Not betray Japan

I've heard the opinion that Japan was "betrayed" by the allies in the aftermath of WWI, thus they were Axis in WWII.

Question: What would it take so the Japan doesn't feel "betrayed" and they stay friendly with the UK and the US?
 

Sumeragi

Banned
Probably the most ASB but surefire way: Accepting the proposal of the inclusion of a "racial equality clause" in the Covenant of the League of Nations as an amendment to Article 21:

"The equality of nations being a basic principle of the League of Nations, the High Contracting Parties agree to accord as soon as possible to all alien nationals of states, members of the League, equal and just treatment in every respect making no distinction, either in law or in fact, on account of their race or nationality."
 
Probably the most ASB but surefire way: Accepting the proposal of the inclusion of a "racial equality clause" in the Covenant of the League of Nations as an amendment to Article 21:

"The equality of nations being a basic principle of the League of Nations, the High Contracting Parties agree to accord as soon as possible to all alien nationals of states, members of the League, equal and just treatment in every respect making no distinction, either in law or in fact, on account of their race or nationality."

Really? You think that would do it?

Did the League have an analog to the Security Council?
 
Let them get their way in Vladivostock and Eastern Siberia, as well as recognise their pre-eminence in China, Manchuria etc

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Not have the Japanese conduct their aggression in the Far East, and not have the UK need to avoid a naval race with the USA by ditching Japan (who the USA increasingly distrusted-as did the British, with their Empire to consider and a new aggressor power disturbingly close by.) The Japanese should have learned from the Germans-the British did NOT like threats to their Empire, even only potential ones.

The League of Nations had collective security, but was weak in enforcing its aims. The British and French were the only countries capable of acting in any significant fashion within it on major issues. The result was that they did achieve some small goals within their spheres of influence (e.g. in Albania), but when those countries were weak or distracted, they were rather less capable: as against, for example, Japan. And the other aggressors later on.
 

Sumeragi

Banned
Not have the Japanese conduct their aggression in the Far East, and not have the UK need to avoid a naval race with the USA by ditching Japan (who the USA increasingly distrusted-as did the British, with their Empire to consider and a new aggressor power disturbingly close by.) The Japanese should have learned from the Germans-the British did NOT like threats to their Empire, even only potential ones.
Part of the aggression on Japan's part was the ability of the military to hijack the normal affairs of state by basis their supposed agenda on fighting against the "Western Imperialist Racism". The rejection of the racial equality clause pretty much killed off the internationalist faction, while allowing the militarist clique to gain power.

Basically, the West indirectly contributed to Japan's aggressive actions, by giving ammo to the radicals.
 

Hoist40

Banned
Probably the most ASB but surefire way: Accepting the proposal of the inclusion of a "racial equality clause" in the Covenant of the League of Nations as an amendment to Article 21:

"The equality of nations being a basic principle of the League of Nations, the High Contracting Parties agree to accord as soon as possible to all alien nationals of states, members of the League, equal and just treatment in every respect making no distinction, either in law or in fact, on account of their race or nationality."

A one way provision when it comes to the Japanese. For the most part they did not allow large scale immigration into Japan and Korean who were in Japan in some numbers were not part of the League of Nations so it did not apply to them.
 
Even larger areas of Russia and China? And constant low-level warfare which gradually discredits the Japanese military?
 

Sumeragi

Banned
A one way provision when it comes to the Japanese. For the most part they did not allow large scale immigration into Japan and Korean who were in Japan in some numbers were not part of the League of Nations so it did not apply to them.
The provision was never passed in OTL. If it was passed, most likely Japan would have had to do a bit more than in OTL.
 
Probably the most ASB but surefire way: Accepting the proposal of the inclusion of a "racial equality clause" in the Covenant of the League of Nations as an amendment to Article 21:

"The equality of nations being a basic principle of the League of Nations, the High Contracting Parties agree to accord as soon as possible to all alien nationals of states, members of the League, equal and just treatment in every respect making no distinction, either in law or in fact, on account of their race or nationality."

Great diplomatic move.

Doesn't change Japanese interests in places occupied by Europeans though.
 
I've heard the opinion that Japan was "betrayed" by the allies in the aftermath of WWI, thus they were Axis in WWII.

Question: What would it take so the Japan doesn't feel "betrayed" and they stay friendly with the UK and the US?

The problem with that is Japanese interests in the Pacific, pretty much everything they need to sustain an empire in Asia is something they need to pry from another nation, as Japan is resource poor and will need to compensate by taking resource-rich areas (read: the history of the war in the Pacific in WWII):

1. Fuel from Manchuria and the Dutch East Indies.

2. Rubber from British Malaya.

3. Breadbasket farmland from French Indochina.

4. Bases in the Philippines.

The United States trades and has interests in all of the following areas, and until the advent of synthetic rubber (which was itself motivated by Japanese seizure of Malaya's rubber resources), the United States is dependent upon Malayan rubber and in trade with a good deal of the rest of Asia.

The Philippines would represent a spear poised to strike directly in the heart of this newfound Japanese Empire, no reasonably intelligent Japanese military commander would tolerate that situation. A base in the Phillippines means the Americans can easily launch an attack into Indochina and cut off Malaya and the East Indies.

Japan can remain on good terms with the West or Japan can be an expansionist power in the Pacific, the two are basically mutually exclusive.
 
The problem with that is Japanese interests in the Pacific, pretty much everything they need to sustain an empire in Asia is something they need to pry from another nation, as Japan is resource poor and will need to compensate by taking resource-rich areas (read: the history of the war in the Pacific in WWII):

1. Fuel from Manchuria and the Dutch East Indies.

2. Rubber from British Malaya.

3. Breadbasket farmland from French Indochina.

4. Bases in the Philippines.

The United States trades and has interests in all of the following areas, and until the advent of synthetic rubber (which was itself motivated by Japanese seizure of Malaya's rubber resources), the United States is dependent upon Malayan rubber and in trade with a good deal of the rest of Asia.

The Philippines would represent a spear poised to strike directly in the heart of this newfound Japanese Empire, no reasonably intelligent Japanese military commander would tolerate that situation. A base in the Phillippines means the Americans can easily launch an attack into Indochina and cut off Malaya and the East Indies.

Japan can remain on good terms with the West or Japan can be an expansionist power in the Pacific, the two are basically mutually exclusive.


Agreed, every place they would for a new empire has already been occupied by Europe.
 
Part of the aggression on Japan's part was the ability of the military to hijack the normal affairs of state by basis their supposed agenda on fighting against the "Western Imperialist Racism". The rejection of the racial equality clause pretty much killed off the internationalist faction, while allowing the militarist clique to gain power.

Basically, the West indirectly contributed to Japan's aggressive actions, by giving ammo to the radicals.

True, enough but changing it is near ASB. This is particularly true with WW as POUS as he probably was the most racist president in the 20th century.
 
True, enough but changing it is near ASB. This is particularly true with WW as POUS as he probably was the most racist president in the 20th century.

Yep, not that I think it would really affect all that much though.

Japanese expansionism basically requires my big list of places they need to take from people one way or the other.

Honestly I think that racial equality thing could just justify some sort of "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere" type of nonsense like historically.
 
Yep, not that I think it would really affect all that much though.

Japanese expansionism basically requires my big list of places they need to take from people one way or the other.

Honestly I think that racial equality thing could just justify some sort of "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere" type of nonsense like historically.

Agreed, they could use it to show that it all needs to be "Asian" (Read Japanese) hands.
 
The problem with that is Japanese interests in the Pacific, pretty much everything they need to sustain an empire in Asia is something they need to pry from another nation, as Japan is resource poor and will need to compensate by taking resource-rich areas (read: the history of the war in the Pacific in WWII):

1. Fuel from Manchuria and the Dutch East Indies.

2. Rubber from British Malaya.

3. Breadbasket farmland from French Indochina.

4. Bases in the Philippines.

The United States trades and has interests in all of the following areas, and until the advent of synthetic rubber (which was itself motivated by Japanese seizure of Malaya's rubber resources), the United States is dependent upon Malayan rubber and in trade with a good deal of the rest of Asia.

The Philippines would represent a spear poised to strike directly in the heart of this newfound Japanese Empire, no reasonably intelligent Japanese military commander would tolerate that situation. A base in the Phillippines means the Americans can easily launch an attack into Indochina and cut off Malaya and the East Indies.

Japan can remain on good terms with the West or Japan can be an expansionist power in the Pacific, the two are basically mutually exclusive.


Mmm, what if the Allies decide to punish the Netherlands for trading with Germany by giving the Dutch East Indies to the Japanese?

Would provocation would the allies need for this to happen?

Would the Netherlands need to be drawn in on the Germans side somehow?

Korea, Taiwan, and the Dutch East Indies is a lot of territory for Japan.

They could start farms in this territory. COuld they develope Rubber plantation in the East Indies? Might they think they could?

It might upset the military, but if the colonial operations are going on well and the Japanese get to play on a world stage in the League of Nations...

Plausable?
 
Mmm, what if the Allies decide to punish the Netherlands for trading with Germany by giving the Dutch East Indies to the Japanese?

Would provocation would the allies need for this to happen?

Would the Netherlands need to be drawn in on the Germans side somehow?

Korea, Taiwan, and the Dutch East Indies is a lot of territory for Japan.

They could start farms in this territory. COuld they develope Rubber plantation in the East Indies? Might they think they could?

It might upset the military, but if the colonial operations are going on well and the Japanese get to play on a world stage in the League of Nations...

Plausable?

Not really. The British and French would most likely divide the Dutch East Indies between themselve first.
 
Top