Barbarossa without lend lease and with Japanese invasion of Siberia

how much can Barbarossa succeed (push to A-A line) without lend lease and with Japanese invasion of Siberia

will soviet have a famine and bad supply lines without lend lease food and truks?

will soviets be spread thin with Japanese invasion of Siberia ?
 
First you need to convince the Japanese to invade. They did not do well against the Soviets in the Border Skirmishes in 39 and were not looking to take on the Soviets again. They were interested in the south.
Then once Barbarossa kicks off why do you think the UK wouldn't help the Soviets? And if the Brits help so will the U.S.
 
The Japanese are going to get their asses kicked.

No LL means babrarossa might succeed. Since the Soviets can't feed or supply the needed army for long.
 
The Japanese are going to get their asses kicked.
Considering that at Khalhin Gol the Soviets had massive advantages in infantry (3x), tanks (7x), aircrafts (2x), and in Zhukovs, and still lost 25% more men. I am certain that if the Japanese send enough men and equipment to have numerical parity or even superiority they could push as far as logistics permit, the Sovietic advantage in this case is not that the Soviets are super soldiers that eat Japanese at breakfeast, their advantage lies on the fact that Japanese logistics can't reach anything important, they could maybe occupy the territory that once was the Far Eastern Republic at its maximum extent.

If the Soviet Union panicks and send troops against the Japanese, that probably means that the Germans have an easier time, it is hard to know what the effects would be, but if the Japanese are able to hold one Soviet Army away that could be the difference between OTL and Leningrad falling prey to starvation or Stalingrad falling on the march. But the outcome would probably be Stalin just saying, "well, we have more important things to do here in the west at the moment, enjoy your stay".
 

GuildedAgeNostalgia

Gone Fishin'
Japan isn't getting it's ass kicked in the Far East.

- Soviet advantages are defensive only. 1941 Soviet army lacks the ability to roll through Manchuria.

- Japanese easily take Sakhalin, Kamchatka, and the Komandorskiye Islands.

- Japanese navy successfully blockades every Russian far east port and Japan keeps air superiority.
 
Japan isn't getting it's ass kicked in the Far East.

- Soviet advantages are defensive only. 1941 Soviet army lacks the ability to roll through Manchuria.

- Japanese easily take Sakhalin, Kamchatka, and the Komandorskiye Islands.

- Japanese navy successfully blockades every Russian far east port and Japan keeps air superiority.
And the Japanese are burning through their oil reserves. As of July the U.S. has an oil embargo against Japan, and convinced the Dutch to stop selling them any ether. Japan has 18 months before they run out of oil. Striking North means no invasion of South East Asia at least till the late Spring of 1942. By then the Americans, and British will be better prepared for war. The Americans were reinforcing the Philippines, and the British will have more troops, and aircraft in Singapore. Time was working against the Japanese, and invading the Soviet Union would only add to their problems.
 
The operation will be very bloody for the Soviets. Depending if Hitler listens to his generals, Moscow might fall and the Soviet government retreats to Novosibirsk. The Red Army would use the Urals as a staging ground for a guerrilla campaign. So basically Germany finds itself in a Vietnam-style conflict within the USSR.

For the Japanese, invading the Soviet Union from the East is logistical suicide. Consider that the Japanese were already bleeding themselves dry in China and were planning offensives in Southeast Asia. The last thing Japan needed was a larger resource sink.
 
Should be noted that Barbarossa is before L-L went into effect for the USSR.
Technically yes, but the U.S. was sending supplies to the Soviets before that.


US deliveries to the Soviet Union[edit]​

Allied shipments to the Soviet Union[50]
YearAmount
(tons)
%
1941
360,778
2.1
1942
2,453,097
14
1943
4,794,545
27.4
1944
6,217,622
35.5
1945
3,673,819
21
Total
17,499,861
100
If Germany defeated the Soviet Union, the most significant front in Europe would be closed. Roosevelt believed that if the Soviets were defeated the Allies would be far more likely to lose. Roosevelt concluded that the United States needed to help the Soviets fight against the Germans.[51] Soviet Ambassador Maxim Litvinov significantly contributed to the Lend-Lease agreement of 1941. American deliveries to the Soviet Union can be divided into the following phases:

  • "Pre Lend-lease" June 22, 1941, to September 30, 1941 (paid for in gold and other minerals)
  • First protocol period from October 1, 1941, to June 30, 1942 (signed October 7, 1941),[52] these supplies were to be manufactured and delivered by the UK with US credit financing.
  • Second protocol period from July 1, 1942, to June 30, 1943 (signed October 6, 1942)
  • Third protocol period from July 1, 1943, to June 30, 1944 (signed October 19, 1943)
  • Fourth protocol period from July 1, 1944 (signed April 17, 1945), formally ended May 12, 1945, but deliveries continued for the duration of the war with Japan (which the Soviet Union entered on August 8, 1945) under the "Milepost" agreement until September 2, 1945, when Japan capitulated. On September 20, 1945, all Lend-Lease to the Soviet Union was terminated.
 
The operation will be very bloody for the Soviets. Depending if Hitler listens to his generals, Moscow might fall and the Soviet government retreats to Novosibirsk. The Red Army would use the Urals as a staging ground for a guerrilla campaign. So basically Germany finds itself in a Vietnam-style conflict within the USSR.

For the Japanese, invading the Soviet Union from the East is logistical suicide. Consider that the Japanese were already bleeding themselves dry in China and were planning offensives in Southeast Asia. The last thing Japan needed was a larger resource sink.
I don't think that would happen. If Stalin thought the Japanese were going to attack, and he had good intelligence sources in Japan, he'd probably elect to still transfer most of the Siberian divisions to Moscow anyway. Given a choice of defending Moscow, or Vladivostok Moscow would have the priority. Even if the Germans reached Moscow itself the Germans would be very hard pressed to take the city, and holding it into the Winter would be very unlikely. Under Winter conditions the Germans can't encircle Soviet armies, just slug it out with them, and they can't take that kind of attrition. Ultimately losing Moscow wouldn't mean the end of organized resistance. Largescale conventional war would continue.
 
And Japan is going to hurt Soviet how? Stalin might order the defences west of Vladivostok to withdraw to the west. Apart from Vladivostok there is nothing worthwile in 1941 in Siberia until Japan reaches Kazakstahn. And that is twice the distance at least of the German furthest advance in 1942. And if you think German supply situation for the units in the Caucacus was bad, just think of the Japanese situation.
 
Considering that at Khalhin Gol the Soviets had massive advantages in infantry (3x), tanks (7x), aircrafts (2x), and in Zhukovs, and still lost 25% more men. I am certain that if the Japanese send enough men and equipment to have numerical parity or even superiority they could push as far as logistics permit, the Sovietic advantage in this case is not that the Soviets are super soldiers that eat Japanese at breakfeast, their advantage lies on the fact that Japanese logistics can't reach anything important, they could maybe occupy the territory that once was the Far Eastern Republic at its maximum extent.

If the Soviet Union panicks and send troops against the Japanese, that probably means that the Germans have an easier time, it is hard to know what the effects would be, but if the Japanese are able to hold one Soviet Army away that could be the difference between OTL and Leningrad falling prey to starvation or Stalingrad falling on the march. But the outcome would probably be Stalin just saying, "well, we have more important things to do here in the west at the moment, enjoy your stay".

i'm not saying the Japanese aren't going to be able to conquer anything, i'm saying the Soviet Far East was well defended and the Japanese, once they run out of momentum are going to be pushed back without gaining anything at all. Thats an ass kicking. There were troops defending the far east that were never tranferred to the west, so the Germans aren't going to get anything out of it. Except the OP suggested no LL, so thats a different cake. But then again, the Japanese attacking the Soviets is going to cause a reaction by the US and probably means giving aid, so the OP's scenarion is just too vague to say anything meaningful about it. Hence my short 2 sentences in my original post.
 
I don't think that would happen. If Stalin thought the Japanese were going to attack, and he had good intelligence sources in Japan, he'd probably elect to still transfer most of the Siberian divisions to Moscow anyway. Given a choice of defending Moscow, or Vladivostok Moscow would have the priority. Even if the Germans reached Moscow itself the Germans would be very hard pressed to take the city, and holding it into the Winter would be very unlikely. Under Winter conditions the Germans can't encircle Soviet armies, just slug it out with them, and they can't take that kind of attrition. Ultimately losing Moscow wouldn't mean the end of organized resistance. Largescale conventional war would continue.
Back then, many would consider Moscow falling as the death sentence of the USSR. I disagree. I could the Red Army turn Moscow into an urban hell for the Germans. The Red Army has the vastness of Siberia to hold out while both the Axis bleed themselves dry in just trying to pacify the USSR.
And Japan is going to hurt Soviet how? Stalin might order the defences west of Vladivostok to withdraw to the west. Apart from Vladivostok there is nothing worthwile in 1941 in Siberia until Japan reaches Kazakstahn. And that is twice the distance at least of the German furthest advance in 1942. And if you think German supply situation for the units in the Caucacus was bad, just think of the Japanese situation.
Losing Vladivostok might shortly hurt the Red Army's morale. However, I could see Stalin consider the lose of Vladivostok as acceptable. The Japanese would not get even far. The Kazahk SSR is in the heart of the Asian continent. Winter stall the Japanese advance to the point they won't get any territory after seizing Vladivostok.
i'm not saying the Japanese aren't going to be able to conquer anything, i'm saying the Soviet Far East was well defended and the Japanese, once they run out of momentum are going to be pushed back without gaining anything at all. Thats an ass kicking. There were troops defending the far east that were never tranferred to the west, so the Germans aren't going to get anything out of it. Except the OP suggested no LL, so thats a different cake. But then again, the Japanese attacking the Soviets is going to cause a reaction by the US and probably means giving aid, so the OP's scenarion is just too vague to say anything meaningful about it. Hence my short 2 sentences in my original post.
The U.S. would definitely give Lend Lease aid using the Arctic Route or across the Bering Strait.
 
Japan is still running out of oil on schedule, which is the entire ballgame for them no matter what happens in Eastern Europe. Germany isn't building a trans-Siberian pipeline and wouldn't have oil to send anyway. So, with a war in both China and Siberia, what formations are available to take the DEI, Malaya, and the PI?
 
Its not much of a stretch to reduce Lend Lease. I can think of some PODs, or a combination of below.

1) Germans have fixed their torpedo issues earlier
2) Germans delay use of magnetic mine, so that it can make a major impact when delivered.
3) Germans during Battle of Britain focus on ports and mining
3) Germans implement HE177 as a 4 engine bomber avoiding some issues, so its available in Winter of 42-43 in some numbers, these numbers being deployed over the Atlantic.

So the Allies are behind OTL on shipping capacity, just can't afford to ship stuff in quantity until 1944. (maybe 1/4 of what was shipped in OTL in 1942, 1/2 in 1943, 3/4 in 1944)

Barbarossa won't succeed, but the Soviet counter offensive will be delayed. Germans might prioritize defense of Nikopol mines and Romanian oil fields even if Allies are driving across the Rhine. (I mean there were German armies in Courland at the end so its not a stretch).

Allies take Berlin, Hilter shoots himself just the same and much of eastern Europe is still under occupation or collaborationist governments in May 1945.

Making things like the Polish Home army uprising and Slovak army uprising possible. Certainly the Allies could be in Prague and support the Poles in Warsaw in such a time line. (I would think the Soviets would want and get occupation of Romania and Hungary just the same).
 
Last edited:
The POD which enables Japanese participation needs to be profound enough that there is no embargo with the USA. So, Japan's follow up invasions in China after Manchuria pretty much have to be butterflied away (how?) Perhaps the USSR is more aggressive in Manchuria, stoking fear in Japanese ranks that expanding the war in China before securing the north is a bad idea. And so, Japan expands north as a way of securing their flank for future endeavors in China. In this event, the Japanese invasion of the USSR would be quite muscular. The resource drain in the east would be larger that OTL (as the only way to make this TL work would be for the USSR to be more aggressive about Manchuria's borders). When Barbarossa goes of ITTL, the Germans are helped a bit. The USA, perhaps due to more instability during the Great Depression (no switch in time to save 9, court packing goes through) does not look to send aid to the USSR or trade with them, to avoid war with Japan for the moment. Aid sent to Britain is just for Britain, and so it is up to the British to send supplies to Russia.

Germany won't win, but they will almost certainly get 2 out of 5 of the following: Leningrad, Rostov, Moscow, Sevestapol, avoiding heavy losses in the winter--roughly in order of likelihood. This changes things big time in 1942, even if the USA gets buyer's remorse and issues an ultimatum to Japan to stop expanding their war against Russia. Japan rejects this and does an ATL Pearl Harbor, Philippines invasion, etc. Germany likely strikes for Stalingrad ITTL, logistics are no better so they may succeed but they're not capturing Baku...even Astrakhan is 50/50 ITTL. If Leningrad did not fall already, it would by that winter, as the Russian counteroffensive would not be strong enough ITTL. Pretty much, if USA is not in the war against Germany by the end of 42, which they probably will be, USSR is done by default.

Beyond this point USSR stumbles on, even if Moscow falls in 1943. Germany ends up getting nuked. Japan gets nuked next. USA is more powerful in this Cold War scenario, USSR would be a regional power hedged in by Balkan and Eastern European countries under western sway.
 
Top