Alternative History: What if the KMT won China

[tower9]

One of the greatest tragedies in modern history IMO is the KMT losing the Chinese civil war to the CCP. If the KMT had won, today China would be a democratic, wealthy and civilized nation with a high standard of living, protection for human rights, a well mannered and polite society like that in Japan and Taiwan, the world's largest economy and a long time ally of the United States. China would not be aggressively nationalist but will be secure and established as an industrial superpower and have a cosmopolitan society that would be welcoming to people from all over the world.

 

[Yankee-stani]

Even if the KMT won there would still be friction with the United States and perhaps the Soviet Union as well Chiang was an interesting character in geo politics earlier he was pro Soviet then pro German then pro British/American I really think China and the west and Soviet would still clash regardless who was in power

 

[powastick]

That is naive. It would be corrupt and dysfunctional democracies like India and Russia. And still be contained by the US because China will always be a threat to its power even if it a demoracy. Tibet and Xinjiang would be secede. Social instability due to freedom of media, infiltration of US agit prop, and unstable government.

 

[Yankee-stani]

That is naive. It would be corrupt and dysfunctional democracies like India and Russia. And still be contained by the US because China will always be a threat to its power even if it a demoracy. Tibet and Xinjiang would be secede. Social instability due to freedom of media, infiltration of US agit prop, and unstable government.

In a realistic alternative timeline those events would have occured during social and economic reforms of the 1980s and the rise of neo liberalism Taiwan under Chiang was a one party Authoritarian state until the early 90s I doubt Chiang would have tolerated dissent and sepratists,let's say Chiang wins not loses in 1949 Communists are purged Mao is irrelevant or dead the US would have an ally but a cordial one Soviets under Stalin would probably support a Communist insurrection So China would probably be unstable throughout the 1950s again hypotheticals

 

[tower9]

Even if the KMT won there would still be friction with the United States and perhaps the Soviet Union as well Chiang was an interesting character in geo politics earlier he was pro Soviet then pro German then pro British/American I really think China and the west and Soviet would still clash regardless who was in power

Yes, Chiang had some frictions with the US but given the circumstances and the Cold War, a KMT China would firmly side with the US especially as the USSR was supporting an independent Mongolia which the KMT claimed as a part of China. During the Cold War, China would've been America's top ally in Asia and would've probably started becoming a manufacturing superpower by the 60s, far earlier than out timeline, probably 30 years earlier. Even though Chiang would still be nationalistic and would still want Hong Kong returned and so forth, a KMT China's national interest would be inextricably tied to an alliance with the US.

I think China would've eventually developed into a liberal democracy by the late 80s or 90s and would've reached developed nation status then. There may be friction between the US and China, especially as China's economy continued to grow, but it would not be the type of hostility that we see now. The modern world would basically sit on the basis of a Sino-American dominated world order with liberal democracy as the prevailing system.

In a realistic alternative timeline those events would have occured during social and economic reforms of the 1980s and the rise of neo liberalism Taiwan under Chiang was one party Authoritarian state until the early 90s I doubt Chiang would have tolerated dissent and sepratists

Chiang was very much a nationalist and would've made sure China controlled those regions. In fact, the US would've helped China assert sovereignty over Xinjiang and Tibet and maybe even helped China demonize the Dalai Lama if he stood in the way. Quite ironic compared to our current timeline.

By the time that China becomes a liberal democracy, the force of Chinese nationalism among the population would keep those regions within China.

 

[powastick]

In a realistic alternative timeline those events would have occured during social and economic reforms of the 1980s and the rise of neo liberalism Taiwan under Chiang was one party Authoritarian state until the early 90s I doubt Chiang would have tolerated dissent and sepratists

I think the economy and the government will be controlled by oligarch like Cheabol in Korea and Keiretsu in Japan. Making it extremely difficult for small companies to survive.

 

[tower9]

I think the economy and the government will be controlled by oligarch like Cheabol in Korea and Keiretsu in Japan. Making it extremely difficult for small companies to survive.

South Korea and Japan are far richer, more developed countries than China. So an ROC China would've been a very economically powerful, prosperous country with a liberal democratic framework. It would be among the most popular destinations for global tourists with a strong pop culture and would be well respected throughout the world. Chinese citizens would be well educated, well behaved and cosmopolitan and would be welcomed as tourists throughout the world. China and the US would be the bedrock that would uphold liberal democracy and capitalism worldwide. A KMT China would be very different from what the PRC is now.

 

[powastick]

South Korea and Japan are far richer, more developed countries than China. So an ROC China would've been a very economically powerful, prosperous country with a liberal democratic framework. It would be among the most popular destinations for global tourists with a strong pop culture and would be well respected throughout the world. Chinese citizens would be well educated, well behaved and cosmopolitan and would be welcomed as tourists throughout the world. China and the US would be the bedrock that would uphold liberal democracy and capitalism worldwide. A KMT China would be very different from what the PRC is now.

Disagree, liberal democracy is not necessarily = wealth. What makes China rich is "trade". Hypothetically, US will call for sanctions on China by disrupting Tibet and Xinjiang. Like you said, China will never allow them to be independent. Freedom of media and politics will inflame insurgency and will force harsher crackdown, thus allowing US sanctions China for example.

 

[艹艹艹]

a KMT China would firmly side with the US especially as the USSR was supporting an independent Mongolia which the KMT claimed as a part of China.

1945年，国民政府和苏联签订《中苏友好同盟条约》，中央政府会根据公民投票结果决定外蒙古是否独立。1945年10月20日，外蒙古人民在外蒙当局与苏联的监视和控制下进行公民投票，之后国民政府公告说：“外蒙古人民于1945年10月20日举行公民投票，中央曾派内政部次长雷法章前往观察，近据外蒙古主持投票事务人员之报告，公民投票结果已证实外蒙古人民赞成独立，兹照国防最高委员会之审议，决定承认外蒙古之独立，除由行政院转饬内政部将此项内决议正式通知外蒙古政府外，特此公告。”随后国民政府表示支持蒙古入联合国。2月13日，国民政府与蒙古建立外交关系。

Yes, Chiang had some frictions with the US but given the circumstances and the Cold War, a KMT China would firmly side with the US especially as the USSR was supporting an independent Mongolia which the KMT claimed as a part of China. During the Cold War, China would've been America's top ally in Asia and would've probably started becoming a manufacturing superpower by the 60s, far earlier than out timeline, probably 30 years earlier. Even though Chiang would still be nationalistic and would still want Hong Kong returned and so forth, a KMT China's national interest would be inextricably tied to an alliance with the US.

I think China would've eventually developed into a liberal democracy by the late 80s or 90s and would've reached developed nation status then. There may be friction between the US and China, especially as China's economy continued to grow, but it would not be the type of hostility that we see now. The modern world would basically sit on the basis of a Sino-American dominated world order with liberal democracy as the prevailing system.

Have you ever heard of the "plaza accord"? This is how the US treats its Allies

 

[kankan326]

Chiang was very much a nationalist and would've made sure China controlled those regions. In fact, the US would've helped China assert sovereignty over Xinjiang and Tibet and maybe even helped China demonize the Dalai Lama if he stood in the way. Quite ironic compared to our current timeline.

By the time that China becomes a liberal democracy, the force of Chinese nationalism among the population would keep those regions within China.

1, US is a big version of England. Who in the history was more interested in tearing up other countries.
2, After WW2, US encouraged small nations to be independent from big powers. There was no way to help China to control Tibet.
3, Xinjiang and part of Manchuria would be controlled by Soviet Union. US didn't have balls to confront Soviet Union.
4, Most important of all. KMT is a weak and incompetent political group. From 1927-1937, China had a relatively peaceful period. Which is called "golden decade". But KMT totally wasted it. When Sino-Japan war broke out, China could not produce any decent weapon. In the meantime Stalin changed Soviet Union from a backward country into an industial country.
For the long run, nation pride is much more important than democracy. CCP gave China pride and KMT failed.

 

[tower9]

1945年，国民政府和苏联签订《中苏友好同盟条约》，中央政府会根据公民投票结果决定外蒙古是否独立。1945年10月20日，外蒙古人民在外蒙当局与苏联的监视和控制下进行公民投票，之后国民政府公告说：“外蒙古人民于1945年10月20日举行公民投票，中央曾派内政部次长雷法章前往观察，近据外蒙古主持投票事务人员之报告，公民投票结果已证实外蒙古人民赞成独立，兹照国防最高委员会之审议，决定承认外蒙古之独立，除由行政院转饬内政部将此项内决议正式通知外蒙古政府外，特此公告。”随后国民政府表示支持蒙古入联合国。2月13日，国民政府与蒙古建立外交关系。


Have you ever heard of the "plaza accord"? This is how the US treats its Allies

The Sino Soviet friendship pact broke down due to Russia's annexation of Tuva.

And yes I know of the Plaza Accord. Eventually the US and China will experience some intense friction but it would not lead to the intense hostility that exists now. I think the alliance would still remain intact.

1, US a big version of England. Who in the history was more interested in tearing up other countries.
2, After WW2, US couraged small nations to be independent from big powers. There is no way to help China to control Tibet.
3, Xinjiang and part of Manchuria will be controlled by Soviet Union. US didn't have balls to confront Soviet Union.
4, Most important of all. KMT is a weak and incompetent political group. From 1927-1937, China had a relatively peaceful period. Which is called "golden decade". But KMT totally wasted it. When Sino-Japan war broke out, China could not produce any decent weapon. The meantime Stalin changed Soviet Union from a backward country to a industial country.
For the long run, nation pride is much more important than democracy. CCP gave China pride and KMT failed.

The KMT was still busy trying to unite the country by defeating warlords during the 20s. It didn't have sufficient time to industrialize and build.

 

[Viva_Viet]

One of the greatest tragedies in modern history IMO is the KMT losing the Chinese civil war to the CCP. If the KMT had won, today China would be a democratic, wealthy and civilized nation with a high standard of living, protection for human rights, a well mannered and polite society like that in Japan and Taiwan, the world's largest economy and a long time ally of the United States. China would not be aggressively nationalist but will be secure and established as an industrial superpower and have a cosmopolitan society that would be welcoming to people from all over the world.

KMT never had a chance to win cos PLA actually fought much better than KMT ( Korean war showed that PLA could defeat US if US didnt have airstrike support). PLA soldiers mostly were poor farmers lost everything to the landlords, so they hate the landlords to the core.

Mao gave them a chance to revenge and they also believed that they will have their own land to make their own food, thats why they will fight to the last man while KMT soldiers just fought for good salary, no real will to fight and easy to accept surrender.

KMT simply had No single chance to win.

 

[tower9]

KMT never had a chance to win cos PLA actually fought much better than KMT. PLA soldiers mostly were poor farmers lost everything to the landlords, so they hate the landlords to the core.

Mao gave them a chance to revenge and they also believed that they will have their own land to make their own food, thats why they will fight to the last man while KMT soldiers just fought for good salary, no real will to fight and easy to accept surrender.

KMT simply had No single chance to win.

Yes, obviously the PLA were far better at war than the KMT. But in this hypothetical timeline, the KMT is better managed and are able to beat the PLA.

 

[艹艹艹]

And yes I know of the Plaza Accord. Eventually the US and China will experience some intense friction but it would not lead to the intense hostility that exists now. I think the alliance would still remain intact.

You don't know what is national dignity and sovereign independence

 

[tower9]

You don't know what is national dignity and sovereign independence

If the KMT were able to develop China's economy post WW2 and become an economic powerhouse, it would certainly have both.