R. Bassett - Democracy and foreign policy : a case history : the Sino-Japanese dispute, 1931-33

ROUTLEDGE LIBRARY EDITIONS: JAPAN

DEMOCRACY AND FOREIGN POLICY

A Case History
The Sino-Japanese Dispute, 193133

R.BASSETT

Volume 64

First published in 1952 for the London School of Economics by Longmans,
Green & Co Ltd.

This edition first published in 2011
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN

Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada
by Routledge
270 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016

This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2010.

To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledges collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.

1952 R.Bassett

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN 0-203-84152-2 Master e-book ISBN

ISBN 13: 978-0-415-56498-4 (Set)

eISBN 13: 978-0-203-84317-8 (Set)

ISBN 13: 978-0-415-59484-4 (Volume 64)

eISBN 13: 978-0-203-84152-5 (Volume 64)

The publisher has gone to great lengths to ensure the quality of this reprint but points out that some imperfections in the original copies may be apparent.

The publisher has made every effort to trace copyright holders and would welcome correspondence from those they have been unable to trace.

A CASE HISTORY
The Sino-Japanese Dispute, 193133

R.BASSETT

First published in 1952 for
The London School of Economics and Political Science
by Longmans, Green and Co. Ltd.

Now published in 1968 by
FRANK CASS AND COMPANY LIMITED
67 Great Russell Street, London WC1

In order to avoid possible confusion, the readers attention is drawn to the two following points:

(1) In all instances, the phrase Authors italics indicates italicisation by the author of this book.

(2) Whenever the Guardian is mentioned, the newspaper referred to is the Manchester Guardian.

THIS book is the outcome of a long felt concern about the misleading versions of British foreign policy between the First and Second World Wars which have been widely popularised and are still prevalent. The time may not yet have come for an impartial history of that policy, but there is nothing, save the magnitude of the task, to stand in the way of a study of one vitally important part of the subject, viz. the state and movements of public opinion about foreign policy. The present volume, it is hoped, may make a contribution to such a study.

The form of the book requires some explanation. To cover the whole period adequately was not a practicable proposition for one heavily burdened with teaching and other duties. In any event, it would have necessitated a series of volumes. The important point here is that detailed analysis, stage by stage, is required. Serious difficulties and dangers are involved in any attempt to make generalisations about public opinion, or about the opinions of any individual or group of individuals, over a period of years. It is not only that the opinions embraced by public opinion are of great variety and complexity; they also change, and may be subject, indeed, to considerable fluctuation. Constant reference needs, therefore, to be made to the actual sequence of events, and to the views held at each particular stage.

Memories can be stifled with great facility by those who wish to convey the impression that their attitude at some particular time was different from what it actually was. Indeed, taking a more charitable view, it is quite easy for people to come genuinely to believe that they advocated action which, in fact, they opposed; and easier still for them simply to forget the qualifications and reservations with which they proposed or supported any particular course of action, their hesitations, their second thoughts, their attainment to wisdom after, sometimes long after, the event. We hear much of the vacillations of statesmen. In this respect, as in others, it is desirable that the records of their critics, particularly of the intellectuals among them, should be subjected to the same kind of scrutiny. The point is of special importance because critics of British foreign policy have often changed their ground. In doing so, they have not infrequently presented versions of their own previous opinionsas well as of the opinions of other sections of the publicwhich do not conform to the facts.

Since the entire period between the wars could not be dealt with in sufficient detail, at any rate in one volume, the analysis has been confined to one phase only of British foreign policythat relating to the Manchurian crisis of 19313. The attempt has been made to provide an adequate and illuminating case history.

The reasons for selecting the Manchurian affair are as follows: In the first place, it covers a relatively brief period, and is substantially complete in itself. It seems unlikely that any further information which may be forthcoming will compel any drastic revision of judgments on British policy. Publication of the relevant Documents on British Foreign Policy (not available at the time of writing) will, it is hoped, clear up some important points of detail. An account by Viscount Simon of the conduct of British policy would, of course, be most welcome and important. But such information as may be made available in that kind of way is not necessary for this book, which is concerned with the opinions expressed in this country on the basis of the knowledge available either at the time or in subsequent years.

Secondly, and more important, the Sino-Japanese crisis of 19313 provides effective illustrations of the wider themes. It might even be said that the general pattern of opinion in this country at the time was to be reproduced in subsequent crises. Certainly, all the main issues were raised; and it can legitimately be contended that the Manchurian problem, and the controversies which it provoked, give invaluable clues to an understanding of later developments.

Lastly, the importance of the Manchurian affair, although variously assessed, is universally acknowledged. Apart from its place in the sequence of events which culminated in the Second World War, post-war developments give it a special interest. The Manchurian wheel came full circle. The Japanese aggressor was totally defeated and evicted from the Asiatic mainland; but Chinese sovereignty and territorial integrity were not restored in Manchuria. Acquisitions were made there and elsewhere at Chinas The consequences of this new intrusion of Russian power into Manchuria are another matter; suffice it to say that they have already proved far-reaching. As for Manchuria itself, no doubt it was only one of a score of similar cases in the post-war world. No doubt, Great Britain was more concerned with cases nearer home. Yet Great Britain had problems nearer home in 19313. Doubtless also, a major share of power and responsibility rested at the close of hostilities with the United States of America. But was not that also true in 19313? Anyhow, previously ardent advocates of collective resistance to aggression were, for the most part, strangely silent, and not only in regard to Manchuria. Former champions of international morality, however uneasy, were mostly so restrained as to appear acquiescent. Was that the fruit of wisdom painfully acquired in the interval? It would hardly seem so, for no modifications can be detected in their criticisms of pre-war British policy. Whatever the answer may be, the contrast between the thirties and the later forties is striking.