The Role of the Russo-Japanese War in Japanese Imperialism - Essay Example

The Role of the Russo-Japanese War in Japanese Imperialism The Role of the Russo-Japanese War in Japanese Imperialism After the disorder that burdened Japan at the end of the Russo-Japanese War, the government began an extensive propagandism. The aim was the obviously upset Japanese citizens, and the technique was mostly showing off military skills. This campaign signalled the rise of Japan to imperialism (Kowner, 2007). Several Japanese historians in the 1960s discussed the role of the Russo-Japanese War in Japanese imperialism. The book Japan Examined (1983) broadly discusses the contribution of the War to the growth of Japan as an imperial power. Despite of its limited point of view on the effects of the War, the arguments discussed in this book remain important (Kowner, 2007, p. 30). Because of such concerns, this essay tries to evaluate the place of the Russo-Japanese War in the Japan’s history of imperialism. The Russo-Japanese War and the Rise of Japan to Imperialism Interest in the role of the Russo-Japanese War in Japan’s rise as an imperial power appeared only after the Second World War, when it became likely to examine the direction of imperialism. At this time it became clear that the Russo-Japanese War was the biggest fight in which Japan was caught up in the initial period of its modernisation efforts. Before the Russo-Japanese War, Japan had a conflict with China, but the fight with Russia was greater, and losses in the economy and death of many for Japan were much larger (Wolff & Steinberg, 2007). The conflict with Russia was caused by imperialistic clash that developed from the competition of Japan and Russia over Korea and Manchuria. The entering of Russia into North Korea and its refusal to leave Manchuria were answered by Japanese efforts to discuss a splitting up of the territory into provinces. Yet, the Russian government was stubborn and it was eager to wage war believing that Japan was destined to be overpowered and that a successful Russian campaign would prevent the developing possibility of civil war in Russia (Gordon, 2003). Japan ended bargaining efforts and terminated peaceful relations with Russia. The resulting War was massive for Japan (Wells & Wilson, 1999, 161): The [Japanese] government spent at least 7.6 times as much on the war with Russia as on the earlier war, though its normal expenditure immediately before this war was only 2.6 times higher than just before the previous one. More than five times as many soldiers were sent to the Russo-Japanese War, and six times as many died. The large number of men recruited in 1904-5, as well as the high number of farm horses and cattle requisitioned, had a marked effect on agriculture and industrial production, a factor that had not been present in 1894-5. In spite of the significance of the War as regards to its direct and longer-term effects, it has been largely ignored by intellectuals except for military historians. However, it is seen as a crucial period in Japanese imperialism. In addition, media scholars raise the role of the War in the course of producing a nationalist media and avid readers (Wells & Wilson, 1999). Still, very few have been discussed about the importance attributed to the War, in spite of the abundance of the literature on the subject area. So, the question remains: Was the Russo-Japanese War a decisive moment in the rise of Japan as an imperial power? Some scholars would claim that it never was. The rise of Japan to imperialism, according to them, was a continuous string of occurrences from the time when Japan decided in 1874 to open Korea to the world, and possibly further than the grand ambition of Tokugawa propagandists to expand (Wolff & Steinberg, 2007). According to Wells and Wilson (1999), there were no defining moments for, as soon as activated, Japanese imperialism was pushed unstoppably by the forces of past and present incidents until the demise of the regime in 1945. The explanations of these scholars were not that persuasive, especially if the idea of historical determinism is disregarded. Furthermore, all findings indicate that the choice to create an empire arose in the latter part of the Meiji era (Kowner, 2007). The leaders’ foreign policy measures during the second half of the 19th century show a serious distaste towards expansionist goals rather than an intense desire to expand, and even Japan’s hostile response to China in 1894 was viewed with great fear (Gordon, 2003). Japan’s oligarchs could have postponed or sped up its actions had they wanted to. Hence, another argument, which is more convincing, had been introduced. According to some scholars, the Sino-Japanese War was a defining moment, possibly the start of contemporary Japanese imperialism, because Japan gained her very first foreign territories after the war, the Pescadore Islands and Taiwan (Wells & Wilson, 1999). Yet, it is still interesting to know whether the outcomes of the Sino-Japanese War were as important as the consequences of the war between Japan and Russia. The major path of Japanese imperialism was towards establishing and strengthening control in East Asian global political affairs (Duus, 1995). As regards to this, the Sino-Japanese War broke off quite incompletely and with much less certainty than the Russo-Japanese War. Japan’s success in the Sino-Japanese War did not help the country take over Korea. At the conclusion of the war, Japan continued to be a seaward island dominion with almost no control over the situations and events in China and confronting serious rivalry from the Russians for ownership of Korea. If Japan was defeated by Russia, Japan could have failed even this insignificant status (Wolff & Steinberg, 2007). Yet, in truth, Japan defeated Russia, and her standing in the Far East was considerably transformed accordingly. The international treaties and diplomatic negotiations that ensued rewarded Japan a new territory in southern Manchuria and Korea. The protection and development of this province became the major objective of the foreign policy measures of Japan over the following 40 years (Wray & Conroy, 1983, p. 154). In relation to this the Russo-Japanese War was the turning point of Japanese imperialism, a period in history where supremacy in East Asia and control over the Asia became a central nationalist goal. At any later time, major actions could have shifted Japan’s foreign policy to another path, but the conflict between Russia and Japan did produce circumstances that lessened the possibility of a foreign policy opposed to imperialistic objectives. Primarily, the successful campaign against Russia raised Japan as one of East Asia’s imperialist powers. By a string of bilateral settlements with France, the United States, Great Britain, and Russia, Japan actually agreed not to intervene on the territories and outposts of other imperialist powers if they were given full freedom to operate in Manchuria and Korea (Young, 1999). Western acceptance of the newly acquired status of Japan on the Asian mainland showed a blend of defencelessness, apathy, and self-centredness. According to Kowner (2007), by the norms of the period, provided that Japan did not violate the privileges and liberties of the other imperialists, excluding the overpowered Russians, their acquisitions were valid. A new world order had been built by the success of Japan, and it is totally futile to challenge it. No imperialist power was eager to provoke Japan. None of the imperialists answered the requests of Korea to defend them from Japanese command. Japan, by 1910, was adequately certain of their right to take over the country officially as a colony (Wray & Conroy, 1983). According to Wolff and Steinberg (2007), under the rule of imperialism, the tough build alliances, and Japan had showed their great potential to Western powers by expelling the Russian forces into mainland Manchuria and by destroying the Russian armada. The formation of an official territory acknowledged by the other imperialists had other outcomes that further placed Japan into imperialist international relations. First is the growth of new commercial focus on economic development. Without a doubt, growing local economies kept on supplying the key mechanism for economic development and commercial expansion, but in the initial post-war period the media flaunted confident ideas of prospective economic benefits from China, Manchuria, and Korea (Gordon, 2003). A group of business people, merchants, and stock brokers started to relocate to the region to exploit new prospects. According to Peattie (1984), the economic opportunities in Japan drew the attention of not only the leading investors and capitalists but the local entrepreneurs as well encouraged as much by nationalism as by riches. Another outcome of the new status of Japan was a heightened understanding of the strategic military requirements of Japan. The political affairs of imperialism were undecided, and neither political assurances nor acceptance by the Western countries as a co-equal was an adequate security for a dominion of the form Japan currently owned (Kowner, 2007). The triumph over Russia, instead of lessening the defence needs of Japan, had considerably enlarged them. A newly formed national defence programme in 1907 was created on the idea that France, the United States, and Russia would be Japan’s leading theoretical adversaries (Wray & Conroy, 1983). All had friendly relations with Japan in the past, but all had significant aspirations towards the Pacific and East Asia, and by it all were capable threats to the Japanese imperial foothold. The military formation promoted increase in weaponry to deal with this possible danger (Wray & Conroy, 1983). Imperialism failed to gratify a hunger for strategic safety; it generated new demands that cried hungrily to be gratified. An ultimate outcome of the triumph over Russia and the agreements afterwards was to generate a widespread ‘popular imperialism’ (Wray & Conroy, 1983, 156). As stated by Wray and Conroy (1983), “In the final analysis, an empire is as much a state of mind as a question of political boundaries” (p. 156). The official imperial dominion of Japan did not grow significantly from 1905 to 1931, yet popular loyalty to imperialist goals intensified. To challenge the validity of the political and economic campaigns of Japan on the Asian mainland was to attract popular dissent, if not direct charges of disloyalty. At the most profound way, the war between Russian and Japan had implanted imperialist sentiments all over Japan (Wray & Conroy, 1983). This could have been the foremost outcome of the Russo-Japanese War because it strongly attached Japanese national pride to imperialism. Conclusions In view of the above discussion, it is obvious that the Russo-Japanese War was a defining moment not just in the rise of Japan as an imperial power but in the historical trajectory of imperialism and military exploits in the contemporary period. The successful campaign of Japan against Russia pushed it further into the realm of imperialism. Japan, seeing its potentials in a magnified lens, realised fully that it possesses the necessary resources, intellect, and popular sentiment to climb into the global arena. References Duus, P. (1995). The abacus and the sword: the Japanese penetration of Korea, 1895-1910. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Gordon, A. (2003). Modern History of Japan. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kowner, R. (2007). The Impact of the Russo-Japanese War. London: Routledge. Peattie, M.R. (1984). Introduction, in Ramon H. Myers and Mark R. Peattie, eds. The Japanese Colonial Empire, 1895-1945. New Jersey: Princeton. Wells, D. & Wilson, S. (1999). The Russo-Japanese War in Cultural Perspectives, 1904-05. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Wolff, D. & Steinberg, J.W. (2007). The Russo-Japanese War in Global Perspective: World War Zero, Volume 2. Danvers, MA: BRILL. Wray, H. & Conroy, H. (1983). Japan Examined: Perspectives on Modern Japanese History. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press. Young, L. (1999). Japan’s total empire: Manchuria and the culture of wartime imperialism. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Read More