What was finally agreed was a substantial Soviet sector of control in the south of Germany, which largely corresponded to the borders of Baden-Württemberg and Bavaria​
Interestingly this means that the Mercedes, Porsche (both Stuttgart) and BMW (Munich) factories are located in the Soviet sector.
Combined with Fiat and Alfa Romeo (Turin), Lamborghini and Maserati being in communist Italy, this will mean a world of difference on the automotive front after WW2. Ferrari probably never starts producing cars.

And autoracing will also look totally different. No Porsche and Ferrari in Le Mans, no Alfa Romeo, Ferrari, Maserati and Mercedes in F1. The worldchampionship F1 will have a tough start without those.
 
Interestingly this means that the Mercedes, Porsche (both Stuttgart) and BMW (Munich) factories are located in the Soviet sector.
Combined with Fiat and Alfa Romeo (Turin), Lamborghini and Maserati being in communist Italy, this will mean a world of difference on the automotive front after WW2. Ferrari probably never starts producing cars.

And autoracing will also look totally different. No Porsche and Ferrari in Le Mans, no Alfa Romeo, Ferrari, Maserati and Mercedes in F1. The worldchampionship F1 will have a tough start without those.
Well that sucks.
 
But so far the Kremlin does not apparently have tight control over Italy at any rate--south Germany will surely be a very different and familiar story, but the Italian Reds so far actually are part of a lefty coalition with other parties, nor am I so sure the actual Communist Party members in Italy will always toe the International Party Line uncritically. I gather they largely did when out of power, and indeed a certain Darwin-like shakedown has taken place where the Soviets were German allies until Hitler struck at them--OTL in the USA at any rate, quite a few American card-carrying Communists (I am thinking of the memoirs of SF writer and editor Fred Pohl here in particular but his case was far from unique) uneasily held on to Party loyalty, of a queasy and reserved sort, when the Hitler-Stalin Pact was in place--but when the Kremlin simply reversed itself again and expected all loyal Party members to pretend they had never been parroting instructions to speak up for the Soviet alliance with Hitler (not to mention more active members actively trying to sabotage the Allied war effort) and had been against Hitler all along...that snapped a lot of people. They gave up on the CP after that--quite perverse the first reversal didn't throw them in retrospect, but I think a person can understand the mentality at work.

In Italy of course, one could not just join the CP openly and announce it to friends and family; it was quite criminal under the Fascists and so I expect Party loyalty was of a somewhat more fraught nature. All that said--push comes to shove, the Italian Reds are not so very likely IMHO, or at any rate I would guess the author would agree with me hardly certain, to take unilateral one-party Stalinist control of northern Italy. Can they stay within the leading coalition? I think their chances are very good for that, and indeed they might lead that coalition more often than not--but only if they do demonstrate some independence from the Kremlin and some fair play at least toward "fellow traveler" parties also on the left.

In short I've read the author's description of the formation of the Milan centered northern government in this way, as a fairly loose and broad leftist omnibus. Indeed, especially because it seems both Britain and the USA are veering somewhat rightward of their OTL positions at this moment (perhaps to veer less in that direction later to wind up in the same place on the spectrum as OTL by mid-50s, or even to wind up distinctly more progressive perhaps) I would suppose Milan will ally with the Soviets actively, in geopolitical and also trade terms--but that's because the Western Allies, in particular their leadership and high military brass, have decided to treat the northern Italian regime as diseased. In fact, if American and British diplomacy can be sensitive and deft enough, while I have no doubt Red North Italy will label itself leftist and a friend of the Soviet Union, nevertheless I think they would much rather steer their own course and assert equality with Moscow rather than take orders from it.

Also knowing what we know OTL, Tito is a wild card in the rump of Yugoslavia--but then again, the dismemberment of Yugoslavia leaves the nation as a whole, and Tito in particular, much reduced; I don't think the separation of Tito from his ancestral homeland in the northwest of the interwar nation precludes him hanging on to leadership of a Partisan-ruled rump Yugoslavia--but it must be somewhat demoralizing to him, and perhaps discrediting him in the eyes of OTL followers with more doubts here, that his Party-State does not rule the territory he himself comes from.

Therefore, particularly since Stalin has rather slim pickings versus OTL in terms of puppet states to rule, conceivably versus OTL Tito loses the dice roll instead of winning at some point, and perhaps the Soviets manage to impose the lockstep Party line following satellite Party they desired but muffed, and ATL rump Yugoslavia turns into one of the tightest held satellites? Or with Tito weaker and discredited, perhaps he is edged out by rivals within his own party who have stronger ties to the territories remaining to them--and if this is a Serb who happens not to be deeply devoted to the sort of multi-national agenda Tito was, it could wind up being just a name for a Greater though Not Greatest Serbia run by a Serbian Communist mafia that takes for granted they have to rule the other nationalities with a tight guiding hand. And in another variation--they try this clumsy approach, with lots of uncritically approving Soviet help, and it backfires badly triggering a round of civil war.

And meanwhile of course all the other pieces of OTL Yugoslavia are veering rightward--if not fascist levels of right, then anyway toward the conservative factions within the liberal spectrum.

Could it be that what keeps Austria truly and stably neutral is that the price of Soviet rights of transit from Slovakia to their South German holding is that they recognize the reciprocal right of Western Allied powers to transit forces and material from Czechia to Slovenia and Croatia--that regardless of who has the upper hand at the moment, neither side feels it is quite in a position to seize Austria for its own side, nor interdict the other side's rights of transit, because trying to grab all the marbles in Austria risks disrupting and possibly losing a vital channel of communication for both sides?

In a broader perspective--we know that OTL when push came to shove the Kremlin was ruthless about trying to sustain its power over its much broader (and also much more tightly consolidated, geographically) East European satellites, and whatever credibility the Communists had domestically (not inconsiderable in places like Czechoslovakia, and even not negligible in places like Hungary) on their own merits as native sons if deemed prodigal and worse by their right-wing cousins was rapidly discredited by their subservience to the Soviets--except insofar as Soviet power appeared to be here to stay of course. But they did not dare to push beyond that and try to annex any further territory beyond what the Red Army took in the course of defeating the Third Reich. Nor did any country veer so far to the left in the Western bloc as to invite in the Russians as allies--far from it. And despite the grounds many had to reasonably fear (and maybe some hope, on both sides) that war was inevitable, both sides held off from actually crossing that brink.

Here--the Western powers are mainly different in that we seem to have some foreshadowing that there will not be a tightly united NATO bloc and that the USA will be far less hegemonic in Western Europe than was the case OTL--which implies with it that on paper, the Soviets might calculate they have more favorable chances to win something in open combat, particularly if they think they can subdivide the Western powers against each other and make gains piecemeal (a la Hitler's pre-Poland invasion career and indeed for some time after) at the expense of individual sub-blocs that cannot call on the other powers while the other powers dither.

But I think the OTL track record of the Soviet Union, under Stalin and under his successors, shows that the regime was risk averse--even if they do reckon they can do better than they did OTL, they still might hesitate to upset this particularly ramshackle and intertwined applecart. With South Germany considered to be as tightly integrated into a Soviet empire as East Germany was OTL, the Reds threaten France's borders directly--but the ugly fact of the matter is that in the event the balloon goes up, even if we somehow leave more than a few token A-bombs out of the picture somehow, their lifeline to South Germany from their more contiguous holdings runs through Austria and might well be severed by a strong Western response to interdict it (and then, with little left to lose, incite and support an anti-Communist uprising in SG; the OTL Stasi and other regime organs in the DDR no doubt would chill and hamstring such movements--but if combined with a situation where South Germany is isolated, anti-regime sentiment might prove to be a much stronger force than the Soviets and their partners guessed).

In an all out knock-down brawl of a Third World War, again if we leave the nukes out of it somehow, I suppose Slovenia and Croatia would be in serious trouble, as might be Czechia and of course North Germany--but in a fight like that, Poland would be on the Western side, as would be South Italy (unless we suppose perhaps the SI regime is itself so corrupt that covert sympathy for the Red side proves pretty strong). France might have a hard time gearing up for all out war directly with the USSR--but the Soviets don't really border on them, only their glass-jawed South German puppet does, and I do think postwar France could muster enough force to match what the Soviets can get away with stationing there and raising up from the rather dubious soil of Catholic Southern Germany! Dubious for Reds I mean--not to dismiss the fact that some German Reds were in the south, still overall the southern Catholic former kingdoms including Austria were not strongholds of German Communism generally--I'd say the fate of the Bavarian attempt at a Soviet republic along with what happened to Bela Kun shows the limits. German comrades would be more from the north, from the Ruhr and from "Red Berlin," the major industrialized areas. South Germany certainly has some industrialized areas to reckon with of course, but my impression is that culture was somewhat more reactionary and somewhat more rustic there, so in terms of native born southern German Communist loyalists, the Soviets would be finding them thin gruel versus what they could muster in the neighborhood of Berlin OTL. So, I figure the Soviets can count on the South German "fraternal worker's state" about as much as they could the Polish one OTL--indeed the nation is at their service, if grudgingly and with some complaining that sometimes breaks out into open rioting, as long as Soviet force clearly has the upper hand. And God help them if they seem to lose that upper hand. Which a conflict that results in making a mess of Austria, or worse still Austria, or crucial parts of it, falling into Western hands, and thus cuts their jugular to the main part of the Soviet Bloc, could very well do.

Similarly even if the largely Serbian rump of Yugoslavia falls tightly into Soviet orbit instead of its ATL aloof stance, and puts the coastline at the service of the Soviet Navy (and can the Soviet Navy sortie out of the Black Sea or Baltic even?) nevertheless for them to move to block sea communications from South Italy and beyond in the Western more or less allied nations to Slovenia and Croatia would surely be an outrageous act of war. If the Reds are deterred from such open strikes, then these two south-central Slavic nations are sure to remain in logistic contact with their allies, with or without the ability to go over land in Austria to Czechia.

I think with the Soviet and Western sphere interlaced the way they are here, the greater risk to the Soviet side combined with the overall lower wealth and scope of its East European conquests more than offsets any Western weakness due to lack of a strong united anti-Soviet alliance--and if this seems not to be the case, a suitably strong alliance will emerge, if not under Yankee than Anglo-French leadership. If the author proposes to avoid an ATL NATO--then it must be the case that the diplomatic crises we can expect by the dozens over the next decades and generations never do lead to an open war flashpoint--or if something flashes, both sides move fast to damp down the fire and restore status quo ante.

So getting back to Italy, North Italy is not currently occupied by the Red Army, any enthusiastic secret police work the Soviet organs try to mastermind through their north Italian Communist cadres will backfire on them and discredit their political side, and barring believing the Reds have subversive superpowers that manufacture not just a putsch but a properly victorious coup out of anything at all, Red Italy might be perceived as part of a threatening Soviet Bloc, but in reality it will prefer to remain manifestly independent so that any help they do give the Soviets will be clearly a matter of magnanimous gift or simply aiding a close ally. And unless the South attacks them in a gung-ho manner, on their own hook or frogmarched into it by stronger Western powers backing them, I don't think the Milan-centered leftist state has any interest in starting a world war, or even seeking border adjustments; they will be concentrating on developing north Italy as a model socialist society, and would seek more to restrain than inflame the Soviets if in fact they do ally with Moscow at all.

And what does this mean for the world of racing cars? Well, I daresay that after some snide remarks about the wastefulness and unfair wealth distribution involved in a culture of private automobiles--the Left faction leaders, especially the Communists if they can maintain position as first among equals (and still more if they slip to second or third place) will want to see People's Italy demonstrate the superiority of Socialist Italian technology by entering cars in the races--if they are not there, it is more likely it is because they are blackballed by the Western authorities than because they won't still less can't make cars the equal of OTL, at least a few top-end demonstration models anyway, such as the kinds of cars that enter in serious races!

Dunno anything about the Ferrari corporate background, and would guess the name of Ferrari would never come up--but the engineers who worked for this firm might well be more busy and more successful in organizations of another name.
 

Garrison

Donor
Interestingly this means that the Mercedes, Porsche (both Stuttgart) and BMW (Munich) factories are located in the Soviet sector.
Combined with Fiat and Alfa Romeo (Turin), Lamborghini and Maserati being in communist Italy, this will mean a world of difference on the automotive front after WW2. Ferrari probably never starts producing cars.

And autoracing will also look totally different. No Porsche and Ferrari in Le Mans, no Alfa Romeo, Ferrari, Maserati and Mercedes in F1. The worldchampionship F1 will have a tough start without those.
Not an area I had thought about. I suspect though there will be some relocation of assets before everything settles down.
But so far the Kremlin does not apparently have tight control over Italy at any rate--south Germany will surely be a very different and familiar story, but the Italian Reds so far actually are part of a lefty coalition with other parties, nor am I so sure the actual Communist Party members in Italy will always toe the International Party Line uncritically. I gather they largely did when out of power, and indeed a certain Darwin-like shakedown has taken place where the Soviets were German allies until Hitler struck at them--OTL in the USA at any rate, quite a few American card-carrying Communists (I am thinking of the memoirs of SF writer and editor Fred Pohl here in particular but his case was far from unique) uneasily held on to Party loyalty, of a queasy and reserved sort, when the Hitler-Stalin Pact was in place--but when the Kremlin simply reversed itself again and expected all loyal Party members to pretend they had never been parroting instructions to speak up for the Soviet alliance with Hitler (not to mention more active members actively trying to sabotage the Allied war effort) and had been against Hitler all along...that snapped a lot of people. They gave up on the CP after that--quite perverse the first reversal didn't throw them in retrospect, but I think a person can understand the mentality at work.

In Italy of course, one could not just join the CP openly and announce it to friends and family; it was quite criminal under the Fascists and so I expect Party loyalty was of a somewhat more fraught nature. All that said--push comes to shove, the Italian Reds are not so very likely IMHO, or at any rate I would guess the author would agree with me hardly certain, to take unilateral one-party Stalinist control of northern Italy. Can they stay within the leading coalition? I think their chances are very good for that, and indeed they might lead that coalition more often than not--but only if they do demonstrate some independence from the Kremlin and some fair play at least toward "fellow traveler" parties also on the left.

In short I've read the author's description of the formation of the Milan centered northern government in this way, as a fairly loose and broad leftist omnibus. Indeed, especially because it seems both Britain and the USA are veering somewhat rightward of their OTL positions at this moment (perhaps to veer less in that direction later to wind up in the same place on the spectrum as OTL by mid-50s, or even to wind up distinctly more progressive perhaps) I would suppose Milan will ally with the Soviets actively, in geopolitical and also trade terms--but that's because the Western Allies, in particular their leadership and high military brass, have decided to treat the northern Italian regime as diseased. In fact, if American and British diplomacy can be sensitive and deft enough, while I have no doubt Red North Italy will label itself leftist and a friend of the Soviet Union, nevertheless I think they would much rather steer their own course and assert equality with Moscow rather than take orders from it.

Also knowing what we know OTL, Tito is a wild card in the rump of Yugoslavia--but then again, the dismemberment of Yugoslavia leaves the nation as a whole, and Tito in particular, much reduced; I don't think the separation of Tito from his ancestral homeland in the northwest of the interwar nation precludes him hanging on to leadership of a Partisan-ruled rump Yugoslavia--but it must be somewhat demoralizing to him, and perhaps discrediting him in the eyes of OTL followers with more doubts here, that his Party-State does not rule the territory he himself comes from.

Therefore, particularly since Stalin has rather slim pickings versus OTL in terms of puppet states to rule, conceivably versus OTL Tito loses the dice roll instead of winning at some point, and perhaps the Soviets manage to impose the lockstep Party line following satellite Party they desired but muffed, and ATL rump Yugoslavia turns into one of the tightest held satellites? Or with Tito weaker and discredited, perhaps he is edged out by rivals within his own party who have stronger ties to the territories remaining to them--and if this is a Serb who happens not to be deeply devoted to the sort of multi-national agenda Tito was, it could wind up being just a name for a Greater though Not Greatest Serbia run by a Serbian Communist mafia that takes for granted they have to rule the other nationalities with a tight guiding hand. And in another variation--they try this clumsy approach, with lots of uncritically approving Soviet help, and it backfires badly triggering a round of civil war.

And meanwhile of course all the other pieces of OTL Yugoslavia are veering rightward--if not fascist levels of right, then anyway toward the conservative factions within the liberal spectrum.

Could it be that what keeps Austria truly and stably neutral is that the price of Soviet rights of transit from Slovakia to their South German holding is that they recognize the reciprocal right of Western Allied powers to transit forces and material from Czechia to Slovenia and Croatia--that regardless of who has the upper hand at the moment, neither side feels it is quite in a position to seize Austria for its own side, nor interdict the other side's rights of transit, because trying to grab all the marbles in Austria risks disrupting and possibly losing a vital channel of communication for both sides?

In a broader perspective--we know that OTL when push came to shove the Kremlin was ruthless about trying to sustain its power over its much broader (and also much more tightly consolidated, geographically) East European satellites, and whatever credibility the Communists had domestically (not inconsiderable in places like Czechoslovakia, and even not negligible in places like Hungary) on their own merits as native sons if deemed prodigal and worse by their right-wing cousins was rapidly discredited by their subservience to the Soviets--except insofar as Soviet power appeared to be here to stay of course. But they did not dare to push beyond that and try to annex any further territory beyond what the Red Army took in the course of defeating the Third Reich. Nor did any country veer so far to the left in the Western bloc as to invite in the Russians as allies--far from it. And despite the grounds many had to reasonably fear (and maybe some hope, on both sides) that war was inevitable, both sides held off from actually crossing that brink.

Here--the Western powers are mainly different in that we seem to have some foreshadowing that there will not be a tightly united NATO bloc and that the USA will be far less hegemonic in Western Europe than was the case OTL--which implies with it that on paper, the Soviets might calculate they have more favorable chances to win something in open combat, particularly if they think they can subdivide the Western powers against each other and make gains piecemeal (a la Hitler's pre-Poland invasion career and indeed for some time after) at the expense of individual sub-blocs that cannot call on the other powers while the other powers dither.

But I think the OTL track record of the Soviet Union, under Stalin and under his successors, shows that the regime was risk averse--even if they do reckon they can do better than they did OTL, they still might hesitate to upset this particularly ramshackle and intertwined applecart. With South Germany considered to be as tightly integrated into a Soviet empire as East Germany was OTL, the Reds threaten France's borders directly--but the ugly fact of the matter is that in the event the balloon goes up, even if we somehow leave more than a few token A-bombs out of the picture somehow, their lifeline to South Germany from their more contiguous holdings runs through Austria and might well be severed by a strong Western response to interdict it (and then, with little left to lose, incite and support an anti-Communist uprising in SG; the OTL Stasi and other regime organs in the DDR no doubt would chill and hamstring such movements--but if combined with a situation where South Germany is isolated, anti-regime sentiment might prove to be a much stronger force than the Soviets and their partners guessed).

In an all out knock-down brawl of a Third World War, again if we leave the nukes out of it somehow, I suppose Slovenia and Croatia would be in serious trouble, as might be Czechia and of course North Germany--but in a fight like that, Poland would be on the Western side, as would be South Italy (unless we suppose perhaps the SI regime is itself so corrupt that covert sympathy for the Red side proves pretty strong). France might have a hard time gearing up for all out war directly with the USSR--but the Soviets don't really border on them, only their glass-jawed South German puppet does, and I do think postwar France could muster enough force to match what the Soviets can get away with stationing there and raising up from the rather dubious soil of Catholic Southern Germany! Dubious for Reds I mean--not to dismiss the fact that some German Reds were in the south, still overall the southern Catholic former kingdoms including Austria were not strongholds of German Communism generally--I'd say the fate of the Bavarian attempt at a Soviet republic along with what happened to Bela Kun shows the limits. German comrades would be more from the north, from the Ruhr and from "Red Berlin," the major industrialized areas. South Germany certainly has some industrialized areas to reckon with of course, but my impression is that culture was somewhat more reactionary and somewhat more rustic there, so in terms of native born southern German Communist loyalists, the Soviets would be finding them thin gruel versus what they could muster in the neighborhood of Berlin OTL. So, I figure the Soviets can count on the South German "fraternal worker's state" about as much as they could the Polish one OTL--indeed the nation is at their service, if grudgingly and with some complaining that sometimes breaks out into open rioting, as long as Soviet force clearly has the upper hand. And God help them if they seem to lose that upper hand. Which a conflict that results in making a mess of Austria, or worse still Austria, or crucial parts of it, falling into Western hands, and thus cuts their jugular to the main part of the Soviet Bloc, could very well do.

Similarly even if the largely Serbian rump of Yugoslavia falls tightly into Soviet orbit instead of its ATL aloof stance, and puts the coastline at the service of the Soviet Navy (and can the Soviet Navy sortie out of the Black Sea or Baltic even?) nevertheless for them to move to block sea communications from South Italy and beyond in the Western more or less allied nations to Slovenia and Croatia would surely be an outrageous act of war. If the Reds are deterred from such open strikes, then these two south-central Slavic nations are sure to remain in logistic contact with their allies, with or without the ability to go over land in Austria to Czechia.

I think with the Soviet and Western sphere interlaced the way they are here, the greater risk to the Soviet side combined with the overall lower wealth and scope of its East European conquests more than offsets any Western weakness due to lack of a strong united anti-Soviet alliance--and if this seems not to be the case, a suitably strong alliance will emerge, if not under Yankee than Anglo-French leadership. If the author proposes to avoid an ATL NATO--then it must be the case that the diplomatic crises we can expect by the dozens over the next decades and generations never do lead to an open war flashpoint--or if something flashes, both sides move fast to damp down the fire and restore status quo ante.

So getting back to Italy, North Italy is not currently occupied by the Red Army, any enthusiastic secret police work the Soviet organs try to mastermind through their north Italian Communist cadres will backfire on them and discredit their political side, and barring believing the Reds have subversive superpowers that manufacture not just a putsch but a properly victorious coup out of anything at all, Red Italy might be perceived as part of a threatening Soviet Bloc, but in reality it will prefer to remain manifestly independent so that any help they do give the Soviets will be clearly a matter of magnanimous gift or simply aiding a close ally. And unless the South attacks them in a gung-ho manner, on their own hook or frogmarched into it by stronger Western powers backing them, I don't think the Milan-centered leftist state has any interest in starting a world war, or even seeking border adjustments; they will be concentrating on developing north Italy as a model socialist society, and would seek more to restrain than inflame the Soviets if in fact they do ally with Moscow at all.

And what does this mean for the world of racing cars? Well, I daresay that after some snide remarks about the wastefulness and unfair wealth distribution involved in a culture of private automobiles--the Left faction leaders, especially the Communists if they can maintain position as first among equals (and still more if they slip to second or third place) will want to see People's Italy demonstrate the superiority of Socialist Italian technology by entering cars in the races--if they are not there, it is more likely it is because they are blackballed by the Western authorities than because they won't still less can't make cars the equal of OTL, at least a few top-end demonstration models anyway, such as the kinds of cars that enter in serious races!

Dunno anything about the Ferrari corporate background, and would guess the name of Ferrari would never come up--but the engineers who worked for this firm might well be more busy and more successful in organizations of another name.
Overall Italy is going to plow its own furrow when it comes to it's Socialist/Communist government and by the 1960s/70s its likely they will be embracing something more dynamic as far their economic system goes. I am actually working on some postwar addendums and I'm probably going to limit them to nothing later than the 1970s as honestly I think beyond that the major political/economic/military figures will be totally different and close to anything goes.
 
1st September – 13th November 1944 – China – Part I – The Long March to Guangzhou

Garrison

Donor
1st September – 13th November 1944 – China – Part I – The Long March to Guangzhou

The war in China had been every bit as bitter as that on the Eastern Front, though without attracting nearly the attention the fight between the Nazi’s and the Soviets did either at during the war or afterwards in the West. At the time many in Washington and London saw the Chinese Nationalist leadership and the Kuomintang forces as corrupt and incompetent in equal measure, and while there was some truth in this it hardly painted a complete picture of forces which had been forced to fight the Japanese for far longer than anyone else and had started from a situation of a weak national government and a distinct lack of support from the very nations that were so bitterly critical of them later. The Nanking Massacre brought condemnation but little action and even the Japanese bombing of the USS Panay produced no meaningful response other than some more rational elements in Japan seeking to apologize and raising donations for the victims to make amends. It was not until the Japanese occupied Indochina that the USA imposed meaningful sanctions on the Japanese with the embargoes on oil, scrap metal and loans. There had been some support for the Chinese Nationalists before American entry into the war, with the First American Volunteer Group, more colloquially known as the Flying Tigers being the best known, however when one compares this to the unofficial war being waged by the USN in the Atlantic against the Kriegsmarine it pales in comparison [1].

Even when America entered the war there would be doubts raised about the scale of the support to offered to the Kuomintang. Reports from military missions despatched to evaluate the Chinese Communist forces under the control of Mao Zedong were largely favourable, suggesting the Communists were better organized and more committed to the fight than the Nationalists and they were also possessed of support across a broad swathe of the country. The degree to which these reports reflected the reality on the ground remains a topic of debate into the modern day, with some suggesting that the American observers were deceived by Mao’s equivalents of a Potemkin Village, or the kind of exaggeration of their strength that the Luftwaffe managed to convey to Charles Lindbergh when he was so favourably impressed on his visits to Germany. There was also other intelligence received In Washington that painted a very different picture, suggesting that far from wholeheartedly opposing the Japanese the Chinese Communists had in fact colluded with them at various points, even during the period of the Nanking Massacre. Of course, there were similar accusations levelled against the Nationalists as well but the more rabidly anti-communist elements in Washington seized on the reports that painted Mao and his forces in a less than favourable light to argue against any support for the Chinese Communists, in which argument they were ardently supported by the Kuomintang. Regardless of these doubts plans were proposed to ensure that the Communists received a substantial share of the Lend-Lease supplies sent to China and the credit, if one can call it such, for derailing these plans can largely be placed with the British [2].

The British objections to the amount of materiel that was sent to the Chinese along the Burma Road have been mentioned previously, but perhaps without stressing the sense of genuine grievance that fuelled them. As the British drove the Japanese back in South East Asia in 1942 they felt they were carrying the larger part of the burden of the war against the Imperial Japanese Army, with heavy fighting along the Malayan peninsula and in the Dutch East Indies that was forcing the Japanese to draw down their forces in China in their attempts to first renew the offensive in Malaya and then to defend as the British turned the tables. As such there was strong belief both in London and among the senior British commanders in the region that the tanks, guns and munitions sent to the Chinese, whether to the Nationalists or Communists, would be better utilized arming more British Empire troops to bring about the swiftest possible defeat of the Japanese in South East Asia. To some extent the success of the British in 1942 actually served to work against this argument, but they still pressed it forcefully and they did receive some support in Washington and indeed for once the French supported their position, though naturally the French were also arguing for more equipment being sent to the Free French to prepare an attack on Indochina. The expansion of American war production eased these concerns somewhat, but they never quite went away [3].

There was also a political dimension to the opposition emanating from London over Lend-Lease going to the Chinese Communists while Churchill remained Prime Minister, which should come as no surprise. Churchill may have quieted his anti-Communist views when it came to the USSR as he correctly regarded their involvement in the war as vital to defeating Nazi Germany, he was not inclined to extend the same tolerance to the Chinese Communists. He regarded the spread of Communism in Asia as a direct danger to British Empire and he was forthright in expressing his view that it would be a grave mistake to support ‘Mao and his minions’ when the Allies were already driving the Japanese back and did not need the assistance of the Communists. Under other circumstances Washington might have been inclined to dismiss the concerns coming out of London but as the British backed up Churchill’s views with one victory after another in Asia during 1942 and 1943 this provided ammunition for those arguing against support for the Chinese Communists in Washington and plans to do so were drastically curtailed. This did not sit well with Mao, who took advantage of Communists spies inside the Kuomintang to obtain intelligence about their plans and leak this to the Japanese, while at the same time claiming the Kuomintang were inept and doomed to fail. Unfortunately for Mao this was discovered when the Japanese later tried, quite successfully, to stir up trouble among the Chinese factions by revealing this to the Kuomintang. Mao’s actions therefore ultimately backfired as this reinforced the opposition to aiding the Communists in Washington and by the Summer of 1944 the subject was moot anyway as Truman and Dewey were both publicly engaging in anti-communist rhetoric that could not be square with providing Lend-lease to Mao’s forces and Roosevelt was persuaded that doing so would damage Truman’s chances of securing the Presidency [4].

With the war in Europe reaching its climax there had a been a further increase in not only equipment and supplies but also American military advisers assigned to work alongside the Kuomintang forces to ready them for a major offensive operation. This had proven a frustratingly difficult task given the quality of some of the senior Chinese commanders, whose lack of ability was only matched by their firm belief in their own brilliance. In fairness the Kuomintang were hardly the only ones to have been afflicted with such questionable Generals and by the time of the Great Southern Offensive the worst offenders had been eased out of operational commands by the time-honoured method of promoting them and sending them off to take charge of some meaningless task, what some Americans called ‘the MacArthur solution’ [5].

After a series of small-scale operations in Southern China in late 1943 and early 1944 designed to test the mettle of the Chinese forces and boost their morale the Americans were confident that a large-scale offensive in Southern China was practical, though the climax of the war in Europe caused some delays in planning and preparation. This was in part because of a falling out between the Chinese Nationalist Leader Chiang Kia-Shek and the American General Joseph Stillwell. Stillwell wanted to be made overall commander of all Nationalist forces in China and Chiang saw this as an attack on his own prestige and authority. In the end Chiang was persuaded that a successful offensive against the Japanese would make his position unassailable and he accepted giving overall command to Stillwell for the duration of the Great Southern Operation, with the intent of having Stillwell replaced afterwards regardless of the outcome. Choosing a target for the operation was the simplest part of organizing the Great Southern Offensive. The city of Guangzhou, or Canton as it was called in the west, was a major port city and its reconquest by the Chinese Nationalist forces would be a serious blow to the Japanese position in southern China and huge boost to the standing of the nationalists both at home and abroad [6].

Astoundingly even as the first drafts of the plan for the Great Southern Offensive were being prepared in April of 1944 the Japanese were still working on their own plan for an offensive in China, Operation Ichi-Go. The concept of Ichi-Go was a series of thrusts design to sever the routes along which Lend-Lease supplies flowed to the Kuomintang and destroying large parts of their foes. Such an operation could theoretically even pose a threat to Burma and force the British to turn their efforts to that front instead of further offensive operations of their own. Such a plan would have been unlikely in 1943 and by 1944 it was pure fantasy, but the Japanese nonetheless pressed ahead with preparations even as the remaining resources of their armies in China drained away in the face of the continuing advance of the Allies and the cutting off of their supply routes. The only part of the plan that ever came to fruition was an attack towards Liuzhou in July of 1944. This was intended to threaten USAAF bases in the region, and it did achieve some initial success. This was short lived however and the successful defence by the Kuomintang did much to encourage their belief that they could take the fight to the Japanese. This focus on fresh offensive action led the Japanese to ignore the threat of a Kuomintang attack, still convinced that they were facing the same badly led, poorly motivated force they had in previous years. In truth they were not entirely wrong in their assessment despite all the measures that had been taken to improve capabilities of the Kuomintang. Still given the numerical advantage enjoyed by the Chinese Nationalists in the Great Southern Operation they didn’t have to be good, just good enough to get the job done [7].

[1] The attempts by various Japanese individual and organizations to make reparations for the Panay is as per OTL.

[2] The attitude to the Chinese Communists is less favourable because of course ITTL it does not seem that the Japanese are on the brink of conquering the whole of Asia in 1942.

[3] You can take this as a heady mix of pragmatism and a certain degree of racism towards the Chinese.

[4] In the simplest terms the Allies have decided they don’t need the Chinese Communists, which given the strategic situation ITTL means they can indulge in a bit of politics without any dire consequences.

[5] Even with the prospect of a change in political administration MacArthur still isn’t getting out of the doghouse. You can assume he made some less than helpful comments during the election campaign.

[6] Stillwell avoids being fired as he was IOTL, for a while at least.

[7] Basically this is meant to serve as a potted history of the Chinese theatre of operations. Given the focus of the TL on the British I hope it is understandable that China hasn’t received more attention.
 
[7] Basically this is meant to serve as a potted history of the Chinese theatre of operations. Given the focus of the TL on the British I hope it is understandable that China hasn’t received more attention.
Honestly I'm thrilled we're getting any kind of attention to china. It has gotten a bit more focus in recent years on the forum, but overall people ignore it
 

Garrison

Donor
Honestly I'm thrilled we're getting any kind of attention to china. It has gotten a bit more focus in recent years on the forum, but overall people ignore it
Well basically it came out of earlier discussions in the thread about the war in Asia and I felt it would be a bit ridiculous to ignore China.
 
On the morning of 24th May the invasion force approached the coast of British Borneo, a broad area that occupied most of the northern coast of the island. The landings were aimed at Sematan, west of Kuching the capital of the crown colony of Sarawak.
Somewhat minor nitpick, but Sarawak should still be a de-jure independent protectorate under White Rajah Charles Vyner Brooke (it's a long story), who didn't cede sovereignty to the British until 1946 OTL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raj_of_Sarawak#World_War_II_and_decline

Speaking of which, that may not happen TTL, which would have major regional consequences. For more see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Colony_of_Sarawak#Cession. If you didn't know, the history of this apparently unassuming corner of Borneo is quite the wild ride.
 
Last edited:

Garrison

Donor
Somewhat minor nitpick, but Sarawak should still be a de-jure independent protectorate under White Rajah Charles Vyner Brooke (it's a long story), who didn't cede sovereignty to the British until 1946 OTL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raj_of_Sarawak#World_War_II_and_decline

Speaking of which, that may not happen TTL, which would have major regional consequences. For more see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Colony_of_Sarawak#Cession. If you didn't know, the history of this apparently unassuming corner of Borneo is quite the wild ride.
I've edited that, thanks. It is possible that given the British having returned to Borneo much sooner than OTL that Sarawak can follow its own path for longer.
 
1st September – 13th November 1944 – China – Part II – The Great Southern Offensive

Garrison

Donor
1st September – 13th November 1944 – China – Part II – The Great Southern Offensive

The Great Southern Offensive had no other official codename, the designation Operation Summer Storm being the invention of some creative Kuomintang officers post war when being interviewed by western historians. The operation would involve nearly 500,000 Kuomintang soldiers, attacking along two main lines of advance with their main jumping off points being Guilin and Liuzhou. Facing them would be the Japanese 11th and 23rd Army Groups, who could muster less than 150,000 men between them. Simple numbers do not tell the whole story for either side as they prepared for battle. The morale and discipline of the Kuomintang troops was still suspect in many cases, but the same was also true of much of the opposing forces and the condition 23rd Army Group perfectly encapsulates the issues the Japanese forces in China as a whole faced [1].

23rd Army Group had been created in 1941 and had been intended to serve as a garrison force to discourage any attempted Allied landings in Southern China, though the circumstances that made this prospect more likely had also seen it starved of resources. By 1944 it was under the command of General Hisakazu Tanaka and it was obvious to any external observer that it had become something of an irrelevance and had failed utterly in its mission to deter the Allies after the successful British landings in Hong Kong, with 23rd Army taking no part in the fighting there because of the prospect of a Kuomintang offensive. 23rd Army had been repeatedly plundered for men and equipment in the face of Allied attacks in South East Asia and efforts to shore it up had left it reliant on the dregs of the IJA. Filled with poor quality Japanese recruits, Korean and Okinawan auxiliaries, and men from labour battalions suddenly thrust into the role of combat troops. its formations lacked cohesion, its morale was rock bottom, and it lacked the means to conduct proper training. Nothing about the 23rd Army inspired any confidence that it would be effective against even the Kuomintang, whom the Japanese continued to hold in contempt [2].

The 11th Army Group, under Lieutenant General Isamu Yokoyama, was in somewhat better condition, or had been prior to their involvement in the attack on Liuzhou, which had not only depleted their manpower and supplies but damaged their morale after being driven back by the Kuomintang. The British assault on Hong Kong had required 11th Army Group to deploy part of its strength to cover the possibility of a British assault out of Kowloon in the direction of Guangzhou, since in August this was still viewed as a far greater threat than the prospect of Chinese offensive. This was partly because General Yokoyama and his staff had tried to save face by claiming that they had inflicted far higher casualties on the Chinese during the battle of Liuzhou than they had taken, and it would be many months before the Kuomintang forces could be reorganized to take any sort of offensive action. Yokoyama was projecting his own problems onto his enemies, and this was always a dangerous approach, and in the case of the 11th Army it led to Yokoyama ignoring intelligence arriving at his HQ, some of it coming from the Chinese Communists, that a Chinese offensive was in the offing and none of this information was shared with his superiors [3].

The rapidly deteriorating situation in Hong Kong fixated the attention of all the Japanese forces in Southern China and at the end of August both 11th and 23rd Army Groups were making plans to redeploy further troops to cover the threat of a British breakout and they were taken completely by surprise when their positions facing Guilin and Liuzhou came under heavy artillery and air attacks starting just before dawn on the 1st of September. The attack on the Japanese position was launched by four Kuomintang divisions, with American organized and led armour leading the way. The Japanese forces at Hezhou and Wuzhou were caught completely off guard and while they did their best to hold they had little choice but to withdraw on the 2nd of September, barely escaping being flanked and cut off [4].

The overall Japanese command initially assumed that the initial Kuomintang attacks were diversionary in nature and while orders were issued to 23rd Army Group for a counterattack at Wuzhou this would be carried out by the 108th Infantry Regiment with little in the way of support. What armour the Japanese had available in the region had been concentrated towards Hong Kong as part of the preparations for the anticipated British offensive and would remain there practically until the Chinese forces were on the outskirts of Guangzhou, in no small part because a lack of fuel meant that repositioning them was out of the question. Despite the odds against them the 108th Infantry enjoyed some success and managed to push the Chinese forces out of the centre of Wuzhou. The blame for this can be laid at the door of rampant indiscipline among the troops who had followed up the spearheads and taken over control of the town. The Kuomintang troops were taken just as much by surprise when the 108th Infantry attacked on the 4th of September as the Japanese had been by the opening of the Chinese offensive. This success led to the Japanese overreaching. The 137th Infantry regiment, part of the 104th Infantry Division alongside the 108th Infantry Regiment, was now thrown forward, followed swiftly by two companies belonging to the 161st Infantry, the third regiment of the 104th Division. This was a mistake as poor Japanese communications meant the reinforcing units were not aware that the Kuomintang forces had stabilized the situation at Wuzhou and in fact Kuomintang troops were moving to flank the town once more. What this meant was that almost the whole of the 104th Infantry Division was being sent into the very trap their comrades had escaped on the 2nd of September. Stragglers from the 161st Infantry who had been driven back by the Kuomintang advance advised their HQ of the situation of the rest of the division, but the only thing the senior officers could do given their available resources was to order the 104th to attempt a breakout and withdraw back to where the remainder of 23rd Army were trying to prepare a new line of defence [5].

The 104th did make several attempts to breakout between the 6th and 8th of September, though even had they been able to escape the immediate encirclement of Wuzhou they would have been completely cut off by the advance of the rest of the Kuomintang forces. In the end the remnants of the division laid down their arms on the 10th of September. How many actually surrendered to the Chinese has been a subject of controversy, whether the Japanese soldiers chose to fight to the death rather than fall into Chinese hands or if as some Japanese sources claim, the Kuomintang perpetrated a massacre of captured soldiers. Putting this emotive issue aside the counterattack at Wuzhou had been a disaster for the 23rd Army Group, with a third of its combat strength lost in a fight that had handed the Kuomintang a victory without even significantly slowing their advance [6].

About the only good news for the Japanese from this series of actions was that it had slowed the advance of the Chinese forces and bought time for 11th Army Group to begin to redeploy units away from Hong Kong, where it was now apparent the British weren’t planning any immediate attack towards Guangzhou, to reinforce a new defensive line between Yunfu at the southern end and Guangning towards the north, with 23rd Army filling the line still further north and extending the line to Dawan. This was a long front to cover with the available Japanese troop strength and yet there was little choice but to try. The new plan for the defence of Guangzhou as laid out by Generals Yokoyama and Tanaka was to hold this line long enough for reinforcements to arrive from the north, reinforcements that would both extend the line to prevent the Kuomintang flanking the northern end and deploy a reserve behind the line to counter any Chinese breakthrough. Unofficially neither General was confident such reinforcements would be able to intervene in time to make a difference and according to diaries and interrogations the real intention was to try and hold open a line of retreat so the 11th Army Group could pull back from Guangzhou if the position became untenable and allow both armies to make an organized withdrawal until they could finally link up with elements of the Kwantung Army. That this intention was not laid out as part of the official strategy for the two army groups is understandable given that it was pragmatic rather than what many of Yokoyama and Tanaka’s superiors in Tokyo would have regarded as honourable [7].

This strategy offered the Kuomintang the opportunity to destroy both Army Groups if they were willing to commit the necessary forces to turn the northern end of the Japanese line at Dawan, forcing 23rd Army to pull back to the south and opening the entire force up to encirclement. General Stillwell was certainly enthusiastic about this idea, perhaps too enthusiastic as his attempts to lobby in favour of it with his superiors further strained his relations with Chiang Kia-shek. The Kuomintang leader’s resistance to the idea was not simply born out of spite, there were conflicting reports on just how many troops the Japanese still had available to cover Guangzhou and how quickly they might be reinforced. To Chiang the key objective was Guangzhou, and while he would never admit it to Stillwell he was acutely aware that his forces lacked the tactical flexibility to embrace such a change of plan, better to maintain the focus on the existing plan and try to through the Japanese lines rather than going round it. Chiang confirmed that main weight of the advance would remain in the south, which was very bad news for the 11th Army Group [8].

A combination of the Chinese advance becoming somewhat ragged, and the high-level strategic arguments led to a temporary halt to operations being called around the 15th of September and the advance would not resume until the 23rd, much to Stillwell’s displeasure though he was at this point guilty of overestimating the capability of the Japanese forces. That the halt lasted so long reflected the poor infrastructure in the area of the offensive and the difficulty in moving supplies and equipment forward. This problem was made worse by the presence of bandits who attacked convoys and stole considerable quantities of food, weapons, and ammunition. These bandits were often nothing more than Chinese locals who had little love for the Kuomintang and were every bit as happy to steal from them as they would have been the Japanese. Suppressing these now well armed bandits would be an issue for the Kuomintang Army, but one they would be able to postpone until after the completion of the battle. When they did turn their attention to suppressing the bandits they treated the Chinese peasant farmers who made up their ranks every bit as harshly as they had the Japanese, much to the discomfort of their American advisors [9].

One comfort for the Kuomintang as they worked to prepare for the next phase of the offensive was that 11th and 23rd Army Groups faced an even worse struggle, the Kuomintang at least had supplies to be stolen after all. There are stories that some Japanese units tried to buy stolen equipment from the Chinese bandits, though how successful such attempts were is uncertain as many Chinese peasant would claim they had handed over rusty rifles or ammunition boxes full of dirt and stones, though these claims were made at a time when they had to answer to the Kuomintang. Despite all the travails Yokoyama and Tanaka were determined to hold the line, not only because of the strategic importance of Guangzhou, which was somewhat diminished as the British tightened their grip on Hong Kong, but because they had little choice except to try, unless they wished to fall on their swords immediately. The soldiers under their command cared nothing about matters of honour or grand strategy, they were simply soldiers with their backs to the wall whose only chance of survival was to hold the line long enough for the promised reinforcements to arrive, surrendering to the Chinese was not an option anyone wanted to consider [10].

[1] So I’ve had to patch together various forces that took part in battles in China in 1944, though of course with the roles of attacker and defender largely reversed.

[2] The 23rd Army was a poor formation IOTL, it’s even worse here.

[3] The 11th Army is stretched far too thin and unlike OTL the attack on Liuzhou was a failure.

[4] There are an awful lot more American ‘advisors’ in China than OTL.

[5] The Japanese have allowed their disdain for the Kuomintang to get the better of them.

[6] While ignoring the mistake that led to the Japanese retaking the town in the first place.

[7] It’s a desperate strategy and they don’t have the manpower anywhere to hold on.

[8] On this occasion Chiang Kai-Shek is right and Stillwell is wrong.

[9] The Kuomintang will not be magnanimous in victory to put it mildly.

[10] And we will see how that works out for them.
 
Great chapter. If true then massacring surrendering troops is wrong but this is WWII in which Japanese troops rarely surrendered and these soldiers had been part of an army that spent the past 7 years committing some of the most horrific atrocities of the war so I can see why the KMT doesn't feel so inclined to accept surrenders,
 

Garrison

Donor
Great chapter. If true then massacring surrendering troops is wrong but this is WWII in which Japanese troops rarely surrendered and these soldiers had been part of an army that spent the past 7 years committing some of the most horrific atrocities of the war so I can see why the KMT doesn't feel so inclined to accept surrenders,
It's taken on some of the same aspects as the Eastern Front in the European theatre of war.
 
If the British start threatening to break out of Hong Kong that would continue to tie down the Japanese. And I'm sure that both the British and Chinese would prefer that it remains no more than a threat.
 

Garrison

Donor
If the British start threatening to break out of Hong Kong that would continue to tie down the Japanese. And I'm sure that both the British and Chinese would prefer that it remains no more than a threat.
That is exactly what the British would prefer.
 
1st September – 13th November 1944 – China – Part III – Stumbling to Victory

Garrison

Donor
1st September – 13th November 1944 – China – Part III – Stumbling to Victory

When the Kuomintang resumed their advance towards Guangzhou the battle that followed was a brutal attritional struggle, ‘two boxers flailing away hoping they might get lucky and land a punch’ as one American observer put it. The Kuomintang forces have come in for much criticism over the years which are superficially reasonable given their superiority in numbers and firepower. Certainly, there were numerous instances of poor communication, inadequate leadership, and lack of discipline that made the Kuomintang advance far slower than many would have expected even at the time, however they advanced nonetheless and did so in the face of surprisingly stiff resistance from what post battle assessments classed as low-quality lines of communication troops and labour units deployed into the frontlines by the Japanese. In some ways the poor standard of the Japanese troops worked on their favour, given that little was expected from them other than serving as cannon fodder there were few examples of banzai charges or troops defiantly holding a position beyond the point where it made any tactical sense to do so. The goal of the Japanese defenders holding the line before Guangzhou was survival and nothing more, such idealistic notions as death before dishonour or fighting to the bitter end for the Shōwa Emperor got short shrift from soldiers in the front lines, many of whom were Koreans or drawn from ethnic groups who cared nothing for the Empire of Japan. What drove them on was the fear of falling into the hands of the vengeful Kuomintang and they constantly had one eye on their avenues of retreat to the north [1].

These soldiers attitude was unofficially endorsed by General Tanaka and General Yokoyama, whose exhortations to their troops to fight focused on the need to hold out until reinforcements arrived rather than stirring entreaties to fight for the honour of Japan, which were reserved for the increasingly inventive reports being sent up the chain of command back to Tokyo, in the hopes that the desperately needed reinforcements might yet be dispatched. After the disaster at Wuzhou Tanaka in particular was wary about launching any counterattacks and several opportunities to repel the Chinese forces were passed up by this cautious approach, though this was undoubtedly the correct decision by the Japanese General as the sheer weight of the Kuomintang forces would almost have certainly engulfed any local successes just as they had at Wuzhou. Despite these more conservative tactics it was clear by the 16th of October that the position of 11th Army Group had come completely untenable. The British had achieved their final victory in Hong Kong which meant there was now little to prevent them mounting their own offensive in the direction of Guangzhou barring a painfully thin screening force made up mainly of troops driven out of Kowloon and as such badly disorganized and lacking in weapons and ammunition [2].

The British did mount several small demonstration attacks between the 16th and 25th of October, these however were simply intended to probe the Japanese lines and determine their remaining strength. This did aid the Kuomintang by increasing the Japanese anxieties about a fresh British offensive pushing north. This was never seriously considered in London and Montgomery was adamantly against getting dragged into what he bluntly termed the ‘quagmire of China’. There were discussions about where, when, or indeed if the British would mount any further major operations in the Pacific theatre, but Guangzhou was definitely not on the agenda, which suited the ambitions of Chiang Kai-shek who wanted an unequivocal victory for the Chinese Nationalists regardless of the fact it would mean heavier casualties for the Kuomintang forces [3].

What reinforcements reached the defending forces never made it further than the northern end of the area of 23rd Army Group, as the concern remained that the Kuomintang would turn the northern flank of the force and drive the 23rd and the 11th back into a pocket around Guangzhou. Some in the Kwantung Army saw this as all but inevitable and thus 23rd Army Group should pull back south and east towards Guangzhou, shortening their lines and perhaps allow them to exhaust the Kuomintang forces momentum and open them up to a properly organized counteroffensive when there were proper reinforcements available. Neither Tanaka nor Yokoyama were inclined to support such a plan, seeing it as little more than an excuse to push the two Army Groups into some heroic stand that would achieve nothing except to sacrifice their remaining men while still losing Guangzhou. They successfully argued that it would be better to preserve their men for future battles, especially as the British control of Hong Kong undermined the strategic value of Guangzhou regardless of any other considerations [4].

Not willing to wait for some superior to think better of this plan 11th Army began to pivot and draw back north on the 22nd of October. This was a complex movement, especially as they intended to fall back past Guangzhou with only a modest rear-guard force left to defend the city and delay the Kuomintang advance. That the 11th Army Group was able to complete the move successfully was partly due to the caution of the Kuomintang, the unexpectedness of the strategy also played its part, however. The Chinese had expected the Japanese to dig and fight to the end and when they began their withdrawal the Kuomintang commanders suspected that this was a trap, perhaps a preliminary to some large-scale kamikaze attack, or even a chemical or biological attack [5].

This was not an unreasonable fear given the activities of Unit 731 and the Japanese would certainly have had no qualms about making use of the biological agents at their disposal. What prevented this was that unknown to the Chinese the elements of Unit 731 attached to the Japanese command based in Guangzhou had been killed by a bombing raid that had destroyed their operational HQ at the beginning of the battle, the site having been mistaken for the forward headquarters of 23rd Army Group. Kamikaze attacks were not carried out because the IJAAF was desperately short on aircraft and fuel and most of those available to support the defence of Guangzhou had been destroyed in the early stages of the battle. Still the fear of such attacks certainly impacted the operations of the Kuomintang and bought the Japanese forces a little extra space and time that they desperately needed [6].

The Kuomintang forces reached the outskirts of Guangzhou on the 30th of November and over the next few days cleared out the rear-guard units one by one as they carefully advanced into the city. These last defenders were among the few Japanese units to fight to the death against the Chinese attacks, though this may have reflected the fact that the Kuomintang gave them little choice in the matter. Despite this dogged resistance and the painfully slow advance of the Chinese the city was completely secured by the 9th of November and the Great Southern Operation was declared to be completed four days later on the 13th of November, again prompting the displeasure of General Stillwell who had been eager to continue the pursuit and completely destroy the 11th and 23rd Army Groups. This disagreement marked the end of Stillwell’s time in China, and he was unceremoniously removed from his duties on the 20th of November and soon after he was on his way back to the USA, where he would list the defects of the Kuomintang and Chiang Kai-shek to anyone in Washington who would listen, which was not as many people as Stillwell would have liked [7].

For Chiang himself the recapture of Guangzhou achieved all his goals, consolidating the position of the Kuomintang, and himself, as the legitimate government in China and ensuring continued and indeed increased support from the USA. Kuomintang forces met up with the British around the 23rd of November and while the meeting was civil the British were determined that the Kuomintang should focus their efforts on pushing the Japanese back and not concern themselves with any thoughts of ‘assisting’ in garrisoning Hong Kong, a suggestion that Chiang Kai-shek was fortunately dissuaded from making [8].

The strengthening of the Kuomintang position inevitably constituted a setback for the Chinese Communist movement, especially as the Nationalists seized documents that showed the communists had passed intelligence to the Japanese about the Southern Operation, and even worse from the Communist perspective the information allowed the Kuomintang to identify several spies in their ranks and these communist agents would be swiftly eliminated as Chiang Kai-shek took advantage of the victory to clean house, removing dissenting voices and some men of questionable loyalty to the Nationalist cause. Some who had been willing to work with the Communists for no other reason than they seemed best equipped to fight the Japanese and drive them out of China now changed their stance, either for pragmatic reasons or because the Kuomintang were now able to apply some ‘vigorous’ means to persuade them to do so. Mao Zedong was far from happy with these developments and he now took to demanding more aid from the USSR so they could mount their own major operations and advance the cause of the Communist revolution. The autumn of 1944 was not the best time for anyone to be lecturing Stalin on ideological matters or demanding weapons and equipment. STAVKA were laying out their own plans for operations against the Japanese and they did not involve catering to the demands of Mao Zedong [9].

For the Japanese the loss of Guangzhou was not the strategic blow that it might have been a few months earlier given that the Royal Navy and RAF could now operate out of Hong Kong and interdict what little shipping had been able to make its way to the port through the gauntlet of Allied air power and submarines. In political terms though the fact that the Kuomintang had defeated the Imperial Japanese Army in open battle was cataclysmic and excuses about the lack of manpower and the threat from the British did nothing to ameliorate the impact. The emperor himself was shaken and sent a note that expressed his concerns, albeit couched in the courtliest language, to Prime Minister Tojo. The usually unshakable Tojo was unsettled by the Kuomintang victory even before he received the note from the emperor and this rippled out from the Prime Minister’s office all through the Army General Staff, as it now seemed all their calculations about the likely course of the war would have to be re-evaluated, especially as there had been no let-up in the cadence of Allied offensive operations, with the Americans unleashing Operation Iceberg even as the battle for Guangzhou was still raging [10].

[1] ITTL the Kuomintang are becoming to the Japanese what the Red Army was to the Germans, militarily second rate but vast pitiless and vengeful.

[2] Effectively the British can flank the entire Japanese position at Guangzhou, if they feel so inclined.

[3] The Kuomintang or Chiang Kai-Shek anyway is determined to make his government the legitimate rulers of China, regardless of the consequences.

[4] For one brief moment sanity prevails in Japanese strategy.

[5] This is perfectly reasonable as the Japanese probably would do one of those if they had the means to do so.

[6] The survivors might even be deployed some place safe, like Manchuria…

[7] Stillwell was doomed, he just lasted longer than OTL.

[8] Hong Kong is off the menu for the Chinese, possibly permanently depending on post war events.

[9] Mao and Stalin’s relationship is getting frostier.

[10] And Okinawa is next before we get some politics.
 
Last edited:
Top