Impact of Boxer Rebellion on Chinas World Relations

Impact of boxer rise on chinas World RelationsWhat impact did the meat packer insurrection haveon chinawares transaction with the rest of the world?The bagger insurrection instigated an unprecedented coordinated military response from international powers later The Righteous and Harmonious Fists more commonly known as the trunks had mutilated and slaughtered gravitational constants of Chinese Christian converts, Western missionaries and impertinent nationals.1 The atrocities occurred ming guide with 1898 and 1900 when the trunks began targeting their perceived enemies in the Shandong region of mainland mainland China before spreadhead north to capital of Red China. The belowdrawers could not differentiate between the Christian missionaries desire to proselytise Chinas peasants and sop upd westernisation. This paper contends that the meat packer uprising both wounded and opened relations between China and the outside world. Clearly, the discriminate violence of th e shorts shocked and angered the international association.2 at that placefore, far from achieving their objective of persecute China from globalisation and the westernisation of Chinese peasants, it caused the world to hone in on China. Inadvertently the Boxer Rebellion opened international kindreds with China and the outside world. Countries like the fall in States refrained from argumentative dialogue and began to have meaningful diplomatic discussions with the Chinese government. Neverthe little, the Boxer Protocol, signed in 1901, seriously unnatural Chinas relationship with the world. The communications protocol virtu whollyy bankrupted Chinas economy. The Qing Dynasty was forced to pay common chord ascorbic acid and thirty three million United State sawhorses indemnity to foreign countries affected by the Boxers violence.3 The Boxer Rebellion like the majority of insurrections has no narrative from the insurgents. The historiographies of rebellions are a combinatio n of texts of victims, politicians, historians and other academics as in the case the Boxer Rebellion. The majority of eyewitness accounts are usually anonymous but break dance the harsh humanity of death associated with insurrections. Cohen gives a perfect example of this when he cites an eyewitness account of a Chinese individual who witnessed the scene of death during the Boxer Rebellion in Tianjing in 1900, the eyewitness describes the atrocities of the rebellion, they declare,There are many corpses floating in the river. Some were without heads, others were missing limbs. The bodies of women often had their nipples cut off and their crotch mutilated There were also bodies in shallow areas by the banks with flocks of crows pecking away at them. The smell was so bad we had to cover our noses the whole day. Still, no one came out to collect the bodies for burial. People said that they were all Christians who had been killed by the bloomers and the populace dare not get involve d.4Boyd contends that more or less Westerners went to China to make specie or to make converts.5 Neither reason was popular with the Righteous Harmonious Fists (Boxers). They viewed themselves as representatives of the Chinese peasantry and rigorously opposed all foreigners. Although, by the end of the nineteenth century, Chinas population had reached three hundred and fifty million the majority of Chinese peasants had never encountered foreigners or Western missionaries.6 Nevertheless, the Boxers held a pixilated belief that foreigners and Christian missionaries were responsible for the breakdown in the fabric of simple Chinese peasant golf-club and they dishonoured their traditional spiritual and community. Furthermore, the Boxers attributed Chinas natural disasters such as flood, drought and paucity to the debasedion of Christianity. Drought followed the great flood of the Yellow River in 1898 and left-hand(a) two million peasants starvation and desperate. The Boxers a bot tom up organisation without official leadership saw themselves as representatives of the peasantry in the Shandong region of northern China.7 Likewise, the missionaries imposed power in the villages they occupied and they were involved in legal decision-making. The missionaries infuriated the Boxers even more because they were not just content to proselytise Christianity they also rejected Confucianism.8 Harrison contends that the Boxers believed Catholic missionaries posed the greatest threat to Chinese morality. She argues that the Boxers targeted villages where the tumesce-established Catholic missionaries had taken on the government agency of officials. The Boxers believed that because central government had failed to tackle the issue of village politics and moral issues they would take the impartiality into their own hands.9 However, this argument is neutralised by the excessive violence and murder of Catholics perpetrate by the Boxers in the villages of central Shanxi.10 The Boxers believed they were impervious to pain they could withstand attack from both sword, and bullet. Their strange beliefs make them merciless fighters and a therefore a dangerous enemy of foreigners, Chinese Christian converts and missionaries. Even if their beliefs were well founded and justifiable, their methods of resolving their perceived problems were inexcusable and crude.11 The Boxers fervent mystical beliefs are not a impertinent phenomenon because allegedly, in preceding years Chinese peasants had experienced similar supernatural powers following natural disasters. manlike peasants believed that they acquired special religious spiritual powers to overcome the disasters.12 However, the Boxers method of dealing with the threat was incomprehensible. Flemings agonistical claim that at the beginning of the Boxer regime, ninety percent of the Boxers were just peasants in insure dress is debateable. However, he declares that as time went by their sartorial costume of red and yellow turbans and sashes became less important and the majority of Boxers held strong political ideologies.13Following the suppression of the Boxers by the international counterinsurgency force,14 each nation affected by Boxer violence sought retribution. However, close to nations were less harsh than others were. For example, the United States highlighted this in their response. Secretary of State John Hay fearing Chinas partition by European nations following the Boxer Rebellion issued a memorandum in July 1900 to those countries affected by the rebellion. Hay suggested that they should continue to support Chinas administrative and territorial integrity.15 In reality the United States were protecting their own trading interests in China. Furthermore, the United States practised a strict anti-imperialistic foreign policy.16 However, the United States outward support of the Qing Dynasty was a contradiction of their policies towards Chinese immigrants. Ironically, the Chinese Exclusion diddle 1882 and the Geary Act 1892 effectively prevented Chinese people from entering the States.17After the suppression on the Boxer Rebellion, China back up American military presence in Beijing to repel any further rebellions following the drubbing of the Boxers. The United States politely refused and withdrew from China in October 1900. The commander of the American counterinsurgency force stated,Let us hope that this generous, charitable, and magnanimous treatment of the vanquished may prove an example to the nations of the world, and a step forward in the worlds progress toward a higher and nobler humanity. We are glad to know that this work is comprehended to you. It is needless to tell you, however, that the United States does not maintain an army for the purpose of furnishing the city of Peking with darling municipal government, and as a business proposition your appeal for the United States forces to remain longer in Peking has little to stand upon.18Britain was slow to respond to the Boxer Rebellion.19 However, retrospectively the Boxer Rebellion caused Britain to hug a more vigorous foreign policy. Indeed, because of the inadequacies of the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary Lord capital of Zimbabwe in dealing with the Boxer Rebellion, the Conservative government made significant changes to the Diplomatic Service.20 Sir Claude MacDonald the British subgenus Pastor in Beijing despite being fully aware of the Boxers violence against foreigners, Christian converts and missionaries in northern China refused to contemplate that the Boxer would spread across China.21 Indeed, Otte contends that Britains blas attitude to the Boxer violence only changed after the siege of Beijing legation district that began on June 14th 1900. For fifty-five days, the Boxers laid siege to the square mile legation district in Beijing.22When the multilateral counterinsurgency force finally arrived in Beijing in August 1900, they displayed to the world for th e first time that a intellect of unity was possible. The multilateral force consisted of all the nations who had personnel in the legation. The force consisted of approximately twenty thousand troops. The Japanese were the dominant force with ten thousand troops. Japan demonstrated to China and the world that the impressiveness of China was truly international and not just Eurocentric.23 Furthermore, the multilateral force with the aim of rescuing the personnel and their families from the Beijing Legation district were given different instructions from their governments. German emperor Kaiser Wilhelm II commanded his troops to cross-file no mercy to the Boxers after they had murdered the German Minister in Beijing queen von Ketteler. The Kaiser declared to his troops before they left Bremerhaven,Just as the Huns a thousand years ago, under the leadership of Attila, gained a reputation by virtue of which they still live in historical tradition, so may the name of Germany become k nown in such a manner in China, that no Chinese will ever again to look askance at a German. 24Clearly, the Boxer Rebellion affected relations with Germany and this was borne out by the first point in the Boxer Protocol, it declared,.Prince of the First Rank, Chun, was constitute Ambassador of His Majesty the emperor of China, and directed in that capacity to convey to His Majesty the German Emperor the expression of the regrets of His Majesty the Emperor of China and of the Chinese Government at the assassination of his excellence the late Baron von Ketteler, German Minister. The Chinese Government has stated that it will erect on the spot of the assassination of his Excellency the late Baron von Ketteler, commemorative monument worthy of the rank of the deceased, and aim an inscription in the Latin, German, and Chinese languages which shall express the regrets of His Majesty the Emperor of China for the murder committed25The first article of the Boxer Protocol clearly highlight s Chinas humiliation. Germany like other governments cherished to punish and embarrass China after the Boxer Rebellion. The proceeding articles in the protocol all indispensable apologies, monument erections, the destruction of Chinese arms and fortresses, and the forfeiture of land to foreign powers.26 However, as previously mentioned, the most damaging article in the protocol was the three hundred and thirty three million dollar indemnity with four percent interest. Undoubtedly, the multilateral troops took revenge on the Boxers and their supporters, Boyd contends that rumours of looting, rape, and torture committed by multilateral troops spread throughout Beijing. 27 Schoppa argues that the Boxer Protocol is the lowest point in Chinese international relations and their ultimate humiliation. The protocol signed on the 7th September 1901 between China and the Powers of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Belgium, Spain, United States, France, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, and R ussia was yet another unequal treaty that humiliated the Chinese government. The price of the protocol not only restricted Chinas domestic privileges, they increased foreign interests in China. Therefore, the fifty years of humiliation that began with Chinas defeat in the Opium Wars extended into a tonic millennium. Therefore, the Boxer Protocol crippled Chinese spirit, economy and international prestige.28Although, the Boxer Rebellion and the consequent protocol severely damaged China domestically and their international reputation it instigated the dismantlement of their biggest burden, the corrupt Qing Dynasty. The Empress Dowager Cixi deceived the international community by pretending that her troops were suppressing the Boxers. However, the reality was that she despised foreign intervention as much as the Boxers did. She cleverly encouraged the Boxers to turn the Chinese peasantry and country against the foreigners. The Boxers declared bear the Qing, destroy the Foreigners. Foreigners included missionaries and Chinese Christian converts. As Esherick contends, the Boxer Rebellion was not a genuine rebellion, as they did not oppose the Chinese Qing government.29 The rebellion failed to resemble the excepted definition as an organized build up resistance to an established ruler or government.30 Once the Qing dynasty realised that counterinsurgency would overthrow the Boxers they short renounced their involvement so they could continue in the eyes of the West as a legitimate government.31 However, ineluctably the Boxer Rebellion demonstrates that Chinas international relations were damaged by the more uninitiated actions the Boxers and the more sophisticated and sinister intervention of the Qing Dynasty.32In conclusion, the Boxer Rebellion clearly left an indelible mark on China both domestically and internationally. The ruthless action of the Boxers against foreigners, Chinese Christian converts, and missionaries was viewed by the outside world as un justified and inexcusable. The Boxers clearly believed that they were acting in the best interests of peasants who made up the majority of the Chinese population. Their violent activities led to the Boxer Protocol in 1901 that almost bankrupted China through the huge financial reparations. The further articles of the protocol heaped further humiliation on China and allowed international powers access to prominent trading areas. However, arguably inadvertently the Boxer Rebellion prevented China from being colonised by major international powers. The Boxer Rebellion undoubtedly stirred the United States to intervene in order to save their trading rights in China. They sent a clear content to Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Japan, and Russia to support Chinas administrative and territorial integrity. Furthermore, the Boxer Rebellion was the catalyst for disintegration of the deceitful Qing Dynasty. Although, the Qing Dynasty under Empress Dowager Cixi supported the Boxers it was not to protect the interests of Chinas peasantry. Even though the Boxer Rebellion eventually instigated improved foreign diplomacy, it is indisputable that their actions not only led to the massacres of foreigners, Chinese Christians and missionaries it led to thousands of deaths of their own people. The international counterinsurgency forces showed no mercy when they exacted retribution on the Boxers and their sympathisers. The ease in which the Boxers and Imperial guard were defeated by the multilateral counterinsurgency forces compelled the Chinese government to rise their military. The Boxer Rebellion reiterated the Eurocentric ideology that the Chinese are uncivilised. Furthermore, the rebellion alienated the western community from China even though it inadvertently improved international diplomacy and rid China of the corrupt Qing Dynasty that ultimately led to China becoming a republic in 1912. The ease in which the Boxers and Imperial guard were defeated by the multilateral cou nterinsurgency forces compelled the Chinese government to modernise their military.BibliographyBooksBoyd, J., A Dance with Dragon. The Vanished of Pekings Foreign Policy (London I. B. Tauris Co. Ltd, 2012).Cashman, D., America in the Age of the Titans The Progressive era and World War I (New York New York University Press, 1998).Cohen, Paul, in Humanising the Boxers, in Bickers, R. Tiedemann, R. (eds), The Boxers, China, and the World (Plymouth Rowman Littlefield Publishers Ltd, 2007), pp. 179-197.Cullinane, M., Liberty and American Anti-Imperialism 1898-1909 (New York Palgrave MacMillian, 2012).Durschmeid, E,. Beware the Dragon, China 1,000 Years of Bloodshed (London Carlton Publishing Group, 2008).Esherick, J., The Origins of the Boxer Uprising (Oakland University of California Press).Fleming, P., The Siege at Peking (Edinburgh Birlinn Ltd, 2001).Harrison, Henrietta, in Humanising the Boxers, in Bickers, R. Tiedemann, R. (eds), The Boxers, China, and the World (Plymouth Rowma n Littlefield Publishers Ltd, 2007), pp. 1-15.Otte, Thomas, Heaven knows where we shall finally drift Lord Salisbury, the Cabinet, Isolation, and the Boxer Rebellion in Kennedy, G. Neilson, K. (eds), Incidents and internationalist Relations People, Power, and Personalities (Connecticut Praeger Publishers, 2002).Schoppa, K., The capital of South Carolina Guide to Modern Chinese History (New York capital of South Carolina University Press, 2000).Seonnichsen, J., The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 (Santa Barbara Greenwood Publishing Group, 2011).Spence, J., The Searching of Modern China (London Century Hutchinson Ltd, 1990).Steiner, Z., The Foreign force and Foreign Policy, 1898-1914 (Cambridge Cambridge University Press, 1970).JournalsOulett, multinational counterinsurgency the Western intervention in the Boxer Rebellion 1900-1901 Small Wars Insurgencies. 20 3.4 (2009) pp. 507-527.Radio broadcastBragg, M., The Boxer Rebellion In our magazine. BBC radio 4 archive broadcast (21.30, 9 touch 2009)Internet sourceRebellion. Oxford English Dictionary (03 April 2014). functional online http//www.oed.com/view/Entry/159201?isAdvanced=falseresult=1rskey=nNKkrE Date accessed 02 April 2014.Boxer Protocol, 1901, Peace Agreement between the Great Powers and China 09/07/190 (03 April 2014) Available online http//china.usc.edu/(S(ivfmlzuvquerbb45edthpbze)A(irVj2QZVywEkAAAAYWQzZmNiZGMtZTBhNC00MDc1LTg5ZTItOGQ4OGU4MGI0NTk3Uo36FF2grKtLe_4GD64z6sKQqsw1))/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=420 Date accessed 03 April 201411 Oulett, international counterinsurgency the Western intervention in the Boxer Rebellion 1900-1901 Small Wars Insurgencies. 20 3.4 (2009) p. 511.2 Durschmeid, E,. Beware the Dragon, China 1,000 Years of Bloodshed (London Carlton Publishing Group, 2008)p. 172.3 Spence, J., The Searching of Modern China (London Century Hutchinson Ltd, 1990), p. 235.4 cited by Cohen, Paul, in Humanising the Boxers, in Bickers, R. Tiedemann, R. (eds), The Boxers, China, and the World ( Plymouth Rowman Littlefield Publishers Ltd, 2007), p. 1865 Boyd, J., A Dance with Dragon. The Vanished of Pekings Foreign Policy (London I. B. Tauris Co. Ltd, 2012), p. xvi.6 Fleming, P., The Siege at Peking (Edinburgh Birlinn Ltd, 2001), p. 36.7 Bragg, M., The Boxer Rebellion In our Time. BBC radio 4 archive broadcast (21.30, 9 March 2009)8 Ibid.9 Harrison, Henrietta, in Humanising the Boxers, in Bickers, R. Tiedemann, R. (eds), The Boxers, China, and the World (Plymouth Rowman Littlefield Publishers Ltd, 2007), p. 1210 Harrison, Henrietta, in Humanising the Boxers, p. 711 Oulett, Multinational counterinsurgency the Western intervention in the Boxer Rebellion 1900-1901, p. 508.12 Bragg, M., The Boxer Rebellion In our Time13 Fleming, The Siege at Peking, p.36.14 Oulett, Multinational counterinsurgency the Western intervention in the Boxer Rebellion 1900-1901, p. 508.15 Cashman, D., America in the Age of the Titans The Progressive Era and World War I (New York New York University Press, 1998), p.436.16 Cullinane, M., Liberty and American Anti-Imperialism 1898-1909 (New York Palgrave MacMillian, 2012), p. 4.17 Seonnichsen, J., The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 (Santa Barbara Greenwood Publishing Group, 2011), p. xiv.18 cited in Oulett, Multinational counterinsurgency the Western intervention in the Boxer Rebellion 1900-1901. p. 518.19 Otte, Thomas, Heaven knows where we shall finally drift Lord Salisbury, the Cabinet, Isolation, and the Boxer Rebellion in Kennedy, G. Neilson, K. (eds), Incidents and International Relations People, Power, and Personalities (Connecticut Praeger Publishers, 2002), p. 30.20 Steiner, Z., The Foreign Office and Foreign Policy, 1898-1914 (Cambridge Cambridge University Press, 1970), p. 180.21 Otte, Thomas. Heaven knows where we shall finally drift Lord Salisbury, the Cabinet, Isolation, and the Boxer Rebellion, p. 2622 Otte, Thomas. Heaven knows where we shall finally drift Lord Salisbury, the Cabinet, Isolation, and the Boxer Reb ellion, p. 2923 Bragg, M., The Boxer Rebellion In our Time24 Fleming, The Siege at Peking, pp. 135-13625 Boxer Protocol, 1901, Peace Agreement between the Great Powers and China (09/07/1901). Available online http//china.usc.edu/(S(ivfmlzuvquerbb45edthpbze)A(irVj2QZVywEkAAAAYWQzZmNiZGMtZTBhNC00MDc1LTg5ZTItOGQ4OGU4MGI0NTk3Uo36FF2grKtLe_4GD64z6sKQqsw1))/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=420 Date accessed 03 April 201426 Fleming, The Siege at Peking, pp. 250-25127 Boyd, J., A Dance with Dragon. The Vanished of Pekings Foreign Policy, p. 22.28 Schoppa, K., The Columbia Guide to Modern Chinese History (New York Columbia University Press, 2000), p. 171.29 Esherick, J., The Origins of the Boxer Uprising (Oakland University of California Press), p. xiv.30 Rebellion. Oxford English Dictionary. 2014, Available online http//www.oed.com/view/Entry/159201?isAdvanced=falseresult=1rskey=nNKkrE Date accessed 02 April 2014.31 Ibid.32 Esherick, The Origins of the Boxer Uprising, p. 312