 |
| Tiananmen Square 28th October 2013 |
Beginning with the Tiananmen Square incident on 28th
October 2013, the Xinjiang Province in China has been witness to a number of recent
attacks where many lives have ended and many questions have been raised ‘Who is
carrying out these attacks?’ and ‘Why are the attacks happening in the first
place?’ To understand these events and the motives behind them it is important
to recognise the location in which they are taking place.
Xinjiang is in the North West of China and is the largest of
all the Chinese provinces. Xinjiang borders Russia, Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India.
The province is home to many number of ethnic groups the largest being the
Uyghur people followed by the Han Chinese. These two ethnic groups have not
always seen eye to eye, mainly due to the majority of the Uyghur population
seeking autonomy from the rest of China and the Han supporting the Chinese
state in their attempt to modernise the region. The Xinjiang province is of
particular importance to China as it shares boarders with eight different
countries, giving the province a particular geopolitical significance. In some
parts Xinjiang’s boarders have been militarised, namely the Afghanistan and
Pakistan boarders. As western forces begin to withdraw from Afghanistan and the
surrounding area, Xinjiang’s boarders have been secured as a precaution. It is
believed that if radical separatist joined with terrorist insurgents from
Pakistan and Afghanistan then China could be facing a cross-border conflict
that it would much rather avoid.
The response from Chinese leadership has not only been
increased boarder control but also a strict crackdown on perceived separatism
and other activities that they believe might inspire such ideology. The
crackdown has introduced religious restrictions for those practicing Islam, which
happens to be the religion of the Uyghur people, who make up almost half the
population in China’s largest province, and have been seeking greater autonomy
for many years. So to stop the spread of terrorism, the leadership has decided
to alienate a population, restrict their rights, and give them a reason to
resent authority.
I think the phrase ‘playing with fire’ would probably be an
understatement in this context.
Vice News correspondent Jordan Larson reminded us in his
article “Strike Out! Police in China Are Rounding Up and Destroying Matches”
restrictions on the Uyghur are nothing new. “Informants are paid to point
out women wearing the hijab and men sporting long beards, Islamic education for
children is banned, and children are prohibited from entering mosques during
Ramadan. The government also recently banned civil servants and students
in the region from fasting for Ramadan.”
To add to the controversy on 25th June 2009
around 100 Uyghur were killed over accusations that 2 Han women had been raped
by six Uyghur men; there was no evidence to support this claim. Ten days later
on the 5th July 2009 Uyghur protesters were ‘massacred’ by Chinese authorities, the authorities claimed
that 46 Uyghur were killed, however, eye-witnesses claimed the death toll was
closer to 1000.
On top of all this, demolition in
the old city of Kashgar has been approved by local (Chinese) authorities. Around
50,000 Uighurs will be displaced and moved to new apartment blocks. This
is in the name of earthquake protection, which would be an understandable
reason to advise people to leave their homes but it appears as though the
national leadership has an ulterior motive; one that seeks greater control over
cultural practices by replacing the Uighur’s traditional way of life with the
consumer culture of modern China.
Xei Tao - a political science professor at Beijing
Foreign Studies University - believes
that the Chinese government must rethink its
approach to domestic terrorism "The US did the same thing, and something
probably even more stupid . . . look at Guantanamo bay, look at
US invasion in Afghanistan and Iraq."
China likes to keep its national
and international policy regarding many things particularly close to its chest,
and there aren't many ways to know what they will do in the future to suppress
any potency behind domestic extremism. In a recent article by Tom Philips at
the Telegraph, Chinese officials declared a “people’s war” on terrorism and have
begun a PR campaign to possibly avoid criticism from foreign observers. They
intend to increase security measures in an attempt to regain the confidence of
the Han population, but heightening suspicion is likely to further alienate the
Uyghur population.
In their attempts to secure China from the influence of external
terrorism they have bullied, intimidated, and marginalised an ethnic group that
makes up almost half the population of their largest province. The
discrimination and cultural control have resulted in provoking the Uyghur
population and possibly radicalising a small percentage of them. The Chinese leadership must come to
understand that their current approach to domestic terrorism is likely to
escalate into a long drawn out struggle that will result in more suffering and
possibly increased support for the separatist movement in Xinjiang.
References
