Western Support for the Taiping Rebellion

Japhy

Banned
In 1850 Hong Xiuquan began his religious revolt against the Qing Dynasty in China, claiming that he was "The Younger Brother of Jesus". 14 years later the rebellion was crushed as Qing Armies, with the support of Britain, France, and some other Western Mercenaries, the latter groups having grown to feel that the Taiping's were too dangerous after they attempted to take the port of Shanghai.

The negative views of Westerners in China towards the Taipings which helped lead to that Heavenly Kingdom's downfall though were not held by the Westerners whom first encountered the rebellion. To the Missionaries whom made up a sizable and influential plurality of Westerners in the Far East, the Taiping's were seen as an answer to their prayers, Christians (of a sort) out to overthrow the oppressive Qing and bring China to Christianity. Any failures in their dogma could, they hoped be repaired later, and then they the missionaries will have achieved their great dream of Bringing their faith to the Chinese Masses.

Importantly this view was held at least initially by many western diplomats and military officers whom were in the area. Such men as Commodore Perry, of the US Navy were very vocal about their wish to arm the Taiping Rebels. At the same time the United States, Great Britain, and France all worked to negotiate with the rebels on a diplomatic basis, if only to keep the Yangtze Trade Ports opened.

Eventually this view would be soured but in the initial years of the rebellion it was quite a powerful movement amongst the Westerners in China. But what would the effects be of material support to the rebellion in its inital phases? Would it allow the Taipings to decisively defeat the Qing? Or only extend the bloody horror several more years?
 
Most important point: the only people who can make more money from the Taiping than they can from the Qing are the USA. Fiddling the UK or France onto the Taiping side requires them to knowingly lose money on the deal, which is never easy.

The UK is particularly hard. They had an opium war or two not long ago, which has lead to the realization that they DON'T want much to do with China's internal affairs. 1848 may not have lead to revolution in Britain, but it did wipe out most of their investment equity. Their Army supply system is at a particularly low point in its competence, and they have the Crimean and Sepoys coming up to deal with - even if they start out, for no sound reason, supporting the Taiping they're going to be dropped quickly as more important matters land on Britain's plate.

France is getting reorganized; President - oops, Emperor Napoleon III is in the process of solidifying his government and tamping down more radical domestic elements. Add that to the money-losing aspect, and it's probably a non-starter.

The USA has some promise; how do you get a USA so interested in the Taiping that they're prepared to piss off Britain and France in the bargain though?
 
Why would the West support them though? His claims are going to come off as heretical to most Christians at this time.
 
The Crimean War can be avoided, though, and Napoleon III was not the sort to shy away from a foreign adventure (hence his role in the aforementioned war). Without Crimea there are a number of options for where he might try that adventure: his northern frontier, Italy, Southeast Asia, Hispaniola... China. Also without Crimea his prospects for cooperation with either Britain or Russia won't be as good (it might sound strange, but Russo-French relations afer the war were pretty friendly), so aiding the Taiping could open the door for an entente with the US instead.
 
Top