287,292 Pages

Japanese expansion in the Asia-Pacific after KANTOKUEN was cancelled

Nanshin-ron (南進論?, "Southern Expansion Doctrine" or "Southern Road") was a political doctrine in the Empire of Japan which stated that Southeast Asia and the Pacific Islands were Japan's sphere of interest and that the potential value to the Japanese Empire for economic and territorial expansion in those areas was greater than elsewhere.

The opposing political doctrine was Hokushin-ron (北進論?, "Northern Expansion Doctrine") largely supported by the Imperial Japanese Army, which stated the same except with regards to Manchuria and Siberia. After the military setbacks at Nomonhan on Mongolian front, the Second Sino-Japanese War, and negative Western attitudes towards Japanese expansionist tendencies, the Southern Expansion Doctrine became predominant. Its focus was to procure colonial resources in South East Asia and neutralize the threat posed by Western military forces in the Pacific. The Army favored a "counterclockwise strike" while the Navy favored a "clockwise strike".[1]

Meiji-period genesis[edit | edit source]

In Japanese historiography the term nanshin-ron is used to describe Japanese writings on the importance to Japan of the South Seas region in the Pacific Ocean.[2] Japanese interest in Southeast Asia can be observed in writings of the Edo period (17th–19th centuries).[3]

During the final years of the Edo period the leaders of the Meiji Restoration determined that Japan needed to pursue a course of imperialism in emulation of the European nations to attain equality in status with the West as the European powers were laying claim to territories ever closer to Japan.

After the Meiji Restoration of 1868, the nanshin-ron policy came to be advanced with the southern regions as a focus for trade and emigration.[3] In the early Meiji period Japan derived economic benefits from Japanese emigrants to Southeast Asia, the vast majority of whom were prostitutes (Karayuki-san)[4] who worked in brothels in British Malaya,[5] Singapore,[6] the Philippines,[7] the Dutch East Indies[8] and French Indochina.[9] Nanshin-ron was advocated as a national policy by a group of Japanese ideologues during the 1880s and 1890s.[10] Writings of the time often presented areas of Micronesia and Southeast Asia as uninhabited or uncivilised and suitable for Japanese colonisation and cultivation.[11] In its initial stages Nanshin-ron focused primarily on Southeast Asia, and until the late 1920s it concentrated on gradual and peaceful Japanese advances into this region to address what the Japanese saw as the twin problems of underdevelopment and Western colonialism.[12] During the first decade of the 20th century, private Japanese companies became active in trade in Southeast Asia. Communities of emigrant Japanese merchants arose in many areas, selling sundry goods to local customers, and Japanese imports of rubber and hemp increased.[4] Large-scale Japanese investment occurred especially in rubber, copra and hemp plantations in Malaya and in Mindanao in the southern Philippines. The Japanese Foreign Ministry established consulates in Manila (1888), Singapore (1889), and Batavia (1909).

With increasing Japanese industrialization came the realization that Japan was dependent on the supply of many raw materials from overseas locations outside its direct control, and was hence vulnerable to disruption of that supply. The need to promote trade, develop and protect sea routes, and to officially encourage emigration to ease overpopulation arose simultaneously with the strengthening of the Imperial Japanese Navy, which gave Japan the military strength to protect these overseas interests should diplomacy fail.

Pacific islands[edit | edit source]

The Japanese government began pursuing a policy of overseas migration in the late nineteenth century as a result of Japan's limited resources and increasing population. In 1875 Japan declared its control over the Bonin Islands.[10] The formal annexation and incorporation of the Bonin Islands and Taiwan into the Japanese Empire can be viewed as first steps in implementation of the "Southern Expansion Doctrine" in concrete terms.

However, World War I had a profound impact on the "Southern Expansion Doctrine". Japan was able to occupy the vast areas in the Pacific formerly controlled by the German Empire: i.e. the Caroline Islands, Mariana Islands, Marshall Islands and Palau. In 1919, these island groups officially became a League of Nations mandate of Japan and came under the administration of the Imperial Japanese Navy. The focus of the "Southern Expansion Doctrine" expanded to include these island groups (the South Pacific Mandate), the economic and military development of which came to be viewed as essential to Japan's security.

Theoretical development[edit | edit source]

Meiji-period nationalistic researchers and writers pointed to Japan's relations with the Pacific region from the 17th-century red seal ship trading voyages, and Japanese immigration and settlement in Nihonmachi during the period before the Tokugawa shogunate's national seclusion policies. Some researchers attempted to find archeological or anthropological evidence of a racial link between the Japanese of southern Kyūshū (i.e. the Kumaso) and the peoples of the Pacific islands.

Nanshin-ron appeared in Japanese political discourse around the mid 1880s.[13] In the late 19th century the policy focused on adjacent China[14] with an emphasis on securing control of Korea and expanding Japanese interests in Fujian. Russian involvement in Manchuria at the turn of the century led to the policy being eclipsed by hokushin-ron (the "Northern Expansion Doctrine"). The resulting Russo-Japanese War of 1904–05 produced territorial gains for Japan in South Manchuria.[15] Following the war the expansionist aspects of nanshin-ron became more developed, and it was incoroporated into national defence strategy in 1907.[16]

In the 1920s and 1930s, the "Southern Expansion Doctrine" gradually came to be formalized, largely through the efforts of the Imperial Japanese Navy's "South Strike Group", a strategic think tank based in the Taihoku Imperial University in Taiwan. Many professors at the university were either active or ex-Navy officers, with direct experience in the territories in question. The university published numerous reports promoting the advantages of investment and settlement in the territories under Navy control.

The Anti-London Treaty Faction (han-johaku ha) of the Treaty Faction within the Japanese Navy set up a "Study Committee for Policies towards the South Seas" (Tai Nan'yō Hōsaku Kenkyū-kai) to explore military and economic expansion strategies, and cooperated with the Ministry of Colonial Affairs (Takumu-sho) to emphasize the military role of Taiwan and Micronesia as advanced bases for further southern expansion.

Economic development[edit | edit source]

During 1920 the Foreign Ministry convened the Nan-yo Boeki Kaigi (South Seas Trade Conference), to promote South Seas commerce and published in 1928 Boeki, Kigyo oyobi imin yori mitaru Nan'yo (The South Seas in view of Trade and emigration). The term Nan-yo kokusaku (National Policy towards the South Seas) first appeared.

The Japanese government sponsored several companies, including the Nan'yō Takushoku Kabushiki Kaisha (South Seas Colonization Company), the Nan'yō Kōhatsu Kabushiki Kaisha (South Seas Development Company), the Nan'yō Kyōkai (South Seas Society), and others with a mixture of private and government funds for development of phosphate mining, sugar cane and coconut industries in islands and to sponsor emigrants. (Japanese Societies) were established in Rabaul, New Caledonia, Fiji and New Hebrides in 1932 and in Tonga in 1935.

The success of the Navy in the economic development of Taiwan and the South Pacific Mandate through alliances among military officers, bureaucrats, capitalists, and right-wing and left-wing intellectuals contrasted sharply with Army failures in the Chinese mainland.

Increasing militarization[edit | edit source]

The Washington Naval Treaty had restricted the size of the Japanese Navy, and had also stipulated that new military bases and fortifications could not be established in overseas territories or colonies. However, by the 1920s, Japan had already begun the secret construction of fortifications in Palau, Tinian and Saipan.

In order to evade monitoring by the Western powers, they were camouflaged as places to dry fishing nets or coconut, rice or sugar-cane farms and Nan'yō Kohatsu Kaisha (South Seas Development Company) in cooperation with the Navy assumed responsibility for construction.

This construction increased after the even more restrictive London Naval Treaty of 1930, and the growing importance of military aviation led Japan to view Micronesia to be of strategic importance as a chain of "unsinkable aircraft carriers", protecting Japan, and as a base of operations for operations in south-west Pacific.

The Navy also began examining the strategic importance of Papua and New Guinea to Australia, aware that Australian annexation of those territories was motivated in large part in the attempted to secure an important defense line.

Adoption as national policy[edit | edit source]

In 1931 the "Five Ministers Meeting" defined the Japanese objective of extending its influence in the Pacific, but excluded areas such as the Philippines, the Dutch East Indies and Java which might provoke other countries.[4] Nanshin-ron became official policy after 1935.[17] It was officially adopted as national policy with the promulgation of the Toa shin Chitsujo (New Order in East Asia) from 1936 at the "Five Ministers Conference" (attended by the Prime Minister, Foreign Minister, Finance Minister, Army Minister and Navy Minister), with the resolution to advance south peacefully.

By World War II, the policy had evolved in scope to include Southeast Asia.[17] The Doctrine also formed part of the doctrinal basis of the Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere proclaimed by Prime Minister Konoe Fumimaro from July 1940. Resource-rich areas of Southeast Asia were earmarked to provide raw materials for Japan's industry, and the Pacific Ocean was to become a "Japanese lake". In September 1940, Japan occupied northern French Indochina, and in November, the Pacific Islands Bureau (Nan'yō Kyoku) was established by the Foreign Ministry. While the events of the Pacific War from December 1941 overshadowed further development of the "Southern Expansion Doctrine", the Greater East Asia Ministry was created in November 1942, and a Greater East Asia Conference was held in Tokyo in 1943. During the war, the bulk of Japan's diplomatic efforts remained directed at Southeast Asia. The "Southern Expansion Doctrine" was brought to an end by the Japanese surrender in World War II.

See also[edit | edit source]

References[edit | edit source]

  1. "Centrifugal Offensive". http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/C/e/Centrifugal_Offensive.htm. Retrieved 21 December 2015. 
  2. Wong Lin Ken (June 1981). "Reviewed Work: Southeast Asia in Modern Japanese Thought: The Development and Transformation of "Nanshin Ron" by Shimizu Hajime". pp. 94–96. JSTOR 25797650. 
  3. 3.0 3.1 Mendl, Wolf (2001). Japan and South East Asia: From the Meiji Restoration to 1945. 1. Taylor & Francis. pp. 11–12. ISBN 9780415182058. https://books.google.com/books?id=xO3bh5RFfoQC. 
  4. 4.0 4.1 4.2 Matthiessen, Sven (2015). Japanese Pan-Asianism and the Philippines from the Late Nineteenth Century to the End of World War II: Going to the Philippines Is Like Coming Home?. Brill's Japanese Studies Library. BRILL. p. 16. ISBN 9789004305724. https://books.google.com/books?id=llPeCgAAQBAJ. 
  5. Shimizu, Hiroshi (1997). "Karayuki‐san and the Japanese economic advance into British Malaya, 1870–1920". pp. 107–132. Digital object identifier:10.1080/03147539708713130. 
  6. Warren, James Francis (1989). "Karayuki-San of Singapore: 1877–1941". pp. 45–80. JSTOR 41493135. 
  7. Terami-Wada, M (1986). "Karayuki-san of Manila: 1890-1920". pp. 287–316. JSTOR 42632950. 
  8. Japanese Commodities and Formation of Japan Imagery in Colonial Indonesia: The Case Study of Jintan Pills and Its Trademark (Dissertation). Keio University Graduate School of Sociology. 2017. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/145800119.pdf. 
  9. Warren, James Francis (2003). Ah Ku and Karayuki-san: Prostitution in Singapore, 1870-1940. NUS Press. p. 86. ISBN 9789971692674. https://books.google.com/books?id=Eo_Hav3qHYEC. 
  10. 10.0 10.1 Yamashita, Bosco (2004). The Making of Anthropology in East and Southeast Asia. Berghahn Books. p. 96. ISBN 9781571812599. https://books.google.com/books?id=yb3O2sCPv5MC. 
  11. Nanyo-orientalism. Cambria Press. p. 5. ISBN 9781621968689. https://books.google.com/books?id=CHJSXpf3JlsC. 
  12. Lindblad, J. Th.; Post, Peter (2014). Indonesian Economic Decolonization in Regional and International Perspective. Verhandelingen van het Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde. Volume 267. BRILL. p. 63. ISBN 9789004253780. https://books.google.com/books?id=jfFjAAAAQBAJ. 
  13. Kikuchi, Yuko (2007). Refracted Modernity: Visual Culture and Identity in Colonial Taiwan. University of Hawaii Press. p. 75. ISBN 9780824830502. https://books.google.com/books?id=gzIutZvuf-UC. 
  14. Ramcharan, Robin (2002). Forging a Singaporean Statehood, 1965–1995: The Contribution of Japan. International Law in Japanese Perspective. Volume 9. Martinus Nijhoff. p. 75. ISBN 9789041119520. https://books.google.com/books?id=iiQuDHmTLk4C. 
  15. Kokubun, Ryosei; Soeya, Yoshihide; Takahara, Akio; Kawashima, Shin (2017). Japan–China Relations in the Modern Era. Taylor & Francis. pp. 10–11. ISBN 9781351857949. https://books.google.com/books?id=pCUlDwAAQBAJ. 
  16. Ramcharan 2002, p. 75.
  17. 17.0 17.1 Ramcharan 2002, p. 75.

Bibliography[edit | edit source]

  • Beasley, W. G. (1991). Japanese Imperialism 1894–1945. London: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-822168-5. 
  • Nish, Ian (1991). Japanese Foreign Policy in the Interwar Period. Praeger Publishers. ISBN 978-0-275-94791-0. 
  • Howe, Christopher (1999). The Origins of Japanese Trade Supremacy: Development and Technology in Asia from 1540 to the Pacific War. University Of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-35486-6. 
  • Peattie, Mark (1992). Nan'Yo: The Rise and Fall of the Japanese in Micronesia, 1885–1945 (Pacific Islands Monograph Series). University of Hawaii Press. ISBN 978-0-8248-1480-9. 

This page uses Creative Commons Licensed content from Wikipedia (view authors).
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.