WI: Japan gets North Sakhalin in 1905?

What if Japan gets also the Northern portion of Sakhalin in 1905? Would this make any difference in relations between countries in the region? And what sort of effects this would have for Japan? According to Wiki there were coal and manganese mines in North Sakhalin in 1920's so Japan could now get at least those.
 
I don't see how this changes anything. They still lose it after World War II.
Actually this changes quite a bit, not getting Northern Sakhalin was seen as a betrayal and helped fuel the rise of the militarist faction

If they get this they may be less aggressive and expantionistic and more willing to cooperate with the European powers, this could butterfly the invasion of Manchuria and everything that follows if the butterflies flap right
 

Nietzsche

Banned
At the least, they will care more about the general opinion Britain has of them, which should hopefully persuade them to maybe limit their designs. You won't get rid of their goals in regards to becoming the undisputed power in East-Asia, but this will likely have them try soft over hard power a little longer.
 
If Japan does get North Sakhalin, then how can this affect the economical development of NE Asia in a world where Japanese militarism cools down?
 
How exactly was Japan restricted to the southern half of Sakhalin Island? That always seemed counterintuitive. Why didn't they get the whole thing?
 

Nietzsche

Banned
Teddy Roosevelt convinced them to settle for half during the Treaty negotiations, seriously
Purportedly, he threatened them with his big-stick. It is commonly mistaken to be an actual stick about the size of a baseball bat, when in fact it was merely the size of one.
 
How exactly was Japan restricted to the southern half of Sakhalin Island? That always seemed counterintuitive. Why didn't they get the whole thing?
In addition, I think that before the war, there'd been some sort of understanding between Russia and Japan that Japan would settle the southern half, and Russia, the northern half. The Treaty of Portsmouth basically enshrined this in law; though obviously, if Japan had gotten all of Sakhalin, that would have gone out the window.
 
In addition, I think that before the war, there'd been some sort of understanding between Russia and Japan that Japan would settle the southern half, and Russia, the northern half. The Treaty of Portsmouth basically enshrined this in law; though obviously, if Japan had gotten all of Sakhalin, that would have gone out the window.
That decision had some historical basis as the Treaty of Shimoda in 1855 had already divided Sakhalin between Russian north and Japanese south and there have been Japanese settlements in the area since the 17th century. I don't know did these factors affect the decision but they very well might have.
 

katchen

Banned
It depends on the context of Japan getting all of Sakhalin in 1905. I just finished reading Sharlin's TL of the Franco-Japanese War over Indo-China. ITTL, Russia stayed out of that completely and avoided war with Japan altogether. Apparently, Russia was able to reach an agreement with Japan on Korea.
Basically, Russia needed a Pacific port that was not blocked by ice. Russia did not need all of Korea to get that. Northeast Korea up to Chongjin or maybe down as far as Wonsan Bay would be enough to give Russia a number of fine ice free harbors.
I could see Russia giving Japan the entire island of Sakhalin as a quid pro quo for that. Sakhalin was something of a white elephant and a disappointment for Russia. Occupied in 1870, all it turned out to be good for was as a gulag for political prisoners. Sakhalin in Japanese hands, though, could amount to a port of entry for Russia to Japan across a three mile, readily bridgeable by rail strait to the Russian mainland. It would make great economic sense for Russia to let Japan have Sakhalin and might even mean a Japanese built railroad to Khabarovsk and up the Amur to intersect the Trans-Siberian through Manchuria. That is assuming that the Russians were at all inclined to be reasonable in 1905. :rolleyes:.
 
I could see Russia giving Japan the entire island of Sakhalin as a quid pro quo for that. Sakhalin was something of a white elephant and a disappointment for Russia. Occupied in 1870, all it turned out to be good for was as a gulag for political prisoners. Sakhalin in Japanese hands, though, could amount to a port of entry for Russia to Japan across a three mile, readily bridgeable by rail strait to the Russian mainland. It would make great economic sense for Russia to let Japan have Sakhalin and might even mean a Japanese built railroad to Khabarovsk and up the Amur to intersect the Trans-Siberian through Manchuria. That is assuming that the Russians were at all inclined to be reasonable in 1905. :rolleyes:.
I don't think the bridge between Sakhalin and the continent is viable at this time. It is true though that Japan was rather successful in developing its own part of island when compared to Russians.
 
While it would be a given that Japan would successfully develop the entire island compared to OTL under Russian control. Assuming the Japanese managed to retain control over all of Sakhalin up to the present, could the island in theory support a population at roughly Hokkaido and Kyushu levels + (between 5.5 million to over 13 million) if it has been developed enough during Japan's period of post-war rapid growth (compared with the OTL Sakhalin's population of under 600.000)?
 
While it would be a given that Japan would successfully develop the entire island compared to OTL under Russian control. Assuming the Japanese managed to retain control over all of Sakhalin up to the present, could the island in theory support a population at roughly Hokkaido and Kyushu levels + (between 5.5 million to over 13 million) if it has been developed enough during Japan's period of post-war rapid growth (compared with the OTL Sakhalin's population of under 600.000)?
I don't think 5.5 million is possible but its population would be definitely higher than it's now. The population of Karafuto prefecture (South Sakhalin) was about 400 thousands in 1941. If also the northern part belongs to Japan, it would be somewhat higher, maybe 500-600 thousands. Hokkaido's population has doubled after the war and if the same happens in Karafuto, its population would be 1-1.2 million people. It could be also higher depending on how much the government wants to support the area.
 
Even if Japan gets all of Sakhalin, if Japan loses a major war to Russia/some other incarnation thereof then I think it's still likely they'll end up losing all of Sakhalin.
 
There is oil in the northern part of the island. Some small fields were exploited by the Soviets before World War II, actually in economic partnership with the Japanese. From old and possibly faulty memory, those fields would have supplied about 20% of Japan's oil needs if the oil had all gone to Japan.

Huge oil fields have been discovered there in the last couple of decades, but finding and exploiting them would have been difficult for the Japanese, due to their depth and other technical factors.
 

FDW

Banned
Well, you'd have a larger Ainu minority overall, in addition to other minority groups like the Nivkh and Orok (And maybe a few more Japanese of Russian and Korean descent) having some presence there. I dispite General Tripitz's claims of a population celling of about 1.2 million, as the Island at it's height probably had around 750,000 people (Probably hit twice, in the early 40's and mid 70's), and the abundance of natural resources would probably end up attracting a disproportionate share of immigrants than you would expect by projecting OTL growth rates (especially if Japan avoids a conflict as nasty as WWII was). So I would say anywhere from 1.7-2.5 million being the potential range for an ATL Japanese Sakhalin.

Also, remember Sakhalin Island is large, about 27,000 sq mi (or twice the size of Kyushu and about 80% the size of Hokkaido). Though the climate means that it's growing season is rather short, Japanese Sakhalin would also probably contribute a considerable agricultural surplus.

In influencing Japanese Culture, we might see the frontier as a stronger theme in Japanese culture given that the process of expanding to new land would be taking place over a longer time, over a much larger area than OTL, and I imagine that Sakhalin (and the people from there) would acquire a sense of weirdness and exoticness due to it being really far from the metropole (Kind of the way most of America regards San Francisco OTL).

As for other butterflies, keeping all of Sakhalin might mean that Japan keeps the Kurile Islands and Taiwan to the present, which is a whole other can of worms.
 
I dispite General Tripitz's claims of a population celling of about 1.2 million, as the Island at it's height probably had around 750,000 people (Probably hit twice, in the early 40's and mid 70's), and the abundance of natural resources would probably end up attracting a disproportionate share of immigrants than you would expect by projecting OTL growth rates (especially if Japan avoids a conflict as nasty as WWII was). So I would say anywhere from 1.7-2.5 million being the potential range for an ATL Japanese Sakhalin.
My (conservative) estimation was based on Hokkaido's development, but as I said, it could be very well higher. (So more like minimum than a ceiling.)

In influencing Japanese Culture, we might see the frontier as a stronger theme in Japanese culture given that the process of expanding to new land would be taking place over a longer time, over a much larger area than OTL, and I imagine that Sakhalin (and the people from there) would acquire a sense of weirdness and exoticness due to it being really far from the metropole (Kind of the way most of America regards San Francisco OTL).
This is a rather interesting idea. I assume that this would cause also greater interest towards Hokkaido as a side-effect of this more northern orientation in culture.
 
Top