DBWI: Axis Japan, Allied USSR

As well all know, the USSR, formerly Russia, was not too happy about losing all that territory in Eastern Europe. This led to their infamous alliance with Nazi Germany that only stayed together thanks to the fact both nations wanted that parts of Poland that belonged to them before 1914.

Japan was sufficiently pleased with having the German territories in China as well as a few concessions elsewhere in the Pacific. But what if those were denied for whatever reason, and Japan got mad? For that matter, what if Hitler really decided to try and take out Stalin?
 
America wouldn't have to bomb the USSR with nukes.
OTL, while the germans were formidable in battle, their allies in the soviet union would fall apart (many believe that Hitler didn't send them officers to improve because he wanted their land still). Plus the best of the German and russian troops were bogged down in the Afghanistan front trying to defeat the Raj. This meant Hitler was unable to respond to M-Day effectively until it was too late, and europe was freed by 1948. However, America and Britain were cautious about trying to supply an invasion into Eastern Europe, so they decided the cruelest mercy would be to nuke Petrograd.

So millions of lives would be saved both from nuclear hellfire, the holocaust, and the war's other horrors
 
One thing is certain though, Japan won't have the Eastern Siberia / Yakutsk for themselves, potentially minimizing Japanese economic boom of the 1970-2000s, especially if their Manchurian and Korean territories also forced to be independent, further depriving Japan from being one of the largest Rare Earth producer AND manufacturer.

To think about Alaska without the joke of "I could see Japan from my home" is just unthinkable nowadays.
 
Let's not forget the coup in Japan back from 1931. If that wasn't thwarted, who knows how far Japan would stoop to expand their territory. God knows if such a Japan would have done the same things the USSR did to both them and Chinese anti-communists, if not worse.
 
Last edited:
Hmm... Given that Germany's military imploded after the Anglo-French invasion and occupation of the South Caucasus, I doubt Hitler would even be able to start WWII in a TL where he can't count on Soviet oil.
 
Let's not forget the coup in Japan back from 1931. If that wasn't thwarted, who knows how far Japan would stoop to expand their territory.
That Emperor Hirohito getting wary from the militarists and used his *divine* status to forcibly remove them from office to be replaced with moderate, pro-democracy officials is one of the Monarchy of Japan's saving grace from being turned into either Facist Italy or Nazi Germany knockoff.

Sure, the seppuku order to some of the militarists made the West cringe, but how those ordered to kill themselves actually obeyed that without question is the one who shocked everyone else, as while they were protesting Hirohito's foolishness of not aggressively expanding, they merely write those letters on their office before publicly disemboweled themselves, think about such dedication!
 
Let's not forget that if the USSR had switched sides, we might not have gotten the Cold War after all.

Mind you, the source of many of the issues that arose then came about as a result of how to reform the former Axis Power's governments. The US, France, and China all looked forward to create republics in the defeated nations. But the UK, Brazil, and Japan all preferred the idea of restoring the Kaiser's position under special conditions, then putting a Czar wannabe in Russia with Prime Ministers in both nations.

Lucky thing that the former Allies realized that it didn't really matter as long as the nations were remade into democracies. Who knows if it all could have lasted beyond 1973, at least in terms of the cultural divides.
 
Slavic Americans would have it much better then IOTL. 48% of russian-americans and eastern orthodox followers were either interned or put on probation, and the russian language was banned from being spoke. In contrast, we can presume ITTL japanese would suffer the same, if not even since they're not white and christian, which is in contrast to how the russians were treated as the lowest white people, but still people the same.

Pop culture-wise, I imagine the world would never see works inspired by the respective Nukings of Petrograd and Rostov-on-Don, such as my favourite franchise Morvedmus [1] and the book Red Night.

On the other hand, what Japanese cities would the Allies most likely select to nuke if the former were Axis-allied? Perhaps a likely candidate would be in the north, close to Alaska and a now-Allied USSR.

[1] ATL Godzilla of sorts, only more inspired by slavic and finnish mythology and culture rather then japanese. His name's derived from Ukrainian
 
Last edited:
On the other hand, what Japanese cities would the Allies most likely select to nuke if the former were Axis-allied? Perhaps a likely candidate would be in the north, close to Alaska and a now-Allied USSR.
I always found Hiroshima more likely in the case of at least the first A-Bomb.

Also the first bomb was dropped on Petrograd and not Sochi because the former was untouched compared to Sochi, which was bombed regularly after the Allies began pushing back in the Middle East.
 
Sorry, my mistake. Got confused with how its creator, Pavel Chegovsky was born there.

Also, why Hiroshima? It wasn't one of the major port cities it had, unlike Tsugaru, which was already very urbanised and important to the navy.
 
Where was that again? IIRC they did propose land on Sicily after the liberation of Turkey.
It's complicated. It was the mass funding of resistance movements all across the nazi empire, from France to Poland (that one has been accused of being a sacrificial loin) and the invasions were supplementary, since Britain's espionage rivaled the german military more than the allied militaries did. But the main invasion was two fold- the vetran british would take normandy, to secure more reinforcements, and the less experience americans stormed the low countries to act as a much more immediate threat. The allies were desperate, hence so many tactics that make Grant look like McCullen's cautionary ass
 
It's complicated. It was the mass funding of resistance movements all across the nazi empire, from France to Poland (that one has been accused of being a sacrificial loin) and the invasions were supplementary, since Britain's espionage rivaled the german military more than the allied militaries did. But the main invasion was two fold- the vetran british would take normandy, to secure more reinforcements, and the less experience americans stormed the low countries to act as a much more immediate threat. The allies were desperate, hence so many tactics that make Grant look like McCullen's cautionary ass
If there was any bright side at the time, France at least learned from the mistakes other invaded nations made and prepared more fully. Just too bad they didn't reach a deal with Belgium for extending the Maginot Line back in say, 1936.

That, and the fact the Soviets had to keep going into China to get Mao out of trouble also means it could have been worse. Imagine how downright despairing it would have been if both the USSR and Japan were on the Axis.
 
Last edited:
Hmm... Given that Germany's military imploded after the Anglo-French invasion and occupation of the South Caucasus, I doubt Hitler would even be able to start WWII in a TL where he can't count on Soviet oil.
It would have... if the USSR hadn't counted on it and invaded the Middle East.

Pop culture-wise, I imagine the world would never see works inspired by the respective Nukings of Petrograd and Rostov-on-Don, such as my favourite franchise Morvedmus [1] and the book Red Night.
Remind me, but was that John Hershey's book about various survivor accounts? Or was that one Kuibyshev, which started with the first British nuke?

Another thing we should note is how we later found out the horrific truth that the Soviet firebombing of Japanese civilian areas had been deliberate, most notably the napalming of Kyoto, which with little doubt in my mind done because of its cultural importance. After that, one can't help but understand why Japanese people consider V-Soviets Day to be the day that Petrograd was nuked and not their official surrender date.

Hell, looking back I can see why the Allies were desperate enough to forgive so many Germans. They were going to need all the man-power possible; adding to the four total bombs that were used; the American ones on Leningrad and then Rostov-on-Don. Then the British ones they tested in the Australian Outback then dropped on Kuibyshev and Novosibirsk from their occupied Central Asia and the Raj.
 
It would have... if the USSR hadn't counted on it and invaded the Middle East.
The invasion that fizzled out from total logistical overreach and thinning of the lines? That only enabled the Anglo-French advance as the isolated Soviet tank divisions were busy trying to shake down the Turks for spare parts while Auchinleck closed in on them. Had the Soviets kept to their defensive positions they may have held.
 
The invasion that fizzled out from total logistical overreach and thinning of the lines? That only enabled the Anglo-French advance as the isolated Soviet tank divisions were busy trying to shake down the Turks for spare parts while Auchinleck closed in on them. Had the Soviets kept to their defensive positions they may have held.
Amusingly the Afghan Front, where the fighting was worst, was probably the only way they could've won. If it had gone better for the Axis, India would've fallen, and with it, Britain's breadbasket and manpower hub. Though the axis winning their might be more ASB than sealion if you can believe it- King George VI didn't join the men for M-Day, but almost every battalion got a chance to meet the King in India. the King's charisma and the fact that Parliament prioritized India even over Britain, while not popular in the home isles, actually is a huge reason for Indian nationalism to die down.
 
Amusingly the Afghan Front, where the fighting was worst, was probably the only way they could've won.
I would argue that the Axis' best chance was if they stuck to Europe first. Even if the UK could never be completely conquered via invasion. It still could have been starved enough to quit.
 
Let's also not forget the implications of if the USSR was on the side of the Allies. They were one of the most populous countries of the time, and the largest landwise, so who's to say that had they been on the side of the Allies, they wouldn't overtake the UK as the US' competitor for global influence later on.

Mind you, the main reason the UK was able to rival the US afterwards was because they were relatively undamaged compared to the rest of Europe. That, and the fact that many colonies of theirs, most notably India and Hong Kong, had their sense of nationalism dramatically reduced due to how, as @KingOnTheEdge mentioned, the UK prioritized the survival of those two places over even the home Isles sometimes.

Let's not forget that had the USSR been allied, they probably would have been able to eventually give Ho Cin Minh the support that would have been necessary to kick the French out of Indochina. The only reason they even considered it IOTL was an act of desperation to try and cut the India - Singapore - Hong Kong - Japan shipping routes in half. Not that it would have worked there either.
 
Last edited:
Top