Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy
Banned
Your challenge, should you choose to accept it, is to bring about a state of war between the United States and the Anglo-Japanese Alliance by 1950 with a POD after the end of WWI.
Challenge: Red-Orange
- Thread starter Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy
- Start date
This will be quite difficult. By the end of WWI, the US was clearly a rising power that had directly helped the UK and France on the Western Front. The US did not trust the Japanese Empire at all. Canceling the Anglo-Japanese Alliance was the price the UK would have to pay for closer ties with the US, and the US was clearly a more desirable alliance partner. There were those in the UK who argued, with good reason, that an outright alliance with Japan was still preferable to what was far short of an alliance with the US. The US was already clearing retreating into isolationism. However, I think by this point the UK will not do anything to purposefully alienate the US, and continuing the alliance with Japan would do just that.
I might suggest that you change your PoD to sometime before WWI. If you can have an alternate WWI-sized war, but where the US stayed out . If the US is still seen as a large country, but not one that involves itself outside of its own hemisphere, then it will not be seen as a reliable and desirable alliance partner. Then, with no hope of the US helping out in this WWI, there might be more pressure for the IJA to place a few divisions on the Western Front. If Japan was a vital part of the UK (and France) winning the war, then the UK will be willing to fight to continue the Anglo-Japanese Alliance.
My personal suggestion is to try to get the US involved in the Mexican Civil War/Revolution of this time. If the US is heavily bogged down in Mexico during WWI, it will be much harder for them to join the war in Europe.
Regardless, use whatever PoD you want. I hope you continue this TL. There definitely aren't enough TLs where Japan stays aligned with Liberal Democracies.
The US, especially its naval commanders, still looked askance at the UK on a regular basis up to the point where we directly allied with them. Much of the American military establishment was unsatisfied with the idea of Lend-Lease precisely because they found the British to be not particularly close allies. Sure, we had fought with them in World War I, but in the postwar period we hadn't built on that alliance, while a number of people remembered our 140-year opposition to the British prior to WWI and were dissatisfied with their tight control of the globe.
In short, getting the Americans and British to be on opposite sides of a conflict is not far-fetched at all. I think that getting the British and Japanese to ally with each other is a bigger obstacle, given that they were rivals for naval power in the Western Pacific throughout the period in question.
In short, getting the Americans and British to be on opposite sides of a conflict is not far-fetched at all. I think that getting the British and Japanese to ally with each other is a bigger obstacle, given that they were rivals for naval power in the Western Pacific throughout the period in question.
wolf_brother
Banned
Keep the US out of WWI. Eventual settlement, perhaps "soft" CP victory, results in largely status quo ante-bellum. The Anglo-Japanese alliance is still more important to the Brits than US economic assistance ITTL.
I'm not sure beyond that, but its a solid foundation. Now you just need to move the US out of her isolationism, but in a way that brings her into conflict with either, or preferably both, Britain & Japan.
Also, just because the Anglo-Japanese Alliance is maintained doesn't necessitate that Japan is a liberal democracy. Perhaps ITTL the British Union is far more successful; 'losing' WWI could easily put her into a situation comparable to OTL Italy; throwing away millions of lives and cash for no tangible reason tends to polarize and aggregate a population.
I'm not sure beyond that, but its a solid foundation. Now you just need to move the US out of her isolationism, but in a way that brings her into conflict with either, or preferably both, Britain & Japan.
Also, just because the Anglo-Japanese Alliance is maintained doesn't necessitate that Japan is a liberal democracy. Perhaps ITTL the British Union is far more successful; 'losing' WWI could easily put her into a situation comparable to OTL Italy; throwing away millions of lives and cash for no tangible reason tends to polarize and aggregate a population.
Markus
Banned
IMO too late. The UK was not in a shape to attack anyone let alone the USA and Japan had not exactly honored its alliance with the UK during the war.
David S Poepoe
Banned
As a counterpoint by about 1918 the Anglo-Japanese Alliance was already showing its expiration date. The Royal Navy was entirely unsatisfied with the amount of material assistance it got from the Japanese. By 1920 the Admiralty was worrying about the Japanese being their rivals in the Far East and began withholding information about their experiments in naval aviation from Japanese naval aides.
The major problem for the British is 'Crimson' - Canada, which has played a major moderating effect upon their foreign policy in regards to the United States. It is entirely possible that in the event of an Anglo-Japanese-American War that the Canadians will declare themselves neutral - which could trigger a constitutional crisis of sorts within the 'White Dominions'.
The British simply are not world spanning power house by the 1920s, they had concentrated, justly so, their forces in European waters to face a major threat in the early 1900s and can't afford a conflict with another Great Power.
At the Washington Naval Conference the British were more than willing to toss the Japanese under the bus to secure peace and time to recover from the Great War.
The major problem for the British is 'Crimson' - Canada, which has played a major moderating effect upon their foreign policy in regards to the United States. It is entirely possible that in the event of an Anglo-Japanese-American War that the Canadians will declare themselves neutral - which could trigger a constitutional crisis of sorts within the 'White Dominions'.
The British simply are not world spanning power house by the 1920s, they had concentrated, justly so, their forces in European waters to face a major threat in the early 1900s and can't afford a conflict with another Great Power.
At the Washington Naval Conference the British were more than willing to toss the Japanese under the bus to secure peace and time to recover from the Great War.
I have thought long and hard ... and still haven't come up with an entirely satisfactory scenario.
My initial ideea required a Russian empire that has survived ww1 relatively intact, which isn't possible wiht your POD. But let's say that there is a scenario where the whites win the civil war quiclky and decisively (unfortunately, I don't know enough about the Russian revolution to say if and how exactly this would be possible). Russia needs to rejoin the entente, at least initially, and by the time the final peace treaties are signed it must have recovered enough of its former power that it can once again throw its weight around. Now it would be quite possible that with Germany out of the picture, the old English-Russian rivalry in Asia is rekindeled. England will be more and more concerned with Russian power and seek to contain it. To do so, it will strengthen the ties with Japan in the face of the common enemy, and seek other allies (but without much success at first). Eventually Britain will leave the entente, while France will remain loyal to Russia. Tensions between the two rival alliances will grow, and it is probable that Russia and Japan will end up going to war against eachother, dragging their respective western allies with them. Britain will of course be reluctant to fight, but the need to preserve the balance of power wil compell it to act. At first, the Anglo-Japanese, being weaker than their enemies, will be pushed back. In desperation, Britain will turn to a previously unthikable solution: an alliance winth Germany. Let us assume that the Germans, with British help, can rebuild their forces in spite of the inevitable French attack, and that they can turn the tide of the war. The Anglo-German-Japanese alliance must be winning the war, so that they feel emboldened for their next move. We can suppose that during all this time, the US has been happily suplying both sides with war materials. Even close to defeat, the Franco-Russians would still recieve copoius amounts of supplies from America. Obviously, the UK will want to do something about this, but the public will not support yet another war against a fellow democracy. So the English will settle for a "proxy war". They will instruct their German allies to launch an unrestricted submarine campaign against US shipping. It is hoped that the war in Eurasia will be over soon enough and then the UK can broker a peace. Meanwhile, the Royal navvy will try to covertly support the Ubootwaffe, while pretending to stay neutral. However, the pretense of neutrality can not be kept for long. After a series of incidents, thensions between the US and UK rise to unbearable levels. (Let's assume that Japan has allso attacked the US at the same time or at an earlier date, thus creating another source of tnsions). Finally, the Americans can't take it any more and launch an invasion of Canada. The English and their allies rush in reinforcements, and a large scale war rages across North America....
BTW, this scenario allso meets the challenge of an Anglo-French conflicht which you outlined in your other thread about the entente breakup.
My initial ideea required a Russian empire that has survived ww1 relatively intact, which isn't possible wiht your POD. But let's say that there is a scenario where the whites win the civil war quiclky and decisively (unfortunately, I don't know enough about the Russian revolution to say if and how exactly this would be possible). Russia needs to rejoin the entente, at least initially, and by the time the final peace treaties are signed it must have recovered enough of its former power that it can once again throw its weight around. Now it would be quite possible that with Germany out of the picture, the old English-Russian rivalry in Asia is rekindeled. England will be more and more concerned with Russian power and seek to contain it. To do so, it will strengthen the ties with Japan in the face of the common enemy, and seek other allies (but without much success at first). Eventually Britain will leave the entente, while France will remain loyal to Russia. Tensions between the two rival alliances will grow, and it is probable that Russia and Japan will end up going to war against eachother, dragging their respective western allies with them. Britain will of course be reluctant to fight, but the need to preserve the balance of power wil compell it to act. At first, the Anglo-Japanese, being weaker than their enemies, will be pushed back. In desperation, Britain will turn to a previously unthikable solution: an alliance winth Germany. Let us assume that the Germans, with British help, can rebuild their forces in spite of the inevitable French attack, and that they can turn the tide of the war. The Anglo-German-Japanese alliance must be winning the war, so that they feel emboldened for their next move. We can suppose that during all this time, the US has been happily suplying both sides with war materials. Even close to defeat, the Franco-Russians would still recieve copoius amounts of supplies from America. Obviously, the UK will want to do something about this, but the public will not support yet another war against a fellow democracy. So the English will settle for a "proxy war". They will instruct their German allies to launch an unrestricted submarine campaign against US shipping. It is hoped that the war in Eurasia will be over soon enough and then the UK can broker a peace. Meanwhile, the Royal navvy will try to covertly support the Ubootwaffe, while pretending to stay neutral. However, the pretense of neutrality can not be kept for long. After a series of incidents, thensions between the US and UK rise to unbearable levels. (Let's assume that Japan has allso attacked the US at the same time or at an earlier date, thus creating another source of tnsions). Finally, the Americans can't take it any more and launch an invasion of Canada. The English and their allies rush in reinforcements, and a large scale war rages across North America....
BTW, this scenario allso meets the challenge of an Anglo-French conflicht which you outlined in your other thread about the entente breakup.
usertron2020
Donor
I know this sounds strange coming from an oddball like me,
but beware the oddballs. There are some strange people out there who not only believe in Red-Orange, but think the US wouldn't stand a chance! In 1942! There's a bizarre Discussion thread on spacebattlebattles.com (sorry, I don't have the link) from 2009 that went on for twenty pages, but the three or so oddballs derailed it by refusing to listen to anyone but themselves. The whole thing was very ASB.
The pertinent point about it was the recognition by most everyone else was that following the IJN driving the US out of the western Pacific, Japan really didn't have a significant role to play.
At least the discussion WAS centered around the idea of throwing all political common sense out the window. I mean, the British Empire going to war with the world's largest non-British English-speaking people on the side of Imperial Japan? POD the American Civil War, with Lord Palmerston showing the foreign policy sensitivity of Neville Chamberlain and the firmness as well. The Union wins the ACW, but with no peaceful settlement of grievances with the Empire afterwards, and no US entry into WWI. Also, abandonment of the friendly posture Britain took towards the US after the ACW.
but beware the oddballs. There are some strange people out there who not only believe in Red-Orange, but think the US wouldn't stand a chance! In 1942! There's a bizarre Discussion thread on spacebattlebattles.com (sorry, I don't have the link) from 2009 that went on for twenty pages, but the three or so oddballs derailed it by refusing to listen to anyone but themselves. The whole thing was very ASB.The pertinent point about it was the recognition by most everyone else was that following the IJN driving the US out of the western Pacific, Japan really didn't have a significant role to play.
At least the discussion WAS centered around the idea of throwing all political common sense out the window. I mean, the British Empire going to war with the world's largest non-British English-speaking people on the side of Imperial Japan?
POD the American Civil War, with Lord Palmerston showing the foreign policy sensitivity of Neville Chamberlain and the firmness as well. The Union wins the ACW, but with no peaceful settlement of grievances with the Empire afterwards, and no US entry into WWI. Also, abandonment of the friendly posture Britain took towards the US after the ACW.