Talk:Japanese Alaska/Archive

General Questions to be resolved

 * How would the gold and oil and other resources in Alaska affect Japanese development? Might it reduce their attempts to establish an East Asian empire?
 * If they did go into China, would Alaska allow them to ignore Western sanctions? Or at least reduce the perceived desperateness of their situation, and allow the moderates to gain influence in the government, and perhaps negotiate some face-saving treaty?
 * If the Pacific War did occur, who would get Alaska? Would it go back to Soviet hands?  Would the Americans seize it?  Canada, perhaps?  Or maybe it would become a new nation?  Maybe it'd be a situation like Okinawa where it would be occupied for a period before returning to Japanese rule? -- Nik 05:14, 28 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Much probably there would be no Pacific War... or at least not as we kwow it. If oil is discovered in Alaska before the USA (much probably a much less imperialistic USA) would embargo for anything related to China, Japan still have that source of row materials in Alaska.  This means: no attack to Pearl Harbor (even assuming Hawaii bellongs to the USA...).  OTOH, if there is no war in Europe, the British might control Japan in a more effective way, so the USA would not become involved in a Pacific War, if any.  First explore any Russian-Japanese war... — Carlos Th (talk) 05:38, 28 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Oil, while the most significant raw material needed by Japan, wasn't the only one. Rubber was an important resource as well, and Alaska contains no rubber.  But, yeah, I think that a Pacific War, or at least one anything like the one in OTL, is far less likely.
 * Oops. I just checked, and it turns out that oil as discovered *here* in 1968.  I don't see any reason for it to be much earlier in that ATL, so the presence of oil wouldn't have much effect -- Nik 04:13, 29 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Hmm ... I have to admit I didn't think much about the effect on the US. Without the Alaska Purchase, might we have been less expansionistic otherwise?  I'm not sure.  Would we still go for Hawaii, for example?  Or might it become a British protectorate instead?  I'll have to research how much of an influence Alaskan gold had on US development
 * I'm assuming that events in Europe would occur much the same as in OTL, so there'd still be WW1 and at least the European theater of WW2. I think the Russo-Japanese war would occur *there* as well, but I'm not positive on that ... -- Nik 05:42, 28 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, even if there is a Great War in the 1914-18 period in Europe with the same development than OTL, including a Versailles Treaty, there is no automatic grant of a WWII. Many reasons: a different depression, another kind of militaristic regime in Germany, or just somebody else than Chamberlain in Munich...  Now, a different or no Russo-Japanese war might affect Russian policies and therefor the way WWI was fought... if fought.  So it is quite likely that 50 years from the POD European history would differe from OTL. — Carlos Th (talk)


 * Very good point there. The Russian defeat in the Russo-Japanese War did have a major impact on Russian politics ... so, this is the crucial point, indeed.  I'm thinking that the Alaskan Purchase might make for a better Russo-Japanese Relationship ... especially if I move it later to after the Sino-Japanese War, when it could compensate (especially after the discovery of gold) for Japanese anger towards Russia. -- Nik 17:41, 28 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * In my thoughts I think we could have a German-Russian-Japanese alliance for WWII. And this alliance may win. --Henneth 18:39, 28 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * What would cause this alliance? -- Nik 04:05, 29 Jun 2005 (UTC)

If the Soviets have better relations with Japan by this purchase, Hitler may have set aside his grudge against Communism fearing Japan may join the Allied side. --Henneth 23:24, 6 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Klondike gold Rush
European trappers and explores traveled through Alaska and the Yukon OTL. Does Japan try to prevent these folks from entering Alaska in ATL? When is gold discovered in a big way? Is the Klondike Gold Rush limited to the Japanese and when does it happen (probably after 1896)? Europeans/Americans would try mine gold in the Yukon and could easily cross the border into Alaska to search for gold? What does this do for relations between Japan and the USA and Britain?


 * Very good questions! I'll have to think about that.  It'd be quite difficult to keep them out ... possibilities arise of some kind of Texan Revolution-style revolt among the American/British settlers, or, alternately, a British/American-Japanese war over Alaska, triggered by Japan's attempts to keep out white settlement -- Nik 04:05, 29 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Presumably the discovery of gold in Alaska would lead to relatively large Japanese population in that area. Does USA / Canada consider this a threat?


 * A good possiblility, the old "Yellow Peril" was quite active at the time -- Nik 04:05, 29 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I'd personally think it likely that the US or Canadians would try to sieze Alaska on some pretext. This could result in a war with Japan in 1898.--TheFuzzy 06:14, 6 Jul 2005 (UTC)

If the gold rush is somehow limited, then Seattle remains a relatively small city. If the population in the Pacific Northwest is smaller is the Colombia river still dammed - making electricity cheep - making aluminum cheap - making WWII Liberty Ships cheap? If Seattle remains small does the Boeing family ever decide to make airplanes or do they stay in the canning business? --AirshipArmada 19:15, 28 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Hunh. Interesting potential consequences there. -- Nik 04:05, 29 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"In 1895, the Klondike Gold Rush began"

Why do you have the gold rush start two years earlier than OTL? I would think that if the Japanese took official control of Alaska in 1887 then the European frontiersmen would slowly start to leave the region and favor areas to the south and east. Japanese frontiersmen would take some time to aquatint themselves with Alaska and I see no reason for them to discover major gold deposits earlier than OTL. I would think that the Klondike Gold Event would happen sometime after 1897 - and because of Alaska's status, this Event may not necessarily become of full fledged Gold Rush. --AirshipArmada 16:50, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC)


 * Hunh. For some reason I thought it happene in 1895 *here*.  Well, that works out better, actually. -- Nik 19:03, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC)


 * Perhaps it would be closer to 1900 or even 1905 *there*. That'd give plenty of time for Japan to be involved in the First Sino-Japanese War before the gold rush.  If I move it far enough ahead, there might even be a Russo-Japanese War as *here* in the intermediate period ... though that'd probably lead to a situation too similar to *here* -- Nik 19:42, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Threat to Alaska?
Might the danger of losing Alaska provide an impetus to negotiate with the British and the Americans? Might it be possible that the Japanese would ally with Britain against the Nazis, perhaps in exchange for diplomatic recognition by Britain of Manchuria, and an acknowledgement of Japanese control over Dutch and French colonies, maybe ostensibly "safeguarding" them?

Depending on the timing, this could have some interesting consequences. If the Japanese delayed long enough, the Soviets might not withdraw troops from the Far East to defend Moscow, or at least not until it was too late. In OTL, they withdrew them upon learning from spies in Tokyo that the Japaense were planning an attack on the US, and knowing the Japanese wouldn't go to war against both at the same time. The troops that were pulled to Moscow played a crucial role in defeating the Nazi attack. If Moscow falls, what would become of the Soviets?

Japanese troops sailing from Japan through the Indian Ocean and into the Eastern Mediterrenean might be able to play some of the Eastern Front role of the Soviets in OTL, but, at the very least, a longer war would surely take place. Without the attack on Pearl, what, if anything, could pull the Americans into the war? -- Nik 22:50, 4 Jul 2005 (UTC)

More Mercantile Japan?
Would it be reasonable to suppose that the gold in Alaska would promote more mercantile development in Japan? Perhaps even no interference in China at all? Or at the very least, stopping with Manchuria (Manchuria was useful as a protective buffer against China and Russia) -- Nik 22:53, 4 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't really know enough Japanese history to answer that. An important thing for you to answer here is how much money did Alaskan gold produce, exactly? I can't find the answer directly.  In the 19th century, falling to mercantile interests (and gansters) was causing Japan to disintegrate, which was one of the reasons for their enthusiastic adoption of a strong militaristic Emperor in the 20th century.  If Alaskan gold were sufficient to make a difference in Japanese economics, the merchant class of Japan might have had a chance to pull their act together.  However, I somehow doubt that Alaska actually produced that much gold.--TheFuzzy 06:12, 6 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * It looks like OTL the gold rush was more influential than the gold itself. See Here http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/klondike/pacific13b.html and This article: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/klondike/html97/final_072097.html says that in the first six months of the rush $2.5 million gold was mined but $25 million worth of materials was sold to prospectors. --AirshipArmada 02:24, 7 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * There were many factors involved in Japan's militarization. One of the biggest factors was the actions of Western Powers in events such as the Triple Intervention, during which Japan was treated almost as if they were the defeated power.  These insults were piled up, turning Japan increasingly sensitive to slights, both real and perceived, and causing them to feel that the only way they could compete with the West was by mimicking their militarism, and going further with it.  If the gold rush sufficiently strengthened the economy, and if moderates could somehow be strengthened politically, it could result in a more mercantile Japan. -- Nik

Other Unanticipated Consequences

 * Their successful management of the Klondike Gold Rush significantly raised the PR of the Canadian Mounties and is credited with preventing the disbanding of this police force by the Canadian Parliament in the early 20th century. So likely ATL would lead to no Mounties.


 * Why? The Mounties were in the Yukon Territory, which would still be British in ATL.  The Klondike Gold Rush spanned the border -- 152.163.100.201 02:49, 8 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm just parroting this article: [Klondike], particularly:
 * "Throughout this period, the North West Mounted Police, under the command of Sam Steele maintained a firm grip on the activities of the prospectors to ensure the safety of the population as well as enforcing the laws and sovereignty of Canada, strictly policing the entry of weapons into the territory and requiring all those transiting the White Pass or Chilkoot Pass to be carrying sufficient goods (one ton) to survive. As a result, this gold rush has been described as the most peaceful and orderly of its type in history. The effectiveness of the Mounties in this period made the police force famous around the world, and ensured the survival of the organization at a time when its continued operation was being debated in the Canadian Parliament."


 * Exploration of Alaska might have provided the Japanese with their own "Frontier culture" which would have mixed with, and supplimented, the romantic stories of ronin in late Edo Japan. As a result, Kurosawa might have made a couple of movies about Alaska instead of a couple of the samurai movies he did make.
 * The movie "The Hidden Fortress" comes to mind -- where the heroes are smuggling gold bars past check points and war zones. --AirshipArmada 21:42, 11 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * Another artist effected by this POD would be the author Jack London. Books such as Call of the Wild and White Fang along with many short stories may not have been written or may have been very different. If they were not written, this may effect America's romantic notions of the wilderness. --AirshipArmada 16:56, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Spanish american War
What effect does a Japanese Alaska have on the Spanish American War? I imagine things in Cuba would happen as in OTL but things in the Philippines may end up differently. Does Japan get involved?. Even if Japan does not get involved, does the mere fact of its increased power influence Americas decisions? Is Dewey still stationed in Hong Kong? Does Dewey still attack the Spanish fleet? Is Hawaii annexed? --AirshipArmada 13:52, 6 Jul 2005 (UTC)

I believe the US, seeing a growing Japanese threat would annex Cuba and several other Carrebian islands from Spain. They would also speed up the opening of either and Nicuragan Canal or Panama Canal. They would probably have a much larger and more desive role in WWI. And Japan may strike back harder. --Henneth 23:24, 6 Jul 2005 (UTC)


 * Good questions. I honestly can't see there being any difference in the Caribbean, but it's possible that there'd be some differences in the Pacific.  I'll have to figure out exactly what happens in the 1880's and 90's before I can figure that out.  And to do justice to that, I'm gonna need to do some serious research into the First Sino-Japanese War and the Russo-Japanese War, since those were rather critical points in OTL -- Nik 06:31, 10 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Russo-Japanese War
If - as according to the new version of the article - the Russo-Japanese War does happen but with RUSSIA starting it, IMHO Japan will lose. In OTL, the Japanese launched a sneak-attack that destroyed much of the Russian Pacific Fleet, hence Tsushima and so forth. In a war started by Russia, Russia will actually be READY for it, so Manchuria and Korea will probably wind up being "within the Russian sphere of influence". Not sure if they could retake Alaska, though...

Speaking of which, though it is unrelated, are you sure Japan will be allowed by the USA to get Alaska? I mean, isn't that against the Monroe Doctrine or something?


 * I don't think the US would care about Alaska enough. And it wouldn't invoke the Monroe Doctrine as Alaska was not a sovreign nation.  The Monroe Doctrine only covered sovreign nations in the Americas.
 * But, yeah ... I'll have to figure out what I want to do with this. I keep changing my mind.  :-)  For one, I'm not entirely sure what I want to happen.  A Japanese defeat in the Russo-Japanese War might actually be for the best, as it might very well trigger a rethinking of militarism.
 * I wonder if I can keep Korea in Japanese control even with a defeat, though? Or create a later situation where Korea can return to Japanese domination?  Maybe after a Russian Revolution of some sort, assuming any such revolution occured, of course ...

Another issue to consider is the Trans-Siberian Railway. If the war occurs too early, than Russia would have an even harder time defending their interests in Manchuria than in OTL -- Nik 08:02, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Effects of different Russo-Japanese War
I think the best situation would be a sort of stalemate. Perhaps a compromise wherein Japan recognizes Russian sphere of influence in Manchuria while Russia recognizes Japan's sphere of influence in Korea - essentially what Japan had been trying for before the war. However, what was desired before the war would not satisfy the Japanese after the war. This will lead to unrest, and possible revolution in Japan.

For the Russians, retention of their interests in Manchuria would probably cause them to continue focusing their interests in East Asia, to the expense of the Balkans. This, of course, would have a significant impact 10 years later. Would the assassination of Franz Ferdinand in that case be anything more than a local issue? -- Nik 08:02, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC)