We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
That is to say, no matter what else happens, I can't see the Japanese Empire surviving. They'll either lose everything on the mainland and then fall to a coup in the home islands or vice versa. Only after a regime change and someone gaining control of and racially altering the miltiary's methods, culture and philosophy, will Japan be able to form longstanding relations with...anyone, really.
I mean...the whole reason why I was fine with making an alliance with Japan at the conference was because I suspected they were going to immediately crash and burn as soon as the game started again.
I just didn't expect them to attempt to screw Russia over immediately, a move so idiotic that I thought the Soviets would have to at least attempt to hide their support of Mao and other Asian communist groups for a while...
But, as we see, Stalin got lucky and can do it in his much preferred fashion. Full frontal assault.
Due to how this last member of the axis was not disarmed, defeated, changed government or altered in any way, they are at present 'the' evil in the world,
This however is more than fair. It's not like Japan has been sweetness and sugar for the past decade. That being said, even in OTL the Americans were more than eager to ally with their bitter foe to fight the Red Menace in Korea, albeit in TTL Japan was demilitarized and Red China was on the ascendancy as well, nevertheless I think there is a case to be made that "beef" is a subjective measure in the eyes of the foreign offices.
Add to that the domestic unrest from Japanese public tired of the military's crap, tons of recours issues, war exhaustion (for them, they've been fighting nonstop since 1933 and still are on the mainland)...Well...Japan is screwed.
This I don't necessarily buy. OTL Japan was prepared to fight to the very last man (and possibly woman, child, etc.) rather than surrendering up until the bombs and August Storm. IIRC, a large part of this was because the Japanese public were unaware of how badly the war had actually gone for them, but in this case even that is moot because the war has gone fantastically for Japan, you can place them on the "losing side" all you want but they made out with territorial gains and not losses on every front compared to pre-GW2 (say, 1933 or so). With the great power war ending, even if warfare is continuing on many fronts the intensity will reduce which one expects to mean that the home front situation will improve for the average citizen, and certainly there will be no need for the extensive rebuilding that France, Russia, Poland, Italy, Romania, and certain UGNRs among others must go through.
Add to this the strong Japanese communalism and nationalism cultural elements, the latter of which will only be reinforced after Geneva, and I just don't see it. Japan has a lot of problems, but in the sense of being "good" problems to have (not morally "good", but from the amoral perspective of a great power). That's not really a recipe for the kind of public sentiment and pressure on the government that leads to the downfall of nations.
The US can't actually DO anything about that (yet. Its going to take decades to build a presence on the continent again), and indeed helped the Comintern take over Europe. The red scare will still probably start up again from where it left off in the 30s, but it'll take time. Years maybe, considering the level of involvement the US had with the comintern, was a comintern member themsevles (and 'clearly' isn't evil), how much propaganda was put out by the US saying how great the Soviets were...and Russia doesn't hold any former US territory as an imperial possession either.
I agree the Japanese population is heavily suppressed and in the dark about rhe costs of war...but even when Japan 'wins', the war never seems to end. They've been 'winning' the war since the initial invasion of manchuria and China 15 years ago, and yet they're still at war, and it's still in areas that they've had as core parts of their empire for a decade now (or longer, in the case of Korea).
There's also going to be quite a bit of anger because (again, from their one sided perspective), the Japanese government have away half of their war gains for no reason. Japan had been seen to (to a degree, actually was) rather effortlessly crushing the allies all the way to Australia and New Zealand, and yet has given most of the big land gains back, including the vital oil fields.
What with troop losses continuing to rise, this strange withdrawal from a war they are told they won, plus constant fighting across most of the empire...Well...dissent is going to start rising. From the army too, because those junior officers who loved couping for not being aggressive enough in the 30s are still around for a new generation of men who had won every battle they fought in (except if they were fighting the Soviets) and yet were told to retreat all the way back to Japan by high command.
but even when JapanAmerica 'wins', the war never seems to end. They've been 'winning' the war since the initial invasion of manchuria and Chinathe Middle East 15 years ago, and yet they're still at war,
-Anonymous, c. 2016. If we're going by reckless speculation on flimsy parallels, the next Japanese PM will be a crazy buffoon with a cult of personality who will Make Japan Great Again by building a wall and making the Russians pay for it. Which is a pretty terrible outcome, but arguably survivable.
I do think Japan will not be able to hold all of their gains, militarily (cough cough Afghanistan Indochina cough cough), but that's going to be a longer-term failure. I certainly don't see the population revolting and toppling the government in a matter of months because the warfare continues at a low intensity. The sensibilities and imperatives of the GW2-era Japanese culture are markedly different from 21st-century Western/Anglospherical maxims. Notably, the European norms of war since the Victorian era have shifted from war being a constant (as historically was the case in most times and places) towards war being either a distant, colonial venture, or a very destructive exclamation point that shatters the continent (GW1 & GW2). Japan, and East Asia in general, still broadly experiences what has been the historical norm of fairly constant warfare, which fortunately for the Japanese population usually happens at a safe distance. For this to continue after the exclamation point of GW2 is hardly unexpected, whereas for Europeans the same concept would be considered quite intolerable, to say nothing of 21st-century Europeans transported back to the 1940s.
All of which sums up as: I don't believe the Japanese population will be nearly as restive or anti-government as you seem to be projecting. Japan will have many problems but securing the general cooperation and acquiescence of the population will not be near to the forefront among them.
On 5 April 45, the Soviet Union, confirmed it would not consider a Japanese proposal to revive the Soviet–Japanese Neutrality Pact of April 1940. They explained the idea would remain “under review” given the failure of both sides to come to an agreement over the future of Mongolia. That country would remain split into North (Soviet controlled) and South (Japanese controlled) Mongolia for the foreseeable future.
This became one of a number of causes of increased (resumed) friction between the two former enemies and staunch ideological adversaries in the years immediately following the peace settlement. The ‘realpolitik’ working relationship developed between them at the Geneva Peace Conference was quickly breaking down under the pressure of breaking events in a turbulent post-GW2 Asia.
The omission in Geneva of the Mongolian question seems to have been a most unfortunate oversight with serious ramifications. I really hadn't expected the alliance of convenience between Japan and Moscow to unravel quite so quickly. Wherever the fault lies, I'm sure these developments will be well received in London and Washington!
He would be replaced two days later by the 77-year-old Baron Admiral Kantarō Suzuki, a loyal but far right-wing Imperialist who would be given secret instructions by Emperor Hirohito, who stated that "I desire that concrete plans to end hostility with Turkey and the West, unhampered by existing policy, be speedily studied and that efforts made to implement them."
Again, very welcome to the Allied powers that the Emperor wishes to repair relations, although there's some work to do there, especially with the US. In keeping with the view I took as Foreign Secretary, it is going to take a coalition of everybody else if we're going to build an effective counter-weight to the very powerful accord between the USSR and the UGNR.
As 1945 ended, parts of the Japanese occupied territories in China and Korea and their puppet state in Vietnam in particular were coming under increasing pressure from armed Nationalists, mainly Communist insurgencies.
Japan seems to be having far more problems holding the GEACPS together than expected at this early stage in proceedings and is clearly nervous about that long border with the Soviets. It is to be hoped Tokyo has more than enough to handle now without trying to make more trouble for anyone else.
The omission in Geneva of the Mongolian question seems to have been a most unfortunate oversight with serious ramifications. I really hadn't expected the alliance of convenience between Japan and Moscow to unravel quite so quickly. Wherever the fault lies, I'm sure these developments will be well received in London and Washington!
I'll be honest, I just assumed it was Soviet and everyone agreed because that just made sense, unless we didn't make peace with Japan and had to fight to get it back.
But the accord falling apart immediately honestly is pretty great for the Soviet Union and comintern, as it gives us an immediate outside enemy to direct a lot of communist fervor towards, esepcially as we have actual red rebels to support against oppressive colonist masters in various Asian countries. Which is fantastic propaganda to spread about Africa as it too start to decolonise, and a great thing to show India we're on 'their' side.
Honestly, it was unintentional but it makes the Soviet diplomatic team look even better in hindsight. Took Japan for a ride throughout the conference, than had Japan break from Russia thsmevles over a stupid thing that makes them look like the bad guys, and give Russia a good excuse to aid the heroic rebels in the struggle for freedom
Great press for Russia, more communists in Asia, and Japan the old enemy gets busted down to size without further warfare.
Stalin will probably later claim he meant to do that all along.
Japan being in such trouble with its colonial empire brings up the OTHER paper tiger colonial empire still kicking post war.
The TTL suez crisis is going to be...interesting. this time round, the british haven't been bombed or had their economy destroyed by war. They have all their ships and planes. But they're going up against not just decolonised Eygpt but the UGNR, which almost certainly means the entire Comintern as well. So the land situation is decidedly against them...but at sea and air, they are dominant...hmm...
And there's that dashed amercian air and naval base at Rhodes, which means they're ideally placed to interfere or intervene. If this goes badly for Britain, they lose all presence in the Med (suez, Cyprus, Malta, and possibly even Gibralter). If it goes well, they'll only lose suez (they are certain to lose it to eygptain nationalisation) but be compensated in some way and keep their bases elsewhere.
Basically, it'll be their big test. Are they still capable of commanding some pull internationally, or is the empire basically at an end and about to fully decolonise?
Does Suez even happen? Britain doesn't have nearly as much access to Middle Eastern Oil in TTL, and a lot less investment further east with India being out of the Empire. Meanwhile, Turkey's heavy hand in Middle Eastern affairs likely changes the shape of things drastically, if nothing else the Arabian countries will be less interested in throwing all of their armies into Israel (if it even comes into existence in TTL, which is yet to be seen) knowing that an expansionist UGNR is right on the border looking for new members, Syria for example is likely to be intimidated by this.
Per authAAR notice, I do expect that these OTL events will still happen, but it's an interesting question all the same.
Yes. Eygpt was always going to get out from british yoke, and they were always going to nationalise such an absurdly strategic resource as the suez canal. The British would naturally object to their property being seized by what was months and years before their vassal state, and essential declare to the world that they were not only no longer a hegemon but not even a great power at all.
TTL, I expect it to happen a lot sooner. The British are weaker, eygpt got left high and dry by them in the war, and Churchill is in office (if he wins the 45 election that is).
Meanwhile, Turkey's heavy hand in Middle Eastern affairs likely changes the shape of things drastically, if nothing else the Arabian countries will be less interested in throwing all of their armies into Israel (if it even comes into existence in TTL, which is yet to be seen) knowing that an expansionist UGNR is right on the border looking for new members, Syria for example is likely to be intimidated by this.
I suspect what happens here is the petition from the UK and the nations in question themsevles to the new council and league overall to allow these former colonies, Protectorate and mandates to become free indepednant nations, and very possibly join the allies bloc.
Even if this does happen, I can see a lot of beef starting very quickly between Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Arab states, and this resurgent Turkish empire on the border and in persia. But with the british in Palestine and Iraq, Turkey in persia, the US in Rhodes and Eygpt in question, I suspect its going to be a whole bloody mess for all involved.
Great and detailed comment and conversations, thanks once again. Due to their length, speculation about things I want to keep my narrative powder largely dry for now and the fact that many stand on their own or are well-discussed in exchanges, I will not do my normal detailed blow-by-blow feedback. I will however make a few brief observations along the way.
This could be trouble, but will be also fairly brittle and easily broken (or at least made mortally difficult to hold onto)...
Both of those will be issues...though if Japan negotiates well, Soviet reaproachment is possible. The Soviets want a simple deal in Asia, given how a lot of their focus is in Europe...however that's in terms of economics. Militarily speaking, the Russians absolutely can stomp Japan flat if they really decide to be stubborn...
I completely forgot about them. Oh yes, the Soviets actually have a ton of ins into Asia. Ho chi min probably not, he went asking for American help first...but actually quite liked communism (seemingly) after seeking an ally of convenience.
Surely Japan would back down from that...Mongolia is Russian clay, has been since before the war and the only real thing in the entire region Russia would be certain to riot over if Japan stayed. They couldn't be that stupid, right?
...
Alright, proxy wars it is. Good luck fighting the entire population of Asia, Japan!
Not sure they'll be as succesful as OTL without the Soviet red army conquering a lot of China for them, but Mao was very good at fighting the Japanese, so if it comes down to it, I think he can carve a decent size state from this.
All systems go on multiple proxy wars at once. And the Japanese have to man the huge Soviet border, rebuild their navy and keep an eye out for the amercian and British War hawks.
Not a great start to their post war.
Hehehe. Korea is going to be the big one that takes up the Japanese regimes time and effort. Simply put, they cannot afford the prestige hit (or strategic issues) that losing Korea to communism would bring. Vietnam might get off a little lucky if the Japanese are smart enough to pull out and instead smash the Koreans down before rounding on China.
If they try fighting all three of these enemies at the same time though, they'll tank their economy and miltiary. Nothing will be achieved but a lot of death and damage on all sides.
Japan has a lot going for it but its going to have to work hard to keep any of it.
Not sure if the Soviets (in game ATL) are in that good kerb-stomping form in the east, where they've done pretty poorly over the last four-plus years. And we saw how hard it was in my Quick & Dirty 2 campaign, even with human v AI and nukes!
Mongolia was a bit of mischief I decided to make when reviewing the armistice map and Geneva outcomes. Japan here felt it was still in quite a strong military position and it looked to me like a nice Korea-like DMZ scenario for post-war bickering, as it was quite evenly split and never settled at the Peace Conference.
Korea could be nasty too ... post-WW2 OTL Asia was not a peaceful place!
This seems to be about what one would expect from post-GW2 Japan. The military will soon find its hands full dealing with the numerous problems they have conquered, which should satisfy the needs of the military to feel important while limiting them from getting into any serious trouble by starting something against one of the major powers. How many gains Japan can actually hold onto will of course remain to be seen.
For once I agree with TBC, I don't see how Japan can expect to hold onto half of Mongolia. Best outcome there would be leveraging against settling some border questions in Manchuria/Transamur in a favorable manner.
As far as the wider world goes, I expect diplomacy with the majors will be frosty for some time yet, but sooner or later the desire to oppose Communism will lead the West to seek out an Eastern ally...or at least cordial relations, on the part of the warmonger USA.
I think, with the falling-out with the Soviets, Japan may be feeling both like performing a bit of bastardry to expand Mengukuo and perhaps use it as some kind of propaganda and bargaining point in their outreach attempt to the West. Yes, "Watch out for those dominoes falling to the Communists in Asia! Help resist the Communist behemoth!"
They really should. It would have bought them a bit of time to try and secure south east Asia before the communists in China got fully armed. As is, they have an even larger Soviet border to patrol, in an area they don't even want, where the locals are even more hostile than usual.
THAT depends on the Japanese military conduct. If they continue to do the things they did throughout the 30s and 40s, the west is going to have a hard time dealing with them in any way due to popular and political condemnation.
Given the long and storied history of outstanding military conduct in the West, I suspect that if the West wants a Japanese ally they will be more than happy to overlook quite a lot of outstanding military conduct as long as it is convenient for them. And then later once the Communists inevitably collapse in on themselves (not to make a statement, rather assuming our esteemed authAAR hews relatively close to OTL happenings as he has indicated), such outstanding conduct can become a pressure point the West pushes on whenever convenient to try and get something out of their "allies".
Let's all keep in mind that this is the pre-Internet era, so news of such outstanding conduct getting out is a less probable and slower process than in the modern day and age, and even then as we have seen in the modern day and age many of the population simply do not care if it does not affect them personally, such is the world we inhabit.
Different event train here. Peace with China after 1937, then the war v the Soviets and then Allies. Hardly any fighting with the US and no Pearl Harbour. Not nice guys, but a somewhat different vibe to OTL.
That could work...unfortunately Japan has been at war with the british empire and US for some time and actually invaded Australiasia and occupied some of it. Can you begin to imagine not just the OTL horrors being published by the returning allied troops but all the TTL stuff Japan got up to in actual 'white western country' terirotry?
At the very least, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand and everywhere else that felt the touch of Japanese imperialism is going to very ardently against the empire, who is still in power in Tokyo.
This is only going to get worse for Japan as they have to contend with Vietnam and Korea, who will be getting a bunch of help from all these nations.
Sure, a strong unified US government had and will continue to back horrible people and dictators and regimees when it suits them, but this is a very divided amercia up to and including Congress, which is also in the process of hearing war vets horror stories about what rhe Japanese did to them and what they're doing now to the rest of East Asia.
Due to how this last member of the axis was not disarmed, defeated, changed government or altered in any way, they are at present 'the' evil in the world, and every other power on the planet has at least 'some' fairly major beef with them.
Add to that the domestic unrest from Japanese public tired of the military's crap, tons of recours issues, war exhaustion (for them, they've been fighting nonstop since 1933 and still are on the mainland)...Well...Japan is screwed.
Good points, but then Japana gave it all back withpout further fighting. Some placation, though as noted perhaps with a domestic cost as well. The gamble is trying to regain some kudos with the Allies and US while using the Soviets as a potential common adversary, enemy or my enemy ploy.
That is to say, no matter what else happens, I can't see the Japanese Empire surviving. They'll either lose everything on the mainland and then fall to a coup in the home islands or vice versa. Only after a regime change and someone gaining control of and racially altering the miltiary's methods, culture and philosophy, will Japan be able to form longstanding relations with...anyone, really.
I mean...the whole reason why I was fine with making an alliance with Japan at the conference was because I suspected they were going to immediately crash and burn as soon as the game started again.
I just didn't expect them to attempt to screw Russia over immediately, a move so idiotic that I thought the Soviets would have to at least attempt to hide their support of Mao and other Asian communist groups for a while...
But, as we see, Stalin got lucky and can do it in his much preferred fashion. Full frontal assault.
Well other than the giant red bear menacing all of Europe, yes. "But other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, ..."
This however is more than fair. It's not like Japan has been sweetness and sugar for the past decade. That being said, even in OTL the Americans were more than eager to ally with their bitter foe to fight the Red Menace in Korea, albeit in TTL Japan was demilitarized and Red China was on the ascendancy as well, nevertheless I think there is a case to be made that "beef" is a subjective measure in the eyes of the foreign offices.
This I don't necessarily buy. OTL Japan was prepared to fight to the very last man (and possibly woman, child, etc.) rather than surrendering up until the bombs and August Storm. IIRC, a large part of this was because the Japanese public were unaware of how badly the war had actually gone for them, but in this case even that is moot because the war has gone fantastically for Japan, you can place them on the "losing side" all you want but they made out with territorial gains and not losses on every front compared to pre-GW2 (say, 1933 or so). With the great power war ending, even if warfare is continuing on many fronts the intensity will reduce which one expects to mean that the home front situation will improve for the average citizen, and certainly there will be no need for the extensive rebuilding that France, Russia, Poland, Italy, Romania, and certain UGNRs among others must go through.
Add to this the strong Japanese communalism and nationalism cultural elements, the latter of which will only be reinforced after Geneva, and I just don't see it. Japan has a lot of problems, but in the sense of being "good" problems to have (not morally "good", but from the amoral perspective of a great power). That's not really a recipe for the kind of public sentiment and pressure on the government that leads to the downfall of nations.
I think there's also the factor here that the Comintern has done much better than in OTL on the one hand, but a lot of that is down to the Turks, who are definitely not Communist though will initially at least remain very close to the Soviets. Especially while Inonu and Stalin are still around. All bets are pretty much off now there is a new Administration in the US. Both Japan and the Allies may be betting on weaning Turkey away from the Soviets as much as they can, while opposing Communism in proxy wars in Asia.
Of course, the Soviets will not be sitting idly by either and the Japanese are still carrying a lot of lead in their saddle-bags, even with the concessions made at Geneva and their just-starting diplomatic push. At home, the Emperor is still the Emperor (and has not really been demystified yet) and while they had to make concessions, things turned out a lot better than they might have. Japan has some problems, but is far from down and out as yet.
The US can't actually DO anything about that (yet. Its going to take decades to build a presence on the continent again), and indeed helped the Comintern take over Europe. The red scare will still probably start up again from where it left off in the 30s, but it'll take time. Years maybe, considering the level of involvement the US had with the comintern, was a comintern member themsevles (and 'clearly' isn't evil), how much propaganda was put out by the US saying how great the Soviets were...and Russia doesn't hold any former US territory as an imperial possession either.
I agree the Japanese population is heavily suppressed and in the dark about rhe costs of war...but even when Japan 'wins', the war never seems to end. They've been 'winning' the war since the initial invasion of manchuria and China 15 years ago, and yet they're still at war, and it's still in areas that they've had as core parts of their empire for a decade now (or longer, in the case of Korea).
There's also going to be quite a bit of anger because (again, from their one sided perspective), the Japanese government have away half of their war gains for no reason. Japan had been seen to (to a degree, actually was) rather effortlessly crushing the allies all the way to Australia and New Zealand, and yet has given most of the big land gains back, including the vital oil fields.
What with troop losses continuing to rise, this strange withdrawal from a war they are told they won, plus constant fighting across most of the empire...Well...dissent is going to start rising. From the army too, because those junior officers who loved couping for not being aggressive enough in the 30s are still around for a new generation of men who had won every battle they fought in (except if they were fighting the Soviets) and yet were told to retreat all the way back to Japan by high command.
Hmm, the Red Menace may be cited sooner than one thinks. But it is not a given it will happen immediately, to be sure.
As for Japan, as yet the only war they are directly involved in is the Chinese Communist insurgency, which is a growing irritation but far from an existential threat to their position in China for now. Korea is basically quiet other than a bit of canary-in-the-coal mine unrest in Seoul and Kim's irritating (and probably Soviet-backed) presence in the nascent KCP.
Vietnam could become serious, but Japan has yet to answer their puppet's calls for military assistance, though will need to decide their policy soon. They are about where France was just after the end of the OTL war. What will they do next? How far will it drag them in?
-Anonymous, c. 2016. If we're going by reckless speculation on flimsy parallels, the next Japanese PM will be a crazy buffoon with a cult of personality who will Make Japan Great Again by building a wall and making the Russians pay for it. Which is a pretty terrible outcome, but arguably survivable.
I do think Japan will not be able to hold all of their gains, militarily (cough cough Afghanistan Indochina cough cough), but that's going to be a longer-term failure. I certainly don't see the population revolting and toppling the government in a matter of months because the warfare continues at a low intensity. The sensibilities and imperatives of the GW2-era Japanese culture are markedly different from 21st-century Western/Anglospherical maxims. Notably, the European norms of war since the Victorian era have shifted from war being a constant (as historically was the case in most times and places) towards war being either a distant, colonial venture, or a very destructive exclamation point that shatters the continent (GW1 & GW2). Japan, and East Asia in general, still broadly experiences what has been the historical norm of fairly constant warfare, which fortunately for the Japanese population usually happens at a safe distance. For this to continue after the exclamation point of GW2 is hardly unexpected, whereas for Europeans the same concept would be considered quite intolerable, to say nothing of 21st-century Europeans transported back to the 1940s.
All of which sums up as: I don't believe the Japanese population will be nearly as restive or anti-government as you seem to be projecting. Japan will have many problems but securing the general cooperation and acquiescence of the population will not be near to the forefront among them.
Japan has a complex path ahead, full of possible land mines. Keeping the lot, especially if they want accommodation with the West, would be difficult, for sure. But they hold quite a few trading cards in their hands for now.
The omission in Geneva of the Mongolian question seems to have been a most unfortunate oversight with serious ramifications. I really hadn't expected the alliance of convenience between Japan and Moscow to unravel quite so quickly. Wherever the fault lies, I'm sure these developments will be well received in London and Washington!
Again, very welcome to the Allied powers that the Emperor wishes to repair relations, although there's some work to do there, especially with the US. In keeping with the view I took as Foreign Secretary, it is going to take a coalition of everybody else if we're going to build an effective counter-weight to the very powerful accord between the USSR and the UGNR.
Japan seems to be having far more problems holding the GEACPS together than expected at this early stage in proceedings and is clearly nervous about that long border with the Soviets. It is to be hoped Tokyo has more than enough to handle now without trying to make more trouble for anyone else.
Re Mongolia, unfortunate for the participants perhaps, but a little golden nugget for your humble authAAR!
Yes, the USSR-UNGR dynamic will be important. And something the West (including the new US administration) will also be so very keen to undermine in the next few years. This is shaping up as a far more multi-polar world than the OTL post-WW2 and then Cold War era.
Japan will be trying to decrease its troubles, certainly. Whether they succeed or not will be another matter.
I'll be honest, I just assumed it was Soviet and everyone agreed because that just made sense, unless we didn't make peace with Japan and had to fight to get it back.
But the accord falling apart immediately honestly is pretty great for the Soviet Union and comintern, as it gives us an immediate outside enemy to direct a lot of communist fervor towards, esepcially as we have actual red rebels to support against oppressive colonist masters in various Asian countries. Which is fantastic propaganda to spread about Africa as it too start to decolonise, and a great thing to show India we're on 'their' side.
Honestly, it was unintentional but it makes the Soviet diplomatic team look even better in hindsight. Took Japan for a ride throughout the conference, than had Japan break from Russia thsmevles over a stupid thing that makes them look like the bad guys, and give Russia a good excuse to aid the heroic rebels in the struggle for freedom
Great press for Russia, more communists in Asia, and Japan the old enemy gets busted down to size without further warfare.
Stalin will probably later claim he meant to do that all along.
Jury is still out on whether the Soviet-Japanese cool-off will be good, bad or indifferent for either. The ones that may benefit the most could be primarily the Allies-US, perhaps even Turkey in some side-dealing.
Japan being in such trouble with its colonial empire brings up the OTHER paper tiger colonial empire still kicking post war.
The TTL suez crisis is going to be...interesting. this time round, the british haven't been bombed or had their economy destroyed by war. They have all their ships and planes. But they're going up against not just decolonised Eygpt but the UGNR, which almost certainly means the entire Comintern as well. So the land situation is decidedly against them...but at sea and air, they are dominant...hmm...
And there's that dashed amercian air and naval base at Rhodes, which means they're ideally placed to interfere or intervene. If this goes badly for Britain, they lose all presence in the Med (suez, Cyprus, Malta, and possibly even Gibralter). If it goes well, they'll only lose suez (they are certain to lose it to eygptain nationalisation) but be compensated in some way and keep their bases elsewhere.
Basically, it'll be their big test. Are they still capable of commanding some pull internationally, or is the empire basically at an end and about to fully decolonise?
Now something will surely happen in the Suez eventually, but what (and the outcomes/aftermath) is unknowable at this point. And the US are going to be pretty keen to keep that base in Rhodes. To who knows what end. The UK still has some clout and more standing in this ATL as the Allied leader. But the perils of the post-war world (and domestic politics) will know doubt have some unpredictable consequences.
Does Suez even happen? Britain doesn't have nearly as much access to Middle Eastern Oil in TTL, and a lot less investment further east with India being out of the Empire. Meanwhile, Turkey's heavy hand in Middle Eastern affairs likely changes the shape of things drastically, if nothing else the Arabian countries will be less interested in throwing all of their armies into Israel (if it even comes into existence in TTL, which is yet to be seen) knowing that an expansionist UGNR is right on the border looking for new members, Syria for example is likely to be intimidated by this.
Per authAAR notice, I do expect that these OTL events will still happen, but it's an interesting question all the same.
Maybe, but per above in what form and to what end I don't know yet. I feel % dice coming on for that one. Including on how whatever US administration is in power then may react.
Yes. Eygpt was always going to get out from british yoke, and they were always going to nationalise such an absurdly strategic resource as the suez canal. The British would naturally object to their property being seized by what was months and years before their vassal state, and essential declare to the world that they were not only no longer a hegemon but not even a great power at all.
TTL, I expect it to happen a lot sooner. The British are weaker, eygpt got left high and dry by them in the war, and Churchill is in office (if he wins the 45 election that is).
I suspect what happens here is the petition from the UK and the nations in question themsevles to the new council and league overall to allow these former colonies, Protectorate and mandates to become free indepednant nations, and very possibly join the allies bloc.
Even if this does happen, I can see a lot of beef starting very quickly between Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Arab states, and this resurgent Turkish empire on the border and in persia. But with the british in Palestine and Iraq, Turkey in persia, the US in Rhodes and Eygpt in question, I suspect its going to be a whole bloody mess for all involved.
Not sure if Egypt were really left high and dry in TTL? The British did manage to repel the Axis assault, after all. But they are more surrounded there than in OTL and have the hot potato of Palestine in their hands. Whole bloody mess? Pretty likely! Sooner or later? Not sure yet.
To All: thanks as always for the great comments. Next chapter will be out fairly soon, last one before a short Christmas break. It will cover some global matters to help set up the new international security architecture, before we head back to country/regional themes.
sure if Egypt were really left high and dry in TTL? The British did manage to repel the Axis assault, after all. But they are more surrounded there than in OTL and have the hot potato of Palestine in their hands. Whole bloody mess? Pretty likely! Sooner or later? Not sure yet.
Using Iranian puppet troops and failing to send any actual british troops there, and there was fighting in the country for several years. What with Turkey resurgent, and the other Arab countries uneasy with Turkey moving in and the UK coming back to Palestine and Iraq post war...I think the Nationalists will be wanting to get put of the empire ASAP and seize the country's wealth for themsevles so they have time to prepare themsevles for the inevitable bloodbath which everyone in the region knows is coming. And it's even more obvious than OTL that, push comes to shove, the british will abandon Palestine and leave the locals to fight it out rather than sort their mess themselves. And that's not something the Muslim countries can afford with Turkey resurgent and looking at them all hungry like.
3
Reactions:
Chapter 243: Global Issues – November 1944 to December 1945
Chapter 243: Global Issues – November 1944 to December 1945
The League of Nations Atomic Energy Commission Established
In a motion sponsored by Turkey and seconded by Japan, the League of Nations Security Council (LNSC) approved the creation of the League of Nations Atomic Energy Commission (LNAEC) on 1 January 1945. The UK, USA and USSR, despite various misgivings, were all persuaded to support the resolution, which was carried unanimously.
The LNAEC was created as an intergovernmental organisation that would promote the peaceful use of nuclear energy and inhibit its use for any military purpose, including nuclear weapons. It was established in 1945 as an autonomous organisation within the League of Nations system. Though governed by its own founding treaty, the organisation reports to both the General Assembly and the Security Council of the League of Nations, and would be headquartered at the LN Office in Vienna, Austria – within Turkey’s Bucharest Pact sphere of influence.
The LNAEC’s first task was to assess the current level of research into atomic energy and propose measures for its safe and peaceful use. The classified report of the LNAEC, eventually submitted to the P5 of the LNSC on 1 January 1946, noted that the countries leading civil nuclear research as the GW2 armistice came into effect on 9 October 1944 were the UK, USA, USSR and Germany. Each of these four nations had successfully researched isotope separation and completed the first stage of civil nuclear research. All except the USSR had begun to research the second stage. France and Japan had only completed the first stage of basic atomic research, while Turkey had not undertaken even begun that level of research.
---xxx---
The League of Nations Conference on International Organisation
The first plenary session of the LN General Assembly since the end of the war was held in Geneva on 25 January 1945. Secretary General Seán Lester said that the world body should work out a new charter to reflect the great changes in global affairs in recent years, which had culminated in the Geneva Peace Conference of October-November 1944.
Soviet Foreign Minister Maksim Litvinov stated that the lessons and problems of the initial pre-war years of the League of Nations must be remembered. He offered to host the first meeting of what was to be called the League of Nations Conference on International Organisation (LNCIO).
The LNCIO duly convened in the Livadia Palace in the Soviet Crimean Black Sea resort town of Yalta on 25 April 1945 and four committees began work on a new League of Nations charter.
The Livadia Palace in Yalta .
The LNCIO opening, 25 April 1945.
On 12 May, the Security Committee of the LNCIO agreed on an eleven-member security council, with non-permanent members chosen by the General Assembly. The Conference approved veto rights for the Big Five powers (the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, the United States, Turkey and Japan) on the Security Council on 23 May.
Officials agree the arrangements for the League of Nations Security Council at Yalta, 12 May 1945.
The League of Nations conference settled its last controversy on 25 June when the Big Five agreed to let the General Assembly have the right to discuss "any matters within the scope of the charter." The next day, the Yalta LNCIO concluded when the New League of Nations Charter was signed by 50 of the 51 attending member countries. However, many of the signatories would need legislative ratification by their respective parliaments, a process that would last for months yet.
---xxx---
New League of Nations Charter Adopted
The new League of Nations Charter came into effect on 24 October 1945. And with it, a new flag was adopted.
On 15 December 1945 the League confirmed the permanent headquarters of the LN would remain in Geneva. The Palace of Nations would remain as the interim home of the General Assembly but plans for a new and larger building were already being discussed.
The Palace of Nations, Geneva.
---xxx---
International Monetary Fund Founded
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) was established on 27 December 1945. It was envisaged as a major financial agency of the League of Nations and an international financial institution. It would be headquartered in Leningrad. Its stated mission was "working to foster global economic justice, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote full employment and equitable economic growth, and reduce poverty around the world."
Of course, in OTL the USSR opposed and never joined the IMF, Russia joining eventually in 1992. Here, there was no Bretton Woods meeting, just a series of negotiations in Geneva during 1945. The ATL Soviets have tried to hijack the concept, though the ideas of Harry Dexter White (US) and John Maynard Keynes (UK) have also influenced its formation. None fully got their way [I have modified the IMF mission in the ATL quote to make it more to Soviet liking.]
In OTL the American delegate Harry Dexter White thought the IMF should function more like a bank, making sure that borrowing states could repay their debts on time. Most of White's plan was incorporated into the final acts adopted at Bretton Woods. British economist John Maynard Keynes, on the other hand, imagined the IMF would be a cooperative fund upon which member states could draw to maintain economic activity and employment through periodic crises. This view suggested an IMF that helped governments to act as the United States government had during the New Deal to the great depression of the 1930s.
Some later academic analysis using former Soviet documents [drawn from an academic paper extract I found, so I’m running with it without cross-checking because fictional alt-history mumble mumble] has argued that in the initial phase of post-war international economic and trade cooperation the Soviet government attached great importance to the participation of the Soviet Union in the formulation of the IMF. They were ready to make significant concessions for the opportunity to work on the formation of international economic policy and maintain the image of being an influential actor in the international arena.
However, in the autumn of 1945 the Soviet government's position began to change due to a number of political factors. In particular, the Soviet Union was drawn into a big economic and political game between Washington and London, which influenced Soviet representations on participation in international economic cooperation in late 1945 and early 1946. This became the key factor driving the refusal of the USSR to join the IMF. We assume here in the ATL that while some of these tensions exist, the Soviets instead seek to assert their strong post-war position by not only joining, but trying to steer the IMF closer to their own international economic policy agenda.
UK delegate Lord John Maynard Keynes (centre) discusses the finer points of international financial and economic policy with his Soviet counterpart Mikhail Stepanov (left) in July 1945 during the lead-up to the founding of the IMF in December 1945. The Soviets would engage strongly with the process, trying to steer it away from the more capitalist direction the Americans and British wished to see it move. [Picture actually from the OTL Bretton Woods conference]
Through the fund and other activities such as the gathering of statistics and analysis, surveillance of its members' economies, and the demand for particular policies, the IMF would work to influence the economies of its member countries. However, though established, it would not commence financial operations until 1 March 1947.
But early on in its existence, the views of its three most financially powerful and influential members, the USSR, US and UK, would often be at odds, with each having a different view of what the IMF should be aiming for in its ‘demands for particular policies’. In particular, the US would exert leverage over the UK, which was dependent on US financial support following on from the wartime lend-lease program. The Soviets of course had a very different view of what the IMF should be supporting.
Turkey found itself having to carefully decide how it would replace its own lend lease support – which it had received from all three of these leading powers during the war – at a time when it needed a massive injection of funds to rebuild and modernise its sprawling new national and regional holdings. And at a time when its potential as a massive producer of oil (itself a significant future bargaining chip) had not yet been realised. Japan was still frozen out of the international economic system and sought to join it. And of course many countries around the world had been devastated by the war and cried out for support to rebuild.
---xxx---
Initial Report of the LNAEC
In its report submitted to the LNSC P5, the LNAEC noted that by the end of 1945, only the UK and Germany (whose scientists worked under the supervision of Soviet overseers and shared all their work with the USSR) had successfully completed the third stage of civil nuclear research. Of the two, only Germany was proceeding with Level 4 research (considered a prerequisite for beginning research on nuclear weapons).
The US had completed Level 2 and was actively researching Level 3 technology. The USSR had suspended its own program, apparently relying on its joint approach with what was by then the German Democratic Republic. Neither Japan, France or Turkey had conducted any further research in the field.
---xxx---
‘After-After Action Report’
As a ‘special treat’, because I was playing the game through (as a minor neutral) on AI to get the nuclear research info for the LNAEC report, I took a look at what would have happened in the AATL had the game just run without me playing Turkey. Just for the interest factor, I’ll post some periodic updates of what happened without the Treaty of Geneva and no human intervention.
---xxx---
Northern Front
Basically, things remained fairly even on the Soviet-Japan front, with the Soviets gaining in the north but the Japanese pushing back again towards Lake Baikal and in Mongolia. The previous Soviet insurgency on the Pacific coast north of Vladivostok had been defeated, but a new one broke out later in 1945.
The Japanese push in Mongolia and towards Irkutsk.
The Japanese and Manchurians move to shut down the latest Soviet uprising.
More Comintern divisions were heading east at the end of 1945, though whether the Soviets could supply them all adequately was another matter.
---xxx---
Southern Front
In the south, the British had made progress on a number of fronts. A steady British advance had been made in Burma all year. A marginal advance in Malaya and the elimination of of the Japanese enclave in southern Sumatra were minor sideshows. But the big move was the British-led Allied invasion of the Japanese Home Islands in early November 1945. By January, significant progress had been made and a firm beachhead established.
The British advance in Burma had continued all year.
The British had led the invasion of southern Honshu around 7 November 1945. By the end of November they were firmly lodged and spreading out east and south.
By the end of the year, the advance in Honshu was held up at Osaka, while the northern half of Kyushu had been occupied and the British lodgement in southern Honshu had been reinforced.
The situation in the South-West Pacific Area was largely the same as in October 1944, except for a new Japanese lodgement in northern Papua. Things were unchanged in New Zealand, while the Australians had made a few minor gains in the south towards Canberra.
Using Iranian puppet troops and failing to send any actual british troops there, and there was fighting in the country for several years. What with Turkey resurgent, and the other Arab countries uneasy with Turkey moving in and the UK coming back to Palestine and Iraq post war...I think the Nationalists will be wanting to get put of the empire ASAP and seize the country's wealth for themsevles so they have time to prepare themsevles for the inevitable bloodbath which everyone in the region knows is coming. And it's even more obvious than OTL that, push comes to shove, the british will abandon Palestine and leave the locals to fight it out rather than sort their mess themselves. And that's not something the Muslim countries can afford with Turkey resurgent and looking at them all hungry like.
Soviet-influenced IMF lays plenty of groundwork for The Convergence(TM) coming sooner rather than later. Interconnected capitalist economies do not natural Cold War enemies make – but then it’s one thing signing a piece of paper, quite another actually getting on and implementing its stipulations…
Jury is still out on whether the Soviet-Japanese cool-off will be good, bad or indifferent for either. The ones that may benefit the most could be primarily the Allies-US, perhaps even Turkey in some side-dealing.
We'll need everything we can muster to keep it going postwar, so any sidedealing we can do, we definitely will. If not, at least we'll try to make the Allies benefit less.
Good points, but then Japana gave it all back withpout further fighting. Some placation, though as noted perhaps with a domestic cost as well. The gamble is trying to regain some kudos with the Allies and US while using the Soviets as a potential common adversary, enemy or my enemy ploy.
Inonu's plan was always to make multi party elections as soon as the world was calm again, so after the ripples of the aftermath is past it's open elections. No lifelong presidency for Inonu.
The LNAEC’s first task was to assess the current level of research into atomic energy and propose measures for its safe and peaceful use. The classified report of the LNAEC, eventually submitted to the P5 of the LNSC on 1 January 1946, noted that the countries leading civil nuclear research as the GW2 armistice came into effect on 9 October 1944 were the UK, USA, USSR and Germany. Each of these four nations had successfully researched isotope separation and completed the first stage of civil nuclear research. All except the USSR had begun to research the second stage. France and Japan had only completed the first stage of basic atomic research, while Turkey had not undertaken even begun that level of research.
It's good that we're spearheading this effort, especially under the light that no Bucharest Pact members have researched anything of significance about atomics. Maybe some German scientists have fled to us and USSR might have shared some information but that's that.
On 12 May, the Security Committee of the LNCIO agreed on an eleven-member security council, with non-permanent members chosen by the General Assembly. The Conference approved veto rights for the Big Five powers (the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, the United States, Turkey and Japan) on the Security Council on 23 May.
Turkey found itself having to carefully decide how it would replace its own lend lease support – which it had received from all three of these leading powers during the war – at a time when it needed a massive injection of funds to rebuild and modernise its sprawling new national and regional holdings. And at a time when its potential as a massive producer of oil (itself a significant future bargaining chip) had not yet been realised. Japan was still frozen out of the international economic system and sought to join it. And of course many countries around the world had been devastated by the war and cried out for support to rebuild.
During wartime we only could utilize a miniscule percentage of the ICs in territories other than Anatolia since it was regarded as occupied land. Now that they're integral lands, the industry from there would be way more than the lost lend-lease capacity.
Hmm...that's our first in, get a pan European science program going, to go along with coal and steel trade board. Build up to CERN, a shared European space agency, radio and electromagnetic group, nuclear and other power, engineering and architecture, and arts and culture. Make so many that europe and the comintern become increasingly one and the same thing.
Soviet-influenced IMF lays plenty of groundwork for The Convergence(TM) coming sooner rather than later. Interconnected capitalist economies do not natural Cold War enemies make – but then it’s one thing signing a piece of paper, quite another actually getting on and implementing its stipulations…
The IMF may play an even bigger role in TTL than OTL, especially given Soviet and Turkish influence post-war and participation. The US also remains very strong economically and, despite not getting much in the way of post-war spoils, it also lost relatively little itself while becoming the 'arsenal of the anti-fascist world'. It too will have great influence, while the UK may also play a comparatively more influential role than it did in OTL. Or not.
We'll need everything we can muster to keep it going postwar, so any sidedealing we can do, we definitely will. If not, at least we'll try to make the Allies benefit less.
And Turkey is well-positioned to do side deals with all three/four of the opposing power factions: The Soviet half of the Comintern (Warsaw Pact), the US and/or Allies and Japan's GEACPS.
Inonu's plan was always to make multi party elections as soon as the world was calm again, so after the ripples of the aftermath is past it's open elections. No lifelong presidency for Inonu.
I've read this similalry and, though influenced a bit by very different recent events, the next episode (out soon) will show how things might have developed internally within Turkey, the UGNR and the rest of the Bucharest Pact nations.
The Middle East will be seeking its post-colonialist way, for sure. But will that be towards the UGNR - or away from it? Britain may not be the only one to have a difficult time in that neighbourhood in the post-war world.
It's good that we're spearheading this effort, especially under the light that no Bucharest Pact members have researched anything of significance about atomics. Maybe some German scientists have fled to us and USSR might have shared some information but that's that.
That's about it. And Stalin is pretty unlikely to share anything, no matter how cordial relations may remain. If nuclear weapons do start to proliferate, Turkey may find itself in a similar position to countries such as OTL India ...
During wartime we only could utilize a miniscule percentage of the ICs in territories other than Anatolia since it was regarded as occupied land. Now that they're integral lands, the industry from there would be way more than the lost lend-lease capacity.
Hmm...that's our first in, get a pan European science program going, to go along with coal and steel trade board. Build up to CERN, a shared European space agency, radio and electromagnetic group, nuclear and other power, engineering and architecture, and arts and culture. Make so many that europe and the comintern become increasingly one and the same thing.
