On the Lytton Commission and Report
滿洲帝國協和會/滿洲帝國協和會/The Concordia Association of Manchuria
Since the official beginning of the Restoration Movement of Manchoukuo, numerous of CCP agents and ignorant persons began to defame this movement using the Lytton Report as an excuse. We, the Concordia Association carefully reviewed the history of Lytton Commission and hereby release our report of the “Lytton Commission and Report” to clarify the common misunderstandings of the modern world.
On the Lytton Commission and Report
Basic Background: The League of Nations
Nowadays, people generally mistakenly think that the League of Nations is the “prototype” of the United Nations. However, it is completely incorrect. There are two major differences between these two organizations.
As the United States, which is a major nation in the world and the initiator of the League of Nations, had never joined the League of Nation, and many major states joined and left the League of Nations, the conclusions by the League of Nations are NOT with enough authoritativeness as universal international law or even international opinion.
According to the Covenant of the League of Nations, the League of Nations shall only advise rather than enforce to its member states. This is totally different from the United Nations, which has the authority to maintain military forces to enforce (Through the Security Council and UN Peacekeepers) its conclusions.
The same problem that the League of Nations and the United Nations have, despite the big differences between them: Viewing communist states as normal members of the international society: it is like to reach balance among police, law-abiding citizens, and bandits. In such abnormal and deformed framework, it keeps ending up with the communist states getting the most advantage. According to the concept of “semi-state” from Leninism, all communist “nations” are semi-states, whose primary function is just a cover of the communist party to make it easy and convenient to initiate relationships with, confuse, and subvert the capitalist states.
After understanding the basic nature of the LoN as well as the challenge it was facing at that time, we can draw to the following simple conclusion. The Lytton Report was just a report, and what the Lytton Commission did was just an ADVICE to the MEMBER STATES of the League of Nations. It is NEVER an international law judgement or arbitration.
Even if this conclusion made by Lytton Commission were a resolution of the United Nations in the Yalta System, it would have been same useless for bringing peace and order in Manchuria and same harmful to Manchuria’s independence because both the League of Nations and the United Nations de facto allow the communist states to use themselves as a medium to infiltrate Manchuria and eventually take over Manchuria (they intended to do so back then, they are doing it right now).
The “Lytton Report”: Content and Our Comments (comments in [])
The report, published on October 2, 1932, consisted of an introduction and a total of 10 chapters, the contents of which are as follows:
The Introduction clarified the process of establishing the commission.
Chapter 1 detailed an overview of China’s recent history, educating from the fall of the Ching Empire, the emergence of the Republic of China, the subsequent civil wars, the formation of the Kuomintang, and the Communist Party of China.
Chapter 2 described Manchukuo, that was, China was indifferent to Manchuria, and that today’s development of Manchuria was due to the efforts of Japan, from the political situation of Chang Tso-lin and Chang Hsiao-liang to the conflict between Russia and China.
Chapter 3 explained the issues related to Manchuria between Japan and China, that was, Japan’s rights in Manchuria, with Japan’s explanation of Manchuria’s uniqueness that was unparalleled in the world, as well as the issues related to railways, commercial rights, etc. This chapter especially explained important issues in the years before the outbreak of the incident (Wanpaoshan incident and the subsequent anti-Chinese riots in Korea).
Chapter 4 described the incidents that took place on the day of 18 September 1931 and later in Manchuria, when emotions were tense between the Japanese and Chinese troops, and Japan had a careful plan for hostilities. Suffering from the explosion of the Renkyo Line 連京綫, it was carried out promptly and accurately. But the Chinese side had no plans to attack. Although the Japanese military action on the night could not be recognized as a measure of self-defense, it was stated that the hypothesis that officers and others were acting for self-defense (misunderstanding defense) could not be ruled out.
Chapter 5 outlined the actions taken from 20 February 1932 to the withdrawal of the Imperial Japanese Army regarding the First Shanghai Incident.
Chapter 6 dealt with Manchukuo, first stating the stage of construction of a new nation, assuming that a group of Japanese civilian and military officers planned and organized an independence movement, then denying voluntary independence and the Government of Manchukuo. Considering the finances, education, justice, police, and military, and it finally concluded that the Chinese in Manchuria generally did not support the Government of Manchukuo. [where it started to get totally false.]
true will of the Manchurian People
The Lytton Commission’s way of listening to true will of the people of Manchuria was totally problematic and unpractical. In Manchuria back in 1932, most of the mass did NOT care about or participated in politics at all. Only 官紳士民 (generally property owners, i.e., officials, local landlords, gentlemen, military officers, former Ching’ s Mongolic feud lords, firm owners, and other property owners etc., it is a little equivalent to bourgeoisie) were all participants of Manchurian politics. Within them, most of them supported Manchuria’s independence and the Founding of Manchoukuo. That has represented the true will of the people of Manchuria. When Emperor Kangteh ruled Manchoukuo from 1932 to 1945, this situation remained in Manchuria.
Chapter 7 called it “Japan’s economic interests and the boycott of China,” and admitted that China’s attitude was illegal.
[Well…China’s illegal attitude caused all the incidents before the Manchuria Incident, gave the Soviet Union more chances to infiltrate Manchuria, and contributed to an inevitable social environment of the Manchuria Incident…Without that environment and the subsequent Manchuria Incident, the people of Manchuria would have not been able to self-determine to become independent from China. ]
Chapter 8 detailed the economic benefits of Manchuria, made the restoration of goodwill between Japan and China essential for resources and development, and hoped to open the door of Manchuria from a practical standpoint.
In Chapter 9, the Lytton Commission stated that Manchuria had many special circumstances that were unparalleled in other parts of the world [well, in your investigation you never kept that in mind], so this conflict was not a trivial case in which one country’s borders were invaded by the armed forces of neighboring countries. The Lytton Commission denied both restoration to the original status and maintenance of Manchukuo:
- To be in line with the interests of both Japan and China; [their interests on Manchuria were irreconcilable.]
- Respect for the interests of the Soviet Union;[then you would not be able to respect for interests of any other state.]
- Being in harmony with the current multilateral treaty; [if it could work, there would have been no Manchuria Incident, remember you mentioned that in your report too?]
- Approval of Japanese interests in Manchuria;[China was against that and that was why they incited so many anti-Japanese incidents.]
- Establishment of new treaty relations between Japan and China;[then why did you mention №3? It is your self-contradiction.]
- Creating an effective facility for future dispute resolution; [how to define effective? who create? who participate? and do not forget the League of Nations was never able to do such thing as the later United Nations.]
- Allow Manchuria to be self-governing to the extent that it is in harmony with China’s sovereignty and administrative conservation; [well, that is equivalent to restore the original status as Chang Hsiao-liang Regime, you just said you would not do that, self-contradiction again. ]
- Internal order by efficient local gendarmerie, security against external aggression by withdrawal and non-aggression treaties of all troops; [no one was able to set such local gendarmerie that was efficient enough to maintain social order and resist Soviet infiltration, otherwise Manchoukuo Founding Fathers could have already done it instead of getting independent from China, they told you that in your investigation already.]
- Promotion of economic alliance between Japan and China; [China wants full control of Manchuria rather than that. ]
- International cooperation for the remodeling of China is a condition for dispute resolution. [then that condition had an extremely high possibility for never going to accomplish, so in your way, this “dispute” would hardly be able to get resolved. ]
In Chapter 10, the Lytton Commission stated that it should make some proposals to the Council to exemplify the above solution and convene an advisory council if both Japan and China approved to discuss the above solution. The Chinese central government should reserve the conclusion of general treaties and control of external relations as long as it would not conflict with its declaration on Manchuria, and the Chinese central government should manage the affairs of customs, postal services, salt tax, stamp tax, and cigarette tax.
The allocation of tax revenues should be decided by the advisory council, the primary appointment of the head of the self-autonomous government should be reserved by the Chinese central government and have the authority to issue orders to ensure the implementation of the Chinese central government’s foreign treaties, and others. It should be decided by the advisory council that all other powers should belong to this autonomous government. In addition, the special military police should be organized with the cooperation of foreigners, and all foreign troops should be withdrawn to make it the only armed group in Manchuria. And the head of the self-autonomous government should appoint foreign advisors, most of whom should be Japanese.
[In Chapter 10, the Lytton Commission did not talk like human beings at all.]
The conclusions made by the Lytton Commission:
- “Restore the original status before the Liutiaohu Incident (China’s claim)” and “Approval of Manchukuo (Japan’s claim)” could not solve the problem.
- In Manchuria, an autonomous government should be established under the sovereignty of China. This autonomous government should have sufficient administrative authority under the guidance of foreign advisors dispatched by the League of Nations.
- Manchuria should be a demilitarized zone, and the Special Higher Police Organization, which should be advised by the League of Nations, would maintain security.
- Japan and China should conclude a “non-aggression treaty” and a “trade treaty.” If the Soviet Union would like to participate in this, it would conclude a separate Tripartite Pact.
The Chang Hsiao-liang Regime was already a self-autonomous government under the Chinese central government. It had been proven that it was highly infiltrated by the Soviet Union / Comintern. That regime could not maintain a satisfactory social order in Manchuria, which had been proven by the result of the Manchuria Incident breaking out. Although people back then had not known that the Chang Tso-lin Explosion and the Liutiaohu Incidents were both done by the Soviet Union, still it can be clearly and easily seen that the biggest and sole beneficiary of this self-contradictory, illogical, and unrealistic conclusion by the League of Nations is the Soviet Union.
The “Lytton Commission and Report”: Summary
The Lytton Commission and Report and the subsequent resolution of the League of Nations concerning it was never primarily to answer whether Manchuria’s independence is legitimate or not, it was to answer the League’s member state’s request of investigation under the Article 10, 11, and 15 of the Covenant.
In the Report, it had been made clear that the issue of Manchuria Independence was “complicated”, and thus the Lytton Commission decided not to “argue this issue”.
However, as stated above, this investigation was called according to the Article 10, 11, and 15 of the Covenant, so it was primarily to answer to the conflict between both its member states, which were the Empire of Japan and the Republic of China. And the conflict between them was all about Manchuria’s independence. It is illogical to just reach a conclusion to answer this conflict concerning Manchuria’s independence without making conclusion on whether Manchuria’s independence was right or not. But such illogical investigation, reporting, and conclusion were exactly what the Lytton Commission did.
If the League of Nations had concluded that Manchuria’s independence was not legitimate, then Manchuria should have been returned to the original status before the Liutiaohu Incident at that time immediately. If the League of Nations had concluded that Manchuria’s independence was legitimate, then according to international law the League of Nations or any other state should never interfere this issue at all. Neither did the Lytton Commission choose to conclude.
To summarize, the Lytton Commission and Report were illogical and self-contradictory in the first place.
Provided that the Lytton Commission mentioned that they had acknowledged the uniqueness of Manchuria, especially the uniqueness in the case of the Manchuria Incident and the Founding of Manchukuo, they still ignored the specific situation in Manchuria, if not the East Asia, at that time. They failed to use proper way of investigating the truth of the Manchuria Incident, the independence of Manchuria and founding of Manchukuo. In their investigation, they only had contact with a very limited number of Manchurians (mostly the immigrants from North China to Manchuria, this group has the most proportion in the mass who never participate in politics), including Soviet-funded bandits such as Ma Chan-shan. And in their investigation, they failed to apply the definition of genuine independence movements to the East Asia based on its locality.
As is known to all, the Continental Army could have never beaten the British Forces without the help of the French government and troops. That was just the same in Manchuria. Without the help of Japanese troops, Manchuria would have never become independent or maintain independence and Manchoukuo would have never been founded. In the Declaration of Independence of Manchuria and the Declaration of the Founding of Manchoukuo, the Founding Fathers of Manchoukuo had made it clear that the people of Manchuria did not mean to be independent for the sake of independence from the very beginning but because independence was the only option for survival under that circumstance.
To summarize, the Lytton Commission and Report were totally ignorant to the uniqueness of Manchuria and totally neglected the true will of the people of Manchuria.
The League of Nations and the United Nations have been both wrong about one way of thinking: trying to reach balance between the communist states and all other states.
As is known to all, you can NEVER reach a balance among the interests of a police officer, a law-abiding citizen, and a bandit.
What the League of Nations tried to do when Manchukuo was founded in 1932, was trying to make everyone happy. Obviously, that can never happen in any circumstances anytime anywhere.
For the Soviet Union/Comintern, uncertainty or unclear boundaries make them most benefits. They can take most advantage on such occasions than every party else. The League of Nations’ advice concerning Manchuria in 1932 would bring most uncertainty of Manchuria’s future, and ironically, it has been Manchoukuo who never leaves chances to Soviet.
A self-autonomous Chinese government in Manchuria, as proposed by the League of Nations, was so easy for Soviets to infiltrate, which had been proven by the Chang Regime as it was a self-autonomous government under Chinese central government itself and it was highly infiltrated by the Comintern. And also, even for the Empire of Japan, the Comintern infiltration in Japanese government was a huge headache back then, let alone the Chiang Kai-shek’s Chinese central government was already very highly infiltrated by the Comintern. Back then, only Manchukuo could save Manchuria and the rest East Asia from communism. Even today, it is exactly the same. However, the League of Nations totally ignored the potential of total communist subversion as a result of their conclusion and advice concerning Manchuria back in 1932.
To summarize, the Lytton Commission and Report ended up with a conclusion equivalent to concede Manchuria into the Soviet hand immediately.
It has left the first seed of the communist takeover of the entire East Asia Continent, and all the subsequent tragedies since then (the newest is the Wuhan Virus).
Without enough international support of Manchuria’s Independence and Manchoukuo’ s Founding, Manchukuo and the Empire of Japan were under super pressure with the misunderstanding of the civilized world. It was the original reason of the tragic Pacific War between the Western Allies and Manchukuo with the Empire of Japan. Without Manchukuo and the Empire of Japan, the root of evil in East Asia cannot be contained. This has been proven again and again in the history since the end of WWII. The result of WWII in East Asia was essentially the victory of the Soviet Union and all its puppets (the Communist China, the Communist North Korea, the Communist Vietnam, the Communist Khmer etc. ). That result was all from the false conclusion made by the League of Nations.
The first step to correct the wrong, is to go to the original point of mistake. Otherwise, you are just by all means hiding the mistake or creating more mistakes instead of solving the mistake. In this mistake of failing to recognize Manchuria’s independence in 1930s, it can be learnt that the cultural arrogance of European and North Americans has become very harmful to the international society. The League of Nations failed to realize the true will of the people of Manchuria in 1932 because of that. This has to be resolved if the world wants to get out of the disasters since the end of WWII.
The correct understanding of the Lytton Commission and Report with the League of Nations’ advice on Manchuria is the starting point of correctly knowing the international law status of Manchoukuo, because the false conclusion coined by the League of Nations was the original logic point of the fake theory of “Manchukuo being a puppet state”.
編者注：本文發佈於康德九十年1月期《王道月刊》，更多請看：
