Military attachés and observers in the Russo-Japanese War

Military attachés and observers in the Russo-Japanese War were foreign observers who oversaw the 1904–1905 Russo-Japanese War. Observers from several nations took part, and their reports influenced subsequent military strategy in future conflict, including World War I.Sisemore, James D. (2003). "The Russo-Japanese War, Lessons Not Learned." U.S. Army Command and General Staff College.

Overview

The multi-national military attachés and observers who took part in the Russo-Japanese War were expressly engaged in collecting data and analyzing the interplay between tactics, strategy, and technical advances in weapons and machines of modern warfare. For example, reports evaluating the stationary battle at Port Arthur and the maneuver battle at Mukden demonstrated the lethality of modern warfare and foreshadow the combined effects of hand grenades, mortars, machine guns, and field artillery in World War I.

Military and civilian observers from every major power closely followed the course of the war. Most were able to report on events from a perspective somewhat like what is now termed "embedded" positions within the land and naval forces of both Russia and Japan. These military attachés, naval attachés and other observers prepared voluminous 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 factors which came to dominate in World War I.

In 1904-1905, Sir Ian Hamilton was the military attaché of the Indian Army serving with the Japanese army in Manchuria. As the attaché to arrive earliest in Japan,Chapman, John and Ian Nish. (2004). "On the Periphery of the Russo-Japanese War," Part I, p. 53 n42, Paper No. IS/2004/475. Suntory Toyota International Centre for Economics and Related Disciplines (STICERD), London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). he was recognized as the dean of the group. Also amongst the Western attachés observing the conflict were the future Lord Nicholson, Chief of the Imperial General Staff; John J. Pershing, later General of the Armies and head of the American Expeditionary Force in the First World War; Douglas MacArthur, later a United States General of the Army; and Enrico Caviglia, later Marshal of Italy.

Press coverage of the war was affected by restrictions on the movement of reporters and strict censorship. In all military conflicts which followed this 1904-1905 war, close attention to more managed reporting was considered essential by the Japanese.Walker, Dale L. World of Jack London website. These concerns were considered inessential by the Russian command. The Russian press frequently revealed information deemed crucial by the opposing commanders; and the Japanese profited from the lack of military censorship on the Russian side. Information gathered from Russian newspapers was telegraphed by the Japanese military attaché in the Japanese embassy in Berlin; and it was received by the Japanese armies in Manchuria within six days.Harmon, Ernest N. (1933). "Study of the Japanese intelligence service during the Russo-Japanese War," p. 5.

The Russian war artist Vasili Vereshchagin was invited by Admiral Stepan Makarov to observe the war aboard Makarov's flagship Petropavlovsk. On April 13, 1904, the warship hit mines near Port Arthur; and nearly all aboard were killed. Vereshchagin's last work was recovered. The salvaged canvas depicted a council of war presided over by Admiral Makarov."State Historical Museum Opens 'The Year 1812 in the Paintings by Vasily Vereshchagin'," Art Daily, March 11, 2010; "War Lasted 18 Months ... Russian Miscalculation," New York Times. August 30, 1905

Selected military attachés serving with Russian forces

Russian Imperial Army American observers Capt. Sydney Cloman, U.S.Russo-Japanese War Research: Capt. William Voorhees Judson, U.S.Newbury Library: - William Voorhees Judson; Sisemore, p. 109. Judson arrived in St. Petersburg in early 1904. He was eventually attached to the Russian Army in Manchuria and was captured by the Japanese at the Battle of Mukden on March 10, 1905. He was returned to the United States by the Japanese.

Judson's initial prediction about the Russians’ chances was positive. In a letter to the U.S. Ambassador dated July 26, 1904, he explained that the Russians were doing better than expected and believed within a few weeks they would have no reason to fear the Japanese any longer. He did cite that the war was not popular among Russian troops, but he felt their attitudes would change when the army went on the offensive. Upon moving to Manchuria, Judson's opinion of the situation began to change. In a letter to the U.S. ambassador dated October 25, 1904, he described the tactical situation as a stalemate and was not certain as to which side would be victorious.

Judson was shocked at the carnage produced by modern warfare. He said in his official report, “I saw one battle in which the Russian slain outnumbered the Union dead on twelve of the greatest battlefields of the Civil War.” Judson believed future wars would prove so costly that even victors would not be able to justify waging them. He viewed the Russo-Japanese War as conflict without a clear winner. According to Judson, both combatants were anxious to seek peace and had little to show for their efforts. He concluded that in order for the U.S. to promote peace, it must exercise diligence in preparing for war and be prepared for an international call for disarmament. Col. Valery Havard U.S. - Colonel Valery Havard, an Assistant Surgeon General in the United States Army, arrived in St. Petersburg as a military attaché on December 7, 1904. He arrived at the front in Manchuria on February 8, 1905. After being embedded with Russian forces just over a month, Havard was captured by Japanese forces at the Battle of Mukden. Upon reaching Tokyo he was sent back to the United States.

The purpose of Colonel Havard's observations was to ascertain important information about the changing battlefield and how to apply it to the Army Medical Corps. In his official report, Havard compiled a list of lessons learned from the Russo-Japanese experience. He noted the lack of frontal assaults that were the result of improved weaponry, particularly the machine gun. Flanking movements became more necessary to avoid the machine gun, which necessitated increased frequency and distance of forced marches. In previous wars, soldiers were able to rest at night and armies saw little action during winter months. Attacks were often ordered at night and the waging of war never ceased, even in sub-zero temperatures. According to Havard, the result of these trends was soldiers experiencing an increased amount of battle fatigue, as well as resurgence in the usefulness of the bayonet in night assaults. The Japanese claimed seven percent of their casualties resulted from bayonet wounds.

According to Havard, casualty trends were changing with the employment of modern weaponry. Hard-jacketed rifle bullets were deadly at greater ranges. Despite this fact, the number of soldiers killed in action by the rifle diminished due to the increased effectiveness of artillery. The advancements in field artillery technology made it necessary for battle lines to be farther apart, resulting in rifles being outside of their effective ranges. The increased accuracy of modern artillery pieces led to increased ratios of artillery casualties. In some battles during the war, fifty percent of casualties were the result of artillery fire. Havard claimed that during Russo- Japanese War, both belligerents experienced higher levels of casualties than had been noted in earlier wars, with a great ratio of killed to wounded. According to Havard, one out of every four soldiers wounded during the conflict died from their wounds.

Because of his observations in Manchuria, Havard recommended changes to the U.S. Army's Medical Corps. He suggested the war department devise a plan to train and mobilize large numbers of medical personnel for war and to promote the development of civilian organizations like the Red Cross. Because of the increased number of casualties resulting from modern weaponry, Havard stressed the significance of training enlisted soldiers in assisting medical officers in field hospitals. He also spoke to the importance of devising an adequate evacuation system from the battlefield to military hospitals. He explained that railroads were of important in this process. Havard also advocated the implementation of telephone technology in order for hospital staff to have quick access to information from the battle.

British observers Gen. Montagu Gerard, Indian ArmyTowle, Philip. (1998). Paper No. IS/1998/351. STICERD, LSE. Maj. J. M. Horne, UK.Great Britain War Office, General Staff. (1908). The Russo-Japanese War: Reports from British Officers Attached to the Japanese and Russian Forces in the Field. London: H.M. Stationery Office. Col. W. H. W. Waters, Indian ArmyMcCullagh, p. 99.

Other observers Capt. Nils Edlund, SwedenÅselius, Gunnar (1991) Militärattachéerna i St Petersburg. From Militärhistorisk tidskrift 1990. Stockholm p.22 Capt. Carl von Hoffman, Germany.Hoffman, Carl von. (1936). "Jottings from an Explorer's Notebook," The Empire Club of Canada Speeches 1935-1936. pp. 253-264. Capt. Oskar Nyqvist, Norway

Russian Imperial Navy Somerset Arthur Gough-Calthorpe, UK (1904–1905).Rickard, J. (2007). Somerset Arthur Gough-Calthorpe. Lieutenant Dimitur Dobrev, Bulgaria, present at TsushimaVladimir Pavlov, "The Bulgarian Navy (1879–1914)," Bulgarian Historical Review, 3 (1990): 68.

Selected military attachés serving with Japanese forces

Japanese Imperial Army

United States of America observers 1Lt. Granville Roland Fortescue, USAArlington National Cemetery: Granville Roland Foretscue Maj. Joseph Kuhn, USAArlington National Cemetery: Joseph Ernest Kuhn MG Arthur MacArthur Jr., USAArlington National Cemetery: Arthur MacArthur Chafing at the bit at his Fort Mason, San Francisco headquarters, MacArthur requested that he also be assigned as a military observer upon hearing of the outbreak of war between Russia and Japan in 1904. He finally secured the appointment, but arrived in Manchuria in mid-March, 1905, just after the major fighting had ended with the Japanese triumph at the Battle of Mukden. When the Portsmouth Peace Conference was convened in August, MacArthur was sent to Tokyo as military attaché to the American legation. Capt. Peyton C. March, USAArlington National Cemetery: Peyton Conway March Dr. Anita Newcomb McGeeScharf, Frederick A. (2001). "Dr. Anita Newcomb McGee and the Russo-Japanese War (1904–1905)," National Museum of Health and Medicine, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. Capt. John J. Pershing, USAState of Nebraska: Pershing w/Gen. Kurohi, 1904-1905. Captain John Pershing arrived in Tokyo as an attaché to the Japanese Army on March 5, 1905. At that time he claimed the outcome of the war was uncertain, as both sides were bogged down after months of indecisive fighting. During his first days in the country, the Japanese achieved a pivotal victory at the Battle of Mukden. According to his memoirs, the way the Japanese celebrated led him to believe they had actually expected defeat at the hands of the Russians. Pershing's observations as an attaché were significant because they provided a first-hand account from the perspective of a company grade officer who had previously seen combat during the Indian Wars and the Spanish–American War.