Was Japan's rise to power inevitable?

I've been going about this over and over again in my head when I think about alternate history. We all know the story from history class. After Japan won World War I as a member of the Allies, they immediately got shafted by the Allies and their country was not economically strong, although it was strong in the area of the military, which would take over the government and plunge the country into a brutal war.

My question is: would this have still happened had the Central Powers won World War I in 1914? Japan being defeated that early in the 20th Century by a European power could've laid the groundwork for a militaristic government to take power after the war.

What do you think? Was the rise of Japan's militaristic government inevitable, regardless of who won World War I?
 
In short: I think Japan's rise to militarism and it catching up with Europe and the US in fighting capacity was already happening during the Russian-Japanese war of 1904. WWI just gave it a boost.
 

CECBC

Banned
If the Central Powers won I think Japan would be even more militaristic as they rushed to pick off chunks of the beaten French, British and Russian empires in the years after. Being on the losing side of WWI wouldn't mean much to Japan. The Central Powers didn't have enough assets in Asia to even fight the Japanese at any meaningful level.
 

Delta Force

Banned
I've been going about this over and over again in my head when I think about alternate history. We all know the story from history class. After Japan won World War I as a member of the Allies, they immediately got shafted by the Allies and their country was not economically strong, although it was strong in the area of the military, which would take over the government and plunge the country into a brutal war.

My question is: would this have still happened had the Central Powers won World War I in 1914? Japan being defeated that early in the 20th Century by a European power could've laid the groundwork for a militaristic government to take power after the war.

What do you think? Was the rise of Japan's militaristic government inevitable, regardless of who won World War I?

In short: I think Japan's rise to militarism and it catching up with Europe and the US in fighting capacity was already happening during the Russian-Japanese war of 1904. WWI just gave it a boost.

Japan received significant war reparations from China as a result of the First Sino-Japanese War, equivalent to 6.4 times the Japense national budget at the time. The Japanese national budget was heavily allocated to military uses, so in a way the Japanese victory in the Sino-Japanese War helped win the Russo-Japanese War. Keep in mind that even with those massive war reparations the Japanese were in a very tight financial situation during the Russo-Japanese War, it was almost a war of attrition. If Russia had simply fought it out and continued the war against Japan it could have won simply by crushing the Japanese economy.
 
Japan received significant war reparations from China as a result of the First Sino-Japanese War, equivalent to 6.4 times the Japense national budget at the time. The Japanese national budget was heavily allocated to military uses, so in a way the Japanese victory in the Sino-Japanese War helped win the Russo-Japanese War. Keep in mind that even with those massive war reparations the Japanese were in a very tight financial situation during the Russo-Japanese War, it was almost a war of attrition. If Russia had simply fought it out and continued the war against Japan it could have won simply by crushing the Japanese economy.

There's just a good of chance that Russia collapses into revolution too. Both sides were lucky that war ended when it did.

I don't know that Japan's rise was inevitable but they were blessed with neighbours who were either weak or in decline while Japan was surging ahead in strength. Korea, Russia, China and the Spanish were all in right shape in the 1890s-1900s.
 
IMO Japan was a third rate power masqerading as a first rate power due to being in a backwater with no meaningful enemies during the first 20 years of 20th century.
 
To be honest I am not a fan of "inevitable." I think there are certainly a lot of forces that push history to its outcomes but often the path was not so certain in honest hindsight. And to be fair I am pondering the butterflies in Asia if the Central Powers achieve a stalemate, no outright victory but no clear defeat, no Versailles as we know it. With those caveats I am pondering the same conquest of German possessions and linger tension over it. Germany has no way to confront Japan and I doubt there is much leverage in a stalemate "peace" to get them back. I think Japan gets the Marshall Islands as OTL and this might get bargained over, if Germany gets anything it is likely some cash and an apology note.

Longer term I see Imperial Germany under a more Social Democrat influenced government willing to befriend the KMT and generally destabilize the other European powers in China, possibly building a bridge to the USA in the process, especially if the Japanese pursue conquest. In Asia it was definitely the USA versus Japan, not a certainty, but the sparks in the wind. I am not certain if WNT happens, if not IJN build-up bankrupts Japan or the earthquake derails it, either way one might see the IJA rise up to usurp power. A "what-if" here is how relations between the UK and Japan improve, degrade or stay the course. If the British do not repudiate the treaty with Japan the "Special Relationship" likely takes no root and one sees the USA both more Pacific focused and less fertile as a British ally anytime soon. Perhaps the British supply Persian oil and export other materials, that gets Japan out from under the American thumb and under the British. That will drive a deep wedge into Anglo-American relations.

Thailand and France are primed to fight and if the KMT wins in China over the CPC then I imagine it begins to support the Nationalists in Vietnam sometime in the future. The Dutch might move more towards Germany and Germany might leverage the relationship to get back into Asia, at least arming the DEI forces of the Netherlands, supporting the Dutch stay in control, if not at some point at least gain passage and port visits to return a far east squadron and provoke the Japanese at minimum. One cannot underestimate how the USSR will be exerting influence, provoking revolution and setting everyone after each other.

If Japan still goes at Manchuria then it gets messy. If Japan invades China proper it might lead to at least a war in Asia, at worst it provokes a round two in Europe. Either way I do not see Japan getting out very much differently. Best case for Imperial Japan is to stay in the British camp and pursue trade, edging out colonial powers with Nationalist movements and a genuine Asian trading sphere, once China awakes become its industrial trading partner.
 
Top