U.S. declares war on Japan would britian honor their alliance

Would Britain honor their alliance with Japan

  • Yes

    Votes: 19 20.4%
  • No

    Votes: 74 79.6%

  • Total voters
    93
Anytime between the signing of the Anglo japanese alliance and world war 1 . Had the us and an other power declared war on Japan for whatever reason would britian honor their alliance or abandon their ally for better relations with the U.S.
 
Last edited:
Anytime between the signing of the Anglo japanese alliance and world war 1 . Had the us declared war on Japan for whatever reason would britian honor their alliance or abandon their ally for better relations with the U.S.
The US > Japan.
 
"Promise of support if either signatory becomes involved in war with more than one Power."

The USA is only one power and no one would help them, so Britain wouldn't even be breaking their treaty by throwing the Japanese under a bus.
 
The way you present the scenario, that the US decides to go all fascist and start trying to carve out an empire, yes, Britain would have no choice but to do that, alliance or no.
 
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/4965272

Article 2 is as follows:-"If by reason of unprovoked attack or aggressive action, wherever arising, on the part of any other Power or Powers, either contracting party should be involved in war in defense of the territorial rights mentioned in the preamble, the other should immediately come to the assistance of its ally, and conduct the war in common and make peace by mutual agreement with it."

So after 1905 they would have to do it or break their sworn word. And at that time US Navy wasn't in any way superior to the combined strength of Britain and Japan: http://www.friesian.com/dreadnot.htm
 
I cant find it but thought that GB had made it clear to Japan that it would not go to war v USA for any reason ?
 
I cant find it but thought that GB had made it clear to Japan that it would not go to war v USA for any reason ?
Probably why they had the two power clause. They knew that Japan would probably end up fighting either Russia or the US, but not any two powers at once.
 
My guess and my vote is no. The British may not need the Americans per say, certainly not to the same extent that they would in World War II, but in less than 150 years, the United States has gone from a colonial backwater to an emerging industrial superpower, and more importantly one that's on friendly terms with Britain. The British are increasingly concerned about a possible war with Germany, especially after 1905. They might be willing to act as a intermediary between the Americans and the Japanese, but the possibility of an alliance with the United States is going to become increasingly important to them and they're not about to risk that, certainly not over Japan.
 
Last edited:
Before mid 1920s, yes. Afterwards, no.

Seems a bit late a cut off date.

I mean as far back as the 1890s the British had given up on defending Canada against the USA (the Canadians drew up their own 'plan' to pre-emptively invade the USA without British assistance) and by the 1910s the Americans were rapidly building up their fleet. True the British had the edge in numbers and perhaps quality but they would need to keep half their fleet at home to keep the Germans or French from getting ideas so that is null.

Basically Britain wanted Japan to kick the Russians around, Japan achieved this goal and afterwards was a problem for Anglo American relations and possibly a spark that would lead to a war that the British had decided was too costly to consider fighting decades before.
 
Seems a bit late a cut off date.

I mean as far back as the 1890s the British had given up on defending Canada against the USA (the Canadians drew up their own 'plan' to pre-emptively invade the USA without British assistance) and by the 1910s the Americans were rapidly building up their fleet. True the British had the edge in numbers and perhaps quality but they would need to keep half their fleet at home to keep the Germans or French from getting ideas so that is null.

Basically Britain wanted Japan to kick the Russians around, Japan achieved this goal and afterwards was a problem for Anglo American relations and possibly a spark that would lead to a war that the British had decided was too costly to consider fighting decades before.

Up until 1905 at the very least, it's clear that both Britain and Japan were treating the A-J alliance as if it were still in force. This was mostly because of the Russian factor, but the fact that Britain had to keep a large portion of her fleet in home waters was actually a major factor in keeping the A-J alliance alive (since, the German naval buildup meant that it was impossible for Britain to maintain both the Far Eastern and Mediterranean fleets at full strength without having insufficient ships to counter increasing German naval strength), so Britain was going to come to have to depend on Japan in the Pacific in the event of any major war (which did end up becoming the case during WWI). The removal of the German naval threat post-Versailles, and the subsequent massive gains by Japan following WWI are what I would cite as the point when Japan ceased being a useful tool for Britain into a credible threat. But in addition to that, the Washington Naval Treaty also had the effect of destroying Japanese trust in Britain (the effects of which on Japanese politics certainly cannot be understated).

So basically, while the end of the Russian threat removed one of the key reasons for the A-J alliance, I think that really, the demise of Germany and the Washington Naval Treaty was a far more important factor than the end of Russia as a Far Eastern naval power.

(admittedly, this does put it rather closer to 1922 than "mid 20s" but still basically the same time frame).
 
Of cause, we can't say for certain. It'd depend upon a complicated web of internal and politics; relative strengths and the causes of the war.

If we assume conditions much like 1900 to 1920ish in OTL I don't see Britain wanting to get involved.
 
Seems a bit late a cut off date.

I mean as far back as the 1890s the British had given up on defending Canada against the USA (the Canadians drew up their own 'plan' to pre-emptively invade the USA without British assistance) and by the 1910s the Americans were rapidly building up their fleet. True the British had the edge in numbers and perhaps quality but they would need to keep half their fleet at home to keep the Germans or French from getting ideas so that is null.

Basically Britain wanted Japan to kick the Russians around, Japan achieved this goal and afterwards was a problem for Anglo American relations and possibly a spark that would lead to a war that the British had decided was too costly to consider fighting decades before.

It might depend on the specifics of the situation and how closely the Japanese decide to hold London to the letter of the treaty, but the British won't get involved any more than they absolutely have to and they will literally bend over backwards to avoid having to actually fight the United States.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
I'd note that the British were in pretty full appeasement mode relative to the United States. When other powers would voice objections over American moves in some corner of the world (Germans and Russians complaining about American moves in the Philippines, Japanese and Germans complaining about American moves in Hawaii, pre-annexation), Britain would consistently pat them on the head, refuse to join any condemnations or uninvited gestures of mediation and told them to get over it, America was getting what it wanted in those places and nobody was stopping it.

So I see the British talking their way out of any obligation to Japan, unless America has the meantime initiated a whole series of other steps seen as hostile against specifically British interests and bent on an eventual showdown.
 
Top