Pathway to Japanese Literature

[Today's World and East Asia]

“Gentlemen, the issues of China and Korea have recently attracted considerable public attention.”
“The fact that the Manchuria-Korea issue has come to attract attention not only among politicians and scholars but also among businessmen is most heartily welcome.”
“I have studied the China problem for over a dozen years now.”
“Yet until recently, society paid little heed to this.”
“That society now places such weight upon this matter across all strata is something we must rejoice in together, gentlemen.”
“Fundamentally, interpreting this issue requires understanding our nation’s present war concerning safety and peril, honor and disgrace.”
“The primary question lies in how this war will conclude.”
“Should we suffer defeat, it would extend beyond China and Korea.”
“We would face defending our very coastline.”
“This constitutes no trivial matter.”
“It stands as the gravest challenge looming over our people.”
“Yet I hold unwavering faith in our certain victory.”
“The authorities naturally share this conviction.”
“Moreover, our military wages battle with utmost confidence.”
“Through Japan’s valiant forces and officers uniting wisdom with courage, triumph must assuredly be ours.”
“However, victory alone cannot resolve all affairs.”

The world today is by no means dominated solely by Japan and Russia.
One must never forget that other powerful nations and great powers exist in the world besides Japan and Russia.
Were we to ask what great nations exist in today's world—what powerful nations there are—one would have to count seven or eight on one's fingers.
It presents a situation precisely like China’s Spring and Autumn and Warring States period, akin to the Seven Hegemons of that era.
In Europe exist six great powers: Britain, France, Germany, Russia, Austria, and Italy.
Adding the United States of America to these makes seven great powers.
Comparable to the Seven Hegemons of the Warring States period—though naturally our present age does not constitute such an era—it nearly replicates those historical circumstances.
And now, precisely as the Japanese Empire of the Far East stands poised to join these seven great powers as an eighth nation, this current war cannot be interpreted through the narrow lens of Japan and Russia alone.
This war constitutes a global issue.
"Therefore, gentlemen, I believe we might first frame today’s discussion under the title 'Japan’s Position in the World.'"
"However, this proves too expansive."
"If we narrow it slightly to 'Japan’s Influence on the Continent'—though 'continent' remains somewhat indefinite."
"I even contemplated titling it 'Influence in Asia,' but 'Asia' itself remains excessively broad."
"Thus I conclude it would be most fitting to frame our inquiry as 'Japan’s Influence in East Asia.'"

Thus among the world's powerful nations, Japan now stands poised to join their ranks—though it has not yet fully done so.
Even should one declare oneself a powerful nation, victory in battle alone does not confer that status.
Only when various established powers recognize Japan as their equal does it truly become a great nation.
Though a country may boast of its own might, it cannot count itself among the powers unless acknowledged by them.
To put it plainly: One only takes place among the world's great powers when granted voice in global affairs.
Should one trumpet its strength alone, none shall seek its counsel.
When weighty matters are decided exclusively by existing powers who merely notify others afterward, those others remain outside the circle of true influence.
Whether Japan will indeed attain this standing remains to be seen.
Hence this war.

To describe the nature of this war—though I am no military man and thus refrain from discussing it from a strategic perspective—let me first explain it in simplest terms: Russia remains essentially a medieval European nation.
Last November, I delivered a speech at a certain venue where I declared that Russia is entirely equivalent to Mongolia—that Russian military power is Mongol-style in nature, that the organization of Russia’s armed forces is Mongol-like, and that Russia’s autocratic monarchy similarly follows Mongol patterns.
It is truly perplexing that while Mongol power faded over five centuries ago, Russian power identical to it persists to this day.
Even when analyzed through evolutionary principles, it remains deeply questionable that such medieval entities endure in our time.
This must entirely stem from a particular diplomatic circumstance.
That is to say, due to international relations and the balance of power, while Russia projects itself as a great global force, its true strength has already dissipated.
Actual power has long since passed; what remains is merely residual momentum persisting through inertia.

"But what kind of power is Japan?
That is to say, a new power.
It is a power that has newly emerged.
It is a nation that has applied the world’s civilization and all its sciences, cast off medieval, autocratic, and feudal shackles, finally implemented constitutional government, established a constitution, and recognized religious freedom.
Even when reading history, since the French Revolution, autocratic forces had gradually waned, and after 1848 at the latest, autocratic forces had almost entirely vanished.
To use today’s popular parlance, even Austria and Prussia—which stubbornly resisted constitutional movements—along with the German states, were all ultimately defeated and came to implement constitutional government.
At this time, Russia alone as a single nation still did not reform its institutions.
This stemmed from Russia’s geographic remoteness being conducive to conservatism and the Slavic people’s inherent deficiency in political thought; however, I believe it was also due to its terrain being easy to defend yet difficult to attack, coupled with Western European nations overestimating its power following Napoleon’s failed invasion.
However, for such forces to compete against new forces and win ran counter to the principle of evolution.
As medieval relics, Mongolic forces and Asiatic forces existed in Europe.
Yet Japan, while being in Asia and possessing the world’s most advanced civilization, would defeat them.
That is to say, the 'Slavonic' nation established in Europe—
That a nation engaging in Asiatic activities while established in Asia should be struck down by Japan—which breathed the air of new civilization—was how utterly perplexing a phenomenon, yet this was indeed the truth.
It conformed to the principle of evolution.
Therefore, I was certain this war would be won."

However, upon achieving victory, what transformation would occur in Japan's position in the world as I define it? Were I to express my ideal and hope in the most explicit terms, it would be this: that the Japanese Empire seeks to fully secure the right to speak on all global matters—this I firmly believe. Yet how feasible would it be to obtain such influence all at once? This remains doubtful. Therefore, conceding several steps initially—first and foremost—the nation of Japan must attain sufficient authority over East Asia.

Should I humble myself thusly, some among you gentlemen might declare that Ōkuma has grown senile—yet I choose first to make this concession.

“Observe how the United States of America attained its status after gaining independence from Britain and gradually emerging as a nation.”

“Consider what position that country holds in global affairs today.”

“As you know well, President Monroe of America once proclaimed his doctrine.”

“This ‘Monroe Doctrine’ has been practically sanctified in American political thought.”

“It declared two principles: absolute prohibition against European interference in its sphere of influence, and reciprocal non-involvement in European matters.”

“Even America found it necessary to establish such parameters.”

“For Japan’s abruptly risen power to claim global voice and authority over all international issues remains pure fantasy.”

“Yet through this victory alone—in securing that within East Asia no major power may act willfully against our government’s will—our objective shall assuredly be achieved.”

However, even this would fail to achieve its purpose if left undefined.
As history taught us, even when a nation's status had reached a certain level, if its diplomacy did not keep pace, matters might not advance as intended.
Yet if the people became sufficiently advanced and their national power stood firmly behind the government, this country's diplomacy would undoubtedly succeed.
I believed that diplomacy developing in tandem with the nation's maturing external consciousness would steadily yield results without fail.

Therefore, first and foremost, the fact that Japan’s influence was fully realized on the Asian continent—in China, Korea, or Siberia—was something that the Japanese people had to fully recognize. Simultaneously, as the people’s zeal compelled the world to recognize this—as Japan’s influence became something that no major power could deny—only then did Japan’s every word and deed regarding issues that arose in the East come to possess the power to move the world.

Thus, as Japan’s position became established, the problem shifted to the region you gentlemen constantly discuss—Qing and Korea.
Japan will win; it certainly will win.
"The reason lies in our alignment with world civilization’s tide and striking down those opposing it."
"This embodies what Confucius meant by upholding benevolence through humanity’s path."
"They profess cruelty; we enact benevolence."
"We engage neighboring nations through benevolent governance."
"As for these neighbors—pitiable peoples afflicted by grave maladies surround us."
"Regarding their treatment: impetuous youths reportedly champion invasion doctrines."
"Consider their arguments—while personal ethics advance splendidly, international morality stagnates utterly."
"What they call strategic artifice—the Spring and Autumn Annals recognize no just wars; might alone prevails."
"That Japan should invade and despoil neighbors merely from strength—this astonishes profoundly."
"The very premise that international justice cannot exist constitutes profound error."
"To cite isolated instances of scheming and declare all global ethics immature—this reckons hastily indeed."
"In our twentieth century’s dawn, Machiavellian stratagems find no tolerance."

"If a nation invades another country, it will inevitably face invasion from others as retaliation."
"Since ancient times, countries that have invaded other nations by force have never ended well."
"Russia engages in reckless invasion."
"Japan opposed this invasion."
"'To foster neighboring nations and advance their progress—no sooner do they invoke such rhetoric than they themselves imitate that very aggression—what kind of absurdity is this?'"
"'Even a hegemon would not do such things.'"
"'How much less would a righteous king?'"
"'Truly, human desires are something astounding.'"
"'What did the Russian Emperor declare?'"
"'He declared China's opening to maintain its status quo and preserve its integrity.'"
"'He declared this not once but many times.'"
"In 1900, the Russian Emperor declared."
"Foreign Minister Lamsdorf of Russia sent the same reply to the American Secretary of State."
"The previous President McKinley issued a circular note to the powers regarding the opening of China."
"To this, Lamsdorf enthusiastically expressed agreement."
"However, at that time, the Russian Emperor, Foreign Minister, Cabinet—and especially the General Staff—had drawn lines on maps, declaring 'All of this would become Russian territory,' and their plans for invading China had been meticulously prepared."
"And yet, outwardly they continued to advocate for the preservation of China’s status quo, not uttering a single word about invasion."
"It is truly a formidable country."

[“Preservation of China” Theory]

In this situation, I keenly feel the necessity to reiterate my longstanding assertions regarding the China issue.
In Meiji 31 [1898], I delivered an address at the Tōhō Kyōkai.
The transcript appeared in the Tōhō Kyōkai’s magazine and was translated and published in European and American newspapers.
The core of that argument was that a country should not be destroyed by external pressure; rather, it perishes through self-destruction without being destroyed from without.
At that time, I spoke of what is called "the worm within the lion’s body."
A lion is truly a fierce beast and is called the king of all beasts.
Once it roars, all beasts cower in fear.
The reason it collapses is that worms develop in its body.
Then, the fierce beast naturally collapses.
This is what is called "the worm within the lion’s body."
China—this peerless great empire and nation of four hundred million—will not easily perish.
It is a country that even Napoleon worried might come to dominate the world in the future.
Such a country will not easily perish.
No strong country can destroy this.
Yet China loses territory at a thousand li daily—this is precisely why.
In merely a single century [of decline], it lost land amounting to a thousand li.
Two hundred years ago, Peter the Great—a Russian stalwart and invader—finally attempted to invade northern China.
Whereupon the Kangxi Emperor of China immediately dispatched troops and repelled this.
Russia suffered a crushing defeat; it was confounded.
The Treaty of Nerchinsk was an exceedingly humiliating document for Russia.

For China, it was a treaty of utmost honor; Peter the Great, enduring his own humiliation, came to conclude this agreement that brought prestige to its people. As for what became of the nation that had avoided invasion under the Kangxi Emperor’s descendants—a hundred years later, the Amur River was taken; fifty years after that, even the coastal regions were seized; and subsequently, Russia exploited China’s difficulties to take areas near Vladivostok. Under such circumstances—without facing military force or engaging in battle—it came to lose territory at a thousand li daily. The regions already seized amounted to an area roughly twenty times Japan’s size over a century. These were not taken through warfare. All were acquired through diplomacy—seized without deploying troops. Russia’s diplomatic methods are truly remarkable. Thus do all nations destroy themselves. They perish not through external forces but through internal collapse. It is not destruction from without but decay from within. Though some claim barbarians destroyed Rome, this is utterly false. Rome had already rotted from within. Only then did northern tribes invade. A thing must first decay before worms infest it. This is perishing through internal failure, not external destruction. That nations fall for such reasons—this is essentially what I have long maintained.

Then, at that time, discussions about partitioning China were quite vigorous.
It was there that I, believing in the impossibility of partitioning China, advocated for its preservation.
I gave the admonition to encourage China so that it would not perish.
At that very time, spheres of influence were being advocated, and partition was being advocated.
In that era, I believed that the people of the world were gravely mistaken.
Above all, diplomats were committing the gravest error.
It was not as if they could act like magicians, arbitrarily drawing lines on paper to seize others’ possessions—there was no logic by which such an act could be justified.
There was once an instance where a conference of powers had been held in Berlin to partition Africa.
It was at that time that the term “Sphere of Influence” first came into existence.
Such diplomatic terms had come into use.
This was when diplomats placed a large “table” before “Bismarck,” drew lines on a map with the pencils they held, and decided which areas should be taken—this for Britain, this for Germany, this for France.
Moreover, since taking this area would have been quite troublesome, they did things like deciding to leave it neutral.
In this manner, the lines drawn with a pencil on paper each manifested themselves in reality.
This was no wonder.
The continent called Africa, as you gentlemen can see on the map, had many areas left white.
It had not become too black.
The reason it wasn’t black was that there had been little exploration.
Or rather, places not explored were all left white.
Such areas could be arbitrarily determined by diplomats drawing lines on maps, but China has four thousand years of history and is inhabited by a great nation of four hundred million people.
It was extremely strange that even the most astute diplomats had forgotten this.

It was entirely different from Africa.
Such foolishness was impossible.
At that time, I denounced these so-called spheres of influence of various nations as being comparable to unsigned legal documents.
Yet Japan's own pledge regarding Fujian Province's non-cession was similarly condemned—we consequently faced vehement criticism from newspapers denouncing our actions as utterly inexcusable.
As Foreign Minister and a principal authority at the time, I endured particularly fierce public attacks; nevertheless, maintaining my integrity, I expressed my convictions without reservation.
This was indeed factual.
To assert rights over vital agreements lacking official seals constitutes pure absurdity.
What course then remains? A colossal nation like China becomes akin to a stirred hornet's nest when provoked.
Leave it undisturbed while providing careful oversight.
Thus did I advance this proposition: that guiding China's development through measured stewardship stands imperative.

And so arose the major issue: which country would serve as the teacher to develop and guide China, or become the doctor who examines and treats this great patient, or the nurse. Would Britain be suitable due to its longstanding relations? Or Russia because it shares a border? Or perhaps America acting as a friendly mentor to guide them? Such propositions were made—yet this too proved impossible. There existed no country in the world capable of leading China to civilization. There was no nation that could treat and revive the great patient called China. If such a country existed, there could only be one in all the world—not two. There was only one. What country was that one? It was Japan. There existed none other than Japan. This I had forewarned as Foreign Minister.

[Japan-China Relations]

It seemed that very time had now drawn near.
For when Japan extended its great influence over the Asian continent—and when its endeavors came to be respected by the world—Japan would at last be able to wholeheartedly embark on China's treatment.
The reason Japan was suited to guide and develop China, and undertake the task of curing this nation lying on its deathbed, was that our ancestors differed little from the Chinese.
Some claimed the Japanese were 'Aryan'—
They asserted we belonged to that race.
We questioned whether being 'Aryan' was truly desirable.
Whatever others might say, our blood differed from theirs.
Though some 'Aryan' blood might have mingled with ours through history—
To declare the Japanese an 'Aryan' race remained a rash conclusion.

To put it in the Chinese people’s own terms: Same Race and Script—the same race meaning belonging to the same ethnic group.
Next, we Japanese have owed a great debt to China these past fifteen hundred years in matters of literature, art, religion, politics, scholarship—and above all, ethics.
To state it plainly: your fathers must assuredly have been disciples of Master Confucius.
If not, they could only have been peasants or unlettered men of no learning. The great nation of fifty million consists largely of Master Confucius’ disciples.
Having received Master Confucius’ teachings, they speak of benevolence and righteousness whenever they open their mouths.
This concept of benevolence and righteousness springs wholly from Chinese philosophy—an influence of truly immense reach.
Lately those who disparage China affect the airs of worldly sophisticates—a most unexpected development.
Though China’s present state leaves much to be desired, it ill becomes us to revile even Master Confucius on that account.

For example, in medieval Christianity, it became corrupted through the power of the Roman Pope.
They use this to speak ill of Christianity, but Christianity should by no means be disparaged.
Christ is, at the very least, a saint.
He was a man who sought to save humanity from sin.
However, as those Roman monks' power temporarily grew, they committed every manner of crime.
They ended up committing even more than ordinary laypeople.
I think it is precisely those Roman monks who must have descended into hell in great numbers.
However, it would be unfair to condemn Christianity on account of that.
In the same way, it is truly regrettable that they speak ill of Master Confucius simply because his descendants—the Chinese people—have somewhat fallen into decline.

Be that as it may, the Japanese people are disciples of Master Confucius. In that case, we are fellow disciples with the Chinese people. Same Race and Script—and even sharing the same Master—make it only natural that China’s development should be entrusted to Japan. The Japanese people share the same race, script, and school with the Chinese; we studied Chinese philosophy, Chinese literature, Chinese politics, and every field of Chinese academic arts. The customs and practices observed in your households today also largely stem from China. That this nation is most suited for China’s development remains beyond dispute. Thus when we Japanese tell the Chinese: 'You suffer grave illness from poisoning by Buddhism and Confucianism—we too once endured this malady, but through Western medicine regained health a hundredfold,' we offer this remedy and urge you to take it. This can only be done between kinfolk. When races differ—when customs and civilizational roots diverge—even friendship breeds suspicion through human frailty. Shoddy missionaries' repeated deceptions spawn fears of fresh schemes. Yet being of shared race and school—closest kin—we Japanese shall tend them with utmost sincerity. The Chinese too shall place their trust. What China lacks today—in my view—is political capability. All customs rot when politics decay. Corrupt governance ultimately corrupts the people.

Even a country like Korea was more advanced than Japan in every aspect fifteen hundred years ago.
Literature and crafts both flourished.
For instance, pottery known as Goryeo ware—what remains today constitutes true treasures.
The technical mastery required to produce such ceramics was no ordinary feat.
Judging by these examples, there must have existed other exquisite crafts as well.
Moreover, in literature too, there were numerous significant literary works.
Why then has it reached its current state?
The corruption stems entirely from defective governance.

China too has experienced the same—due to poor politics, literature, arts, and all other things have gradually declined.
China’s textiles, pottery, sculpture, painting, and various other crafts were once quite thriving; however, from just about two hundred years ago onward, they gradually declined and have now become exceedingly diminished.
Therefore, in developing China, political reform must first be undertaken.
Guiding this is Japan’s divine mission.
And now, the appropriate time has come for Japan to fulfill this divine mission.
The time has now come when Japan will face almost no interference in treating China and guiding China.
In another sense, guiding China is Japan’s repayment of obligation to China.

Despite having reached such a time, it remains most improper to advocate aggressive arguments that stir jealousy and suspicion among the Chinese people.
Japanese politicians and scholars must exercise utmost caution in both words and deeds at this critical juncture.
As declared in the Imperial Rescript on war proclamation, Japan—naturally—along with the United States of America and Britain, has proclaimed the preservation of China as our shared principle.
The opening of China constitutes not merely Japan’s principle alone but one that has become established worldwide.
It has nearly attained the status of a fundamental global doctrine.
To contravene this doctrine would strip China of its hard-won resolve to depend upon Japan.
Should this resolve be lost, consequences would follow: detriment to China’s interests, Japan’s profound reluctance, and disruption to peace.
This means that should the Chinese people revolt politically—we could not remain silent.

The same applied to Korea.
Should Korea's monarch and ministers defy the sacred will of His Majesty the Emperor—so benevolent and magnanimous—and, under misunderstandings about territorial seizure, engage in conspiracies with the enemy or become ensnared by ambitious nations, one could not say Japan might not be compelled to annex Korea.
Was this truly Japan destroying another nation?
By no means.
It would be Korea destroying itself.

Such being the case, the same held true for China.
However much Japan extended friendship toward China, should China's rulers—harboring suspicion—succumb to scheming tactics of so-called ambitious nations and thereby harm Japan, such conduct could never be permitted.
No sovereign, however benevolent and magnanimous, could countenance overlooking this through half-measures.
In certain circumstances, seizing nations and executing populations became necessary.
Subduing tyranny was essential.
Yet Japan did not hold aggression as its principle.
Needless to say, subjects governed by His Benevolent and Magnanimous Majesty must treat China amiably.
Given that China and Japan shared the Same Race and Script—having been nurtured under the same teacher for fifteen centuries—Japan was obliged through friendship to advance China's civilization utterly; this ethos must permeate China thoroughly.
Otherwise, grave errors would arise.
Therefore, avoiding suspicion as far as possible seemed imperative.

[Japan-Russia Peace Treaty Terms]

Having thus argued through these points, Japan's responsibility toward East Asia becomes one of utmost gravity.
Therefore, I consider it imperative to articulate the peace terms pertaining to this war's outcome.
Though discussing armistice conditions now may seem premature, the hour for reconciliation will assuredly arrive.
As established at this discourse's commencement, victory shall indisputably belong to Japan.
Our nation remains confident in fully achieving this conflict's objectives.
Henceforth, examining peace provisions constitutes no idle pursuit.
Given Japan's impending role as guarantor of Eastern peace, we must accord supreme importance to treaty stipulations.
Let it be unequivocal: This war's purpose transcends base conquest—it seeks no plunder of lands nor subjugation of peoples.
As solemnly declared in His Majesty's rescript, ours remains an army befitting enlightened sovereignty.
If battle was joined to secure peace, then forestalling its recurrence must stand as our paramount design.

In international interactions among world powers, there is inevitably some degree of friction.
There is also competition for international interests.
However, Russia's influence beyond the Urals into East Asia differs fundamentally in nature from ordinary international competition or disputes among civilized nations.
This influence has been obtained through centuries of applying pressure on weak regions and employing aggressive means.
Such forces halt when encountering strong resistance.
Just as water bends and changes course upon meeting rocks or mountains—what attempts to flow west may turn east—so too does this principle apply.
Russia's northern boundaries are naturally defined.
That is to say, there lies what we call the Arctic Ocean.
As for its western expansion, Russia encountered Germany's formidable power and was checked.
Thus turning southward toward the Black Sea,
where Turkey's weakness invited immediate pressure.
Ultimately seizing Crimea—
the entire peninsula and Black Sea coast fell under their control.
Redirecting their course again toward the Balkans,
they were first checked by British power then restrained through concerted efforts of European powers.
There, Russia's westward and southward expansionist forces were completely halted.
This energy then pivoted toward Central Asia,
extending further from Afghanistan toward India,
while another front turned from Central Asia toward Persia with designs on reaching the Persian Gulf.

Wherever they applied violent pressure on vulnerable areas, this too encountered Britain’s resistance, making it quite difficult to achieve their aims.
Therefore, all of Russia’s forces conquered the Siberian tribes and oppressed northern China, finally coming to oppress Manchuria and Korea.
They also exploited the chaos of the Boxer Rebellion to completely militarily occupy Manchuria.

Thus, Russia’s expansion differed in nature from the international competitions among European civilizations.
They always avoided strong areas and headed toward weak ones; whenever an opportune moment arose, they immediately seized it.
This was Russia’s policy.
There, Russia had encountered Japan’s emerging power in the Orient, and the clash between Japan and Russia had arisen there.
Just as the forces that destroyed Poland and turned toward Germany and Austria-Hungary, or those that advanced toward the Balkans and India, had been checked by Britain, Germany, and other European powers, so too was Russia’s expansionist force in the Far East now encountering and being checked by Japan—a new power in the Orient.
However, this expansionist movement would not cease after one or two setbacks.
If an opportune moment arose, it was clear from the example of the Balkans that [the expansionist movement] would rise again.
While that Balkan issue had been established through conferences among the powers, the interests of the powers were not always aligned.
Depending on the times, some changes might occur in the balance of power among the nations.
Due to conflicts of interest arising, the collective power of the nations might appear strong, but in reality, it was exceedingly weak.
This was precisely the opening that diplomacy should seize, and all too easily Russia headed toward the "Balkans."
The force that Russia had exerted westward had completely lost its eruptive power; however, the force directed toward the Balkans was merely dormant now, so should an opportune moment arise, it would immediately flare up again.
For preventing this was not the work of a single nation’s power but that of several nations combined; thus, when these nations united, this activity ceased, but should their unity weaken, it would immediately arise again.

The same holds true in East Asia.
Russia's exertion of influence in the Orient finds no welcome among the world's commercial nations.
Britain, America, and Germany will never countenance it.
The reason for their opposition lies in commerce inevitably declining under Russian dominance.
Should Russia's power prevail, China - serving as the world's commercial marketplace - would inevitably suffer under Russia's prohibitive heavy taxation.
Therefore, all stand united against this.
The form this opposition took manifested precisely through China's preservation and the Open Door Policy.
This debate over open doors arises from necessity - had no entity been closing doors initially, no such policy would be required.
Mark well: wherever Russia's flag flies unimpeded, commerce inevitably withers.
Thus do all civilized nations and thriving commercial powers oppose Russian aggression in Asia.
This explains why foreign countries demonstrate such fervent sympathy for Japan's war against Russia.

If this holds true, one might argue that collective action by the Powers to restrain Russia’s force would seem most desirable; however, as with the Balkans, such international cooperation—while grand in form—lacks comparable solidity in practice. For example, there was an instance where Britain and France allied to attack Russia. In response to Russia’s arbitrary invasions of other nations, Britain and France initiated hostilities against Russia. This was the famous Crimean War, and after three years in total, Russia finally capitulated and sued for peace. At that time, Britain and France allied against Russia; yet a mere forty years later, Russia and France formed an alliance in East Asia to interfere with Japan’s occupation of Liaodong. Thirty years after the Crimean War, Russia and France formed an alliance. For this reason, international cooperation changes depending on international interests and the balance of power among nations. Therefore, the one with the closest interests must inevitably take up the sword with single-nation strength to represent global interests. In future times as well, within this Far East region, Japan must assume responsibility for preserving peace. The imperative to become a guarantor of world peace constitutes a divine duty arising from our nation’s position—a necessity truly beyond avoidance. Therefore, peace terms must adopt as their foremost principle severing future sources of calamity in East Asia.

Though the outcome of this war remains uncertain, Japan's demands will gradually intensify as hostilities prolong.
However, one or two major battles may yet occur—within which time Port Arthur too shall fall.
Vladivostok may likewise succumb.
Should Russia abandon Mukden and retreat northward, establishing peace would require completely severing all Manchuria from Russian influence and compelling its relinquishment.
Moreover, allowing Russia to moor large warships at Vladivostok's naval port would gravely endanger the security of the China Sea and Sea of Japan.
Just as passage through the Bosporus Strait was restricted and the Black Sea Fleet limited at the Paris Conference, stationing a dominant fleet in these waters would pose considerable peril.
Since preserving Vladivostok under Russian control presents extreme danger, we shall claim this naval port as our victor's right.
We demand the cession of Primorsky Krai and annexation of Sakhalin.
As for Siberia—that territory Russia developed over centuries through new management—
Japan naturally harbors no deliberate intent to invade these lands.
Provided retaining them poses no threat to future peace, I deem no necessity to demand their cession to Japan.
In such circumstances, Japan must naturally assume control of the Chinese Eastern Railway.
Yet even should Japan secure either the Chinese Eastern Railway or Siberian Railway connecting to Vladivostok—being vital arteries of global transit—we maintain not the slightest intention to close them for exclusive use.
Conversely, Russia must refrain from sealing off Siberia.
To promote mutual trade benefits, abolishing excessive tariffs becomes imperative.
Simultaneously, Siberia's boundless riches and astonishingly vast barren lands must be opened equally to all nations, prohibiting obstructive legislation against foreign enterprises.
Through such measures, liberal principles will permeate throughout—ensuring Siberia's inevitable march toward prosperity.
Commerce shall flourish accordingly.
Thus shall future Russo-Japanese relations undoubtedly grow cordial.
This constitutes the most efficacious means to preserve lasting peace in the Orient.

Japan has absolutely no intention of deliberately asserting national dignity or wielding the might of victory to cause suffering to others.
Once peace is restored，Japan hopes that Russia will conduct civilized politics，and that its nation will prosper—that its Slavic people will prosper.
This hope constitutes what we call mutual benefit.
Such mutual benefits are derived from peace.
Eternal peace can be achieved solely when not only China but also Russia open their doors to admit world civilization.
In this way，as transportation flourishes and world commerce prospers，the power guaranteeing peace will increasingly strengthen.

[Response to the Manchuria Issue]

When this comes to pass, the question arises of how the Japanese government will dispose of Manchuria.
This concerns not Russia but China.
Manchuria is a vast territory nearly two and a half times Japan's size, bearing three millennia of history and two thousand years of relations with Japan; yet its population remains sparse and economic development markedly underdeveloped.
The cause lies, as I have previously stated, in poor governance.
Order cannot take root.
These mounted bandits are no recent phenomenon.
They emerged almost simultaneously with China's recorded history.
The so-called ancient tribes of northern China—those succeeding the Zhou Di to become the Xiongnu, then evolving through successive transformations into the Liao, Jin, and Yuan dynasties—culminated in the rise of the Aisin Gioro clan.
Thus, forces perpetually arising from this northern region have pressed upon China.
They repeatedly conquered her domains.
Even without complete subjugation, the Xiongnu's ascendancy proved truly astonishing.
Emperor Wu of Han suffered constant harassment from them, and Qin Shi Huang—though having vanquished the Six Kingdoms—found himself compelled to construct the Great Wall against these northern barbarians, the Xiongnu.
From that era onward, the northern nomads reveled in mounted warfare, growing formidably powerful.
When galloping forth to raid at will, their momentum resembled wildfire scorching the plains.
The iron cavalry of Jin and Yuan struck terror into Song dynasty rulers.
Once these horsemen swept southward, what the Chinese called their "imperial troops" could never withstand them.
When battles ceased, they dismounted to resume nomadic life.
Or turned to agriculture.
When famine struck, they remounted as bandits.
Thus they became soldiers when riding, farmers when dismounting, bandits when remounting—these mounted marauders being no contemporary development.

Since the dawn of Chinese history, the people of northern China mounted horses to plunder and invade.
This flourishing gave rise to what became known as the Xiongnu, then the Khitan, and subsequently the Jin and Yuan dynasties.
For this reason, order could not be established.
Therefore, civilization did not progress.
Culture and society did not develop.
This was undoubtedly due to poor governance.
The nation fell into disorder because its monarchs had failed to master the art of governance.
As a result, it finally came under Russia’s possession.

Therefore, if we were to restore Manchuria to China in its current state, could the Chinese government properly govern it? Should they prove incapable, this disorder would inevitably invite foreign oppression and spawn manifold calamities. This would injure East Asian peace. Japan shall restore it to China through unwavering friendship. This restoration—as I have reiterated—manifests the magnanimous benevolence of His Majesty Our Emperor toward His Majesty the Chinese Emperor. Yet simultaneously, numerous conditions must accompany this restitution. Not merely Manchuria but all China stands likewise—should disorder persist as at present, our neighboring nation's afflictions would directly extend to Japan. Bearing the grave responsibility of becoming peace's guarantor in the Far East, Japan must exercise appropriate rights for peacekeeping—rights arising inherently from that responsibility. This constitutes the very reason we initially expounded Japan's position in East Asia.

Despite being land that Japan had obtained by sacrificing tens of thousands of lives and expending billions in funds, we did not hesitate to return this to China.
However, regarding this return, not only Manchuria but all of China had to maintain sufficient order.
To rephrase this: Until such time as the Chinese Emperor implemented benevolent governance to establish order in China while simultaneously advancing the nation’s civilization—assimilating its institutions and cultural artifacts with those of the global community—so that it might stand in the arena of survival among nations and endure as the fittest, Japan had to maintain a tutelary position over China in fulfillment of its responsibility as the protector of peace in the Far East.
Therefore, it became most necessary that not only the Chinese Emperor but all of China’s high officials—down to the local viceroys and governors—fully embodied this spirit of friendship from the Japanese Emperor and people, guiding China toward civilization and prospering the nation through benevolent governance.
In executing this duty, Japan remained obligated to provide friendly assistance to the extent of its capabilities.
This stood precisely as the hope of the entire nation regarding Manchuria’s return.
When achieved through these measures, industrialists and merchants from all nations would safely reside throughout China, conduct business anywhere, and sense no danger whatsoever.
When achieved through these measures, all nations—even those that had scorned and oppressed China—would naturally come to show due respect to its people.
Thus peace would arrive unsought.
China’s dignity would manifest unsummoned.
This remained precisely the hope that the Japanese people held toward their brethren of shared race and script—toward a people bound by fifteen centuries of friendship and common discipleship under Confucius.
And thus would the blessing of peace secured through these means extend its reach across the world.

Let me reiterate emphatically: Our Japan has no intention of exploiting military triumph to commit aggression, nor of relying on might to oppress the weak.
This principle we proclaim not solely to China's government and populace, but declare unreservedly to the entire world.
All rights hitherto acquired in China and Korea—that is, throughout the Far East—by Western powers through national or private means must be scrupulously honored by Japan without exception.
Moreover, with peace restored and global commerce poised to flourish unprecedentedly in our Orient, I firmly believe the Japanese Government will assiduously avoid policies that unduly privilege one nation's interests while obstructing others'.
Furthermore, the entirety of our Japanese people earnestly desire to develop Far Eastern civilization and augment its prosperity through free competition under shared international interests.
That international suspicions, ethnic animosities, and religious antipathies may dissolve completely; that collaborative global interests may prosper; that peace's radiance may swiftly illuminate every Far Eastern people—and that these outcomes be achieved through our Imperial Army's victorious campaign—this constitutes the genuine aspiration of Japan's citizenry.
Our Yamato race holds unwavering conviction that realizing this objective constitutes both our perpetual mission and heaven-ordained vocation (Applause and cheers).