5 ms·

I appreciate your point. But it is only one-sided story. Both sides have been victims of historical conflict, there is a long history of han ethnic people being

I appreciate your point. But it is only one-sided story. Both sides have been victims of historical conflict, there is a long history of han ethnic people being driven away too. Arguing who did wrong first is a bit like a religious debate. Look at the globe one shouldn't fail to see it's a common pattern (Palestine etc). To argue who has the ultimate rights to the land is a tricky and dangerous task. Another observation I have is that there's little mention of the history of Xinjiang itself. The long-standing threat from Russian influence starting from before Republic of China (ROC) period. And the autonomous Muslim defense against russian puppet gov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_rebellion_in_Xinjiang_(1937) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_rebellion_in_Xinjiang_... and even the later alliance with the communist party. Sure you could argue from one-side that all that is happening is wrong but unfortunately a lot of the evidence today are from anti-china alliance such as epoch times, which in my opinion really hides the real issues of the chinese society.

enriquto 6y ago
You talk about Russian influence as a "threat", and Han influence as something natural that needs to be protected. I appreciate your respectful message, but please notice that another equally defensible position would be the opposite one: considering Han influence a "threat" to be protected against.
- dumb1224 6y ago
  I apologise for my choice of words, I'm not a native speaker, nor could I do it in a more diplomatic way. However I do agree with you, for the opposite it might well see han population as a threat, probably right from the early dynasties. I have by no means implied Russian influence is 'evil', it is simply the historical narrative. It is only natural that from 1900s the powers around that area want to take control in the geopolitics. Same situation today. My point is that if you understand the situation better (which is hard because of language / culture barriers, similar to middle east crisis), you might be able to know more nuances of the issue.

enriquto 6y ago

You talk about Russian influence as a "threat", and Han influence as something natural that needs to be protected. I appreciate your respectful message, but please notice that another equally defensible position would be the opposite one: considering Han influence a "threat" to be protected against.

dumb1224 6y ago
I apologise for my choice of words, I'm not a native speaker, nor could I do it in a more diplomatic way. However I do agree with you, for the opposite it might well see han population as a threat, probably right from the early dynasties. I have by no means implied Russian influence is 'evil', it is simply the historical narrative. It is only natural that from 1900s the powers around that area want to take control in the geopolitics. Same situation today. My point is that if you understand the situation better (which is hard because of language / culture barriers, similar to middle east crisis), you might be able to know more nuances of the issue.