"One nation, one state" not for China: senior advisor

[Rahul9090]

The concept of "one nation, one state" cannot be applied in China because the country is a multinational and centralized state, a senior political advisor and former official in charge of ethnic issues has said.

"When it comes to issues concerning Tibet and Xinjiang, some scholars from western countries often make their opinions based on this concept, which is not suitable for China," said Zhu Weiqun, a member of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), in an interview with Xinhua this week.

Zhu is director of the Committee for Ethnic and Religious Affairs of the CPPCC National Committee, and a former deputy head of the United Front Work Department of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee.

"One nation, one state" is suitable when the area of a state is consistent with the distribution of its nation, said Zhu, who took European history as an example, saying that the feudal system secured the independent status of small countries and denied a centralized government. The system was the beginning of the modern European structure.

However, Chinese history is totally different from Europe. Since 221 BC, China ended the warring states period and established the powerful centralized and unified dynasty.

"Unity is the mainstream along the development path of the Chinese nation," Zhu said.

He added that different ethnic groups in China mix with each other, and are interdependent economically, so they need one another.

"If the country is divided, the nation can not safeguard its interests or dignity in the circumstances of a foreign invasion. It is impossible for the Chinese nation to carry out 'one nation, one state', national self-determination or a federal system within the state," said Zhu.

Globalization accelerates and deepens exchanges among different nations, so few states have only one ethnic group.

"If national self-determination is thoroughly implemented, many states, including western countries will suffer from separatism," Zhu added.

Since 2002, Zhu has been a representative of China's central authority in negotiations with Dalai Lama's private representatives. He denounced the Dalai Lama's "middle way" approach, as it denies Tibet of being part of China historically and claims one fourth of Chinese territory.

The Dalai clique also want the ruling status of the CPC and the socialist system in Tibetan areas to be overthrown, withdrawal of the People's Liberation Army in the areas and non-Tibetan people in the region to be expelled, Zhu said.

Zhu said the Dalai clique's so-called memorandum of the "middle way" approach did not make any genuine revision on the old version, on the contrary, it added more separatist content.

"The memorandum claimed that the Dalai clique represent all Tibetan people. How does a separatist treason group have the qualification to represent Tibetan people? Where does that leave the people's government of the Tibetan Autonomous Region?" said Zhu.

"The memorandum arrogantly demanded an amendment of the Constitution of the People's Republic of China. Do they have the qualification? The "middle way" approach is always with a separatist nature," Zhu said.

Zhu published an article on Feb. 19 explaining why western countries keep causing trouble for China on Tibet issues. Two days later, U.S. President Barack Obama met with the Dalai Lama at the White House, in defiance of China's strong opposition.

"Obama's move verified my viewpoint," Zhu said, "the meeting undermined bilateral ties and triggered Chinese people's antipathy to the U.S. government. U.S. support to the Dalai clique and East Turkistan Islamic Movement separatists will finally become its negative asset."

"One nation, one state" not for China: senior advisor - Headlines, features, photo and videos from ecns.cn|china|news|chinanews|ecns|cns

 

[dray]

"If national self-determination is thoroughly implemented, many states, including western countries will suffer from separatism," Zhu added.

Since 2002, Zhu has been a representative of China's central authority in negotiations with Dalai Lama's private representatives. He denounced the Dalai Lama's "middle way" approach, as it denies Tibet of being part of China historically and claims one fourth of Chinese territory.

The Dalai clique also want the ruling status of the CPC and the socialist system in Tibetan areas to be overthrown, withdrawal of the People's Liberation Army in the areas and non-Tibetan people in the region to be expelled, Zhu said.

Dalai Lama will always remain the true & only representative of the Tibetan people.

 

[BJP*]

China was never a united country, This article validates this point of view. The Govt in Beijing wants every one to believe that China is ancient and united country. Provided the condition of taiwan, Tibet and turkmenistan, China is still not a united country.

 

[Fattyacids]

China was never a united country, This article validates this point of view. The Govt in Beijing wants every one to believe that China is ancient and united country. Provided the condition of taiwan, Tibet and turkmenistan, China is still not a united country.

Do not belittle the intellect of the forum members here.

1) This article is saying China is not a single ethnic country (though Han Chinese is majority) Hence, "one nation one state" does not apply.

2) This article clearly stated China has been one country for over 2000 years. "Since 221 BC, China ended the warring states period and established the powerful centralized and unified dynasty."

3) Your condition of a united China doesn't hold any water. Taiwan is not a country as per UN. Tibet is part of China recognized by UN and Dalai Lama. There was never a state called E. Turkmenistan.

4) If you don't realize how dumb your logic is, apply it on your own country. Your Kashmir is still not united today, is India not a united country? Of course not, India has been one country since 1947.

 

[BJP*]

Do not belittle the intellect of the forum members here.

1) This article is saying China is not a single ethnic country (though Han Chinese is majority) Hence, "one nation one state does not apply."



2) This article clearly stated China has been a country for over 2000 years. "Since 221 BC, China ended the warring states period and established the powerful centralized and unified dynasty."

Read the line you have written and read the article once again. Or to cut short read the very first line of the article. It clearly says China is "multinational", Where does it mean "United" in case of china??

3) Your condition of a united China doesn't hold any water. Taiwan is not a country as per UN. Tibet is part of China recognized by UN and Dalai Lama. There was never a state called E. Turkmenistan.

Taiwan is a geographical area which has its own government. That government claims itself to be independent. It suits on the definition of country. The definition of 'country' does not not mandate to have the recognition from UN

4) If you don't realize how dumb your logic is, apply it on your own country. Your Kashmir is still not united today, is India not a united country? Of course not, India has been one country since 1947.

The govt of Jammu and Kashmir is executing its power like the govts of other 27 states as per the constitution of India. This situation does not defies with that of china. China itself says Tibet as "Tibet Autonomus Region". People in Kashmir are demanding the status which Tibet already has. There is a difference mate

 

[cnleio]

Can "One nation, one state" for United State, Russian Federation or Republic of India ?!

Bullsh!t from the West, what about Europe Union ???

 

[Fattyacids]

Read the line you have written and read the article once again. Or to cut short read the very first line of the article. It clearly says China is "multinational", Where does it mean "United" in case of china??

Where does the article say China is "not united"? You are inventing stuff to serve your own agenda. The article clearly stated, "Since 221 BC, China ended the warring states period and established the powerful centralized and unified dynasty."

Taiwan is a geographical area which has its own government. That government claims itself to be independent. It suits on the definition of country. The definition of 'country' does not not mandate to have the recognition from UN

Many unincorporated or autonomous region has it own government and geographical area too, that doesn't them make a sovereign country. E.g. Puerto Rico and Hong Kong.

Any group can make any claims, but if it is not recognized by relevant authority, it has no official status. Taiwan is not recognized as a sovereign country by UN and the world. This is a fact.

For definition of "country," refers to dictionary.
For definition of sovereign country, refers to UN.

The govt of Jammu and Kashmir is executing its power like the govts of other 27 states as per the constitution of India. This situation does not defies with that of china. China itself says Tibet as "Tibet Autonomus Region". People in Kashmir are demanding the status which Tibet already has. There is a difference mate

Do not divert from the original point, which is your notion of "unified country." Since the other half of Kashmir is not in India's control, going by your own reasoning, India is not united.

I'm merely showing how dumb your logic is.

 

[JSCh]

Chinese culture has always value cooperation more than competition.

China has always been a major country in the world. One can imagined a country with big geographical size and huge population would inevitably be very diverse. But the Chinese people has managed to stick together through thick and thin with a centralized governing administrative authority for majority of the last two thousand years.

This did not happen by chance.

Is Chinese concept of valuing togetherness and harmony, of valuing common good more than individual will/wishes that hard to understand?

Think about it, how do you think China could have accomplished all that she has achieved has China not be united?

 

[maniac]

Read the line you have written and read the article once again. Or to cut short read the very first line of the article. It clearly says China is "multinational", Where does it mean "United" in case of china??

Taiwan is a geographical area which has its own government. That government claims itself to be independent. It suits on the definition of country. The definition of 'country' does not not mandate to have the recognition from UN

The govt of Jammu and Kashmir is executing its power like the govts of other 27 states as per the constitution of India. This situation does not defies with that of china. China itself says Tibet as "Tibet Autonomus Region". People in Kashmir are demanding the status which Tibet already has. There is a difference mate

Probably you did not realize that, but you just made a hilarious mistake and got completely wrong. Though it is used interchangably with "state", the idea of "nation" is completely different from "state" or "country". Go and read this wikipedia article on Multinational_state (can't post link but you can search the term in wikipedia), not just China, India is also a multinational state.

Btw, Chinese are united under the Chinese nation, also known as the Zhonghua Minzu, go and read this article on Chinese_nation.
And the idea of Chinese nation are coined in 1912, way before the birth of Communist Party of China.

China was never a united country, This article validates this point of view. The Govt in Beijing wants every one to believe that China is ancient and united country. Provided the condition of taiwan, Tibet and turkmenistan, China is still not a united country.

The concept of "multinational state" is in contrast of "nation-state". If we apply the political science concept to Chinese history, then not just PRC, most Chinese dynasty, from Han to Tang to Qing, were multinational state.
You are getting COMPLETELY wrong saying it is not a united country. A multinational state is ONE sovereign state, it is not multiple states, nor it is related to being united or not.
PRC is apparently not a nation-state but a multinational state. That's why the idea of "one nation, one state" does not apply to China.