Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/97362
|
| Title: | 屬國與保護之間：以1880年代初期的清法越南交涉為中心 |
| Other Titles: | Between vassalité and protectorat:Sino-French Controversy on the Tonkin Affair, 1880-1883 |
| Authors: | 岡本隆司
Okamoto, Takashi |
| Keywords: | 屬國;保護;越南;宗主權;《李寶節略》
vassalité;protectora;Tonkin;Affair;sužeraineté;Li-Bourée Convention |
| Date: | 2010-05 |
| Issue Date: | 2016-06-02 15:34:51 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 清朝方面通過寫明「保護」，主張越南就是清朝的「屬邦」。相對於此，法方則不提「保護」二字，否認清朝對越南的宗主權，並想要使清朝承認法國對越南有事實上的「保護權」。就這樣，因為雙方的基本利益始終相反，《李寶節略》遭到否認只是遲早的事、不可避免的結果。即使是脫利古特使代替寶海，與李鴻章交涉，也無法輕易地消解雙方的緊張關係。清法兩國不久就走向戰爭之路。
The results of the Treaty of Tientsin, signed in June of 1885, which put an end to the Sino-French War were the “loss” of the vassal state of Vietnam by China and a giant step toward achivement of its colonization by the French. Given this outcome, the changes that occurred during what is known as the “Tonkin Affair” might be termed a matter of course. Nevertheless, in regard to many of the facts that led to warfare between France and China , much remains unclear, such as what brought about their confrontation, how they reached a compromise, the special interests that concerned them, and the diplomatic negotiations between them. This article explores clues to explain such questions by examining the course of the negotiations from the proposal of the Li-Bourée Convention concluded in late 1882 until its later abandonment. The confrontation between France and China over the Tonkin Affair became conspicuous when the Chinese Minister to France, the Marquis Tseng, protested to the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs at the end of 1880. In the negotiations between the French Minister to China, Frédéric-Albert Bourée, and the Tsungli-Yamen (總理衙門) at Peking in 1882, parting spheres of influence in Tonkin were proposed, and, at the end of the same year, were put in writing during the negotiations between Bourée and the imperial commissioner for Northern Ports Li Hung-chang at Tientsin. However, the term hsün-ch`a pao-hu (巡査保護), meaning to surveille and protect which appears in the Chinese version of the Li-Bourée Convention, was recorded only as surveillance in the French, resulting in a discrepancy. This expresses the interests of the two parties and latent contradictions regarding them. In opposition to the Chinese use of the term pao-hu “protect,” which furthered the advocacy of the vassalité of Vietnam to China , the French denied the sužeraineté of China by not referring to protection and thereby aimed to win recognition of Vietnam as a de facto protectorat of France. In this way, not only were the fundamental interests of the parties at odds, but this became increasingly apparent, so that the rejection of the Li-Bourée Convention was inevitable. There was no easy way that the confrontation might be ameliorated in the following negotiations between Arthur Tricou and Li, and France and China proceeded step by step toward rupture and warfare. |
| Relation: | 政治大學歷史學報, 33, 83-116
The Journal of History |
| Data Type: | article |
| Appears in Collections: | [政治大學歷史學報 THCI Core ] 期刊論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 33-2(p.83-116).pdf | | 782Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 696 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
