Why could China keep most of the lands it conquered after 17th century but European powers could not?
score:51
The Chinese situation was fundamentally different from the Western European colonial empires. In fact it's rather more like Russia, who also managed to keep her Eurasian empire, or the United States, who acquire vast territories West of the Mississippi. In the case of China, those lands you refer to are mostly Sinkiang and Tibet.
Most notably there is the inherent advantages of a land link. It was (and is) considerably easier for a Chinese regime to dispatch an army to Sinkiang to suppress a revolt, than it is to ship a similarly sized force across the Atlantic Ocean. Moreover, overseas territories tends to become distinct from the motherland by virtue of a giant ocean in between the two, allowing a people to develop distinct national identities.
Secondly, Chinese power is simply overwhelming relative to either Tibet or Sinkiang. That China itself was no match for the Europeans is irrelevant. After World War Two, the European overseas colonies successfully fought off the Great Powers; for instance the French by Vietnam. In contrast, once the ruling Chinese regime turned its attention towards it, Tibet was helpless to prevent a military takeover,
Part of this is because despite their geographic size, the native population was very small. With Tibet, the population is a mere three million even today. Sinkiang is a lot more populous currently, but not so for most of history. A paper[1] by Qi Qing-shun of the Xinjiang Social Studies Institute notes that region's population had hovered around one million for most of the time since the Han dynasty.
Moreover, Sinkiang's demographics was devastated by its forcible incorporation into China. The province was created out of the Dzungar Khanate's lands, after it fell to the Manchurian Empire. In addition to just the conquest, the Manchus enacted a brutal extermination campaign that effectively erased the Dzungar people from the their former homeland. Most survivors either fled into Russia, or were enslaved within China proper.
These conditions enable China to establish effective control via internal colonisation. Ethnic Han Chinese settlers now constitute roughly half the whole population in both. Coupled with a strong emphasis on national unity and general nationalism, China virtually ensured it will be able to maintain its rule over both regions.
[1]: Qi, Qing-Shun. "The Major Measures to Solve the Population Arable Land Problem in Xinjiang during the Period of the Mid-Qing Dynasty." Journal of Shihezi University 24.1 (2010).
Upvote:1
The Europeans got no land but concessions from China, mostly in trade apart from signing over Hong Kong to the British which was about it. The europeans could not conduct a a land invasion into China proper, the defeats were mainly in naval engagements and even then the Qing managed to defeat the Portuguese, French and Dutch on several occasion so the idea that the European powers could gradually eat up China is ridiculous. Finally by the end of the Chinese civil war, the Communist had amassed an army of over 7 million, which had extensive experience in battling the massive Japanese invasion and winning the civil war, subjecting Tibet and Xinkiang under their control was a matter of will, the European situation was rather different, instead of strengthening they were greatly weakened and new powers rises to take their place, chiefly the United States, Russia and China.
Upvote:2
In order to attack China, "European" powers had to send armies "halfway" around the world. That is a difficult way to "project" power even today, let alone in the 19th or early 20th centuries. It's fairly easy to send a "punitive" expedition, but much harder to conquer and control a country under those circumstances even with a large technological advantage. Think of the U.S. vs. Vietnam, and imagine how much easier it would be for the U.S. to conquer nearby Canada, it's technological equal.
Another thing was the relative populations. The Qing population of perhaps 300 million was about ten times that of most European states. Even with a technological advantage, it may be easy to "beat" but hard to "hold" a more populous country. Britain did it with India, but just barely. China is larger, further away, and more organized.
On the other hand, the indigenous populations of China's "colonies" in Tibet and Sinkiang were in the millions, so the Chinese to indigenous population was on order of 100 to 1. Couple that with the fact that China is "just across the border" from them, and can move settlers in behind the troops to pacify them.
In short, one can see why it was easier for China to hold onto nearby sparsely populated colonies than "Europe" with densely populated distant colonies.
Upvote:3
The answer has to do with demographics based on agricultural productivity.
The sedentary 'Han' Chinese could spread into the lands of their conquerors and out-breed and out-produce them.
Thus, though the Mongols and Manchus and so on conquered 'Han' China, increasing proportions of their own homelands came to be ethnically Chinese.
In the Manchu case, there was already a process of elite assimilation even before the conquest and though the Manchu/Han distinction was instrumentalized for political purposes, the Japanese attempt to create a puppet 'Manchuko' was bound to fail because 90 percent of the population already identified as Han.
A separate point has to do with the difference between the Stalinist policy on Nationalities- whereby non Russian states were made bigger so as to include large Russian or other Russophile ethnic minorities- and the Chinese lip service to the same concept which masked massive, subsidized, re-settlement of Han Chinese and the categorization of vast classes of subject people as 'class enemies'.
I should point out that China is not ethnically h*m*geneous. It's just that 'Han' characteristics, no matter who adopts them, have superior demographic outcomes.
The annexations of Tibet & Sinkiang were by no means a foregone conclusion. Had the Soviets been suspicious of the regime in Peking, they could have kept Sinkiang as a buffer.
Similarly, suppose India had chosen to ally with the US, then it could have kept the Chinese out of Tibet by reason of superior air-power and the shelter provided by the U.S nuclear umbrella. India however supported China's claim to Tibet because it considered the U.S the greater threat.
More post
- 📝 Why are the ground floors windows of northern Italian palazzi often barred up?
- 📝 What are the origins of this pendant?
- 📝 Which of these quotes are actually Einstein's (if any)?
- 📝 Which days in the Mayan calendar were most auspicious for performing sacrifices?
- 📝 How common is "decades ahead of his time" in real history?
- 📝 Why is the consensus that WW2 started on September 1, 1939 and not July 7, 1937?
- 📝 Were non-firing replica firearms ever made to the same standards of fit, finish, and from the same materials as a functioning firearm?
- 📝 What is known about the Ubaid lizard-people figurines?
- 📝 Why did three states delay ratification of US fifth amendment?
- 📝 Was there a plan to use nuclear weapons for terrain modification in North America?
- 📝 How did schoolgirls dress in Japan in the 1930s/40s?
- 📝 Was Kamehameha I unique in elevating so many foreigners?
- 📝 Why is this column in Pompeii constructed in two parts?
- 📝 When did the Russians first employ a successful envelopment tactic?
- 📝 What is the Balboa Park in San Francisco named after?
- 📝 What possible uniform with decoration is my ancestor from New South Wales in the early 1900's wearing?
- 📝 Why was Lafayette imprisoned after the French Revolution?
- 📝 Has there been a soldier who refused a direct illegal order and was not prosecuted for insubordination (post-1945)?
- 📝 Is Dalmatia often disregarded or largely overlooked when studying the history of the Roman Empire?
- 📝 Where are the Native American primary source documents?
- 📝 What are the occurences of total war in the Native Americans?
- 📝 Were the mongol army boots of 13th century lined with fur?
- 📝 Does anyone know what type of structure this is?
- 📝 What factors led some South American governments to be sympathetic to Nazi war criminals?
- 📝 What was the fate of Gülbahar, the chief consort of Sultan Suleyman of 16th century?
- 📝 How has mother/ child mortality evolved from pre industrial era?
- 📝 Star of the Allies
- 📝 What is Washington holding in the painting "Scene at the Signing of the Constitution of the United States"?
- 📝 Historical accuracy of gulag archipelago
- 📝 Why did Sweden and Norway become the vassals of Denmark?
Source: stackoverflow.com
Search Posts
Related post
- 📝 Why could China keep most of the lands it conquered after 17th century but European powers could not?
- 📝 Why did Europe not see Roman-era numbers of men participating in battles until the 17th century?
- 📝 Why does Japan celebrate the Gregorian New Year but China still celebrates Chinese New Year?
- 📝 Why were bloody religious wars so incredibly frequent in Europe in the century following the Reformation?
- 📝 Why are most of the world's oldest buildings in Europe and not in the Fertile Crescent?
- 📝 Why do some 17th and 18th century maps depict Ottoman sanjaks north of the Danube in Wallachia?
- 📝 Before entering WW II, why was the US so against Japanese aggression in China but did nothing about Germany in Europe?
- 📝 In the 18th c., did/would China accept gold from Europe as trade payment? Why / why not?
- 📝 Why did the attempts to keep Africa colonized after World War II fail?
- 📝 Why did United Kingdom not keep the colonies after Napoleon's defeat?
- 📝 Why did China begin persecuting Falun Gong after tolerating the movement for nearly a decade?
- 📝 Why women in English-speaking world commonly assume husband's family name after marriage, but women in China do not?
- 📝 Why haven't bankers gained as much power in China as the Medici got in Europe during their height?
- 📝 Why was most of Europe against communism right from the start?
- 📝 Why was the US table tennis team sent to communist China even after a difference in ideology?
- 📝 Why was there a "workers' militia" in Eastern Europe but not in the USSR?
- 📝 Was the concept of a solar eclipse familiar to most people in northwest Europe in the 17th century?
- 📝 Why did Europeans call Native Americans Indians in the 18th Century AD, After they had found out they were in the wrong continent?
- 📝 Why did conquered countries after WWII recover, but countries conquered later continue suffering?
- 📝 Why did the Arab spring and Iranian Green movement failed for the most part, but the European revolution did not?
- 📝 Why did the Confederacy think they could win the American Civil War?
- 📝 Why does the United States keep using "old" date representations and imperial system, while being in the minority?
- 📝 Why did the British scuttle the u-boats surrendered after WWII?
- 📝 Why did the Western Roman Empire collapse but not the Eastern Roman Empire?
- 📝 Why did stock brokers go bankrupt after the crash of 1929?
- 📝 Why didn't the USA move to the left after WWII?
- 📝 Why did China shut itself out of the world in the 15th century?
- 📝 Why did the German army execute so few soldiers in World War I compared to most other armies?
- 📝 Why did Poland keep Warsaw as its capital instead of returning it to Krakow in the 20th century?
- 📝 Why were the drawings of Colossus burnt after WW2 and why was its very existence "of course" kept secret?
