ASB spell makes Soviets and Japanese keep fighting at Khalkhin Gol and beyond for months

[raharris1973]

This scenario will use a low-ambition ASB to intervene in human affairs to make a politically/strategically unlikely/unwise set of decisions occur and enforce them on human leaders, rather than any more truly impressive display of supernatural powers.

The ASB exerts a mind-control effect on Soviet and Japanese civilian and military leaders during their armed clashes with each other in the summer of 1939 that compels both sides to fight each other as hard as possible without sacrificing short-term security on other fronts (Europe for the Soviets, the China theater and the seas for the Japanese) and reject ending their mutual conflict short of victory or true military, economic, material exhaustion.

This ASB spell of compulsion remains binding upon the Soviet and Japanese leaderships until June 22nd, 1940, coincidentally, the day the French signed an armistice with the Germans. On that day, Soviet and Japanese leaders have their full free will restored, and if they wish, can come to a settlement.

What condition will the armies, navies, and air forces be of both sides by June 1940, after basically 10 to 11 months of escalated and widened Soviet-Japanese conflict? Where will the battle-lines be by this point? Will the Japanese have lost substantial mainland Asian territories to Soviet forces? Will the Soviets have lost substantial portions of the Far East of the RFSR or Outer Mongolia? Will the two belligerents be stalemated at basically the pre-war border? Or will they have exchanged roughly 'even' amounts of territory, merely 'straightening' their mutual border and rendering their zones of control on the Asian mainland more physically compact and defensible?

What kind of shape is the USSR in after this to defend itself from Axis attack in Europe, in the near and medium term, especially compared to OTL?

What kind of shape is Japan in after this to prosecute the war on China, or to attack & seize western outposts in the Pacific, in the near and medium term, especially compared to OTL?

 

[ATP]

This scenario will use a low-ambition ASB to intervene in human affairs to make a politically/strategically unlikely/unwise set of decisions occur and enforce them on human leaders, rather than any more truly impressive display of supernatural powers.

The ASB exerts a mind-control effect on Soviet and Japanese civilian and military leaders during their armed clashes with each other in the summer of 1939 that compels both sides to fight each other as hard as possible without sacrificing short-term security on other fronts (Europe for the Soviets, the China theater and the seas for the Japanese) and reject ending their mutual conflict short of victory or true military, economic, material exhaustion.

This ASB spell of compulsion remains binding upon the Soviet and Japanese leaderships until June 22nd, 1940, coincidentally, the day the French signed an armistice with the Germans. On that day, Soviet and Japanese leaders have their full free will restored, and if they wish, can come to a settlement.

What condition will the armies, navies, and air forces be of both sides by June 1940, after basically 10 to 11 months of escalated and widened Soviet-Japanese conflict? Where will the battle-lines be by this point? Will the Japanese have lost substantial mainland Asian territories to Soviet forces? Will the Soviets have lost substantial portions of the Far East of the RFSR or Outer Mongolia? Will the two belligerents be stalemated at basically the pre-war border? Or will they have exchanged roughly 'even' amounts of territory, merely 'straightening' their mutual border and rendering their zones of control on the Asian mainland more physically compact and defensible?

What kind of shape is the USSR in after this to defend itself from Axis attack in Europe, in the near and medium term, especially compared to OTL?

What kind of shape is Japan in after this to prosecute the war on China, or to attack & seize western outposts in the Pacific, in the near and medium term, especially compared to OTL?

1.I think,that they would be in the same place like 1939,after Japan being beaten and coming back.
Thanks to that,Japan would have real AT guns,and fighters witm 20mm guns,when soviets would use T.34 and maybe KV1.
Which would lead to Japan making 75mm AT guns/but not using it yet/

Both sides would take loses,but not crippling - and,when soviets would not learn anytching new,Japan would learn to made better tanks,AT guns,and fighters.

And,in 1940 we would have white peace.

2.Soviets in OTL had 6:1 tank,and 3:1 plane advantage,and lost becouse soldiers surrender/fool thought that german come liberate them/ and commanders feared to act without orders,or acted in stupid way.
That would not change,but they would have Japan with better tanks on border,ready to attack in 1941.

3.Japan with maybe less planes,but better,real tanks,and real AT guns.If they decide to attack Siberia in 1941 instead of Pacyfic,they could take it.
If not,Allies would have more problems fighting them,becouse their Shermans would be no longer wunderwaffe there,and japaneese could destroy them easily.
Better planes,too.


And,Japan ,as germany ally,could gave them captured T.34 in 1940 - which mean P.IV with long 75mm gun in 1941,and Tiger A and Panther A in 1942.
German would still lost,but fighting on E.50 and E.75.
Notching really changed,but more fun !

 

[raharris1973]

So you see this mainly being stalemated in terms of gains/losses of territory, through 1940, but providing the chance for the Japanese to significantly improve their ground forces with better tanks and AT guns, and better guns on their fighter aircraft? Plus, despite the stalemate, the Japanese would still be in shape for a rematch?

I would expect this high-intensity combat attrition, and industrial effort, would all cost Japan something. Japan by summer 1939 was already finding it difficult to advance deeper into China against a much more primitive enemy force.

Would the intense fighting on the Manchukuo-Korea-Sakhalin-Mongolian-Soviet border from summer 1939-summer 1940 force the Japanese to shift troops, reinforcements, and aircraft from the fronts facing the Chinese armies to the fronts facing the Soviets? Would the Japanese have to give up any ground in China as a consequence? Could Chiang have any success in his planned winter 1939-1940 offensive as a consequence? What about more Chinese Communist attacks against Japan, or stepped up guerrilla ops and behind the lines expansion? Certainly Stalin (that guy you call Sralin) would be demanding Moose Dung (that guy also called Mao Zedong) to throw all his forces into the attack on the Japanese if the Japanese are attacking the Soviets at this time.

And, if the Japanese are building heavier tanks and more/better anti-tank and aircraft guns in their factories, can they still complete the same number of carriers, naval aircraft, and other ships by the same time as OTL, to be able to do the Pearl Harbor raid and the strike south against the western colonies in Southeast Asia? Or is their Navy and Air Force weaker by December 1941? Indeed, would the Japanese have lost some of their best naval aviators and landing forces, and even some ships, during battles with the Soviets over Sakhalin, the maritime province or maybe the Kamchatka tip?

----- Meanwhile, can the Soviets hold the line in the Far East, and reorganize and build forces in the west by June 1941 in this scenario? With a hot war going on with Japan, will they have enough grain and oil to support their own war effort, domestic consumption, and exports the Nazis needed in 1939-1940?

 

[ATP]

So you see this mainly being stalemated in terms of gains/losses of territory, through 1940, but providing the chance for the Japanese to significantly improve their ground forces with better tanks and AT guns, and better guns on their fighter aircraft? Plus, despite the stalemate, the Japanese would still be in shape for a rematch?

I would expect this high-intensity combat attrition, and industrial effort, would all cost Japan something. Japan by summer 1939 was already finding it difficult to advance deeper into China against a much more primitive enemy force.

Would the intense fighting on the Manchukuo-Korea-Sakhalin-Mongolian-Soviet border from summer 1939-summer 1940 force the Japanese to shift troops, reinforcements, and aircraft from the fronts facing the Chinese armies to the fronts facing the Soviets? Would the Japanese have to give up any ground in China as a consequence? Could Chiang have any success in his planned winter 1939-1940 offensive as a consequence? What about more Chinese Communist attacks against Japan, or stepped up guerrilla ops and behind the lines expansion? Certainly Stalin (that guy you call Sralin) would be demanding Moose Dung (that guy also called Mao Zedong) to throw all his forces into the attack on the Japanese if the Japanese are attacking the Soviets at this time.

And, if the Japanese are building heavier tanks and more/better anti-tank and aircraft guns in their factories, can they still complete the same number of carriers, naval aircraft, and other ships by the same time as OTL, to be able to do the Pearl Harbor raid and the strike south against the western colonies in Southeast Asia? Or is their Navy and Air Force weaker by December 1941? Indeed, would the Japanese have lost some of their best naval aviators and landing forces, and even some ships, during battles with the Soviets over Sakhalin, the maritime province or maybe the Kamchatka tip?

----- Meanwhile, can the Soviets hold the line in the Far East, and reorganize and build forces in the west by June 1941 in this scenario? With a hot war going on with Japan, will they have enough grain and oil to support their own war effort, domestic consumption, and exports the Nazis needed in 1939-1940?

Of course,that Japan would stop attacks in China.And Moose dung would attack them,becouse sralin was still his overlord then.
But Czang? yes,he get I.16 and T.26 from soviets,but was not their puppet.
He probably would be more then happy to sit and watch,demanding moar from soviets.

Japan - soviet air force and navy was shit,so they would suffer little there.

But,they still built less ships for Navy.Another reasons for them to go after soviets in 1941,not USA.
If they act like in OTL,they would probably choose safer option,attack Philippiness,and wait for USA fleet there.
That was their plan - nad,honestly,they should keep to that.
Attacking Pearl was big risk,after all.
And considering,that americans considered japaneese as "yellow monkeys" they would probably get overconfident and get sunked.

Soviets export - no problem there,they could always starve few millions more people to deliver enough grain for their GERMAN NOT NAZI allies.
And even if they lost,let say,4000 tanks and 2000 planes fighting Japan,they could have vast numerical advantage over germans.
And fuck it just like in OTL.

 

[Vadim]

Could Britain and France have formed an alliance with Japan to attack the USSR during the Winter War (Stalin attacked defenseless Finland anyway in November 1939). That is, the British and French are helping the Japanese develop technology and armed forces so that they can advance in Siberia, while British aircraft are bombing the oil fields of the Caucasus (Operation Pike), and the Allied fleet is providing the transfer of the expeditionary force to Norway and destroying Arkhangelsk.

 

[raharris1973]

Could Britain and France have formed an alliance with Japan to attack the USSR during the Winter War (Stalin attacked defenseless Finland anyway in November 1939). That is, the British and French are helping the Japanese develop technology and armed forces so that they can advance in Siberia, while British aircraft are bombing the oil fields of the Caucasus (Operation Pike), and the Allied fleet is providing the transfer of the expeditionary force to Norway and destroying Arkhangelsk.

They could have theoretically.

But in realpolitik terms, this does not seem likely to achieve anything Britain or France needs imminently, to bolster the ground defense of France or sea lane and air defense of Britain...it just gets them some ***vee strike at zee godless Bolsheviks*** lulz.

It's nice, in a way, to get the Japanese pointed in another direction for awhile. But it is bad to be giving them technology, and you're not getting them to evacuate from China in return.

You can end up doing damage to Pacific ports of the Soviets like Vladivostok (via Japan), Arctic ports like Murmansk & possibly Archangelsk (via Finland) and to Baku and Caucasus oil production [although it is not easy as it looks, and will take more missions and aircraft attrition than you want, and won't necessarily be permanent] and some Black Sea/Caspian Sea ports. Meanwhile, in addition to getting a Scandinavia expeditionary force in the field, when the BEF for France is not even big enough yet, Soviet counterattacks against the Allied air routes and bases against Baku, probably running through Iran to Iraq, and maybe through eastern Turkey as well, are going to require Imperial troops reinforcements in the Middle East by the Brits for the Persian Gulf and French (for Syria).

This stretching of limited Allied ground assets won't be great when the Nazis come crashing into France in spring 1940. Once that starts going downhill, the western powers will probably be doing a panicked pull-out from Scandinavia, leaving the Finns, Swedes and Norwegians in a lurch, and leaving them to mercy of Soviet and Nazi forces invading them at their leisure.

The double setback in fallen France and Scandinavia by summer of 1940, possibly a triple setback if the Soviets counterattacking in the Middle East end up gaining any ground, will make the Anglo-French attack on the USSR look pretty dumb. Even the Japanese holding on to Vladivostok and the Soviet Pacific coast won't be making the British in London feel all that much better about themselves.....Especially when Luftwaffe attacks start on Britain.

Now even if Hitler doesn't do the smart play and extract more anti-British combat labor from the Soviets and leaving the latter alone for a longer period of time, while using his own subs and aircraft on the British, and Hitler can't help himself and decides he has to interrupt the Anglo-Soviet fight by attacking the Soviets in spring or summer 1941, it is only a partial relief for Britain.
Now Britain would probably come to its senses and realizes the Soviets and they have a common enemy in the Germans, and the Soviets, angry as they would be against the British, would be ready to forgive them in the interest of working against the common German threat. But earlier British action would have screwed over Arctic ports for delivery, reduced Caucasus oil output, Anglo-Soviet fighting messed with Persian and Persian Gulf transit infrastructure, on top of the ongoing Japanese fighting taking out Vladivostok, so now they *can't* help each other by trade and aid, they can only help by throwing themselves at different sides of the Axis.

 

[ATP]

Could Britain and France have formed an alliance with Japan to attack the USSR during the Winter War (Stalin attacked defenseless Finland anyway in November 1939). That is, the British and French are helping the Japanese develop technology and armed forces so that they can advance in Siberia, while British aircraft are bombing the oil fields of the Caucasus (Operation Pike), and the Allied fleet is providing the transfer of the expeditionary force to Norway and destroying Arkhangelsk.

Not when they arleady fought germans,and Japan was their ally.But - it would indeed help both sides.
I remember some AH story where England allied with Japan in 1940 - Japan send help to Africa,and defeated soviets on Siberia before that.
England paid them with Dutch India for their efforts.Forget title and author,as usual.

Merry Easter !