AH Plausibility: A Cold War Between the USSR and Imperial Japan

Inspired by the alt-Cold War between say the Western Allies led by the United States and Nazi Germany in the German victory over the Soviet Union, what events could have led to a possible Cold War between the USSR and the Empire of Japan? The Soviets could have a victory in Europe, but lose a bit of territory in Asia. Say the size of the OTL Far Eastern Republic as a Japanese puppet state. It'd be like a Soviet defeat in Europe and a rump Soviet state east of the Urals, but in this case, six federal subjects in the Russian Far East would be lost to the Japanese Empire.
 
I don't see a plausible way of doing this.

If Japan were to be a US ally in this scenario, it would operate under the US-German aegis, or just the US's if by some miracle Germany was defeated.

Basically, it would require Germany to be quickly trounced in the war before the US got involved; I'm going to assume this is due to the USSR, France, Italy, and the UK, all allied to one another (maybe they've all gone communist; that's probably the only thing that would ally the US with Nazi Germany in the first place), launching a surprise attack on Germany. I never thought I'd say this, but poor Hitler.

Anyways, then it would require the People's United Republics of Britain or whatever to heavily militarize Canada. This would be a really nasty war, because the US-Canadian border is quite possibly the single most indefensible thing in the world. The US would be able to easily capture the major cities, but the rest of Canada is going to be a total quagmire not unlike invading Russia. Also, if the Comintern gets naval superiority in the Atlantic (not sure how plausible that would be, probably not very) it would be nigh-impossible for the US to keep Britain from resupplying Canadian and Caribbean airbases to stop bombing raids and so on.

I'm going to further assume that Mexico has somehow gone communist and has both industrialized and militarized. If the US is somehow forced into a two-front war (with one of them being an occupation of Communist Canada), that might be enough to grind public morale down and force an armistice. Then the US economy would be ailing enough so that it doesn't develop the A-bomb until after the Russians do. Let's say that the US tries to go completely fascist and collapses into a civil war in the 1970s, with nukes being used and large swathes of the country being reduced to rubble. Japan negotiates an alliance with a Pacific coast successor state (California, Oregon, Washington, and perhaps others) to be included into its co-prosperity sphere. Nationalist China, which has more or less defeated the CCP, also joins in.

There is now a nuclear Pacific Bloc with Japan at the forefront facing down a Soviet Eurasia. Almost 1984, except Oceania has fractured into mostly neutral successor states and Mexico is probably still communist.

Pretty ferociously unlikely overall. I'm not even going to try to find a POD that would satisfy the above conditions while keeping the rise of the NSDAP intact.
 
I don't see a plausible way of doing this.

If Japan were to be a US ally in this scenario, it would operate under the US-German aegis, or just the US's if by some miracle Germany was defeated.

Basically, it would require Germany to be quickly trounced in the war before the US got involved; I'm going to assume this is due to the USSR, France, Italy, and the UK, all allied to one another (maybe they've all gone communist; that's probably the only thing that would ally the US with Nazi Germany in the first place), launching a surprise attack on Germany. I never thought I'd say this, but poor Hitler.

Anyways, then it would require the People's United Republics of Britain or whatever to heavily militarize Canada. This would be a really nasty war, because the US-Canadian border is quite possibly the single most indefensible thing in the world. The US would be able to easily capture the major cities, but the rest of Canada is going to be a total quagmire not unlike invading Russia. Also, if the Comintern gets naval superiority in the Atlantic (not sure how plausible that would be, probably not very) it would be nigh-impossible for the US to keep Britain from resupplying Canadian and Caribbean airbases to stop bombing raids and so on.

I'm going to further assume that Mexico has somehow gone communist and has both industrialized and militarized. If the US is somehow forced into a two-front war (with one of them being an occupation of Communist Canada), that might be enough to grind public morale down and force an armistice. Then the US economy would be ailing enough so that it doesn't develop the A-bomb until after the Russians do. Let's say that the US tries to go completely fascist and collapses into a civil war in the 1970s, with nukes being used and large swathes of the country being reduced to rubble. Japan negotiates an alliance with a Pacific coast successor state (California, Oregon, Washington, and perhaps others) to be included into its co-prosperity sphere. Nationalist China, which has more or less defeated the CCP, also joins in.

There is now a nuclear Pacific Bloc with Japan at the forefront facing down a Soviet Eurasia. Almost 1984, except Oceania has fractured into mostly neutral successor states and Mexico is probably still communist.

Pretty ferociously unlikely overall. I'm not even going to try to find a POD that would satisfy the above conditions while keeping the rise of the NSDAP intact.

Well, an easiest way to attack Germany right off the bat would have been in 1938. Say Britain and France stick to their promise of defending Czechoslovakia from German aggression. (They don't allow Hitler to take over the Sudetenland) While the Czechs would have defended them, France could simply cross the border and invade Germany from there. Of course, this would only work if Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe had a stronger Communist movement there.

I'm sure that with the Soviets and the Japanese facing each other in a nasty Cold War, would the Japanese be the ultimate victor? What of Australia and New Zealand? They both detest the Japanese and the Soviets, so who would they pick as the lesser of two evils?
 
The only way to do this is to change China into even more of a trainwreck in the 1920's, and have it divided into Soviet and Japanese spheres of influence. Butterflies cause the avoidance of the Pacific war, and lead to much more brutal fighting in Europe. Further butterflies prevent the allocation of Marshall Aid, and the U.S. decides it's only concerned about the Western Hemisphere. The only powers left standing are the USSR and Japan. Together they share many possible points of friction.
 
Could China be balkanized long enough for the Soviets and Japanese to gobble some parts? Manchuria would be the very sore point where their interests would clash, as would maybe Korea. Butterflying the Pacific War would help if only the colonial powers in SE Asia (Britain, France, the Netherlands, and maybe Portugal) undergo some worse upheaval that would force them to allocate the bulk of their military close to home. A more brutal fighting in Europe could happen, but which nations would have gone communist by then? Along with a divided and fractured China, the Polish-Soviet War would also help decide things in Europe.

By let's say, 1961, with the Soviet Union and Japan as the top two superpowers, I'd be curious as to what would Australia and New Zealand do. They hate both the Soviets and Japanese, but has to choose one of them to put up with. Not the Philippines though, since Japan would want to integrate it. No Pacific War is better than a Japanese victory in the Pacific, though how could Japan acquire more colonies without the Pacific War?

I really don't see a way of Japan being able to hold onto enough territory to pull this off.

Japan doesn't have to hold a huge amount of territory. They could simply create better goods and trade with the world while the Soviets would face pressure from both sides.
 
I don't understand this at all.

1. Nazi Germany defeats the Soviets in WWII? But is defeated by the United States in turn? Who then ally with them?

2. The US never fights Japan (Just Germany?) who in turn enter a cold war with the Rump USSR?

I'm so confused, what's happened to Britain and France? Why are they listening to a defeated Nazi Germany or were they defeated too?

EDIT: Are you trying to propose a three way cold war with the following Red Alert-esque factions.

1. The Allies (US, British Empire, France, Nazi Germany).
2. The Soviets (USSR rump state?)
3. Empire of Japan (Japan and parts of China)
 
Last edited:
The main plausibility is just a 'two sided' Cold War with the Soviet Union against Imperial Japan. The Western Allies would have to be a lot weaker than in OTL, though Europe would either be neutral and not take sides at all or would become communist states with Asia falling under the 'Bamboo Curtain'.
 
Well okay hmmm. Let me try.

1. Japan and US stays out of WWII. (Either the US for some reason grants them oil for some reason. Someonse else will have to help with that) and remains fighting in China solely. The US is going to have to be extremely isolationist in this Timeline. (someone else tackle this issue)

2. WWII follows a similar route but without US intervention from no Pearl Harbour (implausible I know, just bear with me), after a long bloody slog the USSR overruns much of the European continent as it crushes the weakened Nazi warmachine. As Germany collapses it abandones France and Britain lands a Commonwelath invasion force which helps with quickly liberating the country.

3. The USSR now occupies most of Germany and everything East of it. Britain and Franceare exhusted. In the East the USSR is now a Juggernaught which is busy consolidating it's power in Europe and it eventually turns it's eyes to Asia.

4. Japan is meanwhile fighting bitterly in China to secure it's own Empire. It is wary of the USSR looming in the North and turns to the most unlikely allies imaginable. With the US simply happy to look after it's own affairs, Japan turns to Britain and France who both have colonial interests in Asia and the Pacific which they wish to keep secuity over. Tenuously united by a common enemy, the Allies, now headed by Japan, engage in a Cold War with the USSR.

Note: This is FAR prom perfect and probably implausible for reasons I'm about to find out, but it's a difficult premise.
 
Last edited:
Well okay hmmm. Let me try.

1. Japan and US stays out of WWII. (Either the US for some reason grants them oil for some reason. Someonse else will have to help with that) and remains fighting in China solely. The US is extremely isolationist in this Timeline. (someone else tackle this issue)

2. WWII follows a similar route after WWII but without US intervention from no Pearl Harbour (implausible I know, just bear with me), after a long bloody slog the USSR overruns much of the European continent as it crushes the weakened Nazi warmachine. As Germany collapses it abandones France and Britain lands a Commonwelath invasion force which helps with quickly liberating the country.

3. The USSR now occupies most of Germany and everything East of it. Britain and Franceare exhusted. In the East the USSR is now a Juggernaught which is busy consolidating it's power in Europe and it eventually turns it's eyes to Asia.

4. Japan is meanwhile fighting bitterly in China to secure it's own Empire. It is wary of the USSR looming in the North and turns to the most unlikely allies imaginable. With the US simply happy to look after it's own affairs, Japan turns to Britain and France who both have colonial interests in Asia and the Pacific which they wish to keep secuity over. Tenuously united by a common enemy, the Allies, now headed by Japan, engage in a Cold War with the USSR.

Note: This is FAR prom perfect and probably implausible for reasons I'm about to find out, but it's a difficult premise.

The main key is no oil embargo. No oil embargo means that Japan wouldn't have any reason to attack the United States, and it would also mean that they won't have to overextend themselves in the Pacific. Though in the Soviets' case, there should be a way to either: prevent the Great Purge from happening or Stalin is informed of Barbarossa and actually does something about it.

The Allies on the other hand if it was led by Japan, would have a much more freer hand in internal affairs, though the Japanese may want to purchase the Philippines from the United States if it wants to acquire additional bases from which they can attack China through occupation of Guangdong and Fujian. The only alternative if the Philippines isn't protected by Japan would be a full blown communist revolution in which the Soviets could happily send aid to the Huks. In this case, Australia and New Zealand would have to bite the bullet and accept (reluctantly) Japanese suzerainty since Britain and France would want Japanese help in containing the Soviet Union.
 
The main key is no oil embargo. No oil embargo means that Japan wouldn't have any reason to attack the United States, and it would also mean that they won't have to overextend themselves in the Pacific. Though in the Soviets' case, there should be a way to either: prevent the Great Purge from happening or Stalin is informed of Barbarossa and actually does something about it.

The Allies on the other hand if it was led by Japan, would have a much more freer hand in internal affairs, though the Japanese may want to purchase the Philippines from the United States if it wants to acquire additional bases from which they can attack China through occupation of Guangdong and Fujian. The only alternative if the Philippines isn't protected by Japan would be a full blown communist revolution in which the Soviets could happily send aid to the Huks. In this case, Australia and New Zealand would have to bite the bullet and accept (reluctantly) Japanese suzerainty since Britain and France would want Japanese help in containing the Soviet Union.

Indeed Australia and New Zealand would be very much tied to Britain. The issue is making the USA so uninvolved in external affairs.
 
This isn't impossible but it needs several things to happen differently from OTL. The requirements are that Japan wins its conflict with China decisively but does not become involved in a war with either Britain or the USA, that the USA does not fight against Germany and remains isolationist and finally that the British Empire continues to fight in 1941 despite limited American support and that eventually Britain and the USSR defeat Germany (and probably Italy although a deal in which Italy switches sides might be more plausible).

Now there was a faction in the IJA that was very strongly focussed on China by early 1938 and it had a fairly determined leader, one Tojo Hideki (to be honest one can always find a faction advocating almost any policy within the Japanese Military and Government at around that time). However, possibly 1938 is already too late to develop a strategy to win the war in China. Trying not to risk incidents on the Manchuria – USSR border frees up some troops. The logistic problems of taking Sichuan can be solved if a significant fraction of the spending on the IJN were transferred to building trucks and river craft. However, it is still clear that Japan cannot garrison every village in China. Thus Japan needs to develop a political strategy that can win some Chinese support. The good news for Japan is that they should have at least until 1945 to establish something like the Wang Ching-wei government in control of China. You can look at http://books.google.co.uk/books/abo...ar_1937_1945.html?id=ikmrAAAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y or http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=3XhuAAAAMAAJ&source=gbs_book_similarbooks&redir_esc=y. to decide how likely that is but it would be at least slightly more likely if Kagesa Sadaaki became influential.

The nice feature of cutting spending on the IJN might be that in 1940, the IJN might be forced to explain that the wicked policy of neglect enforced by the IJA had left them unable to take on the Anglo-American powers. This is the inverse of the OTL situation where the IJN found it hard to admit that it would not be able to win a war after demanding and receiving a huge (by Japanese standards) budget (see Barnhart's http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...=onepage&q=michael barnhart total war&f=false and “Nanshin: Budget-Maximizing Behavior, the Imperial Japanese Navy and the Origins of the Pacific War” by Brian Dollery, Zane Spindler and Craig Parsons).
 
That could be true, but the real question the Japanese should ask themselves would be, "How to win the support of Wang Jingwei while at the same time avoiding atrocities that got them condemned?" in OTL. The IJN would have to contend with a smaller fleet if they want to put more emphasis on improving the IJA's weaponry. I do understand that Japan had very few prototype submachine guns on their disposal. Perhaps a more emphasis on Type 100 submachine gun production would be more important.
 
Yes that is why I doubted if 1938 is early enough for a POD. The question is whether there is any possible POD for a Japanese victory in China even if there is no American intervention. Japan does not seem to have actually had any leadership trying to produce a plan for victory once it had been decided not to negotiate with Chiang (unless you believe Bix :)).

Hendryk doubted if any peace that Japan might accept was possible in this thread https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=147599. I also seem to have tried to play with these ideas in this thread https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=115735. There is some discussion of why Japan treated prisoners badly in WW2 in an article by John Hickman www.jmss.org/jmss/index.php/jmss/article/download/277/291.

It is not hard to find PODs for avoiding the Panay Incident, for example removing Colonel Hashimoto Kingoro, which offers a possibility for settling off changes in American politics to – waves hands – bring about the necessary additional PODs.
 
What were the policies of Ito Hirobumi if he had lived a lot longer? I'm sure that under his guidance we may have seen Japan expand benevolently instead of recklessly, and/or that the IJA becomes aware of their deficiencies on land and in the air. They'll probably need a lot of luck in getting over their deficiencies on the military side but I'm sure that the main reason why Japan became more hostile towards the West is because of America's role in ending the Anglo-Japanese Alliance and possibly the rejection of the Racial Equality Clause.
 
Go to:

http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/forums/67/t/The-Naval-Fiction-Board.html#.T43-hI7Bj-U

and read Big Dave's TotTotGE timeline. Although he hasn't gotten up to the 1940s yet, he already has had Japan fight and win two wars with the USSR over Siberia. So there already is a Cold War between the two nations, one that will likely get worse as the decades progress.

Big Dave already has a bonus point for this plausbility of the Soviets that would...
lose a bit of territory in Asia. Say the size of the OTL Far Eastern Republic as a Japanese puppet state.

I'll get a chance to read it.
 
Top