How could the Anglo-Japanese Alliance be saved?

I am working on a TL of my own that I have been thinking about off and on for quite awhile now. A key part of it involves the saving the Anglo-Japanese Alliance and keeping it intact for WWII. Please help me with your answers to any or all of the following questions:

1) How can the Anglo-Japanese Alliance be saved in 1921? (I know it officially terminated in 1923)
2) Does saving the Alliance make the Washington Naval Treaty and the Nine-Power Treaty untenable?
3) If the Washington Naval Treaty does not happen, does the naval arms race heat up? What happens to the battleship vs. aircraft carrier ideas in the TL?
4) If the Nine-Power Treaty does not happen, what ramifications?
5) On the assumption that the Anglo-Japanese Alliance does persevere, any other observations, suggestions, questions, etc. that the AH.com community would like to put forth.

I have many of my own answers to all of these questions and if we get a good discussion going I will share them all. But I would like to hear your ideas untainted by my own first.

Thank you in advance for all your help.

PS. I already know that some (or many) on this site will say that this premise is ridiculous, impossible or generally worthless. If this is your opinion, I completely understand. But this is the PoD that I have chosen.
 
While I don't believe that the AJA could be saved, the British were not for it and had started to consider the Japanese as a future rival, I'll give a few points about how it could be.

1. No German advisors for the Japanese Army in the 19th century. The Japanese military was divided over supporting the Entente rather than the Central Powers. The Imperial Japanese Navy had been trained by the British.

2. The Japanese lend the Royal Navy the battlecruiser Kongo, which serves out the war with the Grand Fleet in the North Sea.

3. Japanese troops are dispatched to the Middle East or Europe.

4. No Japanese involvement in China.

The continuation of the AJA would make the WNT very difficult. The US didn't like it - basically the US liked Britain and disliked Japan. One interpretation of the Nine-Power Treaty was - in a degree like the Munich Accords - it was an attempt to buy the West time to regroup and rearm for a likely war with Japan by basically selling out the Chinese.

Regarding the failure of the WNT look at the other thread since that is already being addressed. Aircraft carriers will still happen.

A continueing AJA will find the British tied to Japan that will be 'the bull in the china shop' - so to speak. I find it highly doubtful, given the Japanese government at the time, that British will be able to influence Tokyo at all in its attempt to dominate China. The British will probably repeatedly tell Tokyo that the AJA does not cover war with the US.
 
While I don't believe that the AJA could be saved, the British were not for it and had started to consider the Japanese as a future rival, I'll give a few points about how it could be.

1. No German advisors for the Japanese Army in the 19th century. The Japanese military was divided over supporting the Entente rather than the Central Powers. The Imperial Japanese Navy had been trained by the British.

2. The Japanese lend the Royal Navy the battlecruiser Kongo, which serves out the war with the Grand Fleet in the North Sea.

3. Japanese troops are dispatched to the Middle East or Europe.

4. No Japanese involvement in China.

Thank you. Are you suggesting all or any one of those would do it? I have a Canadian friend that believes the prevention of Arthur Meighen becoming PM of Canada would alone stop the termination of the AJA; thoughts?
 
CLFS: Meighen was one of those "Empire Patriots" who did not consider Canada to have nationhood. By which I mean that he believed that Canada was British, not Canadian. He was only PM for eighteen months from Borden's retirement in July 1920 to the start of the King era at the end of 1921. No major moves were made in foreign policy, and he was ridiculed for agreeing to everything London asked. When asked about the Dardanelles he said "Ready aye Ready". King ridiculed him as in effect London's poodle, which was true of much of the foreign policy establishment in both parties until the Statute of Westminster.
 

The Vulture

Banned
Thank you. Are you suggesting all or any one of those would do it? I have a Canadian friend that believes the prevention of Arthur Meighen becoming PM of Canada would alone stop the termination of the AJA; thoughts?

Could you expand on that a little? I'm intrigued by the idea but must confess a lack of knowledge on my part.
 
CLFS: Meighen was one of those "Empire Patriots" who did not consider Canada to have nationhood. By which I mean that he believed that Canada was British, not Canadian. He was only PM for eighteen months from Borden's retirement in July 1920 to the start of the King era at the end of 1921. No major moves were made in foreign policy, and he was ridiculed for agreeing to everything London asked. When asked about the Dardanelles he said "Ready aye Ready". King ridiculed him as in effect London's poodle, which was true of much of the foreign policy establishment in both parties until the Statute of Westminster.

Thank you for the insight; I never did trust that Canada was responsible for the direction of the Empire on this treaty.
 
TV: I just explained why. ;) Meighen could not become PM in 1920-1 by Thomas White, Borden's Finance Minister, accepting the Tory leadership in place of Meighen. Mackenzie King still wins the next election no matter what: no Canadian POD after 1920 will change that.

King is a political Machiavellian on par with FDR, Meighen is an authoritarian (denying immigrants the right to vote, gerrymandering the military vote in 1917) who has great oratorical skills but no backroom skills, in addition to pulling off the breathtaking feat of royally pissing off Quebec and Bay Street simultaneously. Those two reasons are partially why he lost in '21.
 
Could you expand on that a little? I'm intrigued by the idea but must confess a lack of knowledge on my part.

According to a self-proclaimed "Imperial Loyalist Canadian" associate of mine: PM Meighen single-handedly changed the mind of all the dominion ministers at the Imperial Conference in London (1921) and convinced them to abandon the AJA and pursue an alliance/friendship with the US.
Note this is not my opinion, but her strong belief in this made me at least question the possibility.
 
Thank you. Are you suggesting all or any one of those would do it? I have a Canadian friend that believes the prevention of Arthur Meighen becoming PM of Canada would alone stop the termination of the AJA; thoughts?

I'm thinking that all would have to be in effect, but then there would still be butterflies.

The Australians and New Zealanders want the continuation of the AJA in order to restrain Japan. There will have to be MAJOR changes within Japan itself in order to curb its expansionistic tendencies and the military in the 1920s.
 
As I said, there were very few pro-Americans in those days, and they were seen as loonies by the frontbenches of both parties. Only a decade before, in 1911, the Tories had run on the most anti-American platform in Canadian history, equalled only by Dief in '62 and '63. King was also somewhat pro-American, as his aborted attempt for free trade "reciprocity" in 1946 showed IOTL.
 
As I said, there were very few pro-Americans in those days, and they were seen as loonies by the frontbenches of both parties. Only a decade before, in 1911, the Tories had run on the most anti-American platform in Canadian history, equalled only by Dief in '62 and '63. King was also somewhat pro-American, as his aborted attempt for free trade "reciprocity" in 1946 showed IOTL.

My basic idea is more American vs. British animosity in this TL. From what you just said, I am thinking that this is not such a stretch.
 
That's what I was thinking.

Perhaps the British continue to try to hold down Ireland and due to the influence of Irish-Americans, the US complains a lot.

Yes that along with greater US anti-colonialism aimed at all of Europe generally and Britain specifically. And combined with Britain not caring as much about what their junior alliance partner Japan is doing in China.
 
Yes that along with greater US anti-colonialism aimed at all of Europe generally and Britain specifically. And combined with Britain not caring as much about what their junior alliance partner Japan is doing in China.

I don't think this issue is useful, especially with the US owning the Philippines, Guam, Hawaii and Samoa.
 
Top