WI: Japan militarily intervenes in Hawaii in 1893?

[dirtyjapaneseman]

What if the Japanese invade the Provisional Government on the basis of protecting the ethnic Japanese workers there and then proceed to occupy it militarily? Using part of the Navy they have at the time, they travel to the islands and overthrow the plantation government US citizens have set up.

Is it feasible to annex it? or is the threat of military intervention on the US part too great? From what I know their Navy wasn't doing too well at the time. Could they at the very least guarantee independence/neutrality in a treaty with the US as a signatory? What are the ramifications on the Pacific theater in WW2?

 

[Roland Traveler]

Welcome to the board!
Though I can't be too sure about outright conquest, I'm sure that WWII would not happen due to a major change ~50 years before it. What likely happens is the US gives Japan the stink eye and it creates a strain on relations, but not much else. Cleveland didn't want Hawaii, so war is out.
Though this is a little bit before the 1st Sino-Japanese War, so the strain on resources could cause Japan to lose or have a hard time, especially if they deal with a hostile US and the likely insurgency by disgruntled settlers in Hawaii.

 

[Fenrir_Angerboda]

Japan in 1893 has more pressing matters on their mind than Hawaii.

To have Japan try and do so would mean that matters in Korea and China need to be settled earlier, and even then their ability to project that far without outside support is dubious.

Second, after the overthrow, Japan was one of the nations to recognize the Provisional, and later the Republic, as legitimate.

Assuming that Japan does intervene and Counter Coups Dole and friends, They're just meddled with American citizens, which opens another major issue: What does the US do?
Annexation wasn't popular, and in these circumstances a war is possible.

In any event, I doubt anyone would be willing to let the Japanese annex Hawaii.
If anything, the restoration of the Kingdom might have more support.

 

[dirtyjapaneseman]

Welcome to the board!
Though I can't be too sure about outright conquest, I'm sure that WWII would not happen due to a major change ~50 years before it. What likely happens is the US gives Japan the stink eye and it creates a strain on relations, but not much else. Cleveland didn't want Hawaii, so war is out.
Though this is a little bit before the 1st Sino-Japanese War, so the strain on resources could cause Japan to lose or have a hard time, especially if they deal with a hostile US and the likely insurgency by disgruntled settlers in Hawaii.

Thank you man.

I'm counting the whole annexation scenario on Cleveland wanting to work it out through words rather than gunboats and the condition of the US navy at the time. He probably wouldn't want to start a war at the beginning of his presidency where a somewhat destitute Navy wins the war but at moderate cost. There are tens of thousands of Japanese workers on the islands who would be more inclined to support their homeland than the usurpers. The short-term benefits of the war imo don't outweigh the costs. Cleveland doesn't get much out of this except worsened relations with Japan, casualties and sunk ships in a war and most likely still no annexation which would piss off his peers.

Hopefully even after annexation they could still scrap along a victory in the Sino-Japanese war.

Japan in 1893 has more pressing matters on their mind than Hawaii.

To have Japan try and do so would mean that matters in Korea and China need to be settled earlier, and even then their ability to project that far without outside support is dubious.

Second, after the overthrow, Japan was one of the nations to recognize the Provisional, and later the Republic, as legitimate.

Assuming that Japan does intervene and Counter Coups Dole and friends, They're just meddled with American citizens, which opens another major issue: What does the US do?
Annexation wasn't popular, and in these circumstances a war is possible.

In any event, I doubt anyone would be willing to let the Japanese annex Hawaii.
If anything, the restoration of the Kingdom might have more support.

The British might support them in exchange for someone to counter growing Russian and US influence in the Pacific. Even though they and the US were no doubt close, the US is still a potential enemy in a lot of ways and having someone to counter them would be useful. And I don't need to tell you about Russia.

They wouldn't extend support for the overthrow in this TL since they're planning to take over anyways. It's likely they would hand over the instigators of the overthrow to the US, except for Dole who is being kept on the islands and trialed with overseers from the US making sure it's all legitimate and fair. This would hopefully satisfy Cleveland since he is now no longer responsible for the deaths of citizens at the hands of a foreign government and it would also win affection from immigrants (who were somewhat ill-treated) and the queen who might be reinstated as a ruler but at a more "local level".

Even if they aren't able to annex do to outside influence, they would be able to restore the monarchy and perhaps get a Cleveland empathetic to Hawaii to sign it stating that it would at the very least remain independence.

 

[viperzero]

My big concert is Hawaii to big a step for japan in 1893? I don't feel that really became a major power till after the first sino japanese war and this will distract them from that. Korea is really more important to Japan's security and power. Also taking Hawaii without Korea is really just another Okinawa, Japan is a regional power but not a great one.

 

[David T]

Admiral Kato Kanji, reminiscing about the 1890's, when he served on the "Nanawa," the Japanese cruiser sent to Hawaii in the wake of the Hawaiian Revolution:

"As I recollect there were hardly any people in our country at that time who valued Hawaii, the 'Gibraltar' of the Pacific. Since domestic public opinion was extremely weak and no alarm bells went off the consequence is that we are now left with a vexing problem today. Ōkuma Shigenobu, as I remember, was the only one who stated that we must not overlook the value of Hawaii. At that time our naval strength comprised newly-constructed highspeed cruisers such as the Naniwa and the Takachiho, whereas America was weak in naval strength and possessed only steel-bound, wooden-hulled ships. If our people had had the concern they have today, if we had considered carefully the international outcome and if we had considered carefully the international outcome and if we had used the British appropriately then I positively believe it would not have been difficult to at least make Hawaii remain neutral..." Ian Gow, *Military Intervention in Pre-War Japanese Politics: Admiral Kato Kanji and the 'Washington System'* https://books.google.com/books?id=4V6QAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA41

I'm inclined to think that this is wishful thinking by the Admiral--especially the hope for British cooperation. The impression I get is that the British government, while it did not want annexation, did not really care that much and was not willing to back up the British representatives in Hawaii (from John Hay Wodehouse to George Sidney Hawes to W. J. Kenney) who tried to do something to stop it:

"Kenney probably did not realize that within a year after taking up his duties in Honolulu, the Hawaiian Republic would be annexed by the United States. He must have been aware, however, that the entire energies of the Republic were dedicated to bringing about annexation, and feeling toward that end was very strong among the American residents. Hawes had noted this activity and had expressed concern that the Hawaiian government showed no interest in listening to Native opposition. He also believed non-American foreigners whose interests would be affected by annexation should have a voice. His interest in organizing petitions among British residents, including sugar planters, had not been supported by the British government, which continued to follow a policy of abstention from any interference in Hawaiian affairs.58

"It was a difficult policy to follow, and questions were asked in London concerning the perceived supineness of the government in the face of the annexation threat. In June 1897, questions were asked in the House of Commons about what the British government would do to prevent the Hawaiian Islands, which were so important to British trade and cable communications in the Pacific, from falling into the hands of the United States. The reply was to the effect that the government would act to see that lawful rights of Britain and its subjects would be maintained.59 It was not a very helpful statement.."
https://evols.library.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10524/562/2/JL24097.pdf

 

[XFE]

What if the Japanese invade the Provisional Government on the basis of protecting the ethnic Japanese workers there and then proceed to occupy it militarily? Using part of the Navy they have at the time, they travel to the islands and overthrow the plantation government US citizens have set up.

Is it feasible to annex it? or is the threat of military intervention on the US part too great? From what I know their Navy wasn't doing too well at the time. Could they at the very least guarantee independence/neutrality in a treaty with the US as a signatory? What are the ramifications on the Pacific theater in WW2?

Losing Hawaii would put a major obstacle in further expansion into the Pacific for America, and if a victory was secured--even a minor one, it will have the effect of shocking the world in a fashion similar to the Russo Japanese war. Wether Japan wins would depend--in my view on the reaction of the US. If the US decides to fight for Hawaii, Japan would lose, but still have the home islands untouched due to lack of power projection and the small scaled nature of the war. If the US doesn't fight for Hawaii, Japan would win, but relations between the two, and to an extent Anglo-American relations would decline greatly.

 

[Yeti]

Losing Hawaii would put a major obstacle in further expansion into the Pacific for America, and if a victory was secured--even a minor one, it will have the effect of shocking the world in a fashion similar to the Russo Japanese war. Wether Japan wins would depend--in my view on the reaction of the US. If the US decides to fight for Hawaii, Japan would lose, but still have the home islands untouched due to lack of power projection and the small scaled nature of the war. If the US doesn't fight for Hawaii, Japan would win, but relations between the two, and to an extent Anglo-American relations would decline greatly.

I think people need to look at the distances involved and understand how nascent Japanese naval power was. Japan needed those ships at home to resist China. Sending them thousands of miles away for land not essential to their national security just wasn't going to happen. For this butterfly I think you'd need to de-rail or at least delay TRs rise to prominence among the Mahanians and/or his rise into the government. There'd have to be no impetus for the USA to annex Hawaii until after the First Sino-Japanese War. That would give Japan time to neutralize China and build more and better ships, though I'm not sure how soon Russia became a similar threat (?).

 

[Fenrir_Angerboda]

I think people need to look at the distances involved and understand how nascent Japanese naval power was. Japan needed those ships at home to resist China. Sending them thousands of miles away for land not essential to their national security just wasn't going to happen. For this butterfly I think you'd need to de-rail or at least delay TRs rise to prominence among the Mahanians and/or his rise into the government. There'd have to be no impetus for the USA to annex Hawaii until after the First Sino-Japanese War. That would give Japan time to neutralize China and build more and better ships, though I'm not sure how soon Russia became a similar threat (?).

So essentially we need to go back all the way to the 1840s.

The California Gold Rush put sugar into demand, the Great Mahele gave foreigners a chance to get land and get their foothold.

at the latest, messing around in 1875 with the Reciprocity treaty might help keep interest down, but even then it's too late.

And this is coupled with Japan opening up and successfully modernizing earlier.

 

[XFE]

I think people need to look at the distances involved and understand how nascent Japanese naval power was. Japan needed those ships at home to resist China. Sending them thousands of miles away for land not essential to their national security just wasn't going to happen. For this butterfly I think you'd need to de-rail or at least delay TRs rise to prominence among the Mahanians and/or his rise into the government. There'd have to be no impetus for the USA to annex Hawaii until after the First Sino-Japanese War. That would give Japan time to neutralize China and build more and better ships, though I'm not sure how soon Russia became a similar threat (?).

The Beiyang navy was pretty shit by the time. Yes, it was in theory the strongest fleet in Asia, but then Cixi decided that building her resort with naval funds would be a good idea...*proceeds to go on an anti Cixi rant*

 

[Yeti]

The Beiyang navy was pretty shit by the time. Yes, it was in theory the strongest fleet in Asia, but then Cixi decided that building her resort with naval funds would be a good idea...*proceeds to go on an anti Cixi rant*

As it sounds like you know, the Chinese Navy outnumbered the Japanese, and it was only by audacious deployment and execution that the Japanese won a decisive victory. The Japanese couldn't afford to send their best ships across the ocean for a Hawaiian adventure.

 

[XFE]

As it sounds like you know, the Chinese Navy outnumbered the Japanese, and it was only by audacious deployment and execution that the Japanese won a decisive victory. The Japanese couldn't afford to send their best ships across the ocean for a Hawaiian adventure.

Well, the Hawaiian rebellion of 1893 was in January, while the Sino Japanese War was in August of 1894. There's a large time gap between the two, enough for the IJN to cross the Pacific Ocean multiple times. More over the war was started by Japan, so when the war starts and what conditions it starts under is mostly determined by Japan. Moreover due to be lack of funding (again, because Cixi) the Beiyang Navy's once superior resources were now less than Japan's. The Beiyang Navy, unless with extreme luck could never have bested the IJN in that war.

 

[dirtyjapaneseman]

I think people need to look at the distances involved and understand how nascent Japanese naval power was. Japan needed those ships at home to resist China. Sending them thousands of miles away for land not essential to their national security just wasn't going to happen. For this butterfly I think you'd need to de-rail or at least delay TRs rise to prominence among the Mahanians and/or his rise into the government. There'd have to be no impetus for the USA to annex Hawaii until after the First Sino-Japanese War. That would give Japan time to neutralize China and build more and better ships, though I'm not sure how soon Russia became a similar threat (?).

I don't really think you need to disrupt his rise, it more depends on, as you said, neutralizing China. That is done with the Sino-Japanese war which happens in 1895. After defeating China the rivals Japan has would take time to re-evaluate Japan's position among them and China itself couldn't effectively fight unless they reform. As I see it they have a span of 3 years to get their ships out to Hawaii and use gunboat diplomacy. Plus I don't think Russia is truly a threat to Japan until China leases Port Arthur to them, and that doesn't happen until 1898 plenty.

So essentially we need to go back all the way to the 1840s.

The California Gold Rush put sugar into demand, the Great Mahele gave foreigners a chance to get land and get their foothold.

at the latest, messing around in 1875 with the Reciprocity treaty might help keep interest down, but even then it's too late.

And this is coupled with Japan opening up and successfully modernizing earlier.

A variation on the Reciprocity treaty might be made between US and Japan, or there could end up being a Guantanamo Bay style situation going on where US just plain refuses to leave. Keeping them there on a time based lease will probably be the best option, however.

 

[The Undead Martyr]

People are sorely underestimating the US here, and also ignoring the strongly racist ideologies of the US and Britain. While there was considerable domestic opposition to "imperial entanglements" tHe idea that Britain and the US would blithely accept such a considerable show of force by the Japanese is utterly out of touch with reality. This isn't that far removed from the Spanish American War; the US only lacks a military because they don't want one, and can get one very quickly as OTL showed. IIRC America surpassed British Industry in the 1880s...

Moreover, why would Japan want to annex Hawaii directly? The only purpose (as opposed to simply restoring the monarchy, which *could* find support from Britain and parts of the US) would be as a forward base against the US. Can someone say "yellow peril?"

Such an aggesssive move would lead to a *massive* upswing in jingoist support in the US, and if push comes to shove even with British support I don't see Japan walking away from an open military confrontation with the US without looking pretty bruised...

That said, if they were smart they would play to the anti-imperialists in the US and to the power politics of Britain, and call for the restoration of the monarchy. Position themselves as "the defenders of Asia" to the natives, anti-imperialists to the Americans, and dependable proxies to the Brits, and without Hawaii it's possible the US never gets directly involved in the Philippines and SE Asia at all. Hell Japan could jump on Spain too and "liberate" the Phillipines under a native puppet dynasty.

 

[Fenrir_Angerboda]

I don't really think you need to disrupt his rise, it more depends on, as you said, neutralizing China. That is done with the Sino-Japanese war which happens in 1895. After defeating China the rivals Japan has would take time to re-evaluate Japan's position among them and China itself couldn't effectively fight unless they reform. As I see it they have a span of 3 years to get their ships out to Hawaii and use gunboat diplomacy. Plus I don't think Russia is truly a threat to Japan until China leases Port Arthur to them, and that doesn't happen until 1898 plenty.

Given that the overthrow happened two years before the First Sino-Japanese War, that means either Japan invented time travel or Japan is going to try and counter-coup the Republic, who's already got support.

Or they're going to send a very new and untested force against the Americans.

A variation on the Reciprocity treaty might be made between US and Japan, or there could end up being a Guantanamo Bay style situation going on where US just plain refuses to leave. Keeping them there on a time based lease will probably be the best option, however.

The Reciprocity Treaty was about Sugar, not sure why Japan wants that.
Not to mention there's no real way Japan can enforce their part of any deal, not why the US would agree to share.

 

[Napoleonrules]

I'm sorry but history shows us that this whole idea that if only Japan interferes then of course the US will back down is as near to ASB as possible without a PoD as far back as 1700 messing with the very American psyche. Let's see reasons Americans fight wars (including colonial wars, quasi wars, and Indian wars)- a ship captain having his ear cut off, an Indian confederacy wiped out because they supported the British during the ARW, French mess with our shipping, British mess with our shipping (and of course Canada wanted us to invade obviously), a ship explodes suspiciously, Indians being unruly in Florida, which river is the border of a nominally independent state, Chinese people threatening to undue unfair treaties, failure to pay your bills (looking at you Haiti... and a handful of other Caribbean states) unrestricted submarine warfare, one part of a nation crossed an arbitrary line into another part of that nation (this one is so popular it was a reason for more than one war), socialist take over (looking at you Grenada), oil, a horrible terrorist attack planned by terrorists harbored by that govt, and of course- a horrible terrorist attack that had nothing to do with that nation.

That doesnt include every single military incursion the US has performed. Do you think the Japanese messing with Americans in the late 1890s is going to make Americans NOT want to go to war to beat a nation which the US has a long standing racial bias against? It is guarenteeing the US gets Hawai'i. And probably results in Hawai'i not having a Japanese population for a long time in this ATL.

 

[Napoleonrules]

And dont forget my favorite reason- dig a canal in a less favorable place than Nicaragua

 

[Fenrir_Angerboda]

And probably results in Hawai'i not having a Japanese population for a long time in this ATL.

Since any American-Japanese war over Hawaii is likely to be the early 1890s, there's already a sizable population of Japanese immigrants.

The question would be if they're willing deport a large amount of the workforce.

 

[Luminous]

It depends on what Japan's chosen preference is. Mind that this would be pushing the edge of their range to send a fleet to Hawai'i at the time; one way is roughly 3400 nautical miles from Tokyo to Honolulu. Their ships would be pushing it, especially as some of their maneuvers would be above the most efficient speed. So, yes, they could reach Hawai'i, but if combat maneuvers are required and they engage in combat, some ships are at risk of not making it all the way back.

The question is this: The US was in the midst of expanding its navy; its first ACR was commissioned (later) in 1893, but it was launched two years before. The ABC cruisers were decommissioned this year as well, and the US's first regular cruiser wouldn't quite have the range to make it to Hawai'i and back (even though the distance is 2/3 as far). Also, the first US battleship is being launched in 1893, a month or so after the rebellion.

I'd put it like this: Japan would be sending a sizable portion of its navy to occupy and garrison the islands at the end of a long supply chain. At best, nothing will happen, although they are risking a tit-for-tat conflict with the US, whose own navy is just entering its second stage of expansion. This also raises issues with the Sino-Japanese War; this won't be an one-time operation; there needs to be a local presence kept, and not all forces can be committed to the war proper. If a conflict does break out between the US and Japan, then they will have to shelve Korea... and Korea is far more important to Japan than Hawai'i is. And every ship that Japan loses means that it becomes that much more difficult to win total supremacy over China.

So: Japan risks ships being lost, either by damage or running out of fuel during the trip. Even a ship that doesn't sink may not make it all the way back to Japan for repairs due to the enormity of the distance required. And by doing that, they risk damaging their ability to influence Korea without those additional ships on hand. The Chinese vessels, while having poorly trained crews and ammunition problems, did manage to do severe damage to the Japanese ships at the Yalu River. An even smaller Japanese line may not be able to penetrate the Chinese defenses.

And that goes without saying that things may proceed even more poorly if Japan ends up against China and the US at the same time.

While Hawai'i would be nice, Korea and China are far more important to Japan; they wouldn't risk their ships an ocean away for an island group when they need them to establish dominance in their region. And even an accident or some other mishap could cost them a ship; it wouldn't even be the first one lost at sea in recent memory.

...Although, a question to anyone who does know. Are the Matsuhima-class ship's main guns worth anything in naval combat? Their size on such a small ship, and their rate of fire, implies that they are more of a bombardment weapon. That, combined with their bad engines and relatively slow speed (for the Japanese navy), might make them a little less effective than otherwise intended. They seem to be their mainline ships of the war.

 

[Napoleonrules]

Since any American-Japanese war over Hawaii is likely to be the early 1890s, there's already a sizable population of Japanese immigrants.

The question would be if they're willing deport a large amount of the workforce.

Given US attitude towards Asians in that time period I was already assuming yes to that question before you said it