China's Rise
The Century of Humiliation and Why Beijing Never Lets You Forget It
To understand why China behaves the way it does on the world stage, you have to start not with its rise but with its collapse.
The Idea
Between roughly 1839 and 1949, China — once the world's largest economy and the civilisation that gave the world paper, printing, and gunpowder — was carved up by foreign powers, forced into unequal treaties, occupied in parts by Japan, and brought to its knees by internal chaos. The Chinese Communist Party calls this the 'Century of Humiliation', and the phrase isn't just historical description. It's a living political framework. What makes this so important to grasp is that China's current assertiveness — in the South China Sea, over Taiwan, in its resistance to Western criticism on human rights — is not simply nationalism for its own sake. It is, in the official telling, the restoration of a natural order that was violently interrupted. Xi Jinping's signature concept, the 'China Dream', is explicitly framed as national rejuvenation: China returning to where it was always supposed to be. This reframes a lot. Western observers often interpret China's behaviour as aggressive expansion. Chinese state media frames the same behaviour as defensive consolidation — reclaiming what was taken. Neither framing is neutral, but understanding that Beijing genuinely operates from a restoration mindset, rather than a conquest mindset, changes how you read almost every geopolitical move it makes. The century of weakness is not ancient history to the Chinese Communist Party. It is the story they use to justify everything.
In the World
The Opium Wars are a useful place to anchor this. In 1839, China attempted to halt the British trade in opium, which was devastating its population and draining its silver reserves. Britain responded with military force, and China — technologically outmatched — lost. The resulting Treaty of Nanking in 1842 ceded Hong Kong to Britain, opened five ports to foreign trade on foreign terms, and imposed enormous reparations. It was the first of many such agreements China came to call 'unequal treaties'. Over the following century, France, Germany, Russia, Japan, and the United States all extracted concessions of one kind or another. The low point, in Chinese collective memory, may be the Nanjing Massacre of 1937, when Japanese forces killed an estimated 200,000 to 300,000 civilians in what was then China's capital — a wound that still shapes Sino-Japanese relations today. When the People's Republic was founded in 1949, Mao Zedong's declaration that 'the Chinese people have stood up' was not rhetorical flourish. It was the explicit end of humiliation as an era. Every major anniversary, every policy speech, every military display in Tiananmen Square is in some sense a restatement of that moment. The Hong Kong handover in 1997 was celebrated not primarily as a geopolitical victory but as the closing of a wound — Britain finally returning what it had taken at gunpoint 155 years earlier.
Why It Matters
Once you see the Century of Humiliation as Beijing's operating system rather than a historical footnote, a lot of things click into place. Why does China react so disproportionately — by Western standards — to criticism of its internal affairs? Because sovereignty is not an abstract principle to the Chinese state; it is the thing that was stripped away and had to be clawed back. Why does Taiwan matter so intensely? Because in the official narrative, its continued separation is the last unresolved thread of that era of fragmentation. This doesn't mean China's positions are correct or that its methods are justified. But geopolitics understood only through one civilisation's assumptions tends to produce bad predictions and worse policies. The leaders negotiating with Beijing, and the citizens forming opinions about it, are better served by asking what the world looks like from inside that historical memory — even when they ultimately disagree with the conclusions drawn from it. Historical grievance is one of the most powerful forces in international relations, and China's is unusually coherent, unusually institutionalised, and unusually central to how a rising superpower narrates itself to its own people.
A Question to Ponder
If a nation's foreign policy is shaped by a story it tells itself about past humiliation, how would you know when that story is a genuine guide to its intentions — and when it's become a justification for things the history doesn't actually require?
Get a new one of these every morning.
Start learning with Thinkable