The New Great Game: Britain, America, and the War for East Asia

The New Great Game: Britain, America, and the War for East Asia
George Kennan, 1952

_“Eastern Asia is the prize for which all energetic nations are grasping”
-Brooke Adams

“Monopolies, oligarchy, the striving for domination and not for freedom, the exploitation of an increasing number of small or weak nations by a handful of the richest or most powerful nations — all these have given birth to those distinctive characteristics of imperialism which compel us to define it as parasitic or decaying capitalism.”
-Vladimir Lenin_​

Overview

The cataclysmic final year of the Great War is today remembered principally for the massive twilight offensive of October and the economic depression and revolutionary upheaval which followed in its wake. When it is discussed at all, the events in East Asia are treated as a sideshow. Yet the struggle that began in 1919 was as much an augury of the future world order as the revolutions in Europe. The future contest that would be waged between Britain and America for control of the world’s markets was signaled by the hardening geopolitical alignments of Japan and China and the beginning of a proxy war between the world’s two largest economies. William Jennings’ Bryan is frequently cast as an outsider to typical Washington politics, but his commitment to anti-imperialism and sinophilic foreign policy were tempered but never broken by future American presidents. In this respect, the 2nd Sino-Japanese war not only foreshadowed the battles of the thirty-year Cold War from which we are now emerging, but also played an essential role in shaping its basic structure.

1919 marked the endpoint of a process of deteriorating Anglo-American relations that began with the Bryan Inauguration. It was, in the end, only the pacific sentiments of Bryan and the pragmatism of the British foreign ministry which prevented America from joining the war as a Central Power. In retrospect, British behavior throughout the two diplomatic crises was legally justifiable but extraordinarily reckless as state policy - this attested to the frustration that the nation’s diplomats felt with Bryan’s administration and rising anti-American sentiment in Britain.

The Parvus Affair

It all began with a January 8th Chicago Tribune article detailing the Bryan administration’s decision to grant asylum to Alexander Parvus, a Marxist theoretician and German social-democrat who had requested refuge following his attendance at the Trenton Conference. Pavus himself was a dubious character in the pay of German intelligence; the Tribune alleged that he was involved in the Bolshevik revolution, an accusation we now know to be only partially correct. Congress began an investigation into Parvus, and quickly uncovered links between the social-democrat and prominent diplomats at the German consulate in San Francisco. On January 22nd, they uncovered bribes offered by Parvus to several mid-ranking bureaucrats of the American immigration office, but then learned that these were uniformly rejected. The question quickly became if anyone with knowledge of Parvus’ shady history was involved in the approval of his Asylum application.

The Republican house investigation received a major windfall on January 28th, when Eduard Bernstein (another social-democratic refugee) testified that Parvus had bragged about meeting several high-ranking American state department officials. On February 2nd, Parvus himself was apprehended by the police in Bend, Oregon. In exchange for a plea deal with prosecutors, he quickly revealed the details of a vast Indo-German operation being run out of Germany’s San Francisco Consulate. Parvus claimed that he had no involvement with this particular intelligence operation, which was likely true. Further investigations soon demonstrated that a fairly large money laundering operation was being run out of San Francisco; British intelligence actually knew of this, but had little idea of the complicity of American law enforcement. Attention soon turned to the California governor, Hiram Johnson. Johnson was a convenient target for Congress - despite being a lifelong Republican, he had been one of Bryan’s most vocal defenders and had even broken with his ally Theodor Roosevelt to campaign for him in 1916. Widely considered something of a Judas, he was nonetheless broadly popular in California. It soon became clear that Johnson knew of the German intelligence efforts but had remained silent, perhaps out of loyalty to an unknown benefactor. He vociferously denied that he was personally involved in asking law enforcement to “look the other way”.

Alexander Parvus, German Social-Democrat and spy. Trotsky is said to have remarked that “He never believed such a scoundrel could nearly cause another inter-imperialist war!”.​

On February 19th, the Chicago Tribune published a document which it alleged to be a “memo from the American State Department”. The document, purportedly written by the Secretary of State William Borah, instructed diplomats and members of the intelligence services to “so far as possible, ensure that the German operations in San Francisco remain covert.” Although we now know that this document was a British forgery, most of its details were not too far from the truth. At the time, the state department’s invocation of executive privilege in response to a congressional subpoena was considered an admission of guilt.

Meanwhile, British intelligence concluded that it was overwhelmingly likely that the Bryan administration had given some form of support to the Indo-German conspiracy. British concerns were heightened in the wake of increased unrest in East Bengal - workers had been leaving their jobs en masse, and appeared to possess a seemingly inexhaustible strike fund. On the 26th, Arthur Balfour publicly accused the Bryan Administration of funding Indian separatists, and demanded the speedy arrest of all the American officials associated with the Ghadar plot. Shortly thereafter, William Borah offered his resignation to Bryan, hoping that this would redirect attention from the President. Bryan refused, determined not to bow to the pressure. On 29th, articles of impeachment passed the house and were sent to the Senate.

Bryan’s Speech and the 2nd Sino-Japanese War

On March 1st, Bryan spoke before congress, giving a speech which once more stunned the nation, and this time nearly brought it to war.

_”…There are a great many calumnies which have been levied against this administration in the past year, and their full dissection would require more patience than I can bear at the present moment. My task, in fact, is not to dispel the rumors which menacingly circulate around this august body. I forthrightly admit to the charges you have brought, and yet I insist that what is here deemed a high crime is an act of simple patriotism.

Less than a year ago, I instructed the members of my administration to do what they could to provide aid to the freedom-loving peoples of this world. In this decision, I was motivated solely by considerations of national interest. Sympathy for the plight of the Indian people does not arise from unfriendliness toward those of England or any other nation. This sympathy is due to the fact that we, as Americans, believe in the principles of self-government and repudiate those of monarchy. If at any point this nation surrenders its conviction in the universal application of the principles set forth in the Declaration of Independence, it will be fatally diminished.

We must recognize that the pursuit of Empire is ruinous for not merely this nation, but all humanity. The valleys of France and fields of Poland lay bloodied with the countless victims sacrificed upon its unholy altar. Our own nation is threatened by parasitic elements which will have us recapitulate the tragedy in Europe. If this world is to be made safe for democracy, the law of master and slave must be broken; only then will the common man be guaranteed his rightful share in the common enterprise of humanity.

This administration does not seek war. While the vast system of despotism known as the British Empire shares no true principle in common with this great nation, we have and will continue to do all in our power to ensure the continuation of peace between Britain and America. On the matter of India, we will commit to the dissolution of any operations intended to stir unrest amongst the native peoples, while insisting that Britain fulfill its obligation to give full autonomy and self-rule to the Indian people, who are the rightful inheritors of a civilization as old and distinguished as our own.”_

Needless to say, the speech was received quite poorly in Britain. Winston Churchill and a few others favored an immediate declaration of war. It was quickly realized that this would likely lead to the loss of Canada, the breaking of the blockade, and an American-German alliance that might prove the end of the British Empire. Still, it was felt something must be done. Britain expelled around half the American diplomatic staff in protest of Bryan’s remarks, but did not formally break off relations.

Britain received a diplomatic cable the next day from Bryan himself, who expressed his desire for peace and informed them that he was sending John W. Davis, an anglophilic southern congressman, as a special envoy. As a show of goodwill, he also provided the names of the German officials involved in the operation, though most of these were already known to British intelligence. Bryan himself appears to have been genuinely conciliatory at the time, hoping to avoid war, even if it meant backtracking on the support for the Indian rebels.

Events in the next few days would change Bryan’s attitude. On March 6th, Japan declared war on China. Knowing the effect this would have on America, Balfour pleaded with the Japanese to delay the operation, but was met with obstinate refusal. On the 4th, Balfour actually informed America of an impending attack on China; this was relayed to the Chinese ambassador, and gave the army crucial time to prepare its defenses. Some commentators believed it may have prevented the encirclement and destruction of the Beiyang Army.

Bryan was outraged by the attack on China, and demanded that Britain break off its relations with Japan in response to the act of war. In another speech before congress, he excoriated this “latest act of British-financed imperialism” - this time, he received cheers from Republicans as well as Democrats, who were concerned about growing Japanese influence in the Pacific. Britain, of course, did not break off its relations, instead declaring “strict neutrality” in the Sino-Japanese conflict. With overwhelming congressional support, a bill was passed authorizing a partial embargo against Japan.

The German government believed it could use this opportunity to bring America into the war, ending the blockade and the nation’s economic entanglement. Ludendorff coerced the Chinese into formally declaring themselves a member of the Central Powers, hoping that this would lead Britain to declare war on China. But China would not directly declare war on Britain, and, for the moment, Britain also refused to take the bait.

In America, impeachment once again stirred up domestic disquiet. Opinion polls indicated that though popular opinion was trending against Bryan, a narrow majority opposed removing him from office. Most simply did not believe that involvement with the Ghadar conspiracy constituted a high crime, and many sympathized with the Indian independence struggle. Most thought that the impeachment was a pretext for bringing the nation to war, a belief that was reinforced by the rumored anglophilia of the Vice President Woodrow Wilson.

Massive protests broke out once it became clear the Senate would move forward with a conviction vote. Once again, the antiwar movement and American leagues mobilized, bringing hundreds of thousands into the streets to decry the attempt to remove the pacifist president. Bryan encouraged the movement, and in an unprecedented move, accused Vice President Woodrow Wilson of “Fomenting a coup against the nation’s rightful government”. By just two votes, impeachment failed in the Senate. It is hard to say if the popular mobilization had an effect on the Senate vote, though it is possible that northern democrats and progressive republicans were convinced by the protests that Bryan still had a substantial following which would punish them at the ballot box.

Bryan’s success in frustrating a conviction in the Senate gave his political career a new lease on life. Traditionally anglophilic Senate Republicans started to sour on Britain when it became clear that they were acting as anything but a truly neutral party in the Sino-Japanese war. A growing chorus of anti-japanese sentiment culminated in race riots in San Francisco and Los Angeles. Shortly after the impeachment vote, a sweeping new bill placed a complete embargo on Japanese goods and provided more money for the expansion of the Navy. Hawks decried the “Anglo-Japanese plot to enslave China and dominate the Pacific”. In Congress, Bryan finally achieved the support needed to regulate war loans; a formal moratorium was placed on lending to both Britain and France. Believing that America was on the verge of declaring war, Ludendorff called off unrestricted submarine attacks on American shipping.

In April, massive protests began in China against “Japanese-European Imperialism”, coinciding with a wave of unrest in Europe. The fall of Beijing prompted a radicalization of the Chinese government’s rhetoric. On April 14th, a mob in Hong Kong approached the British Legation and was fired upon by British soldiers, killing over two hundred Chinese civilians. The “Hong Kong massacre” prompted the local Chinese Army in the area, under the influence of a nationalist, KMT general, to invade the British possession. A day later, Britain declared war on China, and recognized Japan as an ally in the Sino-Japanese war.

On the 16th, the American stock market plunged nearly 10% as rumors proliferated of an American entry into the war. Bryan was photographed with the German ambassador Johann Heinrich von hernstorff. In a fiery speech, he denounced British imperialism and threatened to declare war if either Britain or Japan interfered in the flow of trade between China and America. A list of ten demands was issued to the governments of both Britain and Japan; taken together, they guaranteed the freedom of American merchant vessels and proscribed the expansion of British influence in China.

The British conservative government, dealing with widespread revolt in India, spiraling domestic discontent, and a worsening crisis of troop discipline on the western front, knew that it was in no position to fight a war with the American behemoth. Bonar Law’s conservatives were forced to agree to almost all of Bryan’s demands, humiliating and discrediting the government amongst the British people. Japan’s government reluctantly agreed to do the same, a decision which was hugely unpopular among the military establishment. Bryan surged in popularity following the successful political maneuvering; he seemed to have accomplished through diplomacy and persuasion what others would have only been able to achieve with war. In reality, Bryan had resigned himself to the expansion of Japanese influence in China, but the continuation of trade would at least allow the Chinese Army to stay in the fight.

Bryan used his windfall of political capital to press for the war-industrial act of 1919, perhaps the most controversial piece of legislation ever introduced by Congress. Influenced by the work of the political philosopher John Dewey, it called for the nationalization and reorganization of the booming American war industries along industrial-democratic lines. Workers at these plants would be required to join a union - likely Lewis’ CIO - and union delegates would sit on the boards of the nationalized corporations, along with government bureaucrats and private investors, who were promised lucrative terms. Unsurprisingly, Bryan was accused of trying to introduce Bolshevism into America.

In Britain, Bonar Law’s government was undergoing its own crisis of confidence following its capitulation to American demands. The conservatives were confronting what seemed to be a never-ending cascade of crisis and dissent both at home and across the Empire. In Ireland, the civil war had resumed, and much of its rural hinterland was already lost to the rebel nationalists. Further afield, protests and strikes wracked India, along with a low-level insurgency. Most INC chapters refused to negotiate, insisting that they did not have control over the boycott and strike campaign. Others pressed for maximalist demands. The dominions, too, appeared to be growing tired of the war, and both Canada and Australia were stalling on requests to raise fresh divisions.

Largely peaceful antiwar protests and strikes shook major British cities in early April, and the use of mounted police to dismiss a “war wives” demonstration in Manchester led to the denunciation of the government from liberal radicals. Then, in a shocking, unprecedented act, the British Prime Minister was shot by a radical suffragette; though Bonar Law survived, he would be indisposed for some time. This provided the impetus for a change in government - Winston Churchill, the most popular of the British conservatives, invited Lloyd George’s centrist liberals and a minority faction of pro-war Labor parliamentarians into government. At a little under 45 years of age, he was the youngest Prime minister in over 100 years. Churchill’s appointment as Prime Minister capped a rise as improbable as it was meteoric; in 4 years, he went from a little-known figure reviled among most Tory Politicians to a celebrated conservative leader and household name. Like Clemenceau, he came to power at a time of national crisis. He promised to use “all the means this island has at its disposal to ensure a final and dignified victory in this conflict which shall determine the fate of the British Empire”.

Britain Pursues Detente

Many hoped that the new government would seek a rapprochement with the American behemoth. The moratorium on loans was beginning to place increased fiscal strain on Britain, which had already been having trouble attracting domestic credit following its decision to leave the gold standard. Liberals pressed especially hard for a resumption of normal relations, though this would not be easy - detente would require some settlement of the situation in East Asia. The liberals planned to sign a separate peace with China, and now seemed as opportune a time as any, with British forces having recently repulsed a Chinese assault on Hong Kong. Moreover, it was clear that Qurui’s government was desperate to avoid a war on two fronts, and it had signaled on several occasions that it had no desire for a fight with England.

Unfortunately, any peace with China would violate the London agreement, which prohibited any of the Entente powers from signing a separate peace with a member of the Central Powers. Some ministers of the new government worried that setting a precedent for breaking the treaty would prompt France to quit the war, leaving Britain alone in fending off the inevitable assault on the middle east. Others point out that betraying Japan would likely deprive Britain of its key ally in the Pacific, opening up the region to American domination. In the nearer-term, it seemed exceedingly unlikely in this scenario that Japan would respect the agreement limiting their zone of influence, and Britain had little means of enforcing the terms of the secret treaty.

Grey suggested the notion of a four-power conference, between America, China, Japan, and Britain. Perhaps if Japan was once again threatened with a joint British-American intervention, it would be convinced to step down. Of course, if Japan was to remain an ally, it had to be given at least some of the concessions which it sought. They were well-positioned to enforce at least some of their war goals, having seized the key cities of Nanjing and Beijing and forced the Chinese government to evacuate to Wuhan.

The other three powers all proved receptive to the idea. Duan Qurui’s government hoped to end the war as quickly as possible, fearing a nationalist coup while it was displaced from its power base in Berlin. Japan’s civilian administration and navy worried that continuing the fight would unduly empower the army. And Bryan hoped to stabilize the East-Asia situation so he could focus on passing domestic legislation.

Edward Grey, William Borah, Uchida Kosai, and V.K. Wellington Koo met in Shanghai on June 5th. Thus far, no armistice had been agreed to, but the news of the conference was sufficient to stir unrest in both Japan and China. In the former, soldiers garrisoning Manchuria had gone on “strike” with the support of their generals, protesting Japan’s interest in a negotiated peace. In China, the unrest was spread much more broadly throughout the population. In Wuhan and several coastal cities still under Chinese control, students and workers protested the decision to seek a peace deal. Both governments feared a coup in response to an unfavorable peace settlement. Sun Yatsen, who previously joined the government as a minister in a national unity cabinet, now denounced Qurui’s decision to “concede more of China’s rightful territory to the British imperialists and their Japanese lapdogs”.

Negotiations proceeded slowly. Though Japanese maximalism was hardly surprising, the degree of Chinese intransigence was something of a shock to the British. Chinese diplomats ruled out any further economic or territorial concessions, though they were open to granting Japanese citizens additional extraterritorial rights. Japan eventually scaled back many of its harshest demands, but it still desired the formal cession of the territory around key Chinese railways. Grey suggested that Japan be allowed to control ownership stakes in the railways, but both parties were reluctant to accept this idea.

This is how the conference proceeded, with Chinese and Japanese intransigence met with largely futile, and largely British, attempts at forging compromise, until on June 19th the entire affair was rendered merely academic. On this date, which much of China today celebrates as “National Independence Day”, the 2nd Chinese Army seized Wuhan, arrested Duan Qurui, and declared loyalty to a new government led by Sun Yatsen. Student’s and worker’s marches in support of the new government commenced in Shanghai, Guangzhou, and other large cities, prompting the governors of the coastal provinces to declare loyalty to the new government. Speaking in Wuhan, Sun Yatsen vowed to continue the “war of Chinese independence” to its victorious conclusion. Bryan congratulated China on its “Democratic Revolution”, and, already in a pique over Japanese demands, gave a speech outlining America’s “commitment to the freedom of the Chinese People from foreign, imperialist aggression”.

The Japanese government reacted to the developments with great consternation - the military was demanding an increasing share of domestic resources, and the Chinese Army had been bloodied but not defeated decisively in the field. Its steady retreat into China’s rural hinterlands was posing increasing logistical problems for Japan, and the march west along the Yangtze river was proceeding at a snail’s pace. There was little that could be done to stop the flow of American arms into China beyond enforcing a complete blockade, which would likely lead to a declaration of war. It was an option that the Japanese government now felt obliged to contemplate.

Over the next four months, Anglo-American tensions slowly calmed as each nation turned away from East Asia, toward domestic (and imperial) discontent. Despite frequent Japanese entreaties, Britain made little contribution to the war against China beyond keeping Hong Kong and its other concessions well-garrisoned; Sun Yatsen had the requisite political acumen to avoid provoking the British. Grey still feared that in the event of victory, Japan would press for far more concessions than those initially agreed to, enough to turn all of China into its protectorate. By September, Britain had calculated that a stalemate was preferable to a Japanese victory, and it began covertly supplying weapons to the Chinese through a Hong Kong smuggling network. Later that month, a bill passed Congress rescinding the moratorium on British loans. Over 75% of Congressmen voted to override Bryan’s veto, and new loans were being issued to Britain by the 29th. Two weeks later, William Jennings Bryan was assassinated by a lone gunman while addressing supporters in Illinois; the ascension of the more anglophilic Woodrow Wilson to the presidency marked the beginning of the first Anglo-American rapprochement, and the end of the first act of the new Great Game.