The Rise of the Boxers and Qing Court Paralysis
The Boxer Rebellion (1899-1901) emerged during a period of profound crisis for China’s Qing Dynasty. Anti-foreign and anti-Christian sentiments had been simmering for decades, fueled by Western imperialism, missionary activities, and economic exploitation. The Boxers, a peasant-led movement, gained momentum by promoting martial arts and supernatural invulnerability, framing their struggle as a righteous crusade against foreign encroachment.
By 1900, the movement reached Beijing, where Empress Dowager Cixi faced an impossible choice: suppress the Boxers and risk alienating a populist force, or endorse them and provoke foreign powers. Initially, Cixi vacillated. As recorded in the Jingshan Diary, her court issued contradictory edicts—one day ordering attacks on foreign legations, the next sending conciliatory gifts of food. This indecision reflected her dual fears: the wrath of foreign armies and the loss of domestic legitimacy.
The Voices of Dissent: Liu Kunyi and the Failed Warnings
Among the few officials bold enough to challenge Cixi’s ambivalence was Liu Kunyi, the Viceroy of Liangjiang. A seasoned statesman, Liu recognized the catastrophe brewing. In a memorial dispatched via urgent courier, he implored Cixi to halt Boxer attacks on foreign embassies, warning that retaliation would be devastating. His language, steeped in Confucian deference, carefully avoided blaming the throne:
“The current conflict stems from the Boxer bandits’ exploitation of religious grievances. Foreign powers now use this as pretext to mobilize against us. Though we are militarily prepared, Your Majesty’s benevolence must guide us to avoid unnecessary war.”
Cixi’s response was evasive. She praised Liu’s loyalty but continued supporting the Boxers, revealing her gamble: if the Boxers succeeded, the Qing might expel foreigners; if they failed, she could distance herself.
The Fall of Tianjin and Diplomatic Panic
The turning point came in June 1900, when Allied forces captured the Dagu Forts near Tianjin. Suddenly confronted with military defeat, Cixi shifted tactics. She ordered supplies sent to besieged legations and issued a remarkable edict to foreign governments, portraying China as a victim of “misunderstandings”:
“The Boxer chaos arose from local officials’ negligence. We never intended hostility. Now, despite the Dagu incident—which China did not provoke—we remain committed to protecting foreign nationals.”
This document, drafted on July 1, was a masterclass in duplicity. Days earlier, Cixi had authorized bounties for killing foreigners. Her sudden “appeal for peace” aimed to exploit divisions among the Allies, particularly between Russia, Britain, and Japan.
The Desperate Diplomacy: Playing Powers Against Each Other
In early July, Cixi launched a secret diplomatic offensive. Identical letters—backdated to June 19—were sent to the rulers of Russia, Britain, and Japan, each tailored to historical grievances:
– To Tsar Nicholas II: She invoked the 1898 Li-Lobanov Secret Treaty, urging Russia to “mediate” and preserve Sino-Russian solidarity.
– To Queen Victoria: She emphasized Britain’s commercial dominance in China, warning that its collapse would invite a scramble for territory.
– To Emperor Meiji: She framed Sino-Japanese solidarity as essential to resisting Western imperialism.
These appeals, routed through envoys like Yang Ru in St. Petersburg, revealed Cixi’s flawed understanding of international politics. The letters ignored the Allies’ coordinated response and overestimated their rivalries.
The Cultural Chasm: Xenophobia and Confucian Loyalty
Liu Kunyi’s memorials expose a deeper ideological rift. Like most Qing officials, he couched criticism in flattery, blaming “incompetent ministers” rather than the throne. This reflected Confucian ideals of loyalty, where remonstrance required ritualized humility.
Foreign observers, however, saw hypocrisy. As one contemporary noted:
“Chinese officials publicly decry violence but privately crave vengeance. Their diplomatic letters are artful performances, not sincere overtures.”
This mistrust stemmed from decades of unequal treaties and cultural contempt. Many Chinese elites viewed foreigners as barbarians; foreigners, in turn, dismissed Qing diplomacy as deceit.
Legacy: The Boxer Protocol and the Qing’s Last Gasps
The Rebellion’s aftermath was catastrophic. The 1901 Boxer Protocol imposed crushing indemnities and foreign troops in Beijing. Cixi, though retaining power, became a symbol of failed leadership.
Yet the crisis also birthed reforms. The New Policies (1901–1911) modernized education and the military, albeit too late. Liu Kunyi, notably, became a reform advocate, illustrating how even loyalists recognized the need for change.
Modern Reflections: Nationalism and Historical Memory
Today, the Boxer Rebellion is a contested symbol. In China, it’s often framed as anti-imperialist resistance; abroad, as xenophobic violence. Cixi’s indecision mirrors modern debates over sovereignty and populism—how should leaders balance domestic pressures with international realities?
The Rebellion also underscores a timeless lesson: diplomacy requires mutual understanding. Cixi’s letters failed because they assumed foreign rulers shared her worldview. In an interconnected world, such miscalculations remain perilously relevant.
As historian Jonathan Spence observed, “The Boxer crisis was not just a rebellion—it was a collision of civilizations, each blind to the other’s fears.” That blindness, as much as any treaty, shaped China’s turbulent 20th century.