The Russian Army and the Japanese War, Vol. 1 (of 2): Being Historical and Critical Comments on the Military Policy and Power of Russia and on the Campaign in the Far EastKuropatkin, A. N. (Alekseĭ Nikolaevich)
History
The Russian Army and the Japanese War, Vol. 1 (of 2): Being Historical and Critical Comments on the Military Policy and Power of Russia and on the Campaign in the Far East
Kuropatkin, A. N. (Alekseĭ Nikolaevich)
Russo-Japanese War, 1904-1905
“Thus warmly, eloquently, and shrewdly did Kuropatkin condemn the
Ya-lu adventure, and thus clearly did he see on the political
horizon the ruinous consequences that it would have for Russia.
But why did this bold and clear-sighted censor not protest against
the decision of the Port Arthur council? Why, after making a few
caustic remarks about Bezobrazoff, did he sign the paper which
put the Ya-lu adventure under the protection of Russian troops,
and thus stop the evacuation of Manchuria? Why did not the other
members, who shared Kuropatkin’s opinion as to the great danger
of Bezobrazoff’s adventurous schemes, and expected a rupture with
Japan to be imminent, prevent, on the authority of those July
councils at Port Arthur, Bezobrazoff’s political and economic
escapades? Why did they, on the contrary, with Kuropatkin, put
their signatures to a document which admitted Bezobrazoff’s
enterprises as useful Government undertakings, ratify a treacherous
policy in China, Korea, and Japan, and so lay the first stone in
the monument of indelible shame erected by the war? Why? Simply
because at that time everybody was afraid of Bezobrazoff.”
Such accusations, which have had wide publicity, require an explanation.
The council held at Port Arthur, in June, 1903, was called for the
purpose of finding, if possible, some means of settling the Manchurian
question without lowering the dignity of Russia. There were present at
this council, in addition to Admiral Alexeieff and myself, Acting State
Councillor Lessar, Russian Minister in China; Chamberlain Pavloff,
Russian Minister in Seoul; Major-General Vogak; State Councillor
Bezobrazoff; and M. Plancon, an officer of the diplomatic service. We
were all acquainted with the wish of the Emperor, that our enterprises
in the Far East should not lead to war, and we had to devise means of
carrying the Imperial will into effect. With regard to these means
there were differences of opinion, but upon fundamental questions there
was complete agreement. Among these were—
1. _The Manchurian Question._—On July 3 the council expressed its
judgment with regard to this question as follows: “In view of the
extraordinary difficulties and enormous administrative expenses
that the annexation of Manchuria would involve, all the members of
the council agree that it is, in principle, undesirable; and this
conclusion applies not only to Manchuria as a whole, but also to its
northern part.”
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