AHC: Maximum Japan Success in Pacific War

One thought I had recently was slightly different Japanese planning regarding their seizure of the Philippines.

In OTL they saw the importance of the Bataan peninsula, but their desire to take Manila before the end of 1941 led them to ignore it until it was too late. Despite MacArthur's bungling, a good chunk of the American and Philippine forces were able to make it to Bataan and resist far longer than they would have been able to otherwise.

The Japanese invasion could have very easily gone slightly differently and prioritized taking Bataan over Manila. This likely wouldn't change Manila being declared an open city, and likely would greatly curtail American resistance on Luzon and the rest of the Philippines by extension. Assuming American indecisiveness when the Japanese take Bataan in December 1941, I'd wager that by January 1941 the Japanese would be able to essentially accomplish what they did in OTL by May 1942.

This would massively improve Japanese logistics and free up several divisions that were tied down in OTL facing the Americans holding out in the Philippines. The obvious beneficiary here is the SWPA. Perhaps with the additional forces available, the Japanese opt to launch an overland campaign to take Port Moresby in March 1942 and succeed? The Japanese may well get closer to isolating Australia than they did in OTL.

However I don't think any POD in 1941 gives the Japanese enough strength to take New Caledonia. In TTL this likely becomes an even more lopsided version of the Guadalcanal campaign and crushes the Japanese military, before an American central pacific drive begins the process of knocking them out of the war.
 
The obvious answer is OTL.
Actually, there's a few places they could have done better, and maybe lasted a month longer or so. But, really, the Japanese were lucky at an incredible level iOTL.
 
The obvious answer is OTL.

Actually, there's a few places they could have done better, and maybe lasted a month longer or so. But, really, the Japanese were lucky at an incredible level iOTL.
This is a perfectly acceptable answer, JFTR. If it turns out to be more or less the consensus, I'd consider the question asked and answered.
As I said, technically speaking a status quo ante bellum leaves Japan with its post-1931 borders.
And if that's doable given the OP restrictions, then that absolutely works as well.
 

The Sandman

Banned
Port Moresby and the rest of Papua. Darwin. Maybe up towards Chittagong. The southern Gilberts and the Ellices, in the early months when they were undefended. A few more of the Aleutians. The rest of the Solomons and the Santa Cruz Islands, again in the period before Allied reinforcements.

They wouldn't be able to hold any of them for long, except maybe Papua. But they could have taken them if they chose to make the attempt.
 
If you're stupid enough to attack the US--

Follow up the Pearl Harbor raids with an invasion of Hawaii (ala Turtledove) i.e. Dec 8th or 9th and an attack on Dutch Harbor latter that month. Figure out how to get some sabatours into the Panama Canal Zone and for arguements sake, hit the jackpot there.

Unlikely, I know, but we are going for the maximum advantage.
 
Just curious, but are we going for "maximum area the Japanese can control before they collapse as OTL" or "best the Japanese can hope for after the war?"

Because I see those as different (and probably mutually exclusive) questions. A Japan that crashes and burns hard very early might end up keeping e.g. the Kuriles and Sakhalin, just because the Soviets never need to get involved. On the other hand, a more successful Japan (e.g. one that wins decisively at the Coral Sea and thus both makes additional gains in New Guinea and slows the US counteroffensive) might hold out long enough for the Soviets to invade Hokkaido, which is probably the worst case for Japan, longterm. And of course, different occupation authorities might end up with more or less lenient occupation policies, if we prefer to measure along that axis.
 
It can be either question, depending on which has more potential (again, given the op restrictions). I'd also say "maximum territory" with worse long term prospects, is preferred (for our purposes) to improving the status of Japan postwar where the empire is still crushed.
 
IMHO the easiest way to have Japan hold on longer is to find some way of getting the USSR to collapse in the 1941-42 timeframe.

A Japanese attack would do nothing to cause the Soviet Union to collapse, it would merely earn Japan vast tracks of nothing that the Soviets will simply walk back into when the Japanese economy implodes a year later.

In any case, the Japanese overtly discounted a major attack against the USSR right around the time the OP directs the earliest the PoD can be.
 
A Japanese attack would do nothing to cause the Soviet Union to collapse, it would merely earn Japan vast tracks of nothing that the Soviets will simply walk back into when the Japanese economy implodes a year later.

In any case, the Japanese overtly discounted a major attack against the USSR right around the time the OP directs the earliest the PoD can be.

they discounted that because they suffered a sound thrashing in Mongolia in 1939 right as the Nazis made a deal with Stalin. Then the Soviets offered them a non aggression pact and they took it, as they were seriously concerned Zhukov might just drive further south into something important.

In 1939 -45 there are significant mineral deposits of value to the Soviets within Japanese reach in the Soviet Far East... gold among them. The Gulags were in that area not just to cut timber.

Whether the Japanese could have done much with it is another question
 
they discounted that because they suffered a sound thrashing in Mongolia in 1939 right as the Nazis made a deal with Stalin. Then the Soviets offered them a non aggression pact and they took it, as they were seriously concerned Zhukov might just drive further south into something important.

In 1939 -45 there are significant mineral deposits of value to the Soviets within Japanese reach in the Soviet Far East... gold among them. The Gulags were in that area not just to cut timber.

Whether the Japanese could have done much with it is another question

Not much, really. They don't have much of a need for gold. They needed oil, oil that was fairly out of reach up north due to tech. Morevoer, Siberia made up of about 95% nothing. Literally just miles and miles of empty forest. Holding it all only makes the Japanese maps look pretty, but not much else except bog down resources and manpower in partisan hunting. If they can get past the Red Army, of course.
 
IMO, Japan does have chances to win Pacific. Very slight chances, worse than Barbarossa. But still, a non-zero possibility. Maybe not even Seelion territory. We already know that USA can end a war because of public opinion. A democracy won't go into a total war mode, dealing enough losses can get them a peace deal. Not much gains though, at most American Polynesia and Hawaii but none of these annexing West Coast scenarios as seen on every Axis victory map ever.

Let's change Pearl Harbour first. Striking at a different time when more ships are there, especially the carriers, is a must. If possible, a declaration of war minutes or hours beforehand: the attack seems a bit less like a backstab, changing the public opinion, while still giving no warning to the Navy. Overall a stronger attack, maybe even capturing Hawaii and establishing a puppet state if that is even possible. This makes losses heavier on both sides but now Japan can raise and fix the sunken ships, and US has for the moment no way to respond. Island hopping doesn't work without a base, and they need time to get more ships there. For the moment Japan has the advantage but US will outproduce them sooner or later.

Now Japan must not run out of their luck before US gets fed up with the war. They have limited manpower but more ships, so they just have to not lose to the Navy. A few minor victories might be enough, but to really ensure peace they need a second great victory. Maybe more. This time they are defending and have more islands and ships, so can be pulled off. I don't know where the first counterattack would take place, but my two cents are on Hawaii and Midway. Hell, they don't even need to win the battles, even a pyrrhic American victory at retaking Hawaii might be enough to convince them not to continue.

For a truly lasting victory they need allies, though, and they won't get many if Axis victory doesn't happen in Europe, too. Or really stepping up their diplomacy. Or getting their own nukes. Otherwise America might declare war on them in revenge pretty soon, and Japan can't win against a prepared USA. So we are looking at a borderline ASB thing here, but I'd say people have won against worse odds. To someone in an alternative universe Swedish Empire itself is already borderline ASB, and then that almost winning a war against Russia, Poland, Saxony, and Denmark-Norway at the same time would be absolutely unbelievable. Or Nazis beating the strongest army out there in one month with little to no losses, after France having a year to prepare. Or Greeks keeping Persia out of Europe. Or Japan taking a large part of China, including the capital. Or Napoleon, pretty much anything about him. Or Israel beating three countries in six days. Sometimes history doesn't care about the odds.
 
Sorry for the late reply, I just saw this.

A Japanese attack would do nothing to cause the Soviet Union to collapse, it would merely earn Japan vast tracks of nothing that the Soviets will simply walk back into when the Japanese economy implodes a year later.

The point is disputed by some, but I didn't say it would. What I meant was just find some way of having the German invasion succeed. Say Stalin dies and the Soviet government collapses, or some such. The benefits I was saying would accrue to Japan, which became pretty clear in the rest of the post which you left out, are not mainly its territorial gain in the Soviet Far East, but the fact that the greatly strengthened Germany would then redirect the entirety of its war effort against the Western Allies, which would correspondingly reduce pressure on the Japanese in accordance with the Wallied Germany first strategy.

In any case, the Japanese overtly discounted a major attack against the USSR right around the time the OP directs the earliest the PoD can be.

I'm not assuming the Japanese act any differently from OTL.
 
Japan under normal circumstances lacked the backing to win a prolonged war in the first place, as its Industrial output was too limmited and it relied on shipping for resources to continue a war.

Some elements of a "what if", can favour Japan though, though only under artifircial conditions, such as the complete dominance of the Pacific, with the USA completely out of it. This was highly unlikely, though could have been accomplished theoretically by the complete destruction of Pearl Harbor as a base, as Yamamoto predicted. Withoug this forwarded base, the Allies would have needed seriously stretched lines of communication and supply to the SW Pacific, whcih might be cut by a stronger Japanese thrust in that direction, due to the relocating of forces, otherwise left in the homewaters in case the USN was to counter from Pearl Harbor, if that base was still in use.

A second element of Japanese favour would have to come form the German win in their war against the USSR. With the USSR destroyed somehow, Japan would have been given a free hand on the continent, mainly China, with no need to hold back substantial forces along the Manchuria-USSR borders.

These two elements were vital in any possible succes of Japan in the war. Since both were not achived, as Japan relied on a foreign power completely (Germany) to achieve the second part, Japan was doomed, even before it started the war as such.
 
Maximum Axis success: Japan takes all of Burma and Midway, as well as Papua New Guinea. Imperial Japan continues to exist: join the allies.
 
The Japanese didn't definitively decide to go to war against America until August 1941. With a POD of July of that year, the best they can hope for is some kind of ASB intervention from Hirohito in which Japan caves to FDR's demands and focuses on building up Manchuria. That way they can sit out the war and emerge undamaged as a near-superpower, serving as a useful Cold War counterweight to the USSR in East Asia.

Assuming they actually do go to war, the best they've got is maybe another year or so assuming Japan sweeps New Guinea, Coral Sea, and Midway with little damage while annihilating the opposition. After that point they would have been overtaken through sheer numbers and industrial power on the part of the US. As for the first 6 months of the war, that was done about as perfectly as one could hope. The initial offensive was well-planned, well-executed, and concluded ahead of schedule with much smaller losses than expected. Given the balance of power in the Pacific Japan did well to have achieved as much as she did.
 
A Japanese attack would do nothing to cause the Soviet Union to collapse, it would merely earn Japan vast tracks of nothing that the Soviets will simply walk back into when the Japanese economy implodes a year later.

In any case, the Japanese overtly discounted a major attack against the USSR right around the time the OP directs the earliest the PoD can be.

To claim a suicidal Japanes DOW on the soviets won't have ANY consequences for the latter is not quite accurate though:

It closes one of the three avenues through which LL got into Russia - the other two being the extremely hazardous Arctic Ocean route (also liable to being partially shut down if Op. Platinum Fox succeeds) and the not-yet-operational Persian route.

It also means the Soviets would have another front where they would be losing men and machines to attrition and enemy action, something they'd rather not have in '41 and '42.

EDIT: It's not exactly costing them the war, but it still hurts nonetheless
 
Top