Empire's Tomb #7
The Japanese army is mostly pinned down on the Balkan front after Korea's stern warning, so the remaining garrison troops in French Indochina are in no position to organize a Cambodian liberation front.
But they did have the capability to stir up a Cambodian nationalist movement from Thailand. The Japanese might not excel at much else, but they had money.
Japan first promised the Indochinese independence activists a Cambodian Republic. And from Thailand, they agreed to carve out as much territory as possible for this soon-to-be-born republic.
Thailand had already ceded land to France and Britain multiple times, so why not make them yield a bit to Cambodia too? The Siamese Thai royal family and Thai people would call it madness, but Thailand—having surrendered territory repeatedly—looked like the kind of pushover that might do it again.
Especially since the demand to drive the Thais out of that developed Bangkok and make it the capital of the new Cambodian Republic was particularly satisfying.
What if France fully withdrew from Indochina? The whole peninsula could fall into Khmer hands—no, into the hands of the Khmer Empire. That was the spark Japan ignited.
Cambodian nationalists rose up in Thailand, and border disputes erupted between Thailand and Indochina (Cambodia).
The French governor-general's office, to which France had delegated governance, temporarily transferred authority to the Korean Empire. Korea then handed it off to Japan. So French Indochina was under triple domination—no, quadruple domination.
Everyone interpreted the boundaries of Indochina differently. No one could challenge the status quo.
"Things are getting noisy, but let's handle it well."
"Yes, sir."
The biggest headache was that France and Korea—the powers capable of thrashing Japan to resolve this cleanly—had no interest in Thailand. Meanwhile, Thailand, the other belligerent, couldn't strike back at Indochina, jointly ruled by France, Korea, and Japan.
Should Thailand crack down on those reactionary elements at home? That would be like dancing in the rain to avoid getting wet. The more they suppressed, the more manpower, supplies, and bullets those reactionaries would get from Indochina.
This was fundamentally a matter for Thailand and Indochina to negotiate—like Germany and Russia hashing out the Polish question.
But Thailand couldn't attack Indochina—or France or Korea, for that matter—nor even negotiate. Well, they wanted to negotiate, precisely because the demands didn't single out Bangkok.
"Banchnh Bangkók!"
The relentless chant of "Liberate Bangkok!" left Thailand unsure whether it came from Korea, France, Japan, or the reactionaries themselves.
If they yielded? Thai citizens would revolt immediately. Regardless of the past, Bangkok was Thai territory now—Bangkok was Thailand. How do you cede that? Without Bangkok, the monarchy would crumble, the nation would crumble—everything would collapse.
So instead of pleading with the silent Korea, France, and Japan, they turned to Britain. It was straight-up summoning the devil.
Britain, the great emancipator of slaves. And what did that "emancipator" do under the banner of abolition? It boarded ships.
French, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch—didn't matter. If it wasn't flying a British flag, Britain demanded they strike sails with a cannon shot.
Whether slaves were aboard or not was beside the point. Even if France declared no slaves, Britain fired first on French ships.
The goal was ensuring no non-British flag sailed the Atlantic—or any ocean.
Comply with the cannon-backed inspection? Once disarmed before Britain or in mid-ocean, the fate of that ship and crew was anyone's guess.
One certainty: Britain impressed sailors from the "independent" United States.
Americans spoke English, and Britain—plagued by manpower shortages—press-ganged English speakers wherever found. The U.S. was no exception for long.
Any non-British ship endured these "slave inspections." The problem? Britain couldn't kick the habit and turned it on its own people.
One head of state quipped that the most exploited nation by Britain wasn't Chinese, Indian, American, or Irish—it was the British themselves. Not a lie.
Britain, once sucking honey from foreign inspections, now taxed even British-flagged ships selling domestically with excise duties first.
Not tariffs—Britain championed free trade. It pushed zero tariffs abroad while aiming for them at home. This was excise.
In the British Empire, selling anything meant paying liquor tax, salt tax, match tax—whatever—up front. To foreigners, it was just tariffs. Goods sold in Britain funneled money to the government.
Trump griping, "You don't tax your own goods but slap VAT on ours?" had merit. A flat 10% on all goods, domestic included—isn't that a tariff? No tariff character?
That's the importer's view. Exporters see any tax on their goods abroad as a tariff—VAT, excise, all included.
Simple example: Abe sells to Trump. Trump declares 50% VAT, refunding it as welfare or subsidies to domestic firms. Trump's steel pays nothing; Abe's pays 50% full. Why? Foreigners don't get the refunds properly.
Still not a tariff? Exactly why the free-trade U.S., which shunned VAT, introducing 30% now is a sovereignty issue—not a tariff—as Japan once claimed. Japan, comfortably collecting VAT, says "not our problem"?
Japan would have to reply, "Ah, yes, sir. That's not a tariff."
Regrettably, countries collecting VAT while denying it's a tariff must say that. No other answer works. Admit VAT is a tariff now? Call it a non-tariff barrier? Then why collect 20-30% all this time?
Impressive, in a way. Only a nation indifferent to diplomatic isolation—branded as the mad 30% tariff state—could pull it off.
Extreme example, but to foreigners, VAT/excise barely differs. Medieval excise taxes everywhere for a reason—mercantilist to the core.
Britain: preaching slave emancipation and inspections, shouting free trade while exploiting citizens via excise and erecting tariff walls behind the scenes.
And Thailand called for help from that hypocrite.
For Britain, morality, goodness, rules, norms—mere names, always low priority. They only emerge for special events.
Thailand triggered one, regardless of Britain's own mess. To a nation that started the Opium War over unsold opium.
"What, begging for the finisher?"
Thailand shattered and collapsed in under a year.
1917: Germany and Russia forcibly truced. But their mess didn't vanish.
Germany starved a bit—Germans and Poles alike. "Turnips are all we've got."
Russia died a bit—Russians and Poles alike. "Rye'll grow well."
Ironically, Germany attacked then retreated, but Russia collapsed. Germans didn't retreat cleanly.
Russian troops chased "victories" post-retreat—and became the victims.
Now, in this brief tension release: revolution in Russia. Or maybe it started earlier.
"Jugashvili, sorry to burden you fresh from the Caucasus, but mind Germany here."
"I'll handle Russia well, comrade."
With the Russo-German truce, Germany's Kaiser wanted to solidify it. France and Britain kept urging Russia and Korea to fight on—making him want it more.
Problem: Nicky nailed down no full peace. Serbia unresolved.
Nicky demanded Austria cede Bosnia to Serbia forever—no repeats. Austria refused.
The German-Austrian-Russian triad was always thus: Russia vs. Austria vying for Balkan influence.
Germany backed Austria provisionally at Berlin Congress, souring Russia ties.
Surprisingly, Berlin wasn't just for handing Congo to Belgium's wrist-king. Russia wanted a Greater Bulgaria from Ottoman land; the world ganged up. Bismarck's Germany—friendly with all but France—stepped in: "I'm neutral on Balkans; I'll mediate."
Russia, then friendly, got diplomatically iced.
Russia wanted Germany to wise up, drop Austria, grab Russia's hand. Blood was blood, but Russia had south and east to expand—no need to die on German hill.
Poland aside, Russia saw mutual benefit in alliance. Germany had to drop Austria first—that was minimum.
Thus, Russia demanded Balkans as price—proof Germany chose Russia over Austria.
Russia needed war's fruit: no more German-Austrian cling.
But Germany disagreed. Unlike Russia—with status quo okay, ideally splitting Germany-Austria—Germany had no "next." France loomed; defeat meant endgame.
Win unconditionally—east (oil-rich) over west (French-infested).
West was mere stepping stone to east. But now, east aside, west unresolved.
Ideal vs. reality gap too wide. Germany compromised: drop east, focus west.
Silence French war-mongers to end war. Stabilize east first.
So Germany poisoned Russia: shipped nearly all revolutionaries (minus Polish nationalists) via express mail.
One package: Lenin. Brief revolution, and the Soviets emerged.