If China collapsed into Warring states in 19th century, Would it have been colonized.
- Thread starter walmart
- Start date
Russia will want the areas bordering it - East Turkestan, Mongolia, Manchuria.
Japan will want Manchuria as well, leading to some conflict with Russia.
France and Britain will probably want to control land adjacent to their existing territories. Possibly southern China will be propped up by some kind of Anglo-French agreement.
Japan will want Manchuria as well, leading to some conflict with Russia.
France and Britain will probably want to control land adjacent to their existing territories. Possibly southern China will be propped up by some kind of Anglo-French agreement.
Alarico Rodríguez
Banned
China wasn't colonised in this period, except by the British, French, Russians, Germans, Italians and even the Austrians (one can add the Portuguese and Dutch as well, though to be fair, the Portuguese had a leased territory given wilfully while Dutch Taiwan and Pescadores weren't officially part of China). The British got Tibet, which is nearly 1/5th of China, and control over Hong Kong and Shanghai gave about 1/15th of the Chinese population. The Russians meanwhile had Liaoning and Vladivostok, while a German mercenary on the side of the White Army carved out Mongolia. It's the reason why Mongolia is independent to begin with. Counting all these territories, over a third of China got colonised. The Japanese also got about another third during WWII. In other words, two thirds of China were colonised at one point or another during the Century of Humiliation.
Alarico Rodríguez
Banned
Also, Korea was effectively a Chinese province, and the Japanese colonised it. Vietnam was more independent, but if we count it, since the French stalemated the Chinese over Vietnam, then it also counts as yet another part of China that was colonised.
Define Colonized? If you mean that as in out and ruled by European powers and Japan, no outside of the occasional concession cities and naval bases holding Chinese territory means outnumbered Europeans and Japanese, who have to deal with different administration systems and depending on the region lots of religious tensions. Russian control of the Vladivostok area was contested, and the Trans-Siberian railway would not be built for a while.
Although you really need a clear POD as anything pre-Taping Rebellion does not necessarily mean you are going to get an OTL Meiji Restoration in Japan, or even an Imperial Japan out for land and power from the outset, and it leaves U.S participation up in the air. I brought up the Taping Rebellion because it was during that conflict the Qing started to move away from the Banner System to armies that eventually lay the groundwork for the later warlord period.
If you mean colonized to be the European and Japanese Powers start backing their own regional warlords for concessions and influence then you might have something here.
Alarico Rodríguez
Banned
But those conceded cities and naval bases aren't the only things Europeans or Japan held. The British held Tibet, a territory over half the size of Mexico, while the White Army carved out Mongolia, another gigantic territory. Korea was effectively part of China, and the Japanese colonised it. The Chinese went to war with France over Vietnam, so that's yet another Chinese territory we can count as colonised.
Moreover, the British occupied Beijing itself during the Second Opium War. They would have gotten an even bigger amount of territory had the Russians not intervened. Vladivostok also isn't insignificant, and I don't know why you say it was "contested" when the Russians still have Vladivostok (a territory that directly neighbours North Korea) to this day.
That or protectorates
Isn't that the case with the majority of colonies.
Alarico Rodríguez
Banned
Ethnic British only numbered in the thousands in India even when counting garrisons. And it's not like China hasn't been ruled by ethnic minorities before. It's as if the Mongols, Khitans and Jurchens/Manchu didn't exist.
I guess it depends when China falls apart. If it is before the 1890's I'd say there is a real possibility. Once Russia and the United States show up the British and the United States would probably commit to a policy that would preclude formal annexation. Though that basically could mean a proxy war fueled by foreign money, arms, and mercenaries
Nobody wanted to colonize China; taking over India after company rule screwed the pooch was a nightmare scenario for the British, and doing it in China would be even worse. What they wanted was a friendly government that would give them unrestricted access to Chinese markets, not the chance to plant their flag on Chinese soil,
Well actually, I remember Lord Elgin saying it might be a good idea during the Second Opium War, but I don't think many people agreed.
Uhm... while they did grow in the following century, Shanghai appears to have had a population of about a quarter of a million in 1842, and Hong Kong less than 10 000.
I am reasonably sure Chinas population at the time was larger than 4 000 000.
And did you just call Baron Roman Fyodorovich von Ungern-Sternberg a German mercenary?
Also, maybe a source on Britain holding Tibet, as memory and a quick google seems to consider it
more of an invasion to open up trade and check for Russians, followed by a withdrawal once the
Treaty of Lhasa was signed. And accepting a fee from the Qing "not to annex Tibetan territory or
to interfere in the administration of Tibet".
Shanghai also wasn't British territory like Hong Kong to begin with.
Alarico Rodríguez
Banned
Korea was a tributary vassal where even the Korean emperor considered its territory "Little China". Koreans participated in the war of resistance against the Manchu in such battles like Sarhu, and the Chinese in turn treated Korea as a territory of its own during the Japanese invasion of the 16th century. The First Sino-Japanese War was basically a war over Korea. So yes, it's pretty much a Chinese province just with some autonomy.