StarDestroyer.Net BBS

In this scenario you have been assigned by Q to be in charge of the Empire of Japan from 1911 CE. Your guidance will be behind the scenes, unnoticed and via proxy. You can make the Prime Ministers, cabinet ministers and the high ranking generals and admirals do whatever they want as far as setting policy goes, though you can not make the commit suicide or similar.

Your objectives are as such...
-Further the Empire of Japan's Industrial and technological development
-Improve Japan's political prominence (relating to the first bit)
-Protect Japan against western aggression
-Maintain Empire's current borders (including its colonies of Korea and Taiwan) and if possible expand them

"Don't be an evil lot of racist, rape happy mass murdering jerks" is not an objective because I expect better of you.

You will have control of Japan for 50 years. After that, regular politics will set in.

What do you do?

Zor

I think most of the issues with Japan from that era focused on it attempting to become a colonial power the way the Western nations did. That caused the Western nations to try to contain them, such as with the Washington Naval Treaty where Japan got the short end of the stick as far as naval forces go.

I would focus more on diplomatic and economic methods to expand our sphere of influence. Trade with the US for the oil we need and remain on good terms so that supply isn't cut off. While building our industrial base and military, gradually work with the Pacific island nations to improve their economic status and get them friendly to us so we can place our military bases where we need to without becoming imperialist. That would get us the buffer we need in the Pacific.

We would definitely need to secure our own supply of resources though, we should not rely on trade just with the US for everything. Relations with China and Tsarist Russia are already damaged due to the Sino / Japanese war and Russian / Japanese war. I would work on repairing those relations (even at the short term cost of some concessions) so that over time we would be strong trading partners and have multiple sources for what we need for our industry and military growth. If Communist revolutions took place in Russia and China again, I would send supplies and troops (if permitted) to prop up the existing governments and ensure stability.

As the late 1930's approach, Japan would not join the Axis. We would remain officially neutral, but we would supply allied nations with material similar to how the US was supplying Britain. By this time, hopefully my efforts at repairing relations with Russia paid off to the point where if Hitler was dumb enough to launch Barbarossa again, the bulk of the Russian army could meet him and stop him in his tracks since they won't be needed to guard our border.

By the 50's, the following things would hopefully have occured.

1. Without going to war with the US, Japan would be unscathed with most of her military and heavy industry intact. This would give us a jump start in the economic boom that takes place after the war.
2. Without invading China, millions of deaths there will be avoided.
3. By supporting the Allies, the war in Germany is brought to a close quicker and with less loss of life.
4. By reinforcing the non-communist regimes in China and Russia, many smaller proxy wars (Korea for example) will not take place, and the Communist cold war will not occur.

I would probably take a similar route to Borgholio, but I would emphasise scientific development with increased funding. As soon as Meitner and co in Berlin announce fissioning uranium, begin an extensive and well-funded research program into nuclear power, so as to reduce dependence on foreign sources of coal and oil for power.

The big challenge is going to be gradually winding down Japanese militarism so it doesn't strangle the civilian economy. Going into the war, Japan had roughly the same GDP as France- today, it's more like twice as high. I would argue that the biggest thing that's changed is that postwar Japan freed itself to concentrate on creating an industrial and technical base competitive with the West in all ways, not just in terms of things that go "bang."

Trouble is, Japan's constitution did a pretty good job of entrenching militarism in the government. Being able to mind-control senior IJA and IJN officers helps, but you're going to see constant political instability as one wave of militarists tries to coup the suddenly-reasonable leaders put into office.

Sounds like it would probably be better to go back another 50 years to start the ball rolling at the start of the Meiji era because by 1911 it's a bit too late to change Japan from rolling down the dark road to fascist warmonger?

Not too late but definitely already on the path. Best to go back to the 1850s if you want an easier time of it.

Also, you need a contingency plan for Russia and China - they won't play nice, and when the shit hits the world-wide fan in 1939, they will look at japan to extract their pound of flesh. It might even turn the whole course of the war around.

China is a paperweight waiting for someon to push around. If Russia decides to go against you and China (Stalin seems the type to go after percieved helpless prey), it'd keep allied with Germany, and Hitler would never launch the preemptive invasion if Russia is actively binding allied forces in the east. He could keep his eye on Britain, and commit the full German strenght to that fight, and also draw on Russian oil.

What the US would do if Russia expanded into China(which it would steamroll just as Japan did, but with much less atrocities) and Asia (the British/French colonies) is quite easy to say - the US would try to counter that expansion, as it would put US interests in jeopardy, even worse than Japan or Germany did. Communist Russia effectively controlling the Pacific would be their worst nightmare, and Russia could build and support a navy to compete with theirs if not stopped.

So Russia could soak up the American war effort, leaving Europe to fend for itself, and without Russian help. It would result in T34s rolling against Shermans in the Chinese/Russian border region. If the Allied could win that war with Russia on the Axis side is questionable. Nuclear option? Maybe - depends on what the Russians manage to produce - if they keep air superiority, then bombing would become hard to do, and they would get the plans for the V1&V2 from the germans in order to retaliate. Maybe even the A9/A10 rockets - they were in development during the late war, and only didn't see the light because of the ressource scarcity. Russia would have no problem assembling them in mass quatities with help from Germany. And from Russia, they would have it even easier to hit American soil.

This whole scenario could turn out into an even crazier war and a quite different cold war situation.

LaCroix wrote:Also, you need a contingency plan for Russia and China - they won't play nice, and when the shit hits the world-wide fan in 1939, they will look at japan to extract their pound of flesh. It might even turn the whole course of the war around.

China is a paperweight waiting for someon to push around. If Russia decides to go against you and China (Stalin seems the type to go after percieved helpless prey), it'd keep allied with Germany, and Hitler would never launch the preemptive invasion if Russia is actively binding allied forces in the east. He could keep his eye on Britain, and commit the full German strenght to that fight, and also draw on Russian oil.

This doesn't seem like a probable contingency. Hitler was fixated on invading Russia because his real ambition was to conquer territory, not to win the war against the Allies.

Meanwhile, Stalin never showed much sign of wanting to annex large Pacific territories badly enough to launch a major military invasion in China. It doesn't help that there's very little desirable real estate in the areas immediately bordering Russian territory, just miles and miles of miles and miles.

Far more likely that there simply... is no Pacific War, if you ask me. The USSR might secure a few more concessions at China's expense, but I doubt we'd see a full-blown invasion of China.

Also, note that while we're trying for a less militarized Japan, there's no reason we have to avoid having any military. And this is after Tsushima, so the West has already learned to take the Japanese military seriously as a credible opponent that can't just be pushed aside casually.

This all depends on there even being a Stalin. Remember, if you prevent the Communists from winning, Stalin won't come into power. You'd still be dealing with the Tsars. Would they be so quick to gobble up China?

In order to keep Japan's military credible, I would support close ties with Britain. As I recall, they were already quite close around the early 1900's (and I think a Japanese destroyer squadron worked with the RN at some point). Keeping those ties allows Japan to have a strong ally in the region, perhaps offering bases to the RN in the area in exchange for technical help and/or training/joint exercises. Through the good graces with Britain you get help dealing with (diplomatically) the USA as well.

Simon_Jester wrote:This doesn't seem like a probable contingency. Hitler was fixated on invading Russia because his real ambition was to conquer territory, not to win the war against the Allies.

Not probable, but in real life, Hitler had Japan as ally who would bind Allied power in the east (At least the RN). If Russia is his only (useful) ally left, he might think twice, and rather concentrate on Britain, instead.

Stalin had plans for Japan, and most likely, they were stopped because of the Ribbentrop deal, and thus it was bad form to attack other allies of your 'friends'...

http://thediplomat.com/2012/08/the-forg ... r-of-1939/
and the Sowjets were more than willing to attack Japan right after they were done with Germany
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2% ... %281945%29

So, there is certainly no love between them. Without Japan allied to Germany, Stalin might have let Zhukov continue, getting himself a nice morsel of Japanese-held territory.

What he would have done once that was done, who knows...

For Hitler, he gained lots of territory, already. Most of Europe was under his yoke by the time he turned on Russia. But the attack on Russia was (mostly) done because he feared Stalin to strike first. If Stalin were to go on an Asian adventure, he might wait until the UK were out of the war, or might strike immediately while Stalin's back was turned. But who knows how dictators think...

LaCroix wrote: and the Sowjets were more than willing to attack Japan right after they were done with Germany
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2% ... %281945%29

So, there is certainly no love between them. Without Japan allied to Germany, Stalin might have let Zhukov continue, getting himself a nice morsel of Japanese-held territory.

What he would have done once that was done, who knows...

This is assuming the Japanese take over Manchuria and invade the rest of China. As we start in 1911, this is not necessary.

Well, during 1900, Russia already started invading China , after they noticed how the first Sino-japanese ware went.
Invasion of Manchuria

The Russo-Japanese war showed that Russia wanted all of Machuria and Korea, too, seeking a warmwater port. Japan beat Russia, lost Manchuria, and thus they weren't too well on speaking terms with Japan, who annexed Korea in 1910.

So we start having a setup for a rematch.

Now, we stand before the question of how to react before/in WW1? Will you take the German and Austrian Provinces as you did? Will you send the 20000+ soldiers for the Siege of Tsingtao? How will that change the War?

Will you interfere in the Russian Civil War as Japan originally did? More? Less? Will you invade? Will you occupy Kamchatka and Northern Sakhalin?

How will a continued Anglo-Japanese friendship change the pre-WW2 years? Etc...

Butterfly effect fully engaged...

What if we turn a few tables here and have Japan stay out of the Russian Civil War. Maybe even help supply the communists in a not obvious way. That way when Stalin comes to power I could reasonably make a deal to carve China up between the two of us and be done with it.

You think Stalin would agree to anything like that? Only way would be to have a far superior military to his and make him want to agree to a split rather than fighting us over it. I don't recall the Japanese military ever being able to challenge the full might of Russia / USSR on land.

Borgholio wrote:You think Stalin would agree to anything like that?

Why would Stalin even want part of China? Obviously, he would want China to be communist, but otherwise he'd be fine with it remaining independent. China never was a part of Russia, so his desires to reincorporate former Russian territories into the USSR are here irrelevant.

Borgholio wrote:I don't recall the Japanese military ever being able to challenge the full might of Russia / USSR on land.

Japan's forces sucked on land much, much more than they sucked in the air and the seas. In fact, Mongolia and the USSR remained untouchable for them and several defeats led to the ultimate failure of the Northern Strike strategy. Japan's militarism and imperialism was often driven by non-economic considerations, too (same as Hitlers). Or, in any case, very-very primitive economics at best. Expansion plans were never well-designed in the first place.

If Stalin would want Manchuria is questionable - the Zar did. So your wager would only work if you manage to keep the Zar alive and in control of Russia.

But then, by arranging that Japan and Russia conquer and divide China, you could potentially avoid WW1 breaking out the way it did - when Russia is busy in China, they couldn't care less about the Balkan, I'd guess.

Of course, Britain and Germany would clash, anyway, taking France and Austria with them, but the conflict would be different, and has the potential to avoid the later issues.
But the longer Germany and Britain are in close competition and thus busy, the more time you have to prepare your nation for when the war finally breaks out.

My idea is - the way things worked out was kind of bad for Japan - so why not stirr the kettle up?

In going after China you do give the militarism a vent, and can set up new weapon projects with specs close to what we know will work fine. Continue development and arming, and you could get V1 and V2, and quite good tank designs (Like T-34 or Panzer 4), good aircrafts and pilots, and a huge carrier fleet going by the mid-twenties, while other nations still argue if "these Asians" are crazy. Invest in radar & sonar, computing, and topedo development. (Bonus points for developing anti-ship Rockets or V1 - hell, just go and use the manned V1 version for kamikaze purposes, if needed - it would be hell for any fleet to fight that.)

Japan did what it could with weapons development. It did it's best. The handful successes it had in naval buildup and airforce were bought with immense effort. To duplicate them in all other spheres for an underdeveloped state like Japan would be impossible. Even the USSR with vastly greater total mobilization capacity excelled in land combat and tank construction (which required pouring enormous funds down the drain) and didn't really succeed that much in naval or aviation construction.

It is pointless to say Japan could've just had all these advanced technologies somehow. You are in charge, but you're not the omniscient tech developer.

Not? Usually, Zor scenarios include that.

There's no reason to think that fascism is the inevitable course for Japan. Japan's fascism was imposed from the top down, rather than it being the result of a populist movement. In fact, there were such movements, and they all failed. If we do have control of the top, is is suggested, we can very easily set the course of the country. That's actually the nice thing about this scenario; more than most countries, we have the ability to set policy that will be implemented relatively thoroughly.

I also wonder why would one want to further the goals of an Empire? Wouldn't it be better to attempt to do away with Empire?

I would want to ensure the development and well-being of the people of Japan, and of the world as a whole.

Whether Japan has a ceremonial monarchy is not relevant to this goal. Persuading Japan to renounce militaristic destruction, and to pursue peace, science, and development is important.

I'm not sure that's really true in the 1910s, though. Colonial powers are still actively screwing with the Asian nations; SDN-run Japan will need a substantial military to keep them out of its sphere of influence - larger than a comparable European power, probably, since [colonial power]obviously our good, white, Christian soldiers are worth ten Japanese in a fight.[/colonial power]

So yes, by all means we should be demilitarizing the country, but not disarming it, if that makes sense.

I think we would need a clarification from Zor - does the grey eminence keep their knowledge of the future or doesn't it? Because most of the scenarios we are creating are made using knowledge that what Japan tried didn't work, and with knowledge of events down the road we need to prepare for. Because what Japan did was (in that day) the best known method to not get swallowed by some empire - they simply went too far with, and then overstepped the red line when they went against the US directly.

If we keep knowledge, we can try to interfere in world politics to improve our and the world's future. For example, arrange an untimely death for Hitler, (and/or Lenin, Stalin, Reagan, Thatcher, or some other people of your particular fancy) before they can become a huge problem down the road. Influence science and production with things you know will work out to eleminate a few wrong turns - make Japan the most innovative nation on the planet, and let economic prosperity follow.

You do retain knowledge of the future. You can, if you want to, arrange for the Japanese government to press a lot of funding into developing a Tank comparable to the T-34 or build a computer, adopt SMGs or a large scale or develop an assault rifle and so forth.

Zor