East and South Asia after a Nazi Victory

Say Germany wins on the Eastern front and Allies agree to ceasefire in 1944 or 1945

What would be the impact on Asia

Would the Communists still win in China
 
Still surrenders after the nukes but the soviets don't invade Manchuria
Without the Kwantung Army's abandoned equipment, or a power base in Manchuria, the CCP will probably lose to the Nationalists pretty quickly. It'll be less proper field battles as in the OTL post-1945 Civil War, and more sporadic warfare like the Encirclement Campaigns.

With most of the warlord cliques severely weakened, Chiang likely centralizes power in due time and properly reunifies China.
 
Without the Kwantung Army's abandoned equipment, or a power base in Manchuria, the CCP will probably lose to the Nationalists pretty quickly.

Not likely. The wholesale defection of Nationalist armies to the communist cause was far more important then anything the Soviets did and that political base was in place by 1944, at the latest. The Soviet contribution to the CCP's civil war effort was pretty unimportant.
 
If Japan is defeated, will the Allies allow a Nazi victory in Europe? Once Japan is out of the way will not the Allies concentrate their efforts to pull down the lone Germany?
 
If Japan is defeated, will the Allies allow a Nazi victory in Europe? Once Japan is out of the way will not the Allies concentrate their efforts to pull down the lone Germany?

The OP specifically says the result is a ceasefire; likely as a result of the Unity government in Britain as the public decides the price being paid is too high. A failed Overlord equivalent in which the Commonwealth ends up losing alot of it's young men is a good possability here, considering Churchill had bet the house on it's success. Would the country be willing to put up the blood ante for another try, especially now that the Germans would be better prepared?

If the UK decides to negotiate, you'd probably see the US reluctantly following along especially since they now have the task of occupying Japan. It's hard to continue the bombing campaign without the unsinkable aircraft carrier, after all.
 
The OP specifically says the result is a ceasefire; likely as a result of the Unity government in Britain as the public decides the price being paid is too high. A failed Overlord equivalent in which the Commonwealth ends up losing alot of it's young men is a good possability here, considering Churchill had bet the house on it's success. Would the country be willing to put up the blood ante for another try, especially now that the Germans would be better prepared?

If the UK decides to negotiate, you'd probably see the US reluctantly following along especially since they now have the task of occupying Japan. It's hard to continue the bombing campaign without the unsinkable aircraft carrier, after all.

So, are we assuming that Italy is never invaded ITTL, or that none of the Italian Islands are either? While losing quite a bit to a failed Overlord is one thing, losing all invasions in the region is another (especially with naval superiority and bases in North Africa).

Though, it begs the question of whether Overlord failed, or if the Germans have too many forces at the region and there is too much balking at the projected cost. I'm unsure if OP means the Soviets fell in 1944-45, or if they fell earlier.

If Japan is defeated, will the Allies allow a Nazi victory in Europe? Once Japan is out of the way will not the Allies concentrate their efforts to pull down the lone Germany?

Basically, this seems to be the AANW scenario right here.

Though would the nuclear weapons be saved for Europe, and Japan instead allowed to starve in the middle of a naval blockade? No reason to invade Japan when the men are needed for Europe.
 
So, are we assuming that Italy is never invaded ITTL, or that none of the Italian Islands are either? While losing quite a bit to a failed Overlord is one thing, losing all invasions in the region is another (especially with naval superiority and bases in North Africa).

Though, it begs the question of whether Overlord failed, or if the Germans have too many forces at the region and there is too much balking at the projected cost. I'm unsure if OP means the Soviets fell in 1944-45, or if they fell earlier.

That's certainly a solid point: though it is worth considering how slow a slog even OTL's fight up the penninsula was, which in a scenario where the Germans have eliminated the eastern front is likely to be an even more difficult affair. It's hard to nail down any specifics of exactly how we get to a ceasefire without a timeline of just when Ivan throws in the towel: I'm just trying to construct a framework that meets the OP specifications. It probably would have to be in 42 or very early 43 to not veer into extremely unlikely territory...

I'll say the most likely model is one of a Soviet surrender in late 42 which would allow the Germans to stiffen Italy's spine and give a morale-propaganda shot in the arm to keep Mussolini in power with the Italian military in play to dissuade or defeat an Operation Huskey. That allows for a potentially viable Fortress Europe.
 
That's certainly a solid point: though it is worth considering how slow a slog even OTL's fight up the penninsula was, which in a scenario where the Germans have eliminated the eastern front is likely to be an even more difficult affair. It's hard to nail down any specifics of exactly how we get to a ceasefire without a timeline of just when Ivan throws in the towel: I'm just trying to construct a framework that meets the OP specifications. It probably would have to be in 42 or very early 43 to not veer into extremely unlikely territory...

I'll say the most likely model is one of a Soviet surrender in late 42 which would allow the Germans to stiffen Italy's spine and give a morale-propaganda shot in the arm to keep Mussolini in power with the Italian military in play to dissuade or defeat an Operation Huskey. That allows for a potentially viable Fortress Europe.

Oh, it certainly took forever, I agree, so it may seem untenable from a political standpoint, especially if you have certain setbacks.

Perhaps even if the US and all didn't cease in attempting Huskey, but managed to succeed (albeit possibly later), you could see toeholds established, but fighting even bloodier and going north (and with more obvious German support). Time is

Perhaps even Churchill gets his Balkan front, and tons of men and material are wasted there trying to liberate Greece and Yugoslavia. So you have a parallel front slowly marching up the boot and the Balkans. Without the Soviets, further diversionary attempts are made to pry off the periphery of German control. Norway is invaded to attempt to liberate that.as well and regain some control of the North Sea and capture German garrisons. And, no matter what, the cost is grisly (though here it takes a lot of bad luck for everything to go terribly).

And, in the end, you have the Allies in control of the Mediterranean islands, the southern bit of italy and maybe even Greece/Albania/Macedonia, Norway, but the politicians don't think it's worth going any farther and that too many lives have been lost. Something like that.

But yeah. Germany can't do anything to help Southeast Asia. The biggest question is what happens to the European colonies sans any European governments reasserting control, but aside from that...
 
Even if the CCP can manage to do decently without the substantial Soviet support it received, the West is going to be looking for a victory in the absence of victory in Europe, and maintaining China as at least western friendly would probably be high on their priority list.
 
Even if the CCP can manage to do decently without the substantial Soviet support it received, the West is going to be looking for a victory in the absence of victory in Europe, and maintaining China as at least western friendly would probably be high on their priority list.

On the flip side though with the looming threat of the "Red Menace" being gone and continued radical anti-communism being associated tightly with the Fascists, does the West have to take as hostile a stance to "Agrarian Reformer" and "Freedom Fighter" movements? With France and the Netherlands in Germany's orbit, you don't need to pussy foot on freedom for Indonesia or Indochina and the US has Marshall Plan money to back British efforts to help the regional states organize using the Malaysian model.
 
On the flip side though with the looming threat of the "Red Menace" being gone and continued radical anti-communism being associated tightly with the Fascists, does the West have to take as hostile a stance to "Agrarian Reformer" and "Freedom Fighter" movements? With France and the Netherlands in Germany's orbit, you don't need to pussy foot on freedom for Indonesia or Indochina and the US has Marshall Plan money to back British efforts to help the regional states organize using the Malaysian model.

In the case of China specifically I think it'll be a case of the long standing ally, Chiang, vs an unknown not that ideologically friendly character, Mao. The US will probably be more free to support anti-colonial regimes in Indochina and Indonesia as you said, but the KMT isn't a colonial government, and is on the US's side.
 
In the case of China specifically I think it'll be a case of the long standing ally, Chiang, vs an unknown not that ideologically friendly character, Mao. The US will probably be more free to support anti-colonial regimes in Indochina and Indonesia as you said, but the KMT isn't a colonial government, and is on the US's side.

I wasen't thinking of running guns to the Communists or anything. However, I think its worth noting that Chaing wasen't exactly universally popular with the American political or bussiness establishment prior to the Flight to Taiwan (When he became "our son of a bitch") particularly pro-Capitalist or liberal, and even among his own party and China at large diden't exactly have an iron grip on the reigns of power. The Marshall Comission is probably going to be pushed harder (backed by the more left-leaning members the KMT) to build a Cohalition government to avoid China turning into a gurellia war quagmire or quasi-Fascist terror state that will be open to Western influence and bussiness. The question is if Chiang would be Confusus' proverbial green reed and bend, or try to stay an oak and either endure or break.
 
Top