Introduction: War and Dissent in Early 20th Century Japan
The Russo-Japanese War marked a pivotal moment in modern East Asian history. It was the first major military victory of an Asian power over a European empire in the modern era, reshaping global perceptions of power and imperialism. Yet, behind the triumphant headlines and patriotic fervor, there existed a significant though marginalized undercurrent of anti-war activism. Despite widespread public support for the conflict against Russia, pacifists and critics persistently voiced their opposition, condemning the war as unjust and wasteful.
This article explores the complex interplay of nationalism, militarism, and dissent in Japan during the lead-up to and unfolding of the Russo-Japanese War. By examining the historical context, key events, cultural shifts, and the legacy of anti-war advocates, we gain a richer understanding of the social dynamics that shaped Japan’s path toward modern imperialism, as well as the voices of conscience that resisted it.
Historical Context: From the Boxer Rebellion to Rising Tensions in Manchuria
The seeds of the Russo-Japanese War were sown during the Boxer Rebellion of 1899-1901, a violent anti-foreign uprising in China that drew an international military coalition known as the Eight-Nation Alliance to intervene. Japan, as part of this coalition, was involved in the suppression of the Boxers. Russia, however, exploited the chaos to solidify its presence in Northeast China , particularly occupying strategic territories in the region.
The occupation of Manchuria by Russian forces alarmed Japan, which viewed the area as crucial to its security and interests in Korea. Although international pressure forced Russia to promise withdrawal, it repeatedly delayed doing so, exacerbating tensions. Japan’s leadership perceived Russia’s continued foothold in southern Manchuria as a direct threat to its influence in Korea and national security. The situation became a powder keg, setting the stage for armed conflict.
Nationalism and Militarism after the Sino-Japanese War
Japan’s victorious outcome in the First Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895 had a profound effect on its national psyche. The war’s success instilled a strong sense of pride and confidence, triggering a surge of nationalistic and militaristic sentiment. As Japan’s Foreign Minister Mutsu Munemitsu reflected, the country was engulfed in a triumphant atmosphere where calls for further expansion and military assertiveness drowned out voices advocating caution.
This cultural shift made the prospect of war with Russia more palatable to the public and political elites alike. Advocates of military action argued that Japan had to assert its dominance decisively to maintain and expand its sphere of influence in East Asia. Any call for moderation was often labeled unpatriotic or cowardly, marginalizing dissenters.
The Surge of Imperialism and Public Opinion
Entering the 20th century, imperialist ideology and militarism intensified within Japanese society. Media coverage heavily emphasized Russia’s growing presence in Manchuria as a direct challenge to Japan’s security. The narrative constructed by newspapers and public discourse suggested that only a display of military strength could compel Russia to negotiate or retreat.
Political parties, intellectuals, and commentators rallied behind the idea that war with Russia was inevitable. They contended that the rivalry in Korea between two great powers would only end with one relinquishing its claims, and since Japan could not cede its position, it had to prepare for armed conflict. This consensus created powerful pressure on the government to act decisively.
Government Hesitation and Military Realities
Despite the rising clamor for war, Japan’s government harbored serious reservations. Military and economic assessments showed Japan at a significant disadvantage compared to Russia. At that time, Russia’s population exceeded 140 million, with a standing army of over one million and a large reserve force. Japan, in contrast, had a population of about 44 million and a standing army of approximately 375,000 troops.
Economic resources and industrial capacity also posed concerns about Japan’s ability to sustain a prolonged conflict. The government faced a difficult balancing act—responding to popular and political pressure while acknowledging the risks and limitations inherent in challenging a European great power.
The Intellectual Push for War: Tokyo University Professors’ Intervention
In July 1903, seven professors from Tokyo Imperial University personally appealed to Prime Minister Katsura Tarō. They argued that to secure Japan’s position in Korea, a fundamental resolution of the Manchurian issue was necessary, and that military action should not be delayed. Their intervention reflected a growing faction within the intellectual elite advocating for assertive national policy.
This movement found support among mid-level bureaucrats in key ministries, such as Foreign Affairs and the Interior, further pressuring the government to adopt a more confrontational stance. The idea that war was unavoidable gained ground, contributing to the escalating momentum toward conflict.
The Emergence of Anti-War Voices and Their Challenges
Amid this swelling tide of pro-war sentiment, a small but determined group of anti-war activists emerged. Journalists like Uchimura Kanzō, Kōtoku Shūsui, and Sakai Toshihiko, affiliated with publications such as the “Citizen’s News,” began to publicly denounce the coming war. Uchimura articulated a deeply moralistic opposition, stating that war was murder on a massive scale and a profound evil that could never yield lasting benefit.
Their critiques, however, were largely drowned out by the dominant nationalist discourse. Anti-war articles were often published under their own names and did not represent the editorial stance of their newspapers. As popular enthusiasm for war intensified, anti-war journalists faced severe social and political pressure.
The Shift of “Citizen’s News” and the Fracturing of Anti-War Advocates
By October 1903, under mounting public and governmental pressure, the “Citizen’s News” shifted its editorial position, declaring that war was unavoidable and urging citizens to set aside doubts and support the government. This volte-face was a profound disappointment to pacifist contributors.
In protest, leading anti-war figures resigned from the paper. Uchimura Kanzō famously declared that supporting the war equated to supporting the destruction of Japan itself. Kōtoku Shūsui and Sakai Toshihiko, coming from a socialist perspective, condemned international war as a struggle among elites and militarists for their own interests, with ordinary people bearing the costs.
Founding of “Citizen’s News” Weekly: A Platform for Peace and Social Justice
Following their departure, Kōtoku and Sakai launched a weekly publication also named “Citizen’s News,” distinct from its predecessor, which promoted pacifism, social justice, and egalitarian ideals. The new journal openly criticized imperialist ambitions and military aggression, advocating for freedom, equality, and fraternity as fundamental human values.
With a circulation of nearly 5,000 copies per issue, this platform became a voice for the anti-war movement, attracting intellectuals and activists who challenged the dominant militaristic narrative. Their manifesto called on Japanese and Russian citizens alike to unite in opposing the war and the imperialist governments that had plunged their nations into conflict.
The Cultural Impact of Anti-War Activism
Though marginalized and often suppressed, the anti-war movement during the Russo-Japanese War planted seeds of dissent that would influence later social and political developments in Japan. Their critiques highlighted the human costs of militarism and questioned the legitimacy of imperialist expansion.
These activists also connected domestic issues with broader international concerns, advocating for solidarity among peoples rather than rivalry among empires. Their efforts underscored the presence of alternative visions of national identity and social organization, contrasting sharply with the prevailing militaristic ethos.
Legacy: Lessons from Dissent in Wartime Japan
The Russo-Japanese War ultimately ended in Japan’s favor, reshaping the balance of power in East Asia and elevating Japan’s status on the world stage. However, the conflict also foreshadowed the intensification of militarism and imperialism that would characterize Japan’s trajectory in the decades leading up to World War II.
The anti-war voices from this period remind us that even in times of overwhelming patriotic fervor, critical perspectives persist and challenge dominant narratives. Their moral courage and intellectual clarity offer enduring lessons about the costs of war, the dangers of nationalism unchecked by reason, and the importance of standing for peace and justice.
Conclusion: Remembering the Courage to Oppose War
The Russo-Japanese War was a landmark event with far-reaching consequences, but it was not without its critics. Despite societal pressures, a brave minority raised their voices against the war, denouncing it as an unjust and brutal enterprise fueled by imperial ambition.
Their story enriches our understanding of early 20th-century Japan, revealing a society grappling with the tensions between nationalism, militarism, and the pursuit of peace. In remembering these dissenters, we honor the enduring human impulse to seek justice and resist the machinery of war, even when it seems unstoppable.