Would Japan have fared much better had they not bothered with China in WWII? (WW2, war)

[Marleinie]

I have heard before that one issue Japan had during WWII was that a lot of their men and resources were bogged down in China. So hypothetically had Japan not at all bothered with China but tried to accomplish all their other goals would it have helped much?

While China was technologically far inferior to Japan it was nevertheless a vast area and vast population, seemed kind of foolhardy to me that Japan thought they could really keep China long-term at least without making sure they had a definitive hold on everywhere else and none of the other big boys would get in their way. I understand hindsight is 20/20 but wouldn't it have made more sense for Japan to take all the resource rich areas they could, make absolutely sure none had any chance of stopping or impeding them then after a few years after try to take China?

[joe from dayton]

China was a resource rich area, which is why Japan went into Manchuria and China. China provided raw material, labor and food to the Japanese war machine. The war in China also gave Japan a significant military force that had already seen combat when it went to war with the West.

[Grandstander]

The other goals you reference were seizing territory which contained the resources they required to sustain the war in China. If they had not been in China, they would not have needed the rest.

[Unsettomati]

Originally Posted by Marleinie

I have heard before that one issue Japan had during WWII was that a lot of their men and resources were bogged down in China. So hypothetically had Japan not at all bothered with China but tried to accomplish all their other goals would it have helped much?

While China was technologically far inferior to Japan it was nevertheless a vast area and vast population, seemed kind of foolhardy to me that Japan thought they could really keep China long-term at least without making sure they had a definitive hold on everywhere else and none of the other big boys would get in their way. I understand hindsight is 20/20 but wouldn't it have made more sense for Japan to take all the resource rich areas they could, make absolutely sure none had any chance of stopping or impeding them then after a few years after try to take China?

Japan's moves against the European powers and the U.S. were a consequence of its war in China and the resulting embargoes that denied it the materials it needed to prosecute that war.

Had the Japanese 'not bothered with China', they would neither need those materials nor would they have been denied what materials they otherwise needed.

[southwest88]

The Meiji Restoration put Japan on the track of becoming a Western-style economy - industrializing rapidly, & building up a Western-style military - navy, army & integrated air forces - well armed, well trained, the economy & military were the first of their kind & tech indigenous to the area. Japan reminded Teddy Roosevelt of the up & coming US back when, & he cut a deal with Japan to take Korea (which had put itself under US protection), with the expectation that the US would have favored-nation status with Japan. It didn't work out well.

See
The China mirage : the hidden history of American disaster in Asia / James Bradley 1954- author, Little Brown & Company, c2015, 327.51 BRAD


Subjects

• United States -- Foreign relations -- China.
• China -- Foreign relations -- United States.
• United States -- Relations -- China.
• China -- Relations -- United States.
• China -- History -- 20th century.
• China -- History -- 19th century.

Summary]

• A history of turbulent U.S.-China relations from the 19th century to World War II and Mao's ascent.
• "In each of his books, James Bradley has exposed the hidden truths behind America's engagement in Asia. Now comes his most engrossing work yet. Beginning in the 1850s, Bradley introduces us to the prominent Americans who made their fortunes in the China opium trade. As they---good Christians all---profitably addicted millions, American missionaries arrived, promising salvation for those who adopted Western ways. And that was just the beginning. From drug dealer Warren Delano to his grandson Franklin Delano Roosevelt, from the port of Hong Kong to the towers of Princeton University, from the era of Appomattox to the age of the A-Bomb, THE CHINA MIRAGE explores a difficult century that defines U.S.-Chinese relations to this day" -- provided by publisher.
• An account of U.S.-China relations from the 19th century through post-World War II reveals lesser-known facts about America's role in Asia, including the historical influence of prominent Americans who made fortunes in China's opium trade.

Length: 417 pages : index, maps, photos. chapter notes


Excellent - ties together the opium trade, the US Protestant fervor (& expectation) for a Christian China, the Soong family dynasty & fortunes, Chiang Kai-Shek/KMT, TR, Japan/Korea, FDR, Harvard, Henry LuceTime/Life/Fortune & media, the xenophobic rejection of Chinese & Japanese laborers in the US West (1860s - transcontinental railroad & mining & etc.), self-inflicted ignorance about China & Japan.

[joe from dayton]

Originally Posted by Grandstander

The other goals you reference were seizing territory which contained the resources they required to sustain the war in China. If they had not been in China, they would not have needed the rest.

I disagree. Japan did not have enough raw materials for its war with the West, nor did it have enough food to feed its own people.

[southwest88]

Yep, Imperial Japan was a puzzle. They had coal, a literate disciplined population. They'd have done better to focus on trade in the region, but they'd invested a lot in their industrialization & modernizing & reforming their military. They trained hard, & they won lots of battles in Korea, Manchuria, China - but often @ the cost of committing their reserves & everything else. In short, they barely eked out some victories, & were usually unable to follow up & mop up the opposing forces.

They outfought the Koreans, Manchurians, Chinese, & defeated the Imperial Russian Fleet @ Tsushima. They cut through a lot of the Western militaries too, in the opening of WWII in the PTO - but those units were preoccupied with the war in the ETO. Even the US units were more concerned about sabotage than about a Japanese raid.

IJ needed a military, but they needed a more rational approach to building a trade empire than they attempted. IJ had excellent tactical intelligence on their military targets for the opening drive against the West - but they ignored open-source intel that would have told them that they were moths flying into the flame. It was the strategic intelligence - or lack of same, or lack of attention or misjudgment of what they knew about the West - that eventually killed them, in mass quantities.

[LINative]

Originally Posted by joe from dayton

I disagree. Japan did not have enough raw materials for its war with the West, nor did it have enough food to feed its own people.

Originally Posted by Grandstander

The other goals you reference were seizing territory which contained the resources they required to sustain the war in China. If they had not been in China, they would not have needed the rest.

Originally Posted by Unsettomati

Japan's moves against the European powers and the U.S. were a consequence of its war in China and the resulting embargoes that denied it the materials it needed to prosecute that war.

Had the Japanese 'not bothered with China', they would neither need those materials nor would they have been denied what materials they otherwise needed.

Joe, I think what Grandstander and Unsettomati are correctly saying is that if Japan did not start of wars of conquest in Manchuria/China/Indochina, she would not have been embargoed by the Americans, British, Dutch and I believe other western nations. Japan's military and political actions (such as joining the Axis and taking over French Indochina) in Asia caused the embargos.

In other words, instead of military conquest if Japan had been at peace in the 1930s there would have been no embargos and Japan could have continued to buy everything she needed from the world market just like she had been doing since the 1800s.

Basically today that is the policy Japan have been pursing since after WW2, a policy of peaceful trading and it has been far more successful then the militarism she was pursing before WW2.

[cpg35223]

If Japan had not invaded China there would not have been a war with the United States in the first place. The Japanese instead should have elected to be content with being a trading empire versus a military one.

[southwest88]

Originally Posted by cpg35223

If Japan had not invaded China there would not have been a war with the United States in the first place. The Japanese instead should have elected to be content with being a trading empire versus a military one.

Yah, but there's an odd side to virtue in China & Japan. Both thought highly of virtue as a family kind of concept - learning, honor, honesty, integrity, courage, etc. Neither one thought highly about trade nor merchants - farmers were virtuous & necessary, priests were too & so were government functionaries. Profit was not necessarily a bad thing, but it wasn't a good thing either, to be pursued as part of government's mandate.


& so the IJ military - which had absorbed samurai values - didn't value trade nor caution nor a deliberate pace - their battles & wars were typically short & bloody - they weren't geared up for long, costly wars of attrition. IJ military couldn't even be bothered to worry about logistics - which were vital for a war across the PTO - the distances are staggering, & the Japanese merchant marine was never sufficient to supply the wartime economy plus supply the IJ Navy & Army across the Pacific.