East Beats West
June 10, 2009 | Written by Daniel Lagan | 5 Comments
The Russo-Japanese War stands out in history for it was the first time that an Asian power defeated a modern western nation in a military conflict. The success of the Japanese was met by stunned surprise around the world and not only catapulted the Japanese onto the world stage as major player in the 20th century, but also underlined the significant weaknesses of the Russian military and nation as a whole which were to become obvious during WWI and WWII.. The Russo Japanese War serves as a major landmark in history because it showed that military success was no longer monopolized by the West.
On a macro scale, the conflict began as a result of Japanese and Russian rivalry over Korea and Manchuria. Japan also saw the war as a means to validate itself in the eyes of the world as a legitimate military and naval power, while Russia welcomed the war because it thought it could easily achieve a military victory over the Japanese, and take by force what it had failed to achieve through diplomacy.
What was to come was a dramatic shift in the balance of power in East Asia, as Japan won phenomenal land and naval victories so embarrassing to the Russians, that Russia’s defeat in the war was to lead into the Russian Revolution of 1905.
During the war, Japan not only defeated the Russian army in Korea, seized the vast majority of Manchuria, but also captured the essential Russian location at Port Arthur. The war essentially began with the destruction of the Russian Pacific fleet anchored at Port Arthur, and ended with the destruction of the Russian Baltic fleet in one of the most disastrous strategic decisions in history.
After the Russian’s lost their Pacific fleet in the opening year of the war, the Russian Baltic fleet sailed 18,000 miles around Africa in an attempt to reach the Russian port of Vladivostok. After months and months at sea, the Russian navy was within days of reaching its destination, when it was surprised by the Japanese and virtually annihilated. The Japanese on the other hand lost only three small boats and a little over a hundred men.
After this battle, the Russians sued for peace. They had been defeated time and again on both land and sea, by a supposedly frail and incompetent Asian power. The war forced the Russians to abandon its desire to expand its empire in the Far East, and also heralded the rise of the Japanese as a force to be reckoned with.
“underlined the significant weaknesses of the Russian military and nation as a whole which were to become obvious during WWI and WWII.”
what? Russia had the largest military in world war 1 and tipped the scale in world war 2 so what weaknesses
Japanese and Russian rivalry over Korea and Manchuria.
no it was just Korea they didnt invade Manchuria for 30 years
that defeat had nothing to do wih the revolution. People in Russia were still living in serfdom yet americans still think the USSR was a bad thing. the people were extremely poor and the monarchy had lost what it meant to connect to the people and the military
In regards to the first comment, Russia did have a massive army in both World Wars, but it actually signed an armistice with the Germans during World War One because of how badly it was getting defeated by the Germans. It was terribly ineffective and the Germans made a mockery of the Russians time and again on the eastern front.
In the Second World War, in the end the Soviets certainly did play a major roll in the ultimate defeat of the Axis powers, but not before suffering inexplicable losses, and at the ultimate expense of its people as a whole. Russia’s weaknesses included little if any infrastructure, terrible if any training, terrible if any equipment, poor generals (thank you Stalin and your purges), and terrible if any moral. Essentially the only strength the Russians did have was unbelievable amounts of men and resources.
As far as the second comment is concerned, it is actually true that the humiliation suffered by the Russians at the hands of the Japanese played a roll in the continued frustration of the Russian people with their rulers, and therefore ultimately the Russian Revolution. While the Soviet Union certainly did establish some form of government and leadership over a fractured and admittedly frustrated Russian people, the USSR was based entirely on fear and resulted in the brutal deaths of millions and millions of Russians. It has never been a purely American sentiment which disapproves of the USSR, if such were the case, why did so many countries throw off the Soviet yoke as soon as they had the chance in the late 1900’s?
The Russians at the beginning of WW2 signed a non agression pact with Germany and had reinforced their garrissons along the border of manchuria because they were worried about the Japanese attacking them. So when operation Barbarose was launched the Russians had a very poorly defended western front so the Germans easily defeated them but with the Germans apprroaching there larger sized garrisons the Germans started to lose battles and there last major assault, Stalingrad. The Germans were using blitzgrieg and that was enourmoulsy powerful against small european country however becuase of russia’s massive size The lightining strike didnt work because the Russians could Regroup (eg in Stalingrad)
As for the thing about them killing millions of their own people it is true but that is from Stalin. Lenin was a great strong and fair leader in fact he didnt even kill the royal family until the white army was close to victory. The bad reputation of Communism stems entirly from Stalin and his enforcments of fear and murder. In fact people hated him so much that when he did finally die the doctor didnt even try to save him.