On January 9 of 1932, Korean nationalist Lee Bong-chang threw a grenade in the direction of Hirohito's carriage when he was on his way to a military parade. The grenade missed, instead exploding near the carriage of Imperial Household Minister Ichiki Kitoko. There was little fallout from this event, and Lee was dismissed as a lone-wolf terrorist. What would happen if the grenade hit its mark, killing the Emperor Hirohito? Presumably his younger brother would ascend to the throne, as Akihito hadn't been born yet and women were barred from the throne. How would Yasuhito's rule differ from Hirohito's and what course would this steer Japan into?
WI: Hirohito Successfully Assassinated in 1932?
- Thread starter Tripledot
- Start date
-
- Tags
- assassination hirohito japan korea
Hiroitho could approve or disapprove politics and military expansions but did he have had any de facto competence other than ceremonial representation ? On the other hand he was a god, a mortal god would shock and disturb Shintoist society
PhilippeO
Banned
huh ? Emperor is not immortal. Meiji dead, Hirohito father dead. Emperor can be assassinated would affect nothing in Japanese belief of Emperor Divinity or State Shinto practice.
Hirihito death would affect
1) possible change on Korea policy due to reprisal
2)possible change on Japanese politics due to difference of personality between Hirohito and her replacement
ceremonial didn't mean powerless, there are some change that Emperor can do, limited yet sometimes significant.
Hirihito death would affect
1) possible change on Korea policy due to reprisal
2)possible change on Japanese politics due to difference of personality between Hirohito and her replacement
ceremonial didn't mean powerless, there are some change that Emperor can do, limited yet sometimes significant.
Asami
Banned
Yes. He was a very powerful and important person. That's why a lot of the right-wing militarism emerged, was to protect the Emperor's power of absolutism, while those aligned against militarism wanted to institute a more constitutional society. The whole 'ceremonial leader' thing is a post-occupation, post-1947 thing.
Yasuhito/Chichibu was far more supportive of the militarist factions than Hirohito was. Where Hirohito gave only passing approval and with some reluctance, Chichibu was rather known for his support for the Kwangtung Army and some of the atrocities conducted in China. The only reason he wasn't charged with war crimes in 1945 was because of the deal the Allies struck up with the Emperor-- no charges for Imperial Household members.
Asami
Banned
Especially with Chichibu on the throne. He's literally the man that the militarists would've preferred to be Emperor over Hirohito.
Anti-Korean reprisals would be likely, but why would there any plans for full-scale genocide of Koreans? Korea was considered an important and integral part of the Japanese empire- depopulating the country doesn't seem like it'd be conducive to their plans of dominating East Asia.
They didn't think he was invincible, they'd mostly just be really REALLY angry at the Koreans.
Since the Mukden Incident happened only a few months earlier, and Japanese radicals were poised to take power- Japanese radicals whose aim was to empower the emperor, a goal which Yasuhito was sympathetic to- what kind of effect would stronger imperial control have on the outcome of the Second Sino-Japanese war and a potential conflict with the United States? What would be the international reaction, as well, and would this accelerate the course of war or not? In the course of war, would the United States have been as lenient on an emperor who more explicitly supported the militarists, and what would be the reaction of the Japanese people?
Last edited:
Not exactly. The thing of supporting the Emperor (who was basically a high priest for centuries and had been constantly bullied by the Shogun) was to fight the Shogun and the Council of Five. When Meiji took power he basically was ceremonial. While I read it suggested that his approving the constitution was like this, since he took it then immediately handed it to someone else as an act of approval, I doubt that counts since you don't sit down to read stuff in a big ceremony like that. Probably read it in advance. But yes, there was a good deal of moral authority. Just go back to Meiji again, who insisted on patching up his own uniform, even when people offered to buy him another or pointed out that making a new one would be cheaper that constantly repairing it. He wanted to be an example.
Because that integral part has just proven itself to be disloyal to the Emperor and to Japan as a whole; it'll be like how Britain treated India at their worst - genocide not with an intent to repopulate the area with non-Korean ethnicities, but with an intent to truly destroy the Korean nation - or huge chunks of it.
And post-WW2 korea would be independent... but it will be a new country with entirely different ethnicity...
Not what I said, not what I meant. I only meant to say that there would be attempts to genocide, and considering OTL Japan's war capacity they're going to fail badly. But many people will die in the process, etc. Or who knows, maybe they adopt a Khmer Rouge type tactic and do succeed in wiping out half the population or something
Attempted genocide is the extreme end of the continuum of possible Japanese reactions.
I would suspect that Koreans residing in Japan rather than Korea would bear the brunt of reprisals, since that's where Lee Bong Chang did the deed and where there would be lynch mobs against a vulnerable and outnumbered population. In Korea itself, extreme reprisaling invites broad-based revolt, which can be bad for economic exploitation.
On the lower end of the continuum of reprisals would be mob violence against Koreans in Japan and reversal of any of the reforms of the more lenient 1920s [I figure they were probably all reversed by the time we got to the Pacific War, but I don't know when, if ever, in the 1930s, things went back to the pre-1919 military police rule - regardless rollback would be accelerated].
Anger at the Koreans would be high enough that championing ethnic Koreans in Manchuria would not be a policy (as it was in OTL, albeit for instrumental reasons).
A real attempt at genocide would be a big effort provoking guerrilla resistance at a far higher level than what the Japanese experienced in OTL. It would also lead to mass Korean exodus (nowhere near a majority of peninsular inhabitants) to places beyond Japanese control. It could seriously mess with Tokyo's appetite to fight for a larger sphere in China outside Manchuria.
We'd be getting WI's about how Japan's militaristic binge would have been averted "if only" Hirohito had lived.
trurle
Banned
I think the Yasuhito would not make a very good emperor. May be he will be even more incompetent than Hirohito, approaching emperor Taisho in the worthlessness. Also, some accounts do exist about Yasuhito supporting Kodoha faction (mostly anti-Russian politics). I imagine more impulsive orders from emperor compared to OTL, adding to already severe lack of of coordination in Japanese Empire. More repressions against Koreans, more incidents, more reliance on army..
Manchukuo is likely to continue similar to OTL, but more severe course of Japanese-Soviet border wars may prevent even hottest Japanese heads from venturing into the Shanghai.
hmm, Kwangtung Army talks itself and IGHQ and the Emperor into thinking Japan can
intervene in outer Mongolia and use it as a mainland bulwark resulting in all out war with USSR ?
intervene in outer Mongolia and use it as a mainland bulwark resulting in all out war with USSR ?