NOTES

1. INTRODUCTION

1. For example, Bernard Lewis’s best seller (What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East [New York: Oxford University Press, 2002]) clearly emphasizes the argument of the essential incompatibility between Islam and modernity and claims that it was the legacy of a centuries-long Muslim-Christian conflict that led to contemporary Muslim anti-Westernism. For examples of books that relate anti-Westernism to responses to Western colonialism, see Stephen Kinzer, All the Shah’s Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror (New York: Wiley, 2004), and Rashid Khalidi, Resurrecting Empire: Western Footprints and America’s Perilous Path in the Middle East (New York: Beacon, 2005).

2. For an example of modern Chinese history, see Guy S. Alitto, The Last Confucian: Liang Shu-ming and the Chinese Dilemma of Modernity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986).

3. H. Bull, “The Revolt Against the West,” in H. Bull and A. Watson, eds., The Expansion of International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984), 217–228.

4. S. N. Hay, Asian Ideas of East and West: Tagore and His Critics in Japan, China, and India (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970).

5. Ian Buruma and Avishai Margalit, Occidentalism: The West in the Eyes of Its Enemies (New York: Penguin, 2004).

6. For examples from Iranian history that show how colonialism and religious conservatism are not sufficient to explain the variant and complex roots of anti-Westernism, see Mehrzad Boroujerdi, Iranian Intellectuals and the West: The Tormented Triumph of Nativism (Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press, 1996); Ali Gheissari, Iranian Intellectuals in the 20th Century (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1998); and Ali Mirsepassi, Intellectual Discourse and the Politics of Modernization: Negotiating Modernity in Iran (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000).

7. As Richard W. Bulliet shows, the relationship between Islam and Christianity in history cannot justify any clash-of-civilization thesis. On the contrary, he makes a strong case for understanding this relationship through the paradigm of a shared Islamo-Christian civilizational legacy. See Richard W. Bulliet, The Case for Islamo-Christian Civilization (New York: Columbia University Press, 2004).

8. Tetsuo Najita and Harry Harootunian, “Japanese Revolt Against the West: Political and Cultural Criticism in the Twentieth Century,” in Bob Tadashi Wakabayashi, eds., Modern Japanese Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 207–272.

9. Buruma and Margalit, Occidentalism.

10. Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities (London: Verso, 1983). For a good discussion of the role of (mis)perceptions of the Other in international history, see Mark Bradley, Imagining Vietnam and America: The Making of Postcolonial Vietnam: The Making of Postcolonial Vietnam, 1919–1950 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2000).

11. Stefan Tanaka, Japan’s Orient: Rendering Pasts into History (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993); Furuya Tetsuo, ed. Kindai Nihon no Ajia Ninshiki (Kyoto: Jin-bun Kagaku Kenkyûjô, 1994).

12. The writings of Norbert Elias, Oswald Spengler and Arnold Toynbee show the importance of the idea of civilization for relations both within Europe and with the rest of the world. See Norbert Elias, The Civilizing Process: The Development of Manners (New York: Urizen 1978); Oswald Spengler, The Decline of the West, ed. Arthur Helps (New York: Knopf, 1962); and Arnold Toynbee, Civilization on Trial (New York: Oxford University Press, 1948).

13. Jacob M. Landau, The Politics of Pan-Islam: Ideology and Organization (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990); Hans Kohn, Pan-Slavism: Its History and Ideology (New York: Vintage, 1960); P. Olisanwuche Esedebe, Pan-Africanism: The Idea and Movement, 1776–1991 (Washington, D.C.: Howard University Press, 1994).

14. Takeuchi Yoshimi, “Hôhô to shite no Ajia,” in Nihon to Ajia (Tokyo: Chikuma Gakujitsu Bunshô, 1993).

15. For the best discussion of the changing political nature of Japan’s images of Asia, see Hashikawa Bunsô, “Japanese Perspectives on Asia: From Dissociation to Coprosperity,” in Akira Iriye, ed., The Chinese and the Japanese: Essays in Political and Cultural Interactions (Princeton: Princeton University, 1980), 331–341.

16. Marius Jansen, The Japanese and Sun Yat-sen (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1954); Joyce Lebra, Jungle Alliance: Japan and the Indian National Army (Singapore: Donald Moore, for Asia Pacific Press, 1971); R. C., Bhardwaj, ed., Netaji and the INA: A Commemorative Volume Brought Out to Mark the Golden Jubilee of the Indian National Army (New Delhi: Lok Sabha Secretariat, 1994).

17. Prasanjit Duara, “The Discourse of Civilization and Pan-Asianism,” Journal of World History 12, no. 1 (Spring 2001): 99–130.

18. This revisionism was popularized in Puraido: Unmei no Shunkan (Pride: The moment of destiny, Tôei Company, Tokyo, 1998), a recent and rather controversial movie on the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal. The controversy the movie caused can best be followed through the editorial letters sent to the Japan Times by all the representative sides, including the Japanese right wing and Asian residents in Japan. For example, see “War Crimes Remain Unacknowledged,” “Not Proud of a Nation in Denial,” and “First Seek Knowledge, then Speak Out” in “Letters to the Editor,” Japan Times, June 2, 1999, 9.

2. THE UNIVERSAL WEST

1. Donald Keene, Japanese Discovery of Europe, 1720–1830 (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1969); Bernard Lewis, Muslim Discovery of Europe (New York: Norton, 1982).

2. Locating the historical roots of the underdevelopment or late development of the Middle Eastern region in Ottoman arrogance and ignorance toward the Europe during the era of reformation, scientific revolution, and enlightenment was a predominant trope in the nationalist history writing of Turkey and postcolonial Arab states. For a harsh critique of Ottoman ignorance of Europe’s scientific revolution by a late Ottoman and Republican era nationalist intellectual, see Adnan Adivar, Osmanli Türklerinde İlim (Istanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 1982).

3. See Keene, Japanese Discovery of Europe, 123. Donald Keene quotes a conversation with Bernard Lewis as evidence of Muslim ignorance. Bernard Lewis’s book on Muslim interest and representations of Europe carries the same basic argument of Muslim contempt and uninterest in Europe. See Lewis, Muslim Discovery of Europe.

4. Gabor Agoston, “Early Modern Ottoman and European Gunpowder Technology,” in Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu, Kostas Chatzis, and Efthymios Nicolaidis, eds., Multicultural Science in the Ottoman Empire (Turnhout, Belgium: Brepolis, 2003), 13-27.

5. For an example of the Ottomans’ selective approach to European science and technology during the eighteenth century, see Ekmeleddin Ihsanoğlu, “The Introduction of Western Science to the Ottoman World: The Case Study of Modern Astronomy (1660–1860),” in Ekmeleddin Ihsanoğlu, ed., Transfer of Modern Science and Technology to the Muslim World (Istanbul: IRCICA, 1992), 1–44.

6. Niyazi Berkes, The Development of Secularism in Turkey (New York: Routledge, 1999).

7. Mustafa Sami Efendi, Avrupa Risalesi (Istanbul: Takvim-i Vekayi Matbaasi, 1840).

8. For an English language discussion of Yirmisekiz Mehmet Çelebi, see Fatma Müge Göçek, East Encounters West: France and the Ottoman Empire in the Eighteenth Century (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987).

9. Sadik Rifat Paşa, Müntehabat-i Asar (Istanbul: Takvimhane-i Amire, 1858), 1–12.

10. Martin Bernal, Black Athena: Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1987).

11. “The Concert of Europe” was a form of diplomacy established after the Congress of Vienna (1815) to maintain long-lasting peace in international politics. See Richard B. Elrod, “The Concert of Europe: A Fresh Look at an International System,” World Politics 28, no. 2 (January 1976): 159–174.

12. For the universalist reflections of an eighteenth-century Ottoman intellectual and bureaucrat with regard to the Ottoman Empire and the emerging new world, see the discussion on the writings of Ahmed Resmi Efendi (1700–1783) in Virginia Aksan, “Ottoman Political Writings, 1768–1808,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 25, no. 1 (February 1993): 57–59.

13. Several contemporary historians interpreted the Westernism of Tanzimat leaders as deception of themselves and their subjects. See Coskun Çakir, “Türk Aydtmmn Tanzimat’la İmtiham: Tanzimat ve Tanzimat Dönemi Siyasi Tarihi Üzerine Yapilan Çahşmalar,” Türkiye Araştirmalari Literatür Dergisi 2, no. 1 (2004): 13–15.

14. Aware of shared Hellenistic legacy with Europe, Ottoman intellectuals even translated Arabic versions of classical Greek texts during the 1718–1730 period to understand better the scientific developments in contemporary Europe. See Salim Aydüz, “Lâle Devri’nde Yapilan İlmi Faaliyetler,” Divan: İlmi Araştirmalar 1, no. 3 (1997): 151–152.

15. H. L. Bulwer, Life of Palmerston, 3 vols. (London, 1870–1874), 2:298, quoted in M. E. Yapp, “Europe in the Turkish Mirror,” Past and Present, No. 137, (November, 1992), 155.) For the connection and comparisons between Metternich and Ottoman reformists, see Ilber Ortayli, “Tanzimat Bürokratlari ve Metternich,” in Osmanli Imparatorluğu’nda İktisadi ve Sosyal Değişim: Makaleler, vol. 1 (Ankara: Turhan Kitabevi, 2000). Ortayli rightly emphasizes that Tanzimat reformists were less reactionary and conservative than Metternich.

16. Berkes, The Development of Secularism in Turkey, 123–125.

17. Rifa’a Rafi’, Tahtavi [Rifaah Rafi al-Tahtawi], Paris Gözlemleri, ed. Cemil Çiftçi (Istanbul: Ses Yayinlari, 1992).

18. For a recent reassessment of Khayr al-Din Tunisi, see Syed Tanvir Wasti, “A Note on Tunuslu Hayreddin Paşa,” Middle Eastern Studies 36, no. 1 (January 2000): 1–20.

19. Even in European definitions of interstate relations and international law, Hedley Bull notes a de-Christianization of language and identity during the first quarter of the nineteenth century. See Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995), 31–33.

20. Vasant Kaiwar and Sucheta Mazumdar, “Race, Orient, Nation in the Time-Space of Modernity,” in Vasant Kaiwar & Sucheta Mazumdar, eds., Antinomies of Modernity (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2003), 270–271.

21. Ejder Okumuş, “İbn Haldun ve Osmanh’da Çöküs Tartişmalari,” Divan: İlmi Araştirmalar 4, no. 6 (1999): 183–209.

22. Montesquieu (1689–1755) wrote The Spirit of Laws (De l’esprit des lois) in 1752. See Charles de Secondat Montesquieu, The Spirit of Laws (Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus, 2002).

François M. Guizot (1787–1874) first published Histoire de la civilisation en Europe in 1828. For a recent English language edition, see François M. Guizot, The History of Civilization in Europe (London: Penguin, 1997).

Henry Thomas Buckle’s History of Civilization in England was first published in 1857 and became more influential for the intellectuals of the 1860s and 1870s. See below on the Japanese intellectual construction of a universal West.

23. Yapp, “Europe in the Turkish Mirror,” 155; David Urquhart, Turkey and Its Resources (London: Saunders and Otley, 1833); Orhan Koloğlu, “Alexandre Blacque: Défenseur de l’état ottoman pour amour des libertés,” in Hamit Batu and Jean-Louis Bacque-Grammont, eds., Empire Ottoman, la République de Turquie et la France, (Istanbul: Isis, 1986), 179–95.

24. François, baron de Tott, Memoirs, containing the state of the Turkish Empire and the Crimea, during the late war with Russia, with numerous anecdotes, facts, and observations, on the manners and customs of the Turks and Tartars (London: G. G. J. and J. Robinson, 1786).

25. For the development of Ottoman interest in European civilization, see Ahmet Hamdi Tanpinar, 19uncu Asir Türk Edebiyati Tarihi (Istanbul: Çağlayan Yayinlari, 1988), 37–128.

26. Tuncer Baykara, Osmanlilarda Medeniyet Kavrami (Izmir: Akademi Kitabevi, 1992).

27. Franz Rosenthal, The Classical Heritage in Islam (London: Routledge, 1992). For examples of the classical Muslim approach to a universal history of science and knowledge, one can look at the sections on pre-Islamic scientists, physicians, and philosophers in the classification of science and biography books in the Islamic tradition.

28. Cevdet Paşa’s approach was partly shaped by Ibn Khalduns legacy. Even his interest in Ibn Khaldun should be seen as deriving from an intellectual search to redefine universalism after the encounter with early nineteenth-century European liberal thought. See Ümid Meriç, Cevdet Paşa’nin Cemiyet ve Devlet Görüşü (Istanbul: Ötüken Yayinlan, 1979).

29. Meriç, Cevdet Paşa’nin Cemiyet ve Devlet Göörüşü, 50–57, 84–85.

30. Perhaps recognizing this difficulty, Egyptian liberal reformist Rifaah Rafi al-Tahtawi used the term “el-ümem’ül mutabarbire” (barbarian nations) as the opposite of “civilization” and refrained from making any connections between savage People’s and Bedouin culture. See Nadia Abu-Zahra, “Al-Tahtawi as Translator of the Culture of Parisian Society: An Anthropological Assessment,” in Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu, ed., Transfer of Western Science and Technology to the Muslim World (Istanbul: IRCICA, 1992), 420.

31. Ussama Makdisi, “Ottoman Orientalism,” American Historical Review 107, no. 3 (2002): 768–796.

32. Bull. The Anarchical Society, 32.

33. Bob Tadashi Wakabayashi, Anti-Westernism and Western Learning in Early-Modern Japan: The New Theses of 1825 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986).

34. During the Tokugawa period, only Dutch merchants were allowed to trade between Europe and Japan, and some of them lived on a particular island off the port of Nagasaki. Dutch studies, rangaku, was the study of Dutch texts brought to Japan by those Dutch merchants, which triggered the interest in European knowledge.

35. Watanabe Hiroshi, “They Are Almost the Same as the Ancient Three Dynasties: The West as Seen Through Confucian Eyes in the Nineteenth-Century Japan,” in Tu Wei-Ming, ed., Confucian Traditions in East Asian Modernity (Cambridge.: Harvard University Press 1996), 125–127

36. In English translations of the Charter Oath, the Confucian term “Fair Way of Heaven and Earth” is usually translated as “just laws of Nature.” See “Charter Oath,” in Tsunoda Ryusaku, Wm. Theodore de Bary, and Donald Keene, eds., Sources of Japanese Tradition (New York: Columbia University Press, 1958), 2:136–137. The original Japanese text, however, refers to the Confucian terms and concepts.

37. For an excellent discussion of the late Tokugawa background of the terms “bunmei and kaika,” often translated as “civilization and enlightenment,” see Watanabe Hiroshi, “‘Shimpo’ to ‘Chuka’: Nihon no Baai,” in Mizoguchi Yuzo, Hamashita Takeshi, Miyajima Hiroshi, and Hiraishi Naoaki, eds., Kindaika Zô (Tokyo: Tokyo University Press, 1994), 133–175.

38. It was published in the summer of 1866 and sold more than 250, 000 copies that same year.

39. Fukuzawa Yukichi, An Outline of a Theory of Civilization [Bunmeiron no gairyaku], trans. David A. Dilworth and G. Cameron Hurst (Tokyo: Sophia University, 1973).

40. Takashi Fujitani, Splendid Monarchy: Power and Pageantry in Modern Japan (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996).

41. Hirakawa Sukehiro, “Japan’s Turn to the West,” in Bob Tadashi Wakabayashi, ed., Modern Japanese Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1998), 47–71.

42. Robert S. Schwantes, “Christianity Versus Science: A Conflict of Ideas in Meiji Japan,” Far Eastern Quarterly 12, no. 2. (February 1953): 123–124.

43. G. B. Sanson, The Western World and Japan: A Study in the Interaction of European and Asiatic Cultures (New York: Vintage, 1973), 475–476.

44. For the gradual redefinition of Buddhism as a universal religious alternative to Christianity, see James Edward Ketelaar, Of Heretics and Martyrs in Meiji Japan (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990), 136–220; and Judith Snodgrass, Presenting Japanese Buddhism to the West: Orientalism, Occidentalism, and the Columbian Exposition (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003).

45. For the tensions between Christianity and science in Meiji thought, see Schwantes, “Christianity versus Science,” 123–132.

46. Michael Burtscher, “Facing ‘the West’ on Philosophical Grounds: A View from the Pavilion of Subjectivity on Meiji Japan,” Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 26, no. 3 (Fall 2006): 367–376.

47. Fukuzawa Yukichi, An Encouragement of Learning [Gakumon no Susume], trans. David A. Dilworth and Umeyo Hirano (Tokyo: Sophia University, 1969).

48. Matsumoto Sannosuke, “Profile of Asian Minded Man V: Fukuzawa Yukichi,” Developing Economies 5, no. 1 (March 1967): 156–172.

49. Henry Thomas Buckle, History of Civilization in England (New York, Hearst’s International Library, 1913). Originally written in 1857, it tried to explain the laws that governed the evolution of society and progress of humanity. For Buckle, the division between European and non-European civilizations was due to the fact that in Europe man is stronger than nature, while elsewhere nature is stronger than man, the consequence of which is that in Europe alone has man subdued nature to his service. The advance of European civilization is thus characterized by the continually diminishing influence of physical laws and the continually increasing influence of mental laws. The book made Buckle a social celebrity. Though his work was later criticized for its many fallacies, it provoked further discussion on the topic and became influential worldwide.

50. For a discussion of the implicit critiques of Western thinkers of civilization in Fukuzawa’s theorization, see Matsuzawa Hiroaki, “Varieties of Benmei Ron (Theories of Civilization),” in Hilary Conroy, Sandra T.W. Davis, and Wayne Patterson, eds., Japan in Transition: Thought and Action in the Meiji Era (London: Associated University Presses, 1984), 209–223.

51. See Earl H. Kinmonth, The Self-Made Man in Meiji Japanese Thought: From Samurai to Salary Man (Berkeley: University of California Press 1961). Samuel Smiles (1812–1904) wrote Self-Help in 1859. See Samuel Smiles, Self-Help (Chicago: Bedford and Clarke, 1884).

52. Marius B. Jansen,” Changing Japanese Attitudes Toward Modernization,” in Marius B. Jansen, ed., Changing Japanese Attitudes Toward Modernization (Rutland: Tuttle, 1982), 67.

53. Tokutomi Sohô published Dai Jyûkyûseiki Nihon no Seinen oyobi sono Kyôiku (Japan’s youth and its education in the nineteenth century) in 1885. Later editions of the book carried the shorter title Shin Nihon no Seinen (The youth of new Japan). For a discussion of the impact of this work, see Kenneth Pyle, The New Generation in Meiji Japan: Problems of Cultural Identity, 1885–1895 (Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press, 1969), 32–36.

54. Shôrai no Nihon was first published in 1886. For its English translation, see Tokutomi Sohô, The Future of Japan, trans. and ed. Vinh Sinh (Edmonton, Canada: University of Alberta Press, 1989).

55. Pyle, The New Generation in Meiji Japan.

56. Ibid., 89–91.

57. Miwa Kimitada, “Fukuzawa Yukichi’s ‘Departure from Asia’: A Prelude to the Sino-Japanese War,” in Edmund Skrzypczak, ed., Japan’s Modern Century (Tokyo: Sophia University, in cooperation with Tuttle, 1968), 1–26. This argument sought to separate the destiny of Japan, which was progressing rapidly toward civilization, from that of the rest of East Asia, which seemed to lag far behind. For the translation of Fukuzawa’s article, see Fukuzawa Yukichi, “On De-Asianization,” in Meiji Japan Through Contemporary Sources (Tokyo: Center for East Asian Cultural Studies, 1973). 3:129–133.

58. P. J. Vatikiotis, The History of Modern Egypt: From Muhammad Ali to Mubarak (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980), 73.

59. For the Ottoman response to the Great Indian Revolt of 1857, see Azmi Özcan, “1857 Büyük Hind Ayaklanmasi ve Osmanli Devleti,” İ. Ü. Islam Tetkikleri Dergisi (Istanbul) 9 (1995): 269–280.

60. Moshe Gammer, Muslim Resistance to the Tsar: Shamil and the Conquest of Chechnia and Daghestan (London: Cass, 1994).

61. Anthony Reid, “Nineteenth Century Pan-Islam in Indonesia and Malaysia,” Journal of Asian Studies 26, no. 2 (February 1967): 275–276. Reid’s article demonstrates the role played by pilgrims, students, scholars, and merchants who connected Indonesia with Mecca, Cairo, and Istanbul and revived the notion of Islamic solidarity during the 1860s and 1870s.

62. Azmi Özcan, “İngiltere’de Hilafet Tartismalan, 1873–1909,” in İsmail Kara, ed., Hilafet Risaleleri (Istanbul: Klasik Yayinlari, 2002), 1:65–67. The reports noted that the number of pilgrims engaging in the hajj increased dramatically. Even though there was no immediate threat, the majority of the reports further noted that these developments had to be followed with special attention. Here, it is important to underline that pan-Islamic moves and gestures started during the reign of Ottoman sultan Abdulaziz (1830–1876), not Abdulhamid II (1842–1918), whose name was later identified with the Ottoman pan-Islamic projects. This shows that trends at the level of Ottoman government cannot be reduced to the personality of the sultan.

63. The Freedom and People’s Rights Movement, Jyû Minken Undo, was a nationwide political movement during the early Meiji period that peaked in the 1870s and 1880s. It involved the participation of both former samurai and commoners and asked for the reform of the new Meiji government along the lines of Western participatory democratic models. The Freedom and People’s Rights Movement contributed to the declaration of the Japanese constitution.

64. For an excellent discussion of Ottomans’ perception of the external pressures and how they acted to protect their integrity and reforms in a delicate balance-of-power politics, see Engin Deniz Akarli’s unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, now considered a classic in its field: “The Problems of External Pressures, Power Struggles, and Budgetary Deficits in Ottoman Politics under Abdulhamid II (1876–1909): Origins and Solutions” (Ph.D. diss., Princeton University, 1976), 10–76.

65. For a good discussion of the Ottoman liberal belief in Christian-Muslim equality, see Roderic H. Davison, “Turkish Attitudes Concerning Christian-Muslim Equality in the Nineteenth Century,” American Historical Review 59, no. 4 (July 1954): 844–864.

66. For examples, see Namik Kemal, “Medeniyet,” Mecmua-i Ulum 5 (1 Safer 1297/January 14, 1880): 381-383; and Münif Paşa, “Mukayese-i İlm ve Cehl,” Mecmua-i Fünün 1 (Muharrem 1279/June 1862): 26–27.

67. Serif Mardin, The Genesis of Young Ottoman Thought (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1962), 283–336.

68. Namik Kemal, “ittihad-i Islam.” Ibret (Istanbul), June 27, 1872.

69. Ali Suavi, “Democracy: Government by the People, Equality,” Ulum Gazetesi (Paris), May 17, 1870, reprinted in Charles Kurzman, ed., Modernist Islam, 1840–1940 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 142.

3. THE TWO FACES OF THE WEST

1. Michael Adas, “High Imperialism and the New History,” in Michael Adas, ed., Islamic and European Expansion: The Forging of a Global Order (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1993), 311.

2. Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (New York: World, Meridian, 1962), 123.

3. Carl Schmitt, The Nomos of the Earth in the International Law of the Jus Publicum Europaeum (New York: Telos, 2003), 3.

4. Rudyard Kipling, “The White Man’s Burden (1899),” in Jan Goldstein and John W. Boyer, eds., Nineteenth-Century Europe: Liberalism and Its Critics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988), 544–545.

5. J. P. Lehmann, The Image of Japan: From Feudal Isolation to World Power, 1850–1905 (London: Allen and Unwin, 1978).

6. For debates on imperialism, see Harrison M. Wright, ed., The New Imperialism: Analysis of Late Nineteenth-Century Expansion (Lexington, Mass.: Heath, 1976).

7. William Ewart Gladstone served as British prime minister on several occasions for a total of twelve years between the years 1868 and 1894. He was prime minister during the 1880–1885 period, when the crucial imperial policies were applied.

8. William Gladstone’s anti-Islamic remarks have become legend in contemporary Islamic reformist thought. Though not verified by any historic evidence, many Muslims still believe that Gladstone, during his tenure as colonial secretary, declared his intention to discredit the Qur’an, since this was the only way the British could truly dominate the Muslim People’s. This anecdote is seemingly one of the transformative events in the biography of Muslim reformist Bediuzzaman Said Nursi. See Necmeddin Sahiner, Bilinmeyen Taraflariyla Bediuzzaman Said Nursi (Istanbul: Nesil Yayinlari, 1997), 84.

9. For an economic history approach to explaining the changes in British policy toward the Middle East, see Resat Kasaba, “Up the Down Staircase: British Policy in the Near East, 1815–74,” in Francisco O. Ramirez, ed., Rethinking the Nineteenth Century: Contradictions and Movements (New York: Greenwood, 1988), 149–160.

10. Ernest Renan’s writings on Islam embodied this argument and will be discussed in the following section. For another example of the anti-Turkish writings that argued the impossibility of Turks becoming members of civilized Christian Europe, see Edward A. Freeman, The Ottoman Power in Europe (London: Macmillan, 1877).

11. For a comprehensive examination of Ahmed Midhat’s writings on Western civilization and Islamic identity, see Orhan Okay, Bati Medeniyeti Karşisinda Ahmed Midhat Efendi (Istanbul: Milli Eğitim Bakanliği Yayinlari, 1991).

12. For a discussion of the critique of over-Westernization among the Ottoman intellectuals, see Şerif Mardin, “Tanzimat’tan Sonra Aşiri Batililaşma,” in Makaleler, vol. 4, Türk Modernleşmesi (Istanbul: İletişim Yayinlari, 1992), 21–79.

13. Carter Vaughn Findley, “An Ottoman Occidentalist in Europe: Ahmed Midhat Meets Madame Gulnar, 1889,” American Historical Review 103, no. 1 (1998): 15–49.

14. Findley, “An Ottoman Occidentalist in Europe,” 49.

15. For the main outlines and diverse formulations of Muslim modernism, see Charles Kurzman, ed., Modernist Islam, 1840–1940: A Sourcebook (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002).

16. Kenneth Pyle, “Meiji Conservatism,” in Marius B. Jensen, ed., The Cambridge History of Japan (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 5:674–720.

17. Shiba Shirô, Kaisetsu Kajin no Kigu (Tokyo: Jiji Tsushinsha, 1970).

18. Guohe Zeng, “From Patriotism to Imperialism: A Study of the Political Ideals of ‘Kajin No Kigu,’ a Meiji Political Novel” (Ph.D. diss., Ohio State University, 1997).

19. Suzuki Tadashi, “Profile of Asian Minded Man IX: Tôkichi Tarai,” Developing Economies 6, no. 1 (March 1968): 79–100.

20. Liang Qichao (1873–1929) was a leading Chinese intellectual who advocated constitutionalism and reform. After becoming a disciple of Kang Youwei in 1890, he worked closely with Kang throughout the 1895–1898 reform movement. After the conservative coup of 1898 that ended the reforms, Liang spent fourteen years of exile in Japan. He returned to China in 1912, upon the collapse of the dynasty, and served in the cabinet of Yuan Shikai. He retired from politics in 1917 to pursue academic studies and writings.

21. Suzuki, “Profile of Asian Minded Man,” 97–98.

22. Vladimir Tikhonov, “Korea’s First Encounters with Pan-Asianism Ideology in the Early 1880s,” Review of Korean Studies 5, no. 2 (December 2002): 195–232.

23. Richard Jaffe, “Seeking Sakyamuni: Travel and the Reconstruction of Japanese Buddhism,” Journal of Japanese Studies 30, no. 1 (Winter 2004): 65–96.

24. Kenneth Pyle, The New Generation in Meiji Japan: Problems of Cultural Identity, 1885–1895 (Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press, 1969), 150–153.

25. Michael Burtscher, “Facing ‘the West’ on Philosophical Grounds: A View from the Pavilion of Subjectivity on Meiji Japan,” Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 26, no. 3 (Fall 2006).

26. For a broader world historical assessment of Ernest Renan’s ideas on the Aryan race, see Vasant Kaiwar, “The Aryan Model of History and the Oriental Renaissance: The Politics of Identity in an Age of Revolutions, Colonialism, and Nationalism,” in Vasant Kaiwar and Sucheta Mazumdar, eds., The Antinomies of Modernity, (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2003), 13–61.

27. Soon afterward, in the same year, the speech was published separately as a twenty-four-page booklet.

28. For the most comprehensive discussion of the direct and indirect refutations of Renan, see Dücane Cündioğlu, “Ernest Renan ve ‘Reddiyeler’ Bağlaminda İslam-Bilim Tartişmalarina Bibliyografik bir Katki,” Divan (Istanbul) 1, no. 2 (1996): 1–94.

29. Expectedly, there were immediate reactions from Muslim intellectuals, three of whom are well known: Jamal ad-Din al-Afghani, Namik Kemal, and Ataullah Bayezidof (mufti of Russia). For the discussion, see Ernest Renan, “Islamlik ve Bilim,” in Ziya İhsan, ed. and trans., Nutuklar ve Konferanslar (Ankara: Sakarya Basimevi, 1946), 183–205. (For an English translation, see Ernest Renan, The Poetry of the Celtic Races and Other Studies [London: Walter Scott, 1896], 84–108.) For Namik Kemal’s response, see Namik Kemal, Renan Müdafaanamesi: Islamiyet ve Maarif (Ankara: Milli Kültür Yayinlari, 1962). For Afghani’s response, see Jamal al-Afghani, “Answer of Jamal ad-Din to Renan,” in Nikkie Keddie, ed., An Islamic Response to Imperialism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968), 181–187. For the response of Ataullah Bayezidof, see his Islam ve Medeniyet (Ankara: TDV Yayinlari, Ankara, 1993). For an account of Afghani’s relationship with Renan in Paris, see Elie Kedourie, Afghani and Abduh (London: Cass, 1966), 41–46.

30. Renan, “Islamlik ve Bilim,” 201.

31. Michael Adas, Machines as the Measure of Man: Science, Technology, and Ideologies of Western Dominance (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989), 11–12.

32. Münif Efendi, “Mahiyet ve Aksam-i Ulum,” Mecmua-i Fünun, no. 13 (June 1863): 7. For similar racist comments on blacks and natives of the West Indies, see Mehmed Şevki, “Avrupa Devletlerinin Ahval-i Hazirrasi,” Mecmua-i Fünun, no. 32 (October 1864): 305.

33. See Cündioğlu, “Ernest Renan ve ‘Reddiyeler,’” 28.

34. Charles Mismer, Soirées de Constantinople (Paris: Hachette, 1870).

35. Interestingly, the first public response was an article by Charles Mismer: “L’Islamisme et la science,” in Revue de la Philosophie Positive (May-June 1883). See Cündioğlu, “Ernest Renan ve ‘Reddiyeler’ Bağlaminda İslam-Bilim Tartişmalarina Bibliyografik bir Katki,” 27–28.

36. Afghani, “Answer of Jamal ad-Din to Renan,” 183.

37. Ibid., 184–185.

38. For the bibliography of all the Muslim refutations of Ernest Renan, see Cündioğlu, “Ernest Renan ve ‘Reddiyeler’ Bağlaminda İslam-Bilim Tartişmalarina Bibliyografik bir Katki,” 87–92.

39. For an authoritative analysis of salafi modernism and its critique of historical Islam, see İsmail Kara, “Islamcilartn Fikri Endişeleri,” in İsmail Kara, ed., Türkiye’de Islamcilik Dusuncesi, 3d ed. (Istanbul: Kitabevi, 1997), 1:57–66. See also David Dean Commins, Islamic Reform: Politics and Social Change in Late Ottoman Syria (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 65–88.

40. See Cemil Aydin,” Beyond Culturalism? An Overview of the Historiography on Ottoman Science in Turkey,” in Ekmeleddin İhsanoglu, Kostas Chatzis, and Efthymios Nicolaidis, eds., Multicultural Science in the Ottoman Empire (Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2003), 201–215.

41. See William Draper, Niza-yi İlim ve Din, trans. Ahmet Midhat (Istanbul: Tercümani Hakikat Matbaasi, 1313/1896–1897).

42. Findley, “An Ottoman Occidentalist in Europe,” 49.

43. Numan Kamil Bey, “Vérité sur l’Islamisme et l’Empire Ottoman,” Présentée au X. Congrès International des Orientalistes à Genève (Paris: Charles Noblet et Fils, 1894).

44. Numan Kamil Bey, Islamiyet ve Devlet-i Aliyye-i Osmaniye Hakkinda Doğru bir Söz (Istanbul: Tahir Bey Matbaasi, 1316/1898). For a current edition of the text, see Numan Kamil Bey, “Islamiyet ve Devlet-i Aliyye-i Osmaniye Hakkinda Doğru bir Söz: Cenevre’de Musteşrikin Kongresi’nde İrad Olunmuş bir Nutkun Tercümesidir,” in İsmail Kara, ed., Hilafet Risaleleri (Istanbul: Klasik Yayinlari, 2002–2004), 1:353–371.

45. Numan Kamil Bey, “Islamiyet ve Devlet-i Aliyye-i Osmaniye Hakkinda Doğru bir Söz,” 361.

46. Ibid., 368–369.

47. Ibid., 371.

48. Kara, Hilafet Risaleleri, 1:30.

49. For a history of the concept of the yellow peril, see Heinz Gollwitzer, Die gelbe Gefahr: Geschichte eines Schlagwortes (The yellow peril: Retracing a slogan), (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1962). A collection of German diplomatic documents includes the text of a letter from Kaiser Wilhem to the czar of Russia, dated April 26, 1895; see German Diplomatic Documents, 1871–1914, ed. E. T. S. Dugdale, vol. 3, The Growing Antagonism, 1898–1910 (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1930).

50. The name of the article was Dôjinshu Dômei: Shina Mondai Kenkyû no Hitsuyô (We must ally with those of the same race, and we must study the China problem). See Marius B. Jansen, “Konoe Atsumaro,” in Akira Iriye, ed., The Chinese and the Japanese: Essays in Political and Cultural Interactions, ed. Akira Iriye (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980), 113.

51. Jansen, “Konoe Atsumaro,” 113–115.

52. Yamamuro Shinichi, “Ajia Ninshiki no Kijiku,” in Furuya Tetsuo and Yamamuro Shinichi, eds., Kindai Nihon no Ajia Ninshiki (Kyoto: Kyoto University Press, 1994), 33–34.

53. The Monroe Doctrine, introduced during President Monroe’s seventh annual message to the U.S. Congress on December 2, 1823, was aimed at limiting European expansion into the Western hemisphere. Monroe proclaimed, “The American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers.” The Monroe Doctrine became more important after the emergence of the United States as a world power in the late nineteenth century. See Dexter Perkins, A History of the Monroe Doctrine (Boston: Little, Brown, 1955).

54. A similar change of perspective occurred with regard to Japanese interests in Egypt. Immediately after the Meiji Restoration, the Japanese government became interested in Egypt, specifically in how Egypt dealt with the system of unequal treaties and mixed courts. Thirty years later, however, Japanese leaders looked at Egypt from the perspective of its British colonial rulers, hoping for lessons on how to design a new policy in colonizing Korea. See Nakaoka San-eki, “Japanese Research on the Mixed Courts of Egypt in the Earlier Part of the Meiji Period in Connection with the Revision of the 1858 Treaties,” Journal of Sophia Asian Studies 6 (1988): 11–47;see also Ôkuma Shigenobu, preface to Cromer, Saikin Ejiputo [Modern Egypt] (Tokyo: Dainippon Bunmei Kyôkai, 1911), 1:12–13.

55. According to Takeuchi Yoshimi, since Asianism was nothing more than a trend of thought advocating Asian nations’ solidarity under Japanese leadership for the purpose of resisting Western expansionism, it did not inherently possess any specific ideological characteristic as democracy or socialism did, and as such it could be allied with different forms of ideologies in different political contexts. See Takeuchi Yoshimi, “Nihon to Ajiashugi,” in Nihon to Ajia (Tokyo: Chikuma Gakujitsu Bunshô, 1993). 337–340.

56. For the anticolonial and nonhegemonic Asianist idealism that Miyazaki Tôten advocated for China’s political revival, see Miyazaki Tôten, My Thirty-Three Years’ Dream: The Autobiography of Miyazaki Tôten, trans. Etô Shinkichi and Marius Jansen (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982).

57. G. B. Sansom, The Western World and Japan: A Study in the Interaction of European and Asiatic Cultures (New York: Vintage, 1973), 411–415.

58. Marius B. Jansen, “Japanese Imperialism: Late Meiji Perspectives,” in Ramon H. Myers and Mark R. Peattie, eds., Japanese Colonial Empire, 1895–1945 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984), 61–79. See also Alexis Dudden, Japan’s, Colonization of Korea: Discourse and Power (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press 2004).

59. E. H. Norman, “The Genyôsha: A Study in the Origins of Japanese Imperialism,” Pacific Affairs 17, no. 3 (September 1944): 261–284

60. The Chinese character denoting the Amur River gave the society its name.

61. Hiraishi Naoaki, “Kindai Nihon no Kokusai Chitsujyokan to Ajiashugi,” in 20 Seiki Shisutemu (Tokyo: Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai, 1998), 1:195–197

62. While their intelligence gathering, espionage, and covert operations did prove useful to imperial interests, both organizations were also a severe liability in domestic politics. Members even arranged an assassination attempt against Foreign Minister Ôkuma Shigenobu in 1889 in response to Ôkuma’s perceived conciliatory posture toward Western powers on the issue of the revisions of unequal treaties.

63. Marius B. Jansen, The Japanese and Sun Yat-sen (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1954), 34–41. The main source of information on this society is its own history: Yoshihisa Kuzuu, ed., Tôa Senkaku Shishi Kiden (Tokyo: Kokuryûkai Shuppanbu, 1933–1936).

64. For the Asian Solidarity Society, see Rebecca Karl,” Creating Asia: China in the World at the Beginning of the Twentieth Century,” American Historical Review 103, no. 4 (October 1998): 1096–1118.

65. Okakura Tenshin is usually referred to as the pioneer of Japanese pan-Asianism and Japan’s intellectual revolt against the West. See Tetsuo Najita and Harry Harootunian, “Japanese Revolt Against the West: Political and Cultural Criticism in the Twentieth Century,” in Bob Tadashi Wakabayashi, ed., Modern Japanese Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 211–212. Initially, Okakura Tenshin’s books were not widely known in Japan, as they were published in English and were addressed to educated Westerners interested in Asian art and to Indian nationalists, with whom Okakura became familiar during his trip to India in 1902. For example, and quite ironically, Europeans were the first to quote from Okakura Tenshin in Japan’s Asianist publications. See James H. Cousins, “The Cultural Unity of Asia,” Asian Review (Tokyo) 2, no. 3 (March-April 1921): 217–228.

66. Christopher Benfey, The Great Wave: Gilded Age Misfits, Japanese Eccentrics, and the Opening of Japan (New York: Random House, 2003), 75–108.

67. For Okakura’s radically anticolonial rhetoric, see Okakura Tenshin, “The Awakening of the East,” in Okakura Tenshin, ed., Okakura Kakuzô: Collected English Writings (Tokyo: Heibonsha, 1984), 134–168. This essay, written during Okakura’s visit to India, was not published during his lifetime. Its Japanese translation was published in 1938, while the original English version was published in the context of the Japanese claim to leadership in Asia in 1940.

68. The term “Asiaphile” was coined by Stephen Hay to describe those Western critics of modern rationalism and materialism who searched for an alternative in Asian intellectual traditions. Sister Nivedita was in contact with Okakura Tenshin while he was writing The Ideals of the East. Okakura’s intellectual dialogues with Nivedita’s master, Swami Vivekananda, intensified when the two were working together at the Boston Fine Arts Museum. The correspondence between Okakura and Tagore continued until Okakura’s death in 1913.

69. Okakura Tenshin, “The Ideals of the East with Special Reference to the Art of Japan,” in Okakura, Okakura Kakuzô, 122.

70. Okakura, Okakura Kakuzô, 136.

71. Okakura Tenshin, “Book of Tea,” in Okakura, Okakura Kakuzô, 270.

72. For an extensive account of Okakura Tenshin’s thought, including its paradoxes, see F. G. Notehelfer, “On Idealism and Realism in the Thought of Okakura Tenshin,” Journal of Japanese Studies 16, no. 2 (Summer 1990): 309–355.

73. Miwa Kimitada, “Crossroads of Patriotism in Imperial Japan: Shiga Shigetaka 1863–1927, Uchimura Kanzô 1861–1930, and Nitobe Inazô 1862–1933” (Ph.D. diss., Princeton University, 1967).

74. See Okakura, “The Awakening of the East,” 134–168.

75. For an assessment of Abdulhamid II’s policies from a world historical perspective, see Engin Deniz Akarli, “The Tangled End of Istanbul’s Imperial Supremacy,” in Leila Fawaz and C. A. Bayly, eds., Modernity and Culture from the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean, 1890–1920 (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002), 261–284. Also see Selim Deringil, The Well-Protected Domains: Ideology and the Legitimation of Power in the Ottoman Empire, 18/6–1909 (London: I. B. Tauris, 1998).

76. See Azmi Özcan, “Peyk-i Islam: 1880’de Istanbul’da Çikanlan Bir Gazete ve İngiltere’nin Kopardiği Firtina,” Tarih ve Toplum, no. 99 (March 1992): 169–173.

77. Jacob M. Landau, The Politics of Pan-Islam: Ideology and Organization (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990), 2.

78. For the most extensive documentation of the extraordinary diversity of ideas, personalities, and interpretations of pan-Islamism during the era of high imperialism, see ibid., 1–72.

79. For an Engish-language extract from the article on Muslim unity published in the journal al-Urwa al-Wuthqa in 1884, see ibid., 318–320.

80. Ibid., 59.

81. Thanks to İsmail Kara’s editorial leadership, all the major texts of the caliphate debate are being published. See Kara, Hilafet Risaleleri.

82. Azmi Özcan, “İngiltere’de Hilafet Tartişmalari, 1873–1909,” in Kara, Hilafet Risaleleri, 1:64–65.

83. J. W. Redhouse, A Vindication of the Ottoman Sultan’s Title on ‘Caliph’: Showing Its Antiquity, Validity and Universal Acceptance (London: Effingham Wilson, 1877).

84. For a recent reprint of Blunt’s 1882 book, see Wilfrid Scawen Blunt, The Future of Islam (Lahore, Pakistan: Sind Sagar Academy, 1975). The second chapter of this book, titled “The Modern Question of the Caliphate” (48–89), directly deals with the question of reforming and reviving Islam by moving the caliphate to Arabic Cairo away from Ottoman Istanbul.

85. For an extensive discussion of the predominantly Arab opposition to the Ottoman caliphate during the early years of Abdulhamid II’s reign, see Ş. Tufan Buzpinar, “II. Abdulhamit Döneminde Osmanli Hilafetine Muhalefetin Ortaya Çikişi: 1877–1882,” in Kara, Hilafet Risaleleri, 1:37–61.

86. For an assessment of this question from the British perspective, see Özcan, “İngiltere’de Hilafet Tartişmalan,” 63–91.

87. See Ş. Tufan Buzpinar, “The Repercussions of the British Occupation of Egypt on Syria, 1882–1883,” Middle East Studies 36, no. 1 (January 2000): 82-91; and Selim Deringil, “The ‘Residual Imperial Mentality’ and the ‘Urabi Paşa Uprising in Eygpt’: Ottoman Reactions to Arab Nationalism,” in Studies on Turkish-Arab Relations Annual (Istanbul: Foundations for Studies on Turkish-Arab Relations, 1986), 31–38.

88. For an article-length biography of Halil Halid, see Syed Tanvir Wasti, “Halil Halid: Anti-Imperialist Muslim Intellectual,” Middle Eastern Studies 29, no. 3 (July 1993): 559–579.

89. Halil Halid wrote his own autobiography in the form of political and cultural essays on the Muslim society he grew up in and his experience in the West. See Halil Halid, The Diary of a Turk (London: A. C. Black, 1903).

90. Mustafa Uzun, “Halil Halid,” in TDV Islam Ansiklopedisi (Istanbul: TDV, 1997), 15:313–316.

91. In 1912 Halil Halid entered the Ottoman parliament as a representative of Ankara for the Party of Union and Progress. He was appointed as the chief consul (başşehbender) to Bombay and developed very close ties with Indian Muslims during this assignment. In 1922 Halil Halid was appointed to Istanbul University to teach ethnography of Muslim People’s, Islamic philosophy, and introduction to anthropology.

Ahmed Riza was another Ottoman intellectual who was involved in challenging the justifying ideology of the Eurocentric world order in defense of Muslim political entities. For examples of this work, see Ahmed Riza, La faillite morale de la politique occidentale en Orient (1922; reprint, Tunis: Bouslama, 1979); and Ahmed Riza and Ismayl Urbain, Tolérance de l’Islam, (Saint-Ouen, France: Centre Abaad, 1992).

92. It should be mentioned from the very beginning that Halid’s arguments and explanations regarding the civilizational identities in world order relied primarily on sources in European languages and were initially addressed to the Western public as a critique of their governments’ imperial foreign policy. European writers Halil Halid made reference to included F. Guizot, T.W Arnold, J. W. Draper, Sir William Muir, Albert Reville, Ernest Renan, R. N. Cust, De Thiersan, John R. Nott, Carl Peters, Theodor Nöldeke, Stanley Lane-Poole, Meredith Townsend, Max Nordau, Thomas Carlyle, Gibbons, D. A. Forget, Ch. Latourneau, H. Wallon, Thomas R. R. Cobb, Cesare Lombroso, Henry Wheaton, Clarkson, G. P. Gooch, P. S. Reisch, J. B. Crozier, W. Howitt, J. L. de Lanessan, and H. C. Morris.

93. Halil Halid, Hilal ve Salib Munazaasi (Cairo: Matbaa-i Hindiye, 1907), 4–5. Although the original of this book was written in English, here I will usually refer to the Ottoman-language version, published in the same year. For the English version, see Halil Halid, The Crescent Versus the Cross (London: Luzac, 1907).

94. Three sections in Halil Halid’s Hilal ve Salib Münazaasi are devoted to the issue of women in Islam: “The Role of Women in Islam,” “Polygamy,” and “Divorce” (83-133). Two sections are devoted to the question of slavery: “Slavery in Christianity and Islam” and “Humanist Purpose in the Emancipation of Slaves” (134-149).

95. See Halil Halid, A Study in English Turcophobia (London: Pan-Islamic Society, 1904). An earlier version of this book was published in 1898 without reference to Halil Halid’s name. See A Study in English Turcophobia (London: Pan-Islamic Society, 1898). The book was translated into Urdu by Muhammed Şuayb Arvi and published under the title Heybeti Türki in Calcutta in 1905. Its Arabic translation was published in the journal al-Liva.

96. Halil Halid refers to John William Draper’s A History of Intellectual Development of Europe (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1862). J. W. Draper became well known among Ottoman intellectuals for his book History of Conflict Between Religion and Science (New York: D. Appleton, 1875).

97. Halid, Hilal ve Salib Munazaasi, 179–180.

98. Halid, The Crescent Versus the Cross, 194–197

99. Halid, Hilal ve Salib Munazaasi, 181–182.

100. Ibid., 185–187

101. Halid, The Crescent Versus the Cross, 210. Halil Halid quotes from the 1909 Nobel Peace Prize laureate Baron d’Estournelles de Constant’s (1852–1924) work “Les congrégations religieuses chez les Arabes et la conquête de l’Afrique” (Paris, 1887), 70.

102. Halid, The Crescent Versus the Cross, 223.

103. For other Young Turk intellectuals who thought similarly to Halil Halid, see M. Şükrü Hanioğlu, Preparation for a Revolution: The Young Turks, 1902–1908 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 303–306.

4. THE GLOBAL MOMENT OF THE RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR

1. Prasenjit Duara, ed., Decolonization: Perspectives from Now and Then (London: Rout-ledge, 2004), 2-3; Narangoa Li and Robert Cribbs, eds., Imperial Japan and National Identities in Asia, 1895–1945 (London: Routledge, 2003), 2-3; Klaus Kreiser,” Der japanische Sieg über Rußland (1905) und sein Echo unter den Muslimen” [The Japanese victory over Russia (1905) and its echo in the Islamic world], in Die Welt des Islam [The world of Islam] 21 (1981): 209-239; Barbara Watson Andaya, “From Rum to Tokyo: The Search for Anticolonial Allies by the Rulers of Riau, 1899–1914,” Indonesia 24 (1977): 123-156; Nagazumi Akira. “An Indonesian’s View of Japan: Wahidin and the Russo-Japanese War ‘,’,” in F. H. H. King, ed., The Development of Japanese Studies in Southeast Asia: Proceedings of the Fourth Leverhulme Conference (Hong Kong: Centre of Asian Studies, University of Hong Kong, 1969), 72–84.

2. Gesa Westermann, “Japan’s Victory in the Russo-Japanese War (1904-05) from the Philippine, Vietnamese, and Burmese Perspectives,” in Rotem Kowner, ed., Rethinking the Russo-Japanese War: Centennial Perspectives (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2006); Michael Laffan, “Tokyo as a Shared Mecca of Modernity: Reading the Impact of the Russo-Japanese War in the Colonial Malay World,” in Rotem Kowner, ed., The Impact of the Russo-Japanese War, 219–238 (London: Routledge Curzon, 2006). The image of Japan in England and America differed according to the ideological perspective of the individual. While progressive anti-imperialist figures welcomed the rise of Japan as an obstacle to imperialism, right-wing figures lamented it as a dangerous yellow peril. For example, British socialist Henry Hyndman’s journal Justice had many pro-Japanese articles. For a very sympathetic account of Japan’s victory written by a Universalist minister, see Sidney L. Gulick, The White Peril in the Far East: An Interpretation of the Significance of the Russo-Japanese War (New York: Revell, 1905). For a very negative right-wing British account of Japan, see T. W. H. Crosland, The Truth About Japan (London: Richard’s, 1904).

3. For the most comprehensive work on Middle Eastern perceptions of Japan, see Renee Worringer, “Comparing Perceptions: Japan as Archetype for Ottoman Modernity, 1876–1918” (Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago, 2001). See also Anja Pistor-Hatam, “Progress and Civilization in Nineteenth-Century Japan: The Far Eastern State as a Model for Modernization,” Iranian Studies 29, nos. 1–2 (1996): 111-126; and Sugita Hideaki,” Japan and the Japanese as Depicted in Modern Arabic Literature,” Studies of Comparative Culture, no. 27 (March 1989): 21–40. For examples of primary sources of this literature, see Mustafa Kamil, Al-Shams al-Mushriqah (Cairo: Matbaat al-Liwa, 1904). For the reception of Mustafa Kamil’s book on Japan in Southeast Asia, see Michael Laffan. “Watan and Negeri: Mustafa Kamil’s ‘Rising Sun’ in the Malay World,” Indonesia Circle, no. 69 (1996): 157–175.

4. Oka Yoshitake, “The First Anglo-Japanese Alliance in Japanese Public Opinion,” in J. P. Lehmann, ed., Themes and Theories in Japanese History (London: Athlone, 1988), 185–193.

5. For example, Egyptian nationalist leader Mustafa Kamil argued that, despite the vested interest of Britain in the Japanese victory, “a victory for Japan is a victory for the yellow race” against the British Empire. See Mustafa Kamil, “Al-Harb al-Hadirah wa’l-Islam,” Al-Liwa, February 18, 1904, 1. For a discussion of Mustafa Kamil’s ideas, see Worringer, “Comparing Perceptions,” 350–356.

6. For the African-American reaction to the Russo-Japanese War, see Marc Gallicchio, Black Internationalism in Asia, 1895–1945: The African American Encounter with Japan and China (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2000), 6–15.

7. Renee Worringer, “‘Sick Man of Europe’ or ‘Japan of the Near East’? Constructing Ottoman Modernity in the Hamidian and Young Turk Eras,” International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 36, no. 2 (May 2004): 207-223; see also Roxane Haag-Higuchi, “A Topos and Its Dissolution: Japan in Some Twentieth-Century Iranian Texts,” Iranian Studies 29, nos. 1–2 (1996): 71–83.

8. Henry Dyer, Dai Nippon, the Britain of the East: A Study in National Evolution (London: Blackie, 1904).

9. For direct military reports from the fronts, see Ali Fuad Erden, Musavver 1904–1905 Rus-Japon Seferi (Istanbul: Kitaphane-yi Islam ve Askeri, 1321/1905 or 1906). Japanese military power and history were well studied and written about by Ottoman military officer Pertev Bey, especially in his book Rus-Japon Harbinden Alinan Maddi ve Manevi Dersler ve Japonlarin Esbabi Muzafferiyeti: Bir Milletin Tâli’i Kendi Kuvvetindedir! [Material and moral lessons taken from the Russo-Japanese War and the reasons for Japan’s victory: A nations good fortune from its own power!] (Istanbul: Kanâ’at Kütüphanesi ve Matbaasi, 1329/1911).

10. Jawaharlal Nehru, An Autobiography (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1989), 16. See also Jawaharlal Nehru, Toward Freedom (Boston: Beacon, 1967), 29–30.

11. Prasenjit Duara, “Transnationalism and the Predicament of Sovereignty: China, 1900–1945,” American Historical Review 102, no. 4 (1997): 1038.

12. Quoted in Hugh Tinker, Race, Conflict, and the International Order (New York: St. Martin’s, 1977), 39.

13. Mehmed Sevki, “Japonya Memleketi,” Mecmua-i Fünun, no. 41 (December 1866): 314.

14. Both the Japanese conception of tôyô and the Ottoman concept of Sark were connected to complex political dynamics that involved relations not only with the West but also with the Ottoman and Japanese Orients, but this topic lies outside the scope of this chapter. See Stefan Tanaka, Japan’s Orient: Rendering Pasts into History (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993); and Ussama Makdisi, “Ottoman Orientalism,” American Historical Review 107, no. 3 (2002): 768–796.

15. Misawa Nobuo, “Relations Between Japan and the Ottoman Empire in the Nineteenth Century: Japanese Public Opinion About the Disaster of the Ottoman Battleship Ertuğrul (1890),” Annals of Japan Association of Middle East Studies 18, no. 2 (2003): 1–8.

16. Michael Penn, “East Meets East: An Ottoman Mission in Meiji Japan,” Princeton Papers: Interdisciplinary Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 13, 33–62.

17. For the Ottoman imagination of Japan as an Eastern nation, see Cemil Aydin, “Nihon Wa Itsu Tôyô No Kuni Ni Natta No Ka? Chutô Kara Mita Kindai Nihon” [When did Japan become an “Eastern” nation? Modern Japan in the imagination of Middle Eastern nationalists], in Atarashi Nihongaku no Kôchiku—Constructing Japanese Studies in Global Perspective (Tokyo: Ochanomizu University, 1999), 81–86.

18. James Hevia, “Looting Beijing: 1860, 1900,” in Lydia H. Liu, ed., Tokens of Exchange: The Problem of Translation in Global Circulations (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1999), 192–213. During the suppression of the Boxer Rebellion, Japan joined the Western coalition, composed of soldiers from the United States, Austria-Hungary, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, and Russia.

19. M. Şükrü Hanioğlu, The Young Turks in Opposition (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 210.

20. William Cleveland, The Making of an Arab Nationalist: Ottomanism and Arabism in the Life and Thought of Sati’ Al-Husri (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1971), 37–38.

21. Ahmed Riza, “La Leçon d’une guerre,” Mechveret Supplément Français 169 (November 1, 1905): 1–2. The translation is from Worringer, “Comparing Perceptions,” 208.

22. Gerrit Gong quotes L. Oppenheim’s International Law: A Treatise (London: Longmans, Green, 1905) as an example. See Gerrit Gong, The Standard of “Civilization” in International Society (New York: Oxford University Press, 1984), 57

23. M. Şükrü Hanioglu, Preparation for a Revolution: The Young Turks, 1902–1908 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 304.

24. Ibid., 304–305.

25. Nader Sohrabi, “Historicizing Revolutions: Constitutional Revolutions in the Ottoman Empire, Iran, and Russia, 1905–1908,” American Journal of Sociology 100, no. 6 (July 1995): 1383–1447.

26. As an example, see R. P. Dua, The Impact of the Russo-Japanese (1905) War on Indian Politics (Delhi: S. Chand, 1966).

27. Mission Scientifique du Maroc first published the Revue du Monde Musulman was in November 1906; the last issue appeared in 1926. The founding editor, Alfred Le Chatelier, was appointed chair of Muslim sociology at the College de France in 1903. See Susan Bayly, “Racial Readings of Empire: Britain, France, and Colonial Modernity in the Mediterranean and Asia,” in Leila Fawaz and C. A. Bayly, eds., Modernity and Culture from the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean, 1890–1920 (New York: Columbia University Press 2002), 296. See also Edmund Burke III, “The First Crisis of Orientalism,” in Jean-Clause Vatin et al., eds., Connaissances du Maghreb: Sciences sociales et colonisation (Paris: CNRS, 1984), 213–226.

28. For some of the articles on pan-Islamism in the Revue du Monde Musulman (RMM), see L. Bouvat, “La presse anglaise et le panislamisme,” RMM 1, no. 3 (January 1907): 404-405; L. Bouvat, “Un projet de parlement musulman international,” RMM 7, no. 2 (March 1909): 321-322; A. Fevret, “Le croissant contre la croix,” RMM 2, no. 7 (May 1907): 421-425; Ismael Hamet, “Le Congrès Musulman Universal,” RMM 4, no. 1 (January 1908): 100-107; and A. Le Chatelier, “Le pan-Islamisme et le progrès,” RMM 1, no. 4 (February 1907): 145–68.

29. Bayly, “Racial Readings of Empire,” 304.

30. For the English translation of La psychologie du musulman, see André Sender, Islam and the Psychology of the Musulman, trans. A. S. Moss-Blundell, pref. Louis Bertrand (New York: Scribner’s, 1924). For a similar book by the same author, see André Servier, Le nationalisme musulman en Egypte, en Tunisie, en Algerie: Le péril de l’avenir (Constantine, Algeria: M. Boet, 1913).

31. For the importance of WWI in the history of decolonization, see Prasenjit Duara, “The Discourse of Civilization and Pan-Asianism,” Journal of World History 12, no. 1 (Spring 2001): 99-130; and Michael Adas, Machines as the Measure of Men: Science, Technology, and Ideologies of Western Dominance (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989).

32. “Luhmah buyna al-Sharqiyyin,” Al-Liwa, October 11, 1904, 1.

33. Nitobe Inazô, Bushido: The Soul of Japan. An Exposition of Japanese Thought (Tokyo: Kodansha International, 1998), 188.

34. Leon Ostrorog, Conférence sur la renaissance du Japon (Istanbul: Ahmed Ihsan, 1327/ 1911). This work includes Ostrorog’s published remarks during the proceedings as well as organizer M. Salih Gourdji’s speech, which serves as a postscript on pages 86–91. An Arabic translation of the book was produced by the former Ottoman Army officer and later Iraqi officer Taha al-Hashimi in 1925. See Nahdat al-Yaban wa Ta’thir Ruh al-Ummah fi’l-Nahdah [The awakening of Japan and the influence of the nation’s spirit on the awakening] (Baghdad, 1925). For comments on this lecture, see also Worringer, “Comparing Perceptions”, 267.

35. Hanioğlu, Preparation for a Revolution, 304.

36. For Gourdji, the three years since the constitutional revolution had not offered enough time for the constitution Ottoman regime to demonstrate comparable achievements; see Gourdji’s postscript in Ostrorog, Conference, 86–88.

37. For example, Ahmet Münir İbrahim, who studied commerce at Waseda University, sent articles to Sebilürreşad. Münir reportedly became a member of the Progressive Asian Student Society at Waseda, joining other students from China, Korea, India, Siam, and Japan. See Ahmed Münir, “Hâricî Ticâret Vesile-i Sa’âdet-i Umûmidir,” Sebilurreşât 12, no. 307 (1330/1914): 290-291; and idem, “Japonya Ticaret-i Bahriyesi,” Sebilurresât 1-8, no. 204 (1328/1912): 426–427. Münir also wrote a tribute to the Meiji emperor after his death: “Japonya Mikado’su Mutsuhito,” Sebilürreşât 2-9, no. 213 (1328/1912): 96–98. Another student, Hasan Fehmi, wrote articles on the Japanese constitution and parliament emphasizing the key role played by the participatory political system in the empowerment of the Japanese nation. See Hasan Fehmi, “Şuyûn: Japonya,” Sebilürresad 12, no. 295 (1914): 167

38. For the derivative modernity concept, see Partha Chatterjee, Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World: A Derivative Discourse (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1986).

39. For a discussion of this topic, refer to the section in chapter 2 on the appropriation of history of civilization literature from Europe.

40. Stephen Vlastos, ed., Mirror of Modernity: Invented Traditions of Modern Japan (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988).

41. Albert Hourani, Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age, 1798–1939 (Cambridge: Oxford University Press, 1962), 205.

42. Even as late as the Balkan wars of 1911–1912, the example of Japanese women was invoked to ask for dedication and sacrifice from Ottoman Muslim women for the sake of the Ottoman state. See Zafer Toprak, Milli Iktisat—Milli Burjuvazi (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfi Yurt Yayinlari, 1995), 175. For the “good wife, wise mother” ideology, see Sharon Nolte and Sally Hastings, “Meiji State’s Policy Toward Women,” in Gail Lee Bernstein, ed., Recreating Japanese Women, 1600–1945 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991), 151–74.

43. Egyptian modernist Qasim Amin’s famous work Tahrir al-Mar’ah, written in 1899, spoke of Japanese women as an ideal example for Muslim women. See Qasim Amin, Tahrir al-Mar’ah (Cairo: Dar al-Maarif, 1970). For the English translation, see idem, The Liberation of Women: A Document in the History of Egyptian Feminism, trans. Samiha Sidhom Peterson (Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, 1992).

44. See Niyazi Berkes, ed., Turkish Nationalism and Western Civilization: Selected Essays of Ziya Gökalp (New York: Allen and Unwin, 1959), 277. See also Uriel Heyd, Foundations of Turkish Nationalism: The Life and Teachings of Ziya Gökalp (London: Lucaz, 1950).

45. I discussed the shift in mood toward pessimism and radical ideologies of change in the last quarter of the twentieth century in my master’s thesis; see Cemil Aydin, “Mecmuai Fünün ve Mecmuai Ulum Dergilerinde Bilim ve Medeniyet Anlayişi” (master’s thesis, Istanbul University 1995).

46. Worringer, “Comparing Perception,” 222.

47. Indonesian nationalists metaphorically used the similarity between the words “Japanese” and “Javanese” to advance their claim that the Javanese could one day become independent and advanced as well. Islamic Fraternity (Tokyo) 2, no. 2 (May 15, 1911): 1–2.

48. F [ernand] Farjenel, “La Japon et l’Islam,” Revue du Monde Musulman 1, no. 1 (November 1906): 101–114.

49. Abdurreşid İbrahim went to Japan in 1933 during the turbulant years after the post-Manchurian Incident reorientation in Japanese foreign policy. He participated in the Japanese public policy discussions about the Muslim world and died in Tokyo in 1944. See Selçuk Esenbel, “Japan’s Global Claim to Asia and the World of Islam: Transnational Nationalism and World Power, 1900–1945,” American Historical Review 109, no. 4 (October 2004): 1140–1170.

50. For information about its Japanese and Muslim members, see Daitô 4, no. 3 (March 1911): 64–65.

51. For examples, see “Japonya’da Daito Mecellesi ve Asya Gi Kai Cemiyetinin Beyannamesi,” Sirat-i Müstakim 6, no.133 (1327/1911): 42–44. See also Barakatullah, “Japonya’da Islam Nasirleri,” Sirati Müstakim 7, no. 158 (1327/1911).

52. The political and pan-Islamic focus of Abdurreşid İbrahim was in sharp contrast with the two previous great Muslim travelers, Ibn Batuta and Evliya Çelebi. Traveling in the fourteenth century from Morocco to China, Ibn Batuta experienced the scope of cosmopolitan Muslim networks of scholars and traders, as well as the power of the Arabic language. But he neither talked about Muslim unity nor interacted deeply with non-Muslims. Seventeenth-century traveler Evliya Çelebi preferred to remain mostly within Ottoman boundaries, or close to them, and engaged in conversations with and cultural observations of both Muslims and non-Muslims. Abdurreşid İbrahim’s travels not only covered large areas of non-Muslim Asia but demonstrated a great sympathy for Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, and Hindus as the Asian-Eastern brothers of Muslims. He constantly urged unity against the common threat of Western hegemony. See Abdurreşid İbrahim, Alem-i Islam ve Japonya’da İntişari Islamiyet (Istanbul: Ahmed Saki Bey Matbaasi, 1327/1910–1911).

53. Mustafa Kamil, Al-Shams al-Mushriqah (Cairo: Matbaat al-Liwa, 1904).

54. Jacob M. Landau, The Politics of Pan-Islam: Ideology and Organization (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990), 128–129.

55. In his student years in Moscow (1865–1867), İsmail Gaspirali was socially adopted by a famous pan-Slavist publisher and journalist, Mikhail Katkov, and witnessed the activities of the Moscow Slavic Benevolent Committee (which organized a pan-Slavic congress in 1867).

56. “İsmail Bey Gaspirah’nin ‘Müslüman Kongresi’ ile ilgili olarak Osmanli Padişahi II. Abdulhamid’e hitaben yazdiği mektubu,” in Hakan Kirimli and İsmail Türkoğlu, eds., İsmail Bey Gaspirali ve Dünya Müslümanlari Kongresi, Islamic Area Studies Project: Central Asian Research Series, no. 4 (Tokyo: Tokyo University, 2002), 7.

57. Daitô 3, no. 4 (December 1910): 2.

58. The Islamic Fraternity was edited and managed by Mohammad Barakatullah of Bhopal, India, in Tokyo from 1911 to 1912.

59. For an example of Kokuryûkai’s increasing networking with Asian nationalists after the Russo-Japanese War, see Selçuk Esenbel, “Japanese Interest in the Ottoman Empire,” in Bert Edstrom, ed., The Japanese and Europe: Images and Perceptions (Richmond, Surrey, U.K.: Curzon, 2000), 112-120; and El-Mostafa Rezrazi, “Pan-Asianism and the Japanese Islam: Hatano Uhô. From Espionage to Pan-Islamist Activity? Annals of the Japan Association for Middle East Studies, no. 12 (1997): 89–112.

60. Hatano Uho was an expert on Chinese Muslims and a graduate of Konoe Atsumaro’s Tôa Dôbun Shoin in Shanghai.

61. Hatano [Uho], Asya Tehlikede, trans. Nakawa and [Abdurreşid] İbrahim (Istanbul: Sebilurreşad, 1328/1910).

62. İbrahim, Alem-i Islam ve Japonya’da Intişari Islamiyet. For an assessment of the Japanese contacts of Abdurreşid İbrahim and his pan-Asianism, see Selçuk Esenbel, Nadir Ozbek, İsmail Türkoglu, François Georgeon, and Ahmet Ucar, “Ozel Dosya: Abdurresid İbrahim 2,” Toplumsal Tarih 4, no. 20 (August 1995): 6–23.

63. Sakamoto Tsutomu, “The First Japanese Hadji Yamaoka Kôtaro and Abdurreşid İbrahim,” in Selçuk Esenbel and Inaba Chiharu, eds., The Rising Sun and the Turkish Crescent: New Perspectives on the History of Japanese-Turkish Relations(Istanbul: Boğaziçi University Press, 2003), 105-121; and Nakamura Kojiro, “Early Japanese Pilgrims to Mecca,” Report of the Society for Near Eastern Studies in Japan (Nippon Orient Gakkai) 12 (1986): 47–57. See also “Japonya’da İhtida,” Sirati Mustakim 7, no. 174 (1327/1912), which discusses the conversions of Hatano and Baron Hiki.

64. See Selçuk Esenbel, “A ‘fin de siècle’ Japanese Romantic in Istanbul: The Life of Yamada Torajiro and His ‘Toruko Gakan.’ “Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 59, no. 2 (1996): 237–252.

65. Ibid., 247

66. For the early stages of pan-Islamism, see Azmi Özcan, Pan-Islamism: Indian Muslims, the Ottomans and Britain (1877–1924) (Leiden: Brill, 1997). For the Buddhist links of pan-Asianism, see Stephan N. Hay, Asian Ideas of East and West: Tagore and His Critics in Japan, China, and India (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970).

67. See Rebecca Karl, Staging the World: Chinese Nationalism at the Turn of the Twentieth Century (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2002).

68. Rebecca Karl, “Creating Asia: China in the World at the Beginning of the Twentieth Century,” American Historical Review 103, no. 4 (October 1998): 1096–1118. Rebecca Karl analyzes an attempt by Chinese intellectuals at the beginning of the twentieth century to construct a radical meaning of “Asia, emphasizing how they tried to make Asia a site for anti-imperialist and antistate praxis and for cultural recovery. Karl traces the development of this “Asia” concept from the Chinese appropriation of the Philippine struggles against the United States for their own nationalist discourses to the founding of a small pan-Asianist society in 1907 by Japanese and Chinese socialists and anarchists, Indian nationalists, and Filipino and Vietnamese activists. Contrary to those who focus on state-centered pan-Asianism, particularly the figure of Sun Zhongshan (Sun Yat-sen), she argues that this ultimately failed effort at radical Asianism was seminal in the articulation of new relationships among emerging concepts of culture, race, geography, and global solidarity. Karl also challenges the reification of “Asia” as a unit of historical analysis by historicizing this original radical impulse in regional construction. Her argument about Asia as a constructed rather than natural category not only illuminates developments in that part of the world at the beginning of the twentieth century but suggests how historians can analyze regional constructs in other times and places.

69. “Al-Yaban wa’l-Islam,” Al-Muqtabas, February 18, 1910.

70. Daitô 3, no. 4 (December 1910): 2.

71. İbrahim, Alem-i Islam ve Japonya’da Intişari Islamiyet, 88

72. Islamic Fraternity 2, no. 2 (May 15, 1911).

73. In this context, Tokutomi Sohô (1863–1957) advocated a “yellow man’s burden,” giving voice to an alternative to the idea of the white man’s burden inspired by Rudyard Kipling’s famous poem of 1899. See Tokutomi Sohô, “Kôjin no omoni,” Kokumin Shimbun (January 1906), quoted in Hirakawa Sukehiro,” Modernizing Japan in Comparative Perspective,” Comparative Studies of Culture, no. 26 (1987): 29.

74. Yamamuro Shinichi, “Nihon Gaikô to Ajia Shugi no Kôsaku,” in Seiji Gaku Nenpô (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1998), 26-27, taken from Tsurumi Yusuke, Gotô Shinpei (Tokyo: Keisô Shôbo, 1965–1967), 960–961.

75. George Akita and Itô Takashi, “Yamagata Aritomo no ‘jinshû kyôsô’ ron” [Yamagata Aritomo’s theory of racial conflict], in Nihon Gaikô no kiki ninshiki (Tokyo: Yamakawa Shuppansha, 1985), 95–118.

76. For example, Abdurreşid İbrahim was able to meet with Ôkuma Shigenobu, Itô Hirobumi and other leading statesmen of Japan, particularly because of the Japanese leaders’ interest in meeting with a Muslim intellectual and pan-Islamist activist. For the records of his conversation with Ôkuma Shigenobu in 1909, see İbrahim, Alem-i Islam ve Japonya’da İntişari Islamiyet, 386–387. For Gotô Shinpei and Inukai Tsuyoshi’s role in helping an Indian revolutionary in Tokyo in 1917, see Tapan Mukherjee, Taraknath Das: Life and Letters of a Revolutionary in Exile (Calcutta: National Council of Education in Bengal, 1997), 109–110. For the attention that Vietnamese nationalist Phan Boi Chau received from Inukai Tsuyoshi and Ôkuma Shigenobu, see David Marr, Vietnamese Anti-Colonialism, 1885–1925 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971), 113.

77. Yamamuro, “Nihon Gaikô to Ajia Shugi no Kôsaku,” 26-27, taken from Tsurumi, Goto Shinpei, 960–961.

78. Marr, Vietnamese Anti-Colonialism, 146, 154–155.

79. Miura Tôru, “Nihon no Chutô-Isuramu Kenkyû,” Gekkan Hyakka, no. 365 (1993): 18–23. For Ôkuma Shigenobu’s comments, see the preface to Cromer, Saikin Ejiputo [Modern Egypt] (Tokyo: Dainippon Bunmei Kyôkai, 1911), 1:12–13. For a recent English-language assessment of this topic, see Miura Tôru, “The Past and Present of Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies in Japan: Using the Bibliography of Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies in Japan 1868–1988,” Annals of Japan Association for Middle East Studies 17, no. 2 (2002), 45–60.

80. Nitobe’s famous work on Bushido ethics represented this interpretation; see Nitobe Inazô, Bushido: The Soul of Japan. An Exposition of Japanese Thought (Tokyo: Kodansha International, 1998). For the implications of Nitobe’s argument, see Akira Iriye, Cultural Internationalism and World Order (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997), 44. For insightful articles on Nitobe Inazô as both an internationalist and Japanese nationalist, see John F. Howes, ed., Nitobe Inazô: Japan’s Bridge Across the Pacific (Boulder, Colo.: Westview, 1995).

81. See Okakura Kakuzo, The Ideals of the East with Special Reference to the Art of Japan (London: John Murray, 1903).

82. For an example of the popularity of this slogan among the Japanese political elite, see Joyce Lebra, “Ôkuma Shigenobu: Modernization and the West,” in Edmund Skrzypczak, ed., Japan’s Modern Century (Tokyo: Sophia University, in cooperation with Tuttle, 1968), 40. See also Ôkuma Shigenobu, Tôzai Bunmei no Chôwa (Tokyo: Waseda Daigaku Shuppansha, 1990).

5. THE IMPACT OF WWI ON PAN-ISLAMIC AND PAN-ASIANIST VISIONS OF WORLD ORDER

1. Celal Nuri, İttihad-i İslam: Islamin Mazisi, Hali, İstikbali (Istanbul: Yeni Osmanli Matbaasi, 191), 10–11. For an example of how Ottoman intellectuals perceived pan-Islamism as unrealistic around 1904 and 1905, see Yusuf Akçura, Üç Tarzi Siyaset (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi, 1987), 39–40. In his work İttihad-i İslam (Muslim unity), Celal Nuri describes the objections of realist politicians of the Ottoman state to the rising tide of pan-Islamic ideas after the Balkan wars. Those against Ottoman leadership in the Muslim world saw the Ottoman state as an “old and sick grandfather [perhaps referring to the European notion of the “sick man of Europe”], in need of help himself” (ibid.) and believed that the Ottoman state was in no position to help liberate other Muslims.

2. The best example of this historiography can be found in Turkish school textbooks and military history books, prepared by the Turkish General Staff. For an example, see Turkish General Staff, Osmanli Imparatorluğu’nun Siyasi ve Askeri Hazirhklari ve Harbe Giriş, vol. 1, Birinci Dünya Harbi’nde Turk Harbi (Ankara: Genelkurmay Basimevi, 1991). Mustafa Aksakal attributes the origin of this official version of Turkish history to the writings of Yusuf Hikmet Bayur, especially his Türk Inkilabi Tarihi (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi, 1940–1967). For an assessment of this historiography, see Mustafa Aksakal, “Defending the Nation: The German-Ottoman Alliance of 1914 and the Ottoman Decision for War” (Ph.D. diss., Princeton University, 2003), 1–13.

3. This view is also part of official Turkish history textbooks. For examples of similar views in English-language literature, see Jacob M. Landau, Pan-Turkism: From Irredentism to Cooperation (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995), 51–55.

4. Feroz Ahmad was the most articulate critic of this theory. For a summary of his views, see Feroz Ahmad, “Ottoman Armed Neutrality and Intervention, August–November 1914,” Studies on Ottoman Diplomatic History (Istanbul) 4 (1990): 41–69. Ahmad concluded this article with the following statement: “Turkey’s intervention in 1914 was not the result of collusion between the Germans and the war party. It was mainly determined by the nationalist aspirations of the Unionists which Enver Paşa came to personify” (69).

5. Aksakal, “Defending the Nation.”

6. Mustafa Aksakal puts emphasis on the triumph of nationalist feelings in the post-Balkan War period and connects it to the post-1923 Kemalist policies of nationalism. Aksakal’s references to the writings of Özdemir and Habil Adem, the pseudonyms for Şehbenderzade Filibeli Ahmed Hilmi and İsmail Naci Pelister, suggest the connections between nationalism and pan-Islamism.

7. For the ideas and activities of Mehmet Akif Ersoy during the Balkan wars and WWI, see Ertuğrul M. Duzdağ, Mehmet Akif Ersoy (Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanhği Yayinlari, 1988).

8. Selim Deringil, The Well-Protected Domains: Ideology and the Legitimization of Power in the Ottoman Empire, 1876–1909 (London: Tauris, 1998); Engin Deniz Akarli, “The Tangled End of Istanbul’s Imperial Supremacy,” in Leila Fawaz and C. A. Bayly, eds., Modernity and Culture from the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean, 1890–1920 (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002), 261–284.

9. Famous pan-Islamist activist Abdurreşid İbrahim’s observation of the Muslim responses to the opening of the parliament in a small town in Russian Siberia is an illustrative example of the global impact of the Turkish constitutional revolution. Muslims in this remote Russian town gathered on the same evening to celebrate the new “liberty and freedom” in the Ottoman Empire and wanted to send a congratulatory telegraph to Istanbul. See Abdurreşid İbrahim, İslam Dünyasi (Istanbul: Yeni Asya Yayinlari, 1987), 1:151–152. The anti-imperialist and modernist rhetoric of the Young Turks made them very popular among Muslims throughout the world. The coincidence that two prominent Egyptian and Albanian leaders of the twentieth century, Anwar Sadat and Anwar Hoja, received their names from parents celebrating the achievements of Young Turk leader Anwar Pasha is an indication of the popularity of the Young Turks’ image among civilized modern Muslims.

10. Two Young Turk leaders, Ahmed Riza and Dr. Nazim, mentioned the formula of making Turkey “The Japan of the Near East” in their interview with British foreign secretary Sir Edward Grey in 1908. See M. Şükrü Hanioğlu, Preparation for a Revolution: The Young Turks, 1902–1908 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 304 and 492; and Feroz Ahmed and Marian Kent, eds., The Great Powers and the End of the Ottoman Empire (London: Allen and Unwin, 1984), 13. The conversation clearly refers to the fact that Japan was an ally of Great Britain and a recognized great power in international affairs.

11. For an assessment of the activities and lack of support for a pan-Islamist intellectual during the early years of the Young Turk period, see Nadir Özbek, “From Asianism to Pan-Turkism: The Activities of Abdürreşid İbrahim in the Young Turk Era,” in Selçuk Esenbel and Inaba Chiharu, eds., The Rising Sun and the Turkish Crescent: New Perspectives on the History of Japanese-Turkish Relations (Istanbul: Boğaziçi University Press, 2003), 86–104.

12. Sirat-i Müstakim (The straight way) was a weekly magazine that started on August 1908. Publication under that name ceased, but the journal continued under the name Sebilürreşad (The right way). It was edited by Mehmet Akif Ersoy and Eşref Edip.

13. Interestingly, Muhammad Barakatullah, a pan-Islamist activist who published Islamic Fraternity in Tokyo, reflected on the Muslim perception of the Italian invasion of Libya as a modern European crusade in his editorial titled “Christian Combination Against Islam,” Islamic Fraternity (Tokyo) 3, no. 2 (June 1912): 1–2.

14. For the ethnic cleansing of the Muslims in the Balkans, see the sections on the Balkans wars in Justin McCarthy, Death and Exile: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821–1922 (Princeton, N.J.: Darwin, 1995), 135–164.

15. After about six months of negotiation, during which a second Balkan war occurred, the Treaty of London signed on May 30, 1913, ended the Balkan wars. With that treaty, Turkey ceded most of its territory in Europe.

16. For the most comprehensive biography of Ahmed Hilmi, see M. Zeki Yazici, “Şehbenderzade Ahmet Hilmi: Hayati ve Eserleri” (Ph.D. diss., Istanbul University, 1997).

17. For the English translation of Şehbenderzade Ahmed Hilmi’s novel on universal mystical thought, see Şehbenderzade Ahmed Hilmi, Awakened Dreams: Raji’s Journeys with the Mirror Dede [Amak-i Hayal), trans. Refik Algan and Camille Helminski (Putney, Vt.: Threshold, 1993).

18. Şeyh Mihridin Arusi [Şehbenderzade Ahmed Hilmi], Yirminci Asirda Alem-i İslam ve Avrupa—Müslümanlara Rehber-i Siyaset (Istanbul, 1911). İsmail Kara has published a good selection from this work (2-11, 66-73, and 87-96) in his edited collection Türkiye’de İslamahk Düşüncesi [Islamist thought in Turkey], 3d ed. (Istanbul: Kitabevi, 1997) 1:86–101.

19. See Kara, Türkiye’de Islamahk Düşüncesi, 1:100–101.

20. Ibid., 1:86–87.

21. Özdemir [Şehbenderzade Ahmed Hilmi], Türk Ruhu Nasil Yapihyor? Her Vatanperverden, Bu Eserciği Türklere Okumasini ve Anlatmasini Niyaz Ederiz (How is the Turkish spirit formed? We ask that each patriot read and relate this pamphlet to the Turks) (Istanbul: Hikmet Matbaa-i İslamiyesi, 1913).

22. For Sehbenderzade Ahmed Hilmi’s critique of Celal Nuri (İleri) for proposing a materialist interpretation of Islamic history, see Sehbenderzade Filibeli Ahmed Hilmi, Huzur-i Akl u Fende Maddiyyun Meslek-i Dalaleti: Tarih-i İstikbal’in Birinci Cildini Teşkil Eden Mesail-i Fikriyenin Tenkidi (Istanbul, 1332/1913–1914).

23. The Arabic translation of this work was published in Cairo in 1920, the year of the Paris Peace Conference. See Celal Nuri Bey [Jalal Nuri Bek], İttihad al-Muslimin: Al-Islam, madihi wa-hadiruhu wa mustaqbaluhu, trans. Hamzah Tahir and Abd al-Wahhab Azzam (Cairo, 1920). Celal Nuri published a similar work on pan-Islamism on the eve of WWI but focused more on its potential relations with German grand policy. See Celal Nuri Bey, İttihad-i İslâm ve Almanya (Istanbul: Yeni Osmanli Matbaasi, 1914).

24. Especially during and after the Balkan wars, Celal Nuri wrote often and turned his articles into various books. He traveled to Russia, Scandinavian countries, and America in 1914. Nuri became a founding member of the Wilsonian Principles Society in 1918. In 1919 he was elected to the Ottoman parliament and helped in the preparation of the draft of the National Pact (Misak-i Milli). Exiled to Malta by the British occupation authorities, he later joined the parliament of the Ankara government.

25. Celal Nuri, Kendi Noktai Nazarimizdan Hukuk-i Düvel (Istanbul: Osmanli Şirketi Matbaasi, 1911). Even in this early work, Celal Nuri argues that Muslims should co-operate with socialists in their struggle against Western imperialism.

James Lorimer (1818–1890) was the author of The Institutes of the Law of Nations: A Treatise of the Jural Relations of Separate Political Communities (1884). He occupied the chair of Law of Nature and of Nations in Edinburgh. An anti-Semite, he viewed Islam as a degenerate religion. Friedrich von Martens’ book Völkerrecht: Das internationale Recht der zivilisierten Nationen (Law of nations: International law of civilized nations) was first published in 1882. Henri Bonfils (1835–1897) authored a book on international law, edited by Paul Fauchille (1858–1926), that existed in Ottoman translations. See Henri Bonfils and Paul Fauchille, Hukuk-i umumiye-yi düvel, trans. Ahmet Salahettin and Mehmet Cemil (Istanbul: Matbaa-i Jirayir-Keteon, 1908).

26. For Nuri’s main writings on Islam and modernity, see Celal Nuri. Mukadderat-i Tarihiye: Tedenniyat-i Osmaniyenin Esbab ve Sevaik-i Tarihiyesi (Istanbul: Matbaa-i İçtihad, 1912); and idem, İştirak Etmediğimiz Harekat: Tarih-i Osmani ve Keşfiyat, Rönasans ve Reform Harakati (Istanbul: Cemiyet Kütüphanesi, 1917).

27. Nuri, İttihad-i İslam, 3.

28. “Japanese and Chinese should not be separated in a time when Europe is conquering the whole world. On the contrary, the expansion and the penetration of the West will unite them in a serious and sincere way” (ibid., 139).

29. “Asia is now the home property of Europe. If it was not for the rise of the government of the ‘Sun of the East [Japan],’ and if Europeans were a little more capable of unity and cooperation among themselves, today China would be divided and fully colonized to be in the status of another India” (ibid., 139-140).

30. Celal Nuri perceived a common culture in Asia different from European culture and depicted the Asian civilization as older and more moderate, humanist, and spiritual (ibid., 141-142).

31. Celal Nuri seem to have been aware of Abdurreşid İbrahim’s ideas about solidarity between the Muslim world and Japan. He thought that this rapprochement would create new era in Asia and further strengthen a shared cultural legacy. Nuri rejected the idea that the weak and backward Asia was already dead. For him, Asia was asleep until the beginning of the twentieth century, and the turn of the century symbolized the end of this long sleep and a new awakening. See ibid., 144.

32. Celal Nuri, Kadinlarimiz; Umumiyet İtibarile Kadin Meselesi ve Tarihi, Müslüman ve Türk Kadinlari (Istanbul: Matbaai Içtihat, 1912).

33. Aloys Sprenger (1813–1893), an Austrian Orientalist, was famous for his argument that Muhammad suffered from hysteria. After acting as the principal of a Muslim college in Delhi in 1857, he was naturalized as a British subject and left India to become a professor of Oriental languages at Bern University from 1858 to 1881. See Aloys Sprenger (1813–1893), Das Leben und die Lehre des Mohammad (Berlin: Nicolai, 1869).

Reinhart Dozy became a well-known Orientalist for his thesis that the Islamic faith spread with the help of the sword. See Reinhart Peter Dozy, Essai sur l’histoire de l’Islamisme (Paris: Maisonneuve, 1897). Because this work was perceived to be prejudiced in its representation of Islamic history, its Turkish translation in 1908 by Abdullah Cevdet attracted negative reactions, and its distribution was banned in 1910. See Reinhart Peter Dozy, Tarih-i İslamiyet (Misir: Matbaa-i İçtihad, 1908). Dozy became a frequent reference in Muslim apologetic writings critical of European Orientalism.

34. Celal Nuri’s biography of the Prophet, Hatemül Enbiya, was republished during the Republican period; see Cemal Kutay, Tarih önünde İslam Peygamberi (Istanbul: Ak-soy Yayincilik, 1998). Şehbenderzade Ahmed Hilmi severely criticized some of the ideas in the book; see Hilmi, Huzur-i Akl u Fende Maddiyyun Meslek-i Dalaleti.

35. For Celal Nuri’s critique of Abdullah Cevdet’s pro-Westernism during the Balkan Wars, see Celal Nuri, Müslümanlara, Türklere Hakaret, Düşmanlara Riayet ve Muhab-bet (Istanbul: Kader Matbaasi, 1914).

36. Belak [pseud.], Mağlub Milletler Nasil İntikam Alirlar, trans. Habil Adem [pseud.] (Istanbul: Ikbal Kütübhanesi, 1332/1913–1914).

37. Jons Mul [pseud.], Londra Konferansindaki Mes’elelerden: Anadoluda Türkiya Yaşayacak mi? Yaşamayacak mi? trans. Habil Adem [pseud.] (Istanbul: Ikbal Kütüphanesi, n.d.).

38. Professor Vayt [pseud.], Muharebeden Sonra: Hilafet Siyaseti ve Türklük Siyaseti, trans. Habil Adem (Istanbul: Ikbal Kütüphanesi, 1915). İsmail Kara used selections (only pages 32 to 143) from an earlier version of the work, published in 1913 in Istanbul by Şems Matbaasi, for a recent edition. See Professor Vayt, “Muharebeden Sonra: Hilafet Siyaseti ve Türklük Siyaseti,” in İsmail Kara, Hilafet Risaleleri (Istanbul: Klasik, 2003), 3:329–383. İsmail Naci also wrote on pan-Germanism and pan-Slavism, indicating his interest in the politics of “pan-” ideologies in world affairs. See Habil Adem [pseud.], Pan Cermanizm, Pan Islavizm (Istanbul: Seda-yi Millet Matbaasi, 1916).

39. Siyasetü’l-Etrak ve’l-Hilafe (Istanbul: Matbaatu’l-Adl, 1331/1913).

40. Naci attributes the origins of the Tanzimat policies to European diplomats, not to Turkish bureaucrats; see Professor Vayt, “Muharebeden Sonra,” 3:335–336.

41. Professor Vayt, “Muharebeden Sonra,” 331–381.

42. Muhiddin Baha [Pars], “Halife Ordusu Misir ve Kafkas’da,” in İsmail Kara, ed., Hilafet Risaleleri (Istanbul: Klasik, 2003), 3:387.

43. İsmail Kara has underlined the exceptionality and originality of Said Halim Paşa’s ideas in the history of Islamist thought. See Kara, Türkiyede İslamcilik Düşüncesi, 1:38–39.

44. Said Halim’s seven essays, written between 1910 and 1919, were titled” Meşrutiyet” (Constitutionalism), “Mukallitliklerimiz” (Our emulation [ of the West]) ; “Buhran-i Fikrimiz” (Our intellectual crisis); “Taassub” (Dogmatism); “Buhran-i İçtimaimiz” (Our social crisis); “İnhitat-i İslam Hakkinda Bir Tecrübe-i Kalemiye” (An essay on the decline of Islam); and “İslamlasmak” (On Islamization). All these essays were published as one book under the title Buhranlanmiz (Our crisis) in 1919. For a recent edition of this work, see Said Halim Paşa, Bütün Eserleri (Istanbul: Anka, 1985). For other published books by Said Halim Paşa, see Said Halim Pasşa, Intihat-i Islam Hakkinda Bir Tecrübe-yi Kalemiye (Istanbul: Matbaa-i Âmire, 1918); and Mehmet Said Halim Paşa, L’Empire Ottoman et la guerre mondiale, 1863–1921 (Istanbul: Isis, 2000). See also Said Halim Paşa, Political Reform of Muslim Society (Lahore: Islamic Publications, 1947).

45. See Kara, Türkiyede İslamcilik Düsüncesi, 1:193.

46. Jacob M. Landau, The Politics of Pan-Islam: Ideology and Organization (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990), 92–94.

47. After he came to Istanbul, Abdurreşid İbrahim participated in the pan-Islamic campaigns against the colonization of the Muslim lands and joined the Libyan resistance to the Italian invasion, where he developed his close ties with the Young Turk leadership. During WWI, İbrahim worked actively for the Ottoman/German government’s pan-Islamic campaigns.

48. Landau, The Politics of Pan-Islam, 105–142.

49. [Pars], “Halife Ordusu Misir ve Kafkas’da.” The play was originally written in 1915 and published in Bursa.

50. For the English translation of this proclamation, see Geoffrey L. Lewis, “The Ottoman Proclamation of Jihad in 1914,” Islamic Quarterly: A Review of Islamic Culture (London) 19, no. 1–2 (January–June 1975): 157–163.

51. Feroz Ahmad, “1914–1915 Yillarinda Istanbul’da Hint Milliyetçi Devrimcileri,” Yapit (Ankara), no. 6 (August–September 1984): 5–15.

52. This is the title of a British intelligence memorandum, dated July 15, 1917, about the pan-Islamic activities in East Africa. See Landau, The Politics of Pan-Islam, 141.

53. İsmail Kara’s edition of all the major writings on the issue of the caliphate demonstrates the intellectual lineage of the idea of the illegitimacy of the Ottoman caliphate and the proposal of an alternative Arab caliphate from the early 1880s to the 1910s. See İsmail Kara, Hilafet Risaseleri, 4 vols. (Istanbul: Klasik, 2002–2004).

54. The reports of the wartime Foreign Office from Tokyo indicate the increasing suspicion and confusion of the British embassy with regard to the relationship between Asianists and a number of influential politicians. See British Foreign Office, Japan Correspondence, 1914–1923, Public Records Office Collection, FO 371.

55. Ôtsuka Takehiro, Ôkawa Shûmei to Kindai Nihon (Tokyo: Mokutakusha, 1990); idem, Ôkawa Shûmei: Aru Fukkô Kakushin Shugisha no Shisô (Tokyo: Chûô Kôronsha, 1995); and Hashikawa Bunsô, “Kaisetsu,” in Ôkawa Shûmei, Ôkawa Shûmei Shû, ed. Hashikawa Bunsô (Tokyo: Chikuma Shobô, Tokyo 1975), 407.

56. Ôkawa’s views on the inevitable conflict between Eastern and Western civilizations were best formulated in his work “Ajia, Yoroppa, Nihon” [Asia, Europe, and Japan], in Ôkawa Shûmei, Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû, 7 vols., ed. Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû Kankôkai (Tokyo: Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû Kankôkai, 1961–1974), 2:872–873. This article was originally published in book form in 1925. See also Ôkawa Shûmei, “Yoroppa no Rakuchô,” Tôyô 32, no. 2 (1929). For references to Ôkawa Shûmei’s ideas as evidence for a Japanese conspiracy to wage aggressive war, see International Military Tribunal for the Far East, The Tokyo Major War Crimes Trial: The Transcripts of the Court Proceedings of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, ed. R. John Pritchard (Lewiston, N.Y.: Edwin Mellen, 1998).

57. See Ôtsuka, Ôkawa Shûmei, 66-72; and Hiraishi Naoaki, “Kindai Nihon no Kokusai Chitsujyokan to Ajiashugi,” in 20 Seiki Shisutemu (Tokyo: Tokyo Daigaku Shuppansha, 1998), 1:201–204.

58. Takeuchi Yoshimi,” Ôkawa Shûmei no Ajia Kenkyû,” in Hashikawa Bunsô, ed., Ôkawa Shûmei Shû (Tokyo: Chikuma Shobô, 1982), 391–406. Because of the high quality of Ôkawa’s scholarship on Asia and the recent interest in Islamic revivalism, two of his works were reprinted in the last decade. See Ôkawa Shûmei, Fukkô Ajia no Shomondai (1922; reprint, Tokyo: Chûô Kôronsha, 1993); and idem, Kaikyô Gairon (Tokyo: Keiô Shobô, 1942).

59. He seemed to be most fascinated by the ideas of Schleiermacher; see Ôtsuka, Ôkawa Shûmei to Kindai Nihon, 63–64. Most of the biographical information on Ôkawa’s youth provided here relies on this book, unless noted otherwise.

60. He was especially interested in Kôtoku Shûsui and subscribed to the anarchist journal Heimin Shinbun (Commoner’s news), which was an influential socialist weekly founded by Kôtoku Shûsui and Sakai Toshihiko, famous for its publication of Karl Marx’s manifesto in 1904 and for taking a critical, pacifist stance toward the Russo-Japanese War. Its publication was suspended in January 1905. In 1904, before he started high school, Ôkawa visited Tokyo and attended lectures by leading socialists such as Kôtoku Shûsui, Sakai Toshihiko, and Abe Isoo. See Ôtsuka, Ôkawa Shûmei to Kindai Nihon, 23–24. Sakai Toshihiko (1871–1933) was a journalist and socialist thinker, and Abe Isoo (1965–1949) was a Christian-socialist educator. Together with Kôtoku Shûsui, they led the socialist movement, and all of them opposed the Russo-Japanese War.

61. For Ôkawa’s involvement in Dôkai, see Ôtsuka, Ôkawa Shûmei to Kindai Nihon, 63–100. For the importance of Dôkai in the history of Christianity in Japan, see Mark. R. Mullins, Christianity Made in Japan: A Study of Indigenous Movements (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1998), 69–81. Like many other Japanese at that time, Matsumura Kaiseki encountered Christianity during his study of a foreign language, and he was later baptized as a member of the Dutch Reformed Church. Matsumura Kaiseki left the organized missionary church in 1881 because of disagreement with its “un-Japanese” and “irrational” interpretation of Christianity and, in particular, the white missionaries’ disrespectful attitudes toward Japanese culture. While continuing his intellectual and spiritual search, he began to think of forging a Confucian Christianity that could be integrated with the new scientific theology that emerged in Europe. In connection with his new religion, Matsumura launched the magazine Michi. He published A History of the Rise and Fall of Nations in 1902 and Modern European History and Saint Socrates in 1903. When he decided to establish an independent church fostering a new, reformed Christianity for Japan, he initially called his church the One Heart Association. In 1907 he renamed it Nihon Kyôkai (the Church of Japan) and finally dubbed it Dôkai (South Church) in 1912. The name changes reflected his realization that the movement had transformed from a reform movement within Christianity into a new religion independent of Christianity. According to his teachings, Matsumura Kaiseki was combining the basic truths contained in the sacred writings of Christianity, Buddhism, and Confucianism. He was convinced that it was possible to reduce the central truths of all major religions to the following four basic teachings: belief in God, cultivation of moral character, love of neighbor (interpreted broadly to mean responsibility for emperor, nation, and humankind), and belief in eternal life. Dôkai rejected the Christian beliefs of the Holy Trinity and original sin.

62. Sir Henry Cotton, New India or India in Transition (London: K. Paul, 1907).

63. Ôkawa, Anraku no Mon, in Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû, 1:803–804.

64. See Ôkawa, Fukkô Ajia no Shomondai, 1–3.

65. Tetsuo Najita and Harry Harootunian, “Japanese Revolt Against the West: Political and Cultural Criticism in the Twentieth Century”, in Bob Tadashi Wakabayashi, ed., Modern Japanese Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 211–212.

66. See James H. Cousins, “The Cultural Unity of Asia,” Asian Review (Tokyo) 2, no. 3 (March-April 1921): 217–228.

67. Ôkawa even wanted to translate some of Okakura’s writings from English into Japanese. See Ôtsuka, Ôkawa Shûmei, 61–62.

68. See Anagarika Dharmapala, “Naite Nipponjin ni keikoku su” [A cry of warning to the Japanese], Michi, no. 65 (September 1913): 29-33; and Muhammad Barakatullah, “Yo ga Sokoku” (My motherland), Michi, no. 67 (November 1913): 42-47.

69. Kahawatte Siri Sumedha Thero, Anagarika Dharmapala: A Glorious Life Dedicated to the Cause of Buddhism (Sarnath, Varanasi: Maha Bodhi Society of India, 1999).

70. Tôa Dôbun Shoin was the Japanese school established in Shanghai in 1901 by the Asianist organization established by Konoe Atsumaro, Tôa Dôbunkai. It recruited students from Japan to study Chinese language and culture.

71. Anti-British agitation of Islamic Fraternity led to pressure from the British embassy to close down the journal, but because of its status as a religious journal, the Japanese government did not want to ban it. Finally, in 1912, the Home Ministry prohibited the publication of the journal, and in 1914 the Barakatullah’s teaching contract was not renewed. See Gaimushô Gaikô Shiryôkan, Tokyo, Muhammad Barakatullah file. See also Ôkawa, Fukkô Ajia no Shomondai, 307.

72. The Ghadar Party was established in 1913 in San Francisco as a revolutionary party dedicated to achieving the full independence of India. It was led by Har Dayal. During WWI, Ghadar Party members cooperated with both Germany and the Ottoman government in attempts to form an army from imprisoned Indian soldiers, but they could not actualize these plans. For more details, see Harish K. Puri. Ghadar Movement: Ideology, Organization, and Strategy (Amritsar: Guru Nanak Dev University, 1993).

73. Lala Lajpat Rai was one of the leaders of a new generation of Indian nationalists who advocated violence if repression became too strong. He was a prolific writer, and his book Young India made him famous. When he went to Japan in 1915, he often gave speeches with names such as “Asia for Asiatics,” and he emphasized Japan’s responsibility for helping its Asian neighbors. Rai predicted that the Great War would destroy European ethics and a worldwide revolution could occur. During his visit to Japan in 1915, Rai also published a book in Tokyo about the current nationalist movement in India; see Lala Lajpat Rai, Reflections on the Political Situation in India with A Personal Note and Extracts from Indian and English Newspapers etc. (Tokyo, 1915).

74. Ôtsuka, Ôkawa Shûmei, Aru Fukkô, 70.

75. For the text of Rai’s speech, see Lala Lajpat Rai, “Ajia no Bunmei,” Michi, no. 92 (December 1915): 31–34.

76. Nakajima Takeshi, Nakamuraya no Bosu (Tokyo: Hakusuisha, 2005), 81–98.

77. For the full text of Tagore’s speech at Tokyo University, see Rabindranath Tagore, The Message of India to Japan: A Lecture by Sir Rabindranath Tagore, Delivered at the Imperial University of Tokyo (Tokyo, 1916). For a discussion of the response to Tagore’s message in Japan, see Stephen N. Hay, Asian Ideas of East and West: Tagore and His Critics in Japan, China, and India (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970).

78. Ôkawa Shûmei, Indo ni Okeru Kokuminteki Undô no Genjyô oyobi sono Yurai, in Hashikawa Bunsô, ed., Ôkawa Shûmei Shû (1916; reprint, Tokyo, Chikuma Shobô, 1975), 11–76. For a detailed assessment of this work as a contribution to the study of Indian nationalism, see Nagasaki Nobuko, “Ôkawa Shûmei no Shoki Indo Kenkyû, Indo Kankei no Ichi Sokumen,” Tôkyô Daikgaku Kyôyôbu Jinbun Kagaku Kiyô: Rekishi to Bunka, no. 12 (March 1978): 116–120.

79. Rai, Reflections on the Political Situation in India. Ôkawa seemed to rely on two other works in the preparation of his book: Lala Lajpat Rai, Young India: An Interpretation and a History of the Nationalist Movement from Within (New York: B. W. Huebsch, 1916); and Paul Samuel Reinsch, Intellectual and Political Currents in the Far East (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1911).

80. Ôkawa, Indo ni Okeru, 75–76. Rai’s book starts with a quotation from a Dr. Seton Watson about the aims of the allied powers in the war: “Our task is nothing less than the regeneration of Europe, the vindication of the twin principles of nationality and democracy and the emancipation of subject races from alien rule” (quoted in Rai, Reflections on the Political Situation in India, 1).

81. Ôkawa, Indo ni Okeru, 73–74. The quotation here is drawn from the English original published in the Manchester Guardian. This comment of Tagore’s was frequently referenced in Japanese Asianist writings. For an example, see Taraknath Das, Is Japan a Menace to Asia? (Shanghai, 1917), i.

82. Taraknath Das left Bengal in 1905 and earned a master’s degree from the University of Washington while remaining highly involved in organization and publication to popularize the cause of Indian nationalism. During the war, he went to Germany and Turkey but did his most fruitful work in Japan. He became a naturalized U.S. citizen. For the best study on his life, see Tapan Mukherjee, Taraknath Das: Life and Letters of a Revolutionary in Exile (Calcutta: National Council of Education in Bengal, 1997).

83. Mukherjee, Taraknath Das, 92–93.

84. Tarakunato Dasu [Taraknath Das], “Ajia no Kyôisha wa Hatashite Nihon Ka?” Nippon Oyobi Nipponjin, no. 706 (June 1, 1917): 68–75.

85. Mukherjee, Taraknath Das, 102–103.

86. An Asian Statesman [Taraknath Das], The Isolation of Japan in World Politics (Tokyo: Asiatic Association of Japan, 1918). The book included an introduction by Oshikawa Masayoshi, an M.P. in the Imperial Japanese Diet, and appendixes by Dr. Setsui Miyake, the editor of Nippon Oyobi Nipponjin, and Prof. Dr. Senga Tsurutaro of Kyoto Imperial University. The Japanese translation of the work, by Ôkawa Shûmei, was published earlier than its English original. See Dasu Tarakunato [Taraknath Das], Kokusaikan ni Okeru Nihon no Koritsu (Tokyo: Asiatic Association of Japan, 1917).

87. For other articles written by Das for the same purpose, see Taraknath Das, “The Orient and the Question of Race Superiority,” Asian Review 1, no. 7 (October 1920): 712-717; and idem, “The European Peril,” Asian Review 1, no. 8 (November–December 1920): 835–841.

88. Kuwajima Sho, Indian Mutiny in Singapore (1915) (Calcutta: Ratna Prakashan, 1991).

89. W. W. Pearson, For India (Tokyo: Asiatic Association of Japan, 1917). Pearson also wrote one of the first articles on Gandhi for the Japanese Asianist press; see idem, “A Character Study of M. K. Gandhi, Leader of the Non-Cooperation Movement in India,” Asian Review 2, no. 5 (July-August 1921): 485–492.

90. Pearson, For India, 47–48.

91. Ôkawa Shûmei, “Sekai ni Okeru Nippon no Chii,” Dôwa, no. 52 (August 1915): 40–44.

92. Ôkawa Shûmei, “Kunkoku no Shimei,” Michi, no. 93 (January 1916): 47–55.

93. See chapter 3.

94. For a summary of Tokutomi Sohô’s Asian Monroe Doctrine, see Iichirô Tokutomi, “Japan’s Mighty Mission,” appendix to Das, Is Japan a Menace to Asia? 122. The appendix by Tokutomi Sohô was originally published in the Japan Chronicle of January 19.1917. Das reproduced the articles from the version published in the Peking Post on February 10, 1917

95. Kodera Kenkichi, Dai Ajiashugi Ron (Tokyo: Hôbunkan, 1916), i-ix.

96. For a biography of Paul Richard by his son, see Michel Paul Richard, Without Pass-port: The Life and Work of Paul Richard (New York: Peter Lang, 1987).

97. Ôkawa Shûmei, “Kaisetsu,” in Paul Richard, Nipponkoku ni Tsugu (1917; reprint, Tokyo: Seinen Shobô, 1941). Other works translated by Ôkawa Shûmei are Paul Richard, Dai Julchiji (1921), in Ôkawa Shûmei, Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû, 1:881-993; and Paul Richard, Eien no Chie (Tokyo: Keiseisha, 1924).

98. Paul Richard, Nipponkoku ni Tsugu (Tokyo: Seinen Shobô, 1941). Paul Richard wrote this book at Ôkawa Shûmei’s suggestion. Also see Kita Reikichi, “Waga Kuni no Daishimei—Pôru Risha shi no Nipponkoku ni Tsugu wo yomu,” Tôhô Jiron 2, no. 12 (November 1917): 12.

99. Paul Richard, “Some Answers,” Asian Review 1, no. 1 (February 1920): 42.

100. Paul Richard, introduction to Pearson, For India, iii-v.

101. Paul Richard, “Democracy,” Asian Review 1, no. 3 (April 1920): 272–275.

102. Kuzuu Yoshihisa, “Farewell to Dr. Richard and Prof. Cousins, Advisors of the Asian Review,” Asian Review 1, no. 3 (April 1920): 282.

103. Ishikawa Yoshihiro, “Tôzai Bunmeiron to Nihon no Rondan,” in Furuya Tetsuo, ed., Kindai Nihon no Ajia Ninshiki (Kyoto: Kyoto University Press, 1994), 395–432.

6. THE TRIUMPH OF NATIONALISM?

1. Signed between the British and French empires in May 1916, The Sykes-Picot Agreement laid out how these two empires would share the Middle East after the dismemberment of the Ottoman state, dividing the Ottoman provinces of Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Palestine into various French- and British-administered areas. The agreement took its name from its negotiators, Sir Mark Sykes of Britain and Georges Picot of France.

2. Woodrow Wilson’s “Fourteen Points” speech to the United States Congress on January 8, 1918, articulated what he considered the basic framework of a just and lasting peace after WWI. This included freedom of the seas and open covenants, the settlement of the boundaries of Eastern Europe according to the principle of self-determination, and a League of Nations that would enforce the peace. It constituted the only open statement by any of the belligerents of their war aims. The fourteen points thus became the basis for German and Ottoman surrender. Wilson asked for the settlement of competing claims for imperial territories based on the interest of the populations concerned and defined by the principle of “national self-determination.” I discuss conflicting interpretations of the idea of “national self-determination” below.

3. See Michael Adas, “Contested Hegemony: The Great War and the Afro-Asian Assault on the Civilizing Mission Ideology,” in Prasenjit Duara, ed., Decolonization: Perspectives from Now and Then (New York: Routledge, 2004), 78–100.

4. Arno Mayer, Wilson vs. Lenin: Political Origins of the New Diplomacy, 1917–1918 (Cleveland: World Publishing, 1964).

5. Number 12 of Wilson’s fourteen points read as follows: “The Turkish portion of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development, and the Dardanelles should be permanently opened as a free passage to the ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees.” For the full text of the fourteen points, see www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?doc=62.

6. Even Mustafa Kemal Paşa, later to become the leader of the national struggle against the British-led coalition, thought of establishing good relations with the British Empire after WWI. See Şerafettin Turan, “Mondros Mutarekesi Ertesinde Mustafa Kemal’in Orduya, Siyasete ve İngilizlerin Tutumuna İlişkin Düsünceleri,” Belleten (Ankara) 46, no. 182 (1982): 346.

7. Egyptian leader Sa’ad Zaghlul, Vietnamese leader Ho Chi Minh, and Indian nationalist leader Bal Tilak were some of the anticolonial leaders who aimed at gaining support for their cause at the Paris Peace Conference; see Erez Manela, “The Wilsonian Moment: Self Determination and the International Origins of Anticolonial Nationalism, 1917–1920” (Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 2003).

8. Mine [Sümer] Erol, “Wilson Prensipleri Cemiyeti’nin Amerika Cumhurbaşkam Wilson a Gönderdiği Muhtira,” in Ankara Üniversitesi Dil ve Tarih Coğrafya Fakültesi Tarih Araştirmalari Dergisi 3, nos. 4–5 (1966): 237–245. See also Mehmet Şahingöz and Vahdet Keleşyilmaz, “Milli Mücadele Dönemi Türk Basimnda Wilson Prensipleri,” Atatürk Araştirma Merkezi Dergisi (Temmuz) 12, no. 35 (July 1996): 357–378.

9. Mustafa Budak, Idealden Gerçeğe: Misaki Milliden Lozan’a Diş Politika (Istanbul: Küre Yayinlari, 2002), 64. In the first royal consultative assembly organized by the Ottoman government to discuss the crisis caused by the Greek invasion of Izmir (Birinci Saltanat Şurasi of May 26, 1919), delegates emphasized the importance of demanding the implementation of the Wilsonian principles, reminding the great powers of the promises of the civilized world. Several participants urged the Ottoman government to chart a pro-British and pro-American policy, with appeals to Wilsonianism, to receive their support for liberating Western Anatolian Muslims from Greek invasion. It was agreed that the government should try to get an invitation to go to the Paris Peace Conference to present its legitimate and just cause, under the twelfth point of the Wilsonian principles, against the foreign occupation of the Muslim-majority areas in Anatolia.

10. Mustafa Budak, “I. Dünya Savaşi Sonrasi Uluslarasi Düzen Kurma Surecinde Osmanli Devleti’nin Tavri: Paris Baris Konferansi’na Sunulan 23 Haziran 1919 Tarihli Muhtira,” Divan İlmi Araştirmalar Dergisi 4, no. 7 (1992): 191–215.

11. Budak, Idealden Gerçeğe, 86.

12. Mushir Hosain Kidwai was an Indian Muslim nationalist and a leading name in the international pan-Islamic network of intellectuals, with connections to the Ottoman government. He received a law education in England from 1897 to 1904. One of the founders of a pan-Islamic society established in London in 1903, he received a decoration from the Ottoman sultan, Abdulhamid II. Kidwai joined the Indian National Congress and became a founding member of the Khuddam-ul-Ka’ba Society (the organizational predecessor of the Khilafat movement). Living in England between 1913 and 1920, he served as the honorary secretary of the Central Islamic Society of London

13. S. Mushir Hosain Kidwai, The Future of the Muslim Empire: Turkey (London: Central Islamic Society, 1919); idem, The Sword Against Islam; or, A Defence of Islam’s Standard-Bearers (London: Central Islamic Society, 1919).

14. S. Mushir Hosain Kidwai, İslama çekilen kiliç, yahut, Alemdaran-i İslami müdafaa: Osmanli heyet-i murahhasasinin sulh konferansina takdim ettiği muhtira ve Paris sulh konferansi onlar meclisi tarafindan aldiği cevaba nazaran Osmanli devlet İslamiyesi meselesinin tenkidi (London: Londra Cemiyet-i Merkeziye-i İslamiyesi, 1919).

15. Kidwai later wrote in support of socialist internationalism. See S. Mushir Hosain Kidwai, Pan-Islamism and Bolshevism (London: Luzac, 1937).

16. See Mim Kemal Öke, Hilafet Hareketleri (Ankara: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfi Yayinlari, 1991), 43–45. For a more comprehensive assessment of the Khilafat movement, see Gail Minault, The Khilafat Movement: Religious Symbolism and Political Mobilization in India (New York: Columbia University Press, 1982).

17. Muhammad Ali made this argument in a speech in London in 1920; see Jacob M. Landau, The Politics of Pan-Islam: Ideology and Organization (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990), 208.

18. Mustafa Necati, “Sevgili Payitahtimizin İşgali Karşisinda,” İzmir’e Doğru, no. 46 (March 24, 1920), quoted in Şahingöz and Keleşyilmaz, “Milli Mücadele Dönemi.”

19. For a recent assessment of the Sèvres Treaty and its renegotiation from the perspective of the new world order established by the Paris Peace Conference, see Margaret Macmillan, Paris 1919 (New York: Random House Trade Paperbacks, 2003), 427–455.

20. See Martin Kramer, Islam Assembled: The Advent of the Muslim Congresses (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986), 72–79.

21. British intelligence took note of this conference and reported in on September 14, 1921. For the activities of Ahmed al-Sharif al-Sanusi in connection with the Ankara government, see Anita L. P. Burdett, Islamic Movements in the Arab World (Slough: Archive, 1988), 1:146. For an assessment of the British intelligence reports during this period and the basis of their analysis of the pan-Islamic activities of Ankara government, see A. L. Macfie, “British Intelligence and the Turkish National Movement, 1919–1922,” Middle Eastern Studies 37, no. 1 (January 2001), 1–16.

22. For the international pan-Islamic activism of the post-WWI period, see Landau, The Politics of Pan-Islam, 231–234.

23. Born in 1858, Ahmed Riza joined the Young Turk opposition to Sultan Abdulhamid II in 1889 and for about nineteen years played a leadership role in the opposition movement. He became an important member of an international group of positivists in Paris. After the 1908 constitutional revolution, Ahmed Riza entered parliament as a representative from Istanbul and later became the president of both the parliament and the senate.

24. Ahmed Riza, Meclisi Mebusan ve Ayan Reisi Ahmed Riza Bey’in Amlari (Istanbul: Arba Yayinlari, 1988), pp. 76–80.

25. Using his personal contacts, he helped to arrange the mission to Ankara by Franclin Bouillon, who signed the first agreement between France and the nationalist government in Anatolia.

26. Ahmed Riza, La faillite morale de la politique occidentale en Orient (Paris, 1922; reprint, Tunis: Bouslama, 1979).

27. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, “Fransiz Muharriri Maurice Pernot’ya Demeç (29/10/1923),” in Uygur Kocabaşoğlu, ed., Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce, vol. 3, Modernleşme ve Baticilik (Istanbul: Iletişim Yayinlari, 2002), 599–600.

28. Mustafa Kemal, ‘A Speech Delivered by Ghazi Mustapha Kemal, October 1927” (Leipzig: K. F. Koehler, 1929), microform, 586-587, quoted in Roderick Davison, “Turkish Diplomacy from Mudros to Lausanne,” in Essays in Ottoman and Turkish History, 1774–1923: The Impact of the West (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1990), 586–587.

29. Erkan Türkmen, “M. İkbal’in Gözüyle Türkiye ve Atatürk,” in Ata (Dergisi), no. 2 (1992): 18–29.

30. For the patterns of response of the Indian Muslims to the abolishment of the caliphate, see Mohammad Sadiq, The Turkish Revolution and the Indian Freedom Movement (Delhi: Macmillan India, 1983), 104–130.

31. Arnold Toynbee, Survey of International Affairs, 1925, vol. 1, Islamic World Since the Peace Settlement (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1927), p. 53. For the caliphate’s international importance, see also Arnold J. Toynbee and Kenneth P. Kirkwood, Turkey (London: E. Benn, 1926), 112.

32. Ali Satan, “Halifeliğin Kaldinlişi, 1919–1924” (M.A. thesis, Marmara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitutüsü, 2000).

33. The Ottoman newspaper Vakit noted that the League of Nations did not even have a modicum of power or initiative. If great powers experienced difficulties over second-and third-rate matters, they passed them on to the league. See Yücel Güçlü, “Turkey’s Entrance into the League of Nations,” Middle Eastern Studies 39, no. 1 (2003): 189. Though not a member of the league, Turkish delegates participated in various conferences and committees, such as the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference in 1928, the Advisory Convention on Traffic in Opium, the International Opium Convention, the International Labor Organization, and the Briand Commission of Enquiry for European Union.

34. The Mosul question was not resolved with the Lausanne Treaty but referred to the league by the British government, which argued that the league had given it the mandate over Iraq. Turkey saw the league as helping Britain to obtain in peacetime what it had been unable to get through war.

35. Ahmed Riza, The Moral Bankruptcy of Western Policy Towards the East (Ankara: Ministry of Culture and Tourism Publications, 1988), 210.

36. See Halil Halid, Turk Hakimiyeti ve Ingiliz Cihangirligi (Istanbul: Yeni Matbaasi 1925).

37. Miwa Kimitada, “Japanese Opinions on Woodrow Wilson in War and Peace,” Monumenta Nipponica 22, nos. 3–4 (1967): 368–389.

38. The Japanese name of the proposal means the abolition of racial discrimination, which does not exactly mean “race equality,” Therefore, some scholars choose to name it the “racial nondiscrimination clause.” In this work, I will follow the “racial equality proposal” translation of Naoko Shimazu, because the proposal was later interpreted as an attempt to make racial equality a tenet of the League of Nations, despite the initial Japanese wording and intention.

39. Naoko Shimazu, Japan, Race and Equality: The Racial Equality Proposal of 1919 (London: Routledge, 1998), 66–67.

40. For an example of the dominance of this civilizational paradigm, see Hara Takashi, “Harmony Between East and West,” in K. K. Kawakami, ed., What Japan Thinks (New York: Macmillan, 1921).

41. Frederick Dickinson, War and National Reinvention: Japan in the Great War, 1914–1919 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2001).

42. African-American intellectuals shared this critique of the league; see Marc Gallicchio, Black Internationalism in Asia, 1895–1945: The African American Encounter with Japan and China (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2000), 21–29.

43. Ôkawa Shûmei, “Kôwa Kaigi ni Okeru Wiruson no Shippai,” Michi, no. 138 (October 1919): 45–54.

44. “The League of Nations and Colored People,” Asian Review 1, no. 4 (May–June 1920): 347–348.

45. Miwa, “Japanese Opinions on Woodrow Wilson,” 382–385.

46. The Washington Conference system relied on the international agreement at the Washington Conference in February 1922 among Japan, France, Great Britain, and the United States to replace the Anglo-Japanese Alliance with a naval disarmament program and to establish international cooperation among them to respect the status quo in the Pacific Region. It allowed for a compromise between Japan’s special interest in Manchuria and the open door policy of the USA. The conference agreement set the framework of power relations in the Pacific Region for almost a decade.

47. Ôtsuka Takehiro, Ôkawa Shûmei: Aru Fukkô Kakushin Shugisha no Shisô (Tokyo: Chûô Kôronsha, 1995), 92–93.

48. The final resolution of the conference was telegraphed, as the opinion of the Japanese people, to Georges Clemenceau, head of the Paris Peace Conference, and to the prime minister of Japan, Hara Takashi. See “Jinshuteki Sabetsu Teppai Kiseikai Un-dôki,” Ajia Jiron 3, no. 3 (March 1919): 60–61.

49. For the texts of Paul Richard’s speeches, see Paul Richard, “Jinshuteki Sabetsu Teppai Mondai to Nippon Kokumin no Tenshoku,” Ajia Jiron 3, no. 4 (April 1919): 25. See also idem, “Mazu Ajia Renmei wo Jitsugen Seyo,” Ajia Jiron 3, no. 5 (May 1919): 31–32.

50. Ôkawa Shûmei, “Indo Kokuminteki Undo no Yûrai,” in Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû, 7 vols., ed. Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû Kankôkai (Tokyo: Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû Kankôkai, 1961–1974), 2:508–510.

51. Among the Japanese Asianists, Miyazaki Tôten seems to have been one of the very few who agreed with Paul Richard. See Hiraishi Naoaki, “Kindai Nihon no Kokusai Chitsujyokan to Ajiashugi,” in 20 Seiki Shisutemu (Tokyo: Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai, 1998), 1:196–197

52. Ôkawa Shûmei, “Kroma Shi no Ejipto Tôji,” in Fukkô Ajia no Shomondai (Tokyo: Daitôkaku, 1922; reprint, Tokyo: Chûô Kôronsha, 1993), 234–238.

53. The Baku Congress aimed to create cooperation between the anticolonial nationalist movements and the new Soviet Russia, advancing several unorthodox theses on national and colonial questions and ending with a revolutionary manifesto to the People’s of the East that urged them to unite against colonialism in order to bring about nationalist awakening. For the proceedings of the Baku Congress, see John Riddell, ed., To See the Dawn: Baku, 1920—First Congress of the People’s of the East (New York: Pathfinder, 1993).

54. For Enver Paşa’s cooperation with the Bolshevik government and his activities during the years of 1921 and 1922, see Suhnaz Yilmaz, “An Ottoman Warrior Abroad: Enver Paşa as an Expatriate,” Middle East Studies 35, no. 4 (October 1999): 40–70.

55. Enver Paşa died in battle, on August 4, 1922, in one of the military confrontations in the Central Asian Basmachi resistance against the Bolshevik army.

56. B. Nicolaevsky, “Russia, Japan, and the Pan-Asiatic Movement to 1925,” Far Eastern Quarterly 8, no. 3 (May 1949): 269.

57. Tan Malaka, “Communism and Pan-Islamism,” What Next: Marxist Discussion Journal, no. 21 (2001), www.whatnextjournal.co.uk/Pages/Back/Wnext21/Panislam.html.

58. Ôkawa., Fukkô Ajia, 162–176.

59. For pan-Asianist Ôkawa’s early positive ideas on the role of the Soviet Revolution in Asian revival, see ibid., chap. 7, 170–185. This sympathetic evaluation of Soviet policy in Asia was shared by Indian nationalists in Tokyo, who advocated an alliance between Asian nationalism and Bolshevism to purge white colonialism from Asia. Ôkawa’s sympathy with the Bolshevik efforts to create a noncapitalist economy and his later advocacy of normalizing Japan’s diplomatic ties with the Soviet Union became one of the reasons behind his disagreement with Kita Ikki, who remained a firm opponent of the new government in Russia. When Soviet envoy Joffe visited Tokyo in February 1923, Ôkawa Shûmei advocated Japanese rapprochement with the new socialist regime in opposition to Kita Ikki, who viewed Soviet Russia as a menace to Japan and the rest of Asia. See George M. Wilson, “Kita Ikki, Ôkawa Shûmei, and the Yûzonsha,” Papers on Japan, no. 2 (1963): 161–162.

60. Takeuchi Yoshimi, “Nihon to Ajiashugi,” in Nihon to Ajia (Tokyo: Chikuma Gakujitsu Bunshô, 1993), 337–340.

61. Ibid., 337-340; Ôgata Kôhei, ed., Nippon to Indo (Tokyo: Sanseidô, 1978), 61–66.

62. The polarization of right- and left-wing radical ideologies in domestic politics occurred from 1917 to 1921. Faced with the turmoil in the international order symbolized by the Russian Revolution and the significant domestic discontent in Japan near the end of WWI, Ôkawa Shûmei and Mitsukawa Kametarô organized a cosmopolitan study group, Rôsôkai (Old and Young Society), to discuss both world developments and social problems at home. Their group included a highly diverse array of individuals, including socialists and liberals, who would meet regularly to discuss the global trends created by the Great War. Well-known socialists such as Takabatake Motoyuki and Sakai Toshihiko, the agrarianist Gondô Seikyô, the populist nationalist Nakano Seigô and even the famous liberal Ôi Kentarô were members of Rôsôkai. When this study group ended its meetings after only one year, Ôkawa Shûmei, Mitsukawa Kametarô, and Kita Ikki organized a radical nationalist organization called Yûzonsha. The cofounders of Yûzonsha hoped to execute Kita Ikki’s plan of national reorganization with the goal of fostering conditions in Japan that would aid Asian revival.

Mitsukawa Kametarô (1888–1936) was a pan-Asianist intellectual and activist who cooperated with Ôkawa throughout the 1920s and 1930s. For his most famous book on Asia, see Mitsukawa Kametarô, Ubawaretaru Ajia (Tokyo: Kôbundô Shoten, 1921); for his view of civilizational conflict, see idem, Tôzai jinshu tôsô shikan (Tokyo: Tôyô Kyôkai Shuppanbu, 1924).

63. The term “yûzon” comes from an ancient Chinese poem and means “to survive.” In terms of its program for domestic politics, Yûzonsha advocated a state-controlled economy and limitations on the wealth of individuals. For a discussion of the economic ideas of Ôkawa Shûmei and Yûzonsha, see Ôtsuka, Ôkawa Shûmei, 199-200; and Wilson, “Kita Ikki, Ôkawa Shûmei and the Yûzonsha,” 153–155.

64. Takeuchi Yoshimi was the first to emphasize this aspect; see Takeuchi Yoshimi, “Profile of Asian Minded Man X: Ôkawa Shûmei,” The Developing Economies 7, no. 3 (September 1969): 368–369.

65. According to Ôkawa’s argument, in spite of the heroic achievements of the Meiji Restoration, Japan had fallen behind its goals.

To have the heart to die for the purpose of raising our country, and to spread justice to the four seas, was actually the real wish of our seniors who embodied the spirit of the Meiji Restoration. The nation of new Japan has to make this real wish a tradition and shoulder the responsibility of its job vigorously. For to undertake the leadership of Asia and create Asian unity is in fact the only way to bring justice to the four seas. This should be done for the sake of Japan, and for the sake of Asia, and for the sake of humanity.

(ÔKAWA, FUKKÔ AJIA, 21)

66. Both Ôkawa and Kita Ikki used the metaphor of “the sword of Islam” to describe their mission: “It was about the same time when my heart became attracted to the faith of Muhammad, whose doctrines require a unity of religion and politics and whose religion puts an emphasis on the principle of ‘either the sword or the Quran” (Ôkawa, Fukkô Ajia, 21-22). In his later scholarly works on Islam, Ôkawa commented that this was an Orientalist depiction of Islam and had nothing to do with Islamic history. See Ôkawa Shûmei, Kaikyô Gairon (Tokyo: Keiô Shobô, 1942; reprint, Tokyo: Chûô Kôronsha, 1992), 10–11.

67. For the historical development of Bolshevik policies toward pan-Asiatic movements as well as nationalist movements in East Asia, see Nicolaevsky, “Russia, Japan and the Pan-Asiatic Movement,” 259–295.

68. Bertrand Russell, Roads to Freedom: Socialism, Anarchism and Syndicalism (London: Allen and Unwin, 1918).

69. Stolen Asia was the title of a well-known book by Ôkawa’s close friend and comrade Mitsukawa Kametarô (1888–1936). See Mitsukawa, Ubawaretaru Ajia.

70. For example, interest in Japan among leading Vietnamese nationalists from 1905 to 1914 was replaced by Wilsonian and socialist inclinations after World War I. For the pro-Japanese trend in mainstream Vietnamese nationalism, see David Marr, Vietnamese Anti-Colonialism, 1885–1925 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971), 113. Ho Chi Minh’s biography illustrates the appeal of both Woodrow Wilson’s principle of self-determination and socialist internationalism. See Mark Bradley, Imagining Vietnam and America: The Making of Postcolonial Vietnam, 1919–1950 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2000).

71. Mohammad Sadiq, The Turkish Revolution and the Indian Freedom Movement (Delhi: Macmillan India, 1983). For Chinese nationalist interest in the success of Turkish national movement, see Chin Tokujin and Yasui Sankichi, eds., Sonbun Kôen Dai Ajia Shugi Shiryôshû: 1924 nen, 11 Gatsu Nihon to Chûgoku no Kiro (Kyoto: Hôritsu Bun-kasha 1989), 44-47.

72. Lothrop Stoddard, The New World of Islam (New York: Scribner’s, 1921). The fact that Stoddard’s book was translated into Arabic and Ottoman within a few years is indicative of the global circulation of ideas. In the Arabic translation, the extensive and far-ranging commentaries by pan-Islamic thinker Shakip Arslan made the translation almost a different work. See Lothrop Stoddard, Yeni Alem-i Islam, trans. Ali Riza Seyfi (Istanbul: Ali Şükrü Matbaasi, 1922). For the Arabic translation, see Lûthrub Stûdârd, Hadir al-Alam al-Islami, trans. Ajjâj Nuwayhid, ed. al-Amîr Shakîb Arslân (Cairo: Matbaa-i Salafiyah, 1924).

73. Ôkawa, Fukkô Ajia, 37–41.

74. The Rising Tide of Color Against the White World Supremacy was the title of an influential book by Lothrop Stoddard (1883–1950), first published in New York by Scribner’s in 1920. Ôkawa often referred to Stoddard’s works in his writings.

75. Ôkawa, Fukkô Ajia, 27–45.

76. For the diplomatic background of the Immigration Act of 1924 and its long-term consequences for the U.S.-Japanese relations, see Minohara Toshihiro, Hainichi Iminho to Nichibei Kankei: “Hanihara Shokan” no Shinso to Sono “Judainaru Kekka” (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 2003), 259–266.

77. For a recent assessment of the impact of the 1924 Immigration Act on U.S.-Japanese relations, see Hirobe lzumi, Japanese Pride, American Prejudice: Modifying the Exclusion Clause of the 1924 Immigration Act (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001).

78. Minohara, Hainichi Iminho to Nichibei Kankei, 258–264.

79. Peter Duus, “Nagai Ryutaro and the ‘White Peril,’ 1905–1944,” Journal of Asian Studies, 31, no. 1 (November 1971): 41–48.

80. In fact, the primary international publication of Kokuryûkai, the Asian Review, devoted its massive attention to both the racial equality proposal at the Paris Peace Conference and the issue of discrimination against Japanese immigrants in the USA. The Asian Review mailed its initial copies to Japan-related diplomats, politicians, and business leaders in the United States. It published editorials on issues of race equality and the status of Japanese immigrants in the USA in almost every issue. As examples, see Kaiichi Toda, “The Japanese in California,” Asian Review l, no. 4 (May–June 1920): 362-363; and Tokutomi Sohô, ‘America and Japan,” Asian Review 2, no. 2 (February 1921): 134–138.

81. Ogata Sadako, “The Role of Liberal Nongovernmental Organizations in Japan,” in Dorothy Borg and Okamoto Shumpei, eds., Pearl Harbor as History (New York: Columbia University Press, 1973): 459-486; and Yoichi Nakano, “East-West Harmony: The Immigration Controversy and the U.S.-Japan Relations Committee (1916–1932)” (unpublished paper submitted to History 1851 seminar at Harvard University, January 2000).

82. Ôkawa Shûmei, “Nichi-Bei Mondai,” Tôyô 27 (June 1924), reprinted in idem, Ôkawa Shûmei Kankei Monjo, ed. Ôkawa Shûmei Kankei Monjo Kankôkai (Tokyo: Fuyô Shohô Shuppan, 1998), 194–196.

83. Prasenjit Duara, “Transnationalism and the Predicament of Sovereignty: China, 1900–1945,” American Historical Review 102, no. 4 (October 1997): 1030-51; Kobayashi Toshihiko, “Sun Yatsen and Asianism: A Positive Approach,” in J. Y. Wong, ed., Sun Yatsen: His International Ideas and International Connections (Sydney, N.S.W.: Wild Peony, 1987), 15–38.

84. For the text (in multiple languages) and media coverage of Sun Yat-sen’s Great Asianism speech, see Chin Tokujin and Yasui Sankichi, eds., Sonbun Kôen Dai Ajia Shugi Shiryôshû: 1924 nen, 11 Gatsu Nihon to Chûgoku no Kiro (Kyoto: Hôritsu Bunkasha, 1989).

85. Ibid., 11.

86. The American challenge to Japan referred to here is the anti-Japanese Immigration Act of 1924.

87. Ôkawa Shûmei, ‘Ajia, Yoroppa, Nihon” (1925), in Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû, 2:872–873. The English translation is taken from the excerpt Ôkawa quoted in the English version of his post-Pearl Harbor lectures on the radio. See Ôkawa Shûmei, A History of Anglo-American Aggression in East Asia, trans. Yoshio Agawa and P. B. Clarke (Tokyo: Daitôa Shuppan Kabushiki Kaisha 1944), 2.

88. Ôkawa Shûmei, “Shin Tôyô Seishin,” in Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû, 2:946. Ôkawa did not specify when he first read Soloviev.

89. Ôkawa Shûmei, “Soloviev no Sensô Ron,” Gekkan Nihon, June 1928, reprinted in Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû, 4:543–560. See also Vladimir Sergeyevich Soloviev, The Justification of the Good: An Essay on Moral Philosophy, trans. Nathalie Duddington (New York: Macmillan, 1918); Paul Marshall Allen, Vladimir Soloviev: Russian Mystic (New York: Steiner, 1978).

90. Mark R. Peattie, “Forecasting a Pacific War, 1912–1933: The Idea of a Conditional Japanese Victory,” in J. White, M. Umegaki, and T. Havens, eds., The Ambivalence of Nationalism: Modern Japan Between East and West (New York: University Press of America, 1990), 116.

91. Incidentally, two decades later, when Ôkawa’s prosecutor questioned him about his advocacy of a war between Japan and the United States, Ôkawa responded that what he wrote was not a plan for Japanese aggression against the United States but rather a prediction of an American attack if Japan stood up for principles of Asian liberation. See Exhibits of International Military Tribunal for the Far East, 60 vols. (Tokyo, 1946–1948), vol. 31, exhibit 2177.

92. For ideas of a Muslim League of Nations or its variants, see Landau, The Politics of Pan-Islam, pp. 219 and 222.

93. Seiyûkai was one of the two major political parties in Japan during the interwar period. Zen Ajia Kyôkai had been founded in the aftermath of the anti-Japanese Immigration Act of 1926 under the leadership of Seiyûkai director Iwasaki Isao. See Mizuno Naoki, “Senkyûhyaku Nijû Nendai Nihon, Chôsen, Chûgoku ni okeru Ajia Ninshiki no Ichidaimen: Ajia Minzoku Kaigi o Meguru Sankoku no Ronchô,” in Furuya Tetsuo, ed., Kindai Nihon no Ajia Ninshiki (Kyoto: Kyôto Daigaku Jinbun Kagaku Kenkyûjo, 1994), 509–544.

94. The organizing committee was composed of Won Kong-su, China; Lin Koi, China; R. B. Bose, India; Raja Pratap, Afghanistan; General Ricarte, Philippines; Ôkawa Shûmei, Tokyo; Gen Saroi, Annam; and J. Imazato.

95. Nakatani Takeyô, a young student and follower of Ôkawa Shûmei’s Asianism, was among the seven members of the Japanese delegation in Shanghai. Two close friends of Ôkawa, Indian representative Rash Behari Bose and Afghanistan representative Pratap Mehandra, were other important figures at both conferences.

96. Upon a proposal by its most active delegate, the Indian nationalist Rash Behari Bose, the conference issued a note of appreciation to those who had done much to forward the cause of the Asian People’s. The list included not only nationalist leaders such as the king of Afghanistan, Amanullah Khan; Mustafa Kemal Pasha of Turkey; Sa’ad Zaghlul of Egypt; Gandhi of India; Aguinaldo of the Philippines; and Sun Yat-sen from China but also Tôyama Mitsuru and Inukai Tsuyoshi, two of the most prominent Asianist figures in Japan.

97. “Asiatic Conference: The Gathering at Nagasaki,” Japan Weekly Chronicle, August 15, 1926, 158.

98. “Asiatic Congress,” Japan Weekly Chronicle, July 29, 1926, 135–136.

99. “An Asiatic Congress,” Japan Weekly Chronicle, July 22, 1926, 93–94. In Nagasaki, it was only on the third day of the conference that local Japanese attendance increased dramatically, mainly because of the international media coverage of the event on the days before. The meeting was held at the Young Men’s Christian Association hall because of financial limitations.

100. Pratap was the second-closest Indian nationalist to Ôkawa after Behari Bose. For Ôkawa’s critique of the Japanese government’s unfriendly treatment of Mehandra Pratap, see Ôkawa Shûmei, “Pratap-kun wo Mukaeru,” Gekkan Nihon, no. 3 (June 1925): 19–20.

101. Both Rash Behari Bose and Mehandra Pratap had little contact with the national leadership in India, even though Pratap traveled around the world for Asianist causes and received financial support from Afghanistan’s King Amanullah Khan. See Raja Mehandra Pratap, My Life Story of Fifty-five Years (Dehradun: World Federation, 1947). One Filipino delegate to the Nagasaki conference, General Ricardo, was so out of touch with Filipino nationalism that, by the time he returned to the Philippines during the Japanese occupation, he could play no role in his home country in spite of his Japanese connections (private communication with Professor Nick Cullather of Indiana University, April 2001). Prince Cuong De of Vietnam, although he was unable to join the Nagasaki conference, had a similar experience because of his exile in Japan during the 1920s and 1930s. When Japanese occupation forces in Vietnam decided to end French colonial rule in 1945, Prince Cuong De found that he had become almost irrelevant to Vietnamese nationalism and could not take any part in the independence movement. See David Marr, Vietnamese Anti-Colonialism, 1885–1925 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971), 238.

102. For an example, see “Letter to the Editor,” Japan Weekly Chronicle, August 5, 1926, 157.

103. Japan Weekly Chronicle, July 15, 1926, 68.

104. Japan Weekly Chronicle, August 15, 1926, 158.

105. Mizuno, “Senkyûhyaku Nijû Nendai Nihon, Chôsen, Chûgoku ni okeru Ajia Ninshiki no Ichidaimen,” 543–544.

106. New York Times, July 17, 1926.

107. Japan Weekly Chronicle, July 29, 1926, 121.

108. Ibid., 127.

109. Japan Weekly Chronicle, July 22, 1926, 94.

110. Zumoto Motosada, Japan and the Pan-Asiatic Movement (Tokyo: Japan Times, 1926). The book is based on Motosada’s lecture at the Congress of the International University in Geneva in 1926.

7. THE REVIVAL OF A PAN-ASIANIST VISION OF WORLD ORDER IN JAPAN (1931–1945)

1. The Manchurian Incident of 1931 initiated a process that led to the establishment of a Japanese-controlled puppet government in Manchuria and Japan’s withdrawal from the League of Nations. The Japanese Kwantung army guarding the South Manchurian Railways bombed parts of the railway in Mukden to create a pretext to occupy Manchuria with the ostensible purpose of providing security against Chinese nationalists in September 1931. Instead of withdrawing from the occupied territories, the Japanese government created the puppet state Manchukuo in February 1932. Nonrecognition of this state by the League of Nations, then, became the reason for Japanese withdrawal from the league in 1933.

2. Frederick Dickinson, War and National Reinvention: Japan in the Great War, 1914–1919 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2001).

3. Richard Storry, The Double Patriots: A Study of Japanese Nationalism (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1957).

4. Christopher Szpilman, “Conservatism and Its Enemies in Prewar Japan: The Case of Hiranuma Kiichirô and the Kokuhonsha,” Hitotsubashi Journal of Social Studies 30, no. 2 (December 1998): 101–133.

5. Genzo Yamamoto, “Defending Japan’s Civilization and Civilizing Mission in Asia: The Resilience and Triumph of Illiberalism in the House of Peers, 1919–1934” (Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1999). See also Arima Tatsuo, The Failure of Freedom: A Portrait of Modern Japanese Intellectuals (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1969). For a previous work on this topic that focuses more on the failure of the liberals to fight the antiliberals, see Toru Takemoto, The Failure of Liberalism in Japan: Shidehara Kijuro’s Encounter with Anti-Liberals (Washington, D.C.: University Press of America, 1978).

6. Louise Young, Japan’s Total Empire: Manchuria and the Culture of Wartime Empire (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998).

7. For Nitobe Inazô’s arguments justifying Japan’s Manchuria policy, see Thomas W. Burkman, “The Geneva Spirit,” in John F. Howes, ed., Nitobe Inazô: Japan’s Bridge Across the Pacific (Boulder, Colo.: Westview, 1995), 204–209. See also George Oshiro, “The End: 1929–1933,” in Howes, Nitobe Inazô, 255–258.

8. For Zumoto’s defense of the Manchurian Incident before international audiences in the United States and Europe, see Zumoto Motosada, The Origin and History of the Anti-Japanese Movement in China (Tokyo: Herald, 1932); and idem, Japan in Manchuria and Mongolia (Tokyo: Herald, 1931). For Nitobe Inazô’s opinion on the Manchurian Incident, see Nitobe Inazô, “Japan and the League of Nations,” in The Works of Nitobe Inazô (Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 1972), 4:234-239; and idem, “The Manchurian Question and Sino-American Relations,” in The Works of Nitobe Inazô, 4:221–233.

9. For a discussion of Shôwa Kenkyûkai, see J. Victor Koschmann, “Asianism’s Ambivalent Legacy,” in Peter J. Katzenstein and Takashi Shiraishi, eds., Network Power: Japan and Asia (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1997), 90–94. Shôwa Kenkyûkai (1933–1940) was labeled in the popular press as Konoe Fumimaro’s brain trust. Especially during Konoe’s tenure as prime minister (1937–1939, 1940–1941), Shôwa Kenkyûkai was preoccupied with formulating the East Asian Cooperative Body and the New Order Movement. The membership of the association was diverse and included scholars and journalists from different ideological backgrounds.

For the anti-Western ideas of the Kyoto School philosophers, see John Dower, War Without Mercy: Race and Power in the Pacific War (New York: Pantheon, 1986), 227.

10. Harry Harootunian, Overcome by Modernity: History, Culture, and Community in Interwar Japan (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000); Stefan Tanaka, Japan’s Orient: Rendering Pasts into History (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993); Kevin Doak, Dreams of Difference: The Japan Romantic School and the Crisis of Modernity (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1994). There is an ongoing debate about the relationship of the pro-war nature of the Kyoto School philosophy and its vision of overcoming modernity. See Ueda Shizuteru,” Nishida, Nationalism, and the War in Question,” in James Heisig and John Moraldo, eds., Rude Awakenings: Zen, the Kyoto School, and the Question of Nationalism (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1995), 77-106; Yusa Michiko, “Nishida and Totalitarianism: A Philosopher’s Resistance,” in Heisig and Moraldo, Rude Awakenings, 107-131; and Andrew Feenberg, “The Problem of Modernity in the Philosophy of Nishida,” in Heisig and Moraldo, Rude Awakenings, 151–173.

11. Akira Iriye, “The Failure of Economic Expansionism: 1918–1931,” in Bernard S. Silberman and H. D. Harootunian, eds., Japan in Crises: Essays on Taishô Democracy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974), 265.

12. James B. Crowley, “A New Asian Order: Some Notes on Prewar Japanese Nationalism,” in Silberman and Harootunian, Japan in Crises, 273.

13. This continuity in change was theorized by Andrew Gordon as the transition from imperial democracy to imperial fascism. See Andrew Gordon, Labor and Imperial Democracy in Prewar Japan (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991).

14. “Confronted by a formidable cluster of diplomatic, economic, and military problems, the Imperial government [of Japan] resorted to a series of potential solutions: Manchukuo, a Japanese Monroe Doctrine, Hirota’s three principles, an advance to the South Seas, a national defense state, and the rejuvenation of China”; see James B. Crowley, “Intellectuals as Visionaries of the New Asian Order,” in James W. Morley, ed., Dilemmas of Growth in Prewar Japan (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1971), 395. Similarly, Ben-Ami Shillony has demonstrated that, even at the peak of the Pacific War, Japan did not deviate from the normal functioning of the Meiji Constitution. See Ben-Ami Shillony, Politics and Culture in Wartime Japan (New York: Oxford University Press, 1981).

15. Hayashi Fusao, Daitôa Sensô Kôteiron, 2 vols. (Tokyo: Banchô Shobô, 1964–1965), cited in Crowley, “A New Asian Order,” 297–298.

16. For example, Mark Peattie has argued that Ishiwara Kanji’s views “were part of this surging anti-Western nationalism during the interwar period, and his concept of a Final War must be seen as a reinvigoration of a persistent, if long-muted, theme of challenge to the West throughout Japan’s modern history to 1945” (Mark R. Peattie, Ishiwara Kanji and Japan’s Confrontation with the West [Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975], 368).

17. For a good example of the perception of Western retreat from Asia, see No-Yong Park, Retreat of the West: The White Man’s Adventure in Eastern Asia (Boston: Hale, Cushman, and Flint, 1937).

18. U. Ottama (1879–1939) was an influential figure in Burmese nationalism. Influenced by both the Indian National Congress and the Japanese model, Ottama denounced British colonial rule. He was imprisoned by the British authorities for a very long time, ultimately dying in prison. For Ôkawa’s praise of Ottama, see Ôkawa Shûmei, “Ottama Hôshi o Omou,” in Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû, 7 vols., ed. Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû Kankôkai (Tokyo: Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû Kankôkai, 1961–1974), 2:913–915.

19. Selçuk Esenbel, “Japanese Interest in the Ottoman Empire,” in Bert Edstrom, ed., The Japanese and Europe: Images and Perceptions (Richmond, Surrey, U.K.: Curzon, 2000), 112-120; El-Mostafa Rezrazi, “Pan-Asianism and the Japanese Islam: Hatano Uhô. From Espionage to Pan-Islamist Activity,” Annals of the Japan Association for Middle East Studies, no. 12 (1997): 89–112.

20. Tanaki Ippei was a scholar of China and Buddhism. He converted to Islam and performed pilgrimages to Mecca in 1925 and 1933. Wakabayashi describes Tanaka Ippei as a fighter for “Sonnô Yûkoku,” meaning “Revere the Emperor, and be a Patriot,” despite the fact that Tanaka became a Muslim and adopted the name Haji Nur Muhammad in 1918.

21. His brother, Wakabayashi Kyûman, worked for the same cause, operating undercover as a merchant among Chinese Muslims until he died in Changsha in 1924. For Wakabayashi’s reflections on the history of the Kokuryûkai circle of Islam policy advocates, see Wakabayashi Han, Kaikyô Sekai to Nihon (Tokyo: Wakabayashi Han, 1937), 1–3.

22. Wakabayashi, Kaikyô Sekai to Nihon, 3–7. Araki Sadao (1877–1966) was a leader in the Imperial Way faction of the army.

23. Ôkawa Shûmei, “Cho Gakuryo Shi o Tazuneru no Ki” (November 1928), in Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû, 4:591.

24. Christopher Szpilman, “The Dream of One Asia: Ôkawa Shûmei and Japanese Pan-Asianism,” in H. Fuess, ed., The Japanese Empire in East Asia and Its Postwar Legacy (Munich: German Institute of Japanese Studies, 1998), 51.

25. Ôkawa Shûmei, “Manmô Mondai no Kôsatsu,” Gekkan Nihon, no. 75 (June 1931), reprinted in Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû, 2:649–683.

26. See Awaya Kentaro and Yoshida Yutada, eds., International Prosecution Section (IPS) (Tokyo: Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai, 1980), 23:396–398. During the interrogation, Ôkawa conceded that he knew something would happen but noted that many others at that time had the same knowledge and it was not a secret.

27. For instance, as the biography of Ishiwara Kanji, the military brain of the Manchurian Incident, confirms, ideas about a final war and East-West confrontation, which were very important in Ôkawa Shûmei’s pan-Asianism, were commonly shared by other European, American, and Japanese thinkers, and Ôkawa was not the main inspiration for Ishiwara’s plans. See Peattie, Ishiwara Kanji, 27–86.

28. William Miles Fletcher, The Search for a New Order: Intellectuals and Fascism in Pre-war Japan (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1982), 29–30. For the detailed arguments of Rôyama on the issue of Manchuria policy, see also Rôyama Masamichi, Japan’s Position in Manchuria (Tokyo: Institute of Pacific Relations-Japan Council, 1929).

29. Even in June 1931, shortly before the Manchurian Incident, when Ôkawa warned that a war could break out between China and Japan at a slight provocation and suggested the necessity of a radical change in policy in Manchuria, his ideas still were not exceptional enough to single him out as an instigator of Kwantung Army officers. See Ôkawa, “Manmô Mondai no Kôsatsu,” 679–682.

30. Ôkawa Shûmei, “Nijyû no Nankyoku ni tai suru Kakugo,” Gekkan Nihon, May 1932, reprinted in Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû, 4:629-631; and idem, “Manshu Shin Kokka no Kensetsu,” Gekkan Nihon, July 1932, in Ôkawa Shûmei Kankei Monjo, ed. Ôkawa Shûmei Kankei Monjo Kankôkai (Tokyo: Fuyô Shohô Shuppan, 1998), 244–248.

31. Ôkawa Shûmei, “Daitô Kyôeiken no Rekishiteki Konkyo,” in Dai Nippon Genron Hôkokukai, ed., Kokka to Bunka (Tokyo: Dômei Tsûshinsha, 1943), 29–43.

32. For Ôkawa Shûmei’s main article on the withdrawal from the League of Nations, see “Kokusai Renmei to Nihon,” Tôyô, May 1932, reprinted in Ôkawa Shûmei Kankei Monjo, 232.

33. For Ôkawa’s advocacy of the withdrawal from the league before the Manchurian Incident, see Ôkawa Shûmei, “Nihon no Kokusai Chii O Kokoromiru,” Daitô Bunka, May 1929, reprinted in Ôkawa Shûmei Kankei Monjo, 234–243.

34. Inukai was assassinated by a group of radical nationalist army cadets and naval officers. Ôkawa Shûmei was indicted, and found guilty, of providing material assistance to this group. It is ironic that he ended up contributing to Inukai Tsuyoshi’s assasination, as pan-Asianists usually viewed Inukai positively, and the 1926 Nagasaki pan-Asiatic conference honored him as one of the Asian politicians who aided the cause of Asian people’s awakening.

35. The fifteen-year prison sentence Ôkawa received on February 3, 1934, was reduced to five years on October 24, 1935. Because of his health problems, he was allowed to postpone his prison term until June 16, 1936. He was finally paroled on October 13, 1937. See Ôtsuka Takehiro, Ôkawa Shûmei to Kindai Nihon (Tokyo: Mokutakusha, 1990), 220.

36. In the aftermath of the Manchurian Incident, Ôkawa established Jinmukai (Society of Jinmu) as a new nationalist organization, with the hopes of reaching a larger audience and creating a broader popular base for his radical nationalist and Asianist movement. Ôkawa Shûmei’s trial and imprisonment must have played a role in his decision to disband the group. Moreover, after the coup of February 26, 1936, an event that led to the execution of Kita Ikki as the civilian ideologue of the military conspirators, the authorities began to show less tolerance for radical nationalist organizations.

37. The journal was published by Mantetsu Tôa Keizai Chôsakyoku in Tokyo from August 1939 to February 1944.

38. Ôkawa Shûmei, editorial, Shin Ajia 1, no. 1 (August 1939): 2–3.

39. Tazawa Takuya, Musurimu Nippon (Tokyo: Sho Gakkan, 1998), 145–146.

40. See Grant K. Goodman, ed. Japanese Cultural Policies in Southeast Asia During World War 2 (New York: St. Martins, 1991), 2–5.

41. Gotô Ken’ichi, “‘Bright Legacy’ or Abortive Flower’: Indonesian Students in Japan During World War 2,” in Goodman, Japanese Cultural Policies in Southeast Asia During World War 2, 7–35. See also Grant K. Goodman, An Experiment in Wartime Inter-Cultural Relations: Philippine Students in Japan, 1943–1945 (Ithaca: Cornell University Southeast Asia Program, 1962).

42. Students of Ôkawa were the leading figures in Ôkawa Shûmei Kenshôkai and organized the publication of his collected works and other related materials. See Harada Kôkichi, Ôkawa Shûmei Hakushi no shôgai (Yamagata-ken Sakata-shi: Ôkawa Shûmei Kenshôkai, 1982).

43. For a personal account of the Ôkawa Juku from the memoirs of students, see Tazawa, Musurimu Nippon, 129–142.

44. For the evaluation of Ôkawa’s Islamic studies, see Takeuchi Yoshimi, “Ôkawa Shûmei no Ajia Kenkyû,” in Hashikawa Bunsô, ed., Ôkawa Shûmei Shû; (Tokyo: Chikuma Shobô, 1975), 391–394.

45. See Ôkawa Shûmei, “Taisen no Zento to Ajia no Shorai o Kataru Zadankai,” Shin Ajia 2, no. 3 (August 1940): 126. See also Ôkawa Shûmei, “Nanhô Mondai,” in Yoshioka Nagayoshi, ed., Sekai no Dôkô to Tôa Mondai (Tokyo: Zenrin Kyôkai, 1941), 384–385.

46. Ôkawa, editorial, Shin Ajia 1, no. 1 (August 1939): 3.

47. Haruo Iguchi, Unfinished Business: Ayukawa Yoshisuke and U.S.-Japan Relations, 1937–1953 (Cambridge: Harvard East Asia Monographs, 2001).

48. See Ôtsuka Takehiro, Ôkawa Shûmei: Aru Fukkô Kakushin Shugisha no Shisô (Tokyo:, Chûô Kôronsha, 1995), 160-170; Kusunoki Seiichirô, “Ôkawa Shûmei no tai-Bei Seisaku,” Nihon Rekishi, no. 474 (November 1987): 54–70.

49. See Ôtsuka Takehiro, “Shôwa Jyunendai no Ôkawa Shûmei,” in Ôkawa Shûmei to Kindai Nihon, 227–252.

50. Ôkawa Shûmei, A History of Anglo-American Aggression in East Asia, trans. Yoshio Ogawa and P. B. Clarke (Tokyo: Daitôa Shuppan Kabushiki Kaisha, 1944), 1–3.

51. For the way the prosecution used this reference, see Awaya and Yoshida, International Prosecution Section (IPS), 23:319.

52. Ibid., 23:303–306.

53. The New Asia, edited by Rash Behari Bose in Tokyo from 1933 to 1937).

54. The content of The New Asia included many of the arguments expounded by Ôkawa Shûmei, unsurprisingly, given the close ties that had existed between Ôkawa and Bose since 1915. For example, the content in The New Asia, nos. 5–6 (September–October 1933): 1 is very similar to the writings of Ôkawa in Fukkô Ajia no Shomondai and Ajia, Yoroppa, Nihon.

55. For news about Muhammad Hatta, see The New Asia, nos. 13–14 (May–June 1934): 4.

56. The New Asia, nos. 17–18 (September–October 1934), contains extensive coverage of Chandra Bose’s ideas.

57. The New Asia, nos. 5–6 (September–October 1933): 3.

58. The New Asia, nos. 7–8 (November-December 1933): 3.

59. News about the visit to Japan of the African American poet Langston Hughes was accompanied by information about the issue of white discrimination against blacks in the United States; see Shin Ajia, no. 4 (August 1933): 2. In another instance, the Pan-Asiatic Cultural Association declared its goal to invite students from Turkey, Afghanistan, Persia, India, and East Asian and Southeast Asian regions to Japan. See Shin Ajia, nos. 7–8 (November-December 1933): 4.

60. Shin Ajia, nos. 5–6 (September-October 1933): 2.

61. For a lengthy commentary on the rise of the colored and decline of the white races, see Shin Ajia, no. 17–18 (September-October 1934): 1.

62. The New Asia, nos. 7–8 (November-December 1933): 2. Indicating his color-blind loyalty to universal principles, Bose wrote about his admiration for Abraham Lincoln, describing him as the leader who taught the world the meaning of liberation. See The New Asia, nos. 23–24 (March-April 1935): 2.

63. The New Asia, nos. 13–14 (May-June 1934): 3. See also nos. 17–18 (September-October 1934): 4.

64. Yani Yapon Muhbiri was edited by Qurban Ali in Tokyo from 1933 to 1938. The journal often contained didactic articles about the history, economy, and culture of Japan, as well as carrying news about the Tatar Turkish diaspora living within the boundaries of the Japanese Empire. Since there was a large Tatar Muslim community in Manchuria, the journal included news about Manchukuo, the Manchu dynasty, and developments in China as well.

65. For the background of Abdul Kerim Efendi incident and other Muslim activists who visited Japan after 1933, see Selçuk Esenbel, “Japan’s Global Claim to Asia and the World of Islam: Transnational Nationalism and World Power, 1900–1945,” American Historical Review 109, no. 4 (October 2004): 1159–1162.

66. Abdurreşid İbrahim looked to a Japanese expansion in the north against the Soviet Union with the hope that this would allow the Muslim regions of Central Asia to achieve independence. Initially, this idea had many supporters within the Japanese army as well. However, clashes between Japanese and Soviet forces in Nomonhan, Mongolia, during the summer of 1939 convinced the military authorities of Japan that Soviet military power could not be easily challenged, strengthening the southern advance theory.

For the relationship between Kokuryûkai and Abdurreşid İbrahim, see Selçuk Esenbel, “Japanese Interest in the Ottoman Empire,” in Edstrom, The Japanese and Europe, 95-124; see also Selçuk Esenbel, Nadir Ozbek, İsmail Türkoğlu, François Georgeon, and Ahmet Ucar, “Ozel Dosya: Abdurresid İbrahim (2),” Toplumsal Tarih 4, no. 20 (August 1995): 6–23.

67. See Storry, The Double Patriots, 149.

68. In fact, General Ishiwara Kanji’s Tôa Renmei Kyôkai (East Asia League Association), founded in 1939, was based on ideas also advocated by Dai Ajia Kyôkai. See Peattie, Ishiwara Kanji and Japan’s Confrontation with the West, 281–282.

69. Nakatani Takeyô became a prolific writer in Asianist publications of the 1930s. Nakatani was influenced by Ôkawa Shûmei during his student years at Tokyo University and later became a member of several organizations led by Ôkawa. He took a leading position in both Dai Ajia Kyôkai and its journals. For his memoirs, see Nakatani Takeyô, Shôwa Dôranki no Kaisô—Nakatani Takeyô Kaikoroku, 2 vols. (Tokyo: Tairyûsha, 1989).

70. Koschmann, “Asianism’s Ambivalent Legacy,” 89–90.

71. For example see. Okubô Kôji,” Shinkô Toruko No Kokumin Shugi Hyôshiki’,’” Dai Ajia Shugi 5, no. 5 (May 1937): 5–10. By late 1934, the news section was divided into five parts, devoted to Manchuria, China, India, Southeast Asia, and West Asia.

72. See “Nichi Ei Shôtotsu no Hitsuyôsei,” Dai Ajia Shugi 1, no. 12 (December 1933): 33–38.

73. See “Shin Ajia Kensetsu No Shin ShinNen,” Dai Ajia Shugi 6, no. 1 (January 1938): 2–19. Both Ôkawa and Rash Behari Bose used the same “New Asia” as titles of their journals.

74. In a roundtable discussion on nationalist movements in Asia, four Indians (including Behari Bose), two Annamese, two Indonesians, and one Manchurian nationalist offered contributions. Naitô Chishû, Mitsukawa Kametarô, and Nakatani Takeyô, all three close to Ôkawa Shûmei, were among the ten participants representing the Japanese side of the organization. See “Ajia Minzoku Undo: Zadankai,” Dai Ajia Shugi 3, no. 3 (March 1935): 51–62.

75. It was only during the Pacific War that the same circle of Japanese Asianists began to publish an English-language magazine in Shanghai, Asiatic Asia, in order to reach a larger non-Japanese readership with more participation from non-Japanese Asian intellectuals. Publication began in January 1941 and continued for at least five monthly issues.

76. Gotô Ken’ichi, “The Indonesian Perspective,” in Akira Iriye, ed., Pearl Harbor and the Coming of the Pacific War (Boston: Bedford and St. Martins, 1999), 207–219. Gotô’s article is reprinted from Gotô Ken’ichi, “Return to Asia”: Japanese-Indonesian Relations, 1930S-1942 (Tokyo: Kyûkei Shosha, 1997), 300–312.

77. Akira Iriye, Cultural Internationalism and World Order (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997), 119-122; Robert S. Schwantes, “Japan’s Cultural Foreign Policies,” in James Morley, ed., Japan’s Foreign Policy, 1868–1941: A Research Guide (New York: Columbia University Press, 1974), 179–180.

78. Shibasaki Atsushi, Kindai Nihon no Kokusai Bunka Kôryû: Kokusai Bunka Shinkôkai no Sôsetsu to Tenkai, 1934–1945 (Tokyo: Yûshindô Kôbunsha, 1999). For example, it was through the support of Kokusai Bunka Shinkôkai that two Muslim intellectuals, Amir Lahiri and Mian Abdul Aziz, were able to visit Japan to prepare books advocating Asian solidarity: Mian Abdul Aziz (former president of the All-India Moslem League), The Crescent in the Land of the Rising Sun (London: Blades, 1941); and Amar Lahiri, Japanese Modernism (Tokyo: Hokuseido, 1939); idem, Mikado’s Mission (Tokyo: Japan Times, 1940).

79. For example, the journal Dai Ajia Shugi printed articles on the Italian-Ethiopian conflict with a pro-Ethiopian character, including those sent by Japanese correspondents from Addis Ababa, in each of the twelve months of 1935. There was also regular news on Ethiopia in the section devoted to West Asia. As an example, see the five articles on Ethiopia in Dai Ajia Shugi 3, no. 8 (August 1935): 32–53.

80. J. Calvitt Clarke III, “Japan and Italy Squabble Over Ethiopia: The Sugimura Affair of July 1935,” in Selected Annual Proceedings of the Florida Conference of Historians 6 (December 1999): 9–20.

81. Takemoto Yuko, “W. E. B. Dubois to Nihon,” Shien 54, no. 2 (March 1994): 79–96. Also see Marc Gallicchio, Black Internationalism in Asia, 1895–1945: The African American Encounter with Japan and China (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2000), 74–75.

82. Naoki Sakai, “Tôyô no Jiritsu to daitô-A kyôeiken,” Jokyo, no. 48 (December 1994): 13.

83. For a good example of a Japanese individual who embraced the liberation vision of pan-Asian identity, sometimes with highly critical views on the policies of the Japanese state, see Mariko Asano Tamanoi, “Pan-Asianism in the Diary of Morisaku Minato (1924–1945) and the Suicide of Mishima Yukio (1925–1970),” in Mariko Asano Tamanoi, ed., Crossed Histories: Manchuria in the Age of Empire (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2005), 184–206.

84. Quoted in Thomas W. Burkman, “Nitobe Inazô: From World Order to Regional Order,” in J. Thomas Rimer, ed., Culture and Identity: Japanese Intellectuals During the Interwar Years (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990), 211.

85. Ibid., 212–213. Burkman discusses an article by Kamikawa Hikomatsu, “Asia Rengô ka Kyokutô Renmei ka?” Kokka Gakkai Zasshi 47, no. 7 (July 1933): 90–100.

86. Rôyama Masamichi, Tô-A to Sekai (Tokyo: Kaizôsha, 1941), 141-142, quoted in Miwa Kimitada, “Japanese Policies and Concepts for a Regional Order in Asia, 1938–1940,” in J. White, M. Umegaki, and T. Havens, eds., The Ambivalence of Nationalism: Modern Japan Between East and West (New York: University Press of America, 1990), 149.

87. Rôyama Masamichi, Foreign Policy of Japan, 1914–1939 (Tokyo: Institute of Pacific Relations-Japanese Council, 1941).

88. For an argument that shows the proto-Asianist views of Japanese liberals during the 1920s, see Han Jung-Sun, “Rationalizing the Orient: The ‘East Asia Cooperative Community’ in Prewar Japan,” Monumenta Nipponica 60, no. 4 (Winter 2005), 481–514.

89. Ôkawa Shûmei, “Gandhi wo Tô Shite Indojin ni Atau” and “Nehru o Tô Shite Indojin ni Atau” (1942), in Shin Ajia Shôron (Tokyo: Nihon Hyôronsha, 1944), reprinted in Ôkawa Shûmei Zenshû, 2:925–938.

90. For some examples of the flood of publications on Okakura, see Kiyomi Rokurô, Okakura Tenshin den, (Tokyo: Keizôsha, 1938); Okakura Kakuzô, Okakura Tenshin Zenshû (Tokyo: Rikugeisha, 1939); and Kiyomi Rokurô, Senkakusha Okakura Tenshin (Tokyo: Atoriesha, 1942). See also Okakura Kakuzô, Japan’s Innate Virility: Selections from Okakura and Nitobe (Tokyo: Hokuseido, 1943).

91. For examples of the publication and republication of the books of Das, Paul Richard, and Ôkawa after the post-1937 Japan-China war, see Taraknath Das, Indo Dokuritsu Ron (Tokyo: Hakubunkan, 1944); and [Paul] Risharu, Tsugu Nihon Koku, trans. Ôkawa Shûmei (Tokyo: Seinen Shobô, 1941).

92. For a recent assessment of Miki Kiyoshi’s Asianist ideas, see Harootunian, Overcome by Modernity, 394–399. See also Koschmann, “Asianism’s Ambivalent Legacy,” 90–94.

93. Crowley, “‘A New Asian Order,” 278–279.

94. Germaine Hoston’s study of the writings of post-tenko Sano Manabu shows the importance of her interest in Eastern spirituality and intellectual tradition, as well as her belief in Japanese exceptionalism, in leading her to search for a Japanese context for adopting certain core ideals of Marxism. See Germaine A. Hoston, “Ikkoku Shakai-Shugi: Sano Manabu and the Limits of Marxism as Cultural Criticism,” in Rimer, Culture and Identity, 168–190.

95. George Beckmann, “The Radical Left and the Failure of Communism,” in Morley, Dilemmas of Growth in Prewar Japan, 170.

96. From Miwa,” Japanese Policies and Concepts for a Regional Order in Asia,” 142.

97. Minamoto Ryôen, “Symposium on ‘Overcoming Modernity” in Heisig and Moraldo, Rude Awakenings, 197–229.

98. All the books Ôkawa published during the wartime years attempted to define the ideology of the Greater East Asia Coprosperity Sphere and Japan’s war aims. See Ôkawa Shûmei, Dai Tôa Chitsujyo Kensetsu (Tokyo: Dai Ichi Shobô, 1943); idem, Shin Ajia Shôron; and idem, Shin Tôyô Seishin (Tokyo: Shinkyô Shuppan Kabushiki Kaisha, 1945).

99. For a description of the ideas of Asian solidarity as they functioned in Japanese collaboration with Indian and Burmese nationalists, see Louis M. Allen, “Fujiwara and Suzuki: Patterns of Asian Liberation,” in William H. Newell, ed., Japan in Asia (Singa pore: Singapore University Press, 1981), 83–103.

100. A similar idealist Asianism can be seen in the Japanese cooperation with the nationalist leadership of Burma. As Louis Allen has shown, a conflict emerged among Japanese officers involved in the Burmese government when Officer Suzuki Keiji from Minami Kikan took the side of Burmese nationalism and asked for immediate independence, while General Ishii objected to this on the grounds of military interest. See Allen, “Fujiwara and Suzuki.”

101. Objection to the leadership of Rash Behari Bose is another indication of the ineffectiveness of Japanese pan-Asianists’ political networks. Although Japan’s Asianist circles had always presented Rash Behari Bose as the representative voice of Indian nationalism, it became apparent that he did not have a reputation sufficient to play a role in the project of the Indian National Army. See Tilak Raj Sareen, Jap an and the Indian National Army (New Delhi: Mounto, 1996), 35–82. See also Fujiwara Iwaichi, Japanese Army Intelligence Operations in South East Asia During World War II (Singapore: Select, 1983).

102. Sareen, Japan and the Indian National Army, 228–236.

103. Quoted in Joyce Lebra, “Bose’s Influence on the Formulation of Japanese Policy toward India and the INA,” in International Netaji Seminar (Calcutta: Netaji Research Bureau, 1975), 361.

104. Ôkawa Shûmei,” Bosu-shi no Raichô,” Shin Ajia 5, no. 7 (1943): 1.

105. Quoted in Lebra, “Bose’s Influence on the Formulation of Japanese Policy,” 368.

106. Akira Iriye, “Wartime Japanese Planning for Postwar Asia,” in Ian Nish, ed., Anglo-Japanese Alienation, 1919–1952 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982): 77–91.

107. For the best description of the Japanese war aims, see Akira Iriye, Power and Culture: The Japanese American War, 1941–1945 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981).

108. The Greater East Asia conference did not allow for any representation from not-yet-independent regions under Japanese occupation, such as Indonesia and Vietnam. Similar contradictions existed in the Atlantic Charter Alliance, however, which likewise had not been prepared to envision a fully decolonized Asia. In fact, immediately after the end of the war, the French, British, and Dutch governments rushed to regain their colonial possessions in Asia.

109. One report made the following suggestion as a means to win support for the Allied cause: “Play up American and United Nations war aims; play down our association with Great Britain in the East. . . . Do not refer to British Malaya since many inhabitants of Malaya will not wish to see Malaya revert to its old status under British control” (Office of Strategic Services, Research and Analysis Branch, “Japanese Attempts at Indoctrination of Youth in Occupied Areas,” March 23, 1943, microfilm, 10).

110. Christopher Thorne, Allies of a Kind: The United States, Britain and the War Against Japan, 1941–1945 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1978), 157–159.

111. Ibid., 242–243.

112. Ôkawa Shûmei, entry for August 15, 1945, Ôkawa Shûmei Nikki (Tokyo: Iwasaki Gakujitsu Shuppansha, 1986), 391.

113. Sareen, Japan and the Indian National Army, 234–236.

114. Richard Minear, Victor’s Justice: The Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1971); John Dower, Embracing Defeat (New York: Norton, 1999), 443–484.

115. Timothy Brook, “The Tokyo Judgment and the Rape of Nanking,” Journal of Asian Studies 60, no. 3 (August 2001): 693.

116. Radhabinod Pal became the hero of the revisionist Right in Japan in the postwar period. He himself revealed his long-lasting sympathies to Japan during his celebrated visit to Japan in 1966 upon the invitation of Japanese right-wing revisionist groups. Justice Pal declared how he had admired Japan since his youth because Japan had “consistently stood up against the West” with “the spirit of independence that can say ‘no.’” Then, he urged the Japanese people once again to resist the “flood of Westernization” with inspiration from Eastern civilization. For Pal’s speeches during his 1966 visit to Japan, see Radhabinod Pal, Ai Rabu Japan: Paru Hakase Genkôroku, ed. Paru Hakase Kangei Jimukyoju (Tokyo: Tôkyô Saiban Kankôkai, 1966).

8. CONCLUSION

1. Richard Wright, The Color Curtain: A Report on the Bandung Conference (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1995).

2. James B. Crowley, “A New Asian Order: Some Notes on Prewar Japanese Nationalism,” in Bernard Silberman and H. D. Harootunian, eds., Japan in Crisis: Essays on Taisho Democracy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974), 297-298; and Hayashi Fusao, Daitôa Sensô Kôteiron, 2 vols. (Tokyo: Banchô Shobô, 1964–1965).