DOCSLIB.ORG

Early Meiji Diplomacy Viewed Through the Lens of the International Treaties Culminating in the Annexation of the Ryukyus

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Early Meiji Diplomacy Viewed Through the Lens of the International Treaties Culminating in the Annexation of the Ryukyus Volume 19 | Issue 6 | Number 2 | Article ID 5558 | Mar 15, 2021 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Early Meiji Diplomacy Viewed through the Lens of the International Treaties Culminating in the Annexation of the Ryukyus Marco Tinello Abstract: This paper focuses on Meiji Japan’s imposed an “unequal treaty” on Korea, annexation of the Ryukyus as seen through the employing the same kind of gunboat diplomacy eyes of key Western diplomats in the 1870s. that Commodore Matthew Perry had used Although it played out over seven years, the against Japan in 1853-54. Finally, in 1879, annexation process unfolded relativelyJapan formally annexed the former kingdom of smoothly on the international stage. One the Ryukyus reason for this was the skill with which Japanese diplomats handled inquiries and potential protests by Western diplomats. In this article, I show that, as early as 1872, leading members of the Meiji government were gaining familiarity with the nuances of Western diplomatic maneuvering. Indeed, in some ways the annexation functioned as a rehearsal for future diplomatic challenges the regime would face. In retrospect, it offers an excellent lens through which to view Japanese diplomacy of the 1870s.1 Keywords: East Asian diplomacy, Meiji Japan’s diplomacy; Ryūkyū shobun; the Ryukyu Kingdom’s annexation by Japan; Western imperialism; international treaties. Following the restoration of imperial power, Meiji Japan embraced modernization and, as part of this process, it sought to determine its national borders in order to create a modern nation-state. In the north, in 1869, the Meiji leaders incorporated the former foreign territory known as “Ezo,” renaming it Hokkaido; in 1875, they exchanged the island of Sakhalin with Russia in return for the As previous scholarship has shown, by the early acquisition of the Kuril Islands; in the south, in 1870s Japanese diplomats had recognized the 1876, they annexed the Bonin Islands through a interconnected nature of Japan’s unresolved formal declaration; and in the same year, they border issues and the need to devise a 1 19 | 6 | 2 APJ | JF comprehensive policy towards them.2 Although with the Ryukyus (“Lew Chew”) in the 1850s. I fully acknowledge the importance ofIn other words, the Meiji leaders needed, at the understanding Meiji Japan’s national border very least, the powers’ tacit approval of their issues as a single question, in this paper I future plans for the islands.5 confine myself to addressing the Ryukyuan annexation to Japan. This paper focusses on the annexation as seen through the eyes of a number of key Western Dissatisfied with the Ryukyus’ ambivalent diplomats during the 1870s. Had these status – China and Japan both laid claims to the diplomats chosen to make a serious issue of territory – in the new era of international Japan’s annexation of the Ryukyus, the matter relations, between 1872 and 1879 Tokyo’s could easily have become more complex and leaders resorted to political and diplomatic international tensions escalated. Although it maneuvers that aimed to formally incorporate played out over seven years, the annexation the Ryukyu Kingdom into the newly established unfolded relatively smoothly on the Meiji state. They ordered the Ryukyus to international stage. One reason for this was the dispatch an embassy to Tokyo, where they skill with which Japanese diplomats handled appointed the ruling monarch as “King of the questions and potential protests by Western Ryūkyū Domain”; sent a punitive mission to diplomats. As we will see, a number of their Taiwan to avenge the deaths of a group of inquiries were directed specifically at the 6 Ryukyuan fishermen considered to beRyukyuan treaties. “Japanese subjects”; concluded, through British As early as 1872, leading members of the Meiji mediation, an international agreement with the government were becoming increasingly adept Qing court that (implicitly) stated that the at interpreting the nuances of Western Ryukyuan people were Japanese; ordered the diplomatic maneuvering.7 Indeed, the kingdom to cease tributary relations with annexation of the Ryukyus can be seen as an China; and, finally, in the face of strong early example of the future diplomatic resistance from the Ryukyuan authorities, challenges the regime would face. In annexed the kingdom by force. retrospect, the annexation provides an excellent lens through which to view Japanese Historians have conventionally referred to this diplomacy of the 1870s. process, which culminated in the establishment of Okinawa prefecture in 1879, as the Ryūkyū shobun (“the disposition of Ryukyu,” 3 1872-1879; hereafter “annexation”). Gregory The Ryukyuan treaties Smits has pointed out that during the 1880s, “the shobun became an international event, In 1609, the Ryukyu Kingdom was defeated by involving diplomatic activity between and the Satsuma Domain and surrendered among China, Japan, Britain, the United States, unconditionally; as a result, it was placed under France, and, of course, former officials of the the de facto rule of Satsuma (and by extension, Ryūkyūan court.”4 of the Tokugawa bakufu).8 However, the Ryukyus continued to maintain the posture of As Smits’ analysis suggests, the Ryukyu islands an independent country, with Satsuma’s presented the new Meiji State with aapproval and financial support, in order to diplomatic conundrum, one that involved not maintain tributary relations with China.9 In this only relations with China, but also itsway, while Satsuma gave the kingdom a high relationship with several Western countries, degree of autonomy in its internal affairs, it especially those which had negotiated treaties exercised considerable control over the 2 19 | 6 | 2 APJ | JF kingdom’s foreign relations and created what without the bakufu’s involvement.12 Smits has called a “theatrical state” in its relations with China.10 On the other hand, the bakufu did not raise any objection to the compacts the Ryukyus signed After centuries under this arrangement,with the US and France, and when in 1857 the Westerners arrived in East Asia, visiting both Dutch asked the shogunate to mediate a treaty the Ryukyus and Japan. Subsequently, the between Holland and the Ryukyus, the United States, France, and Holland concluded shogunate replied that even though the Ryukyu treaties of amity with the Ryukyu Kingdom in Kingdom shitagafu (obeys or submits) to Japan, 1854, 1855, and 1859, respectively. In so moto yori gaikoku no koto nite (“it has been a doing, these Western nations recognized that foreign kingdom from the beginning”), and thus the kingdom possessed at least some degree of it would be problematic for Japan’s rulers to diplomatic capacity, as the Ryukyuangive instructions about such a treaty.13 From authorities had signed these variousthe bakufu’s perspective, the Ryukyus were agreements without the direct involvement of subordinate to Japan, but not part of Japan; Satsuma officials. Ryukyuan officials drafted thus, they thought it prudent not to intervene the treaties they exchanged with their Western in the Ryukyuan–Dutch Treaty. Although, at counterparts in classical Chinese and dated that time, the bakufu did not fully grasp that an them according to the Chinese calendar, international treaty was an agreement signed omitting any reference to the kingdom’s by two sovereign states and all the subordination to Japan. ramifications that flowed from that, it still tacitly approved the instruments signed by the The Ryukyuan officials who negotiated with Ryukyu Kingdom in the 1850s. these Western powers were exercising the same kind of “theatrical diplomacy” that the The Ryukyuan–American Treaty concluded on Ryukyus had employed for centuries with July 11, 1854, stipulated that American citizens China. While they repeatedly emphasized the in the Ryukyus should be treated with courtesy kingdom’s status as a tributary of China, they and friendship; Americans were granted the never revealed their subordinate relationship right of free trade and the ability to move freely with Satsuma and the bakufu.11 Although the on the islands without restriction, as well as the powers’ arrival was perceived as a threat to the right of extraterritoriality (but not of consular kingdom’s stability, and the Ryukyuanresidence); and that US ships in difficulty negotiators took great pains to prevent the should be assisted and treated with courtesy by signing of these agreements, in the end, they the Ryukyuan authorities. In the French treaty, succumbed to the Westerners’ demands. in addition to these privileges, the Most Favored Nation clause was also included, along In the 1850s, Western observers were further with rights to rent houses, land, and boats. The prevented from fully understanding theDutch treaty was similar to the American Ryukyus’ status by the bakufu’s ambiguous treaty, but like the French instrument it also replies when they asked about its relations with included the Most Favored Nation clause. the kingdom. When, in early 1854, Commodore Perry demanded that bakufu officials open the In the original documents, these agreements port of Naha, the Japanese negotiators replied were referred to variously as “treaties,” that “the Ryukyu islands are very distant and “compacts” and “conventions.” As the treaties the opening of its ports cannot be discussed by lacked ratification clauses, the rights and us.” It was following this reply that Perry relations defined in them were valid and decided to sign a treaty with the Ryukyus effective immediately following the exchange of 3 19 | 6 | 2 APJ | JF the documents between the parties involved.14 and their relations with China, Satsuma, and However, while the US government ratified its the bakufu. Therefore, although in the 1860s treaty with the kingdom in 1855 (a purely the bakufu had no intention of incorporating domestic act to formally sanction thethe kingdom, it had in effect created a agreement), the French and Dutch government diplomatic environment that would prove decided not to ratify their respective treaties advantageous to Meiji Japan when it eventually with the Ryukyus in the late 1860s.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Gunboat Diplomacy: Political Bias, Trade Policy, And
    Gunboat Diplomacy Political Bias, Trade Policy, and War∗ Brendan Cooley† 13 November 2019 Abstract Countries with deep trading relationships rarely ght wars with one another. Here, I develop a theory of trade, war, and political bias, in which both trade and war are endogenous objects. Governments can rectify poor market access conditions abroad through war and subsequent regime change, in which the victorious country installs a liberal “puppet” government abroad. Trade policy bargaining is therefore conducted “in the shadow of power,” with counterfactual wars shaping the policy choices that prevail in times of peace. When peace prevails, militarily weak countries are more open to trade than powerful ones, all else equal. Equilibrium trade policies balance domestic interests against military threats from abroad. War is less likely between liberal governments because they prefer less protectionist trade policies. As a result, trade ows and the probability of peace are positively correlated in equilibrium, even though trade does not cause peace. JEL Classication Codes: D72, D74, F13, F51, F52, F54 ∗Ph.D. candidate, Department of Politics, Princeton University. Previous versions of this paper were circulated under the titles “Trade Wars, Hot Wars, and the Commercial Peace” and “Trade Policy in the Shadow of Power.” For helpful comments and discussions on earlier drafts of this paper, I thank Timm Betz, Adrien Bilal, Tyson Chatagnier, Rob Carroll, Andrew Coe, Noel Foster, Erik Gartzke, Kishore Gawande, Dan Gibbs, Joanne Gowa, Gene Grossman,
    [Show full text]
  • Franziska Seraphim Associate Professor, History Department Director of Asian Studies Boston College
    Seraphim, p. 1 9/14/2017 Franziska Seraphim Associate Professor, History Department Director of Asian Studies Boston College Office phone: 617-552-2142 E-mail: [email protected] PROFESSIONAL APPOINTMENTS Boston College 2007- Associate Professor of History 2001-2006 Assistant Professor of History Duke University 2000-2001 Visiting Assistant Professor of History EDUCATION Columbia University, New York February 2001 Ph.D. in Japanese History Dissertation: "Negotiating the Post-War: Politics and War Memory in Japan, 1945- 1995." May 1994 M.Phil. in Japanese History Major Fields: 19th-century Japan, 20th-century Japan th th Minor Fields: 20 -century German history, 20 -century German critical theory October 1992 M.A. in Japanese History Master's Thesis: "The Discourse about War Responsibility in Early Postwar Japan, 1945-1960." University of California at Berkeley May 1991 B.A. in Asian Studies Honor's Thesis: "Constitutional Thought and Political Compromise as Building Blocks of the Modern Japanese State: Inoue Kowashi and Hermann Roesler." Magna cum laude. Maximiliansgymnasium Munich, Germany June 1986 Abitur (College-level state examination) Major Fields: German and English literature Minor Fields: Theology, Chemistry LANGUAGES Fluency in written and spoken Japanese. Native fluency in German. AWARDS 2016 Exploratory Technology Grant (ETG), Boston College (summer) 2014 Northeast Asia Council (NEAC) of the Association for Asian Studies conference grant for workshop on “’Juridical Arenas’ of the Allied War Crimes Trial Program” 2013-15 Multi-year grant for conferencing and GIS mapping project, Institute for the Liberal Arts, Boston College Seraphim, p. 2 9/14/2017 2012 NEH Fellowship for 12 months of research/writing 2011 ACLS Fellowship for 12 months of research/writing (6 months taken) 2010 Research Expense Grant (summer) Boston College—research trip to Japan 2009 Research Expense Grant (summer ) Boston College—research trip to Europe 2009 Clough Center Graduate Research Assistantship, Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy, Boston College.
    [Show full text]
  • Gunboat Diplomacy of the Great Powers on the Ottoman Empire
    Journal of International Eastern European Studies/Uluslararası Doğu Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi, Vol./Yıl. 2, No/Sayı. 2, Winter/Kış 2020) ISSN: 2687-3346 Araştırma Makalesi Gunboat Diplomacy of the Great Powers on the Ottoman Empire: With Particular Reference to the Salonika Incident (1876) and Armenian Reform Demands (1879-80) Fikrettin Yavuz* (ORCID ID: 0000-0002-3161-457X) Makale Gönderim Tarihi Makale Kabul Tarihi 01.12.2020 08.12.2020 Abstract Throughout history, gunboat, a small vessel of a naval force, has been turned into a term of coercive diplomacy. Gunboat diplomacy, associated with chiefly the activities of the Great Powers, means the use of naval power directly or indirectly as an aggressive diplomatic instrument. It seems highly probable to see many examples of this coercive diplomacy in the world history, particularly after the French Revolution. Naturally, the Ottoman Empire, always attracted attention of the Great Powers, was exposed to this policy of the Powers. During the nineteen century, the rivalry among the European Powers on the Ottoman territorial integrity became a common characteristic that led them to implement gunboat diplomacy on all occasions. In this context, this article firstly offers a critical analysis of gunboat diplomacy of the Great Powers on the Ottoman Empire within the dimension of two specific examples: The Salonika Incident and Armenian reform demands. In addition, it aims to contribute to the understanding of gunboat diplomacy of the Great Powers and Ottoman response by evaluating it from native and foreign literatures. Keywords: European Powers, Ottomans, Gunboat Diplomacy, Salonika, Armenian, Reform * Assoc. Prof. Dr., Sakarya University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Department of History, Turkey, [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Imperial China and the West Part I, 1815–1881
    China and the Modern World: Imperial China and the West Part I, 1815–1881 The East India Company’s steamship Nemesis and other British ships engaging Chinese junks in the Second Battle of Chuenpi, 7 January 1841, during the first opium war. (British Library) ABOUT THE ARCHIVE China and the Modern World: Imperial China and the West Part I, 1815–1881 is digitised from the FO 17 series of British Foreign Office Files—Foreign Office: Political and Other Departments: General Correspondence before 1906, China— held at the National Archives, UK, providing a vast and significant primary source for researching every aspect of Chinese-British relations during the nineteenth century, ranging from diplomacy to trade, economics, politics, warfare, emigration, translation and law. This first part includes all content from FO 17 volumes 1–872. Source Library Number of Images The National Archives, UK Approximately 532,000 CONTENT From Lord Amherst’s mission at the start of the nineteenth century, through the trading monopoly of the Canton System, and the Opium Wars of 1839–1842 and 1856–1860, Britain and other foreign powers gradually gained commercial, legal, and territorial rights in China. Imperial China and the West provides correspondence from the Factories of Canton (modern Guangzhou) and from the missionaries and diplomats who entered China in the early nineteenth century, as well as from the envoys and missions sent to China from Britain and the later legation and consulates. The documents comprising this collection include communications to and from the British legation, first at Hong Kong and later at Peking, and British consuls at Shanghai, Amoy (Xiamen), Swatow (Shantou), Hankow (Hankou), Newchwang (Yingkou), Chefoo (Yantai), Formosa (Taiwan), and more.
    [Show full text]
  • International Relations in a Changing World: a New Diplomacy? Edward Finn
    INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IN A CHANGING WORLD: A NEW DIPLOMACY? EDWARD FINN Edward Finn is studying Comparative Literature in Latin and French at Princeton University. INTRODUCTION The revolutionary power of technology to change reality forces us to re-examine our understanding of the international political system. On a fundamental level, we must begin with the classic international relations debate between realism and liberalism, well summarised by Stephen Walt.1 The third paradigm of constructivism provides the key for combining aspects of both liberalism and realism into a cohesive prediction for the political future. The erosion of sovereignty goes hand in hand with the burgeoning Information Age’s seemingly unstoppable mechanism for breaking down physical boundaries and the conceptual systems grounded upon them. Classical realism fails because of its fundamental assumption of the traditional sovereignty of the actors in its system. Liberalism cannot adequately quantify the nebulous connection between prosperity and freedom, which it assumes as an inherent truth, in a world with lucrative autocracies like Singapore and China. Instead, we have to accept the transformative power of ideas or, more directly, the technological, social, economic and political changes they bring about. From an American perspective, it is crucial to examine these changes, not only to understand their relevance as they transform the US, but also their effects in our evolving global relationships.Every development in international relations can be linked to some event that happened in the past, but never before has so much changed so quickly at such an expansive global level. In the first section of this article, I will examine the nature of recent technological changes in diplomacy and the larger derivative effects in society, which relate to the future of international politics.
    [Show full text]
  • Hearing on China's Military Reforms and Modernization: Implications for the United States Hearing Before the U.S.-China Economic
    HEARING ON CHINA'S MILITARY REFORMS AND MODERNIZATION: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE UNITED STATES HEARING BEFORE THE U.S.-CHINA ECONOMIC AND SECURITY REVIEW COMMISSION ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2018 Printed for use of the United States-China Economic and Security Review Commission Available via the World Wide Web: www.uscc.gov UNITED STATES-CHINA ECONOMIC AND SECURITY REVIEW COMMISSION WASHINGTON: 2018 U.S.-CHINA ECONOMIC AND SECURITY REVIEW COMMISSION ROBIN CLEVELAND, CHAIRMAN CAROLYN BARTHOLOMEW, VICE CHAIRMAN Commissioners: HON. CARTE P. GOODWIN HON. JAMES TALENT DR. GLENN HUBBARD DR. KATHERINE C. TOBIN HON. DENNIS C. SHEA MICHAEL R. WESSEL HON. JONATHAN N. STIVERS DR. LARRY M. WORTZEL The Commission was created on October 30, 2000 by the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for 2001 § 1238, Public Law No. 106-398, 114 STAT. 1654A-334 (2000) (codified at 22 U.S.C. § 7002 (2001), as amended by the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for 2002 § 645 (regarding employment status of staff) & § 648 (regarding changing annual report due date from March to June), Public Law No. 107-67, 115 STAT. 514 (Nov. 12, 2001); as amended by Division P of the “Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003,” Pub L. No. 108-7 (Feb. 20, 2003) (regarding Commission name change, terms of Commissioners, and responsibilities of the Commission); as amended by Public Law No. 109- 108 (H.R. 2862) (Nov. 22, 2005) (regarding responsibilities of Commission and applicability of FACA); as amended by Division J of the “Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008,” Public Law Nol. 110-161 (December 26, 2007) (regarding responsibilities of the Commission, and changing the Annual Report due date from June to December); as amended by the Carl Levin and Howard P.
    [Show full text]
  • Exercising Diplomatic Protection the Fine Line Between Litigation, Demarches and Consular Assistance
    Exercising Diplomatic Protection The Fine Line Between Litigation, Demarches and Consular Assistance Annemarieke Künzli* I. Introduction The last Draft Article that was proposed by the Special Rapporteur to the Inter- national Law Commission for inclusion in the Draft Articles on Diplomatic Pro- tection concerns the relationship between diplomatic protection and consular as- sistance. International law distinguishes between (at least) two kinds of interna- tional relations.1 This is stipulated by the existence of two separate treaties: the two Vienna Conventions of 1961 and 1963 have codified the rules with respect to dip- lomatic and consular relations respectively.2 A fundamental difference is that a dip- lomatic agent is a political representative of a state, while a consular officer has no such function.3 As a consequence, the establishment of a consulate in non- recognised territories does not always imply recognition while establishing an em- bassy usually does and immunities granted to ambassadors are markedly different from those granted to consuls.4 In accordance with the two regimes applicable to international relations, international law recognises two kinds of protection states can exercise on behalf of their nationals: consular assistance and diplomatic protec- tion. There are fundamental differences between consular assistance and diplomatic protection. A persistent subject of debate and controversy however is the question of which activities by governments fall under diplomatic protection and which ac- tions do not. This debate is fuelled by an equally persistent misunderstanding of * Ph.D-fellow in Public International Law, Leiden University. The author wishes to thank Prof. John D u g a r d and Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • State Shinto”
    Recent Research on “State Shinto” Okuyama Michiaki 奥山倫明 Nanzan Institute for Religion & Culture As a scholarly concept, the concept of State Shinto has been developing, especially after 1945, to refer to the prewar situation surrounding the sup- port and management shrine matters by the state. Academic works are accumulating, both on the concept of State Shinto itself and on the elements that concretely constituted State Shinto. This essay will first summarize the scholarly institutions surrounding the researches related to State Shinto developed in the past fifteen years or so. Then it will try to give an overview of the related sites and facilities of State Shinto, elements that concretely constituted prewar State Shinto. elen Hardacre published Shinto: A History in 2017. In this book she “tries to address the issue of continuity in Shinto history from a new vantage point,” after Kuroda Toshio’s theory on Shinto dismantled “the rhetoric of Shinto as ‘the indigenous religion of HJapan’” in the 1980s (5). Hardacre discusses the subject of modern Shinto in the following five chapters in this book: Chapter 12 entitled “Shinto and the Meiji State”; Chapter 13 “Shinto and Imperial Japan; Chapter 14 “Shinto from 1945 through 1989”; Chapter 15 “Shrine Festivals and Their Changing Place in the Public Sphere”; and Chapter 16 “Heisei Shinto.” These five chapters occupy approximately one-third of the main text of the volume (198 among 552 pages). In this book, “State Shinto” is not a main topic, but nevertheless she pays sig- nificant attention to it. In the introduction that summarizes the contents of each chapter, Hardacre comments on the term “State Shinto” in referring to Chapter 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Gunboat Diplomacy, 1919-1991
    GUNBOAT DIPLOMACY, 1919-1991 Published by Macmillan in association with the International Institute for Strategic Studies STUDIES IN INTERNATIONAL SECURI'IY 18 NATIONS IN ARMS: The Theory and Practice of Territorial Defence Adam Roberts 20 THE EVOLUTION OF NUCLEAR STRATEGY (second edition) Lawrence Freedman 23 THE SOVIET UNION: The Incomplete Superpower Paul Dibb 24 ANTI-SUBMARINE WARFARE AND SUPERPOWER STRATEGIC STABILITY Donald C. Daniel 25 HEDLEY BULL ON ARMS CONTROL Hedley Bull 26 EUROPE IN THE WESTERN ALLIANCE: Towards a European Defence Entity? Jonathan Alford and Kenneth Hunt 28 THE DEFENCE OF WHITE POWER: South African Foreign Policy under Pressure Robert ScottJaster 29 PEACEKEEPING IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS Alan James 30 STRATEGIC DEFENCE DEPLOYMENT OPTIONS: Criteria and Evaluation Ivo H. Daalder AN INTRODUCTION TO STRATEGIC STUDIES: Military Technology and International Relations Barry Buzan MILITARY POWER IN EUROPE: Essays in Memory of Jonathan Alford Lawrence Freedman (editor) EUROl1f'.AN SECURITY AND FRANCE Franc;ois de Rose Series Standing Order If you would like to receive future titles in this series as they arc published, you can make usc of our standing order facility. To place a standing order please contact your bookseller or, in case of difficulty, write to us at the address below with your name and address and the name of the series. Please state with which title you wish to begin your standing order. (If you live outside the UK we may not have the rights for your area, in which case we will forward your order to the publisher concerned.) Standing Order ScJvicc, Macmillan Distribution Ltd, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG21 2XS, England Gunboat Diplomacy 1919-1991 Political Applications of Limited Naval Force Third Edition James Cable Foreword by Admiral of the Fleet Sir Julian Oswald, GCB First Sea Lord, 1989-1993 palgrave macmillan © James Cable 1971, 1981, 1994 Foreword © Julian Oswald 1994 All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • The Early Us-Japan Economic Relationship and the Rise of Shōwa
    THE EARLY U.S.-JAPAN ECONOMIC RELATIONSHIP AND THE RISE OF SHŌWA MILITARISM A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of The School of Continuing Studies and of The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Liberal Studies By Keith J. Kennebeck, BBA Georgetown University Washington, D.C. 03/27/2012 Copyright 2012 by Keith J. Kennebeck All Rights Reserved ii THE EARLY U.S.-JAPAN ECONOMIC RELATIONSHIP AND THE RISE OF SHŌWA MILITARISM Keith J. Kennebeck, BBA MALS Mentor: Michael C. Wall, PhD ABSTRACT The notion that the bilateral economic relationship between the United States and Japan played a central role in prompting the Pacific War is not a novel concept. In particular, the number of scholarly and popular works that have identified the United States’ escalating use of trade and financial sanctions in the late 1930s and early 1940s as a response to Japan’s increasing military advances in Asia are numerous. Such discussions on the Pacific War emphasize that the U.S.-imposed export embargoes on strategic goods and resources and freezes on Japanese financial assets eventually prompted Japan to attack Pearl Harbor in late 1941. More importantly, these discussions are punctuated with the moral argument that the U.S.-imposed embargoes were necessary, and that war was essentially inevitable, given Japan’s brutal occupations of China and Southeast Asia. In short, so the standard argument goes, Japan’s unjustifiable rise towards militarism prompted an end to the bilateral economic relationship, which in turn prompted the onset of the Pacific War.
    [Show full text]
  • Is Confucianism Philosophy? the Answers of Inoue Tetsujirō and Nakae Chōmin
    Is Confucianism philosophy ? The answers of Inoue Tetsujirō and Nakae Chōmin Eddy Dufourmont To cite this version: Eddy Dufourmont. Is Confucianism philosophy ? The answers of Inoue Tetsujirō and Nakae Chōmin . Nakajima Takahiro. Whither Japanese Philosophy 2? Reflections through Other Eyes, , University of Tokyo Center of Philosophy, 2010. hal-01522302 HAL Id: hal-01522302 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01522302 Submitted on 19 May 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. 71 4 Is Confucianism philosophy ? The answers of Inoue Tetsujirō and Nakae Chōmin Eddy DUFOURMONT University of Bordeaux 3/ CEJ Inalco Introduction: a philosophical debate from beyond the grave Is Chinese thought a philosophy? This question has been discussed by scholars in the last years from a philosophical point of view,1 but it is possible also to adopt a historical point of view to answer the ques- tion, since Japanese thinkers faced the same problem during Meiji period (1868–1912), when the acquisition of European thought put in question the place of Chinese
    [Show full text]
  • Csu Japanese American Digitization Project Collections
    CSU JAPANESE AMERICAN DIGITIZATION PROJECT COLLECTIONS CSUJAD Partners California Historical Society California Polytechnic University San Luis Obispo California State University, Bakersfield California State University, Channel Islands California State University, Dominguez Hills (central hub) California State University, East Bay California State University, Fresno California State University, Fullerton, Center for Oral and Public History California State University, Fullerton, University Archives and Special Collections California State University, Long Beach California State University, Monterey Bay California State University, Northridge California State University, San Bernardino California State University, Stanislaus Claremont University Consortium Libraries Claremont School of Theology Eastern California Museum Go For Broke National Educational Center Historical Society of Long Beach Japanese American National Museum Palos Verdes Library District Sacramento State University San Diego State University San Francisco State University San Jose State University Sonoma State University Topaz Museum University of California, Santa Barbara Whittier Public Library The central focus of the California State University Japanese American Digitization Project is the digitization and access to primary source materials focused on the mass incarceration of Japanese Americans during World War II, but also related to the history and progress of Japanese Americans in their communities throughout the 20th century. An enormous range of subjects and
    [Show full text]