China's relationship with the West
History Coursework, 2004
China's relationship with the West
) There are various ways in which a country can put pressure on another country, and many such ways were used by the West regarding the poor standards of human rights in China.
The main tactic used by the West was to send an authoritative figure such as the Head of State to raise the issue in hand within the country. Both Britain and America sent representatives, however each country had a different method of addressing the situation. The President of America, who visited China in June 1998, chose a very direct, blunt approach. President Clinton used 'some of the harshest American language against China for years' to tell the Chinese leaders that their state of human rights was 'thoroughly unacceptable'. Britain on the other hand approached the situation delicately, desperate not to offend the Chinese and provoke conflict. Blair, who visited Chine in October 1998, said 'persuasion and dialogue achieve more than confrontation and empty rhetoric'. Britain's main motive for such delicacy was it's fear of China's discontinuing their trading rights. However despite this fear Britain still felt it necessary to take action, as they too agreed that China's standard of human rights was inadequate. Also, Blair was likely to face criticism if he was seen to 'soft pedal on attacking human rights' in China. Rather than confronting China aggressively, Tony Blair at first complimented the country, before carefully addressing the 'differences' between the West and China regarding human rights. By using this conciliatory method of criticism, Blair hoped to gain China's trust to prevent offending them when he came round to discussing the 'universal' issue of human rights in China.
China also received pressure from human rights groups such as Free Tibet, Reporters Sans Frontières and Amnesty International. These groups supported Blair's cautious censure of China's human rights, and favoured negotiation and persuasion to the American's aggressive approach. Alison Reynolds, the head of Free Tibet, hoped that Blair would 'urge China to open dialogue with the Dalai Lama'. Amnesty International had what was perhaps the most aggressive argument against China, but even still they refrained from harshly or abusively accusing China of poor human rights. Instead they used persuasive language with strong implications, such as 'they call into question China's sincerity in signing key human rights conventions'.
China also bore pressure regarding human rights from members of it's own country. The Tiananmen Square incident, instigated by Deng in 1989, raised huge uproar in China. On the anniversaries of this event many people affected by Deng's 'crackdown on pro-democracy protests' gathered to protest against the murder of thousands of students. These people, marked dissidents by China and victims by the USA, received huge sympathy from Western countries and human rights groups. China warned the West to discontinue this support of 'Chinese dissidents living in exile'. This retaliation of the Chinese people against their own country was avidly highlighted by the Western press, as it provided a source of support for the Western efforts to improve Chinese human rights in China from within the country. Such supposed success would be welcomed within the West, acting as 'proof' that it's efforts toward China were having an impact. Many press articles were exaggerated or cleverly worded to make events seem very drastic, which was likely to incense Western people. For example 'dozens of police pulled two protestors ... from Tiananmen Square. They were complaining about alleged abuse of power by police and prosecutors ...' The press also made a great deal of China's warnings to the West not to support the dissidents of China. Eye-catching headlines were used, such as 'China warns West to shun dissidents'. In one article on this subject the journalist writes 'China, displaying an unyielding stance on human rights ...' Here the journalist is suggesting that China is refusing to act on the encouragement of Western countries to improve it's human rights. Such supposed failure of their efforts would rile the Western people and probably cause further, more persistent pursuit of their goal - an acceptable standard of human rights within China.
Another source of coercion for China was from EU countries, led by Denmark. In 1997 France, Germany, Italy and Spain opposed an EU resolution to criticise China, stating that they thought China should be 'treated differently to other less important states'. Denmark therefore proposed the resolution of criticism of China's human rights for the UN. Beijing immediately warned Denmark that, should it continue to support it's resolution, 'relations between China and Denmark [would] be seriously damaged'. However other members of the EU supported the EU resolution, and therefore supported Denmark, furthering the pressure put on China.
...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Another source of coercion for China was from EU countries, led by Denmark. In 1997 France, Germany, Italy and Spain opposed an EU resolution to criticise China, stating that they thought China should be 'treated differently to other less important states'. Denmark therefore proposed the resolution of criticism of China's human rights for the UN. Beijing immediately warned Denmark that, should it continue to support it's resolution, 'relations between China and Denmark [would] be seriously damaged'. However other members of the EU supported the EU resolution, and therefore supported Denmark, furthering the pressure put on China.
Finally, there was a lot of pressure put on China when President Jiang Zemin made a public visit to England. Police authority was tested as crowds gathered to watch the president's traditional carriage drive with the Queen down the mall. 'Royal parks by-laws prohibit and kind of demonstration without government permission'. Scotland Yard denied that demonstrations were forbidden in accordance with Chinese sensibilities, although it was admitted that the Foreign Office had been involved in discussions on the policing. It was confirmed by a government spokesman in Beijing that any anti-Chinese demonstrations during President Zemin's visit would critically undermine relations between the two countries.
2) a) The Opium Wars demonstrate effectively the poor relationship between China and Western countries in the past. During the 19th century Britain, France, Germany and other countries began to trade with China. The Chinese felt violated by these Western countries, and worried that China was slowly being carved up by them, with increasing foreign control over areas of the country. Britain traded in opium which it had brought from India, and received sought after Chinese goods such as silk and porcelain in return. These sold for great profit in Britain. However the Chinese regarded Britain to be the country that was bringing about it's ruin, by trading the 'poisonous' opium. They claimed that it plundered their wealth, disrupted the economy and caused critical addiction amongst the Chinese. However few British people questioned the morality of smuggling the drug into China, as the trade of opium was so beneficial to Britain.
When in 1839, in an attempt to stop the opium trade, the Chinese authorities in Canton seized and confiscated a quantity of British opium, the British government demanded compensation. They were indignant that the Chinese should have seized their property, and insisted that the Chinese had no authority over them. Incensed by the British's apparent disregard of the harm that the opium was inflicting on it's country, China refused to compensate Britain. The British therefore bombarded Canton and seized Hong Kong, thus bringing about the first Opium War. The British considered themselves to be a superior country to China, as so by starting the war they were able to demonstrate their immense strength to China, and enforce upon them the inferiority of their power. Britain was also eager to set up trade ports in China in order to obtain the highly profitable goods such as silk and porcelain. However the Chinese were an independent, proud country, and claimed that they did not need anything from any other country. Therefore Britain regarded the war as a means of establishing trade in China.
Britain's army was by far superior to China's, as so, in 1842, China inevitably lost the war. They were forced to sign the Treaty of Nanking, which demanded that the Chinese yield Hong Kong to Britain, and that ports such as Canton and Shanghai were opened to foreign trade. These terms allowed Britain to establish a strong trading position in China. However the Chinese considered the Treaty to be unequal, and claimed that the British put forward unreasonable demands which they forced the Qing government to meet.
The second opium war occurred in 1856. The British saw that the Chinese were often illegally breaking the Treaty of Nanking in defiance of foreign control. Chinese mandarins often declared ignorance of the Treaty. In 1856 they arrested the crew of a lorcha, the Arrow, which was flying the British flag. For the British this intervention was the last straw. They thought that the Chinese had established a deliberate system to strip them of the rights that Britain had instituted in the Treaty of Nanking. Once again Britain (this time aided by French units) waged war on China, and once again they were victorious. In 1858 the Chinese were compelled to sign the Treaty of Tientsin which gave Europeans additional trading rights and made the trading of opium legal. However the Chinese Emperor refused to tolerate Western ambassadors in his capitol, and so the fighting continued until 1860. In 1860 the Convention of Peking was signed, which ended the war. This was supposed to place relationships between China and the West 'on a sound footing and insure the continuance of peace for a long time.' China was opened up to foreign trade. The Chinese opinion was that they had been forced to sign three unequal treaties. In fact the Chinese thought that Britain looked for opportunities to provoke them, in order to start a war which would inevitably result in a Treaty and therefore commercial gain for Britain. The Chinese held a great deal of suspicion regarding the British, whereas the British considered the Chinese to be uncooperative.
2) b) Another event which efficiently demonstrates a poor relationship between China and Western countries in the past is the Korean War. There was a long lasting cold war between China and the West, which led to great enmity between the two countries. After about 1945, as a result of the second world war, Korea was divided into two governments - a communist Northern government led by Kim Li Sung and a non-communist Southern government led by President Syngman Rhee. The North of Korea was under Russian rule, whilst the South was under American rule. This caused hostility between the North and the South. On 25th June 1950 North Korea invaded the South and captured the capital, Seoul. The Americans, the UN (in aid of peace within Korea) and other Western countries such as Britain sent help to South Korea, and initiated a battle to repel the attacks of the North. On 7th October UN troops began to pursue the Communists North.
On October the 10th the Chinese announced that they would enter the war and fight against the UN if their troops continued to hound the Communists Northwards towards the Yalu river. China's particular qualms about the UN's actions was that the Yalu river towards which the troops were heading was the border between China and Korea. The Chinese were obsessed with the security of their borders and therefore felt threatened by the UN's advances on the Yalu river. Also, China had only been under Communist rule for 5 years, so China was still being 'sorted out'. The Communist beliefs were not yet firmly installed in China, and so it is probable that the Chinese thought of the UN's fight against the Korean Communists quite threatening. Ignoring the warnings given by the Chinese the UN continued their pursuit of the Communists, so China entered the war in order to defend it's borders. China was still highly suspicious of the West, and still thought that the West sought for opportunities to provoke, or in more extreme cases wage war on China. It is probable that China's entering the war was also intended as a warning to the West. It used the 'human flood' tactic to drive back the Americans.
The Chinese forced the Americans back across the 38th parallel - a humiliating action for America. Similar to the Opium Wars, the West still felt strongly indignant towards China. They claimed that their actions were just, and that they were fighting a defensive war which China had initiated. They also thought that the fact that UN troops were also fighting the war further justified their actions. The West were quite fearful of Communism, considering them to be aggressive and unpredictable. Therefore the West saw no fault in it's actions - they claimed to be attempting to restore peace, and that they were fighting for the good of Korea. It is probable that the Western advancement on the Chinese border (Yalu river) was intended to be a demonstration of their power, and therefore a warning to North Korea and China. It is this Western opinion that caused the Chinese suspicion that the West looked for opportunities to provoke them. The West may also have hounded the Communists to the Yalu river as an action of reassurance to South Korea and other non-communist states for the future. It would hopefully build up trust and respect for Western powers.
By 1950 to 1951 there was a slight difference of opinion within America and allying Western countries. The American general Mac Arthur wanted to attack China and eventually destroy Communism and reinstate Chiang Kai Shek as leader of China. Some people supported this idea but the President of America, President Truman, was not one of these people. He was happy with the current situation (America had pushed the Communists and China back across the 38th parallel) of containment, and wished to negotiate a plan for cease-fire. He feared that Truman's threatening of Communist China would result in Russia joining the War. He was unwilling to risk triggering a Third World War. Most people shared this view. Therefore, on 11th April 1951, he sacked general Truman.
By June 1951 the major fighting had died down and the situation had developed into a stalemate war. In July 1953 an Armistice was reached, signifying a tense truce between the two powers. The line of the 38th parallel still marked the boundary between North and South Korea.
3) China responds sensitively to the West's criticism of its human rights, immediately defending its actions. It treats the West with defiance (bordering on anger) regarding the accusations it makes - accusations which China feels are unjustified.
China reacts with such offence at the West's criticism largely because of the poor relationship the two countries have previously experienced. The past humiliation of their country by the West is very significant to the Chinese people - it could be said that most hold a grudge against the West due to certain previous experiences. A Chinese official said 'we will not forget what happened in the past'. These former incidents involving the West which the Chinese frequently refer to are events such as the Opium Wars and the Korean War. For example the Chinese regard the events leading up to the Opium Wars as the West's unfair violation of China. They think of the West as aggressive and devious, and consider the three treaties which China was compelled to sign after the wars to be unequal. Thus the Chinese are highly suspicious and wary of the West, regarding its 'attack' of their human rights as a new scheme to embarrass their country. During the Opium Wars the Chinese thought that Britain (a Western country) was looking for opportunities to provoke them in order to instigate a war which Britain was certain it would win. Events such as the Korean War also contributed to the poor relationship between China and the West. For example, the UN persistently hounded one of China's borders (the Yalu River) in pursuit of Northern Korea, despite warnings by China that they would enter the war against the UN if they did so. China did join the war against the UN and the West, probably as a warning to the West that it was becoming too bold and threatening towards China. The Chinese retain this attitude of mistrust towards the West regarding the newly arisen issue of human rights. Therefore, when accused of poor human rights, China recalls its past experiences with the West, resulting in a reaction of defiance, pride and suspicion.
However, this poor relationship cannot bear full responsibility for China's reaction to the allegations. There are other factors which contribute to China's aggravation and upset. Firstly, China argues that the West overlooks the fact that China is an Asian country. It is not as developed as the West, and therefore has different values to them. China accomplished industrialisation in just a few decades, whereas it took the West hundreds of years - obviously it had discovered a modernisation which varied to that of Western countries. China is keen to draw attention to the fact that this modernization was responsible for the initiation of an Asian identity, and had therefore been very successful for Asia. China is particularly incensed by the West's assumption that their form of modernization was one so successful that all countries should mould to it. The Chinese think the West ignorant and presumptuous for this, and are abhorrent of the conjecture that Western civilisation will annex all others. Mr Li, head of the National People's Congress, said 'Democracy may be suitable for the West. However, China has its own conditions'.
China also argues that its basic definition of human rights differs from that of the West. Because the country is less developed and much larger than the West, China's people have more basic needs than those of the West. China believes that people need the right of subsistence (i.e. food, clothing and shelter) above all, and that while it is trying to provide all of it's people with these necessities, China has no time for Western luxuries such as political rights for it's people; 'one must be adequately fed and clothed before he can talk about rites and music'.
China is also aware that there are some Western countries who are happy to turn a blind eye to China's 'poor human rights' so long as they can still trade with the country. For example the West makes huge profit in China from the trade of opium (to which many Chinese people object). Luxury goods produced in China such as silk and porcelain are highly sought after in the West, and are therefore very profitable for Western countries. Such countries are so interested in the economical profit of trading with China that they are unwilling to risk the relationship due to political disagreements. China therefore sees that it has the 'support' of some Western countries and is satisfied.
The West has some influence over human rights in China, using various tactics to pressurise the country into action, but not to the extent and effect that it wishes. Although China is willing to acknowledge the West's claims, it is adamant in its belief that its human rights are acceptable. This is largely due to the poor relationship (and therefore distrust) between China and the West, brought about by past events involving both countries such as the Opium Wars and the Korean War. However it is also due, to some extent, to the Asian values and beliefs of China.
GCSE History coursework - Hannah Fulford, April 2004