AHC: longer lasting Treaty Ports

From the First Opium War until WWII, more than 80 treaty ports were created in China. However, in 1943, the Allies agreed to give up their treaty ports. Following the communist takeover in 1949, the last vestigaes of the treaty port system disappeared (unless you count the New Territories, which I don't).

So, with a PoD on or later 1 January 1900, make the treaty ports last longer--at least until the big wave of decolonization in the 1960s.
 
You essentially need to butterfly the Japanese Invasion of China.

Simply by doing that, you might be able to keep the Treaty Ports in place into the 1960's.
 
Well one suggestion might be rather than ceding their rights back to the Chinese government during the middle of the war the Allies decide to wait and see how the looming civil war shakes out first. If the Nationalists win then great, they can give up the ports, if the Communists win then they keep them as a handy resource and to screw with them.
 
Well one suggestion might be rather than ceding their rights back to the Chinese government during the middle of the war the Allies decide to wait and see how the looming civil war shakes out first. If the Nationalists win then great, they can give up the ports, if the Communists win then they keep them as a handy resource and to screw with them.

I can't see the Allies hanging onto them while still trying to treat the Chinese as an equal partner in the Alliance; that was the whole point of handing them over. In the case of the French it was because the Nationalists had occupied Northern Indochina, so you might be able to hang onto their lease, but nothing really beyond that.
 

I can't see the Allies hanging onto them while still trying to treat the Chinese as an equal partner in the Alliance; that was the whole point of handing them over. In the case of the French it was because the Nationalists had occupied Northern Indochina, so you might be able to hang onto their lease, but nothing really beyond that.
I agree, we need to prevent the Second Sino-Japanese War.

Here's a possible PoD: a worse Nanking Incident (not to be confused with the Nanking Massacre). Let's say the Japanese and American ambassadors are both killed, along with a fair number of foreign residents. Since the killers would be both KMT and Communist soldiers, it would be difficult for the US to simply reach an agreement with CSK. That might see the various powers seeing the treaty settlements as important for trying to increase "stability" (the status quo) in China, and to protect their own nationals. If Chinese instability is seen as the threat to Western business interests, and not Japanese militarism, then I think the Europeans, US, and Empire of Japan will want to keep the Treaty Ports around.
What do you think?
 
Top