WI/AHC: Japanese Alaska?

[Revolutionary Avocado]

Okay, so this has been floating around my head for a while.

What would happen if the United States decides not to purchase Alaska? It doesn't seem that far-fetched, perhaps Johnson is narrowly not impeached and the Senate refuses to ratify the purchase out of spite, or Seward has some sort of scandal which prevents him for effectively advocating for the purchase. Then, history continues much the same as in OTL; a change in possession of Alaska will probably not change all that much.

Then, in an alt-Russo-Japanese War (likely to happen, their spheres of influence would have collided regardless), Japan sends a small force to capture Alaska, and succeeds. Now, you have a Japanese colony, sparsely inhabited but with significant mineral and (later) oil reserves. What happens? How does this change the American perception of, and American relations with, Japan? British and Canadian relations?

 

[Saladan]

If the Americans don't get it then the Brits will.

No way will they allow japan to get hold of Alaska and neither would the Americans allow it. Even if the Japanese somehow had the manpower and means to do so.

 

[Revolutionary Avocado]

If the Americans don't get it then the Brits will.

No way will they allow japan to get hold of Alaska and neither would the Americans allow it. Even if the Japanese somehow had the manpower and means to do so.

I'm sure they'll want it, but how exactly will they get it? Britain is largely allied with Japan, and unless they are willing to go into a full-scale war, they have limited assets to fight the Japanese. Plus, the Japanese can do some very nasty things to their supply lines in East Asia, especially in regards to China, if Britain promises to fight.

As for the Americans, their military assets in general are quite limited, and they have the problem of having to get Britain to go along with their plans and help them invade Alaska. No overland attack is going to work, as the region, as far as I know, had negligible transportation infrastructure. The Americans will have to attack by sea, which will bring a recently victorious IJN against them. Not to mention, this gives the Japanese carte-blanche to help arm Filipino insurgents against the Americans, which could both help Japan's image among nationalists in Southeast Asia, and give the Americans real problems.

Britain is far more likely to be able to beat the Japanese than the Americans. For both countries though, they are going to have to have a real reason to go to mobilize their country for a major war effort, over a far-away bunch of ice and Eskimos. I personally can't see either country doing much more than protesting a Japanese annexation, and having a warier and more hostile attitude towards Japan's rise from the beginning

 

[God-Eater of the Marshes]

Is an early Hokkaido-style colonisation a possibility?

 

[Emperor Norton I]

If the Americans don't get it then the Brits will.

No way will they allow japan to get hold of Alaska and neither would the Americans allow it. Even if the Japanese somehow had the manpower and means to do so.

It could win it in some war. I wouldn't put that past it, especially if it remains considered worthless and the resources are not discovered by the British.

 

[Fabilius]

Is an early Hokkaido-style colonisation a possibility?

Hokkaido was settled in the 19th century.

A different Japan can go colonizing earlier. They have surplus population/famines, and they actually were quite outlooking before 1600. One warlord sent 500 people to Europe in order to study catholicism and various other things.

 

[Laplace's Demon]

It would be amusing for Britain to purchase it and then sell it to the Japanese as an insult to Russia. Maybe in a timeline where the Anglo-Japanese and Russo-American alliances are headed for a war in the 1910's or 20's?

 

[pa_dutch]

One warlord sent 500 people to Europe in order to study catholicism and various other things.

I really want to learn more about this.

 

[God-Eater of the Marshes]

Hokkaido was settled in the 19th century.

Well considering that Shakushain's Revolt happened in 1669 against the Japanese in Hokkaido, I would assume it would have been settled to some extent...

 

[Cuāuhtemōc]

I really want to learn more about this.

Some of those people ended up settling down in a town in Spain and having families with the local women.

 

[Beedok]

I sort of managed it in my timeline, though under completely different circumstances.

 

[Æsir]

For the purpose of institutional memory;

Japanese Alaska
WI: Russia sells Alaska to Japan
Japanese Alaska
what if japan owned alaska?
Cultural and Other Effects of a Japanese Alaska

And my take on it; (Shameless self-promotion get!)

The collision of the modern and the traditional in the Japanese Empire at the turn of the century is perfectly illustrated in this 1913 woodblock map of Daihodou (Today the Kawakado, Shichika, and Tana Prefectures). The style clearly shows the influence of traditional woodblock prints, but with a marked simplification and depicting a thoroughly modern Japanese scene; Daihodou had only been in Japanese hands for some 35 years at this point, and the Kawakado-Tana railway, finished only a year before, is visible. This particular piece, annotated in English, was donated by the estate of Lord E.A. Blair, 1st Baron Blair, the noted Orientalist, commander of the Royal Burmese Police, and Ambassador to Japan.

-Description of a piece displayed in 2002 at the Anglo-Japanese Exhibition at the British Museum, commemorating one hundred years of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance.

 

[Enigmajones]

Hokkaido was settled in the 19th century.

Hokkaido was settled 20,000 years ago. It was conquered by the Japanese in the early 19th century.

 

[Laplace's Demon]

Checking some of those previous threads, there are some things that come to mind.

Russia actually trying to sell parts of Siberia as well as Alaska OTL, is one. The suggestion by one poster in one of those old threads that the resources spent on developing and defending Alaska could cause Japan to lose Korea to Russian influence in later wars is another.

Combined they make me think of a situation where in numerous conflicts and treaties Russia beats out Japan for concessions in Korea and China, while trading away Eastern Siberia and related islands bit by bit. A lot of technical victories and negotiated peace where Russia has to toss Japan bones in the form of northern territories in order to cement their Korean victories.

Of course this situation might ultimately allow Japan to cut off Russia's land route to Korea and to conquer a Russianized Korea in some war decades later.

My other thought at the moment is Japanese Alaska would be a strong argument in favor of maintaining the Anglo-Japanese alliance, as British Canada would be the best protection against US adventurism against Japan's Alaska.