WI Nicholas II's assassination leads to an earlier Russo-Japanese War?

[Color-Copycat]

IOTL, the unsuccessful assassination attempt (the so-called Otsu Incident) during the Nicholas II's 1891 state visit to Japan was a huge diplomatic disaster for the Japanese, but it stopped far short of turning into all out war due to cool heads prevailing on both sides. But assume that the future czar was killed that day. Would hostilities break out in this scenario? If so, how would a Russo-Japanese conflict in the early 1890s play out? I've always been under the impression that on paper, Russian naval and land forces far outclassed their Japanese counterparts during this time period (Japanese naval buildup had yet to reach its apex, etc), but how would an actual conflict in the seas and on the ground play out?

edit: Just realized I should've posted this in pre-1900. Please move it there.

 

[mcdo]

Certainly the Japanese military was much weaker then--much of the navy that went to war with Russia OTL was purchased with the money they received in reperations from China. So the IJN will be considerably smaller. The Army, too, come to that--it was expanding rapidly at this point.

I do wonder how easy it will be for the Russians to project force that far, though. The navy barely made it in 1905. I have to imagine it'll be even harder here, given slightly worse tech, and perhaps less well-developed French coaling stations. The Russian army is in even worse shape. The TSR has just started. It's still over a decade away from completion. The Russians will have a devil of a time sending troops to the Far East, and keeping them supplied will be even harder. Probably the best the Russians can do is send a punitive expedition.

The big question I have is this: what are they fighting over? The assassination is a good casus belli, but at this point what are the Russians and the Japanese competiting over?
The 1882 and 1884 revolts in Korea that both resulted in stronger Chinese control over Korea. At this point, Korea was somewhere between a vassal and a colony of China. The "race for concessions" between Russia and Japan (and to a lesser extend, the French, British, and Americans) is still in the future. So the main point of contention between Russia and Japan in 1904 is not around yet. The Russian troop presence in Manchuria, another point of contention with the Japanese, won't happen until after the Boxer Rebellion in 1900.

So, really, what are they fighting about? At this point, Russia has no reason to expect that defeating Japan would lead to a better position in either China or Korea. They can probably sink the Japanese navy, but Japan is already strong enough to prevent outright conquest or colonization. They can capture the Kurils, they can punish Japan. But is that enough? Does it justify the expense of sending the fleet halfway around the world?

Still, if they do it (and they might, just for national pride and honor) it will probably set Japan back for a generation. Without the Sino-Japanese War revealing Chinese weakness, China might be able to hobble on for a while longer. Maybe Russia is the one to take over control of Manchuria and Korea. Maybe Germany still sets off the Far Eastern Question in 1897, regardless of (presumed) greater Chinese strength. It changes everything.

 

[katchen]

Don't forget that the Trans-Siberian Railroad isn't built yet. The Japanese have superior logistics, at least until winter. They may be able to conquer Sakhalin and Nikolavesk na Amur, then send gunboats up the Amur River all the way to the head of navigation at Nerchinsk Maybe engage the Baikal Cossacks with cavalry and push the Russians al the way back to Lake Baikal. . And take Petropavlovsk Kamchatka, Ayan and Okhotsk And send another force from Ayan or Okhotsk to take Yakutsk.
I think that the Russians would have a very difficult time dislodging the Japanese if the Japanese did that.
Then there's the obvious question. Who is now Tsar (or is Alexandra Tsarina?) . And what will the new Tsar or regent do? And could a sign of weakness by the government lead to a rebellion this early as in 1905?.

 

[Lugal]

Then there's the obvious question. Who is now Tsar (or is Alexandra Tsarina?) . And what will the new Tsar or regent do? And could a sign of weakness by the government lead to a rebellion this early as in 1905?.

Alexander III would still be Czar until his death in 1894, or possibly sooner given his poor health and the loss of his son.
Alexander would probably be succeeded by George, although he was in poor health as well.

 

[BBadolato]

Wouldn't another Nicholas eventually take throne if George dies? Either we may have a longer lasting Tsarist Russia if the disastrous reign of Nicholas II is gone.

 

[Emperor Constantine]

Wouldn't another Nicholas eventually take throne if George dies? Either we may have a longer lasting Tsarist Russia if the disastrous reign of Nicholas II is gone.

No Grand Duke Michael would become Emperor. Looking at the Grand Duke its a shame he didn't become Emperor. He was described as democratic, which is a big step for a Romanov.

 

[Razgriz 2K9]

No Grand Duke Michael would become Emperor. Looking at the Grand Duke its a shame he didn't become Emperor. He was described as democratic, which is a big step for a Romanov.

Somehow, I'm going to take that comment with a grain of salt, considering the family we're dealing with.

As for going straight to Russia vs. Japan, mcdo is right in the fact that Japan would be at a greater disadvantage compared to Russia. It would gain the initiative early on due to the Army and Navy having to travel a great distance, and Japanese initiative early on would determine how successful they would be, as well as how lucky they will be against Russia once they do arrive.

On the flip side, while it would contribute to a longer lasting Qing Dynasty...assuming that Cixi kicks the bucket in 1898 as per OTL, unless China can pull out strong serious reforms...though something tells me it's too late now.

 

[Alex Richards]

Somehow, I'm going to take that comment with a grain of salt, considering the family we're dealing with.

He was relatively democratic, believing that the family needed to follow the spirit of the results of the 1905 revloution and that a move towards Constitutional monarchy was needed.

Now, this would almost certainly be closer to the German model of 'reasonably powerful elected body but the Emperor still has a large and highly influential role in politics' than the British model, but he certainly seemed to consider that the traditional autocracy and absolutism of the Tsars couldn't continue for much longer.

 

[M79]

Russia is likely to lose the Far East, Sakhalin, and probably Port Arthur but only because of distance. Japan is not going to win easily either, but more casualties might come from cold than from combat. Either way this makes for a very interesting future, especially because without Nicholas II a *lot* of bad policy and the whole craziness of Rasputin is gone. Look for a Russia that could have surviving Tsars into the 21st century, albeit in a more restricted role, perhaps with a strong legislative branch and the Romanovs as an inherited but permanent executive. 1905 might be butterflied and World War I could go very differently, Russia might become home of many of the world's great innovators and would be largely unrecognizable today. That does not mean she is our friend or that she is even prosperous, just unrecognizable.

 

[Razgriz 2K9]

And what of the Empire of Japan? I highly doubt they would get to hold the Far East for long, though Sakhalin and the Kurils (but not Port Arthur because it is still Chinese and would require the Sino-Japanese War to go ahead as per OTL, but at a later date most likely) would and possibly might be uncontested for the long haul.