Tojo's Alaskan Alternative

[mailinutile2]

If we put ourselves behind Tojo spectacles, Japan had 3 big problems in the 1940:
1) secure a proper foodstuff income
2) secure a proper oil income
3) having a free hand to do 1) and 2)

In OTL, this resulted in 3 divergent lines of operations against China (1), against Holland-UK to get Borneo (2) and against the USA fleet (3).
A 3-fronts war is not something you'd want to experience, but it seemed to be no other option.
Was it really so?
Actually there is some other oil in the region , near the southern coast of Alaska: the problem was that at the time nobody knew that, and actual extractions began around 1968.

So let's suppose a POD around 1900 concerning alaskan oil discovery and drilling.

In these conditions, Tojo could think to remain at peace with European powers, and just attack China and USA.

Thus the war would actually split in 2 separate wars.

That would be strategically sound , since the south pacific would be neutral ground and, after the Pearl Harbour action, the Japanese fleet would have to cover just the Northern pacific (and the home islands, obviously).

The Aleutine landings would probably turn in major actions instead of being diversive actions as in OTL.

Also Alaska would probably be more strongly garrisoned than in OTL.

What would be the best strategy?
Where to land?
How to proceed?
What the best USA line of operation in that case?
Would USA involve in the European war, too?

 

[Amerigo Vespucci]

The problem is that even with a POD involving an earlier discovery of oil in Alaska, it'll remain uneconomic to develop until shortages make it profitable to exploit areas that require greater investment. I don't think there's a plausible way you can make Alaska's oil economical by the 1930s, which is what you'd have to have for it to be a viable target under your scenario.

 

[The Red]

The problem is that even with a POD involving an earlier discovery of oil in Alaska, it'll remain uneconomic to develop until shortages make it profitable to exploit areas that require greater investment. I don't think there's a plausible way you can make Alaska's oil economical by the 1930s, which is what you'd have to have for it to be a viable target under your scenario.

Forgetting that invading Alaska's a suicide mission for Japan, they'd have ridiculously long supply lines and be facing vastly superior American and possibly Canadian forces.

This would be worse than sealion.

 

[LordIreland]

Another problem with Alaska is the weather. IRRC in OTL the american response to the Kuriles invasion was very sluggish due to having to wait for the right weather conditions.

 

[mailinutile2]

Forgetting that invading Alaska's a suicide mission for Japan, they'd have ridiculously long supply lines and be facing vastly superior American and possibly Canadian forces.

This would be worse than sealion.

Longer than OTL Borneo?
How big is Alaskan garrison?
Woud Canada be involved if Japan do not declare war to the UK?

 

[The Red]

Longer than OTL Borneo?

The Borneo campaign is hardly a good example, Japanese forces were expected to be self sufficient there often marching without any food supplies. Do you think they'll be able to be self sufficient in a tundra?

How big is Alaskan garrison?

It was large enough to hold the Japanese at bay combined with the elements and the USN until American and possible Canadian reinforcements arrive to smash the invasion.

Would Canada be involved if Japan do not declare war to the UK?

Oil wasn't the only thing the Japanese needed, and if they're stupid enough not to attack south east Asia you can be sure Britain will declare war, including Canada.

 

[mailinutile2]

It was large enough to hold the Japanese at bay combined with the elements and the USN until American and possible Canadian reinforcements arrive to smash the invasion.

My question was a question.
I do not have any idea of how big is the alaskan garrison: do you have some data/some hints on where I could recover some data?
Even if talking only on the order of magnitude, are we talking of 5,000 or 50,000 men?

you can be sure Britain will declare war, including Canada.

Would it?
With an european and a north africa front already opened?
(plus the battle of the atlantic, and the bombing raids, of course).
Wouldn't that be like saying "pray, honorable fellows, please invade singapore"?

 

[The Red]

My question was a question.
I do not have any idea of how big is the alaskan garrison: do you have some data/some hints on where I could recover some data?
Even if talking only on the order of magnitude, are we talking of 5,000 or 50,000 men?

I don't know for certain but I would presume at least a division, enough to hold the Japanese from sezing anything important.

Would it?
With an european and a north africa front already opened?
(plus the battle of the atlantic, and the bombing raids, of course).
Wouldn't that be like saying "pray, honorable fellows, please invade singapore"?

They were trying to get America on side at this point, also if the Japanese go on such a stupid endeavour, they aren't invading Singapore anytime soon.

 

[mailinutile2]

I don't know for certain but I would presume at least a division, enough to hold the Japanese from sezing anything important.

In 1941, the Imperial Japanese Army had 51 divisions.
Considering 25 divisions in china and 10 divisions kept in the home island as a strategical reserve, there could be a 16-to-1 japanese superiority
and, if things go as in OTL, they would have the strategical surprise
and with the Pearl Harbour fleet gone, there could be some trouble covering the shoreline/escorting the reinforcements

 

[The Red]

In 1941, the Imperial Japanese Army had 51 divisions.
Considering 25 divisions in china and 10 divisions kept in the home island as a strategical reserve, there could be a 16-to-1 japanese superiority
and, if things go as in OTL, they would have the strategical surprise
and with the Pearl Harbour fleet gone, there could be some trouble covering the shoreline/escorting the reinforcements

So your strategy involves the Japanese going straight for the jugular, not island hopping? Presuming this is the case the Japanese would be forced to land these 16 divisions, with hardly any air cover, hundreds of miles away from friendly ports. This would take weeks at the least, enough time for significant US and Canadian forces to build up. Also these divisions were poor in comparison to western divisions, they often had to be self sufficient and had no grasp of modern warfare.

This would be a slaughter.

 

[mailinutile2]

So your strategy involves the Japanese going straight for the jugular, not island hopping? Presuming this is the case the Japanese would be forced to land these 16 divisions, with hardly any air cover, hundreds of miles away from friendly ports.
This would be a slaughter.

In OTL Kiska and Attu were conquered by japanese troops without any problems, with far less than 1 division worth of troops.
Even considering 2 divisions here, there would be a 14-to-1 superiority.
Air support OTL for Aleutine was provided by bombers from the carriers Junyō and Ryūjō.
I don't remember if those would be unavailable because employed against Pearl Harbour, but you would have at least the carrier groups that OTL were used to cover the landings in the south pacific.

Also these [Jap] divisions were poor in comparison to western divisions, they often had to be self sufficient and had no grasp of modern warfare.
This would be a slaughter.

Were they? I knew that they were better than the american ones at the beginning of the war.
maybe I have inaccurate information

 

[CalBear]

The Alaskan oil deposits are remarkably difficult to get at, even today. Japan lacked the specialized equipment needed to do even remotely difficult drilling (with the the only real source of supply for such equipment being the U.S. and to a lesser degree the UK). The oil in the DEI and Borneo is very easy to reach and exploit, especially compared to the North Slope.

In addition to oil the Southern Resource Area was to provide minerals, material (especially rubber), and FOOD to Japan. While there are minerals in Alaska, they are, if anything, a tougher job than drilling for oil. Alaska will provide no food and will use rubber in vast quantities (cold is hell on rubber seals, especially the fairly primitive ones in use in 1941)

Just attacking the United States & China will not really help the Japanese at all. China will continue to be the massive manpower drain that it was IOTL and the United States military will still do exactly what it did IOTL, grind Japan into flour.

You are also ignoring the likelihood that Hitler will still throw in behind the Japanese after Pearl Harbor or that the UK will join in the defense of Canada (especially if it will help draw the U.S. into the ETO).

You will, in this scenario, wind up with the same alliances as IOTL, except this time the British are fully awake and far more prepared in Malaya when the war starts and the Japanese lack any available forces to move against the Southern Resource Area because their ground forces are committed to Alaska.

 

[CalBear]

So your strategy involves the Japanese going straight for the jugular, not island hopping? Presuming this is the case the Japanese would be forced to land these 16 divisions, with hardly any air cover, hundreds of miles away from friendly ports. This would take weeks at the least, enough time for significant US and Canadian forces to build up. Also these divisions were poor in comparison to western divisions, they often had to be self sufficient and had no grasp of modern warfare.

This would be a slaughter.

I'm more concerned with where they get the lift to move SIXTEEN divisions as once. That's 300,000 men and all their equipment and supplies. It will take thousands of marus to move them, vessels that no country on Earth possessed in 1941, especially Japan (most of the FOOD that Japan imported traveled in U.S. or UK owned and operated bottoms, not to mention oil). Can you imagine keeping 300,000 men supplied where EVERYTHING has to be shipped in across the Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea, in winter?

For that matter where in China does Japan retreat to free up 300,000 troops to attack Alaska? China was the whole point of Japan's war.

You are very much on point regarding IJA tactics. Their troops were very tough, but overall the IJA was, by design, a light infantry force with minimal armor and a fairly light artillery train. The Japanese Army did not achieve one significant victory against Western (or Soviet) forces that was not the result of both surprise and engagement against colonial forces.

 

[Bill Cameron]

The Alaskan oil deposits are remarkably difficult to get at, even today.

CalBear,

Don't waste your time.

The heart of this topic is like the Third Wave at Pearl or Sealion. No matter how many times you explain it, they will not listen, they will not understand, and they will continue to present the same What Ifs over and over and over and over until the heat death of the Universe.

I've explained for years now that it is borderline ASB for Japan to simply find, let alone from exploiting or transporting, oil in China, Siberia, Sakhalin, Alaska, or any other locations that routinely get dredged up.

And yet the threads still sho up.

We didn't even have the necessary petro-geology theories or knowledge, let alone the prospecting technology, in the 1940s that were present in the 1950s. The PODs required in this time line for oil to be found in Alaska, not drilled for, not pumped, not transported, would result in an electronics revolution equivalent to that of the 1950s occurring in the 1920s. One can only imagine how those electronics would have effected WW2, yet there's no hint of them in any of this.


Bill

 

[Grimm Reaper]

Attu and Kiska were 'garrisoned' respectively by ten Army meteorologists with a single rifle and a missionary with his wife so that Japan was able to occupy these islands against such 'resistance' is hardly surprising.

That Japan gained absolutely nothing and wasted troop commitments and especially in terms of naval forces to get these useless islands is also a fact.


A larger commitment means Japan can't possibly succeed at the goals that matter, the European colonies and especially the Dutch East Indies. And Japan's ability to land 16 divisions in less than several months does not exist, nor does the ability to supply those divisions in Alaska.

 

[mailinutile2]

Attu and Kiska were 'garrisoned' respectively by ten Army meteorologists with a single rifle and a missionary with his wife so that Japan was able to occupy these islands against such 'resistance' is hardly surprising.

That Japan gained absolutely nothing and wasted troop commitments and especially in terms of naval forces to get these useless islands is also a fact.

A larger commitment means Japan can't possibly succeed at the goals that matter, the European colonies and especially the Dutch East Indies. And Japan's ability to land 16 divisions in less than several months does not exist, nor does the ability to supply those divisions in Alaska.

You're right, but in view of a "japan heads north" strategy, these could become important airstrips.
As regarding European colonies and Dutch East Indies I also agree, but the point of the thread is about japan NOT attacking the European powers and seeking alaskan oil.

Do yow know how many divisions were used in European colonies' landings (including Hong Kong, Borneo and Singapore)?
Would such a force have the possibility of establishing a foothold on the southern alaskan coast or would it have beeen repulsed by the alaskan garrison?

(I 'm not being sarcastic, I really do not know the numbers: do you have any data about it?)

 

[Grimm Reaper]

Alaskan oil had not been discovered, was not known to exist and could not be developed at the time if it had been so the concept is invalid.

Likewise those islands were worthless as bases, air strips or any other military use, which is why Admiral Theobald didn't try to intercept the IJN landings in 1942 because he found it impossible to imagine that any Japanese officer with his wits wanting the islands. He had no idea how woefully ignorant the IJN was about about those islands, even down to basic geography.


Japan, of course, is incapable of a major invasion over such a distance, least of all with 16 divisions and maintaining even a smaller force of 2-4 divisions would be crippling for the Japanese merchant marine. Units in Japan or China could at least hope to live off the land. Here they can't even hope to find adequate shelter.

Finally, Japan assumed in WWII that it could overrun and take advantage of the DEI oil fields before the US embargo crippled the nation, here they don't even have that hope as the oil fields not only are not fully developed, they aren't even known to exist.

So this scenario requires Japan to accept even more certain doom without even the vague hopes of OTL, which is not plausible. Japan could probably throw enough men to hold a piece of land for a time but invading Alaska or any other place with no chance of victor and only for the sake of invading really doesn't make sense.

 

[mailinutile2]

Alaskan oil had not been discovered, was not known to exist and could not be developed at the time if it had been so the concept is invalid.

Likewise those islands were worthless as bases, air strips or any other military use, which is why Admiral Theobald didn't try to intercept the IJN landings in 1942 because he found it impossible to imagine that any Japanese officer with his wits wanting the islands. He had no idea how woefully ignorant the IJN was about about those islands, even down to basic geography.


Japan, of course, is incapable of a major invasion over such a distance, least of all with 16 divisions and maintaining even a smaller force of 2-4 divisions would be crippling for the Japanese merchant marine. Units in Japan or China could at least hope to live off the land. Here they can't even hope to find adequate shelter.

Finally, Japan assumed in WWII that it could overrun and take advantage of the DEI oil fields before the US embargo crippled the nation, here they don't even have that hope as the oil fields not only are not fully developed, they aren't even known to exist.

So this scenario requires Japan to accept even more certain doom without even the vague hopes of OTL, which is not plausible. Japan could probably throw enough men to hold a piece of land for a time but invading Alaska or any other place with no chance of victor and only for the sake of invading really doesn't make sense.

Uhm
from the first message:

Actually there is some other oil in the region , near the southern coast of Alaska: the problem was that at the time nobody knew that, and actual extractions began around 1968.
So let's suppose a POD around 1900 concerning alaskan oil discovery and drilling.

Regarding distance: Is really alaska farther than borneo OTL?

 

[Bill Cameron]

Uhm from the first message: Actually there is some other oil in the region , near the southern coast of Alaska: the problem was that at the time nobody knew that, and actual extractions began around 1968. So let's suppose a POD around 1900 concerning alaskan oil discovery and drilling.

Umm, as I've repeatedly explained in threads of this type, the reason no one knew the oil was there was because in 1900 or even 1940 we lacked the petro-geological theory to even suspect the oil was there.

In addition to the theory, in 1900 or even 1940 we also lacked the technology needed to look for the oil and a big chunk of the technology needed to drill for and exploit such deposits.

Your POD thus comes down to two alternatives:

Geological - In which the deposits which were begun to be exploited in 1968 become the type(s) of deposits which can be found and exploited in 1900.

Scientific/Technological - In which the deposits remain the same, but the theory and technology needed to suspect their presence, locate them, and exploit them is available 50 years earlier.

Either POD has huge consequences.

Regarding distance: Is really alaska farther than borneo OTL?

Ignoring weather concerns, Japanese colonies like Formosa, positions of Japanese forces and bases, and many other issues:

Tokyo to Anchorage by sea: 3333 nautical miles
Tokyo to Balikpapan by sea: 2675 nautical miles

You will now comment that it's "only" another 658 nautical miles while ignoring the many other issues.


Bill

 

[mailinutile2]

Tokyo to Anchorage by sea: 3333 nautical miles
Tokyo to Balikpapan by sea: 2675 nautical miles
You will now comment that it's "only" another 658 nautical miles while ignoring the many other issues.

I'd do it If I knew where Balikpapan was