Imperial Japan victory

[The Federalist]

I've got a couple of PODs that I think could make for a victorious Imperial Japan that survives well after the 40's.

a). Germany gets the Philippines in 1900, meaning no American involvement in the Pacific. After WW1 (Entente still wins but the US stays neutral), Japan gets it as a LON mandate. Probably the southern part of it goes to Britain.

b). Th Japanese establish a foothold in Siberia in the chaos of the Russian Civil War then they expand into Manchuria in the 20's. Oil is discovered in the early 30's. giving Japan enough fuel to conquer China (or at least a large part of it) which they've done by the end of the 40's.

c). Probably go with Philip K. Dick's POD of FDR's assassination or any POD that leads to a worse and longer depression that lingers on into the 40's, just to try to prevent American intervention in the Pacific.

Does this all work and are there any other PODs that can be added to this?

EDIT: All these POD's exist in the same TL. I suppose only the first one is the POD and the rest are butterflies.

 

[Churchill]

Japan gambles on the USA not entering the war in late 1941 by attacking all non-US held territory in South East Asia.
Gamble pays off and America stays out.

By mid 1942 the Japanese Navy captures Fort Moresby in New Guinea, New Caladonia, Fiji and Samoa.
Invasion of Australia by late 1942.
Australia captured by late 1943.
1944 Japanese overun India.
Mid 1944 New Zealand invaded and occupied.

Mmmmm now I still cant see Germany winning the war in Europe but it would be interesting.

 

[MrP]

I think some of our Australian members might take issue with the depiction of Australia being overrun in a year.

 

[Churchill]

I think some of our Australian members might take issue with the depiction of Australia being overrun in a year.

No doubt.
It could well have been the Jap's Barbarossa.

 

[Ferdinand Koenig]

Japan gambles on the USA not entering the war in late 1941 by attacking all non-US held territory in South East Asia.
Gamble pays off and America stays out.

By mid 1942 the Japanese Navy captures Fort Moresby in New Guinea, New Caladonia, Fiji and Samoa.
Invasion of Australia by late 1942.
Australia captured by late 1943.
1944 Japanese overun India.
Mid 1944 New Zealand invaded and occupied.

Without some POD which leads to an increased level of industrialization in Japan (say, big oil deposits discovered in southern Sakhalin, after the Russo-Japanese War of 1905), I don't really see Japan having the military capacity to pull that off. Perhaps an invasion of Australia after a prolonged naval blockade. I'm really not clear to what extent Australia was reliant on imported goods during the 1940s, however.

I also suspect (as alluded to already) that Australian resistance to the Japanese would be positively ferocious, thus further limiting the odds of Japanese victory. A Japanese naval blockage of Australia, to keep them effective neutralized (after the fall of Singapore, and no U.S. to step in to take Britain's place as Australia's security guarantor), while focusing their attention on India, perhaps makes more sense.

 

[GBW]

Have them discover the Daqing oil field early in their puppet Manchukuo; enough oil there to make their military independent of foreign oil.

 

[Churchill]

Without some POD which leads to an increased level of industrialization in Japan (say, big oil deposits discovered in southern Sakhalin, after the Russo-Japanese War of 1905), I don't really see Japan having the military capacity to pull that off. Perhaps an invasion of Australia after a prolonged naval blockade. I'm really not clear to what extent Australia was reliant on imported goods during the 1940s, however.

I also suspect (as alluded to already) that Australian resistance to the Japanese would be positively ferocious, thus further limiting the odds of Japanese victory. A Japanese naval blockage of Australia, to keep them effective neutralized (after the fall of Singapore, and no U.S. to step in to take Britain's place as Australia's security guarantor), while focusing their attention on India, perhaps makes more sense.

Northern Australia could have been taken but anything after that would be very difficult.

 

[Sachyriel]

A Naval blockade untill they capitulate, raiding teams and such.

Piracy and Pillaging. It's not 'honorable', but what do they really care about?

 

[Riain]

I once read a WW2 Japanese appreciation that Australia would produce too much popular resistence to profitably occupy. And besides, where would they invade; Darwin and get stranded up in NT, or Queensland south of the barrier reef and have extremely long supply lines?

 

[mattw101]

I once read a WW2 Japanese appreciation that Australia would produce too much popular resistence to profitably occupy. And besides, where would they invade; Darwin and get stranded up in NT, or Queensland south of the barrier reef and have extremely long supply lines?

Surely they'd only need to occupy the centres of population (ie. the west coast and isolated areas elsewhere) and then garrison/fortify them.

I doubt any thought was given to actually systematically advancing over the whole of Australia!

The country will never be fully pacified, obviously, but then it wouldn't really have to be.

 

[burmafrd]

The japanese were stretched to thier shipping limits as it was doing what they did do in 1942. Unless they have a lot more shipping and other materials that is way too much.
India and China? they would need 10 million men just to keep both countries under some kind of control. That kind of drain would be massive.

 

[CalBear]

Without the Philippines being in U.S. hands, the Japanese might have avoided war with the U.S., although the defensive spheres needed by both nations would still have a huge overlap.

This is very unlikely but it is the only way to get Japan into even a possible survival position.

Even if the IJA had managed to holde a lodgement in Siberia in 1919, it wouldn't have lasted into the 1940's. They would have been shoved out by the Soviets, probably around 1930-32. That event would have resulted in a much stronger Red Army and a far less decimated Red Army filed grade officer corps, with the massive butterfly that tosses into WW II.

Regarding Australia - The problem with ALL the Australia Invaded and Occuppied scenarios is the same, people forget that it isn't an island. Australia is a CONTINENTAL landmass that is a third of the Planet away from Japan.

 

[Ferdinand Koenig]

Regarding Australia - The problem with ALL the Australia Invaded and Occuppied scenarios is the same, people forget that it isn't an island. Australia is a CONTINENTAL landmass that is a third of the Planet away from Japan.

Yeah, well, its not like they'd have to garrison the desert.

 

[AussieHistNut]

Yeah, well, its not like they'd have to garrison the desert.

No but in trying to move from their foothold onwards they would meet resistance of both the military and the civil population. The Japanese were not familiar with fighting in the desert, so the logistics of fighting there would have slowed down their advance to a crawl. Also the Brisbane line plan would have bought the time needed for the Australians to re-group and go on the offensive.

To take Australia the costs would have been prohibative in both men and material and could have actually cost them the war in other fronts. The more men they funnel into trying to take Australia would be less men they could use in China for example.

 

[panzerjay]

to break Australia, there must be some fatal chasm between her and the brits.

the relationship as it was,or is, too damn strong for just some invasion to break

 

[Hendryk]

Oil is discovered in the early 30's. giving Japan enough fuel to conquer China (or at least a large part of it) which they've done by the end of the 40's.

You may find some stuff to work with in this thread.

 

[Faeelin]

b). Th Japanese establish a foothold in Siberia in the chaos of the Russian Civil War then they expand into Manchuria in the 20's. Oil is discovered in the early 30's. giving Japan enough fuel to conquer China (or at least a large part of it) which they've done by the end of the 40's.

The Japanese had a foothold; and they were forced to leave. Staying in OTL means that the rest of the world trusts them less, and provides an interesting counterargument to those who opppose a naval race in the US.

I am also unclear who helps the Japanese build this oil industry.

c). Probably go with Philip K. Dick's POD of FDR's assassination or any POD that leads to a worse and longer depression that lingers on into the 40's, just to try to prevent American intervention in the Pacific.

Who replaces him?

 

[Faeelin]

Japan gambles on the USA not entering the war in late 1941 by attacking all non-US held territory in South East Asia.
Gamble pays off and America stays out.

Here's the problem. Roosevelt would maneuver the Japanese into war; declaring a "Neutrality Zone" around the Phillippines, extending it, allowing the Britis and Australians to use it... meanwhile the military buildup continues.

 

[Electric Monk]

Who replaces FDR?

John Nance Garner, VP from '33 to '41.

Texas congressman, Speaker of the House ('31-33), and from the wiki on his differences with FDR:

During Roosevelt's second term, the previously warm relationship between Garner and Roosevelt quickly soured, as Garner disagreed sharply with Roosevelt on a wide range of important issues. Garner supported federal intervention to break up the Flint Sit-Down Strike, supported a balanced federal budget, opposed packing the Supreme Court with additional judges, and opposed executive interference with the internal business of the Congress.

Given that he's a Texas Democrat he is somewhat more conservative than FDR, but certainly opposed to Republican isolationism.

For the easiest "USA doesn't get involved" Taft should probably win the 1940 Republican nomination and defeat Garner in the general election.

With those conditions Japan probably could invade non-US holdings in the Pacific, Indochina, and the Dutch East Indies. Ideally they then cut a peace deal which lets the British not have to worry about India & Australia just as the Germans reach their European power height.

However just because invading India or Australia is foolhardy (as was, of course, invading China) that doesn't mean Japan won't give it a shot anyway.


Speaking frankly Imperial Japan needed a vast amount of reforms to be competitive ranging from convoy doctrine, pilot training schools, army equipment, army tactics, better production techniques, a cultural orientation that accepts short term failure, and many other things.

 

[MarkA]

I've got a couple of PODs that I think could make for a victorious Imperial Japan that survives well after the 40's.

a). Germany gets the Philippines in 1900, meaning no American involvement in the Pacific. After WW1 (Entente still wins but the US stays neutral), Japan gets it as a LON mandate. Probably the southern part of it goes to Britain.

b). Th Japanese establish a foothold in Siberia in the chaos of the Russian Civil War then they expand into Manchuria in the 20's. Oil is discovered in the early 30's. giving Japan enough fuel to conquer China (or at least a large part of it) which they've done by the end of the 40's.

c). Probably go with Philip K. Dick's POD of FDR's assassination or any POD that leads to a worse and longer depression that lingers on into the 40's, just to try to prevent American intervention in the Pacific.

Does this all work and are there any other PODs that can be added to this?

EDIT: All these POD's exist in the same TL. I suppose only the first one is the POD and the rest are butterflies.

a) Even if Germany got the Philippines why would Japan get them as a Mandate? There is no way that such a prize would go to Japan afetr such a minimal effort in the Great War combined with hostility from Australia who would be violently opposed to their getting them. Britain did consider the Australian objections to renewing the Anglo-Japanese alliance and it would do the same in this scenario. I fail to see how the UK would consider it in its national or imperial interests to allow such a gain by Japan in the Pacific.

b) In OTL the Japanese were forced to leave Russian territory by the Americans who along with all the other interventionists powers saw the victory of the Reds as inevitable and their positions as untenable. The other interventionist powers would not permit Japan to remain and even if they did it would be certain that the Red Army would expel them.

c) Even if the Depression is worse, American national interests in the Pacific would mean that some effort would be put into its security.