In Hong Kong, any person convicted of trafficking a dangerous drug is liable to a fine of HK$5 million ($640,000) and imprisonment for life. In the Chinese mainland, the sentence could be death. How times have changed.
At the end of the First Opium War (1839-42) the British not only enforced drug trafficking in China but seized Hong Kong as a reward for its actions. Prior to the war, the Chinese government, viewing opium as a dangerous drug, had tried to ban its importation. For the British, however, profit was much more of a consideration than morality, and the opium trade from British-ruled India to China was far too lucrative to abandon. When the British refused to cease trading, the Chinese government seized and destroyed British opium shipments in retaliation. War quickly ensued, followed by the forced ceding of Hong Kong to Britain in the Treaty of Nanjing.
From the British perspective, the war had been a great success, so much so that a decade later there was a repeat performance. The Second Opium War (1856-60) was once again the result of China trying to limit the highly damaging importation of opium. Britain, now joined by France, saw this as an opportunity not just to protect its drug trafficking operation, but also to open China’s markets to more foreign trade. The war resulted in a decisive victory for the Anglo-French coalition, forcing China to sign a series of unequal treaties that opened the country to foreign trade and ceded Kowloon to Britain.
The opium wars can be seen as a turning point in Sino-British relationships and had significant short-term and long-term consequences for both China and the UK. In the short term, the wars were a humiliation for China. It lost territory, its economic sovereignty was restricted, foreign powers were given preferential trading rights, and China’s exports were hindered by high tariffs. The government’s finances were drained by enforced indemnity payments to the victorious foreign powers. Opium addiction continued to be a social problem, and popular resentment against the British, other foreign powers and the weak Qing Dynasty (1644-1911) government became widespread. For the triumphant British, on the other hand, the short-term effects of the opium wars were all positive. Britain gained Hong Kong, expanded its empire, increased its wealth, and enhanced its status as a colonial world power.
Western conflicts in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan are all good examples of short-term objectives being pursued to the detriment of long-term reputations and interests. China, on the other hand, has traditionally taken the long view, preferring to bide its time in securing its objectives
In the long term, however, the legacy of the opium wars was very different. With the passing of time and changing moral values, the short-term British gains have been more than outweighed by the damage done to its long-term reputation. As with the slave trade, the verdict of history has not been kind to Britain. Colonial entitlement, imperial pretensions, gunboat diplomacy, and the exploitation of other countries are now seen not as reminders of a glorious past, but as shameful features of British history. The opium wars certainly marked a post-slave-trade low for Britain, effectively enforcing drug trafficking on a nation against the wishes of its government and the interests of its people.
In the UK at the moment, there is a renewed focus in the media on the wrongs of the trans-Atlantic slave trade, with many making the case for Britain to pay reparations in compensation for the brutality and exploitation that it inflicted. If a similar case is ever made to compensate for other wrongs stemming from British imperial power, then the enforced drug trafficking imposed on 19th-century China must surely be near the front of the queue. The moral case for reparations is clear, but of course it won’t happen as it begs the question: Why stop with the slave trade or the opium trade? Since ancient times, history has been full of unjust wars, exploitation, persecution and brutality. It would be impossible to draw up a fair balance sheet showing different countries’ moral debits and credits over the millennia. Nevertheless, the opium wars were undoubtedly a shameful episode in British history, and at the very least a formal British acknowledgment of this would be a positive symbolic move for current Anglo-Chinese relations.
Ironically, the impact of the opium wars on China was the exact opposite of the British experience. In the short term, China’s defeat was undoubtedly a humiliation, especially for a nation with such an ancient civilization and proud history. However, in the long term it can be argued that the opium wars had a positive impact on China’s development. In particular, the humiliating defeat acted as a catalyst for a rising tide of nationalism, helping to unite the country and promote a greater sense of national identity. This was accompanied by a realization that the country needed to modernize if it was to become truly independent of foreign aggression. Political, economic, social and educational reforms all helped to modernize China in the decades after the opium wars. Superior Western arms and technology had been the decisive factor in the wars and this lesson was not lost on China. The new ideas and technologies introduced by Western powers helped to stimulate advances in science, medicine, industry and the military, all laying the foundations for China’s great rise in the 20th century. The opium wars and their aftermath also had a lasting effect on China’s relationship with the UK and other foreign powers, and especially its determination to assert its sovereignty and independence on the world stage. Even today, the legacy of the opium wars is still felt in China’s approach to international relations and its insistence on the sacrosanct importance of national sovereignty and territorial integrity.
There is an important lesson to learn from all of this, especially from the British perspective. Short-term gain is often the driver of government policy and the cause of wars, but the long-term unintended consequences can be very damaging. In the West, this lesson has not always been learned. Western conflicts in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan are all good examples of short-term objectives being pursued to the detriment of long-term reputations and interests. China, on the other hand, has traditionally taken the long view, preferring to bide its time in securing its objectives. Hong Kong is a good example of this. The Chinese mainland had the military capacity and geographical advantages to march into Hong Kong long before 1997, but preferred to take its time, take no risks and ensure a peaceful and successful handover.
It’s a similar story with the Taiwan question. For many years, Beijing has had the military capacity to take Taiwan by force. However, it has once again chosen to take the long view, realizing that to achieve its long-term aims a peaceful reunification is the more sensible, risk-free, responsible and sustainable option. Winning hearts and minds is always a more successful road to unity than brute force, even though it will invariably take longer. Short-term gain is often the enemy of long-term gain. It’s wise of China to acknowledge this important lesson from Britain’s opium wars.
The author is a British historian and former principal of Sha Tin College, Hong Kong.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
