Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Influence of WW1 on Japan

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Influence of WW1 on Japan

    For those that do not know I am the Japanese Player in the Alt war game where the US joins Germany. During WW1 in the normal timeline Japan was able to get it gains without Gearing up to much or changing the way they do things. They were able to fight the war with what they came with.

    In the Alt time line I busy crushing the US but it is going to require me to build more ships troops and actually airplanes to win so Japan is going to be forced to industiralize more than in the orignal timeline.

    This lead me to consider what would be impact on Japan in the Second World War or any conflict that breaks out inbetween. The oil issue for Japan will probally remain the same but I see a tougher Japan coming into WW2 if they get the Philipines and what they took in the orignal timelines.

    Just wondering what others think

  • #2
    Originally posted by craven View Post
    For those that do not know I am the Japanese Player in the Alt war game where the US joins Germany. During WW1 in the normal timeline Japan was able to get it gains without Gearing up to much or changing the way they do things. They were able to fight the war with what they came with.

    In the Alt time line I busy crushing the US but it is going to require me to build more ships troops and actually airplanes to win so Japan is going to be forced to industiralize more than in the orignal timeline.

    This lead me to consider what would be impact on Japan in the Second World War or any conflict that breaks out inbetween. The oil issue for Japan will probally remain the same but I see a tougher Japan coming into WW2 if they get the Philipines and what they took in the orignal timelines.

    Just wondering what others think
    Yes but if WW1 is different then does WW2 even happen?

    Or are you just saying what would happen if Japan went into WW2 with a better armed forces and a more powerful industry?
    A wild liberal appears! Conservative uses logical reasoning and empirical evidence! It's super effective! Wild liberal faints.

    Comment


    • #3
      The major problems for Japan in WW 1 that required solving post war were:

      1. The Imperial Army was small and without alot of influence. This changed as the need for occupation of Manchuria and Korea remained. Then the expansion into China. This forced a continuious expansion of the Army and took resources from the Navy. The increasing continential focus of Japan left the Pacific neglected. This would become a problem in WW 1 if fighting occured. The Army would have taken more and more resources and manpower from the Navy. The likelyhood is that the Navy would have to be reduced to fighting with what they have and give up any substancial building programs due to lack of resources and manpower.

      2. The Japanese navy realized that they had no means of power projection in WW 1. That is, they had no means of coaling or fueling at sea, no auxiliary ships for tending the fleet and, basically were pinned to Japan as a base. If they couldn't steam from there to wherever and back they were pretty much hit.

      3. Japanese industry in general is centered on small shops and piece work at this time. Large factories and facilities are a rarety.
      Start up industries like an aircraft one were going to be slow to grow and develop as a result. If you look at it historically, the Japanese up through the mid 30's really had a tiny air force (Army or Navy) in terms of manpower, pilots and planes. Most of the aircraft were not innovative but rather copies of foreign designs to one degree or another.

      4. The Army - Navy rivalry still exists even in 1914. This means there is a diversion of resources between the two as well as two very different views of what is important to Japan strategically. The Army would focus on China as the most important theater while the Navy would see the Pacific as such.
      The one overseas Japanese operation with any sizable number of troops was using a ad hoc naval infantry battalion at Singapore to help the British put down an Indian Army revolt there in 1916.

      So, the most likely course a Japan faced with more combat in WW 1 would have taken largely depends on the nature of what happens. If naval warfare becomes the norm the Navy would push for more resources to keep their fleet operational. But, given the lack of bases and available troops it is very unlikely that Japan would have sought to aggressively get involved in a land war outside China. The Army likely would not be cooperative without being allowed time to build sufficent resources and units to accomplish such a task.
      Japan being essentially a seapower in 1914 with a small professional army would not have been readily willing to enter into a major land conflict simply due to lack of resources at the time.
      Now, if that became the need then like Britain, they would have to choose between more navy and more army. That would have influenced post war doctrine and strategy.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Destroyer25 View Post
        Yes but if WW1 is different then does WW2 even happen?

        Or are you just saying what would happen if Japan went into WW2 with a better armed forces and a more powerful industry?
        Correct I am projecting control of the PI and Pearl for the Japan. What I am seing is as TA said the Japan is not industtrialized. Fighting WW1 as it did it was not forced to look at how it did business for them the war was over in less than a year with minimal military investment. Right now it looks like Japan will be involved in a protracted fight both at sea and on land. Which should affect Japanese industry. Now if you look at WW2 Japan was not sufficiently industrialized to compete.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
          The major problems for Japan in WW 1 that required solving post war were:

          1. The Imperial Army was small and without alot of influence. This changed as the need for occupation of Manchuria and Korea remained. Then the expansion into China. This forced a continuious expansion of the Army and took resources from the Navy. The increasing continential focus of Japan left the Pacific neglected. This would become a problem in WW 1 if fighting occured. The Army would have taken more and more resources and manpower from the Navy. The likelyhood is that the Navy would have to be reduced to fighting with what they have and give up any substancial building programs due to lack of resources and manpower.

          2. The Japanese navy realized that they had no means of power projection in WW 1. That is, they had no means of coaling or fueling at sea, no auxiliary ships for tending the fleet and, basically were pinned to Japan as a base. If they couldn't steam from there to wherever and back they were pretty much hit.

          3. Japanese industry in general is centered on small shops and piece work at this time. Large factories and facilities are a rarety.
          Start up industries like an aircraft one were going to be slow to grow and develop as a result. If you look at it historically, the Japanese up through the mid 30's really had a tiny air force (Army or Navy) in terms of manpower, pilots and planes. Most of the aircraft were not innovative but rather copies of foreign designs to one degree or another.

          4. The Army - Navy rivalry still exists even in 1914. This means there is a diversion of resources between the two as well as two very different views of what is important to Japan strategically. The Army would focus on China as the most important theater while the Navy would see the Pacific as such.
          The one overseas Japanese operation with any sizable number of troops was using a ad hoc naval infantry battalion at Singapore to help the British put down an Indian Army revolt there in 1916.

          So, the most likely course a Japan faced with more combat in WW 1 would have taken largely depends on the nature of what happens. If naval warfare becomes the norm the Navy would push for more resources to keep their fleet operational. But, given the lack of bases and available troops it is very unlikely that Japan would have sought to aggressively get involved in a land war outside China. The Army likely would not be cooperative without being allowed time to build sufficent resources and units to accomplish such a task.
          Japan being essentially a seapower in 1914 with a small professional army would not have been readily willing to enter into a major land conflict simply due to lack of resources at the time.
          Now, if that became the need then like Britain, they would have to choose between more navy and more army. That would have influenced post war doctrine and strategy.
          But do you see them coming into WW2 better prepared. To me it seems the industrialization of Japan may start early or at a quicker pace.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by craven View Post
            For those that do not know I am the Japanese Player in the Alt war game where the US joins Germany. During WW1 in the normal timeline Japan was able to get it gains without Gearing up to much or changing the way they do things. They were able to fight the war with what they came with.

            In the Alt time line I busy crushing the US but it is going to require me to build more ships troops and actually airplanes to win so Japan is going to be forced to industiralize more than in the orignal timeline.

            This lead me to consider what would be impact on Japan in the Second World War or any conflict that breaks out inbetween. The oil issue for Japan will probally remain the same but I see a tougher Japan coming into WW2 if they get the Philipines and what they took in the orignal timelines.

            Just wondering what others think
            If the AH timeline you campaign in continues on until WW2, the political situation in the wider world will be considerably different. Any comparisons will be pure speculation because (a) Japan was on the winning side in WW1, (b) Japan was not fighting the USA in WW1, and (c) in the AH campaign, so far no winner has been declared.

            Part of Japan's problems post-WW1 was that it was not accorded the amount of respect it thought it deserved and Japan got all huffy. This also affected the nature of politics within Japan, with radical officer cliques expressing their opinions via assassinations, manufactured border incidents, and other silly behaviour.

            But the major problem is (c) above - we don't know who's won, so Japan may yet get it's pants pulled down and told to stop snivelling and take its spanking like a big boy. In which case you've probably lost Formosa and the Ryukyus as a minimum.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by craven View Post
              Correct I am projecting control of the PI and Pearl for the Japan. What I am seing is as TA said the Japan is not industtrialized. Fighting WW1 as it did it was not forced to look at how it did business for them the war was over in less than a year with minimal military investment. Right now it looks like Japan will be involved in a protracted fight both at sea and on land. Which should affect Japanese industry. Now if you look at WW2 Japan was not sufficiently industrialized to compete.
              What I see in a more fought WW 1 is:

              First, Japan lacks the means for power projection. They have zero amphibious capacity and no doctrine for it. An opposed landing would be disasterous. If one were made on some scale I would think that it would be the impetus in post war to develop such on a much more complete scale. That is, the Navy (given the animous between the two services) developing a real marine corps while the Army develops a doctrine with both working on equipment to allow it to happen.
              This wouldn't happen over night and would take years to actually work out just as it did for the US, Britain and, Japan historically. But, it would leave Japan in a WW 2 scenario better prepared for amphibious operations.

              The second thing likely to come out, if there was a Guerre de course run against Japanese merchant shipping is that Japan would be better prepared for a commerce war. That is, more ASW, convoy protection, that sort of thing. That would have led to a greater emphsis on smaller ships and cruisers rather than a massive battleline.

              A underway replenishment capacity is likely to be far more fully developed by the Navy. This will also take years to occur as the technology, doctrine and, methodolgy won't spring up overnight. Building suitable ships will take time, years most likely. This is one area that Japan would have recognized in a Pacific War fairly quickly as they couldn't project power virtually anywhere they didn't hold a good port nearby.
              For example, taking the PI would be very difficult. Keeping ships on station and suppling a large land army would have been nearly impossible. The Japanese have no doctrine or equipment to coal or fuel at sea. A captured port with no facilities or damaged ones does them little or no good until repaired. The Navy just isn't ready to move far from Japan and fight.
              Taking even central Pacific islands would be hard if they were defended. There is no doctrine or technical methodology in place to allow for shore bombardment. There is no amphibious equipment for the landing. Most troops would be coming ashore in row boats... rowed boats.... Obviously, this would be a disaster if a seriously opposed landing were being made.
              All of this argues that in a post war world the Japanese would take amphibious operations far more seriously after a few debacles where they got clobbered trying to do it with an improvisation.

              Japanese industry isn't suddenly going to become more capable or efficent. Here they are still saddled with what they can produce and choices. If the Army needs heavier guns and more mechanized equipment it is at the expense of the Navy in terms of industrial output. This would be a balancing act that largely depended on how both serivces and the government saw the outcome of the war.

              Comment


              • #8
                I was thinking along the lines you were about as far as them being more prepared as far as organizationally in the military.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Japan just fought, and won, a land-war with Russia just ten years earlier.

                  Yes, I know there were several famous Naval battles, but the bulk of the fighting was in Mancuria.
                  The means to raise a large army exists, it didn't just go away. However, a land campaign in a cold to temperate region does not prepare them for an amphibious campaign in the tropics. There would be a lot of trial and error is a war with they US in the game we are running, and I hope I have been running true to that.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Exorcist View Post
                    Japan just fought, and won, a land-war with Russia just ten years earlier.

                    Yes, I know there were several famous Naval battles, but the bulk of the fighting was in Mancuria.
                    The means to raise a large army exists, it didn't just go away. However, a land campaign in a cold to temperate region does not prepare them for an amphibious campaign in the tropics. There would be a lot of trial and error is a war with they US in the game we are running, and I hope I have been running true to that.
                    Japan started that war with 6 divisions, called up 6 more then mobilized another 6. These were all, more or less, retained on home and occupation duties post war. The IJA had the capacity to call up about another 6 by 1914 on top of that without too much harm to the economy in terms of manpower.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      By the Time WW2 Japan would need more oil and steel than it did and might attack the US Earlier than they did . Regardless of what Herr Hitler told the to do and wait .Because he did want the USA in the war untill later .

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Ahh gonna ignore who starts the war when because ulitmately you get to many variables to actually make a decent guess.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by craven View Post
                          Ahh gonna ignore who starts the war when because ulitmately you get to many variables to actually make a decent guess.
                          Okay Just threw it out there. Feel free to uses it or not .

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                            Japan started that war with 6 divisions, called up 6 more then mobilized another 6. These were all, more or less, retained on home and occupation duties post war. The IJA had the capacity to call up about another 6 by 1914 on top of that without too much harm to the economy in terms of manpower.
                            The back story is Japans government was having troubling paying for the Russian war. Depending on whom you read the treasury was empty and loan applications were being refused, or Japan was technically bankrupt & unable to pay its obligations. This was one reason why the government accepted a negotiated settlement when & on the conditions it did. Perhaps this changes in 1914, but I am skeptical. With the US capitol unavailable to the Allies Japan is once again going to have trouble finding loans to pay for long term mobilization costs. Britian & France wont have much to spare as obviously they wont be borrowing any from the US.

                            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                            Japanese industry isn't suddenly going to become more capable or efficent. Here they are still saddled with what they can produce and choices. If the Army needs heavier guns and more mechanized equipment it is at the expense of the Navy in terms of industrial output. This would be a balancing act that largely depended on how both serivces and the government saw the outcome of the war.
                            In the 1920 & more so in the 1930s Japan impovrished itself to sustain its military. While the treasury remained solvent the cost was reflected in the gradual impovrishment of the working and middle classes. A balanced infrastructure was neglected as well. ie: the ship building industry built too few cargo ships for Japans needs due to priority for combat ships.

                            If Japan is forced to fight a long war' against the US it will have the same problem as in 1942-1944. Perhaps even worse as Japan had spent 1939-1941 building a stratigic reserve of critical material. A Japan entering a war in 1914 probablly wont have that advantage of two years focused preperation. On the industrial side a 'expansion' of the armaments industry will not be a net gain. It may even be a significant net loss over the following decades as tough trade offs would be necessary between new manufactoring and sustaining existing industry and the underlying infrastructure.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Actually Japan ended up making a lot of money during WW1 it wiped out the debt and ended up with a surplus.


                              Now if Japan ends up moblizing what does that do to the economy is unknown. The effect that is unknown is does gaining the PI or Pearl end up outweighing the downside. I am not smart enough to calculate that. One thing Japan was definately needing was room to expand. Famine and abortions and infantcide were high do to the high level of poverty from overcrowding.

                              If Japan ends up with more territory post War does it relieve some of it economic and social issues.

                              As has been discussed previously the other advantage is Japan may have a better understanding of the needs it will need to fight the next war. One is the need for more merchant shipping. Part of the reason the US ended up being better prepared for WW2 has it roots in the Spanish American war where they ended up having the even use foreign ships to transport troops.
                              Last edited by craven; 16 Feb 11, 11:30.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X