Japanese Failed Offensive at Nomonhan

On July 23, 1939 the Japanese attacked the Russians at Nomonhan, a disputed point on the Soviet border with Manchuria. This attack marked the largest battle yet in an escalating series of skirmishes that had begun back in May. I also have an earlier post on a similar border clash that occured in July of 1938.

In this attack the Japanese employed two reinforced regiments and sought to outmatch the Soviet artillery. This proved to be a losing game as the Japanese took their standard 10 day supply of artillery ammunition, doubled it and fired half of it off in two days. The Russians, without any special preparations, exceeded the Japanese artillery effort and halted the Japanese offensive almost immediately. The Japanese, seeing the immediate failure of an effort they could neither sustain nor quickly repeat, called off their attack and began drawing up plans for a new offensive in August.

The Soviets have also initiated plans for an August offensive. Who will strike first? Once again Soviet advantages in equipment and logistics have proven effective and Japanese emphases on fighting spirit and the human factor have not. We know in retrospect that Stalin took a personal interest in (and considerable offense at) these border clashes. He pretty much started the one in May and has resolved to settle matters decisively.

On July 20, 1939 the New York Times had published an editorial on the border clashes calling them “A Strange War”  raging in an obscure corner of the world “where it cannot attract a great deal of attention”.  The lessons and consequences were quickly swallowed up by larger events. However, we will pay further attention when that new August offensive rolls around.

Hitler Declares Czechoslovakia No Longer Exists

On march 16th, 1939 Hitler, speaking from Prague castle proclaimed a German ” Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia”. He was able to do this because the previous day in response to German threats of invasion Emil Hacha President of the now defenseless remnant of post-Munich Czechoslovakia surrendered to Germany. German troops moved in to secure the country with considerably more efficiency than they had displayed the previous year advancing into Austria. Hungary, a future German ally, invaded and received the Czech province of Ruthenia, quickly crushing sporadic Czech military resistance.

Slovakia, already semi-autonomous under the terms of the Munich agreement, declared its independence as the Slovak Republic and would in the future become another German ally. Poland, which had received Czech territory as part of Munich and was to be Hitler’s next victim, did nothing as was also the case with Britain and France – the usual diplomatic rituals aside.  Germany had now acquired Austria,  the  most militarily valuable parts of Czechoslovakia and with them influence and future allies throughout Eastern Europe

What it lost, was any remaining credibility to its claims that its territorial ambitions could be satisfied in a way that was acceptable to Britain and France. Even Neville Chamberlain understood that war with Germany was now inevitable. Allied rearmament was, belatedly, proceeding with vigor although Germany had clearly been going all out since the early 30’s and had been allowed to catch up substantially as a result. So, should Britain and France have gone to war in 1938? In retrospect, the answer seems obvious but a case can be made that the Allied historical course of action was rational. A few even argue that not going to war was the best course – attributing the results of 1939-1940 to other causes than German opportuities to grow in strength in 1938-1939. Expect a mini-essay on this question soon.

Japanese Resume the Offensive

On August 22, 1938 the Japanese commenced their long awaited offensive against the Wuhan area including the city of Hankow. To the extent the Chinese still (or at all) possessed an industrial heartland this was it and the Chinese defended ferociously. A number of Chinese division and brigade commanders died with their troops or were executed for failing to hold their positions (or by the Japanese upon capture for holding them).

The Japanese used 13 divisions in the attack against 97 Chinese divisions. Again however, the much larger Japanese divisions were better armed, equipped and supplied. They also had extensive air, naval (riverine) and corps and army level artillery support. Besides executing their own generals to encourage the others, the only asset the Chinese high command had was one more “surge” from their air force which was only briefly effective.

In the end the best Chinese assets were the stubborn resistance of their infantry and the physical limits of the Japanese. I will post later on the outcome of the offensive but it is not giving away too much to point out that at this stage of the war the Chinese were still capable of determined resistance and the Wuhan offensive was no blitzkrieg.  Additional evidence of the limits of Japanese capability comes from the fact that the  Wuhan offensive was scheduled to begin in early June but was postponed  as a result of the border clash with the Soviet Union. The Japanese did not feel they could deal with both if the situation with the Soviets escalated.

Rape of Nanking

On December13, 1937 the Japanese completed their occupation of Nanking and commenced an orgy of massacre, rape, arson, looting and destruction that went on for weeks. All of this was on an enormous scale that was more likely have occured in 1237 than in the supposedly civilized twentieth century.

It began with a Japanese army that had been marching and fighting for weeks without respite and moving deeper into hostile territory amidst an understandably increasingly hostile population. Then came the order to kill the prisoners. The Japanese were holding about 90,000 Chinese army troops as prisoners and lacked both the inclination and quite possibly the ability to properly feed and house them. As with all controversial matters accounts vary but that large numbers of Chinese army prisoners were killed is beyond reasonable dispute.

That done, the Japanese moved on to the defenseless civilian population. About half the population of the city had fled but as often happens those with the least access to transportation, information and good advice remained. A reasonable estimate of Chinese civilian deaths is 200, 000 – 300,000 with 20,000 to perhaps as many as 80,000 women and girls – as well as some men – raped. The Japanese military command made no organized effort to stop the atrocities. On the contrary, many if not most Japanese officers participated in and encouraged their men to participate in what went on. A reasonably accurate account of the events can be found here .

Those who wish to argue about the number of deaths, the quality of the evidence, Iris Chang’s book etc. should not come talking to me. For me the evidence about what happened is clear enough. So, however, is the sad fact that the Nanking massacre was part, albeit a particularly egregious part, of the normal human condition. Anyone who looks at enough history should recognize that.

Ignorance of history is also part of the human condition and it does not surprise me that most people know little or nothing of these events. It should be noted though that these events were page one news in America at the time. Some thought the reports too much to be believed but evidence suggests that enough sunk in to contribute to the slow mobilization of American public opinion against the Japanese.

I have two family stories that relate to these events. I have some personal experience that information about these events was always out there. I knew about them as a child from reading the account in the family’s Encyclopedia Britannica-the 1956 edition as I recall-specifically the article on World War II. More vividly around the same time I was a regular watcher of a documentary history program, hosted and narrated by Walter Cronkite, called The Twentieth Century. I recall seeing film footage of Japanese soldiers shooting civilians in Nanking. There was also footage of Japanese soldiers preparing to bury civilians alive. Then a cut to subsequent footage of Japanese soldiers trampling on the freshly churned earth which appeared, at least to this child’s imagination, to writhe with the struggles of the freshly buried but not yet dead.

Sometime around the same time, my father told me the story about how as a young Marine on his way to Iwo Jima and ultimately to the occupation of Japan he found himself on leave in Hilo, Hawaii. He didn’t have a good time. The town was pretty much shut down and he felt that all of the townspeople were giving him hateful looks or ignoring and avoiding him. He was in uniform at the time. Over the family dinner table he expressed to me his bafflement over what had gone on at the time.

Later, I came across a brief reference to how the survivors of the 1st Marine Division, after months of combat on Guadalcanal, returned to Hawaii and went on leave in Hilo. They pretty much tore up the town. I told my father about this and his reaction was pretty much “mystery solved”. I think it was mostly if not all drunkeness, brawling and vandalism. I am most definitely
not suggesting even remotely any moral equivalence with Nanking.

Still, we’re not supposed to take out our frustrations on innocent civilians in lesser ways either. I will save for a later post my father’s stories about taking, or not taking, prisoners on Iwo Jima.

Panay Incident

On December 12, 1937 Japanese aircraft bombed and sank the U.S. Navy gunboat Panay while it lay at anchor on the Yangtze river near Nanking. Three U.S. sailors were killed and over 50 Americans were wounded including five American civilians who had been evacuated from Nanking the day before. The Japanese formally apologized and paid an indemnity but this had little practical effect on U.S. public opinion which was increasingly anti-Japanese and increasingly sympathetic to China. A brief summary of the incident and subsequent diplomatic and public relations maneuvers and consequences is here .

Update and a Note on Japanese Morale

I am still working out how often to post on this blog. The reference to “day by day” does not mean a post every day. This is especially true prior to September 1, 1939 when things heat up even more. After December 7, 1941 events may reach a scale where the posts are very frequent. Still, you are responsible for being mindful of events as they transpire prompted by my noting the more major developments though I will try to post a little more frequently when the available material on events warrants.

It is probably worth noting a few things that happened in the last few days seventy years ago. On August 22nd the Communists formally joined in expressing solidarity with the “War of National Resistance”. On August 25th the Japanese imposed a naval blockade of the northern and central Chinese coast. On August 27th China and the USSR signed a non-aggression pact which to say the least did nothing to ease the Japanese army preoccupation with keeping strong formations watching the Soviets.

For now the main event is the struggle for Shanghai. I will continue to rely on the Wikipedia article I linked to earlier for the account of the battle. On the issue of possible bias in that article I have received a comment which astutely notes a reference to the determined resistance of the Chinese having a demoralizing effect on the Japanese and questions the validity of that assertion.

This prompted me to review my sources again for evidence on this issue. I believe that what the Japanese experienced was more in the nature of combat stress rather than demoralization. They may well have expected a quick victory and an easier time than they actually had. They experienced very intense fighting for a long period of time. The large number of reservists in the Japanese ranks meant that the impact of these events was even greater.

However, the Japanese were highly motivated by nationalism and racial pride. They were constantly reinforced as the fighting developed and their training and discipline served them well. There is no sign in the article or elsewhere that the Japanese experienced typical signs of reduced morale such as refusal to attack, a quickness to panic and retreat when attacked, high levels of desertion or attacks on officers. We may see some of this type of behavior later but at Shanghai the Japanese maintained their cohesion and used their military assets and advantages effectively. Japanese morale was supported by success elsewhere in China and by ultimate success at Shanghai. More on the results of the combat stress when those events occur

I still give the article credit for a generally honest rendering of events, including a good description of the impact on Chinese morale which the article and my other sources establish was severe by the end. A sign of a good article is that it provides at least some evidence that helps you refute its careless or less than fully supported conclusions By this standard it is a good article and it certainly contains apparently reliable accounts of the fighting that go into more detail than I otherwise normally see.

Essays

My plan is for this blog to have a series of posts that are also essays. Not long ones – more like the five paragraph “in a nutshell” variety. Expect the first one soon and expect it to be on the Nationalist Chinese Army.

As a preliminary matter the most interesting thing to me about that army is that my grandmother on my father’s side was a colonel in its medical corps. She was a nurse – the first western trained Chinese nurse in China according to the family stories and at one time was on the staff of a president of the Republic of China to attend to his health. When I heard this latter story I thought ooh, Sun Yat-sen or maybe Chiang Kai-shek but no. It was the not equally famous Xu Shichang one of many human beings who, sadly being just a little bit special, obtained a significant role in history only to demonstrate that he was not equal to it.

During World War II my grandmother learned enough about Chiang Kai-shek to hit the lecture circuit in America after the war warning of his corruption and, not incidentally, recommending Mao Tse-tung as a better option. This latter got her in a bit of trouble when she sought American citizenship but having two sons one of whom fought at Guam and the other at Iwo Jima (my uncle and my father respectively) saw her successfully through that bit of controversy.

So, now you know a little more about my family’s WW II connections. expect the first essay soon.

The Storm Comes…Or Is It Just Another Shower?

It is a hot summer day in June,1937. Imagine yourself transported back to that time, knowing the 1937 version of what you know now. Do you think war is coming? Do you even ask the question?

If you are following current events here are a few things you know. Germany, Italy and the Soviet Union are waging proxy war in Spain. Mussolini’s Italy is on the march. Few people realize that Mussolini’s vision is a ruinous and delusional fantasy and it certainly doesn’t feel that way if you are Ethiopian. The pro-war party is in power in Japan and has been since March of 1936.

Perhaps the question is-if you are seventeen in 1937, where will you be in five years? What country do you live in?

Hello

When the 50th anniversary of World War II rolled around I started thinking about what it must have been like to live through it. I resolved to try to keep it in my consciousness from day to day-a resolution I by and large failed to keep.

When the 60th anniversary came around the internet was accessible even to the likes of me but this blog thing was more than I could comprehend and besides I had no time. Now the 70th anniversary is approaching and if I am ever going to do this the time is now. 70 years ago today Franklin Roosevelt was younger than I am now and he did not survive the war. On the other hand on VJ day Winston Churchill, who in 1937 was older than I am, had another 20 years to go. We’ll see. Over the next couple of weeks I will post a few more musings about this enterprise and see if I can get the hang of this blog thing.

I will begin the actual chronology on that auspicious day 7/7/07 – the 70th anniversary of the Marco Polo Bridge “Incident”. More later.