British Colonial Policy in Burma and China Compared

Burma's Geographic and Strategic Importance

Geographically, Burma occupies a position of natural trade routes and serves as a strategic hub between two highly desirable European trade destinations: China and India. As an independent monarchy with heavy Chinese and Indian influences throughout the beginning of the colonial period, its political leanings and the pride of its monarchy created conditions of resistance against the major European trade powers — Portugal, the Dutch, France, and Britain (Murphy 256, 314). Although both the Dutch and the British attempted to establish trade stations and routes at strategic locations in the country, success was limited until the British successfully colonized Burma in the early 1800s and made it a province of India, one of Britain's most significant colonial holdings.

The entire history of Burma is marked by years of strategic conflict over control among competing interests, including all the major Western powers as well as Burma's historical rival, China (Murphy 314–315). The Burmese monarchy even attempted to play trade nations against one another by making deals with rivals. In the case of Britain, the Burmese monarch Min struck a trade agreement with France in 1873 (Murphy 315). As Dorothy Woodman observed of the earlier period when France and Britain were both courting Alaungpaya:

Early British Colonial Expansion in Burma

"They supported now the Burmans, and now the Peguers; they occasionally made a common front and often transferred their allegiance — and their arms — to whichever seemed to be the winning side, and therefore in a position to make the most profitable business contacts." (Woodman 11)

Policy Differences: Burma Versus China

Early British policy in Burma, following northern control and then full annexation in 1886, was focused on extending control through already established networks in India, consolidating the two nations under the same colonial administrative systems. This brought with it massive economic expansion that benefited the British and some high-ranking Chinese immigrants, while virtually rendering the Burmese a minority in their own country (Murphy 315). After the Indian connection to Burma became administratively difficult to maintain and nationalism emerged as a significant political force, the British government made Burma a separate, independent colony in 1937. Burma was then granted full independence ten years later, in 1947 (Murphy 315).

Policy differences between Britain's dealings with Burma as opposed to China are largely a matter of scale. The Chinese government was relatively strong and well organized, while Burma — a much smaller nation — possessed what many observers called an antiquated monarchy that was neither as well networked nor as administratively capable as China's. Even though China eventually fell under colonial influence, it did so only after many years of isolationist resistance (Murphy 314, 317). The Opium Wars of 1839–1842 resulted in China being opened to trade from many competing Western interests, including France, Britain, and the United States. To some degree, China became a "semi-colonial" nation as a result of both its own internal instability and French and British aggression (Murphy 317–318).

Conclusion: Scale, Strategy, and Colonial Outcomes

Britain made concerted efforts all over Southeast Asia to colonize nations, and the weaker, smaller, and more strategically located nations tended to fall to colonial rule through a slow progression of trade concessions and then British military aggression. Burma did not retain enough political control, as China did, to remain isolated, and Britain was far more successful there than in other parts of the region. As Woodman observed: "The search for trade explains the successive waves of European travelers from Portugal, Holland, France, and Great Britain, and it is a constant factor in the story of British relations with China in South-East Asia." (Woodman 1)