Chinese Diplomacy and the Paris Peace Conference

Qi-hua Tang, Zhonghu Yan

• Éditeur: Palgrave Macmillan
• Année: 2020
• ISBN:
  9789811556364
• Sujet: History
• Sous-sujet: Chinese History

This book examines Republican China's diplomatic strategies and engagement, and power reconfiguration in East Asia after 1914. Drawing on a vast trove of primary sources, including newly declassified archival materials, the book offers not only a richly-informed account of how the Beiyang government conducted diplomacy at the Paris Peace Conference but also new insights into why. Calling into question such long-held beliefs that the Beiyang government was inadequately prepared for the Conference, was treasonous in urging the signing of the Treaty of Versailles, and that its behavior at the Conference amounted to a thorough failure of diplomacy, the author tries to make a case for a much more nuanced re-interpretation and re-evaluation of this critical period in the country's diplomatic history.

© The Author(s) 2020

Q.-h. TangChinese Diplomacy and the Paris Peace ConferenceChina Connectionshttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5636-4_1

Begin Abstract

1. Introduction

Qi-hua Tang¹

(1)

Fudan University, Shanghai, China

Qi-hua Tang

Email: [email protected]

End Abstract

This book explores Chinese Peace Conference diplomacy after the outbreak of WWI (1914–1920).

A century has passed since the outbreak of WWI. Many academic conferences and commemorative activities have been held throughout the world. The political framework formed in WWI and the power structure established in East Asia at that time still affect us today. In the brutal contest for imperialism, the emerging Wilsonism and Leninism each proposed an idealist new diplomacy, competing to establish the highest moral vantage point for a new world order. On the other hand, Japan advocated for Pan-Asianism, hoping to lead Asia to free itself from the imperialism of Europe and USA. The emerging nationalism of China interacted closely with all these four ideologues, in tension at times and in cooperation at the other times.¹ Together they constituted the deep structure of East Asia diplomacy since 1920. As we study Chinese diplomacy for the last century, we need to build on past experiences and draw lessons from them. We need to free ourselves from the bondage of outdated political propaganda and concepts. Besides Nationalism, we need also to take into consideration other international perspectives and come up with attractive ideas of the new world order.

The year 1919 has for a long time been used to mark the beginning of modern history of China. One of the reasons is that this year was closely related to the Chinese “diplomatic failure” in Paris Peace Conference and subsequent May Fourth Movement. An academic study of Chinese diplomacy at Paris Peace Conference is not plenty, but the conclusion has already been drawn. The Beiyang government in Beijing was friendly to Japan and sold out China. It borrowed money from Japan and signed the treaty forsaking its own sovereignty. This sowed the seed for the diplomatic failure. As head of the Chinese delegation, Lu Zhengxiang (Tseng-Tsiang Lou) was not well prepared for the conference. He was weak in external matters and not capable of bringing order to the delegation internally. Though Gu Weijun (Wellington Koo) and Wang Zhengting performed excellently as diplomats, the conference still decided to turn the rule of Shangdong over to Japan. The Beiyang government in Beijing went so far as to order the delegation to sign the treaty. Thanks to the May Fourth Movement and the Chinese people’s insistence on “striving for sovereignty externally and removing the traitors internally,” the three traitors friendly to Japan stepped down and the delegation refused to sign the treaty. The national dignity was saved in some way.

In the structure of historical narrative in the past in China, nationalism and the view of revolutionary history took on too strong color so much so that many historical facts have been covered up.² The general view of the Chinese in the past hundred years is that those who advocated for signing the treaty were traitors and those who advocated for refusal to sign it were patriotic. With this view in mind, it is nearly impossible to conduct an objective study of Chinese diplomacy in Paris Peace Conference. Though in recent years, some scholars pointed out quite a few achievements in Chinese diplomacy at the conference,³ the interpretive framework has not changed much. Up till now, Chinese scholars still have not got straight through basic historical facts, ignoring the points of view of the scholars from other nations and international situations. They also pay no attention to the basis of some controversial international law. Basically, the Chinese diplomacy at Paris Peace Conference was treated as the background for the development of domestic political history, rather than a subject for the study for diplomatic history.

With an extensive use of Chinese diplomatic archives in the recent years as well as relatively easier access to foreign archives and research findings, the revolutionary historical outlook is also taking place. The time is increasingly ripe to engage in academic study of Chinese diplomacy in Paris Peace Conference. The main problem remains that nationalistic view still predominates.

1 Beginning with Historical Sources

The Beiyang (Beijing) archives that were used for research on Paris Peace Conference were principally Miji lucun 秘籍录存.⁴ This book was compiled by Wu Jisun ⁵ who archived the telegrams during his service as the general secretary of the presidential office when Xun Shichang served as President. He compiled a majority of the important documents relating to Paris Peace Conference and Washington Conference, 1921–1922. In 1927, when the compilation was in a good shape, the project came to a halt and it did not go to print. According to the editorial note: “Considering diplomatic relations, the telegrams which may hurt the feelings of the friendly nations or expose the defects of individuals from individual nations… were mostly deleted. If it would be published in several years and the materials become less sensitive, the deleted part should be restored and added to it.” Unfortunately, when this book was published in 1984, the restoration of the deleted part was not done. Miji lucun preserved many telegrams of the time and has great value as historical material. However, as the historical material was touched by the editorial hand with a certain agenda in mind, while historical facts were recognized, many truths were covered. One should be careful when using them. It is advisable that one compares them with the original files.

The first-hand historical data for the study of Chinese diplomacy at Paris Peace Conference was mainly the archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the Beiyang Government. The Second Historical Archive House in Nanjing has some partial collections, some of which have been published.⁶ However, the files related to Paris Peace Conference preserved in the Second Historical Archives are inaccessible as Beiyang archives section was closed. The digitalization of these files is not foreseen in near future. This author has to wait for future opportunities.⁷

Waijiao dang’an 外交档案 (Diplomacy Archives) (1861–1928) preserved in the Archive Section of the Institute of Modern History, Academia Sinica at Nangang District, Taipei is so far the most important historical data.⁸ The files no. from 03–37 are the documents titled Paris Peace Conference directly related to Paris Peace Conference. Yet, these files are mainly about the minutes of the meetings of the delegation and the official documents from foreign nations received in Paris (They should have been the original copies as there are signatures by Lu Zhengxiang and Wang Zhengting after they read them). Other files are miscellaneous. The most important received and sent off telegrams are missing. In the files no. 03–13 titled “Preserved Files in the Chinese Embassy in Belgium,” one finds the telegrams sent off and received by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Lu Zhengxiang from October 1918 to March 1919. They should be the files of the telegrams sent off or received by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the delegation. The files are not complete.

In recent years, files no. 03–13 tilted “Preserved Files in the Chinese Embassy in Belgium” in the 外交档案 (Diplomacy Archives) had an important addition. In March 1983, “The Ministry of Foreign Affairs”⁹ in Taipei transferred the files of 141 volumes in 37 cases from the Chinese Embassy in Belgium to the Archive Section of the Institute of Modern History of Academic Sinica. After being scanned by the archive section, these files became available for image viewing starting at the end of 2007. These new files include many confidential documents related to Paris Peace Conference and Lu Zhengxiang. Among them, the file no. 03-13-067-069 titled “Minister Lu’s Special Telegrams at the Peace Conference” should be the original telegrams sent off or received by the Chinese delegation. Many telegrams were received with signatures after the reading them (such as ones of Wang Zhengting, Gu Weijun, Shi Zhaoji and Wei Chenzu etc.). A minority of them contained Lu Zhengxiang’s instructions and record of the secretary on how the case was handled. They are very precious. The file no. 03-13-071-01 titled “Telegrams Sent off and Received by Minister’s Office and Other Related Offices” are the telegrams sent off or received by Chen Lu, acting Minister of Foreign Affairs from January to December of 1919. That was the telegram correspondences between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the delegation. The precious files open to the public in the past two years quite completely reflects the diplomatic situation at Paris Peace Conference.

Why were these two important documents not filed with “Paris Peace Documents” in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but with “Chinese Embassy in Belgium Documents”? It makes sense for “Minister Lu’s Peace Conference-related Telegrams” to be kept at the embassy in Belgium, since it was Wei Chenzu, a minister there at the time, who oversaw document filing for the delegation. In addition, the delegation was disbanded after Lu Zhengxiang and Wang Zhengting signed an accord with Austria on September 10, 1919. Gu was put in charge of any outstanding or leftover matters, until June 1920, when Wei Chenzu took over from Gu. So there were good reasons for this batch of documents to be stored at the Chinese embassy in Belgium. Considering the fact that the original diplomatic documents during the conference are preserved in the Archives of Paris Peace Conference, “Minister Lu’s Peace Conference-related Telegrams” might have been brought to Beijing and then transferred to Europe later on.

However, the “Telegrams Sent off and Received by Minister’s Office and Other Related Offices” should absolutely be stored in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In the file no. 03–33 titled “The Archives of Sino-Japan Relations” and the files no. 03–38 titled “The Archives of Archives” both contained copies of the relevant files during Paris Peace Conference. This shows that “Telegrams Sent off and Received by Minister’s Office and Other Related Offices” must have been in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Why were they later stored in the Chinese embassy in Belgium? This writer would hazard a guess: After Lu returned to Beijing in early 1920, he sorted out some confidential files. In August, Lu resigned his position as Minister of Foreign Affairs. In August of following year, he took his wife to Switzerland for health recuperation. These files (perhaps together with “Telegrams Sent off and Received by Minister’s Office and Other Related Offices”) were taken to Switzerland. After Lu was appointed as minister to Switzerland, these files were stored in the Chinese embassy there. In May 1927, Lu resigned his position as minister and buried his wife in Brussels. In October of the same year, Lu joined a Catholic order. Those who were present at the ceremony included Wang Jingqi, minster at the Chinese legation in Belgium. Perhaps, Lu entrusted those files to the care of Wang and had them stored in the legation there. Among the newly declassified files, many were the telegrams that Lu did not want others to see. During the conference, there were fierce competitions among the Powers in China. The political factions in China and the political fights between the forces in the south and the north were entangled. There were many policy changes within Beiyang government in Beijing. In addition, The May Fourth Movement was raging and the nationalistic sentiment was strong. It was difficult to justify many diplomatic moves. And in the situation like that in China, it was difficult to explain what had been done or not done. Lu could only hide away those files.

Besides, the files no. 03–12 “The Preserved Files in the Chinese Embassy in USA” keeps the telegram correspondences between Gu and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Beijing from the end of 1918 to the early 1919. These telegrams truthfully recorded the contacts between Gu and US President Woodrow Wilson and State Secretary Robert Lansing. They serve as highly valuable reference for understanding the shift of the Chinese diplomacy to “play off USA against Japan”. The part of the files related to the Paris Peace Conference and to the Shangdong matter in the files no. 03–33 titled “the Archives of Sino-Japan Relations” have been published and are easy to use.¹⁰

2 Previous Studies

One of the major research findings by Chinese scholars is China and Japan in the Past 60 Years by Wang Yunsheng.¹¹ In chapter 70, volume 7 titled “Paris Peace Conference” of the book he compiled in the 1930s, he quoted much from the confidential telegrams in The Foreign Ministry Archives. Some (original sources) are no longer extant. Besides, Zhang Zhongfu completed his book 中华民国外交史 (1911~1921) [The Diplomatic History of the Republic China] in the spring of 1936, where one chapter was devoted to the discussion on Paris Peace Conference. His approach to writing is very rigorous. These two books lay the foundation for the study of Chinese diplomatic history relating to Paris Peace Conference. All of the later works generally continue what has been left off by t...