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
“Our military position on the Turkish frontier also is no longer
as favourable as it was in the beginning of the nineteenth
century. This is particularly the case now that Germany seems to
be taking so much interest in Turkish affairs. Again, the defence
of the Caucasus has also become difficult. So, too, on the Afghan
frontier we now have powerful neighbours, who in organization and
armament are more on a level with our troops in Turkestan than
they were in the beginning of the last century. An Afghan invasion
of our territory is by no means an impossibility, a fact which
complicates considerably the defence of Turkestan.
“China is at present alone in having no army worthy of serious
consideration, and she is impotent against us in the Pri-Amur[33]
or Kuan-tung districts. But in the place of a weak China has arisen
a powerful Japan, whose armed forces may prove a danger to our
troops in the Far East until sufficient reinforcements can be sent
out.
“Still, notwithstanding our great length of frontier to be
defended and the immense development in the military power of our
neighbours, the difficulties in the way of defeating us on our own
soil are so obvious and so great that, if we confine our actions to
self-defence, no enemy will be likely to attack us.”
Finally, an analysis of the strength and resources of our nearest
neighbours forced me to the conclusion that “_our western frontier
has never in the whole history of Russia been exposed to such danger
in the event of a European war as it is now, and that accordingly the
attention of the War Department in the first years of the present
century should be confined to strengthening our position on that side,
and not diverted to aggressive enterprises elsewhere_.”
FOOTNOTES:
[21] The frontiers with Norway and Sweden were settled by the Treaty of
Friederichsham in 1809, and the St. Petersburg Convention of 1826.
[22] [Written before the partition.—ED.]
[23] In Trans-Caucasia the frontier along the Rivers Araks and Astara
was fixed by the Treaty of Turkmanchai in 1828, and in Trans-Caspia
along the Artek and the Kopet Dagh ridge by the Agreement at Teheran in
1881.
[24] The Trans-Caucasian frontier has held good for seventy years.
[25] [The line to Nushki is evidently referred to.—ED.]
[26] [_Sic._—ED.]
[27] [This view is interesting in the light of more recent events.—ED.]
[28] In 1897 the chief exports were: Cotton-stuffs, £344,100; naphtha
and its products, £100,800; and wool, £40,400. The chief imports were:
Tea, £3,210,900; cotton goods, £170,200; woven materials, £165,800;
live stock, £78,700; and leather, £72,300. Total exports, £640,000;
total imports, £3,920,000.
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