China has land borders with 14 other countries – a world record*. And yet you should not think of China as particularly well-integrated with its neighbours. In fact, as shown in this dramatic map, you should rather consider China to be an island.
That stark image can be found illustrating this article on John Mauldin’s Outside the Box, a blog at Investors Insight, which is a website dedicated to ‘Financial Intelligence for the Informed Investor’. On his blog, Mr Mauldin hebdomadally profiles one of the many articles he reads each week, to challenge and stimulate investors to ‘think outside the box’. What follows is a very brief summary of the article he recently highlighted: ‘The Geopolitics of China’, taken from a series of Geopolitical Monographs by Stratfor.
The Chinese heartland, pictured here as the part of China above water, is favourable to agriculture and has traditionally held the bulk of the Chinese population (i.e. the ethnic Han, whom we think of as ‘the’ Chinese); Over a billion people live here, in an area half the size of the US. The heartland’s northern part is dominated by the Yellow River and speaks Mandarin, the southern part by the Yangtze River and by Cantonese.
Population pressure has always pushed China to expand into Tibet, Xinjiang, Mongolia and Manchuria. Another factor is the historical threat emanating from this non-Han ‘shell’ surrounding the Han heartland, for example from the nomad Mongol horsemen that have long threatened and occasionally dominated the sedentary, agricultural Han.
In the past, when the Chinese state was strong, it managed to conquer and rule these outlying areas, providing a defensive buffer for the heartland. When central authority was weak, these fringes broke off – leaving the heartland vulnerable to invasion. China is strong again, even up to the point where the fringes now are the target of large migrations of Han, much to the chagrin of the native peoples.
This Han-ification of the Chinese fringe does not necessarily imply that the Chinese have more contact with the countries beyond their borders. Only in three places are the Chinese borders naturally permeable: at the Vietnamese frontier, via the Silk Road, and near Russian Far East. Hilly jungles separate China from Laos and Burma, the Himalayas shield it from the Indian subcontinent, almost impassable deserts divide it from Central Asia and the forbidding expanses of Siberia have never appealed to Chinese expansionism (until now, as the Russians fear).
With the exception of the Ming dynasty’s sponsorship of admiral Zheng He’s naval expeditions (as far away as Sri Lanka, Arabia and Africa) in the early 15th century, China has never attempted to be a naval-based power – so for most of its history, China’s ports on the Pacific were hardly windows on the world either.
China’s relative isolation, combined with the size of its population (1 in every 5 humans is Chinese), means China is virtually impossible to subdue militarily (as the Japanese discovered to their disadvantage in the 1930s). It also means China can – and often has – turned its back on the world, existing in splendid isolation.
Its size and its penchand for autarkism dictate China’s three main geopolitical objectives:
- maintain unity of the Han heartland;
- maintain control over the non-Han buffer zone;
- deflect foreign encroachment on the Chinese coast.
Clearly isolationist, these objectives also condemn China to poverty: as a densely populated country with limited arable land, China needs internatioal trade to prosper. The paradox is that prosperity will lead to instability. Prosperity will tend to be concentrated in the areas trading with the outside world (i.e. the coastal regions), creating economic tensions with the poorer interior. This might destabilise the Han heartland.
This is exactly what happened during an earlier ouverture towards the outside world, in the early 20th century. And this is why Mao’s revolution first failed in the coastal areas, and only succeeded after his Long March towards the poorer interior. Mao’s victory allowed him to reassert central control from Beijing (also over the buffer regions which had ‘drifted away’, such as Tibet). He also ‘re-isolated’ the country, in the process making everybody equally poor again.
In the late 1970s, early 1980s, Deng Xiaoping took the gamble of reopening China in order to make it prosperous again. He counted on Mao’s strong, centralised, single-party state system to keep the country together. Time will tell whether he was right, for the main threat to China’s geopolitical goals has again become the economic bifurcation of the Han heartland, with 400 million Chinese living in the relatively wealthy coastal areas, and 900 million in the often still desperately poor interior.
China is now less isolated than it once was – although its points of contact remain coastal rather than terrestrial, meaning the insularity portrayed in this map has not completely vanished. But what makes the Chinese leadership nervous is that its Deng-instigated preference for prosperity over stability is precariously linked to circumstances beyond Beijing’s total control: the health and growth of the global economy. What will happen if a global recession threatens the Chinese model? Will the fringe rebel, will the heartland fracture? Or will the center hold – if necessary by again choosing the stability of an isolationist, hardline dictatorship over openness and prosperity?
Many thanks to Eric Johnson for providing a link to this map.
* North Korea, Russia, Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Kirghizstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar/Burma, Laos and Vietnam. China shares the world record with Russia, which also borders 14 countries: Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, China, Mongolia and North Korea.


Great map, I love this blog.
Point of interest, there is some (heavily disputed) evidence to suggest that Zheng He’s fleet may have reached the Americas.
Comment by MarkW — June 18, 2008 @ 2:07 pm
And there’s even vaguer evidence that they made it to the americas centuries earlier. However we may never know for certain since the earlier dynasties had a habit of burning records from even earlier dynasties that they didn’t like for various reasons.
The one thing i would like to mention about this map is that the land border is more of a point of foreign contact than this map shows. China has started to look to it’s own backyard, so to speak, for access to resources and to make strategic alliances. Look at peace mission 2007 which was part of Chin’s increasing involvement with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). So what will happen next, who knows?
Comment by David Schwartz — June 18, 2008 @ 3:18 pm
Wow! That’ll provoke ‘em in Beijing. And it will provoke ‘em even more in Ulan Baator, if their computers are still working underwater.
OK, now I’m off to look up “hebdomadally.”
Comment by michael5000 — June 18, 2008 @ 3:27 pm
“The heartland’s northern part is dominated by the Yellow River and speaks Mandarin, the southern part by the Yangtze River and by Cantonese.”
This is an oversimplification– the Han Chinese speak many, many different “dialects”–more than fifteen in the area of this map alone. Cantonese is often overemphasized in Western minds, perhaps because of the financial importance of Hong Kong (where Cantonese is spoken), and the fact that a huge proportion of overseas Chinese communities speak Cantonese .
Great map, BTW, and I love the site!
Comment by Knappy — June 18, 2008 @ 3:30 pm
“Clearly isolationist, these objectives also condemn China to poverty: as a densely populated country with limited arable land, China needs internatioal trade to prosper”
Only since the 19th century, when Chinese demographics finally outstripped it’s very advanced agriculture – Chinese peasants probably were better off than most European ones in the 18th century.
And as China’s economy grows, the sheer size of it’s internal market means that trade is inevitably going to be a shrinking part of it’s economy – indeed, a first-world China, with a population bigger than that of the US and Europe put together, isn’t necessarily going to need much from the outside world aside from ideas and raw materials.
“Prosperity will tend to be concentrated in the areas trading with the outside world (i.e. the coastal regions), creating economic tensions with the poorer interior. This might destabilise the Han heartland.”
You mean, sort of the way the greater wealth of the coastal regions has led to the violent rebellion of the US Plains states? (:)}
Comment by Bruce — June 18, 2008 @ 4:51 pm
Very good political commentary. However, I cringe at the author’s use of the words “isolationist” and “Heartland.” The word “Heartland” implies that central China is ethnically and linguistically homogeneous. “Mainland” or “Central China” is a more accurate term.
“Clearly isolationist, these objectives also condemn China to poverty: as a densely populated country with limited arable land, China needs international trade to prosper. The paradox is that prosperity will lead to instability.”
WRONG. China needs international trade, in the form of exports, in order to facilitate wholesale technology transfers from the USA and to modernize the infrastructure of the entire country. To achieve these goals, China must rely on exports to the USA. Prosperity will indeed eventually lead to instability. What would happen if the dollar were to collapse and Americans would no longer be able to afford Chinese exports? Would encouraging the Chinese to consume what they make brand them as isolationist….?
Comment by ron — June 18, 2008 @ 5:04 pm
[...] Read it. [...]
Pingback by DYSPEPSIA GENERATION » Blog Archive » China As An Island — June 18, 2008 @ 5:53 pm
Cantonese is only one of many, many Southern Chinese dialects that are very different from Mandarin. Remember only those on Huang He were originally considered Han, the fact that 90 percent of China’s people are now considered Han shows how the Han polity managed much more successfully then the Romans to spread their identity and then make it last.
Where is Rome’s Empire? Where are the Romans? Where is Latin?
Comment by Ali — June 18, 2008 @ 6:18 pm
An earlier post showed maps for “impossible” building projects that would transform the Mediterranean.
Has anyone seriously considered transforming the Chinese inland by building canals there?
Comment by A.R.Yngve — June 18, 2008 @ 6:50 pm
Where is Latin?
In Portugal, Spain, France, Switzerland, Italy, and Romania (and the Americas).
Comment by Alexander — June 18, 2008 @ 7:13 pm
Great! A couple of years ago I saw the same kind of map – but of Scandinavia …
Comment by Bjorn — June 18, 2008 @ 7:35 pm
Reminds me of a map I once saw of the world where all the desserts were shown as water. Wish I could find that.
Comment by VC — June 18, 2008 @ 9:20 pm
@12: There was a map on here some time ago that had the landmasses and oceans inverted. Was it that?
Comment by Lurker — June 18, 2008 @ 10:24 pm
Ali, an old man told me a story once about his grandfather who witnessed Greek independence. When the politicians showed up in the main square of the town and made the announcement, “You are no longer Ottomans; you are now Greeks!” everyone looked at each other, confused. They thought they were Romans.
Comment by Charlene — June 19, 2008 @ 1:09 am
I would love to see how they would flood the highest elevations in the world in China’s southwest. :)
Comment by David — June 19, 2008 @ 1:44 am
@8: You ask:
“Where is Rome’s Empire? Where are the Romans? Where is Latin?”
In continental Europe, Roman thought never died. It was not by chance that there existed a Roman Empire until 1806. All of continental Europe’s legislation is based on Rome. And there are still a number of “Romans”, even today…
Comment by Esclarmonde — June 19, 2008 @ 1:44 am
Roman empire? Depends on how you define it:
Roman empire defined by Rome: ended at 476AD/CD
The Eastern Roman Empire lasted until 1453, with the collapse of Constantanople.
The Holy Roman Empire (a shaku attempt to revive the Roman Empire): Started in 800, formalized in 932, ended by Napoleon in 1806.
The Ottoman Empire: Started in 1299 (rising from lands once ruled by the “Sultinate of Rome”), ended in 1923 as the Republic of Turkey. Mehmed II conquered Contantanople, proclaimed himself Kayser-i Rûm (Roman Emperor) in 1453. Went so far as to start an invasion of Italy to take over Rome itself before he died.
Moscow was given the title of “Third Rome” due to it being the center of Russian Orthodoxy until 1917, when the Communists went to war against the Orthodox Church.
The Roman Catholic Church, political and religious heir to the Western part of the Roman Empire, continues today with millions and millions of adherents, even in areas long given up to the Muslims and Heathans.
So no, Rome hasn’t died. Just the original empire.
Comment by godozo — June 19, 2008 @ 2:57 am
You misspelt ‘Kyrgyzstan’, btw
Comment by nickShep — June 19, 2008 @ 5:49 am
[...] China as an Island — Another fascinating squib from Strange Maps. Especially worth the read if you are Sinophile, or interested in international trade and development. [...]
Pingback by [links] Link salad, Thursday edition | jlake.com — June 19, 2008 @ 1:18 pm
China is still unsatisfied with the huge land that it currently has. It’s still going after Taiwan, the Diaoyutai and Spratlys islands, not to mention the unsettled border disputes with its neigboring countries.
Comment by Khan — June 19, 2008 @ 3:24 pm
Adv. 1. hebdomadally – without missing a week; “she visited her aunt weekly”
Comment by jon — June 19, 2008 @ 6:09 pm
Kirghizstan is not wrong. At least, it’s no more wrong than Kazakstan, Qazakstan, or O’zbekistan. I’d also point out that Kirghizstan makes it a lot closer to what the Kyrgyz themselves call it [Кыргызстан]. Besides, I’d also accept Kirghizia.
Comment by Michael Hancock — June 19, 2008 @ 8:03 pm
First I noticed in the comments how difficult it is to stick to the point. How little in fact one knows about China today.
Second, I have no idea of how many Chinese people immigrated in the last ten years and live all over the world. But China relies a lot upon a place where the Western world is rather reluctant to invest in – Africa. For instance in Angola, one of the biggest foreign workforces is Chinese. 70% of construction projects is said to be given to Chinese companies. They know where the resources of the future lie…
Regarding trade – the world is bigger than just the USA…
I can well imagine that in a short time the Atlantic, that was regarded as the political, ideological, commercial axe of the world until almost now, will (again) give place to the Pacific, as it was before the XIVth century, before the Latin countries discovered the new World…
And then, when China shakes, we will shake, too.
Comment by Marina — June 19, 2008 @ 8:52 pm
From reading up a fair bit on Chinese history, geography, etc, this is how I’ve come to see China – as the Han ‘heartland’ that controls extensive territories more sparsely populated, and populated by other ethnic groups. I imagined it a little bigger, but about this shape.
I suppose it’s similar to how Australia is basically a loose ‘ring’ of civilisation, concentrated on the East, surrounding an undeveloped interior; or Canada is a 200-mile wide strip of land that happens to own vast tracts of forest and tundra to the North; or Russia is a large, but not immense, European state in possesion of billions of acres of steppes and tunguska.
Comment by Isaac — June 19, 2008 @ 10:30 pm
China’s canals date back as far as the Great Wall and they are gigantic.
I just wanted to point out how amazing it is that China was a Super Power 2000 years ago and it still is today. And there is no other polity you can compare to it for longevity, size, and population.
Comment by Ali Hassan — June 20, 2008 @ 12:03 am
[...] Chinese Paradox Found via Strange Maps ts size and its penchand for autarkism dictate China’s three main geopolitical [...]
Pingback by The Chinese Paradox « Horseman, Pass By! — June 20, 2008 @ 1:25 am
Nice map
and it also show where Taiwan is!!
Comment by andrewkotw — June 20, 2008 @ 2:30 am
[...] strange maps blog has an interesting entry about China as an Island. It talks about the equilibrium between the Han center and the border [...]
Pingback by Thias の blog » China as an Island — June 20, 2008 @ 4:44 am
Of course the number of borders has gone backwards – before handover it shared a border with Hong Kong (UK), Macau (Portugal) and going back before India’s annexation of Sikkim, this was also a separate albeit heavily dominated by India state. But of course at that stage the USSR covered a lot of the new stans which now border Russia so presumably Russia’s international border number was a lot lower.
Comment by iolanthe — June 20, 2008 @ 8:09 am
is said that china now is looking for became a naval power, at least a regional one. This give the japanese the creeps….
Comment by Rafael França — June 20, 2008 @ 11:55 am
@29 iolanthe: According to the CIA Factbook 1990 (earliest edition I could find online, which would exclude an independent Sikkim, but the rest are as you describe), China borders 13 countries (including Hong Kong and Macau, but of course excluding the to-be-independent “Soviet -stans”), and the USSR borders 12.
Comment by David — June 21, 2008 @ 4:12 pm
“The paradox is that prosperity will lead to instability. Prosperity will tend to be concentrated in the areas trading with the outside world (i.e. the coastal regions), creating economic tensions with the poorer interior. This might destabilise the Han heartland.
This is exactly what happened during an earlier ouverture towards the outside world, in the early 20th century.”
Is this really an adequate account of what happened in the earlier 20th century? “Ouverture towards” seems a bit of a euphemism when you take into account the forces from the outside world which were doing their bits to assist this “ouverture.”
Comment by marcellous — June 22, 2008 @ 2:02 am
Even Xi’an, the capital (under various names) of 13 dynasties, is in water?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xi‘an
Comment by yan — June 22, 2008 @ 9:30 pm
One of Mao’s many, many mistakes: shortly after he conquered the mainland, Dr. Ma Yinchu of Beijing University urged him to adopt a population-control policy. This was in a China of 550 million people. Mao not only refused but actually encouraged large family sizes, essentially arguing “the more the merrier.” Ma was attacked by Mao’s advisors and was forced to quit his position.
Twenty years later, the Chinese government belately launch a voluntary family-planning policy (the more draconian one-child policy came a decade after that). A well-known saying in today’s China: “We lost one Ma Yinchu but we gained an extra 300 million people.”
(Incidentally, the voluntary measures adopted in the early 1970s actually reduced China’s birthrate significantly, but by then the population explosion had reached such dire proportions that the government decided on harsher measures.)
Comment by James M. — June 23, 2008 @ 1:54 am
Han population in Manchuria: 95 %; in Inner Mongolia: 85 % ; in Tibet, Qinghai, western Sichuan ( tibetan homelands ): 50-60% ; in Xinjiang : 45 % ( 5 % in 1949 ); and still rising… Siberia crowded with legal or illegal chinese mercants…Central Asia seen as a major oil and gas producer for China…Renewed cultural and commercial links with South-East Asia chinese commmunauties ( at least 50 millions people )… Growing emigration in western countries…it rather seems that the Chinese Ocean is pouring on the world, with some unexpected but interesting effects: they may do in Africa in 30 years what the western world was not able to do in 200 years.
About Rome’s heritage : when we speak about “The Western World” or “The International Communauty” it literally means ” The New Roman Empire and all its Subkingdoms “; an “globalization” is nothing more than an “Global Romanisation ” of this planet ( by trade, technology, media and culture, some kind of smooth but so rapidly efficient roman legions ) .
And even proud and secular China is on the move…
Comment by lp — June 23, 2008 @ 2:33 pm
Interesting to think of the Chinese diaspora in this context: an offshore archipelago?
Comment by ben — June 23, 2008 @ 9:06 pm
[...] Strange Maps (quite possibly the coolest blog in the universe) has this map of more-or-less Han China. [...]
Pingback by Frog in a Well - The China History Group Blog — June 24, 2008 @ 11:26 am
Pleeeease! Mandarin wasn’t even invented back then! It’s a mix of authentic Han tongue and successive waves of minority invaders (yes, the Mongols aren’t the only one). And Cantonese is only spoken by 2 Southern provinces and many of the diaspora.
Xian wasn’t part of Han core? That’s really strange, given that it’s their capital. And Vietnam wasn’t part of the Han empire?
Isolationist? Ever heard of the Silk Road? Guess when it first opened up.
This is indeed a strange map.
Comment by Cindy6 — June 26, 2008 @ 11:12 am
Ah! It seems the map speaks of the contemporary Han population rather than historic Han Dynasty which is where the people get its name from. But this makes the map even more absurd as save Tibet and Xinjiang, Han has been dominant in most provinces “under water” for centuries. The Chinese keep pretty good census since Han Dynasty which was roughly contemporary with Rome.
Comment by Cindy6 — June 26, 2008 @ 11:21 am
I suspect the west is actually hoping that China will get destroyed one way or the other. Admit it, whities. Losing world domination and having to share recources
with the other 90% of the human kind(China, India…) just scared the shit out of u.
Comment by Hmmmm — June 27, 2008 @ 3:11 am
@Hmmmm : my PC,my TV, my shirt, my almost-everything-else is made in China: how could I want to destroy my first Departement Store ?
A more balanced world with multiple superpowers ? It suites me too.
Being not constipated, the s… out of me , it’s every day, thank you.
From a parisian white frog.
Comment by lp — June 27, 2008 @ 8:42 pm
[...] Also from Strange Maps: Someone’s argument that China should be considered an island, despite the fact that it shares with Russia the record for number of other countries [...]
Pingback by Transpacifica » The Lost Island ‘Atlantis’ as a Reference to Japan? — June 29, 2008 @ 9:23 am
[...] China As An Island | Strange Maps: China has land borders with 14 other countries. And yet you should not think of China as particularly well-integrated with its neighbours. In fact, as shown in this dramatic map, you should rather consider China to be an island. [...]
Pingback by Stilgherrian · Links for 02 July 2008 — July 2, 2008 @ 10:13 pm
The map leaves out Shaanxi – birthpalce of Chinese civilization, location of Xi’An – capital of a dozen Chinese dynasties and today a city of about 8 million with large, diverse, sophisticated economy. Plus the entire Wei River valley which is a temperate agricultural region producing food year round. This is just silly and typifies our ignorance of China.
Comment by Sinomania! — July 7, 2008 @ 6:25 pm
Not accurate, I must agree with others on this… and what’s the aim for this map?
Comment by Sergiu — July 13, 2008 @ 7:18 am
[...] From strange maps comes this, well, strange map: [...]
Pingback by ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » China as an Island — July 29, 2008 @ 10:32 pm
[...] (Via Strange Maps) [...]
Pingback by 2050 » Blog Archive » Kina som geopolitisk øysamfunn — August 4, 2008 @ 9:51 am
If maritime borders are considered, Russia also has borders with Japan and the US, bringing the count up to 16.
Comment by Oskari Olematon — August 13, 2008 @ 12:35 pm
[...] 292 – China As An Island « Strange Maps (tags: blog china economics essays geography history interesting map politics maps) [...]
Pingback by The PHA : links for 2008-07-22 — September 19, 2008 @ 11:19 pm
Great map, thought provoking post.
Comment by Steve — October 12, 2008 @ 6:54 pm
I’am Turkish. China’s langauge is for Tibets Turkish.
Comment by Kaliteli İddaacilik — October 15, 2008 @ 6:02 pm
Great map..
Comment by Canli Tv izle — November 22, 2008 @ 4:27 pm
html kodları tr.gg en buyuk html kodları css kodları http://www.capkin-power.tr.gg
Comment by capkin-power — January 24, 2009 @ 8:47 pm
Sürücü Kursunun Yeni Gözdesi Bursada Açıldı Ehliyette Kalite Ucuz Fiyata Kaliteli Ehliyet Bekliyoruz….
As Gözde SÜRÜCÜ KURSU asgozdemtsk .tr.gg – TIKLAYINIZ!
As Gözde Sürücü Kursu
Comment by sadasda — February 26, 2009 @ 11:46 am
China is penetrable from a province in India. Arunachal Pradesh(Tawang in Chinese). It’s at a high altitude no doubt, but that is preceisely the location from which the Chinese launched an invasion in 1962. And @ isolanthe -Sikkim was never annexed, it chose to be a part of India. China itself has recognised it as an integral part of India, so your point rings very hollow and uninformed.
Comment by Someone rightly — March 2, 2009 @ 8:39 am
Çok Güzel Paylaşım…
Teşekkürler..;)
Comment by Buğra — March 10, 2009 @ 3:32 pm
[...] China as an Island (from “The Geopolitics of China” at Investors Insight) [...]
Pingback by Mutant Palm » Blog Archive » China Strange Maps: Cannibals, Frenchmen & Mu — March 15, 2009 @ 5:46 pm
Rap hakkında herşey..
Comment by Rapkoloji — April 18, 2009 @ 9:45 pm
Shrug.
If you define “the Chinese heartland” as “every province that doesn’t border another country,” then, sure, you can get China as an island. If you take out every state that borders Canada and Mexico, then the United States is an island too.
The “Chinese heartland” on this map doesn’t even include all of “China proper” (i.e., the 18 provinces of the Qing dynasty). Inconveniently, parts of China proper are (or were) adjacent to other countries. Even more inconveniently, China proper is a compact blob, plus an appendage sticking out to the northwest. That appendage is Gansu province, along the Silk Road, which was vital for trade with Europe.
Comment by Tom — April 30, 2009 @ 2:58 pm
thank you
Comment by Tony — May 4, 2009 @ 3:44 am
thanks for this map
good
luck
….
Comment by Solomon — May 11, 2009 @ 8:59 am
Thanks
Comment by Kral — May 12, 2009 @ 8:39 pm
merci
Comment by aspicco . — May 17, 2009 @ 6:42 am
En Büyük Oyun Sitesi
Comment by http://www.oyunsel.com — May 30, 2009 @ 12:18 pm
Vielen Dank
Comment by moon — July 3, 2009 @ 5:16 am
Muchas gracias
Comment by sun — July 4, 2009 @ 7:41 am