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
“When, in December, 1903, the Japanese Government presented their
proposals in reply to the draft agreement drawn up by Alexeieff,
and described by him as ‘an honourable retreat for her from a
position which she has herself created by her arrogant behaviour,’
he characterized these as being ‘equivalent to a demand that the
Russian Government should formally acknowledge Japan’s protectorate
over Korea.’ Indeed, he considered the requests made by her ‘so
presumptuous that we should at once reject them.’ In presenting
such requests, he said, ‘Japan exceeds the limit of all reason,’
and he consequently felt that no concession was possible, and
that it would be better to break off negotiations, after clearly
explaining that in her proposals Russia ‘had reached the extreme
limit of concession.’ Then, when the Japanese began to occupy
Korea at the end of December, 1903, Alexeieff represented most
strongly that ‘for self-defence corresponding steps should be
taken to maintain the balance of power upset by the occupation
of Korea’—_i.e._, that the lower reaches of the Ya-lu should be
occupied, and the mobilization of the Far Eastern districts and
the province of Siberia should be carried out. He was of opinion
that Japan’s final proposals, received in the middle of January,
1904, were ‘in tone and substance still more pretentious and bold
than before,’ and he insisted on the negotiations being broken off,
asserting that their continuation ‘could not lead to a settlement
of mutual interests,’ and that ‘any display of yielding on our
part would lead to a great loss of dignity to Russia and to a
corresponding augmentation of the prestige of Japan in the eyes of
the whole East.’
“This was three weeks before the diplomatic negotiations were
broken off. Has Russia’s dignity not yet suffered in full measure?
“Finally, our last answer to Japan—despatched only a few days
before the declaration of war—which contained a refusal to consider
a neutral zone, and admitted Japan’s right to predominate in Korea,
was stated to be ‘an exhibition of generosity beyond which Russia
could scarcely go.’
“After three or four days—_i.e._, on February 6, 1904—diplomatic
relations were broken off by Japan, and so began that awful war
which might have been prevented without loss of dignity to us if
the Viceroy’s policy had been a little less ‘firm,’ and—it must be
added—a little less eccentric.”
My opinions with regard to the relative importance of the tasks which
confronted our War Department made me a convinced opponent of an active
Asiatic policy.
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