This paper examines the economic and cultural forces that gave rise to the Opium Wars between England and China in the mid-nineteenth century. It argues that England's involvement was driven primarily by the need to correct a severe trade imbalance created by China's restrictive import policies, which made opium an irresistible export commodity for British merchants. At the same time, the widespread social damage caused by opium addiction prompted Chinese authorities to ban the substance, directly triggering armed conflict. By tracing both the buildup to war and its resolution in the Treaty of Nanking, the paper illustrates how capitalism's inherent growth imperatives and the disruptive force of cultural change made the Opium Wars an almost inevitable outcome of mid-nineteenth-century global commerce.
The paper uses a dual-causation framework, distinguishing between proximate causes (the opium ban as the immediate trigger) and underlying structural causes (the trade imbalance as the root driver). This layered analysis prevents oversimplification and shows how economic and cultural factors interact rather than operate in isolation — a technique valuable in any historical or policy argument.
The paper opens with a broad theoretical framing about the nature of conflict before narrowing to its specific case. Two body sections address economic and cultural causes respectively, each building toward the same resolution: the Treaty of Nanking and China's eventual acceptance of open trade. The conclusion briefly synthesizes the argument without introducing new material. This funnel-then-synthesize structure is well suited to analytical history essays at the undergraduate level.
Every conflict has at least two sides; this is a logical necessity in order for conflict to exist. This does not mean that the two sides and their need for conflict are always exactly clear, however, and in fact in some of the most interesting and compelling conflicts it turns out that the two opposed sides are actually best served by the same outcome despite their seeming opposition. These particular conflicts present very interesting cases for examination, as they reveal how various systems and interactions can create a seeming conflict that really indicates certain internal problems in one or more of the parties involved, rather than true cross-purposes or incompatible desires. When this type of conflict occurs on an international scale and has worldwide consequences, it is all the more interesting.
The so-called Opium Wars that occurred between England and China during the middle of the nineteenth century represent just such a conflict. Though there were certainly two sides to this conflict, the fact that conflict existed did not actually mean that the two countries' needs could not be met by the same course of action — and in fact the situation improved, in some ways, for both countries following the resolution of the wars. England's involvement in the Opium Wars was driven almost entirely by economic motives arising from a situation created by a misguided Chinese trade policy, while China's primary concern was the drug use of its citizens. Ultimately, the solution to both problems was found in the end of the wars and a change in overall policy.
By exploring both the initial causes of the Opium Wars and their ultimate resolution, an understanding of both the economic and cultural systems that allowed — and in fact propelled — these conflicts can be achieved. Concrete details and real scenarios that illustrate more abstract theories, such as the compelling need for growth in capitalism or the detriment that sudden cultural changes can have on the practical functioning of society, are not always easy to perceive. In the case of the Opium Wars, however, these complex systems and features are right on the surface and clearly influential on the decision-making processes and the inevitable consequences of the decisions made. The following pages explore and define the economic and cultural underpinnings of the Opium Wars, showing the necessity of their emergence given the situation of global commerce in the mid-nineteenth century and China's place within that situation.
The economic forces at work in the buildup to the Opium Wars and the fighting that ensued are far and away the most influential factors in the development of these wars. In fact, the cultural elements that were also part of this lead-up stemmed directly from these economic realities (Hanes & Sanello, 2002; Melancon, 2003). Simply put, China had largely closed itself off to trade with foreign — primarily European and eventually American — nations, and that did not sit well with the merchants of the era. England was at the height of its empire-building and global trade network, and had the most to gain by opening China to trade (Bairoch, 1995).
In the decades leading up to the Opium Wars, China was in a period of reaction to the entrance of European and other foreign merchants and travelers in ever greater numbers, which was fundamentally altering the long-closed economic structure of the country (Hanes & Sanello, 2002). In a situation surprisingly similar to today's globalized economy, China placed strict limits on the imports it would accept while exporting as much as possible in order to generate internal wealth, creating a major trade imbalance with the rest of the world and especially with its largest trading partner (Melancon, 2003). In the first half of the nineteenth century, the Chinese allowed international trading to occur only in a single port, and only with a designated group of merchants that essentially monopolized all legal trade. While today's situation is not so extreme, there are many parallels between Sino-British relations then and Sino-American relations now, simply because the underlying economic system of capitalism has not been altered all that much (Hanes & Sanello, 2002; Bairoch, 1995).
With the highly restricted flow of goods into China, English merchant companies such as the East India Company needed to find goods that were easy to buy, ship, and sell in bulk, and opium was the prime candidate (Melancon, 2003; Page, 2003). This proved a highly successful venture for many foreign merchants, and the English had a distinct advantage given their global position (Page, 2003). With opium easy to grow and produce in the nearby British colonies in India, exporting opium to China became an immensely lucrative business for several English companies (Hanes & Sanello, 2002).
Economically speaking, the Chinese had forced foreign merchants' hands and, in doing so, created the massive importation of opium into their country along with all of the problems they would soon discover it entailed. By making the flow of trade into the country so restrictive and so out of balance with the flow of trade out of China, a basic instability was created that simply could not be sustained — a constant flow of money in one direction is ultimately ruinous to the entire system (Bairoch, 1995). Furthermore, market demand for Chinese goods would not go unanswered, meaning trade out of the country could not be reduced effectively. Though there was not a high market demand for a wide variety of Western goods, this demand was almost certainly artificially lowered by the simple absence of those goods in Chinese markets (Hanes & Sanello, 2002; Melancon, 2003; Page, 2003). Opium was something that created a near-instant market with high demand, and while it remained legal in China it solved — however poorly from the Chinese perspective — the trade imbalance issue.
It was when China decided to make opium illegal that the wars eventually broke out, as foreign merchants were severely crippled by the reduction in legal trade and the governments of China, England, and other countries were unsettled by the illegal trade that took its place (Hanes & Sanello, 2002). China simply wanted the trade to stop, but market forces were not going to allow that — especially not with merchants in desperate need of something to export to China (Melancon, 2003). The final result was the Treaty of Nanking, which established several foreign-controlled ports in China that became centers for legal importation of a variety of goods into the country. This more permanently and positively solved the trade imbalance, at least for the time being (Page, 2003; Bairoch, 1995).
Market forces eventually won out against the stringent cultural demands and expectations of the Chinese government. This is not really all that surprising in the light of twentieth-century capitalism, but when the forces of globalization were still beginning to make themselves known, the results were clearly not as predictable. Eventually, China was forced to recognize that its best interests lay in open trade, and not in cultural and economic isolation.
You’re 70% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.