DBWI: Japan went South in WW2

As we all know, the Imperial Japanese Army joined in Operation Barbarossa in June 22, 1941 with a series of attacks coordinated with the German invasion of the Soviet Union in which the Imperial Japanese Army invaded the Soviet Far East. So, what if Japan pursued a "southern strategy" and went after the European colonies in Southeast Asia? Would it have been more or less successful than the invasion of the USSR? What would have happened to the Soviet Union if Japan went south? Could it have survived the war as opposed to being partitioned by the Axis?
 
That's a tough one, since the USA and UK are a whole different kettle of fish than the Soviet Union.

I speak of the USA because they were likely to get involved in any war there. They were already supporting the UK and leery of Japanese intentions. Going north prevented much from happening with that for awhile, as the Soviets weren't viewed favorably and the collapse in '41 made it academic. Assuming the USA does and commits to the war, they simply outproduce and out manpower Japan. Check out the numbers, it's not even close. At best Japan swings well above their weight class and manages a peace deal, but more likely they get badly beaten and have to beg for whatever peace the Allies will give out. I'd bet on a severely cut down and humbled Japan after that. Maybe even with the Home Islands occupied, but I doubt the Americans and Brits will spend enough blood to make that happen.

I don't know if that saves the Soviets. Barbarossa was a close run thing even with the Soviets responding horribly to it, but how much the Far Eastern Front mattered is a matter of contention. My gut says Moscow still falls and the Soviets fall apart just like IOTL. The Red Army had fatal flaws that the Germans exploited, on top of the total tactical surprise Barbarossa managed.
 
So, Moscow would still be a lake in this world (OOC: The Nazis wanted to turn Moscow into a lake historically if they won) and most Russians would still be serfs toiling away for their German overlords?
 
Last edited:
So, Moscow would still be a lake in this world (OOC: The Nazis wanted to turn Moscow into a lake historically if they won) and most Russians would still be serfs toiling away for their German overlords?

Probably, though I see a few points of hope. If the US got dragged into the UK's war against Germany via Japan attacking them, then all bets are off. If the US decides to take a run at Germany, they have damned good odds even with all of Europe at Germany's command. You could see the Stars and Stripes over Berlin in that case, though it would be from a road baptized in blood. As always, the trick is getting the US to commit to paying the butcher's bill, which as we know is against the basic US outlook of isolationism.

Alternately, if you get a surviving, credible Russian state, they could take another swing down the line. If you have a Japan that's been humbled and won't interfere and a successor state supported by the West, I could see it. Victors almost inevitably become complacent, while the defeated are desperate and hungry. A Nazi state with some time to calcify while the Russians prepare could find themselves in a hell of a pickle.

In a lot of ways, the Nazis winning wasn't inevitable as pop culture assumes. The Fall of France and the Fall of Russia were both overblessed with fortune. Weaken or stop either of those victories and you may well get a better fate for those nations.
 
Yes, it's likely that if Japan went South, the Soviet Union would probably survive in Siberia and Central Asia. Also, I find it ironic that many Russians preferred to surrender to the Japanese than to the Germans due to Imperial Japan's brutality in China towards POWs but well, when your choices are "you will be killed as a sub-human" or "you are dishonorable but if you join us, we will spare you", any sane man would pick the latter. In addition, considering that the Nazis are so genocidal, it's IMHO not a surprise that the Russian Republic (OOC: The bits of Soviet Asia east of the Yenisei) is such a loyal GEACPS ally considering that the Japanese allow them to continue existing as well. Finally, what hot spots do you think are there in the three-way cold war between the Allied Pact (the British Commonwealth+USA+the Indian Federation+most of Latin America), the New Order (Germany and friends), and the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere (Japan and friends)?
 
Why would Japan involve it self against the U.S and the U.K? After all Wasn't it Yamamoto who said that those few mad radicals who drew up those war plans would "awake a sleeping giant"? and that he was thankful he'd managed to reign in those nutjobs. I don't think the Emperor and most of the Japanese high command would risk war with the U.S over a few islands like Guam with no value, or Australia which even IOTL they where afraid to do, partly because of the amount of troops it would have required to hold, especially since so many troops were still in China and Siberia. I know the Japs where kind of nuts, but without some major change in policy or half of Japan being dropped on their heads as children I would say ASB!!!
 
Why would Japan involve it self against the U.S and the U.K? ...

The answer to that lies in a relatively obscure proposal to enact a draconian set of embargos against Japan. Those were discussed by senior US and British leaders in 1941 in response to Japans occupation of French Indo China. Why that embargo plan was not enacted is a complex bit of history I'll not address here. Suffice to say the proposals if carried out would have wreck Japans economy in months & bankrupted the nation inside a year.

1. Freezing/impounding all Japanese assets in US and British banks.

2. Sanctions against any nuetral nation that assists Japan in circumventing the banking freeze.

3. Preventing all US/British controled cargo ships from servicing Japan

These three items alone would cripple Japans economy. Approx 40% of the cargo clearing Japans ports was carried in ships controled by the US and Britain. That alone stalls Japans economy. Also Japans government and industry were heavily dependant on loans obtained in the London and New York banks. Freezing Japans assets in those would wreck its delicately balanced cash flow.

4. Prohibit the sale of a long list of critical raw materials & finished goods to Japan. In 1941 the US provided over 70% of Japans petroleum.

5. Prohibit the purchase of a equally long list of items from Japan.

These two items are almost redundant since the imposition of items 1,2,3 mean Japan cant purchase or import all it needs anyway.

Had these embargos been imposed Japan would have three choices. 1. See its economy wrecked in 6-10 months. 2. Capitulate to the demands of the US/Britain so the embargos would be lifted. 3. attack the US and Britain in a effort to force the lifting of the embargos & gain other concessions. I'll not say for certain Japans leaders would have choosen war, but option 1 was simply insane & option 2 would turn Japan into a client state of the US or perhaps Britain & see its effort at empire & idependance destroyed.
 
A whole lot of Jews end up dead, a whole lot of them, we compeletly cracked the japanese codes during the early 30s and had their complete play book, when we heard about their decision to go north that caused worries about the safety of alaska. Those concerns are what got congress to get off their butts and allow whole sale emigration of jews from europe and the far east into alaska.

That decision shelved the nazi's 'final solution' to the jewish problem, instead they decided to just dump any one they deemed Jewish onto us....after taking all their stuff of corse. Looking at what happened to the Romani, to the Poles, to the Russians now imagine 6 million plus jews joining their fate.
 
The answer to that lies in a relatively obscure proposal to enact a draconian set of embargos against Japan. Those were discussed by senior US and British leaders in 1941 in response to Japans occupation of French Indo China. Why that embargo plan was not enacted is a complex bit of history I'll not address here. Suffice to say the proposals if carried out would have wreck Japans economy in months & bankrupted the nation inside a year.

1. Freezing/impounding all Japanese assets in US and British banks.

2. Sanctions against any nuetral nation that assists Japan in circumventing the banking freeze.

3. Preventing all US/British controled cargo ships from servicing Japan

These three items alone would cripple Japans economy. Approx 40% of the cargo clearing Japans ports was carried in ships controled by the US and Britain. That alone stalls Japans economy. Also Japans government and industry were heavily dependant on loans obtained in the London and New York banks. Freezing Japans assets in those would wreck its delicately balanced cash flow.

4. Prohibit the sale of a long list of critical raw materials & finished goods to Japan. In 1941 the US provided over 70% of Japans petroleum.

5. Prohibit the purchase of a equally long list of items from Japan.

These two items are almost redundant since the imposition of items 1,2,3 mean Japan cant purchase or import all it needs anyway.

Had these embargos been imposed Japan would have three choices. 1. See its economy wrecked in 6-10 months. 2. Capitulate to the demands of the US/Britain so the embargos would be lifted. 3. attack the US and Britain in a effort to force the lifting of the embargos & gain other concessions. I'll not say for certain Japans leaders would have choosen war, but option 1 was simply insane & option 2 would turn Japan into a client state of the US or perhaps Britain & see its effort at empire & idependance destroyed.
But aren't the Japanese smart enough to realize that going to war will only make those economic issues worse? They were already at war in China, and had a war economy IIRC. Wouldn't going to war against the U.S and the U.K be even more economically crippling?
 
OOC: It's a DBWI set in a world where Japan attacked the Soviet Union instead of attacking European colonies in Southeast Asia.

OOC: you need to read the link. He knows.

OOC: I don't think Japan would have fared well invading the Soviet Union in 1941, the Soviets had plenty of troops to defend so that would mean Japan abandoning China which calls out a whole flock(?) of butterflies.
 
So, have you read the book "Tojo's Southern Strategy" by Harry Turtledove and it's sequel which describes what a hypothetical "southern strategy" by the Japanese would have looked like?
 
But aren't the Japanese smart enough to realize that going to war will only make those economic issues worse? They were already at war in China, and had a war economy IIRC. Wouldn't going to war against the U.S and the U.K be even more economically crippling?

Assuming the core proposed embargos were imposed, items 1 2 & 3 it would not have been a matter of crippling Japans economy but of turning it into a smoking hole. Back of the envelope calculations show how items 1 & 3 mean Japan lacks the ability to sustain its industry above a subsistance level & cannot support its armies anywhere in Asia beyond 12 18 months. Its forces in China or Manchuria would have been on their own & effective become local warlord armies in terms of logistics and industrial support. Making things worse from Japans perspective is the US & Britain suffer far less. While japan had become Japans largest trading partner in Asia this was still less than 10% of the overseas trade of the US. Surging income from European war purchases and declining competition in Latin America & other assorted areas would offset & then some from a cesstion of Japans trade.

It is difficult to see Japans leader rolling over & agreeing to US demands that would effectively head it down a path to becoming a US satrapy as Central American nations had become. In pure economic terms that may have been the best long term choice & perhaps some combination of leaders in the cabinet would have choosen this. War would have been a desperate choice, based on some sort of gamble that Japan could pull off what it did vs Russia in 1904-05. A series of sharp defeats of the US Navy might lead to the US negotiating something much more in Japans favor. Its a long shot, but might appeal to Japans leaders over simply giving in.
 
Assuming the core proposed embargos were imposed, items 1 2 & 3 it would not have been a matter of crippling Japans economy but of turning it into a smoking hole. Back of the envelope calculations show how items 1 & 3 mean Japan lacks the ability to sustain its industry above a subsistance level & cannot support its armies anywhere in Asia beyond 12 18 months. Its forces in China or Manchuria would have been on their own & effective become local warlord armies in terms of logistics and industrial support. Making things worse from Japans perspective is the US & Britain suffer far less. While japan had become Japans largest trading partner in Asia this was still less than 10% of the overseas trade of the US. Surging income from European war purchases and declining competition in Latin America & other assorted areas would offset & then some from a cesstion of Japans trade.

It is difficult to see Japans leader rolling over & agreeing to US demands that would effectively head it down a path to becoming a US satrapy as Central American nations had become. In pure economic terms that may have been the best long term choice & perhaps some combination of leaders in the cabinet would have choosen this. War would have been a desperate choice, based on some sort of gamble that Japan could pull off what it did vs Russia in 1904-05. A series of sharp defeats of the US Navy might lead to the US negotiating something much more in Japans favor. Its a long shot, but might appeal to Japans leaders over simply giving in.

Yes, but Russia in 1905 is not the U.S in 1940s. Not to mention the excellent U.S military and specifically Navy. How could they destroy the entire U.S fleet in one year? Without suffering losses that unlike the U.S could not eventually be replaced by a massive ship building industry. The best option for Japan would be too accept the U.S demands and try and keep under Washington's good graces.
 
Last edited:
Yes, but Russia in 1905 is not the U.S in 1940s. Not to mention the excellent U.S military and specifically Navy. How could they destroy the entire U.S fleet in one year? Without suffering losses that unlike the U.S could not eventually be replaced by a massive ship building industry. The best option for Japan would be too accept the U.S demands and try and keep under Washington's good graces. Luckily for Japan they stayed out of the War once the U.S joined the U.K against Nazi Germany in '56, Tokyo didn't end like Berlin a smoldering radioactive ruin.
OOC: The bit regarding Berlin being a wasteland contradicts my statement that a three-way cold war is still on between the Anglo-American bloc against the Nazi bloc against the Japanese bloc
 
I've heard about the proposed embargo, and I just don't think it was ever going to happen with the U.S political leadership being what it was. President Wheeler really didn't want to intervene in the war, and the hawkish Republicans had a very slim chance of winning in 1940. So you'd need to have someone else being selected by the Democrats in 1940- there was talk of a third term for Smith, so perhaps that's one avenue, but it's not like he was a huge interventionist either. The American Public didn't want to join the war anyways, and enacting this sort of embargo would almost inevitably lead to war.

OOC: I think you need to at least tone down Lend Lease for the Axis to have a shot at winning, even with a complete focus on the Soviet Union, hence the earlier PoD.
 
Yes, but Russia in 1905 is not the U.S in 1940s. Not to mention the excellent U.S military and specifically Navy. How could they destroy the entire U.S fleet in one year? Without suffering losses that unlike the U.S could not eventually be replaced by a massive ship building industry. The best option for Japan would be too accept the U.S demands and try and keep under Washington's good graces.

This is so true. AH authors can write about Japan winning by going south, but the facts don't support it. The only way Japan survives a war with a determined US is the US running out of political will to wage war. A decisive battle that goes in Japan's favor merely means the US builds more ships. Japan's lucky that even if this happens, the US isn't the sort of nation to go all the way to the Home Islands.

Now maybe the Japanese Empire circa 1970-80 could, after a few generations of digesting all of the gains in the 40s and expanding. The Japanese simply didn't have the resources, manpower or industry to challenge America in the '40s.
 
This is so true. AH authors can write about Japan winning by going south, but the facts don't support it. The only way Japan survives a war with a determined US is the US running out of political will to wage war. A decisive battle that goes in Japan's favor merely means the US builds more ships. Japan's lucky that even if this happens, the US isn't the sort of nation to go all the way to the Home Islands.

Now maybe the Japanese Empire circa 1970-80 could, after a few generations of digesting all of the gains in the 40s and expanding. The Japanese simply didn't have the resources, manpower or industry to challenge America in the '40s.
Japan in 1970-80 was certainly stronger after all they those new missle-battlecruisers being commissioned, however the U.S wasn't to far behind and still had the monetary and industrial power to outspend Japan completely. Not to mention those ships apparently had major technical kinks that weren't totally worked out until the 90s! The U.S still has those modified/modernized Iowa and Montana class battleships plus by 1980 the U.S still had an Aircraft Carrier advantage, though by 1970 I'd say the Japanese had the CV advantage. The Japanese could attack by the 70s, but it wouldn't work any better than it would in 1940, for all the same reasons. Sure the "Co-Prosperity" sphere was far more entrenched by 1970 but Japan still didn't have the resources to actually defeat the U.S.
 
Top