Challenges in East Asia 1800-1912

¶ … East Asia, 1800-1912

The dominance of European powers in East Asia and its center of accumulation in the last decades of the 20th century have posed enormous challenges in the understanding of industrialized nations. Modernization and national development theories have received notable criticisms from well-developed experiences such as plan vs. market, and this looks like regional and not national. The phenomenon has been characterized by a regional scope that has challenged theories of global systems, which depend heavily on the global economic tripartite division into semi-periphery, periphery, and core. Regional integration theories formulated from experiences in contemporary Europe have been challenged relating to the success of non-governmental infrastructure connecting East Asia sub-regions. This took place even with the lack of intergovernmental organizations characterizing the North American and the European Union Free Trade Treaties.

At the primary cause of all these challenges lies the significant and peculiar trajectory of East Asia for both the future and past world history. East Asia has been regarded as one of the stable and great nations of the past. This was until the 19th century when it suffered a major deep felt eclipse. Through the projection of world achievement, patterns and trends of families shifting abroad, studies indicate that observers reported that East Asia has promised to develop into a great future hub of attraction. This implies that the relationship between European powers and East Asia can be defined by three different temporalities. First, the recent trends are applicable in all territories in the region. These patterns of periods of centuries have separated the European powers from the defeat of China in the Opium Wars. The East Asia divisions and the establishment of the Chinese regime have divided the world into two antagonistic units dominated by the Soviet Union and European powers. In a thorough manner, these events have acknowledged that the region in its external and internal relations, hence creating an environment for the subsequent expansion of European powers. This was the trend of expansion was witnessed across industrializing economies and at the end, across the entire region.

However, researchers have discovered that the understanding of economic developments of European powers and its colonies requires that we invest adequate attention to the integrity of the region and the regional fundamental unity efforts in the current century. After the Second World War, East Asia substantial parts' reorganization under European powers had been premised upon the great political and social upheavals that threatened the region while responding to the challenges posed by Chinese powers in the 19th century. This includes the abortive attempts of Japan in replacing China as the dominating force in the region before the 20th century. This defines the great social and national revolutions that emerged out of the old order disintegration. The second factor characterizes the East Asia region and the century-long separation of European powers from the deeply felt eclipse arising from China's defeat in the Opium Wars.

The advance of European powers in the region camouflaging to be semi-colonial and colonial regimes marked the decisive events shaping the region in the wake of the 19th century. This gave rise to industrialization in Japan and subjugated significant sections of East Asia. Through the 20th century first half period, the recurrent wars between China and Japan sought to see Japan replace China as the leader of the region and to re-structure the new Japan-centric foundation. On the other hand, trends and events shaping East Asia in this period have been blindly understood in the full context of temporality. Neither the region's present achievements nor their previous response efforts towards to the challenges occasioned by the intrusion of European powers took place in a historical vacuum. They neither wiped out the historical slate. As significant literatures focusing on the concepts of modernization, colonialism and incorporation of the European seem to point out the displacing of the historical heritage, cross-fertilization, and processes of East Asia. Most of them kicked off in the previous centuries whereby European military and economic power made no substantial challenges to East Asia. In fact, in the process elements of how this region responded reasserted towards shaping the entire region and restructuring their international political organization. Ultimately, this led to commercial patterns that transformed the entire East Asia region.

The 1899-1900 boxer rebellion became the watershed phenomenon ushering in the 20th century in East Asia and its foreign relation challenges. In the wake of 1898, famine and flood in North China were blamed on western developments in the region, which disrupted the region's Geo-magnetic balance. These fears coupled with great animosity towards European colonizers and their Chinese counterparts became a possible target for a major uprising. The boxer rebellion was orchestrated by the boxer movement. It was optimistic that it could transform itself to a millenarian sect that could be impervious to firearms. The local hegemonies aggressively suppressed the movement terming it a plot to exploit the passion of the East Asia populations. They believed that Europeans had intentions limiting foreign participation of North China is the region.

As official sanctions were brought up, European powers spread rapidly across the region resulting in massive deaths of Chinese populations and hundreds of European foreigners. In the 1900 spring, the imperial army helped the European powers to penetrate Beijing laying a siege to the legation district. This led to the murder of the Chinese chief legato prompting quick international condemnation. This made China declare war on all foreign powers. The royal family flees following the efforts of the European forces in relieving the legation siege. Following this development, the Chinese dynasty entered unequal treaties with European forces and troops regarding major routes between the sea, Beijing and in the capital city.