Deconstructing the Chinese Myth

Pages: 515

The amazing story of the rise of China is being briskly even recklessly complemented by an equally amazing rise of the number of books on China. The world wants to know whether China will be benign or malignant,play by the rules or be the revisionist hegemon upsetting the globalising applecart; become more transparent and,dare I say it,democratic,or remain stubbornly dictatorial above all,will it stay united or implode? Hundreds of books have emerged over the past few years,ranging from the interesting to the bizarre and the ridiculous.

It is with some expectation,therefore,that one opens this book aimed at the general readership by Prof. Odd Arne Westad,the prolific,award-winning historian and international relations scholar at the London School of Economics. Pausing at the title,we learn that this is an account of an Empire and its relations with the world,taking the perspective of the people through the prism of hybridity rather than centralising uniformity. The motivation,laudably,is to deconstruct the myth of Qing Chinas insularity,which Prof. Westad demolishes with great gusto and erudition. However,the fact that there is history in the myth remains unacknowledged. The myth is not history,but it is necessary to understand the linkage between the two,for it is a myth that is deeply intertwined in the white mans burden. But we shall set that aside for the moment.

The history of modern Chinas foreign relations, says the author,began with the Qing dynasty, which established total control by 1750. We thus embark on an account of intense conflict and rapid change in the modern era and Chinas unique ability to absorb such change, as it gradually moved to the centre stage of global affairs. It is a veritable tour de force,covering the expansion of the Qing empire,its extensive trading relationships,the forcible opening up by the western powers and the imposition of free trade and western values,the colonial exploitation in cahoots with the ruling elite,the internal schisms and the great intellectual debates of the late 19th and early 20th century. The book has been imaginatively structured by fusing the thematic and the chronological no mean feat considering the intertwining and overlapping that is involved. The chapter titles are engagingly epigrammatic Imperialisms,Republic,Foreigners,Abroad,China Alone,Chinas Asia etc. There is also Japan,easily one of the best chapters. For those seeking an understanding of this crucial relationship,it would be instructive to learn that just before the Qing empire collapsed,it embarked on administrative and constitutional reforms and sent delegations to study the systems in Europe,US and Japan it was the Japanese model which won out. Tucked throughout the text are such interesting and beguiling facts. One such,an irony of history,is that part of the US share of the Boxer indemnity helped establish the college that later became Qinghua University,which was to produce so many of the top Communist Party leadership.

Given the immense canvas,it is a tribute to the historians grasp that the prose flows simply and effectively. Westad eschews black and white interpretations,culls the subtleties from the obvious and brings the complexities of this volatile century into sharp relief,particularly when we go through the 1880s and 1890s,turbulent years for China,Japan and Korea. Westad retains the macro framework of Western instrumentality in transforming China,though he avoids attributing it with a superior status and retains a kindly disposed outsiders perspective. But the treatment is somewhat uneven,a case in point being the all too brief account of the Boxer Rebellion the immiserised masses and their discontent does not emerge even a footnote recalls Westads childhood memory of the bloodcurdling massacres of Christians a fair number of them being Scandinavians by the heathen Boxers.

The fell hand of Imperialism,moreover,rests lightly through the book. The crisis that overwhelmed the Qing,says Westad,on balance,has more to do with tensions within. The century following the Opium War echoes through the political,intellectual,social,literary and economic discourse in modern China as the century of shame and humiliation. Strangely,or rather not so strangely,Westad hardly uses this phrase. He says,It is important to understand that no great power wanted the complete dismemberment of China,but thats all. Compare Eric Hobsbawms analysis of the wolves Britain,France,Russia,Italy,Germany,the USA and Japan who were ready to form a pack against the prey,as they did when they joined to occupy and loot Peking in 1900 on the pretext of putting down the so-called Boxer Rising. But they could not agree on the division of the immense carcass,all the more since the US was pushing for opening China,…i.e.,it had as much right to booty as earlier imperialists. Emphasis added.

Beyond 1949,the brush strokes get broader and the assessments more generalised. In the context of the anti-China policies of the US,Westad says …in a way,US policies made Maos job easier. The CCP leaders wanted to isolate China and were afraid of any foreign influence in the country. Emphasis added. A big myth is demolished even as little myths spring up.

One recalls Alain Peyriffettes 1989 publication,The Immobile Empire. Westads Restless Empire in 2012 can be seen as an antithesis in many ways. But the latter description reminds one of the first of William Empsons seven types of ambiguity,almost a metaphysical conceit. Restless has become a metaphor for change,both evolutionary and revolutionary,voluntary and forced; for all the shifts,adjustments and variations and for the inevitable process of transformation when conceptualisations of the self and the other are re-examined. That makes one very restless indeed.

Alka Acharya is director,Institute of Chinese Studies,Delhi