Soviet-Japanese conflict in 1939-1941

This may, or may not, be related to my timeline.

Suppose the Japanese and soviets do not sign a non agression pact and a great scale conflict starts in 1940 over Manchuria and Mongolia. Is there any way for the japanese to win or at least force a favourable peace before, say, 1942?

EDIT: I think the Soviets still have a great advantage, but let's assume that the purgues have been worse than in OTL and that their tank research is not as advanced and their tanks in 1940 still resemble more T-26 rather than T-34.
 
Last edited:
I think the best chance that Japan would win againts the SU was if they did a combined attack with Nazi Germany in 1941 via the Soviet Maritime Provinces, instead of attacking the US.
I think I have a TL for that conflict, especially without those T-34s. T-26 was equal to the best tanks of the IJA.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
The Red Army crushes the IJA, just like they did IOTL.

Link (one of VERY many sources): http://www.onwar.com/aced/data/sierra/sovietjapan1939.htm

The only way the Japanese defeat the USSR on the ground is by divine intervention. The Soviet counter offensives in the West (e.g. Eastern Front) may be delayed, although most of the troops used were actually from the Central Asian garrisons. Stalin never trusted the Japanese (particularly the Kwantung Army, which thought it had the right to an independent foreign policy) and maintained more than sufficient forces, even in the darkest periods of the Great Patriotic War, to massacre the IJA.

There are several detailed thread on this very subject here, including analysis of the two forces ground and air components. There is also discussion of what, exactly, the IJA would be using for fuel as a major attack against the USSR would occupy ALL the troops that were used in the offensives that seized the Philippines, Malaya/Singapore, and East Indies.
 
Thank you for the info, it was just what I thought.

Although one can never underestimate the húbris of the japanese commanders. Perhaps if they are able to win or achieve stalemate at Khalkin Gol, they'd be confident enough to at least not sign the Neutrality Pact with the soviets.
 
There are several detailed thread on this very subject here, including analysis of the two forces ground and air components. There is also discussion of what, exactly, the IJA would be using for fuel as a major attack against the USSR would occupy ALL the troops that were used in the offensives that seized the Philippines, Malaya/Singapore, and East Indies.

But rather than a Japanese invasion of Siberia, how would the USSR fare if it was the aggressor, choosing to attack Manchuria in 1939? I'm sure that Japan would choose to defend Manchuria/Manchukuo as well as they could, considering the area's industrial importance, and proximity to the Home Islands. Not to mention the fact that there are all those divisions in China that could be called up, so I'm pretty sure that the IJA would put up much more of an effort.
 
what if? and this is a big what if....the russians had a more aggressive forgion policy (maybe someone other then stalin?) and decided to intervine during the japanise takeover of manchuria...wouldint the west be more then happy to sell the japs supplies to bleed the "bolshevik abomination"
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
But rather than a Japanese invasion of Siberia, how would the USSR fare if it was the aggressor, choosing to attack Manchuria in 1939? I'm sure that Japan would choose to defend Manchuria/Manchukuo as well as they could, considering the area's industrial importance, and proximity to the Home Islands. Not to mention the fact that there are all those divisions in China that could be called up, so I'm pretty sure that the IJA would put up much more of an effort.

What is the goal of the invasion? There isn't anything there important enough for Stalin to rish a second war while fighting the Finns.

As long as logistics work out (which, based on Finland, won't be overly long) the Red Army stacks up Japanese battalions like cordwood and advances at will. Once they hit the limits of their supply lines the Red Army combined arms formations would dig in while continuing to slaughter IJA light infantry until the Soviets run out of ammo or the Kwantung Army runs out of men.

That is the big problem for the IJA; it is a light infantry force, with no substantial artillery train or armored formations, lacking even decent ground transportation. In most ways it had, outside of infantry kit, not evolved from the force that fought the Russians at Port Arthur. While there were air units, even some light armor, the IJA had no combined arms doctrine worthy of the name (the air arm was supposed to sweep the sky of the enemy and bomb factories and other targets, with virtually no thought to close air support beyond occasional attacks against target of opprotunity). The IJA did okay when light infantry, with only minor support, was either all that was needed (China, many of the early actions against colonial forces) or where conditions were actively hostile to heavier forces (jungle fighting, at least until the heavier forces learned new ways to find, fix, and defeat IJA infantry units)

The Red Army (like the other WW II combatants) was a combined arm force, with a heavy reliance on artillery and armor, with organic air regiments. It had solid, if uninspired, doctrine for ground support and was well ahead of the Western Allies in use of armor and infantry as combined formations. Moreover, the Soviets had much of their "A" team in the Far East (what was left after Stalin had thinned the herd) up to and including Georgy Zhukov, who had defeated the Kwantung Army at Khalkhin Gol. (It is also interesting to note that the IJA used a TOTAL of around 190 light tanks during the entire year long campaign, while the Soviets used 500 during just the decisive battle, all of which greatly outclassed their Japanese counterparts.)

Light infantry vs. combined arms, artillery heavy formations. Easy to guess who comes out ahead.
 
That said Khalin Gol was fought with some of the premier units in the Red Army (ie the exception, not the rule, for quality) and they still suffered quite heavy losses.

In a medium/long term war I can see the Soviets ploughing into Manchuria and then loosing steam, plus alot of experienced troops, before new equipment shows up in late 1940/early 1941 and sees the Japs kicked into the sea. Tokyo feared the Red Army for good reason but we're not talking Blitzkrieg finess here, the Soviets would probably suffer horrendous losses to win an ultimately limited, regional war.

Unless they decided to go the whole nine yards and invade the Home Islands :eek: God knows what would happen then.

Actually a little side note- what if the Soviets (or Allies) managed to take out the Home Islands while the IJA held on to large colonial areas (China, East Indies, Indochina etc.). Would we see death or glory, Japanese commanders going native and becoming local warlords? What could happen
 
Great, I open a thread about a side scenario in my Timeline and now it is getting more answers than the timeline itself. :D

I have already made my decision; thanks to everybody for all the data.
 
I see an attck working because without a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor America might not enter the war. The Germans were so close to Moscow, and even if the the japanese attack is suicide the Soviets will still have to divert troops. However, the attack might lead to a succseful Axis victory, but not one for Japan. It is impossible to beat the USSR in a land battle withhout tanks
 
there would be extreemly interesting dewelopments in china as this would make staljin send as much arms and equipement as he could spare to mao and chan kai šek, especialy to mao, and if the japanese wouldnt win there could be a much longer WWII maibe even with china geting envolved, as reinforcement to rusia after taking care of japan

but thats all farfedged a bit

russian population would be definitly be less than 100 milion in 2000
 
if it happens in 39-41 i see complete japanese failure and annhilation....
if it happens around 36 or so when the facests still hadint superseeded the bolshivics as a threat I still see the japs being slaughterd and driven into the sea initial...but with possibal allied support in oil,steal and other supplys to continue the war....if the japs arent to moraly shatterd by the loss of most there army the navy can pick up the slack with whats left of the army and destry the russian "fleet' while siezeing every russian island in the pacific and maybe even the kalmatich (sp) peninsula....untill some sort of peace is negotiated where the japs get korea back in exchange for the occupied islands or they continue to block trade and harras russian forces at every oppurtunity while re-fitting there army for a mecognized war...maybe a ceasefire untill the butterflys causes war with one or more of the powers (germany is obvious but there's other scenarioes like an attempt soviet takeover of china leading to war with britan france and possibly america....is this possibal?...maybe I should start another thread with a rough timeline)
 

Faeelin

Banned
there would be extreemly interesting dewelopments in china as this would make staljin send as much arms and equipement as he could spare to mao and chan kai šek, especialy to mao, and if the japanese wouldnt win there could be a much longer WWII maibe even with china geting envolved, as reinforcement to rusia after taking care of japanp

Actually, the Soviets poured in far more aid to China before Barbarossa than the west did, and most of it went to Chiang. This included volunteer pilots, and gets ignored by many military historians for some reason.

russian population would be definitly be less than 100 milion in 2000

Why?

You can make a good case that the USSR, attacked during the purges, decides to send the generals who were arrested East. Tukhachevsky gets sent East, where he uses Soviet armor to encircle and annihilate Japanese forces.

Stalin, more paranoid, prepares for 1941 differently... and, well, you can see the rest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_operations
 
I tend to side with CalBear and others who think that IJA as a force (despite frighteningly high combat ability demonstrated by it's infantry units) was not a match for Red Army post-1936. Soviets suffered several humiliating lessons from Japanese (beginning of Khasan and Nomonhan) to learn that you treat Japanese as second-level fighting force (as Soviet used to treat Chinese warlords of the day) at your own peril and you need to wage a proper war against them. They largely learned their lesson (keeping numerical, if not qualitative strength on Far East enough even in the hardest days of Autumn 1941) and Japanese understood it well.

I would like to add that having T-34 or T-26 (more likely BT-5 and BT-7) does not change much. Soviets used BTs of 1935 vintage against Japanese in 1945 with incredible efficiency.
 
Top