The military forces available for service in the Pacific are those (1) of Russia; (2) of China; (3) of Japan; (4) of the United States; (5) of the British Empire including India; (6) of the Latin-American peoples of Mexico and South America. The great armies of France, Germany, and Austro-Hungary can have no voice in the destinies of the Pacific Ocean unless indirectly, as, for instance, through Germany or Austria helping or hindering a Russian movement in the Far East by guaranteeing or threatening her European frontier.

The Russian army, though driven back by the forces of Japan during the recent war, still demands respectful consideration in any calculations as to the future of the Asian littoral of the Pacific Ocean. The Russians, as has been pointed out in a previous chapter, fought that campaign under many serious disadvantages. The Siberian railway gave them a very slender line of communication with their base. Now that railway is being duplicated, and in a future war would have at least double its old military capacity. The conditions of unrest at home in Russia during the war were so serious as almost to paralyse the executive government. Those conditions are not likely to be repeated, since Russia has now entered upon a fairly peaceful, if somewhat slow, progress towards constitutional reform. In a war on a land frontier for which the people were enthusiastic, the military power of Russia would be tremendous, though there was never any real foundation for the bogey of Russia as an all-powerful aggressive force.

The Russian army, based upon conditions of universal liability to service, can muster in the field for war some 4,000,000 of men. But considering the vast frontiers to be defended, and the great claims therefore made by garrison fortresses, it is not likely that more than 1,500,000 could be mobilised in any one district. It is reasonably possible to imagine a Russian army of a million men being brought to and maintained on the Pacific littoral: of an even greater army based on, say, Harbin. That would be a formidable force, especially if enrolled to fight for the White Races against an Asiatic peril: for then it would share the old military enthusiasm of the Cossacks.

There is nothing which will give the inquirer into national characteristics a better key to the Russian than a knowledge of the old Cossack organisation. It was formed, in the days of Russia's making as a nation, from the free spirits of the land, suffering on the one side from Turkish cruelty, on the other from the devastations of the Tartars. "Cossacks" meant simply "free men," and, at the outset, they were freebooters mainly, the Robin Hoods and Hereward the Wakes of Russia. But the patriotic work of resisting the Tartars and the Turks gave them a national aim, and in time they formed a military and religious organisation, unique in the history of European civilisation. From the village Cossacks—irregular volunteer troops, pursuing normally the life of villagers, but ready ever to take up arms against Tartar or Turkish bandits, or to become in turn themselves raiders of the enemy's caravans and villages—sprung up the Cossack Zaporojskoe, garrisoning the "Setch," a great military camp in the heart of the Cossack country. The Cossacks who joined the Setch devoted themselves wholly to military life. They had to swear to complete chastity, to abstinence whilst at war from alcohol, and to obedience to the Greek Church. The Cossack could leave the Setch if he were so inclined, but while he remained within its boundaries discipline was inexorable.

In the Setch there was neither organised training, nor compulsory drill, nor military manoeuvres. With the exception of a few elected officers, there were, in time of peace, no social distinctions; but the bravest and the most experienced were treated with respect. For war a Cossack was elected to command each hundred men; his power was absolute. Several hundreds formed a regiment, with a colonel at its head, a temporary officer, elected for one campaign only. The organisation had some artillery and infantry, but its chief strength lay in its cavalry. It also built a Fleet of small boats with which it repeatedly raided the Turkish coast.

This military monastic order passed away with the closer organisation of the Russian nation. Despotic Czars could not tolerate a community so formidable in its virtues. Characteristically enough, it was Catherine the Great who dealt the final blow to the Cossack Setch. But the Cossack organisation and spirit, as well as the Cossack name, survive in the Russian army to-day, and the million or so men whom Russia could muster on the shores of the North Pacific might have some great say in the future destinies of the ocean.

The Japanese army of to-day, an army of veterans, must be credited, in calculating its value as a military engine, with the moral force of its record of victory. I confess to a belief in the superiority of the White Man, qua White Man over any Asiatic: and I am not inclined, therefore, to accept Japanese generalship and Japanese initiative at their Tokio valuation. But the 600,000 men whom Japan can put into the field, perfect in discipline, armed as to the infantry with a first-class rifle, a little deficient though they may be in artillery and cavalry, is a most formidable force, unassailable in Japan's home territory, not to be regarded lightly if called to a campaign on the Asiatic mainland. Since the war with Russia the Japanese army has been increased: the fact is evidence of the unslaked warlike enthusiasm of the people.

China will probably emerge from her present revolutionary troubles, whatever may be their result, with a seasoned army of great proportions. The actual military organisation of China at the time of the outbreak of the present revolt was somewhat nebulous. But an effort was being made to organise an Imperial army (on plans laid down in 1905) which would have numbered about 360,000 men trained on the Japanese model. Should the reformed China decide to follow in the footsteps of Japan as regards military organisation, the Chinese field force of the future would number some 2,500,000 men. It is already announced that the new Chinese Republic will adopt universal military training as part of its system of national reorganisation.

The United States, relying on a purely voluntary system for its military organisation, has, in the opinion of most critics, the framework of an army rather than an army. The peace strength of the United States regular army is about 100,000, and from these the Philippine garrison draws 13,000 men, and the Hawaiian garrison 1000 of all ranks. A partially trained militia numbers about 100,000 men. For the rest there are 16,000,000 of men of military age in the nation, but they are absolutely untrained. In case of a powerful enemy obtaining naval control of the Pacific, there is danger that the United States would suffer the ignominy of the occupation, for a time, of her Pacific coast.

British military forces available for the Pacific come under three headings:

British garrisons in India and elsewhere in the Pacific.

The citizen armies of Australia and New Zealand, and the militia forces of Canada.

The Sepoy forces in India.

The British garrisons total some 80,000 men. They may be classed, without prejudice, among the best troops in the world, well trained and with some experience of warfare. But the majority of them are stationed in India, and few of them could be safely drawn from there in an emergency. The Sepoy troops number some 250,000, officered generally by British leaders. It is conceivable that a portion of them could be used outside of India against coloured races.

The citizen armies of Australia and New Zealand must be spoken of in the future tense: for their organisation has just begun, and it will be some five years before that organisation will be well under way. But so important is the bearing on Pacific problems of the training of some quarter of a million of citizen soldiers in the Australasian Dominions of the British Empire, that attention must be given here to a description of this army of the future.

Taking the Australian organisation as the model: The population of Australia in 1911 was about 4-1/2 millions, of whom there were, on the basis of the last census—

188,000 males of 14 years and under 18 years; and
295,000 males of 18 years and under 25 years.

Allowing for those living in districts too thinly populated to admit of training without excessive expenditure, or medically unfit for training, upon the figures at present available, it is estimated that Australia will have in training, when the scheme is in full operation, each year—

100,000 senior cadets; and
112,000 citizen soldiers.

The system will give in eight years' time a force of 126,000 trained men, and fully equipped. Every year afterwards will increase the reserve by 12,000 men. And if the training be extended into the country areas, the numbers may be increased by 40 per cent. Increase of population will bring, too, an increase of numbers, and my estimate of an eventual 200,000 for the Australian army and 50,000 for the New Zealand army is probably correct.

For the leading positions in this army there is provision to train a number of professional officers. The Military College of Australia is already in existence, and is organised on a basis of simplicity and efficiency which reflects the serious purpose of this democratic military organisation. It is not reserved for the children of the rich. It is not allowed to become intolerable to the children of the poor by the luxury of wealthy cadets. To quote from the official conditions:—

"The Military College of Australia is established to educate candidates for commissions in all arms of the Military Forces of the Commonwealth.

"Only candidates who intend to make the Military Forces their profession in life will be admitted as Cadets to the Military College. Parents or guardians are therefore not at liberty to withdraw their sons or wards at will.

"Cadets, in joining the Military College, shall be enlisted in the Permanent Military Forces for a term of twelve years. Service as a Cadet at the Military College shall be deemed service in the ranks of the Permanent Military Forces of the Commonwealth.

"No fees will be charged for equipment or instruction or maintenance of Cadets, and their travelling expenses within the Commonwealth between their parents' or guardians' residences and the College will be paid on first joining and on graduation.

"The following charges will be admitted against the public and credited to Cadets' accounts after they have joined:—

"Outfit allowance—£30 on joining.

"Daily allowance of five shillings and sixpence (5s. 6d.) to cover cost of uniform and clothing, books, instruments, messing, washing and other expenses.

"No Cadet will be permitted to receive money, or any other supplies from his parents or guardians, or any person whomsoever, without the sanction of the Commandant. A most rigid observance of this order is urged upon all parents and guardians, as its violation would make distinctions between Cadets, which it is particularly desired to prevent.

"No Cadet, when within the Federal Territory, or when absent on duty from College, or when in uniform, shall drink any spirituous or intoxicating liquor, or bring or cause the same to be brought within the College, or have the same in his room, tent, or otherwise in his possession.

"Gambling, lotteries, and raffles are strictly prohibited. They are serious offences, which will be severely punished.

"Smoking may be permitted during certain hours and in authorised places. The smoking of cigarettes is at all times prohibited. A Cadet found in possession of cigarettes is liable to punishment for disobedience of orders."

Canada has a militia force credited at present with a total strength of 55,000 men. Sir Wilfrid Laurier, who controlled the destinies of Canada for fifteen years up to 1911, was no military enthusiast and believed profoundly in a peaceful future for his country. In one respect, and in one respect only, Canada under his rule progressed in defence organisation: she had her own rifle factory turning out a rifle of Canadian design.

But a new spirit moves in Canada to-day in matters of Defence as in other things. I remember in 1909 speaking at Toronto in advocacy of a system of universal training for military service. Lieut.-Col. Wm. Hamilton Merritt, a Canadian militia officer who had learned enthusiasm for the idea of a "citizen army" on a visit to Switzerland, invited me to come up to Toronto from New York to speak on the Australian campaign for the universal training of citizens. The meeting was friendly but not particularly enthusiastic. My strongest recollection of it is that one Canadian paper most unjustifiably and absurdly twisted some words of mine advocating Canadian self-reliance into advice that Canada should arm "to attack the United States." But the outcome of the meeting was that a "Canadian Patriotic League" was formed, and from it sprang the "Canadian Defence League, a non-political association to urge the importance to Canada of universal physical and naval or military training." For two years and more, in spite of the earnest efforts of Canadian enthusiasts, the movement languished. After the General Election of 1911, however, a quickening came to every department of Canadian life, and this particularly showed itself in matters of Defence. In November of that year, Colonel the Hon. S. Hughes, the Canadian Minister of Militia, called a conference of experts to consider the organisation of the militia. To that conference the Canadian Defence League was invited to send representatives, and their presence seemed to inspire the whole gathering with an enthusiasm for a universal service system. Summarising from a report sent to me by the Canadian Defence League: "Universal military training has at last become a live issue throughout the Dominion of Canada. It was the mainspring behind the whole machinery of the Militia Conference; almost every man present was in favour of it, but a few, if the question had come to vote, would have either refrained from voting or voted against it, because they were afraid of the possibility of being misunderstood by the public at large. The cavalry section made no recommendation, and the infantry section discussed it, while the artillery, which is always in the front, was strongly in favour of it. Colonel Logie of Hamilton moved and Colonel Fotheringham of Toronto seconded a resolution recommending the adoption of the Australian system in Canada. This motion was with a view to placing the conference on record; but the Minister, in his wisdom, held the resolution in abeyance, and it did not come to a vote. But in the closing hours of the conference Senator Power of Nova Scotia positively and definitely advocated universal military training for the whole of Canada."

A universal service system in Canada would provide a citizen army of—probably—250,000 men of the finest type: and the effect of this force on Pacific issues would be equal to that of the combined armies of Australia and New Zealand.

The military strength of Latin America (the South American Republics and Mexico) it is difficult to estimate accurately. In almost all cases the constitution of the Republics provides for "universal service" but fails to provide for universal training for service. Under modern conditions of warfare, it is useless to enact that men shall serve unless the necessary sacrifices of money and leisure are made to train them to serve. Raw levies could be made of some use almost immediately in a past epoch of warfare, when the soldier with his "Brown Bess" musket had the injunction from the drill sergeant to "wait until he could see the whites of the eyes" of his enemy and then to fire. That needed stolid nerves mainly, and but little training. In these days raw levies would be worse than useless, of no value in battles, a burden on the commissariat and hospital services between battles. The Latin-American armies must be judged in the light of that fact. Apart from that caution, the numbers are imposing enough.

Mexico has an army organisation providing for 30,000 men on a peace footing and 84,000 men on a war footing. The Argentine army on a peace footing is about 18,000 strong; on a war footing about 120,000 strong, exclusive of the National Guard and Territorial troops (forming a second line). In the Republic of Bolivia the peace footing of the army is 2500: the probable war footing 30,000. The Republic of Brazil has a universal service system. The peace strength of the army is 29,000 (to which may be added a gendarmerie of 20,000). On the outbreak of war there could be mobilised, it is claimed, five divisions totalling, say, 60,000 men. Chili has, on a peace footing, about 10,000 men; on a war footing 50,000, exclusive of the reserves (about 34,000). Colombia makes every man liable to service, but the training is not regular. Possibly 10,000 men could be mobilised in time of war. Ecuador maintains a permanent force of about 5000 men, and claims that it could mobilise 90,000 in case of war. Paraguay has a permanent force of 2500 men and a National Guard available for service in case of war.

The South American has proved himself, on occasions, a good and plucky fighter. But I doubt whether his military forces can be seriously considered as a factor in the fate of the Pacific, except in the matter of defending his own territory from invasion. The only armies that count greatly to-day in the Pacific are those of Japan, Russia, and Great Britain, in that order, with China and the United States as potential rather than actual military forces.