The world 'pulls a Meiji'

[NapoleonXIV]

What would happen if the response of the entire non-Western world to the European challenge was the same as Japan's? What if India modernized her army in the 1600's and China, the Ottomans, even SE Asia and the African kingdoms did the same? Nothing else changes, they don't have any more money or different cultures, they just modernize their military and as much of their culture as necessary to support this. They do it at the crucial moment also, when they have enough money and have not been so coopted as to make the effort futile.

I'm not putting this in ASB because I don't think it is, even on a plausibility definition of ASB. On the contrary, I wonder why they didn't do this.

 

[David S Poepoe]

You have GOT to read David Ralston's Importing the European Army. There is no way you can modernize your army without a cascade effect that eventually touchs all aspects of your society.

These societies could not do 'a Meiji' since their societies were not ready for such advancement to modernize and maintain their new status. Among other things - a host of other things. Many don't have any really centralized government or infrastructure. Having shiny new rifles is one thing, but being able to buy new ammunition and powder and pay for a professional standing army requires money.

 

[Fenwick]

You have GOT to read David Ralston's Importing the European Army. There is no way you can modernize your army without a cascade effect that eventually touchs all aspects of your society.

These societies could not do 'a Meiji' since their societies were not ready for such advancement to modernize and maintain their new status. Among other things - a host of other things. Many don't have any really centralized government or infrastructure. Having shiny new rifles is one thing, but being able to buy new ammunition and powder and pay for a professional standing army requires money.

Also Japan had a very unique position which allowed them to have an isolated revolution, and modernize with limited interference, plus they were at the right time for technology to be open to an opening nation. For India, or other nations it was very hard to keep everyone out.

Japan was an island which had a very closed off soceity prior to the Europeans arriving. So when the Meiji government made changes it was very easy to go into the system of mostly peasants and improve it. Technology was at the point were creating finished goods was not a craftsmen skill. In the 1700's industry was a craft, people were trained to do it, and all over the world systems were set up to ensure that the craftsmen skill was kept isolated. In 1900's it was put a person in the assembly line ahve them pull a lever, move a item ,or punch a hole and move it down. So Western goods could be created with a minimum of effort, and training.

 

[MerryPrankster]

Flocc said that some Indian states could have done it--there were some that were able to avoid the temptation of overinvesting in artillery at the expense of infantry and cavalry.

 

[Flocculencio]

Flocc said that some Indian states could have done it--there were some that were able to avoid the temptation of overinvesting in artillery at the expense of infantry and cavalry.

I think the only candidate in India is the Sikh Empire and they're (i) a bit too late, coming to prominence in the time period when the Brits had shifted from a trading mentality to a take-it-all mentality and (ii) had some serious internal power structure problems.

Shift *Ranjit Singh back 50 years and stabilise the Khalsa and it could be done.

 

[tormsen]

The whole world pulling a Meiji is unlikely due to the reasons mentioned above. Perhaps more countries could pull something like that though.

Imagine if Korea's hermit kingdom mentality had been lessened by a xenophilic ruler who sought to use Western allies to balance the growing power of Japan against the fading Qing. The threat represented by Japan's industrialisation could provide impetus. Having both Japan and Korea industrialising and growing in power to the east could force the Qing to do so, or the Qing could simply swing it's support behind Korea in a struggle with Japan. With hostile Koreans, Russians and Chinese on the continent the Japanese might be suitably deterred from Asian adventuring, only to look elsewhere to expand their empire, such as getting involved in the scramble for Africa.

Siam never fell to Western powers, perhaps it too could have industrialised with enough effort and foreign support. Perhaps by the aforementioned thwarted Japan, who when robbed of a chance to conquer instead turns to a role of teacher and civiliser, helping advance Thailand. If things in Europe go ahead as OTLish, post-WW1 Germany could lend a hand too, seeking a way to outsource Germany industry in the same way it did in China in OTL. Meanwhile, as the Qing collapse and Russia becomes communist, Korea siezes Manchuria as "historical Goryeo" and supports a white Russian state based in Vladivostok.

Hmm, going off on a tangent. Sorry.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

What would happen if the response of the entire non-Western world to the European challenge was the same as Japan's? What if India modernized her army in the 1600's and China, the Ottomans, even SE Asia and the African kingdoms did the same? Nothing else changes, they don't have any more money or different cultures, they just modernize their military and as much of their culture as necessary to support this. They do it at the crucial moment also, when they have enough money and have not been so coopted as to make the effort futile.

I'm not putting this in ASB because I don't think it is, even on a plausibility definition of ASB. On the contrary, I wonder why they didn't do this.

Well, in the 1600s I don't think it's clear that many of the states you mention were terribly inferior to Europe in very many categories.

If you meant to say the 1800s, many were on the path, but had much more significant obstacles. In Africa and SE Asia the polities that existed were just too small and poor to even have an opportunity to begin such a process - the closest in Africa was probably Zanzibar, which was on the way towards building a state but just didn't have time.

The only "serious" states other than Japan were China, Persia, and the Ottomans, and the last two were unfortunately located, both in terms of geopolitics and topography. For example, in Japan you could easily build a profitable railway given the large and concentrated population. The entire population of the Ottoman Empire in the late 19th c was about 60% of Japan's but ten times the size, most of which was desert or extremely mountainous. (Japan is mountainous too but the population is concentrated on fairly easily connectable plains).

Also, Japan could maintain a fairly small military establishment in peacetime, whereas the Ottomans had to maintain a large standing army because they bordered on Russia, Austria-Hungary, and British Egypt.

Persia had many of the same problems, but started out smaller and weaker and was torn apart by Anglo-Russian rivalry.

I'm not a China expert, but a lot of effort went into keeping China weak and divided.

Japan was an island, far away from the centers of European power, and didn't have large Christian minorities for the Powers to obsess over. I think she was in a unique and fortunate position.

 

[Broz]

in 1600 asian armies were similar in numbers and firepower to european

it was the continued development of tehnology and emfasis on tactics and strategy that made european armies so powerfull in later history, as well as the industrial revolution

and it was the fact you could buy a battle wictory for a bag of glass pearls or scare an idigenous army away with a couple of horses that made european states colonial superpowers

but really in 1600 a man with a musket and a sword is a man with a musket and a sword anywhere you go

 

[admkenshin]

Hmm, going off on a tangent. Sorry.

Dont stop, it's interesting ^_^.

Anyway, the POD here could be no 16th century invasion of Korea by Japan. This would in a way prevent most of the korean isolation, and also remove the number one relationship problem between Korea and Japan.

Korea would be opened to trade by Japan as historically, but without the fear of invasion by Japan, would be much more cooperative (which means that Japan has no reason to invade in the first place. Japans main problem with Korea was that it was too weak against Russia. If they got it, Japan had serious problems), and a strategic alliance against Russia wouldn't be impossible. Japan would probably still be able to invest in railroads in Korea, and would then be able to buy raw materials just as cheaply (if not more) than they got them from the occupation.

By the time of the boxer rebellion (unless it is butterflied, unlikely if the western powers intervene in China as historically), japanese and korean troops might both participate. Japan could get Taiwan as historically, and Korea would perhaps grab some land across the Yalu (not much, but enough to be able to build a powerful defensive line).

By this time, Korea is a dagger aimed at Russia, so the Russo-Japanese war might not happen, or Russia would actually commit much more to it, but the advantage of a strong Korea should help Japan here. Depending on the results of the war, the Entente might look different (successful 1905 rebellion?), but it probably wont change much.

WW1 goes mostly historically, since the Pacific was hardly an important theater. During the 20's recession, the result in Japan and Korea would depend on their forms of government. If both were somewhat democratic, a military takeover in one nation could have the other support a democratic comeback. At any rate, Japan would have many investments in Korea (and perhaps Korea likewise in Japan), so militarism in one country would be met with trade problems, and since this trade would be important, militarism wouldn't be able to get the same hold. Hopefully.

If ww2 happens, I have no idea how it would go. It would depend entirely on the economic situation in the states and china (most probably Japan and Koreas biggest trade partners), but if there's no trade embargo against Japan, I cannot see them attacking the US at least.

This might lead to an interesting timeline, but after the boxer uprising, it is very hard to predict anything, thus meaning that one has to 'invent' history .

 

[S. Amir]

Don't forget that Pre-Meiji Japanese society was quite literate, educated and relative advanced compared most Asian countries. They've already been exposed western knowledge to a certain level through the rangaku schools. This provides them with the necessary base for a speedy modernization.

 

[Caesar]

I like this idea. I do think that some of the countries mentioned might have been able to pull off what Japan did, and it would be very interesting to see what the results of this might be.