Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Why wasn't the US like other western powers who carved out China?


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 jack909

jack909

    Citizen (Shumin 庶民)

  • CHF Rookie Member
  • 1 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese Art of War
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    none

Posted 25 July 2011 - 04:02 AM

I was reading about the Open Door Policy on Wiki, and came across the following passage:

"In 1898, the United States had become an East Asian power through the acquisition of the Philippine Islands, and when the partition of China by the European powers and Japan seemed imminent, the United States felt its commercial interests in China threatened."

Why didn't the US jump in and partition China just like the European powers & Japan?

#2 General_Zhaoyun

General_Zhaoyun

    Grand Valiant General of Imperial Han Army

  • Owner
  • 12,284 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Singapore (Taiwanese/Singapore Permanent Resident)
  • Interests:Chinese History, Chinese Philosophy and Religion, Chinese languages, Minnan/Taiwanese language, Classical Chinese, General Chinese Culture
  • Languages spoken:Mandarin, Taiwanese (Hokkien), English, German, Singlish
  • Ethnic Groups or Race:Han Chinese (Taiwanese Hoklo)
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    General Chinese Culture
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Chinese Language, History and Culture

Posted 29 July 2011 - 02:41 AM

I was reading about the Open Door Policy on Wiki, and came across the following passage:

"In 1898, the United States had become an East Asian power through the acquisition of the Philippine Islands, and when the partition of China by the European powers and Japan seemed imminent, the United States felt its commercial interests in China threatened."

Why didn't the US jump in and partition China just like the European powers & Japan?


The US did participate as one of the 8 powers during the Boxer rebellion. However, they were a late comer in terms of becoming a power during the 19th century. The US were more interested in expanding its influence around East Asia pacific ring for its commercial interest.

Unlike other European powers which seek to expand by colonialism, the US's expansion had more to do with its interest in pacific ream.

While many European and Japanese rely on colonialism to exploit resources and raw materials for its industry, America on the other hand has its own huge hinterland full of resources, and thus do not need much of establishing colony for resources extraction. It wants to implement free trade for commercial interests and to enrich the American economy.

Other Europeans are only interested in establishing colonial trading posts to exploit labour, minerals for trade within its own Empire.This is different from America's economic view of free trade and economic liberalism.
Posted ImagePosted Image

"夫君子之行:靜以修身,儉以養德;非淡泊無以明志,非寧靜無以致遠。" - 諸葛亮

One should seek serenity to cultivate the body, thriftiness to cultivate the morals. If you are not simple and frugal, your ambition will not sparkle. If you are not calm and cool, you will not reach far. - Zhugeliang

#3 ahxiang

ahxiang

    Prime Minister (Situ/Chengxiang 司徒/丞相)

  • Master Scholar (Juren)
  • 1,638 posts

Posted 29 July 2011 - 05:54 PM

The US did participate as one of the 8 powers during the Boxer rebellion. However, they were a late comer in terms of becoming a power during the 19th century. The US were more interested in expanding its influence around East Asia pacific ring for its commercial interest.

Unlike other European powers which seek to expand by colonialism, the US's expansion had more to do with its interest in pacific ream.

While many European and Japanese rely on colonialism to exploit resources and raw materials for its industry, America on the other hand has its own huge hinterland full of resources, and thus do not need much of establishing colony for resources extraction. It wants to implement free trade for commercial interests and to enrich the American economy.

Other Europeans are only interested in establishing colonial trading posts to exploit labour, minerals for trade within its own Empire.This is different from America's economic view of free trade and economic liberalism.


The same question was repeatedly asked by forum members, and there is a real need to dispel the popular belief that the U.S. power was not imperialistic.

http://www.chinahist...rved-out-china/

Basically, the U.S. had piggy-back'ed on the British unequal treaties since the Opium War. Refer to Caleb Cushing and the Treaty of Wanghia 望厦条约 in 1844.

Loong dug up some info at http://www.chinahist...ost__p__5004671

I mentioned somewhere else that the U.S. government had its military officers and government officials advising Japan in the first invasion of Taiwan, not to mention President Grant's design to divide the Ryukyu Island into three parts. I cited a Japanese duke's gratitude towards the U.S. for the support the U.S. had shown for Japan in the 19th century somewhere.

Again, the U.S. secretary of state secretly authorized the grab of "Samsah Bay" in December 1900, the port in Fujian Province, BEFORE Japan came out in support of the "open door" policy. Absent Japan's action, China was in deed to be partitioned. And, due to Japan's follow-up action against Russians in 1904, the equilibrium continued till 1931. About the United States' plan to get a share in Fujian. Twice, the US had tried to assert this claim. Two times, Japanese frustrated the American attempt, first in 1900-1901, and the second time mid-1910s, namely, in the midst of Japan's Twenty-one Demands and the World World One.




2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users