How much did the British contribute to victory in the East during WW2?

by spondulicker

My focus as an history enthusiast is the Eastern Front which I'm mildly obsessed about so I often got the impression from pop culture that the Far East was solely fought by the Americans. I saw a documentary about General William Slim and even just reading the wiki of the Burma Campaign which I was completely unaware of, made me the aware that the British/Australians and Kiwis fought hard in the east as well. I was under the impression that the Far East was won solely by the Americans much like the Russians crushed the Germans across eastern Europe but I rarely hear about British/Colonial campaigns.

Bernardito

As much as it hurts me to say it, the war in Burma was not important at all in the defeat of the Japanese. The war against the Japanese was decisively fought by the Americans. The Japanese were unable to supply and send reinforcements to Burma by 1944 due to the control that the Americans had over the sea and air by then. On top of that, reinforcements were clearly more important to far more vital locations closer to Japan. Burma did tie up a sizeable amount of Japanese troops that could have been used elsewhere however, and Operation U-Go inflicted the largest defeat that the Japanese suffered on the ground. In the end, Burma meant very little in comparison to far greater and decisive battles in the Pacific, but it did mean a great deal to make up for the humiliation that the British suffered in 1941-42.

However, I hope this will not stop anyone from studying his incredibly interesting aspect of WWII. General William Slim, general of the British 14th Army, is in my opinion the best British general of the war (I've written about him here previously) and Operation Extended Capital in 1945 is one of the finest executed operations during WWII.