Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T16:32:38.284Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Sino-British Rapprochement, 1927–1931

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Edmund S. K. Fung
Affiliation:
Griffith University

Extract

The year 1927 marked the beginning of a new Anglo-Chinese relationship. The Northern Expedition had split the Nationalist camp into the Nanjing and the Wuhan régimes, both of which conducted a savage purge, one after the other, against the Communists. Especially the Nanjing régime, which ultimately triumphed over Wuhan, wrought a significant change in Guomindang foreign policy. In line with the purge against the Communists, and with the rise to power of the right wing and the military faction, the Guomindang abandoned mass movements and eschewed mob violence as far as possible as a means of achieving foreign policy objectives. Indeed, as it reviewed its position on anti-imperialism which had been an important element in the revolutionary movement during the period 1924–26, the Party reverted to a policy of international co-operation as an essential part of China's self-strengthening and reconstruction, and sought a peaceful solution to the decades-old question of treaty revision. This change is well illustrated by China's new relationship with Great Britain, which, in December 1926, had announced a new, conciliatory policy towards China after having for years been one of the chief targets of Chinese nationalism.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

This paper was originally presented to the ‘China in Transformation’ workshop held at the Australian National University on 24–25 October 1981. The author would like to thank the workshop participants, particularly Dr Tim Wright and Dr David Pong for their many helpful and constructive criticisms. The author is, of course, solely responsible for overall interpretation and for any mistakes that remain.

1 For the full text of the manifesto, see Zhongguo Guomindang dangyi yanjiuhui (ed.), Zhongguo Guomindang linianxuanyan huikan [A Collection of the Manifestoes of the Guomindang] (Nanjing, 1929), pp. 3754.Google Scholar Hereafter cited as Linian xuanyan.

2 Cavendish, Patrick, ‘Anti-Imperialism in the Kuomintang, 1923–28,’ In Ch'en, Jerome and Tarling, Nicholas (eds), Studies in the Social History of China and Southeast Asia (Cambridge, 1970), p. 28Google Scholar; Yunhan, Li, Cong ronggong dao qingdang [From Collaboration with the Communists to Party Purification] (Taibei, 1966), I, ch. 4Google Scholar; Linebarger, Paul M. A., The Political Doctrines of Sun Yat-sen (Baltimore, 1937), p. 189.Google Scholar

3 Hung-ting, Ku, ‘The Emergence of the Kuomintang's Anti-Imperialism,’ Journal of Oriental Studies, XIV: 12 (1978), 8797.Google Scholar

4 Linian xuanyan, pp. 78104.Google Scholar

5 Pratt, John T., War and Politics in China (London, 1943), p. 200.Google Scholar

6 Stremski, Richard, The Shaping of British Policy during the Nationalist Revolution in China (Taibei, 1979), pp. 1314, 55–6.Google Scholar

7 Rigby, Richard W., The May 30 Movement: Events and Themes (Canberra, 1980).Google Scholar For a shorter study focusing on British diplomacy, see Clifford, Nicholas R., Shanghai, 1925: Urban Nationalism and the Defense of Foreign Privilege (Ann Arbor, 1979).Google Scholar

8 See Davis, E., ‘Britain in the Far East, 1922–1931: Study in Foreign and Defence Policy,’ unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Birmingham, 1973.Google Scholar

9 On the effectiveness of boycotts, see Remer, Charles F., A Study of Chinese Boycotts (Baltimore, 1933).Google Scholar

10 Willoughby, W. W., China at the Conference (Baltimore, 1922), I, 23–5, 27.Google Scholar

11 Iriye, Akira, After Imperialism: The Search for a New Order in the Far East 1921–1931 (Cambridge, Mass., 1965), chs 1 and 2.Google Scholar

12 Pratt, , War and Politics, p. 194.Google Scholar

13 In addition to Stremski's book, sec Clark, Peter G., ‘Britain and the Chinese Revolution, 1925–1927,’ unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1973Google Scholar; Wilson, David C., ‘Britain and the Kuo-min-tang, 1924–1928: A Study of the Interaction of Official Policies and Perceptions of Britain and China,’ unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of London, 1973.Google Scholar

14 Stremski, , Shaping of British Policy, ch. 6.Google Scholar

15 FO 371/11653 F3424/8/10 Memorandum by Wellesley, 20 August 1926.Google Scholar

16 FO 371/12398 F70/2/10 Wellesley's minute on telegram from Lampson, 3 January 1927. See also FO 371/13170 F4155/7/10 Memorandum on British policy in China, by Wellesley, 3 August 1928.Google Scholar

17 Chamberlain to Lampson, 29 January 1927, cited in Kane, Harold E., ‘Sir Miles Lampson at the Peking Legation, 1926–1933,’ unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of London, 1975.Google Scholar

18 For the full text of the memorandum, see FO 371/11664 F5688/10/10.

19 FO 371/12414 F7085/3/10 Minute by Pratt.

20 Chapman, H. Owen, The Chinese Revolution, 1926–1927: A Record of the Period Under Communist Control as Seen from the Nationalist Capital, Hankow (London, 1928), pp. 137–8.Google Scholar

21 FO 371/12397 F18/2/10 Goffe to Foreign Office, 1 January 1927.Google Scholar

22 FO 371/12400 F953/2/10.

23 The Times (London), 31 01 1927.Google Scholar

24 The Times, 8 02 1927.Google Scholar

25 En-han, Lee, China's Recovery of the British Hankow and Kiuiang Concessions in 1927 (Perth, 1980), p. 13.Google Scholar

26 FO 371/12410 F8200/2/10 Memo, by Mounsey.

27 FO 371/12436 F5349/67/10 Memorandum respecting the Hankow Agreement.

28 Leang-li, T'ang, The Inner History of the Chinese Revolution (London, 1930), p. 275.Google Scholar

29 Woodhead, H. G. W. (ed.), The China Year Book, 1928 (Tianjin, 1928), pp. 762–4.Google Scholar

30 CAB 23/54 Cabinet Conclusions, 17 January 1927, Cabinet 2 (27)2.Google Scholar

31 Clark, , ‘Britain and the Chinese Revolution,’ pp. 585630Google Scholar; Wilson, , ‘Britain and the Kuo-min-tang,’ pp. 557–98.Google Scholar

32 Quoted in Isaacs, Harold R., The Tragdey of the Chinese Revolution (Stanford, second revised edition, 1961), p. 206.Google Scholar

33 The British minister in Beijing was anxious to reach a compromise settlement with the Chinese. His differences with the Foreign Office on this case caused some hard feeling between him and members of the Far Eastern Department at home. See Kane, ‘Sir Miles Lampson,’ ch. 4. For the Chinese account, see Wensi, Jin, Waijiao gongzuo zhi huiyi [Recollections of My Diplomatic Career] (Taibei, 1968), pp. 614.Google Scholar

34 Borg, Dorothy, American Policy and the Chinese Revolution, 1925–1928 (New York, 1947), pp. 378–85.Google Scholar

35 Iriye, , After Imperialism, p. 94.Google Scholar

36 Yunhan, Li, Cong ronggong dao qingdang, II, 588Google Scholar; Tong, Hollington, Chiang Kai-shek, Soldier and Statesman (Shanghai, 1937), I, 162.Google Scholar

37 China Weekly Review (Shanghai), 28 01 1928, p. 222.Google Scholar

38 mishuchu, Zhongyang (ed.), Zhongguo Guomindang dierjie zhongyang zhixing weiyuanhui diwuci quanti huiyi jilu [Proceedings of the Fifth Plenum of the Central Executive Committee of the Guomindang] (Nanjing, 1928), p. 12.Google Scholar It may be noted that the manifesto of the Fourth Plenum was incorporated into that of the fifth one.

39 Cavendish, Patrick, ‘The “New China” of the Kuomintang,’ in Gray, Jack (ed.), Modern China's Search for a Political Form (London, 1969), pp. 138–86.Google Scholar

40 Yuanlong, Shen (comp.), Huang Υingbai xiansheng nianpu [A Chronology of the Life of Huang Yingbai] (Taibei, 1976), I, 322–3.Google Scholar

41 FO 371/13165 Fg29/7/10 Minute by Toller.

42 Waijiaobu, , Guomin zhengfu jinsannianlai waijiao jingguo jiyao [A Brief Account of the Diplomacy of the National Government during the Last Three Years] (Nanjing, 1929), pp. 37–9.Google Scholar

43 Boorman, Howard L. (ed.), Biographical Dictionary of Republican China (New York, 1970), III, 362–4.Google Scholar See also Wang's unpublished memoirs, ‘Looking Back and Looking Forward,’ in the custody of Columbia University as part of the Oral Chinese History Project.

44 FO 371/13173 F6708/7/10 Hewlett to Lampson, encl. 2 in Lampson to Lord Cushendun, 10 October 1928.

45 FO371/13174F6906/7/10 Lampson to Foreign Office, Telegram 55, 12 December 1928. See also minute by Pratt.Google Scholar

46 Wang, , ‘Looking Back and Looking Forward,’ ch. 14, pp. 56.Google Scholar

47 Ibid., p. 6.

48 SirHewlett, Meyrick, Forty Υears in China (London, 1943), p. 205.Google Scholar

49 FO 371/13170 F379/7/10 Record of meeting between Hu and Chamberlain, 18 July 1928.Google Scholar

50 FO 371/13170 F3881/7/10 Memorandum respecting an interview of Sun with Chamberlain, 24 July 1928.Google Scholar

51 FO 371/13170 F4155/7/10 Memorandum on British Policy in China, by Wellesley, 3 August 1928.Google Scholar

52 FO 371/13157 F3779/5/10 Minutes by Pratt and Mounsey.

53 Louis, W. Roger, British Strategy in the Far East 1919–1939 (Oxford, 1971), p. 140.Google Scholar

54 Kane's unpublished thesis, chs 2 and 3, provides the best account of Lampson's friction with the Foreign Office.

55 Borg, , American Policy, pp. 401–4.Google Scholar

56 FO 371/13158 F3951/5/10 Minute by Pratt.

57 FO 371/12415 F8535/3/10 Minute by Pratt.

58 For a summary of the tariff negotiations, see FO 371/13893 F1056/11/10 Lampson to Chamberlain, 4 January 1929.Google Scholar

59 Fung, Edmund S. K., ‘Britain, Japan and Chinese Tariff Autonomy, 1927—1928,’ Proceedings of the British Association for Japanese Studies, 1981, VI: 1 (1981), 2136.Google Scholar

60 Ransome, Arthur, The Chinese Puzzle (London, 1927), pp. 2832.Google Scholar

61 Documents relating to the Feetham Report can be found in FO 371/15482.

62 Medlicott, W. N. (ed.), Documents on British Foreign Policy, 1919–1939 Second Series, Vol. X (London, 1970), p. 54, Doc. 31.Google Scholar

63 Gengsheng, Zhou, Geming di waijiao [Revolutionary Diplomacy] (Shanghai, 1929), pp. 16passim.Google Scholar See also the various articles in the left-wing weekly, Geming pinglun [The Revolutionary Critic], published in Shanghai in the summer of 1928.

64 Leang-li, T'ang, Inner History, p. 332.Google Scholar

65 Gengsheng, Zhou, Geming di waijiao, pp. 6474, 145–55, 169, 183200Google Scholar; Leang-li, T'ang, Inner History, pp. 350–1.Google Scholar

66 Jieshi, Jiang, Jiang Zongtong yanlun huibian [Collected Speeches and Writings of President Chiang] (Taibei, 1956), IX, 105–13.Google Scholar

67 Zhongguo Guomindang zhongyang zhixing weiyuanhui xuanquan weiyuanhui (ed.), Zhongguo Guomindang di yier sansi ci quanguo daibiao dahui huikan [A Collection of Documents on the First, Second, Third and Fourth National Congresses of the Chinese Guomindang] (Nanjing, 1934), pp. 145–9.Google Scholar

68 Leang-li, T'ang, Inner History, pp. 347–8.Google Scholar

69 Butler, Rohan (ed.), Documents on British Foreign Policy, 1919–1939 Second Series, Vol. VIII (London, 1960), pp. 252–3, Docs 182–3.Google Scholar

70 Ibid., p. 257, Doc. 188.

71 FO 371/14740 F4284/2826/10 Annual report on China for 1929, pp. 34–5.Google Scholar

72 China Weekly Review, 4 April, 1931, p. 152.Google Scholar

73 Documents on British Foreign Policy, 1919–1939, Second Series, Vol. X, pp. 570–1, Doc. 460.Google Scholar

74 Ibid., p. 514, Doc. 417.

75 Ibid., pp. 559–601, Doc. 460.

76 FO 371/16234 F4981/4981/10 Annual report on China for 1931, p. 24–6.Google Scholar

77 Documents on British Foreign Policy, 1919–1939, Second Series, Vol. XI, Appendix, Lampson's review of events in China, 1926–1933, p. 564.Google Scholar For a study of American advice on financial matters, see Young, Arthur N., China's Nation-Building Efforts, 1927–1937: The Financial and Economic Record (Stanford, 1971).Google Scholar

78 Cavendish, , ‘Anti-Imperialism,’ pp. 24–5, 43, 54.Google Scholar

79 The Sino-Soviet imbroglio of 1929 over the Chinese Eastern Railway showed with devastating clarity that China must honour her treaty obligations before they were revised by negotiations. The Powers did not sympathize with Nanjing's actions and welcomed the strong stand the Russians took. The armed conflict was a sobering experience for the Nationalist leadership: the Powers could not be provoked with impunity. See Clubb, O. Edmund, China and Russia: The ‘Great Game’ (New York, 1971), pp. 254–65.Google Scholar

80 Documents on British Foreign Policy, 1919–1939, Second Series, Vol. XI, p. 589.Google Scholar