It’s been clearly documented that many people in the Soviet Union, fed up with Stalin’s rule and (in the case of non-Russians) seeking independence, initially welcomed the German advances during the first few months of Operation Barborossa, before the SS (and the Wehrmacht) clearly displayed Nazi Germany’s own brand of barbarism. It has been speculated that, had Germany invaded with appeals to independence, calls to throw off Stalin’s rule, and a mandate to treat the population humanely like on the Western Front, enough additional manpower would’ve been raised to enable a victory on the Eastern Front in either 1941 or 1942.
But what about Japan? Many of the areas they invaded in the early parts of the Pacific War had grievances with their colonizers (most notably India, which had a small minority of troops and officers fight under Axis command during the war with the goal of liberating their home country), with hopes of achieving independence once Japan pushed the Western powers out. These hopes were quickly dashed once Japan demonstrated their intent to treat Southeast Asia, the Dutch East Indies, and the Phillipines as their own colonies.
Obviously, this was the result of the plans set out by the militaristic and nationalistic forces in Japan’s government and military, and it’s near impossible the Imperial Japan as we knew it would’ve done anything else.
But what if Japan had authentically alturistic goals to liberate Asia from their Western occupiers? How would that have played out?
Well, the Second Sino-Japanese War couldn’t have started. Japan lost much of their reputation amongst the Indian people during their invasion of another independent Asian nation and merciless treatment of the Chinese in the Nanjing Massacre and other atrocities.
While Japan may have been able to get away with the Mukden Incident and subsequent invasion of Manchuria, there would’ve needed to be a different, far more assertive government aimed at smoothing out the Marco Polo Bridge Incident and keeping a tight leash on the IJA to prevent this from occuring (as well as a much different view of Japan’s role in the world, not as a racially superior nation destined to rule over Asia, but as simply one Asian country among many, trying to advocate for the rights of Asians everywhere).
Once the European war happened the way it did (it’s highly doubtful whatever Japan did would’ve impacted the course of events in Nazi Germany and Poland), once France and the Netherlands fell and Britain was on the ropes, Japan could’ve struck quickly, ignoring the Phillipines (which was already promised independence) and the US, announcing their military campaign as aiming to liberate Asia from the hated Western colonizers, allow the peoples to decide their fate independently of foreign intervention, and keep “Asia for Asians”. They could’ve used Thailand, hopefully far more assured of Japan’s benign intentions without the war in China, as a springpoint.
Given the results of the war in 1941-1942, it’s highly likely such an initial endeavor would’ve been successful, and an independent Vietnam, Burma, and Indonesia, amongst others, would’ve been created (as well as a massive expansion of Siam).
Roosevelt would’ve found himself hard-pressed to steer the country into war, given Japan’s less threatening stance, isolationism, and lack of enthusiasm over dying for European colonies.
Without their ground troops tied down in China, Japan would’ve been able to concentrate almost all of their military might against India (they might even have had enough “leftover” for a diverstionary attack on the Soviet Union if Germany still goes Barborossa).
If the Japanese made an all-out effort to cooperate with the Indian National Congess and other pro-independence leaders, they may have been able to inspire a major rebellion/revolution within the colony while they militarily advanced. It’s hard to see how the British forces would’ve been able to cope with this, especially with, at the very least, delayed US intervention in Europe.
I think the end result would’ve been an Imperial Japan seen as a hero by much of Asia, having driven the Europeans out and sacrificed their blood to liberate others (and to get nice trading agreements for natural resources, of course), a slew of independent Asian nations grateful for Japanese help, and potentially new land for Japanese settlers in Siberia, since with a much weaker Britain Germany would’ve been able to force at least a stalemate with the Soviets, leaving few resources to spare for a counteroffensive in the east (there is no question the Red Army would’ve prioritized the western areas of the country).
Of course, none of this could’ve possibly happened. Japanese beliefs among its leadership would’ve had to change fundamentally for anything like this to take place, similar to any Nazi German effort to sincerely appeal to the Eastern Europeans dissatisfied with the Soviets. A more realistic option would be for the Japanese to pretend to do such a thing more convincingly, granting increased autonomy to the peoples they “liberated” before throwing the mask off and carrying out their full plans once (if) a peace agreement was signed with the West. Little would’ve changed in such a scenario if Japan still went to war with the US and China.
So, what do you think of my scenario? Do you think it’s realistic? I look forward to feedback of all kinds.
