Asian Historical: Discussion

Answer

Asian Historical: Discussion

Question 1:  What was the major difference between Ming and Qing Dynasties in terms of political administration?

The Qing and Ming dynasties ruled China in consecutive periods. The Ming dynasty came first as it came into power in1368 till 1644, after which the Qing dynasty took over till 1912. The two dynasties faced many challenges, engaged in wars and disputes, and traded with significant European empires to strengthen China’s economic outlay. Despite these similarities in experiences, there were specific variations in political administration under the two dynasties.

Variations in political administration emerged in the way central government agencies were organized. Notably, under the Qing dynasty, the government was centered on the emperor, who was regarded as the absolute ruler. The emperor presided over six ministries that were each lead by two presidents, each having at least four vice presidents.  Contrary to the Ming political systems, the Qing dynasty established an ethnic policy which required that every appointment needed to be done between Han officials and Manchu noblemen. By so doing, it meant that the Grand secretariat lost its significance as a vital policy-making body under the Qing dynasty as it had been under the Ming leadership.  However, further changes in the administration saw the Grand secretariat evolve into becoming an imperial chancery.  Ideally, the Ming Dynasty utilized the Grand Chancery and Grand secretariat in dealing with important matters. However, during the Qing dynasty, the grand secretariat and chancer occupied the outer court as the dealing relating to essential matters became a function of the inner court that was dominated by Manchu nobility and members of the imperial family.

Territorial administration under both the Ming and Qing dynasty followed the same structure. Ideally, the Ming dynasty organized the emperor into 15 provinces that were inherited by the Qing dynasty. However, the increase in the number of territories led to an increase in the number of provinces by splitting some of the existing ones. Unlike the top leadership, which changed under the leadership of the Qing dynasty, the provincial leadership was maintained. Ideally, there were three parallel structures of leadership, starting with the surveillance, military, and civil. The leadership of each province remained under the military commander and the governor.

Conclusively, the two dynasties seem to have been characterized by relatively robust governance. However, the Ming dynasty often centralized issues making it be seen as a Ming China, while the Qing dynasty was often seen as an outside leadership structure due to its relationship with external players.  The views had implications in various ways. Mainly, the way the emperor related to his subjects under the Qing dynasty was different from the Ming emperor as he was closer as compared to the experiences under the Ming dynasty.  For instance, the Qing dynasty emperor felt that he could only hold the emperor together and avoid collapsing by taking religious and political idioms of the people. As such, the emperor became a patron of the Confucianism system, unlike the Ming emperor, who was only the patron of other religious formations within China.

Question 2: Why were Europeans interested in East Asian countries, and what were their ambitions in this region?

In the early days, Europeans colonized almost all nations in the world, including the United States. Their drive to occupy these nations included acquiring more natural resources, creating new sources of cheap labor, establishing sources of taxes, and developing markets for European products.  Europeans became interested in East Asia nations for almost similar reasons as those for other regions. However, the Europeans main ambition was that East Asian nations could provide a backdoor to China.

China was attractive to most world powers. Ideally, the stability established by both the Ming and Qing Empire meant that China was one of the most stable trading partners, especially in East Asia. Moreover, the decision by the Qing emperor to allow western influence in China meant that Europeans could have an impact there, albeit indirectly. As such, Europeans sought ways that could allow them to access China and help them take over it as they had failed in achieving significant success through headway military conquests against China and Japan.

The way Europeans view East Asian nations and cultures influenced their desire to occupy these nations. Ideally, they viewed most East Asian individuals and cultures as being backward, uncivilized, feminine, and passive. As such, most Europeans felt that they needed to establish a new culture or regenerate new formations in East Asia that would make the inhabitants be powerful, masculine, and learned.  Therefore, in the early days, the interest to spread Christianity, which would form a foundation for new cultural practices in East Asia, influenced European’s desire and focus on East Asian nations. Christianity or rather European religion was considered vital as, through it, social transforming institutions such as schools could be developed and help transition the experiences in Asia.

East Asian nations had an abundant supply of species which most Europeans liked. Therefore, they grew interested in these regions, which eventually culminated unto them colonizing it. Similarly, the vast amounts of land that characterized East Asia attracted Europeans who saw it as a valuable addition to their empires. The land, coupled with the raw materials for European rubber factories, meant that Europeans valued East Asia regions. They felt that occupying East Asia nations could be vital in pushing their economy forward in addition to extending their occupation.

Conclusively, Europe’s main interest in East Asia nations was influenced by socioeconomic factors. Ideally, the region had raw materials and spices that they could use to enhance their experiences while also having raw material for their factories. Similarly, their view that Asians seemed backward and uncivilized led them to develop an interest in influencing the region’s social and cultural practices. Therefore, they sought a way to control them for their benefit. Primarily, the main ambition of Europeans was to use these nations as a backdoor for accessing China for trade or even occupation.

Question 3: Why were the causes of the Korean War, and how did it end?

The Korean War represents a major conflict involving various world nations after the First and Second World Wars. Moreover, it amounts to the first cold war between the Soviet Union and the United States.  The war occurred in the early years of the 1950s, and it pitted North Korea against South Korea.   Ideally, there were several causes of the Korean War, including the American containment, the occupation of Korea by Japan during the Second World War, and the spread of communism.

Japanese occupation of Korea during the Second World War meant that the nation had lost its unique identity. As such, Japan influenced everything in Korea. Under Japan’s leadership, Korea lost its cohesion as a nation. Furthermore, their culture and heritage were adversely affected. The impact meant that Koreans were susceptible to influence by any nation that could offer them reprieve from Japan’s rule. As such, it was relatively simple for the Soviet Union to impose its communist agenda over the northern side of Korea, while the US could easily roll out its democratic approach to leadership in the south.  Consequently, the two nations found themselves on the collision path.

The leading cause of the Korean War was the spread of communism and the American containment policy. Ideally, the United States had liberated the south part of Korea from Japan after the Second World War and placed it under a democratic system of leadership under President Syngman Rhee. On the other hand, the Soviet-controlled northern part of Korea, which was under communism led by Kim Il-Sung using dictatorial approaches. Due to the need to contain communism, the US did not want more influence on the Soviets in Asia. As such, tension escalated between North and South Korea until war broke out in 1950.  Fresh from the communist revolution in 1949, Mao Zedong led China to enter the war to support the communist agenda in Korea when American forces appeared to be winning. Therefore, even though the war was between two sections of Korea, the incentive to begin the conflict had been influenced by the US and the Soviet Union.

The three years of fighting the Korean War was brought to an end by the armistice agreement between South Korea, North Korea, the People’s Republic of China, and the United States.  The agreement allowed for the return of prisoners of war and demilitarized the regions between South and North Korea. Moreover, it allowed South Korea to receive some additional territorial lands.