total GMD victory, a prewar POD is probably a better idea. If you let the CCP introduce the peasants of the north to the wonders of land reform, it's going to be awfully difficult to put that particular genie back into the bottle. Plus, considering how corrupt and incompetent the Guomindang was it's probably better off if they don't have anyone to challenge them in the aftermath of war, because whoever it is might look good in comparison. And especially when you consider how many times the CCP came ever so close to being wiped out in the prewar years, it wouldn't be that hard to engineer a suitable POD.

Nationalist victory doesn't even guarantee one China today. depending on how this "victory" is reached.

This is the real question. How was the victory won? Was it a partial victory - which with a postwar POD is more likely than not, with Xinjiang gone and perhaps even a rump CCP state in the northeast controlling much of Manchuria and perhaps parts of Inner Mongolia as well. Or was it a crushing victory, with the CCP totally destroyed and the Guomindang in control of all of China? It's awfully hard to make any sweeping statements about what Guomindang China will look like without knowing how their victory happened. I'd be careful about stating with near-complete certainty (as a few people have done already) that such a state would be either a): a capitalist wonderland or b): not much different than today's PRC.
 

Markus

Banned
Except for the growth rate in China from OTL 1949-1980 was nothing to sneer at either.

The cultural revolution was also not that disruptive form an economical point of view, that would be the Great Leap Forward. But in either case, the CCP was -very- good at...rooting out any opposition to modernization programs.

Remember, even under "capitalism" India and Philippines did not in fact pull off economical miracles earlier than China did. The idea that China could have being able to pull off what they did from 1980 on from 1950 on just because the KMT is in charge is laughable.

Yeah, like having someone in charge whose economic policies are not known to be the worst anyone ever came up with and who does not kill a few dozen million people won´t make a big impact. That assumption is laughable.
 
I suppose it's worth pointing out that the Second East Turkestan Republic only controlled the Ili Kazakh Autonomous Prefecture (the northern bits) of Xinjaing.
 

Typo

Banned
I never said there wouldn't be a big impact.

I'm simply saying that it's laughable to expect "mega-Taiwan"
 
@subversivepanda - this is completely off topic, but I love your forum name.

Thanks!

I suppose it's worth pointing out that the Second East Turkestan Republic only controlled the Ili Kazakh Autonomous Prefecture (the northern bits) of Xinjaing.

Good point. To say (as, uh, I did) that the USSR via the Second East Turkestan Republic essentially controlled Xinjiang between 1945 and 1949 is wrong. I think that the 2nd ETR controlled three of Xinjiang's ten districts (Yili, Altay, and Tacheng), and the GMD had a rather tenuous grip on the other seven districts; there was a short-lived coalition government in 1946 that fell apart the following year, if I'm not mistaken, although I don't think that much came of the resulting fighting. How would an alternate Chinese Civil War have affected the situation? I guess it depends on how chaotic the situation is (more chaos, more success for ETR) and how willing the USSR is to back their clients up.
 
Top