America occupies the entirety of Korea after WW2?

I don't know if this question has been answered before, since I can't find it in the search bar. I apologize if it has been.

The Question is in the Title: What would it take for the United States to occupy the entirety of the Korean peninsula after the end of WW2, instead of dividing it into a Northern Soviet occupational zone and a Southern US occupational zone?
 
Landing before the Soviets to disarm the Japanese. At the time, the US didn't think much of it save preventing the Red Army from occupying all of the peninsula after Hirohito's surrender.
 
I don't know if this question has been answered before, since I can't find it in the search bar. I apologize if it has been.

The Question is in the Title: What would it take for the United States to occupy the entirety of the Korean peninsula after the end of WW2, instead of dividing it into a Northern Soviet occupational zone and a Southern US occupational zone?

The Bomb is ready two weeks sooner or Germany holds out two weeks longer. The Soviets were not ready for action in Asia when the Bombs dropped; however Stalin ordered them to attack anyway, about two weeks ahead of schedule. I don't think they could have moved a month ahead of schedule; in which case they may not get into the Pacific War at all.
 
Is there any possibility of US landing troops in Korea in July or August after Okinawa?

Or skip Okinawa and land in Korea in April of 1945?

Make Korea the launch pad for Japan invasion. US owned air and sea.

What did Japan have in Korea for army divisions?

US could pull a feint on Okinawa and land in Korea.

Is either Korea after Okinawa or Korea instead of Okinawa feasible?
 
Is there any possibility of US landing troops in Korea in July or August after Okinawa?

Or skip Okinawa and land in Korea in April of 1945?

You would have to sail through the Ryukyu Islands to do this, it would not have been feasible prior to Okinawa.

What did Japan have in Korea for army divisions?

In Korea and Jeju Island, the Japanese had ten divisions, three brigades, three fortress units, and an independent tank regiment.
 
Frankly, given how the Soviets were surprised at the US giving up on so much of the peninsula without any argument, I figure the US might be able to bargain for the entire peninsula if it threw the Soviets a bone. Not sure what that bone would be.
 
I think the Chinese question is really important here. This is a pretty big spanner in the 20th century works. Korea should still get a lot of investment from the West - it is still next to China, and if China goes Red, then it becomes important. But would the PRC still come out the same? If the ROC wins, Korea may just end up ignored.
 
Well One thing (An obvious one) Korea isn't divided BUT China and the Soviets would be either paranoid, or not caring of it. (Though I think china would be more paranoid than Russia do to territory...
 
A thing to remember here is that the division of Korea didn't happen because the Soviets and Americans only just happened to be in those particular parts of Korea when the war ended. The joint occupation was something that was agreed upon and coordinated in advanced. If the Americans had been able to take the entirety of Korea before the Soviets could get there, then chances are they would retreat to the pre-agreed upon division, with perhaps a few tweaks here and there in their favour given their strong position, or risk a massive diplomatic incident that neither side wanted. The alternative could be that the allies agree instead to let the US occupy all of Korea, which would likely mean concessions to the Soviets in other areas (possibly a Japanese occupation zone).
 
Frankly, given how the Soviets were surprised at the US giving up on so much of the peninsula without any argument, I figure the US might be able to bargain for the entire peninsula if it threw the Soviets a bone. Not sure what that bone would be.

OTOH, the US was surprised that the Soviets accepted the 38th parallel. The Soviets seemed to be in a much stronger position to occupy Korea; the nearest US troops were far away, in Okinawa. See my post at https://groups.google.com/d/msg/soc.history.what-if/9d1jVAIdvf0/F8pxmNk3jG4J where I point out that Admiral Gardner actually proposed the 39th parallel, and that this was rejected because the Soviets were unlikely to accept it. In any event, the US was very anxious to prevent the Soviets from occupying all of Korea, and to be sure that Seoul and Inchon were included in the American zone. (Inchon was important not only because it was a port but because many American prisoners of war were being held there).

However, Michael Sandusky apparently argued in *America's Parallel* (I have not read the book and am quoting R. A. Harris' post on it) that "given the positions and strengths of all allied forces as of 15 August, and their logistical capacities, the Americans could have beaten the Soviets to northern Korea up to the 40th or 41st parallel in Korea and the Liaotung peninsula if they were inclined to do so and optimized their deployments for such a purpose. He asserts that the rate and inevitability of Soviet advance was overestimated at the time and in years since..." https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...had-different-korea-maps.301686/#post-8860722
 
The question is: Do the Soviets care enough about East Asia to push the issue?

My understanding was that Manchuria and Japan were the main prizes, with Korea as more of "we're take what we can get without much conflict"


OTOH, the US was surprised that the Soviets accepted the 38th parallel. The Soviets seemed to be in a much stronger position to occupy Korea; the nearest US troops were far away, in Okinawa. See my post at https://groups.google.com/d/msg/soc.history.what-if/9d1jVAIdvf0/F8pxmNk3jG4J where I point out that Admiral Gardner actually proposed the 39th parallel, and that this was rejected because the Soviets were unlikely to accept it. In any event, the US was very anxious to prevent the Soviets from occupying all of Korea, and to be sure that Seoul and Inchon were included in the American zone. (Inchon was important not only because it was a port but because many American prisoners of war were being held there).

However, Michael Sandusky apparently argued in *America's Parallel* (I have not read the book and am quoting R. A. Harris' post on it) that "given the positions and strengths of all allied forces as of 15 August, and their logistical capacities, the Americans could have beaten the Soviets to northern Korea up to the 40th or 41st parallel in Korea and the Liaotung peninsula if they were inclined to do so and optimized their deployments for such a purpose. He asserts that the rate and inevitability of Soviet advance was overestimated at the time and in years since..." https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...had-different-korea-maps.301686/#post-8860722

In relations to what I just wrote above, the Soviet forces were almost entirely focused on Manchuria, with any detour into Korea being intended to hold down the Japanese forces in the peninsula. Given the general situation, my conclusion is that if the US offers a good enough trade, UN-occupied Korea can easily happen.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
A thing to remember here is that the division of Korea didn't happen because the Soviets and Americans only just happened to be in those particular parts of Korea when the war ended. The joint occupation was something that was agreed upon and coordinated in advanced. If the Americans had been able to take the entirety of Korea before the Soviets could get there, then chances are they would retreat to the pre-agreed upon division, with perhaps a few tweaks here and there in their favour given their strong position, or risk a massive diplomatic incident that neither side wanted. The alternative could be that the allies agree instead to let the US occupy all of Korea, which would likely mean concessions to the Soviets in other areas (possibly a Japanese occupation zone).
This pretty much covers it.

Same thing exists as in the ETO. Both sides had agreed upon areas of trusteeship/occupation (in the case of Korea established after FDR made the suggestion in 1943) and both the WAllies and the Soviets followed them. Now the post war politics involving self determination are a different matter (with 400K residents of the Soviet Zone voting with their feet, until movement across the 38th was made illegal on the Soviet side of the boundary line), but the actual zones of control were followed.

The Soviets were in a much better place regarding this than the West. Berlin, at the time, was a LOT more important geo-politically than half of a small chunk of the Asia, and the Soviets were readily positioned to crush the WAllied Zones IN Berlin.
 
A thing to remember here is that the division of Korea didn't happen because the Soviets and Americans only just happened to be in those particular parts of Korea when the war ended. The joint occupation was something that was agreed upon and coordinated in advanced. If the Americans had been able to take the entirety of Korea before the Soviets could get there, then chances are they would retreat to the pre-agreed upon division, with perhaps a few tweaks here and there in their favour given their strong position, or risk a massive diplomatic incident that neither side wanted. The alternative could be that the allies agree instead to let the US occupy all of Korea, which would likely mean concessions to the Soviets in other areas (possibly a Japanese occupation zone).

Well-put. I will add only this. Rather ironically in view of the fact that Americans and Soviets would be SHOOTING at each other in Korea only mere five years later, the actual decision about how and where to divide the peninsula was arrived at in an amazingly relaxed fashion. The Kremlin didn't, for some obscure reason, seem to care particularly about where that dividing line would be. They asked the Americans to put up a proposal, duly received it (*), and accepted it a day later. I guess the big point to them was getting the Americans to agree to an official Soviet military presence in Korea, with the precise placement of the border being viewed as too comparatively trivial to haggle over.

(*) US State Department didn't seem to care either, and asked the Pentagon to decide, so a mere colonel (Charles Bonesteel) was tasked with drawing up the joint occupation plan.
 

B-29_Bomber

Banned
Stalin was ALWAYS insistent on getting his share of the spoils. Arguably the entire Soviet DoW against Japan was a pure land grab.

Thing is if it were a mere matter of recognizing the reality on the ground, with the Soviets barely reaching the Yalu by the time of Japanese Surrender, I don't think Stalin's going to push very hard.

He's already has to deal with Eastern Europe, which still has a number of resistance groups still fighting the Red Army. At the end of the day North Korea isn't as important to Russian security then Eastern Europe.

Besides, he already has Manchuria (and China might follow suit), he's likely to see that as good enough.
 
Top