Both China and Japan were closed societies till the middle of the 19 th
century. It was only with the economic expansion of the western powers
and their need to find more and more new territories to pursue their
imperial economic interests that they turned their attention towards the
west. Thus, after centuries of self-imposed isolation both China and Japan
were exposed to western intrusion and their response to it had some
amounts of similarity but a great deal of contrast as well. It was the
Japanese, who met the western pressure with more vigorous steps to
assure their survival as an independent nation. The response was meant to
meet the western pressure on its own terms i.e. to introduce modern
science and technology in order to refashion traditional society on an
industrial basis under the aegis of a modern nation-state. But why and how
a response of this character developed so rapidly in Japan, but languished
in China has aroused the interests and curiosity of a number of scholars in
the modern times.
As a response to western pressure both China and Japan by the end of that
century had introduced ‘westernising’ reforms – but of a significantly
distinct nature. China’s aim was to use modern means to preserve their
traditional Confucian culture. Thus, the self-strengthening movement,
which was meant to modernise China and put it at par with the west was a
highly conservative movement. It sought changes only within the existing
framework without trying to change the outward structure. Japan, in
contrast, underwent a remarkable social upheaval as it wholeheartedly
pursued modernization. Consequentially, Japan had become a recognised
world power by 1920, whereas China was at the brink of anarchy.
China and Japan followed a similar pattern of relations with the West
between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries, but with the former
usually responding more slowly and less strongly. Both nations sought
western cannon and firearms: the Japanese in the late sixteenth century,
and the Chinese in the early seventeenth. Both initially welcomed Jesuit
missionaries, but later exiled them (due to the threat posed by their
growing influence) from Japan in 1612, and China in 1742. Both withdrew
into isolationism – restricting foreign trade to a single port, and banning
their citizens from travelling overseas – Japan in the mid-seventeenth
century, and China in the mid-eighteenth. In each case, the Chinese
response was not only many decades later, it also tended to be less
vigorous. They were less interested in seeking foreign weaponry, they were
less fearful of Jesuit influence, and the extent of their isolationism was not
nearly as extreme as Japan’s. Some historians have pointed to the Japanese
Bushido warrior code and more militaristic society as enabling them to
more realistically assess the Western military threat. This effect was
complemented by the arrogance of traditional China, whose enduring
civilization had never faced a serious threat before – and the early years of
contact would have merely reinforced their sense of superiority; for as
Strayer remarks, “China was sufficiently strong and the Europeans
sufficiently weak to ensure that China dictated the terms of the
relationship”.
Everything changed in the mid-nineteenth century. The benefits of
industrialization led to such a degree of Western military ascendency that
Asia could be (and was) forced out of its isolationist policies, and opened
for western trade and exploitation. During this crucial period of history, the
Chinese continued to underestimate the challenge posed by the West, and
so met it with aggression. They were severely beaten by the British in the
Opium War (1839-42), and made to sign a series of humiliating ‘unequal
treaties’. Renewed hostilities broke out against Britain and France between
1856-60, which further weakened China and opened up its ports for
further exploitation by the British. The Boxer Rebellion (1899-1900) was a
desperate attempt to oppose imperialism and drive out the foreigners, but
it was eventually crushed by a multi-national force, and China made to pay
even more indemnities.
Japan’s isolation ended in 1853 when U.S. Commodore Matthew Perry
sailed into Edo (Tokyo) Bay. However, the Japanese had apparently learnt
from the mistakes of the Chinese, and did not directly oppose the West.
Instead, they adopted a policy of procrastination. They thereby succeeded
in postponing the first of their own set of ‘unequal treaties’ until 1858, and
impeded their implementation enough to provoke an Allied naval
bombardment of Osaka in 1865. With that minor exception, Japan’s policy
successfully avoided the debilitating conflicts with the West that so plagued
China throughout the nineteenth century. But some scholars have argued
that this was largely due to the external factor of the West’s greater interest
in China, which led to greater exploitation. Japan was given more
manoeuvring room, allowing them to belatedly acquiesce to the West’s
demands – an option which would not have been viable for China.
In some respects, the response of the Chinese populace to the West was
more significant than that of the country’s Manchu elite (who appeared to
be more concerned for the welfare of their dynasty than for the country as
a whole) – the most noteworthy example being the Taiping Revolution
(1850-65). Led by Hong Xiuquan (a mystic who was inspired by a Christian
missionary), this revolutionary movement gathered a following of millions
of Chinese peasants, and challenged the existing system. The
revolutionaries were open to western ideas, and planned to industrialize
China (just thirty years after the first railroads were constructed in
Britain), liberate women, and introduce social reforms akin to communism.
However, the Taiping Revolution threatened Western interests because of
its nationalistic ambitions, so the Great Powers supported the Qing dynasty
with loans, arms, and mercenary soldiers. By 1865, the last of the
revolutionaries were crushed by gentry-led armies, but the consequences
of this failed revolution – an estimated 20-30 million casualties, and the
Qing court’s loss of power to regional gentry leaders – would haunt China
for decades to come.
The Japanese had a revolution too, and theirs was successful. Samurai
reformers in 1868 overthrew the Tokugawa in the name of the Meiji
emperor. They then began a series of drastic reforms designed to
modernize Japanese society, by selectively adopting the features of western
civilization that “enhanced national power”. As their foreign minister
declared in 1887, “What we must do, is to transform our empire and our
people, make the empire like the countries of Europe and our people like
the peoples of Europe”. The feudal structure that existed in Japan was
brought to an end. The daimyos were persuaded to hand over their
domains to the newly formed government and it was because of this that
possibly for the first time a central government was created in Japan, which
exercised direct control over the entire country. In 1873, military reforms
created a peasant conscript army replacing the samurai as a military class.
The destruction of the samurai class came as a major financial boon as their
upkeep was a major burden for the Japanese government. Such funds could
now be used elsewhere. After its 1889 constitution provided the oligarchic
regime with the legitimacy of a “parliamentary façade”. The aim of these
reforms was to ensure that power did not remain in the hands of the ruling
elite and gave supreme control to the emperor. Moreover, there was
separation of power that helped shape Japan’s political development.
The Meiji period also witnessed the rapid industrialisation of Japan. The
Japanese, like the Chinese, had realised that the success of the western
powers lay in their superior industrial growth. Having freed themselves
from the clutches of feudalism the new meiji government undertook a
deliberate process of industrialisation. ‘State capitalism’ was undertaken
with the help of Daimyos and big merchant houses like the House of Mitsui.
It established new factories, mines, railroads, banking and postal systems.
Initially, emphasis was laid on the strategic industries but soon non-
strategic industries like textiles, cement and glass soon followed. Modern
education was promoted in Japan, where emphasis was laid on subjects like
modern science and engineering. An increasing number of Japanese went
to Europe and other parts of the west to be education n and training. They
were able to use this education and training to start industries and new
business in Japan. Countless Western books were also imported and
translated; technicians and experts were brought to Japan and by 1883
most of the work begun by British officers, engineers and doctors was in
the hands of the Japanese. A banking system was introduced along the lines
of the American system and the Meiji government channelized its newly
created resources into building the transport, communication and strong
military mechanism. These policies reflected the belief that for Japan to
survive it must pursue the goal of ‘fukofu Kyohu’ (rich country, strong
army). Japan had also recognised its geographic parallels to Britain, and so
set about developing a strong navy and becoming “the Britain of the East” –
with remarkable success. Military victories over China in 1895 and Russia
in 1905 forced the West to take the Japanese seriously. By 1899, Japan had
abolished extraterritoriality (so held legal jurisdiction over all foreign
visitors), and by 1911, the unequal treaties were gone for good. Japan
emerged from WWI as a major power with new (Chinese) territories and a
permanent seat on the council of the League of Nations.
Sydney Crowcour argues that while government policy may not have
always been successful, a great base for further development and
expansion had been laid down by the Japanese government. And it was the
creation of this base and the desire of the people to learn and develop more
that helped Japan reach the stage of being a major world power.
In contrast, the Chinese elite had effectively ignored the problem posed by
Western expansionism up until 1858, but their defeat in the Second Opium
War forced them to take some steps to strengthen their regime. Thus began
a series of rather feeble reforms, called the ‘Self-Strengthening Movement’
(1860-95), which sought “the preservation of Chinese civilization by
grafting on Western mechanisms”. The rule of Tungh Char, who ruled for
about 12 years came to be known as the ‘restoration period’ wherein the
Manchus sought reforms. However, unlike the Meiji Restoration, which was
meant to overthrow the pre-existing system this movement in China sought
to restore the older order through reaffirmation of knowledge through
practical affairs. Thus, this movement sought to reform society within the
traditional framework and thats where the biggest failure of the movement
lay. Thus, these reforms were doomed to fail from the start as their chief
aim was not reformation at all, but rather consolidation. Although, this
movement seeked to initiate limited reforms in the field of armaments,
education and communications, its primary emphasis was on the agrarian
economy that had been ruined to a large extent as a result of the Taiping
movement. Thus, the chief focus of the government was to revive the
agrarian economy due to which other sectors of the economy like trade and
commerce, industries etc which were thriving in the west and now Japan
were completely neglected. Moreover, the Manchus sought to protect the
gentry class as it was their biggest supporter. As a result the gentry class
continued to remain as powerful as it did prior to the Taiping rebellion,
which was in stark contrast to the development in Japan, where the Meiji
period had seen the destruction of the Samurai class. Some new industries
were developed (such as steel works) but these remained largely
dependent on foreigners for machinery, materials and expertise. The
gentry leaders “had no interest in creating a modern industrial society”,
hence China’s utter failure to achieve that end through these ‘reforms’. It
was a faulty policy to begin with that resisted change and the further lack of
willingness on part of the people to overcome this traditional structure
prevented any change from taking place in China, which was even
comparable to Japan.
It wasn't until 1861 that China wised up and used a Western idea to help
itself; International Law. China also, around this time, created Universities
for the study of Europe, its politics, and its military. These largely failed
however, as China continued to be used as Europe's Imperial playground,
because the resistance put up by China and the Chinese peoples gave the
West more and more reasons to impose treaties onto China.
The failure of the Self-Strengthening Movement was highlighted by the
Chinese defeats of 1885 (to France) and 1895 (to Japan). The Qing dynasty
was finally overthrown in 1911, and replaced with an ineffectual republic.
This was effectively an autocracy under Yuan Shih-k’ai, which fell into
anarchy after his death in 1916, as rival warlords divided the country up
amongst themselves. The 1911 revolution also spelled the end for
Confucianism, as the “New Culture” movement embraced the West and
sought a complete revamp of Chinese society. This attitude soon soured
however – leading to a boycott of Western products and democratic ideas –
due to the treatment of China by the Western powers after WWI. By 1920,
China was adrift; its traditional political and social systems cast away, and
no viable alternatives had yet been found to replace them.
The pattern for China and Japan’s comparative responses to the West
between 1800-1920 was set in the centuries preceding this period. Japan
recognised the threat being posed, and so responded quickly and
decisively. But China, in its arrogance – and self-interested leadership –
tended to respond inappropriately, or be overly complacent. When the
need for reform could no longer be denied, Japan accepted the need to
modernize whole-heartedly; whereas China tried to preserve its traditional
Confucian culture and social structure. China met the challenge of the West
by resisting the West, but to no avail. Japan, in contrast, used the West – its
experts, technology, science and institutions. By 1920, the remarkable rise
of Japan was as undeniable as the tragic fall of China.
