Editor’s Note:

The Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region has seen cohabitation and intermarriage among multi-ethnic groups since the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644). The following is an interview by the Global Times (GT) reporter Chen Chenchen with Wendurina, associate professor at the College of Ethnology and Sociology, Inner Mongolia University, who has conducted extensive field investigations in this border area cohabitated by multi-ethnic groups.

GT: Inner Mongolia has been peaceful for decades. Do you think a high level of cohabitation and intermarriage among Mongolians, Han and other ethnic groups is the key element?

Wendurina: A pure Han or pure Mongolian community can hardly be found in Inner Mongolia today, though different administrative units have different ratios of these ethnic groups, due to their distinct lifestyles.

In cities or rural areas, Han people are often a large percentage of entire population, whereas the population of Mongolians may be higher in districts that are mostly grazing lands.

According to my fieldwork, intermarriage does not necessarily change an individual’s sense of belonging to a certain ethnic group, but has a direct effect on the second generation.

For instance, the son of a Han person and a Mongolian may identify himself as both Han and Mongolian.

Such a hybrid identity gradually weakens the sense of ethnicity in a unitary ethnic group, and blurs the border between two groups.

The original ethnic community thus becomes more open and tolerant.

GT: Along with the process of modernization, how do Mongolians view their ethnic culture? What elements consist of the Mongolian ethnicity today?
Wendurina: In daily life, especially among the youth, people care most about fashionable and new things.

Few people care about their own traditions. This is linked to the demands of globalization.

An ethnic group should have certain characteristics to preserve cohesion. In 1913, Joseph Stalin proposed four elements to identify a certain ethnic group – common language, common territory, common economic activity and common culture.

After the large-scale identification of individuals’ ethnicity in 1950s, the concept of “ethnic group” was politicalized in the former Soviet Union.

This was then copied by China.

The record of ethnicity on the residence booklet and the item of ethnicity on the ID card actually becomes a big criterion for identifying whether one is Mongolian or not.

However, among grass-roots Mongolians, the politicalized concept of ethnicity rarely exists. I hardly heard people asking “are you of Mongolian or Han ethnicity,” but “are you a Mongolian or Han person” instead.

There are indeed subtle differences here. Ordinary people mainly care about lineage by using “person.”

GT: Then why did lots of Han people change their ethnicity into “Mongolian” in the 1980s?
Wendurina: Ninety-five percent of intermarrying parents will choose the ethnicity of
“Mongolian” for their children in birth registration, even though these children may later inhabit a largely Han culture and speak Putonghua.
They do this because it will bring benefits for children in college enrollment and job promotion, due to the central government’s preferential policies toward ethnic minority groups.

Some of these children may be half- Mongolian, but some may only be one-eighth or one-sixteenth Mongolian.

All of them will probably choose “Mongolian” as their ethnicity.

In fact, for most ordinary people, the practical interests are of greatest importance.

From 1982 to 1990, a new policy was released – any individual with a lineal relative of ethnic minority could resume his or her ethnicity.

The population of ethnic groups suddenly increased. According to my observations, some Han people who changed their ethnicity during that wave called themselves “Mongolian of 1982” or “Mongolian of 1983.”

I have to say that the design of ethnic minority policies was reasonable in the 1950s.
However, since the constitution of ethnic minority groups has been changed, the policies need to be improved.

GT: How can ethnic minorities seek balance between developing their economy through interacting with the outside world and preserving its own traditions?

Wendurina: The ethnic minority culture doesn’t only belong to the ethnic group itself, but makes up an important part of the world’s cultural legacy.

When I studied in Japan, the scholars there always emphasized that all cultures are equal, and there are no such thing as “advantaged” or “disadvantaged” culture.

One cannot grade different cultures according to their capability of adapting to modern science and technology.

It’s impossible to restore a culture once it disappears.

The Manchuria culture is facing a severe crisis, since few people still master the Manchurian written language today.

Behind the language, there is a whole set of habits, social customs and ways of thinking.
For Mongolians, it’s important to learn Putonghua and English to promote communication, however, education in Mongolian language and culture should also be stressed.

Preserving traditional culture and developing the economy are not necessarily contradictory to each other.

In the current world, nomadism and herding is probably the most environmentally friendly lifestyle.

In recent years, the growth of GDP has been given too much emphasis. Many entrepreneurs, mainly Han entrepreneurs, focus on exploiting mineral resources, like coal mines and oil, and require local herders to migrate and change lifestyles.

The entrepreneurs’ simplistic emphasis of overemphasizing industrialization and urbanization actually changes themselves into potential victims of the worsening environment.

Enterprises should be more socially responsible, and decision-makers should also work harder to promote ecological education and sustainable development.