35 replies to this topic

[Celestialnaut]

This is an interesting idea someone brought up:

Well, at 33,920 km2, Hainan would make the Republic of China almost twice as large as it is in OTL, since the size of Taiwan is 35,980 km2. Also, Taiwan, despite being mostly covered with mountains and jungles, still manages to host a population of 23 million, crammed along the Western coastline. Hainan, OTOH, while in OTL being home to 8 million people, is flatter and could realistically accommodate over three times as many people.

What if the Nationalists were able to successfully defend Hainan and prevent it from falling to the PRC? What would the Republic of China be like if its territory was doubled and was not as easily identified as merely the government of Taiwan?

[Zheng He]

If I'm not mistaken, the Nationalists held out in Hainan until May 1950. Had they been able to hold until the end of June, when the Korean War started and the Truman administration decided to implement a policy of containment in East Asia, it's likely that Hainan would have been included in the US sphere of protection along with Taiwan.

Presumably, the strategic significance of Hainan wouldn't have been lost on the Americans once the situation in Vietnam started to heat up, assuming it does in this timeline.

Edited by Zheng He, 09 February 2009 - 04:32 AM.

[Optimus]

If the KMT had hold onto Hainan, would that have encouraged CKS to reconquer China with or without American support especially in the 1960s when the mainland is in chaos.

After KMT retreated to Taiwan in 1949, excluding Kinmen and Hainan, they still held 100+ big and small islets stretching from Canton to Shanghai. The initial plan was to secure a naval blockage of china southern provinces and protecting Taiwan. Some of those islets are big enough to be used as battlestations to launch an assault on mainland.

But over the next 4 years. Those chains of islands were all lost to the communists expect for Kinmen and Matsu.

[ahxiang]

If I'm not mistaken, the Nationalists held out in Hainan until May 1950. Had they been able to hold until the end of June, when the Korean War started and the Truman administration decided to implement a policy of containment in East Asia, it's likely that Hainan would have been included in the US sphere of protection along with Taiwan.

Presumably, the strategic significance of Hainan wouldn't have been lost on the Americans once the situation in Vietnam started to heat up, assuming it does in this timeline.

You assumed that Amercians were on the side of ROC. They were not. G Marshall vowed to make sure Chiang was to be deposed at one time.

From 1946 to 1948, ROC was not militarily refurnished by anybody in the world. It was an all-out arms embargo. There was no chance for ROC to defend itself against communist army.

The eruption of the Korean War was a result of Chiang's adopting the strategy of abandoning Haina and Zhoushan to make Korea a "protruding" point of the Asian curvature. Shao Yulin was smart enough to know what geo-politics was involved, and possibly had a suspicion that the Comintern spies had taken over the US government.

What happened was that Acheson promptly declared the curvature from Aleutian ISlands to Japan, to Ryukyu to the Phillipines, excluding Korea and Taiwan. Stalin and Kim then felt emboldened to attack South Korea, hence fulfilling Chiang's wish to drag the USA into the conflict.

[Optimus]

If the nationalists didn't chose to retreat to Taiwan, decided to make Chongqing their base - they carried on fighting in the mainland to the end.
Two scenarios - a - either the nationalists forces were completely destroyed on the mainland or b - American help arrived and the nationalists held onto a few southern provinces with the communists controlling the rest of mainland.

for scenario b - if the chinese communists didn't win the whole country in 1949, Kim Sung II might not have invaded South Korea seeing that his chinese allies might not be free to assist him later on. Similarly, the Vietnam war would not have happened too.

Edited by Optimus, 17 February 2009 - 12:11 PM.

[ahxiang]

If the nationalists didn't chose to retreat to Taiwan, decided to make Chongqing their base - they carried on fighting in the mainland to the end.
Two scenarios - a - either the nationalists forces were completely destroyed on the mainland or b - American help arrived and the nationalists held onto a few southern provinces with the communists controlling the rest of mainland.

for scenario b - if the chinese communists didn't win the whole country in 1949, Kim Sung II might not have invaded South Korea seeing that his chinese allies might not be free to assist him later on. Similarly, the Vietnam war would not have happened too.

I mentioned somewhere that the Comintern-hajiacked US State Department had issued visas to Tibetans before the fall of China and Chungking to make sure that the Tibetans would declare independence so that Chiang had no chance to retreat to Tibet for further resistance to the communist army.

In several places, the US State Department officials commented that communist army should attack Taiwan first before attacking Southwest CHina.

Why?

They were eager to see the earliest downfall of Chiang Kai-shek and ROC.

Unfortunately, Mao Tse-tung missed the tip from the Americans.

[Optimus]

I mentioned somewhere that the Comintern-hajiacked US State Department had issued visas to Tibetans before the fall of China and Chungking to make sure that the Tibetans would declare independence so that Chiang had no chance to retreat to Tibet for further resistance to the communist army.

I never thought that KMT would retreat to Tibet back then. Is it possible? afterall they had 600K or more soldiers and should easily take over control of Tibet. logistically, Tibet is a mountainous region, easier to defend than attack. Technically it made sense for the nationalists to remain on mainland and continue the fight against the communists rather than retreating to Taiwan and be separated from mainland by 120km of water.

[changsham]

600K soldiers holed up in Tibet? Impossible. They would have starved before they froze to death or vice versa.

Edited by changsham, 20 February 2009 - 01:46 AM.

[ahxiang]

I never thought that KMT would retreat to Tibet back then. Is it possible? afterall they had 600K or more soldiers and should easily take over control of Tibet. logistically, Tibet is a mountainous region, easier to defend than attack. Technically it made sense for the nationalists to remain on mainland and continue the fight against the communists rather than retreating to Taiwan and be separated from mainland by 120km of water.

Some Chinese lower-level generals did have plans to conquer Burma and Vietnam. Those plans, should they get carried out, should be a no brainer.

Unfortunately, the French outsmarted the Chinese by cheating them into a retreat to Vietnam with guarantee of possession of weapons and then played a trick to disarm them, possibly 30,000-40,000 troops.

Burma story was that some trick was played to have two ROC army corps abandon the siege of Kunming the capital, where there was a mutiny by chair Lu Han. Then communist army made sure they cut off the retreat path of the two army corps to Burma, hence frustrating the plan to establish a base at the Sino-Burmese border.

In both cases, international opinions, with British American Soviet and French gloating over China's civilw ars, worked against ROC. Chiang already yielded the presidency to Li Zongren in Jan 1949. There was no strongman who could take charge to stabilize the situation.

Hu ZOngnan's 1st Corps was ordered to defend Qinling Ridge, south of XI'an and ordered not to pull out without seeing snow fall. (Communist spies Liu Fei and Guo Rugui must have issued this "snowfall" order.) Then it was too late because Mao's army went around central China to attack Sichuan, cutting off the retreat path of Hu Zongnan's army. -Hu Zongnan suggested abandoning all defense line of North China for Southwest China.

There was no way to go to Tibet because there was no food supply there. Zhang Guotao's Red Army, halved at Baizhangguan battle to 40,000, spent half a year at Xikang-Tibet border, eating grass like beggars.

The importance of Tibet was psychological. So, when US issued visa without ROC foreign ministry stamped passport, it was with vicious intent, which was more psychological blow to ROC.

In any case, ROC could not have defended Southwest China. Even if they had taken Vietnam/Burma, they could not make it. Because there was still the ARMS EMBARGO against ROC. There was no bullets for ROC troops to use against Mao's army which had unlimited supplies from Russians.

Edited by ahxiang, 21 February 2009 - 05:16 PM.

[changsham]

If CKS had tried to conquer Vietnam he likely would have suffered the fate of the French and the USA, arms embargo or not. A Vietnam War with a different twist. How could he ever win what the French and Americans could not with their military might? The Viet Minh and the Communist Axis would have destroyed his forces piece by piece. And in Burma his fate would have been that of a jungle bandit at best. Cut off and isolated from any civilization, surrounded by enemies till the uniforms rotted off his soldiers backs. I think he made the right move to get to Taiwan.

Edited by changsham, 20 February 2009 - 11:53 PM.

[ahxiang]

If CKS had tried to conquer Vietnam he likely would have suffered the fate of the French and the USA, arms embargo or not. A Vietnam War with a different twist. How could he ever win what the French and Americans could not with their military might? The Viet Minh and the Communist Axis would have destroyed his forces piece by piece. And in Burma his fate would have been that of a jungle bandit at best. Cut off and isolated from any civilization, surrounded by enemies till the uniforms rotted off his soldiers backs. I think he made the right move to get to Taiwan.

You got the timeline wrong.

There was not much Viet Minh and the Communist force in Vietnam in 1949. Probably a couple thousand guerrillas at most. And no guns or ammunition.

In Vietnam, there was a KMT copycat in control, called Vietnam Nationalist Party. The generals of Vietnam KMT were formerly serving under ROC army. (Even Ho Chi-min received stipends from ROC.)

The French, with Vietnam emperor, controlled 98% of Vietnam. The initial agreement for the 40,000 ROC troops to come into Northern Vietnam was to help to deal with Ho Chi-ming's communist guerrillas.

French were smarter. They knew they could not handle the ROC troops. So, they cheated the ROC troops into the border and then disarmed them. How? They cheated General Huang Jie and et al into a meeting and put them under house arrest. They then had the generals tell soldiers to put down guns. The soldiers were shipped to concentration camps on islands in South China Sea. See how scared the French, of the Chinese crack force? -French had secret agreement with CCP to imprison those ROC troops for years to come.

Edited by ahxiang, 21 February 2009 - 05:13 PM.

[ahxiang]

If the KMT had hold onto Hainan, would that have encouraged CKS to reconquer China with or without American support especially in the 1960s when the mainland is in chaos.

After KMT retreated to Taiwan in 1949, excluding Kinmen and Hainan, they still held 100+ big and small islets stretching from Canton to Shanghai. The initial plan was to secure a naval blockage of china southern provinces and protecting Taiwan. Some of those islets are big enough to be used as battlestations to launch an assault on mainland.

But over the next 4 years. Those chains of islands were all lost to the communists expect for Kinmen and Matsu.

Under the treaty with Republican Americans, ROC had to abandon those islands. Even Matsu and Quemoy were at one time on the list of exclusion. It was through months of haggling between Wellington Koo and Dulles that the two islands were allowed to be kept.

[changsham]

Not a matter of wrong timing. I said Viet Minh and Communist Axis which was developing over time. Eventually the same troubles tht affected the French and Americans would have befallen CKS forces if they did venture into Vietnam. The Viet Minh were a rapidly rising independance movement and CKS's forces were defeated and in decline. I find it hard to believe the Vietnamese would accept a large force of their traditional natural enemy occupying their territory without serious retaliation. A Chinese crack force? Cracked they certainly were if they had to find shelter in Vietnam.

Edited by changsham, 21 February 2009 - 02:51 AM.

[ahxiang]

Not a matter of wrong timing. I said Viet Minh and Communist Axis which was developing over time. Eventually the same troubles tht affected the French and Americans would have befallen CKS forces if they did venture into Vietnam. The Viet Minh were a rapidly rising independance movement and CKS's forces were defeated and in decline. I find it hard to believe the Vietnamese would accept a large force of their traditional natural enemy occupying their territory without serious retaliation. A Chinese crack force? Cracked they certainly were if they had to find shelter in Vietnam.

Not only timeline was not right, but your cause and effect was wrong, too.

Burma and Vietnam are good examples to show that a ROC army at the border would effectively sever the link of Burmese communists or Viet communists from Chinese communists. Because of the presence of ROC troops at the Golden Triangle for 10+ yeas, Burma was spared the fate of communization till the mid-1960s when the Red Guards and the plaincoat PLA troops went into Burma's civil wars. The French were too myopic to have no tolerance for Huang Jie's ROC troops.

Who is Huang Jie?

He was the war hero at the Battles of the Great Wall of 1933. Check out how Chinese fought against the Japanese to see what kind of army ROC had.

You seem to gloat over the "being cracked" status of ROC troops, not knowing why both China and the world gave the titles of Ironside Army and Steel Army to ROC 4th Corps and 7th Corps, respectively. Huang Jie, Zhang FaKui and Bao Chongxi, in Hunan, fought a Battle of Qingshuping and routed the PLA army, hence slowing down the advance of communist army by a few months. You really need to get a map in front of you to see how PLA army moved from place to place and day by day to appreciate the resistance the ROC troops, under the odds of arms embargo by the whole world, had put up a heroic fight against the PLA which was fully funded and supplied by Russians with weaponry from "August Storm" lend-lease goods.

Even with the loss of mainland, 3-6 million "bandits" continued to rebel against the communist government from 1950 to 1955. Check out the PRC history of banditry quelling that eliminated 3-6 million "bandits".

Edited by ahxiang, 21 February 2009 - 05:11 PM.

[changsham]

An army that can't hold it's territory is cracked. Those stragglers that did make it Burma never created more than a bandit kingdom holed up in the jungle.

Edited by changsham, 21 February 2009 - 03:47 PM.