MagnificentOne

The Iron Curtain: A Cold War NRP

Dutchbag said
I think we can all agree that China would be better off if Yuan Shikai tripped and fell into a firing squad.

Hehehe... >.>

The Iron Curtain: A Cold War NRP

The Nexerus said
The difference is that Chiang wouldn't have killed twenty million people in between. Mao was responsible for more than twice as many civilian deaths as Hitler.

Sad thing about Chiang is that he could've united China, but ended up in insanely difficult circumstances between Japanese, Communists and warlords.

The Iron Curtain: A Cold War NRP

Chiang would be quite pleased with the PRC right now, whereas Mao would be utterly horrified.

The Iron Curtain: A Cold War NRP

The Iron Curtain: A Cold War NRP

“I’m not afraid of nuclear war. There are 2.7 billion people in the world; it doesn’t matter if some are killed. China has a population of 600 million; even if half of them are killed, there are still 300 million people left. I’m not afraid of anyone.”

Good ol' Mao.

The Iron Curtain: A Cold War NRP

The People's Republic of China is disappointed to hear of General MacArthur's assistance to the reactionary rump of the Kuomintang Clique. The Chinese people are unable to feel that MacArthur truly holds the best interests of the Chinese people at heart, as he wages armed aggression upon Chinese territory, and forces an unnatural split between the people of the Mainland and the people of Taiwan.

I was present in Shanghai during 1927, where I had for several years done my proud work for the Chinese nation under the First United Front. It came to a terrible end when Chiang Kai-Shek ordered one of the most brutal crackdowns in Chinese history. Thousands of Communists were slaughtered without second thought, and thousands more innocents were viciously riddled with bullets for the crime of merely wearing red. I myself barely escaped with my life that night, and I struggled to come to terms with what had happened. A man whom I alongside all of China once looked up as to our saviour had betrayed us all, and vanquished the lives of many comrades, many friends, and many guiltless people.

To hear this highly autocratic massacre amongst the many other acts detailed by Chairman Mao to be dismissed entirely, and instead hear our Communist government become accused of warranting 'aggression' for rightfully declining peace from the untrustworthy figure who began the civil war is disappointing. I agree it is also disappointing that the People's Republic of China must decline the peace offer - but it would be against the principles of democracy and the Three Principles of Sun Yat-Sen to accept such an offer, as Chiang Kai-Shek has unfortunately demonstrated ill-will to the people of China.

The Chinese people do not wish to embroil in conflict with the United States of America, for we are a peace loving people. After two decades of civil war, it is our wish not to face yet more harrowing conflict but to rehabilitate and develop our industrial and agricultural production and cultural and educational work in a peaceful environment, free from threats. Our wish is to simply see that a united China is able to fulfil such tasks for the people, rather than only the mainland. I recognise that the United States is an important player within the Pacific Region, and it is with this role in mind that China simply asks for the United States to recognise the democratic wishes of the Chinese people of both the Mainland and Taiwan, and to allow natural unification in line with the people's will to take place.

Zhou Enlai
Premier and Foreign Minister of the People's Republic of China

The Iron Curtain: A Cold War NRP

Mao, evil?

We all know who the true evil one is.

World in Revolution - 1900

The Welsh Wizard’s recent address to the Houses of Parliament had sharply divided the government, with a fearsome debate raging. It could not be denied that German economic power was immense and was likely to remain overshadowing Britain unless something was done – but was war the right answer? Many disagreed, with a great number of the Liberal Party’s MPs fixated upon idea that peace was the right way forward, and that economic co-operation could lead to a brighter future rather than joining a foray which had only caused misery and millions of deaths for an entire continent. On the other hand of the spectrum laid the Conservative Party, who had taken to supporting David Lloyd George’s position upon Germany. They argued that not only was Britain’s immense empire and economic independence at risk, but the victory of what they blatantly termed ‘militaristic huns’ spelled doomed for the traditional British values of democracy and the balance of power. Holding a similar amount of seats within Parliament, the issue was deadlocked. It would come down to the minor parties.

A relative newcomer to the world of British politics, the Labour Party was the third largest party representing Britain within the House of Commons. They were a working class party, and spoke for the ordinary people of Britain. This often meant they were more or less in agreement with the reformist MPs of the Liberal Party, but the issue of war proved to be a difficult case. Although initially the Labour party seemed to be split, the leadership of Ramsay MacDonald – a man with a keen interest in foreign affairs and decidedly affected by the Boer war – was a prominent anti-war spokesman within Parliament. Although he was viciously attacked by many Conservative MPs, he held his ground and it wasn’t long before the majority of the Labour Party turned joining forces with the great majority of the Liberal Party in opposing war.

The anti-war feeling seemed dominant within Parliament, but the Conservative Party refused go down without a fight. Despite Lloyd George being a Liberal Prime Minister, he enjoyed their full support – and it was support he desperately needed to make this bill go through. The Conservative Party did not possess enough seats to pass the bill, and the combined forces of the good portion of the Liberal Party and the Labour Party was enough to override any suggested bill. But there was a hope. The Irish Parliamentary Party possessed a fine number of seats despite the chaos within Ulster, and they were known as reasonable politicians who desired an end to all hostilities within Ireland too. Conservative politicians began to approach the Irish MPs, with Party Leader Bonar Law announcing a support for the IPP’s Home Rule – so long as Ulster was excluded. Negotiations between the two parties began, where in return for joining the cause of the Conservative Party during the fearsome debate on the European war; the issue of Home Rule would be settled and applied to those regions of Ireland unopposed to it. Although the talks were tense, the IPP and Conservatives eventually found common ground. With an unholy alliance struck, a ceasefire was ordered by both parties to their friends within Ireland, respectively the Irish Volunteers and Ulster Volunteer Force. Despite the protests from the Sinn Féin party over the plans for a partition of Ireland, both the Conservatives and IPP defended their decision – with members of the Liberal party themselves coming forward to support the partition.

The debate had raged on for too long, but headway had finally been made. A vote was called over the proposal, known informally as simply “War the Centrals”. Almost the entirety of the Conservative Party and Irish Parliamentary Party voted for, with their deal standing strong. Support was lukewarm from the Liberal Party, where although many votes against, there was a considerable number for. The Labour party themselves were split, but not between for and against, but rather against or abstaining. Sinn Féin themselves had followed the path of the Labour Party, resolutely opposing the war. The tally was counted, with a majority of 391 for; 173 against; and 76 abstained votes. The sphere was tense in Commons after this vote, and the Prime Minister shortly adressed the Members of Parliament. He thanked them for "Saving the country", "Leaving the past behind", and "Fighting the good fight". The remaining process consisted of formalities: The House of Lords approved it and King George V assented it and later that day declared that the British Empire was in a state of war with Germany, the Habsburg Empire, the Ottoman Empire and Scandinavia, joining a Russia that was on the verge of crumbling and a France that was now showing troubles holding their positions in what was certainly a turning point in the history of Great Britain and the world.

The Iron Curtain: A Cold War NRP

Chiang Kai-Shek, having fled to the rogue province of Taiwan after his failure to defend against the masses of China, has formally offered the People's Republic of China peace on the grounds of a united coalition government. This is the same Chiang Kai-Shek whom initiated the current stare of conflict between the Communist Party of China and the Kuomintang reactionaries with the Shanghai Massacre of 1927, embroiling China in a civil war for twenty-three years. This is the same Chiang Kai-Shek, who having proclaimed that he was to 'defend the country and protect the people' promptly submitted to entirety of Manchuria to the vicious Japanese Empire, where the toiling masses of workers and peasants in Manchuria were brutally slaughtered by soldiers with guns, cannons, and bombs. This is the same Chiang Kai-Shek whose actions were not to 'defend the country and protect the people' but rather allowed the devastating occupation to take place without the slightest attempt to resist. This is the same Chiang Kai-Shek who allowed for the so-called Tanggu Truce to be signed between the 'Republic of China' and Empire of Japan. This truce, the most recent of China's unequal treaties, solidified Chiang's policy of non-resistance against the Japanese invaders. In effect, Chiang choose to sacrifice great swaths of China in order to pursue his militaristic policy of attacking his fellow countrymen as he laid siege to us Communists within Yan'an. Despite immense public anger over Chiang Kai-Shek's “internal pacification before external resistance" campaign, the Generalissimo made no attempt to follow the wishes of the people - which is surely a direct contradiction of the Third of Sun Yat-Sen's Principles: that of the People's Livelihood.

Unlike the Chiang Kai-Shek Government, my own government has chosen to listen to the masses and choose a policy of resistance against the Japanese. On December 27th 1935, I called for a United Front between the Communist Party and the Kuomintang Reactionaries in my speech, 'On Tactics Against Japanese Imperialism', in order to lead a nation-wide front against the forces of fascism. My voice was naturally unheeded by the militaristic Kuomintang government, who continued to pursue a policy of killing their own countrymen until the Xi'an Incident.It was only then, when faced with death himself, that Chiang Kai-Shek finally agreed to establish the Second United Front between the Communists and the Kuomintang. For eight years, us Chinese people made immense sacrifices against the Japanese imperialists. But during those eight years, Chiang Kai-Shek was unable to adhere to the agreement undertaken at Xi'an. More often than not, the Red Army had been assaulted by forces of Chiang's pressganged soldiers. We effectively resisted such oppressive means, as us Communists value the unity of China against the forces of imperialism far more than misguided attempts to eradicate our fellow compatriots.

With the end of the War of Resistance in sight, us Communists were willing to maintain the unity of China under a democratic government much like the First Principle of Sun Yat-Sen calls for. But let us not forget that the anti-popular clique of the Kuomintang merely followed in the autocratic footsteps of Yuan Shikai, seeking an autocratic unification where they waged civil war for fully ten years - only to let in the Japanese aggressors while they themselves withdrew to Mount Omei. The dictatorship of the Kuomintang, protected by fascist mercenaries known as 'Blue Shirts', is not and has never truly been interested in democracy and freedom for the people of China. Chiang Kai-Shek has ignored the people of China when he slaughtered the innocents during 1927, when he surrendered Manchuria to the Japanese in 1931, and when he choose to continue the devastating civil war in light of imperialist attacks on China. A man who has committed himself to such policies can not truly claim to fight for the right of people's democracy.

Regardless of the fascist ideology in possession of Chiang Kai-Shek, us Communists attempted to maintain a united China after the end of the War of Resistance. But a simple look at the Kuomintang's past revealed that this could be troubling. There was the slight matter of a counter-revolutionary civil war for ten whole years. There was the other slight matter of launching three large-scale anti-Communist campaigns despite the Japanese invasion. And there was also the slight matter of inviting Japanese soldiers to continue the occupation of Chinese land after the War of Resistance, acting as his allies against us his fellow countrymen - in effect, fulfilling the wishes of the great traitor Wang Jingwei! But no matter these outrageous crimes against our people, us Communists were willing to forgive as we sought a united and free China. We sought to bring an e It was after 47 days of negotiations at the Chonqging Conference where the Double Tenth Agreement was signed, one proclaiming a united China under the leadership of the Kuomintang with the Communist Party as a valid opposition party and partner in coalition. We had the highest hopes, but unfortunately it was not meant to be. It wasn't long before our armies had found themselves encircled by the Kuomintang aggressors as Chiang Kai-Shek sought to destroy us! For the Communist Party and people of China, this was a betrayal as strong as the Shanghai Massacre of 1927. All over China, our were invaded and occupied by the Kuomintang forces, which burned and killed wantonly. In various battles of self-defence we captured piles of "bandit suppression" and anti-Communist documents, among which are the Handbook on Bandit Suppression. This simply confirmed that any notions of a truly united and democratic China was unacceptable to the Kuomintang, despite their sayings otherwise. For days I had stressed the need to be realistic to Chiang Kai-Shek in struggling for a peaceful China. But with the subjective desire of Chiang Kai-shek since 1927 maintain his dictatorship and destroy the Communist Party, this was a task that would prove impossible.

Due to such traitorous actions to the people of China, is it any surprise that the Chiang Kai-shek government, hostile to the whole people, found itself besieged by the whole people? The traitorous Chiang Kai-shek government mustered two million troops and launched an all-out offensive by using political consultation and military mediation to gather time, and as always it is the perversion of these factors in which Chiang Kai-Shek maintains his rule. It is not hard to deny that military suppression and political deception have been the two main instruments by which Chiang Kai-shek maintained his reactionary rule. Thankfully, the people have spoken their mind! Where the Kuomintang reactionaries speak of us Communists 'not embracing what is best for the people, and asserting my own power' - can anyone believe that the acts of Chiang Kai-Shek comply entirely with the wishes of the people? The public anger says otherwise. Whereas Chiang Kai-Shek and his gang of militarists have taken to siphoning as much money as they can, I have taken to imitating the land reform campaigns in which I set free the most heavily oppressed and numerous people of China - the peasants - from the reactionary forces of the feudal landlords. Chaing Kai-Shek may speak with a tongue of honey, but he has nothing but a heart of poison. He was not content with abandoning his reactionary ways of military suppression to maintain his autocracy! The people of Taiwan unfortunately had to endure three years of martial law as we speak now, due to a culmination of the 2/28 Incident - where the Taiwanese people's wish to be represented and protected against the carpetbagging officials of the Kuomintang was mercilessly crushed by a massacre numbering in the thousands.As we can see, the autocratic ideals of Chiang Kai-Shek have not dissipated - they are as strong as ever no matter how he flourishes his words with a supposed love for freedom and democracy.

Having been pushed off of the mainland, a task which as talented as the forces of the People's Liberation Army are could only have been attained with the will of the masses, Chiang Kai-Shek reigns with an iron fist from Taiwan. He is afraid to let go of power, and afraid to accept the reality. In order to maintain a semblance of safety against the People's Liberation Army, Chiang Kai-Shek has called upon the United States of America to block mainland access to his rump state and safeguard his rule. I believe this hearkens back to a familiar scene, where Chiang Kai-Shek sacrificed Manchuria all in an attempt to centralise power in a crippled China solely under his control. Naturally, it was a move that the people of the 1930s found despicable and today this is a move which the people of China shall too find despicable. If Chiang Kai-Shek truly was the legitimate authority of the people, would he not have the support of the masses as us Communists possess? Would he not be welcomed with open arms without the slightest need for military brutality? And would he not be able to maintain his 'legitimate' rule without having to rely upon forces of foreign nations to prop up his regime? We call the Kuomintang running dogs for a good reason, and his recent actions have only demonstrated he wishes to maintain such a title.

In light of these well known facts, the People's Republic of China is inclined to deny the current peace offer from the self-styled Generalissimo Chiang Kai-Shek.

Mao Zedong
Chairman of the Communist Party of China

The Iron Curtain: A Cold War NRP

Let's not give up on this so soon. There's still hope for a glorious cold war!