What do you think of the statement that the Sino-Japanese War symbolized the Qing government's self-improvement and new attack on bankruptcy, but it could not be fought without the new attack on the Yellow Sea? The Qing government's self-improvement and innovation, learning from foreigners to control foreigners and seeking wealth and prosperity are generally manifested in two aspects. First, develop industries, especially those related to the military, such as the Metallurgical Weaving Bureau at that time; Second, develop the military, and purchase the most advanced warships and super-tonnage cruisers from Britain to equip the Beiyang Navy. It can be said that the most powerful maritime force in China at that time was the Beiyang Navy (although there was Nanyang, its equipment was far from the same level). Combined with this background, it is not difficult to know how to fight the Yellow Sea naval battle without self-improvement and innovation. With what? Those big wooden boats are bound to fall apart in an instant. But it was the Yellow Sea naval battle that led to China's defeat (the specific reason was that the navy was not allowed to go out to fight, and those in power were afraid of going to war on their backs). The warships that haven't left the port are all tigers made of paper, so what's the use?

On the other hand, it was precisely because of the defeat of the Yellow Sea War that the Beiyang Navy was completely annihilated, which led to the almost complete loss of sea power and sea control power. Intruders in coastal areas can land anywhere. How can we resist this temptation? Therefore, this failure symbolizes the bankruptcy of self-imposed wealth.

As for historical themes, as long as you know the historical background at that time like the back of your hand, there is basically no problem in analysis. Actually, I'm a science student ... but because I read a lot, I still know something about history, and none of the above is necessarily accurate, for your reference only)

The answer upstairs better expounds the historical facts, but this question seems to have two aspects, and the answer is not targeted enough.