The impact of last week's riots and their meaning

Last week was an important week for China, and unexpectedly so, as for the first time an ethnic minority who has never been particularly happy about being a part of China decided to voice their anger. The spark was a scuffle thousands of kilometres away where some Chinese killed some Uighurs based on a rumour that a Uighur had raped a Chinese woman. Once the truth was out, the Uighurs in Xinjiang voiced their anger.

But because there is no such thing as a right to protest in China, any protests become violent and fast -this one was no exception and it was particularly bloody, beyond just the breaking of shop windows. The Uighurs killed over a hundred Chinese; the police killed a number of Uighurs, and then the next day the Chinese retaliated.

So the region where the two groups had lived side-by-side unhappily, now and for the future, is going to be unstable; and memories of last week will not go away. The simmering tensions are no longer underneath the surface. Being a part of China for the last 50 years or so has not been the preferred choice of the Uighurs, who speak a dialect like Turkish and look nothing like Chinese, nor do they eat Chinese food, and they are generally Muslim.

The last twenty of years have brought economic benefits to Xinjiang (although Xinjiang is oil-rich and its resources mostly bring economic benefit back to Beijing, so it is hard to say who wins that one), and Uighurs do get preferential treatment in theory, like less restrictions on children, and jobs -but the political jobs are still dominated by the Chinese, and the Chinese now outnumber the Uighurs. The Chinese entrepreneurialism and hard working ethic seems different from the Uighurs -many of the Chinese just think of the Uighurs as lazy.

The underlying cause of the unrest is simply that the two cultures are very different and can not really coexist side-by-side, but now the Chinese outnumber the Uighurs. As long as that continues I do not see any solution to the ethnic problems -whether the Chinese might end up leaving (if they feel unsafe or for more economic opportunities elsewhere) is unlikely, but that could reduce the tensions. Quite simply, there is not much of a happy future in sight for the region now.

The government cares little about the Uighurs particularly, though of course it fears the minority of them that want Independence. Really, the bigger fear is, as the Economist puts it that:
"Tibetans and Uighurs are only two of the groups which may not accept the growth-for-freedom trade-off that China's government offers. There are the unknown numbers of adherents to the Falung Gong movement; tens of millions of Christians who cannot follow their faith freely but already probably outnumber the 75m members of the Communist Party; farmers who have been victims of local-authority land-grabs; and many young who, unlike their parents, take economic prosperity for granted and are frustrated by the restrictions on their liberty".

The last line might be the most relevant at the moment, where the elderly remember how bad things were -and they were really bad. The young have only known the good times, and when the times are less good... well, thankfully at the moment China has pumped enough money into the economy to keep growth ticking along enough. But enough is only just enough... and with the environmental problems as well as the economic problems, there might be growing social problems.

What country wants growing social problems? Certainly not the Chinese. The country is not likely to split apart any time soon (though the government often pretends it is, as excuses to repress such riots), but whether the country can remain peaceful, stable and thus prosperous is a more tricky issue... if it cannot, and the value of prosperity that gives the government its legitimacy and credibility , will no longer be enough. The government will then only be able to retain control through force -and without alternatives for people to peacefully vote for, or support, more violence is likely to appear.

Whether the government realises that it desperately needs to allow more peaceful means for the public to express themselves is a good question. It has realised that so far the Chinese are expressing themselves through the internet.. and when that gets too much it blocks the internet or censors it. And when the Chinese turn to their mobile phones, they get censored too (or if they are used to organise protests, the mobile signal is cut altogether). Maybe the internet is a peaceful enough outlet, and non-violent outlet. But it is not enough -and not a long-term solution. There are no organizations controlling or massaging the emotions.

Instead the emotions are all individual and sporadic, and increasingly leading to off-line consequences. The 'human flesh search engine' is a uniquely Chinese phenomenon where someone is identified as requiring punishment (either for corruption or for doing something wrong, maybe a government official, but normally just a regular criminal). So-called 'netizens' search out the person's details, expose their private life and abuse them online, destroying their reputation, making-up things and making their life unbearable. But, there are now many cases where beyond just loosing jobs or being arrested by the police for being exposed, such people are being physically attached in the streets -all because of the original online 'human flesh search engines'.

In fact these individuals who have the time and intelligence dig up these details and publish them are the very ones who could do something more serious in the future. Let's hope the government gives them, and the general public, more opportunities to peacefully give voice themselves and choose amongst different options. Otherwise they might create their own options, and that is surely only going to lead one-way. There is no doubt the Chinese government does not want to rule like the current Iranian government -nor will it be able to, in a country this big and diverse.

Some small steps have been taken -there are increasingly open elections within local communist party branches, and there are numerous residential committees that allow free elections for residents of that community (though these committees just manage the compounds, which is nothing political or impactful). Some government officials are starting to listen to the online chatter, and some even listen to offline voices. But more is needed, and quickly. The government can not be as cautious as it has been before. Change too fast and there can be risks, especially if small pilots cannot be trialled first, but if change is too slow, the risks might be even greater.

4 years ago, I used to think the government had 20 years or so to work this out. But with the growth of the internet and mobile phones, with the increasing environmental problems and the recent economic crisis (reminding people that things could go wrong), i think even 10 years is now looking generous. Hopefully things will start changing soon.. small things, like allowing NGOs (who the government can regulate) to campaign on issues and get public support to provide avenues for self-expression, are possible to start implementing now. Some environmental NGOs have started to do something in this area, but they keep their campaigns to energy and animals (so to speak). I'm looking forward to NGOs who provide real options on real issues that matter to the public who are most wanting and needing to express themselves. Maybe other options will evolve, such as consumer associations, for example. Time will tell...