再见2009。 这里是另一个年底的Chinayouren特别的运作满一年后的第一个。 坚持围绕感谢所有。

像往常一样，我们将开始与中国在新闻的普及。 今年比以往任何时候都更有趣的是，因为2010年是一个全面的数字，和早期鸟类的中国问题专家已经高呼中国的十年。

当我们最后一次预测，2008年是中国在世界上的相关新闻高峰，这将是很难被击败，在短期内。 在一般的上升趋势，2009年已经回到媒体关注的一个合理的水平，部分原因是因为新疆和天安门周年没有为西藏，四川和奥运会的比赛，部分原因是因为美国Obamania被盗来自中东王国的表演。

在今年头几个月的危机也给中国带来一些注意，但一旦它变得清晰一揽子计划的工作和损害控制，记者的兴趣减弱。 这里是我的中新网， 仪表 ，高精度的跟踪装置，我从东英吉利统一购买的结果：

出现“中国”在1881年至2009年LaVanguardia

今年我想去远一点，所以我下面添加谷歌趋势的统计数据为“中国”一词的新闻引用。 请注意，谷歌趋势是不是比我自己原来的方法更精确，因为谷歌引用消息来源的数量一直增长。 要重新调整的规模，我们必须尝试中性词，如“当”或“他”，并采取他们作为视觉零轴，整个曲线向右倾斜。 结果清楚地证实了08年的高峰期。

谷歌为“中国制造”（轴不纠正）趋势新闻

尽管如此，这个系统是不是很准确，我想找到一个更可靠的方法来估计中国的影响。 我想老中新网米，上面是一样好，我现在可以得到的。 作为一个在巴塞罗那与中国没有任何特殊的连接随机主流报纸中，有先锋报没有理由不应该复制大约在西方的大势所趋。

另一种可能的解决方案（虽然没有数字），是使用工具“ 谷歌“时间轴 “，尤其是报纸内出现的”中国“的一些比较。 有趣的是，我所看到的，如纽约时报或华盛顿邮报“曲高和寡”的报纸，往往有一个更稳定的中国的报道，因为他们通常有工作人员专门到这个主题全职：

纽约时报出现“中国”

而更多像今日美国“低俗”的论文往往表现出更多的山峰和山谷，他们遵循流行的利益更加紧密的趋势（见2008年大规模的高峰西藏+四川+奥运会）：

今日美国出现“中国”

作为一个暂时的结论，我会说，从今日美国和类似论文的结果更重要，因为到目前为止，媒体有世界上最大的读者。 这再次证实了我的老中新网米看到的趋势，它也证实了大多数中国博客的印象，我曾：2009年是不一样热在2008年。

您的通话

我仍然不完全满意，这些测量，我希望找到一个更好的办法，估计“中国”，并随着时间的推移，它的。 如果你有什么想法，请让我知道在评论。 任何建议表示欢迎。

在此期间，赌注是2010年的预测，开放，最接近的猜测得到了啤酒。 请记住，是上海世博会和一揽子刺激计划的结束，加上奥巴马的新颖性将佩带。 我去一个安全的时间（我们有再次使用中新网米的，是只有在它的数字图表）4,000。

在接下来的部分，我们将在09年看到这个博客的结果，我会造成你在2009年收集的最好。 虽然我得到准备就绪，按照今年年底传统，这里的比斯开湾沿岸的绿色牧场：

。

更新：今天上午我做了一个“callibrated”谷歌趋势，以字“当”水平参照。 “较低的曲线是一个代表”中国“。 结果是远离精确，但他们确认，在08强峰，并返回到正常在09：

出现“何时”（上）和“中国制造”（下）在谷歌趋势新闻

UPDATE2：我发现了这些天为什么中新网米显示了这样一个在2009年急剧下降：先锋报，拉斐尔Poch的，受欢迎的记者，在今年年初从北京转业的原因之一。 这是非常可能的几百名在09失踪文章可以解释他的缺席。 上面的图表，可能是西方媒体的普遍现实是介于“今日美国”纽约时报图表。 任何想法，我仍然在寻找一种方式，把这一数字，会受到欢迎。

有过很多的事情上来， 最近 “领域媒体的消亡“。 特别是在中国，我们已经看到的壮观的由詹姆斯·法洛斯和其他一系列职位 ，铸造一些奥巴马对中国的访问结果。 对于旧与新媒体的辩论，这不能算作命中，因为双方在讨论报纸的人。 但是中国有一个使事情变得更加有趣的方式，在这里我们看到了整个事情，从不同的角度。

没有人真正关心“在人民日报，媒体辩论，而不是在这里被陷害亲中国与反中国的国家媒体的消亡”。 奥巴马的这次访问是一个伟大的案例分析 ，因为这段时间的争论是太晦涩，以激发广大人民群众，我们可以看看它没有西螺母和愤青朋友的偏光效果。

在所有的关于西方媒体的偏见的讨论中，我一直站在1难受中间地面：我没有不同意1世界的阴谋破坏中国的形象，但我看到有一些在许多新闻项严重的偏见，我试着去了解这种情况的原因。 这是我的尝试提供了一个解释：它有三个主要权力，在不同的比例，影响所有的大众媒体：美国，商业和读者做。

• 媒体主要由国家控制，这包括一些BBC或全国公共广播电台等主要西方球员，加上大部分中国媒体。 他们工作的关键是可信的机制的存在，以确保其从执政党的独立性，这是在党和国家不显着的国家是不可能的。 在某些情况下，像BBC，他们可以产生高质量的结果，但没有可扩展性的系统是：如果所有的媒体是由国家控制，信誉将受到严重损害。

• 媒体主要由商业控制，无论是媒体公司本身或他们的主要广告客户。 这可以包括论文，如“华尔街日报”和新闻集团和许多当地的报纸，其读者（ ）取得地理位置的原因，其面临的主要挑战是不是真的，以获得更多的读者（在其领土上的人口是有限的），但为了获得最好的广告经营与当地的商业机构。

• 读者主要是由控制媒体是一个力求尽可能多的读者，请以增加其流通。 例子包括英国小报和网络媒体的很大一部分。 从次普利策的斗争中获得更多的读者一直是重要的，但与新技术和报纸上的危机，它已成为重要的。 在互联网上，没有人关心企业的意见，甚至是一个国家的法律。 唯一有效的参数是点击每一个月，只要你提供的广告不问问题。

所有这三种权力在不同程度上影响所有媒体，和他们都不是导电公正的报告。 但很少有人写关于这一点，因为我们大多数人已经条款与严酷的现实：无论是好还是坏，这些影响是不可避免的。 因此，辩论不是有关如何获取完全公正的报纸，而是如何保存的已经存在许多不完善的，其偏差在不同方向和强加给对方的“制衡”的，让关键的读者得出一些结论。

这种多样性是必不可少的，我们看到，如今在西方，是一个不断增长的一致性，请读者渴望。 具有讽刺意味的​​是，媒体中解放出来，从最初的两个大国本身，下降了第三个囚犯。 互联网已经变成一个完美的市场竞争中的信息，其中消费者是国王，但正如我们在这里看到 ，“看不见的手”是不是所有的客观报道好。

当读者要求独立的记者，他们很少是指从自己的独立性。 但事实上，他们可以成为最具破坏性的影响：他们不仅很容易欺骗自己成群结队，但他们也缺乏制衡的观点角度把信息。 当媒体告诉读者他们想要听到的，它关闭，这是难以逃脱的党派纷争和成见的反馈环路，外部真相调查成为次要的。 这是媒体的主要危险的今天，无论新老之一。

从中国看的结论

我不知道到什么程度这个读者的因素是负责媒体的质量不好，但我相信它发挥了主要作用在知觉的反华偏见。 正如我们在新疆看到，有许多西方记者见证中国制度的残酷，就像华盛顿记者跟随奥巴马见证检查和新兴中国电力。 在这两种情况下的故事被预先书面西方读者的期望，大多数媒体和新老脚本乖乖地跟着。

我相信读者的偏见问题的根源是因为我根本无法找到任何其他的解释。 它不能成为大企业的利益，当大多数企业在中国有很大的赌注，和崛起的民族主义或贸易战争只能给他们带来的损失。 它不能像美国这样的政府，这将获得在中国的民族主义和军事化的崛起有什么利益。 这是媒体的偏见，只是反映了在西方社会对中国的形象，图像和反思，不断地喂对方。

世界需要良好的接地，合理的CPP政策的批评，特别是灾难性的人权记录。 但不幸的是，专注于错误的目标和错误的时间（例如，当中国的数百名被杀害在乌鲁木齐）西方媒体只设法疏远自己从中国的追随者，建立中国和西方之间的误解，更。 通过这样做，他们正在不知不觉地提供燃料，CPP需要生存的民族主义，并进一步拖延，最诚实，我们希望为中国的自由。

假如媒体真的关心公平报告，他们可以设法让更多的中国记者和读者，并听取他们的意见，介绍其与西方读者的闭环抗衡。 如果中共真正关心的有关中国的形象，他们可以很长的路要走，以改善它 ，而不必放弃自己的独裁权力。

但我们不要梦想太多，无论是中共的，也没有主流媒体有这样的优先顺序。 他们来自不同的世界，旧的结构，和他们分享一个共同的目标：生存在快速变化的时期。

关于中国种族主义的讨论不断回来而在每一次，每次都引起强烈的激情。 这是后，我一直在想，做了一段时间之后，我们在三月有趣的评论，作为新疆系列的结论。

引发这次辩论的故事是， 娄婧 ，是中国在电视选秀节目的一半黑色的参加者已经在互联网上的种族主义言论的对象。 我不认为这本身就是重要的，各国的网民都众所周知张贴离谱的意见，在现实生活中，他们永远不会说出的。 但撇开，很明显是有特定的姿态在中国种族，冲击在许多西方国家，并承担一些反映。

因为它不只是不成熟的网民，同时也支持像笑话的名字和姓氏的尊敬的人，或写这样的评论。 当然，在许多情况下，我们所看到的仅仅是一个内脏反应来自西方的指责。 具有讽刺意味的​​是，许多中国人认为，即使是在一个中国一贯表现比他们更好的领域，傲慢的，居高临下的西方人仍然觉得有道理公共教训给他们一定恼人。

但双方通过第一波激烈的意见后，这是值得冷静看待事物，看到这些误解背后的现实是什么。 和现实的情况是，它是在中国太常见了，听到这样的语句，为“维吾尔人的危险”或“非洲人不聪明”，甚至，令人惊讶的是，“白人比亚洲更能干”。 所有这些西方耳相当惊人的意见，但中国从未归咎于种族主义。

事实上，大多数似乎遵循一个简单的逻辑：“在中国没有问题，因为不像西方人来说，中国人不是种族主义者”。 这种想法显然是，大多数中国人没有经验，由宣传部门制作的工作室，材料，许多国家都面带微笑五颜六色的服装的儿童比其他不同种族的事实。 和它背后的是“人民联盟”从共产主义学说的继承，仍然可能会被视为该国的中心：

毛泽东：“对于世界各国人民的联盟，欢呼”

我并非暗示共产主义理想，这是没有诚意的。 它是，它可能仍然是许多人。 问题是，而几十年前这肯定是在宽容和尊重的先锋队，在当今全球化的世界，它只是不剪​​了。

因为肯定的是，中国有权利说，这不是西方人来决定可接受的种族态度。 但是，这也不是汉族的特权。 最终，它是人民感受到歧视，是非洲人或维吾尔人，谁应该有一个很大的发言权。 在任何争议，这是不是犯罪，但得罪人，谁决定（一些合理的限度内）什么是侮辱的话或态度。

最终，在中国发展新的种族态度将会对整个世界有重要影响，特别是在为自己的国家利益。 这个过程仍然是在它的初始步骤，但已经有一些关键的挑战是显而易见的：内部，由于越来越多的少数民族质疑其治疗汉;和外部，随着中国试图扩大其影响力的战略地区，如非洲和南美洲。 在这些领域取得的所有的软实力将是毫无价值的，如果中国不生活在那里的人民表现出令人信服的尊重。

再次，是中国的种族主义？

那么有没有一个真正的问题，若有，可以做些什么来解决它？ 正如一些中国人有：它是错的，只是因为我们说，亚洲人是在数学和黑人在篮球，换句话说，是中国的种族主义？

从我自己的观察，中国在本质上是不超过其他大多数国家的种族主义。 这是说，很实在。 因为这是世界上最今天，如何它一直。 如果中国和西方之间有一个显着的差异，它仅仅是外观之一：我们是更好地隐藏我们的偏见。

事实上，在西方，我们检查员自己到一个点，这是很难甚至接受斜体，像一个问的问题归结为：“不同种族的平均两套不同的技能吗？”非假正经的答案这显然​​是肯定的，可以从简单的观察了解到的。 就像不同性别，不同种族，往往有略有不同的特点，这种多样性从来就不是一个问题，诚实，开朗的人，而是相反。

问题是当钝个人选择部分重点对这些差异，然后他们理论中的一种方式，以satisfiy一些低的心理需求。 这样的人，有时甚至说服足够多的人能够统治他们的国家，必然导致破坏和羞辱。 从老斯巴达日本帝国，历史表明，民族纯度短视的想法不产生最好的结果，基于这些处所持续下降背后的多元化社会的创造力的群体。

所以，知道在每一个国家钝军团，西做了什么，以防止那些反对多样性和“人类带来了无尽的悲痛”的爆发？ 认识到人类的愚蠢无国界，并不能消除，西方社会，而不是教训，以扫地毯下。 在惊人短的时间内，在二十世纪的下半年，他们已经开发出一系列的规范，以规范的讲话，他们通过为社会所接受的权力执行。 这种非书面的代码，嘲笑为PC，确保个人能保持一如以往的偏见，但将避免使公众，否则将面临的社会排斥。

在此期间，中国的封闭的社会从未真的感到了到现在有必要制定这些限制，和这样的种族偏见，是能够以运行在谈话中自由，震惊，偶尔外国人的敏感的耳朵，并赢得人民的一点好感他们应该交好。

中国应该按照西方？

有一个来自中国的天然抵抗力，采取任何类型的PC解决方案，主要是因为他们不觉得问题的描述适用于他们：在种族主义疯狂的历史，他们大多是在接收端。 它是公平地说，作为一个人，中国人一向最宽容的，当他们在西方的同行已经抓狂消除异教徒的时间接受不同宗教和文化。 为什么会这样一个文明的社会需要申请作为西部野生克制相同严格的标准呢？

在我看来，它不应该和中国是正确的忽略前期许多西方的过度反应。 在一个健康的社会是有错误的本质与调用一个黑色的“黑”或一个黄色的“黄色”，像中国和其他人民做什么。 复杂，充满内疚的美国式的PC最适合特定国家的条件，而不应被迫到中国。

但这并不是说系统不应该得到改善。 从我的观察，在中国一些受影响的社区，它看起来像目前的状况是远远不够理想。 中国应努力生锈，共产主义时代观念的现代化，一点一点地来一个更现实，更平等和种族少居高临下的态度，这将是即将到来的挑战，内部和外部的成功的关键。 和国家不能单独承担这个现代化。 就像西方的，它是在整个社会，作家，名人，和其他公众的榜样，应携手合作，努力。

中国有一个千载难逢的机会，现在几乎从头开始建立自己的种族的态度，从情报和慷慨的，而不是从内疚，并恢复宽容和在国际关系中的良好感觉，他们的国家已当之无愧的形象。

继上周新疆冲突的职位，我看到这个法新社调度： 中国促进新疆武警首席 。 戴先生，在武警顶端的人已晋升。 这意味着，第一次失败，我在最后发表的文章中指出（即未能保护公民在7月5日）尚未承认。 这是不足为奇的。 中国领导人成功的衡量尺度的稳定与和谐，从这个角度看，戴先生的表现显着。 突然面临着一个前所未有的暴力世界的媒体，就在他家门口的冲突，他设法在创纪录的时间内稳定局势。 多少喜欢的文章这有助于他晋升，也许我们永远不会知道。

在此期间，我的新华RSS是随地吐痰以下的标题： 零拒绝外国记者 。 国务院已宣布这项新政策，以确保更好地对待外国记者的要求，从现在起，将有被剥夺的权利（而不是被忽略）。 现在，我不做梦第二，这将大大改变这一局面-本博客可能需要我到任务如果我这样做-但让说，它是积极的，至少有人在国务院明白问题的关键：一贯的形象不佳，中国政府向外国媒体，并延伸到整个世界。 在任何情况下，这个决定是直接连接与新疆冲突期间的媒体开放成功的经验。

TLR为结论

只要有什么新华社这些天来快速浏览一下， 交易会在乌鲁木齐和外交官前往新疆油揉会议的（甚至是土耳其的！）。 同时，热比娅认为没有更多的国家举办她的发言，并迅速挫败西方媒体企图东山再起丝毫光荣上网的朋友。

胜利的明确无误的香味在空气中。 党满意，这一切是如何横空出世，和奖品交给英雄。 王乐泉和胡锦涛可能会得益于此，与他们稳定的超级商人眼中的支持者。 恭喜我的小博客。

然而，有一个缺点。 Singing victory so quickly means that the problem is seen as a one-time event, an outside attack masterfully controlled by Wang and his men. But all seems to indicate that there are deep contradictions in Xinjiang and in China's interethnic policy as a whole, and ignoring this reality can only spell trouble in the near future. To make matters worse, by imprisoning China's best men , the leaders effectively blind themselves to the only reliable way of understanding the problem: independent field research .

Is this really a victory for the long term sustainable development of China? I am afraid not.

政府的基本目的之一是为了确保公民的安全，从这个角度来看，中国政府已在乌鲁木齐失败壮观。

首先，它也买不起足够的保护，在7月5日晚上的汉族受害者。 一些错误的决定，最有可能在危机期间，治安部队领导人向中国欠至少有一些解释。

但是，中国共产党在一个更加重要的方式，不能归因于在紧急情况下的简单的人为错误失败。 它已经失败，到了中国的和平共处创造条件，它已失败，很客观， 它规定为自己创造一个和谐的社会 。 由中国中丧生的200名中国是这次失败的明证。

在这个岗位，我将分析一些原因为何种族间的政策可能会失败，可以做些什么来改善情况。 支持和反对新疆独立，这将使一个迷人的讨论有很多很好的理由，但我不会在这里接触的主题。 无论理论说，实际情况是，新疆是和中国应保持在可预见的未来。 大量的汉族和维吾尔族同样可以致电新疆自己的家园，这些民族必须学会为自己着想一起住。 让有建设性的尝试，看看如何可以做到这一点。

中国共产党的意图

我开始说，政府已经失败，这是显而易见的。 但要完全公平的，间关系是一个非常困难的地区，在世界几乎所有的政府未能在一定程度上。 展望新疆位于该地区，并比较类似邻近国家，我们不得不承认，在过去20年来的纪录，新疆远离灾难性的种族间和宗教间的纷争。

有些人认为有问题，原教旨主义没有恶化，自杀式炸弹袭击，战争只是因为汉极端不人道的镇压维吾尔族人口。 这很容易被证明是错误的，并一直是该地区的任何人都知道这么多。 此外，在世界的简单的外观，可以告诉我们，甚至最极端的镇压军队不保证和平，而是相反，在乌兹别克，车臣和巴勒斯坦。 它主要不是强制，而是不断维吾尔沉默的繁荣和稳定。

党的种族间的政策已经失败，但这些政策和自己的实际执法存在很多谈到党的意图的性质。 明确党的目标是要保证中国的统一，稳定与和谐 ，这是不是从来没有施加汉至上。 诚然，中国是一个专制政权，个人的权利并非总是在新疆或在其他任何省份，尊重。 中国需要民主和法治，但是这有什么做压迫维吾尔，汉。

种族间的政策

让我们看看1在这些种族间的政策，其中大多是正面歧视的形式来的本质看：10添加在进入大学，的单一儿童政策的部分排除，配额（而是在高考考试分低 ），在管理和最令人吃惊：一个宽大处理非政治性的罪行，这是众所周知的中国人都在共同的假设的形式明确的政策：“小心与维吾尔人，他们可以携带刀”。

另一组的政策，是注定要避免危险的伊斯兰原教旨主义的。 这些措施包括禁止戴头巾在学校和政府建筑物和其他宗教的服装，未满18岁不可参加在清真寺祈祷，并严格控制神职人员。 虽然我们可以指责这些政策得罪情面，我们不如说，法国也有类似的头巾禁令，并认为中国是其明确禁止宗教从事政治原则相一致。 一个开明的规则，在我看来，更何况在一个地方有合理的理由担心宗教原教旨主义。

其他最近的政策，决定由党在该地区的最高领导人王乐泉 ，是不太合理的。 特别是所有学校任教纯粹普通话是没有意义的，只能引发维吾尔人之间的怨恨。 这一决定的逻辑是所有公民都必须精通普通话，但是这一点是不是技术上的声音，因为它已被证明，一个完整的从早期的双语教育是精通两种语言兼容。

怨气

在七月冲突及其后果的一个有趣的一点是，它从来就没有明确究竟抗议者希望。 世维会了大量的媒体时间，但它并没有提出一个一致的计划。 热比娅致力于她的出现，送出去的伤亡数字，并否认在事件有关她的角色，他们向广东省事件。 作为一个结果，这是很难知道中国的政策，由维吾尔，比其他被“殖民统治和镇压”最反感。 温和的维吾尔语语音的情况下使事情很难理解，王乐泉的手沉重的政府的另一个后果。

在任何情况下，它看起来像它是不是那么多特别是在一个政策问题，而是一个维吾尔和他韩之间的态度问题。 一个整合和相互误解的问题，是典型的种族间的冲突，而不是压迫者和被压迫者之间的冲突，在任何西方国家。 这是许多居住在新疆的外国人的意见是一致的。

积极歧视在西方，许多人已书面，你可能熟悉的问题，它可以创建。 是自然反应，在他们对少数民族不公正的偏袒的不满，在多数组最穷的元素。 但糟糕的是，如“ 2限制的政策， “ 心慈手软“借给自己虐待和经常在少数民族中受益最差个人，开始恶性循环的负选择。

在中国积极歧视尤其是恶性的，因为汉族，鼓励官方媒体，往往采取一些让步，作为对维吾尔人，然后让他们全权委托从事各种歧视行为的确切的证据证明了他们的慷慨，许多情况下甚至没有意识到他们正在不公平的 。

维吾尔人对此有何反应，知觉，而且往往非常真实的歧视通过永恒的受害者的角色，并回顾了的入侵bingtuans ，或稀释了他们的人民，这是几乎没有一个有力的论据：1 -一个大的一部分兵团人口未安装，因为它们在维吾尔地区，2 - 中国人一直在做类似的活动在新疆兵团很久以前的维吾尔人甚至到达3 - 中国企业拥有所有的权利，只要在自己国家的任何地区建立不强行征用的原业主。

一些可能的解决方案

总之，我认为这与其说是一个兵团，压迫或民族稀释的问题，而是一个完整的麻木从双方汉族，维吾尔族，以及最中国政府在新疆，其头只关心的问题讨好北京 。

I know the really important problem – lack of democracy and rule of law – will not change in Urumqi until it does in Beijing. But without looking so far, I have some modest suggestions to the CPC of Xinjiang that should be easy to try and improve the situation. All relatively simple points, more gestures and attitudes than large power concessions:

• Don't forcefully modernize Kashgar declaring it backward .
• Don't force monolingual schools on people for their own benefit.
• Impose 100% bilingual schools for all in majority Uyghur areas.
• Stop, progressively and with tact, the leniency policies.
• Enforce the laws against discrimination in job postings .

But most important of all, I have one advice for the government of China that is not restricted only to Xinjiang: Actively promote mutual respect and understanding among different cultures and races.

This ability is seriously lacking in most Chinese of all ethnicities, as this essential part of their education has for years been substituted by clichéd touristic dances and children in costumes. This spells trouble for China not only with the minorities, but also in other regions where it wants to earn respect and expand its influence, like Africa or South America.

I was not there and I do not know more than what is in the press. But in the light of the available information, I think it's worth it to have another look at the events, and see what we make of it. Refer to the NYT diagram linked on the illustration, this paper is hardly suspect of pro-CPC, and the information included (from witness accounts) is about as detailed as has been published concerning the events of 5th May.

It all started with a protest in People's Square, followed by a concentration along Liberation Road, which was met around 6.30 by the People's Armed Police. Up to here everything is “normal” in the logic of street rioting: there were clashes and probably some victims from both sides. But Liberation Rd. is very central, many people live there and surely the NYT would have found at least a witness to mention it if hundreds of people had been killed or made prisoner at this point.

But it is afterwards, especially after 8, along the axes of Tuanjie and Dawan Roads, that the events are not normal by any standard of social disorder. Street riots, like other forms of violence, can have collateral damage, but this is not the case. The police was not there, the Han mobs couldn't have been organized in such a short time, and the only way to explain those deaths is that it was a deliberate large scale massacre of civilian residents and passers by. This is consistent with what was written in other accounts by various newspapers.

The initial count of 123* Han casualties that has been more or less accepted by all sides as minimum is an astonishing figure for actions that happened mostly in the space of 5 hours and in such a reduced area. Looking at other riots in the region, including Xinjiang, Tibet or other Chinese areas, we see this ratio is completely out of range. This was not the heat of the fight in a political riot. It was cold-blooded persecution, the kind of actions that can only be the work of fanatics.

Who was behind the events

In its August 2 issue, the Hong Kong newsweekly Yazhou Zhoukan interviewed Heyrat Niyaz, a Uyghur journalist, blogger, and AIDS activist, the kind of person who is unlikely to be partial to the CPC. Heyrat speaks about the Islamic Liberation Party, Hizb-ut-Tahrir al-Islami, a pan-islamic international political party which is formally peaceful, but which has been accused in the past of inciting violence in Europe. This organization has spread very quickly in Xinjiang in the last decade.

作为一个在乌鲁木齐的见证，尼牙孜注意到许多示威者和宗教口号，在听到抗议的强烈喀什口音。 这使我想起所有的中国共产党称为东突伊斯兰组织，它实际上可能的威胁发言时间存在与否。 在任何情况下，确实存在一些激进组织清楚地看到，像攻击这一个 ，去年有16名警察被辗过后，冷冷地刀砍和轰炸。

I will not accuse any group without proof, as I would be guilty myself of the same “solid block” thinking I criticized yesterday. But what we have seen up to now should make any honest observer curious, and it certainly warrants further investigation in the field of radical islamism in Xinjiang. In a region bordered by countries like Afghanistan and Pakistan, it is not at all unthinkable that frustrated youths take example of their counterparts across the border and find an escape in a perverted version of religion.

Response

The Chinese government has handled the crisis relatively well, given the circumstances. Actually, the main objection one could make is the opposite of what most Western readers like to imagine: on Sunday 5th more force should have been used to avoid the murders.

If you think of it, you might agree that the CPC leaders are not precisely idealistic dreamers. When they let the foreign reporters into a place it is because they know they have nothing to lose, and this time they must have been pretty confident that they were not to blame. Also we have to admit that, even when in front of journalists, it is unusual in most armies in the World to exhibit so much discipline and restraint as the Chinese did in the aftermath of indiscriminate racist attacks against their own people.

A large part of the Western media were confused by this attitude, which perhaps explains why they left so early. Indeed, it is some food for thought and it can make some weaker spirits shrink, to consider that for the second time in a row (after the Sichuan disaster) China proves that, sometimes, an authoritarian regime can do things better than a democracy. It takes some solid convictions and some understanding of ones own ideals to be able to look at the World without the mould of good and evil.

In any case, there is little doubt – the Western media has given me no reason to think otherwise – that the Chinese double approach of media control and moderate police action has produced the best results during the crisis. It goes without saying that this only works as a short term formula to curb down the violence, and that much more will need to be done from now on to really solve the problems in Xinjiang. More about long term solutions in the next posts.

Rebiya Kadeer

I will not waste time here to discredit Rebiya Kadeer, because from the beginning she discredits herself. She has provided no basis at all for most of the information she gave to the media, and some of her claims are so absurdly wrong that it actually makes me think she has to be innocent: someone who's made it in business can't possibly be such a bad liar. The only explanation is that she is totally clueless.

Click on the picture for one example of her latest claims.

More than anything, Kadeer gives the impression that she is desperate for TV time. She knows her time of fame is running to an end, and she is forced to place ever stronger claims, raising the stakes at each go to attract the tired audiences. As blogger twofish reflected, if she really cared about the future of Xinjiang, she might have grabbed this chance to send a message of peace and try to connect with the rest of the Chinese at a time when they were brutally attacked, earning perhaps the respect of the moderates.

But how has someone like Kadeer, a successful businesswoman in her time, imprisoned and then released by the CPC, ended up as de facto representative of the Uyghur people? Kadeer was called to play a role, and she plays it just fine. It is a role that has been written by the CPC, and by the Western media, and by the audiences and by the American NED , who is funding her. The story was written long before she arrived, a well proven plot that works with the public and will make everyone happy. It is all over again the Dalai Lama saga, and thanks to the copy-paste now the scriptwriters can relax and enjoy their Summer holidays.

Except, of course, that Rebiya Kadeer is no Dalai Lama, and neither her deeds nor her standing among the Uyghur justifiy any such comparison.

The Important Question

And now down to what many consider the crucial question: is Kadeer in contact or even financing the extremist groups who arranged the killings, or is she, as I suspect, totally ignorant of the reality on the ground? I don't think we will ever find out. It is difficult to believe that the NED, funded by the American Congress, would sponsor anyone connected with terrorism; but if by mistake they did, I am sure they will take good care to hide all the proofs.

Note that, either way, the NED doesn't come out very well from this story. Sponsoring an opportunist who jumps at the chance to get a name for herself while she coldly observes the killings of dozens is hardly in line with the objectives of a National Endowment for Democracy.

But really, is all this so important? 我不认为如此。 Kadeer will not last, and whether she is guilty or not, the peanuts that the NED pays her do not really change anything. Kadeer with her accommodated expatriate Uyghurs of the WUC cannot possibly control the operations of a terrorist group on the ground. And, as an inspirational role, I doubt it very much that she – a woman, twice married, business and PC background – could ever work for young islamist radicals. She will most certainly not turn into the new bin Laden.

No, the real questions for China and for the World are others:

W ho was really behind the killings of 5th July? How will the prisoners be judged? How are the interethnic policies of the CPC failing? How is this failure feeding the bases of some violent groups? What is the connection of these groups with islamist terrorism and what is the probability of Al-Qaeda joining the party? And why is China the only Security Council country that hasn't received a large-scale attack from islamists, in spite of the years-long Uyghur conflict?

And finally, where are the people that are supposed to be answering all these questions?

*See my comment below for the basis of this number.

你一直在看新疆电视这些天吗？ 我是一个球迷。 It's the new Love TV, a 24-7 concentrate of all the corniest efforts by the Chinese official media to promote harmony after the events of 5th July. Smiling kids, flowery dances, long meetings of interethnic neighbour associations discussing love and togetherness. Best served with tequila, lemon, and a grain of salt.

But seriously. It's been a month since the events of Urumqi, and it feels like there hasn't been much done in the way of analysis. All the channels of the media were red hot for a week, but they cooled down as soon as the blood dried on the streets, and no new insights are forthcoming. Too soon the debate has been hijacked by unproven claims of opportunists like Kadeer, and the predictable responses from China. The peace loving Uyghurs and Han who lost their lives in Urumqi deserve better.

So yes, I am consciously watching XJTV, and I suggest you do the same. For lack of anything better and in protest against the rest of the media establishment, both Chinese and foreign. Because no matter how awkward XJTV's efforts might seem, at least this TV station is doing its job.

The events of Xinjiang are more important than the bland Summer coverage would lead us to imagine. It is probably the most deadly single political riot that has happened in China since Tiananmen 1989. It is also the only major case of social unrest where the international press has been granted permission to report from the ground. And there are important lessons to draw from the experience, particularly in the fields of 1- Media and 2- China's policy.

The Chinese Media

I am and I will always be against State-controlled media, and every person I respect here, some CPC members included, agrees with my point of view: without the freedom to blame, all comment is meaningless .

But precisely because we don't believe in that media, we don't expect too much from them. After all, it is not the fault of the writers or editors if they live in such a system, not everyone can be a hero. From this relative point of view, we can say that the Chinese media – or the CPC, which is the same in this case – has done a good job.

Indeed, one interesting phenomenon in the aftermath of the July 5th events is the media's role in calming things down on the Han side. We made fun of all those silly heart warming articles , but probably the love talk was crucial at a moment where ethnic feelings were getting out of control . How many times in the World have you seen interethnic clashes* killing more than a hundred to simply peter out in 2 days with no more than moderate force applied by the State?

By choosing to focus on the positive, turning the blame on external elements and being loyal to the principle of harmony, the Chinese media did a valuable service to their country and probably avoided many more deaths. This might seem obvious now with hindsight, but it might have been just as easy for them to try to appeal to the pride of the Han and disaster would have ensued.

The Free World Media

But what about the media from the free World?

The Xinjiang events were of particular interest for many of us following the debate of anti-China bias in the Western media. In the highest point of the discussion, after the Tibet 2008 events, the Western media always had the point that, since they had been banned from the area, they couldn't be held accountable for inaccuracies in their reporting. Now we have the first major riot where this argument is not valid. The time is to evaluate the results. How well have they fared?

In my opinion, it has been disappointing, at least for two reasons.

1- In a large part of the media there was a clear prejudice against the Han and against the authorities. Not all were as extreme or ignorant as this example , but the principle was clear: their mission was to witness how inhuman the Chinese system is. Even if some of them later moderated their reports, the harm was already done, and when travelling in Europe mid-July I found it a common opinion that “China is slaughtering its minorities again”.

2- Fortunately, free media IS to some extent free and diverse, and we have seen some examples of fair reporting from the ground. In particular I was following the Telegraph journalist Peter Foster, who did a great job of reporting honestly what he saw. And then, I got to this article , only 4 days after the events, and to my despair he announces that he leaves on holidays. Like blogger B&W Cat noted , almost all the others soon followed suit and, to this day, nobody has told us what really happened in Xinjiang.

In the meantime, Xinhua and the others stayed at their posts, showing the Chinese and the World who really cares about Xinjiang, and who really cares about China.

Some Conclusions

There is something very wrong with the World media, and it is something much deeper than a anti- or pro- China stance. It has to do more in my opinion with how it is organized. Remember the line:

By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it.

It is a pleasure to read Adam Smith and imagine that, indeed, the invisible hand is working every day to make our lives better. And yet, this example has made clear that if there is one industry were the hand cannot work it is the media. That is, of course, unless we accept that its role is to produce “the truths we like to hear” in the same way as the role of Apple is to produce computers we like to use.

Because that is exactly the problem. The minute the media sees that there are no obvious CPC crimes, that the police is handling the situation well, and that actually a communist authoritarian regime sometimes does things better than a democracy, this is not interesting. It is not even about political lobbies or advertising companies' pressure, it is simply that most readers don't like it . It is more comfortable to live with their solid categories, Islamism bad, communism bad, democracy good. And the invisible hand says: journalist shut up.

There is a lot of talk on the internet about the future of traditional newspapers, and many are analyzing the reasons for their demise. Well, how about this one:

There has been a major political riot, the most deadly in 20 years in the most important rising country in the international scene, and the media has still not even attempted to explain the reasons behind the events, instead working full-time as a mouthpiece for a self-appointed leader in Washington with very dubious legitimacy, and who might possibly be connected with the terrorist group who has organized the killings of more than 100 people.**

I am not so idealistic to think that internet and blogs are going to change the situation. The information lobby will always be powerful, whatever the shape it takes, and in the end the mainstream reader will always read what he wants to read.

For the people who care, the only hope, now as always, is in diversity. And fortunately the internet works in the right direction for this. Visit this link for just one example of how a blog can provide you –if you take the time to read carefully- with better commentary than your Sunday paper.

* Interethnic clashes: whether or not the initial violence was organized by terrorist elements, by the time the Han mobs went out with bats it clearly became an interethnic clash.

** More about this upcoming.