Japan declares war on germany july 1941

[Carl Schwamberger]

[1] are there other ways to legitimately have a German flagged ship in Pearl Harbour in late 1941?

Only with some extreme PoD. German merchant ship had long been round up by the Brits, or interned. That includes German ships caught in 'neutral' US ports. During 1940 - 1941 those were somehow all sold off or seized under various legal actions. The Germans as I recall were using the money from selling the cargo ships to pay for Cash and Carry purchases in the US and S America, which they tried to smuggle back to Europe. The Brish had their diplomatic corps, MI agents, and commercial representatives in the US attempting at every turn to interfere with these German transactions. In other words the Brits and Germans were waging commercial warfare in the US and Americas.

The other obstacle to a German flagged/crewed ship in PH was the tight security. Foreign flagged ships had to ask for permission to dock there before departing another port. Whenever practical the US tried to inspect such ships before they set out for PH, and they were intercepted and inspected again by Customs and USN officers on approaching Oahu. Further, German, Italian, and Japanese merchant ships were effectively banned from US ports, with or without naval bases. The Embargo Acts severely restricted Japanese cargo ships from US controlled ports & the Germans were subject to similar sanctions.

Its not impossible for a German flagged ship to be present, just extremely unlikely.

 

[thaddeus]

Japan gets nothing from declaring war on Germany in 1941. Their best play is to settle for Manchukuo and declare war on the Germany near the end of the war.

possibly this could happen if Nazi Germany had backed the Vichy regime over Indochina and revived their cooperation with KMT China, by Sept. 1940, Japan had remained out of the war with GB for a year. (not speculating Vichy France and/or KMT China are joining the Axis, just that the Nazis might see their cooperation as more important)

when/if the Nazis invade East, Japan could make a play to improve relations with the USSR, there would be a Soviet state east of the Urals (likely) even if the USSR were defeated, what would Japan have to lose?

it seems the Japanese regime (as it existed) could more plausibly improve relations with the USSR than with the US/UK?

we are way out in speculative territory here but the Allies would (likely) only embrace Japan if the USSR continued their collaboration with Germany? (I've always cited trade with China as a rationale for Germany to continue relations with the Soviets, so they can actually reach the Far East in wartime)

 

[Alan]

Japan's best course of action would have been to ignore the American oil embargo and just occupy the Dutch East Indies as they did with Indo China. Then they would probably have achieved autarky such that they could diregard economic sanctions. Nobody would have declared was on them over th Dutch East Indies.

 

[Sekhmet_D]

Japan's best course of action would have been to ignore the American oil embargo and just occupy the Dutch East Indies as they did with Indo China. Then they would probably have achieved autarky such that they could diregard economic sanctions. Nobody would have declared was on them over th Dutch East Indies.

Osami Nagano's idea. He was ignored.

 

[DougM]

While it is unlikly the US and or Japan may have DoW’ed Japan for invading yet another country in Asia.
GB probably wouldn’t (unless the US did) because it had one war already.
The US on the other hand was not having any more of Japan. This is the reason for the embargo and the economic freeze to begin with.
I think it may have taken a while but I think ultimately the US will go to war with Japan.
Still it would be better for Japan as it would delay the war and the US would not view it as a holy crusade like they did otl.
But more like Germany.

 

[TRH]

Japan's best course of action would have been to ignore the American oil embargo and just occupy the Dutch East Indies as they did with Indo China. Then they would probably have achieved autarky such that they could diregard economic sanctions. Nobody would have declared was on them over th Dutch East Indies.

Circumventing the oil embargo with yet more aggression hardly sounds like something that would be ignored. Not least since the embargo started because of the Japanese occupation of French Indochina.

 

[Protagoras]

In the spirit of trying to figure out how to make this happen rather than just being negative and listing all the reasons it supposedly couldn't, how about this sequence of events? More persistent support of China from Germany and some other shifts in the attitudes of the German and Japanese leadership (some of which definitely had mixed feelings about OTL developments, so alternatives don't seem inconceivable) prevent the Japanese from joining the anti-comintern pact, which in turn further extends and expands German support of China (maybe China joins anti-comintern pact). Butterflies delay Marco Polo bridge incident until after the Anschluss (or produce a different precipitating event for expanded Japanese/Chinese hostilities, also after Anschluss). Allied diplomats, remembering how the response to Italy's conquest of Ethiopia pushed Italy and Germany closer together and made the Anschluss possible, and also seeing disturbingly close German-Chinese ties, decide to be less critical of Japanese aggression in China. Obviously no chance of Germans pressuring Vichy in Indochina to submit to Japan on this scenario. Japanese decide to move on Indochina anyway, and figure that if they're attacking Vichy, declaring war on Germany as well doesn't hurt them and might give them diplomatic cover with the Allies.

 

[Ramontxo]

Its easier in 1940 and easier still with no sino japanese war.

Alexander Clarke has a recent You Tube - Zeros over the Med lecture so this starts at least with his scenario.

The 1940 argument would be something like this. The Fall of France is a strategic earthquake and Japan is faced with what looks like a German Soviet alliance but there is the offer to join an anti Soviet alliance. The Prime Minister at the time is Yonai ( who otl falls in July because the Army want to join the Axis and refuse to appoint an Army Minister). Essentially the reaction of the US to this is the two ocean Navy Act and lend lease. here a separate Japanese reaction is to stand firm with the Auld Alliance and fellow Democracy ( yes Japan is a Democracy or at least much more so that Germany, Italy and the USSR).

Yonai is very close to the Emperor, he is Pro British, Pro American, as Navy Minister was quite clear that the IJN could not win a war against the RN/USN. He has a formidable personality and inspires loyalty. Look him up.

This he says in 1939. So let us suppose that from that point Yonai is working with others to prepare Japan for its place in a world at war - but a far far away war and as a result of this he persuades the persuades the Army that the German Soviet Alliance is a very serious threat and the China war must be closed down or Sinified and forces reallocated to face the communist menace now being navally rearmed by the Nazis and when France falls Yonai steers things away from the Tripartite pact and the Army goes along because the Molotov Ribbentrop pact. There is an effort to close down the China war or turn it into a Chinese civil war. Essentially at this point its a stalemate and while there is a substantial troop commitment needed its a no win no lose proposition and a peace can be had if the KMT can be persuaded that no third party is coming to their rescue.

An alliance or Co Belligerency with Britain gives several advantages. Mostly its a peaceful insertion of Japanese interests into the Southern Resource Area. You get to fight nasty racist Nazi scum, and maybe commies. Maybe you also get an African Empire. You also cut the knees off any US support for Chiang and may help bring him to the negotiating table. The Sino Japanese war is not a Crusade of extermination in and of itself.

At this point East of Suez is an Anglo Japanese lake. The French possessions are in a quandary, pro Vichy aka the legitimate government of France an Anglo Japanese force may install a Free French Governor anyway. Free French this does not happen and France Fights On. For the sake of argument lets say Indo China goes Free French - its way more vulnerable than anywhere else. Madagascar does not and gets invaded by an Anglo Japanese task force.

What you probably have available for deployment a few months hence is a force of 2-3 Kongos, 3-4 Fleet carriers ( because of refits in 1940) the Nagatos and a couple of light carriers. The Nagatos and light Carriers probably do not stray far from Japan. A task force of say one Kongo a pair of Carriers and supporting units to the Med with the Shokakus coming available later on. A temporary task force to seize Madagascar then return to Japan. Maybe a pair of Kongos plus supports to the Atlantic. There is probably a maximum of 10-12 divisions available eventually from Japan, which is the initial invasion force for 1941. But probably only a corps in 1940 to the Middle East. The 10-12 divisions would come because thats an Army Command. And again over time a very significant air component.

I would love to read such an TL

 

[zoomar]

Japan became increasingly aligned with Nazi Germany and Italy for the following reasons stemming from the end of the First World War into the 1930s, so to reverse this to the extent that Japan became an enemy of the Axis powers in 1941, the following would have to happen:

1. Changes to the post-WW1 treaties and political relations that give Japan little reason to resent and want to change the post WW1 world order, and instead align itself with Britain, France, and the other victorious allies wishing to retain or strengthen the status quo. Among such changes might be; western recognition of unfettered Japanese ownership of all former German Asian and Pacific colonies captured by Japanese forces in WW1; more equitable treatment of Japan in the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922; British, French, and American acceptance of Japan having a special role in China in exchange for Japanese acceptance of the existing European and American interests in Asia and the Pacific; elimination of racist anti-Japanese immigration policies by the US, among others

2. The above events reduce the influence of militaristic and anti-western nationalists in Japan, and Japan remains a more open limited democracy under a constitutional monarchy in which civilians and the noble classes dominate.

3. As Nazism rises in 1930's Germany, the Nazi regime seeks to expand its influence in Nationalist China as a proxy against the Soviet Union. While not necessarily aimed against Japan, German military assistance to the Chinese regime is seen as a direct threat to Japanese interests in Manchuria, Tsingtao, and elsewhere in northeast Asia.

4. the European War breaks out in 1939 as in our timeline. In 1940-41, the war extends to the German invasion of the USSR, and Nationalist China is convinced/bribed to formally join the Axis. Well-equipped with German weapons and aircraft, China invades the USSR. Japan begins to assist the Allies fighting against Germany by escorting troop and supply convoys carrying men and material from the ANZACs to Europe. in December 1941, Japan formally declares war on the three Axis powers (Germany, Italy, and China) and invades China with British assistance to force the pro-German Nationalist Chinese regime from power and signs a non-aggression pact with the USSR. The US remains broadly favorable to the British in Europe, but the US chooses to remain neutral in the war, seeing both Japan and the Soviet Union as potentially hostile powers. War ends in 1946 with collapse of Germany resulting from a simultaneous RAF nuclear bombing of six German cities, and the occupation of China by Soviet forces coming from the north and a combined British/Japanese force from the east and south.

 

[Sekhmet_D]

... and the occupation of China by Soviet forces coming from the north and a combined British/Japanese force from the east and south.

Hah. It's 1900 all over again. Hopefully with the British being present, the Nanjing Massacre doesn't happen, although the invading Soviets might just end up filling that vacuum.

 

[Rommel1941]

Where in the world do you find ANYTHING that indicates that Japan wanted out of China?????!?!?!??.

NOTHING forced Japan to go to war with China. (Or anyone else for that matter)
NOTHING stopped Japan from just picking up and leaving China any time it felt like it. So if Japan wanted out of China they could just get out of China. Nothing was stopping them other then themselves.
So not only do we have ZERO evidence that Japan wanted out of China we have the simple fact they they stayed in China to disprove the idea that Japan truly wanted out.

Japan was willing to go to war with the US rather then leave China!
And it was not just just the case in 1940-41. They had the 1937 Panay incident that almost started the war with the US 4 year ea

Did Japan want to fight all China … No. they didn’t want to fight GB and the US either. But they were 100% willing to Fight all of China and GB and the US all at the same time just in order to achieve its goals. Which happened to be to control directly a large part of China as well have domination over the rest of China and most of Asia. Obviously they would have been much happier if Japan and GB and the US just gave it to them but to say they didn’t want to go to war because they would rather have been just handed control is disingenuous at best.

Heck Germany didn’t want to go to war with France or GB but they were willing to take the chance because they wanted Poland.
Same is true for Japan. They wanted huge chunks of Asia including Korea, Mongolia and parts of China and there were willing to start wars with evryone to get what they wanted.

Note Japan was not Attacked by Korea, Mongolia, China, The. Netherlands, France , Australia, GB, the Philipeans or the US to name but a few of the MANY countries Japan attacked/invaded in the 20-30 or so year run up to WW2.

Japan leaves China and the US does not force the embargo. No Embargo and no China war and Japan has no oil issue.
Not to be insulting but did you get your history from/in Japan? Because you are sounding very much like the folks that try to push the narrative that Japan was the innocent party and that they didn’t really want to go to war with everyone they just were forced into it. And that is a sadly common belief by many folk’s education in Japan. Where they are shall we say less the freely willing to admit what they did wrong.

Japan wanted to keep manchuria. A withdrawal from China would have forced this. Oil was what brought them into ww2. Solve oil and get them out of China and try would have been happy.

 

[Rommel1941]

The other trouble With this concept is that Japan and the US had been at each other’s throats for more than a decade at this point. And if GB forms any sort of aliance with Japan the US is not going to be happy.

In order for the US to not go ballistic over this Japan will have to A) leave China completely. And B) give up all attempts to dominate militarily or economically or politically any and all of Asia.

And even then the US is not going yo be on friendly terms with Japan as it’s actions up to July of 41 have not been aimed at making the US it’s friend. It was July of 41 that the US froze Japans assets. So we are talking the exact same time that relations between the US and Japan go completely off the rails they suddenly suck up to GB.
This is going to sit bad with the US.
By July 41 the US and GB had concluded Destroyers for Bases and the US passed Lend Lease. And was starting its “patrols” in the Atlantic that would result in Oct with the sinking of the USS Reuben James. So the US was already supporting GB.
Now the OP is suggesting that GB side with Japan or at least conclude an agreement that seams to favor Japan. This will upset the US the question is how much?
And if GB has to choose between keeping the US happy vs Japan well GB would have to be suicidally insane to pick Japan. The US was the most powerful economy in the world at the time and could more or less match the industrial capacity of the entire rest of the plant. Only a complete fool would choose to keep Japan happy while upsetting the US.

So the OP is suggesting a change that Not only does Japan not want to do (leave China) but they are suggesting that GB would chose Japan over the US.

Well if we are going down this fantasy ASB POD then I have one of my own.
Germany Seeing the writing on the wall with Japan dies not invade the USSR.
Then when the Japanese do whatever dumb thing they will undoubtedly do that starts a war with the US. Germany and The US team up with to fight Japan and get the USSR to join them.
And the OP has successfully found a way for Germany to win WW2.
And while I know Germany will not resist invading the USSR nor will the USSR join Germany and the US fighting Japan. The reality is this is no more unlikely than the Idea that Japan and GB and the US would do what the OP proposes.

britan had a choice after ww1 stay aligned with Japan or over to USA. Under this scenario GB accepts japaneses help. USA all along agreed Germany was the greatest risk. So in this USA slowly moves to war with Germany from subs. Japan helps GB in the short term. USA and Japan push their coming war to the future. USA and GB want Japan out of southern China as did Japan.

 

[Fulano]

An Imperial Japan that attacked the Nazy Germany is probably a Japan that never dropped its "Anti-White Imperialism Crusade" rhetoric and would have been in odds against the European Powers after the 30s.
This would change many things, for example, they would have continued its alliance with Ethiopia, helping them against the Italians in the colonial wars, as opposed to OTL, where they abandoned them in favor of having good relationship with Italy.

 

[Seandineen]

Osami Nagano's idea. He was ignored.

What did Prince Konoe want? for a brief period he had the emperor's ear.

 

[Sekhmet_D]

What did Prince Konoe want? for a brief period he had the emperor's ear.

Konoe's position is somewhat contradictory.

He aggressively pursued the war in China during its initial stages and was in favour of the Tripartite Pact.

Perhaps jaded after Japan's failure to subdue the Chinese, he repeatedly tried to achieve a diplomatic solution with America, but he never advocated complete acquiescence to American terms, did not do much to counter the seizure of Indochina and conceded that war was inevitable should negotiations break down.

In a word, wishy-washy.

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

Japan's best course of action would have been to ignore the American oil embargo and just occupy the Dutch East Indies as they did with Indo China. Then they would probably have achieved
autarky such that they could diregard economic sanctions. Nobody would have declared was on them over th Dutch East Indies.

Circumventing the oil embargo with yet more aggression hardly sounds like something that would be ignored. Not least since the embargo started because of the Japanese occupation of French Indochina.

Beyond the the point TRH makes, the Embargo went far past 'Oil'

Japanese accounts in US banks frozen. Japan was dependent of rolling credit to keep its industry and war going. In 1941 it was effectively at zero capitol in its banks. the only practical sources were either London, or New York. Shut out of those two banking systems was trouble.

In 1940 40 to 50 % of japans cargos in or out of its ports were carried on foreign flagged ships. Between Britan and the US control of the global cargo fleets Japan was dependent on its own cargo fleet, and a few residual merchant ships of other nations. ie: Italy had a half dozen lurking in neutral Asian ports. The cargo fleet problem for Japan started with the embargo and not after they went to war with the US.

Machine tools. Europe and Britan had been closed to Japan from mid 1940. With the US embargo Japan had insufficient capacity to make its own, and no more from the US.

Chemicals & alloys. Similar with the machine tools. Japan had some sources, but not enough to keep its industry running in the short run.

Exports: Taking over French Indo China was supposed to give Japan a income boost from the Mekong Rice factory, and the vast Rubber plantations. The embargo made it near impossible to export any of that. The bank freeze and the cargo ship problem again.

There were a number of other items as well. All this could be worked around in the long run, but Japan had no long run here. The embargo threaten Japan with severe economic problems over the next few years. The Pearl Harbor attack sank a fleet, the Embargo threatened to sink a entire economy.


The books 'Secret Allies in the Pacific', 'The Borrowed Years', The Pacific War 1941-1945' have descriptions of US, British, and Dutch preparations to undercut Japan if it attacked any one of the three. Planning for joint naval operations had been made and were up dated. The Dutch had been purchasing arms from the US, and had multiple orders awaiting shipment, all three had been sharing intelligence on Japans Navy and other military matters, & set up a system for direct communication of intelligence, vs via the usual diplomatic channels.

 

[Sekhmet_D]

All three had been sharing intelligence on Japans Navy and other military matters, & set up a system for direct communication of intelligence, vs via the usual diplomatic channels.

And YET all three still got blindsided in 1941 with a near complete ignorance of what the Japanese war machine could do.

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

Yep. Their commanders on the spot were clearly not up to the task. Arrogance, indecisive changes in strategy, lack of study of Japans tactics and operations, gross overestimation of their own abilities.

All those factors would have led the Brits and the US to interfere with any attempt of Japan to attack the DEI unilaterally. Thinking it would be a easy task.