Xiaoming Zhang

A fascinating and frustrating book, Red Wings Over the Yalu digs into the history of the Communist side of the air war over Korea from 1950 through 1953. As such, it is well written and provides a useful counterbalance to the Western-dominated narratives of the air war. Scholars and military history buffs will want to read it. Both will be frustrated, however, by the tone and implications of the history. Zhang does not maintain a clear relationship to the material; sometimes he repeats the PLAAF accounts without any comment, sometimes he points out inconsistencies in the PLAAF's perceptions and sometimes he makes clear judgments on the effectiveness of certain PLAAF policies. The net result is a confused narrative tone, where PLA propaganda is sometimes offered as if it were true and at other times the shortcomings of the PLAAF is stated as a fact.

In one example among many, on page 152 Zhang recounts an air battle fought by Wang Hai of the 3rd Division, concluding that "Wang Hai and his pilots learned the lesson that personal glory and individual success should come second to staying together and protecting each other during air combat." Yet Zhang concludes that "the actual experience the PLAAF gained in the Korean War was limited... their combat proficiency showed no significant improvement" (211). While the biased perspectives of participants is a necessary part of any history, it would have made for a cleaner narrative if Zhang had clearly quoted the Chinese sources (propaganda and all) to separate them more clearly from his judgments.

Another recurring challenge is the widely divergent kill ratios claimed by the Soviets, PLAAF and UN forces. Zhang recognizes the disagreement, notes that there is no definitive way to answer it and occasionally provides a detailed accounting for whether one side's claim is supported by the other side's records. This leads readers being unclear on how to interpret evidence that he offers without that context. Should PLAAF victories in general be accepted? It would have been clearer if Zhang had chosen some general principle (like only accepting a kill if the other side's records confirm it) and maintained that standard throughout the book. He instead set out to represent the official Chinese and Russian sources, but because he sometimes offers commentary based upon the US record readers are left wondering whether the Chinese claimed kills offered without comment are more accurate than the ones upon which Zhang does comment.

In short, this is a useful history but it raises as many questions as it answers.… (más)