Duly Noted: The Inevitable Rise of Islamism in Xingjian


George Handlery about the week that was. To Moscow with Love. Is one law for all “discrimination”? From autonomy to separatism. Criminal is what is not understood. Who to support? Conformity in culture and its rewards. Limited power is the test of lived democracy.
1. Obama in Moscow. In dealing with foreign cultures, it is crucial to know their MO and their assumptions. The liberal bias is that people shaped by other political systems are “like we are”. The related problem is that it becomes hard to accept that “looking in the eyes” of the other guy reveals little about his substance. What you see might be your own reflected image. Given the background of Obamists, the inclination to err in the direction of such projections is considerable. Regarding the Moscow visit, the problem is not the well-phrased intention to “reset” relations. The difficulty is that Obama operates under self-imposed pressure. He must bring home something that can be spinned as success.
Therefore, the need arises to pay a price plus a bonus, for an agreement. With that the advantage is on Moscow’s side. The expressed intent to reduce nuclear arsenals is a flashy but symbolic act. The reductions are mutual and the measure is (fortunately?) of no material consequence. The weapons left are much more than what would be needed in any nuclear war. It is likely that one of the coins used to pay Moscow for its smiles will be the missile shield in Eastern Europe. Militarily, the planned installations in Poland and the Czech Republic are about peanuts. At best, the system protects an officially uncaring Europe from Iran’s nuclear extortion. Politically, however, the concession of not erecting this system is in the “million” column. Everybody, Moscow included, knows that the “shield” would have been useless against Russia. Thus, the concession would hardly be a bow before the Kremlin’s security needs. On the other hand, dropping the project can be taken to be a signal. Decoded: Washington recognizes the area of proposed deployment to be part of a special interest zone that Russia inherited from the USSR and its conquests.
2. China’s troubles in Xinjiang are a useful object to make points. Some – such as the readers of DN’s European version – might be reluctant to accept them in comparable cases that are nearer to home. Proximity enhances prejudice. Xingjian, inhabited by about 8-9 million Uighurs, has been for some time in the news but failed to make the headlines. The land of the Uighurs – Eastern Turkistan – is again part of China since the foundation of the PRC. Uighurs are not Han Chinese by language, culture, religion and ethnicity. There is some formal nominal autonomy limited by a “Socialist” reality and a “Chinese content”. Peking perceives a threat of separatism in acknowledged diversity. Therefore, to avoid a major future problem, a minor immediate one is created. In theory, a civilized option is available. It would be to attach Xingjian to China by making the indigenous feel better in China than as a part of any other entity. It can be done. Just think of the ethnic Italian and French in Switzerland. These have excellent reasons to prefer to be a Swiss Canton to becoming a province of France or Italy. Instead, Peking is sending Han to Xinjiang to create a new ethnic majority there. By virtue of their race, the new settlers are predestined to be committed to China. Changing the demographic balance – securing a conquest by settlers – creates, as in the case of Tibet and elsewhere, resentment. The threatened indigenous majority begrudges policies that intend to make it a minority in its own homeland. In the case of such conflicts, the provoked instinct for self-preservation leads to the emphasis of a defining trait that differentiates native and intruder most clearly. In this case, this factor is Islam. Since hardly any country is willing to support the Uighur’s cause, Islamism, as a movement without a state, lends growing support and ideology while it also underscores identity. Globally and locally, this is hardly a desirable development even if it happens to be a natural one.
3. A long-lasting negative derivate of the crisis might not be apparent to readers that live in an economy that has traditionally been (USA) inward directed. Border-transcending transactions and businesses, as well as corresponding financing arrangements, are an unavoidable derivate of our global economic system. At the same time, operations in an environment that responds to the needs arising from this process are about to become more difficult. Activities that these procedures demand, and the persons directing them, are now suspected of economic crimes that are hard to express and difficult to understand. The suspicion and the actions that are thereby provoked remind one of indictments alleging witchcraft. The main thing to be said in favor of the revived practice is that “it sounds good” if played to local audiences composed of innocents.
4. The practice of (indebted) states of stimulating the economy might be in order for the duration of the crisis. However, two criteria should be met. The stimulus should pump the prime only for enterprises that are market-capable and should not support activity to avoid creative destruction. This translates into giving some canvass to navigate with the breeze and withholding if from those who wish to sail against the wind. Equally important is that help advertised as temporary should not become habit forming and create permanent dependence. Nor should a friendly push uphill attempt to preempt the competitiveness that rules in an uncorrected market.
5. Germany’s political parties are developing an appetite to blame the continued lack of economic recovery on the banks. Supposedly, these are now too niggardly in extending credits. Here we should remember something crucial. Politically ordered bad credits to unqualified and risky borrowers are the cause of the USA’s contribution to what became a global crisis. Now the demand is made on the banks to risk the misinvestment of funds entrusted to their management. This is a good way to get votes and an even better way to undermine stability and ruin the health of the economy.
6. Liberty is what is legally possible and that is protected under law as a guaranteed right enjoyed by all. Currently we are being accustomed to an innovation. The laws are made relative by subjecting them to an application that considers the descent of individuals affected. Once the principle of one law for all is suspended, the public is in danger of being deprived of its freedom.
7. This matter deserves to be considered. How important is conformity for recognition as “outstanding” by organized culture’s establishment? At any rate, the more state supported organizations become handing out money, awards and opportunity, the more caste-like will become the circle that that is deputized to determine what culture is. Not accidentally, the clan exploits whatever advantages the politics of PC have to offer. Concurrently, those who wish to make a living as licensed participants in recognized and rewarded art will conform to the extent that the rewards grow.
8. Once it is the basis of political decision-making, every idea will demonstrate its built-in corruptibility by attracting cynical exploiters. In the case of global ideologies, their decay also demonstrates that natural laws that determine reality have been neglected by the creed’s speculations. This casts a shadow over the exclusive possession of the total truth that the movement implementing the “idea” claims is its fundament. Man’s systems are as fallible as are the thinkers that conjure them up. To state the full truth about everything, and to be accordingly totally right, is not given to us. This is why good and sound political systems are based upon a corresponding assumption. It is a central foundation of democratic government. Uncontrolled elements (for instance those declared to be infallible) will misuse the power allotted to them. Therefore, a democratic system does not hinge on the power given to the rulers. Much rather, it depends on
 the limitation of the authority of those that are temporary custodians of state power. There is, therefore, a critical question to be raised when we are to implement measures that are allegedly derived of an infallible insight into the mechanism that directs life. This question pertains to the system’s ability that applies a Weltanschauung, to correct the abuses that “might” arise. The more dogmatic a world view, the more difficult is to create effective checks and balances to correct mistakes that, according to the “teaching” and its prophets, cannot arise.


China could simply grant Xinjiang independence or substantial autonomy. Yet, Beijing is determined to retain access to the region's abundant natural resources, and has therefore colonized Xinjiang with the compliant Han.

Creating New Facts

The Chinese are following the only logical solution to the Muslim problem, replace the Muslim population.  The Isrealis have tried this in the West Bank, but it has not worked because there aren't enough Isrealis.  However, even with a one child policy, there are enough Chinese to replace or overwhelm the Muslim population.  They just have to look at India to see if you allow the Muslim population to get too big, then you have a big problem.  Make Muslims a small minority, no matter how disgruntled, they remain a small problem, especially for security services that have no scruples.

Head Start

Europeans enjoyed a big head start, conferred on them by their ancestors, over China and India with regard to having a small to nonexistent Moslem population. A couple of soft-headed generations have squandered that advantage, along with so many others.


1.  The territory has always been populated by Mongol-Turkic tribes, and is not part of the Han ethnic homeland.

2.  The Han Chinese were no less imperial under Mao than under their dynasties or the Kuomintang. Han Chinese territorial annexation has been supported by colonization in Tibet and Xinjiang.

3.  What do Singh, Oklahoma or escort girls have anything to do with anything?

@ kappert

Manmohan Singh was Governor of the Reserve Bank of India when the Bombay stock market collapsed in the early 1990's.
The reason for the collapse was the illegal use of deposit certificates of the RBI to the tune of 17.000 crore rupees, or approx. the total bank deposits of the Indian banks with the RBI. When there were no certificates anymore to keep buying the market collapsed.
The Governor declared bluntly that he was unaware of these facts and was not further disturbed. The blame was squarely put on one stock broker who was arrested and put in prison. After years of putting the case on a backburner the date for a first court appearance was fixed and the stock broker was promptly murdered in jail.
Case closed.

Yes he is the only sane one.


“Manmohan Singh was Governor of the Reserve Bank of India when the Bombay stock market collapsed in the early 1990's. “ He was governor of RBI from 1982 to 1985.
“[Xinjiang] has always been populated by Mongol-Turkic tribes, and is not part of the Han ethnic homeland.” Right, comparable to Oklahoma, an endless stream of colonization. Nevertheless, minorities in China have a population of ca. 125 million and are growing faster than the Han ethnic group.
Escort girls seem to be an important part of G8 meetings.

Manmohan Singh

Sorry kappert, my memory failed me, he was finance minister and still didn't know anything.
The crash was in '92 and he was finance minister at that time, just like the belgian government didn't know anything about Fortis until they read it in the newspapers.


That's right. What do Finance Ministers know these days? Certainly they are not able to detect potentially financial crashes.

@ marcfrans

Let's give OI the benefit of the doubt here. Based upon its title, OI's latest post appears to be a continuation of the  drivel she posted earlier and not a response to my questions. You think?

Obviously insane(2) # 2

@ Atlanticist

1) It would appear that Kappert has not much sympathy for minorities (irrespective of whether they constitute a 'local' majority or not), in a totalitarian political system.  Does anybody want to make a bet as to whether he/she has sympathy for any particular 'minority' in a genuine democray?  The interesting question is, where does this despicable 'discriminatory attitude' (vis-a-vis different 'minorities') originate from? 

2) Kappert is confused. He/she does not seem to realise that there is no political power monopoly in Oklahoma.  Opinions, demonstrations, etc...in Oklahoma City have 'consequences'.  Of course, in Xinjian they have consequences too...but Kappert does not seem to be aware of the differences.  Could it be that it is that 'excellent' German education system that must be responsible for this consequential failure?     


2. continuation

Are escort-girls part of Western culture? (Of course they are!)
Is Mr. Singh the only sane leader appearing at the G8? (Yes, he is.)
Mr Handlery (et al.) should upgrade their knowledge on Xinjiang (and Oklahoma).
Your call for Monarchist makes me wonder – is Marcfrans on holidays?


Xinjiang was inhabited by Mongol tribes (2nd century BC), and since imperial envoy Zhang Qian (195-114 BC) the region is linked to China (much earlier than Tibet, for instance). Todays Uyghur population migrated in the 8th century AD from Mongolia. Today we have 45% Uyghur, 41% Han and 7% Kazakhs in the Autonomous Republic, total population ca. 20 million.
"The threatened indigenous majority begrudges policies that intend to make it a minority in its own homeland." I think, Mr Handlery is speaking of Oklahoma!?

@B. English RE: Useful Idiot

In all likelihood, V.I. Lenin never even used the term much less coin it. Though it may apply to human rights lawyers protecting the enemies of human rights, it does not apply to me. I can assure you that I am not unaware of Russian interests or intentions nor their real or potential conflict with mine. However, ICBM reductions can be made without advantaging Russia, and America has no strategic need of the Central European ABM system.


Here are alternatives:


1.  Russo-American early-warning installations to monitor Iranian ballistic missile activity. Possible sites include in Azerbaijan, an offer rejected by the Bush administration


2.  As an amendment to the ABM Treaty, the permanent members of the UN Security Council could establish a new ABM system to counter "rogue" ballistic missiles. The entire project, from research and development through operating the bases could be completed multilaterally. Firstly, this alleviates fears that one country's ABM system could be upgraded and strategically threaten another's deterrent, and also the possibility of arms races, as the technology will be accessible by all.


3.  Provide Eastern European countries "at risk" from Russian aggression with advanced air defense and anti-armor systems, with advisors if necessary. The South Ossetia War demonstrated that the Russian armed forces had still not mastered the RMA, and the Chechen Wars drove the point home that Russian armor was very vulnerable to inexpensive countermeasures such as mines, rocket-propelled grenades, etc. Faced with the neutralization of its airpower and armor, and heavy losses for both, Russia could not "roll into" the Baltic republics. Ukraina is a separate matter as it has a substantial Russian minority and there is domestic opposition to joining NATO.

Useful Idiot?

Dear Kapitein,
I'm afraid in 1919; a certain Russian leader would have referred to your commentary as coming from a "useful idiot"
Kind Regards.

RE: Duly Noted: The Inevitable Rise of Islamism in Xingjian

Agreement on every point save 1.




1.  The Russian nuclear arsenal is in steep quantitative and qualitative decline. Russia can barely afford to maintain an effective Minimum Credible Deterrent, yet the Russian stockpile is the last remnant of its former superpower status. Not only is the American deterrent highly effective, it can re-activate reserve warheads at Washington's leisure. 


The Pentagon has dreamed of a 100% effective global ABM system since the failure of the Reagan administration's SDI project. Although the current ABM system poses little threat to Russian ballistic missiles, progress is being made. The systems envisaged for Central Europe could be upgraded over the years. Once the network is established, it will be next to impossible to roll it back from Russia's borders.


The notion of Russia retaining influence in the Czech Republic or Poland is ludicrous. Russia has few allies, and is not remembered fondly save perhaps in Belarus, Transnistria, South Ossetia or Abkhazia. The issue is American military expansion. Fortunately, the Obama administration is not inclined to waste taxpayer funds deterring Cold War ghosts or appeasing security complexes without end. As with every other great power or empire, the primary threat is internal