Except, no. Tokugawa Yoshinobu wasn't some kind of backwards traditionalist, he was as much a modernist as the people in the Meiji government in a lot of ways.
Except, no. Tokugawa Yoshinobu wasn't some kind of backwards traditionalist, he was as much a modernist as the people in the Meiji government in a lot of ways.
Those couples of years are all that's necessary, really. It slows the progress of modernisation due to the costs of funding the war and puts both Joseon Korea and Qing China on alert against the Japanese. In OTL, the Joseon court was divided between the Chinese, Japanese, and Russian factions, which allowed for Japan to steadily grow its influence in the peninsula and annex it bloodlessly. The Joseon and Qing were neutral during the Russo-Japanese War since they saw Japan as a counterweight to Russia in the region (lesser of two evils) rather than an imperialistic power bent on annexing their lands. Earlier aggression on the part of the Japanese would alter Qing and Joseon perceptions of Meiji Japan, strengthening resistance against Japanese influence on the mainland and making it more difficult for the Japanese to expand as easily as they did OTL.
Yes, much of the African land taken during the Scramble was costly and of little practical use. But they weren't open sores in terms of militancy and the colonial power didn't have to keep putting in a sizeable garrison to police the population to prevent general uprising. Think the Vietnam War or a much more organised Sepoy Rebellion. Eventually, either the public gets sick of sending their sons to die in a foreign land or the Japanese (with French or Russian support) make occupation too costly to maintain. It's like why Europe never chopped up China.
That's rather implausible post-1864, so I'd say that's a topic for another thread (seeing as this one focuses on post-1864).