Kitajska "naviga za asimilacijo" lahko pripelje manjšine do izumrtja

China’s push toward assimilation has raised concerns among activists and human rights organizations, with some warning that the policy could threaten the survival of minority ethnic groups. On July 2, a Tibetan man named Lobga Rangzen set himself on fire near the United Nations headquarters in New York City during a political demonstration. His act, according to Amnesty International, was a direct response to China’s new ethnic unity law, which aims to promote a unified national identity among the country’s 56 recognized ethnic groups. The law, which was recently introduced, emphasizes the importance of national unity and explicitly prohibits discrimination against any ethnic group. It also outlines criminal penalties for acts such as violent terrorism, ethnic separatism, and religious extremism. Lobga Rangzen, a 52-year-old Tibetan, reportedly took his life in protest against what he and others see as a broader effort by the Chinese government to erase the unique identities of non-Han ethnic communities. According to Amnesty International’s deputy regional director, Sarah Brooks, the law represents a dangerous shift that prioritizes a singular, state-mandated national identity over the protection of diverse cultures and languages. She described the incident as a painful reminder of the potential consequences of such policies. The law, as outlined in a statement released by the Chinese Ministry of Justice and shared via the state-run news agency Xinhua, states that “upholding national unity and ethnic solidarity is the responsibility of all Chinese citizens.” It further asserts that any form of discrimination or suppression against ethnic groups is illegal. The legislation also holds individuals responsible for organizing or participating in activities deemed as separatist or extremist, ranging from planning to funding such actions, accountable under criminal law. China’s population includes approximately 125 million people belonging to 55 non-Han ethnic groups, such as the Uyghurs, Tibetans, Mongolians, and Huis. These groups, though culturally rich and historically significant, often find themselves marginalized within a society dominated by the Han majority, which constitutes roughly 92 percent of the population. Despite this demographic reality, parts of China’s history have been shaped by non-Han rulers, including the Manchu-led Qing Dynasty (1644–1912) and the Mongol-led Yuan Dynasty (1271–1368). During these periods, ethnic minorities sometimes held considerable power and autonomy. In modern times, however, the situation has changed dramatically. For example, Enghebatu Togochog, director of the Southern Mongolian Human Rights Centre, noted that Mongolians under the Qing Dynasty enjoyed relatively greater rights compared to their current status. He explained that Mongolians were regarded as co-rulers of the empire, with significant political and cultural influence. Today, however, the situation is different. Outer Mongolia, once a part of China, gained independence in the early 20th century and later became a sovereign nation. Inner Mongolia, by contrast, remains an autonomous region within China, although many argue that its level of autonomy is limited. The Chinese government maintains that its new laws are intended to combat separatism and ensure social stability, rather than to suppress ethnic diversity. Officials emphasize that the measures are necessary to maintain national cohesion in a multiethnic society. They point to historical precedents, such as the 1911 revolution that led to the collapse of the Qing Dynasty, after which both Mongolia and Tibet sought independence. However, Tibet was eventually incorporated back into China in 1951, following a series of political developments. Cultural festivals, such as the annual Naadam Festival in Inner Mongolia, remain important spaces where ethnic traditions can be celebrated. These events offer a glimpse into the vibrant heritage of minority communities, yet they are increasingly viewed as exceptions rather than the rule. As tensions surrounding China’s assimilation policies continue to grow, the future of these communities, and their cultural practices, remains uncertain.