Is China closing its doors? Its leaders say no, but actions speak louder than words – and more clarity is needed
- An otherwise run-of-the-mill academic article on imperial isolationist policy commissioned by a state-affiliated institution has sparked fierce debate
- It shows the unease being felt at home and abroad over the once-unthinkable: that China’s open-door policy of more than 40 years is now in question
The article, whose title can be roughly translated as “A Fresh Look at the Isolationist Policy in the Ming and Qing Dynasties”, argues that China’s feudal rulers from the 16th to the 19th centuries did not pursue a policy of complete isolation, as is widely believed, but one of “self-restriction” designed to protect the country’s national interests and sovereignty, and ward off Western invasion and colonisation.
It concluded that voluntary restrictions on border openings made historical sense, even though those policies contributed to China’s decline because its rulers refused to accept advanced Western technology and weaponry.
Zero-Covid sparks web storm as article recalls ‘isolationist’ Ming, Qing
The 15,000-word article was first published in an obscure journal called “Historical Research” in June and would have likely remained only of interest to a small circle of academics, had it not been shared on social media by the state-affiliated Chinese Academy of History, which commissioned the article.
Since then, it has gone viral, sparking an intense online debate over not only what the article really means to say, but also China’s commitment to reform and opening up.
Proponents of this theory point to the Chinese Academy of History’s status as a high-level institute formed in 2019 with the top leadership’s blessing.
They argue that China’s extreme zero-Covid policy, which has largely closed the country off from the rest of the world for approaching three years now, could be viewed as an experiment to test the resilience of the Chinese economy.
But other commentators have dismissed those criticisms and worries as people making mountains out of molehills and argued that the article was merely an academic exercise in studying the country’s past.
This author tends to agree with the latter view. In fact, the article in question is well researched and well balanced, succinctly and convincingly articulating the reasons behind and highlighting the failures of those feudal policies. But the worrying sentiment emanating from the debate should not be dismissed out of hand.
As tensions rise, China pivots inwards
The fact that this academic article could elicit such strong reactions at home and abroad is truly remarkable, providing serious food for thought.
Moreover, China’s tight zero-Covid policies have reduced interactions with the international community to a bare minimum.
All these developments have helped conjure up a frightening perception that China is retreating into isolation.
Does Xi’s Hong Kong trip mean Chinese leaders are returning to the global stage?
Meanwhile, the party congress, which is scheduled to begin on October 16, is expected to hear a policy address from Xi that will outline China’s priorities for the next five years or even longer.
Unless China’s leaders provide much-needed clarity and match their promises with concrete actions, unease and worry emanating from the debate on past isolationist policies will continue unabated.