Germany could even use the Japanese relations with Poland as a partial pretext depending on how the dice fall, and how much the Germans want to back Chiang Kai Shek.

We might not see too much German help to China, of course; the British should be kept occupied as long as possible from a German perspective. But the Germans over in China will do their utmost to help Chiang regardless of orders. They'd taken a liking to Chiang, and vice versa. Hitler might need to replace some of them. Still, selling arms to China might prevent the German economy from imploding slightly longer.
Bit late for all that, Germany had already picked a side and it was Japan. Shipments of arms to China were banned in April '38 and Von Faulken and the military mission were withdrawn by June '38.

I suppose Germany could do a sudden pivot back again (it's not like this was a matter of deep ideology for them) but would anyone in China trust them? And without the infrastructure and personnel in place could Germany even do anything particularly useful anyway?
 

nbcman

Donor
Just thinking out loud here:

That's an interesting scenario, to go after Poland without first taking out the Czechs. The assumption would be that Britain is occupied, and didn't guarantee Poland as they did in OTL. Germany could even use the Japanese relations with Poland as a partial pretext depending on how the dice fall, and how much the Germans want to back Chiang Kai Shek.

We might not see too much German help to China, of course; the British should be kept occupied as long as possible from a German perspective. But the Germans over in China will do their utmost to help Chiang regardless of orders. They'd taken a liking to Chiang, and vice versa. Hitler might need to replace some of them. Still, selling arms to China might prevent the German economy from imploding slightly longer.

France would still back Poland. But they'll likely sit behind their Maginot Line as in OTL's sitzkrieg. The Czechs might act up as well, but Hitler might actually want them to try something, since it eliminates his own promise to leave Czechoslovakia alone. And the door shuts even more sharply on Germany's East/Central European victims if the French get drawn into the war with Japan.
But would Stalin decide to allow a trade agreement and to split Poland with Hitler without the distraction of Japanese aggressive moves from Manchuria. If not, Germany will be weaker without the trade with the Soviets. Also, France may push harder for an agreement in the summer of 1939 with the Soviets ITTL with the UK occupied with Japan.
 
Regarding the Czech's, it was my impression that after Munich, the Czech government was supportive of Germany. After all Britain and France had betrayed them, They had lost their border defenses. The government was going to do what the Germans wanted. I never understood why the Germans took over a country that was being submissive.

In my opinion, it would have been better for Germany to continue to dominate Czechoslovak and maintain a fig leave of independence.
 
I never understood why the Germans took over a country that was being submissive.
You would be amazed at what people can convince governments to do because "it will look good on the map".
France & Britain's African policies, Russia's Asian expansionism, American 'Manifest Destiny', and yes, Greater Germany, are all examples just from the top of my head.
 

Slan

Banned
Regarding the Czech's, it was my impression that after Munich, the Czech government was supportive of Germany. After all Britain and France had betrayed them, They had lost their border defenses. The government was going to do what the Germans wanted. I never understood why the Germans took over a country that was being submissive.

In my opinion, it would have been better for Germany to continue to dominate Czechoslovak and maintain a fig leave of independence.
Yeah, they could invade Poland without starting a World War if they let the Czech remain independent.
 
So many options and the butterflies are moving about. With get another conflict between the IJN and IJA, might we see less IJA troops available in the South and force the IJN to pull forces to supply the needed manpower to continue the fighting there?
 

Deleted member 94680

So many options and the butterflies are moving about. With get another conflict between the IJN and IJA, might we see less IJA troops available in the South and force the IJN to pull forces to supply the needed manpower to continue the fighting there?

As in the Chinese mainland becomes the “Army’s War” and the Singapore/Malaya campaign becomes the “Navy’s War” and never the twain shall meet?
 

Garrison

Donor
There are any number of butterflies around Poland. but if Germany makes a deal with Poland that actually works out badly for them because it basically rules out a deal with the USSR, so no Russian grain and oil to help prop up the German economy. Also a peaceful resolution with Poland doesn't change the strategic logic that drover Hitler to go to war in 1939, that is that German rearmament is maxed out while the British and French are still ramping up. Delaying the larger war just give the French time to complete re-equipping the AdA and who knows how they will respond to the potential threat to their Far East colonies? It's a given the British will be far more mobilized and they may be angrier about the Germans entering Prague than they were IOTL as it will seem like a blatant attempt to take advantage of British distraction.
 
Yeah, they could invade Poland without starting a World War if they let the Czech remain independent.

The problems with this is that the German army was heavily reliant on Czech weapons confiscated from the Czech army when they took over and from the impressive Czech armament factories. Germany without a conquered Czechoslovakia is therefore much weaker. The German main thrust from the South East against Poland came from Czechoslovakia OTL. Without access to Czech lands the boarder between Germany and Poland is much shorter and therefore easier to defend in depth.

You would have a German army with less heavy equipment including tanks attacking a country more able to resist. there would also be the possibility that if things went badly with a slower Polish campaign the French might work themselves up to a genuine attack in the west while the Germans are occupied .While there would be a real or imagined threat of the remaining Czech forces attacking to retake their recently lost territory.
 

Deleted member 94680

Yeah, they could invade Poland without starting a World War if they let the Czech remain independent.

I find that highly doubtful. An invasion of Poland, even if it only comes after Sudetenland with no annexation of rump Czechoslovakia, would still be a casus belli for Britain and France.
 
As in the Chinese mainland becomes the “Army’s War” and the Singapore/Malaya campaign becomes the “Navy’s War” and never the twain shall meet?


Aye indeed. The Army will utilize its own navy to support future operations and turn their nose up to any requests from the IJN. They might even pull the troops currently in the Bismarcks and New Guinea and tell the IJN to fight their own futile battles.
 
Aye indeed. The Army will utilize its own navy to support future operations and turn their nose up to any requests from the IJN. They might even pull the troops currently in the Bismarcks and New Guinea and tell the IJN to fight their own futile battles.
That'd be a really bad position for the IJN given that their "special naval landing forces" amounted to two dozen platoons scatter across the IJN's various ships and facilities. Not exactly what I'd want to start with when there's a need to rapidly build up into multi-division strength.
 
Last edited:
Understandable and it's a cluster bleep no matter how the IJA acts. It may be a protracted situation, and they'll cause a lot of pain and suffering as they rage against China, The Commonwealth, and the IJN. Too many will die until things are settled.
 
Like this TL. Pretty good PoD which is often overlooked. Subbed.

Also some help - The British needed to garrison Indian lands like in Awadh and Bengal, but the Royal Nepalese Army and the Royal Bhutanese Army offered to take over for them. In ww2 the request was denied, but in 1938 when Britain is caught off guard and needs the troops, she may well accept the deal. This frees up around 20,000 to 50,000 troops in total, somewhere in between. Not a large number, but a pretty good reserve force.

Also it would be a crime not to use the Gurkhas in jungle warfare and guerilla warfare. That's the entire focus of Nepali martial tradition for god's sake!
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
France is a big question here, they can certainly be counted on to discourage the Italians in the Med, but they also have their own Far East possessions to worry about and history tells us that the Japanese are fully reckless enough to expand the conflict.

I think France will have a Euro-centric, Germany-first policy, but that doesn't mean they avoid war in the east at all costs. France will want to keep Britain committed to France's total security, in Europe even more than overseas, so France will not want to look churlish or unhelpful in its attitude toward any British requests for help, supply, transit, or refuge in the Far East.

So, while I don't see the French as budgeting to send reinforcements to Indochina, the China Treaty ports or Tahiti or New Caledonia, they'll let the British operate from there and be fully willing to see them sacrificed to the Japanese for the sake of solidarity with the British.


Other thing is what happens to Khalkin Gol? Will the Soviets see this war as an opportunity to push back against the Japanese in Manchuria earlier? Could you wind up with the British and Soviets as co-belligerents?
I've mentioned this possibility. I think it would be interesting.
 
Would France not be rushed into rearmament due to partial realignment of British Policies eastward? As I recall German Generals had a plan to remove Hitler before the country tilts over if his ideas didn't bear fruit, that's much more likely TTL.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 94680

Would France not be rushed into rearmament due to partial realignment of British Policies eastward?

I think France can “stabilise” the Far East by ‘allowing’ the British to use ports and if needed (in extremis) territory to gain an advantage over the Japanese. Whatever forces they have in the Far East (I don’t know this for sure, but I imagine there’d be a few light craft and colonial police units) could be made available for British use, but I think that’s slightly less likely.

As I recall German Generals had a plan to remove Hitler before the country tilts over if his ideas didn't bear fruit, that's much more likely TTL.
That would be the Oster Conspiracy - a plan within the Heer to coup the government if War occurred over Czechoslovakia. It had all the problems all the other coup plans within German military conservative circles had - namely not enough support (if any) within rank and file soldiery, unrealistic expectations of reactions to the coup, the mistaken assumption that everything up to the point of the coup would be allowed to be retained by the Germans and insufficient planning of how the coup would be carried out. It appeared to be a genuine concern though, possibly more realistic than the July ‘44 plot. I’m not sure ITTL whether it would happen though, haven’t the WAllies accepted the Czechoslovakian annexations though? OTL, that killed what support the Oster Conspiracy had, so I imagine that’s the same here.
 
I think that the The French and Dutch are going to be a bit twitchy over their Far East possessions. The Japanese have attacked an uncommitted British Empire that was quietly minding its own business in the Far East. I suspect that simple prudence would encourage these Empires to send out some additional resources to their possessions. possibly in the form of some additional naval units and more modern equipment for their garrisons. the Americans would most likely do the same for the Philippines.

However, I’m not sure the Japanese would see it that way. their view might be that the Western Empires are increasing their military in the area to strike at the Japanese to support their ally/friend the British Empire. indeed this might encourage the Japanese to strike at everyone with the intention (similar to OTL) of capturing enough territory that the western powers would be forced to bleed so much to recapture it, that this strategy would force them to the negotiating table.
 
This is my thinking as well. Given what I know about how Japan thought of themselves compared to the colonial powers at the time, any buildup of forces in East Asia, no matter how reasonable and cautious it might seem to those doing the moving, is likely to be seen by Japan as antagonistic. This is why I kind of assume an attack on the Philippines is close to inevitable.
America: "Hm, not sure I can trust Japan to keep this between himself and Britain. I'd better move some extra guys over to Manila just to keep things safe."
Japan: "I KNEW IT! They're ALL determined to keep me down like China! I'LL SHOW THEM, BECAUSE PEOPLE TAKE YOU SERIOUSLY WHEN YOU WIN!"
 
On the China/Germany thing, it's important to remember that Chiang accepted help from everyone. At various times, and often overlapping, he was getting aid from the Germans, the Soviets, the Americans, the Brits and the French. The 'Nazi/China!' alliance thing is thus often overhyped on these boards.

Far more to the point: Chiang knew that his lifeline depended upon supply lines through Burma and Indochina. If those got cut off permanently- by Japanese action, or Britain and France deciding to cut the roads- then China's fighting ability would be severely compromised. Therefore, when push comes to shove, Chiang would always pick the Western democracies. Germany could help him but they could not save him. If Berlin wanted to ship him some supplies, he'd accept them; but the moment that London or Paris raised serious objections the Nationalists would end the contacts with the Germans themselves rather than risk the doom of their cause.
 
Top