In Search of the Asia Principle

“Asia” is not the end result but a means of intellectual exploration. “Asia” is multivalent; it is not self-sufficient and exclusionary vis-à-vis other cultures. It does not exist as an epistemological abstraction. This unique attribute of “Asia” is, however, where its opportunity lies. Taking “Asia” as a means for intellectual inquiry, this article explores the “fūdo” 風土of humankind and cultural formations in dialogue with historical circumstances. It argues that global integration is not the homogenization of disparate societies but mutual respect for their specificities. Furthermore, this article proposes a new kind of universality and reassesses how the specific relates to the universal. Taking Asia’s historical experiences seriously, this article stresses that universality cannot act as an independent and superior imposition vis-à-vis specificities. Rather, specific experiences have to be put into an open dialogue between one another to unleash new possibilities. As a means to reconstruct a new universal imagination, “Asia” poses a potent challenge to hegemonic epistemologies.

Compromise and Defence: Great Britain and the Burma Road Crisis

China and Britain both found themselves in extremely precarious situations by the early summer of 1940, when Japan demanded that Britain close the Burma Road, a vital overland supply route for Chinese forces fighting against Japanese aggression. The British had just seen all of their continental European allies fall like dominoes to Hitler’s forces over the span of a few weeks, while China was fighting a losing defensive war against Japan with minimal outside support. China desperately needed to maintain its overland supply line to the British Empire, the Burma Road, but Britain feared that the very existence of this conduit of war materiel would provoke a Japanese attack on vulnerable British colonies in the Far East. American policy on Japanese aggression was ambiguous at this point and neither Britain nor China could realistically expect help from Washington in the short term. As a result, Britain signed a one-sided confidential memorandum to close the Burma Road to buy time and shore up its East Asian position to the extent that it was able. This deal, a lesser-studied counterpart to Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement policy in Europe, compromised the Chinese war effort against Japan, paved the way for the Japanese conquest of Southeast Asia, and ultimately failed to prevent Britain’s defeat in East Asia. Recognizing that this temporary concession would not moderate Japanese behavior, Britain reopened the Burma Road three months later. This paper examines the vital role of the Burma Road in the Chinese war effort in 1940 and why Japan demanded that London close it, then explores the factors that led to Britain’s unavoidable capitulation on the issue and subsequent reversal three months later, along with the consequences for the Allied war effort in the Far East.

Consolidating Southeast Asia and the Meaning of Force in History: Pax Ming and the Case of Chen Zuyi 陳祖義

Many Chinese historians and politicians consider the Zheng He expeditions as voyages meant to establish peaceful relations with foreign countries. Although, in contrast with European overseas expansion, it was not in the interest of the Chinese emperor and his government to colonialize foreign countries, this does not mean that relations were peaceful. Subordination of neighbouring countries to the Ming court and their acceptance of Ming China’s claim to cultural, ideological and political superiority in the macro region—the implementation of a “pax Ming” in other words—was fully intended. The present article discusses Zheng He’s and the Ming court’s dealing with Chen Zuyi 陳祖義, an “inconvenient” local (“pirate”) leader of Chinese origins dominating parts of the Malacca/Melaka Straits, the use of violence in the implementation of official Ming goals and the ideological transfiguration and (re)interpretation of the Ming court’s own interests in Chinese historical sources.

Ink of Nostalgia: A Review Article of Home is Not Here, Dear China, and Recent Scholarship on China and the Chinese Overseas

This article reviews Wang Gungwu, Home is Not Here (Singapore: National University of Singapore Press, 2018) and Gregor Benton and Hong Liu’s Dear China: Emigrant Letters and Remittances, 1820–1980 (Oakland, CA: University of California Press, 2018) in terms of how they reflect and revisit recent scholarship on China and the Chinese overseas published in English. Adopting different approaches, both books feature family correspondence within Chinese migrant families. This new focus unpacks concepts between ethnicity and language, and between family and homeland in migrants’ identity-making. Beginning from these studies, the article defends “Chinese overseas” as an intellectual concept and as a framework that allows an examination and comparison of the connections between China and its migrants as well as their descendants worldwide. In conclusion, the article argues that diasporas are made up of those who have left home but who miss that home, touching on the concept of nostalgia. Passing down the sense of nostalgia through successive generations via narrating, writing, and verifying, both in Sinophone and other languages, is a way by which Chinese diasporas construct their heritage. The process of retelling, rewriting, and reworking family heritage keeps the idea of home alive, wherever it might be, and whether or not it still exists.

Writing-Mediated Interaction Face-to-Face: Sinitic Brushtalk in the Japanese Missions’ Transnational Encounters with Foreigners During the Mid-Nineteenth Century

Drawing on Chinese-Japanese transnational and transcultural interaction in the mid-nineteenth century, this article illustrates how Sinitic brushtalk functioned as an effective modality of communication between Chinese and Japanese literati who did not have a shared spoken language. The illustrations are adapted from personal diary-like travelogues of Japanese travelers to Shanghai on board the Senzaimaru in 1862 and participants in the Japanese mission to the United States in 1860. The recollection of the brushtalkers with their Chinese interlocutors whom they met on the way, including those during their return journey from the US while calling at trading ports like Batavia and Hong Kong, provides elaborate details on how writing-mediated improvisation using brush, ink, and paper allowed Japanese travelers with literacy in Sinitic to engage in “silent conversation” with their literate Chinese counterparts. A third historical context where Sinitic brushtalk was put to meaningful use was US–Japanese negotiations during Commodore Perry’s naval expedition to Edo Bay in 1854, where Luo Sen, bilingual in Chinese (spoken Cantonese) and English, was hired to perform the role of secretary. Throughout the negotiations, Luo was able to perform his duties admirably in part by impressing the Japanese side with his fine brushtalk improvisations. While misunderstanding and miscommunication could not be entirely avoided, the article concludes that until the early 1900s writing-mediated interaction through Sinitic brushtalk in face-to-face encounters functioned adequately and effectively as a scripta franca between literate Japanese and their Chinese “silent conversation” partners both within and beyond Sinographic East Asia. Such a unique modality of communication remained vibrant until the advent of nationalism and the vernacularization of East Asian national languages at the turn of the century.