THE ARMIES OF THE PACIFIC
The military forces available for service in the Pacific are those (1)
of Russia; (2) of China; (3) of Japan; (4) of the United States; (5) of
the British Empire including India; (6) of the Latin-American peoples of
Mexico and South America. The great armies of France, Germany, and
Austro-Hungary can have no voice in the destinies of the Pacific Ocean
unless indirectly, as, for instance, through Germany or Austria helping
or hindering a Russian movement in the Far East by guaranteeing or
threatening her European frontier.
The Russian army, though driven back by the forces of Japan during the
recent war, still demands respectful consideration in any calculations
as to the future of the Asian littoral of the Pacific Ocean. The
Russians, as has been pointed out in a previous chapter, fought that
campaign under many serious disadvantages. The Siberian railway gave
them a very slender line of communication with their base. Now that
railway is being duplicated, and in a future war would have at least
double its old military capacity. The conditions of unrest at home in
Russia during the war were so serious as almost to paralyse the
executive government. Those conditions are not likely to be repeated,
since Russia has now entered upon a fairly peaceful, if somewhat slow,
progress towards constitutional reform. In a war on a land frontier for
which the people were enthusiastic, the military power of Russia would
be tremendous, though there was never any real foundation for the bogey
of Russia as an all-powerful aggressive force.
The Russian army, based upon conditions of universal liability to
service, can muster in the field for war some 4,000,000 of men. But
considering the vast frontiers to be defended, and the great claims
therefore made by garrison fortresses, it is not likely that more than
1,500,000 could be mobilised in any one district. It is reasonably
possible to imagine a Russian army of a million men being brought to and
maintained on the Pacific littoral: of an even greater army based on,
say, Harbin. That would be a formidable force, especially if enrolled to
fight for the White Races against an Asiatic peril: for then it would
share the old military enthusiasm of the Cossacks.
There is nothing which will give the inquirer into national
characteristics a better key to the Russian than a knowledge of the old
Cossack organisation. It was formed, in the days of Russia's making as a
nation, from the free spirits of the land, suffering on the one side
from Turkish cruelty, on the other from the devastations of the
Tartars. "Cossacks" meant simply "free men," and, at the outset, they
were freebooters mainly, the Robin Hoods and Hereward the Wakes of
Russia. But the patriotic work of resisting the Tartars and the Turks
gave them a national aim, and in time they formed a military and
religious organisation, unique in the history of European civilisation.
From the village Cossacks--irregular volunteer troops, pursuing normally
the life of villagers, but ready ever to take up arms against Tartar or
Turkish bandits, or to become in turn themselves raiders of the enemy's
caravans and villages--sprung up the Cossack Zaporojskoe, garrisoning
the "Setch," a great military camp in the heart of the Cossack country.
The Cossacks who joined the Setch devoted themselves wholly to military
life. They had to swear to complete chastity, to abstinence whilst at
war from alcohol, and to obedience to the Greek Church. The Cossack
could leave the Setch if he were so inclined, but while he remained
within its boundaries discipline was inexorable.
In the Setch there was neither organised training, nor compulsory drill,
nor military manoeuvres. With the exception of a few elected officers,
there were, in time of peace, no social distinctions; but the bravest
and the most experienced were treated with respect. For war a Cossack
was elected to command each hundred men; his power was absolute. Several
hundreds formed a regiment, with a colonel at its head, a temporary
officer, elected for one campaign only. The organisation had some
artillery and infantry, but its chief strength lay in its cavalry. It
also built a Fleet of small boats with which it repeatedly raided the
Turkish coast.
This military monastic order passed away with the closer organisation of
the Russian nation. Despotic Czars could not tolerate a community so
formidable in its virtues. Characteristically enough, it was Catherine
the Great who dealt the final blow to the Cossack Setch. But the Cossack
organisation and spirit, as well as the Cossack name, survive in the
Russian army to-day, and the million or so men whom Russia could muster
on the shores of the North Pacific might have some great say in the
future destinies of the ocean.
The Japanese army of to-day, an army of veterans, must be credited, in
calculating its value as a military engine, with the moral force of its
record of victory. I confess to a belief in the superiority of the White
Man, _qua_ White Man over any Asiatic: and I am not inclined, therefore,
to accept Japanese generalship and Japanese initiative at their Tokio
valuation. But the 600,000 men whom Japan can put into the field,
perfect in discipline, armed as to the infantry with a first-class
rifle, a little deficient though they may be in artillery and cavalry,
is a most formidable force, unassailable in Japan's home territory, not
to be regarded lightly if called to a campaign on the Asiatic mainland.
Since the war with Russia the Japanese army has been increased: the fact
is evidence of the unslaked warlike enthusiasm of the people.
China will probably emerge from her present revolutionary troubles,
whatever may be their result, with a seasoned army of great proportions.
The actual military organisation of China at the time of the outbreak of
the present revolt was somewhat nebulous. But an effort was being made
to organise an Imperial army (on plans laid down in 1905) which would
have numbered about 360,000 men trained on the Japanese model. Should
the reformed China decide to follow in the footsteps of Japan as regards
military organisation, the Chinese field force of the future would
number some 2,500,000 men. It is already announced that the new Chinese
Republic will adopt universal military training as part of its system of
national reorganisation.
The United States, relying on a purely voluntary system for its military
organisation, has, in the opinion of most critics, the framework of an
army rather than an army. The peace strength of the United States
regular army is about 100,000, and from these the Philippine garrison
draws 13,000 men, and the Hawaiian garrison 1000 of all ranks. A
partially trained militia numbers about 100,000 men. For the rest there
are 16,000,000 of men of military age in the nation, but they are
absolutely untrained. In case of a powerful enemy obtaining naval
control of the Pacific, there is danger that the United States would
suffer the ignominy of the occupation, for a time, of her Pacific coast.
British military forces available for the Pacific come under three
headings:
British garrisons in India and elsewhere in the Pacific.
The citizen armies of Australia and New Zealand, and the militia
forces of Canada.
The Sepoy forces in India.
The British garrisons total some 80,000 men. They may be classed,
without prejudice, among the best troops in the world, well trained and
with some experience of warfare. But the majority of them are stationed
in India, and few of them could be safely drawn from there in an
emergency. The Sepoy troops number some 250,000, officered generally by
British leaders. It is conceivable that a portion of them could be used
outside of India against coloured races.
The citizen armies of Australia and New Zealand must be spoken of in the
future tense: for their organisation has just begun, and it will be some
five years before that organisation will be well under way. But so
important is the bearing on Pacific problems of the training of some
quarter of a million of citizen soldiers in the Australasian Dominions
of the British Empire, that attention must be given here to a
description of this army of the future.
Taking the Australian organisation as the model: The population of
Australia in 1911 was about 4-1/2 millions, of whom there were, on the
basis of the last census--
188,000 males of 14 years and under 18 years; and
295,000 males of 18 years and under 25 years.
Allowing for those living in districts too thinly populated to admit of
training without excessive expenditure, or medically unfit for training,
upon the figures at present available, it is estimated that Australia
will have in training, when the scheme is in full operation, each year--
100,000 senior cadets; and
112,000 citizen soldiers.
The system will give in eight years' time a force of 126,000 trained
men, and fully equipped. Every year afterwards will increase the reserve
by 12,000 men. And if the training be extended into the country areas,
the numbers may be increased by 40 per cent. Increase of population will
bring, too, an increase of numbers, and my estimate of an eventual
200,000 for the Australian army and 50,000 for the New Zealand army is
probably correct.
For the leading positions in this army there is provision to train a
number of professional officers. The Military College of Australia is
already in existence, and is organised on a basis of simplicity and
efficiency which reflects the serious purpose of this democratic
military organisation. It is not reserved for the children of the rich.
It is not allowed to become intolerable to the children of the poor by
the luxury of wealthy cadets. To quote from the official conditions:--
"The Military College of Australia is established to educate candidates
for commissions in all arms of the Military Forces of the Commonwealth.
"Only candidates who intend to make the Military Forces their profession
in life will be admitted as Cadets to the Military College. Parents or
guardians are therefore not at liberty to withdraw their sons or wards
at will.
"Cadets, in joining the Military College, shall be enlisted in the
Permanent Military Forces for a term of twelve years. Service as a Cadet
at the Military College shall be deemed service in the ranks of the
Permanent Military Forces of the Commonwealth.
"No fees will be charged for equipment or instruction or maintenance of
Cadets, and their travelling expenses within the Commonwealth between
their parents' or guardians' residences and the College will be paid on
first joining and on graduation.
"The following charges will be admitted against the public and credited
to Cadets' accounts after they have joined:--
"Outfit allowance--£30 on joining.
"Daily allowance of five shillings and sixpence (5s. 6d.) to cover
cost of uniform and clothing, books, instruments, messing, washing
and other expenses.
"No Cadet will be permitted to receive money, or any other supplies from
his parents or guardians, or any person whomsoever, without the
sanction of the Commandant. A most rigid observance of this order is
urged upon all parents and guardians, as its violation would make
distinctions between Cadets, which it is particularly desired to
prevent.
"No Cadet, when within the Federal Territory, or when absent on duty
from College, or when in uniform, shall drink any spirituous or
intoxicating liquor, or bring or cause the same to be brought within the
College, or have the same in his room, tent, or otherwise in his
possession.
"Gambling, lotteries, and raffles are strictly prohibited. They are
serious offences, which will be severely punished.
"Smoking may be permitted during certain hours and in authorised places.
The smoking of cigarettes is at all times prohibited. A Cadet found in
possession of cigarettes is liable to punishment for disobedience of
orders."
Canada has a militia force credited at present with a total strength of
55,000 men. Sir Wilfrid Laurier, who controlled the destinies of Canada
for fifteen years up to 1911, was no military enthusiast and believed
profoundly in a peaceful future for his country. In one respect, and in
one respect only, Canada under his rule progressed in defence
organisation: she had her own rifle factory turning out a rifle of
Canadian design.
But a new spirit moves in Canada to-day in matters of Defence as in
other things. I remember in 1909 speaking at Toronto in advocacy of a
system of universal training for military service. Lieut.-Col. Wm.
Hamilton Merritt, a Canadian militia officer who had learned enthusiasm
for the idea of a "citizen army" on a visit to Switzerland, invited me
to come up to Toronto from New York to speak on the Australian campaign
for the universal training of citizens. The meeting was friendly but not
particularly enthusiastic. My strongest recollection of it is that one
Canadian paper most unjustifiably and absurdly twisted some words of
mine advocating Canadian self-reliance into advice that Canada should
arm "to attack the United States." But the outcome of the meeting was
that a "Canadian Patriotic League" was formed, and from it sprang the
"Canadian Defence League, a non-political association to urge the
importance to Canada of universal physical and naval or military
training." For two years and more, in spite of the earnest efforts of
Canadian enthusiasts, the movement languished. After the General
Election of 1911, however, a quickening came to every department of
Canadian life, and this particularly showed itself in matters of
Defence. In November of that year, Colonel the Hon. S. Hughes, the
Canadian Minister of Militia, called a conference of experts to consider
the organisation of the militia. To that conference the Canadian Defence
League was invited to send representatives, and their presence seemed to
inspire the whole gathering with an enthusiasm for a universal service
system. Summarising from a report sent to me by the Canadian Defence
League: "Universal military training has at last become a live issue
throughout the Dominion of Canada. It was the mainspring behind the
whole machinery of the Militia Conference; almost every man present was
in favour of it, but a few, if the question had come to vote, would have
either refrained from voting or voted against it, because they were
afraid of the possibility of being misunderstood by the public at large.
The cavalry section made no recommendation, and the infantry section
discussed it, while the artillery, which is always in the front, was
strongly in favour of it. Colonel Logie of Hamilton moved and Colonel
Fotheringham of Toronto seconded a resolution recommending the adoption
of the Australian system in Canada. This motion was with a view to
placing the conference on record; but the Minister, in his wisdom, held
the resolution in abeyance, and it did not come to a vote. But in the
closing hours of the conference Senator Power of Nova Scotia positively
and definitely advocated universal military training for the whole of
Canada."
A universal service system in Canada would provide a citizen army
of--probably--250,000 men of the finest type: and the effect of this
force on Pacific issues would be equal to that of the combined armies of
Australia and New Zealand.
The military strength of Latin America (the South American Republics and
Mexico) it is difficult to estimate accurately. In almost all cases the
constitution of the Republics provides for "universal service" but fails
to provide for universal training for service. Under modern conditions
of warfare, it is useless to enact that men shall serve unless the
necessary sacrifices of money and leisure are made to train them to
serve. Raw levies could be made of some use almost immediately in a past
epoch of warfare, when the soldier with his "Brown Bess" musket had the
injunction from the drill sergeant to "wait until he could see the
whites of the eyes" of his enemy and then to fire. That needed stolid
nerves mainly, and but little training. In these days raw levies would
be worse than useless, of no value in battles, a burden on the
commissariat and hospital services between battles. The Latin-American
armies must be judged in the light of that fact. Apart from that
caution, the numbers are imposing enough.
Mexico has an army organisation providing for 30,000 men on a peace
footing and 84,000 men on a war footing. The Argentine army on a peace
footing is about 18,000 strong; on a war footing about 120,000 strong,
exclusive of the National Guard and Territorial troops (forming a second
line). In the Republic of Bolivia the peace footing of the army is 2500:
the probable war footing 30,000. The Republic of Brazil has a universal
service system. The peace strength of the army is 29,000 (to which may
be added a gendarmerie of 20,000). On the outbreak of war there could be
mobilised, it is claimed, five divisions totalling, say, 60,000 men.
Chili has, on a peace footing, about 10,000 men; on a war footing
50,000, exclusive of the reserves (about 34,000). Colombia makes every
man liable to service, but the training is not regular. Possibly 10,000
men could be mobilised in time of war. Ecuador maintains a permanent
force of about 5000 men, and claims that it could mobilise 90,000 in
case of war. Paraguay has a permanent force of 2500 men and a National
Guard available for service in case of war.
The South American has proved himself, on occasions, a good and plucky
fighter. But I doubt whether his military forces can be seriously
considered as a factor in the fate of the Pacific, except in the matter
of defending his own territory from invasion. The only armies that count
greatly to-day in the Pacific are those of Japan, Russia, and Great
Britain, in that order, with China and the United States as potential
rather than actual military forces.