Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
wouldn't Finnish troops fought in Port Arthur?At the time Finland was a Grand Duchy (part of Russia). As the Russian regime was quite oppressive at the time (unlike the Alexander II time, you can still find his statue in the middle of Helsinki), many Finns celebrated the Japanese victory, in quite subtle way.
yes the Finns are famous for their apathy toward Russian misfortunes...Odd how events in the Pacific are celebrated in the Baltic.
This scenario requires one of the two to back off their aspirations in the Korean peninsula. Russia and Japan both felt their rightful spheres of influence included hegemony over the peninsula and Russian encroachment in the hermit kingdom was one of, if not the primary catalyst for the conflict.The entire war should have been avoided. Russia's possession of Port Arthur was a perfect late 1890's bargaining chip to disrupt Britain's growing relationship with Japan (before the Anglo-Japan alliance of 1902) and to both increase Russian trade and rattle Britain's fears for India.
Best path to Russo-Japan alliance is Russia to gift Port Arthur to Japan as part of a trade agreement, with basing privileges for the Russian Navy and Japan investing in the Trans Siberian and Manchurian railway. Japan has been building railways since the 1870s, and will have engineering expertise that the Russians may value.
Port Arthur is ice free year round. Vladivostok is not, and requires ice breakers. That's the whole reason Russia wanted Port Arthur, to serve as an ice free base year round. But if Japan and Russia are on friendly terms, Russia hardly needs a navy at all in the Pacific, and can redeploy her Pacific Fleet battleships to its European bases.
So in addition to the diplomatic benefits of gifting Port Arthur to the Japanese, Russia also gains by forgoing the unsuitability of operating its navy from the port plus the cost of the railway. All good for Russia I'd say, and Japan has a new friend. Just do this before the Anglo-Japan alliance of 1902. If Britain could see a way to deal with Japan in 1902, Russia can do it in the 1890s. Russia, like Britain and its concern over Germany, just needs suitable motivation to push for the Japan deal.
For starters, we need a POD that creates a closer understanding between Russia and Japan. Roman Rosen - Wikipedia apparently tried to avoid the war and negotiated treaties with Japan in the 1890s. There were others with the potential to see through the racism to see potential with Japan...
There is the barrier of Nicolas II failed trip to Japan to overcome. But the emperor himself visited Nicolas, that's pretty strong. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ōtsu_incident Maybe this guy can convince Nico to make a deal with Japan, Esper Ukhtomsky - Wikipedia
If the British could enter into an alliance with Japan, Russia can sort out a working relationship as well.Kinda
A war could have been avoided and a compromise reached.
Problem with the concept is the Russia would have to treat Japan as an equal.
Now ain't that a can of worms.
Japan was not treated as an equal and the Tsar was not the guy to do that.
Problem is some guys just love a good war.
I can't imagine Japan buying Russian made warships. Even during peacetime they were unstable pieces of junk, with bits of wood wedged into spaces where the armour plate didn't line up.All part of the Great Game.Russia was seen as a great British enemy and so Japan could be used as a counterweight as well as buying our ships.
It's interesting that Japan gave the USA its USS Maine moment (the US pretense to declare war on Spain) and the excuse to go to war with the Japanese attack and sinking of USS Panay in December 1937.Beside politically but historically, how the Americans looked to the Japanese can be observed even today.
In April 2017, US threatened NK that it would attack NK if the latter did not abandon the nuclear weapon.
NK did not obey but US did not attack.
NK understood US only shouted and was not so strong as it imagined.
History repeats.
The USA was only getting back on its feet in 1937, there was no appetite for a war whatsoever. IMO. The Maine triggered a war that the USA was happy to take on -- largest casualties suffered by the US were from tropical diseases, IIRC. Pearl Harbor created instant war fever and negated the need to teach how to hate the enemy. In democracies and totalitarian states alike, politicians read the thermometer of public opinion and act appropriately.
In today's realty, I believe, it is no longer possible to 'win' a war once it becomes 'unpopular'. Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, GW2.
Maybe Dreadnought came out of Tsushima but maybe not. New Project to look into!
If only Nicolas' trip to Japan had gone well.It taught machine gun tactics and set the stage for the later Russian Revolution and of course the road to Pearl Harbour.