WI: The US never occupies Hawaii

Well, it would probably have been the British who occupied it. Pearl Harbour as a British naval base sounds like an interesting development.
food for thought, actually the Russians also had a presence in Hawaii until the 1860's,
 
Shouldn't this be in Before 1900?


Well, it would probably have been the British who occupied it. Pearl Harbour as a British naval base sounds like an interesting development.
IIRC Britain and France had a gentleman's agreement that neither would occupy or make a protectorate out of the Hawaiian islands. One time the captain of a visiting Royal Navy warship apparently tried to claim the Kingdom off his own bat only to have his superior commander repudiate his actions and apologise for them. If the agreement with France were to change I'd expect it to become a protectorate like Tonga rather than a colony.

The question of whether Hawaii would be a unitary state or be a collection of seperate ones depends on when the point of divergence is. If it's before Kamehameha unified the different islands then you could see Russia, Britain, France, and the US all backing different chiefs and staking claims to their islands.

Even if Pearl Harbor was a Royal Navy base that's not to say that there might not be an American presence either. A lot of the Hawaii's exports were to the US, not being a territory or state means that they'd be facing external tariffs and taxes. One solution could be to allow the US the use of Pearl Harbour, please note spelling ;), in return for a free trade agreement. Failing that the Destoyers for Bases agreement in 1940 would undoubtedly include Hawaii as one of the sites.
 

shiftygiant

Gone Fishin'
What if the US never occupied the nation of Hawaii and turned it into a state? As a bonus, how would this affect World War II?
The Kingdom was overthrown in 1898, and was annexed the same year, so this is better suited for the pre-1900.

None the less, the Kingdom will likely remain independent but with a strong European presence. The British and the French had recognised Hawaii as an Independent State, and whilst one can argue "so did the Americans but they annexed it", the circumstances surrounding American annexation are unlikely to repeat under Britain or France. So It'll remain an independent state, and it will fall into the spheres of whichever power (European or American) is the strongest in the Pacific.

And for the bolded:

monarch-butterfly-best-friends-valerie-evanson.jpg
 
And for the bolded:

monarch-butterfly-best-friends-valerie-evanson.jpg

Assuming the POD is the late 1890s. And either the coup against the monarchy doesn't happen or the US president refuses to annex the republic.

Then I don't think that would by itself mean that a war between japan and the usa in the 1930s-40s won't or can't happen.

Japan is still looking to build an empire. The first sino-Japanese war has already happened, changes in american politics probably won't change the desire to attack Russia and annex korea either. Likewise the triple alliance already exists so something like a world war one is perfectly possible and so the chances of japan picking up german territories there is still likely.

And then given the japanese mentality at the time a second sino-Japanese war is likely which is going to worry the United States and it's china lobby.

Now if the pod is in the usa rather than Hawaii and a less expansionist president you might see a different result for the Philippines which might change things but I don't think a timeline without the annexation of Hawaii where come 1941 you still have japan and the usa obviously ready to fight each other is impossible..

And well since Hawaii is there and not owned directly by a foreign power, it's going to be a tempting target for the Japanese to either annex or influence. You might see a Spanish morocco thing with Japanese and US agents out in force which culminates in a flat out japanese attempt to attack it over some insult or other. Which the USA might view as something they can't allow.

And without Hawaii the US position in the pacific is going to be weakened but so is the Japanese ability to hit their fleets in dock.

It's an interesting enough thought experiment as to how a US Japan war would go with the US being limited to American Samoa in terms of pacific bases. Especially if you have, for whatever reason, a neutral UK and France.
 

shiftygiant

Gone Fishin'
The point of noting the butterflies being that any World War 2 is going to be significantly different from what we know, if it happens at all, not that the Americans and Japanese will never enter a state of conflict over their influences in the Pacific.
 
The point of noting the butterflies being that any World War 2 is going to be significantly different from what we know, if it happens at all, not that the Americans and Japanese will never enter a state of conflict over their influences in the Pacific.

Yes that's why he's asking how it would affect it.
 
Is this a "US out of the islands completely" POD or a "no formal US annexation POD"?

The "no formal US annexation but lots of US missionaries and businessman" POD doesn't change much. You get a white businessman dominated Hawaiian Republic that becomes a US protectorate, probably still the US naval base, World War II goes IOTL, and after World War II the islands are admitted to statehood. The only possible difference is that the native Hawaiians are even more screwed over in this scenario.

If, OTOH, the islands become a British protectorate, or an Anglo-French condominium, then this could change things considerably. American influence is reduced. The monarchy survives. There is no British naval base at Pearl Harbor because there is no need for one, it doesn't fit in with British grand strategy and the American Pacific Fleet even IOTL didn't move there until 1940.

The US conquest of the Philippines may be butterflied away but probably isn't. Then the US Navy will want a coaling station. But they should be able to set up a coaling station on Johnston atoll, Midway, or Wake atolls. Looking it up, the US claimed Midway in 1856 (!) and its equidistant between the Americas and Asia, hence its name, and has a port so they could put a coaling station there, making the Philippines Commonwealth and territory feasible.

When FDR wants to move the US Pacific Fleet closer to Japan, for whatever reasons, he has two options. He could move it all the way to Subic Bay, or use the Lend Lease Treaty with the UK to get access to Pearl Harbor. If its Subic Bay, that has a big impact because it allows the Japanese to destroy more of the US Pacific Fleet. But boringly, it will probably be gaining Pearl in exchange for Lend Lease. So again, not much changes. The Kingdom of Hawaii, which declares was on Japan in December 1941, becomes an American protectorate instead of a British protectorate, sort of like what happened with Australia and Canada IOTL about the same time.

However, this does mean no statehood for Hawaii. Hawaii is an independent country, a member of the UN and possibly the Commonwealth, that happens to have a really large US naval base and the US military and businesses have free run of the place. Like lots of other places in the world. But statehood for Alaska will be on the agenda, but the US political/ historical tradition is to admit states as pairs. So means either commonwealth status for Alaska, or they swallow hard, skip the commonwealth thing with Puerto Rico, and just admit Alaska and Puerto Rico as states at the same time.

With Hawaiian culture, the American influence, though still strong, is alot weaker and there is more native Hawaiian and more British influence. And the Hawaiian government, which is still mostly under native control until 1941, does not import cheap Japanese labor, and there are fewer immigrants from the American mainland.

As for the Russian protectorate idea, it just becomes a British protectorate by the end of World War I. But the Russian government pretty much abandoned their Pacific ambitions with the sale of Alaska.
 
The point of noting the butterflies being that any World War 2 is going to be significantly different from what we know, if it happens at all, not that the Americans and Japanese will never enter a state of conflict over their influences in the Pacific.
No USA owned Hawai'i doesn't change the fact that Japan is in China, or occupies French IndoChina from the Vichy. As someone else mentioned- it doesn't change much. Making a POD change doesn't mean change the probability of a dice roll; eg- a PoD in Hawai'i in 1899 doesn't mean a die that rolled a 6 in Europe OTL three days later will roll any different in the ATL, butterflies don't break the speed of light and they don't spontaneously emerge. You have to show a continuous link between the POD and any other changes. Otherwise your introducing a NEW additional pod.
 
No USA owned Hawai'i doesn't change the fact that Japan is in China, or occupies French IndoChina from the Vichy. As someone else mentioned- it doesn't change much. Making a POD change doesn't mean change the probability of a dice roll; eg- a PoD in Hawai'i in 1899 doesn't mean a die that rolled a 6 in Europe OTL three days later will roll any different in the ATL, butterflies don't break the speed of light and they don't spontaneously emerge. You have to show a continuous link between the POD and any other changes. Otherwise your introducing a NEW additional pod.
Butterflies sort of do emerge from nothing. You are essentially changing a huge chunks of the maps made after 1899, and every newspaper, magazine or journal article about Hawaii, and the schedules of every ship and every person who visited Hawaii vis a vis OTL. That is lots of really small changes that can suddenly spawn much larger changes seemingly from nowhere (ie someone spends a bit more or less time reading the newspaper and thus starts their commute a bit earlier or later, resulting in an accident occurring or not occurring)
 
Butterflies sort of do emerge from nothing. You are essentially changing a huge chunks of the maps made after 1899, and every newspaper, magazine or journal article about Hawaii, and the schedules of every ship and every person who visited Hawaii vis a vis OTL. That is lots of really small changes that can suddenly spawn much larger changes seemingly from nowhere (ie someone spends a bit more or less time reading the newspaper and thus starts their commute a bit earlier or later, resulting in an accident occurring or not occurring)
That is one school of thought. One I don't subscribe to and I find very dubious. And one that is, at least twice, dismissed and shown why it is unlikely, in the "What if?" collection of essays edited by Robert Cowley.
 
That is one school of thought. One I don't subscribe to and I find very dubious. And one that is, at least twice, dismissed and shown why it is unlikely, in the "What if?" collection of essays edited by Robert Cowley.
Never read that, and I don't really see how this can be dismissed, even ignoring the whole quantum/brownian motion argument in favor

The fact is, Hawaii being independent of the US would result in immediate changes in almost everything written about Hawaii, changes in wording will of course result in a different amount of time reading things. An independent Hawaii would also have different border control rules and affect everyone going too and from by taking a different amount of time to clear those. Do you deny this?

Because this would lead to slight changes in schedule with anyone who goes to Hawaii, or does business with Hawaii, or reads about Hawaii, or interacts with someone who does one of those things. A few seconds here or there can cause or avoid a lot of accidents, traffic and otherwise

This is of course ignoring more major changes, like possibly reducing or increasing the backlash against Imperialism in the US, which would of course effect US politics, and possibly the Spanish-American War aftermath and thus international relations
 
The Kingdom was overthrown in 1898, and was annexed the same year, so this is better suited for the pre-1900.

None the less, the Kingdom will likely remain independent but with a strong European presence. The British and the French had recognised Hawaii as an Independent State, and whilst one can argue "so did the Americans but they annexed it", the circumstances surrounding American annexation are unlikely to repeat under Britain or France. So It'll remain an independent state, and it will fall into the spheres of whichever power (European or American) is the strongest in the Pacific.

And for the bolded:

monarch-butterfly-best-friends-valerie-evanson.jpg
Not sure where you got your source, but Sanford Dole overthrew the Kingdom of Hawaii in 1893 and set up the republic, but Cleveland refused to annex Hawaii since he saw the intervention of U.S citizens there as shameful, and he actually tried to get Dole to reinstate the queen but was refused. It wasn't until McKinley after him was elected that Hawaii was annexed. Maybe a president more along the lines of Cleveland might result in Hawaii not being a state, or possibly a stronger move by the government to censure Dole.
 
Never read that, and I don't really see how this can be dismissed, even ignoring the whole quantum/brownian motion argument in favor

The fact is, Hawaii being independent of the US would result in immediate changes in almost everything written about Hawaii, changes in wording will of course result in a different amount of time reading things. An independent Hawaii would also have different border control rules and affect everyone going too and from by taking a different amount of time to clear those. Do you deny this?

Because this would lead to slight changes in schedule with anyone who goes to Hawaii, or does business with Hawaii, or reads about Hawaii, or interacts with someone who does one of those things. A few seconds here or there can cause or avoid a lot of accidents, traffic and otherwise

This is of course ignoring more major changes, like possibly reducing or increasing the backlash against Imperialism in the US, which would of course effect US politics, and possibly the Spanish-American War aftermath and thus international relations
In your quantum remark you're assuming again that probability is affected by a macro-change. It isnt. You're turning back the clock, making an a change, and setting the clock forward. An atom in Switzerland will decay at the same time as it did OTL, pod changes are not instantaneous across the universe! I make a PoD where the Alexander the Great isn't born, doesn't suddenly allow sentient life to evolve on Mars and conquer Earth in 2150. You simply have to show cause and effect leading from one to the other.

To your other point, such as newspapers, it is covered in the book I mentioned, the argument is, yes a PoD change causes ripples, but all the other things around the world you DIDNT change are providing a bigger combined influence. History will "circle back" to OTL without a HUGE pod or multiple pods. The pod only affects things that the original affected as time goes on, this becomes more and more. But, depending on the time period, the ripple of the butterfly goes out at different speeds. A POD in 1100 AD Yucatan Peninsula will not affect Europe or China history from OTL for centuries or at all depending on how big it is. A POD in the 21st century can move quicker because of speed of communication. Even a PoD in Hawai'i at 1899 (no annexation) will take weeks or months to circle the world and affect anything else. And no it can't affect the Spanish American War because that occured prior to OTL annexation. It's a fait accompli by the time of your pod.
 
In your quantum remark you're assuming again that probability is affected by a macro-change. It isnt. You're turning back the clock, making an a change, and setting the clock forward. An atom in Switzerland will decay at the same time as it did OTL, pod changes are not instantaneous across the universe! I make a PoD where the Alexander the Great isn't born, doesn't suddenly allow sentient life to evolve on Mars and conquer Earth in 2150. You simply have to show cause and effect leading from one to the other.

To your other point, such as newspapers, it is covered in the book I mentioned, the argument is, yes a PoD change causes ripples, but all the other things around the world you DIDNT change are providing a bigger combined influence. History will "circle back" to OTL without a HUGE pod or multiple pods. The pod only affects things that the original affected as time goes on, this becomes more and more. But, depending on the time period, the ripple of the butterfly goes out at different speeds. A POD in 1100 AD Yucatan Peninsula will not affect Europe or China history from OTL for centuries or at all depending on how big it is. A POD in the 21st century can move quicker because of speed of communication. Even a PoD in Hawai'i at 1899 (no annexation) will take weeks or months to circle the world and affect anything else. And no it can't affect the Spanish American War because that occured prior to OTL annexation. It's a fait accompli by the time of your pod.
The Quantum argument is that Atomic decay is purely random. In analogy OTL fired off an RNG to determine when that atom decayed and got back one result, going back in time to change things results in the RNG getting fired again and a different result, because it is random. I am ambivalent about this argument, and specifically say I am ignoring it for the purpose of this conversation, just like I am putting aside the Brownian motion argument which I am not ambivalent about

I don't buy the roll back around argument because the result of your changes will keep causing more changes, and the results of those changes will keep causing more changes and so on and so forth

Also Hawaii was annexed 4 July 1898, Treaty of Paris ending Spanish American War 10 December 1898, ratified by the US Senate Feb 6 1899, plenty of time
 
Top