0012 Nonresistance in 1884: Do not resist evil

---------------------------------------------------------- 

PREVIOUSLY on 1884 

6 January 1884

(Christmas day on Russian Orthodox Julian Calendar)

Yasnaya Polyana, Russian Empire

For more than a decade, Leo Tolstoy has been in a moral labyrinth. Born in a Russian aristocratic family, he spent his youth in wanton pleasure and privilege. But the experience from the Crimean War and journeys around Europe in his twenties opened his eyes to the plight of the ordinary people which completely changed him. 

A public execution he witnessed in Paris traumatized him so much that he thought, "The truth is that the State is a conspiracy designed not only to exploit, but above all to corrupt its citizens" and swore not to serve under any government again.Like his Russian contemporaries Hazen, Bakunin and Kropotkin, he has veered toward anarchism, but always with a heavy dose of pacifism and spiritualism. 

Even after his enormous fame for his masterpieces War and Peace and Anna Karenina, Tolstoy continued to search for his purpose. Now 56 years old, he has finally come within grasp of the true teachings of Christ and resolved all contradictions in the hanunting actions of those who call themselves Christians including the Church ...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now I understood what Christ meant when He said, ‘You have heard that it has been said, “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.” And I say to you, do not resist evil.’ 

Christ means, ‘You have been taught to consider it right and rational to protect yourselves against evil by violence, to pluck out an eye for an eye, to institute courts of law for the punishment of criminals, and to have a police and an army to defend you against the attacks of an enemy; but I say to you, do no violence to any man, take no part in violence, never do evil to any man, not even to those whom you call your enemies.’ 

I now understood that, in this doctrine of non-resistance, Christ not only tells us what the natural result of following His doctrine will be, but by placing this same doctrine in opposition to the Mosaic Law, the Roman law, and the various codes of the present time, He clearly shows that it ought to be the basis of our social existence and should deliver us from the evil we have brought on ourselves. 

He says, ‘You think to amend evil by your laws, but they only aggravate it. There is one way by which you can put a stop to evil; it is by indiscriminatingly returning good for evil. You have tried the other law for thousands of years; now try Mine, which is the very reverse.’ 

Strange to say, I have had frequent opportunities lately of conversing with men of diverse opinions on this doctrine of non-resistance. I have met with some who agreed with me, though these have been few. 

But there are two orders of men who always refuse to admit, even in principle, a direct understanding of this doctrine, and warmly uphold the justice of resisting evil. They are men belonging to two extreme poles: our Christian conservative patriots, who consider their Church as the true orthodox one, and our revolutionary atheists. Neither the former nor the latter will give up their right to resist by violence what they consider as evil. 

Even their cleverest, most learned men close their eyes to the simple, self-evident truth, that if we admit the right of one man to resist what he considers as evil by violence, we cannot refuse another the right to resist by violence what he in his turn may consider as evil. 

A short time ago I met with a correspondence particularly instructive as bearing on this very point. It was carried on between an orthodox Slavophil and a Christian revolutionist. The former excused the violence of war in the name of his oppressed Slavonian brethren, and the latter vindicated the violence of the revolution in the name of his oppressed brethren, the Russian peasants. Both admit the necessity for violence, and both ground their reasoning on the doctrine of Christ. 

Each of us gives the doctrine of Christ an interpretation of his own, but it is never the direct and simple one that flows out of His words. 

We have grounded the conduct of our lives on a principle that He rejects; we do not choose to understand His teaching in its simple and direct sense. 

Those who call themselves ‘believers’ believe that Christ-God, the second Person of the Trinity, made Himself man in order to set us an example how to live, and they strictly fulfill the most complicated duties, such as preparing for the sacraments, building churches, sending out missionaries, naming pastors for parochial administration, etc.; they forget only one trifling circumstance – to do as He tells them. 

Unbelievers, on the other hand, try to regulate their lives somehow or other, but not in accordance with the law of Christ, feeling convinced beforehand that it is worthless. Nobody ever tries to fulfill His teaching. Nor is that all. Instead of making any effort to follow His commandments, both believers and unbelievers decide beforehand that to do so is impossible. 

Christ says that the law of resistance by violence, which you have made the basis of your lives, is unnatural and wrong; and He gives us instead the law of non-resistance, which, He tells us, can alone deliver us from evil. He says, ‘You think to eradicate evil by your human laws of violence; they only increase it. During thousands and thousands of years you have tried to annihilate evil by evil, and you have not annihilated it; you have but increased it. Follow the teaching I give you by word and deed, and you will prove its practical power.’ 

Not only does He speak thus, but He also remains true to His own doctrine not to resist evil in His life and in His death. 

Believers take all this in with their ears and hear it read in churches, calling it the Word of God. They call Him God, and then they say, ‘His doctrine is sublime, but the organization of our lives renders its observance impossible; it would change the whole course of our lives, to which we are so used and with which we are so satisfied. Therefore, we believe in this doctrine only as an ideal that mankind must strive after – an ideal that is to be attained by prayer, by believing in the sacraments, in redemption, and in the resurrection of the dead.’ 

Others, unbelievers, the free interpreters of Christ’s doctrine, the historians of religion – Strauss, Renan, and others – adopting the interpretation of the Church, that this doctrine has no direct application to life and is only an ideal teaching that can only serve to console the weak-minded, say, very seriously, that the doctrine of Christ was all very well for the savage population of the deserts of Galilee, but that we, with our civilization, can only consider it as a lovely reverie ‘du charmant Docteur,’ as Renan calls Him. 

According to their opinion, Christ could not attain the height of understanding all the wisdom of our civilization and refinement. If He had stood on the same scale of civilization as these learned men, He would not have uttered those pretty trifles about the birds of the air, about letting one’s cheek be struck, and about taking no care for tomorrow. Learned historians judge Christianity according to what they see in our Christian society. 

Now the Christian society of our times considers our life as a good and holy one, with its institutions of solitary imprisonment, of fortresses, sweatshops, journals[4], brothels, and parliaments, while it only borrows from the doctrine of Christ what is not against these habits of life. And, as Christ’s teaching is in direct opposition to all this, nothing is taken from that teaching but its mere words. 

The learned historians see this, and not having the same interest in concealing the fact as the so-called believers have, they subject this, for them, meaningless doctrine of Christ to a profound analysis, argue against it, and prove on good grounds that Christianity never was anything but the dream of an idealist. 

And yet it seems to me that before pronouncing an opinion upon the doctrine of Christ, we ought clearly to understand what it is, and in order to decide whether His teaching is rational or not, it is necessary first of all to believe that He meant exactly what He said. This is just what neither the interpreters of the Church nor free-thinkers do, and the reason why is not hard to see. 

We know very well that the teaching of Christ, as we have received it, embraces all the errors into which humanity has fallen, all the ‘toga,’ empty idols, the existence of which we try to justify by calling them church, government, culture, science, arts, and civilization, thinking thus to exclude them from the rank of errors. But Christ warns us against them all, without excluding any ‘toga.’ 

Not only Christ’s words, but those of all Hebrew prophets, of John the Baptist, and of all the truly wise men who have ever lived, have referred to this same church, this same government, culture, civilization, etc., calling them evils and the causes of man’s perdition. 

For instance, suppose an architect were to say to the owner of a house, ‘Your house is in a bad state; it must be wholly rebuilt,’ and were then to go on giving all the necessary details about the kinds of beams that would be required, how they were to be cut, and where placed. If the owner were to turn a deaf ear to the architect’s words about the ruinous condition of the house and the necessity for its being rebuilt, and were only to listen with a feigned interest to the secondary details concerning the proposed repairs, the architect’s counsels would evidently appear but so much useless talk; and if the owner happened to feel no great respect for the builder, he would call his advice foolish. This is exactly what occurs with the teaching of Christ. 

I used this simile for want of a better one, and I remember that Christ, while preaching His doctrine, used one very like it. He said, ‘I will destroy your temple, and within three days I will build up another.’ He was crucified for these words. His doctrine is crucified for the same reason up to the present time. 

The least that can be required of those who judge another man’s teaching is that they should take the teacher’s words in the exact sense in which he uses them. Christ does not consider His teaching as some high ideal of what mankind should be but cannot attain to, nor does He consider it as a chimerical, poetical fancy, fit only to captivate the simple-minded inhabitants of Galilee; He considers His teaching as work – a work that is to save mankind. His suffering on the cross was no dream; He groaned in agony and died for His teaching. And how many people have died, and will still die, in the same cause? Such teaching cannot be called a dream. 

Every doctrine of truth is a dream for those who are in error. We have come to such a state of error that there are many among us who say, as I did myself formerly, that this doctrine of Christ is chimerical because it is incompatible with the nature of man. It is incompatible with the nature of man, they say, to turn the other cheek when he has been struck; it is incompatible with the nature of man to give up his property to another – to work, not for himself, but for others. It is natural to man, they say, to protect himself, his own safety, that of his family, and his property – in other words, it is the nature of man to struggle for life. Learned lawyers prove scientifically that the most sacred duty of a man is to protect his rights – i.e., to struggle. 

We need only for one moment to cast aside the idea that the present organization of our lives, as established by man, is the best and most sacred, and then the argument that the teaching of Christ is incompatible with human nature immediately turns against the arguer. Who will deny that it is repugnant and harrowing to a man’s feelings to torture or kill, not only a man, but also even a dog, a hen, or a calf? I have known men, living by agricultural labor, who have ceased entirely to eat meat only because they had to kill their own cattle. 

And yet our lives are so organized that for one individual to obtain any advantage in life another must suffer, which is against human nature. The whole organization of our lives, the complicated mechanism of our institutions, whose sole object is violence, are but proofs of the degree to which violence is repugnant to human nature. 

No judge will ever undertake to strangle with his own hands the man whom he has condemned to death. No magistrate will himself drag a peasant from his weeping family in order to shut him up in prison. Not a single general, not a single soldier, would kill hundreds of Turks or Germans, and devastate their villages – no, not one of them would consent to wound a single man, were it not in war, and in obedience to discipline and the oath of allegiance. 

Cruelty is only exercised (thanks to our complicated social machinery) when it can be so divided among a number that none shall bear the sole responsibility, or recognize how unnatural all cruelty is. Some make laws, others apply them; others, again, drill their fellow-creatures into habits of discipline – i.e., of senseless passive obedience; and these same disciplined men, in their turn, do violence to others – killing without knowing why or wherefore. But let a man even for a moment shake off in thought the net of worldly institutions that so ensnares him, and he will see what is really incompatible with his nature. 

If once we cease to affirm that the evil we are so used to, and profit by, is an immutable divine truth, we may see clearly which is the more natural to man – violence, or the law of Christ. Which is better – to know that the comfort and safety of my family and myself, all my joys and pleasures, are obtained at the price of the misery, depravity, and suffering of millions, by yearly executions, by hundreds of thousands of suffering prisoners, and by millions of soldiers, policemen and sergeants (урядниковъ) torn from their homes and half stupefied by military discipline, who protect my idle pleasures by keeping starving men at a distance with their loaded pistols[5]; to know that every dainty morsel I put into my mouth, or give my children, is obtained at the price of all this suffering, which is inevitable, in order to obtain these dainties; or to know that my fare is my own, that nobody suffers for the want of it, and that nobody has suffered in procuring it for me? 

It is sufficient to comprehend, once and for all, that, in our present organization of life, every joy and every moment of peace is bought at the cost of the privations and sufferings of thousands, who are only restrained by violence, in order to see clearly what is natural to man; i.e., not only to the animal nature of man, but to his rational nature as well. 

It is sufficient to understand the doctrine of Christ in all its high significance and with all the consequences it entails, to see that it is not inconsistent with human nature, but that, on the contrary, His whole doctrine throws aside what is inconsistent with human nature – the delusive human teaching of resistance of evil, which is the chief cause of all human misery. 

The doctrine of Christ, which teaches us not to resist evil is – a dream! But the sight of men in whose breasts love and pity are innate, spending their lives in burning their brethren at the stake, scourging them, breaking them on the wheel, lashing, slitting their nostrils, putting them to the rack, keeping them fettered, sending them to the galleys or the gallows, shooting them, condemning to solitary confinement, imprisoning women and children, organizing the slaughter of tens of thousands by war, bringing about periodical revolutions and rebellions, the sight of others passively fulfilling these atrocities, the sight of others again writhing under these tortures or avenging them – this is no dream! 

When once we clearly understand the teaching of Christ, we see that it is not the world given by God to man for his happiness that is a dream, but the world such as men have made it for their own destruction that is a wild terrifying dream – the delirium of a madman – a dream from which it is enough to awake once, never to return to it. 

God came down from heaven – the Son of God, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity – and became man to redeem us from the punishment entailed by the sin of Adam. We think that this God must speak in some mysterious, mystical way, difficult to be understood; indeed, that His Word can only be understood through faith and God’s grace; and yet God’s words are so simple and so clear. He says, ‘Do no evil to each other, and there will be no evil.’ Is it possible that the revelation of God is so simple? Can this be all? All this is so familiar to us. 

The prophet Elijah, having fled from the hunts of men and concealed himself in a rock, had it revealed to him that he should see God at the entrance of the cavern. A tempest arose – the trees were rent asunder. Elijah thought God was there and looked, but God was not there. The earth quaked, fire issued out of it, the rock was split in two, and the mountains fell. Elijah looked, but God was not there. Then all grew still and calm, and a light breeze wafted the fragrance of the freshened fields toward him. Elijah looked, and God was there! It is thus with the simple words of God, ‘Do not resist evil.’ 

They are very simple, but they contain in themselves the sole and eternal law of God and man. This law is eternal, and if in history we find any progress made toward the annihilation of evil, it is due to those who truly understood the doctrine of Christ, who suffered evil without resisting by violence. The progression of mankind toward good is brought about by martyrdom, not by tyranny. 

Fire cannot extinguish fire, no more than evil can extirpate evil. Good, meeting with evil and remaining untainted by it, can alone conquer evil. There is a law in the heart of each man that is as immutable as the law of Galileo – still more immutable. Men may turn aside from it or conceal it from others; nevertheless it is the only path that leads to true happiness. 

Each step that has brought us nearer to this great end was taken in the name of the doctrine of Christ: ‘Do not resist evil.’ It is with greater confidence even than Galileo that the follower of Christ can say, in defiance of all the temptations around him and the threats held out to him, ‘It is not by violence but by doing good that you will eradicate evil.’ 

And if the progress is made slowly, it is only because the clarity, simplicity, and rationality of the teaching of Christ and its inevitable absolute necessity are concealed from the eyes of men in the most crafty and dangerous manner; concealed under a spurious teaching, falsely called His. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This text would appear as Chapter IV of his 1884 book "What I believe" which form the foundation of his non-resistance. It will be years later, in 1908, that he would write a letter in reply on this topic to an Indian nationalist . Inspired by the letter, an Indian lawyer working in South Africa would go on and develop his own principle of non-violent resistance to take on the mighty British Empire, but in 1884, he is still a 16-years-old enjoying his first year of marital life. His name is Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.

Young Gandhi (right) and his brother in 1886.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Next on 1884

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0005 Korea in 1884: Morning calm before the storm

PREVIOUSLY on 1884 

Seoul.

8th day of the 5th month in the 21th year of King Gojong’s reign/ 10th year of Qing's Guangxu Emperor’s reign. 

[15 June 1884 / 17th year of Japan’s Meiji Era]

After announcing himself at the heavily guarded gate of former Elder Statesman Yi Yu-won’s residence, an old servant leads Kim Hong-jip, now 42 years old, to a traditional-style room where the owner is expecting him. When the servant announces his arrival, he hears the 70-years-old Elder Statesman telling him to enter. 

Kim Hong-jip slides open the door and sees Yi Yu-won and another guest in the room playing chess. It’s Kim Yun-sik, Korean envoy to the Tientsin, where the  Qing Viceroy of Zhili and de facto Foreign Minister Li Hongzhang resides.

Kim Hong-jip bows to both. “Good evening. Thank you for inviting me, Elder Statesman. Good evening, Envoy Kim.”

“No need to be so formal. Please sit with us.” Yi Yu-won opens his palm inviting Kim Hong-jip to sit at the space between the two players and signals the servant to pour tea to the newcomer.

The two continue to play janggi quietly for a few more moves, while Kim Hong-jip looks around the room. His eyes come to stop in admiration of a painting of plum blossoms with delicate but tenacious beauty blanketed in late winter snow…

Plum Branch by Yi Yu-won

Pushing the janggi table aside, the Elder Statesman softly chuckles, “Envoy Kim, you think I didn’t notice that you intentionally let me take one of your pawns pretending it to be an oversight?”
A moment later Kim Yun-sik exclaims, “I give up, sir. You are truly a master.”

Kim Yun-sik bows his head, "I did no such thing, sir."

With a big smile, Kim Hong-jip says to Yi Yu-won, "Sir, you are always two steps in front of us."

Kim Yun-sik concurs, "Indeed, nothing can escape your eyes."

Kim Hong-jip greets the envoy, seven years older, "Envoy Kim, I didn’t know that you are back in Joseon. I hope the journey from Tientsin was not too rough."

Kim Yun-sik answers with a sad voice, "It was not too bad, Councilor. I just arrived two days ago to report some news to His Majesty.”

At his tone, Kim Hong-jip senses that something is seriously wrong with the situation in China. “How serious is it?”

“As I already reported to His Majesty, Qing and France have signed the Tientsin Accord to end their disagreement over Tonkin. Li Hongzhang decided that continuing the conflict may endanger China itself so the Great Statesman advised the Emperor to end it. But of course, as you know, it's the Empress Dowager Cixi who made the decision.”

Kim Hong-jip pauses with his tea only half drunk. “That is truly a terrible situation. Vietnam has been China's tributary state for centuries like our Joseon. What will become of it?”

Kim Yun-sik nods solemnly, “Just nine days ago, the French and the Vietnamese signed the Treaty of Hue and the imperial seal that Jiaqing Emperor gave to King Gia Long was melted down to symbolize a complete break from a thousand years of link with China.”

Kim Hong-jip’s teacup drops from his hand to the floor. His eyes become teary. “Heaven has collapsed,” he utters with a trembling voice.

Yi Yu-won nods, “Indeed heaven has collapsed. If Huang Zunxian's Korea Strategy was the rumbling of the earth signaling the end of the Chinese world order, this event in Vietnam is the actual earthquake that breaks open the land under our feet. It was not long ago that I had the chance to meet with Vietnamese envoys at Qing Court. I was so impressed with their eloquent words and masterly handwriting. Their official costume took after the great Ming Dynasty, looking more Chinese even than the Manchus. Those days will be forever gone.”

KYS: “Sir, in all of Joseon, there’s no one more knowledgeable than you about Vietnam. You have studied all the dynasties that had ruled for several centuries. Further, you are the only one in our country who can speak with authority on Thai, Lao, Burmese, Cambodian, and Philippine cultures. I wish I had the opportunity to see an elephant at the Qing court like you did.”

YYW: “No need to praise me to the sky. You are now the closest follower of Vietnamese affairs, I believe.”

Add caption

KYS: “Sir, I am still learning. Before two years ago, I had no knowledge whatsoever of the country. It was only when in Tientsin that I learn from Tang Jingxing, the wealthy Cantonese comprador in Shanghai, that Henri Rivière’s stormed Hanoi citadel, causing the Vietnamese court to seek help from Liu Yongfu, the leader of the Black Flag Army which twenty years ago fought in China's Taiping Rebellion. And that information distressed me greatly.”

KHJ: “I am envious of you, Envoy Kim. The little I know about Vietnam came from reading the gazette Hanseong Sunbo. Only through it, did I learn of how the Black Flag killed Henri Rivière in the Battle of the Paper Bridge last year and later in revenge, Courbet stormed the Vietnamese capital Hue and forced the Vietnamese court to sign the Treaty of Hue to become a French protectorate.”

KYS: “Last month's Treaty of Hue will give France the legitimacy to be right on China’s doorstep.”

YYW: As much as I am saddened, we can no longer sit around and talk about our friend’s house on fire. We need to do our best to protect our house from burning down too. I am now old and not so current about the situations with foreign relations. That’s why I invited you today, Councilor Kim. We have shared so many thoughts over the last four years since you brought back the Korea Strategy. Remember how both you and I almost lost our head to the Confucian scholars’ petitions, if his majesty had not stood firm?”

King Gojong in 1880's 

KHJ: “How can I forget, sir? I never thought that a journey to Japan to negotiate customs issues would completely change my life. When Huang Zunxian handed me this document at the Chinese legation, I hardly realized its significance to Joseon, although I already saw how the Japanese have modernized and realized that we have to adopt an open-door and enlightenment policy too to increase the wealth and power of the nation.” 

KYS: “You were the best person, Councilor, to promote the enlightenment policy. Unfortunately, the strong opposition by Confucian scholars was formidable. They even criticized Huang Zun-xian and China for it. These Confucian scholars wanted to make Joseon more Confucian than China!”

KHJ: I must admit Yi Man-Son's Youngnam Manin So “10,000 man protests” to His Majesty was the most powerful, vehemently criticizing as baseless both the argument of Russian threats and the policy of “remain close to China, create ties with Japan and ally with the United States”. 

KYS: Hong Chae-hak’s memorial was also convincing to argue that Japan and the West are one and the same, while Christianity and Western encroachment must be expelled to safeguard Confucian orthodoxy as the basis of Korea’s traditional society. But he lost his head in the end.

Daewongun, King Gogong's father and regent between 1863-73
(Credit: samuelhawley.com)

YYW: I believe it was the Daewongun who was behind the Confucian scholars all along. Having been edged out of power by Her Majesty four years earlier, he was waiting for his return. But after His Majesty stopped the petitions, he went as far as staging a coup to put his illegitimate son on the throne. Lucky that it was discovered and all of them were put to death, except the Daewongun himself for the virtue of being His Majesty’s father. 

KHJ: It was completely out of line, sir. What kind of father would do anything like that, let along father of the king? The Daewongun's attempted coup also would have had a devastating effect on Joseon if succeeded. Joseon would go back for many years more under his conservatism. 

Queen Min
(Credit: The Color of Time)

KYS: Lucky thing he didn’t succeed, so His Majesty could carry out the Strategy's recommendations.  

YYW nods. Wasn’t it the this time that you were sent to China, while Kim Ok-gyun, Seo Gwang-beom, and his friends were sent to Japan and then a Japanese officer was invited back to train the military elite corps?

KYS: Yes, sir. And that’s where we went too fast. With the military reform, the Japanese-trained elite corps were strongly favored, while the traditional units soon to be disbanded received dismal treatments. They had not been paid for more than ten months, and when they protested after their rice rations were found to be mixed with chaff by corrupt officials their leaders were arrested. It’s no wonder that they rose in revolt.

KHJ: That Imo mutiny wouldn’t have been such a disaster if the Daewongun had not again manipulated the situation. They tried to kill Her Majesty and her clan, burned the Japanese legation, and killed many Japanese. The consul Yoshitada had to flee to Japan before returning with a troop to demand remedy. If we had not appealed for Qing troops, who knows what would happen?

Li Hongzhang, de facto Qing Foreign Minister
(Credit: samuelhawley.com)

KYS: Li Hongzhang must also have changed his mind, seeing the rapid increase of Japanese influence, and fearing loss of control. That’s why when I made a request on behalf of Her Majesty, he immediately sent General Wu Changching and a troop of 4500 to restore order. You know who I met on the Qing battleship from Tientsin? Yuan Shikai. He was just a young low-rank soldier back then, but he’s now responsible for the training of our new military units in place of the Japanese. How fast he rose through the hierarchy!

YYW: Indeed, he took your suggestion to remove the Daewongun and handled it so well, spiriting him away to Tientsin. Wasn’t it Li Hongzhang who recommended him to the Empress for promotion?

KHJ: I heard the same, sir. Now that we have Qing’s advisors to help us on foreign affairs – both Ma Chienchang and the German Möllendorff – we can further dilute Japan’s influence by signing treaties with Western countries as the Strategy recommended. 

KYS: Li Hongzhang practically prepared the Shufeldt treaty for us, even while I was back in Tientsin. Councilor Kim must not think I was not doing my job properly. 

KHJ: Not at all. I was honored to represent Joseon in signing the treaty with the US and then with Germany. 

Yuan Shikai, Qing Resident in Joseon 
(Credit: samuelhawley.com)

KYS: You know, sir? Li Hongzhang told me why he recommended Möllendorff over the two British subjects suggested by Robert Hart. He said the Japanese feared Germany the most and disliked Möllendorff, so we should send him to Korea in order to prevent their licentiousness.

KHJ: Qing display of force with 3000 soldiers in Joseon is certainly unprecedented. They are exerting power in Joseon like never before. Even the Japanese merchants are complaining that the Chinese are given unfair advantages. Of course, our Joseon merchants have the most to lose, unable to compete with either of them who pay very low tariffs or none at all. This is really bad for your state finance.

YYW: Although the Qing troop removed the Daewongun and prevented him from causing further problems with the Japanese, it seemed to have encouraged the pro-Japan radicals to push their changes with His Majesty even further. 

KYS: Kim Ok-gyun and Seo Gwang-beom who went to Japan again with Pak Yong-hyo after the Imo mutiny came back, I suspect, with stronger support from the Japanese like that Fukuzawa Yukichi and may be even the Japanese government. Their Enlightenment party (Kaehwadang) are now pushing for dangerous changes. Western technologies are good, but we cannot let them destroy our Confucian society. 

YYW: They have no idea how dangerous it is to lean on Japan. We need Qing support to guide us  through this storm against five, six powerful nations. 

KYS: Elder Statesman Yi and I were reminiscing over chess of a simpler time when it was just a conflict between two parties like the Han漢 and Chu楚 pieces on the janggi board. That time is no more.

(Credit: samuelhawley.com)

KHJ: In Tokyo, I had the opportunity to see how the Western version of chess is played. It’s both similar and different from our janggi. And the intriguing thing they said if the board is enlarged, four players can play at once -- each player can play against or make alliance with any other. 

YYW: Four players? Very interesting. That’s one way to describe the new world order in which Joseon, however, finds itself almost defenseless like the general in the castle without any powerful pieces.

YYW strokes his beard in a pensive gesture. The other two remains silent waiting for what he has to say.  "May be we can see our situations in three tightly connected chessboards with different rules: Joseon, frontier and world chessboards. For the Joseon chessboard with janngi rules, we used to have the conservative Daewongun , the radical Kim Ok-gyun and his friends, and gradualists like us who want a cautious reform. But now with the Daewongun is gone, the conservative force has lost its powerful leader. Perhaps it’s possible to say that it’s us against Kim Ok-gyun...

For the frontier chessboard with the Chinese xiangqi rules, it’s fair to say that it’s a tug-of-war between our old ally Qing trying to maintain it’s Sino-centric hegemony and Japan challenging to replace it.  

And for the world chessboard with Western chess rules, it’s mainly a conflict between Russia and the British Empire, although France is also greedy and her American ally is not far behind. Any of these four can ally with Qing or Japan if it serves their purpose. Russia is a special case as it can also enter the frontier chessboard against China and Japan as well.

Empress Cixi, the power behind Qing throne

KHJ Brilliant, sir. Although the different sets of rules are confusing, the three chessboards make it easy to see all the players and pieces.

YYW: But that's not enough. We also need to understand their motives. Russia has been trying to expand south for an ice-free port. They almost got one in Tsushima. Now they might want Joseon instead. On the other hand, the British Empire will do everything to prevent Russia’s southern expansion – not only in Joseon but also in Xinjiang and Tibet -- in order to protect its Indian colony and China trade. In fact, the Strategy is still very relevant. Let me get the servant to bring a copy from the library.

KHJ: Please don't bother, sir. I can summarize it as easily. It begins, 'On the Earth, there is a gigantic state and it is called Russia.' Then, it points out that though Russia had been seeking territorial expansion for years, its empire building westward had been contained by wariness toward it by the European powers, including Germany, Austria, Britain, Italy and France. As a result, it changed its course eastward, and already occupied Sakhalin, the east bank of Heilong Jiang river and the mouth of Tumen river. Now, Russia is trying to rule these newly acquired areas with the utmost effort. The conclusion is that Russia was doing so 'solely because the country wishes to materialize its ambition in Asia...'

Korea in the late 19th Century

'The land of Korea is located at a pivot in Asia, and will never fail to provide a contesting ground. If Korea falls into crisis, the situation in China and Japan will swiftly change as well. If Russia wants to expand its territory, it will certainly start from Korea. Alas, Russia has been making strenuous efforts for expansion for the past three hundred years or more, watching to pounce like a wolf. Its invasion first targeted Europe, then Central Asia, and now Russia is targeting East Asia. Thus, Korea is very likely to be the immediate victim of Russia. Therefore, no other task is more urgent for Korea than to defend against a possible Russian invasion. What will be the measure for defense against Russia? We say the only way for Korea is to remain close to China, create ties with Japan, ally with the United States, and strengthen itself.”

KYS: Russia’s shadow keeps expanding from the North, as Qing warned us in the Strategy. But it's also Qing’s fault that they now share a border with us with a port in Vladivostok, after Qing yielded the land to them after the Arrow War.

KHJ: And what do you think Britain will do, sir?

Painting of Tsar Alexander II on his deathbed 

YYW: With the assassination of Tsar Alexander II three years ago, the new Tsar is busy with internal problems. However, he is allied with the German and Austro-Hungarian emperors. Britain will have to tread carefully to prevent a war in Europe, so it will only make a countermove after Russia makes a move. 

We can’t trust France either. Its jealously of Britain’s colony in India propelled it to colonize Vietnam. But it won’t stop there. I am sure her ultimate aim is China. France has always used their missionaries as an excuse to invade other countries. Luckily we managed to repel them away with minimal loss. China and Vietnam simultaneously met much worse fate with the Arrow War and the Cochinchina Campaign. 

You two must have heard of Hwang Sa-yong, the Catholic traitor who carried a secret ‘silk letter’ to the French bishop in Beijing asking for one hundred Western ships and tens of thousands of men to be sent to do the Vatican’s dirty work in Joseon.

KHJ: Their religion is indeed their weapon, sir, just as Britain’s opium trade. Maybe that’s why the Western variety of chess replace our projectile cannons with powerful bishops. As I heard, they have fought each other for centuries over religion differences, and now exhausted from European wars they let their bishops running amok on other chessboards. 

YYW: But, as you said, France wouldn’t want another war with Russia so hopefully they will leave us alone for now. And as for their friend America. They also tried to invade us not too long ago. 

Korean casualties of US attack in the Battle of Ganghwa 1871

KHJ: The ambassador Min Young Ik and the remaining officials just arrived back in Seoul a week ago after taking the Suez route with a brief stop in Paris and London. Despite a strong request to President Arthur for a high-level advisor, they were unsuccessful. 

KYS: The Strategy recommended that we sign treaty with America and other Western countries, citing the alliance of Han, Zhao and Wei to thwart Qin’s advance eastward, and Wu-Shu alliance to discourage Wei’s intention to invade the south. Li Hongzhang practically wrote up the Shufeldt Treaty for us to put our seal on. 

YYW: Often I become sleepless over these treaties. With China, Joseon was a tributary state but we had complete independence. Now with these treaties supposedly among equal nations, we suddenly lost sovereignty to foreign concessions. What an irony.

All become silent.

KHJ: Even at that time of signing I had the feeling that, apart from gaining commercial and extraterritorial rights from the unequal treaty which Li Hongzhang barely consulted me upon, they are not so interested to help us. My teacher Pak Gyu-su always warned me not to trust America, based on his experience during the General Sherman incident that ended up with American invasion killing hundreds of our soldiers. Lucky that France was still licking its wound from the defeat in Franco-Prussian War that it didn’t join America. Otherwise we would have suffered much more catastrophically. 

YYW: Your teacher was a great patriot. His death was a great loss to Joseon. He was absolutely right to admonish both Japan and the West that the wealth and power of a nation must come from moral rectitude, not shows of force. And they wonder why we call them barbarians.

KHJ: Do you think that’s why the Strategy recommends us to make tie with Japan despite the Qing-Japanese dispute over Ryukyu? 

YYW: Did Li Hongzhang not always say to use barbarians to control barbarians? Since Britain can’t be counted on or trusted. Japan is the next best thing, because after annexing Hokkaido they landed into dispute with Russia over Sakhalin and Kuril islands. If Joseon is lost to Russia, then Japan’s Kyushu and Shikoku islands may be next.

KYS That may very well be, sir. But it’s a bitter medicine shoved down our throat given our history. Citing that “Japan and Korea are mutually dependent just as a wheel and its axle” or “as close as the lips and the teeth” is not enough. Looking back, I understand why the Confucian scholars went mad over your correspondence with Li Hongzhang on this issue. After all, they can look past Qing invasion due to our shared Confucian values, but Hideyoshi’s invasions and the more recent Ganghwa invasion cannot be forgiven because Japan is now a regressive country turning back on tradition and becoming like Western barbarians.

Japanese landing in the Ganghwa Incident, 1875

KHJ: And the distrust is mutual. Japan also remembers the attempted invasion by the Mongols who invaded and used Joseon for a base and our men for additional soldiers. They see us as a dagger to their throat. Whatever the past aggression, our refusal to recognize their restored leader as “emperor” on par with the Qing Emperor and above our king must have enraged them badly.

KYS: Of course, we know of the breakdown of the Japanese government over the Seikanron debate whether to invade Joseon. If not for Li Hongzhang’s warning, they might already have done so. The frustration of their samurais was directed toward Taiwan to take revenge for the Ryukyuan sailors instead, and then using that as a pretext to annex Ryukyu Kingdom completely.

YYW: In a way, the Ryukyuans paid for Joseon’s independence with theirs. I feel sorry for my Ryukyuan friends, and all the more reason to be wary of Japan’s “help”.

KYS: They were at their most helpful when they sent their gunboat to demand concessions from us, just as the American did to them barely twenty years earlier. Only with Qing’s promise to “exhausting resources of the whole country and every means in its power to protect Joseon if ever an incident takes place” that we agreed to sign the Treaty of Ganghwa with them. 

Seikanron debate. Saigō Takamori is sitting in the center. 1877 painting

YYW: Maybe it was not a bad thing after all, considering that their Taiwan invasion was not enough to quell the disaffection of the powerful Satsuma clan led by Saigo Takamori who soon later led a rebellion against the Meiji regime which he himself helped to establish.

KYS: I always thought the Strategy seems like a risky policy, and Li Hongzhang a fool for placing too much trust on Japan. 

YYW: On the contrary, it’s Li Hongzhang’s cleverness to use Japan to counter Russia, backed by other powers. If war breaks out between Japan and Russia, no matter which side wins, both will be weakened, and so decreases the threat to Korea without Qing having to risk itself.

KYS: Or maybe if Japan is defeated, Qing can negotiate with Russia to claim back Ryukyu without breaking a sweat. Or if Japan wins, it will allow Japan to keep Ryukyu for reward, while maintaining suzerainty over Korea.

YYW: One may wonder if the Strategy was really for Korea or for Qing. Don’t forget that Qing and Russia also had only recently ended their dispute over Ili.

KHJ: But too much trust in Qing can also be dangerous. Li Hongzhang may be clever about the world chessboard and border chessboard, but he certainly is not an expert on the Joseon chessboard. He has no idea what our internal situation is like, as the protest against the Strategy completely surprised him.

YYW: Apart from that, we must make sure that Qing actions are in Korea’s best interest as opposed to its own? With Chinese-imposed new regulations, Chinese merchants have flooded Korea, exploiting advantages over Korean merchants. We also need to strengthen ourselves. Since the Qing’s defeat in the Opium War, we have known of the threats of foreign powers and there’s no replacement for self-strengthening. 

KYS: Councilor Kim, are you not the one who brought back the by the Qing scholar Zheng Guanying’s book Yiyan (Presumptuous views)? Do you agree with him that the adoption of Western technology alone was insufficient for successful modernization and that Western institutions should also be adopted?

KHJ: I believe we will have to be careful what Western institutions we should adopt as to not destroy our society completely. I am sure that the radicals are using Vietnam to push their agenda. They even want to eliminate the Yangban class altogether in the name of equality, but I question their sincerity. Even the Donghak peasants will not trust them.

YYW: How can they be sincere about that, being from Yangban class themselves? They only want to use it as an excuse to get higher positions in government, because they are jealous of Min clan members in high position. Such elimination won’t be good for the country. Without hierarchy, there will be chaos.

YYW says with his eyes toward the painting on the wall: In any case, we will have to be ready for difficult time, but we must face hardship, as Confucius would, with dignity and elegance. “ 

KYS: There’s no other way, sir.

KHJ nods, looking at the painting. Now I understand why you often paint plum branches in winter… 

The three continue to discuss matters affecting Joseon late into the night, without knowing that the next winter a few months away will be a very long one...

(Credit: samuelhawley.com)

Next on 1884