Ruridova wrote:Unicario wrote:
I never said that Asia for Asians didn't mean subservience to Japan or China. We just want Europeans to GTFO.
Smaller states are almost always leaning towards or in the sphere of another country, OTL and ATL. A "Europe out of Asia" policy(no matter how riddled with exceptions) means that European colonies would be released and sphered nations of European countries released. By simple geographic proximity, they would either wind up in the territory or sphere of control of China(like ATL Tibet, Turkestan, Central Asia, and Mongolia) or Japan(like ATL Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Indochina, and Thailand). It's happening in Europe and the Americas too; the Slavic sphere(before the 1990s divided into the Russian, Ukrainian, and Yugoslav spheres), German sphere, Dutch sphere, British sphere, communist sphere, Confederate sphere, Tawantisuyu sphere. "Europe out of Asia", because it puts that land up for grabs by Japan, seems of dubious legitimacy. Akin to Canada's "CSA out of the Three Mexican States" or even the EAU's "Germany out of Central Europe". There may be legitimate humanitarian reasons for saying it, but is that really why you're saying it?
Japan doesn't want to conquer them, no, they just want to exert economic hegemony. I'm taking your whole "NO GEACPS!" thing and turning into Japan simply being the superpower that watches over the smaller states.





