Chinese Press: Batbold Reaffirmed Mongolia Would Adhere to One-China Policy

By , 13 April, 2010, 14 Comments

This has got to be Chinese press at its finest. I cannot fathom any Mongolian person agreeing to One-China policy, certainly not any of our politicians, however faulty they may be.  It’s really unbelievable.  Read on.

Here is the excerpt from the Chinese Press:

Xi said China  would like to work with Mongolia  to expand bilateral cooperation.

Batbold proposed the two countries work more closely in economy, trade, finance, minerals, energy, infrastructure and people-to-people exchanges.

Batbold reaffirmed Mongolia would adhere to the one-China policy.

Batbold was one of 2,000 political and business figures and experts from Asia and around the world who gathered at the island resort in south China’s Hainan Province for the BFA annual session.

Here is the link: China, Mongolia underline stronger cooperation

Probably, the article should read “China agrees to One-Mongolia Policy”, but too bad our economy and population is just too small to make that a reality.  😀

I still can’t believe something like this can be posted on an online website that has the 198th highest usage in the world according to Alexa.

14 Responses {+}
  • Gary Tucker

    RT @MongoliaBiz: Chinese Press: Batbold Reaffirmed Mongolia Would Adhere to One-China Policy http://bit.ly/bjz3dE

  • Mongolia Business

    Chinese Press: Batbold Reaffirmed Mongolia Would Adhere to One-China Policy http://bit.ly/bjz3dE

  • Bathrobe

    I don’t know what was said at the meeting, but I think it’s pretty clear that Mongolia has no choice. Any country that wants to have any kind of relationship with the PRC has to go through the hoops and give ritual recognition Taiwan is part of China (even while hosting a de facto Taiwanese embassy under the name of “Taipei Representative Office” or whatever). Mongolia is in an especially sensitive situation given that China is one of Mongolia’s two sole neighbours, its biggest market, and its shortest outlet to other markets. You’ll notice that when China has troubles in Tibet and Xinjiang, the first people to sympathise should be the Mongolians, but in fact there was only a strained near-silence on the part of the Mongolians when the natives started rebelling against Chinese control. You can’t blame Mongolia for treading carefully — they have no choice.

  • mergen

    @Bathrobe wow, you have very good understanding of Mongolia’s precarious position. Thank you so much for elaborating and adding to the discussion. It really is a very difficult position for Mongolia. …Back when there were riots in Tibet last year, Mongolians really did sympathize with Tibetans but no one really was willing to stand up and say anything. I think you describe it very well that we just really don’t have much choice. Even when Dalai Lama visited Mongolia despite China’s objections, our trains got stuck at the border for “technical” or some other reasons… Still, it’s really hard for Mongolians to have to accept to One-China policy. I am not sure we really HAVE TO accept the One-China policy. If pushed, China can certainly make Mongolia’s life a bit more miserable… sigh…

  • mergen

    Maybe the right decision is the most difficult one? What are your thoughts?

    This definitely is not an easy thing. I am sure China is going to push for one-China, which sees Mongolia as part of their empire.

    What do you think?

  • Manlai

    @mergen

    I guess you have no idea what u talking.

    It’s simple and plain.
    In order to continue good relationship with PROC we have to follow one-china policy recognizing PROC as the one China which having sovereignty over Taiwan.

  • Bathrobe

    Actually, I don’t think most Westerners understand the real background to the One-China policy. It’s not just about Taiwan. Essentially, modern China (both the RoC on Taiwan and the PRC) claim as Chinese territory _all territories that used to belong to the Qing (Manchu) dynasty_. The problem is that this seriously fudges things — the Qing dynasty wasn’t, properly speaking, “China”. While the heart of their empire was in China, the Manchus treated their possessions (China, Tibet, Mongolia, Manchuria, and modern-day Xinjiang) as a multi-ethnic empire, not as “China”. When the modern Chinese took over the Qing territories, they decided that they didn’t just want China, they wanted the lot. That’s the root of China’s massive territorial expanse today, and also of the continued problems with their so-called “ethnic minorities”.

    When the Chinese claim Taiwan (One-China), they do so on the basis that Taiwan belonged to the Qing dynasty, so it by rights belongs to them. The only other Qing territory that China hasn’t got its hands on is Mongolia, which managed to secede with Russia’s help. So the One-China policy would appear to have direct implications for Mongolia.

    But the situation with Mongolia is slightly different from Taiwan. While the ROC on Taiwan still officially claims Mongolia as part of China (although it has pretty much abandoned this stance in reality), the PRC has basically acknowledged that Mongolia is an independent country. To be sure, there is still widespread sentiment in China that Mongolia really belongs to China, but the Chinese government has recognised Mongolian independence. Of course, there is no guarantee that they won’t go back on this, but I don’t think that the One-China policy as it stands has any implications for Mongolia. The territories that the Chinese still claim and that are likely to cause future disputes are the Senkaku Islands (with Japan), the South China Sea (with half of Southeast Asia), and territories along the border with India. Mongolia is not on the list.

    So when the Chinese demand Mongolian support for the One-China policy, I really think it is just part of the diplomatic campaign to get Taiwan back, without deeper implications for Mongolia’s independence.

  • mergen

    @bathrobe hmmm ok, those are some excellent points. I believe I can accept your explanations and points.

    Quick question: what’s the deal with registering of Mongolian throat singing and other items as Chinese?

  • baynaa

    Though they do not say it straight, what China trying so hard is to be “United States of China”. But the point here is without democracy. My heart aches when I hear about the violence in Tibet, discrimination in Inner-Mongolia. This is the real face of totalitarian China, hidden behind the word “One-China”.

    I personally think, it is not important what diplomats say (when they have no choice), but it is important how we act. Let’s take the example of China! What they say and promise is the opposite of what they act. So we should continue welcoming Dalai Lhama to our country for his regular visits, and support Inner-Mongolia to preserve their identity, being home for saving the Tibetian heritage (including language, religion, medicine etc.)

    I liked the idea of “One-Mongolia Policy”. If you see in that sense, we are larger than China. Think about the fact that as of the current territory Mongolia borders only with Mongolian nations — Inner Mongolia to the south, Tuva, Buryat(in Irkutsk and Chita) to the north… and if we add up Khuhnuur, we are far larger than China. But what is more important than the territory is the integrity and vision to keep the identity of One-Mongolia. I want to remind here the example of Tsahim Urtuu for their pioneership in scholarshiping Hazara students to study in Mongolian universities. This can show we can do a lot more that we talk. And to wrap up the idea, we can act the opposite!

  • mergen

    @manlai Now that I think about it, you are probably right. I think I was mainly thrown off by the language used by the Chinese Press. The words Mongolia, adhere, and One-China Policy in the same sentence kind of threw me off. I was afraid the Chinese press used the language to say that Mongolia accepts to being in the “One-China Policy”.

    If we look at the wikipedia page, apparently some unofficial interpretations include Mongolia as part of their One-China Policy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-China_policy

    In any case, I guess this event/news is not a big deal since the event probably just meant that Mongolia agrees to the official One-China Policy that accepts Mongolia as a sovereign nation. I agree with you that Mongolia has little choice on the matter but to support it.

  • Bathrobe

    That’s a fairly simple question.

    In taking over the whole Qing empire, the Chinese have redefined their “nation” as a “multi-ethnic state”. The keystone of this is the concept of “zhonghua minzu” (literally “Chinese ethnicity”). This is not what you normally think of as “Chinese ethnicity”; it consists of all the 56 ethnic groups of China. This includes both the dominant “Han” ethnicity and the 55 “minority” ethnic groups. While historically the Han ethnicity has generally been identified as “Chinese”, the Chinese now insist that _all_ of the ethnic minorities should be called “Chinese”. Under this interpretation, the Tibetans, Mongols, and everyone else is “Chinese”. The dominant Han ethnic group is then called “Han Chinese”.

    One of the minority ethnic groups is the Mongol ethnic group. Since throat-singing is part of the tradition of the Mongol ethnic group, and since the Mongol ethnic group of Inner Mongolia is regarded as Chinese, the Chinese automatically lay claim to any Mongol ethnic tradition as being “Chinese”.

    The idea of “zhonghua minzu” is, in principle, a nice concept that tries to bring all the ethnic groups of China into one harmonious “family”, but when it is applied too zealously, it results in what we see with throat singing — an arrogant attempt to grab neighbouring nations’ ethnic traditions for China. They could at least have had the decency of proposing a shared listing.

    Incidentally, you might be interested to know that there was a big stir in China several years ago when Korea listed the Gangneung Danojie festival with UNESCO as a part of Korean cultural heritage. Unfortunately, the Korean festival originally came from China’s Duanwu festival, although there are apparently many differences in the way it is celebrated. This caused an outcry from many Chinese about Korea stealing China’s cultural legacy. Perhaps some overzealous Chinese nationalists felt that, given that Korea stole China’s cultural heritage, China may as well lay claim to Mongolia’s….

  • mergen

    @baynaa thanks for the support of the One-Mongolia idea. I think Mongolia would greatly benefit from uniting Mongolians from all over the world and having everyone work together better. It would be really interesting to explore all of the NGO’s, Organizations, and other groups working to unite Mongolians all over the world.

    Do you know any organizations already working on uniting every organization and group who are working on uniting Mongolians?

    PS: the scholarships for the Hazara students was definitely a really thoughtful and great thing to do, I think.

  • baynaa

    @mergen

    I didn’t hear any of that kind of organization, but I think formar and current members of Tsahim Urtuu who holds senior positions in NTV and MUIS are backing up Tsahim Urtuu with the idea. You may remember the TV program “World Mongol Ail” on NTV, a travel report from the trip seeking Mongolians around the world. This was another message. I wouldn’t be surprised if they reform the current relationship into an foundation, or NGO.

  • Bathrobe

    Personally speaking, I like the idea of pan-Mongolism — not the type that tries to reconquer Buryatia, Tuva, and Inner Mongolia for a greater Mongolian state (that is probably impossible, anyway), but a pan-Mongolism in culture and cooperation. I was disappointed to find that Mongolia’s current ethnic identity is highly exclusionist and xenophobic. Mongolians like to use the term “Ikh Mongol”, but the modern Mongolian state is nothing more than “Jijig Mongol”. Out of defensiveness over their nation and ethnicity, many Mongolians even try to deny Mongol status to Inner Mongolians and Buryats of Russia. This kind of narrow nationalism only hurts Mongolia. Contrast it with China’s “Zhonghua minzu”, which is confident and expansive and tries to bring all ethnicities under its roof. China is confident and aggressive. Mongolia is defensive and aggressively exclusionist. A shame.

Leave a Reply

*