Abstract
This chapter goes into the historical background to China’s grand strategy and political culture. The focus is, on the one hand, the tributary system with which international relations were conducted during imperial times, and, on the other hand, the ‘Century of Humiliation,’ which occurred between 1839 and 1945 and was defined by the so-called unequal treaties between an internally weakened China and the West and Japan.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In this respect, I will assume that emotions are ‘collectivized’ and that through identity-based structures and culture, emotions are intersubjectively shared. These, in turn, are translated into the state and/or the decision-making structures of the state.
- 2.
See, for example, Ding and Xu (2015).
- 3.
- 4.
See, for example, Chun (1968).
- 5.
The capital was never a constant in Chinese history. What concerns the capital in the last five dynasties, the last imperial capital was Beiping, today’s Beijing , during Qing dynasty under Manchu rule. In the Yuan Dynasty under Mongol rule, it was referred to as Khanbalik. During the Tang , Song , and Ming Dynasties, there were two capitals (either chronologically one after the other, or synchronously with different administrative regional tasks), Chang’an and Luoyang, Bianjing and Lin’an, and Beijing and Nanjing, respectively.
- 6.
It is historically unclear whether China actually colonized surrounding states via the tributary system and exerted suzerainty over them, or whether the tributary system was merely an economic exchange of goods in which the showing of submission and the status of China as supreme and the others in a ranking below it are merely symbolic gestures.
- 7.
The fact that parliamentary monarchy and Western liberal democracy became en vogue with the global hegemonies of Great Britain and the United States , respectively, may be an analogy that comes to mind instantly, when talking about other states adopting the Confucian state ideology during medieval times from the Chinese (regional) hegemon. In the same way, a parliament and elections gave more legitimacy to modern nation-states in the West as the Confucian state ideology have more legitimacy to states or state-like entities in the East.
- 8.
It is disputed by some scholars that China actually held suzerainty over the tributary states in its system, especially those that would subscribe to the argument that the tributary system was merely either symbolic or economic in nature.
- 9.
See, for example, Chung (2006).
- 10.
See Shih (2012).
- 11.
Hedley Bull defines great-power management as an institution of international society with which ‘dangers and inevitable frictions of international political life can be minimized by the recognized managerial role of the great-powers. Great-powers promote order both by managing relations between themselves (through diplomacy, conferences, missions, joint interventions), but also by developing shared understandings of responsibility and by exploiting their own unequal power over subordinate states within their spheres of influence and alliance systems’ [(2012), p. xiv].
- 12.
Complex may be the best-fitting description for the psychological effect the ‘Century of Humiliation’ has on China’s general foreign and security policies. Other psychological concepts that are less well-fitting are those of trauma, condition, and aversion. If one defines this ‘Century of Humiliation’ as something that is only relevant at certain times and is something that is ‘triggered’ by certain situations, then it should be referred to as aversion. In a way, this remains to be seen until resolution by the below following case analyses. Complex, trauma, and condition will refer to a more constant influence on state behavior which is continuous, not situational. Complex may be the most suiting because it refers to the highest constancy, whereas trauma or condition could also equally refer to that but there may or may not be some situational element, and they have a slightly derogatory ring to them, especially trauma. Hence, I chose complex in reference to the ‘Century of Humiliation’s’ influence on China’s state behavior.
- 13.
For an in-depth account of legitimation in imperial China, see Chan (1984).
- 14.
Besides this term, this period is sometimes referred to as ‘Century of National Humiliation,’ or ‘(One) Hundred Years of (National) Humiliation,’ too. See, for example, Wang (2012).
- 15.
- 16.
For more information on how politics shaped this process, see, for example, Wang (2016).
- 17.
Especially what concerns Japan, some Chinese leaders have had favorable—or at least not antagonistic—views of Japan during some time periods. At times, Japan was seen as an East Asian fraternal nation with which China should cooperate. Sun Yat-sen held this view, but also Mao Zedong initially. Still, nowadays the relationship with Japan is mostly antagonistic, particularly what concerns politics and societal relations.
References
Bull, Hedley. Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. 4th Edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.
Callahan, William A. “National Insecurities: Humiliation, Salvation, and Chinese Nationalism.” Alternatives 29 (2004): 199–218.
Chan, Hok-lam. Legitimation in Imperial China: Discussions Under the Jurchen-Jin Dynasty (1115–1234). Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1984.
China, State Council of the People’s Republic of. 2011. “China’s Peaceful Development.” Information Office of the State Council of the People’s Republic of China (September 6). http://in.chineseembassy.org/eng/zt/peaceful/t855717.htm. Accessed on December 1, 2015.
Chun, Hae-jong. “Sino-Korean Tributary Relations in the Ch’ing Period.” In The Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Relations, edited by John K. Fairbank, 90–111. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1968.
Chung, Yong-hwa. “Chosuneui Jogong Cheje Inshikgwa hwalyong [Chosun Dynasty’s perception and utilization on the tribute system].” Hankookjeongchioegyosanonchong 27, no. 2 (2006): 5–31.
Ding, Min, and Xu Jie. The Chinese Way. Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2015.
Gries, Peter Hays, Zhang Qingmin, Yasuki Masui, and Lee Yong Wook. “Historical Beliefs and the Perception of Threat in Northeast Asia: Colonialism, the Tributary System, and China-Japan-Korea Relations in the Twenty-First Century.” International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 9 (2009): 245–265.
He, Yinan. “Remembering and Forgetting the War: Elite Mythmaking, Mass Reaction, and Sino-Japanese Relations, 1950–2006.” History and Memory 19, no. 2 (2007): 43–74.
Kang, David C. East Asia Before the West: Five Centuries of Trade and Tribute. New York: Columbia University Press, 2010.
Kang, David C. “Hierarchy and Stability in Asian International Relations.” In International Relations Theory and the Asia-Pacific, edited by G. John Ikenberry, and Michael Mastanduno, 163–190. New York: Columbia University Press, 2003.
Kim, Key-hiuk. The Last Phase of the East Asian World Order. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1980.
Lebow, Richard Ned. A Cultural Theory of International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Serruys, Henry. “Sino-Mongolian Relations During the Ming II: The Tribute System and Diplomatic Missions (1400–1600).” Mélanges Chinois et Bouddhiques 14 (1967): 1–650.
Shih, Chih-yu. “From Sinic World to Multiple International Relations in East Asia: Between Outsider Japan and Insider Korea.” Tamkang Journal of International Affairs 15, no. 3 (2012): 1–38.
Thucydides. The Peloponnesian War. Translated by Martin Hammond. Introduction and Notes by Peter J. Rhodes. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Twitchett, Dennis C., and John K. Fairbank, eds. The Cambridge History of China. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1978.
Wang, Yi. “Remembering Imperialism and Anti-Imperialism: Collective Memory of International History in Socialist China.” Paper presented at the 57th Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, Atlanta, Georgia, March 19, 2016.
Wang, Zheng. Never Forget National Humiliation: Historical Memory in Chinese Politics and Foreign Relations. New York: Columbia University Press, 2012.
Wang, Zheng. “National Humiliation, History Education, and the Politics of Historical Memory: Patriotic Education Campaign in China.” International Studies Quarterly 52 (2008): 783–806.
Yun, Peter I. Rethinking the Tribute System: Korean States and Northeast Asian Interstate Relations, 600–1600. Unpublished Dissertation. Los Angeles: University of California, LA, 1998.
Zhu, Zhiqun. “Foreign Policy of the People’s Republic of China.” In Foreign Policy in Comparative Perspective: Domestic and International Influences on State Behavior, 2nd Edition, edited by Ryan K. Beasley, Juliet Kaarbo, Jeffrey S. Lantis, and Michael T. Snarr, 118–137. Thousand Oaks, CA: CQ Press, 2013.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Danner, L.K. (2018). The Tributary System and the ‘Century of Humiliation’. In: China’s Grand Strategy . Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65777-6_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65777-6_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-65776-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-65777-6
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)