A Foreigner in Hire: Two Advice, Two Empires: Roche and Parkes Divide Japan's Course at the End of the Edo Period (Late 1860s)

A Foreigner in Hire: Two Advice, Two Empires: Roche and Parkes Divide Japan's Course at the End of the Edo Period (Late 1860s)
Japan at the end of the Edo period was not only in the midst of domestic political strife, but also in the midst of competition among the powers. After the opening of Japan to the outside world, Japan was rapidly drawn into the international political arena, and diplomacy was no longer just the art of concluding treaties, but had the power to influence the future of the nation itself. Foreign ministers were not mere negotiators, but political entities that embodied the strategies of their respective empires.

The French Minister, Leon Roche, had a strong interest in ensuring the survival of Japan as a stable, united nation. In the background was the centralized state model of the French Second Empire. Roche sought to bring Japan under French influence by remaking the shogunate into a modern state, with Tokugawa Yoshinobu at its center. The concept of Keio's reforms, which included a six-branch cabinet, the development of a bureaucratic system, fiscal reform, and the fostering of industry, was based on the idea that strengthening domestic politics would make it possible for Japan to become more independent in the eyes of the outside world. It was an intervention to redesign the nation itself.

In contrast, the attitude of British Minister Harry Parkes was in stark contrast. For the British, freedom of trade and diplomatic initiative were more important than a stable system of governance. Parkes did not go too deeply into the Shogunate, but was flexible in his contacts with anti-Shogunate forces such as the Satsuma and Choshu, and took advantage of the power reorganization process. The fluidity of the political system was rather advantageous in negotiations. Parkes' diplomacy was based on the premise of Japan's internal conflicts, and he was prepared for the consequences of such conflicts.

The difference between the two stems not from personalities or preferences, but from differences in imperial strategy. Roche sought to secure influence by having a strong state created, while Parkes sought to take the initiative in a fluctuating power structure. The former supported internal political reforms, while the latter used diplomatic pressure and political coordination as weapons.

As a result, the Keio reforms supported by Roche lost their chance to be realized with the restoration of the Grand Council of State. Parks, on the other hand, succeeded in establishing an early relationship with the new government and strengthening the ties between the Meiji state and Great Britain. This does not mean, however, that Roche's vision was wrong. It was Roche who provided the first concrete blueprint for Japan's vision of a modern state as an institution.

The contrast between the two men highlights the fact that Japan at the end of the Tokugawa shogunate was not faced with a simple choice between opening the country to the outside world and expelling the barbarians, but with a deeper choice: which model of power to refer to and which form of state to create? Behind the victories and defeats of the Meiji Restoration was the intersection of the different national views and strategies of the powers. The Bakumatsu Restoration was not only a domestic revolution, but also an act of international political realignment.