Quote:
Originally Posted by 3catcircus
My point being that everything that happened in the 90s has led to where we are today - there is nothing in the Chinese political trajectory that is vastly different than back then that would result in forming an alliance with the US. The supposition in the v1/v2 timeline seems fallacious in hindsight - they would be more likely to maintain an uneasy truce rather than fight over Manchuria.
|
I still don't follow. The v1-2.2 history diverges from our reality before 1989 and 1991 respectively.
In any relevant timeline, China was a
very important trading partner of the USA c.1995. Allowing our Cold War arch-rival, the USSR, to conquer one of our top-3 trade partners doesn't make sense. On the other hand, providing material support to China in its war against the USSR would have helped the USA close (or even reverse) the trade deficit with China, and/or reduce its debt to China. It would also stick it to the USA's main rival, the USSR.
I just can't see the USA sitting idly by and watching as the Soviet Union seizes control of Chinese resources and markets. If that's the end result of a mid-1990s Sino-Soviet war, the US is going to be in a much weaker geopolitical position vis-a-vis the victorious USSR. It makes a lot more sense that the USA would use the PRC as a proxy to strengthen its own position by weakening the Soviets, especially if doing so would improve our balance of trade and debt situations in the bargain; it's not like China is going to immediately emerge from a draw with the USSR as a richer, more powerful nation. They're both going to be beaten up.
-