East Asia: why didn't Nationalist retake china during the cul

Print Page | Close Window

why didn't Nationalist retake china during the cul

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: East Asia
Forum Discription: The Far East: China, Korea, Japan and other nearby civilizations
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=36941
Printed Date: 03-May-2024 at 17:43
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com

Topic: why didn't Nationalist retake china during the cul

Posted By: tommy
Subject: why didn't Nationalist retake china during the cul
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2016 at 06:22

We Chinese, especially those who live in Hong Kong , Macau, and Taiwan, always think about this, we believe that this was a very good time for the Taiwan nationalist to go back to China, and overthrew Mao and the Red party, and the Nationalist did not act, although they claimed that they were well preparing for the reconquest of China

What is your opinion?

-------------
leung

Replies:

Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2016 at 13:07

US fears of confrontation with the then Soviets. Now that's the over arching political-strategic defensive regional influence reason. But that's not to say that the machinations of Chiang and the CIA did not occur. Or were not planned for. Eventually the post War modernization, the Korean Conflict, and the improving PRC military made it impossible for a sole Nationalist effort.

But again I'm generalizing.

If ya want more specifics then consider the Yunnan offensives..the political propo and reaction of the Kuomintang after their forced departure from the mainland..

The initial organization and leadership of ROC forces under the failed leadership of the Civil war participants... the reorganization of the ROC force by the Americans and eventually ya need to consider the changing nature of US far east foreign policy goals.

And that's just the tip of as they say the ice berg.

The lone exception... might be 'Operation/Project National Glory'. This was a serious enough effort on the part of the now aging KMT leadership...but again was doomed to stillbirth simply because of non US conclusive support... resistance to Chiang's machinations; and efforts to retake the mainland.

And finally with their represenitive expulsion/replacement from and in the UN..the case was sealed.

-------------
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman

Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'

Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2016 at 13:11

Btw most of this, at some point or another, has been vocalized by numerous layman and professional alike.

-------------
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman

Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'

Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2016 at 13:14

Originally posted by Centrix Vigilis

Btw most of this, at some point or another, has been vocalized by numerous layman and professional alike.

My problem is with age, I don't necessarily remember where or when I conducted the research or review and the sources....so in absetnia I give them credit ntl.

-------------
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman

Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'

Posted By: tommy
Date Posted: 19-Oct-2016 at 02:20

During the cultural revolution, red china even conflicted with Russia, and the latter had made contact with Taiwan, even Nationalist and Russia, at this point, planned to co operate to eliminate Mao and Red China, but finally, no big action was taken , really strange.

-------------
leung

Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 19-Oct-2016 at 15:12

From your perspective I can sympathize..the reality of the context says it was the Russians posturing to the PRC by pretending an alliance. so it's not really strange..merely obsfucation and international 'real politik'.

But you think outside that box which is good.

-------------
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman

Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'

Posted By: tommy
Date Posted: 20-Oct-2016 at 03:45

Not my imagination, I got the information of the Soviet Nationalist contact during the cultural revolution from this book

The generalissimo : Chiang Kai-shek and the struggle for modern China

by Jay Taylor.

-------------
leung

Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 20-Oct-2016 at 17:30

I didn't think u were making anything up...your credibe with me...I'll look for your source.

-------------
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman

Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'

Posted By: red clay
Date Posted: 20-Oct-2016 at 17:51

I think time and age had much to do with the inaction of the Nationalists.
Dr. Lily Yeh was a Prof. of Chinese Art History whom I studied under. Her father was one of Sun Yat-Sens right hand men. My memory prevents me from posting his name. In 68-69 he was in his mid 80's. According to his daughter, in the 30's he was a "firebrand". Most of the National leadership had aged.

The "General" as she referred to him, had moved here to be close to his grandchildren.

Time changes priorities.

-------------
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.

Posted By: tommy
Date Posted: 22-Oct-2016 at 03:36

And you can also sate that the nationalist leaders at that time, were obsessed in the economic building and the modernization program of Taiwan, they focused on the island, and it they carried out military action, then the economic program would be affected. This was another reason?

-------------
leung

Posted By: longbaby
Date Posted: 27-Apr-2017 at 19:56

In the 60s and 70s, the military power of the mainland prevailed much more over that of Taiwan. Though most of China at that time was in chaos and suffered terribly, not the army. During the 50s, Communist China acquired much technology from Soviet Union and built its own navy and air force. Even with the people's support, like you had assumed, KMT couldn't expect to win the war. Unlike the Civil War during 1946 and 1949, when the communist army had much support from the common people, esp. in logistics, modern warfares dpend little on the popularity with ordinary people.
Taiwan is simply a pawn of the US. From Americans's perspective, the confrontation overwhelmed any other situation. They didnt want to risk a war with China to ruin their entire strategy. And without Americans's support (or approval), Taiwan could do nothing.