Imperialism's Effects on China Andrew J.Nathan Three years ago in this journal,James Peck argued that "the what Peck calls a revolutionary Marxist view of the effects of professional ideology of America's China watchers"has tended imperialism on China.s Issacs provides'a set of concrete to blind them to certain approaches to modern Chinese history propositions about the effects of imperialism on China,which that might be labelled "revolutionary Marxist"interpreta- we can test against the findings of recent research.If,as I hope tions.I As an example,Peck argued that the China watchers to show,they are substantially inconsistent,we shall have have explained China's nineteenth and early twentieth century either to abandon the Isaacs interpretation of imperialism's difficulties (prolonged economic and military weakness,failed effects on China,or to look for some error in the research. reforms and revolutions)by reference to internal factors It might be well to begin by fixing in our minds what (culture,social structure),while a revolutionary Marxist arrangements and foreigners'privileges were involved in perspective would seek explanations in the effects of imperialism in China.The legal bases of the institution called imperialism.2 He provided several examples of the types of imperialism were,of course,the Treaty of Nanking(1842),the effects imperialism may have had on China:"The power of the Treaty of 1858 and the 1860 convention which modified it, metropolitan countries to block the formation of vital the Treaty of Shimonoseki (1895),the treaties and domestic industries in the dependent countries competitive conventions arising out of the "scramble for concessions" with their own operations;the domination of mercantile over (1895-1898).and the Boxer Protocol of 1901.Together,these industrial capital;and the subordination of the economic life set up the following complex of institutions. of a dependent nation to the severe fluctuations of the The Treaty Ports.The ninety or so treaty ports,in the most primary commodities market."3 But he did not have space in important of which foreigners had settlements or concessions, his article,which was primarily concerned with a critique of were the keystone of imperialism.The treaty ports existed for existing work in the China field,to provide a fuller outline of the convenience of Western businessmen.Western laws of what the imperialism approach to modern China might contract and personal liability were maintained through involve. exterritoriality,which made foreigners in China subject to the The present essay is an effort to clear away some of the laws of thcir own countries,administered by consula:courts. underbrush surrounding the problcm of the effects of lorcigners virtually owned property in treaty ports,since they imperialism in China,in the hope of helping to make held it on 99-year leases,and they were thereforc able to discussion of this important issue as sophisticated and found factories,banks,and trading firms.From their enclaves, empirical as the present state of research allows.It will the foreign communities looked out with contempt upon the become apparent that I do not agree with what Mr.Peck seems native life for which they had little sympathy or to be saying about these effects,and that I give more weight to understanding.The foreign businessman believed that Chinese internal factors than he does in explaining China's modern officials were creating obstacles to the natural expansion of difficulties.However,having declared my standpoint,I would foreign business and that they should be forced,with gunboats like to focus this essay not on the broad question of the overall if necessary,to open the country further.The atmosphere of explanation for modern China's problems,but on the narrower the treaty ports was strongly racist,as symbolized by the question of imperialism's contributions to the shaping of legendary (if apocryphal)Shanghai park sign,"Dogs and modern Chinese history.This is particularly appropriate Chinese not allowed." because recently published research throws new light on the Spberes of luflueuce.There were in addition the railway subject,and because an accurate evaluation of imperialism's and mining concessions and pieces of additional territory effects is essential to a rounded understanding of the broader controlled by certain powers-e.g.,the Germans in Shantung, question of why modern China took the course that she did. the Russians and Japanese in Manchuria,the British at In the absence of an extended discussion by Mr.Peck Weihaiwei and Kowloon.Those powers enjoyed the right to himself of the effects of imperialism,I take as my text Harold station their own police forces in Chinese territory and thus Isaacs'classic Tbe Tragedy of the Cbinese Revolution.4 In the capability to intervene,by threat or act,in Chinese doing so,I do not mean to suggest that Peck's views are politics.They also enjoyed profits from the railways and mines exactly those of Isaacs or vice versa.But it seems most in the concessions. convenient for both author and reader if we focus on this Other Restrictions on Chinese Sovereignty.The Maritime highly developed,widely available,and influential version of Customs Service was officially a Chinese government organ,I I I 1m.perialism.' s Effects on China I , , Andrew J. Nathan J 1 j I Three years ago in this journal, James Peck argued that "the professional ideology of America's China watchers" has tended to blind them to certain approaches to modern Chinese history that might be labelled "revolutionary Marxist" interpreta￾tions. 1 As an example, Peck argued that the China watchers have explained China's nineteenth and early twentieth century difficulties (prolonged economic and military weakness. failed reforms and revolutions) by reference to internal factors (culture, social structure), while a revolutionary Marxist perspective would seek explanations in the effects of imperialism. 2 He provided several examples or the types of effects imperialism may have had on China: "The power of the metropolitan countries to block the formation of vital domestic industries in the dependent countries competitive with their own operations; the domination of mercantile over industrial capital; and the subordination of the economic life of a dependent nation to the severe fluctuations of the primary commodities market." 3 But he did not have space in his article, which was primarily concerned with a critique of existing work in the China field, to provide a fuller outline of what the imperialism approach to modern China might involve. The present essay is an effort to clear away some of the underbrush surrounding the problem of the effects of imperialism in China, in the hope of helping to make discussion of this important issue as sophisticated and empirical as the present state of research allows. It \-ViII become apparent that I do not agree with what Mr. Peck seems to be saying about these effects, and that I give more weight to internal factors than he does in explaining China's modern difficulties. However, having declared my standpoint. r would like to focus this essay not on the broad question of the overall explanation for modern China's problems, but on the narrower question of imperialism's contributions to the shaping of modern Chinese history. This is particularly appropriate because recently published research throws new light on the subject, and because an accurate evaluation of imperialism's effects is essential to a rounded understanding of the broader question of why modern China took the course that she did. In the absence of an extended discussion by Mr. Peck himself of the effects of imperialism, r take as my text Harold Isaacs' classic The Tragedy of tbe Cbinese Revo/ution.4 In doing so, I do not mean to suggest that Peck's views are exactly those of Isaacs or vice versa. But it seems most convenient for both author and reader if we focus on this highly developed, widely available, and influential version of I I ! I what Peck calls a revolutionary Marxist vie\\ of the effects of imperialism on China.s Issacs provides' a set of concrete propositions about the effects of imperialism on China, which we can test against the findings of recent research. If, as I hope to show, they are substantially inconsistent, we shall have either to abandon the Isaacs interpretation of imperialism's effects on China, or to look for some error in the research. It might be well to begin by fixing in our minds what arrangements and foreigners' privileges were involved in imperialism in China. (, The legal bases of the institution called imperialism were, of course, the Treaty of Nanking (1842), the Treaty of 1858 and the 1860 convention which modified it. the Treaty of Shimonoseki (1895), the treaties and conventions arising out of the "scramble for concessions" (1895-1898), and the Boxer Protocol of 1901. Together, these set up the following complex of institutions' Tbe Treaty Ports. The ninety or so treaty ports, in the most important of which foreigners had settlements or concessions, were the keystone of imperialism. The treaty ports existed for the convenience of Western businessmen. Western laws of contract and personal liability were maintained through exterritoriality, which made foreigners in China subject to the laws of their own countries, administered by consula, courts. Foreigners virtually owned property in treaty ports, ~ince they held it on 99-year leases, and they were thercfor<. able to found factories, banks, and trading firms. From tbeir enclaves, the foreign communities looked out with contempt upon the native life for which they had little sympathy or understanding. The foreign businessman believed that Chinese officials were creating obstacles to the natural expansion of foreign business and that they should be forced, with gunboats if necessary, to open the country further. The atmnsphere of the treaty ports was strongly racist, as symbolized by the legendary (if apocryphal) Shanghai park sign, "Dogs and Chinese not allowed." Spberes of Ilifluence. There were in addition the railway and mining concessions and pieces of additional territory controlled by certain powers-e.g., the Germans in Shantung, the Russians and Japanese in Manchuria, the British at Weihaiwei and Kowloon. Those powers enjoyed the fight to station their own police forces in Chinese territory and thus the capability to intervene, by threat or act, in Chinese politics. They also enjoyed profits from the railways and mines m the concessions. Otber Restrictiol1s 011 Cbinese Sovereigllty. The Maritime Customs Service was officially a Chinese government organ, 3