Red China to the Rescue
_Chinese in X Corps Zone--Introducing the New Enemy--Communist
Victory in Civil War--Organization of the CCF--The Chinese Peasant
as a Soldier--CCF Arms and Equipment--Red China’s “Hate America”
Campaign--CCF Strategy and Tactics_
Up to this time the 1st Marine Division had virtually been waging two
separate wars. In the southern zone, as was related in the last two
chapters, blocking and screening operations were conducted by RCT-1
against NKPA remnants. RCT-7, with RCT-5 in reserve, had meanwhile been
confronted in the north by some of the first Chinese Communist troops
to enter the Korean conflict.
In order to trace the movements of these two Marine regiments, it will
be necessary to go back over chronological ground previously covered.
Division OpnO 18-50, issued on 28 October to implement X Corps OI-13
and supplementary telephone orders received from Corps, assigned RCT-7
the mission of proceeding from Wonsan to Hamhung, prepared for an
advance to the Manchurian border 135 miles to the north. RCT-5 was
assigned a zone behind RCT-7 (see end-paper maps).
Plans for the northward advance brought up the vital problem of
providing security for the 78-mile main supply route (MSR) and the
parallel railway stretching along the coast from Wonsan to Hamhung.
Division orders of the 28th assigned RCT-5 (less 2/5), temporarily
under the operational control of RCT-1, the responsibility for the
security of the Munchon and Yonghung areas, 16 and 57 miles north of
Wonsan respectively. Company A, 1st Tank Battalion, attached to RCT-5,
had orders to establish blocking positions on three main roads joining
the MSR from the west.[200]
[200] 1stMarDiv _OpnO 18-50_, 28 Oct 50; Smith, _Notes_,
463–464.
RCT-7, after being partially issued cold weather clothing at Wonsan,
moved by road and rail to the Hamhung area during the last three
days of October. The 1st Motor Transport Battalion and Division
Reconnaissance Company were attached along with other reinforcing
units, since this regiment had been designated to lead the advance of
the 1st Marine Division to the Manchurian border.[201]
[201] 7thMar _SAR_, 12; CO 7thMar tel to G-3 1stMarDiv, n.t.,
28 Oct 50; 7thMar msg to CG 1stMarDiv, 0850 1 Nov 50;
1stMarDiv _OpnO 18-50_, 28 Oct 50. See the detailed
account of the move in Col R. G. Davis Comments, 7
May 56. RCT-7 did not receive all of its cold weather
clothing until after it reached Koto-ri. MajGen H.
L. Litzenberg Comments, 18 Jul 56; LtCol M. E. Roach
Comments, 17 May 56; LtCol W. D. Sawyer Comments, 7 Sep
56.
RCT-5 completed a motor march meanwhile from its assembly area near
Wonsan to assigned positions along the Wonsan-Hamhung MSR. General
Almond’s OI-15 (30 October) had directed the dispatch of two Marine
RCTs to the Hamhung area, which meant that Lieutenant Colonel Murray’s
regiment was to follow RCT-7. On the 31st General Smith ordered him
to advance a battalion to Chigyong, eight miles southwest of Hamhung.
Murray selected his 1st Battalion and directed that one of its
companies be detached to relieve an RCT-7 company guarding the Advance
Supply Point at Yonpo Airfield, five miles southwest of Hungnam.[202]
[202] CG 1stMarDiv msg to CO 5thMar, 2118 31 Oct 50; CO 5thMar
msg to CO 1/5, 1013 1 Nov 50; Smith, _Notes_, 463–464;
5thMar _SAR_, 8–9; 5thMar _URpt 2_; 1/5 _SAR_, 5; 3/5
_SAR_, 5; Col A. L. Bowser Comments, 23 Apr 56.
Two additional Marine units were assigned to assembly areas along
the MSR. The 1st Tank Battalion (less Company C, attached to the 1st
Marines) moved up to Munchon and regained its Company A. Since the
landing of the 11th Marines (less the battalions attached to RCTs) the
artillery regiment (-) had occupied positions at Munpyong-ni, five
miles northwest of Wonsan.[203]
[203] 1stMarDiv msg to 1stTkBn, 1750 31 Oct 50; 1stTkBn _SAR_,
11. The move was made 1 Nov. 11thMar _URpt 2–28 Oct 50_.
When four days passed without enemy contacts along the MSR, General
Almond decided to expedite the movement of RCT-5 to the Hamhung
area. In a conference with General Smith on 2 November, he outlined
a plan for using patrols instead of blocking positions. Under this
system RCT-1, with elements of the 1st Tank Battalion, would be made
responsible for MSR security as far north as Munchon. The 54-mile
stretch between Munchon and Chigyong would be assigned to the Special
Operations Company, USA, and Korean agents, both under Corps control.
As soon as these arrangements could be put into effect, RCT-5 would
be free to advance to Hamhung. That same day, 2 November, the 2d
Battalion was released from operational control of RCT-1 and moved to
Hamhung.[204]
[204] CG’s Diary in X Corps _WD_, 2 Nov 50. Smith, _Notes_,
463–464. The Special Operations Company was a
commando-type U. S. Army organization, generally employed
in such operations as raids and reconnaissance. The
strength, weapons, and organization depended on the
mission.
Ironically, the 2d was also the date of the first guerrilla raid on the
MSR. A patrol from the 1st Tank Battalion was sent by Division to the
aid of the Special Operations Company, which had reported an attack
west of Munchon resulting in a wound casualty and loss of equipment.
The Marines drove the guerrillas back into the hills.[205]
[205] 11thMar tel to G-2 1stMarDiv, 1300 2 Nov 50; 1stMarDiv
_PIR_ 9.
_Chinese in X Corps Zone_
Red Korean guerrilla activities were overshadowed by confirmation of
reports that organized CCF units had appeared in the X Corps zone
as well as on the Eighth Army front. After crossing the Yalu, they
had secretly infiltrated through the mountains, marching by night
and hiding by day from air observation. Their numbers and intentions
remained a mystery at this date, but late in October the 8th U. S.
Cavalry Regiment and the 6th ROK Division were surprised by Chinese in
northwest Korea and badly mauled.[206]
[206] EUSAK _WDs_ 29 Oct-1 Nov 50.
First-hand evidence of CCF penetrations in northeast Korea was obtained
by three Marine officers of RCT-7. Shortly after arrival in the Hamhung
area, the regimental commander sent out reconnoitering parties in
preparation for the northward advance of 1 November. The 1/7 patrol on
31 October consisted of a fire team in three jeeps led by Captain Myron
E. Wilcox and First Lieutenants William G. Graeber and John B. Wilson.
As a result of their visit to the CP of the 26th ROK Regiment of the
3d ROK Division, which RCT-7 was scheduled to relieve near Sudong (see
Map 7) on 2 November, the Marine officers reported to their regimental
headquarters that they had seen one Chinese prisoner.[207]
[207] Maj J. B. Wilson and Capt W. G. Graeber interv, 20 Oct 55.
As a matter of fact, the ROK regiment took 16 Chinese prisoners in all.
They were identified as belonging to two regiments of the 124th CCF
Division, one of the three divisions of the 42d CCF Army. This force
had crossed the Yalu about 16 October, according to POW testimony, and
moved southward without being observed into the Chosin Reservoir area
during the following ten days.[208]
[208] Smith, _Notes_, 534; 1stMarDiv _PIR_ 4; 1stMarDiv _SAR_,
30. These prisoners were later interrogated by Gen Almond
himself and formed the basis of the first official report
of Chinese intervention. Almond Comments, 21 Jun 56;
FECOM msg C67881, 31 Oct 50.
Not only was Colonel Litzenberg aware that he would be facing Chinese
adversaries in this area; he also suspected that they had infiltrated
toward his left rear. He sent a patrol consisting of 20 men and five
jeeps of Recon Company as far as Chigyong on the 31st without making
any enemy contacts. The following morning CO RCT-7 ordered Recon
Company in 21 jeeps to conduct a reconnaissance to the Huksu-ri area,
approximately 45 miles northwest of Hamhung. After bypassing a blown
bridge, First Lieutenant Ralph B. Crossman’s force dug in for the night
4500 yards short of its objective. Shots were exchanged several times
that night and early the following morning with North Korean guerrillas
in company strength, but the patrol returned with a negative report as
far as Chinese forces were concerned.[209]
[209] Maj R. B. Crossman, Capt C. R. Puckett, and Capt D. W.
Sharon interv, 20 Oct 55; HqBn, 1stMarDiv (hereafter
HqBn) _URpt 8_ (_Supplementary_), 2. Maj Webb D. Sawyer,
CO 2/7 and Maj James F. Lawrence also made helicopter
reconnaissances of the same ground looking for possible
flanking routes to Koto-ri. Sawyer Comments, 7 Sep 56.
News was received on 1 November of the heavy losses taken by the 1st
Cavalry Division at the hands of the Chinese in northwest Korea. There
was no change, however, in Corps orders calling for the advance of
Litzenberg’s regiment to the border. Koto-ri, 23 road miles north of
Majon-dong, was the first objective. The right flank of the Eighth Army
was about 60 air miles southwest of Majon-dong, so that RCT-7 must
advance without protection for its left flank except for Division Recon
Company, which was to be relieved as soon as possible by RCT-1.
“Under these circumstances,” commented General Smith at a later date,
“there was no alternative except to continue forward in the hope that
the Eighth Army situation would right itself and that we would succeed
in our efforts to close up the entire 1st Marine Division behind
RCT-7.”[210]
[210] Smith, _Notes_, 523–524. See also: Smith, _Chronicle_, 70.
_Introducing the New Enemy_
Here it is hardly a digression to pause for a brief survey of the
organization, tactics and aims of the new enemy who was about to
prolong the Korean conflict by intervening on behalf of the beaten
NKPA. The powerful, ever-ready military instrument which the Chinese
Reds knew as the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) had been forged and
tempered in the fires of civil strife. It came into being in the late
summer of 1927 during the abortive Nanchang rebellion. Following their
defeat, the Communists found a refuge in Kiangsi Province of south
China and gained strength as disaffected Kuomintang units came over to
their side.[211]
[211] Richard L. Walker, _China under Communism_ (New Haven,
1954), 111–112; Order of Battle Branch, Office of the
AC/S G-2, HQ Eighth United States Army (Fwd), _CCF Army
Histories_ (hereafter _CCF Army Histories_), 1.
The infant PLA managed with difficulty to survive the first four
“bandit suppression campaigns” waged by Chiang Kai-shek. When he
launched his fifth in 1933, the Chinese Reds planned the celebrated
“Long March” which has become one of their most cherished traditions.
Breaking out of Chiang’s encirclement in October, 1934, they took a
circuitous, 6000-mile route to avoid Nationalist armies. Of the 90,000
who started, only 20,000 were left a year later when the PLA reached
Yenan in Shensi Province.[212]
[212] _U. S. Relations with China_, 43–44, 207, 323.
This destination in northwest China gave the Communists a refuge with
Mongolia and Soviet Russia at their backs. There Mao Tse-tung and his
colleagues alternately fought and negotiated with the Government.
Finally, in 1941, the Communists and Nationalists agreed to cease
fighting one another in order to make common cause against the Japanese
invaders.
The Communists took advantage of their membership in the People’s
Political Council--a Nationalist-sponsored organization which
theoretically united all factions in China against the Japanese--to
continue their “boring-from-within” tactics. Chiang’s estimate of his
troublesome allies was summed up in a quotation attributed to him in
1941:
You think it is important that I have kept the Japanese from
expanding.... I tell you it is more important that I have kept the
Communists from spreading. The Japanese are a disease of the skin;
the Communists are a disease of the heart.[213]
[213] Quoted in George Moorad, _Lost Peace in China_ (New York,
1949), 33.
_Communist Victory in Civil War_
In late 1945, with the Japanese no longer a menace, the grapple for
mastery began anew. Chiang Kai-shek held the material and moral
advantage as a result of the arms and other assistance supplied by the
United States.
The Nationalists controlled all the important centers of population
and industry and the major lines of communication. The Communists,
with their backs to the wall, eagerly accepted the United States
proposal for a cease fire in January 1946. General George C. Marshall,
as personal representative of President Truman, flew out to Nanking
in December, 1945, and tried for 12 months to arrange a workable
compromise between two irreconcilable ideologies. Meanwhile, the Reds
retrained and reequipped their forces with the vast supply of weapons
which had fallen into their hands as a result of the collapse of the
Japanese Army in Manchuria in August, 1945. By the spring of 1947, they
were ready again for war. They denounced the truce and recommenced
military operations. From that time the balance of power swung steadily
in their favor.[214]
[214] _U. S. Relations with China_, 352–363.
Although the PLA had seized the initiative, the Government still
had an army of about 2,700,000 men facing 1,150,000 Reds, according
to estimates of American military advisers in China. But Chiang
was committed to a positional warfare; his forces were dangerously
over-extended, and for reasons of prestige and political considerations
he hesitated to withdraw from areas of dubious military value. Mao’s
hard and realistic strategy took full advantage of these lapses. As a
result the Communists won the upper hand in Manchuria and Shantung and
by the end of the year had massed large forces in central China.
Early in 1948, the year of decision, the PLA recaptured Yenan along
with thousands of Government troops. But the most crushing Communist
victory of all came with the surrender of Tsinan, the capital of
Shantung, and its garrison of 85,000 to 100,000 Nationalists.
In his summary of Nationalist reverses, Major General David G. Barr,
senior officer of the United States Military Advisory Group in China,
reported to the Department of the Army on 16 November 1948:
No battle has been lost since my arrival due to lack of ammunition
and equipment. Their [the Chinese Nationalists’] military debacles
in my opinion can all be attributed to the world’s worst
leadership and many other morale destroying factors that lead to a
complete loss of will to fight.[215]
[215] _U. S. Relations with China_, 358.
By the early spring of 1949 the military collapse of the Nationalists
had gone so far that the enemy controlled the major centers of
population and the railroads from Manchuria south to the Yangtze
Valley. Nanking, Hangkow, and Shanghai were soon to fall into the hands
of Communists whose military strength increased every day as they
captured Nationalist arms and were joined by Nationalist deserters.
Perhaps the best summary of the Chinese Civil War was put in a few
words by Dean Acheson, the U. S. Secretary of State:
The Nationalist armies did not have to be defeated; they
disintegrated.[216]
[216] _Ibid._, xiv-xv.
In addition to the aid extended during World War II, Washington had
authorized grants and credits to Nationalist China amounting to two
billion dollars since V-J Day. Nor was American assistance confined
to arms and monetary grants. From 1945–1947 the occupation of certain
key cities in North China, e. g., Tientsin, Peiping, Tsingtao[217]
etc., by sizeable U. S. Marine forces held those bases secure for the
Nationalist government and permitted the release of appreciable numbers
of Chiang’s soldiers for offensive operations, who would otherwise have
been tied up in garrison type duty.[218]
[217] Marines remained in Tsingtao until early 1949.
[218] The first blows between the Marine and the Chinese
Communists took place not in Korea, but along the
Peiping-Tientsin highway as early as October, 1945.
The Marines, upon their withdrawal, were directed to turn over vast
stores of weapons and munitions to the Chinese Nationalists. In
addition, the Nationalists were “sold” large quantities of military and
civilian war surplus property, with a total procurement cost of more
than a billion dollars, for a bargain price of 232 million.[219]
[219] _U. S. Relations with China_, xiv-xv.
_Organization of the CCF_
Although the victorious army continued to be called the People’s
Liberation Army by the Chinese Reds themselves, it was known as the
Chinese Communist Forces by commentators of Western nations. At the
head of the new police state were the 72 regular and alternate members
of the Central Committee, or Politburo. Formed at the Seventh Party
Congress in 1945, this body consisted for the most part of Mao’s close
associates--leaders identified with the revolutionary movement from the
beginning.
From top to bottom of the Chinese state, the usual Communist dualism
of high political and military rank prevailed. The highest governing
body, the People’s Revolutionary Military Council, consisted of leaders
holding both positions. After they determined policies, the execution
was left to the General Headquarters of the army.[220]
[220] Unless otherwise noted, this section is based on
the following sources: GHQ, FECOM, _Order of Battle
Information, Chinese Third Field Army_ (1 Mar 51) and
_Chinese Fourth Field Army_ (7 Nov 50); 164-MISDI,
ADVATIS, and ADVATIS FWD rpts in EUSAK _WDs_, _passim_;
X Corps _PIRs_; 1stMarDiv _PIRs_; 1stMarDiv _SAR_, 30;
G-2 _SAR_, 16–18; Far East Command, Allied Translator
and Interpreter Service (ATIS), _Enemy Documents, Korean
Operations_, _passim_; Fleet Marine Force Pacific
(FMFPac), _Chinese Communist Forces Tactics in Korea_,
5–11; Maj R. C. W. Thomas, “The Chinese Communist Forces
in Korea,” _The Army Quarterly_, Oct 52 (digested
in _Military Review_, xxxii, no. 11 (Feb 53), 87);
LtCol Robert F. Rigg, _Red China’s Fighting Hordes_
(Harrisburg, 1951); Walker: _China Under Communism_.
This organization comprised a general staff section, a rear Services
section and a general political bureau. Largest CCF administrative unit
was the field army, which reported directly to Headquarters. Composed
of two or more army groups, the field army had a small headquarters of
its own.
The army group, as the largest unit encountered by UN forces, was
comparable to an army in the American military system. CCF army groups
in Korea consisted of two to four armies with an average total strength
of 60,000–120,000 troops. Equivalent to an American corps was the
CCF army, an organization including three infantry divisions and an
artillery regiment. Thus the average strength of a CCF army was about
30,000 men.
The CCF infantry division, with a paper strength of 10,000 men,
averaged from 7,000 to 8,500 men in Korea, according to various
estimates. Triangular in organization, it included three infantry
regiments and an artillery battalion.
Divisional units consisted of reconnaissance and engineer companies of
about 100 men, a 150-man transport company, a 100-man guard company,
and a 60-man communications company. Transport companies had only draft
animals and carts, since little motor transport was organic to a CCF
division at that time.
The CCF infantry regiment, averaging about 2,200 men in the field,
broke down into the following units: three infantry battalions; an
artillery battery of four to six guns; a mortar and bazooka company; a
guard company; a transportation company; a medical unit with attached
stretcher personnel (often composed of impressed civilians) and a
combined reconnaissance and signal company.
The CCF infantry battalion, with an authorized strength of 852 men
and an actual strength of perhaps 700, consisted of a mortar and
machine gun or heavy weapons company, a signal squad, a medical squad
and a small battalion headquarters in addition to the three rifle
companies of about 170 men each. Each of the latter was composed of a
headquarters platoon, a 60mm mortar platoon and three rifle platoons.
The CCF artillery battalion, organic to every division, must be
considered theoretical rather than actual as far as Korean operations
of 1950 are concerned. As a rule, only a few horse-drawn or pack
howitzers were brought into action by an infantry division depending
chiefly on mortars.
_The Chinese Peasant as a Soldier_
Perhaps the most distinctive feature of the CCF, from the viewpoint
of a Western observer, was the lack of any official provision for the
honorable discharge of a soldier. Once he became a cog in the CCF
military machine, a man remained in the ranks until he was killed,
captured, became a deserter, or was incapacitated for active service by
reason of wounds, disease or old age.
Theoretically depending on a “volunteer” system, the recruiting
officers of the CCF knew how to apply political or economic pressure
so that a man found it prudent to become a soldier. After putting on
a uniform, he was vigorously indoctrinated in political as well as
military subjects.
Both self-criticism and criticism of comrades were encouraged at
platoon meetings held for that purpose. Every recruit was subjected
to a course of psychological mass coercion known to the Chinese as
_hsi-nao_ and to the non-Communist world as “brain-washing.” Spying on
comrades and reporting political or military deviations was a soldier’s
duty.[221]
[221] Walker, _China under Communism_, 51–76.
Inured to hardships from birth, the peasant in the ranks did not find
that the military service demanded many unwonted privations. He was
used to cold and hunger, and he could make long daily marches on a diet
which the American soldier would have regarded as both insufficient
and monotonous. It would appear, however, that some of the Western
legends about Oriental stoicism and contempt for death were a little
far-fetched. At any rate, the CCF had to deal with the problem of
straggling from the battlefield; and U. S. Marines in Korea could
attest that on occasion the Chinese soldier showed evidences of fear
and low morale. Nor was he as much of a fanatic as might have been
expected, considering the extent of his political indoctrination.
Although the CCF departed in most respects from the Chinese military
past, the policy of organizing units along ethnic lines was retained.
Men from the same village were formed into a company; companies
from the same area into battalions; and battalions from the same
province into regiments or divisions. Replacements were drawn from the
localities where the unit was originally recruited.[222]
[222] FMFPac, _CCF Tactics_, 9.
On the other hand, the Chinese Reds broke with both Nationalist and
Communist tradition in their policy of avoiding a permanent rank
system. Officers (in Korea denoted by red piping on their sleeves) were
divided into company, field, and general groups. The company commander
and political officer held about equal authority in an infantry unit,
and the only NCOs mentioned in CCF field reports are sergeants and
squad leaders.[223]
[223] ADVATIS FWD Rpt 0213 in EUSAK _WD_, 14 Nov 50; G-3 _SAR_,
21–22.
_CCF Arms and Equipment_
The CCF depended on a wide assortment of weapons, so that it was
not uncommon to find several different kinds of rifles of varying
calibers in the same regiment. Japanese arms acquired after the
surrender of 1945; Russian arms furnished by the Soviets; and American,
German, Czech, British, and Canadian arms taken from the Chinese
Nationalists--these were some of the diverse sources. And it is a
tribute to the adaptability of the Chinese Reds that they managed to
utilize such military hand-me-downs without disastrous confusion.
Paper work was at a minimum in a force which kept few records and
numbered a great many illiterates. As for logistics, each soldier
was given a four-day food supply in the winter of 1950–1951 when he
crossed the Yalu--usually rice, millet or soy beans carried in his
pack. Afterwards, food was to be procured locally by extortion or
confiscation, though the Communists were fond of using such euphemisms
as “purchase” or “donation” to denote those processes.[224]
[224] There is some evidence of an attempt to supply troops
from division stocks. See ADVATIS 1245 in EUSAK _WD_, 4
Dec 50, and 164-MISDI-1176 in _Ibid._, 1 Nov 50. Normal
CCF doctrine, however, held that a division should be
committed to combat for about six days and then withdrawn
to replenish its supplies and replace casualties. This
procedure, naturally, definitely limited the extent of an
attack by the CCF and prevented the maintenance of the
momentum for an extended offensive. MajGen D. G. Barr
testimony in _MacArthur Hearing_, 2650; Bowser Comments,
23 Apr 56.
The CCF soldiers who fought in Korea during the winter of 1950–1951
wore a two-piece, reversible mustard-yellow and white uniform of
quilted cotton and a heavy cotton cap with fur-lined ear flaps. Issued
to the troops just before crossing the Yalu, the quilted cotton blouse
and trousers were worn over the standard summer uniform and any other
layers of clothing the soldier may have acquired.
The first CCF units in action had canvas shoes with crepe rubber soles.
Later arrivals were issued a half-leather shoe or even a full leather
boot. Chinese footwear was of poor quality and few of the troops wore
gloves in cold weather. The consequence was a high rate of frostbitten
hands and feet.[225]
[225] X Corps msg X 11792; G-2 _SAR_, 21–22; SSgt Robert W.
Tallent, “New Enemy,” _Leatherneck Magazine_, xxxiv, No.
2 (Feb 51), 12–15; 3/1 _SAR 26 Nov-15 Dec 50_, 11.
The CCF soldier usually carried a shawl-like blanket in addition to the
small pack containing his food as well as personal belongings. These
were few and simple, for it could never be said that the Chinese Reds
pampered their soldiers.
_China’s “Hate America” Campaign_
It was essentially an Asiatic guerrilla army which came to the rescue
of beaten Red Korea in the autumn of 1950. CCF strategic aims had been
summed up years before by Mao Tse-tung himself:
We are against guerilla-ism of the Red Army, yet we must admit its
guerrilla character. We are opposed to protracted campaigns and
a strategy of quick decision while we believe in a strategy of
protracted war and campaigns of quick decision. As we are opposed
to fixed operational fronts and positional warfare, we believe in
unfixed operational fronts and a war of maneuvers. We are against
simply routing the enemy, and believe in a war of annihilation.
We are against two-fistism in strategic directions and believe
in one-fistism. We are against the institution of a big rear and
believe in a small rear. We are against absolute centralized
command and believe in a relatively centralized command.[226]
[226] Mao Tse-tung: _Strategic Problems of Chinese
Revolutionary Wars_, Ed by LtCol F. B. Nihart (Quantico,
1951), 17–18. Adapted from an English translation
published in the _China Digest_, of Hong Kong.
Mao was held in such reverence as a veteran Chinese Communist leader
that long passages of his writings were committed to memory. His
strategic ideas, therefore, deserve more than passing consideration.
In the first place, his concept of war itself differed from that of
Western nations.
“There are only two kinds of war in history, revolutionary and
counter-revolutionary,” he wrote. “We support the former and oppose the
latter. Only a revolutionary war is holy.”[227]
[227] _Ibid._, 4.
From the Western viewpoint, Mao’s followers had fought four different
wars in close succession--against the Chinese Nationalists from
1927 to 1936; against the Japanese from 1937 to 1945; against the
Nationalists in a second war from 1946 to 1949; and against the
United Nations, beginning in 1950. But Mao and his colleagues saw
this period as one prolonged war in which revolutionists were pitted
against counter-revolutionary adversaries. The fact that the conflict
had lasted for a generation did not disturb Communist leaders who
envisioned a continual state of war “to save mankind and China from
destruction.”
“The greatest and most ruthless counter-revolutionary war is pressing
on us,” continued Mao. “If we do not hoist the banner of revolutionary
war, a greater part of the human race will face extinction.”[228]
[228] _Ibid._
Early in December, 1949, following Red China’s victory over the
Nationalists, Mao arrived in Moscow for a series of talks with Stalin
which lasted until 4 March 1950. The decisions reached in these
conferences are not known, but it was probably no coincidence that
the Communist puppet state in North Korea violated the world’s peace
a few months later. It is perhaps also significant that the head
of the Soviet Military Mission in Tokyo, Lieutenant General Kuzma
Derevyanko, was absent from Tokyo during the same period and reported
in Moscow.[229]
[229] LtGen E. M. Almond Comments, 22 Jun 56.
It was the Year of the Tiger in the Chinese calendar, and a “Resist
America, Aid Korea” movement was launched in Red China when the United
States came to the aid of the Republic of Korea. Every dictatorship
must have some object of mass hatred, and Mao found the United States
ideal for the purpose. A “Hate America” campaign was inaugurated after
the CCF intervention, with the following serving as an example of
anti-American propaganda:
This [the United States] is the paradise of gangsters, swindlers,
rascals, special agents, fascist germs, speculators, debauchers,
and all the dregs of mankind. This is the world’s manufactory
and source of such crimes as reaction, darkness, cruelty,
decadence, corruption, debauchery, oppression of man by man, and
cannibalism. This is the exhibition ground of all the crimes which
can possibly be committed by mankind. This is a living hell,
ten times, one hundred times, one thousand times worse than can
possibly be depicted by the most sanguinary of writers. Here the
criminal phenomena that issue forth defy the imagination of human
brains. Conscientious persons can only wonder how the spiritual
civilization of mankind can be depraved to such an extent.[230]
[230] Excerpt from a series of three articles, “Look, This
is the American Way of Life,” used as a primer in the
“Hate America” campaign. Quoted in Walker, _China Under
Communism_, 13.
Communist doctrine held that the people must be incited by such
propaganda to a constant high pitch of emotional intensity for the
sacrifices demanded by total war. The prevalence of illiteracy made
it necessary to depend largely on street-corner loud speakers blaring
forth radio harangues. Realistic broadcasts of the torture and
execution of political deviates were also heard at times, and such
spectacles were exhibited for the edification of the public.[231]
[231] _Ibid._
_CCF Strategy and Tactics_
CCF strategy was so rudimentary at first that its basic tenets could be
summed up in a 16-word principle adopted by the Central Committee:
Enemy advancing, we retreat; enemy entrenched, we harass; enemy
exhausted, we attack; enemy retreating, we pursue.[232]
[232] Mao, _Strategic Problems_, 31.
But as time went on, other principles were added. Mao favored a planned
defensive-offensive as the only valid strategy against superior enemy
numbers. He made it plain, however, that any withdrawal was to be
merely temporary as the preliminary to advancing and striking at the
first advantageous opportunity. And he reiterated that annihilation of
the enemy must always be the final goal of strategy.[233]
[233] _Ibid._
It was in the field of tactics that the essentially guerrilla character
of the CCF was most fully revealed. Since Communist dialectics
insisted that there was a correct (Marxist) and an incorrect (“petty
bourgeois” or “opportunist” or “reactionary”) way of doing everything,
CCF tactics were reduced to principles whenever possible.
A generation of warfare against material odds had established a pattern
of attack which proved effective against armies possessing an advantage
in arms and equipment. One Marine officer has aptly defined a Chinese
attack as “assembly on the objective.”[234] The coolie in the CCF ranks
had no superior in the world at making long approach marches by night
and hiding by day, with as many as fifty men sharing a hut or cave and
subsisting on a few handfuls of rice apiece. Night attacks were so much
the rule that any exception came as a surprise. The advancing columns
took such natural routes as draws or stream beds, deploying as soon as
they met resistance. Combat groups then peeled off from the tactical
columns, one at a time, and closed with rifles, submachine guns, and
grenades.
[234] Bowser Comments, 23 Apr 56.
Once engaged and under fire, the attackers hit the ground. Rising at
any lull, they came on until engaged again; but when fully committed,
they did not relinquish the attack even when riddled with casualties.
Other Chinese came forward to take their places, and the build-up
continued until a penetration was made, usually on the front of one
or two platoons. After consolidating the ground, the combat troops
then crept or wriggled forward against the open flank of the next
platoon position. Each step of the assault was executed with practiced
stealth and boldness, and the results of several such penetrations on a
battalion front could be devastating.[235]
[235] The above description was derived from S. L. A. Marshall,
“CCF in the Attack” (EUSAK Staff Memorandum ORO-S-26), 5
Jan 51.
The pattern of attack was varied somewhat to suit different occasions.
As an example of an action in which the CCF used mortars, the following
is quoted from a Marine field report:
Five to nine men [CCF] patrols were sent out forward of the main
body in an attempt to locate or establish [our] front lines and
flanks. After these patrols had withdrawn or been beaten off, white
phosphorus mortar shells were dropped about the area in an attempt
to inflict casualties. By closely watching the area for movement
in removing these casualties, they attempted to establish the
location of our front lines. After establishing what they believed
were the front lines, white phosphorous shells were dropped in the
lines and used as markers. While this was taking place, the assault
troops crawled forward to distances as close as possible to the
front lines ... [and] attacked at a given signal. The signal in
this particular instance was three blasts of a police whistle.
The attacking troops then rose and in a perfect skirmish formation
rushed the front line.[236]
[236] 3/1 _SAR 26 Nov-15 Dec 50, 9_. The remainder of the
section, unless otherwise noted, is based on: _Ibid._;
G-2 _SAR_, 13–45; 1stMar _SAR_, 28–29; 5thMar _SAR_,
38–44; EUSAK _Combat Information Bulletin No. 4_; FMFPac,
_CCF Tactics_, 1–5.
It might be added that this attack resulted in a CCF penetration on a
platoon front. Friendly lines were restored only by dawn counterattacks.
The ambush was a favorite resort of Chinese commanders. Whatever the
form of attack, the object was usually fractionalization of an opposing
force, so that the segments could be beaten in detail by a local
superiority in numbers.
CCF attacking forces ranged as a rule from a platoon to a company in
size, being continually built up as casualties thinned the ranks.
Reports by newspaper correspondents of “hordes” and “human sea”
assaults were so unrealistic as to inspire a derisive Marine comment:
“How many hordes are there in a Chinese platoon?”
After giving CCF tactics due credit for their merits, some serious
weaknesses were also apparent. The primitive logistical system put such
restrictions on ammunition supplies, particularly artillery and mortar
shells, that a Chinese battalion sometimes had to be pulled back to
wait for replenishments if the first night’s attack failed. At best the
infantry received little help from supporting arms.[237]
[237] These weaknesses, however, were confined to the early
months of CCF participation in the Korean conflict.
Following the peace talks in the summer of 1951--an
interlude with the enemy exploited for military
purposes--the Chinese gradually built up to an equality
with UN forces in mortars and artillery.
POW interrogations revealed that in many instances each soldier was
issued 80 rounds of small arms ammunition upon crossing the Yalu.
This was his total supply. The artillery and mortars were so limited
that they must reserve their fire for the front line while passing
up lucrative targets in the rear areas. Some attempts were made to
bring reserve stocks up to forward supply dumps about 30 miles behind
the front, but not much could be accomplished with animal and human
transport.
A primitive communications system also accounted for CCF shortcomings.
The radio net extended only down to the regimental level, and
telephones only to battalions or occasionally companies. Below the
battalion, communication depended on runners or such signaling devices
as bugles, whistles, flares, and flashlights.[238]
[238] 164-MISDI-1232, 1260, 1266, 1274, and 1275 in EUSAK _WD_,
19, 26, and 28 Nov and 1 Dec 50; ADVATIS FWD #1. Rpt 0271
in EUSAK _WD_ 4 Dec 50; X Corps _PIR 81_, Annex 2; G-2
_SAR_, 17–18.
The consequence was a tactical rigidity which at times was fatal.
Apparently CCF commanding officers had little or no option below the
battalion level. A battalion once committed to the attack often kept on
as long as its ammunition lasted, even if events indicated that it was
beating out its brains against the strongest part of the opposing line.
The result in many such instances was tactical suicide.
After these defects are taken into full account, however, the Chinese
soldier and the Korean terrain made a formidable combination.
Ironically, Americans fighting the first war of the new Atomic Age
were encountering conditions reminiscent of the border warfare waged
by their pioneer forefathers against the Indians. These aborigines,
too, were outweighed in terms of weapons and equipment. But from time
immemorial the night has always been the ally of the primitive fighter,
and surprise his best weapon. Thus the Americans in Korea, like their
ancestors on the Western plains, could never be sure when the darkness
would erupt into flame as stealthy foes seemed to spring from the very
earth.