“We will never allow anyone, any organization, or political party to tear any part of our region at any time or in any way.” Said.
In his 2016 speech, Xi said, “Our serious commitment to history and people,” China will never break apart.
Concerns about separatism can be seen in the difficult policies adopted by Beijing in Xinjiang, Tibet and Hong Kong, and in an increasingly aggressive stance against the self-governing island of Taiwan, which Xi promised to merge with the mainland. If necessary.
Carrie Lam, the city’s general manager, said the law would “ensure the long-term prosperity and stability of Hong Kong.”
States and separatists
Separatism is a worldwide norm, regardless of the importance of “self-determination” as the principle of international law that many peoples around the world want for their country.
“Since the end of the Cold War, a global norm has strengthened the cartographic stasis, which was freezing instead of the map, as in the late 20th century,” Keating said. Said. “Although the norms on the map have increased in ethnic and religious conflicts, this norm is valid.”
Nowhere is this norm stronger or stronger than China.
The same is true for other parts of China, such as Tibet and Xinjiang, which are called integral by the government. While these regions were often under China’s control or influence, they were part of a larger imperial system, which was completely removed from modern nations.
“The borders of modern China do not correspond to the historical borders of the common culture of the ethnic Chinese (or Han) people, or to the borders of the premodern Chinese state,” writes Esherick, “How Qing became China.”
“Half of today’s Chinese territory was bought by the conquest of the ruling house during the Qing dynasty, which was a dynasty where Manchu went beyond the Great Wall, not Han China. Most of this expansion took place only in the 18th century.”
Sam Crane, head of Asian studies at Williams College, said that many provinces and territories that paid tribute to the Qing Empire would not be accepted by China as part of China or Chinese civilization.
“The imperial political control has not received a singular, common, modern national identity,” he said. “By 1949, the claim that Tibet and Uighurs are part of the” Chinese nation “is established to a much greater extent than Qing’s, and therefore the relevant political bets that demand more autonomy are much higher.”
The idea of a modern nation state – a person united by common culture, language or ethnicity – has traditionally been fixed in a series of agreements in the mid-17th century when the Holy Roman Empire recognized the independence of the two non-monarchic. states, Switzerland and the Netherlands
According to Keating, this is the point where nation states have become “the most important units in international politics” after the point where nation states have become more important than governments or empires with the rise of nationalism across the continent.
This did not happen immediately, and the disintegration of the great empires of Europe would not be complete until the 20th century. In Asia, the understanding of empire did not appear to change in a similar direction until challenged by new ambitious nation states such as Qing, New Britain, France and Japan.
Despite adopting the imperial borders, since the fall of Qing, China has completely reinvented itself as a modern nation-state and has developed the idea of an unlimited Chineseness, a language and education system that transcends its borders. China.
The concept of the nation-state has also been extended backwards over time, so that ancient imperial regions such as Tibet and Xinjiang have become “part of the country since ancient times,” whose traditional peoples had little ethnic or linguistic or cultural ties to those in eastern China. As Liu and other Chinese officials argue.
“It was the assumption that Pandora would open the dangerous separatism box, if the departure movements were allowed to succeed,” said Keating, who wrote about the global norm in favor of the status quo.
This is especially true in China, where a single pro-independence domino can initiate a series of territorial unrest.
Beijing addressed the desire for independence in Xinjiang and Tibet, in part by promoting the mass immigration of Han China to both regions, as well as advancing education, language and religion Sinemation policies. The changing ethnicity of both areas makes it difficult to defend the right to self-determination, based on the idea of racial or cultural difference compared to China, where millions of Han Chinese live in both regions.
Hong Kong and Taiwan threaten the status quo differently. Both are predominantly Han China, and their dislike against Beijing in these areas is based on the rejection of the political system on the mainland, not nationalism. To be completely independent in both regions, this could undermine legitimacy claims, as the PRC was based on the idea that a historic China always existed and should always be.
Challenging this idea is controversial everywhere – as in China as Scotland in China, Spain over Catalonia or Russia and Ukraine over Crimea. But as Keating wrote: “The countries in the world are not good on their own; they are beneficial to the extent that they help provide security and general well-being for the people as well as for the people who live in them.
“When they can’t do that, our first urge should be to ask how they can be improved, not just to indicate that they should be protected.”
Analyst. Amateur problem solver. Wannabe internet expert. Coffee geek. Tv guru. Award-winning communicator. Food nerd.