3. The army was insufficiently trained tactically.

4. We did not insure victory by having considerable superiority in numbers.

We did not have before us any clear idea of our object, and consequently did not show sufficient determination in its prosecution.

So many different reasons have been advanced for our failure that the question naturally arises as to what foundation there really is for my opinion—shared by the greater part of the army in the field—that if we had not concluded peace so hastily victory would have crowned our arms.

My belief that we could, and ought to, have issued victorious from the struggle is based upon—

  1. The steady growth of our material forces.
  2. The growth of our moral forces.
  3. The gradual deterioration of the enemy in both respects.

I.

We have already seen how fatal the inefficiency of our railways was for us. Yet, though six months before the outbreak of war only two pairs of short trains were available for military purposes, when peace was concluded we had ten and even twelve pairs of full trains running in the twenty-four hours. Thus, during hostilities the carrying capacity of the railway grew sixfold, and was capable of still further increase. Notwithstanding all our reverses, the army continued to grow in numbers, and was 1,000,000 strong when peace was concluded, and more than two-thirds of this number (including the newly arrived drafts, the new corps, and the Pri-Amur troops) had not been under fire. Moreover, owing to improved rail transport and the proper exploitation of all local resources, the whole number was assured of everything necessary, both for fighting and subsistence, to an extent that had never previously been the case. We had received a proper proportion of artillery of every nature, reserves of light railway material, telegraph and wireless telegraph stores, and entrenching and technical tools and equipment of all sorts. We had constructed three strong lines of defence at Hsi-ping-kai, Kung-chu-ling, and Kwang-cheng-tzu; our communications in rear were safe; almost every army corps was in possession of its own line of rails; and the Sungari and other rivers were crossed by many bridges. The war strength of all units had been considerably augmented. Russia’s resources for continuing the struggle were greater than those of Japan, for not only had our Guards and Grenadiers not been drawn upon, but the greater part of the army was still at home.

II.

Though an improvement of moral is by no means as easy to bring about in an army as that of its material condition, the officers who were most in touch with our men were convinced that it was done in our case. It may possibly be a peculiarity of the Russian soldier that he possesses latent moral strength of the kind which is developed slowly, and not destroyed by any trials to which the individual is subjected; but to those who made a study of the war it appeared perfectly clear that our men showed an increasing spirit of stubborn determination as the campaign progressed. In the early fights before the battle of Liao-yang—at Te-li-ssu and Ta-shih-chiao—we withdrew after comparatively small losses. At the latter fight two army corps, and at Yang-tzu-ling one corps, retired, though they together did not collectively lose as many men as the 1st East Siberian Rifle Regiment alone lost in the battle of Mukden. At Liao-yang our men fought better than in the previous fights; on the Sha Ho they showed a better spirit than at Liao-yang; while at Mukden many units showed a still further improvement. We were all convinced, therefore, that in a defence of, or an offensive advance from, the Hsi-ping-kai position, the men would fight even better than at Mukden, for the improvement in spirit shown by our troops had been progressive and steady. They had learned much, particularly during their long stay in direct touch with the enemy on the Sha Ho. Even the reserve units, which failed in the early fights, fought with great bravery and steadiness at Mukden. To prove this, it is only necessary to recall the exploits of the 71st and 54th Divisions, the later arrived reserve units of the 55th and 61st Divisions at Mukden, and of many regiments of the 10th, 17th, and 1st Army Corps. The regiments of the 4th Siberian Corps and the East Siberian Rifles, indeed, were an example throughout the war.