Japan and US go to war in 1913

I was reading about how there were anti-American demonstrations in Japan in 1913 in reaction against California legislation forbidding aliens who couldn't become citizens to own real property, and that Wilson was advised to move the USN to the west coast.

Is it possible for the US and Japan to go to war at this time? If so, how it would go, and what effects would it have on the wider world? And if it did come to war, would the UK join Japan because of their alliance?

If it's not possible to have a US-Japan war in 1913 with a POD in that year, would it be possible if the POD was in 1911 with a worse incident in that year, say Baron Uchida does not deny the scaremongering rumors that Japan was trying to set up naval bases in Mexico?

Thanks in advance.
 
According to the Anglo-Japanese alliance, Britain would provide support if Japan were at war with more than one Power (and vice versa). So only if the US gets itself an ally do you get an Anglo-American war.
Even without direct military support, though, Britain might help finance Japan's war efforts and may provide naval intelligence; at the least, the US Navy would be rather wary of any British shipping.
 
According to the Anglo-Japanese alliance, Britain would provide support if Japan were at war with more than one Power (and vice versa). So only if the US gets itself an ally do you get an Anglo-American war.
Even without direct military support, though, Britain might help finance Japan's war efforts and may provide naval intelligence; at the least, the US Navy would be rather wary of any British shipping.

anon_user

Working from memory but I think that was the original version, in 1902. It was renewed in 1905 and 1911 and at one of them I'm pretty certain this requirement was dropped and it became a simple defensive alliance.

There was for the 1911 a condition that Britain insisted on, which the Japanese agreed to reluctantly, that it would not apply if the power that attacked one signatory had a treaty of arbitration with the other. It was clearly the intent of Britain that this would prevent Britain being committed to war with the US if the latter attacked Japan. Such a treaty of arbitration, which would mean any dispute between the two powers was offered to the US by Britain, but rejected by the senate I believe.

As such, if the conflict comes after the 1911 treaty and the US is the aggressor, Britain is treaty bound to aid its ally. If Japan is the aggressor the treaty is not binding. Hence it would depend on what starts the war. [Plus in 1911 Britain was deeply split over Irish Home Rule and House of Lords reform, still ongoing to a degree in 1913, so how the government reacts is difficult to tell].

Steve
 
I doubt Britain is going to want to go to war with the United States with the European situation being what it is, so maybe they try to mediate as much as possible?

Maybe this leads to an earlier rupture of the Anglo-Japanese alliance. Worst-case scenario, we get the Japanese allying with Germany instead and the U.S. allying to Britain and something resembling the WWII Pacific Theater, only in WWI?
 
I doubt Britain is going to want to go to war with the United States with the European situation being what it is, so maybe they try to mediate as much as possible?

Britain would definitely be seeking to avoid a clash between the two, or end it as quickly as possibly. A lot would depend on what the hell caused the clash but it could get very messy.

Maybe this leads to an earlier rupture of the Anglo-Japanese alliance. Worst-case scenario, we get the Japanese allying with Germany instead and the U.S. allying to Britain and something resembling the WWII Pacific Theater, only in WWI?

Actually there is something a lot worse. That Japan gets alienated and ends up siding with Germany, although in this time period they would be rather exposed, while the US sinks back into isolationism.:(

This is presuming of course that the war isn't stopped. Whatever decision Britain takes a US-Japan war is going to cause problems.

Steve
 
Say the US and Japan do go to war and it is a short, indecisive naval war that ends in a white peace in say six months to a year.

If Britain does not support Japan does this drive them into the arms of Germany? Japan's main interests at this time were in China and their main antagonist was probably Russia. Being desperate for allies the Kaiser would be more than happy to agree to Japan gaining whatever she could from the Chinese and from Russia.

Would Wilson be reelected in 1916? Having taken the country to war in '13 he can hardly campaign on the slogan 'he kept us out of the war' now can he? Would an unsuccessful war with Japan make America less willing to get into an even bigger war in Europe and the Pacific?
 
One thing I've been wondering, the UK is definitely not going to be happy about this. But if say Japan declares war on the US, the UK will stay out, but I definitely see them applying diplomatic pressure on the US to settle for a white peace.

If the US declared war on Japan (Hearst and his like whip up the US population into a war frenzy the most probable cause), the UK is apparently treaty-bound (thanks to stevep to pointing that out, I wasn't sure of the details of the Anglo-Japanese treaty) to join in on Japan's side. So either the UK can join in and immediately earn the enmity of the US or not, which would alienate Japan and show the world that the UK's word is useless, which should have interesting impacts on France, Belgium, and Germany.

In all these scenarios, I see a varying degree of US enmity towards the UK as a result. "Perfidious Albion sides with the yellow monkeys." "Perfidious Albion denies us our rightful victory over the Asiatic scum." The Hearst headlines write themselves.

Assuming WW1 broke out, I can see the US being a whole lot more Anglophobic, which causes all sorts of problems for the Entente. However only in the event of a serious shooting war between the UK-Japan and the US do I see a chance of the US joining the Central powers.
 
[...]
If Britain does not support Japan does this drive them into the arms of Germany? Japan's main interests at this time were in China and their main antagonist was probably Russia. Being desperate for allies the Kaiser would be more than happy to agree to Japan gaining whatever she could from the Chinese and from Russia.[...]
Possible, but unlikely without a different secretary of the foreign office or another German specific PoD, because the Kaiser had no love for Japan - the "Yellow Peril". There are, of course, a number of working PoDs, like getting Karl von Eisendecher to become the German foreign minister. He was the long time minister plenipotentiary to Japan. There are other possibilities, after all Germany had built up relations to Japan in OTL. But you will need an influential person to persuade the Kaiser to accept this.

Kind regards,
G.
 
What was Canadian policy about Japanese immigration to (for the most likely example) BC in those days?

Simreeve

Pretty much the same as the US or Australia, not wanted here.:( Possibly not quite as bad as the others as there was some immigration but it was a sore point for Japan with all their white neighbours.

Steve
 
One thing I've been wondering, the UK is definitely not going to be happy about this. But if say Japan declares war on the US, the UK will stay out, but I definitely see them applying diplomatic pressure on the US to settle for a white peace.

If the US declared war on Japan (Hearst and his like whip up the US population into a war frenzy the most probable cause), the UK is apparently treaty-bound (thanks to stevep to pointing that out, I wasn't sure of the details of the Anglo-Japanese treaty) to join in on Japan's side. So either the UK can join in and immediately earn the enmity of the US or not, which would alienate Japan and show the world that the UK's word is useless, which should have interesting impacts on France, Belgium, and Germany.

In all these scenarios, I see a varying degree of US enmity towards the UK as a result. "Perfidious Albion sides with the yellow monkeys." "Perfidious Albion denies us our rightful victory over the Asiatic scum." The Hearst headlines write themselves.

Assuming WW1 broke out, I can see the US being a whole lot more Anglophobic, which causes all sorts of problems for the Entente. However only in the event of a serious shooting war between the UK-Japan and the US do I see a chance of the US joining the Central powers.

Basileus444

That's basically my feelings and it would be a hell of a mess for the UK, as either an important ally or a major trade partner is alienated. Only difference is, unless there is a clear guilty party, Britain would be using her influence with both sides to try and bring it to a end.

The other consideration possibly, if there was a short brew-up that Britain was able to calm down, how might it affect events in Europe. Even something like that would probably make the continental powers more doubtful Britain would get involved in a war there. If there was an ongoing shooting war in the Pacific and even more so if Britain had become a belligerent this would be massively more significant. [7th heaven for Tirpitz and possibly the Kaiser but it could prompt them to do something stupid].

Steve
 
IMHO a Japanese-American War is NOT going to draw in a third party - neither the the Spanish-American or the Russo-Japanese War did.

What is the state of the Japanese economy by this time? I assume that since they are engaging in dreadnought building programmes they have recovered from the post RJ War economic downturn? Would they thus have the economic capacity to carry on such a war at an equivalent length to the RJ War?

As said above, it depends what triggers the war. If its an American over-reaction that results in a US declaration, this makes the Japanese look a bit better, but if its a matter of US actions bringing a Japanese attack (de facto declaration of war) it will be an entirely different war

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
IMHO a Japanese-American War is NOT going to draw in a third party - neither the the Spanish-American or the Russo-Japanese War did.

Their different matters. Spain had no allies that I'm aware of. The Russo-Japanese conflict came under the 1st version of the treaty, which only committed either power [Britain or Japan] if their ally was at war with two other powers.

What is the state of the Japanese economy by this time? I assume that since they are engaging in dreadnought building programmes they have recovered from the post RJ War economic downturn? Would they thus have the economic capacity to carry on such a war at an equivalent length to the RJ War?

Probably but don't know in any detail.

As said above, it depends what triggers the war. If its an American over-reaction that results in a US declaration, this makes the Japanese look a bit better, but if its a matter of US actions bringing a Japanese attack (de facto declaration of war) it will be an entirely different war

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

That would be the key point. An awkward one might be if the US decided to make Manila a major fleet base. Since it was directly astride the Japanese trade lines they had made clear this would be seen as a cause bellis[sp?]. That would be a case where possibly Japan struck the 1st military blow but guilty could be found on either side. Or possibly some outrage against a diplomat or something in either country as feelings were running high on both sides.

Steve
 

MacCaulay

Banned
What was Canadian policy about Japanese immigration to (for the most likely example) BC in those days?

There were a bunch of Asians that ended up going into Canada as "Mexicans". The American and Canadian governments both had laws against Asians coming in, but they didn't have laws against Mexicans, right?


So there was this thing about Chinese and Japanese coming into Mexico, getting Mexican citizenship, and then crossing the Rio Grande legally as "Mexicans." :D
 
First Japan has a clear goal, get the U.S. to make California allow its subjects there to own property. But what can they do militarily to get that?

If there is a chance of the current defense treaty getting Britain in on Japan's side would Japan think strategically and let the Americans strike the first blow?
 
First Japan has a clear goal, get the U.S. to make California allow its subjects there to own property. But what can they do militarily to get that?

If there is a chance of the current defense treaty getting Britain in on Japan's side would Japan think strategically and let the Americans strike the first blow?

I think in this scenario, it'd more likely be the US declaring war. The California racist legislation passes, leading to anti-American riots in Japan (all OTL so far). Then perhaps the riots get nastier than OTL, some Americans are killed (prominent ones, diplomatic staff or businessmen, or maybe missionaries). Hearst and the like start whipping up war fervour amongst the populace (perhaps reviving the 'Japanese naval bases in Mexico' scare from 1911). If along the road, the Japanese insult Wilson somehow (he's touchy about things like that), you have a pretty good climate for the US declaring war on Japan.

And if the US declares war on Japan, the UK is treaty-bound to help Japan. That would give cooler heads in the American government significant leverage, although a good counterargument would be that the UK won't intervene and gain the USN as an enemy when it has to deal with the High Seas Fleet.

If the UK did enter the war on Japan's side, expect lots of American shrieking about perfidious Albion. If the UK doesn't, showing that Great Britain can't be trusted to honor her agreements, then expect Germany to start getting some ideas regarding France and Belgium.
 
Top