Asia Pacific
China Fences In Its Nomads, and an Ancient Life Withers
MADOI, China — If modern material comforts are the measure of success, then Gere, a 59-year-old former yak-and-sheep herder in China’s western Qinghai Province, should be a happy man.
In
the two years since the Chinese government forced him to sell his
livestock and move into a squat concrete house here on the windswept
Tibetan plateau, Gere and his family have acquired a washing machine, a
refrigerator and a color television that beams Mandarin-language
historical dramas into their whitewashed living room.
But Gere, who like many Tibetans uses a single name, is filled with regret. Like hundreds of thousands of pastoralists across China
who have been relocated into bleak townships over the past decade, he
is jobless, deeply indebted and dependent on shrinking government
subsidies to buy the milk, meat and wool he once obtained from his
flocks.
“We don’t go hungry, but we have lost the life that our ancestors practiced for thousands of years,” he said.
In
what amounts to one of the most ambitious attempts made at social
engineering, the Chinese government is in the final stages of a
15-year-old campaign to settle the millions of pastoralists who once
roamed China’s vast borderlands. By year’s end, Beijing claims it will
have moved the remaining 1.2 million herders into towns that provide
access to schools, electricity and modern health care.
Official
news accounts of the relocation rapturously depict former nomads as
grateful for salvation from primitive lives. “In merely five years,
herders in Qinghai who for generations roved in search of water and
grass, have transcended a millennium’s distance and taken enormous
strides toward modernity,” said a front-page article in the state-run
Farmers’ Daily. “The Communist Party’s preferential policies for herders
are like the warm spring breeze that brightens the grassland in green
and reaches into the herders’ hearts.”
But
the policies, based partly on the official view that grazing harms
grasslands, are increasingly contentious. Ecologists in China and abroad
say the scientific foundations of nomad resettlement are dubious.
Anthropologists who have studied government-built relocation centers
have documented chronic unemployment, alcoholism and the fraying of
millenniums-old traditions.
Chinese
economists, citing a yawning income gap between the booming eastern
provinces and impoverished far west, say government planners have yet to
achieve their stated goal of boosting incomes among former
pastoralists.
The
government has spent $3.45 billion on the most recent relocation, but
most of the newly settled nomads have not fared well. Residents of
cities like Beijing and Shanghai on average earn twice as much as
counterparts in Tibet
and Xinjiang, the western expanse that abuts Central Asia. Government
figures show that the disparities have widened in recent years.
Rights
advocates say the relocations are often accomplished through coercion,
leaving former nomads adrift in grim, isolated hamlets. In Inner
Mongolia and Tibet, protests by displaced herders occur almost weekly,
prompting increasingly harsh crackdowns by security forces.
“The
idea that herders destroy the grasslands is just an excuse to displace
people that the Chinese government thinks have a backward way of life,”
said Enghebatu Togochog, the director of the Southern Mongolian Human Rights Information Center, based in New York. “They promise good jobs and nice houses, but only later do the herders discover these things are untrue.”
In
Xilinhot, a coal-rich swath of Inner Mongolia, resettled nomads, many
illiterate, say they were deceived into signing contracts they barely
understood. Among them is Tsokhochir, 63, whose wife and three daughters
were among the first 100 families to move into Xin Kang village, a
collection of forlorn brick houses in the shadow of two power plants and
a belching steel factory that blankets them in soot.
In
2003, he says, officials forced him to sell his 20 horses and 300
sheep, and they provided him with loans to buy two milk cows imported
from Australia. The family’s herd has since grown to 13, but Tsokhochir
says falling milk prices and costly store-bought feed means they barely
break even.
An
ethnic Mongolian with a deeply tanned face, Tsokhochir turns emotional
as he recites grievances while his wife looks away. Ill-suited for the
Mongolian steppe’s punishing winters, the cows frequently catch
pneumonia and their teats freeze. Frequent dust storms leave their
mouths filled with grit. The government’s promised feed subsidies never
came.
Barred
from grazing lands and lacking skills for employment in the steel mill,
many Xin Kang youths have left to find work elsewhere in China. “This
is not a place fit for human beings,” Tsokhochir said.
Not
everyone is dissatisfied. Bater, 34, a sheep merchant raised on the
grasslands, lives in one of the new high-rises that line downtown
Xilinhot’s broad avenues. Every month or so he drives 380 miles to see
customers in Beijing, on smooth highways that have replaced pitted
roads. “It used to take a day to travel between my hometown and
Xilinhot, and you might get stuck in a ditch,” he said. “Now it takes 40
minutes.” Talkative, college-educated and fluent in Mandarin, Bater
criticized neighbors who he said want government subsidies but refuse to
embrace the new economy, much of it centered on open-pit coal mines.
He
expressed little nostalgia for the Mongolian nomad’s life — foraging in
droughts, sleeping in yurts and cooking on fires of dried dung. “Who
needs horses now when there are cars?” he said, driving through the
bustle of downtown Xilinhot. “Does America still have cowboys?”
Experts
say the relocation efforts often have another goal, largely absent from
official policy pronouncements: greater Communist Party control over
people who have long roamed on the margins of Chinese society.
Nicholas
Bequelin, the director of the East Asia division of Amnesty
International, said the struggle between farmers and pastoralists is not
new, but that the Chinese government had taken it to a new level.
“These relocation campaigns are almost Stalinist in their range and
ambition, without any regard for what the people in these communities
want,” he said. “In a matter of years, the government is wiping out
entire indigenous cultures.”
Advertisement
A
map shows why the Communist Party has long sought to tame the
pastoralists. Rangelands cover more than 40 percent of China, from
Xinjiang in the far west to the expansive steppe of Inner Mongolia in
the north. The lands have been the traditional home to Uighurs, Kazakhs, Manchus and an array of other ethnic minorities who have bristled at Beijing’s heavy-handed rule.
For
the Han Chinese majority, the people of the grasslands are a source of
fascination and fear. China’s most significant periods of foreign
subjugation came at the hands of nomadic invaders, including Kublai Khan, whose Mongolian horseback warriors ruled China for almost a century beginning in 1271.
“These
areas have always been hard to know and hard to govern by outsiders,
seen as places of banditry or guerrilla warfare and home to peoples who
long resisted integration,” said Charlene E. Makley, an anthropologist
at Reed College, in Oregon, who studies Tibetan communities in China.
“But now the government feels it has the will and the resources to bring
these people into the fold.”
Although
efforts to tame the borderlands began soon after Mao Zedong took power
in 1949, they accelerated in 2000 with a modernization campaign, “Go
West,” that sought to rapidly transform Xinjiang and Tibetan-populated
areas through enormous infrastructure investment, nomad relocations and
Han Chinese migration.
The
more recent “Ecological Relocation” program, started in 2003, has
focused on reclaiming the region’s fraying grasslands by decreasing
animal grazing.
New
Madoi Town, where Gere’s family lives, was among the first so-called
Socialist Villages constructed in the Amdo region of Qinghai Province,
an overwhelmingly Tibetan area more than 13,000 feet above sea level. As
resettlement gained momentum a decade ago, the government said that
overgrazing was imperiling the vast watershed that nourishes the Yellow,
Yangtze and the Mekong rivers, China’s most important waterways. In
all, the government says it has moved more than 500,000 nomads and a
million animals off ecologically fragile pastureland in Qinghai
Province.
Gere
said he had scoffed at government claims that his 160 yaks and 400
sheep were destructive, but he had no choice other than to sell them.
“Only a fool would disobey the government,” he said. “Grazing our
animals wasn’t a problem for thousands of years yet suddenly they say it
is.”
Proceeds
from the livestock sale and a lump sum of government compensation did
not go far. Most of it went for unpaid grazing and water taxes, he said,
and about $3,200 was spent building the family’s new two-bedroom home.
Although
policies vary from place to place, displaced herders on average pay
about 30 percent of the cost of their new government-built homes,
according to official figures. Most are given living subsidies, with a
condition that recipients quit their nomadic ways. Gere said the
family’s $965 annual stipend — good for five years — was $300 less than
promised. “Once the subsidies stop, I’m not sure what we will do,” he
said.
Many
of the new homes in Madoi lack toilets or running water. Residents
complain of cracked walls, leaky roofs and unfinished sidewalks. But the
anger also reflects their loss of independence, the demands of a cash
economy and a belief that they were displaced with false assurances that
they would one day be allowed to return.
Jarmila Ptackova,
an anthropologist at the Academy of Sciences in the Czech Republic who
studies Tibetan resettlement communities, said the government’s
relocation programs had improved access to medical care and education.
Some entrepreneurial Tibetans had even become wealthy, she said, but
many people resent the speed and coercive aspects of the relocations.
“All of these things have been decided without their participation,” she
said.
Such grievances play a role in social unrest, especially in Inner Mongolia and Tibet. Since 2009, more than 140 Tibetans, two dozen of them nomads, have self-immolated
to protest intrusive policies, among them restrictions on religious
practices and mining on environmentally delicate land. The most recent
one took place on Thursday, in a city not far from Madoi.
Over
the past few years, the authorities in Inner Mongolia have arrested
scores of former herders, including 17 last month in Tongliao
municipality who were protesting the confiscation of 10,000 acres.
This
year, dozens of people from Xin Kang village, some carrying banners
that read “We want to return home” and “We want survival,” marched on
government offices and clashed with riot police, according to the
Southern Mongolian Human Rights Information Center.
Chinese
scientists whose research once provided the official rationale for
relocation have become increasingly critical of the government. Some,
like Li Wenjun, a professor of environmental management at Peking
University, have found that resettling large numbers of pastoralists
into towns exacerbates poverty and worsens water scarcity.
Professor
Li declined an interview request, citing political sensitivities. But
in published studies, she has said that traditional grazing practices
benefit the land. “We argue that a system of food production such as the
nomadic pastoralism that was sustainable for centuries using very
little water is the best choice,” according to a recent article she wrote in the journal Land Use Policy.
Gere
recently pitched his former home, a black yak-hide tent, on the side of
a highway as a pit stop for Chinese tourists. “We’ll serve milk tea and
yak jerky,” he said hopefully. Then he turned maudlin as he fiddled
with a set of keys tied to his waist.
“We used to carry knives,” he said. “Now we have to carry keys.”
---{-=@
Hickok
No comments:
Post a Comment