- Inner Mongolia & Outer Mongolia
Strictly speaking, Modern Mongolia is a divided nation similar to Korea. In particular, their modern history has the characteristic of showing the pain of the divided nation that occurred under external influences rather than internal conflicts. Because the separation policy of the Manchurian regime toward the Mongol tribes the division of the Mongolian was began before the founding of the Qing Dynasty in 1644 already. After the establishment of the Manchurian Qing, Mongolia was largely divided into the Inner Mongolia, which conquered by Abahai, and the Outer Mongolia (the residence of the Khalkha Mongolian), which was occupied by Kangxi Emperor. And then Mongolia was constantly divided into leagues(盟) and banners(旗), and prohibited crossing tribal boundaries (越界禁止). With this strong separation policy, Mongolia has been completely divided by the Qing dynasty.
After the fall of the Qing dynasty in 1911, Mongolia had the opportunity to be unified, but the fragility of the government of the ruling Bogdkhan (living Buddha=Leader of politics and religion), corruption of nobles and religious forces, and the disintegration of the Mongols for more than 300 years, made them lost the opportunity of integration. Of course, the external influence of the quarrel and territorial disputes among the between China's Kuo Min Party government, northern warlords, and other surrounding powers was greater. The Mongolian mass integration, which could eventually develop into so-called Pan-Mongolism, had its roots cut off.
Outer Mongolia, under the direct influence of the Soviet Union in the 1920s, established the Mongolian Republic (renamed the Mongolian People's Republic in 1924) in 1921 and Inner Mongolia organized the first minority autonomy government in the People's Republic of China in 1947 (Two years before the founding of the People's Republic of China), it means they started a modern history of division by another external force. After the threat of national identity due to the Chinese Cultural Revolution in the 60s and 70s and the direct influence of the Soviet Union in 70s, these Inner Mongolia and Outer Mongolia had a new turning point from the 1980s. In other words, since the reform and opening of the People's Republic of China in 1978 and the reform and openness and democratization policy of Mongolia in 1989, the relationship between Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region of China and Mongolian People's Republic has developed in various fields.
This series of contemporary historical flow will be analyzed in this research to understand in various fields and various factors; internally between Mongolians, externally through the analysis of the development in relations between Russia and the Outer Mongolia, between China and Inner Mongolia.
In the research methodology, the starting point of the relationship change was approached historically. Inner Mongolia in the flow of the Sinocentrism, and Outer Mongolia in the relationship with the Soviet Union based on ideology in the 20th century, in this history of internal difference it was solidify the division of Inner Mongolia and Outer Mongolia. In particular, it examines the institutional differences such as independence and autonomy of Mongolians according to the interests of the great powers such as China and the Soviet Union (Russia), and the differences in the perception of the inner and outer Mongols living in it. Therefore, I focused on the change of identity of consciousness of Inner and Outer Mongols according to the reform and openness linked with analysis on the political and economic exchanges together.
In the end, it is a basic approach method to understand constantly explore the implicit meaning of the independence of Outer Mongolia and the elevated autonomy(高度自治) of Inner Mongolia in the fence of modern Chinese communist ideology and Sinocentrism flowing under the history.
In addition, I deal with issues of the cultural identity of Inner and Outer Mongolian and issues of economic, political, and international relations in order.
This is an objective and comprehensive academic approach methodology to research highlighted in "Area Study" and "Kultuwissenschaft".
The second half of this book is an objective analysis of China's reform and opening to the changes of Inner Mongolia, influences of the Soviet Perestroika to the Outer Mongolia, and the identity of Mongolian national culture.
Since the reform and opening policy of Deng Xiaoping (邓少平) in 1978, the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region concentrates all its capabilities on economic development. Though the population of Han-Chinese is higher than Inner Mongolian, but the Mongols of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region also have an important place in economic development.
The Outer Mongolia, through its democratization movement (Шинэчлэл: New Revolution) in 1989, takes the form of a state called the Mongolia. She was escaped from the Soviet satellite country over the past 70 years and appears on the international stage, but economic development becomes a top priority. In this field of economic development, the Inner Mongols and the Khalkha Mongols of Outer Mongolia were together devoted to speedy development.
However, 11 years ago, the Inner Mongolia, which focused on economic development in accordance with the reform and opening, showed a fundamental difference from the Outer Mongolia. Because the people of Outer Mongolia led a successful political reform first. In other words, it is the question of the richness as an Autonomy Region in the People's Republic of China (Inner Mongolia), or the question of the poor but independent Mongolia state (Outer Mongolia).
After all, in the political arena, the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region was regarded as a province under the strong influence of the Beijing central government, but the economic development was very rapid. In other words, political sovereignty is so weak that there was no clear concept of autonomy other than economic development in relation to the situation where the migration of Han Chinese is active. On the contrary, the Mongolia (Outer Mongolia), through political reform, has resurrected and democratic traditional Mongolian democracy in a short period of time and concentrated on economic development.
Since the reform and opening of Inner Mongolia and Outer Mongolia, the official response of Outer Mongolia was very careful about the active exchange of politics, economy, society and culture with Inner Mongolia in the beginning. However, there was a concern about the policy of giving priority only to economic development in Inner Mongolia style internally. Therefore, the uncomfortable relationship between the Outer Mongolia and the Inner Mongolian people in China was existed. In fact, when I surveyed Ulaanbaatar, the capital city of Mongolia, where the reform and openness of the 1990s and the liberal democracy movement were on the horizon, most of the university students in Outer Mongolia accused the Accident of Tiananmen Square in 1989 and strongly condemned the Beijing government's oppression of Mongolians in Inner Mongolia. As evidence that Outer Mongolia's political reform priority was right, the results of the election of Outer Mongolian leaders in the 90s showed an extremely ideal form of democracy.
Especially in the international community, Outer Mongolia has a sense of superiority in self-regulation such as its own position and flexible foreign relations. Ultimately, however, the Outer Mongolian generosity to the Inner Mongols with Chinese passports rather than Han Chinese with Chinese passports will lead these two peoples as ethnic minorities and independent countries to a process of reconciliation for the distant future beyond conflict. In conclusion, this understanding is based on the balance and harmony between emotional cohesion and real compromise, which is the factor of national emotions. Therefore in this research I'd like to observe precisely the possibility of leaning toward one side by the influence of China or other country.
In terms of cultural identity, the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region has incorporated the traditional Mongolian tradition into the modern society through using the Uighur Mongolian character, while the Outer Mongolian continues to utilize the Cyril script adopted in 1940 to promote communism. It seems that Inner Mongolia is better able to protect their tradition using the old text application. In fact, however, there is a problem in Uighur Mongolian text in Inner Mongolia that only some professional researchers use it constantly, and that ordinary life uses Chinese characters. On the other hand, the use of the Cyril Mongolian character of the Outer Mongolia, which seems to have lost its tradition, ironically contributed to the political reform in 1989 by lowering the illiteracy rate and raising the consciousness level of the general Mongols.
In another way, China threatened the Mongolian people's identity with more fundamental historical distortions through its Northern process (北部工程: although it is not an official name, but the content of the research was to write about Chinggis Khan as one of the emperors of China and to describe Mongolian history as a part of Chinese history). The Outer Mongolian government's criticism of this was also very intense.
To understand of this issue of national identity I focused on what kind of correlation is maintained with the respect of traditional culture in the social flow of the priority of modern economic development.
The purpose of this study is to understand comprehensively what external and internal factors are related to the development of the relations between the Outer Mongolia and the Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region.
I have been conducting field surveys almost every year since 1990 in Outer Mongolia and the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region and even in Bryat Mongolia in Russia. I have seen a clear desire to have another Pan-Mongolism among the Mongolians in contact with the various social classes of both sides.
It is hoped that this study will be the first button to judge whether it represents the resurgence of Asian nationalism based on economic development beyond the problems of the divided Mongols. So far, the main issue in Asian modern history has been the formulation of the cohesion through nationalism and the economic development based on cohesion. But now how can nationalism after economic development really change in the society of diversity? It is necessary to be able to see.
Because, history is not only precisely recognizing the facts of the past, but also it is a continuous dialogue with the past. Eventually, it is a future on the line of the past and present.