Archaeology provides the basis for finding one’s own past. All nations look to archaeology to “dig” their way to find history in the form of buildings, pottery and, in some cases, grand monuments. The People’s Republic of China (PRC), however, is unique in using even archaeology as a weapon to claim that such findings are evidence that occupied territories belong to them. This trend of course parallels the PRC’s “invisible” manipulation of geographical borders for smoothly imposing the “fait accompli” of its will of unmatched power. In fact, history and geography always go hand in hand.
In the cases of Xinjiang, which its non-Han inhabitants call East Turkestan, and of Tibet the manipulatory attempt of the PRC is evident. While the remains found in these areas are fascinating and provide a glimpse into the past, they do little to strengthen Beijing’s historical claims to the territories. In this article, my focus is on Xinjiang. “Bitter Winter” does not enter political disputes, but we do report about the Uyghurs and other Turkic populations’ aspiration to nationhood, and on the PRC’s abuses against them.
Just outside Kashgar, in Xinjiang, is an ancient Buddhist stupa in the middle of the desert. Its conical shape gives it the local name “Mo’er,” meaning “chimney” in the Uyghur language. Experts assess that the stupa and temple next to it were built around 1,700 years ago and a few centuries later the site was forgotten. Archaeologists started excavating the site in 2019 and discovered some stone tools, copper coins, and fragments of a Buddha statue. So far so good. But next comes the Chinese usual declaration that this archeological site “proves” that Xinjiang has been historically part of China.
The ideologues of the PRC in fact argue that artefacts discovered at Mo’er are similar to those found thousands of miles to the east, in Han-dominated areas. It is also claimed that parts of the temple were constructed in a “Han Buddhist” style. And somewhere along the way, it was visited by the famous monk from central China known as Xuanzang (602–664). Called Hsuen Tsang in India (while his real name, before entering the monastic life, was Chen Yi), he is credited with spreading Buddhism in China—but using this fragmentary piece of information to claim Beijing’s authority over Xinjiang is absurd.
Recently, the PRC organized a conference in Kashgar that focused on the discoveries made at Mo’er temple and other sites. Pan Yue, minister of the National Ethnic Affairs Commission and a deputy head of the United Front Work Department, openly claimed that those archaeological findings proved that there is no separation between the culture of Xinjiang and of China. He added that those criticizing the PRC’s policies in the region reveal their “widespread ignorance of Chinese history” and are peddling “baseless narratives.” Obviously, this is an attempt to deflect attention from the persistent effort by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to erase Uyghur identity and culture.
A perusal of Pan Yue’s remarks makes it clear that his focus is on asserting the Chinese nature of culture in Xinjiang. After listing the numerous archaeological findings in Xinjiang belonging to various civilizations, the minister emphatically stated that “the culture of Xinjiang is diverse, but more in unity” and that “the unifying element is ‘Chinese culture.’” For Pan Ye, Mo’er is an example of Sinicized Buddhism. While he admits that the site has an Indian Gandhara style architecture, he insists that centuries later “Sinicized Buddhism returned to the Western region, building Chinese Buddhist halls at its original entry points into China.” Pertinently, archaeology has been given importance in China, with projects being laid out in the 14th five-year plan. According to Li Qun, head of China’s National Cultural Heritage Administration, in 2021 1,388 archaeological projects were conducted. As has been noted, they are guided more by politics than by science.
The PRC’s narrative on Xinjiang is in fact dodgy. Its ancient dynasties had an on-and-off military foothold in Xinjiang, From the 8th century to the early 18th century, they had little influence. It was not until 1759 that China’s Qing dynasty conquered the region and turned it into a colony. Later, from 1944 to 1949, the region was a de-facto independent republic, prior to its annexation by the PRC. Since then, the CCP has tried to sinicize East Turkestan in various ways, among which by renominating it Xinjiang. At the peak of the “strike hard” security campaign in 2018–2019, over a million Uyghurs (a conservative estimate used in international documents, as experts say the real number may easily be the triple), most of whom Muslims, and other Turkic residents, have been forcibly assimilated into Han Chinese culture in the ill-famed “transformation through education” and forced labor camps. But here a simple question arises: if the inhabitants of Xinjiang have always been Chinese, then why forcibly assimilate them? The re-education camps (because this is what they truly are) led in fact to an international outcry and some countries have gone to the extent of terming the PRC’s actions in Xinjiang as cultural genocide.
In effect, what the PRC is doing is imposing its culture in retrospect on ancient civilizations that were quite distinct. Archeological sites demonstrate the links along the Silk Road, an ancient network of Eurasian trade routes, that connected China with Central Asia and Europe. Trade and religion freely moved along the Silk Road, and there was a natural intermingling of cultures along the way.
The Uyghurs are today mostly Muslims (there are Christians too, descending form the so-called “Nestorian” missions, that weren’t Nestorian at all), but in ancient times a Buddhist influence in this region was also present. That is why a Buddhist stupa was found at Mo’er. At any rate, nothing lends itself to the interpretation that Xinjiang was culturally or politically part of China. Islam came to Xinjiang much later, around the 10th century, and by the 16th most Uyghurs were practicing it.
Why the PRC has no interest in discussing too much the history of this later period? For the simple reason that its efforts are today concentrated in suppressing and erasing it. In recent years, Beijing officials ordered the destruction of hundreds of mosques and Muslim shrines across the region. It is a very practical and brutal way of stating that the neo-post-communist rulers of the PRC want a Han-only China, which most probably puts them within the ranks of the racists or at least of those violent suprematists that consider cultural and ethnic diversity a sign of a lesser entitlement to full humanity.
