Manchurian controversy between history and facts
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages:5-10
Manchurian controversy between history and facts
The Fourth roundtable meeting during the third IPR meeting there wasvJames G. McDonald of the United States, Viscount Lord Hailsham of England, Newton W. Rowell of Canada, and Roland W. Boyden was chosen as the moderator. Effort was made to discuss the Manchurian problem objectively as possible
1 What is the historical origin of the Manchuria problem?
What are the rights of the treaty and the administrative penalties in the Liaodong Peninsula that have occurred in relation to this? Foreign railway defense · railway police and consulate police; Telecommunication, postal, telegraph and radio administration management; Residential business and land in Kawasaki; What about the new railway and harbor construction issues?
What are the major foreign economic interests in Manchuria?
What about some countries acting without special provisions in the treaty to protect their rights in foreign countries and to maintain security?
What is the international aspect of the Manchurian Railway problem?
What about the problem of Koreans in Manchuria?
What are the provisions of the existing treaty, such as the Washington Convention and the Paris Convention, as a way of addressing the Manchuria problem above, and how can there be a solution?
What are the special proposals for resolving the Manchu problem, and which issues are possible for reconciliation or intervention?
The core of the agenda was to discuss why Manchuria was at the center of controversy and how it could be resolved. However, despite the careful arrangement of the program by the committee, the China and Japan’s conflict has come from the first day of the conference. On the first day of the conference, the Japanese delegation made a substantive debate on the remarks made by the chairman of the People’s Republic of China and the dispute started boilling. The chairman had to not allow any questionable debate to the entire member. That evening, the general conference was focused on making a statement about changes in circumstances and development of international cooperation between the two countries since the Second Conference in 1927. However, the reason for the controversy was that in May 1928, Chairman of China warned Japanese about Jinan incident. In June of 1928, the criminal was not formally charged in the case of Jiujiang Linn explosion, he said that China assumed that Japan awas the criminal and set Japan on the defendant’s seat in front of other nations.
In the evening of November 4, 1929, Matsuoka first established the historical and economic relations between Japan and Manchuria in accordance with the order in which they were made. Japanese contributions in Manchuria development, Chinese benefits by Manchurian development, Respectively. Shushusho denounced Matsuoka’s speech while criticizing the Japanese government’s actions and Japanese actions in Manchuria. On that day, Matsuoka’s rehearsal was not permitted. On the morning of the following day, a special roundtable conference was held so Shushushu can reorganized the remarks of the previous day, and Matsuoka, explained the status of Japan in Manchuria repeatly.
‘Japan does not make any strategic attempt in Manchuria, but Manchuria itself has valuable strategic value and will always be as long as Manchuria lies between Russia and the Korean peninsula.’
The purpose of the IPR conference was to seek out the facts about the serious and difficult conflicts that exist between the nations and try to come up with solutions. However, unlike many countries participating in IPR conferences, Japan and China had different starting ideas from the beginning. Although China used historical facts to approach fundamental solution to the problem of Manchuria, but Japan claimed that the Japanese should be responsible for Manchuria, insisting on the railroad landing rights, military presence and immigration in Manchuria. Of course, all of these were in line with the direction of China’s development plans as well.
The discussion categories prepared by the IPR and the materials prepared by each country have already been presented, also Matsuoka, the 만철부총재 and 쉬수시 from (燕京) University in China have made their remarks. Based on their remarks, concrete discussions were held at each Round Table conferences.
The discussion process of each roundtable conference had been held for three days. They were given the discussion guidelines in the syllabus, but not all the discussion groups have adopted it. The various items presented in the syllabus are not treated equally in each section. It is natural that it topic varies according to the atmosphere of the round table conference attendees and their interests. Nonetheless, it seemed that more of general topics were discussed at each round table.
On November 4, 1929, topics were discussed about after the Sino-Japanese War and the Russo-Japanese War, the scope of the rights that Japan acquired from Manchuria and the factors of the economic development of Manchuria at the Roundtable. On November 5, Manchurias crime and safety was discussed. The 6th day, discussion was about dispute over the legal effect of the 21st amendment. Observing these controversial issues closely, it relates to the issue of economic development, the issue of maintaining security, As well as the abuse of rights in the treaty and also abuse of authority.