Japan goes north...then what?

Assume if you will that Japan attacks Russia sometime in late 1941 to get the resources it need to continue its war in China. The consensus here is that Japan would fail to get anywhere in Siberia because of the dramatic superiority of the Red Army in the east. But...then what happens? The initial Japanese offensive fails, and it's going to be at least another 4 years before the U.S.S.R can commit its undivided attention to the east. Japan is going have a crisis after it realizes it's not going to get any oil. Is there a change in government? Do the Russians sweep through China? How does this effect the Cold War?
 
Just off the top of my head, after the Red Army pushed enough beyond the border to make their point, Stalin offers a cease-fire and peace treaty.

One often-overlooked point was the Japanese neutrality was useful to the USSR; it meant Lend-Lease shipments could sail from US pacific ports to USSR pacific ports without any risk. As noted above, the USSR can't commit major forces to the East until the German are finished, so there's little to be gained by war and definite benefit to be gained in peace.
 
So how does that effect long term Japanese policy? It's got to be a wake up call for the militarists. I can't really imagine Japan making peace with anyone with out a coup happening.
 

archaeogeek

Banned
So how does that effect long term Japanese policy? It's got to be a wake up call for the militarists. I can't really imagine Japan making peace with anyone with out a coup happening.

IOTL, the japanese imperial general headquarters were more or less terrified of the Soviets after Khalkin Gol - you'd need someone even more insane than Tojo in charge imo.
 
I agree. There would have to be some sort of coup, in order for the Japanese to change their overall expansionist policy. A major defeat to the Russians might just do the trick.

But if the Japanese attack is coordinated with the German war effort, there is no use in making peace with the USSR, hence a German defeat would ultimately mean a Japanese defeat. Therefor the best thing for the Japs would be to keep on attacking, costly as it might be! It will definetely tie up a lot more Soviet ressources than IOTL, and a japanese blocade of the USSR's eastern port will also cause troubles in Moscow....and happines in Berlin!
 
Guys

Two questions:
a) What does Britain do. Would come under serious pressure to declare war but hopefully would guard Malaya properly 1st. [Knock on effects of do the Japanese try and seize the Dutch colonies and then what does the US do?]

b) How long does the Japanese position last with their armies being destroyed in the north and their industry and military collapsing because of lack of oil and other supplies? [Presuming they don't manage to get their hands on the Dutch fields before the latter are destroyed or defended fully and their then able to get oil back to Japan].

I would expect Japan to face serious problems by say 43 at the latest. Probably a serious collapse of their position in China and continued humiliation in Siberia.

Steve
 
If the Japanese are only attacking the Soviet Union there is no way the British will declare war. Given their situation in North Africa and Europe they have nothing to gain and a lot to lose. With the Russians already fully committed to fighting the Germans a declaration of war will not bring them any new allies. While at the same time putting their Asian colonies in serious danger.

Obviously the US is not going to go to war just to defend the Soviet Union. I doubt it would even be cause for sanctions. If in this time line the Japanese choose not to enter Indochina the US might not freeze their assets or issue an embargo.
 
The Japanese ministers sober up and go "...wait...does Siberia even have oil and rubber?"
 
One often-overlooked point was the Japanese neutrality was useful to the USSR; it meant Lend-Lease shipments could sail from US pacific ports to USSR pacific ports without any risk. As noted above, the USSR can't commit major forces to the East until the German are finished, so there's little to be gained by war and definite benefit to be gained in peace.

The question is, would this be enough to finish off the Soviet Union? Without provocation of Pearl Harbor any US declaration of war against Germany or Japan would be delayed at least by months, perhaps even by a year. By this time USSR would lack 50% of lend lease aid (Pacific Route was the most importan) and most importantly would not be able to rely on the fact that even if Soviet Army retreated some supplies would still come through.
 
If the Japanese are only attacking the Soviet Union there is no way the British will declare war. Given their situation in North Africa and Europe they have nothing to gain and a lot to lose. With the Russians already fully committed to fighting the Germans a declaration of war will not bring them any new allies. While at the same time putting their Asian colonies in serious danger.

I can see a lot of pressure for this, both from Stalin and from many elements in Britain. Not just internal politics. The nightmare other than the Soviets being defeated is Stalin making a separate peace. [Which would be very difficult since Hitler would never agree if he thought he was winning but that wouldn't be clear at the time]. After all, reluctantly it may be but we did declare war on Finland and they had a decent reason for fighting the Soviets.

The empire, with some preparation and careful planning, would be pretty safe against the Japanese. [Whether we would have careful planning with Churchill in charge might be a different matter.:(]. Also with the views at the time I could see a lot of people vastly underestimating the Japanese.

The other concern would be the vulnerability of the Dutch colonies, which would be far more difficult to defend. If we could get a cast-iron guarantee from Roosevelt to defend them from a Japanese attack the idea would be viable. [However between his internal problems and desire to have anyone else do the work that could be a serious sticking point:(].

Obviously the US is not going to go to war just to defend the Soviet Union. I doubt it would even be cause for sanctions. If in this time line the Japanese choose not to enter Indochina the US might not freeze their assets or issue an embargo.
I'm pretty certain that Roosevelt would tighten any embargo but this would be after the one imposed for invading French Indo-China, the southern half of which was taken over in ~June 41 I think, i.e. before the POD. Since he's desperately trying to prevent the anti-Nazi powers collapsing and there is already anger at the Japanese expansionism and their just attacked another power.

Steve

PS One other point to consider. If the Japanese get into a serious rumble in Siberia, both tying up forces and losing prestige, could they fail to cower Thailand? That would make things a lot easier in defending SE Asia.
 
The question is, would this be enough to finish off the Soviet Union? Without provocation of Pearl Harbor any US declaration of war against Germany or Japan would be delayed at least by months, perhaps even by a year. By this time USSR would lack 50% of lend lease aid (Pacific Route was the most importan) and most importantly would not be able to rely on the fact that even if Soviet Army retreated some supplies would still come through.

Jukra

Probably not, crossing fingers. Vladivostok was the most important route, totalling about 60% of American L-L to the Soviets but I think the western routes were more important earlier on. If they can get through 41 and definitely through 42 then they should be OK, although wearing down the Germans will be even bloodier and slower. By late 42 at the latest the Japanese will be pretty much a busted flush with little mobility left. [You could end up with a communist China even earlier TTL]. Also the Germans could push even deeper into Russia and suffer even greater defeats than Stalingrad.

Not certain as I say but can still see the allies winning in the end. You might see Stalin's empire reaching to the Rhine and fairly directly controlling China and much of Japan, although it would probably be pretty shattered].

Steve
 
This could be nightmarish, but frankly, I feel as though the POD for Japan getting in on the war against the USSR has to be in 1937 at the latest.
 
Eh, the IJA is a WW1 army that wont get anywhere near Vladivostok nor will they be able to cut off the Trans-Siberian Line. In fact the IJA would get badly mauled if it attacks the Red Army in the far east.

The IJA has no tanks. What they claim are tanks are glorified armoured cars at best. Plus their artillery is inferior and they wont have uncontested control in the air. I wont even get into into their crazy combat doctrine and leadership.

No doubt US L-L can still make it across the Bering Sea, but it wasnt a factor early in the war so the Germans wont gain anything, and will still run out of steam before Moscow. Their plan to attack the U.S.S.R was deeply flawed, nothing Japan does can alter the basic balance of forces.
 
Top