Today the Japanese government has declassified what the media has called "Plan G" where the Konoe Government had a plan to get closer to Nazi Germany and join the Axis. However Germany not recalling Falkhausen from China, SS soldiers beating up Japanese national Fuki Namoto in Wilhelmshaven and a host of other reasons prevented it from happening. However what if this 'Plan G' was executed and Japan joined the Axis before WWII broke out? How would that change the course of the war?
DBWI: Japan Joins Axis
- Thread starter ThatOneGuy
- Start date
Zachary VIII
Banned
I don't think the Japan could ever be an ally to Nazi Germany due to Hitler's racial views.
FillyofDelphi
Banned
Really? I seem to recall him more than willing to declare the Chinese, Italians, and Arabs "Honorary Aryans" in recognition of their sheer cultural achievements and Imperial successes being unexplainable in the official Nazi view of history otherwise. Though, I suppose that depends on weather or not you subscribe to the notion that this was a logical academic conclusion (In which case it hardly qualifies to Japan), or the school of thought that these were purely cold political concessions in order to justify his alliances.
Be that as it may, Japan in such a case would have probably not reached back out to Britain and extend her guarantee of security over the Empire's Pacific posessions during the tensions with The Chinese, Vichy, and Siam. That was really the thin yellow line keeping Hong Kong and British Malaysia from getting land-grabbed by the pro-Axis Asian nations during her struggle for survival during the European War, or heaven forbid some kind of Chinese funding for the Indian National Congress. Who knows what would have happened on the subcontinent if Britain had been forced to tap troops from the decaying Raj, rather than her loyal and more professional colonial divisions, to keep Graziani on the banks of the Nile Delta?
How would this change Japan's invasion of China? The Chinese theater, while not an official second theater of the War, was basically a second theater in all but name. Chaing was a 'partner' to the Axis fighting Japan who was a 'Strategic Defense Planner' for the Allies. Do you think China still would have done as well as it did, for as long as it did, without German aid?
Well if Japan was in the Axis they probably would attack the Soviet Union when Germany launched Barbarossa to make the Soviets face a war on two fronts. This most likely means an Axis victory in WW2 IMHO.
OOC: Does Japan still attack pearl harbor in this TL?
OOC: Does Japan still attack pearl harbor in this TL?
FillyofDelphi
Banned
The PRC would have been far better served with a partner who could actually provide more than a handful of (admittedly highly tactically skilled) officers, especially if Japan was part of the Axis instead and therefore considered a "problem" warranting Allied aid. The extra help Japan got from the southern Warlords and steady supply of British rubber, Canadian Iron/Steel, and Dutch petroleum as well as the damage done by Mao's guerrillas FAR outweighed any benefits Chaing derived from his partnership with the Germans. I mean sure, it helped them win some battles on the ground which temporarily blunted Japanese offensives in places, but on a broader tactical level the lack of access to outside manufactures after Japan seized control of the sea lanes meant she coulden't keep any force in the field capable of countering a combined arms forces.
Now, having Japan with the Axis and China becoming a fellow "Enemy of my Enemy" to the British and seeing Vichy as the "Friend of my Enemy" probably means there's no major Burmese front, since China would make Petain's presence on the subcontinent untenable and Japan wouldn't have as many spare forces or industrial potential to lend to convince Siam to enter the war on the Axis side. Any spare land capacity not already dedicated to China would have to be sent north against the Soviets once she allied with Germany and Operation Barbarossa kicked off.
Last edited:
FillyofDelphi
Banned
OOC: I highly doubt it if they're "Strategic Defensive Planners" to the Allies.
Japan and China would never cooperate. Both sides had ambitious plans against each other. Japan planned to completely absorb China into the Co-Prosperity Sphere, while Chiang and his nationalists planned on puppetizing Japan. Expansionist powers can never cooperate. Except for the Axis, but that's special because they managed to deflect their interests outwards towards the Allies.
Japan being in the Axis would definitely simplify things for the Allies after the war tho. After Chiang fell, we almost got WW3 over the Japanese occupation in the NE. Maybe the Allies stay together if Japan was with the Axis the whole time. I wonder if Puyi would still be famous.
FillyofDelphi
Banned
... I never said they did. On the contrary, I suggested they'd be adopting an off-handed pro-Allied policy. Japan and China are naturally going to be on opposite sides, so if Japan is in the Axis and an enemy of the British China is naturally going to be seen by London as "The Enemy of my Enemy" and, like Stalin provided with some strategic aid to help save British lives by sucking up Axis resources even if Churchill didn't particularly well like Chiang's regime personally.
As for the Manchukuo "Crisis", that was an overblown response on Stalin's part: legal scholars around the world, even as far away as Africa, readily accepted the validity of the arguement that Puyi was the legal heir of the traditional Manchu regions that had dominated over, but never legally subsumed under, China proper, making any Chinese claims outside the mutual dynastic connection unsubstantiated. As for Gwóngdūng and Mongolia, they were both had the legitimacy of internationally overseen referendums and have proven to be successful states for their non-Han majorities. Besides, once Hitler was gone I HIGHLY doubt the Soviets and British are going to be getting along in ANY case; not after how tenious the division of influence in Europe agreements were. Japanese presence provided a great deal of stability in what could have easily proven to be an unstable continent in the following years if Russia decided to support the violent guerrillas in Indonesia, Indochina, and India before the "soft landing" program of de-colonization and native reform could be implemented
That brings up another point, would the whole 'Soft Landing' policy be adopted by the Brits when they went about decolonizing? The lack of stress on their imperial holdings was probably a contributing factor in keeping down any separatists (keeping away any power vacuums that might have erupted) which helped the S-L Policy gain steam. So, my question is that if Japan joined the Axis and managed to seize most of the European Imperial holdings in East/S-E Asia during the War could the S-L Policy still be executed effectively, if at all?