How does manchuria become independent? And what's that yellow colored thing in Southern China?
WIP Map Thread
- Thread starter B-29_Bomber
- Start date
-
- Tags
- work in progress
How does manchuria become independent? And what's that yellow colored thing in Southern China?
China was too unstable in the early 90s to keep Manchuria, and the yellow thing is basically belarus 2.0
Belarus has an identity separate from Russia that can justify such separation. That yellow thing doesn't.
The same goes for "Manchuria". Yeah, you can point out the Manchu ethnic group, but they're mostly assimilated, and the region is majority Han by a large margin.
Also, forgot to mention, but congrats on making Mongolia majority Chinese lol.
Manchuria is like 98% Han so any attempted genocide there isn't even going to get off the ground, and the Han in Inner Mongolia outnumber the Mongols like 4.5 to 1.
No, I haven't seen any mention of such genocides in your original post.
Which is even more ridiculous. Such genocides would leave "manchuria" and the yellow part of China with literally no one living there. The perpetrators might as well have killed themselves to spare the trouble....
Not to mention, I find it highly unlikely, impossible even, that the Han living in ANY of the breakaway regions would've agreed to be slaughtered or ethnically cleansed, regardless of the situation in Beijing. Having spent centuries in the privileged position of power with all the guns and power, why be killed when you can (brutally) retain your power and privilege.
The collapse of the Soviet Union didn't stop the Russian government from intervening to "protect" Russians and co. in Transistria, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, etc...
Besides, "manchuria" is basically China's Rust Belt. Why leave your only source of survival and go for it alone with decrepit, Stalin-era heavy industries that have no competitive value for the sake of restoring, at best, a country that assimilated itself into your own culture via conquest, and at worst, a Japanese colony for slave labor, resources, and experimental test subjects?
For China to be too unstable to "keep" Manchuria, there would need to be a popular independence movement in Manchuria. Such a thing never existed in 1991, because, as has been stated, Manchuria is 98% Han Chinese. If you want an independent Manchuria, you're better off having it split off along ideological lines, not manufacturing some kind of ethnic situation that doesn't exist in real life.
For example, rather than China "collapsing", it suffers another civil war. The majority of mainland China winds up controlled by a republican government a la Taiwan (and is also reunified with Taiwan), while the CCP clings to power in Manchuria. International arbitration creates a DMZ situation between Manchuria and China similar to the one that exists between North and South Korea. Manchuria would still technically be called "The People's Republic of China", but shorthand would likely just be "Manchuria" or "North China" in the same way we refer to the "Republic of China" as Taiwan.
That doesn't allow Mongolia to absorb Inner Mongolia (nor should it, that's a ridiculous situation), and it does't allow for the existence of a Chinese "Belarus" (which is also ridiculous), but it at least gives you an independent Manchuria.
The only bits of China that Mongolia could eat without issues are Northern Chahar.
Everyone has offered the classic gripes with this map, but lets say we do want a realistic balkanized China, what does that look like?
If we want to take it really far, we could see regionalism in economically powerful regions which want to break off from an economically collapsing country, perhaps. Places like Guangdong COULD potentially then back-justify this by saying that Cantonese speakers are a distinct ethnicity and thus deserve a nation state, but Id need people who know more about China to tell me if thats even remotely viable.
Manchuria and inner Mongolia re staying almost certainly. If you REALLY want ethnic separatism, MAYBE a Zhuang state though I imagine that's economically a bad idea, I doubt they have much to work with in inland Guangxi.
Tibet and Xinjiang though, assuming a rather weak China and willing international support are very much plausible.
Note that a severely weakened China might not need ethnic secession only. There could be ideological splits or political factions if you want a REALLY ugly civil war situation. On the other hand, you could also have regions demanding AUTONMY from an increasingly weak government on an ethnic or economic basis.
I know two Mainland Chinese Cantonese speakers, and neither of them consider themselves "not-Chinese". On the contrary, I've heard more that Cantonese-speakers view the language as being the more " authentic" Chinese. Guangxi actually has a lot of Canto speakers too. Improved linguistic rights are more likely, but the greivences that would induce seccession don't seem to be there, especially in 1989-91, so it would probably not even be an issue to be addressed till later down the line, when the proportion of Mandarin speakers increases with China's economic growth.
The Zhuang don't seem to have any problems with the CCP that would lead to seccessionist feelings, especially in 1989, as the regime was more conciliatory with ethnic minorities. Otherwise, we would've heard about it. A lot of minorities were/are pretty well assimilated into China and Chinese society owing to longer periods of Chinese rule. The ones that arent are the ones we know. (Tibetans, Uighurs, Mongols to a much lesser extent)
Realistically, only Tibet and Xinjiang have the best chances, but even then, Xinjiang would probably be a war zone owing to the large numbers of (armed) Han living there.
My biggest gripe with independent Xinjiang borders is that they go off of PRC-drawn boundaries, which in turn reeks of "lets balkanize China by removing provinces marked differently" and ignores realities on the ground...
This is map #129 that I've seen which accidentally makes Mongolia a Han supermajority state because it doesn't realize Inner Mongolia is only 17% Mongol, and it is 6 times as populous as Outer Mongolia.
This isn't a recent development either - in 1949, it was 14% Mongol.
Very common mistake, unfortunately.
Edit: in other words, Outer + Inner Mongolia combined are only 25% Mongol.
This isn't a recent development either - in 1949, it was 14% Mongol.Very common mistake, unfortunately.
Edit: in other words, Outer + Inner Mongolia combined are only 25% Mongol.
Last edited:
Makes sense.
Gotchy.
I did have the thought of like the Taliban making its way into Xinjiang too, as it indeed has tried to set up an emirate there before and in the extreme chaos of collapsing China, Han countersecession in the style of like Serbs in 90s Croatia and Bosnia, and potentially Kyrgyz and Kazakh resistance to an Uyghur state they may actually have an opening to do so.
Yeah that seems to be the case though, to be generous to OP, that DID happen in both the USSR & Yugoslavia.
After all, Bosnia is full of armed Serbs in the eastern and northern portions and similarly armed Croats in the southwest and other pockets. Bosnias borders had at times been drawn differently too. Herzegovina has very little in the way of Bosniaks (Muslims) beyond Mostar and a long history of being part of separate states and administrative units, at various points in time the West bank of the Drina has been part of Serb states and regions even when the rest of Bosnia was not (under the Serbian empire and the post-collapse states for a bit, administered by Serb rebels during the first uprising, and part of the Drina Banovina in the kingdom of Yugoslavia) and West Herzegovina and adjacent Croat-majority parts of Bosnia HAD been part of the Croatian Autonomous Banovina in the kingdom of Yugoslavia. On top of that, at a few points in time, Bosnia and Herzegovina as an administrative unit under the Turks and later the Austrians contained Herceg Novi in modern Montenegro. However, Bosnia in the end had its communist borders (barring the irrelevant dispute over the northern tip of the Klek peninsula which has since been resolved).
I would argue that "manchurian" independence is irrelevant regardless of the demographics of the region. The biggest legitimate case for secession I've seen is that the traditional culture of the locals will be at risk of destruction. However, the Manchu are much more assimilated into China than the "problem" minorities we traditionally associate with secession. Much of this can be thanks to the Qing Dynasty rule, which had included Han Chinese into its ranks.
Besides, even if the ethnic demographics would favor a Manchu state, how would independence work? Xinjiang and Tibet are individual entities, so it would be easier for them. But "manchuria" is three provinces and part of an autonomous region. Which provincial governor would end up controlling the country? How would you make sure all 4 parts broke away successfully? What if the other governors wanted to rule instead? Many cases of secession are when a single administrative unit (province, republic, state, etc) breaks off. There aren't many cases of mulitiple units breaking off to form a single country. There is the USA but the country started off very decentralized and it took a civil war to create a coherent identity. Kurdistan faces this same problem, except its divided between 4 countries. 2 portions (Iraq, Syria) have broken off, but we don't see a unified Kurdish state. Instead, we have two entities, one Kurdish, another Kurdish-dominated but not explicitly.
Besides, Manchus and other Northeastern ethnicities are basically China's model minority, IIRC. Why trade that position for an independent state, where you need for blue collar and manual labor jobs. If you're part of China, you just leave that to the Han living there instead. Especially given that Northeastern China is a rust belt that lives off support from the center.
The Taliban were Pashtun, probably wouldn't want anything to do with Xinjiang. Al-Qaeda and more interestingly, Turkic ultra nationalist groups like the Grey Wolves OTOH....
Potential Kazakh, Kyrgyz resistance is an interesting concept, but it would depend on how Uighur-centric the movement is. Maybe an initial period of unity followed by division, or vice-versa.
I meant Al-Qaeda, I keep mixing up whos the Afghan political party & whos the global Islamist organization. Yes, I can definitely see Turanist types hopping in on this.
I think the former makes sense. United as Turkic Muslim brothers when they have to resist China but dissatisfaction grows as the numerically superior Uyghurs come to dominate the state.
A quick and rough take on a potential collapse of China in the early 90s that I've begun to work on. Macau and HK weren't reintegrated like OTL when the British treaty ran out in the late 90s, and ended up as independent city states which joined together. They are big economically but also closely tied to China and have a strong movement to join as Chinas newest federal unit. China and Taiwan reunited following the fall of the CCP & though nominally an equal partner in a state union with the rest of China, Taiwan is really just a very autonomous federal unit within China.
India jealously guards Tibet as its anti-Chinese buffer and threatens nuclear retaliation if Tibet is attacked. East Turkestan on the other hand presents an excellent opportunity for a counterterrorist operation on the part of newly reconsolidated China.
The CPRX is much more PRC-nostalgic than the rest of China as the local Chinese see it as having been able to protect them and hold some resentment towards the leadership of the anticommunist uprising and by extension the leadership of the new China for causing their situation, but still hope for reintegration. Resemblance in shape to Republika Srpska is actually entirely coincidental.
