When did Japanese Navy stop believing they could fight just US or UK or Dutch w/out fighting others?

[raharris1973]

1) When did Japanese Naval planners stop believing they could fight one of the US or UK or Dutch without fighting the other two?

a) Once Americans and other white powers jointly bombarded Japanese ports in 1863

b) Once Britain added the loophole to the Anglo-Japanese Treaty (1911) that under no circumstances were they obligated to fight the U.S.

c) Once the US successfully pressed for the end of the Anglo-Japanese alliance in 1922

d) Once the Naval Conference ended in 1930

e) Once the Imperial Navy decided in 1932 or so that war plans only war plans involving war with the U.S. justified the desired level of Navy vs. Army spending

f) Once the Japanese withdrew from the League in 1933

g) Once the Naval Conference in 1935 ended

h) 1937 (read possible reasons in OP first)

Relevant events of that year:

July – Full Sino-Japanese War breaks out around Beijing

September – War spreads to Shanghai

By December – Brussels conference on China, Quarantine Speech, Rape of Nanking, Panay Incident, founding of first pro-embargo lobbies in USA

MacArthur, former US Army Chief of Staff, retired and became chief military advisor to Philippine Commonwealth

i) 1938 (read possible reasons in OP first)

Relevant events of that year:

Some U.S. naval increases voted?

International aid to China rises

Japanese seizure of Wuhan and Canton

Japanese proclamation of New Order in Asia

U.S. Moral Embargo on aircraft

j) 1st half of 1939 (read possible reasons in OP first)

Relevant events of those months:

Tianjin Blockade affair with Britain begins

Japanese seize Hainan island

Japanese Changsha offensive fails

June – U.S. give 6 months notice on trade treaty

k) 2nd half of 1939 (read possible reasons in OP first)

Relevant events of those months:

US aid to China rises

FDR makes increasing number of pro-Allied statements before and after beginning of war

l) 1st half of 1940 (read possible reasons in OP first)

Relevant events of those months:

May – U.S. Pacific Fleet stays in Pearl Harbor instead of returning to San Diego

m) 2nd half of 1940 (read possible reasons in OP first)

Relevant events of those months:

Month – US Two-Ocean Navy Bill passes

November – FDR reelected

December – Churchill spends Christmas in Washington for Talks

n) 1st half of 1941 (read possible reasons in OP first)

Relevant events of those months:

March 1941- US Lend-Lease aid begins to Britain and China) - ? Burma Road?

June 1941 – US extends Lend-Lease to Soviet Union

o) 2nd half of 1941 (read possible reasons in OP first)

Relevant events of those months:

Late July – Japanese move south approved, occupation of Indochina

Late July – US embargo and asset freeze begins

Late July – McArthur reactivated and U.S. Forces Far East, based out of Manila, established

August 1941 - American Volunteer Corps, Chennault’s “Flying Tigers” established in China

 

[The Red]

This is the fourth thread you’ve posted today, maybe slow things down a bit?

 

[HB of CJ]

Perhaps when the Japanese Navy understood that the Army would always get the vast majority of any budget and the only way to insure any kind of expanding Japanese Navy was to make up or just imagine that the USN would be the only large force they would have to fight? The plans to attack Pearl Harbor sealed the doom of Japan. Perhaps the Japanese Navy at that time did not understand this. They believed the USA would seek a cease fire and request a treaty? Boy ... were they wrong. In less than 4 years the very large modern and powerful Japanese Navy rested shattered on the bottom of the Pacific Ocean.

 

[TonyA]

Perhaps when the Japanese Navy understood that the Army would always get the vast majority of any budget and the only way to insure any kind of expanding Japanese Navy was to make up or just imagine that the USN would be the only large force they would have to fight? The plans to attack Pearl Harbor sealed the doom of Japan. Perhaps the Japanese Navy at that time did not understand this. They believed the USA would seek a cease fire and request a treaty? Boy ... were they wrong. In less than 4 years the very large modern and powerful Japanese Navy rested shattered on the bottom of the Pacific Ocean.

Isn't that pretty much "e"?

 

[lionhead]

I went for C. They understood by then that any war in the Pacific, the US would become involved, they knew resources were in the Pacific if they ever needed them, but then they would have to attack the US to secure them.

 

[raharris1973]

Perhaps when the Japanese Navy understood that the Army would always get the vast majority of any budget and the only way to insure any kind of expanding Japanese Navy was to make up or just imagine that the USN would be the only large force they would have to fight? The plans to attack Pearl Harbor sealed the doom of Japan. Perhaps the Japanese Navy at that time did not understand this. They believed the USA would seek a cease fire and request a treaty? Boy ... were they wrong. In less than 4 years the very large modern and powerful Japanese Navy rested shattered on the bottom of the Pacific Ocean.

So IJN strategy was trapped by its budgetary rationale? Indeed one of the choices I offered.

I mean it is plausible certainly. On the other hand, at least theoretically the IJN could budget for one war (with the US) and actually only fight another (vs UK and Dutch)

After all, the Japanese army did that. They justified their budget on the basis the USSR would be their main enemy on land, but only initiated war with the lesser foe, China.

But maybe the Navy could not have gotten away with what the Army did politically. Maybe the Army was politically bulletproof and did not need to justify itself to anyone outside.

 

[raharris1973]

I find it remarkable that the pre 1930 options in the poll are much more popular than the post 1930.

 

[raharris1973]

I think the most logical answer is o), second half of 1941, because of all the Anglo-American consultative measures and U.S. posturing by that time. In earlier periods, the Japanese might have been able to convince themselves they could pick one fight at a time, and they may be right!

I think with the U.S. fleet and U.S. forces in the Philippines being in the weaker state they were in during the 1930s, the islands' geography is not an automatic war starter. Rather the Japanese can regard it as something they can take care of later....if they have to.

 

[raharris1973]

I as the OP, am reviving this thread, to allow more voting, as this thread, with its poll, would be complementary/ and supplementary to the current thread. And such a poll would be time-consuming to freshly reconstruct from scratch.

What if Japan attacked the Dutch East Indies in 1936?

What if Japan had attacked the Dutch East Indies in 1936, based on lobbying from the Navy to gain the valuable archipelago located at the strategic maritime crossroads of the Indian and Pacific Oceans, offering Japan a position outflanking Singapore and Manila Bay, and providing already...

www.alternatehistory.com