What would be an ideally prepared Japanese Empire for WW2?
- Thread starter eretzyegern
- Start date
Not occupy French Indochina which avoids worrying the US voters & Congress, which avoids the crippling embargos of 1941. Tensions remain at 1940 levels. Japan is able to focus on consolidating it's position in China & remain a larger threat to the USSR.
The US remains focused on it's Europe First policy until at least 1944. Japan remains a Fleet & Army in being. Distracting the Allies wi a hypothetical threat,
The US remains focused on it's Europe First policy until at least 1944. Japan remains a Fleet & Army in being. Distracting the Allies wi a hypothetical threat,
Keep the "China Incident" at the level of an incident. Once Japan gets into a full-on war with the ROC, they lose all their options and maximize their geopolitical risks.
If the Japanese held back at Lugouqiao, they would still keep their position at Beiping and North Hebei. There was basically no way that the KMT could liberate Manchuria given the shoddy state of their military and political regime in the late 1930s, so the crown jewel of Japan's empire would be safe for industrial development. It was the full invasion of China (really, the annexation of Vietnam) that eventually triggered the trade and financial crisis and caused Japan to be unable to sustain its overseas holdings without attacking the Western powers.
A Japan that held Korea, Manchuria, and Taiwan would be pretty strong. Manchuria in particular would draw in immigrants from northern China as well as Japanese settlers from the home islands. Not antagonizing the Western allies too much could have allowed the IJA to carry out a "Strike North" operation in around 1942, coinciding with the height of the German invasion of the USSR. Even if the Soviets are not knocked out in Europe, they would be distracted and possibly be unable to recover the Primorsk (Outer Manchuria) region later, as the only route in would be via the Trans-Siberian Railroad.
Soviet defeat on the ground in the Far East would allow the IJN a chance to take Kamchatka and enjoy some martial accomplishments so as to not be totally overshadowed by the Army.
By around 1950 or so the Japanese will likely discover and exploit the oil in Manchuria, giving themselves additional resource security.
There's a good argument to be made that the Japanese empire won't be able to resolve the ethnic contradictions in their colonies in the long run, but it's still a lot more tenable than trying to digest all of China.
If the Japanese held back at Lugouqiao, they would still keep their position at Beiping and North Hebei. There was basically no way that the KMT could liberate Manchuria given the shoddy state of their military and political regime in the late 1930s, so the crown jewel of Japan's empire would be safe for industrial development. It was the full invasion of China (really, the annexation of Vietnam) that eventually triggered the trade and financial crisis and caused Japan to be unable to sustain its overseas holdings without attacking the Western powers.
A Japan that held Korea, Manchuria, and Taiwan would be pretty strong. Manchuria in particular would draw in immigrants from northern China as well as Japanese settlers from the home islands. Not antagonizing the Western allies too much could have allowed the IJA to carry out a "Strike North" operation in around 1942, coinciding with the height of the German invasion of the USSR. Even if the Soviets are not knocked out in Europe, they would be distracted and possibly be unable to recover the Primorsk (Outer Manchuria) region later, as the only route in would be via the Trans-Siberian Railroad.
Soviet defeat on the ground in the Far East would allow the IJN a chance to take Kamchatka and enjoy some martial accomplishments so as to not be totally overshadowed by the Army.
By around 1950 or so the Japanese will likely discover and exploit the oil in Manchuria, giving themselves additional resource security.
There's a good argument to be made that the Japanese empire won't be able to resolve the ethnic contradictions in their colonies in the long run, but it's still a lot more tenable than trying to digest all of China.
Last edited:
Avoid the Kwantung Incident and just operate in Manchuria through the South Manchurian Railroad with nominal sovereignty of Nanjing over Manchuria instead of building a puppet state.
Chiang will probably leave the SMR to its own devices since he's probably going to busy fighting the commies and big headed regional warlords for the next decade or so, at least.
Chiang will probably leave the SMR to its own devices since he's probably going to busy fighting the commies and big headed regional warlords for the next decade or so, at least.
You want to try and Finland style war against one of the allies only.......? What about a limited strike north on USSR so no Pacific war and no war with China/GB/US.....then negotiate peace.....so fighting in 41-43/4...?
Driftless
Donor
Would attacking into Soviet areas - at least if timed to coincide with Barbarossa - result in pressure by Stalin on the Western Allies to do something to relieve pressure on the Soviet armies both East and West? i.e. A British/American/French/whoever Eastern Front as well as a Western Front? Stalin got pretty adamant that the West help him out when it was Barbarossa. If Vladvostok is threatened, there goes one of Stalin's supply pipelines.
IF the Japanese decide to go North before Barbarossa, (I don't know why they would), then the political math gets more complicated, I think
Basically, do the Japanese need to avoid getting too greedy to the North as well as to the South and Western Pacific?
IF the Japanese decide to go North before Barbarossa, (I don't know why they would), then the political math gets more complicated, I think
Basically, do the Japanese need to avoid getting too greedy to the North as well as to the South and Western Pacific?
Last edited:
Go north and attack Soviets instead of starting the war with entirety of the world. Soviets have no navy to challenge them allowing Japan to save oil trough winding down naval operations and focusing it on air and ground offensives. Which then translates into double pressure on Soviets beleaguered by Germany. If enough pressure is applied to allow Germany to take Caucasus the war is won. Stalin can’t give up Siberia without a fight and especially not for long.
marathag
Banned
Or Emperor demands the officers responsible, and their COs, to commit suicide.
Long live the Spirit of Bushido.
In the realm of improving Imperial Japanese material capacity, rather than changing geopolitical objectives or internal political strife, I have a couple of ideas:
Increase Japanese merchant shipping tonnage in the decades before World War Two. This could be accomplished by snapping up the glut of merchant tonnage that had been built by Britain, Canada, and the USA for World War One, that became surplus in the lull after the war that lead into the Great Depression. I don't know how that could be justified at the time, but Japan could not build the number of merchant ships they needed to keep Japanese industry supplied, so this would be an end- run around the Japanese shipbuilding limit.
Develop a first rate anti-submarine warfare capacity. Japan did send a flotilla of destroyers to the Mediterranean in World War One to support the Entente. Then they gave up and ignored anti-submarine warfare for World War Two. I understand that the internal obstacle to developing an ASW capacity was the the IJN culture stressed offence and the Decisive Battle, and ASW was considered to be defensive and a waste of resources. A solution I have, again an end run around the IJN culture, would be to create another service like a Coast Guard, that was not prestigious, and would not be competing with the Combined Fleet. The ASW/CoastGuard fleet could be equipped with cast-off World War One destroyers. These destroyers could be modified like the Royal Navy Long Range escorts trading a few boilers for fuel tanks to extend their range, and reduce their top speed to 20 knots, which would allow them to fall outside of LNT/WNT limits on destroyer tonnage.
Increase Japanese merchant shipping tonnage in the decades before World War Two. This could be accomplished by snapping up the glut of merchant tonnage that had been built by Britain, Canada, and the USA for World War One, that became surplus in the lull after the war that lead into the Great Depression. I don't know how that could be justified at the time, but Japan could not build the number of merchant ships they needed to keep Japanese industry supplied, so this would be an end- run around the Japanese shipbuilding limit.
Develop a first rate anti-submarine warfare capacity. Japan did send a flotilla of destroyers to the Mediterranean in World War One to support the Entente. Then they gave up and ignored anti-submarine warfare for World War Two. I understand that the internal obstacle to developing an ASW capacity was the the IJN culture stressed offence and the Decisive Battle, and ASW was considered to be defensive and a waste of resources. A solution I have, again an end run around the IJN culture, would be to create another service like a Coast Guard, that was not prestigious, and would not be competing with the Combined Fleet. The ASW/CoastGuard fleet could be equipped with cast-off World War One destroyers. These destroyers could be modified like the Royal Navy Long Range escorts trading a few boilers for fuel tanks to extend their range, and reduce their top speed to 20 knots, which would allow them to fall outside of LNT/WNT limits on destroyer tonnage.
RuneGloves
Banned
No, it would require a stronger military leadership. Those junior officers were not acting against civilian bureaucracy, but ignoring their own orders. Civilian leadership isn't part of the equation.
It wasn't the military co-opted government in Tokyo that caused the incident, but people on the ground.
Honestly, just avoid antagonizing the USA would mean the Japanese Empire survives in some form. The USSR, UK, France, and the Netherlands are all more concerned with Germany and China is too weak.
A "Go North" strategy would be interesting because the USA would still be willing to supply the Japanese with the oil it needs to run its war machine, especially if the conflict with the USSR occurs during the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.
It seems like better coordination with the European Axis is the best play.
-Coordinate with Germany on the invasion of the USSR. Cutting off the Trans-Siberian railway prevents European Russia from defending the Russian Far East, and with the German invasion, they would not be sending anything anyways. People point out that Soviet tanks and armor were a lot better than the Japanese Army's, which is true, but I don't think its appreciated how much the region relied on European Russia for defense which could be cut off. Japan can grab a chunk.
-Instead of sending troops to French Indochina, just get the Germans to demand Vichy France enforce any weapons embargo of China. I doubt Vichy France is going to stick up for China. This avoids the American embargo and allows the Japanese war machine to keep going.
UK is allied with the USSR in Europe but neutral in the Pacific, similar to the USSR being an ally in Europe and neutral in the Pacific like OTL.
The USA getting involved in this war is a lot more complicated for FDR. The sacrifice needed to fight the Axis will not be worth it without a causus belli like Pearl Harbor. Many Americans will likely be pro-Japan vis-a-vis the USSR. This also benefits the European Axis by keeping the USA out of the war, and removing Vladivostok as an area for the Soviets to get Lend-Lease for the European war.
Stalin was willing to make peace with Hitler during WWII, and it was only Hitler's arrogance that kept the war going to total victory. I can see the USSR willing to slice off some land to keep Japan happy if things get dicey, with the Japanese agreeing to it.
The Anglo-Soviet alliance could still win this, but it will take much longer, and the USSR will only turn its focus to Japan after a much bloodier victory over Germany in 1946 or 1947, at which point, Japan should have consolidated much more land. The Soviet Pacific fleet will be sunk by then, with no hope of total victory over Japan, if the Soviets want to continue the fight. And if the European Axis wins, only then is it time to "Go South," but for the European possessions only.
A "Go North" strategy would be interesting because the USA would still be willing to supply the Japanese with the oil it needs to run its war machine, especially if the conflict with the USSR occurs during the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.
It seems like better coordination with the European Axis is the best play.
-Coordinate with Germany on the invasion of the USSR. Cutting off the Trans-Siberian railway prevents European Russia from defending the Russian Far East, and with the German invasion, they would not be sending anything anyways. People point out that Soviet tanks and armor were a lot better than the Japanese Army's, which is true, but I don't think its appreciated how much the region relied on European Russia for defense which could be cut off. Japan can grab a chunk.
-Instead of sending troops to French Indochina, just get the Germans to demand Vichy France enforce any weapons embargo of China. I doubt Vichy France is going to stick up for China. This avoids the American embargo and allows the Japanese war machine to keep going.
UK is allied with the USSR in Europe but neutral in the Pacific, similar to the USSR being an ally in Europe and neutral in the Pacific like OTL.
The USA getting involved in this war is a lot more complicated for FDR. The sacrifice needed to fight the Axis will not be worth it without a causus belli like Pearl Harbor. Many Americans will likely be pro-Japan vis-a-vis the USSR. This also benefits the European Axis by keeping the USA out of the war, and removing Vladivostok as an area for the Soviets to get Lend-Lease for the European war.
Stalin was willing to make peace with Hitler during WWII, and it was only Hitler's arrogance that kept the war going to total victory. I can see the USSR willing to slice off some land to keep Japan happy if things get dicey, with the Japanese agreeing to it.
The Anglo-Soviet alliance could still win this, but it will take much longer, and the USSR will only turn its focus to Japan after a much bloodier victory over Germany in 1946 or 1947, at which point, Japan should have consolidated much more land. The Soviet Pacific fleet will be sunk by then, with no hope of total victory over Japan, if the Soviets want to continue the fight. And if the European Axis wins, only then is it time to "Go South," but for the European possessions only.
Last edited:
I was more of the idea of having as a result of a more competent Japan, a more Asia-Pacific focused United States.
It can't be done without a ASB POD (or one really early)........
Why Japan really lost the Pacific war..........
Nearly twice the population of Japan.
Seventeen time's Japan's national income.
Five times more steel production.
Seven times more coal production.
Eighty (80) times the automobile production.
Really Japan can't do much better than it did in our timeline all it maybe could do is get us a bit more Lucky in battles besides that not much else axis Japan. Is pretty much doomed it just doesn't have the production capabilities of matching the United States British Empire and Soviet Union industrial and Manpower output all we can hope to do is get a bit more Lucky in the opening year of the Pacific War dragging out its demise a year
And Japan gets WHAT out of attacking north? Other than being out of oil in six months. Attacking north is a terrible idea for Japan.
And it wouldn't do anything for the Eastern Front in Europe either as the German offensive failed against troops from Siberia, not the far East.
And the Germans couldn't take Moscow or reach the Caucuses in any event.
I think that is why so many are hinting 'The only way to win is not to play.'
Avoid getting dragged into a forever war in mainland China (puppet states and economic dominance would be the ticket in that direction)? Little support of outside embargoes and less need for raw materials to begin with. Problems solved.
ETA: Of course this is on the same level of 'cheating' as Germany stopping with the Sudetenland, if not the Anschluss, but it works.