No WW2: What happens to the Second Sino-Japanese War?

As we know, World War 2's European theatre directly influenced the East Asian theatre: Germany's invasion of the Netherlands and France helped Japan in its plans to occupy Indochina and Indonesia. Such occupations caught the eye of the US, who, eventually, entered the war, and started sending aid to the Kuomintang government in China.
But what if World War 2 never happened? Say, if the Munich Agreement is not signed in 1938, a war between Germany and France/Czechoslovakia happens, the germans are defeated quickly and Hitler is ousted. That, or the Battle of France is a german failure.
What would happen to the ongoing Second Sino-Japanese War? Japan already occupied Manchuria and most of the chinese coast, but the lack of a Burmese Campaign would mean that Britain will be able to send over a lot of supplies across Burma to the chinese.
Do the US still get involved in the war? Will they still put an oil embargo against Japan?
Who is more likely to win here? If the odds are equal, then can the war end in a stalemate, with Japan occupying Manchukuo, some coastal cities, but not much else?
 
Last edited:
First: absent a defeat of France Japan can't simply occupy French Indo China. That was done first to eliminate a trade route to KMT territory, and second to gain control of the rice, tin, coal & other resources in FIC. With no defeat of France & FIC occupation by Japan the US does not have a panic attack & mobilize its reservists or enact the the embargoes against Japan. Instead the US takes lesser measures to remedy the Depression era military budgets, prepare the Phillipines for independence, and continue incremental small sanctions vs Japan.

Japan can continue to prosecute its war with China & trade in the global markets for a while. Gradually over the next year Britain, France, and the US will continue incremental sanctions, and improve support to the KMT. At some point Japans credit in the international banking is likely to run out, the finical losses from the war & occupation of China will tank the economy & the leaders of the Zaibatsu, the Army, and others will have to take a cold harsh look at their options. Alternately they can take some other route that will resolve nothing or make things worse and Japans Imperial ambitions will dissolve in economic decline, internal fighting, and a resurgent and vengeful China.
 
It might be fun to speculate what a war circa 1943 might be like, between a Anglo/French coalition, maybe with the Italians and US reluctantly following? The Japanse military might still be razor sharp, but even more brittle than in December 1941, & wielded by a weaker arm.
 
It might be fun to speculate what a war circa 1943 might be like, between a Anglo/French coalition, maybe with the Italians and US reluctantly following? The Japanse military might still be razor sharp, but even more brittle than in December 1941, & wielded by a weaker arm.
Since the nazis would have probably been defeated by then, i'd expect France, Britain, and the Netherlands to be more prepared for a japanese offensive on that part of the world. Thus, it is probable that Japan loses, big time.
 
I wonder if the French would have a carrier operational by 1943?

Since the nazis would have probably been defeated by then, i'd expect France, Britain, and the Netherlands to be more prepared for a japanese offensive on that part of the world. Thus, it is probable that Japan loses, big time.

Maybe the Japanese never get to a offensive. by late 1941 OTL the Dutch, Australians, Brits, and US had broken several key codes. No reason why that trend won't continue. If the Japanese go berserk & make a decision for war their enemies are likely to figure it out & take remedial or preventive actions. i.e.: Ambush the Japanese as they come out the gate, or make preemptive strikes. I'm thinking the Brits make two, three, or more preemptive first strike raids on Japanese bases on Hainan, Formosa, the China coast, Truk, ect...
 
Why does everyone ignore the Soviets in these threads? They were the main source of supplies for the Nationalists, and had actually fought several battles with the Japanese.

It's 1943. The Red Army is modernized. And Stalin thinks "hey, it's a good time to get that defensive perimeter in East Asia..."
 

Deleted member 1487

Why does everyone ignore the Soviets in these threads? They were the main source of supplies for the Nationalists, and had actually fought several battles with the Japanese.

It's 1943. The Red Army is modernized. And Stalin thinks "hey, it's a good time to get that defensive perimeter in East Asia..."
Because IOTL they didn't express interest in fighting Japan until it was clear Japan would collapse and the USSR needed to carve out a buffer against US penetrations onto continental Asia?
 
Because IOTL they didn't express interest in fighting Japan until it was clear Japan would collapse and the USSR needed to carve out a buffer against US penetrations onto continental Asia?
Since his western front is secured and Japan is bogged down in China and likely gutted by sanctions. it is a temping target
 

Deleted member 1487

Since his western front is secured and Japan is bogged down in China and likely gutted by sanctions. it is a temping target
Without WW2 Japan doesn't move into Indochina, so avoids the worst sanctions, Japan is also on the wrong side of the Transsiberian RR, so isn't a great target to fighting a major war against, and just because Germany is defeated doesn't mean Stalin isn't threatened by the Imperialist powers.
 
Why does everyone ignore the Soviets in these threads? ..."

I dont. In this case I've lumped them under 'European'.

Thinking this over the slightly more likely course is Japans leaders choose a face saving peace treaty with China. In 1905 the US president was able to 'persuade' them to take the same with Russia, which like the KMT in 1941 was down but not out. Its possible nephew Roosevelt can do the same in 1942. The US and Europeans can offer assorted carrots and sticks to both sides & get them to accept a treaty neither will appreciate. The other two possibilities are:

1. One or several European powers (& the USSR is one of these) stumbles into war with Japan to assist China. If Japan does not make peace very quickly it loses Manchuria, possibly Korea, and worst case Formosa too.

2. The war remains between Japan and China for a couple more years before bankrupting Japan. If China has a had sufficient support from Europe or the US the such a peace would favor China. However it falls out, in this short term Japan is liable to keep its pre 1937 empire.

Any treaty between Japan and China is liable to be temporary & a resurgent China is liable to be after restoration of the full Middle Kingdom by the 1950s.
 

Deleted member 1487

Doesn't mean they won't be sanctioned eventually , The US was putting increasing economic pressure even before Japan moved into Indochina
Only due to increasing Japanese outrages; they didn't get crippling until Japan stepped out of China.

I dont. In this case I've lumped them under 'European'.

Thinking this over the slightly more likely course is Japans leaders choose a face saving peace treaty with China. In 1905 the US president was able to 'persuade' them to take the same with Russia, which like the KMT in 1941 was down but not out. Its possible nephew Roosevelt can do the same in 1942. The US and Europeans can offer assorted carrots and sticks to both sides & get them to accept a treaty neither will appreciate. The other two possibilities are:

1. One or several European powers (& the USSR is one of these) stumbles into war with Japan to assist China. If Japan does not make peace very quickly it loses Manchuria, possibly Korea, and worst case Formosa too.

2. The war remains between Japan and China for a couple more years before bankrupting Japan. If China has a had sufficient support from Europe or the US the such a peace would favor China. However it falls out, in this short term Japan is liable to keep its pre 1937 empire.

Any treaty between Japan and China is liable to be temporary & a resurgent China is liable to be after restoration of the full Middle Kingdom by the 1950s.

I feel obligated to link to the Soviet-Japanese war in 1939...which could potentially happen with Hitler dealt with by then:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...much-of-the-mainland-could-japan-hold.439122/
 
Because IOTL they didn't express interest in fighting Japan until it was clear Japan would collapse and the USSR needed to carve out a buffer against US penetrations onto continental Asia?

But there was a ton of Soviet aid to the Chinese, which would only increasea s the Soviet Union finishes modernizing and arming. If Europe is peaceful, why would it decline?

Soviet Union and the Threat to the East
:
"From the end of 1937 until mid-1939 a total of 3665 military experts had come and gone" from the Soviet Union to China."

Soviet aid included "9720 light and heavy-machine guns, 50,000 rifles, about 180 million cartridges...."

From Chinese Soviet Relations, 1937-1945

"Prior to Guangzhou's occupation by Japan in 1938, some 80,000 tons of equipment . . . moved through that port."

This book also notes that among the Soviet advisors to China included some guy named Zhukov, who I think played a role in the Red army during WW2.
 
Without WW2 Japan doesn't move into Indochina, so avoids the worst sanctions, Japan is also on the wrong side of the Transsiberian RR, so isn't a great target to fighting a major war against, and just because Germany is defeated doesn't mean Stalin isn't threatened by the Imperialist powers.

The OTL 1945 Manchurian Offensive involved over 1.5 million men, so I don't know if the Transsiberian railway is the stumbling block you portray it as.
 

Deleted member 1487

But there was a ton of Soviet aid to the Chinese, which would only increasea s the Soviet Union finishes modernizing and arming. If Europe is peaceful, why would it decline?

Soviet Union and the Threat to the East
:
"From the end of 1937 until mid-1939 a total of 3665 military experts had come and gone" from the Soviet Union to China."

Soviet aid included "9720 light and heavy-machine guns, 50,000 rifles, about 180 million cartridges...."

From Chinese Soviet Relations, 1937-1945

"Prior to Guangzhou's occupation by Japan in 1938, some 80,000 tons of equipment . . . moved through that port."

This book also notes that among the Soviet advisors to China included some guy named Zhukov, who I think played a role in the Red army during WW2.
That's pretty minor aid compared to what they were getting from the US. Certainly the Soviets had interests in keeping the Japanese distracted in Asia, but what does that have to do with attacking them?

The OTL 1945 Manchurian Offensive involved over 1.5 million men, so I don't know if the Transsiberian railway is the stumbling block you portray it as.
They cherrypicked their very best from Europe and stripped out their Western military for the offensive while still getting 50% of their LL aid (billions of dollars in 1945) via Vladivostok. LL was a massive part of Soviet logistics in the region.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Route#Routing
Total westbound tonnage through the Bering Strait was 452,393 in comparison to 8,243,397 tons through Vladivostok.[6] Part of this northern tonnage was fuel for the Alaska-Siberia Air Route airfields described below. Provisions for the airfields were transferred to river vessels and barges on the estuaries of large Siberian rivers.[2
During the conflict the Pacific Route saw a steady stream of goods moved from the west coast of the United States and overall accounted for some 50% of all Lend-lease goods to the Soviet Union.[1] The route closed in September 1945 with the end of the conflict and the cessation of the Lend-Lease scheme.

80,000 tons of equipment to the Chinese from 1937-45....over 8.2 million tons to the USSR from the US via Vladivostok from 1941-45.

http://www.o5m6.de/redarmy/ll_routes.php
Over 2 million tons in 1945 alone to Vladivostok, 1.5 million tons between May-September 1945 for the Milepost Agreement leading up to the negotiated Soviet intervention in Manchuria.

The Soviets also had since February 1945 to plan for it after the Yalta Agreement.
 
That's pretty minor aid compared to what they were getting from the US. Certainly the Soviets had interests in keeping the Japanese distracted in Asia, but what does that have to do with attacking them?

... What is your evidence that this is "pretty minor compared to the aid they were getting from the US?" America didn't even start sending Lend Lease equipment to China until April 1941, four years after the war started!

Edit: Sorry, I see. Soviet aid to China is small compared to the aid that the aid America gave to Russia, eventually.

Second edit: Your post is wrong to say 80,000 tons from 1931 to 1941; Soviet aid to China basically stopped after the fall of France.
 

Deleted member 1487

... What is your evidence that this is "pretty minor compared to the aid they were getting from the US?" America didn't even start sending Lend Lease equipment to China until April 1941, four years after the war started!
I didn't say it was more in 1937-39, rather what the US gave from 1940 on (when the aid started) was enormous and above that of the USSR during the entire period it aided the KMT.

Edit: Sorry, I see. Soviet aid to China is small compared to the aid that the aid America gave to Russia, eventually.
Both actually. The US gave a lot more to China from 1940 on than the Soviets gave them from 1937-45.

Second edit: Your post is wrong to say 80,000 tons from 1931 to 1941; Soviet aid to China basically stopped after the fall of France.
I misread your post about the 80,000 tons via Guangzhou.
 
Of the major powers involved only Weimar Germany and the USSR had any interest in a resurgent or at least independent China, neither have any extraterritorial holdings or spheres of influence, although the USSR was falling into Russia's old patterns and haunts. As between the two China had its best hope in Germany who unlike the USSR had no shared border or designs on her territory, including lost territory. The British, French and even USA had been and continued to be exploitative of China and only their own interests served as pause for Japan's naked attempt to usurp them. Japan views this as kicking out the Westerners and imposing a new order in Asia led by them, fellow Asians, they see themselves as the superior or more fit ones because they already got rid of the unequal treaties, industrialized and stood as one of the great powers. Obviously the Middle Kingdom does not see Japan as any different than the Europeans, in fact even less so because they are nothing but a wayward cousin compared to what China had been as the actual greatest power in Asia. The more I read on internal Japanese politics from 1914 forward I am increasingly pessimistic about Japan averting the suicide she is bent upon.

First, I see no way to break the strangle hold the military has on the government nor to dislodge the Army and its faction that was compelled to go to China, second I do not see how Japan can continue what she sees as her manifest destiny without expanding her quasi-colonial sphere and exploiting China as the other powers had and were. Third, without a war in Europe the British and French will stand up to Japan, the USSR is working more obliquely to subvert China itself to her sphere through the KMT and will be the linchpin in getting China free of one set of masters for another. In too many instances the British let Japan intrude into her known spheres and encouraged Japan by that weakness or indifference. The USA has its own axe to grind and may eventually come to support the KMT and a free China but I think we exaggerate the American position or motivation minus a war with Japan or against the backdrop that was Europe.

Without a threatening Germany in Europe and no war there, Japan is boxed in, but may simply consolidate her hold on the old Russian sphere in Manchuria. The KMT faces indifference or sabotage from the British and French but might yet grow strong enough to reassert something more than being a free-for-all to them. Best case scenario is that Chiang shows no signs he is going to kick them out and they ignore his development path. I am dubious if the Japanese will go full invasion of China where the other powers remain in place, even if weakened by a Depression, so we might get just a border war between the ROC and Japan who steps too far in subverting another of the Northern warlords to their hegemony. It still occurs to me that the out of control Army might simply go for it and Japan is still plunged into a war that now sees open support for the KMT and counters from the British and French. I think isolationist America is more remote here. As long as China can arm itself and sustain its armies in the field I do not see the Japanese doing nearly as well as they did. This is what I believe the Japanese foresaw, they could never win in the long run so needed to conquer China, but like a snake eating a crocodile the prey is too big to swallow. Remove the occupation of her ports, or leave open supplies from Germany to China through Russia with some scraps from Russia and China will choke Japan to death.
 
Top