WI: Japanese-Ethiopian alliance in the 20s and 30s?

How could Ethiopian Army build up her strength in view of insufficient domestic industrial production and blockade of foreign supply by the Italian Navy? The stock is small to begin with and constant fighting to hold line will prevent the building up of stock that can be used to train and establish new formations.

One thing to remember is that Japan spent 44 years to "pull off a Meiji" in the Meiji period and it was still one of the least powerful of the industrialised countries. To think the Ethiopians can do the same in less time and with a much worse starting conditions (i.e. low literacy population) is absurd.
I’m aware of Ethiopia’s problems in regards to her problems (which many people have pointed out already). As for an alternate source of importing what’s needed, couldn’t other materials come from French Somaliland and other British colonies? Or would that be too insufficient for Ethiopia’s needs?
 
Alright, so the general consensus seems to be that Ethiopia can’t win any war against Italy, regardless of Japanese training and equipment. So what other effects could a Japanese-Ethiopian alliance have on both Ethiopia and the rest of the world?
 
??? The first time i hear this. What is "magnetic warfare"?
It was apart of the Chinese strategy of resistance during the Second Sino-Japanese War. It was when Chinese forces attracted advancing Japanese troops to certain points and then they would ambush, flank and encircle them. Could that be replicated in Ethiopia?
 

trurle

Banned
It was apart of the Chinese strategy of resistance during the Second Sino-Japanese War. It was when Chinese forces attracted advancing Japanese troops to certain points and then they would ambush, flank and encircle them. Could that be replicated in Ethiopia?
This is quite common, widely known tactics. It works sometimes, especially if enemy have a bad reconnaissance combined with agressive doctrine. Not a case against Italy i.m.h.o. - Italian forces had a lot of shortcomings, but ambushes of sort you depicted were not particularly frequent.
 
This is quite common, widely known tactics. It works sometimes, especially if enemy have a bad reconnaissance combined with agressive doctrine. Not a case against Italy i.m.h.o. - Italian forces had a lot of shortcomings, but ambushes of sort you depicted were not particularly frequent.
Could utilizing guerrilla tactics be successful?
 
Could utilizing guerrilla tactics be successful?

That was OTL, and no, it didn't work any better than the field armies.

Guerrillas need supplies, and there were few firearms of any sort outside of the actual military units, who had their own shortages.

As it was, there was the penalty of Death for anyone who didn't fall in for the General Mobilization Order, so there were not many men of fighting age left behind to do that kind of warfare

Villages that resisted got bombed, sometimes with poison gas
 
That was OTL, and no, it didn't work any better than the field armies.

Villages that resisted got bombed, sometimes with poison gas.
Guerrilla tactics were not utilized among Ethiopian forces until the country fell to Italian occupation in 1936.

Regardless of any bombing, the Patriots continued to launch guerrilla attacks even when the Italians used gas. I don’t see why this is any different for an ATL about a Japanese-Ethiopian alliance.
 
Last edited:
Guerrilla tactics were not utilized among Ethiopian forces until the country fell to Italian occupation in 1936.

Regardless of any bombing, the Patriots continued to launch guerrilla attacks even when the Italians used gas.

And that was largely ineffective and the Italians were only kicked out when the British invaded once WWII started.
 
And that was largely ineffective and the Italians were only kicked out when the British invaded once WWII started.
While the Italians were only expelled when the British invaded, the Patriots had managed to actually rout Italian forces in the particularly mountainous regions (Shewa, Gojjam, Gondar, etc.) and actually threaten Italian occupational forces - I wouldn’t say the resistance was ineffective. There’s also the fact that Italian forces were facing defeat in many areas in 1937-41 as the Patriots actually expanded the lands under their control.
 
Last edited:
Closest possible analogy would the Thailand after coup of 20 June 1933. In next 12 years, Thailand was harassed by great powers of epoch, but managed to remain independent (although its independence was on the brink of collapse at times), and nowadays is ~5 times higher GDP compared to Ethiopia, despite being about half the size of Ethiopia by size or population.
Thai military model:
1) Domestic rifle and rifle ammunition production
2) Buyout of heavy military equipment abroad, concentrating on artillery
3) License production of ground-attack aircraft (Thailand made a good choice with Avro 504), with engines only bought abroad
4) Navy purchases abroad, concentrating on mobile coastal defence and submarines
Doesn't this miss the problem that Thailand didn't manage to hold out successfully, it was invaded by IJA in WWII and then grew after wards as a US puppet that benefited from build up for Vietnam war? Ethiopia could have done far better post WWII with better cold war luck even if they lost as OTL to Italians.
 
Doesn't this miss the problem that Thailand didn't manage to hold out successfully, it was invaded by IJA in WWII and then grew after wards as a US puppet that benefited from build up for Vietnam war? Ethiopia could have done far better post WWII with better cold war luck even if they lost as OTL to Italians.
What do you think could’ve happened?
 
What do you think could’ve happened?
I simply don't think you can totally link 1930s policy of Ethiopia or Thailand with how well they are doing now, both got invaded and lost self control to larger losing major powers in WWII after that different influences drew them apart in terms of wealth, stable coastal nation acting as supporting base for USAF v land locked regime change and revolutions....5 time the GDP isn't very surprising IMO.
 
I simply don't think you can totally link 1930s policy of Ethiopia or Thailand with how well they are doing now, both got invaded and lost self control to larger losing major powers in WWII after that different influences drew them apart in terms of wealth, stable coastal nation acting as supporting base for USAF v land locked regime change and revolutions....5 time the GDP isn't very surprising IMO.
Could Ethiopia ever replicate Thailand’s success in industrialization and modernization?
 

trurle

Banned
Could utilizing guerrilla tactics be successful?
Guerilla tactics has the point, but usually work only with heavy foreign assistance.
Doesn't this miss the problem that Thailand didn't manage to hold out successfully, it was invaded by IJA in WWII and then grew after wards as a US puppet that benefited from build up for Vietnam war? Ethiopia could have done far better post WWII with better cold war luck even if they lost as OTL to Italians.
They at least avoided the physical dismantling of government. IJA occupation was more of negotiated basing settlement reached after armed demonstration of intentions, rather than full conquest as happened in Ethiopia. Thai even was able to disarm Japanese garrisons on their own without Allied help in August 1945, and that process was nearly peaceful. Therefore Thai suffered less social disintegration after time of troubles was over. Ethiopia devastation after 2 conquests - first by Italians and then by Allies - was much more comparable to Vietnam rather than Thailand.
Could Ethiopia ever replicate Thailand’s success in industrialization and modernization?
I think Ethiopia was in worse starting situation compared to Thailand (less export goods, and more fragmented society), but room for improvement indeed exist.
 
Doesn't this miss the problem that Thailand didn't manage to hold out successfully, it was invaded by IJA in WWII and then grew after wards as a US puppet that benefited from build up for Vietnam war? Ethiopia could have done far better post WWII with better cold war luck even if they lost as OTL to Italians.

The IJA did not invaded Thailand, Thailand (at least the then prevailing government) was collaborating with the Japanese:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thailand_in_World_War_II

Thailand in World War II officially adopted a position of neutrality until it was invaded by Japan in December 1941 which led to a armistice and, later, the military alliance treaty between Thailand and the Japanese Empire. At the start of the Pacific War, the Japanese Empire pressured the Thai government to allow the passage of Japanese troops to invade British-held Malaya and Burma. The Thai government under Plaek Phibunsongkhram (known simply as Phibun) considered it preferable to co-operate with the Japanese rather than fight them, since Japan promised to help Thailand regain some of the indochinese territories (in today's Laos and Cambodia) which had been lost to France. Axis-aligned Thailand declared war on the United States and Britain and annexed territories in neighbouring countries, expanding to the north, south, and east, gaining a border with China near Kengtung.[1]

Thailand retained control of its armed forces and internal affairs. The Japanese policy on Thailand differed from their relationship with the puppet state of Manchukuo. Japan intended bilateral relationships similar to those between Nazi Germany and Finland, Bulgaria, and Romania.[2] However Thailand at that time has been labelled by both the Japanese and the Allies as the "Italy of Asia"
 
Guerilla tactics has the point, but usually work only with heavy foreign assistance.

They at least avoided the physical dismantling of government. IJA occupation was more of negotiated basing settlement reached after armed demonstration of intentions, rather than full conquest as happened in Ethiopia. Thai even was able to disarm Japanese garrisons on their own without Allied help in August 1945, and that process was nearly peaceful. Therefore Thai suffered less social disintegration after time of troubles was over. Ethiopia devastation after 2 conquests - first by Italians and then by Allies - was much more comparable to Vietnam rather than Thailand.

I think Ethiopia was in worse starting situation compared to Thailand (less export goods, and more fragmented society), but room for improvement indeed exist.

Much worse starting situation. Thailand was comparatively richer, more literate and more socially developed in 1930s.
 

Zachariah

Banned
Much worse starting situation. Thailand was comparatively richer, more literate and more socially developed in 1930s.

Was it to that extent though? The only real comprehensive source I've been able to find on the economic and social development of Ethiopia, and its early modernization efforts, indicates that while it was nothing to write home about, Ethiopia wasn't doing too bad in the 1900s and 1910s. https://www.persee.fr/doc/ethio_0066-2127_2004_num_20_1_1075 Also, it's worth mentioning that an integral part of the proposed Japanese-Ethiopian alliance was a mutual agreement with Japanese immigration companies (imin-kaisha), who saw an opportunity to increase relations between the two countries, and whose efforts were responsible for the proposed marriage between Prince Lij Araya Abebe and a Japanese noblewoman IOTL. A number of Japanese trade missions had been arranged to Ethiopia, where the proposed alliances would have ensured that Japanese farming interests managed to secure the 500,000 hectares of land that they sought for cotton, coffee and other products, as well as land for immigrant families to settle.

And unlike elsewhere, where the Japanese emigrants faced racial prejudice and forced assimilation, Ethiopian progressive intellectuals called “Japanizers” had been arguing that Japan was a good model for modern development, and supported marriage between the upper classes of the two countries. Many Japanese nationalists were also supportive of intermarriage between the proposed Japanese emigrants and Ethiopians, arguing it was necessary to unite the colored races against the white. So even if we place the question of future wars involving Ethiopia to one side for now, you have to consider the size of the Japanese Ethiopian community in this scenario, and the impact this community might have. How many more Japanese people might choose to emigrate to Ethiopia, instead of to such places as Brazil and Peru? Could the Japanese Ethiopian community, rather than the Japanese Brazilian community, be the largest group of the Japanese diaspora in this TL?
 
How many more Japanese people might choose to emigrate to Ethiopia, instead of to such places as Brazil and Peru? Could the Japanese Ethiopian community, rather than the Japanese Brazilian community, be the largest group of the Japanese diaspora in this TL?
You could see the same 500k Japanese who settled in Manchuria IOTL instead immigrate to Ethiopia.
 
You could see the same 500k Japanese who settled in Manchuria IOTL instead immigrate to Ethiopia.
Yeah, no, Manchuria's way closer to home with much more obvious economic gains to be seen (better existing infrastructure, land and higher wages given to Japanese settlers, years of propaganda regarding the riches of Manchuria). Much safer, with the home islands and the military nearby, and much more integrated into the Japanese cultural psyche of the era due to its status as a gleaming jewel of the imperial era. The Japanese government also wanted Japanese people to colonize the region to bring it more fully into the Japanese Empire. Even if Japan does not take Manchuria, the majority of the Japanese who would've gone there would probably go to either Korea or Taiwan, colonies where the Japanese government was far more invested and that held a similar place in Imperial Japanese culture with Manchuria.
 
Top