Russo Japanese alliance- how, when and why?

So I'm a little interested in alternate world War matchups and the two biggest ones involve Russia. A Russo Gemran alliance in WWI, while fascinating in it's own right, is perhaps less immediately interesting to me than a more outlandish scenario- a Russo Japanese alliance.

If somehow the Russians can come to an agreement that averts the Russo Japanese war that's probably ideal but that's probably ASB given attitudes of the time.

Let's say that Gallipoli succeeds (or else that WWI ends early saving the tsarist regime), and a *fascist Russian state takes power, and the two somehow come to an agreement vis a vis China after the Anglo Japanese alliance breaks.

Say Russia-Italy-Japan vs France, US, China and Britain, with a Weimar Germany basically sitting it out until the end.
Alternately say Germany, US, UK and China vs France, Italy, Japan and the Russians.

Mainly I'm interested in a Pacific War where Japan and Russia are allied and supporting each other since this IMHO is one of the few alliances that could plausibly go toe to toe with the US, or at least stalemate them in the Pacific. The big kicker is naval power projection of course- Japan doesnt have enough by herself and although the russian navy can become a factor I feel like logistical issues would limit them. You'd need a good decade of buildup in the east for russia to really act there and the US is not going to sit idly by.
 

thaddeus

Donor
the only actual proposal was during WWII, for the USSR to join the Axis. seems doubtful that the Soviets would take military action other than to expand their borders?

it might create a scenario where Japan has plenty of fuel?
 
Ehhhh... this one's tricky. I'll try to give it a shot anyway.

In OTL (at least as best as I can recall), Japan had been seeking to partition Northwest Asia between themselves and Russia, with Japan gaining Korea and Russia gaining Manchuria. Maybe have Russia realise that this could be an opportunity to trigger the British in the Great Game. Perhaps Russia gets Port Arthur in 1898, but then gives it to Japan in 1900? In return, Japan buys Russian resource exports, plus warships, trains and other technology. Through this, the alliance between Japan and Britain never occurs. Britain supports China instead. As the US Navy starts to get stronger in the Pacific, Japan seeks a military alliance with Russia. As for France joining their side, perhaps that could happen as a result of a stronger France getting into tenser colonial conflicts between Britain than in OTL, thus seeing no reason to ally itself with Britain in the wake of the war. You're probably looking at an Allied Ottoman Empire, being opposed to Italy and Russia. As for how a war could happen, maybe the Dogger Bank Incident?

idk
 
Last edited:
Both nations were part of the Eight-Nation Alliance during the Boxer Rebellion. However, if any further cooperation takes place regarding Northeast Asia, the Russians are more likely to double-cross the Japanese, or maintain an "Alliance" for the convenience of containing them and depriving them of territorial gains. The Russians would want as much territory as they could get and keep it to themselves. Why share with a weaker nearby rival and let them have a chance to grow slightly stronger with more resources?

Negotiations would unravel before such a foreign policy disaster could take place. I think that if the Tsar was saved and a Fascist Russian state materialized, the Alliance blocs would more likely be Russia, China (reluctantly), and France Vs. Great Britain, Germany, Italy, and Japan. The US stays neutral unless one of the blocs force their hand.
 
Last edited:
In return, Japan buys Russian resource exports, plus warships, trains and other technology.

Russia isn't exactly well placed to supply any of those in this time period. In warships and trains, Russia needed her entire domestic production (and much of that was still inferior to what Germany, Britain, France and the US could produce) and in resource exports, the trans-siberian is a thin ribbon of steel with very little carrying capacity and high costs and Siberia itself has no significant economic activity.

Through this, the alliance between Japan and Britain never occurs. Britain supports China instead.

There's a small problem called the Sino-Japanese war. Japan had utterly trashed China (at that point Britain's ally), rendering China useless to the British. The British in OTL then quickly shifted to ally with Japan. And even if Japan had allied with Russia after its victory in the Sino-Japanese war, Britain would still seek to court Japan. All the British want is to avoid Russia becoming too strong in the Pacific - something the Japanese will also be interested in, even if they're allied with Russia.

As the US Navy starts to get stronger in the Pacific, Japan seeks a military alliance with Russia

In the time period you are talking about, Russia would be a useless ally for Japan if the US were the enemy. If they want an anti-America grade navy, the only choice at this point is Britain.

Italy joining their side wouldn't be that hard.

Italy had a pretty severe fear of the Royal Navy. I have a hard time seeing them engage in any alliance that they saw as drawing them against the British. Also, what the heck does Italy get from an alliance with Russia and Japan? Germany at least had things to offer, though as soon as Germany and Britain ended up at loggerheads, note how Italy made sure to not fight Britain.

If somehow the Russians can come to an agreement that averts the Russo Japanese war that's probably ideal but that's probably ASB given attitudes of the time.

I wouldn't say ASB. Though to get a Russo-Japanese alliance, you probably want to keep the Russo-Japansese war, since the war did definitively prove to Russia that Japan could be taken seriously.

As things were, if there had been no WW1 or a delayed WW1, Russia and Japan might have ended up as allies. Both were concerned by Britain's growing power in the Pacific and saw the other as a party they could do business with should Britain ever try to become the premier power in the North Pacific.

Such an alliance probably wouldn't have amounted to much in the short run - I have difficulty seeing Britain actually trying to project power into the North Pacific and Japan would continue to be allied with Britain even as they hedged their bets.

Depending on what's happening in China, relations could deepen however. If there's no WW1, China may avoid falling into warlordism. But if China does fall to warlordism (whether there's been a ww1 or not) I can imagine a surviving Imperial Russia joining Japan in some sort of coordinated intervention.

fasquardon
 
Indeed, such an alliance, much like the Entente Cordiale, would probably be a "one thing leads to another and then whoops, you're in a world war together" sort of thing, rather than a hard and fast commitment.

I would not underestimate Russian seapower, even if it is very clearly second class. Russia by herself is useful only with China, but Russia with France for instance, or Germany? That is another matter. Once (if) she can get a decade to industrialize and ideally move beyond the straits and into the Mediterranean (or the Middle East, or the Baltic) then suddenly Russia becomes the nightmare that the USSR became if not worse.
 

Deleted member 109224

Avoid the Spanish-American War and the US capture of the Philippines. The Philippines, with Japanese support, become an Independent Republic under Japanese protection. In the long-term, this translates into Japan being southern-oriented.

Russia and Japan avoid the Russo-Japanese War by agreeing to divide Northeast Asia: Russian Manchuria and Japanese Korea.

Germany proves to be a headache for Japan, trying to stir things up in the Philippines. With no territorial disputes with Russia and a mutual dislike of Germany, Japan joins France and Russia in alliance against Germany.
 
You would somehow need a few things to happen.
Russia needs a warm water port on the Pacific (but that lead to a war so I don’t know how this happens)
This may mean that Russia sees a benifit to increasing transportation ability on the trans siberian railway. So they can support said Warm Water port. The problem is where does the money come from to
A) Built the port
B) support the port
C) build the ships to use the port
And all while at least doubling the railway (and probably tripling it)

The US had multiple transcontinental railroads ranging from the south to the extreme north and a shorter distance to travel. They also had a LOT more resources available on the pacific coast and had been building them up for about a century by WW2. And they still chocked the transportation ability.
And don’t forget the US had the Panama Canal to send it’s ships (military and cargo) through unlike around the tip of Africa trip that anything from Russia is going to do.
So in a war between England and the US vs Russia and Japan Russia is going to get owned in the Pacific. And. They are going to basically supply next to nothing to Japan as all the transportation they have (and a LOT more) will be needed to support what they have in the Pacific. Thier was more reasons then just the fight against Germany that kept Russia from going to war against Japan.
 
You would somehow need a few things to happen.
Russia needs a warm water port on the Pacific (but that lead to a war so I don’t know how this happens)
This may mean that Russia sees a benifit to increasing transportation ability on the trans siberian railway. So they can support said Warm Water port. The problem is where does the money come from to
A) Built the port
B) support the port
C) build the ships to use the port
And all while at least doubling the railway (and probably tripling it)

The US had multiple transcontinental railroads ranging from the south to the extreme north and a shorter distance to travel. They also had a LOT more resources available on the pacific coast and had been building them up for about a century by WW2. And they still chocked the transportation ability.
And don’t forget the US had the Panama Canal to send it’s ships (military and cargo) through unlike around the tip of Africa trip that anything from Russia is going to do.
So in a war between England and the US vs Russia and Japan Russia is going to get owned in the Pacific. And. They are going to basically supply next to nothing to Japan as all the transportation they have (and a LOT more) will be needed to support what they have in the Pacific. Thier was more reasons then just the fight against Germany that kept Russia from going to war against Japan.

In OTL Russia got/built the warm ports: Port Arthur as a naval base and Dalnii as a commercial port. The railroads had been built at the expense of the main Transsiberian Railroad. Besides the well-known fact that this project led to the RJW, the naval base proved to be an expensive disaster: it was so shallow that the battleships could stay only on its tiny part and could get out only at a high tide. Then, of course, Russian Pacific fleet had been split. The commercial port was losing money. The SU was doing just fine with Vladivostok.

So the whole idea of the warm water ports was something witlessly adopted from the “general ideology”.

There was no obvious reason for the Russian - US military confrontation so this scenario is neither here nor there. Even if there is Russian-Japanese alliance and Japan is at war with the US this does not automatically mean Russian participation, just as in OTL SU - US alliance aga8nst Germany left the SU neutral toward Japan (trade continued).

As far as Japan is involved, if Russia does not renege on the existing agreements splitting spheres of interest is possible and Japanese economic interests in cooperation remain the same as during the WWII: natural resources from the Russian Far East (source of gold for Russia).

As for the development of the Russian commercial fleet on the Far East, Goremikin in his (post RJW memo) remarked that there are no serious overseas partners on the Pacific warranting such a development.
 
Obviously the way the timeline actually worked out did not go well with the ports as they were directly involved in starting the way between Japan and Russia and as noted they sucked.
But.. if you want an effective Russia/Japan alliance and the only reason for that would be to fight the US/Great Britain. Then Russia NEEDS a port. Otherwise they are not actually in the war.
And they need to be able to support said port and the ships Russia is using to help fight the war.
This is not my Objective it is the OPs objective.
But a Russia with no port and no ships is basically a cheerleader for Japan. “Push um back push um back waayyy back!” Is about all they would be good for.
They don’t have much on the pacific in the real timeline and the Russian navy would be considered a joke if it wasn’t so sad. And they can’t transport enough to keep Russia going across the railroad they had so they are sure not sending any help to Japan even before the US and the RN spurs down the ability to ship it. Remember Japan is a series of Islands.
 
Obviously the way the timeline actually worked out did not go well with the ports as they were directly involved in starting the way between Japan and Russia and as noted they sucked.
But.. if you want an effective Russia/Japan alliance and the only reason for that would be to fight the US/Great Britain. Then Russia NEEDS a port. Otherwise they are not actually in the war.
And they need to be able to support said port and the ships Russia is using to help fight the war.
This is not my Objective it is the OPs objective..

Russia did have port Vladivostok and, taking into an account that there was no realistic way for Russia or the SU to build up any serious Pacific fleet prior to the age of the nuclear submarines (maintenace of such a fleet would require industrial facilities well beyond the realistic possibilities of the region) the mantra of the warm sea port was just one more delusion of the Russian navy. Which makes the whole idea of the OP rather questionable in the terms of a probability (why would Russia get into the war with the US? Just for the fun of it?) unless it is not expected that Russian Pacific fleet (based on Vladivostok because Port Arthur was making close Russian-Japanese military alliance pretty much impossible) is playing any significant role beyond securing communication lines between Japan and Russia.
 
Best path to Russo-Japan alliance is Russia to gift Port Arthur to Japan as part of a trade agreement, with basing privileges for the Russian Navy and Japan investing in the Trans Siberian and Manchurian railway.

Japan has been building railways since the 1870s, and will have engineering expertise that the Russians may value. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rail_transport_in_Japan

As a naval base, Port Arthur was as lousy site as one can possibly imagine and Russia would do much better by developing f@cilities in Vladivostok. So how about Russia not developing it at all and, earlier, not preventing Japan from building its base there?

As far as the railways are involved, it would probably be enough to let Japan to build its own railway in Korea and give Russia reasonably favorable rights of using it? Or simply clearly separate trade/influence zones in Manchuria and coordinate the RR construction? After all Russian concession on East China RR continued into the Soviet time and was sold only in 1934

upload_2019-7-13_15-2-17.png
 

MatthewB

Banned
@alexmilman Port Arthur is ice free year round. Vladivostok is not, and requires ice breakers. That's the whole reason Russia wanted Port Arthur, to serve as an ice free base year round.

But if Japan and Russia are on friendly terms, Russia hardly needs a navy at all in the Pacific, and can redeploy her Pacific Fleet battleships to its European bases.
 
Last edited:
@alexmilman Port Arthur is ice free year round. Vladivostok is not, and requires ice breakers. That's the whole reason Russia wanted Port Arthur, to serve as an ice free base year round.

But if Japan and Russia are on friendly terms, Russia hardly needs a navy at all in the Pacific, and can redeploy her Pacific Fleet battleships to its European bases.

I know why Russia wanted Port Arthur but the Hell is in the details:
1. The inner bay was so shallow that the reasonably big ships could stay only in its tiny corner.
2. The battleships could leave the bay only at a high tide and only one by one.
3. The outer bay was completely open to enemy’s attack.
4. Adequate protective fortifications had been prohibitively expensive and labor consuming and even a less ambitious option adoptedin OTL was quite expensive and hard to build.
5. The whole idea was based upon the assumption that the railroad never would be cut off.
6. Construction of the railroad came at the expense of completing Transsiberian RR (connection to Vladivostok was accomplished only in 1914 or even later).
7. There was absolutely nothing ASB in having icebreaker: Russia already had at least on.
8. Against whom Russian Pacific Fleet could operate aggressively even if it was not split? It was not strong enough to launch attack on Japan, not to mention the US.
9. Port Arthur was lacking facilities allowing adequate repairment of the seriously damaged battleships and while Vladivostok did not have the either they would be easier to develop on the Russian mainland, especially if the money spent upon the RRs across Korea had been spent on the earlier completion of the Transsiberian RR.
10. The commercial port, Dalnii (about which people tend to forget), as a result of constructing a protective seawall ceased to be ice free and, anyway, proved to be unable to compete with the existing Chinese ports.

Now, about your second point, some fleet would be needed but it could consist of the cruisers and lighter ships (in OTL did not even had the cruisers by the time of WWII). They would be able to provide some security of the coast and conduct the raider style operations, on opponent’s communications.

Transfer OTL battleships into the European ports is an interesting idea but keep in mind that they were not quite up to date even by the time of the RJW and badly designed on the top of it. So by the time of, say WWI (or its equivalent) they would be good for nothing but a coastal defense and even this is questionable.

Basically, Russia approached its naval program from the wrong end: it needed to concentrate upon creation of a heavy industry capable of producing high quality armor, powerful engines, big caliber guns, etc. in OTL, even after the Soviet industrialization, plans to built series of the battleships capable to challenge opponents like Bismark proved to be unrealistic: no adequate size wharves, no modern armor, etc. Russians first dreadnoughts were inferior (AFAIK) to those of AH while more expensive and construction of the next generation was going slowly due to the shortage of the industrial capacities, experienced personnel, etc.
 

MatthewB

Banned
Okay, so in addition to the diplomatic benefits of gifting Port Arthur to the Japanese, Russia also gains by forgoing the unsuitability of operating its navy from the port plus the cost of the railway. All good for Russia I’d say, and Japan has a new friend. Just do this before the Anglo-Japan alliance of 1902.
 
Okay, so in addition to the diplomatic benefits of gifting Port Arthur to the Japanese, Russia also gains by forgoing the unsuitability of operating its navy from the port plus the cost of the railway. All good for Russia I’d say, and Japan has a new friend. Just do this before the Anglo-Japan alliance of 1902.

Yes, this would save a lot of everything and probably make it easy to agree upon who is looting which parts of China (Japanese were seemingly very sensitive about Korea). There was no even need of doing anything physically, just don’t do stupid things and pass this as a generous diplomacy. Probably even Japanese-British alliance would not be a problem in that scenario.

To clarify what I was saying, here is the map. As you can see, most of the space in the left part of the bay are shallows. A relatively deep space in the bottom left corner was station for the destroyers (I suspect that the depths are in meters and for high tide ). The port facilities are on the right facing rectangular pool.


upload_2019-7-13_21-1-59.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • upload_2019-7-13_20-53-19.jpeg
    upload_2019-7-13_20-53-19.jpeg
    228 KB · Views: 134
Last edited:

BooNZ

Banned
Okay, so in addition to the diplomatic benefits of gifting Port Arthur to the Japanese, Russia also gains by forgoing the unsuitability of operating its navy from the port plus the cost of the railway. All good for Russia I’d say, and Japan has a new friend. Just do this before the Anglo-Japan alliance of 1902.
If Imperial Russia was prepared to enter into an alliance (or similar) with Japan and thereby recognize Japan as a peer (or similar) before 1902, then it would be Japan rather than Russian offering the concessions. At that point the existing world order was inherently racist and an alliance between a colonial power and an Asiatic power was not familiar territory. For many of the reasons outlined above, an early alliance between Imperial Russia and Imperial Japan is an elegant solution to many problems, but it would require a very different mindset among the Russian decision makers.

On a similar note, a constructive understanding between Imperial Russia and the Ottomans (also shunned as a dance partner by traditional colonial powers during the same time period) would have also helped avoid Imperial Russia featuring in future quagmires...
 
Top