Could Germany or Japan get anything by declaring war on each other?

1: If Japan declares war on the Germans over their invasion of Poland and offered Britain and France token troops (a division or something), would this soften views towards them? Give them leeway occupying French or Dutch territories later (with the goal of keeping them if Germany isn’t defeated)? Would they get the West to ignore their war on China indefinitely?

2: If Germany declared war on Japan after Pearl Harbor instead of the US and promised to send America support after the war with Britain is over, does this buy Germany any time before America officially enters the war in Europe? Maybe if Germany also avoids their submarine policy and leave shipping alone?
 
1. No It would be way too obvious and they would not be able to provide any meaningfull help. Its the asian colonies in trade for nothing essentially.

2. No. Again way too obvious and blatantly stupip. It would be a token gesture with no real meaning and giving up the shipping attacks would untie massive resources for the RN.


Both run so contrary to their countries objectives that their opponents would start to think that they'd gone insane.
 
1: If Japan declares war on the Germans over their invasion of Poland and offered Britain and France token troops (a division or something), would this soften views towards them? Give them leeway occupying French or Dutch territories later (with the goal of keeping them if Germany isn’t defeated)? Would they get the West to ignore their war on China indefinitely?

2: If Germany declared war on Japan after Pearl Harbor instead of the US and promised to send America support after the war with Britain is over, does this buy Germany any time before America officially enters the war in Europe? Maybe if Germany also avoids their submarine policy and leave shipping alone?

With regards to the first question

Japan declaring war on Germany and supporting the Allies is clearing going to improve their image with the Allied powers at least. However being part of the allied camp means not annexing the Dutch or French territories. The British and French would probably feel that Japan does more harm than good to their cause if Japan remains on the offensive in China though. Ultimately the Allies want US support and the Japan of OTL would have been a hinderance.

However if Japan had somehow avoided being evil and attacking China in the lead up to WW2 then it could probably have traded industrial and economic support in the form of ship building and some military support for colonial territory. With hindsight I think that is the one strategy which would have left them intact at the end of the war.

2. I don’t think it buys Germany much time, it does not change anything on the ground and the diplomatic record of Germany was ‘unreliable’ at this point. Leaving shipping alone is very good news for the UK and Soviet Union, but arguably delays the US entry. I don’t think they could afford not to attack shipping though if they wished to win the war.
 
With regards to the first question

Japan declaring war on Germany and supporting the Allies is clearing going to improve their image with the Allied powers at least. However being part of the allied camp means not annexing the Dutch or French territories. The British and French would probably feel that Japan does more harm than good to their cause if Japan remains on the offensive in China though. Ultimately the Allies want US support and the Japan of OTL would have been a hinderance.

However if Japan had somehow avoided being evil and attacking China in the lead up to WW2 then it could probably have traded industrial and economic support in the form of ship building and some military support for colonial territory. With hindsight I think that is the one strategy which would have left them intact at the end of the war.

Japan could make a great contribution in the war in Europe with little cost eg zeros in the battle of Britain and air support for convoys in the battle of the Atlantic.

Then as China was allied with Germany so there might be something there. More importantly, once Holland and France fall, Japan might claim that it must move against French and Dutch positions rather than let Vichy France and NSB Holland in the area. Japan might here be able to get the raw materials she needed without going to war with the US and Britain.
 
Japan might take over Vichy Indochina (while being at war with Germany) under the pretext that Vichy is a German puppet and get away with it.
Japan would not get away with taking over Indonesia... But wouldn't need to either as Dutch gov in exile would still sell oil to them.
 
WW2 is an interesting example of common ideology vs. pragmatic geopolitical expediency in history. The axis may have been more ideologically similar than the allies, but they were really crappy alliance partners to each other for much of the war.

The Tripartite Pact didn't even require the other two powers to declare war on a non-Axis power once one member was at war, and the Soviet-Japanese nonaggression pact signed in April 1941 basically nullified any Japanese commitments from previous agreements.

The fact that Germans had a planned "Operation Axis" for Italy leaving the war or switching sides says a lot. I don't think the US ever drew up plans for the US Army to barge in the door at 10 Downing Street or launch a coup in the Kremlin to keep its alliance partners in the war.
 
1: If Japan declares war on the Germans over their invasion of Poland and offered Britain and France token troops (a division or something), would this soften views towards them? Give them leeway occupying French or Dutch territories later (with the goal of keeping them if Germany isn’t defeated)? Would they get the West to ignore their war on China indefinitely?

If the Japanese government are to take advantage of this token support won't cut it. Japanese Army officers craved the glory and promotions that only active operations could bring. The Japanese Empire needs to be able to offer a significant number of these officers a chance at a front line posting. A war in Europe is probably as satisfactory and possibly even more so being closer to the centre of the world stage as a war in China.

The big issue for the Japanese government arises when the war in Europe ends and the next cadre of junior and field grade officers are looking for their bite of the cherry.

Overall it is an interesting and interestingly imaginative idea but probably not a long term solution to the rampant careerism problem within Japan's Army.
 
Japan might take over Vichy Indochina (while being at war with Germany) under the pretext that Vichy is a German puppet and get away with it.
Japan would not get away with taking over Indonesia... But wouldn't need to either as Dutch gov in exile would still sell oil to them.

If Japan was active in the Allied campaign, I cannot see the Dutch government in exile cutting the oil. So what if the Japanese just sent people over and took over the place by stealth? They simply sent in their guys, took over the distribution of the resources, the defences and took charge.

Japan would end ww2 with a lot of money and a large rich empire.
 
Last edited:

BlondieBC

Banned
I could see it being useful as a part of long-term and broad peace offer. It would require a Japan that understood it was overstretched in 1938, and then to decide it needed long term borders that work.
 
Top