WI: Australia never got involved in World War II?

What if instead of declaring war on Germany on the 3rd of September 1939 and following Great Britain into World War II, Australia decided to stay out of it? How would that have affected the war?
 
A large supply of men and equipment just got taken from the British empire. Limited troops are stationed in PNG and thus Japan over runs it and will invade northern Australia. Japan only really needs the top end and northern Queensland. So in answer to your question Australia is invaded and the Aussies fall back to the Brisbane line, Australia is divided and the Japanese have a large land base that can almost be self supporting. The allies will basically be cut off from the South Pacific region.
 
A large supply of men and equipment just got taken from the British empire. Limited troops are stationed in PNG and thus Japan over runs it and will invade northern Australia. Japan only really needs the top end and northern Queensland. So in answer to your question Australia is invaded and the Aussies fall back to the Brisbane line, Australia is divided and the Japanese have a large land base that can almost be self supporting. The allies will basically be cut off from the South Pacific region.

Would a lack of Australian troops have affected the campaign in North Africa?
 
What if instead of declaring war on Germany on the 3rd of September 1939 and following Great Britain into World War II, Australia decided to stay out of it? How would that have affected the war?
Australia hadn't ratified Westminster in 1939. Australia was by consequence of the UKs declaration at war.

You need a federal ALP in the 1930s. And you need it to have a principled anti war line. CPA or Wobbly Australia is probably easier tbh. But that's a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

Yours
Sam R.
 
Would a lack of Australian troops have affected the campaign in North Africa?
My guess is it wouldn't. AFIAK the growth of the British Empire and Commonwealth armies 1939-42 was governed first by the supply of equipment and second by the amount of shipping that was available to transport them rather than the supply of men. Therefore my guess is that the 3 Australian divisions that went to the Middle East 1941-42 (and the division sent to Singapore) would have been replaced by British and Indian formations.

Ireland was neutral, but tens of thousands of Irish people enlisted in the British armed forces. So did some Americans between September 1939 and Pearl Harbour. My guess is that tens of thousands of Australians would have enlisted in the British armed forces if Australia had remained neutral.
 
I seriously doubt that they would have. Didn't a fair few Australians back then still consider themselves 'British to the bootstraps' (to quote their Prime Minister of the day :p ) ?
 
A large supply of men and equipment just got taken from the British empire. Limited troops are stationed in PNG and thus Japan over runs it and will invade northern Australia. Japan only really needs the top end and northern Queensland. So in answer to your question Australia is invaded and the Aussies fall back to the Brisbane line, Australia is divided and the Japanese have a large land base that can almost be self supporting. The allies will basically be cut off from the South Pacific region.
That assumes that the Japanese would declare war on a neutral Australia. My guess is that they would leave the Australians alone until they had dealt with the Americans, British and Dutch. Keeping Australia neutral would be to Japan's advantage after it became clear to the Japanese Government that they were fighting a long war.

The Battle of Midway had it still happened is likely to have had a different result because there would not have been a Battle of the Coral Sea (because there would have been no attempt to take Port Moresby). There would be no Solomons-New Guinea Campaign. Instead Papua New Guinea would be a buffer between the Japanese and the Americans. The oil installations in the Dutch East Indies would have been more secure because they would not have been bombed from bases in the north west of Australia.

However, the defeat of Japan would not have been prevented and probably not delayed either because the Americans would have concentrated on the drive across the Central Pacific.
 
A neutral Australia might have retarded the growth of the RAF because the RAAF made a significant contribution to the Empire Air Training Scheme and many of the aircraft in the training schools were built in Australia. Without the personnel and aircraft it might take longer to build up equivalent capacity in Canada, New Zealand, South Africa and Southern Rhodesia.
 
That assumes that the Japanese would declare war on a neutral Australia.
But with the example of the Japanese attacking the US 1st then declaring war would any rational Australian politician take the risk?
I'd expect the sight of Japanese forces heading in their direction would send much of the Australian political establishment into panic no matter how unlikely an actual Japanese attack/invasion might actually be.
Who is going to help them? - The Americans have just lost their Pacific battlefleet apart from a couple of aircraft carriers & are being overrun in the PI, the French are already allowing the Japanese free passage and they refused to aid the British in their 'Darkest Hour'.
 
Just a reminder: if Japan attacks Australia then Australia has become involved in the second Great War by default.

Ie: not our speculation.

Yours,
Sam R.
 
Top