Transcription
Hello. It gives me great pleasure to welcome you to the dialogue we are going to have today with Professor Wang Gangu of the National uh University of Singapore. Uh Professor Wang is clearly Asia's most distinguished historian. uh few can match his understanding of how Asia has evolved uh and reached where we are uh today.
So today we're going to have a discussion of the topics and themes that we covered in week one uh of our course on how history is influencing the course of US China relations and we're going to spend some time discussing uh the century of humiliation uh that we have covered in this course. So Gang Wu welcome uh to this discussion and I'm going to begin as I said to ask you a question about the century of humiliation which probably lasted from 1842 to 1949. It was clearly a searing experience for China and it left deep scars. Indeed as recently as July 1st 2017 President President Xiinping said that the return of Hong Kong marked the end of the Chinese nation's 100red years of shame. And we know that many painful episodes occurred in this century of humiliation. The opium war, the sacking of the summer palace, the defeat by Japan in 1895, the betrayal after World War I on German territories in China. In your view, which of these events scarred China the most and why?
It depends, I suppose, when you are addressing the question and who you are talking about. Because today when you quote Xiinping, it is in the context of US China >> tensions and uh disagreements about various things and a sense of being threatened by the United States that that the Chinese feel. >> At other times, uh it is just a general statement. It's not addressed to anybody. >> Right now, it is addressed very much towards the how the Chinese feel about United States policy towards China. Mhm. >> So it has a target >> but before that it was just a general statement. >> Uh and then you ask how many people actually felt it. Well that varies a lot because uh when it happened in the 1840s60s summer palace burning all the way to the loss to Japan even to the boxer uprising and the boxer indemnity all those of course they were all humiliating but they were humiliating to the Qing dynasty. For most Chinese who wanted to get rid of the Manchus, >> this was a good thing. It shows that the Manchus are hopeless. They didn't have the they didn't have the interests of China at heart. They justified the rebellion against the Manchus that this these these people should be out. And all those Mandarins, Chinese Mandarins who collaborated with Manchus were also to be blamed because they tried to support a failed enterprise. And uh so the these foreigners showed that the Chinese were backward, hopeless and we are very poor because of poor governance and so on. So in a way all those events showed that it was time to get rid of the munchers. >> So from those those people's point of view >> uh there might be humiliating to the Qing dynasty but it didn't affect the Chinese people in the same way. is a good thing because it justified what they were going to do >> after the munchers overthrown. However, in their efforts to restore a good relationship >> to with the west to try and get them to, for example, renegotiate the treaties >> to take away things like extraterality, all the things which made the Chinese feel inferior >> and the way they were racism that was involved to treat the Chinese as somewhat barbarous and univilized. These were things were much more hurtful >> because in other words they continued after they got rid of the Qing the west attitude towards the Chinese were you all to be taught how to behave >> how to modernize yourself you're so backward and of course the Chinese were determined to catch up they tried to learn their science and >> the political institutions international law they were trying to but all that time they were treated like you just have to learn more you got to do better than that is really the the deep humiliation is to be treated.
What time was that? since from about the first world war. For example, the uh the Treaty of Sai thing was an openly internationally perceived humiliation of the Chinese when the Chinese had actually been allies of the West when the West defeated the the Germans, the German Empire at that time. And yet when it came to the treaty of Versailles, they get they allowed the territory of the the Germans had in Shandong to pass over to the Japanese. Now that is real humiliation. Japanese and Chinese are on the same side as the allies. And yet there the Japanese are treated as superior to the Chinese. >> That that of course you can say that was partly because the Japanese defeated the Chinese. >> But you can see all these are cumulatively and as dependent who the target was at that time the target would have been Britain and France >> because they were the ones who were they won the war in Europe. >> Yes. >> And the first world war. So America was not in the in the not treated in the same way at all because America was relatively peaceful in the relations with China. >> So now when you when this is addressed today, it is now targeted at America because America is now the country the only country in the world >> that is treating China as come something you know they're just not quite they're not quite civilized. They are they are they tyrannical their ruler is their party is evil. you know all these words that are being used in in the languages in western media and by the western American politicians and so on this they're really targeting >> is it deep deep humiliation I I it is hard to evaluate but it's certainly politically necessary to portray the Americans in that way because Americans are doing to them what they consider to be totally unacceptable >> you know I'm glad u you mentioned the Japanese uh and how the territories returned to Japan instead of China. It's a sort of indication that the uh westerners treated Europeans and Americans treated Japan with greater respect and at the time and you know as you know our our mutual friend Ezra Vogle the Harvard scholar has said that for centuries China with its great civilization and stronger had societies had the upper hand v Japan. Yet where yet when Japan woke up to the western challenge in the Maji restoration and reformed itself to become stronger, China didn't pay attention and as we know was then humiliated by Japan in the 1895 SinoJapanese war. Why why didn't the Chinese pay attention to the fact that the Japanese were waking up reforming themselves becoming stronger? Why why they why when they sort of noticing that Japan was going through a great transformation while they were slipping behind?
Well, they probably underestimated the speed at which the Japanese were learning from the west. >> But they were themselves learning from the west. They were also trying to build a navy. >> They were also trying to retrain the army, modernize them, >> buying modern weaponry from the west and so on. >> They didn't expect to lose to the Japanese. Mhm. >> But when they lost to Japan in 19 1894 to95, frankly, it's a question of the the Japanese were more maritime anyway. They were a maritime nation. And learning from Britain, the greatest maritime nation in the world at the time, >> made them very superior. Whereas the Chinese turn when they asked the British to help them build a navy, the British turned them down. >> The British had decided >> for China to have a strong navy would be a threat to their interests. Mhm. >> For Japan to have a strong navy, it was all right because Japanese just a small group of little islands >> and they they chose to train the Japanese but refused to change train the Chinese. So the Chinese had to turn to the French >> and frankly in comparison the French Navy is nothing nothing like the British Navy. And so in a way some people joke about it a little that the SinoJapanese war of 189495 was a battle between the the British Navy against the French Navy and the French Navy lost >> but that's putting aside putting aside that part the key part is that military power was everything >> that the fact the Japanese defeated China >> and a few years later they defeated Russia >> the Russian fleet went out and what did the British do they had the Anglo-Japanese alliance. >> Yeah. >> They allied with Japan because they didn't want to, >> you know, to keep an eye on Japan, >> but at the same time they respected Japanese military and naval power in particular. >> So the British alliance with Japan raised the Japanese to the same level as the British. >> They had no alliance with any other Asian nation. The others all under the empire. So given that thing the Japanese took upon themselves as being not equal to the west treated as civilized people worthy of respect >> whereas the Chinese weren't >> and in the first world war the Japanese took the side of the British who was the allies >> and they took took the Shandong from the Germans >> in the course of that the Chinese joined the allies but pro a bit later >> but nevertheless expected at the end of the war to be treated at least the same as Japan. as equals. >> But in the treaty of Asai, they didn't because the Japanese were allies of the British. The British favored the Japanese and the Japanese insisted that they were they took the Germans, the German control of Shandong. They deserved to to have it. And to this shock, that's humiliation to the Chinese that the British accepted that argument >> and handed it over to the Germans. And that that was a real the first real break. But there was some other early little things but I won't go into the details but all that leading up to the fact that the Japanese had destroyed the Chinese tributary system. >> They took Korea and but by that time they had already taken in fact before that they had already taken Taiwan after the first world war that the the first war that they lost. >> They took over Korea. They had entered into Manuria after defeating the Russians. They actually took over Manuria, part of Manuria, the southern Manuria, all that was already built even before the first world war. >> And then after during the after the first world war, after the treaty of Versailles, the Japanese pushed further ahead to take over Manuria as a whole and eventually created the monarchy of Manuko. All that of course and the West protesting in the League of Nations, but to no avail. >> In the end, the Japanese got their way more or less. And so all that I think was genuinely humiliating >> and to end all that with the Japanese invasion of China to actually try to take Chinese ter more and more Chinese territory >> and being defeated by the Japanese again and again. Now you can say the all that >> was was a cumulative >> really heavy heavy sense of humiliation after that.
you know this uh when the when the Japanese right uh as Ezra Vogel said traditionally used to look up to the Chinese progressively as the Japanese could see that they were becoming stronger and stronger than the Chinese you know defeating them in 1895 as you said and then taking over more and more of the territory. How what were the Japanese attitudes towards how were the Japanese attitudes towards the Chinese evolving around that time? Were their perceptions of China changing significantly?
I think there are lots of differences within Japan itself. There were those of course I mean the military of course who despised the Chinese military as being hopelessly incompetent and and backward and they were right. They were not wrong. Uh for a lot of Japanese scholars they remain very respectful of Chinese civilization. But among the scholars, they were divided because a new group, new generation of postmi scholars who saw the western uh standards of modern civilization as far superior to what the traditional Chinese had to offer. So while they respected traditional China, they felt that China had been corrupted, >> had been uh completely weakened by having lost many wars. >> After all, they lost to the Mongols, they lost to the Manchus, to the Japanese. The Chinese people are hopeless. >> They are just not capable of running themselves. So they be that group of Japanese scholars too began to look down on the civilization as being really passed it. >> It's really missed the boat and it's it's completely rejected and you had the famous some famous intellectuals in the maj Japan who then said we must turn to the west. Forget about China. >> Yuki Fukuzawa >> Fukuza just forget about it. We turn to the west. And of course when he said that he was alone but after that are the whole generations of those Japanese who studied in the west >> went along with that >> that forget about Chinese civilization that was all in the past >> that may have helped us shaped our early centuries of development for Japan. But today we turn to the west and we become as strong as the west if not stronger. And then they developed the next generation of Japanese who said that why should we allow the west to dominate us in the in Asia. >> Asia should get together Asians get together and kick the west out. Asia for the Asians. It's just they moved even further >> and they wanted the Chinese to join in. >> And some of the Chinese were tempted by that. So it's not true to say that all Japanese are anti-Japanese all Chinese were anti-Japanese. Yeah, >> Chinese were persuaded by some Chinese were persuaded by the Japanese that we should all get together in the greater East Asia prosperity sphere >> and the Wongqing way and some of his other colleagues actually went along with that. >> Yeah. >> But there was a small defanted group >> that led by Changai and so on. That's it. And Changai because he knew the Japanese very well. He had studied with the Japanese military. >> Yeah. He knew that they were not really talking about chasing the the west out. Chasing the west out so that they can take over. >> So that is young guys's understanding. And therefore he said >> we cannot allow that. That's that's not the real story. >> Yes. >> And so he insisted on fighting to the end >> and that is how they came together with the communists. They were fighting a civil war. >> Yes. >> But they decided to put aside their differences >> because he said this is a greater threat >> to us in the long run >> and they combined successfully. >> Yeah.
As you know Gangu this course is uh focused on US China relations and we have to address the question as is what basically was the role of the United States in this century of humiliation that the Chinese talk about and as you know until the boxer rebellion the American troops didn't really fight uh in China but at the same time the US insisted on most favored nation treatment and joined the settlements in Shanghai and so on so forth. So how is the US role regarded by Chinese historians when they look at the century of emulation because at the same time as you know the US was also so very generous and contributed money for the establishment of Chinua University. So how will you how would you characterize uh Chinese attitude towards the Americans in this century of humiliation?
There were lots of reservations about the United States at the beginning, but eventually I would say the Chinese decided that learning from America was a way of dealing with the West >> Mhm. >> because America was willing to at least to teach them >> in the mission schools, the colleges. Of course, they were also preaching Christianity and and generally trying to convert the Chinese, which they didn't particularly like, but they didn't mind that. America provided also some opportunities for them. Learning about capitalism, entrepreneurship, all the modern features of economic development and it was a very successful America. America's transformation, economic transformation at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th century was really most impressive. I mean they they are the the great uh economic growth. If you look at examples in modern times the Americans showed that and the Chinese admired all that whereas of course for the British and the French they were polite and so on but they really treated the Chinese. They offered no nothing to the Chinese really. They would Chinese would be absolutely impossible for Chinese to succeed in the in in in in Europe in England or France. But in United States it was possible even though there were racist troubles every now and then with labor unions and so but the rich successful Americans were quite happy to deal with rich and successful Chinese. They were dealing at the at the level of capitalist cooperation collaboration and so on >> and generally they they admired the Americans. Americans had a open society, relatively free and not uh not too discriminatory to the Chinese. The Chinese did feel it there. But the Chinese couldn't even get to Britain and France. >> Whereas in United States at least they got there, >> treated not so well. But on the whole, many many Chinese benefited from that. And the students, the Americans invited and opened up itself to Chinese students by the thousands right from the beginning very early where hardly any Chinese went to Britain or France. >> Japanese did for the navy for naval thing at the military level. >> But in where America was concerned, it was educational. It was cultural civilizational in a way >> and the entrepreneurship that the Americans showed appealed very much to the Chinese. The Chinese had very mixed feelings and but on the whole I would say in balance the Chinese were very positive about America right up to 1949 up to the Korean war >> and then of course the government took a different line.
Well, let's end on that positive note [laughter] that how Chinese attitudes towards America were quite positive and then in next week uh we when we discuss to a more contemporary uh era we can discuss about the transformation of Chinese uh attitudes towards the Americans. Thank you very much Gangu for this discussion.