If Japan doesn't attack the US, what are its chances of victory/stalemate?

[trurle]

It's not anti-japanese to suggest that Japans OTL 1940s leaders weren't exactly rational and moderate people. Which is why conflict with the US is all but inevitable. And Japan has no way to resolve that conflict outside of a) backing down or b) going to war.

The timing should be taken into account. The peak of ultra-nationalist feelings in Japan has happened in 1936. After Imperial Way Faction was purged after failed coup d'etat 26 February 1936, the gradual trend has begun for pacification of Japanese policy. The war in China of 1937 was the last pure conquest. By 1941, the Japanese were thinking mostly about survival in hostile political environment rather than about exploiting an expansion possibilities. Therefore, the Pearl Harbour 7 December 1941 was in fact an unusually far-planned DEFENSIVE ATTACK operation. A harbinger for the "Strategic Defense Initiative" concept (which is also oxymoron). Reading history, the Yamamoto`s force waited with attack until it was confirmed what the Japanese diplomats have failed to make a reasonable terms with US.

So, keep military situation relatively "cold" up to 1974 and Japan may become rational enough to back down in China. May be. The trends are unreliable, because it take so long to allow hard-liners to die out. Japan can be defeated a half dozen times meanwhile.

 

[Namayan]

Where is Japan getting the raw materials to fuel their empire then?



It is quite obvious that the OP meant a Japan that was largely like the OTL Japan, just avoided Pearl Harbor (which is easy, considering it was basically Yamamoto's idea). Otherwise, the OP's question makes no sense. If we have a completely different japan, then "victory" would also be completely different, and the question pointless.

It's not anti-japanese to suggest that Japans OTL 1940s leaders weren't exactly rational and moderate people. Which is why conflict with the US is all but inevitable. And Japan has no way to resolve that conflict outside of a) backing down or b) going to war.

No it's not pointless. It merely stated not attacking USA which can be anything after 1900 without any specific pod. Unless the op specified otherwise it should be otl 1941 being the pod.

Nor did I immediately assumed they were Japanese in the 1940s. Because if the op did specificy the pod being so, then you are correct, the Japanese were such. But the pod is lacking except it is after 1900 forums which gives everyone a lot of leeway for imagination.

 

[Faeelin]

Where is Japan getting the raw materials to fuel their empire then?

The US and UK, since the US had no problem selling the raw materials to fuel their empire up until 1941. I mean, American oil and American metal were used for several years OTL. The embargo was only put in place when Japan moved into Indochina.

 

[zoomar]

No it's not pointless. It merely stated not attacking USA which can be anything after 1900 without any specific pod. Unless the op specified otherwise it should be otl 1941 being the pod.

Nor did I immediately assumed they were Japanese in the 1940s. Because if the op did specificy the pod being so, then you are correct, the Japanese were such. But the pod is lacking except it is after 1900 forums which gives everyone a lot of leeway for imagination.

I don't follow you. The original PoD was:

"If Japan doesn't attack the US at Pearl Harbor what are its chances of victory/stalemate?"

This is clearly asking about OTL's Militarist Imperial Japan and its decisions in 1940-41. It is a Japan that has already joined the Axis and is an ally of Germany and Italy. It is a Japan that is already deeply engaged in a costly war of conquest in China that is spiraling out of control. It is a Japan that has been anticipating the need for Indonesian oil since the 1920's and has been planning for a likely war with the USA (and others) if this source is in danger of being cut off. It is not anti-Japanese to take OTL realities as the basis for speculation regarding what might happen if Japan elected NOT to attack the US in its push south to the NEI.

 

[Faeelin]

It is not anti-Japanese to take OTL realities as the basis for speculation regarding what might happen if Japan elected NOT to attack the US in its push south to the NEI.

It's very weird to me how this board sometimes seems to think the German decision to try to conquer Europe and put Jews in gas chambers can be stopped by killing one man, but the Japanese are an alien race of Kilrathi bent on raping Nanking.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

It's very weird to me how this board sometimes seems to think the German decision to try to conquer Europe and put Jews in gas chambers can be stopped by killing one man, but the Japanese are an alien race of Kilrathi bent on raping Nanking.

No, but enought the Japanese officer corps was. AND it was THEY who were allowed to set policy.
Sorry, but it's true.

 

[Faeelin]

No, but enought the Japanese officer corps was. AND it was THEY who were allowed to set policy.
Sorry, but it's true.

Then why didn't Japan attack the Dutch East Indies as soon as France fell? Why didn't they invade the Soviet Union? Why did they make a compensation payment for the Panay Incident?

 

[trurle]

No, but enought the Japanese officer corps was. AND it was THEY who were allowed to set policy.
Sorry, but it's true.

You again messing the Imperial Way Faction with the entire Japan. They were never strong enough to set policy, although were strong enough to stage "incidents". These guys were used to be influential in Japan up to 1934, put afterwards the Japanese government have increasingly cracked down on them.

Such guys like Imperial Way Faction do appear after economic hardships. It happened after Shōwa financial crisis back in 1927, and do repeat currently after Great Recession follow-up in 2009-2010. People see the declining standards of living and start to search opportunities to improve their lives by violence targeted to foreign nationals and entire nations.
And this mode of thinking is not entirely insane. Do not forget what the Great Depression in US was ended by the Second World War!

But i think the discussion is led astray.
Let`s return to alternative invasion (or even no invasion) strategies without attack on US, allowing Japanese victory or stalemate. I proposed early Soviet Sakhalin oil as POD and invasion of Japan to Northern Sakhalin. Good chances for stalemate, in my opinion. Other possibilities?

 

[mlp]

You again messing the Imperial Way Faction with the entire Japan. They were never strong enough to set policy, although were strong enough to stage "incidents". These guys were used to be influential in Japan up to 1934, put afterwards the Japanese government have increasingly cracked down on them.

That doesn't make sense. Weren't the Imperial Way Faction the ones who proposed invading the USSR, instead of going south into Southeast Asia?

 

[lycan]

The "strike south" policy taken was a compromise between what the Army wanted and what the Navy wanted. The Army wanted to strike counterclockwise, starting in Malaysia, moving through DEI and finally the Philippines. They may have wanted to keep a last minute "strike north" option available until they actually reached PI. The Navy wanted to knock the US out by attacking PI first, then moving clockwise through DEI and Malaysia. The option chosen was a compromise, to start at PI and Malaysia and reach DEI in a "pincer" movement--plus the added attack on Pearl.

For reasons probably only Hitler knew, he ordered that the Japanese be kept in the dark about the upcoming Barbarossa. Had Japan joined in, the Soviet counterattack would probably have destroyed Japan's position in China, with earlier communist gains. As for how the Soviets would have fared in Europe, there are many variables.

 

[trurle]

That doesn't make sense. Weren't the Imperial Way Faction the ones who proposed invading the USSR, instead of going south into Southeast Asia?

The Imperial Way Faction has lost an argument. So Japan has moved to south to confront easier (as they understood) instead of the most dangerous adversary - Soviet Union.
But (sorry for repeating) the Japanese intelligence about Soviet Union was faulty. Soviets have properly identified their main defensive strategy in Siberia as "disinformation". The level of alert against Japanese spies was unprecedented. Thousands of people were imprisoned or shot, tens of thousands resettled for just being technically able to collaborate with Japanese. At later pre-war stages, Japanese has resorted to para-trooping agents from Ki-20 planes at least 1000 km deep within Soviet territory to avoid high-alert zones. But Soviets rapidly discovered it and extended the spy-hunt zone for the whole Siberia.

 

[trurle]

For reasons probably only Hitler knew, he ordered that the Japanese be kept in the dark about the upcoming Barbarossa. Had Japan joined in, the Soviet counterattack would probably have destroyed Japan's position in China, with earlier communist gains. As for how the Soviets would have fared in Europe, there are many variables.

Possible, but the timing is extremely tight. The Barbarossa plan was finished in February 1941, and in March 1941 the Japanese have already trashed the Soviet Union invasion strategy. To actually work and have the Japanese prepared, the Germany should actually develop Barbarossa together with Japan. Japanese will need at least 6 month notice to perform an emergency mobilization and conversion program - assuming no time wasted in political process (which is unlikely). My estimate is at least 9 months should elapse from Japanese first notice to actual joint invasion to Soviet Union. As alternative, a stark political changes in Japan to prepare faster and attack more limited set of Soviet targets.

 

[mlp]

As i said, the Imperial Way Faction has lost an argument. So Japan has moved to south to confront easier (as they understood) instead of the most dangerous adversary - Soviet Union.
But as i mentioned several times, the Japanese intelligence about Soviet Union was faulty. Soviets have properly identified their main defensive strategy in Siberia as "disinformation". The level of alert against Japanese spies was unprecedented. Thousands of people were imprisoned or shot, tens of thousands resettled for just being technically able to collaborate with Japanese. At later pre-war stages, Japanese has resorted to para-trooping agents from Ki-20 planes at least 1000 km deep within Soviet territory to avoid high-alert zones. But Soviets rapidly discovered it and extended the spy-hunt zone for the whole Siberia.

Welp, misunderstood that previous post.
In correcting what I said above:
Of course, the IWF is different from the entirety of Japan - it'd be more than wrong of me to accuse the Japanese nation of being hellbent on invading China and elsewhere. But it is fact that the Japanese state, in the mercy of the IJA and IJN, was forced to be aggressively expansionist in policy. IWF was just one of the aggressive factions that called for invasion of the USSR; the other factions were slightly less or perhaps equally aggressive in what they wanted from neighbouring countries.
By the late 1930s aggression is inevitable towards anywhere else than China. The question would be whether or not the US should be struck with the other countries.

 

[Blue Max]

I think most of it comes down to China;

Japanese Policy in China was intrinsically self defeating. Gain access to markets and gain influence by installing pro-Japanese leaders, sure. Killing Chinese People in wanton savagery and refusing to negotiate with Chiang?

What are the Chinese people getting out of this?
Indeed, why wouldn't the Chinese just fight to the better end to get them out?

Victory for Japan is possible but means that their military advantage over China can be turned into a more advantageous peace for them. I don't have a huge opinion of Chiang--I suspect that given how the Nationalists promptly lost the Civil War against the Communists, it may very well be possible for China to simply splinter. But if there is no other choice, the Chinese people will fight as opposed to getting debased by vicious sorts that are literally using biological weapons against them.

Japan has no chance of beating anyone except China. They didn't have the foresight to win the peace there, although I give them some odds of Chiang collapsing, and some chance that some of their puppet regimes could eventually become decent enough that the Chinese people simply give up resisting their rule.

In all likelihood: They'll go broke before they break the Chinese people.

If Japan tries the Soviet Union, the whole scenario is whether shutting down Vladivostok to US Aid and likely drawing Soviet forces away from Europe [or even a hastily signed concession in the Far East--what's a few hundred miles of icepack if the cost is Moscow?] somehow tips the war in favor of Hitler. The Soviets were crushing in 1945 against the Kwangtung Army, and equally capable in small skirmishes fought in the late 1930s. Japan can only win if the Soviets are truly screwed in Europe, and it's not within their power to decide.

If Japan tries the DEI / British, they're picking a fight with Winston Churchill. This man does not give up, he does not graciously admit defeat, and he does not accept a diminished future. They'll need to fight to the point that the UK sacks him, and that's not going to happen unless Australia or India are simply coming apart. Slim to none, and Slim is a gifted British General.

==========

I think it's very possible for Japan to win in China, if there were a better vision what what winning meant and how to sell it to the Chinese people. Ultimately, though, the situation never really moved before naked force and without giving the Chinese people a good spot in this new future.

Victory: >1%.
Stalemate: Leads to defeat via humiliating economic collapse.

 

[trurle]

I think most of it comes down to China;

Japanese Policy in China was intrinsically self defeating. Gain access to markets and gain influence by installing pro-Japanese leaders, sure. Killing Chinese People in wanton savagery and refusing to negotiate with Chiang?

What are the Chinese people getting out of this?
Indeed, why wouldn't the Chinese just fight to the better end to get them out?

Victory for Japan is possible but means that their military advantage over China can be turned into a more advantageous peace for them. I don't have a huge opinion of Chiang--I suspect that given how the Nationalists promptly lost the Civil War against the Communists, it may very well be possible for China to simply splinter. But if there is no other choice, the Chinese people will fight as opposed to getting debased by vicious sorts that are literally using biological weapons against them.

Japan has no chance of beating anyone except China. They didn't have the foresight to win the peace there, although I give them some odds of Chiang collapsing, and some chance that some of their puppet regimes could eventually become decent enough that the Chinese people simply give up resisting their rule.

In all likelihood: They'll go broke before they break the Chinese people.

If Japan tries the Soviet Union, the whole scenario is whether shutting down Vladivostok to US Aid and likely drawing Soviet forces away from Europe [or even a hastily signed concession in the Far East--what's a few hundred miles of icepack if the cost is Moscow?] somehow tips the war in favor of Hitler. The Soviets were crushing in 1945 against the Kwangtung Army, and equally capable in small skirmishes fought in the late 1930s. Japan can only win if the Soviets are truly screwed in Europe, and it's not within their power to decide.

If Japan tries the DEI / British, they're picking a fight with Winston Churchill. This man does not give up, he does not graciously admit defeat, and he does not accept a diminished future. They'll need to fight to the point that the UK sacks him, and that's not going to happen unless Australia or India are simply coming apart. Slim to none, and Slim is a gifted British General.

==========

I think it's very possible for Japan to win in China, if there were a better vision what what winning meant and how to sell it to the Chinese people. Ultimately, though, the situation never really moved before naked force and without giving the Chinese people a good spot in this new future.

Victory: >1%.
Stalemate: Leads to defeat via humiliating economic collapse.

Mostly agree. I must just note what Soviet Union is unlikely to gave up large concession in any case. North Sakhalin, Russian-held Aleutian islands, Karaginsky island..may be. Continental Siberia concessions- politically impossible. The majority of the Russian important cities were within 100km from the border.

Also, in China the best scenario in case of Japanese victory may resemble a French Algeria. Retreat and evacuate every collaborationist. I doubt the Manchukyo or other Chinese holdings was stable or important enough for Japanese anyway. As de-colonization movement around the world will gain momentum (and it started well before WWII), the Japanese will eventually concentrate effort on their oldest colonies. Priority (from most important to least important) would be Taiwan(1895)-Sakhalin(1905)-Korea(1910)-Manchukyo(1932)-other Chinese territories(1937).

 

[1965 Timelord]

Imperial Japanese racial attitudes of themselves and others

The problem of the Japanese people in those years after the Russo-Japanese war and the inter-war years was the rise of the idea of the racial superiority complex. This philosophical complex was to have the Japanese people become the destined rightful rulers of Asia that will guide the inferior races to a future peace where everyone is subservient to them. Those races who resist this destiny are liquidated under the Japanese military might and the prescribed methods for this campaign was described in details from the Military History magazine article 'The Culture Of Cruelty' authored by Mark Felton in their January 11 issue of 2011. Parts of this article talks about the indoctrination of the Japanese people and their military to this belief. So avoiding future conflicts with USA will become very difficult for this reason unless Japanese militants start some smart planning for a political campaign with a broad future view that bring the Western Powers to their knees permanently. That would require patience and sacrifice against any current economic troubles that would have push the OTL government to war against the Allies with a shoddy decision making war plan that only covers short-term situations.

 

[trurle]

The problem of the Japanese people in those years after the Russo-Japanese war and the inter-war years was the rise of the idea of the racial superiority complex. This philosophical complex was to have the Japanese people become the destined rightful rulers of Asia that will guide the inferior races to a future peace where everyone is subservient to them. Those races who resist this destiny are liquidated under the Japanese military might and the prescribed methods for this campaign was described in details from the Military History magazine article 'The Culture Of Cruelty' authored by Mark Felton in their January 11 issue of 2011. Parts of this article talks about the indoctrination of the Japanese people and their military to this belief. So avoiding future conflicts with USA will become very difficult for this reason unless Japanese militants start some smart planning for a political campaign with a broad future view that bring the Western Powers to their knees permanently. That would require patience and sacrifice against any current economic troubles that would have push the OTL government to war against the Allies with a shoddy decision making war plan that only covers short-term situations.

Racial superiority complex was the tool to control a masses (defined as everybody beyond elite of few thousands), not the system of belief among decision-makers. Average Japanese during war just worked hard and hoped the army will solve their economic problems. On other statements, you are talking about "Total War" Japanese faction thinking. Nominally, the Japan from 1936 have pursued long-term goals. Unfortunately, for Japan, the actual foresight level was grossly inadequate. Segmentation of knowledge and responsibility, miscommunication between the Diet, Army, Navy, and Zaibatsu companies .. all resulted what the no Japanese men (including elites) have a clear picture of perspectives or progress of military conflict. "Mass thinking", "Non-critical thinking", "Blind Believe", "Delegation of Responsibility" - were the factors which lead the Japan to where it was in OTL.

Zaibatsu companies set the deadline of year for operations without import, Yamamoto have set the 6 months as limit of IJN operational efficiency, IJA have insisted what not blocking import of weapons to China will cost Japan the war in a year..and all these constraints were assumed fixed to produce an suicidal military campaign plan of December, 1941.
Nobody even though about cancelling some constraints, because people making constraints were considered the top experts.

The same situation happened with weapons development.
One of the saddest stories about inflexible constraints/specifications is the field air defence of IJA. Army engineers have produced at least 3 different prototypes of self-propelled 20mm AA guns. None were accepted for production - because the technical requirements were never updated as war has progressed. Same story with the 40mm Bofors cannon - the best medium AA gun of WWII- failing to pass the Japanese acceptance trials.

As war dragged on, progress in social structure was made. Zaibatsu were weakened, indoctrination was reduced (trying to remove most notably rite-of-passage bullying in IJN/IJA, because it was identified as one of the main contributors to the lack of Japanese tactical initiative). But the speed of progress was far from needed to win the war.