UPDATE: If you are visiting us from the WordPress homepage or StumbleUpon, please check out the rest of our blog and subscribe to the feed here.
Nothing defeats bigotry like knowledge. Scott Horton proves it here.
If you’ve been following the story coming from Xinjiang, you know that there have been riots and scores of deaths reported by the Chinese national news agency. Most of the story has been told at arm’s length, and without knowledge of China’s history with its minorities, the riots may seem like just another global flareup.
The dirty secret, of course, is that China’s ethnic minorities are treated as third-class citizens, and despite their labeling as “Muslim terrorists” by the Chinese government, they are far from the Taliban or al-Qaeda. Horton:
Yesterday, another Central Asianist with whom I was trading Xinjiang experiences recounted a conversation he had with Uighurs in Kashgar a few years ago. “What really upset them,” he said, “was the fact that the Chinese were emptying their prisons of convicted felons, offered their freedom if they would resettle in Xinjiang. And these convicted felons were put in positions of authority over the natives.” The message could not be clearer: Central Asians are third-class citizens, not to be trusted. And this is the sort of conduct which has led to uprisings, just like the one now occurring in Xinjiang, in Tibet, and other regions.
China’s government has systematically hurt its ethnic minorities in an attempt to expand the Han Chinese dominant culture. Even at the Olympics, during which China eagerly paraded out the costumes of its various ethnic minorities, the parts were played by Han children.
Horton wrote his article in response to Andy McCarthy at the National Review, who has labeled the Uighurs as terrorists. The sooner we begin seeing the bogeyman everywhere, the more rare our friends become.
hi, Stendhal
Have you been to China before? Have you been to Xinjiang before? Have you been to Urumqi before? Please stop such blah blah without first-hand information. You didn’t show even a little sympathy on those innocent children women killed by Uighurs mobs. I suggest you’d better look this
http://www.viddler.com/explore/lintmars/videos/1/
Not that it matters, but I am an American of Han descent and am fairly well-read on the subject. Videos coming out of China are going to be pretty limited to violence against Han Chinese.
I have sympathy for all victims of violence in Urumqi. Nevertheless, the official Chinese story seems to merit scrutiny.
Shocking though the video may be, the point of my post remains. Labeling the Uighur population as “terrorists” does little to try to understand the situation or the years of conflict between China and its ethnic minorities, particularly in Xinjiang.
I’ve heard about this once, but I never realized that this could be that far… I mean, putting convicted felons into a position of authority, that’s… unbelievable.
Thanks for some more context to go with the questionable reporting we’re getting. It needs to be done.
Well, ethnic minorities aside. Australia started off with prison inmates as their 1st settlers too.
That worked out real well for the Aborigines, eh? Just saying…
I completely agree with the last sentence of your “About us” page. You are a teacher, eh? Yeah, go ahead and teach the kids that killing is okay because you feel like you are lower-class citizens. Stand up for yourself, burn the rich and powerful so we can become more important. Shame on you. There are a lot more learning for you as well, teacher.
Again, I do not condone violence in this (or any) case. (Staunchly anti-death-penalty, anti-war, etc.)
I maintain that understanding the long-bubbling resentment towards the Han Chinese ruling class and the history of Xinjiang — its conquest, its ethnic mix, its relative isolation, even its geography — is more important than simply labeling them callously as “terrorists.”
(For more reading on the subject, I suggest “Under the Heel of the Dragon” by Blaine Kaltman for a more academic ethnographic approach, and “Wild West China: The Taming of Xinjiang” by Christian Tyler for a more readable survey.)
For the record, I try to keep my teaching and my politics separate. For what it’s worth, I also attempt to instruct my students on proper analysis and non-violent resolution of conflicts.
Nobody called all Uighurs “terrorists”, but the massive murder did are committed by some Uighur terrorists. As a teacher, You should learn to respect everyone’s life.
I do not want to sound rude but you do sound like you know nothing about China, though you said you are “an American of Han descent and am fairly well-read on the subject”. I really doubt if that identity gave you any advantage in saying things about China without really getting to know it.
“China’s government has systematically hurt its ethnic minorities in an attempt to expand the Han Chinese dominant culture.” I cannot say I am not shocked and amused when I read this. Systematically, the ethnic minorities have much better advantage in many things. Do you know they have lower entering-score for college? Do you know they enjoy reduce in tuition? Do you know how much we emphasis on cultures of these ethnic groups?
And after all, just think about one reason why the government want to “expand the Han Chinese dominant culture”?? Why would any government want to expand a dominant culture?
Of course, these are just my personal opinions. As a Chinese, I do feel I have the responsibility to stand out and fix the misunderstanding we have with the rest of the world.
Jessie,
Affirmative action does not mean that inequalities have been wiped away. Han chauvinism is well-documented, and although there is ethnic diversity at the lower levels of government, the upper reaches of the Party and its organs remains dominated by Han Chinese.
You ask why a government would want to expand a dominant culture. Generally speaking, governments tend to be functions of the dominant culture. The Chinese national government is no different. Although attempts to placate ethnic minorities with affirmative action-style privileges (and notably, exemption from the One Child Policy) are admirable, the programs of Han resettlement — aided by the China Western Development — into areas such as Xinjiang and Tibet do far more to damage relationships with minority groups.
FYI, many “Hui” people, another Muslim ethnic minority in Xinjiang, are also killed by the Uigurs mobs in this riot. How do you explain it with the excuse of the government oppression?
http://torguqin.wordpress.com/2009/07/09/chinese-expert-on-xinjiang/
I have just translated an essay by a Chinese expert on the subject.
As a Han Chinese (I know, the name you see here is my pen name) spearheading the promotion of Han Chinese traditional culture (just look at my blog), I can show nothing but total bafflement at the PRC’s asinine responses in political and cultural affairs.
If you think that Han culture is dominant and superior, then please tell me – why is the Han Chinese the biggest force of resistance against the restoration of widely wearing their OWN traditional clothing, or reusing their rituals, or being widely educated with their own Classics?
And lastly, don’t believe in the single-sided Propaganda (yes, with a capital P) by the Wall Street Journal and the likes. We’ve all seen the anti-CNN protests last year with the Tibet thing, but this time it’s different, with a lot more knives and gore…
Excellent article. Even I was surprised by the ethnic favoritism in China’s economic endeavors into Xinjiang.
If it isn’t blindingly clear already…
There IS no favoritism. The Communist Party THINKS their ethnic policies are affirmative action towards the minorities.
The HAN think it’s too much and spoiling the minorities while completely removing their rights of ethnic survival (by killing off their next generation)…
While the ethnic minorities see the “benefits” as merely more clauses to control their natural livelihood and merely facades to control them even further.
Just to reiterate my (and Dr. Yi’s) 2 cents.
“ethnic favoritism” towards Han Chinese, not towards Uighurs
Then I think you’re absolutely not getting my point = =”
If the Han Chinese don’t have a beef with the government and its policies towards them (e.g. fear of being accused as “Han Chauvinist” which has no clear definition in China, rejection of Han Chinese having a distinct heritage and image, One Child Policy only applying to Han Chinese, unnatural education disadvantages…), there wouldn’t BE conflict with the other minorities.
There wouldn’t be the issue of “Uighur pickpockets” in every city. There wouldn’t be the Man from Wuhan who dipped a Uighur pickpocket’s head into a vat of boiling oil and chopped the Uighur’s 7 comrades with a cleaver in the middle of morning market on March 8, 2007(http://www.tianya.cn/publicforum/content/free/1/1049148.shtml).
This resentment doesn’t come without the HANS THINKING that THEY are the third-class citizens, seeing the Uighurs getting off scot-free every time. Except that since these are “internal matters”, the West doesn’t get to hear about it.
Nobody is the winner. They are ALL third-class citizens.
Satsuki,
I think we are in much closer agreement here than you do. Han Chinese resentment to affirmative action policies is in line with the resentment of majority populations across cultures (USA, Western Europe, India, etc.).
I wouldn’t say, however, that such efforts are totally ineffective. China’s attempts to give minority groups representation in local government are admirable, particularly since the Han chauvinism of the Cultural Revolution, when non-Han cadre members were purged heavily.
That said, I agree with you that the efforts of the Chinese government, both in its ham-handed attempts to “help” ethnic minorities and in its Han-dominated economic ventures, have been poorly managed. I also agree that most in the West know little about China’s frontier, particularly when it is framed as Muslim terrorists vs. China.
There’s more from Glenn Greenwald, for those who are interested. He comes in from the angle of the politics within the U.S. (i.e. how National Review Andy McCarthy’s “terrorists” would be celebrated by McCarthy types as anti-communist freedom fighters if the Uighurs happened to be Christian instead of Muslim).
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/07/06/uighurs/index.html
Just because one is or isn’t Chinese, if they have or have not been to Xinjiang isn’t to say they aren’t as informed as others. Indeed, by no fault of their own, it is Chinese people who sometimes face barriers to understanding the situation because they are given media that, while freer than ever, are still very much controlled by the CCP. There are two types of stories being reported, the CCP propoganda about violent seperatists who live in America (which the CCP refuses to let anyone else verify) and the response from the rest of the Globe that, in many languages, tells a united story. Moreover, people should refrain from what sounds a lot like Nationalism on here– no one is blaming Chinese citizens for race riots in Xinjiang, just noting that a bunch of factors have coalesced to produce an uncomfortable situation in Xinjiang, and that some of this situation could have been avoided.
We also shouldn’t feel too tempted to describe the violence as either wholly blamed on the Uyghurs or Han Chinese. Like most situations in life, I believe it’s a mix of the two. Having spent a year in China, and as I’m able to speak Chinese, I can say that I’m not very impressed with the condition of ethnic minorities within the country, but I don’t blame the CCP for all of that.
Chinese people usually reference the fact that ethnic minorities are given a bonus to their college entrance exams, are allowed to have more than one kid, etc., but I think to dwell on these superficial advantages misses the fact that in many ways, minorities are still second-class citizens.
A lot of this is simply geographical, they come from the parts of China that are nearest to other countries and tend to stay close to the border, but as the most developed parts of China are on the Eastern Seaboard (or close to it) minorities tend to miss out on the benefits of China’s economic expansion. It is also hard for them, there are 55 ethnic groups in China, but the Han make up for more than 90% of the population, and a culture as homogenous as China’s tends to draw sharp lines between who is “one of us” and who isn’t.
Allowing minorities a higher birth rate doesn’t make them more accepted, it just creates more second-class citizens. And giving them a bonus to their college entrance exams not only ignores the educational gap leading up to college but also causes them to be seen as “spoiled” or privileged by their classmates or future employers, who are unwilling to really listen to the problems faced because they assume that affirmative action has healed all wounds.
China doesn’t want to let Xinjiang declare independence, because China would lose face, because there are natural resources in Xinjiang, because they would lose a buffer-zone between Beijing and the non-Chinese world, but also because it would set a precedent for separatism in Tibet, Inner Mongolia, and in a sense, Taiwan. But China has undeniably supported mass movements of Han Chinese people to dilute (or integrate, depending on your perspective) populations of ethnic minorities who have different identities and different personal alliances than the CCP’s “One Nation, One Family” principle advocates.
In any case, I think the long-term solution is to try and spread China’s rapid economic improvements a little more in the poorer areas, so that they do not feel so marginalized.
Do you really think Xinjiang’s economic development will get better if Han people leave Xinjiang? I don’t think so. I believe that will make the situation worsen. AS you mentioned “but as the most developed parts of China are on the Eastern Seaboard (or close to it) minorities tend to miss out on the benefits of China’s economic expansion.” That’s the reason why the Uigurs shouldn’t hesitate to see Han people coming to Xinjiang. They should learn from the economic success of Han people as Chinese learn from Western countries.
Charles,
I think you’re assuming that the reason Beijing’s most developed cities are located on the East is because of some kind of inborn Han characteristic. I think it’s more a question of geography. As you know, China has put its capitals in the East or South East since the Eastern Zhou Dynasty because that was the safest, most fertile part of China, and also nearest to trade routes and therefore cultural development. Even when its capitals was invaded, there were at least dynasties created, like the Yuan and Qing. In the West and Northwest they had to deal with the Xiongnu, the Khitans, etc., who didn’t build empires so much as raze the scraps.
Anyway, after you’ve had China’s heart in the East for so long, of course it’s going to be more developed, the problem is that existing development sets a precedent for future development staying where it originated instead of radiating across the country. My experience in Xi’an, for example, was that the large population of Hui and the other minorities seemed integrated into the community through a better ability to enjoy China’s development.
I’m flattered that you see China as learning from the West’s successes (although I’d argue that the Western world has learned plenty from China through the years, too) it’s also important to remember that America has had racial tensions, race riots, etc. in the past. The integration of Africans into mainstream society after they had been slaves was a source of major contention for many years after they had been nominally given all the rights of whites. It’s still a tense situation, sometimes. I’m not an expert on that field, but there’s plenty that has gone wrong in inter-Western race relations that could be illustrative to China, in terms of what mistakes China could learn from the West making.
However, one thing I think that America did do well in this regard was to first focus on getting African-Americans to be ABLE to enjoy the rights they were given through protecting their ability to exercise those rights, and only extending affirmative action until a more stable baseline was established. There’s something about giving minorities extra rights in some regards when they already lack so much as far as general equality that really seems to have a damaging effect, and polarizes people like it is in Xinjiang. Each side sees itself as being marginalized, and in a sense, they’re both right.
good. now we get folks like Stendhal shouting out foul with RESOLUTION and DETERMINATION. Mostly readers certainly are no expert with “ethnic favoritism” in China, good deal
the author is invited to Xinjiang streets and physical action sells more bucks than lip service, doesn’t it.
Huh?
Re: Charles
The death toll has yet to be verified, and since the Chinese authorities are keeping a tight clamp on the region, limiting media contact, cell phone reception and Internet connections. Since the bodies have not been identified as Han or Uighur, perhaps it’s best to keep the name-calling to a minimum.
(Side note: I don’t know why I should respect life any more because I am a teacher. Shouldn’t one value and respect life as a human being?)