Author’s Note: My articles on related subjects recently published in The Statesman include “Understanding China”, “China’s India Aggression”, “China’s Commonwealth”, “Nixon & Mao vs India”, “Lessons from the 1962 War”, “China’s force & diplomacy” etc https://independentindian.com/2009/09/19/my-ten-articles-on-china-tibet-xinjiang-taiwan-in-relation-to-india/
China’s India Example: Tibet, Xinjiang May Not Be Assimilated Like Inner Mongolia And Manchuria
by
Subroto Roy
First published in The Statesman, Editorial Page Special Article March 25, 2008
Zhang Qingli, Tibet’s current Communist Party boss, reportedly said last year, “The Communist Party is like the parent (father and mother) of the Tibetans. The Party is the real boddhisatva of the Tibetans.” Before communism, China’s people followed three non-theistic religious cultures, Buddhism, Confucianism and Taoism, choosing whichever aspects of each they wished to see in their daily lives. Animosity towards the theism of Muslims and Christians predates the 1911 revolution. Count Witte, Russia’s top diplomatist in Czarist times, reported the wild contempt towards Islam and wholly unprovoked insult of the Emir of Bokhara by Li Hung Chang, Imperial China’s eminent Ambassador to Moscow, normally the epitome of civility and wisdom. In 1900 the slogan of the Boxer Revolts was “Protect the country, destroy the foreigner” and catholic churches and European settlers and priests were specifically targeted. The Communists have not discriminated in repression of religious belief and practice ~ monasteries, mosques, churches have all experienced desecration; monks, ulema, clergymen all expected to subserve the Party and the State.
Chinese nationalism
For Chinese officials to speak of “life and death” struggle against the Dalai Lama sitting in Dharamsala is astounding; if they are serious, it signals a deep long-term insecurity felt in Beijing. How can enormous, wealthy, strong China feel any existential threat at all from unarmed poor Tibetans riding on ponies? Is an Israeli tank-commander intimidated by stone-throwing Palestinian boys? How is it China (even a China where the Party assumes it always knows best), is psychologically defensive and unsure of itself at every turn?
The Chinese in their long history have not been a violent martial people ~ disorganized and apolitical traders and agriculturists and highly civilised artisans and scholars more than fierce warriors fighting from horseback. Like Hindus, they were far more numerous than their more aggressive warlike invading rulers. Before the 20th Century, China was dominated by Manchu Tartars and Mongol Tartars from the Northeast and Northwest ~ the Manchus forcing humiliation upon Chinese men by compelling shaved heads with pigtails. Similar Tartar hordes ruled Russia for centuries and Stalin himself, according to his biographer, might have felt Russia buffered Europe from the Tartars.
Chinese nationalism arose only in the 20th Century, first under the Christian influence of Sun Yatsen and his brother-in-law Chiang Kaishek, later under the atheism of Mao Zedong and his admiring friends, most recently Deng Xiaoping and successors. “Socialism with Chinese characteristics” is the slogan of the present Communist Party but a more realistic slogan of what Mao and friends came to represent in their last decades may be “Chinese nationalism with socialist characteristics”. Taiwan and to lesser extent Singapore and Hong Kong represent “Chinese nationalism with capitalist characteristics”. Western observers, keen always to know the safety of their Chinese investments, have focused on China’s economics, whether the regime is capitalist or socialist and to what extent ~ Indians and other Asians may be keener to identify, and indeed help the Chinese themselves to identify better, the evolving nature of Chinese nationalism and the healthy or unhealthy courses this may now take.
Just as Czarist and Soviet Russia attempted Russification in Finland, the Baltics, Poland, Ukraine etc., Imperial and Maoist China attempted “Sinification” in Manchuria and Inner Mongolia as well as Tibet and Xinjiang (Sinkiang, East Turkestan). Russification succeeded partially but backfired in general. Similarly, Sinification succeeded naturally in Manchuria and without much difficulty in Inner Mongolia. But it has backfired and backfired very badly in Tibet and Xinjiang, and may be expected to do so always.
March 25, 2008 at 10:35 pm
I am afraid I think India is still a gigantically awful place.
March 26, 2008 at 4:25 am
I think this is a great article. The Chinese state has a history of fear of instability because its history has had patches of such great upheaval (the latest being only 40 years ago). Consequently it has developed a sort of “stability insecurity” and instituted heavy-handed means to prevent the possible dissolution of the state as it is.
March 26, 2008 at 8:23 am
I am Chinese and I have a lot of admiration for India. My Indian friends know that not all Chinese think alike. One of the best things that has happened in the last decade has been the twin takeoff of both India and China. This is a great article and expresses of course not the whole truth, but at least enough for China to ponder its ethnic policies. As far as the most recent events are concerned, it is clearly a riot it seems to me and order has to be restored. However, it should serve as a lead for China to rethink its policies, and I am certainly encouraged as China has had a record of meeting most, if not all, of the demands of the people as shown to be the case after June 4 1989.
March 26, 2008 at 9:30 am
“In India, our soft state and indolent corrupt apparatus of political parties constitute nothing like the organized aggressive war-machine”. By way of democracy, colonial rule did bequeath some benefits. China, being a product of its own history, values stability more — comparatively speaking, far more ethnic violence may be erupting in India than in China.
“The Dalai Lama and other Tibetan exiles also have a natural right to be issued Chinese passports enabling them to return to Tibet”. This seems to me naive –without reaching a political settlement, allowing the Dalai Lama to return would merely create confusion and inflame further ethnic tensions. Moreover, allowing elections in Tibet is presently infeasible:
1. Without a shared national consciousness would risk the recent Keyan scenario.
2. The Tibetan votes would be overwhelmed by the Han votes.
3. Tibetans are united because of a charismatic Dalai Lama. Will the next Dalai Lama be like that? If not, then the purpose of allowing the Dalai Lama to return is risky and potentially useless.
Finally, India is a democracy with multi-party elections, which is a great accomplishment but let’s not take it too far: it’s not like other forms of government can work for India, with its multitudes without a preponderantly dominant ethnicity. The tradeoff is inefficiency in the running of the government. India is a democracy because that is clearly, with British influence, the best arrangement. Similarly, China is more authoritarian given its own experience. There is clearly merit in the Chinese focus on economic development regardless of ideological preference for forms of government. Rebellions occurs when people lack jobs. Look no further than the insurgencies in Nagaland and Manipur in a democratic India.
July 24, 2008 at 1:36 am
I thought this is a great article that appears completely unbiased. I did not read anything negative about the Chinese people, instead it was simply a methodical argument about the two systems (both of which are far from being ideal). It appears to me that China can only be considered a serious power when it learns to maturely accept its shortcomings and work on improving itself. Communist China will perish with the next wave of technological & socio economic revolution coming within the next two decades.
September 6, 2008 at 9:17 am
I think China is doing excellently well. I see it with my own eyes. But human rights and freedom are delayed.
September 7, 2009 at 10:54 am
As a Mongolian from Inner Mongolia myself, I am surprised to read Dr Roy sound as if the Mongols in Inner Mongolia are willing to be assimilated by Chinese. Yes, it is relatively calm in Inner Mongolia and Chinese dominant are more apparent in Inner Mongolia in comparison with Tibet and Singkiag. But please note that Mongols in Inner Mongolia are fighting for their rights and struggling to keep their culture. There is almost daily occurrence of the various forms of protests taking place in Inner Mongolia. I sincerely hope that the world will pay a little more attention to the Mongolia cause in Inner Mongolia.