Background on Xinjiang and Chinese Policies in the Region (1800s-2001)
Uyghurs are an ethnic minority of Turkic origin and Islamic faith that live in Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR, or Xinjiang) in China, which today accounts for one-sixth of its land mass. As of 1998, Uyghurs comprised 45 percent of the 18.5 million citizens in Xinjiang; the Han Chinese comprised 40.58 percent of Xinjiang’s population. Two cultures, the Han Chinese represented by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the Uyghurs (the largest minority group in China), provide two different interpretations of the history of the formation and maintenance of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR). The CCP and Chinese scholars argue that Xinjiang has always been a part of China.
Xinjiang has been under political contestation since the late eighteenth century, when the Qing reconquered the area. Political unrest became increasingly prominent since the late-1800s and sporadically manifests into violent opposition, especially during the late-1980s and early-1990s. From the 1820s to the 1870s, the Uyghurs posed a significant challenge to Qing conquests in the area until the Qing re-conquered the majority of the land. In 1884, the Manchu Qing empire brought Xinjiang under its control and incorporated it into the Chinese empire. The Manchus appointed hereditary princes and staffed local ethnicities, but never exercised much more than minimal authority in the area. After the dissolution of the Qing dynasty, neither Uyghurs nor Chinese ruled Xinjiang. The Soviet Union exercised some influence in the area. In the beginning of the twentieth century, sporadic violent uprisings occurred, but none that made a serious impact on the Chinese state.
The first documented incidents of violent separatist activity on behalf of the Uyghurs occurred between 1932–33, when ethnically Chinese Muslims and Uyghurs attempted to separate from the Chinese state and temporarily established an East Turkistan Republic. However, this resistance was crushed by February 1934, when the Chinese Nationalists (Guomingdang, or GMD) reestablished control over in the area. In 1944, Uyghurs attempted once again to rebel against the Chinese state. Uyghurs established an “East Turkistan Republic,” which lasted until the Chinese Communist Party re-conquered the area in 1949. These sporadic violent outbursts that were aimed at establishing Turkish republics, James Millward argues, reflected “more the general anarchy of the warlord period (1916–1928) and the weight of Soviet influence than any…Islamic or even ethnonationalist motivation.”
By 1949, the GMD were ousted from control and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) tried to quell and control Uyghur uprisings, and were largely successful. The PRC did not actively promote ethnically oriented policies towards the Uyghurs early on, but by the Great Leap Forward (1958–61) policies called for rapid cultural homogenization, and as many as 60,000 Uyghurs had been displaced. PRC policies began to have an assimilationist undertone, ethnicity was deemed an obstacle to progress, and Han in-migration increased. Assimilationist and intolerant attitudes towards non-Hans increased throughout the 1960s and became the most extreme during the Cultural Revolution (1966–76).
After Mao Zedong’s reign over China ended in 1976, Deng Xiaoping relaxed the assimilationist aspects of cultural policy and brought more non-Hans back into government positions. This relaxation spurred demonstrations from the Uyghurs against the PRC. Tensions escalated and climaxed with several riots and protests in the 1990s. For example, a major Islamic-inspired insurrection in Baren county that was originally against family planning, weapons testing, and oil exploitation morphed into a violent uprising “with calls for ‘jihad’ and the overthrow of communism.” Shortly after, China reacted with a crackdown on political activity with “Strike Hard” campaigns aimed at sweeping up political infidels.
Uyghur unrest resurfaced in the form of violent outbreaks in the 1990s, and prompted China to initiate its “Strike Hard” campaign in April 1996. Their Islamic faith has put Uyghurs at odds with the Chinese government. Their religion has also made them susceptible to being labeled as religious terrorists who want to secede from China and establish an independent Islamic state called East Turkistan.
Strangely, prior to 2001, the Chinese state gave little lip service to anything related to East Turkistan. Anyone who even used the term could be subject to arrest. The September 11, 2001 (9/11) terrorist attacks on several United States targets altered Chinese domestic and foreign policy, and reinvigorated China’s drive to counter terrorist, separatist, and splittist movements within and around its borders. In 2002, both the United States and the United Nations placed an organization known as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM), a radical militant organization that uses violence to try to establish a separate Turkic republic, on the international terrorist watch list. Post-9/11 policies and strategies are more widely publicized in both national and international media than those of the 1990s.
Sources:
Graham E. Fuller and S. Frederick Starr, The Xinjiang Problem (Baltimore, Maryland: Central Asia-Caucasus Institute at John Hopkins University, 2004)
Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region Bureau of Statistics, Xinjiang Tongji Nianjian, 2001 (Xinjiang statistical yearbook, 2001) (Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2001)
Information Office of the State Council Of the People’s Republic of China, White Paper: History and Development of Xinjiang, May 2003, Beijing, http://www.china.org.cn/e-white/20030526/
Yongjiu Gao and Shangzhe Liu, “Lun ‘dongtu’ kongbu nuli dui guojia liyi de weixie yu pohuai” [On the "East Turkistan" terrorist forces in the national interests and the threat of destruction], Xinjiang shehui kexue [Social Sciences in Xinjiang] (May 2005)
Christian Tyler, China’s Wild West: The Taming of Xinjiang (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 2004)
James Millward, “Violent Separatism in Xinjiang: A Critical Assessment,” Policy Paper 6 (Washington, D.C.: East West Center Washington, 2004)
David Wang, The East Turkistan Movement in Xinjiang: A Chinese Potential Source of Instability? EAI Background Brief No.7, East Asian Institute, (Singapore: National University of Singapore, 1998)
Gardner Bovingdon, “Autonomy in Xinjiang: Han Nationalist Imperatives and Uyghur Discontent,” Policy Paper 11
(Washington, D.C.: East West Center Washington, 2005)
Dewardric L. McNeal, China’s relations with Central Asian states and problems with terrorism CRS report for Congress, RL31213. (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 2002)
July 9th, 2009 at 5:45 am
An interesting factual account, well done. I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts, as someone who is living in China currently, on what the attitude toward the XUAR is now.
July 9th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
I am sorry but you’ve got all the facts wrong. Where did you get this material?
Take a look at this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Great_Campaigns
The Uyghurs are not the indiginous people of Xinjiang. Nobody really is. This is a big open flat desert land on the silk road, and a cross-road of different ethnic groups. Different races came and went; they fought and mingled with each other here throughout history. The Uyghurs are a Turkic people originated some where in northern Mongolia and Siberia, just like all the Turkic people. Of cause, that was more than 1000 years ago. But some Turkics still live by the Arctic ocean in the Russian far east today. Most of them fled Tang Dynasty and later the Mongols, and went West. Some made it all the way to the near east, destroied the Byzantine Empire, i.e. what was left of the Roman civilization, founded the notorious Ottoman Empire, committed a whole bunch of crimes against humanity (e.g. the Armenian Genocide during WWI). The Uyghurs are just the ones with relatively less mobility, and settled in Xinjiang.
But Xinjiang was dominated by Lamaist Mongolian tribes, especially by the Dzungars, for hundreds of years until the 18th century. The Uyghurs at the time were marginalized and pushed the to south of Xinjiang against the Tibetan plateau. This all changed in the 1750s when Empirer Qianlong led his Manchu army to wipe out the Dzungars. Qianlong moved the Uyghurs (plus a mix of other Muslim) to filled the vacuum after his genocide against the Dzungars. The name “Xinjiang” was also coined at this time by Qianlong. So that was when Xinjiang finally all converted to Islam. But once the Uyghur gained their foothold in Xinjiang, they started a jihad against the Manchu, and then got decimated by Qianlong of course. All these Manchurian wars and genocides in the 18th century had a nice name, “the peacification of Xinjiang.”
The Uyghur population reached its peak percentage-wise when the communist Chinese got there, making up roughly 75% of all peoples of Xinjiang. But really the Uyghur dominace of the region only happened in the last two hundred years or so. They have no more legitimate claim as indiginous people to their land than whites in North America.
As to the Han Chinese, we are definitely not the first people in Xinjiang. But we are probably one of the earlier peoples to bring civilization there, we are definitely one the first to record its history. The silk was of great interest to us before sea routes to the Middle East were established. So we dominate the area on and off for nearly a millenium after we defeated the Huns in the 2nd century before Christ, especially during Han and Tang Dynasties. A lot of the now Uyghur towns and cities were initially founded by Han Chinese, and later occupied by Mongols and all sorts of peoples. For Example Urumqi started out as Luntai Country of the Tang Empire. The greatest Chinese poet, Li Bai, who coincidentally wrote some of the most racist poems (e.g. 胡无人) against 胡人 “the rude western tribes”, was born in present-day Kyrgyzstan during Tang Dynasty.
After some major technological breakthoughs in navigation in Song Dynasty 1000 years ago(the invention of megnatic compus, etc.), we Chinese lost interest in that desert. After all, we were the people who were used to buiding and hiding behind the Great Wall. International trading was mainly done by sea. So Xinjiang fell to different nomadic tribes, and eventually to Muslims.
I have no idea where you got the idea ” In 1884, the Manchu Qing empire brought Xinjiang under its control and incorporated it into the Chinese empire. ” It is all BS. If you really want to know the story behind this place, read some history.
July 9th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Read some history from, like, Wikipedia?
“destroied the Byzantine Empire” (sic)
“committed a whole bunch of crimes against humanity”
It’s gripping stuff, Wildean even…
July 9th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
Where did I get this material? Please check the long sources list at the bottom of my entry. If you should like me to cite even more sources, I can list more for you, all in CMOS format.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:05 am
Hi Tom. Sorry about my spelling. It should be evident to you that I’m not used to writing in English. But what really matters is not my spelling, but my message: Historically the Turkic people were not peaceful. They are typically on the delivering end of racial violence. The Uyghurs have a extremely violent side as well, which manifested itself in Urumqi a couple of days ago, and resulted in 156 deaths.
Thanks again for correcting my spelling.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:15 am
Hello Miss. Chang. If I haven’t said so, thank you for your brilliant article. I appreciate the time and effort you put in. And I’m sorry for being so uncharitable. But if you can, please do list more, and please make some footnotes, because you really don’t show me which single piece of information comes from which source. I believe footnotes are a requirement for any serious scholarly paper in CMOS style. It is not helpful to the readers, if you just compile a list of every book or paper you came across on this topic, and put it at the back.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:28 am
And Mr. Herbert, I read Chinese history in Chinese because I can, and because that’s how most of the original texts were written. I doubt it would be very useful to you if I list my sources. Also, how could reading history from Wikipedia any worse than reading history from a blog post?
July 16th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
[...] Shared Background on Xinjiang and Chinese Policies in the Region (1800s-2001) [...]
July 16th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Roadblock,
Sometimes you come off as hostile towards my viewpoints, as if they are invalid. However, I welcome your feedback, even if you disagree with me most of the time.
If this were an academic article for publication, I would edit this post with footnotes, but this is just a blog. I don’t see many news articles or blog posts that even cite sources; if so, they do what I did and put them at the end. I posted this because I am frustrated with recent news coverage in both Western and Chinese media regarding Xinjiang–lots of misinformation, lots of political play. I feel that my interpretation is more balanced (albeit nothing is ever completely neutral) and investigates the issue further back than media coverage out there.
Despite what you say, I never stated that Uyghurs were indigenous to Xinjiang. I just said that they currently live there. Regarding the line you think is BS (In 1884, the Manchu Qing empire brought Xinjiang under its control and incorporated it into the Chinese empire), check:
James Millward, “Violent Separatism in Xinjiang: A Critical Assessment,” Policy Paper 6 (Washington, D.C.: East
West Center Washington, 2004), 3.
“Conquest by the Manchu Qing empire in the mid-eighteenth century brought the territories now known as Xinjiang under Qing rule.”
and
Joseph Esherick, “How the Qing Became China,” in Empire to Nation: Historical Perspectives on the Making of the Modern World, eds. Joseph Esherick et al. (Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2006), 231–2.
“It was only under the Manchus that Mongolia, Tibet, and the Muslim areas of Xinjiang…were incorporated into the empire.”
I admit, the date 1884 is a little arbitrary. I wouldn’t mind reforming my previous statement to say mid-eighteenth century.
Where are your sources?
July 16th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
@Roadblock
“Historically the Turkic people were not peaceful.”
I do not think any civilization on this planet has ever been “historically peaceful.” Do you think Chinese people are “historically” peaceful?
July 23rd, 2009 at 6:00 pm
1884 was the year when the Chinese authorities officially set up “Xinjiang Province”, which was after China was fed the Western notion of sovereign nation state. People typically point to that year at an attempt to delegitimize Chinese rule in that area. But Xinjiang was taken under the control of Qing Dynasty long before that. This point shouldn’t be hard to understand. Hawaii was not a state of the US until 1959. So you could make an awkward statement that Hawaii was not incorporated into the US until 1959. Nonetheless, there should be no deny that Pearl Harbor 1941 was an attack on the US.
If you are interested in original historical material on Xinjiang, see if you can find this: 《新疆私议》沈垚. If you can read that, I’m sure you could find all other relevant texts on your own.
I hope you are reasonable enough to agree with me that everyone is different, and that some people are just more prone to violence than others. I know it’s not a politically correct thing to say, but it is true.