Truth and myths about the Russo-Japanese War 1904-1905

Truth and myths about the Russo-Japanese War 1904-1905

Japan and Russia were incomparable neither in terms of human potential - the difference is almost threefold, nor in terms of the capabilities of the armed forces - the Japanese themselves feared that an angry “bear” could, in the case of mobilization, expose a three millionth army.

The thesis, known since Soviet times, that the conflict with the samurai was lost due to the rottenness of tsarism, the “general backwardness of Russia” fully coincides with the conclusions that many contain in Western publications. Their essence boils down to the simple - they say, "corrupt tsarism could not effectively wage war." The views of our and Western historians do not often coincide, what is the reason for such a consensus of opinion?

Virtually all researchers agree that hard work, self-sacrifice, patriotism, high combat skills of soldiers, the skill of military leaders, exceptional discipline helped the Japanese to win, and the praise can be continued to infinity. Let's try to figure it all out.

To what extent were the officers and soldiers of the Land of the Rising Sun ready to sacrifice themselves, as they now like to say? How much their fighting spirit surpassed the patriotism of our soldiers and sailors? After all, the tendency to revolt is attributed to Russians not only in the rear - this is about the battleship Potemkin, but even at the front - let us recall the description of a small revolt on the battleship Orel before the Tsushima battle. How this contrasts sharply with the description of the life of Japanese sailors, made public by French journalists: the crew members of the Japanese armored cruiser wore wool socks for their army colleagues in their free time!

In order to dot all the “i”, refer to the Japanese sources. We are talking about feature films created in the Land of the Rising Sun itself. And not for the purpose of educating pacifist feelings among the subjects of the emperor, but, as they say, to descendants as an example.

Telling about the life of ordinary sailors on the flagship of the Japanese squadron "Mikasa", filmmakers show all its background - mass brawls, theft, insubordination to orders, non-statutory relations.

There is also an element unfamiliar to us: foremen lend money to sailors at a large percentage. The Russian army and navy, thank God, never knew such a “bouquet” of violations. So it is clear why, despite external discipline, the crew of “Mikasy” rebelled immediately after coming from England in 1902.

Now - about the readiness for self-sacrifice. We, like the majority in the world, have rooted a completely misconception about all Japanese as kamikaze pilots. It is necessary to take into account the following: the courage of the Japanese was blown away by the wind, as soon as they began to fail in battle. As historians remind, in 1904, after several unsuccessful attempts at assault on Port Arthur, he refused to obey orders of the 8 Infantry Regiment right on the front line, and many Japanese officers were going to desert, to flee to Shanghai for fear of dying.

Another argument in favor of the exclusivity of the Japanese is this: they acted extremely competently in battle, and thereby won. Let us recall even the famous poem of those times: "In Manchuria, Kuroki gives Kuropatkin lessons in tactics in practice." This quality allegedly allowed the Japanese to prevail. In actual fact it is only a diligently fanned myth. What kind of literacy can we talk about when Russian fortifications in Port Arthur were stormed into the forehead through well-adjusted terrain several times. And the same admiral Kheykhatiro Togo, who was proclaimed almost as a military genius of that war, could not explain to his admirers why in August 1904 did not attack the Russian squadron, which had fallen into a heap after the failure of the flagship Tsesarevich. Another question: why then, at the initial stage of the Tsushima battle, he put his flagship under the concentrated fire of the most powerful Russian ships, almost dying himself?

The actions of our enemies and the special coherence of various divisions did not differ.

As the Englishman testifies, First Rank Captain William Pekinham, who was assigned to the squadron of Admiral Togo, after the end of the first day of Tsushima, when the Japanese ordered to attack the remnants of the Second Pacific Squadron to their destroyers, one of them, avoiding a collision with another ship suddenly emerged from the mist. , made a sharp turn and turned over. Perhaps those are right who say that the root of all the fantastic victories of the Japanese is in the admiral's exceptional luck.

We were somewhat inferior to the Japanese in the design of artillery systems, but the Japanese were also far from good at all: their Arisaka rifle was noticeably losing to the Russian rifle by Sergey Mosin in a number of important characteristics. The samurai simply could not bear the best Russian cavalry in the world, and, most importantly, our opponents could not compete in physical strength with our soldiers.

Well, what helped the Japanese win? I think a whole complex of factors - both subjective and objective - made themselves felt. One of the main ones is the extremely careful handling of the Japanese by a military secret, our rivals were able to classify even the death of two of the six battleships they had. What can we say about the smaller destroyers - they went to the bottom with “bundles”, but the Japanese stubbornly denied everything, and after a while they put into operation the same type, that is, the same ship under the same name. The world and Russian public believed, and the myth about the invincibility of enemies was born. Naturally, all this affected the mood among our military. The Japanese, however, scooped all the information about our losses, the movements of troops and the appointment of new commanders from Russian newspapers.

Our gendarmerie, which was then assigned the function of counterintelligence, simply could not cope with the new conditions for it - it was elementary to distinguish the Japanese from the Chinese, many of its employees were not able to.

It came to the point that in the summer of 1904, as is evident from the front-line reports of the Niva magazine, there was a strict order to shoot all the Asians who appeared in the combat positions of our troops.

We will not ignore the underestimation of the enemy: at first, the king did not want to transfer a single unit from the European part of Russia, and the second Pacific Squadron began to be equipped only after the death of Admiral Stepan Makarov.

Another reason is the peculiarity of the Russian spirit. After all, we are accustomed to waging war with the expectation of a gradual gathering of forces for the subsequent crushing blow to the enemy. Example - World War 1812, when we were retreating to Moscow, and the Great Patriotic War. As they say, Russians slowly harness, but drive fast. Here and in those years, statements were heard like "The Japanese will inevitably be crushed, if not under Loyang, so under Mukden, not under Mukden, so under Harbin, not under Harbin, so under Chita." History We did not give this chance.

But there was also lack of will of Russian diplomacy. The office at Pevcheskoy was unable to use for the international isolation of Tokyo the fact of an attack on Port Arthur without declaring war.

The diplomats could not solve the issue of passing through the Turkish-controlled straits the most powerful battleships of the Black Sea fleet. Instead, the foreign ministry preferred to compose horror stories about a possible war with England, Afghanistan and Turkey in the event of the passage of our ships.

Evil tongues then blamed Foreign Minister Vladimir Lamzdorf for character weakness, seeing the reason for his unconventional sexual orientation ...

The main reason was initially the wrong decision to place the main naval base in Port Arthur. It is more than nine hundred kilometers from the Korea Strait, which was and is still the focal point of the routes of ships between Russia, China, Korea, Japan and the countries of South-East Asia. No wonder the sailors did not like this city, calling it a "hole." Therefore, the naval command to sweeten the pill, formally considered the entire Pacific Fleet ... Pacific squadron of the Baltic Fleet. The position of the main base was aggravated by the fact that it was connected with the metropolis by a thin “string” of the railway, the final part of which lay across Manchuria, a territory that had an incomprehensible status then - seemingly not Chinese, but not completely Russian. But naval strategists persisted - we need an ice-free harbor on the Pacific Ocean, and that’s it.

Oddly enough, the then military minister, General Alexei Kuropatkin, took the most realistic position on this issue. At the very end of 1903, he sent a note to the authorities, in which, in particular, he wrote that Port Arthur, “being away from our natural defensive line running along the coast of the Sea of ​​Japan, and being in the distance from it from 600 to 1000 miles, it cannot serve as a support for our naval operations along this coast, leaving it completely open to the enemy attack; in particular, the entire southeastern coast of Korea with the Japanese outpost Fusan existing here remains open for impunity and, being in the distance from it from 600 to 1200 miles from the northern ports of our main enemy Japan, our fleet in Port Arthur would be completely deprived of the opportunity to prevent and even threaten the advance of the Japanese fleet to the Korean or our coast. This base does not cover even the western coast of Korea and the approaches to Seoul, because it is located 350 km in front of the entrance to the Yellow Sea, that is, in front of the enemy offensive, which will also firmly rely on all ports of the south and south-west coast of Korea . Finally, being in the distance of 1080 miles from our main base, Vladivostok, Port Arthur remains completely cut off from it, because the line of communication, on the one hand, has no intermediate strongholds, on the other, is completely attacked by the Japanese fleet. ”

The war that broke out then fully confirmed his fears.

Moreover, in his note, A. Kuropatkin went much further - he suggested leaving not only Port Arthur, but also all of Southern Manchuria, citing arguments - we may simply not have enough strength to simultaneously defend Port Arthur and conduct large-scale hostilities with the Japanese in Manchuria and Korea. Anticipating possible objections, the general argued that there were not too many industrial enterprises in these parts, and therefore the costs of possible withdrawal would not be too great. In total, he cites more than a dozen arguments in favor of abandoning South Manchuria.

Well-trained in all the subtleties of the functioning of the state machine, A. Kuropatkin was well aware that his innovative plan had few chances for implementation. Therefore, he sent it by “fan”, in the hope of at least gaining support somewhere. But all was silent.

And then the war begins. Kuropatkina is appointed to the post of commander of the Manchurian army. And then strange things start to happen - the Russian army suffers humiliating defeats one after another, and, as it seems to an outside observer, completely from scratch. For example, near Luoyang, we, having departed before the Japanese who panicked, who were preparing to retreat, simply gave up the victory. Almost the same thing happened under Mukden at the beginning of 1905: Kuropatkin refused at the critical moment for the Japanese to bring Russian reserves into battle, for which he was publicly offended by another Russian military leader. Does this not speak about Kuropatkin’s obstinate, fatal striving to realize his plan of abandoning South Manchuria? After all, in the end it happened. It turns out that the commander hoped that in case of defeat he would remain in the highest echelons of power - which is what happened.

Finally, one more frequently asked question: could Russia continue the war after the Tsushima battle? The same Vladimir Linevich, appointed to the post of commander of the Russian army after the removal of Kuropatkin, later declared that he could have broken the Japanese. He is echoed in his memoirs by the future leader of the White movement in southern Russia, Anton Denikin, saying that we could squeeze the Japanese. But this is the opinion of the generals who do not very well represent the role of the fleet.

It should be understood: after the defeat of the Russian squadron, the Japanese owned the sea. This meant that they could easily and quickly disembark landing where they liked - for example, they were already testing the ground for the invasion of Kamchatka.

We were unable to do anything in response - we were able to concentrate troops only at the end points of our railways.

Of course, the Russian-Japanese war, despite the allegations that all facts about it are known, remains so far and not fully understood. In order to more or less clarify the situation, work is needed in both Russian and Japanese, Chinese and Korean archives. And this is not a task for one generation of researchers.

One thing is clear - assurances about the invincibility of the Japanese army and the genius of its military leaders are just a myth.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    20 October 2012 10: 03
    The insulting loss of the war, and most importantly even then it was possible to close the question of Kuril Islands.
    1. +9
      20 October 2012 13: 02
      The loss is not offensive, but absolutely predictable! There are many reasons: a very small army in such territory; a divided fleet with a weak command; strategically and tactically disadvantageous location of Port Arthur; poor connection with the metropolis (extremely low throughput of a single railway); some artillery backwardness in terms of both guns and ammunition; the war is actually not with Japan, but with the whole Western world!
      1. 0
        24 July 2016 15: 16
        Quote: Krasnodar
        the war is actually not with Japan, but with the whole Western world!

        Well, you are very fantasized.

        Japan received arms supplies, yes.
        But Russia also bought a lot, often from the same manufacturers. The Russian navy had more ships bought abroad than the Japanese. "Just business, nothing personal."

        In addition, a significant part of these weapons was ordered long before the tension in Russian-Japanese relations. Again, your version is covered clearly. Japan, for a start, was preparing for a war with China and won it in 1895 - but patriots with world history are unfamiliar.

        Google what the Gull incident is. At that moment, England could even wrap Rozhestvensky’s squadron back, or block it for an indefinite time, or put all its command on trial — in general, this squadron would not have reached the theater of operations.
        But the British did not.
        But France and Germany were rather pro-Russian.

        Quote: Krasnodar
        some artillery backwardness in both guns and ammunition

        Worse, in preparation.

        In the Russian army, the lower ranks were completely illiterate, and even the officers in the majority did not have training in the requirements of the time. And in Japan, a generation has already grown up brought up on universal secondary education.

        Quote: Krasnodar
        extremely low single-rail capacity

        ..which began to expand only in the late autumn of 1904, exactly before the fall of Port Arthur.
    2. beech
      20 October 2012 15: 26
      there was no genius of the Japanese military leaders, the Japanese army was not invincible. To lose the war we had only the limitless stupidity of our command !!
    3. Brother Sarych
      20 October 2012 15: 41
      Actually, the Kuril Islands were Japanese ...
      1. Brother Sarych
        20 October 2012 18: 50
        The one who minusanul - you did not know about it?
      2. +2
        20 October 2012 21: 15
        why would you? after the conclusion of peace, they became Japanese! learn materiel, comrade!
        1. Brother Sarych
          20 October 2012 22: 12
          In exchange for ownership of southern Sakhalin, Russia transferred Japan to 1875 g. all the Kuril Islands.
          Enlighten baby ...
          So after the war I had to give half of Sakhalin, for which Witte received the nickname Polusakhalinsky ...
          1. -1
            21 October 2012 10: 30
            You are absolutely right.
      3. beech
        22 October 2012 19: 37
        maybe they still squeeze the island so as not to blather ??
  2. 0
    20 October 2012 10: 21
    Very interesting pages of our history. Many myths are associated with these events. N. Starikov and V. Medinsky have a lot of interesting things about these events. I don’t understand how a country with a small population and a tiny territory with absolutely no strategic resources can defeat Russia. The only explanation for the Yapes fed the entire Anglo-Amer world.
    1. Kaa
      20 October 2012 15: 00
      Quote: AK-74-1
      The only explanation for the Yapes fed the entire Anglo-Amer world.

      Alas. not the only one. The principle of "quiet operations" was ignored: "The Land of the Rising Sun began to prepare for war long before the outbreak of hostilities. In May 1903, all Japanese residents in Russia, under the cover of diplomatic consulates in port cities and embassies in St. Petersburg, received a secret order : “... To intensify contacts with representatives of Russian opposition and revolutionary parties in order to destabilize domestic civilian life. For what financially encourage the organization of uprisings in the provinces, civil disobedience companies in large industrial cities and military ports. Already in July 1904, in connection with the assassination of Minister of Internal Affairs V.K. Pleve, the Russian resident in Tokyo, Igor Pavlov, reported from Japan: "... all the latest political assassination attempts in Russia are being prepared and coordinated by Japanese agents who support the revolutionaries with material means. ” And further: “With the sanction of the Tokyo government, the Japanese attache in Vienna, Sihuniro Akashi, transferred on June 27, 1904 to the Russian revolutionaries 1 million 250 thousand yen. These funds have been spent. Socialist revolutionaries to finance two inter-party conferences, as well as to purchase and send weapons to Russia. It will be delivered in the holds of the John Grafton steamer, which will arrive in Odessa in three months. ” On the territory of the Russian Empire, taking advantage of diplomatic immunity, they traveled around the country and collected military and economic information. On December 1, 1903, the regiment commander of the Kherson district reported to his superiors in St. Petersburg: “... November 20 this year, the consignee of the Japanese consul Tagashi participated in a meeting of the city workers' bureau Social Democrats ... The heads of the factory cells Kretov, Malkov, Saburov and Sinitsky were present - everyone is under supervision ... The Japanese agreed to repay strikers' civil bills on a bank loan last year and allocate 5000 British pounds to help working families in the event of a repeated lockout of the factory directorate in the strike, what is planned for Christmas ... Tagashi will pay debts provided that the contractual terms for completing the battleship “Prince Potemkin of Tauride” and the work on replacing the engine on the battleship “Rostislav” are violated. One should be wary of sabotage and direct sabotage ... ”The Japanese consul in Odessa, Izhima, left Russia in February 1904 and settled in Vienna. According to the police department, he headed the "intelligence center" with agents in Kharkov, Lviv and Odessa. His former attache Kotsesimo Tagashi in the summer and fall of 1904, 8 times (!) Visited in Nikolaev, where stormy events took place at that time. Today, a century later, it is safe to say that in 1904-1905 Japanese intelligence carried out in Nikolaev "distracting operation". The Black Sea Fleet objectively could not participate in hostilities in the Far East. The British squadron tightly blocked the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles. Russia did not want to aggravate relations with the “mistress of the seas”. She was not physically able to wage a war on two fronts.
      1. Brother Sarych
        20 October 2012 15: 45
        There was no question of the Black Sea Fleet at all - there was no one to sail in the Far East, even if they had let someone through the straits! Most likely, Three Saints would not have reached the place, even if Rostislav had accompanied him ...
        1. Kaa
          20 October 2012 18: 52
          Quote: Brother Sarich
          The Black Sea Fleet was out of the question

          Yes, actually, it’s not about him, first of all, but about the revolt of 1905. How can you win the war in this case - just the same as the USA did after Pearl Harbor and the loss of the Philippines and the rest. For 1-2 years, Russia would simply strangle Japan after Tsushima. But what kind of mobilization of the army and industry is possible if, excuse me for figurativeness, the hut is on fire - strikes armed with unknown (then) on whose money people shoot, blow up how much in vain ... So I had to ... sign the world. One cannot help but admire the work of Japanese intelligence, professionalism is always beautiful, although for Russia this ended in failure.
          1. Beck
            21 October 2012 14: 26
            Why pick out the reasons? And if that, and if that. So, for all this and that, Japan was better prepared and won the war.

            I'm talking about something else. I "consider" Japan one of the main "culprits" and the Japanese admiral Togo, in particular, in the cataclysm of 1917 that struck Russia.

            As you know, the 2nd Pacific squadron of Admiral Rozhestvenny is almost the entire Baltic fleet sent, bypassing Africa, to the Japanese islands. Among the ships of the squadron was the cruiser Aurora.

            If Admiral Togo from the entire Russian squadron would have sunk only the cruiser Aurora, then his name in history would have been much more significant.

            The cruiser "Aurora" rescued, left. He returned to the Baltic. And on October 25, 1917 at 21 hours 40 minutes. fired his fatal shot, the signal for the storming of the Winter Palace, which overthrew Russia.
            1. Beck
              21 October 2012 19: 58
              Yes. I see the minuses. Who set without any humor. Full of seriousness.
          2. 0
            24 July 2016 15: 25
            REV was ALREADY lost before the unfolding of revolutionary events.
            From this fact, all your conspiratorialism goes clearly where.
        2. +1
          20 October 2012 21: 18
          You want to say that at the Black Sea Fleet there were only 2 battleships ?????????? would have come, do not hesitate. Nebogatov’s squadron reached Madagascar in 3 months, ships in the squadron averaged 10 years each, comrade
          1. Brother Sarych
            20 October 2012 22: 08
            Normal - two and a half, even if they did, then there would be no sense from it ...
            The Twelve Apostles in Service since 1892
            Three saints since 1895
            Rostislav, an under-armor-bearer, in service since 1898
            Potemkin - unfinished
            1. Kaa
              21 October 2012 00: 56
              Quote: Brother Sarich
              Normal - two and a half, even if they did, then there would be no sense from it.

              "If we assume that Britain will calmly observe how the Russian fleet will leave the Black Sea and set off to smash the Japanese, then ... options are possible:
              Option One. Russia initially has the ability to freely navigate warships through the straits, while England remains neutral. Then, Japan, beginning the war, is forced to reckon with the fact that in the latest three to four months a fleet will appear in the Far East with at least 12 battleships, not counting other ships. With this option, Japan, by definition, cannot start a war. The only chance for her is a war in alliance with England.
              Option two. Sending to the Far East detachment of Virenius, reinforced by one or two Black Sea armadillos. If the Japanese do not succeed in breaking up this detachment before joining the Pacific Squadron, they will lose their minor advantage and the war at sea will be won by Russia. After all, the combat effectiveness of the 1st Pacific Squadron was quite high.
              Option Three. The 2nd Pacific squadron is reinforced by one or two armadillos from the Black Sea. They increase the strength of the squadron slightly, and the result of the battle differs from the results of Tsushima only in a large number of victims.
              The fourth option. The 2nd Pacific Squadron is reinforced by all ships of the Black Sea Fleet. Then it has the ability to force the Japanese to negotiate without a battle, otherwise it might just crush the Japanese fleet in numbers.
              Option Five. The 2nd Pacific Squadron, in its real naval composition, is fully equipped with more trained and more combat-ready personnel of the Black Sea Fleet. In battle, she has better chances thanks to better combat training and, possibly, less demoralization before and during the battle. With leadership in the style of Christmas, there is no chance of winning, however, a battle can be such a catastrophic defeat.
              Variant of Objective Reality. Russia retained the Black Sea Fleet as a fighting force. It was possible to avoid serious complications in Europe by changing the regime of the Black Sea Straits. The first four options create a dangerous precedent for the passage of warships through the Straits. They cease to be the castle that does not give way to the enemies of Russia in the Black Sea. Therefore. For a certain time, Russia secured its southern borders, and retained superiority in the Black Sea until the outbreak of the First World War.
              Why did this happen? The most important role was played, of course, by England. The threat that, leaving the Dardanelles, the Black Sea Fleet would be defeated by a powerful British squadron, constantly had an impact on the Russian leadership... The actions of British diplomacy in solving this problem should be recognized as successful. Russia turned out to be too weak to even diplomatically fight the sea power of Britain. "Velmozhko AV Possible participation of the Black Sea Fleet in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905 // Maritime law: history, modernity, development prospects. .- Odessa. - 1
              1. Brother Sarych
                21 October 2012 13: 35
                In fact, there was no one to get out of the straits, the guns and people left for the Baltic Fleet, which slowed down the commissioning of new ships of the Black Sea Fleet ...
              2. 0
                24 July 2016 15: 28
                All your fantasies are shattered into pieces about the simplest question: why then didn’t England use the Gull incident to completely stop Rozhestvensky’s squadron? wink
          2. 0
            24 July 2016 15: 26
            Russia did not want to expose the Black Sea, and did the right thing.
      2. 0
        24 July 2016 15: 24
        All this is very exciting, but NONE sign of the influence of revolutionaries or foreign agents on the military events of the strategic nuclear forces is still not known.

        Find - get a Nobel wink
    2. Zonter
      22 October 2012 09: 22
      "A country with a small population and a tiny territory" (c) you, sir, turned it down. The territory and population are comparable to those of Germany.
      1. 0
        24 July 2016 15: 28
        In 1904 144 million people in Russia, 45 million people in Japan
        Always happy to help, K.O.

        As for the comparison with Germany - at that time it was much stronger not only Japan, but also Russia.
    3. 0
      24 July 2016 15: 22
      Quote: AK-74-1
      N. Starikov and V. Medinsky have a lot of interesting things about these events.

      You would still recall Pikul and Rezun, they also have a lot of interesting things wink
      Both Starikov and Mudinsky are never historians, but they are well-known prostitutes.

      Quote: AK-74-1
      The only explanation for the Yapes fed the entire Anglo-Amer world.

      Yah. And why would they?
      And why are you not happy with the long-known explanation that the Russian authorities lost their legal capacity by the 20th century and messed around?
  3. -1
    20 October 2012 10: 38
    Yes, we do not raise the question that Japan violated the rules of warfare from the use of then banned ammunition to the use of military ships against land facilities.
    1. 0
      3 August 2016 00: 10
      And what Japanese ammunition was banned? For what reasons, what convention?

      With what fright do you consider the use of the fleet against land objects unconventional if the navy has been doing this continuously throughout its history?
  4. KDM-219
    20 October 2012 11: 45
    The article is undoubtedly good, but it amazes me: 1- that our Nicholas 2 at that time saw that the conflict between Japan and Russia was brewing, but nothing was done in advance.2. that we rented Port Arthur and gave it to the Japanese so obscene, when you could just transfer some of the ships from the Balkan, Black Sea or Northern Fleet to the Pacific Fleet (you would protect the Sea of ​​Japan and the coast of Manchuria, and the troops could just stand on the border with Korea and in Vladivostok, so that the desire disappears from them to land in Korea (This is my personal opinion)
    1. +14
      20 October 2012 14: 10
      Nicholas 2 I think is the main culprit of the defeat. I lost the war, I pissed off the country, and now, oddly enough, HOLY.
      1. Kaa
        21 October 2012 00: 13
        Quote: Pashhenko Nikolay
        Nikolay 2 I think is the main culprit of the defeat

        Victory always has 100 fathers, defeat has 1 culprit ... When you think, you understand that war and governing the country are not a one-on-one boxing meeting, although a team of specialists also works for the boxer ...
    2. Brother Sarych
      20 October 2012 15: 47
      The Northern Fleet did not exist in principle, half of the BF was already in the Far East, in the Black Sea Fleet there were actually two battleships ...
      At least look at the map, strategist, since your hands haven’t reached the story ...
    3. 0
      24 July 2016 15: 31
      Nikolasha did not believe that the Japanese were able to start a war, much less win it. Forest concessions in Korea were more valuable to him than the interests of the whole country.
  5. Fox
    20 October 2012 11: 54
    to the author +, but one must look at the root of the war ... after all, before the reign of Nikolashka, Russia was friends with Japan against England, the Russian Navy was in Nagasaki ... and this ushleopok betrayed everything that was done and achieved.
    1. Kaa
      21 October 2012 00: 21
      Quote: Fox
      this trickster betrayed everything that was done and achieved.

      And how do you think absolute monarchs do this, to the detriment of their own patrimony, do they write receipts of cooperation, get drunk, fall into insanity, or in some other mysterious way? Maybe the emphasis needs to be shifted, England made Japan proposals that she could not refuse (well, there is the development of the fleet and armed forces, loans, recognition of territorial aspirations). And the familiar "nikolashka" smacks of the works of the authors of Soviet history textbooks for elementary grades, who especially loved this period and similar epithets
      Quote: Fox
      one must look at the root of the war.
      indeed, one must read and mature in the root ...
    2. Kaa
      21 October 2012 01: 04
      Quote: Fox
      .Before the reign of Nikolashki, Russia was friends with Japan against England

      And you, for an hour, did not hear how, during the reign of Alexander III, a certain heir to the throne, named Nikolai, received a blow on the head with a saber from a "mentally unhealthy" policeman during an official visit to "friendly" Japan? In 1914, the assassination of the heir to another throne became the casus belle for a whole world war ... that's how Japan was friends with Russia.
  6. +7
    20 October 2012 12: 22
    our opponents could not compete in physical strength with our warriors.
    That's where the dog rummaged! And the fact that the Yaps had the latest rangefinder on each gun turret, and we had 2 for a ship, and not the best design, and the fact that the reservists did not know how to handle new equipment for them is Nonsense. The main thing is that the Russians are stronger than the Japanese physically. "The Japs have thin legs, the monkey has small lice ..." Plus, the Yapam helped the whole world "lower" the Russian barbarians. England built a fleet and trained sailors, Germany created an army and supplied excellent artillery systems Kruppai is all for the money of the States. And in general, I have the impression that Russia played giveaway with the Yapas, often doing themselves to their own detriment. Why is it a shame for the defeat so far. And the victory over Japan in 1945 is not enough. to embed them well. That would be "crushing and brilliant". God forbid, there will still be.
    1. Kaa
      21 October 2012 00: 39
      Quote: revnagan
      I would also like to cut them well. That would be "crushing and brilliant." Yes, God, there will be more.

      We'll bump, we'll definitely bump ... but then, now the Pacific Fleet is temporarily out of shape, unlike the Japanese, some of their "destroyer-helicopter carriers" are worth something ... Let them warm up with the Chinese fleet ... "The Varyag is already the Chinese have ... good
  7. +6
    20 October 2012 14: 20
    One thing is clear - assurances about the invincibility of the Japanese army and the genius of its military leaders are simply a myth

    Then this makes the defeat of the Russian Empire even more bitter.
    But what else to expect from the impaled Tsarist military machine, where ballerinas commanded the orders of the artillery, and the senior artilleryman accepted nicandiciln guns of the main caliber as a bribe (questions to Novikov-Pribo)
  8. Region71
    20 October 2012 15: 25
    More recently, just a week ago, I read 2 books of the well-known writer Alexei Silych Novikov-Priboy. I read Tsushima for the first time in primary school, and I read Kreiser for the first time. The conclusions made in these books about the reasons for the defeat of the Russian troops in that war basically coincide with the opinions of historians. Russian soldiers fought bravely, but the high command of the troops and navy made so many unforgivable mistakes that it was possible to write this command to the traitors of Russia. Japanese soldiers fought the same bravely, covered the approaches to the Russian fortifications with bodies. As for the technical equipment of the troops and in the initial period of the war, the Japanese yielded to us as weapons. Subsequently, England and the United States supplied a large number of modern weapons to Japan. What is most bad, if you study the historical documents, it will turn out that even before the capture of Port Arthur the Japanese army was greatly depleted. There were not enough soldiers and officers, difficulties arose in supplying the army, Desertion and disobedience to commanders became more frequent.The Japanese emperor began to think about a truce, but Kuropatkin’s actions, when he began to withdraw his troops farther away from Port Arthur, became one of the main reasons for the surrender of the fortress, although Stessel was no less guilty of surrendering the fortress. An investigation conducted by tsarist officials showed that Port Arthur had large stocks of provisions, but they did not give them to the troops, but surrendered them to the Japanese.
  9. Brother Sarych
    20 October 2012 15: 40
    The article is trash! Well, what can you do about it, even if I risk another mustard plaster ...
    A pile of fiction with a certain number of realities ...
    Is it worth it to sort it all out?
    Why even climbed into Manchuria?
    If not Arthur, then where to drive the fleet? After all, our fleet generally wintered in Nagasaki for some time!
    How to fight without reliable supply lines?
    Was Russian cavalry stronger? And the author is aware that the Russian cavalry did nothing at all in Manchuria? She had nothing to do there, just simply ...
    The Japanese stupidly stormed the fortifications in the forehead? And this sometimes led to rebellion? And what was the alternative? Everyone then fought just like that, even after ten years ...
  10. Stasi.
    20 October 2012 18: 39
    The main reason for the Russo-Japanese war was the desire of our then elite not to negotiate with Japan on the issue of dividing spheres of influence in Korea. Nicholas II, Prince Vonlyarlyarsky colorfully described such a prospect: "It is necessary to quietly, by the spider's method, to buy Korea, there is nothing to give it to the Japanese. We can buy up coal mines there, and leave the Japanese with a nose." Nicholas II, because of his political myopia and short-sightedness, agreed. At the same time, it was not taken into account that in the event of war, troops would have to be transferred over long distances, that the army and navy were not mobilized. And most importantly, the people did not want to fight for tsarism, because everyone understood perfectly well that this war was not needed by Russia, but beneficial only to the ruling regime. When it was reported about the next victory of the Japanese, it caused joy among the population, even high school students sent congratulatory telegrams from Russia to the Japanese Mikado.
  11. ShOoMok
    20 October 2012 19: 04
    Russia did not have the opportunity to exert political pressure on Japan. Russia, having pledged to preserve the territorial integrity of China, received the right to build the Sino-Eastern Railway and leased the Port Arthur naval fortress. These acquisitions ruined relations with England and Japan. Later, these countries entered into an alliance against Russia, and this opened up great opportunities for Japanese diplomacy.

    To the causes of the defeat, I would attribute the following reasons:
    1. The supply of troops. Everything had to be delivered to Manchuria from the central regions of the country via the single-track Trassiberian Railway.
    2. In the technical equipment and quality of weapons, the Japanese had an advantage.
    3. The tactics of passive defense, a supporter of which was A.N. Kuropatkin.
    He failed to win a single battle.

    By the spring of 1905, the morale of the army had fallen, although military capabilities had not been exhausted.

    Although the Portmust Treaty was a success of Russian diplomacy, the concession to the empire was disapproving. In the international arena, Russia's authority has fallen. How could the Russian Empire lose the war to such a small country like Japan?
  12. +2
    20 October 2012 20: 02
    When they write about the humiliating Portsmouth Treaty, for some reason many historians forget to indicate that the Japanese were begging for a peace on their knees. It was the Japanese side that hysterically asked the United States to mediate in the negotiations and persuade Russia to sit at the negotiating table.
    The essence of the problem was that Japan's mobilization resources were exhausted, the economy was on the verge of bankruptcy, the morale of the army was severely undermined, and even Tsushima did not correct the situation. And in the Far East, by the middle of 1905, 500 thousand Russian army was concentrated, which hung over 220 thousand Japanese army. Therefore min. in. The affairs of Japan during the negotiations in Portsmouth, when they were de-impaired, ordered the Japanese delegation to conclude peace at any cost and even on any conditions without territorial requirements (Russia rejected the indemnity in principle). But Comrade Witte too late found out about the instructions of the Japanese side and gave the Yaps the floor of Sakhalin.
    All this is in recently declassified Japanese documents. RAS are going to publish them soon.
    In short, the fact is that the story of Japan's dizzying victory is nothing more than a myth.
    1. Kaa
      21 October 2012 00: 42
      Quote: Prometey
      But Comrade Witte too late found out about the instructions of the Japanese side and gave the Yaps the floor of Sakhalin.
      Or rather, on the contrary, he gave it too early ... why - there are a lot of considerations in the literature on this subject.
    2. wax
      21 October 2012 03: 44
      "... the story of Japan's dizzying victory is nothing more than a myth."
      In contrast, the humiliating defeat of tsarist Russia.
    3. 0
      24 July 2016 15: 36
      Quote: Prometey
      500 thousand Russian army, which hung over 220 thousand Japanese army

      Sure sure. It hung. She sat behind a deeply echeloned defense, strengthened it even more and hoped that this would stop the Japanese in the event of an offensive.

      Meanwhile, the Japanese calmly mastered Manchuria and grabbed Sakhalin.
  13. -1
    20 October 2012 21: 15
    Before the attack on Port Arthur, the Japanese bribed four Russian officers, and received maps of fortifications and minefields. Without this, they did not want to start hostilities. True, the officers never saw the money - the conditions of the Japanese were as follows: bills of exchange, through a Swiss bank, and only if Japan won. This is just one example of betrayal. The explosion of the battleship "Petropavlovsk" and the death of Admiral Makarov is a very strange incident that no one has yet figured out .. One of the versions is the participation of the Putilov workers in the restoration work of the battleship, just near the main-caliber gun magazines. Classified by the party. The fighting went along the railroad tracks, and no further. The fashion was for generals' personal trains. The railway ran out. the way, hostilities ceased - the general's train did not go further. An order to end the offensive or pursuit follows. This gave the Japanese several times to retreat, reorganize, and with new forces into battle! Well, the fact that we were forced to lose in the war is unambiguous. At the negotiations, the Russian side proposed to fight until the last day, but under pressure from Britain, the United States, Germany, it was forced to agree ..
  14. -1
    20 October 2012 21: 25
    when Port Arthur became a Russian base, not a single dock, not a single one was built before the war !!!!!!!!! as a base, he was absolutely not fit. according to war plans, all armadillos were to be docked in Vladik. so here it is! there were plans to make a base not in Arthur, but in the Far
    1. 0
      24 July 2016 15: 40
      Patridiots have set you minuses, but could not argue. This is normal for them.

      And also, in Port Arthur, funds were "used" for the construction of fortifications and deepening of the fairway.
      The fortifications were not completed, the deepening was not even started. The money went "somewhere". wink

      And then the Martians, the Bolsheviks and the British are to blame for everything from the patridiots.
  15. xan
    20 October 2012 21: 32
    it’s just that the generals didn’t know how to fight, which was later seen in the WWII.
    general systemic crisis. they appointed lizoblyudov, not a warrior.
    for the jambs of the chiefs were not brought to justice, solid otmazalchiki at the helm and court sharkuns. impotence of supreme power. if the battles were not lost, then only thanks to the soldier. Solzhenitsyn is right, the general must be a highly skilled specialist, the novice soldier can be forgiven everything, the novice general cannot be forgiven.
  16. +4
    20 October 2012 23: 46
    The most offensive thing in the Russo-Japanese War is that "the lesson did not go for the future", they did not correct the mistakes and after 10 years they got practically the same thing, only with worse consequences.
  17. +3
    21 October 2012 01: 31
    Яone thing is clear - assurances about the invincibility of the Japanese army and the genius of its military leaders are simply a myth.
    But the thesis about the decay of the autocracy-BAD TRUTH !!! The author himself gives examples in the article with diplomats, and with the moron king, and with disorder in the generals who are unable to fight, and panicky retreats, even with battles won. So Nikolashka went for his crap and the crap of his system 12 years after Witte-Polusakhalinsky!
    And Russian soldiers - the Japanese were brought into a state of horror so that even in 1941, going to Pearl Harbor, the samurai in the squadron sang the ballad "About a soldier who sacrifices himself", created in memory of the DEAD JAPANESES IN RUSSIAN BAYONET CONTRACTORS UNDER PORT ARTUR !!! Like this!
    1. 0
      24 July 2016 15: 42
      Quote: nnz226
      Russian soldiers - the Japanese were led into a state of horror

      It didn’t stop the Japanese from occupying the FER in 1918. And to start provocations in the 30s, until they got lyuley at Khalkhin Gol.
  18. mechanic11
    21 October 2012 18: 40
    Nehren from Nicholas 2 to do the holy sovereign has no other obligation how to engage in the defense of the kingdom (read Machiavelli) And then machine guns, expensively, my treasury cannot stand, etc. The Bolsheviks were right about the rotten regime of autocracy. very different from the king, read about kickbacks under the king at 7% and calm down.
  19. AlexMH
    21 October 2012 20: 43
    The thesis of the Soviet era "The Russo-Japanese War showed all the rottenness of the tsarist regime" ABSOLUTELY VEREN. The massive incompetence of the highest military leaders, the rapid transition from a capricious mood to panic, the inability to establish counterintelligence and intelligence, and as a result - a war lost on the eve of victory. Actually, even the defeat at Tsushima did not solve anything - at the end of the war, Japan did not have trained reserves, weapons and money. Another six months of land war - and the remnants of the Japanese troops would have pressed to the shore under the cover of the guns of the battleships. But the tsar foolishly started this war, so foolishly and hastened to end it, being frightened by him himself provoked unrest in the country. What a monstrous contrast to Stalin, who could be wrong, but always admitted and corrected his mistakes. And all because it is grief for a country when mediocrity is at its head at a sharp turn in history. By the way, it is still relevant now.
    1. Beck
      21 October 2012 21: 01
      To Alex.

      What did Stalin recognize and correct? Recognized the millions of repressions and thousandth executions, dispossession, hunger. Or the fact that his policy failed the country not ready for war. And do not say that Stalin won the Second World War. This people won under the leadership of their commanders.
      1. xan
        22 October 2012 16: 40
        what kind of demagoguery
        snot erase
  20. 0
    21 October 2012 23: 33
    There is no truth and myths, but there are archival documents on the basis of which historians draw conclusions and build theories.
    There are no invincible armies and brilliant military leaders.
    De Artagnan believed that the case on the head has only three hairs that you need to grab on time.
  21. Suvorov000
    22 October 2012 11: 45
    Yes, Nikolashka is to blame, the shit is weak-minded, but he had to put such a nanny of henpecked on the throne of such a country as Russia, he lost everything and failed to fail. Instead of ruling the country, he would sit under a skirt, rob the country, plunder the war, and there he will drive the Shura-Mura, he will throne the throne and merge the country into the slop for 72 years
    1. 0
      29 January 2013 09: 17
      Not at 72, but at almost 96.
  22. davoks
    22 October 2012 12: 50
    replace Nikolai 2 with Stalin, Kuropatkin with Zhukov and the result will be exactly the opposite
    1. xan
      22 October 2012 16: 38
      it's about the role of personality in history
      under the same initial conditions, Japan will never win over Russia

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"