The Franco-Japanese war

[benjamin]

Excellent timeline Sharlin.

I'm wondering what the other major player in the region thinks about all of this? Surely, the US, led by master AH fodder Teddy Roosevelt, must be clamoring for a role either as peacemaker or foil. It behooves the US, still supporting its Open Door policy, not to let any one power become to strong in the region. I'm guessing with the Venezuela Crisis of 1902 resolved, the Alaska Boundary dispute settled in the US's favor, and TR being largely pro-British that his administration would be more inclined to favor Britain and by extension Japan.

It may be possible that the Taft-Katsura Agreement never occurs but perhaps it does with more serious repercussions. If Japan is willing to pledge never to move against American control of the Philippines it is likely the US would return with some favor of its own. And by 1905 the US had a lot of surplus ship building ability that could be put to good use by a nation in need. That North Carolina design is interesting and perhaps could be replicated for the export market.

Benjamin

[sharlin]

I'm glad your enjoying the timeline Ben, the US will get involved at some point but at the moment the other major powers are looking on with interest. In Europe you've got England and France grumbling at each other with the Russians press quite vocally supporting the French, with the Germans watching the Anglo/French kerfuffle with glee in their eyes.

In the Far east the big players are the Russians and English. The Germans have one colony in the region at Tsintao and a visiting group of small warships.

The English have deployed a formidable fleet to the Far East in light of the ongoing battles to 'safeguard' their dominions. This fleet is based at Singapore and is currently patrolling the region as well as making trips to India.

The Russians at Port Arthur in Korea have the original Pacific Squadron of six battleships and five cruisers has been reinforced by four armoured cruisers from Vladivostok but the fleet remains in harbour, avoiding any provocation under orders from St Petersberg.

In the next update we'll have a post battle breakdown as well as reports home and international reactions.

[Ziomatrix]

Originally Posted by benjamin

Excellent timeline Sharlin.

I'm wondering what the other major player in the region thinks about all of this? Surely, the US, led by master AH fodder Teddy Roosevelt, must be clamoring for a role either as peacemaker or foil.
Benjamin

According to this author's article Teddy saw Japan as a rising power and seemed sympathetic to their colonial ambitions; seeing them as a people (in the sense of 19th century eugenics) who "earned" their place among the peoples of east Asia. Perhaps he figured Japan would follow in the footsteps of Western European empires and ultimately attain the same kind of enlightenment. Sadly, events took a slightly different turn and landed the biggest crisis the US had to face to date on the American people and particulary on his grandson.

[iddt3]

Originally Posted by Ziomatrix

According to this author's article Teddy saw Japan as a rising power and seemed sympathetic to their colonial ambitions; seeing them as a people (in the sense of 19th century eugenics) who "earned" their place among the peoples of east Asia. Perhaps he figured Japan would follow in the footsteps of Western European empires and ultimately attain the same kind of enlightenment. Sadly, events took a slightly different turn and landed the biggest crisis the US had to face to date on the American people and particulary on his grandson.

Fifth cousin is the degree of relation your looking for, not grandson.

[sharlin]

The end of the beginning or the beginning of the end.

The Battle of the Tonkin Gulf did not end with a roar, but a muted whimper, for the first time in hours the sound of naval caliber gunfire did not fill the air. The exhausted and battered survivors of the Second Squadron were in no fit state to persue the Japanese as they withdrew at 18 knots whilst the French reinforcements in the shape of the armoured cruisers of the First Squadron could not engage the Japanese ships unsupported.

So the French cruisers simply steamed closer to the battered battleships to offer what aid they could and help locate survivors.
The crippled Hoche completed four full circles at a steady 10 knots before control was finally restored and she staggered back onto her original course. On gun decks, in gun turrets and deep in the bowels of the French and withdrawing Japanese ships, the crews slumped at their posts, exhausted from working so hard in the heat of the day but they could not rest, they had to ensure the survival of their ships and tend to injured crewmates.

Of the three surviving French battleships the Marceau had taken the least damage but her upper works and hull were a shambles thanks to the culmative effects of five 12 inch, three 8 inch and eleven 6 inch hits. Over eighty crew were dead with twice that injured, some severely. The survivors had to put out fires, man pumps and stem any flooding.

)1)

The Magenta had suffered three 12 inch hits but a staggering twelve 8 inch and ninteen 6 inch rounds, but fortunately none had been below the waterline. But the end result of this barrage of lightweight shells had been a hull that looked like it had been hit by a monsterious pair of metal jaws.


2)

The ships upperworks and hull were a shambles, fire had gutted most of the superstructure and the small caliber hits had caused fearsome casualties to the crew but the deluge of light shells had not caused crippling damage, the port barbette was dented and scarred from hits but none had penetrated. The carnage on the gundecks for the 5.5 inch guns though had been horrific. The crew were reduced to washing the remains of some of their colleagues off the decks with hoses once the fires were under control.

The Hoche was a floating wreck from the attentions of eleven 12 inch rounds, one 8 inch and 4 six inch rounds that had gutted her port barbette, smashed her foreward turret, collapsed her mainmast and destroyed the bridge just as a few examples. There was also a heavy hit on the bow that was taking on water, one of her funnels had partially collapsed, dragging its partner with it until they both hung at a 25 degree angle, the smoke from the boilers spilling out of the vent and the rents in the metal.

Two armoured cruisers now stood alongside, transfering the wounded off and sending damage repair teams over to the crippled warship, her commander, a Senior grade Lieutenant directing the damage efforts personally was determind to keep the ship that had fought so bravely from sinking.

Reducing speed the French ships wallowed south at a mere six knots, escorted all the way by the warships of the First Squadron who had rendered the mauled survivors a salute before taking up position to guard them against attacks and provide more crew to assist with the repairs.

Three days later the First and Second Squadrons sailed into Cam-ranh Bay and the port facilities there. The battered Hoche tying up alongside the dock, whilst the Marceau went into drydock to repair her underwater damage.

Whilst the Marceau and Magenta could be repaired by the dock workers and ships crews the Hoche would need a trip home. The Admiral of the Docks suggested the ship be declared a total constructive loss as she was simply beyond economic repair, but Admiral Gilbert would have none of it.

It would have been a blow to morale to the crew and fleet who had fought so hard to get the Hoche home. Indeed she had nearly foundered twice on the journey home. To have all that hard work dismissed would have damaged morale which had suffered due to the sheer number of casualties suffered.
The Hoche was patched up as best as possible, her port barbette was wrecked but the gun remained in place and the forward turret made operational again but the ship was made Guardship of the bay.

The Imperial Japanese navy suffered less casualties thanks to the fact that none of their vessels exploded, unlike the French who lost a battleship and light cruiser when massive blasts tore them asunder but their ships had still taken a pounding.
The more modern battleships had held up well, their Krupps armour resisting the heavy 13.4 inch shells and keeping their machinery and turrets safe but their upperworks were a shambles. The surviving battleships steamed to Hainan and the fairly simple facilities there to repair and refit whilst the Mikasa, Asahi and the five cruisers of Rear Admiral Kamura's 1st Cruiser squadron would patrol and seek out any French warships and engage them.


3)

Rear Admiral Tokioki accepted the blame for the loss of the Fuji and Kasuga but was ordered by Admiral Togo and his Emperor to continue his service to the Nation having performed well in a poor tactical situation and had claimed three French warships and driven the rest to port.

Captain Scott spent a full week writing a detailed report, interviewing gunners and engine room personnel and touring the damaged ships before cabling England via Singapore.

In later years the 'Scott Memorandum' as it would be called would be seen by some as a very polite 'I told you so' and it did not impress all who read it. Captain Scott had been an apostle of gunnery, pushing constantly for more gunnery practice and the adoption of long range gunnery in the fleet which until, after his constant urgings and the coming of Admiral Fisher, Royal Naval gunnery was developed around fighting at about 2000 yards. This was slowly changing with the fleet now regually practicing at 5000 yards but it was still inaccurate and too short ranged for Scott and Fisher's liking.

Having witnessed a battle taking place at 7000 yards with guns being consistenly laid accurately was a revalation and he had gleamed valuable information about the effectiveness of torpedo boats and gun calibers.

Within naval circles the almost standard 6 inch gun was viewed as the main weapon of a warship due to its rate of fire. The quick firing 6 inch guns could smother a target and kill crew and disable weapons whilst the slow firing and less accurate 12 and 11 inch weapons prevalent in the worlds warships would deliver occasional heavy hits. But in a long range engagement the heavier 12 inch shells were not only more accurate but harder hitting and this had been proven at the Tonkin Gulf.

Small torpedo boats and destroyers had been a success although they had paid a high cost to put their torpedoes into two ships. The small and fragile Torpedo boats were still viewed as being inferior to the larger destroyer type vessel and continued production of destroyers was urged.

The 128 page document once fully compiled detailed the minutea of the battle, from the signals sent to damage control methods and ideas on gunnery. The most salient points being the following.

1) Heavy guns at long ranges were more valuable than lighter shells.
2) Long range gunnery and the use of range finders was clearly vital, the ship that struck first and struck often would win a battle and long range gunnery would enable this.
3) Heavy caliber shells were easier to spot at longer ranges.
4) Damage control and internal subdevision needs to be revised, longitudal bulkheads were possibly a threat to ships stability.
5) Propellant and ammunition should be properly protected and the layout of turrets should be examined to prevent possibly fatal explosions.
6)The use of radio and the marconi system to replace flags is highly recommended. The new systems are faster, clearer and less vulnerable to damage.

In the Admiralty in London this document was eagerly embraced by the First Lord who had always expounded that the fleet needed to be better trained and prepared. Orders were drafted and sent out and wheels started turning. The same happened in France and Japan as both sides immediately began planning their next moves.

1) The effect of a 12 inch HE round detonating above the main belt on the Marceau.

2) Part of the gundeck on the Magenta, the section was hit by four 6 inch rounds that penetrated the hull and detonated inside causing carnage amongst the gun crews. Sadly the guns have been removed for repairs.

3) Some of the damage on the IJN Yashima's superstructure round her funnels, most of this damage was caused by 5.5 inch shells and one 13.4 inch round that bounced off up the hull its fuse detonating it above the ship just forward of amidships.

[MerryPrankster]

So, who actually won?

The Japanese apparently withdraw from the area, but at the same time, the French fleet is described as being forced back to the port.

[sharlin]

Basically a bloody draw, the French lost more ships and were beaten back to port but the Japanese lost two priceless vessels and withdrew to repair, fluffing the chance to eliminate a portion of the French forces in the region without facing their superior numbers. In terms of casualties the Japanese have won a phyrric victory, but the ships they lost are irreplacable.

[DD951]

Originally Posted by sharlin

Basically a bloody draw, the French lost more ships and were beaten back to port but the Japanese lost two priceless vessels and withdrew to repair, fluffing the chance to eliminate a portion of the French forces in the region without facing their superior numbers. In terms of casualties the Japanese have won a phyrric victory, but the ships they lost are irreplacable.

I'm guessing that after reading the report, they're really hoping their new mini-battleships get there soon in Tokyo in order to restore the combat power of their fleet.

BTW, have you given any thought to what the Japanese are going to call them? If you haven't, may I suggest some of the names they used for the battleships captured from the Russians in the OTL Russo-Japanese war, such as Tango, Hizen, Iwami, or Suwo. (According to the IJN fleet list at the Russo-Japanese War Research Society's website, and what I recall from reading Jemtschura several years ago, most of the WW1/WW2 battleship names were being used by old armored vessels being used as guardships, coast defense vessels, & depot hulks at this time.)

[sharlin]

I'm thinking the Hizen and Tango for the ex Swiftsure and Triumph.

[mcdo]

Originally Posted by sharlin

I'm thinking the Hizen and Tango for the ex Swiftsure and Triumph.

Those names sound good. According to Wiki:

Originally Posted by Imperial Japanese Navy Ship Naming Conventions

Ships captured during the Russo-Japanese War were renamed with Japanese names. Some of these vessels were given names related to where they were captured or some other aspect of the war, such as the month of capture. Some Russian ships were given Japanese names that were phonetically similar to their original Russian names (example: Angara became Anegawa).

You could simply give the ships Japanese names similar phonetically to their current names. Alternatively, since the ships were not captured, you could just give them original Japanese names. Battleships were named after the provinces of old Japan, such as Mutsu or Shinano.

See the complete list here.

[sharlin]

Oooh most useful! Much obliged!

[Xgentis]

It look like it will end up in statu quo ante bellum.

[sharlin]

Originally Posted by Xgentis

It look like it will end up in statu quo ante bellum.

And our survey says......


Just have to wait and see won't ye.

[mcdo]

Originally Posted by sharlin

Oooh most useful! Much obliged!

Happy to be of service.
One other tidbit I thought I would add:
Some provinces were more important or "patriotic" than others, and so show up more often in ship names.

• Ise Province is the location of Ise Grand Shrine, the single most important shrine in Shinto (the state religion during the Imperial period). One of the only shrines important enough to get yearly visits from the Emperor himself.
• Musashi Province contained much of modern-day Tokyo. The name starts with the charcter for "warrior".
• Satsuma and Nagato Provinces are not overly important in themselves, but the samurai from these provinces were the leaders of the rebellion that overthrew the Shogunate and lead to the Meiji Restoration/Revolution.
• Yamato Province is the homeland of the original Japanese state, before it expanded to cover the whole of the Home Islands. To this day, Yamato is used as a shorthand for Japan itself.

[Perky50]

Impressive as always, Shar! Well done!

[Shevek23]

Regarding the question of "who won," a factor to be considered no one seems to be paying attention to is--

What about the army invasion? The purpose of the Japanese fleet sailing was to cover the landing of ground forces in Tonkin, these were to act in conjunction with Thais attacking from the west. By the time the two fleets engaged the French should already have been reacting to reports of ground forces striking at Indochinese targets.

I'm puzzled how the story we've seen so far is 100 percent naval, with no mention of the war going on on land.

If the reason for this is that the Japanese were prevented from landing (and the Thais, hearing of this failure, called off their own invasion) then the French have clearly won; probably won the whole war too as a second attempt has much tougher odds to beat--fewer Japanese ships, the French are warned and have more of their ships present, etc.

I believe though that the Japanese did manage to land their troops and we should be hearing about how these forces are doing against French ground forces. We have been told the Thai plan was to strike somewhat later so we are in suspense there.

If the landings did take place, then the Japanese have enjoyed at least a partial and provisional success, one worth losing some ships over if that army can then achieve its goal.

OTOH, it is going to be hard for the fleet to get close to Indochina again to supply or reinforce that army, take home wounded, etc. It had better be sufficient to the goal. And it isn't clear to me what the goal is, exactly--to drive the French completely out of all Indochina and gain hegemony over Vietnam for Japan, possibly as a nominally independent puppet empire, possibly as a straight Japanese conquest, possibly partitioned between them and the Thais? Grabbing off a part of Indochina, say just Tonkin, and being prepared to let the French hang on in Cochin China (ie the south, Saigon area)?

I'd think, having cast their die so dramatically and unforgivably against a major European power, they are going for all of it--to completely crush French power in Southeast Asia, drive them out, and in some combination make Indochina either nominally independent or overtly Japanese. They might not want to do the latter since they probably need Vietnamese support to prevail. But of course there's nothing unprecedented in history about using some ally and then betraying them--It's just my personal sentiment that hopes the Japanese will be more honorable than that. So a nominally independent Vietnamese Empire is probably the goal, but one quite beholden to Japan and very friendly to Japanese investments and receptive to their advice...that would be what they'd think they can achieve in Tokyo anyway! I presume the Thais would be well satisfied with taking back Laos, maybe some incremental gains on the Cambodian border. I am not sure what would happen to Cambodia, but I think the Japanese have to have the goal of expelling the French from there too, otherwise they'd have this threat poised to strike back at them any time.

Of course things don't have to go the way they plan in Tokyo at all. The Vietnamese could prove unexpectedly loyal to the French regime; the Thais could prove spectacularly incompetent or unreliable; the invasion forces might achieve many goals but still fail to completely dislodge the French, particularly now that extra French fleet elements are coming and they have the freedom of the seas to land more troops. Whereas as far as I can see, the Japanese are not going to be able to land reinforcements for their invasion.

Their bolt is shot; we need to see how it lands. Either what they have landed is adequate to topple the colonial regime in Indochina, and quickly, or it isn't.

Presuming then that this one-shot invasion force has been landed safely, I'd say the Japanese on the whole won the battle--the French failed to intercept an invasion.

I don't really understand this talk of the lost Japanese capital ships being "irreplacable." Sure, they have never yet built a full-sized battleship or even cruiser in their own yards yet, but OTL indicates they will surely be able to someday, and perhaps now is the time to start? If not they can get new battleships the same places they got the sunk ones--buy them overseas. From British yards preferably, maybe German or American yards instead. So the lost Japanese ships are no more and no less irreplacable than the ones the French lost are for them. It's costly to lose a capital ship, and the Japanese ships were ton for ton better than the French ships so losing two of them is probably a greater loss than losing three of those French monstrosities.

But they achieved their goal, they landed an invasion army, and they countered their losses by inflicting serious costs on the French. The question now is, can the French beat the Japanese army, hopefully supported by Thais and perhaps insurgent Vietnamese, and/or can the French fleet come and crush the Japanese one? Presumably the French fleet is large and can afford to lose a ship for every Japanese one they sink, and come out of the exchange still in being while the Japanese one is destroyed---unless the Japanese can cost the French more than one ship for every one of theirs they lose. Also the French have to consider they can't expend their whole fleet against Japan, not when they still have to worry about Britain and Germany.

Unless the invasion army is utterly routed immediately, in which case I'd say the Japanese lost both the battle and the war right there, it seems to me now the Japanese are ahead. We need to see what the invasion accomplishes, and how well Japan can ride out the French naval retaliation in the meantime. The Japanese-Thai invasion had better prevail fast against French Colonial forces, because the French are going to be able to send in reinforcements and they can't--unless there is a more spectacular Japanese victory at sea that is, and they can land more and interdict the French. At the moment though the shoe is on the other foot. Since I see the Japanese Fleet as maybe being able to defend itself and make any losses they take cost the French as much or more, but hardly able to sweep the French from the seas, it all comes down to that invasion force.

Which we need to hear more about!

[Grand Prince Paul II.]

Vive la Marine nationale de la France.
The sooner they stop the advance of the Imperial Japanese armed forces and the more they weaken them, the better it is for everyone (in the long run, at least).

Originally Posted by Shevek23

I don't really understand this talk of the lost Japanese capital ships being "irreplacable." Sure, they have never yet built a full-sized battleship or even cruiser in their own yards yet, but OTL indicates they will surely be able to someday, and perhaps now is the time to start? If not they can get new battleships the same places they got the sunk ones--buy them overseas. From British yards preferably, maybe German or American yards instead. So the lost Japanese ships are no more and no less irreplacable than the ones the French lost are for them.

Buying new capital ships from foreign powers is expensive, especially if you are aiming for becoming an independent great power.

[Shevek23]

Here's my impression of the situation in Indochina at this time:

Before the French showed up, the peninsula was divided mainly among the Thais based in the southwest, the Cambodian kingdom in the south center, and a formerly united but currently divided set of Vietnamese powers on the east coast. Between them, in what is now called Laos and the Vietnamese highlands, were a bunch of small mountain peoples who were claimed by imperial powers drawing lines on maps, but weren't inclined to submit to anyone; these powers did well to dissuade or otherwise prevent them from making trouble, none could claim them as actively loyal citizens. Laos was nominally under Thai control but the kings could only assert rather indirect control over dynastically allied but loosely feudal local princes of Thai ethnicity in the river valleys. Vietnam was split between what Europeans called Cochin China, in the south around the Mekong mouth and bordering on Cambodia, Tonkin in the North around another river delta (in the Hanoi area) and between them the coastal strip of Annam, where a dynasty claiming to be Emperor over all Vietnam still resided but had no power in Tonkin or the south.

The French weren't the first Europeans to intervene; the modern Vietnamese version of the Roman alphabet was derived from Portuguese.

Sometime early in the 19th Century, I believe around the 1830s, the French took control of Cochin China. Gradually they expanded their control to Annam and Tonkin, and we've been told here how they attacked the Thais and wrested Laos from them. I'm not sure what went on in Cambodia but my impression is that rule there was somewhat indirect; apparently the French were concerned, with Laos and Cambodia, to establish deep buffer states to protect their real investment, which was in Vietnam, and perhaps refrained from too much interference in Cambodia to minimize resentment and hold the place as a secure barrier. Laos of course was inherently difficult to exploit and even to meaningfully secure, but the Thais had little control over their remaining northeast frontier either.

As a profitable zone of exploitation, then, Vietnam was the center of action; it was there that they were most active, and most resented. At the same time, while I think resentment was the majority reaction, they certainly did secure some solid allies in Vietnam. These included the royal dynasties they patronized, and the converts to Catholicism. The latter were resented and hated by the Buddhist majority and their die was cast, win or lose, with the French.

Now that's the background as I understand it from my lifetime of passing interest in the background of the mess that was the only war my father ever fought in, and the political thing that dominated my childhood. I don't know how just or unjust this sketch is, but this is the context I'm looking at this timeline in.

Now for the questions:

Are the Japanese in fact planning to leverage Vietnamese resentment to multiply the effectiveness of their invasion force?

I believe a certain number, a minority but substantial, will be loyal to the French colonial regime, including pretty much all the Catholics. Are the Catholic Vietnamese pretty much the same percentage as OTL WWII period and after, or are they less since OTL a number of conversions may have happened after 1900?

About 60 percent of the ground forces the French count as theirs are Vietnamese, re a prior post. So of them--how many can the French rely on? If most or all of them are Catholic I'd think they can count on them, then the question arises of how well trained and armed they are. And the French would be capable, I'm afraid, of failing to trust and rely on forces they actually can count on, out of racism and a fear of giving native Vietnamese, even ones who have committed so irrevocably to the French regime, too much clout. Will they make this mistake?

Perhaps, if the Vietnamese forces are not so solidly committed as an overwhelmingly Catholic force would be, they can still be counted on to fight against the Thais, as traditional enemies.

Have the Japanese done any homework in the form of prior organization of Vietnamese nationalists? Is there in fact any sort of recognizable Vietnamese nationalist movement at this date, or did that sort of thing have to wait until the post-WWI period? Clearly any preparation would have to be very circumspect, as subversive organizations are notoriously shot through with police informers and the wrong word in the wrong ear could wind up on some colonial prefect's desk, alerting the French to Japanese plans. Clearly that didn't happen here, so either Japanese intelligence did a very good job contacting just the right Vietnamese, or more likely they are jumping in cold and any arrangements with anti-colonial Vietnamese are going to be made on the fly.

These considerations suggest to me the Japanese probably can't rely on any organized support from the Vietnamese, and considering that they probably hope to profit from holding Vietnam themselves, they might do well to just keep the Vietnamese neutral and quiet while they duke it out with French forces.

Another possible tip-off to the French that apparently did not happen would be if the French have informers among the mountain tribes of northeast Thailand, as they might; Thai movements preparing their strike if that strike were in the north, against the obvious target of Laos, would be visible to these people and they'd pass it on to the French.

This seems like a consideration in favor of your earlier mention that the Thais are suppose to strike at southern Vietnam, which I thought unreasonable as they'd have to march through Cambodia to get there. But southeast Thailand is probably more under royal control and secure; if the Thais can hope to keep the Cambodians neutral and just swiftly pass through perhaps a southern strike makes sense after all. Of course the French have to have at least some nominal forces in Cambodia; they have to be watching their Thai border at least in a desultory fashion. And they probably do have at least token Cambodian forces and probably can leverage some nationalistic resentment of Cambodians against invading Thais, so frankly I'm still very skeptical of a southern strike by Thailand--if there is one, the first battles will be fought in Cambodia, not Vietnam!

I still think Laos is the most reasonable target, it's also the territory the Thais can most easily take and hold and that the Japanese and Vietnamese are likeliest to concede to them in good will.

That would mean that Tonkin and northern Annam would be getting a serious one-two punch while Cochin China rides it out untouched for the moment.

If the Japanese-Thai invasion can go well in the north, I'd think they'd just keep rolling south. Eventually they can come on places like Camh Ranh Bay from landward and in that way deny the French Fleet its port, which might tip the balance in favor of the Japanese Fleet at sea and open the way for more reinforcements being landed at Haiphong or even directly at Cahm Rahn (OK, I'm just swapping the h and n's around trying to guess the right spelling, my spell checker hates all possibilities equally! None of them actually look right to me anyway).

If instead the Thais strike south as you say, assuming they can get through Cambodia without being decimated, they will tie down French and pro-French Vietnamese forces there. Can the Thais be so ambitious as to plan on a postwar hegemony over both Cambodia and Cochin China? Will the Japanese let them hold it if they can manage to bite off that much? And if they can, can they chew it--can they manage both southern Vietnamese and Cambodian resentment at yet another foreign set of rulers, these ones without the power and connections the French had to at least plausibly protect them against other European powers?

I really think that what Thailand can rationally want out of this war is to get Laos back, and possibly come to some understanding with post-war Cambodia that makes their southeast border more secure. I think attacking in the north, in direct conjunction with the Japanese invaders, and sending expeditionary forces south in token numbers alongside their Japanese allies to steamroller the French out of the region completely is the way to go. Of course the French could easily counterattack out of Cambodia, so in addition to the Laos-conquest forces they'd better have that border reinforced, and hope the Japanese and their own invasion will absorb most of the forces the French could otherwise send west.

Which is to say they're going to be fighting in the Cambodia region anyway, perhaps they'd best plan to concentrate everything they've got there and as you say go for a southern strike after all, planning on getting Laos back at the peace table.

I hope everyone's not too dizzy at my gyrations here, this is how I think, with mouth in gear. Sorry!

[Shevek23]

I went to Wikipedia to read up on the history of Indochina a bit. I was trying to see how the Cambodians would react to proposals from the Thais that they'd guarantee Cambodian independence and integrity if the Cambodians would rise up against the French, to pin down French forces stationed there, and open the way for Thai forces to attack Cochin China and southern Annam.

It doesn't look too promising. The king of Cambodia, Norodom, petitioned the French to make Cambodia a protectorate in 1863. Now reading up on him, it's quite a bit more complicated than that. There were indeed risings against the French by the Cambodians, and Norodom's own son was prevented from succeeding to the throne after Norodom's death in 1904. Norodom's half-brother Sisowath was given it instead until his death in 1927 OTL.

The complications come in because the Khmer kingdom had long been partitioned between the Thais and the Vietnamese; Norodom was actually living in Bangkok when he appealed to the French. And he represented his submission to France as extorted to the Thais. In a sense Norodom actually created modern Cambodia by submitting to French hegemony--in lieu of Thai/Vietnamese hegemony!

So now, 1905, Norodom is recently dead, his son, Yukanthor, his chosen heir, is not king. Sisowath, I judge, would do nothing to alienate the French.

So, what if as part of the war preparations, the Thais go to Yukanthor, and offer to install him on the throne, as an independent monarch beholden to no one (but of course good, formally allied, friends to his benefactors Siam and Japan, who will scrupulously respect Khmer sovereignty and give aid). What if the Thais go so far as to sweeten the deal by, in addition to confirming all the territory the French had in the interim (including quite recently, in 1904) extorted from Siam to give to Cambodia, also offer the large territory the French took in 1907 OTL to make up Cambodia's far west?

I'm not sure the Thais would do that last bit, probably that territory was more valuable than all of Laos. However, they might if it was strongly ethnically Khmer and hard to hold, or if they judged that this offer would be what was necessary to persuade Yukanthor to throw in with them and give the prince the leverage to win over decisive numbers of Khmers to the cause.

With this revolutionary plot in place, then, the Thais attack the French Cambodian border (which was far east of where the Thai-Cambodian border is now, in 1905) and Yukanthor steps forth proclaiming the free kingdom and calls for action to pin down French forces; the Thais race through to Nam Bo. (my reading now corrects me, the Vietnamese terms for the three regions of Vietnam were not Tonkin, Annam and Cochin China, but "They called the north Bac Bo, the center Trung Bo, and the south Nam Bo.") As many Thai forces as Yukanthor dares request stay behind to secure Cambodia, while the rest of the Thais hope to find a spontaneous uprising in Nam Bo to assist them.

Can the Thais and Japanese be relied upon, assuming they win the war, to actually respect Cambodian independence? I hope so. For one thing, if the Thais don't they will be trying to hold down a resentful province that might once again invite in the resentful French. For another Japan will look better internationally if they stand forth as the champion of Asian independence, having liberated Cambodia and Vietnam and helped the Thais recover what was stolen from them.

Of course both the Thais and the Japanese have to know that they can count on the Cambodians to support them...

[sharlin]

Don't worry this is just the first part of the story, the land battles are to come and we've got the French under seige at Fort Bayard which is a major shipping port town on the chinese coast which the Japanese want to claim as their own, whilst they also have an invasion force marching on Hanoi.

The siamese military will also feature and I really must thank you Shevek23 for your insight and knowledge into the region its amazingly helpful!