DEVELOPMENT AS LOCALIZATION : Ethnic minorities in China

V. Elena Barabantseva  (2009) “DEVELOPMENT AS LOCALIZATION :

Ethnic Minorities in China’s Official Discourse on the Western Development Project”

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14672710902809393

• China presenting itself as having ambitious socio economic construction. Its Western Development Project (WDP) shows interdependence between development and ethnicity. WDP has had enthnicity ascribed to it as well as unequal regional development, increased security concerns, unequal development. These type of discourse prevents minorities from being fully participants in the transformation.
• Expansion in China took new meaning under Deng Xiaoping (1978). This essay looks at how ethnic minorities The WDP was a strategy to address the difference in development in East and West. The right to development is related to population quality which designates higher value. China also advocated humanistic modernisation        where all chinese should work for the benefits of China’s modernization aims. In this wider context WDP aims to make ethnic minorities accomplished citizens. Approached used is “discourse analysis” -> which focuses on discursive production of knowledge presented as truth. He wants to uncover established order of discursive formation by uncovering what underlies it and makes it possible. Pays attention to exclusions, hyrachies, limitations, and stereotypes that fix the discourse as natural.  He contents that ethnic minorities remain on the margins. Localising ethnic minorities blocks them as being recognised as modern citizens participating fully in economic transformations .
• Modernisation, Citizenship and localisation -  Key goals for growth – Deng (Seek truths from facts) , Jiang Zemins (Three represents) and Hu Jintao’s (build a harmonious society) – prioritised different aspects of society. Den was green light to capitalism, Hu saw balanced and more scientific development including bringing development to country side and western side. Aims based on Mao’s goals to build a well off society by 2020 and modernisation complete by 2050. Economic development has been the core driver with GDP the KPI, the level of participation in this goal demarcates citizenship. In china ethnicity is stamped in documents and dictates range of rights and entitlements – minorities have more relaxed one child policy and certain educational privilages – but there are designated ethnic areas. China’s leaders maintain particularities of localization through cultures and social practices. Those with localized identities find it hard to participate.
• Offical perspectives on WDP – Jiang Zemin proposed the dev of West in 1999. Deng had though of developing the east and then dragging through the West. It didn’t work and exacerbated regional differences. WDP has no single policy document. It is really an aspiration goal, around infrastructure, attract investment, and to a lesser extent promote social engineering and environmental initiatives. Twenty airports, diversion of natural gas and electricity, highways, rail, and water conservation projects. Clearly have short term eco benefits however not sure if they will -> integration of east/west. Reason for projects in WDP is to develop productive forces in minority region and provide jobs however labour inc comes from east. (some thought this was a good thing to upskill west). Idea was that the west would be led by higher order culture of east. Tourism was presented as major touchstones for the west however many argue that this presents a “exotic and traditional China”. Wilk argues “difference is built upon temporal rhythms, spatial hyrachies, and essentialised age and gender”. There is something homogenising in how minority difference is articulated. An important goal articulated in the WDP is an attempt to pacify (for example Tibet). Addressing security concerns has been urgent.
• The ethnic character of the WDP – Ethnic policies are important.  Was always positioned as something that would narrow the development gap. When WDP was established there were changes to law on regional national autonomy (LRNA) to ensure that state provided assistance to autonomous ethnic minorities rather than assisting them to modernise. Revised -> confirmation of central government role in regulating every aspect of life. Govt sponsored set of essays by scholars on ethnic issues and then by officials looking at this area. Li suggested that inequalities were the main restriction to resolution of the ethnic question. Fei Xiaotong (famous anthro) suggestest WDP is second key act in formation of China’s minority work – allows minorities to develop their own culture. Another topic often comment on is the difference in mentality between east and west – west is encouraged to open up to socialist market eco. Zhou Zian suggests that traditional mentality is main obstacle to growth.
• How ethnic is China’s West?  To many the main characterisation of West is its ethnicity. 46 out of 55 ethnic minorities. Many ethnic groups inhabit east however – ethnic groups in all developed areas. In 1990 24 million ethnic minorities did not live in autonomous areas and majority Han has been inflltrating West since 1950’s.. Even in predominanty minority areas  the Han majority predominates. Therefore this type of labelling creates an artificial concept of ethnic minorities with associated derogatory characterists. Also GDP evidence does not support concept that it is the least developed area – particularly when looking at GDP per capita figures. Makes you wonder if eco dev was primary motive. Income disparity hs been fixed as a norm by official sources. Many poor areas in Han dominated areas. This characterisation -> state sponsored subsidisation. Share of foreign capital has been insignificant (1.62% vs 86% in east).

Localisation, ethnicity, and citizenship – Some refer to the West as the wellsprint of culture, others the cradle of Chinese civilisation. Yet official and scholarly language reflects more economic incentives and consolidation of power. Ethic minorities are construed as “problematic” with differences -> conflict. They are assigned a denigrated position in development and seen as not engaged with modernisation (a fact that is statistically incorrect). The state encouraged transnational ties with minorities as part of WDP – did not always work out.