This blog has been one of the hardest to write b/c it seems that wherever I look to for info - books, online sources, etc. - they have pretty much the same stuff. Part of me wonders if this is because few Westerners have written extensively on this subject. Another reason might be that there may be few Chinese sources available to the West given the current nature of China's closed society. If that is the case, maybe what is happening is that when historians write about this subject, they repeat the same info over and over.The basics of the Opium Wars (1839-42) seem to be that:
1. The British East India Company needed tea, silk, porcelain and other goods from China;
2. China wasn't very interested in Western goods - basically, "thanks, but no thanks."
3. This created an imbalance of trade (or trade deficit) with the British and the Chinese.
*The Chinese were used to being paid in silver from earlier dealings w/ the Spanish and the Portugeuse, but the British were on the gold standard and had to buy their silver from other European countries at an increased price.
4. In order to solve this trade deficit, Britain began importing opium from Indian traders in Calcutta. However, the Chinese emperor in 1729 banned the sale and smoking of opium, so the British had to resort to smuggling it.
5. In the 1760s, the British EIC gained a monopoly over the production and monopoly of opium, cutting out the trader in Calcutta (in essence, paying the Indian farmers to grow it, buying it from them, and then smuggling it into China when purchasing tea and silk).
6. When the Chinese struck back and destroyed EIC warehouses full of opium, the EIC cried foul to the British government who then attacked the Chinese for daring to protect their people from drugs (this last part is my own emphasis / sarcasm).
7. After the Chinese lost this series of battles, they were forced to sign unequal treaties and give up Hong Kong as well.
Here are some of my questions that kept popping up as I read through the material:
1. Why did the British sell opium to the Chinese? Was it just the Chinese or was it the Indians and other SE Asian peoples as well? Were some British addicted as well?
2. Why did the British government go to war with the Chinese when the Chinese were trying to stop this awful trade from addicting their people? Didn't this mean that the British gov't. approve of this trade, and by extension approve of addicting thousands of people to opium?
3. Why couldn't the Chinese stop the British from smuggling in the drug? What were the Chinese officials' roles in allowing or stopping the trade?
4. Was this opium war really a war over getting access to the Chinese markets so that the British (and other Western nations later) could sell their cheap goods? I ask this b/c of the terms of the Treaty of Nanking signed in 1842; the British didn't demand to sell more opium, they asked for access to more ports (including Hong Kong) and better trading rights.
So, when the whole thing is said and done, what can we learn from this? (Pick two of the following questions to answer)
1. Should a government support a company's actions even if it's actions are illegal? Why or why not?
2. Should the British government be responsible today for its actions 170 years ago? Why or why not? It gave Hong Kong back to China at the end of the "100 year lease" in 1997
3. If the British East India Company still existed today, should it be held responsible for its actions? Why or why not? What could be done to it?
4. Can you think of any examples in recent times when a country has gone to war for economic / business reasons? Explain.
200 words, due Tuesday, February 22, 2010.
http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/special/china_1750_opium.htm - Asia for Educators: Opium Wars and Foreign Encroachment
