[War & Business] The Iran War Echoes the Anglo-Persian Conflict

Four-Month Anglo-Persian Conflict of 1856
U.S.-China Power Rivalry Echoes the “Great Game”

AFP Yonhap News

As the Iran war drags on for over two months, attention is once again being drawn to a war from the 19th century: the Anglo-Persian War. This conflict broke out in 1856, immediately after the end of the Crimean War, between Britain and the Qajar dynasty of Persia, which ruled Iran at the time. The war lasted for four months, with battles taking place in the Strait of Hormuz and along the Iranian coastline—areas that now serve as the main theaters of the current Iran war.

This confrontation began when Russia, having been blocked by Britain and France from advancing southward in the Crimean War, supported Persia in attacking Afghanistan. Britain, wary of Russia using Persia as a proxy to expand its influence into Afghanistan and western China, responded by blockading the entire Iranian coastline and occupying cities along Iran’s southern coast for four months.

During the four months of clashes, the situation across Asia changed dramatically. In India, the Sepoy regiments—Indian mercenary troops employed by the British East India Company—staged a rebellion, sparking the Indian War of Independence. At the same time, in China, the Arrow Incident occurred, which would become the catalyst for the Second Opium War. Ultimately, with the Persian Empire suffering economic hardship due to the maritime blockade, and Britain needing to address problems in India and China, both sides quickly entered into a ceasefire agreement, ending the hostilities after four months.

Afterwards, the focus of the great powers shifted to East Asia. The Sepoy Rebellion in India was suppressed the following year, in 1857, enabling Britain to establish direct rule over India and officially create the British Raj. The very next year, in 1858, France, seeking to benefit from the Arrow Incident and the Second Opium War, attacked and occupied the port of Da Nang in Vietnam.

Then, in 1860, two years after joining forces in the Second Opium War, the combined British and French armies captured Beijing, the capital of China, and looted the Forbidden City. The Qing Dynasty was forced to accept all British and French demands and sign the humiliating Treaty of Beijing. Meanwhile, Russia, acting as mediator in the agreement, seized Primorsky Krai. Just six years later, the Russian fleet appeared off the coast of Wonsan, and in response, France launched the Byeongin Yangyo and attacked Joseon (Korea).

The rapid changes in the international situation that began with the Anglo-Persian War in the 19th century ultimately swept across the Korean Peninsula at extraordinary speed. This swift movement of global affairs at the time was due to the so-called “Great Game”—the worldwide struggle for hegemony between Britain and Russia. After their first clash in Crimea, they confronted each other again in Iran, and then once more in the Korean Peninsula region.

Now, the eyes of the world are turning toward East Asia, just as they did in the 19th century. In particular, the Taiwan Strait is drawing heightened attention. Should the United States and China clash in the Taiwan Strait, there are concerns that not only Southeast Asia but all of Northeast Asia would inevitably be drawn into the conflict in some way.

The current full-scale competition for hegemony between the United States and China is showing trends that closely resemble the 19th-century Great Game. Major oil trading partners for China, including Venezuela and Iran, have been targeted by the United States, and China’s imports of Iranian oil have sharply declined amid the ongoing dual blockade by the United States and Iran in the Strait of Hormuz. Under these circumstances, the United States and China are once again poised to clash over the Taiwan Strait issue.

Northeast Asia’s geopolitical situation has become even more complex than it was in the 19th century. The Korean Peninsula is divided, while China—a military power engaged in comprehensive competition with the United States—and Japan, which sees the current conflict as an opportunity for remilitarization, surround Korea. Meanwhile, the U.S. government, which has prioritized the defense of Korea in its policy toward the U.S. Forces Korea and the Korean Peninsula, has begun to adopt a much more flexible stance not only on the peninsula but across its broader East Asia policy. It is now a critical moment to reflect on the experience of the Joseon Dynasty, which failed to properly respond to international affairs after the Byeongin Yangyo, and to avoid repeating the history of becoming entangled in the great powers’ struggle for hegemony.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.