Economic Development of India and China in the 19th Century - Essay Example

Economic development of India and China in the second half of the 19th century Introduction Economic development of India and China in the second half of the 19th century was halted by European supremacy and a lack of sovereignty in these countries. Further on we will consider economic development of China and India, compare and contrasts them. It is suggested that the period of British colonization in China and India hampered internal development of the countries, triggered internal turmoil, social and economic challenges. China and the economic crisis of the second half of 19th century British Empire imposed on China “unequal treaties”, which resulted in China’s approval of opium trade in China and enabled foreign territories to have the “extraterritorial" rights. For example, foreign countries were free from all taxes in the country and liability for the legal system of China in case foreign forces were located in “treaty ports” of the country. Therefore, doing business in China in the second half of the 19th century resulted in economic privileges for foreign partners. Other conditions of treaties resulted in China’s inability to restore their sovereignty. For China, a period after treaties approval resulted in the negative economic period, which lasted from 1860 until 19431. China suffered great monetary losses in 1860, but officials of China tried to renovate the country’s potential and prevent a total colonization of the country. Under conditions of unequal treaties, Chinese officials were prevented from successful industrialization. There were a huge number of opium addicts in China and Chinese government was unable to regulate economy of the country and take control over activities of foreign investors2. Moreover, after war China suffered from huge war indemnities payment in post war period. Starting from 1800, China experienced difficulties of industrialization and colonization activities of Europe. Colonization imposed on Asian, Eastern countries and Africa by Europe was a result of a growing power of European countries. Non-Western countries were prevented from a successful development and lost their potential of economic development. Before 1800 Chinese authorities had a chance to regulate foreign trade of Chinese goods. After 1800 Chinese authorities were challenged by British officials, who suggested opium trading in China, which was of high demand in the country. For China this foreign policy of Britain resulted in tremendous losses of population: “Qing Chinese authorities became increasingly alarmed at the tremendous human cost of hundreds of thousands (and later millions) of Chinese opium addicts, at the corruption of Chinese officials and merchants involved in the opium trade.3” These hostile moods of China were seized by the power of Britain in 1839, when Britain initiated "Opium War." First of all, Britain wanted to gain compensation from China for losses the country experienced after China’s attempt to destruct opium. Moreover, Britain was mainly concerned about protection of future sales in India. There were two periods of “Opium War” (from 1839 to 1842 and from 1856 to 1860)4. British military concerns were mainly based on the idea that military weak countries should be guided by stronger countries with more military strength and authoritative potential. Moreover, it should be noted that Qing China had a nominal sovereignty and it had struggled for financial independence and economical improvement in the country. The following words underline the following attempts taken by Chinese officials: “Chinese officials and entrepreneurs initiated Chinese owned steam shipping, a modern coal mine, a steam railway, a telegraph company, and modern mechanized cotton mills. The Qing government also approved the setting up of a modern iron and steel mill and a Western-style bank”5. Chinese officials were prevented by the British Empire to prosper. During the period from 1870 to 1897 China’s losses reached 28 mln silver taels a year6. Opium trade reached indirect losses. The opium trade contributed much into the level of corruption growth among Chinese officials. Tariffs on opium imports were increased. For foreign banks it was advantageous to operate in China. The decrease of Chinese tariff from 5 to 3 percent during the period of 1860 and 1900 were collected in fixed silver tariffs7. Moreover, unequal treaties led to the challenge of Chinese-owned modern industrial development. A process of Western military invasion expanded and Qing Chinese had to move up to “defensive modernization”8. Internal struggles of warfare resulted in the increase of crime, economy crisis in Canton, trading city of China, and the economic development of Shanghai and Hong Kong. That was a period, when Chinese people were left with no money, no economic progress etc. In the result of drastic economic changes the rates of unemployment increased. The Hakkas and Puntis clans competed between each other9. As a result, in 1850s thousands of lives were lost. Another drastic historical event resulted in 1851 rebellion. Social minorities started protesting against rebellion involvement. As far as it can be seen, China suffered from social and economic crisis in the second half of the 19th century. The agricultural industry was also hampered during the crisis. After the Nian rebellion large land territories were devastated and the tax, which might have been raised by the Chinese government, was essentially decreased10. Consequently, Chinese dependence on European Imperial forces was evident. The Imperial government had to pay large charges for the European power and suffered even greater losses. Eventually, the power of Qing was weakened and China lost its nominal sovereignty status and national status. Therefore, the rebellions were a core reason for economic crisis in China in the second half of the 19th century. Economic crisis in India in the second half of the 19th century  India suffered from economic crisis in the second half of the 19th century as well. A rapid change of technological development and industrial revolution was the main privilege for Britain to take control over India. Still, India made numerous attempts to develop and contribute much into technological development of the country. India built canals, roads, railways in order to transport goods of India for import to England to Bombay port. The raw materials export, such as cotton export, was one of the privileges of India. The same way, British goods were transported back to India11. There was a big difference between markets in Britain and India: the infrastructure development of British market was hampered by private investors and in the Indian market farmers produced potential market risks12. A high-speed development of technology in India was rather challenging for the agricultural sector of the country and many raw materials were being transported to the distant markets. As a result, the majority of small farms lost their lands, animals, equipment. Moreover, the second half of the 19th century in India was marked by the growth of large-scale famines in India. Tens of millions of Indian population were dying and the colonial administration was often blamed for such kind of drastic consequences of their ruling. The colonial period was also remarkable in India due to the following reasons: taxes for the majority of Indian population were decreased. For example, “the land tax revenue amounted up to 15% of Indias national income during the reign of Mogul times and was only 1% by the end of the colonial period”13. Nevertheless, the level of drastic consequences of famine in India was seized by the British power. Thus, the construct of railways in India under British guidance is often positioned as a progressive step in the modernization of the country. In reality: “…the construction of the railways in India only further strengthened the colonial nature of India’s economic development. The railway network made it easier to penetrate the interior markets and sources of raw material in the colony and linked them to port cities, instead of linking internal markets to each other”14. Therefore, the British colonizers took care about their own profits and not about industrialization of India. Moreover, internal creative potential of India was also destructed, because the level of handicrafts industry decreased. “The Indian commodities in British markets suffered from high custom duties”15. The Indian commodities were unequal rivals to machine-produced goods of the European markets. In the result, deindustrialization emerged, which was a negative consequence for the Indian market. Comparison and contrasting of economic crises in China and India We can see, that both India and China suffered great losses during the period of economic crisis. There were different triggers of economic crisis in the countries. One common feature was British colonization, which devastated sovereignty and natural resources of both countries. On the one hand, China suffered from rebellions and inner turmoil. People did not have an opportunity to live a pacified life under conditions of nominal sovereignty. British powers considered China to be a medium of enrichment, in spite of the fact that opium trade created a great number of opium addicts and hundreds of deaths emerged16. Moreover, internal turmoil between Chinese clans and “unequal treaties” approval were the main reasons for the decrease of the Chinese economy. With regards to India, it should be noted that inner potential of the country, its ability to produce raw materials, goods, handmade products etc has contributed much into potential economic interest of British colonizers17. Therefore, India was positioned as an object for potential industrialization, but in reality British followed its own interests and looked for different means of the country’s enrichment. Conclusion Consequently, the years of British colonization were destructive for China and India. The countries suffered from social, economic and political challenges. Therefore, British authorities instead of industrializing and developing their colonies, looked for different means of monetary gaining. In spite of people sufferings in the colonized countries, China and India felt no support of their colonizers. Unfortunately, in the modern globalized world very often developing countries are only small golden fishes for the developed countries, which are used for making their wishes come true. Bibliography 1. Ashworth, William, A Short History of the International Economy, 1850-1950, (London: Longmans Green, 1952). 2. Boateng, Osei, "From Poverty to Wealth . How the Others Did It: State Intervention Has Been at the Core of the Wealth Creation and Economic Success Stories, Starting with Britain and Europe in the Late 15th Century, Carrying through to the USA in the 19th Century and Japan, Taiwan and South Korea in the 20th Century, and Now China and India in the 21st Century, Reports Osei Boateng," New African (April 2011), pp. 20+. 3. Brown, Judith M., Modern India: The Origins of an Asian Democracy, (2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008). 4. Gray, Jack, Rebellions and Revolutions: China from the 1800s to the 1980s, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990).  5. Jones, Geoffrey, Multinationals and Global Capitalism: From the 19th to the Twenty-First Century, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005). 6. Judd, Denis, "Hanging on to the Jewel in the Crown: A Century Ago, the British Authorities in India Passed a Series of Reforms That They Hoped Would Appease the Subcontinents Increasingly Confident Political Movements. but, Writes Denis Judd, It Was Too Little, Too Late," History Today (November 2009), pp. 34+. 7. Kenwood, A. G., and A. L. Loughee, The Growth of the International Economy 1820-2000: An Introductory Text, (London: Routledge, 1999). 8. Lynn, Gillian Goh Hui, "China and India: Towards Greater Cooperation and Exchange," China: An International Journal, 4 (2006), pp. 263+. 9. Murphey, Rhoads, History of Asia, (6th edition, Longman, 2008). 10. Palsetia, Jesse S., "The Parsis of India and the Opium Trade in China," Contemporary Drug Problems, 35 (2011), pp. 647+. 11. Pomeranz, Kenneth, The Great Divergence: Europe, China, and the Making of the Modern World Economy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000. 12. Siddiqi, Moin, "Dawn of a New Economic Order? the Western Dominance of the Worlds Economy Is Being Challenged by a Small but Powerful Collection of Emerging Markets Led by China, Brazil and India. the Economic Map of the World in 50 Years Time Says Our Columnist, Will Be Very Different from What It Is Today," African Business (April 2006), pp. 48+. Read More