Did Emperor Meiji plan the war, or did his advisers conceive the idea of attacking Russia?
Why didn't the British fully commit to the Japanese side?
How was the United States able to convince the two sides to meet a peace agreement?
Does Japan have a legitimate claim to Sakhalin & the Kurils, historically speaking?
Also feel free to discuss the war in general and post related pics.
>Why didn't the British fully commit to the Japanese side?
Primarily because the French had an alliance with Russia and had Britain decided to come steaming in, France would have been obliged to fight alongside Russia. This was something that neither parties wanted, considering the situation with Germany in Europe (who would have gained massively from an Anglo-French split), and the looming Entente cordiale treaty was literally around the corner (it was signed 2 months after hostilities between Russia and Japan had broken out). Secondly most of the world was expecting Russia to curb-stomp the Japanese, you have to remember that the world was utterly astounded when the Japanese beat the Russians at Tsushima.
Thanks, I didn't realize the French and Russians were allied at the time. I have heard/read that the British did support in small ways, do you know of any examples of this?
I've read that the British passed on intercepted wireless transmissions and intelligence to the Japanese and The Japanese shared information and intrigue about the Russians to the British. Also the British denied the use of the Suez-Canal to the Russian Baltic Fleet after the hilarious Dogger bank incident.
>the world was utterly astounded when the Japanese beat the Russians
Was it not spun as a British proxy war of sorts? The majority of Japan's navy being British designed and built, and Togo being British trained and educated?
Seems like a convenient excuse.
>Was it not spun as a British proxy war of sorts? The majority of Japan's navy being British designed and built, and Togo being British trained and educated?
Not necessarily, the reason for the worlds shock was more because it was the first time in the modern age that a European power had been soundly defeated by an Asian power on the field of battle, using European doctrines and tactics.
I would lean more to say that the Japanese definitely used the Anglo-Japanese alliance as a shield to ward off other nations (like France and Germany) from pitching in on the Russian side. The British in turn using the alliance as a shield against Russian expansion in the far east. While the war really had nothing to do with Britain in regards to why Japan declared war, it was certainly in their interest for Japan to emerge victorious.
I was doing some reading and stumble upon this.
>"On January 18 the annual lecture on European history delivered before the emperor was devoted to reading an extract from David Hume's History of England describing the defeat of the Spanish Armada by the British, a curiously prophetic choice."
Source: Lines 36-39, Page 600, Ch. 53, "Emperor of Japan: Meiji and His World."
This can't be a coincidence, right?
>How was the United States able to convince the two sides to meet a peace agreement?
Because US wanted to look like a nice peacemaker and while Russia was seriously worn out by the war, so was Japan. All the parties were interested.
>Does Japan have a legitimate claim to Sakhalin & the Kurils, historically speaking?
Sakhalin, not really (but fucking look at it now, look at it, it's a fucking dump). Northern Territories are rightful Jap clay.
>The main Russian fleet then approached Tangiers, Morocco, and lost contact with the Kamchatka for several days
>The Kamchatka eventually rejoined the fleet and claimed that she had engaged three Japanese warships and fired over 300 shells
>The ships she had actually fired at were a Swedish merchantman, a German trawler, and a French schooner