Open the gate

Author: Li Haisheng et al. / Country:
Publisher:
Publishing Date: 2002-08-01
Features: The Origin of "Closing the Country"
The great defense at the gate was a symbol of the dignity of the Celestial Empire. When the Westerners, separated by the ocean and ignorant of the Chinese nation, discovered the vast land of China, their surprise sparked excitement, first stirring desires, mixed with greed, cruelty, and primitive bloodshed. Historical records show that in the 12th year of the Zhengde reign of the Ming Dynasty (1517), eight Portuguese pirate ships the Pearl River estuary, firing cannons in defiance; the following year, they landed to establish a foothold, committing all sorts of atrocities such as "plundering travelers" and "murdering and looting." In the mid-16th century, the Spanish became the masters of the seas. By allying with the Ming Dynasty to attack the peasant uprisings along the coast of Fujian, they peered into the secrets of China's coastal defense and arrogantly declared: "As long as there are 5,000 Spaniards, they can conquer China." Although they did not fulfill their boastful words, their colonialist disdain for China spread like a plague across Europe, and the gates of the country were no longer peaceful.
From the 17th to the 18th centuries, as the maritime hegemony shifted, Portuguese, Dutch, Russian, and British ships came one after another. They our coastal defenses, seized our fishing boats, killed our people, and invaded our islands. During this period, the Penghu Islands were lost twice, and Taiwan was occupied by the Dutch for decades. The colonialist incursions intensified the defensive mentality of the feudal rulers of China, leading them to link the policy of closing the country with the great defense at the gate. An American diplomat named Foster, in a book written in 1904, analyzed: "Since the 16th century, the rulers of China have not ignored the aggressive posture of the Portuguese, Dutch, and Spanish, who had already occupied the Philippines, Java, and other islands by force and had established footholds in India and the Malay Peninsula. The atrocities and killings that occurred during early contacts between China's own ports and these peoples, as well as the British, led the Chinese authorities in the 17th century to take severe measures that resulted in the closure of all ports except Guangzhou. Even in Guangzhou, foreign trade was conducted under extremely harsh conditions."
Behind the colonial expansion was a powerful economic interest driving the actions. Free trade was the banner under which they acted unrestrainedly and without regard for consequences. In response to the Chinese government's policy of closing the country, colonialists adopted both hard and soft tactics: the hard approach was to use military intimidation, while the soft approach was to bribe Chinese officials to secure trade rights beyond restrictions. In the 16th century, the Portuguese obtained the right to reside in Macau through bribery. In the 18th century, the British East India Company was able to monopolize trade with China largely due to the protection of the "Guangzhou Interest Group." The reason was that the Qing officials in charge of foreign relations lined their own pockets. To this end, the company established a secret fund (later known as the "Company Fund" by the East India Company) in 1775, requiring each member to "pay one-tenth of their trade profits" to the guild "to deal with the extortion of Chinese officials when necessary." By the end of the 18th century, "this corrupt practice had worsened, and every customs supervisor, during their three-year term, could only focus on enriching themselves." A "Guangzhou Interest Group" within the Qing government bureaucracy emerged, gradually turning the funds extracted from trade into wealth for all those associated with foreign merchants or the guilds" (Fairbank, ed., The Cambridge History of China: Late Ch'ing, 1800-1911, Vol. 1, p. 175).
In reality, the existing trade interests and the importance of national self-defense put the Qing court in a dilemma. By 1685, Emperor Kangxi ordered the lifting of the sea ban and designated Guangzhou, Zhangzhou, Ningbo, and Yuntai as commercial ports, aiming to expand foreign trade. However, from the perspective of national defense, the Qing court imposed many strict restrictions. For example, in Guangzhou, foreign merchant ships could enter Huangpu to dock, but foreign warships were not allowed. If merchant ships carried cannons, they had to be unloaded before entering the port. Foreign merchants conducting business in Guangzhou had to hold special licenses issued by the Qing court, and their daily activities in Guangzhou were also restricted, such as being forbidden to stay over winter; being forbidden to hire Chinese people or borrow capital from them; being forbidden to leave the "foreigners' quarters" and wander freely; being forbidden to bring women into the city; and being forbidden to ride in sedan chairs, etc. These restrictions reflected both considerations for national defense and the maintenance of feudal etiquette and moral education. For instance, riding in sedan chairs highlighted the superior status of Chinese officials and gentry over foreigners, while forbidding "foreign women" from entering the city was an extension of the patriarchal concept and the desire to purify customs. In response, some Western countries expressed extreme dissatisfaction, employing a variety of aggressive and military tactics, ultimately forcing the Qing court to abandon trade interests in favor of greater focus on national defense.
After some fluctuations, the policy of closing the country returned to the situation before Emperor Kangxi. Reflecting on this period of history, we should consider the motives and outcomes together: In terms of motives, it is wrong to view the trade systems of the Qing court in the 18th century merely as a "backward policy of closing the country" and to deny its role in national self-defense; but in terms of historical outcomes, it was foolish to "combine this defensive policy with the pursuit of socioeconomic progress in the country" (Hu Sheng, From the Opium War to the May Fourth Movement, Vol. 1, p. 21). On one hand, it isolated modern civilization, creating a breeding ground for protecting backwardness; on the other hand, in the absence of comparison, the unwavering belief in the "Celestial Empire" made the development of capitalism in China an extremely difficult task.