[Doomhammer]

I played some Hearts of Iron with Japan today and easily took over most of Asia. Why wasn't this the case in real life? I only have superficial knowledge about the topic. The navy was more predominant in Japan and the Japanese were more interested in expanding in the Pacific and so on. Was that all though? I therefore I have two questions: Why did Germany and Japan fail to coordinate their war effort? Second, to what extent did Japan affect Soviet strategy in WWII?

Thanks.

[Oxymoron]

I dont think the Germans had a real strategy, they were just swining like drunks and knocking some people out, before they hit a really big dude.

[Wolfman]

Why did Germany and Japan fail to coordinate their war effort?

Germany didn't really like any of its allies. They were all cases of 'one less mongoloid race to kill'. And Japan didn't really trust Germany. And the same was true on the Allied side. The USSR and Finland (both part of the Allies) went to war, with the UK threatening to invade Finland in support of the USSR, and several US generals suggested after the conquest of Berlin that the US should just keep going into Moscow.

Second, to what extent did Japan affect Soviet strategy in WWII?

To my knowledge, the USSR wanted nothing to do with Japan. The Blue Army and the White Army (who both opposed the Soviets, and each other) controlled most of Asian Russia. The Blue Army felt no threat from Japan, so they didn't care, and the White Army had bigger things to deal with. The Soviets were involved in the Pacific Campaign, but not by much.

I dont think the Germans had a real strategy, they were just swining like drunks and knocking some people out, before they hit a really big dude.

Hitler was the biggest weakness the Germans had in WWII. His shitty decisions ended up with German troops fighting simultaneously in France, Eastern Europe, the Balkans, Italy, North Africa, and there were German troops stations in Scandinavia ready for a second D-Day. Hell, Hitler ordered the removal of German troops from Normandy while his top officials were telling him to reinforce Normandy.

[Rei Murasame]

I feel like the fact that answering the question could quite easily take all day. But basically a lack of an ability to defeat the Soviet Union, because both Nazi Germany and Empire Japan decided to (wisely) take some breathing space to consolidate themselves because both of them were way about trying to take on too many opponents on too many fronts at once.

Germany signed the German-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact in 1939 because it wanted to concentrate on dealing with the Western powers and a less-than-cooperative UK. Since the world had already been divided into two management spheres, Japan actually did take that into account in its planning, there was huge controversy over that decision really, a strategic argument which came to a head under Baron Hiranuma's premiership in that year.

Also, within the Japanese power structure a necessary evolution was taking place, where the 'right' (Control Faction) fascists and 'left' (Imperial Way Faction) fascists were engaged in rubbing each other's corners off on every issue from state socialism, to public morals, to spiritual matters, and most importantly the foreign policy matters and the role of the military itself.

As a result of those two factions thoroughly battering each other into synthesis, what resulted is that the Control Faction won on foreign policy and military-resource consolidation matters, and the Imperial Way Faction won on domestic matters and they just merged. This created a form of Right-Socialism which took on the really-cool social justice ideas of Kingoro Hashimoto but also abandoned the 'bold' (read: slightly unhinged) ideas of 'strike north at USSR' and 'fighting spirit', replacing those elements with a more cautious (but perhaps not really cautious enough?) southern consolidation approach into South East Asia instead, along with better co-operation with Zaibatsu structure for the improvement and development of technology and the use of more capital to that end.

This decision was cemented by the situation on the ground in Mongolia during the Nomonhan Incident where the Kwangtung Army got itself punched in the nose pretty hard by the USSR's Marshal Zhukov in the same year 1939. That was in the midst of the already-strained situation in China.

So I think both Nazi Germany and Empire of Japan decided to leave the USSR alone at that time in 1939 because the leaders of Axis knew Axis was not yet ready for that fight.

Japan needed to attack the USA and did. By the time Germany was finally ready to go into USSR territory, the whole war effort had deteriorated into a very bad situation in which was not necessarily to the advantage of Axis, and the UK and USA were recovering from their early losses.

Germany was late in its foray into USSR territory (in large part because of the UK), and we all know the rest of the story after that. USSR hurt Germany quite a lot in the cold snow and then had some breath left to commit time to rampage through Manchukuo and etc, knocking down Japanese presence there.

[fuser]

First of all Hearts of Iron is not a very good simulation but yet very engaging though. You can also play as China and take over Japan.

Why wasn't this the case in real life?

Many factors

1. It was a case of over expansion.

2. Japan was not self dependent on almost any raw material needed for war effort.

3. Still largely a agricultural Country.

4. Navy was expanded largely on the expense of army. No independent armored formations.

5. Logistics. They were everywhere at the same time. China, Pacific Islands, Indonesia, Indochina etc. Supplying all of them was a nightmare specially with allies submarines lurking.

Japanese were more interested in expanding in the Pacific and so on. Was that all though?

They should have stuck to Pacific only, it was where she could have got her vital resources not in china which proved to be a strain on Japan rather than any help.

But western nations wouldn't had taken any Japanese expansion with ease..

Why did Germany and Japan fail to coordinate their war effort?

Mainly because of Geography, completely different interests.

Second, to what extent did Japan affect Soviet strategy in WWII?

Japan was a threat to SU even bigger than Germany for quite a long time. A large portion of Red Army was always present in Far East even after non aggression pact with Japan.

Contrary to Popular belief there wasn't a large transfer of troops from far east after the NA pact with Japan. SU always maintained just over one million men in far east for Japanese threat and had superiority in afvs and planes over Japan in that region.

Japan also had to maintain a large part of her army in Manchuria (which could have been used in China) for a possible Soviet threat.

[Smilin' Dave]

Why wasn't this the case in real life?

Partly because the logistics were messy. Not only was Japan short of strategic resources (fuel shortages limited the mobility of their fleet at times for example) but everything had to go by ship... but Japan was fighting against a power whose navy was not decisively defeated. So Japanese forces even in 1941 when they had the strategic surprise were often going to war short on equipment/supplies.

Why did Germany and Japan fail to coordinate their war effort?

Ultimately they had very different goals and fought in very different theatres. Even in a hypothetical 'go north' Japanese strategy, their objectives and their battlegrounds would have had little to do with each other. So while they were allies in a broad sense, what really interests could they work towards together?

Second, to what extent did Japan affect Soviet strategy in WWII?

It seems fairly little. In 1939 the Red Army had effectively put the Japanese military in its place. While the Soviets didn't drawn from the Far Eastern reserve much, they also didn't add to it until their Manchurian offensive.

Germany was late in its foray into USSR territory (in large part because of the UK)

...no. The Germans didn't have a plan for a proper war with the Soviet Union until relatively late in the piece. Their logistical preparations took a long time to complete and was further detailed by late seasonal rains. So German invasion was significantly late, and unless Winston Churchill had a weather machine, I don't think the British had much to do with it.

[fuser]

Also, in this hypothetical scenario if Germany do start Barbarossa early, why it would be better for them than originally??
Yes SU would had been a lot less prepared but so would had been Germany..

[Godstud]

Japan, had it not attacked USA, at Pearl Harbour, might have changed the course of history quite dramatically. USA might not have entered the war, when it did. A few more months without support might have seen Britain in some real harsh times.

Japan, effectively, "woke the giant", when it attacked USA. USA then entered the war against Japan AND Germany.

USSR didn't declare war on Japan until a short time before the end of the war, so Japan really didn't have much opposition(aside from USSR) in Asia.

[fuser]

Japan had to attack USA. She was already bogged down in China with no end at sight and with ever depleting resources she had to do something like Pearl harbor.

While USSR didn't contributed much directly in asian war, her mere presence diverted away vital men and materials from Japanese war machine which could have been used elsewhere.

[Bubba]

Why didn't Japan just conquer Asia?

1) The hugeness of China and Asia in general.

2) The hugeness of the Chinese population (and thus armies).

3) The Japanese were still fighting Britain, Australia, New Zealand and the Netherlands in addition to the United States, so they couldn't focus entirely on continental Asia.

Why didn't Japan and Germany team up against the Soviets?

1) The Japanese were low on resources before capturing Indonesia, capturing Indonesia would have led to war with the United States anyway, even without Pearl Harbor. So the Japanese would always have the Americans to contend with, requiring a significant military presence in the pacific.

2) People made mistakes: the Japanese could have captured Indonesia, attacked the Soviet Union and fought a defensive war against the Western allies from then on until the Soviet Union was finished. Then the Germans could have attacked Britain and the Japanese could have gone on the offensive against the Americans. Of course everything was a gamble, they didn't have all the knowledge we have in retrospect, they probably expected that Germany would overrun the Soviets and that it would be better to keep the Americans away from Europe in the meantime.

[Smilin' Dave]

^ On last point there, I'm not sure that even in hindsight the Japanese would have done that well to invade the Soviet Union.
1. Most of the resources they wanted were not immediately available in the Far East. Rubber certainly isn't available there, and oil wasn't being drilled in the area at the time.
2. Like China, it was a massive area to control, and they were already having problems with China.
3. Their existing logistically problems might have been much worse since they wouldn't have even been able to use their fleet for support. This would limit their strategic mobility.
4. Assuming point 4 is correct, the Soviets could almost afford to give up some territory to the Japanese to focus on the far more serious Nazi threat. Without a massive advance, Japanese forces can't cause a strategic problem for the Red Army.
5. Given what happened in 1939, and that even by 1945 things had changed much for the Japanese in China, it's not entirely unlikely an invasion would be defeated.
6. Attacking the Soviets, like the occupation of Vietnam by the Japanese (which might still be necessary) may still bring the US and Japan closer to conflict. While fighting a war with China was apparently tolerable to the US, they seem to have taken exception to threats against 'European' possessions (ie. French Indochina), which might have extended to Russia (FDR wasn't exactly anti-Soviet, so it's not totally out of the question).

[foxdemon]

I played some Hearts of Iron with Japan today and easily took over most of Asia. Why wasn't this the case in real life? I only have superficial knowledge about the topic. The navy was more predominant in Japan and the Japanese were more interested in expanding in the Pacific and so on. Was that all though? I therefore I have two questions: Why did Germany and Japan fail to coordinate their war effort? Second, to what extent did Japan affect Soviet strategy in WWII?

Thanks.

The answer to the first question is limited resources. Japan was struggling to find the troops for their SE Asian conquest.

Most of their forces were committed to China. Out of 51 divisions, only 11 were avaliable for the Pacific in 1941.


Germany and Japan didn't communicate very much. Infact, they couldn't. Of several attempts by German U boats to reach Japan, only one suceeded. Even if such attempts had been more sucessful, communication via U boat isn't that effective. The allies, by contrast, held many meetings between the three main leaders. Other national leaders, generals and their staffs had plenty of contact.

Japan did hold down Soviet troops before the outbreak of hostilities between Germany and the USSR. However Japan and the USSR had reached a deal by 1941 to not attack each other. For the Japanese, this mean't their could focus on China and the Pacific. For the USSR, it mean't they could bring up the Siberian guard at the counter attack at Stalingrad. For some reason, the Japanese left 13 divisons guarding the Soviet boarder which they might have better employed in the Pacific. So Japan didn't really affect the Soviet war plan but the USSR did effect the Japanese war plan.

So Japanese forces even in 1941 when they had the strategic surprise were often going to war short on equipment/supplies.

I'm not so sure about that. Japan was short on supplies very earlier in the Pacific war but this was due to the efforts of 16 American submarines. For some reason, the Japanese did not use convoys.

It is worth noting that all America had in the Pacific of note after Pearl Habour was 4 carriers, 16 submarines and a squardon of B-17's. The carriers were to defeat the Japanese navy before US industry had fully geared up, the 16 submarines destroyed the Japanese merchant marine and the B-17's not only evacuated General MacArthur to Australia, but also spoted the Japanese fleet at the begining of the Coral Sea battle. Finally, one division of marines was all it took to crush what reserves the Japanese had avaliale at Guadalcanal.

It may be supprising to some how small the American forces were that stopped the Japanese. The huge fleets of the later war period were a reconquest force. The shouting was over by that stage.

[Bubba]

@Smilin Dave

Like I said, they would have had to conquer Indonesia either way to get rubber and oil. In The Soviet Union all they would have to do was take Vladivostok, defeat Russian forces in the larger Siberian towns and destroy factories and mines. They couldn't have reached Moscow or even the Caucasus but they didn't have to, all they had to do was keep the Soviets off balance and prevent them from sending Siberian reinforcements to Moscow, St. Petersburg, etc... This would help Germany in securing the major Russian cities and then Japan could retreat their armies from Siberia and use them against the Americans, they wouldn't even need to leave an army at the Soviet-Korean border.

[fuser]

The Soviet Union all they would have to do was take Vladivostok, defeat Russian forces in the larger Siberian towns and destroy factories and mines

And what makes you think Japan was capable of doing this?? Read my post, SU had over 1 million men in far east all the time, it wasn't left open for Japanese after signing non aggression pact with Japan..

SU had numerical superiority in airplanes and afvs in that region...After Khalkin gol Japan's decision to not mess with SU was actually one of the few saner decisions that Japan took in WW2

Now,
How Japan is going to defeat such an army while still bogged down in china and how will it supply such an army in an area which would have been a logistical nightmare if they did advanced...

prevent them from sending Siberian reinforcements to Moscow, St. Petersburg, etc...

Another prevalent WW2 myth, there was no large scale transfer of Siberian divisions who saved Moscow in the december 5 counter offensive. In that operation siberian divisions constituted of only about 7-8 %.

This would help Germany in securing the major Russian cities

Highly unlikely. See above points

apan could retreat their armies from Siberia and use them against the Americans, they wouldn't even need to leave an army at the Soviet-Korean border.

Even if Japan do succeed against SU (an impossibility by the way), they will still need a large part of their army in siberia to pacify the population..

[Bubba]

And what makes you think Japan was capable of doing this?? Read my post, SU had over 1 million men in far east all the time, it wasn't left open for Japanese after signing non aggression pact with Japan...

They had even more than that in Europe, but it didn't do them much good. Besides, if the Russians were that confident then why didn't they attack Japan so America could join the war in Europe sooner?

SU had numerical superiority in airplanes and afvs in that region...

Maybe they did, but I doubt they would have if Japan had focused on Siberia instead of the pacific.

Now,
How Japan is going to defeat such an army while still bogged down in china and how will it supply such an army in an area which would have been a logistical nightmare if they did advanced...

They would indeed have been fools to go at it the Napoleon way, but they could have moved quickly, destroyed a town and then moved on.

prevent them from sending Siberian reinforcements to Moscow, St. Petersburg, etc...

Another prevalent WW2 myth, there was no large scale transfer of Siberian divisions who saved Moscow in the december 5 counter offensive. In that operation siberian divisions constituted of only about 7-8 %.

And those 7-8% made a difference I believe, the Germans were often "this" close to victory. In any case the Soviet Union would have had to divide its forces, maybe they would have send those soldiers to Moscow anyway, but that would have left Siberia more vulnerable, and vice versa.

Even if Japan do succeed against SU (an impossibility by the way), they will still need a large part of their army in siberia to pacify the population..

Why? They could have just left.

[Cookie Monster]

Japan's defeat in the 1930s against the Soviet Union was the main reason why Japan focussed to expand into a naval Empire rather than trying to capitalise on the Nazi invasion and pincer the Soviets from the East and expand far into the Asian continent. They lacked the heavy armour and gear to face Soviet armies and their experiences from the 1930s made them careful from trying that option again, especially when they already had expanded all over the Eastern Pacific.

[fuser]

They had even more than that in Europe, but it didn't do them much good

Actually it did very good to them. They won the war you know.

Besides, if the Russians were that confident then why didn't they attack Japan so America could join the war in Europe sooner?

Who is talking about confidence, its about readiness.. Why risk a two front war and what's wrong with preparedness??

Maybe they did, but I doubt they would have if Japan had focused on Siberia instead of the pacific.

Number wise Pacific wasn't much of a strain as China and again simply putting more numbers isn't going to help if you are logistically unprepared as we had seen how Japanese advance were hampered in china again and again due to logistics..

Beside Japan had a significant shortage of afvs and no independent armored formations, so simply forget that Japan could have catched up with SU in this regard..

but they could have moved quickly, destroyed a town and then moved on.

You know, its not just about Japanese army, you are forgetting about the army opposing it i.e. red army who was there to stop it..

And those 7-8% made a difference

Of course they did as did the rest 90%. everyone fighting made a difference but point here is that they were not very significant.

I believe, the Germans were often "this" close to victory.

No, they were never actually except in the heads of German generals memoirs which has affected the whole world to think on those lines.

In any case the Soviet Union would have had to divide its forces, maybe they would have send those soldiers to Moscow anyway, but that would have left Siberia more vulnerable, and vice versa.

Are you even reading my posts. Until you can show that how Japan could take on Far east against a prepared enemy with a strength of 1 million men.
Also, for the last time there wasn't a very significant transfer of Siberians from far east and Far East always maintained a very large number of troops.

If you want I can give you a detailed list for Red Army's personnel's, planes and afvs in Far east for 1941-45 (year by year)

Why? They could have just left.

You know this is very basic that if you have occupied a region for its resources you actually need men to extract and guard those resources. There is a little problem for the occupying force and its is called "Partisans". Just leave that place and you loose all the control over it..

[Smilin' Dave]

I'm not so sure about that. Japan was short on supplies very earlier in the Pacific war but this was due to the efforts of 16 American submarines. For some reason, the Japanese did not use convoys.

I'm not sure that US submarine operations are an adequete explanation either. One would assume the Japanese would the opportunity to stockpile (or otherwise have available) supplies prior to launching its offensive across the Pacific, before the submarines could have started to have an effect on the flow of materials. Despite this opportunity Japanese forces even in the earliest days of their operations seemed to be short of supplies. Which might suggest there wasn't much to stockpile in the first place.

defeat Russian forces in the larger Siberian towns and destroy factories and mines.

The key industrial zones of Siberia (and the mines that were supposed to feed them) were quite a trek from the Manchurian border. Even unopposed it would have been a very tough march for the Japanese. Remember that to reach these destinations the Soviets often had to go by barge or train (of which there was really only one line), which would be a logistical bottleneck. The Red Army build up in 1945, where their logistical tail was not under threat, where they had more trucks etc. was still considered to be very impressive for its time precisely because of these difficulties.

all they had to do was keep the Soviets off balance and prevent them from sending Siberian reinforcements to Moscow, St. Petersburg, etc.

If they could reach the Siberian 'core' perhaps, but historically the reinforcements the Soviets drew from the east in 1941 didn't actually come from the troops stationed in the Far East.

and then Japan could retreat their armies from Siberia and use them against the Americans

In addition to the difficulties of getting troops that far up the line, getting them back in a timely fashion without wearing them out would be quite a feat.

[pugsville]

(1) the US subs almost totally ineffective early in the war due to torpedo problems?

(2) the Japs had a large stockpile of oil got the figures somewhere (yes I must organize my data).

[Smilin' Dave]

(1) the US subs almost totally ineffective early in the war due to torpedo problems?

Yeah, I remember hearing something about this. I looked it up and apparently the mk14 torpedos had issues like being inaccurate and failing to detonate on impact. I have no idea how pervasive a problem it was though... a torpedo that can't hit or damage anything does sound like of serious though

(2) the Japs had a large stockpile of oil got the figures somewhere (yes I must organize my data).

Working again with my patchy memory, I recall a debate about whether battleship sorties around Guadalcanal were limited due to limited fuel reserves. That however I'm having trouble locating