TheHipster57
Banned
if after world war 2 the us makes japan a territory what would its poltical status be would it eventually recieve statehood or commonwealth status
Japan As A Us teritory
- Thread starter TheHipster57
- Start date
This has been discussed on a number of occasions. Japan is way too large to be absorbed whole into the United States, but the state of Honshu, Hokkaido, Ryushu etc, might be more feasible in the right circumstances.
They would be like Puerto Rico. They are too foreign culturally to be assimilated into a US state.
It would be incredible to think what US GDP would be in such an event if the US went-full imperial mode. The US would likely control SOuth Korea as well and would to this day be a leader in manufacturing.
It would be incredible to think what US GDP would be in such an event if the US went-full imperial mode. The US would likely control SOuth Korea as well and would to this day be a leader in manufacturing.
Not going to happen. Japan would never accept it, the US wouldn't want it, and the Soviets would probably threaten WWIII. In 1945 Japan had a population of 71 million while the US had a population of 137 million. The US would have to keep WWII levels of troops occupying Japan indefinitely to maintain control. If the Americans are willing to let the Philippines gain their independence with relatively minimal fuss they certainly aren't going to try to assimilate Japan under any circumstances.
Assuming the planets align and it did somehow happen and the American public is willing to support it, the US spends billions failing to control a Japanese independence movement that increasingly turns to Moscow for military and moral support. The US' reputation around the world is destroyed and many more nations turn to Moscow and the Soviets to protect them from a terrifying and expansionist America. Tied down in Japan, China and southeast Asia fall quickly to the Communists. The US position in the world is severely hurt as the Soviets use the American repression of the Japanese independence movement as propaganda that almost writes itself.
Eventually the US is forced to admit defeat in Japan and a new Communist government takes power. Asia is firmly in the hands of Communists and the third world is tipping heavily in Russia's favor.
Assuming the planets align and it did somehow happen and the American public is willing to support it, the US spends billions failing to control a Japanese independence movement that increasingly turns to Moscow for military and moral support. The US' reputation around the world is destroyed and many more nations turn to Moscow and the Soviets to protect them from a terrifying and expansionist America. Tied down in Japan, China and southeast Asia fall quickly to the Communists. The US position in the world is severely hurt as the Soviets use the American repression of the Japanese independence movement as propaganda that almost writes itself.
Eventually the US is forced to admit defeat in Japan and a new Communist government takes power. Asia is firmly in the hands of Communists and the third world is tipping heavily in Russia's favor.
Last edited:
cubefreak123
Banned
Minimal fuss...after a rather messy occupation for the decades prior that was only really alleviated after the US guaranteed eventual independence and worked with them to make sure they were prepared for it.
Just isn't possible. The Japanese with fight tooth and nail, the Russians will flip out, as will Britain. Any attempt to depose the Emperor, not to mention annex the whole nation, will lead to a long, drawn out war I doubt the US is willing to fight. Might end in more nukes, not happy funtimes.
This is just a nitpick because the thread got me thinking, should it be "an US" territory or "a US territory". It starts with a vowel but I've always seen it as "a" and "an" just sounds wrong.
This is just a nitpick because the thread got me thinking, should it be "an US" territory or "a US territory". It starts with a vowel but I've always seen it as "a" and "an" just sounds wrong.
The nation unconditionally surrendered in 1945 and were just nuked. Sure, they couldn't be a state but they can definitely be turned into a territory.
TFSmith121
Banned
Territorial status in the US, however, has been a stop on the
Territorial status in the US, however, has been a stop on the way to statehood since the Northwest Ordinance in the Eighteenth Century.
There's a reason Alaska and Hawaii were territories, while Puerto Rico and the Philippines were commonwealths.
Japan as a US commonwealth would be interesting, but there was no political support for annexations, permanent or temporary, within the US after WW II (arguably, after WW I or even before); the US pretty much preferred economic domination, rather than political control, from the turn of the (19th) century onward.
Best,
Territorial status in the US, however, has been a stop on the way to statehood since the Northwest Ordinance in the Eighteenth Century.
There's a reason Alaska and Hawaii were territories, while Puerto Rico and the Philippines were commonwealths.
Japan as a US commonwealth would be interesting, but there was no political support for annexations, permanent or temporary, within the US after WW II (arguably, after WW I or even before); the US pretty much preferred economic domination, rather than political control, from the turn of the (19th) century onward.
Best,
Devvy
Donor
They unconditionally surrendered to the Allied forces; not solely to the US.
As mentioned, if the US was to attempt to annex Japan as a territory, there would be significant blow back, if the US even had the stomach to attempt it; you'd have significant guerilla warfare in Japan to resist it, and civilian unrest. You are effectively stating that the Emperor is no longer divine and sovereign over Japan.
Thanks for clarifying. Yes, it would be a commonwealth and not a territory.
Well, the Emperor did renounce his divinity in a radio broadcast in 1945, and he offered to resign (which MacArthur refused).
TFSmith121
Banned
The thing is, the US was pretty much for self-determination
The thing is, the US was pretty much for self-determination as national policy since (arguably) 1917... and there would be no appetite for a commonwealth in legal terms over Japan; the US was quite happy to see Philippine independence in 1946, and if FDR had lived past 1945, it is possible that Puerto Rico and some of the other insular possessions (the VI? Samoa?) may have gained independence.
Micronesia was a little different, because of demographic and economic issues; it is possible the entire trust territory might have been amalgmated with Guam.
Best,
The thing is, the US was pretty much for self-determination as national policy since (arguably) 1917... and there would be no appetite for a commonwealth in legal terms over Japan; the US was quite happy to see Philippine independence in 1946, and if FDR had lived past 1945, it is possible that Puerto Rico and some of the other insular possessions (the VI? Samoa?) may have gained independence.
Micronesia was a little different, because of demographic and economic issues; it is possible the entire trust territory might have been amalgmated with Guam.
Best,
All of Japan? No. Parts? Maybe.
All the territory that was placed under US control as a result of the San Francisco Peace Treaty could end up as US territory. The Bonin and Volcano Islands seem most plausible (they had American and European settlements before), but the Ryukyu Islands are harder. Could there have been an annexation movement more successful in the Ryukyu Islands, or perhaps a separatist movement that leads to an independent Ryukyu state under a Compact of Free Association?
The Home Islands themselves are near ASB, with it more likely that the Soviet Union would end up with the north of Hokkaido (which it did desire as a zone of occupation) than the US getting any territory on them.
All the territory that was placed under US control as a result of the San Francisco Peace Treaty could end up as US territory. The Bonin and Volcano Islands seem most plausible (they had American and European settlements before), but the Ryukyu Islands are harder. Could there have been an annexation movement more successful in the Ryukyu Islands, or perhaps a separatist movement that leads to an independent Ryukyu state under a Compact of Free Association?
The Home Islands themselves are near ASB, with it more likely that the Soviet Union would end up with the north of Hokkaido (which it did desire as a zone of occupation) than the US getting any territory on them.
Why would they do that?! They didn't do that for the American-occupied part of Germany...
birdboy2000
Banned
To play devil's advocate, the US held the Ryukyus as a territory for 27 years, and managed to occupy Japan for seven without much in the way of armed resistance, albeit with a promise it was temporary.
If they're hands-off enough regarding the territorial government (i.e. listen to them on major territorial/federal disputes, free and fair territorial elections, exemptions from most federal laws) and if membership in the US is made a precondition for the American defense umbrella, and they get favorable enough trade ties and economic aid that independence looks bad for the economy... maybe. Not likely, but not completely outside the realm of possibility that Japan could be reconciled to US membership with a perfectly threaded needle and the right mix of carrot and stick.
But there's no reason to do that when the US can get everything they need from an independent and friendly Japan. And Japan is not going to enjoy the subordinate status of a territory, and a US which won't even give Hawaii statehood yet is not going to enjoy incorporating a non-anglophone, non-white population that large on the east edge of Asia into congress.
If they're hands-off enough regarding the territorial government (i.e. listen to them on major territorial/federal disputes, free and fair territorial elections, exemptions from most federal laws) and if membership in the US is made a precondition for the American defense umbrella, and they get favorable enough trade ties and economic aid that independence looks bad for the economy... maybe. Not likely, but not completely outside the realm of possibility that Japan could be reconciled to US membership with a perfectly threaded needle and the right mix of carrot and stick.
But there's no reason to do that when the US can get everything they need from an independent and friendly Japan. And Japan is not going to enjoy the subordinate status of a territory, and a US which won't even give Hawaii statehood yet is not going to enjoy incorporating a non-anglophone, non-white population that large on the east edge of Asia into congress.