Kalter Krieg - a TL of a three way cold war

[MSZ]

Why do you think that Americans and others will not sell oil to Japan if they don't occupy French Indochina? ( and IIRC IIT they didnt do that )
And do you really think that UK, France, USA and other countries prefer USSR in control of China and Korea much more than Japan?
And how the hell did Chinese managed to occupy Taivan?
OK, maybe somehow Soviets could retain northern Sakhalin, maybe even to conquer southern part of it- but Taiwan?

1) Because OTL nobody was happy about Japan occupying China, and everybody, including the USA and Germany made at least some effort for the war to end. Sure, taking over French Indochina was one of the reasons (the general reason being something like "The Japanese are too aggrresive/expansive"). It's not like the embargo was introduced the day they made it to Hanoi, months have passed in between.

2) Korea - they didn't care OTL, wasn't important until the Korean War. Peace with Japan doesn't decide China's future, and again - OTL even the USA didn't care so much for it (arms embargo agaist the ROC in 1946, forcing withdrawal from Manchuria).

3) Same way as OTL - the Japanese withdraw as part of the peace treaty, the Kuomintang takes over. No naval invasion took place.

But the von Ribbentrop thing struck me as well. That bumbling joke was only in the Ministry because Hitler wanted somebody more sycophantic than the conservative von Neurath. Were Ade to kick off and Joachim the Joke left without his patron, I'd imagine that crafty ol' Konstantin would be back on the Wilhelmstrasse before you can say "Donaudampfschiffahrtsgesellschaftskapitän."

It was meant as a way of showing that the transition of power in the NSDAP didn't go the "night of long knives" way, but was more gradual. A lot of people assume that with Hitler dead before the war, the SS would take over like that. Personally I don't believe that, but in order to show that Himmler still has power, some of the Nazi fanatics had to remain in office.

 

[abc123]

1) Because OTL nobody was happy about Japan occupying China, and everybody, including the USA and Germany made at least some effort for the war to end. Sure, taking over French Indochina was one of the reasons (the general reason being something like "The Japanese are too aggrresive/expansive"). It's not like the embargo was introduced the day they made it to Hanoi, months have passed in between.

2) Korea - they didn't care OTL, wasn't important until the Korean War. Peace with Japan doesn't decide China's future, and again - OTL even the USA didn't care so much for it (arms embargo agaist the ROC in 1946, forcing withdrawal from Manchuria).

3) Same way as OTL - the Japanese withdraw as part of the peace treaty, the Kuomintang takes over. No naval invasion took place.

1) Nobody was happy, but nobody didn't do a thing about that. While the Japan was in their little war in China ( not going out of China and no Axis ) evreybody were just happy with protest note now and then.
Why would they done something different ITTL?

2) They didn't cared while Japanese were owners of Korea. The same moment that changed you have US troops in Southern Korea.

3) Since IMO USA wouldn't have imposed oil embargo on Japan ( and so DEI would niether ) I don't see why Japan has no enough oil?
And with that, why would Japanese give up something that they didn't loose in the battlefield?

 

[MSZ]

1) Nobody was happy, but nobody didn't do a thing about that. While the Japan was in their little war in China ( not going out of China and no Axis ) evreybody were just happy with protest note now and then.
Why would they done something different ITTL?

2) They didn't cared while Japanese were owners of Korea. The same moment that changed you have US troops in Southern Korea.

3) Since IMO USA wouldn't have imposed oil embargo on Japan ( and so DEI would niether ) I don't see why Japan has no enough oil?
And with that, why would Japanese give up something that they didn't loose in the battlefield?

1) An embargo would be imposed to stop Japanese expansion -like OTL. If Japan manages to take China - who is next? The Philippines? Indonesia? Relations between the USA and Japan were getting gradually colder OTL, the embargo was just another step, which happens here as well.

2) Nah. Come on, its not like the reasons for the US Army to move into South Korea was "Don't give to the Commies!". It was just a result of how the war went.

3) OTL 80% of Japanese oil was imported from America. When the Pacific War started, it had about 1 year worth of reserves, 2 tops. OTL they replenished it from Dutch East Indies. ITTL they lose both access to american oil, and don't claim Indonesia. And that's in 1941 - by 1945 they are all out.

They withdraw from Taiwan because they are being bombed night and day, and the Red Army was just beyond the sea - like what happened OTL.

 

[Bavarian Raven]

Sorry, while this is a good (great) TL, i dont see the soviets advancing that face nor the Japanese giving up taiwan, etc. sure they would loose their chinese and korean possessions but beyond that...nope. not imho.

 

[iddt3]

Sorry, while this is a good (great) TL, i dont see the soviets advancing that face nor the Japanese giving up taiwan, etc. sure they would loose their chinese and korean possessions but beyond that...nope. not imho.

The mismatch between the Soviet and Japanese armies was pretty astounding. The Soviets have only gotten better since they spanked Japan last time, but the Japanese are still fighting with mid 30s tech overall.

I think there is one major thing missing from this, namely purges. As long as Stalin remains in power, he's going to keep conducting them. Without a war to make some of the military establishment essential, I suspect he would have gone and purged the military again. I think Stalin will continue to build up his forces, but by the mid 40's there might not be much of an officer corps to lead them.

 

[Reichenfaust]

This looks exceptional, and as well shows a great quality of story writing in the author. I like, keep it up!

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

1) Nobody was happy, but nobody didn't do a thing about that. While the Japan was in their little war in China ( not going out of China and no Axis ) evreybody were just happy with protest note now and then.
Why would they done something different ITTL?
...
3) Since IMO USA wouldn't have imposed oil embargo on Japan ( and so DEI would niether ) I don't see why Japan has no enough oil?
And with that, why would Japanese give up something that they didn't loose in the battlefield?

1) Actually, there was a lot done. The US didn't suddenly come out of nowhere and impose the oil embargo.

In particular, there were earlier embargoes on steel and iron, which the Japanese also needed to import.

The US had a measured response (in their opinion). Each time Japan ratcheted up their aggression, the US ratcheted up their embargoes. Basically.

3) Umm... Even if the US didn't impose an oil embargo, Japan was fast running out hard currency to pay for it. Moreover, she didn't have nearly enough oil tankers of her own to carry the oil, and was using leased ships from e.g. Britain. OTL, those tankers got pulled out not only because they didn't want to help Japan, but also because they were needed for the Allied war effort. In a cold war situation, it's not so immediately obvious whether they'd be pulled out, or not. However, you still have the problem of paying hard currency for their use.

 

[tukk323]

Excellent TL MSZ, don't worry bout those naysayers, seems pretty plausible to me, not ASB at all. After all your POD is so near to WW2 that most of the main concerns and trends were already in play, all you've really done is move those trends into a cold war instead of WW2.
But the question is will it stay cold? OTL Cold War came about becuase of the Allies having faced a massive war with the fascist states likely they wanted to recover and have peace, so decided to only 'wage economic and puppet wars', contirbuting also was the MAD of nukes and to top it off was the UN. Without these a major war is still possible.
And even before your POD the LON was pretty much a joke-after Manchuria and Abyssinia

 

[abc123]

1) Actually, there was a lot done. The US didn't suddenly come out of nowhere and impose the oil embargo.

In particular, there were earlier embargoes on steel and iron, which the Japanese also needed to import.

The US had a measured response (in their opinion). Each time Japan ratcheted up their aggression, the US ratcheted up their embargoes. Basically.

3) Umm... Even if the US didn't impose an oil embargo, Japan was fast running out hard currency to pay for it. Moreover, she didn't have nearly enough oil tankers of her own to carry the oil, and was using leased ships from e.g. Britain. OTL, those tankers got pulled out not only because they didn't want to help Japan, but also because they were needed for the Allied war effort. In a cold war situation, it's not so immediately obvious whether they'd be pulled out, or not. However, you still have the problem of paying hard currency for their use.

Well, if Japan is defeated in China and in Korea, than all reasons for US embargo, wether on oil or on iron/steel are null. And also, if Japan was defeated in China/Korea, why wouldn't he had enough money to buy oil? After all, now only Navy and Air Forces need oil, Army not much, since Japan is a island.

 

[abc123]

1) An embargo would be imposed to stop Japanese expansion -like OTL. If Japan manages to take China - who is next? The Philippines? Indonesia? Relations between the USA and Japan were getting gradually colder OTL, the embargo was just another step, which happens here as well.

2) Nah. Come on, its not like the reasons for the US Army to move into South Korea was "Don't give to the Commies!". It was just a result of how the war went.

3) OTL 80% of Japanese oil was imported from America. When the Pacific War started, it had about 1 year worth of reserves, 2 tops. OTL they replenished it from Dutch East Indies. ITTL they lose both access to american oil, and don't claim Indonesia. And that's in 1941 - by 1945 they are all out.

They withdraw from Taiwan because they are being bombed night and day, and the Red Army was just beyond the sea - like what happened OTL.

1, 2 and 3) Fine, I don't want to argue anymore.

About Taiwan, so what if they are bombed? Britain was bombed too, but they didn't withdraw to Canada. It isn't that Japanese were too much sensitive on civilian casualties, and BTW majority in Taiwan were not Japanese.
Also, Taiwan Strait is 250 km wide, and if we remember that 10 years later PLA had invasion fleet of dzunkhas, I don't think that IJN had too much fear that they will made sucessful invasion of Taiwan.
As I said, Far Eastern Sea mammal.

 

[MSZ]

Excellent TL MSZ, don't worry bout those naysayers, seems pretty plausible to me, not ASB at all. After all your POD is so near to WW2 that most of the main concerns and trends were already in play, all you've really done is move those trends into a cold war instead of WW2.
But the question is will it stay cold? OTL Cold War came about becuase of the Allies having faced a massive war with the fascist states likely they wanted to recover and have peace, so decided to only 'wage economic and puppet wars', contirbuting also was the MAD of nukes and to top it off was the UN. Without these a major war is still possible.
And even before your POD the LON was pretty much a joke-after Manchuria and Abyssinia

True, in OTL the fear of repeating WW2 and nukes made leaders very careful when it came to a real threat of war. But remember that before WW2 world leaders and people were not very hot on going to war either - even in Germany in 1939 you did not have streets crowded with people cheering for war. World War I was enough for most of them, and there were few people who wanted to repeat it - heck, Hitler probably didn't explicitly want it, he prefered peace in the west and was 'just' willing to accept a war in the west. As for nukes - interestingly, before WW2 strategic bombings created a comparably great fear and paranoia as atomic bombs. It is an intersting read of various military theorists who predicted that air armadas full of bombers would be leveling cities in a matter of days or weeks, killing hundreds of thousands and nothing could stop them (The bomber will always get through). So there is a reasonable fear of war and not wanting them to escalate.

Essentially, if three blocks are present it might be even simpler to keep the war cold - every side knows that they stand no little chance against the other two combined, but no side is capable of forming an aggressive alliance with another against the third, nor risk a "one on one" war fearing that even if it was to emerge victorious, it would lose to third party which is fresh (where two fight, third one wins).

1, 2 and 3) Fine, I don't want to argue anymore.

About Taiwan, so what if they are bombed? Britain was bombed too, but they didn't withdraw to Canada. It isn't that Japanese were too much sensitive on civilian casualties, and BTW majority in Taiwan were not Japanese.
Also, Taiwan Strait is 250 km wide, and if we remember that 10 years later PLA had invasion fleet of dzunkhas, I don't think that IJN had too much fear that they will made sucessful invasion of Taiwan.
As I said, Far Eastern Sea mammal.

I think you misunderstand - there was no invasion on Taiwan. The japanese were forced to withdraw from it as part of the peace settlement. We might have to agree do disagree on the feasibility of a Soviet-Japanese peace, but in my opinion Japan would still surrender even if a "Soviet Downfall" was beyond the USSR capability. Because the USSR's capability of making it possible are much greater than Japan's ability to protect itself from it.

OTL Japan was in a similarly bad position in 1945 as it is ITTL. They surrendered when they were demanded to accept an unconditional surrender. Here, they are not required to do so.

 

[Shaby]

Very interesting developments so far. But what do Americans think of the entire situation? I haven't seen them do anything beyond calling for peace. What is happening with on the espionage front?

 

[iddt3]

True, in OTL the fear of repeating WW2 and nukes made leaders very careful when it came to a real threat of war. But remember that before WW2 world leaders and people were not very hot on going to war either - even in Germany in 1939 you did not have streets crowded with people cheering for war. World War I was enough for most of them, and there were few people who wanted to repeat it - heck, Hitler probably didn't explicitly want it, he prefered peace in the west and was 'just' willing to accept a war in the west. As for nukes - interestingly, before WW2 strategic bombings created a comparably great fear and paranoia as atomic bombs. It is an intersting read of various military theorists who predicted that air armadas full of bombers would be leveling cities in a matter of days or weeks, killing hundreds of thousands and nothing could stop them (The bomber will always get through). So there is a reasonable fear of war and not wanting them to escalate.

Essentially, if three blocks are present it might be even simpler to keep the war cold - every side knows that they stand no little chance against the other two combined, but no side is capable of forming an aggressive alliance with another against the third, nor risk a "one on one" war fearing that even if it was to emerge victorious, it would lose to third party which is fresh (where two fight, third one wins).



I think you misunderstand - there was no invasion on Taiwan. The japanese were forced to withdraw from it as part of the peace settlement. We might have to agree do disagree on the feasibility of a Soviet-Japanese peace, but in my opinion Japan would still surrender even if a "Soviet Downfall" was beyond the USSR capability. Because the USSR's capability of making it possible are much greater than Japan's ability to protect itself from it.

OTL Japan was in a similarly bad position in 1945 as it is ITTL. They surrendered when they were demanded to accept an unconditional surrender. Here, they are not required to do so.

I have to say, I can see the Soviets forcing the Japanese off of the mainland, but I have a much harder time believing that the could push them out of Taiwan. I think your analogy between 1945 OTL USA and TTL USSR is informative, and not from the similarities, but from the differences. America was using heavy strategic bombers to burn Japanese cities to the ground, had sunk the Japanese merchant fleet, and had the capacity to attack the home islands directly. The USSR has none of these things. Their bombers are generally short ranged, tactical aircraft, incapable of carrying the kinds of loads the B-29 did, and much more vulnerable to interception as they had lower service ceilings. The japanese merchant marine is also still afloat, meaning that the Soviets are not going to be able to strangle the home islands, or even credibly threaten them. This is also a Soviet army without the experiences of the Winter War to prompt large scale reform.

Most importantly, your ignoring the reason japan was embargoed in the first place, namely that the Americans wanted open access to china. If the Soviets kick the Japanese out, the embargo is going to go too because the Americans are no more interested in seeing a Soviet dominated china then a Japanese one.

 

[abc123]

I have to say, I can see the Soviets forcing the Japanese off of the mainland, but I have a much harder time believing that the could push them out of Taiwan. I think your analogy between 1945 OTL USA and TTL USSR is informative, and not from the similarities, but from the differences. America was using heavy strategic bombers to burn Japanese cities to the ground, had sunk the Japanese merchant fleet, and had the capacity to attack the home islands directly. The USSR has none of these things. Their bombers are generally short ranged, tactical aircraft, incapable of carrying the kinds of loads the B-29 did, and much more vulnerable to interception as they had lower service ceilings. The japanese merchant marine is also still afloat, meaning that the Soviets are not going to be able to strangle the home islands, or even credibly threaten them. This is also a Soviet army without the experiences of the Winter War to prompt large scale reform.

Most importantly, your ignoring the reason japan was embargoed in the first place, namely that the Americans wanted open access to china. If the Soviets kick the Japanese out, the embargo is going to go too because the Americans are no more interested in seeing a Soviet dominated china then a Japanese one.

Precisly what I wanted to say.

 

[MSZ]

I have to say, I can see the Soviets forcing the Japanese off of the mainland, but I have a much harder time believing that the could push them out of Taiwan. I think your analogy between 1945 OTL USA and TTL USSR is informative, and not from the similarities, but from the differences. America was using heavy strategic bombers to burn Japanese cities to the ground, had sunk the Japanese merchant fleet, and had the capacity to attack the home islands directly. The USSR has none of these things. Their bombers are generally short ranged, tactical aircraft, incapable of carrying the kinds of loads the B-29 did, and much more vulnerable to interception as they had lower service ceilings. The japanese merchant marine is also still afloat, meaning that the Soviets are not going to be able to strangle the home islands, or even credibly threaten them. This is also a Soviet army without the experiences of the Winter War to prompt large scale reform.

Most importantly, your ignoring the reason japan was embargoed in the first place, namely that the Americans wanted open access to china. If the Soviets kick the Japanese out, the embargo is going to go too because the Americans are no more interested in seeing a Soviet dominated china then a Japanese one.

Hmm. The Soviet Air Force was capable to produce twice as much aircraft as Japan, which would be well within their range once taking off from Korea. The Japanese merchant fleet might be technically afloat, but otherwise Japan has no fuel to power them, no currency to buy goods, no creditors willing to pay for it and no suppliers due to an embargo. The Red Army also has the largest paratrooper force in the world at that point. Sure, Japan can defend itself from a Soviet Downfall, but for how long? With the Soviets dominating the skies over Japan, it is a matter of time before the Navy is either sunk by naval bombers or forced to relocate, giving the Soviets an opening, at least to Hokkaido, and Japan can't stop them. Ending the war before the Russians make an (eventually inevitable) landing is in Japan's favor.

 

[iddt3]

Except the Soviets can't deploy anything like their full force against japan, and because Stalin needs to aintain a credible force in Europe out of fear of the axis. While that fear might be misplaced, Stalin is still going to be paranoid about it. The the Soviets are probably looking at air parity, with crappy doctrine, against an unembargoed japan. If nessisary the US will sell the Japanese the oil at a discount if it keeps them as a credible threat to the Russians.

The Russians are also likely to accept a US offer of mediation. Why would they, and when they have japan on the ropes? Again it comes back to stalin's fear, and what was his biggest fear? A western alliance against him. Stalin wasn't Hitler, and he wasn't a gambler, he's going get some major gains, and and japan will loose it's continental presence, but that's the extent of what the Soviets will do.

 

[NoMoreSanity]

Except the Soviets can't deploy anything like their full force against japan, and because Stalin needs to aintain a credible force in Europe out of fear of the axis. While that fear might be misplaced, Stalin is still going to be paranoid about it. The the Soviets are probably looking at air parity, with crappy doctrine, against an unembargoed japan. If nessisary the US will sell the Japanese the oil at a discount if it keeps them as a credible threat to the Russians.

The Russians are also likely to accept a US offer of mediation. Why would they, and when they have japan on the ropes? Again it comes back to stalin's fear, and what was his biggest fear? A western alliance against him. Stalin wasn't Hitler, and he wasn't a gambler, he's going get some major gains, and and japan will loose it's continental presence, but that's the extent of what the Soviets will do.

Didn't the author say the Japanese are embargoed still for their crimes in China?

The Soviets can take on the Japanese with their current Asian forces without diverting too much from Europe. They don't need to worry that much anyway about Europe, the French have got their backs, and Polands between them and Germany still. The Japanese are stuck in China with low fuel and even less supplies, so it'll be a cakewalk for them. I was more surprised that the Japanese managed to stall the Soviets at all in certain places.

I guess you can make a case for Sakhalin being easily taken by the Japanese, but the Japanese have so little supplies, it's still doubtful.

 

[Karogas]

Didn't the author say the Japanese are embargoed still for their crimes in China?

Your not actually saying foreign policy of that time was motivated by morals are you

 

[NoMoreSanity]

Your not actually saying foreign policy of that time was motivated by morals are you

Considering the horrendous things the Japanese did in OTL which would obviously still be true here, and the general world response in OTL, I'd say in this case, yes.

 

[Karogas]

Brits and Americans knew how bad Stalin and the Soviets were, but still chose to use them to deal with Hitler