A matter of imperial defence : Arthur Balfour and the Anglo-Japanese alliance, 1894-1923
This thesis investigates Arthur Balfour’s policy towards Japan and the Anglo-Japanese alliance from 1894 to 1923. Although Balfour was involved in the Anglo-Japanese alliance from its signing to termination, no comprehensive analysis of his role in the alliance has been carried out. Utilising unpublished materials and academic books, this thesis reveals that Balfour’s policy on the Anglo-Japanese alliance revolved around two vital principles, namely imperial defence and Anglo-American cooperation. From the viewpoint of imperial defence, Balfour emphasised the defence of India and Australasia more than that of China. He opposed the signing of the Anglo-Japanese alliance of 1902 because it was not useful in the defence of India. The Russo-Japanese War raised the concern of Indian security. Changing his lukewarm attitude, Balfour took the initiative in extending the alliance into India to employ Japanese troops for the defence of India. Moreover, as an advocate of Anglo-American cooperation, Balfour made every effort to maintain good Anglo-American-Japanese relations. However, imperial defence and Anglo-American cooperation began to clash within the alliance during the Great War. Although the Siberian intervention was useful Japanese military assistance in the defence of India, America, who was not interested in India, hesitated to support it due to her suspicion against Japan. After the war, the alliance was still instrumental in defending India and Australasia, but its existence damaged the relations with America. Balfour tried to achieve both imperial defence and Anglo-American cooperation by developing the alliance into an Anglo-American-Japanese trilateral agreement with a military clause to revive a bilateral defensive alliance. But America and Japan did not support Balfour’s plan at the Washington Conference, and he had to accept the Four-Power Treaty without any military commitment.
‘Incidents’ and foreign policy: A case study
abstract Anglo‐Russian relations during the period 1894–1914 were filled with incidents in large part stemming from the very different social and political frameworks of the two countries. The two countries had sharply differing traditions concerning individual liberty, freedom of the press and other such matters usually covered by the rubric of human rights. While the realities of great power politics forced the two countries to work together, it is not surprising that their collaboration was often marred by clashes of political and social sensibilities.
The Limits of Vulnerability in Explaining Fear of Crime: A Comparative Neighborhood Analysis
Recent research on the fear of crime in the United States has focused on the sources of fear. Many of these studies have identified neighborhood-level variables that are related to fear, but most have examined the differences in fear among individual residents of one or more cities. There has been substantially less research on the differences in the sources of fear among residents of different areas within a single city. This article examines the causes of fear through a comparative analysis of three different neighborhoods in San Francisco. An analysis of covariance model is used to assess the importance of differences in the sources of fear that may be associated with an individual's neighborhood of residence. The findings demonstrate that age, as a measure of physical vulnerability previously associated with fear among individuals, is not related to fear in neighborhoods where residents express the greatest general concern about crime. It is concluded that in those urban areas where crime problems are regular features of the neighborhood environment, measures of physical vulnerability are less important in predicting differences in fear among individuals.