Japan vs. Russia: Round 3

Under great pressure of Hitler to attack the Soviet Union, Japan agrees in early May to launch a 2-pronged attack into Russia in, (they still attack on June22, 1941) though it doubts any sucess of their attacks concedering earlier wars with Russia.

When June 22 comes what happens to Russia?

What is Japan's plans of attack?

How much Russian territory do they get?



(no pearl harbor attack on America in this timline)​
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Under great pressure of Hitler to attack the Soviet Union, Japan agrees in early May to launch a 2-pronged attack into Russia in, (they still attack on June22, 1941) though it doubts any sucess of their attacks concedering earlier wars with Russia.

When June 22 comes what happens to Russia?

What is Japan's plans of attack?

How much Russian territory do they get?



(no pearl harbor attack on America in this timline)​

The USSR forces get knocked back about 15 miles in the Far East before getting the feet under them and crushing the Kwantung Army like bugs.

Deception, with some early gains, followed by masses of light infantry charging tanks and heavy artillery and being annihilated in number worthy of the Somme.

Less than none, they probably lose Korea.

BTW, what does the IJA use for fuel if no attack against Pearl Harbor occurs? IOTL the IJA was down to around three months worth of fuel before they had to land the planes, pull the trucks off the road & go back to horses while the IJN was sitting on 18 months supply before they had to tie up to the dock and watch several hundred billion yen rust at the quay.
 
I agree with Calbear, especially considering Japan's previous encounters with the Soviet Union and how badly the Japanese were defeated in those encounters. I really don't expect any difference between this encounter compared to the other encounters the Japanese military had with the Soviet.
 
The Soviets defeated the Japanese in the battles of Lake Khasan and Khalkhin Gol, so I think we'd see a repeat in such a scenario. The most significant effect of such a scenario however would be on the Eastern Front and on the United States' involvement in the war.

How would the Eastern Front have changed with Soviet soldiers tied up fighting Japan?

How does Japan organise (is it actually capable of mounting one) an attack on the United States while fighting the Soviet Union?
 
The US oil embargo against Japan didn't start until Summer. So this might have gone ahead before oil became an issue.

The Battle of Khalkhin Gol was not a lopsided victory for the Soviets as some imagine. Casualties on both sides were about equal. Tying down Siberian forces would have significant impact on the European front. It would mean the Soviet counter-offensive at Moscow in the winter of 41-42 would unlikely succeed. in OTL fresh Siberian troops were the backbone of that operation. That would give the Wehrmacht a window to capture Moscow.
 
Last edited:

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
The US oil embargo against Japan didn't start until Summer. So this might have gone ahead before oil became an issue.

The Battle of Khalkhin Gol was not a lopsided victory for the Soviets as some imagine. Casualties on both sides were about equal. Tying down Siberian forces would have significant impact on the European front. It would mean the Soviet counter-offensive at Moscow in the winter of 41-42 would unlikely succeed. in OTL fresh Siberian troops were the backbone of that operation. That would give the Wehrmacht a window to capture Moscow.

While the OIL embargo did not begin until after June, the U.S. had already begun to strangle the Japanese economy with embargos on Iron & Steel by the summer of '41. FDR was hesitant to cut off the oil tap as he believed (quite correctly) that it would mean war. There was no question, on either side, that the Japanese were at the mercy of the United States where her oil supply was concerned. That the embargo didn't start in June doesn't mean that both sides weren't sure that it was coming.

Khalkhin Gol casualties may have been even AS A CAMPAIGN (actually, this is something that is still open to question, while Soviet records have been reviews so a reasonably accurate picture if losses is available, the same is not true for IJA records & loss estimates for the IJA range as high as 60,000, with the true KIA figure probably being a 15-25% of the high number), not that casualties are any way to judge victory or defeat in a military sense. The Red Army stopped the Japanese offensive cold; when the Soviets counterattacked in September, in a forshadowing of the Eastern Front victories by both the Heer & Red Army, they pulled a double envelopment on the Japanese and annihilated the IJA 23rd Division. At the end of the day, the Red Army held the field of battle, destroyed a Japanese field army, and pushed Japan back across the Soviet border. That is a fairly serious drubbing.

The Far East Front was never "stripped" IOTL as part of the effort to defeat the Reich. That is one of the fallicies of the Great Patriotic War. There were LOTS of "Siberians" moved, but these veteran troops were replaced by troops from Central Asia (leavened by some of the veterans of Kalkhin Gol), leaving 19 DIVISIONS, 1,200 aircraft and 1,000 tanks facing the Kwantung Army. Given that the IJA had less than 400 tanks on the Asian mainland, and that Japanese armor was, at best, pitiful, this was an overwhelmingly potent defensive force.

It is also sometimes forgotten that Stalin had a source IN Toyko (Richard Sorge) that was able to tell Stalin, well in advance, of Japan's plans (at least until he was burned in late 1941). While Sorge was not always listened to, frex - he had the actual DATE for Barbarossa but Stalin didn't WANT to believe him, he WAS listened to when the subject was Japan. By the time Sorge was arrested the decision had been finalized to attempt the Southern Strategy with all the risks involved.
 
Khalkhin Gol casualties may have been even AS A CAMPAIGN (...), not that casualties are any way to judge victory or defeat in a military sense. The Red Army stopped the Japanese offensive cold; when the Soviets counterattacked in September, in a forshadowing of the Eastern Front victories by both the Heer & Red Army, they pulled a double envelopment on the Japanese and annihilated the IJA 23rd Division. At the end of the day, the Red Army held the field of battle, destroyed a Japanese field army, and pushed Japan back across the Soviet border. That is a fairly serious drubbing.
Soviets had very serious logistic hit against them, operating approx. 700 km from the closest railway station. It gave them an opportunity to test "combined drive" of BT tanks (famous 1930s wunderwaffe, proved to be useless on the real battlefield) and confirm that previous estimates of it as useless toy was correct), but everything else was logistic nighmare. Imagine trucking all supplies in, taking into account that standard supply trucks of the day had load of 1.5 or 3 metric tons. And BTW, Khalkhin Gol happened on the border between Mongolia (Soviet client state back then) and China. Also, although it had been hailed as great victory by propaganda, it triggered some serious soul-searching in the Red Army, as number of screw-ups greatly exceeded estimates (tanks attacking in wrong directions and/or without infantry support, bad recce job, planes losing it's position in battle formation, supply problems, this kind of things). So, if anything, Red Army was much more prepared to face unreformed foe in 1941.

The Far East Front was never "stripped" IOTL as part of the effort to defeat the Reich. That is one of the fallicies of the Great Patriotic War. There were LOTS of "Siberians" moved, but these veteran troops were replaced by troops from Central Asia (leavened by some of the veterans of Kalkhin Gol), leaving 19 DIVISIONS, 1,200 aircraft and 1,000 tanks facing the Kwantung Army.
As far as I know bulk of the new troops had been conscripted locally, giving double advantage of having conscripts familiar with the terrain and willing to fight to protect their families. But your main statement is true. Apanassenko made a tremendous job keeping operational strength of Far Eastern group. BTW, it was called Far Eastern Front back then and service there had been considered frontline (although counted "day-for-day" in the soldier's records, and German front had been counted as "three-days-for-day", if my memory serves me well).
 
Top