AHC:Japanese PM Yukio Ozaki

Yukio Ozaki was a member of the Japanese Diet for 63 years (1890-1953)and a strong supporters for such liberal Causes as the right to vote for women and disarmament. Even though a member of the Diet, he was imprisoned during WWII. He also, while Mayor of Tokyo was responsible for the first donation of Cherry Trees to Washington, DC which led to the National Cherry Blossom Festival in Washington, DC.

Can we get him to be Japanese PM and if so, can be manage to redirect the Japanese tendency toward Militarism during the majority of the time in the Diet?

(No limitation that the POD is post-1900, this just seemed like the more logical of the two forums)
 
Even if you manage to get a liberal Japanese prime minister; the biggest obstacle to militarism is the immense power and influence of the military and navy. What you need to get are generals and admirals who have respect for the rule of law and democracy, and that will be the best way to halt militarism in Japan. Part of this might be luck; but I think that it's not impossible that a talented politician could play off the army and navy against each other in order to subordinate both of them to the civilian government.
 
Even if you manage to get a liberal Japanese prime minister;
Well, the Empire of Japan did have liberal Prime Ministers. Shidehara was (acting) PM in 1930-31, and he was definitely a liberal internationalist--he was the one which came up with the idea for Article 9, for example. When he was Foreign Minister in the 1920s, he actually directed Japan to have a more conciliatory policy towards China than did any of the other powers with concessions (which is why the Militarists hated him).
I wouldn't count Inukai as a liberal internationalist per se, but he was definitely liberal, and he worked hard to keep the peace--which is why he was assassinated. I consider him to be a martyr. If you look in my profile, he's the guy you see.
the biggest obstacle to militarism is the immense power and influence of the military and navy. What you need to get are generals and admirals who have respect for the rule of law and democracy, and that will be the best way to halt militarism in Japan. Part of this might be luck; but I think that it's not impossible that a talented politician could play off the army and navy against each other in order to subordinate both of them to the civilian government.
I think the easiest way to achieve this is simply to have Aritomo die earlier. He was the one that created the policy that only an active duty general or admiral could serve in a cabinent. Eliminate that, and the military can't take down a government. That's huge.

There are other things one can do, too. Getting rid of Sadao Araki would definitely take some of the ideological basis away from the Militarists. Making get rid of Ikki Kita, too. That way, the Militarists have less of a coherent ideological basis around which their ideas can grow.

I think most people have this idea that only conservative and right-wing ideas existed in prewar Japan. To my mind, this is incorrect. There were more than enough left-wing voices, it's just that they consistently lost the fight. If one wanted to write a PoD around a more liberal prewar Japan, there is no shortage of figures to use.
 
Well, the Empire of Japan did have liberal Prime Ministers. Shidehara was (acting) PM in 1930-31, and he was definitely a liberal internationalist--he was the one which came up with the idea for Article 9, for example. When he was Foreign Minister in the 1920s, he actually directed Japan to have a more conciliatory policy towards China than did any of the other powers with concessions (which is why the Militarists hated him).
I wouldn't count Inukai as a liberal internationalist per se, but he was definitely liberal, and he worked hard to keep the peace--which is why he was assassinated. I consider him to be a martyr. If you look in my profile, he's the guy you see.

I think the easiest way to achieve this is simply to have Aritomo die earlier. He was the one that created the policy that only an active duty general or admiral could serve in a cabinent. Eliminate that, and the military can't take down a government. That's huge.

There are other things one can do, too. Getting rid of Sadao Araki would definitely take some of the ideological basis away from the Militarists. Making get rid of Ikki Kita, too. That way, the Militarists have less of a coherent ideological basis around which their ideas can grow.

I think most people have this idea that only conservative and right-wing ideas existed in prewar Japan. To my mind, this is incorrect. There were more than enough left-wing voices, it's just that they consistently lost the fight. If one wanted to write a PoD around a more liberal prewar Japan, there is no shortage of figures to use.

Heh; probably should have done a brief stroll through wikipedia before shooting my mouth off.

I'm not really familiar enough with Japanese politics or the Taisho era to really provide a really detailed response, so I spoke more in general terms, such as that what would be necessary would be a Prime Minister who could play off the army and navy against each other. I wasn't aware that the requirement that the army and navy ministers be active duty general officers was a late requirement for example; though I'd heard about the requirement mostly through reading about an episode where apparently every army general officer refused the post, preventing formation of a government until they got their desired budget.

However, also thinking in general terms; I am thinking that the bottom line would be that it would be required to completely change the attitude of the army and navy, to make them completely subordinate to the civilian government. On things like expansionism, for example, AFAIK, there were few in the army who were against that, so a Prime Minister who sought good relations with China, Britain, and America would swiftly run afoul of them. So, would breaking the ideological core of the army prevent them from actively involving themselves in government (and what other measures might be necessary to contain them)?
 
However, also thinking in general terms; I am thinking that the bottom line would be that it would be required to completely change the attitude of the army and navy, to make them completely subordinate to the civilian government. On things like expansionism, for example, AFAIK, there were few in the army who were against that, so a Prime Minister who sought good relations with China, Britain, and America would swiftly run afoul of them. So, would breaking the ideological core of the army prevent them from actively involving themselves in government (and what other measures might be necessary to contain them)?
Expansionism into China was popular because it WORKED. Economically the Mukden Incident had great rewards for Japan, and this was in the middle of the great depression.

Regarding the military though, the 'military' wasnt a single bloc. It was a dysfunctional schizophrenic mess*. For Japan militarism was practically anarchism.

*Then again so are most militaries. :p More so than usual.
 
Last edited:
Expansionism into China was popular because it WORKED. Economically the Mukden Incident had great rewards for Japan, and this was in the middle of the great depression.

Regarding the military though, the 'military' wasnt a single bloc. It was a dysfunctional schizophrenic mess*. For Japan militarism was practically anarchism.

*Then again so are most militaries. :p More so than usual.

Can you imagine the Japanese (Pre-1945) trying to pull off a coastal invasion like D-Day? *complete* insanity...
 
Taisho Period had snakebit luck

I've argued in other threads that Japan winning the Russo-Japanese War invited all kinds of militaristic adventures IOTL.
Best thing that could give the IJA some needed humility was getting pwned or fighting to a much messier draw against Russia to show that elan only goes so far against a capable, prepared opponent.

Another POD I've floated is IJA participation both on the ground and IJN providing convoy protection in the European theater of WWI to show Japan what modern armies need, (logistics and mobility provided by industrial prowess), get some recognition for fighting bravely and capably in the theater that mattered to London and Paris against the Germans and thus gain some much needed respect in the post-war division of the spoils,:eek: I mean Versailles!
Having Japan fully on-board with the League of Nations and committed to democracy, trade, and so forth does a lot to weather the 1926 Kanto earthquake and disruptions of the Great Depression w/o pillaging China.

IMO if either of the above happened, you'd have a tamer military. If both happened, Japan would be where it is now in the 1950's as a formidable economic and technological power w/o the militarist atrocities staining its honor.

I agree wholeheartedly that you'd need to de-Prussianize the Diet, and more closely follow the British parliamentary model that a capable, respected PM suck as Yukio Ozaki would be ITTL would do a lot to make happen.
 
One of the biggest problems is that, de jure and de facto, the military was considered only answerable to the Emperor as part of the Meiji Constitution. Couple that with a military culture which encouraged assassination as a legitimate tool for "shaping" the political process and one which gave overeager junior officers far more ability to impact policy than they ever should have and you've got a disaster waiting to happen.

The best way to stop that freight train is to get a Prime Minister who manages to play the system in the right way to get the Emperor to turn over control of the military to the Diet instead of being answerable only to the Imperial Household and the Emperor. Do that and you build a strong foundation for reigning the militarists in.
 
Top