Barbarossa/Pearl Harbor 7/22/41

[usertron2020]

That's it. Ignoring politics, advancing Japanese conquest plans and naval construction, Indo-China is already fully occupied in July 1941 as it was IOTL in December of that year. Japan learns of Barbarossa and decides to throw the dice when FDR announces oil embargo with Japanese occupation of Indo-China.

This is not a fixed idea. Basically what I'm looking at is a simultaneous attack by Germany plus a Japan OTL under ATL conditions in terms of positions in Indo-China and the military forces they enjoyed in 12/41.

Also, the effects of the combined sense of "infamy" felt by both the USSR and the USA being attacked on the same day. Perhaps America followed by Russia, or vice-versa.

What happens? Is the US-USSR relationship changed in anyway? For the better? For the worse?

Opinions?

EDIT: Japan's attack is OTL save for timing, i.e., no invasion of Russia.

 

[Post]

Shokaku and Zuikaku were commisioned in august and september 1941. With 4 carriers instead of 6, the attack will be less succesful.
Although if the US carriers are in Pearl Harbor, they will be sunk/damaged.

 

[Derwit]

I could see the Russian-Japanese position being even worse in this situation as it looks like the Nazis and Japanese are acting together. In such a scenario could low level warfare develop between these powers in the Far East of the USSR? This would certainly help the US-Russian relationship. If nothing else does this development effect the decision to move the Siberian divisions west to defend Moscow?


The US will also readily agree with the Russians that the Axis powers are clearly working together. So a US DOW on Germany is much more likely ITTL.

 

[raharris1973]

Main effects are from a 5 month head start in American full participation in the war.

 

[Hilarious Bolloc]

Monsoon season in SE Asia is May/June to October. Either the Japanese invade this theatre in the teeth of the monsoon, or they've lost surprise by October.

 

[Geon]

It's an interesting idea.

The Russians are in the process of sending their best divisions in Siberia westward to stop the Germans. The Russians right now have only second-class troops on the frontline. However, the Japanese are probably in no better shape. Most of their best troops are tied down either in China or in Burma by this point. Do they have the manpower to launch a major offensive?

Distance is also a factor. The Germans could conceivably shift troops to the East in a few days. Even with the Trans Siberian railroad it would take the Russians much longer to shift troops between the two fronts.

I suspect Stalin will have to decide whether defending Leningrad and Moscow is worth losing Vladivostok. And I also suspect he will decide the Germans are the greater threat and develop a Germany first policy like the United States. Lower-grade infantry will hold the Japanese line along with whatever Stalin can send eastward until the Germans are being rolled back, then likely Stalin will start sending seasoned front-line troops to deal with the Japanese. That might mean the Allies actually get to Berlin as Stalin has to divide his manpower.

It also likely means another purge is in store. This time for the intelligence section. Beria is likely one of the victims. Stalin had gotten clear assurances that Japan was not going to attack the U.S.S.R. allowing him to eventually concentrate his forces in the west. Expect a purge of the KGB and NKVD with Beria being the chief scapegoat.

 

[Post]

It's an interesting idea.

The Russians are in the process of sending their best divisions in Siberia westward to stop the Germans. The Russians right now have only second-class troops on the frontline. However, the Japanese are probably in no better shape. Most of their best troops are tied down either in China or in Burma by this point. Do they have the manpower to launch a major offensive?

OP stated that the Japanese will not start a war with Russia, so there is little to no difference there. Maybe it even will free up Siberian troops sooner.

 

[usertron2020]

OP stated that the Japanese will not start a war with Russia, so there is little to no difference there. Maybe it even will free up Siberian troops sooner.

Yes. There are zillions of ATLs about Japan attacking Russia. This discussion is about an OTL strategy, SAVE IN TIMING.

 

[usertron2020]

Shokaku and Zuikaku were commissioned in august and september 1941. With 4 carriers instead of 6, the attack will be less succesful.
Although if the US carriers are in Pearl Harbor, they will be sunk/damaged.

As I stated, the Japanese are secretly scrapping the naval treaties sooner, so I'm giving them the two carriers in time for an earlier Pearl Harbor. IIRC, one of these two ships left for Hawaii with still wet paint! Perhaps it can be argued that the US Navy gets an additional Yorktown approved (there's an ATL about that) or the Essex-class gets started a few months sooner.

I could see the Russian-Japanese position being even worse in this situation as it looks like the Nazis and Japanese are acting together. In such a scenario could low level warfare develop between these powers in the Far East of the USSR? This would certainly help the US-Russian relationship. If nothing else does this development effect the decision to move the Siberian divisions west to defend Moscow?

Quite the opposite IMO. Stalin had nothing but the word of his master spy in Tokyo that Japan's eyes lay elsewhere prior to the OTL Pearl Harbor. And Stalin never believed his spies. But with Germany's Operation: Typhoon going full blast, for once, he did believe his spies. He simply had no choice otherwise.

So with Japan attacking the West at the same time as Barbarossa, the Siberian divisions can load up and head west on D+1.

The US will also readily agree with the Russians that the Axis powers are clearly working together. So a US DOW on Germany is much more likely ITTL.

I wonder that Hitler STILL wouldn't beat FDR to the punch, though. US interference in the U-Boat War, as well as Lend-Lease now going to Russia full bore on D+1 of Pearl Harbor/Barbarossa...

Everybody has always called Hitler crazy for DoW'ing the USA after Pearl Harbor. I'm not everybody. IF the USA had remained neutral in Europe the level of support the American People would feel for both the British and the now beleaguered Soviets would be doubled and redoubled. (1) Unlimited Lend Lease, especially in food stuffs, for both major European Allied Powers. As U-Boat attacks could be expected in the same fashion as the "Second Happy Time", FDR would have to DoW Hitler eventually. IMO tho, Hitler was far too much a bullying personality to let the other guy declare war first. Even the DoW by France and the British caught him by surprise. He was never going to be caught out like that again.

1) Lend-Lease enjoyed varying support in the USA. ITTL, its just a matter of keeping your allies in the war.

 

[usertron2020]

Main effects are from a 5 month head start in American full participation in the war.

Probably works out to a larger army, air supremacy for the Allies sooner, more L-L to the Russians via the Caspian route, the U-Boats defeated more quickly, naval wars of attrition in the Pacific going in favor of the US more quickly. IOW, Japanese DDs and subs take it on the chin at a bloodier rate than OTL.

Monsoon season in SE Asia is May/June to October. Either the Japanese invade this theatre in the teeth of the monsoon, or they've lost surprise by October.

I'd say in the teeth of the monsoon, considering the paucity of the forces they'd be facing, especially in the Philippines, as MacArthur's buildup would be 5 months further back behind schedule. For that matter, a lot of the forces lost at Singapore hadn't arrived yet. So maybe they are saved to protect Australia, and be available for counter-offensives later on? OTOH, there's no guessing what happens in Burma.

 

[raharris1973]

Maybe such a PoD could accelerate victory in the war to 1944 and cause FDR to not run again and the Republicans winning in 1944 based on “time for change” sentiment?

 

[usertron2020]

Maybe such a PoD could accelerate victory in the war to 1944 and cause FDR to not run again and the Republicans winning in 1944 based on “time for change” sentiment?

An interesting idea, except that no matter had badly the Japanese did ITTL's WWII (and I'm not saying whether they'd do better or worse), WWII would still be raging in the Pacific regardless. You could advance the events in Europe, yes. But not to the degree that VE-Day happens before the 1944 political campaign season. Plus, the GOP was running a campaign against the Democrats that year that wasn't for change. It was for totally scrapping the New Deal and returning to Isolationism. They'd thrown up their hands that year, and the affable Thomas Dewey of 1948 was in 1944 running like a Pat Buchanan on amphetamines. The sun over the New Deal Coalition was at its blazing noon. If Wendell Willkie had lived and been healthy, while FDR died a year earlier, then that would have been another thing entirely.

FDR, however, was utterly blind to his own sense of mortality. He talked to friends and advisors of his idea that after the end of his fourth term he would try to become secretary General of the United Nations! Tho even if an ASB gave him extended life, he wouldn't have been allowed a 5th term. The Berlin Airlift, and his history of trusting Stalin, would have ruined him.

 

[nbcman]

As I stated, the Japanese are secretly scrapping the naval treaties sooner, so I'm giving them the two carriers in time for an earlier Pearl Harbor. IIRC, one of these two ships left for Hawaii with still wet paint! Perhaps it can be argued that the US Navy gets an additional Yorktown approved (there's an ATL about that) or the Essex-class gets started a few months sooner.
{snip}

The problem is the slipways were occupied before Shokaku and Zuikaku. Shokaku’s slipway was occupied from before 1936 per the chart in this post by Hiryu and Zuiho. Unless the IJN was breaking the treaty in the early 1930s, there isn’t dock capacity to accelerate the CVs by 6 months.

 

[usertron2020]

The problem is the slipways were occupied before Shokaku and Zuikaku. Shokaku’s slipway was occupied from before 1936 per the chart in this post by Hiryu and Zuiho. Unless the IJN was breaking the treaty in the early 1930s, there isn’t dock capacity to accelerate the CVs by 6 months.

Then, a 4 CV strike at Pearl?

 

[nbcman]

Then, a 4 CV strike at Pearl?

Theoretically yes, but the airgroups for at least the remaining 2 of the 4 CVs were in the process of receiving A6M Zeros and other more modern aircraft in mid 1941 (Akagi still had A5M Claude fighters in May 1941 per Akagi's TROM on Combined Fleet). Kaga wasn't operating Zeros, Kates or Vals in late November 1940 but there is no note exactly when the Kaga airgroup was upgraded as she did have Zeros, Kates and Vals in December 1941. Soryu and Hiryu may not have had an up to date airgroup either since their wiki pages note that their airgroups that were embarked in late November included the newer aircraft but there are no notes in the TROMs on Combined Fleet on when their airgroups were upgraded.

Overall, an earlier strike would have been smaller and would have to involve the Kido Butai getting closer due to the shorter ranged aircraft than OTL but the US defenses would be weaker as the US Pacific Fleet just moved to Pearl in the past few months.

 

[raharris1973]

Overall, an earlier strike would have been smaller and would have to involve the Kido Butai getting closer due to the shorter ranged aircraft than OTL but the US defenses would be weaker as the US Pacific Fleet just moved to Pearl in the past few months.

But a showstopper for the Pearl Harbor operation =/= a showstopper for a Japanese offensive in the western Pacific and Southeast Asia.

Western Pacific, including U.S. possessions like Guam and PI can still be attacked, it just force the Japanese to use their “traditional”, pre-Yamamoto anti-U.S. operational concept.