20th Century US/ UK Naval rivalry

By 1906 the Navy (if not the government) had decided that Germany was the most likely potential enemy so targetted their resources against them. The USA didn't really come into the equation as they were not even a Great Power at the time.
 
They may not have been a great power, but after the Civil War I think it was clear that the potential was there. By 1900-ish the Monroe Doctrine and the Spanish-American War had indicated that the US was capable of deciding it wanted influence beyond it's borders, and was willing to go to some lengths to get it.
The problem is that UK power depended on its overseas possessions and trade, US power was based on more or less internal sources. It would take the UK deciding that the US could seek to control it's trade routes, and then deciding that they were not willing to permit that. I think you'd need a POD before 1900 for the most plausible results - say during the American Civil War there are some incidents between the USN and British blockade-runners, followed by some poorly-handled diplomacy to make things even frostier.

Just my $0.02, though.
 
One needs to remember that the US's first overseas military actions were caused by the need to protect trade and freedom of navigation. The only way that I can see the UK/USA becoming rivals on the worlsds tage is if the RN acting by direction of His/Her Majesties Government traded to restrict freedom of the seas
 
Is there any way the UK could have persuaded itself that US Naval strenght was a threat or a worry?

Really tough.
The problem is that by 1900, the Empire faced a surging Germany and still had worries about France. The United States - while vast potential existed - was a quiet, self-absorbed power that didn't - in any way - threaten British interests.

You have to do 1 of 2 things - have the United States actively antagonistic against the British Empire (and the obvious question there is why - especially when BOTH powers would go to some lengths to defuse any crisis that arose) - or have Germany and other European powers eschew naval strength - making the USN the only potential rival for the RN.

Mike Turcotte
 
The ALNAVCO Log, back in the seventies, had a report on a gaming club's battle. They had assumed that the pre-London Treaty building programs had continued, leading to a US-UK war in the late twenties. Thus you had G3 battlecruisers and N3 battleships facing off against Lexington CB and South Dakora BB, plus the older ships from the prewar days.

I kept those things for years but have no idea where they are now.

Of course, the reason there was a London Treaty was that those building programs were unaffordable . . .
 
The ALNAVCO Log, back in the seventies, had a report on a gaming club's battle. They had assumed that the pre-London Treaty building programs had continued, leading to a US-UK war in the late twenties. Thus you had G3 battlecruisers and N3 battleships facing off against Lexington CB and South Dakora BB, plus the older ships from the prewar days.

I kept those things for years but have no idea where they are now.

Of course, the reason there was a London Treaty was that those building programs were unaffordable . . .

Interesting since the G3s, N3s, Lexingtons and South Dakotas were all scrapped, and probably showing their age design wise, by the London Treaty.
 
Not in the 20th Century. Britain and the US had already resolved most of their historical animosity. In the latter half of the 19th Century, Britain constantly appeased the US since its demands were moderate, their trade was valuable, and the US was not threatening any vital British interests. After World War I, Britain is hoping the US will be active as a British ally to both hold the peace in Europe, and to act as a balancer against Japan in the Pacific.
 
You would need more Anti-UK feelings in the US and the same in reverse in the UK. POD could be :
More UK help towards the South or problems with the Oregon/ 54-50 or Fight. UK help towards Spain during the SAW or UK help towards Mexico in US Mexico war.
Then you would need to somehow get the US Congress to build a real Navy
Some of these POD might even butterfly away the ACW. Meaning more south/north anti-uk feelings keep the South from pulling away.




Is there any way the UK could have persuaded itself that US Naval strenght was a threat or a worry?
 
There was an arms race up until the Washington Treaty. Could you just make that worse?

But it would not last too much longer.
 
The U.S. had contingency war plans drawn up during the 1920s and 1930s that were color coded to reflect various possible opponents. Great Britain was coded Red (with variants for Brit colonies, such as Pink for Canada.) Of course many of these plans were strictly hypothetical , considering the political situation of the day. I'm not aware if Britain possessed any similar plans for use against the U.S.
 
Consider the eye...
Open Treaties, openly arrived at.
A bird in the hand...

Eyes are unlikely things, they seem to rely on too many things happening just right to come about. Should one step fail... The League of Nations without the USA is a busted flush. Many realise this. And wait a minute... just who is it going to fall on to make it work if it comes to force?

Naval Intelligence has become aware that the Americans are reading our and others mail.

We have a treaty with Japan. It worked.

Let's just be a little less gullible about this Washington business.

Especially as we haven't actually killed either Germany or Russia and the Italians are becoming aware they didn't get anything out of fighting with us except a huge stack of dead and maimed.

Oh, and the majority of the fleet is obsolete, knackered or vulnerable. We need more dockyard jobs and where will the dockyards and gear cutters be after a 10 year building holiday? Who will invest in modern plant if they don't have anything to build?

A naval arms race might be undesirable at the moment, but neither is it desirable to wreck our fleet and industry.

Cui bono?

The USA's interests are not Great Britain's and Great Britain's interests are not the USA's.

Neither Britain nor Germany set out to go to war with one another. Britain was paying more attention to not going to war with France, Russia and Japan. They were the powers we paid attention to, they could directly threaten the Empire or the Metropolitan, just as Germany paid most attention to France and Russia for the direct threat they posed.

Ten years before the Kaiser marched into Belgium, an Anglo-German war was the stuff of fiction, and bad fiction at that. Tweaking Washington to address our interests in the East, our industrial and naval interests and the inevitable contingencies of Central Europe wont necessarily lead to an Anglo-American rivalry either but it is a feasible scenario.

Don't know how you would get an Anglo-American war though, there is no
need to march through Belgium to get at Japan.
 
Top