M-mG-GÛÅ-Çtï¾-zºÛ-¤Û-¼ÛGÅ-Å-DôPÅ-¼P-BôP-Ç+ô¼-HÛ-hïz-Mz-Á-h;¼-qôü

• ¤Û-¼ÛGÅ-Å-DôPÅ-¼P-BôP-Ç+ô¼-HÛ-hïz-Mz-Á-h;¼-qôü
• Download story audio

{}ü üM-mG-GŸÝP-GÛÅ-Zï-V¼-Çtï¾-zºÛ-¤Û-¼ÛGÅ-Å-DôPÅ-¼P-BôP-¿YôPÅ-ŸïÅ-qºÛ-hïz-Mz-Á-h;¼-qô¼-zôh-GmÅ-¤DÅ-hzP-¶ï-¼m-ŤÛf-»ÛÅ-h‚ï-ŸÛz-ˆÛ-¯ô¤-ŸÛG-ƒÛÅ-q-hï-zÅôh-m¤Å-¿Ë-¤ô-¾GÅ-mÅ-wz-zNå¼-hP-ljm-Oôm-ŸÝÅ-»ôhüü

CHINA ISSUES NEW WHITE PAPER ON ETHNIC REGIONAL AUTONOMY The Chinese Government's Information Office of the State Council has issued a new White Paper on ethnic regional autonomy. The title of the White Paper is "Regional Autonomy for Ethnic Minorities in China." A Chinese government White Paper is a statement of official government policy. This is the second White Paper on China's ethnic autonomy system. In 2000 China issued a White Paper titled "National Minorities Policy and Its Practice in China," which differs little from the new White Paper. China has published six White Papers on Tibet, the most on any subject. The latest White Paper on Tibet was published in 2004. The title is "Regional Ethnic Autonomy in Tibet." Both the last White Paper on Tibet and the latest one on ethnic autonomy attempt to justify China's system of autonomy for minority nationalities. All of the White Papers claim that the system is appropriate for China, that it has worked well and that, therefore, it will not be changed. The message in regard to Tibet is that China will make no concessions in regard to Tibetan autonomy. The latest Chinese White Paper on ethnic autonomy follows the style of the previous White Paper on Tibet in using the terminology "ethnic regional autonomy" rather than "national regional autonomy" as was the case until recently. The change apparently reflects an attempt to downgrade all China's minorities from nationalities to mere ethnic groups. The change in terminology is significant since nations have the right to national self-determination in international law whereas ethnic groups do not. The new White Paper maintains that China's system of ethnic regional autonomy was voluntarily chosen by the minorities in question, that it accurately reflects China's actual conditions, and that it has been proven in practice to guarantee the right of minorities to independently manage their own affairs. The White Paper says that the system meets the desires of all ethnic groups in China, that it suits the actual situation in China, that it guarantees equal rights for all ethnic minorities, that it preserves the unification of the Chinese motherland and ethnic unity, that it furthers economic development and that it has won the sincere support of all the ethnic groups in China. Chinese news releases accompanying the new White Paper claim that China is characterized by the absence of ethnic conflict because all China's nationalities are accustomed to intermixture and cooperation. They say that Chinese government policy toward minorities is solely concerned with their economic development and raising their economic and cultural levels to a level equal to that of the majority. These news releases also indicate that China acknowledges no problems with its nationalities policy and anticipates no changes in that policy. In reply to the demand of Tibetans in exile that China must negotiate with the Dalai Lama in order to resolve the Tibet issue, China seems to be saying that there is no Tibet issue about which it needs to negotiate with the Dalai Lama or anyone else. Also accompanying the release of the new White Paper, and in relation to the opening of the annual session of China's National People's Congress, was a call from China's top security chief, Luo Gan, for repression of hostile forces, including those agitating for an independent Tibet. Luo's call for the repression of hostile forces, by which China means all separatists as well as their foreign supporters, would seem to indicate that China is not in the mood to deviate from its hard line on Tibet. The latest Chinese White Paper on nationality autonomy, as well as last year's White Paper on Tibet, reveal that China is absolutely unyielding on any alterations to its ethnic regional autonomy system. China justifies the system as satisfying the desires of both China's minorities and the majority, but, in fact, the system is satisfactory only to the Han Chinese majority. China claims that the system actually allows minorities to control their own affairs, a claim that is far from the truth, especially for those minorities like Uighurs and Tibetans who pose a security threat to the Chinese state. China praises the autonomy system for providing an equitable solution to China's nationality issues, but what it has actually done is to repress all nationality issues for the sake of China's national unity. China has not allowed any autonomy that would threaten the unity of China. In regard to Tibet that has meant almost any autonomy at all. Despite China's claim that its autonomy system has guaranteed the rights of minorities and satisfied their needs to preserve their cultures, the actual goal has been to repress separatism, to protect China's unity and to assimilate minorities to Chinese culture. China has now identified most aspects of Tibetan culture as separatist and has imposed severe restrictions on many Tibetan religious and cultural practices. China has identified Tibetan national identity as an inherent threat to China's national unity and has apparently determined to repress all manifestations of Tibet's separate national identity. China praises itself for its economic development policy in Tibet and other minority areas, but the ultimate goal of economic development is to assimilate Tibetans and other minorities to Chinese culture. Economic development also furthers Chinese colonization of Tibet and Xinjiang under the guise of economic assistance to frontier areas. China's ethnic autonomy policy in theory is aimed at allowing minorities to rule themselves and preserve their cultures if they choose to do so. In practice, however, the policy is relentlessly assimilationist, as has been revealed by its actual application. Throughout Chinese history, including the period of the PRC, China has pursued an assimilationist policy for the sake of national unity. China's most recent White Papers indicate that this policy has not and will not change. The Chinese message to Tibet and Tibetans is that China will not allow any expansion of Tibet's autonomous rights nor will it negotiate about Tibetan autonomy with the Dalai Lama. 03/04/05