Russo-Japanese War
Date 8 February 1904 – 5 September 1905 Location Manchuria, Yellow Sea, Korean Peninsula Result Japanese victory; Treaty of Portsmouth
Belligerents
Russian Empire	Empire of Japan
Commanders and leaders
Emperor Nicholas II Aleksey Kuropatkin Stepan Makarov † Zinovy Rozhestvensky	Emperor Meiji Ōyama Iwao Nogi Maresuke Tōgō Heihachirō
Strength
500,000[citation needed]	300,000[citation needed]
Casualties and losses
34,000 – 52,623 killed and died of wounds 9,300 – 18,830 died of disease 146,032 wounded 74,369 captured 50,688 deadweight loss[1][2]	47,152 – 47,400 killed 11,424 – 11,500 died of wounds 21,802 – 27,200 died of disease[1][2]

The Russo-Japanese War (8 February 1904 – 5 September 1905) was "the first great war of the 20th century."^[3] It grew out of rival imperial ambitions of the Russian Empire and Japanese Empire over Manchuria and Korea. The major theatres of operations were Southern Manchuria, specifically the area around the Liaodong Peninsula and Mukden; and the seas around Korea, Japan, and the Yellow Sea.

Russians sought a warm water port^[4] on the Pacific Ocean, for their navy as well as for maritime trade. Vladivostok was only operational during the summer season, but Port Arthur would be operational all year. From the end of the First Sino-Japanese War and 1903, negotiations between Russia and Japan had proved impractical. Japan chose war to gain dominance in Korea. After discussions broke down in 1904, the Japanese Navy attacked the Russian eastern fleet at Port Arthur, a naval base in the Liaotung province leased to Russia by China, which led to war. The Russians were poorly organized and the Japanese defeated them in a series of battles on land and at sea.

The resulting campaigns, in which the Japanese military attained victory over the Russian forces arrayed against them, were unexpected by world observers. As time transpired, these victories would transform the balance of power in East Asia, resulting in a reassessment of Japan's recent entry onto the world stage.

Background[link]

After the Meiji Restoration in 1868, the Meiji government embarked on an endeavor to assimilate Western ideas, technological advances and customs. By the late 19th century, Japan had emerged from isolation and transformed itself into a modernized industrial state in less than half a century. The Japanese wanted to preserve their sovereignty and be recognized as an equal with the Western powers.

Russia, a very strong Imperial power, had ambitions in the East. By the 1890s it had extended its realm across Central Asia to Afghanistan, absorbing local states in the process. The Russian Empire stretched from Poland in the west to the Kamchatka peninsula in the East.^[5] With its construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway to the port of Vladivostok, Russia hoped to further consolidate its influence and presence in the region. This was precisely what Japan feared, as it regarded Korea (and to a lesser extent Manchuria) as a protective buffer.

Sino-Japanese War (1894–1895)[link]

Chinese generals in Pyongyang surrender to the Japanese, October 1894.

The Japanese government regarded Korea, which was close to Japan, as an essential part of its national security; Japan's population explosion and economic needs were also factored into Japanese foreign policy. At the very least, the Japanese wanted to keep Korea independent, if not under Japanese influence. Japan's subsequent victory over China during the First Sino-Japanese War led to the Treaty of Shimonoseki under which China abandoned its own suzerainty over Korea and ceded Taiwan, Pescadores and the Liaodong Peninsula (Port Arthur) to Japan.

However, the Russians, having their own ambitions in the region, persuaded Germany and France to apply pressure on Japan. Through the Triple Intervention, Japan relinquished its claim on the Liaodong Peninsula for an increased financial indemnity.

Russian encroachment[link]

In December 1897, a Russian fleet appeared off Port Arthur. After three months, in 1898, a convention was agreed between China and Russia by which Russia was leased Port Arthur, Talienwan and the surrounding waters. It was further agreed that the convention could be extended by mutual agreement. The Russians clearly believed that would be the case for they lost no time in occupation and in fortifying Port Arthur, their sole warm-water port on the Pacific coast and of great strategic value. A year later, to consolidate their position, the Russians began a new railway from Harbin through Mukden to Port Arthur. The development of the railway was a contributory factor to the Boxer Rebellion, and the railway stations at Tiehling and Lioyang were burned. The Russians also began to make inroads into Korea. By 1898 they had acquired mining and forestry concessions near the Yalu and Tumen rivers,^[6] causing the Japanese much anxiety. Japan decided to strike before the Trans-Siberian Railway was complete.

The Boxer Rebellion[link]

Troops of the Eight nations alliance in 1900. Left to right: Britain, United States, Russia, British India, Germany, France, Austria, Italy, Japan.

The Russians and the Japanese were both part of the eight member international force sent in 1900 to quell the Boxer Rebellion and relieve the international legations under siege in the Chinese capital. As with other member nations, the Russians sent troops into Beijing. Russia had already sent 177,000 soldiers to Manchuria, nominally to protect its railways under construction. The troops of the Qing empire and the participants of the Boxer Rebellion could do nothing against this massive army. As a result, the Qing troops were ejected from Manchuria and the Russian troops settled in.^[7] Russia assured the other powers that it would vacate the area after the crisis. However, by 1903, the Russians had not yet established any timetable for withdrawal^[8] and had actually strengthened their position in Manchuria.

Pre-war negotiations[link]

The Japanese statesman Itō Hirobumi started to negotiate with the Russians. He believed that Japan was too weak to evict Russia militarily, so he proposed giving Russia control over Manchuria in exchange for Japanese control of northern Korea. Meanwhile, Japan and Britain had signed the Anglo-Japanese Alliance in 1902, the British seeking to restrict naval competition by keeping the Russian Pacific seaports of Vladivostok and Port Arthur from their full use. The alliance with the British meant, in part, that if any nation allied itself with Russia during any war with Japan, then Britain would enter the war on Japan's side. Russia could no longer count on receiving help from either Germany or France without there being a danger of British involvement in the war. With such an alliance, Japan felt free to commence hostilities, if necessary.

On 28 July 1903, the Japanese Minister in St. Petersburg was instructed to present his country's view opposing Russia's consolidation plans in Manchuria. On August 12, the Japanese minister handed on the following document to serve as the basis for further negotiations:

• "1. Mutual engagement to respect the independence and territorial integrity of the Chinese and Korean Empires and to maintain the principle of equal opportunity for the commerce and industry of all nations in those countries.
• 2. Reciprocal recognition of Japan's preponderating interests in Korea and Russia's special interests in railway enterprises in Manchuria, and of the right of Japan to take in Korea and of Russia to take in Manchuria such measures as may be necessary for the protection of their respective interests as above defined, subject, however, to the provisions of Article I of this Agreement.
• 3. Reciprocal undertaking on the part of Russia and Japan not to impede development of those industrial and commercial activities respectively of Japan in Korea and of Russia in Manchuria, which are not inconsistent with the stipulations of Article I of this Agreement. Additional engagement on the part of Russia not to impede the eventual extension of the Korean railway into southern Manchuria so as to connect with the East China and Shan-hai-kwan-Newchwang lines.
• 4. Reciprocal engagement that in case it is found necessary to send troops by Japan to Korea, or by Russia to Manchuria, for the purpose either of protecting the interests mentioned in Article II of this Agreement, or of suppressing insurrection or disorder calculated to create international complications, the troops so sent are in no case to exceed the actual number required and are to be forthwith recalled as soon as their missions are accomplished.
• 5. Recognition on the part of Russia of the exclusive right of Japan to give advice and assistance in the interest of reform and good government in Korea, including necessary military assistance.
• 6. This Agreement to supplant all previous arrangements between Japan and Russia respecting Korea".^[9]

On October 3, the Russian Minister to Japan, Roman Rosen, presented to the Japanese government the Russian counterproposal as the basis of negotiations, as follows:

• "1. Mutual engagement to respect the independence and territorial integrity of the Korean Empire.
• 2. Recognition by Russia of Japan's preponderating interests in Korea and of the right of Japan to give advice and assistance to Korea tending to improve the civil administration of the Empire without infringing the stipulations of Article I.
• 3. Engagement on the part of Russia not to impede the commercial and industrial undertakings of Japan in Korea, nor to oppose any measures taken for the purpose of protecting them so long as such measures do not infringe the stipulations of Article I.
• 4. Recognition of the right of Japan to send for the same purpose troops to Korea, with the knowledge of Russia, but their number not to exceed that actually required, and with the engagement on the part of Japan to recall such troops as soon as their mission is accomplished.
• 5. Mutual engagement not to use any part of the territory of Korea for strategical purposes nor to undertake on the coasts of Korea any military works capable of menacing the freedom of navigation in the Straits of Korea.
• 6. Mutual engagement to consider that part of the territory of Korea lying to the north of the 39th parallel as a neutral zone into which neither of the Contracting Parties shall introduce troops.
• 7. Recognition by Japan of Manchuria and its littoral as in all respects outside her sphere of interest.
• 8. This agreement to supplant all previous Agreements between Russia and Japan respecting Korea".^[10]

Negotiations followed and, on 13 January 1904, Japan proposed a formula by which Manchuria would be outside the Japanese sphere of influence and, reciprocally, Korea outside Russia's. By 4 February 1904, no formal reply had been received and on 6 February Kurino Shinichiro, the Japanese Minister, called on the Russian Foreign Minister, Count Lambsdorff, to take his leave.^[11] Japan severed diplomatic relations with Russia on 6 February 1904.

This situation arose from the determination of Tsar Nicholas II to use the war against Japan as a spark for the revival of Russian patriotism. His advisors did not support the war, foreseeing problems in transporting troops and supplies from European Russia to the East.^{[12][Full citation needed]} This attitude by the Tsar led to repeated delays in negotiations with the Japanese government. The Japanese understanding of this can be seen from a telegram dated December 1, 1903 from Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs Komura to the Minister to Russia, in which he stated:

"the Japanese Government have at all times during the progress of the negotiations made it a special point to give prompt answers to all propositions of the Russian Government. The negotiations have now been pending for no less than four months, and they have not yet reached a stage where the final issue can with certainty be predicted. In these circumstances the Japanese government cannot but regard with grave concern the situation for which the delays in negotiations are largely responsible".^[13]

The assertion that Tsar Nicholas II dragged Japan into war intentionally, in hopes of reviving Russian nationalism, is disputed by his comment that "there will be no war because I do not wish it".^[14] This does not reject the claim that Russia played an aggressive role in the East, which it did, rather that Russia unwisely calculated that Japan would not go to war against its far larger and seemingly superior navy and army. Evidence of Russians' false sense of security and superiority to Japan is seen by their reference to the latter as an "infantile monkey".^[15]

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2010)

Declaration of war[link]

Greater Manchuria. Russian (outer) Manchuria is the lighter red region to the upper right.

Japan issued a declaration of war on 8 February 1904.^[16] However, three hours before Japan's declaration of war was received by the Russian Government, the Japanese Imperial Navy attacked the Russian Far East Fleet at Port Arthur. Tsar Nicholas II was stunned by news of the attack. He could not believe that Japan would commit an act of war without a formal declaration, and had been assured by his ministers that the Japanese would not fight. Russia declared war on Japan eight days later.^[17] Japan shrewdly made reference to the Russian attack on Sweden in 1809 without declaration of war, and the requirement to declare war before commencing hostilities was not made international law until after the war had ended, in October 1907, effective from 26 January 1910.^[18] Montenegro also declared war against Japan as a gesture of moral support for Russia out of gratitude for Russian support in Montenegro's struggles against the Ottoman Empire. However, for reasons of logistics and distance, Montenegro's contribution to the war effort was limited to the presence of Montenegrins serving in the Russian armed forces. The Qing empire favoured the Japanese position and even offered military aid, but Japan declined it. However, Yuan Shikai sent envoys to Japanese generals several times to deliver foodstuffs and alcoholic drinks. Native Manchurians joined the war on both sides as hired troops.

Campaign of 1904[link]

Battlefields in the Russo-Japanese War.

Port Arthur, on the Liaodong Peninsula in the south of Manchuria, had been fortified into a major naval base by the Russian Imperial Army. Since it needed to control the sea in order to fight a war on the Asian mainland, Japan's first military objective was to neutralize the Russian fleet at Port Arthur.

Battle of Port Arthur[link]

On the night of 8 February 1904, the Japanese fleet under Admiral Togo Heihachiro opened the war with a surprise torpedo boat destroyer^[19] attack on the Russian ships at Port Arthur. The attack badly damaged the Tsesarevich and Retvizan, the heaviest battleships in Russia's far Eastern theater, and the 6,600 ton cruiser Pallada.^[20] These attacks developed into the Battle of Port Arthur the next morning. A series of indecisive naval engagements followed, in which Admiral Togo was unable to attack the Russian fleet successfully as it was protected by the shore batteries of the harbor, and the Russians were reluctant to leave the harbor for the open seas, especially after the death of Admiral Stepan Osipovich Makarov on 13 April 1904.

However, these engagements provided cover for a Japanese landing near Incheon in Korea. From Incheon the Japanese occupied Seoul and then the rest of Korea. By the end of April, the Japanese Imperial Army under Kuroki Itei was ready to cross the Yalu river into Russian-occupied Manchuria.

Battle of Yalu River[link]

In contrast to the Japanese strategy of rapidly gaining ground to control Manchuria, Russian strategy focused on fighting delaying actions to gain time for reinforcements to arrive via the long Trans-Siberian railway, which was incomplete near Irkutsk at the time. On 1 May 1904, the Battle of Yalu River became the first major land battle of the war; Japanese troops stormed a Russian position after crossing the river. The defeat of the Russian Eastern Detachment removed the perception that the Japanese would be an easy enemy, that the war would be short, and that Russia would be the overwhelming victor.^[21] Japanese troops proceeded to land at several points on the Manchurian coast, and in a series of engagements drove the Russians back towards Port Arthur. The subsequent battles, including the Battle of Nanshan on 25 May 1904, were marked by heavy Japanese losses largely from attacking entrenched Russian positions.

Blockade of Port Arthur[link]

Japanese soldiers near Chemulpo, Korea, August–September 1904, during the Russo-Japanese War.

The Japanese attempted to deny the Russians use of Port Arthur. During the night of 13 February – 14 February, the Japanese attempted to block the entrance to Port Arthur by sinking several cement-filled steamers in the deep water channel to the port,^[22] but they sank too deep to be effective. A similar attempt to block the harbor entrance during the night of 3–4 May also failed. In March, the charismatic Vice Admiral Makarov had taken command of the First Russian Pacific Squadron with the intention of breaking out of the Port Arthur blockade.

On 12 April 1904, two Russian pre-dreadnought battleships, the flagship Petropavlovsk and the Pobeda, slipped out of port but struck Japanese mines off Port Arthur. The Petropavlovsk sank almost immediately, while the Pobeda had to be towed back to port for extensive repairs. Admiral Makarov, the single most effective Russian naval strategist of the war, perished on the battleship Petropavlovsk.

On 15 April 1904, the Russian government made overtures threatening to seize the British war correspondents who were taking the ship Haimun into warzones to report for the London-based Times newspaper, citing concerns about the possibility of the British giving away Russian positions to the Japanese fleet.

The Russians learned quickly, and soon employed, the Japanese tactic of offensive minelaying. On 15 May 1904, two Japanese battleships, the Yashima and the Hatsuse, were lured into a recently laid Russian minefield off Port Arthur, each striking at least two mines. The Hatsuse sank within minutes, taking 450 sailors with her, while the Yashima sank while under tow towards Korea for repairs. On June 23, 1904, a breakout attempt by the Russian squadron, now under the command of Admiral Wilgelm Vitgeft, failed. By the end of the month, Japanese artillery was firing shells into the harbor.

Anglo-Japanese intelligence co-operation[link]

Even before the war, British and Japanese intelligence had co-operated against Russia.^[23] Indian Army stations in Malaya and China often intercepted and read wireless and telegraph cable traffic relating to the war, which was shared with the Japanese.^[24] In their turn, the Japanese shared information about Russia with the British with one British official writing of the "perfect quality" of Japanese intelligence.^[25] In particular, British and Japanese intelligence gathered much evidence that Germany was supporting Russia in the war as part of a bid to disturb the balance of power in Europe, which led to British officials increasingly perceiving that country as a threat to the international order.^[26]

Siege of Port Arthur[link]

Bombardment during the Siege of Port Arthur.

The siege of Port Arthur commenced in April 1904. Japanese troops tried numerous frontal assaults on the fortified hilltops overlooking the harbor, which were defeated with Japanese casualties in the thousands. Eventually, though, with the aid of several batteries of 11-inch (280 mm) Krupp howitzers, the Japanese were finally able to capture the key hilltop bastion in December 1904. From this vantage point, the long-range artillery was able to shell the Russian fleet, which was unable to retaliate effectively against the land-based artillery and was unable or unwilling to sortie out against the blockading fleet. Four Russian battleships and two cruisers were sunk in succession, with the fifth and last battleship being forced to scuttle a few weeks later. Thus, all capital ships of the Russian fleet in the Pacific were sunk. This is probably the only example in military history when such a scale of devastation was achieved by land-based artillery against major warships.

Japanese assault on the entrenched Russian forces, 1904.

Meanwhile, attempts to relieve the besieged city by land also failed, and, after the Battle of Liaoyang in late August, the northern Russian force that might have been able to relieve Port Arthur retreated to Mukden (Shenyang). Major General Anatoly Stessel, commander of the Port Arthur garrison, believed that the purpose of defending the city was lost after the fleet had been destroyed. Several large underground mines were exploded in late December, resulting in the costly capture of a few more pieces of the defensive line. Nevertheless, the Russian defenders were effecting disproportionate casualties each time the Japanese attacked. Despite this, Stessel decided to surrender to the surprised Japanese generals on 2 January 1905. He made this decision without consulting the other military staff present, or of the Tsar and military command, who all disagreed with the decision. Stessel was convicted by a court-martial in 1908 and sentenced to death for his incompetent defense and disobeying orders, though he was later pardoned.

Battle of the Yellow Sea[link]

With the death of Admiral Stepan Makarov during the siege of Port Arthur in April 1904, Admiral Wilgelm Vitgeft was appointed command of the battle fleet and was ordered to sortie from Port Arthur and deploy his force to Vladivostok. Flying his flag in the French-built pre-dreadnought Tsesarevich, Vitgeft proceeded to lead his 6 battleships, 4 cruisers, and 14 torpedo boat destroyers into the Yellow Sea in the early morning of 10 August 1904. Waiting for him was Admiral Togo and his fleet of 4 battleships, 10 cruisers, and 18 torpedo boat destroyers.

At approximately 1215 hours the battleship fleets obtained a visual contact with each other, and at 1300 hours with Togo crossing Vitgeft's "T", they commenced main battery fire at a range of about 8 miles, the longest ever conducted up to that time.^[27] For about thirty minutes the battleships pounded one another until they had closed to less than 4 miles and began to bring their secondary batteries into play. At 1830 hours a hit from one of Togo's battlewagons struck Vitgeft's flagship in the bridge, killing him instantly.

With the Tsesarevich's helm jammed and their Admiral killed in action, she turned from her battle line, causing confusion among her fleet. However, Togo was determined to sink the Russian flagship and continued pounding her, being saved only by the gallant charge of the American-built Russian battleship Retvizan, whose captain successfully drew away Togo's heavy fire from the Russian flagship.^[28] Knowing of the impending battle to come with the battleship reinforcements arriving from Russia (the Baltic Fleet), Togo chose not to risk his battlewagons into pursuing his enemy as they turned about and headed back into Port Arthur, thus ending naval history's longest-range gunnery duel up to that time and the first modern clash of steel battleship fleets on the high seas.

Baltic Fleet redeploys[link]

Meanwhile, at sea, the Russians were preparing to reinforce their Far East Fleet by sending the Baltic Fleet, under the command of Admiral Zinovy Rozhestvensky. The squadron sailed half way around the world from the Baltic Sea to the Pacific via the Cape of Good Hope. After a port of call at Madagascar, then Cam Ranh Bay (later part of South Vietnam), Rozhestvensky finally reached the Far East in May 1905. On 21 October 1904, while steaming past Great Britain (an ally of Japan, but neutral, unless provoked by a non-combatant nation), vessels of the Russian fleet nearly sparked a war with Britain in the Dogger Bank incident by firing on British fishing boats that they mistook for enemy torpedo boats.

Campaign of 1905[link]

Retreat of Russian soldiers after the Battle of Mukden.

With the fall of Port Arthur, the Japanese 3rd army was now able to continue northward and reinforce positions south of Russian-held Mukden. With the onset of the severe Manchurian winter, there had been no major land engagements since the Battle of Shaho the previous year. The two sides camped opposite each other along 60 to 70 miles (110 km) of front lines, south of Mukden.

Battle of Sandepu[link]

The Russian Second Army under General Oskar Gripenberg, between January 25–29, attacked the Japanese left flank near the town of Sandepu, almost breaking through. This caught the Japanese by surprise. However, without support from other Russian units the attack stalled, Gripenberg was ordered to halt by Kuropatkin and the battle was inconclusive. The Japanese knew that they needed to destroy the Russian army in Manchuria before Russian reinforcements arrived via the Trans-Siberian railroad.

Battle of Mukden[link]

The Battle of Mukden commenced on 20 February 1905. In the following days Japanese forces proceeded to assault the right and left flanks of Russian forces surrounding Mukden, along a 50-mile (80 km) front. Approximately half a million men were involved in the fighting. Both sides were well entrenched and were backed by hundreds of artillery pieces. After days of harsh fighting, added pressure from the flanks forced both ends of the Russian defensive line to curve backwards. Seeing they were about to be encircled, the Russians began a general retreat, fighting a series of fierce rearguard actions, which soon deteriorated in the confusion and collapse of Russian forces. On 10 March 1905 after three weeks of fighting, General Kuropatkin decided to withdraw to the north of Mukden. The Russians lost 90,000 men in the battle.

The retreating Russian Manchurian Army formations disbanded as fighting units, but the Japanese failed to destroy them completely. The Japanese themselves had suffered large casualties and were in no condition to pursue. Although the battle of Mukden was a major defeat for the Russians it was not decisive, and the final victory still depended on the navy.

Battle of Tsushima[link]

Japanese battleship Mikasa, the flagship of Admiral Tōgō Heihachirō at the Battle of Tsushima.

The Russian Second Pacific Squadron (the renamed Baltic Fleet) sailed 18,000 nautical miles (33,000 km) to relieve Port Arthur. The demoralizing news that Port Arthur had fallen reached the fleet while at Madagascar. Admiral Rozhestvensky's only hope now was to reach the port of Vladivostok. There were three routes to Vladivostok, with the shortest and most direct passing through Tsushima Straits between Korea and Japan. However, this was also the most dangerous route as it passed between the Japanese home islands and the Japanese naval bases in Korea.

Admiral Togo was aware of Russian progress and understood that with the fall of Port Arthur, the Second and Third Pacific Squadrons would try to reach the only other Russian port in the Far East, Vladivostok. Battle plans were laid down and ships were repaired and refitted to intercept the Russian fleet.

The Japanese Combined Fleet, which had originally consisted of six battleships, was now down to four (two had been lost to mines), but still retained its cruisers, destroyers, and torpedo boats. The Russian Second Pacific Squadron contained eight battleships, including four new battleships of the Borodino class, as well as cruisers, destroyers and other auxiliaries for a total of 38 ships.

By the end of May the Second Pacific Squadron was on the last leg of its journey to Vladivostok, taking the shorter, riskier route between Korea and Japan, and travelling at night to avoid discovery. Unfortunately for the Russians, while in compliance with the rules of war, the two trailing hospital ships had continued to burn their lights,^[29] which were spotted by the Japanese armed merchant cruiser Shinano Maru. Wireless communication was used to inform Togo's headquarters, where the Combined Fleet was immediately ordered to sortie.^[30] Still receiving naval intelligence from scouting forces, the Japanese were able to position their fleet so that they would "cross the T"^[31] of the Russian fleet. The Japanese engaged battle in the Tsushima Straits on 27–28 May 1905. The Russian fleet was virtually annihilated, losing eight battleships, numerous smaller vessels, and more than 5,000 men, while the Japanese lost three torpedo boats and 116 men. Only three Russian vessels escaped to Vladivostok. After the Battle of Tsushima, the Japanese army occupied the entire chain of the Sakhalin Islands to force the Russians to sue for peace.

Military attachés and observers[link]

Japanese General Kuroki and his staff, including foreign officers and war correspondents after the Battle of Shaho (1904).

Military and civilian observers from every major power closely followed the course of the war. Most were able to report on events from the perspective of "embedded" positions within the land and naval forces of both Russia and Japan. These military attachés and other observers prepared first-hand accounts of the war and analytical papers. In-depth observer narratives of the war and more narrowly focused professional journal articles were written soon after the war; and these post-war reports conclusively illustrated the battlefield destructiveness of this conflict. This was the first time the tactics of entrenched positions for infantry defended with machine guns and artillery became vitally important, and both were dominant factors in World War I. Though entrenched positions were a significant part of both the Franco-Prussian War and the American Civil War due to the advent of breech loading rifles, the lessons learned regarding high casualty counts were not taken into account in World War I. From a 21st century perspective, it is now apparent that tactical lessons available to observer nations were disregarded in preparations for war in Europe, and during the course of World War I.^[32]

In 1904–1905, Ian Standish Monteith Hamilton was the military attaché of the British Indian Army serving with the Japanese army in Manchuria. Amongst the several military attachés from Western countries, he was the first to arrive in Japan after the start of the war.^[33] As the earliest, he would be recognized as the dean of multi-national attachés and observers in this conflict; but he was out-ranked by a soldier who would become a better known figure, British Field Marshal William Gustavus Nicholson, 1st Baron Nicholson, later to become Chief of the Imperial General Staff.

Peace and aftermath[link]

Treaty of Portsmouth[link]

Negotiating the Treaty of Portsmouth (1905). From left to right: the Russians at far side of table are Korostovetz, Nabokov, Witte, Rosen, Plancon; and the Japanese at near side of table are Adachi, Ochiai, Komura, Takahira, Sato. The large conference table is today preserved at the Museum Meiji Mura in Inuyama, Aichi Prefecture, Japan.

The defeats of the Russian Army and Navy shook Russian confidence. Throughout 1905, the Imperial Russian government was rocked by revolution. The population was against escalation of the war. The Empire was certainly capable of sending more troops, but the poor state of the economy, the embarrassing defeats of the Russian army and navy by the Japanese, and the relative unimportance of the disputed land to Russia made the war incredibly unpopular.^{[citation needed]} Tsar Nicholas II elected to negotiate peace so he could concentrate on internal matters after the disaster of Bloody Sunday on 22 January 1905.

Japan-Russia Treaty of Peace, 5 September 1905.

American President Theodore Roosevelt offered to mediate, and earned a Nobel Peace Prize for his effort. Sergius Witte led the Russian delegation and Baron Komura, a graduate of Harvard, led the Japanese Delegation. The Treaty of Portsmouth was signed on 5 September 1905.^[34] at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, Maine. Witte became Russian Prime Minister the same year.

After courting the Japanese, Roosevelt decided to support the Tsar's refusal to pay indemnities, a move that policymakers in Tokyo interpreted as signifying that the United States had more than a passing interest in Asian affairs. Russia recognized Korea as part of the Japanese sphere of influence and agreed to evacuate Manchuria. Japan would annex Korea in 1910, with scant protest from other powers.^[35]

Russia also signed over its 25-year leasehold rights to Port Arthur, including the naval base and the peninsula around it, and ceded the southern half of Sakhalin Island to Japan.

Casualties[link]

A Japanese propaganda of the war: woodcut print showing Tsar Nicholas II waking from a nightmare of the battered and wounded Russian forces returning from battle. Artist Kobayashi Kiyochika, 1904 or 1905.

Sources do not agree on a precise number of deaths from the war because of lack of body counts for confirmation. The number of Japanese army dead in combat is put at around 47,000 with around 80,000 if disease is included. Estimates of Russian army dead range from around 40,000 to around 70,000 men. The total number of army dead is generally stated at around 130,000.^[36] China suffered 20,000 civilian deaths, and financially the loss amounted to over 69 million taels worth of silver.

During many of the battles at sea, several thousand soldiers being transported by sea drowned after their ships went down. There were no agreed consensus about what to do with transported soldiers at sea, and as a result, many of the ships denied rescuing casualties that were left shipwrecked. This led to the creation of the second Geneva Convention in 1906, which gave protection and care for shipwrecked soldiers in armed conflict.

Political consequences[link]

This was the first major military victory in the modern era of an Asian power over a European nation. Russia's defeat was met with shock in the West and across the Far East. Japan's prestige rose greatly as it became seen as a modern nation. Concurrently, Russia lost virtually its entire Pacific and Baltic fleets, and also much international esteem. This was particularly true in the eyes of Germany and Austria–Hungary before World War I. Russia was France and Serbia's ally, and that loss of prestige had a significant effect on Germany's future when planning for war with France, and Austria–Hungary's war with Serbia. The war caused many nations to underestimate Russian military capabilities in World War I.

In the absence of Russian competition, and with the distraction of European nations during World War I, combined with the Great Depression that followed, the Japanese military began efforts to dominate China and the rest of Asia, which eventually led to the Second Sino-Japanese War and the Pacific War theatres of World War II.

Revolution in Russia[link]

Popular discontent in Russia after the war added more fuel to the already simmering Russian Revolution of 1905, an event Nicholas II of Russia had hoped to avoid entirely by taking intransigent negotiating stances prior to coming to the table at all. Twelve years later, that discontent boiled over into the February Revolution of 1917. In Poland, which Russia partitioned in the late 18th century, and where Russian rule already caused two major uprisings, the population was so restless that an army of 250,000–300,000—larger than the one facing the Japanese—had to be stationed to put down the unrest.^[37] Notably, some political leaders of the Polish insurrection movement (in particular, Józef Piłsudski) sent emissaries to Japan to collaborate on sabotage and intelligence gathering within the Russian Empire and even plan a Japanese-aided uprising.^[38]

In Russia, the defeat of 1905 led in the short term to a reform of the Russian military that allowed it to face Germany in World War I. However, the revolts at home following the war planted the seeds that presaged the Russian Revolution of 1917.

Effects on Japan[link]

Although the war had ended in a victory for Japan, Japanese public opinion was shocked by the very restrained peace terms which were negotiated at the war's end.^[39] Widespread discontent spread through the populace upon the announcement of the treaty terms. Riots erupted in major cities in Japan. Two specific requirements, expected after such a costly victory, were especially lacking: territorial gains and monetary reparations to Japan. The peace accord led to feelings of distrust, as the Japanese had intended to retain all of Sakhalin Island, but were forced to settle for half of it after being pressured by United States.

Assessment of war results[link]

Russia had lost two of its three fleets. Only its Black Sea Fleet remained, and this was the result of an earlier treaty that had prevented the fleet from leaving the Black Sea. Japan became the sixth-most powerful naval force,^[40] while the Russian navy declined to one barely stronger than that of Austria–Hungary.^[40] The actual costs of the war were large enough to affect the Russian economy and, despite grain exports, the nation developed an external balance of payments deficit. The cost of military re-equipment and re-expansion after 1905 pushed the economy further into deficit, although the size of the deficit was obscured.^[41]

A lock of Admiral Nelson's hair was given to the Imperial Japanese Navy by the British Royal Navy after the war to commemorate the victory of the Battle of Tsushima, which was considered on a par with Britain's victory at Trafalgar in 1805. It is still on display at Kyouiku Sankoukan, a public museum maintained by the Japan Self-Defense Force.

The Japanese were on the offensive for most of the war and used massed infantry assaults against defensive positions, which would become the standard of all European armies during World War I. The battles of the Russo-Japanese War, in which machine guns and artillery took a heavy toll on Japanese troops, were a precursor to the trench warfare of World War I.^[42] A German military advisor sent to Japan, Jakob Meckel, had a tremendous impact on the development of the Japanese military training, tactics, strategy, and organization. His reforms were credited with Japan's overwhelming victory over China in the First Sino-Japanese War of 1894–1895. However, his over-reliance on infantry in offensive campaigns also led to a large number of Japanese casualties.

Military and economic exhaustion affected both countries.^{[citation needed]} Japanese historians regard this war as a turning point for Japan, and a key to understanding the reasons why Japan may have failed militarily and politically later. After the war, acrimony was felt at every level of Japanese society and it became the consensus within Japan that their nation had been treated as the defeated power during the peace conference.^{[citation needed]} As time went on, this feeling, coupled with the sense of "arrogance" at becoming a Great Power^{[citation needed]}, grew and added to growing Japanese hostility towards the West, and fueled Japan's military and imperial ambitions. Only five years after the War, Japan de jure annexed Korea as its colonial empire. In 1931, 21 years later, Japan invaded Manchuria in the Mukden Incident. This culminated in the invasion of East, Southeast and South Asia in World War II in an attempt to create a great Japanese colonial empire, the Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere. As a result, most Chinese historians consider the Russo-Japanese War as a key development of Japanese militarism.

Not only Russia and Japan were affected by the war. As a consequence, the British Admiralty enlarged its docks at Auckland, New Zealand; Bombay, British India; Fremantle, Australia; British Hong Kong; Simon's Town, Cape Colony; Singapore and Sydney, Australia.^[43] The 1904–1905 war confirmed the direction of the Admiralty's thinking in tactical terms while undermining its strategic grasp of a changing world.^[44] For example, the Admiralty's tactical orthodoxy assumed that a naval battle would imitate the conditions of stationary combat, and that ships would engage in one long line sailing on parallel courses; but in reality, more flexible tactical thinking would be required in the next war. A firing ship and its target would maneuver independently at various ranges and at various speeds and in convergent or divergent courses.^[45]

Chinese Honghuzi[link]

Chinese Honghuzi bandits, who roamed the area around Manchuria and the Russo-Chinese border, fought against the Russians during the war.

The Honghuzi took advantage of the conflict to carry out attacks against Russian forces: "There was also at the end of February a report that a land mine had exploded at the Russian station at Hayuenkow, on the south coast of Liaotung, between the Yalu and Port Arthur. The Russians had expected the Japanese would try to land here, as it was one of their principal landing-places in the war of 1894 against China; so the place was mined, and it was said that the Hunghutze attacked the Russians in force, and managed to blow up the mine, with a loss of 200 Russian soldiers. There were numerous other outbreaks of the Hunghutze, who seem to have carried on a sort of guerilla warfare against the Russians all the time."^[46][47] Dr. Seaman observed the Chinese Honghuzi in action against the Russians during the war, described in The Nation magazine: "He had some amusing and exciting experiences with the Hung-hutzes (Chun-chuzes), ex-bandits, now nominally Chinese soldiery, many of whom were operating as guerillas on the Russian flank and communications under Japanese officers, as is charged."^[48] The Japanese had in their employ Zhang Zuolin (Chang Tso-lin), a famous Honghuzi leader who led his men against the Russians. ^[49]

One Russian position was swarmed by Honghuzi numbering around 500. Russian casualties reached 20 wounded and dead before the Honghuzi were driven away.^[50]

The war-correspondent Douglas Story mentioned an incident where one Honghuzi killed several Russian Cossacks before succumbing to return fire: "I have seen a solitary Hunghutze, pursued by a Cossack patrol, calmly dismount from his pony and engage an entire sotnia with his solitary rifle. Kneeling in a field of kiaolang stubble, alone and unsupported, he deliberately picked off the men with his Mauser until the Russians pulled themselves sufficiently together to end his sharp-shooting with a volley."^[51]

The Chinese Imperial troops let the Honghuzi roam freely, since many of them used to be comrades, as described by Louis Livingston Seaman (Dr. Seaman): " They can not be caught, the plain truth being that the best of fellowship exists between them and the imperial troops, their old comrades of yore."^[52] Seaman also mentioned the reason for the Honghuzi hatred towards the Russians: "The Chinaman, be he Hung-hutze or peasant, in his relation to the Russians in this conflict with Japan has not forgotten the terrible treatment accorded him since the Muscovite occupation of Manchuria. He still remembers the massacre at Blagovestchensk when nearly 8,000 unarmed men, women, and children were driven at the point of the bayonet into the raging Amur, until—as one of the Russian officers who participated in that brutal murder told me at Chin-Wang-Tao in 1900—" the execution of my orders made me almost sick, for it seemed as though I could have walked across the river on the bodies of the floating dead." Not a Chinaman escaped, except forty who were employed by a leading foreign merchant who ransomed their lives at a thousand roubles each. These, and many even worse, atrocities are remembered and now is their moment for revenge. So it was easy for Japan to enlist the sympathy of these men, especially when emphasized by liberal pay, as is now the case. It is believed that more than 10,000 of these bandits, divided into companies of from 200 to 300 each and led by Japanese officers, are now in the pay of Japan."^[53]

List of battles[link]

• 1904 Battle of Port Arthur, 8 February: naval battle Inconclusive
• 1904 Battle of Chemulpo Bay, 9 February: naval battle Japanese victory
• 1904 Battle of Yalu River, 30 April to 1 May: Japanese victory
• 1904 Battle of Nanshan, 25 May – 26 May, Japanese victory
• 1904 Battle of Telissu, 14 June – 15 June, Japanese victory
• 1904 Battle of Motien Pass, 17 July, Japanese victory
• 1904 Battle of Ta-shih-chiao, 24 July, Japanese victory
• 1904 Battle of Hsimucheng, 31 July, Japanese victory
• 1904 Battle of the Yellow Sea, 10 August: naval battle Japanese victory strategically/tactically inconclusive
• 1904 Battle off Ulsan, 14 August: naval battle Japanese victory
• 1904–1905 Siege of Port Arthur, 19 August to 2 January: Japanese victory
• 1904 Battle of Liaoyang, 25 August to 3 September: Inconclusive
• 1904 Battle of Shaho, 5 October to 17 October: Inconclusive
• 1905 Battle of Sandepu, 26 January to 27 January: Inconclusive
• 1905 Battle of Mukden, 21 February to 10 March: Japanese victory
• 1905 Battle of Tsushima, 27 May to 28 May naval battle: Japanese victory

Cause of IRN and IJN Warships Sunk During the War 1904–1905[link]

Although submarines, torpedoes, torpedo boats, and steel battleships had existed for many years, the Russo-Japanese war was the first conflict to see mature forms of these weapon systems deployed in large numbers. Over a hundred of the newly invented torpedo boats and nearly the same number of torpedo boat destroyers ^[54] were involved. The Imperial Russian Navy would become the first navy in history to possess an independent operational submarine fleet on 1 January 1905.^[55] With this submarine fleet making its first combat patrol on 14 February 1905, and its first clash with enemy surface warships on 29 April 1905,^[55] all this nearly a decade before World War I even began.

During the course of the war, the IRN and IJN would launch nearly 300 self propelled automotive torpedoes at one another.^[56] Dozens of warships would be hit and damaged, but only 1 battleship, 2 armoured cruisers, and 2 destroyers would be permanently sunk (not salvaged). Another 80 plus warships would be destroyed by the traditional gun, mine, or other cause. The Russian battleship Oslyabya was the first modern battleship sunk by gunfire alone,^[57] and Admiral Rozhestvensky's flagship, the battleship Knyaz Suvorov was the first modern battleship sunk by the new "torpedo" on the high seas.

[edit] Vessel type and cause of loss^[58]

• Battleships lost to naval gunfire-3 (plus 1 Coastal Battleship) IRN
• Battleships lost to land/shore batteries-4 IRN
• Battleships lost to combination of gunfire & torpedoes-2 IRN
• Battleships lost to strictly torpedoes-1 IRN
• Battleships lost to mines-2 (plus 1 Coastal Battleship) IJN/1 IRN
• Cruisers lost to naval gunfire-5 IRN
• Cruisers lost to land/shore batteries-3 IRN
• Cruisers lost to mines-1 IRN/4 IJN
• Destroyers (DDs, GBs, TBDs, TBs) lost to naval gunfire-6 IRN/3 IJN
• Destroyers (DDs, GBs, TBDs, TBs) lost to shore batteries-3 IRN
• Destroyers (DDs, GBs, TBDs, TBs) lost to gunfire & torpedoes-1 IJN
• Destroyers (DDs, GBs, TBDs, TBs) lost to torpedoes-2 IRN
• Destroyers (DDs, GBs, TBDs, TBs) lost to mines-3 IRN/3 IJN
• Auxiliary cruisers lost to naval gunfire-1 IRN
• Auxiliary Cruisers lost to shore batteries-1 RN
• Auxiliary Gunboats lost to mines-1 IJN
• Minelayers lost to shore batteries-1 IRN
• Minelayers lost to mines-1 IRN
• Submarines-3 lost to scuttling & 1 lost by shipwreck IRN (Note: Only IRN submarines were operational during the war)

The above data includes vessels that were sunk and consequently salvaged (raised) and put back into service by either combatant. Data regarding surface vessels either shipwrecked or scuttled was excluded.

Imperial Russian Navy warships sunk, 1904–1905[link]

From 1880 through the end of the war, Russia prepared a systematic plan to build their navy into a major naval power, able to meet any modern adversary—which during this time period were primarily based in Europe.^[59] By 1884 Russia lead the world in numbers of the newly invented torpedo boats and torpedo boat destroyers with 115 such vessels. By 1904, the IRN was a first rate navy, but by the end of 1905, Russia was reduced to a third rate naval power.

[edit] Warship type, name, and date of loss^[60]

• Battleship Navarin 28 May 1905
• Battleship Sissoi Veliky 28 May 1905
• Battleship (Coastal) Admiral Ushakov 28 May 1905
• Battleship Petropavlovsk 13 April 1904
• Battleship Sevastopol 2 January 1905
• Battleship Oslyabya 27 May 1905
• Battleship Borodino 27 May 1905
• Battleship Imperator Aleksandr III 27 May 1905
• Battleship Knyaz Suvorov 27 May 1905
• Cruiser Vladimir Monomakh 28 May 1905
• Cruiser Dmitri Donskoy 28 May 1905
• Cruiser Admiral Nakhimov 28 May 1905
• Cruiser Rurik 14 August 1904
• Cruiser Svetlana 28 May 1905
• Gunboat Gremyashchi 18 August 1904
• Gunboat Otvajni 2 January 1905
• Torpedo Boat Destroyer (TBD) Steregushchi 19 March 1904
• TBD Strashni 13 April 1904
• TBD Stroini 13 November 1904
• TBD Vnushitelni 25 February 1904
• TBD Vuinoslivi 24 August 1904
• TBD Buini 28 May 1905
• TBD Gromki 28 May 1905
• TBD Blestyashtchi 28 May 1905
• TBD Bezuprechni 28 May 1905
• Torpedo Boat (TB) Tantchikhe (#201) 21 August 1904
• TB Ussuri (#204) 30 June 1904

The above list excludes captured, surrendered, or sunken warships that were raised and put back into service by either combatant.

Financing[link]

Despite its gold reserves of £106.3 million, Russia's pre-war financial situation was not enviable. The country had had large budget deficits year after year, and was largely dependent on borrowed money.^[61]

Russia's war effort was funded primarily by France, in a series of loans totalling Fr.800 million; another loan in the amount of Fr.600 million was agreed upon, but later cancelled. These loans were extended within a climate of mass bribing of the French press (made necessary by Russia's precarious economic and social situation and poor military performance). Although initially reluctant to participate in the war, the French government and major banks were co-operative since it became clear that Russian and French economic interests were tied. In addition to French money, Russia secured a German loan in the amount of M500 million.^[61]

Conversely, Japan's pre-war gold reserves were a modest £11.7 million; a major portion of the total cost of the war was covered by money borrowed from the United Kingdom and the United States.

During his canvassing expedition in London, the Japanese Vice-Governor of the Bank of Japan met Jacob Schiff, a Jewish-American banker and head of Kuhn, Loeb & Co. Schiff was sympathetic to Japan's cause, and extended a critical series of loans to the Empire of Japan, in the amount of $200 million.^[62]

Arts and literature[link]

Painting of Admiral Togo on the bridge of the Japanese battleship Mikasa, before the Battle of Tsushima in 1905.

• Between 1904 and 1905 in Russia, the war was covered by anonymous satirical graphic luboks that were sold at common markets and recorded much of the war for the domestic audience. Around 300 were made before their creation was banned by the Russian government.
• The disastrous war was among the reasons that spurred Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov to compose his satirical opera, The Golden Cockerel, which was immediately banned by the government.
• The Russo-Japanese War was covered by dozens of foreign journalists who sent back sketches that were turned into lithographs and other reproducible forms. Propaganda images were circulated by both sides and quite a few photographs have been preserved.
• Russian novelist Vikenty Veresayev wrote a detailed and scathing memoir of his experiences in the Russo-Japanese War, entitled In the War.
• Russian-born British spy Sidney Reilly's role in providing intelligence that allowed the Japanese surprise attack that started the Siege of Port Arthur is dramatised in Episode 2 of the TV series Reilly, Ace of Spies.
• The Siege of Port Arthur is covered in an encompassing historical novel Port Arthur by Alexander Stepanov (1892–1965), who, at the age of 12, lived in the besieged city and witnessed many key events of the siege. He took a personal role in Port Arthur defense by carrying water to front line trenches. He was contused and narrowly evaded amputation of both legs in the hospital. His father, Nikolay Stepanov, commanded one of the Russian onshore batteries that protected the harbor. Through him, Alexander knew many of the city's top military commanders personally—generals Stessels, Belikh, Nikitin, Kondratenko, Admiral Makarov, and others. He wrote the novel in 1932, based on his diaries and his father's notes. Though it might be subject to an ideological bias, as anything published in the USSR at that time, Russians generally consider it one of the best historical novels of the Soviet period.^[63]
• "On the hills of Manchuria" (Na sopkah Manchzhurii), a melancholy waltz composed by Ilya Shatrov, a military musician who served in the war, became an evergreen popular song in Russia and in Finland. The original lyrics are about fallen soldiers lying in their graves in Manchuria, but alternative lyrics were written later, especially during Second World War.
• The Russo-Japanese War is occasionally alluded to in James Joyce's novel, Ulysses. In the "Eumaeus" chapter, a drunken sailor in a bar proclaims, "But a day of reckoning, he stated crescendo with no uncertain voice—thoroughly monopolizing all the conversation—was in store for mighty England, despite her power of pelf on account of her crimes. There would be a fall and the greatest fall in history. The Germans and the Japs were going to have their little lookin, he affirmed."
• The 1969 Japanese film Nihonkai daikaisen (Battle in the Sea of Japan) depicts the naval battles of the war, the attacks on the Port Arthur highlands, and the subterfuge and diplomacy of Japanese agents in Sweden. Admiral Togo is portrayed by Toshirô Mifune.
• The Russo-Japanese War is the setting for the naval strategy computer game Distant Guns developed by Storm Eagle Studios.
• The Russo-Japanese War is the setting for the first part of the novel The Diamond Vehicle, in the Erast Fandorin detective series by Boris Akunin.
• The Domination series by S.M. Stirling has an alternate Battle of Tsushima where the Japanese use airships to attack the Russian Fleet. This is detailed in the short story "Written by the Wind" by Roland J. Green in the Drakas! anthology.

See also[link]

• Kentaro Kaneko
• Baron Rosen
• Imperialism in Asia
• Liancourt Rocks
• List of wars
• Russian Imperialism in Asia and the Russo-Japanese War
• Sergius Witte

References[link]

Bibliography[link]

• Chapman, John W. M. (2004). "Russia, Germany and the Anglo-Japanese Intelligence Collaboration, 1896–1906". In Erickson, Mark; Erickson, Ljubica. Russia War, Peace and Diplomacy. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. pp. 41–55. ISBN 0-297-84913-1. 
• Connaughton, R. M. (1988). The War of the Rising Sun and the Tumbling Bear—A Military History of the Russo-Japanese War 1904–5. London. ISBN 0-415-00906-5. 
• Forczyk, Robert (2009). Russian Battleship vs Japanese Battleship, Yellow Sea 1904-05. Osprey. ISBN 978-1-84603-330-8. 
• Grant, R. Captain (1907). Before Port Arthur in a Destroyer; The Personal Diary of a Japanese Naval Officer. London: John Murray.  First and second editions published in 1907.
• Keegan, John (1999). The First World War. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. ISBN 0-375-40052-4. 
• Mahan, Alfred Thayer (1906). "Reflections, Historic and Other, Suggested by the Battle of the Japan Sea". US Naval Proceedings magazine. US Naval Institute, Heritage Collection 36 (2). 
• Olender, Piotr (2010). Russo-Japanese Naval War 1904–1905, Vol. 2, Battle of Tsushima. Sandomierz, Poland: Stratus s.c.. ISBN 978-83-61421-02-3. 
• Paine, S. C. M. (2003). The Sino-Japanese War of 1894–1895: Perceptions, Power, and Primacy. ISBN 0-521-81714-5. 
• Simpson, Richard (2001). Building The Mosquito Fleet, The US Navy's First Torpedo Boats. South Carolina: Arcadia Publishing. ISBN [[Special:BookSources/01738505080|01738505080]]. 
• Strachan, Hew (2001). The First World War: To Arms. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-926191-1. http://books.google.com/?id=zv8Zrrt6vqgC&dq=ernest+troubridge+russo-japanese+war. 
• Watts, Anthony J. (1990). The Imperial Russian Navy. London, Great Britain: Arms and Armour Press. ISBN 0-85368-912-1. 

Filmography[link]

see also film list about Russo-Japanese war

• Port Arthur (1936)
• Kreiser Varyag (1946)
• Nichiro sensô shôri no hishi: Tekichû ôdan sanbyaku-ri (1957)
• Meiji tennô to nichiro daisenso (1958)
• Nihonkai daikaisen (1969)
• The Battle of Tsushima (1975) [documentary], depiction of the naval Battle of Tsushima
• 203 kochi (1980), depiction of the Battle of Port Arthur
• Nihonkai daikaisen: Umi yukaba (1983)
• Bogatstvo (2004)
• Saka no ue no kumo (2009)

Further reading[link]

• Corbett, Sir Julian. Maritime Operations In The Russo-Japanese War 1904–1905. (1994) Originally classified, and in two volumes, ISBN 1-55750-129-7.
• Hough, Richard A. The Fleet That Had To Die. Ballantine Books. (1960).
• Jentschura, Hansgeorg; Dieter Jung, Peter Mickel. Warships of the Imperial Japanese Navy, 1869–1945. United States Naval Institute, Annapolis, Maryland, 1977. Originally published in German as Die Japanischen Kreigschiffe 1869–1945 in 1970, translated into English by David Brown and Antony Preston. ISBN 0-87021-893-X.
• Jukes, Geoffry. The Russo-Japanese War 1904–1905. Osprey Essential Histories. (2002). ISBN 978-1-84176-446-7.
• Kowner, Rotem (2006). Historical Dictionary of the Russo-Japanese War. Scarecrow. ISBN 0-8108-4927-5.
• Matsumura Masayoshi, Ian Ruxton (trans.), Baron Kaneko and the Russo-Japanese War (1904–05), Lulu Press 2009 ISBN 978-0-557-11751-2
• Morris, Edmund (2002). Theodore Rex, Books.Gooble.com. New York: Random House. 10-ISBN 0-8129-6600-7; 13-ISBN 978-0-8129-6600-8
• Novikov-Priboy, Aleksei. Tsushima. (An account from a seaman aboard the Battleship Orel, which was captured at Tsushima). London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd. (1936).
• Nish, Ian Hill. (1985). The Origins of the Russo-Japanese War. London: Longman. 10-ISBN 0-582-49114-2; 13-ISBN 978-0-582-49114-4
• Okamoto, Shumpei (1970). The Japanese Oligarchy and the Russo-Japanese War. Columbia University Press.
• Pleshakov, Constantine. The Tsar's Last Armada: The Epic Voyage to the Battle of Tsushima. ISBN 0-465-05792-6. (2002).
• Saaler, Sven und Inaba Chiharu (Hg.). Der Russisch-Japanische Krieg 1904/05 im Spiegel deutscher Bilderbogen, Deutsches Institut für Japanstudien Tokyo, (2005).
• Seager, Robert. Alfred Thayer Mahan: The Man And His Letters. (1977) ISBN 0-87021-359-8.
• Semenov, Vladimir, Capt. The Battle of Tsushima. E.P. Dutton & Co. (1912).
• Semenov, Vladimir, Capt. Rasplata (The Reckoning). John Murray, (1910).
• Tomitch, V. M. Warships of the Imperial Russian Navy. Volume 1, Battleships. (1968).
• Warner, Denis & Peggy. The Tide at Sunrise, A History of the Russo-Japanese War 1904–1905. (1975). ISBN 0-7146-5256-3.
• Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Correspondence Regarding the Negotiations between Japan and Russia (1903–1904), Presented to the Imperial Diet, March 1904 (Tokyo, 1904)

External links[link]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Russo-Japanese War

• RussoJapaneseWar.com, Russo-Japanese War research society.
• BFcollection.net, Database of Russian Army Jewish soldiers injured, killed, or missing in action from the war.
• BYU.edu, Text of the Treaty of Portsmouth:.
• Flot.com, Russian Navy history of war.
• Frontiers.loc.gov, Russo-Japanese Relations in the Far East. Meeting of Frontiers (Library of Congress)
• CSmonitor.com, Treaty of Portsmouth now seen as global turning point from the Christian Science Monitor, by Robert Marquand, 30 December 2005.
• The New Student's Reference Work/Russo-Japanese War
• Montenigrina.net, Montenegrins in the Russo-Japanese War (Montenegrin).
• Stanford.edu, Lyrics, translation and melody of the song "On the hills of Manchuria" (Na sopkah Manchzhurii).

v t e Empire of Japan General topics Agriculture Censorship Demographics Economic and financial data Economic history Education Eugenics Foreign commerce and shipping Industrial production Militarism Nationalism Statism Internal politics Emperors Meiji (Mutsuhito) Taishō (Yoshihito) Shōwa (Hirohito) Government Constitution Charter Oath House of Representatives House of Peers Daijō-kan Ministry of Taxation Ministry of the Treasury Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Japan) Ministry of Commerce Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry East Asia Development Board (Kōain) Foreign relations Government and military commanders of World War II Gozen Kaigi Ministry of Greater East Asia Home Ministry Imperial Rescript on Education Imperial Way Faction (Kōdōha) Kokutai National Spiritual Mobilization Movement Peace Preservation Law Political parties State Shinto Supreme Court of Judicature Taisei Yokusankai Tokkō Tonarigumi Tōseiha Tripartite Pact Greater East Asia Conference Military Imperial General Headquarters Imperial Japanese Army Imperial Japanese Navy Ministry of the Military Ministers of Army of Japan Ministry of the Navy of Japan Taiwanese Imperial Japan Serviceman Imperial Guard Nuclear weapons program Kamikaze War crimes Supreme War Council Japanese holdout Emblems Flag of Japan Imperial Seal of Japan Government Seal of Japan Kimigayo Rising Sun Flag History Meiji Restoration Meiji period Boshin War Satsuma Rebellion First Sino-Japanese War Triple Intervention Boxer Rebellion Anglo-Japanese Alliance Russo-Japanese War Taishō period During World War I During the Siberian Intervention General Election Law Shōwa period Shōwa financial crisis Pacification of Manchukuo Second Sino-Japanese War Tripartite Pact Soviet–Japanese Neutrality Pact Pacific War Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Soviet invasion of Manchuria Surrender Occupation Expansionism Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere Occupied territories Burma Hong Kong Indonesia Korea Malaysia Manchuria The Philippines Singapore Taiwan Thailand Vietnam South Pacific Mandate Other Fukoku kyōhei German pre-World War II industrial co-operation Hakkō ichiu Racial Equality Proposal Shinmin no Michi Shōwa Modan Socialist thought Yasukuni Shrine International Military Tribunal for the Far East

Michael Savage (born Michael Alan Weiner; March 31, 1942) is a conservative American radio host, author, and political commentator. He is the host of The Savage Nation, a nationally syndicated talk show that airs throughout the United States on Talk Radio Network. The Savage Nation has an audience of 8 to 10 million listeners on 400 stations across the United States, making it the fourth most listened-to radio talk show in the country.^[2][3] He holds master's degrees from the University of Hawaii in medical botany and medical anthropology and a Ph.D. from the University of California, Berkeley, in nutritional ethnomedicine. As Michael Weiner, he has written books on herbal medicine and homeopathy. As Michael Savage, he has written four New York Times-bestselling political books.^[4][5][6][7]

Savage has summarized his political philosophy in three words: borders, language, and culture. Some, including Savage himself, have characterized his views as conservative nationalism,^[8] while critics have characterized them as "fostering extremism or hatred."^[9] He outspokenly opposes illegal immigration to the United States, supports the English-only movement and argues that liberalism and progressivism are degrading American culture. Although his radio delivery is usually characterized as confrontational and politically themed, some of his show involves ruminating on topics such as medicine, nutrition, music, literature, history, theology, philosophy, sports, culture, and personal anecdotes.

Since 2009, Savage has been barred from entering the United Kingdom, for allegedly "seeking to provoke others to serious criminal acts and fostering hatred".^{[9][10][11][12]}

Personal life[link]

Savage was born Michael Alan Weiner in the Bronx, New York, one of three children of Benjamin and Rae Weiner; he comes from Russian Jewish heritage.^{[13][1][14][15]} He described his childhood as difficult.^[1] His father, the owner of an antique shop, died of a heart attack at age 57,^[13] and his mother died in 2003.^[15]

After graduating from Jamaica High School in 1958,^[16][17] Weiner attended Queens College, where he earned a bachelor's degree in biology in 1963.^[13] After college Weiner taught high school for several years in New York City. His first marriage to Carol Ely in 1964 ended in divorce, and he remarried after meeting his current wife Janet in 1967. His first wife says that she became pregnant twice and aborted both pregnancies over Weiner's objections.^[1] During this time Weiner also worked for famous psychedelic drug advocate Timothy Leary as keeper of the stone gatehouse on Leary's Millbrook estate. Leary hired him to the post because Weiner did not use LSD himself.^[1] Weiner then earned two master's degrees in ethnobotany and anthropology from the University of Hawaii at Manoa. He obtained a Ph.D. in 1978 from the University of California, Berkeley, in nutritional ethnomedicine.^[18] His thesis was titled Nutritional Ethnomedicine in Fiji.^[19]

While in the South Pacific, he became fascinated with the 19th-century sailor Charles Savage, who was believed to have been the first man to bring firearms to Fiji.^[20] That fascination led to Weiner's name change to Savage.

Savage and his second wife Janet have two children, a daughter and a son; his son, Russell Weiner, is the founder of the company that produces the Rockstar energy drink.^[21] Russell's mother, Janet, served as CFO of his company until July 2009.^[1] Daughter Rebecca Lin Yops has worked as an elementary school teacher.^[22] Savage has said that although he believes in God, he attends houses of worship only a few times a year.^[23] During the 1980s, Savage attended Friday night services at a Chabad house in Berkeley.^[13]

Shift in philosophy[link]

Savage introduced himself to certain writers in the North Beach area of San Francisco in the early 1960s.^[22] He befriended and traveled with Beat poets Allen Ginsberg and Lawrence Ferlinghetti. Stephen Schwartz, also an acquaintance of Savage from this time, reported Savage possessed a photograph of himself and Ginsberg swimming naked in Hawaii and used the photograph as sort of a "calling card."^[1][22] Savage maintained a correspondence with Ginsberg consisting of ten letters and a trio of postcards across four years, which is maintained with Ginsberg's papers at Stanford University.^[1][24] One letter asked for Ginsberg and Ferlinghetti to come do a poetry reading, so others could "hear and see and know why I adore your public image."^[14] One postcard mentions his desire to photograph Ginsberg in a provocative way, though Savage states that this correspondence is actually a forgery created by homosexual detractors.^[1] Another acquaintance was poet and author Neeli Cherkovski, who says Savage dreamed of becoming a stand-up comic in the mold of Lenny Bruce.^[1]

Around 1980, an acquaintance, Robert Cathcart, says in his private conversations with Savage he knew him to have conservative political views.^[22] Schwartz stated Savage became alienated from the North Beach scene in the early 1980s. Savage had intense arguments with his liberal friends.^[22] When asked about his shift in politics and other views, Savage replied, "I was once a child; I am now a man."^[14] Savage has cited many occurrences in his life that helped shape his conservative views. Savage states that his opinions on welfare were partly shaped by his first job out of college as a social worker.^[25] He described one incident in which his supervisor had him deliver a check to a welfare client to furnish their apartment, while his own apartment was furnished with cardboard boxes.^[26] Another turning point occurred for him as a writer of health and nutrition books in the 1980s, when he experienced what he saw as "political opposition" after making the suggestion that the closure of homosexual bathhouses might be necessary in response to the emerging AIDS epidemic.^[27] In 1994 his final health and nutrition manuscript, Immigrants and Epidemics, was rejected by publishers for being inflammatory.^[28] In 1996, Savage applied to become the Dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at the University of California, Berkeley. The University instead selected award-winning journalist and China scholar Orville Schell. Savage sued the University, contending discrimination for being conservative.^[22] Savage later dropped the lawsuit.^[29]

Career as commentator[link]

Radio show[link]

The rejection of his 1994 manuscript prompted him to record a demo tape with a mock radio talk show about illegal immigrants and epidemics. He mailed this tape to 250 radio stations in an attempt to change careers and become a radio talk show host.^[22][30] On March 21, 1994, Savage began his radio career on KGO (a San Francisco news/talk radio station) as a fill-in host for the liberal Ray Taliaferro. Less than a year later, he began hosting his own show on KGO's sister station KSFO.^[13][1]

At the time, his slogan was "To the right of Rush and to the left of God." On January 1, 1995, he was given his own show during the drive-time hours. The show quickly became a local hit. During his time at KSFO, Savage reached #1 in Arbitron ratings among both adult men and women over 18 during afternoon drive-time in San Francisco and became top talk host in his timeslot in Northern California.^[31] In 1999, he came to the attention of the Talk Radio Network, based in Oregon, which currently syndicates his The Savage Nation radio program.

As of the fall of 2006, Savage has 8–10 million listeners per week,^[32] making his show the third most widely heard broadcast in the United States. Savage calls his listeners "literate callers with intelligence, wit, and energy." He says that he tries to make a show that has a "...hard edge combined with humor and education...Those who listen to me say they hear a bit of Plato, Henry Miller, Jack Kerouac, Moses, Jesus, and Frankenstein."^[31] Mark de la Viña of the San Jose Mercury News wrote of Savage, "In contrast to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Laura Schlessinger, Bay Area-based Savage mixes conservative diatribe and blunt observations with acerbic humor and a gift of gab. It has propelled him to the top of radio talk-show ratings as well as bestseller book lists."^[14]

On September 10, 2009, KNEW-AM (910 kHz) in Savage's home market of San Francisco announced that it was dropping his program and replacing him with John and Ken from sister station KFI-AM (640 kHz)/Los Angeles.^[33] John Scott, program director of KNEW said in an e-mail that the station was headed "...in a different philosophical and ideological direction, featuring more contemporary content and more local information."^[34] According to Arbitron monthly ratings, KNEW-AM dropped in the ratings since Savage was let go. San Francisco station KTRB picked up the program for the San Francisco market, and saw a ratings boost in the afternoon drive. However, the program was among the first casualties when KTRB went into receivership in September 2010.^[35]

Savage had asked his audience for their opinion prior to consenting to a profile interview by Kelefa Sanneh of The New Yorker; Savage eventually accepted that offer and the New Yorker profile, titled "Party of One", was published in the August 3, 2009 issue, which covered Savage's life and personality in great detail.^[13][36]

On January 22, 2010, Savage revealed to his audience that a writer for Playboy had contacted him via email to do a lengthy interview, and again asked his listeners if he should accept the offer. During the show, Savage read from personal emails between the Playboy writer and himself. The writer admitted to being a listener of the Savage Nation but a critic of the profile done by The New Yorker. The writer also stated that the purpose of the interview was to "rattle" Playboy's readers. On May 12, 2010, Savage revealed that he had granted the interview at his home. Playboy published the interview in June 2010.^[26] He read from a pre-publication copy of the 8,000 word Playboy interview, in which the writer expressed animosity for Savage and his views. Savage said that he was disappointed at the lack of journalistic objectivity, but did not harbor hatred for the writer. He referred back to the New Yorker interview by Kelefa Sanneh, and praised Sanneh as a "real writer" who had understood his subject.

On October 1, 2011, Michael Savage was ranked as the #2 for online streams according to the internet rankings report published by TalkStreamLive.com ^[37]

MSNBC television show[link]

Savage was hired by MSNBC president Erik Sorenson to do a one-hour show beginning March 8, 2003, despite Savage's previous criticism of the network in his book The Savage Nation and the objections of NBC employees like anchor Tom Brokaw, who asked NBC executives, "Is this the sort of man who embodies the values of NBC?"^[24] Sorenson, at the time, called Savage "brash, passionate and smart," and promised that he would provide "compelling opinion and analysis with an edge."^[38]

From the very beginning of his stint at MSNBC, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) urged the show's sponsors to stop advertising on the show. Savage did not sue GLAAD, but Talk Radio Network Inc. (TRN), which syndicated his radio show, did sue the owners of three small noncommercial websites that had criticized Savage and endorsed the call for advertisers to withdraw their support for the show. The suit alleged that the defendants had caused Savage financial damage by interfering with his relationship with advertisers, had used material from The Michael Savage Show without permission, and had spread "false and malicious" information about Savage.^[39] The suit was brought in Illinois, the location of Culligan, a company that stopped advertising with TRN.^[40] Public Citizen undertook the legal defense of the owners of savagestupidity.com.^[41] Savage also contended before the National Arbitration Forum that the "savagestupidity.com" and "michaelsavagesucks.com" domain names were "confusingly similar" to his own "michaelsavage.com", and that he should be given those domain names.^[42] Several months after filing the lawsuit, TRN withdrew it without obtaining any concessions from the defendants.^[43] The National Arbitration Forum ruled against Savage's claim.^[44]

Four months later, on July 7, Savage was fired from his MSNBC television show after remarks made in response to a caller, later identified as prank caller Bob Foster, who insulted Savage's teeth. Savage then asked if Foster was a "sodomite", to which the caller answered, "Yes, I am." Savage then said to the caller,

Oh, so you're one of those sodomites. You should only get AIDS and die, you pig; how's that? Why don't you see if you can sue me, you pig? You got nothing better to do than to put me down, you piece of garbage? You got nothing to do today? Go eat a sausage, and choke on it. Get trichinosis. Now do we have another nice caller here who's busy because he didn't have a nice night in the bathhouse who's angry at me today? Put another, put another sodomite on....no more calls?...I don't care about these bums; they mean nothing to me. They're all sausages.^[45][46]

The day after being fired, Savage apologized on his radio program and on his website. He explained that he believed that MSNBC had gone to commercial to cover the gaffe of the attempted sabotage by a prank caller and that he was off the air at the time of the offensive comments, despite the fact that clips of the segment show Savage going to commercial after he made the comments. He also said his remarks were meant only to insult the caller, not all people with AIDS.^[47]

Political views[link]

Michael Savage calls himself an "independent-minded individualist" and says that he "fits no stereotype."^[31] He has also cited Barry Goldwater as an influence.^[48] Savage criticizes big government as well as liberalism and liberal activism, accuses the news media of liberal bias, and champions conservationism and animal rights.^[8] He considers the three aspects that define a nation as borders, language, and culture; those aspects inspired the motto of the Paul Revere Society.^[49]

In 2003, Savage said that he voted in 2000 for George W. Bush "quite reluctantly, incidentally."^[50] In 2004, Savage and the Revere Society hosted a party at Schroeder's Cafe in San Francisco celebrating the re-election of Bush.^[49] Savage donated $5,600 to the campaign of Democratic candidate Jerry Brown in the 2006 California Attorney General election.^[51]

Regarding candidates for the 2012 Republican primaries, Savage said that Ron Paul had "great ideas" but expressed that Rick Perry should be the nominee.^[52]

On December 12, 2011, he offered Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich "1 million dollars" to withdraw from the Presidential contest, saying that only Mitt Romney had a chance to beat Barack Obama, a man he regards as a Communist and a possible foreign usurper^[53], in the 2012 election^[54].

Activism[link]

Legal defense contributions[link]

Savage has regularly donated money toward the legal defense of the Marines accused of murdering civilians in Haditha, Iraq; occasionally, Savage will offer proceeds from any sales through his website. Savage had regular contact with the attorneys of the accused and criticizes their treatment at Camp Pendleton.^[55] Most recently, Savage has donated over $10,000 to the U.S. Marines Charity Defense Fund at the Thomas More Law Center^[56] On April 25, 2007, he pledged $1 for each copy of Healing Children Naturally and Reducing the Risk of Alzheimer's purchased from his website to be donated to the U.S. Marines Defense Fund.^[57] The Marines were ultimately found not guilty.

Lieutenant Michael Behenna[link]

On his nationally syndicated talk radio program, Michael Savage announced that he had sent another $50,000 to aid in the defense of First Lieutenant Michael Behenna, who has been sentenced to 15 years in prison for allegedly murdering terrorist suspect Ali Mansur Mohammed while serving in Iraq with the 101st Airborne Division in 2008. Savage has previously given $50,000 to Behenna’s defense from the Savage Legal Defense Fund and his own personal contributions. According to Vicki Behenna, the lieutenant’s mother, additional contributions from listeners since Savage brought up this topic on his program have amounted to over $40,000. This brings the total contributions from Savage and his listeners to nearly $150,000.^[58]

Awards, criticisms, and controversies[link]

Awards[link]

On June 9, 2007, Talkers Magazine awarded Savage with the publication's annual "Freedom of Speech Award," and he accepted it with a pre-recorded speech.^[59]

Criticisms[link]

In July 2005, conservative writer Bernard Goldberg ranked Savage number 61 in his book 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America. Goldberg wrote that "Savage's brand of over-the-top bile... puts him right in there with the angriest haters on the Left."^[60] David Klinghoffer, a National Review columnist, speculated that The Savage Nation "is an act, a put-on."^[48]

Liberal advocacy groups and media watchdogs such as GLAAD and FAIR accuse Savage of racism,^[38] homophobia,^[61] bigotry^[38] and Islamophobia^[62] because of his controversial statements about homosexuality, Islam, feminism, sex education, and immigration.^[63] On his September 21, 1999 broadcast, Savage said that the motivation for female students who come from a Marin County private school to feed and provide services to the homeless is so they "can go in and get raped by them, because they seem to like the excitement of it..."^[64][65]

On April 17, 2006, he said of Muslims, "They say, 'Oh, there's a billion of them.' I said, 'So, kill 100 million of them, then there'll be 900 million of them.' I mean, would you rather die—would you rather us die than them?"^[66] This was taken from an argument dealing with the possibility of a nuclear conflict in that region. After Savage was banned from the UK, this was also reported in the UK media.^[67]

Controversies[link]

Roman Catholic Church and immigration[link]

In March 2006, Savage drew the ire of some in the Roman Catholic community when he accused the Roman Catholic Church of breaking federal law by giving assistance to illegal immigrants (in response to statements by Roger Cardinal Mahony of Los Angeles calling it "pastoral support").^[68] William A. Donohue, the president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, was scheduled to be on the show that day, but refused after hearing Savage's language. He later said, "what is not fine is Savage's diatribe about the 'greedy pigs' in the Catholic Church and how 'the institution is rotten from the top to the bottom.' He owes all Catholics an apology."^[69]

On March 28, 2006, Savage encouraged his listeners to burn Mexican flags to counter massive rallies held in California during which demonstrators marched in opposition to proposed legislation that would impose new immigration restrictions.^[70]

C-SPAN broadcast of Talkers Award[link]

When Talkers Magazine awarded Savage with the publication's annual "Freedom of Speech Award," C-SPAN opted not to broadcast a pre-recorded speech that had been sent by Michael Savage.^[59] Although the award ceremony had received coverage in previous years, C-SPAN did not televise it due to its policy of televising such speeches only when delivered in person. Savage stated that C-SPAN's decision was "censorship" and he told his listeners to express their ire to C-SPAN through calls and e-mails to the organization.^[71]

Dispute with CAIR[link]

In early November 2007, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) called on radio listeners to contact companies that advertise on Savage's program to express their concerns about his comments concerning Muslims. Savage was quoted as saying Muslims "need deportation", and that adherents of Islam would do well to "take your religion and shove it up your behind" because "I'm sick of you."^[72] On his show and website, Savage answered by reminding his listeners that CAIR is linked to terrorist organization Hamas, and as such has been called an "unindicted co-conspirator" by government officials in an anti-terrorist trial" (the Holy Land Foundation trial). On November 8, 2007, following a campaign by CAIR meant to get Savage off the air by going after his sponsors, Citrix Systems, Inc. pulled its advertisements from his show.^[73]

Savage sued CAIR for its use, on its website, of excerpts from his show, for copyright infringement by CAIR.^[74] The suit alleged that CAIR's repackaging of Savage's comments was "deliberately designed to obscure the specific message conveyed by Michael Savage". The excerpts included Savage's characterization of the Qur'an as "a throwback document" and a "book of hate". CAIR called the suit "bizarre, sloppy and baseless".^[75] On July 25, 2008, the United States district court dismissed Savage's suit against CAIR, holding that the posting of the audio clip was protected under the First Amendment doctrine of fair use, as it was used to "comment on and rebut derogatory statements regarding their organization and their religious affiliations."^[76] The court gave Savage the opportunity to file an amended complaint if he wanted to try to cure the defects in his suit. On August 14, 2008, however, Savage's lawyer announced that Savage would not file an amended complaint and would drop the case.^[77][78] CAIR then sought attorneys fees against Savage but U.S. District Court judge Susan Illston denied that request.^[79]