Nineteen Russian vessels were destroyed, the Japanese ships sustaining
almost no injury. All that remained of the Russian fleet was
surrendered to Admiral Togo, and Rojestvenski, desperately wounded, and
all of his surviving officers, were prisoners of war in Tokio.
With this climax of Russian disaster the end had come. Although Russia
still doggedly refused to acknowledge defeat, and made feint of
preparation for reenforcements and future triumphs, the world saw that
there must be peace; and that the only existing obstacle was the
determination of a proud nation not to be placed in a humiliating
position.
The absolute neutrality of the United States enabled President
Roosevelt to intervene at this critical moment as no European sovereign
could have done. His proposal that there should be a meeting of envoys
for the discussion of some peaceable adjustment of their differences
was promptly accepted by both nations, and with the hostile armies
still facing each other in Manchuria, arrangements were made for the
Peace Conference to be held in the United States in August.
The envoys selected for this mission were M. de Witte and Baron Rosen,
Ambassador to the United States from Russia, on the one hand, and Baron
Komura, Minister of Foreign Affairs in Japan, and Kogaro Takahira,
Minister at Washington from that country, on the other. If the
appointment of M. de Witte had awakened expectation of a presentation
of the Russian cause from the view-point of a progressive leader, the
mistake was quickly discovered. M. de Witte, performing a duty
intrusted to him by his Imperial master, was quite a different person
from de Witte, the exponent of liberal ideas, pleading the cause of an
oppressed people before the Tsar; and an adamantine side of his
character, quite unexpected, was revealed. The fencing between the two
skilled diplomats, de Witte and Komura, afforded a fascinating study in
racial methods and characteristics at a high point of development; the
impression left being that the intense sincerity of purpose in the
Japanese, and the lack of it in the other, was the main point of
difference. The Russian argument throughout was upon a perfectly
insincere basis. The Russian envoy never once recognized that he
represented a defeated nation, steadily maintaining the attitude of a
generous foe willing to stop fighting to prevent the shedding of more
blood. In striking contrast to this was Baron Komura's calm
presentation of his twelve peace proposals, and the sad sincerity with
which he tenaciously maintained their justification by the results of
the war.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account