By Enhebatu Togochog, director of Southern Mongolian Human Rights Information Center

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen,

            I represent the Southern Mongolian Human Rights Information Center (SMHRIC). My goal today is to show that the “Ecological Immigration” policy of the Chinese government in essence represents a gross violation of the human rights of the native Mongols. In view of the limited time, I cannot do full justice to this important issue. I hope to rectify this in future such talks.

            I would like to begin by providing some brief background on the origin and implementation of the “Ecological Immigration” policy in Inner Mongolia, known as “Sheng Tai Yi Min” in Chinese. My source materials are public reports from the Chinese press as well as first hand reports communicated to me through my work at the SMHRIC.

First what is it?

            It is the massive forced eviction of hundreds of thousands of Mongolian herder families from their nomadic pasturelands. It is a policy planned, sanctioned, and carried out by the government of China. It aims to relocate the entire herding and semi-herding population of Mongols from their ancestral lands to agricultural and urban areas; areas predominantly populated by Han Chinese.

            Planning and sanctioning of this massive population displacement started in November 1998 when the State Department Document No.36 “Notice Regarding Nation-wide Environmental Development Plan” was issued to all levels of government at the province, autonomous region and municipal levels. Regional level legislation started in 2001 as a series of government orders urging lower level local governments to implement “ecological immigration” project without delay. Two such regulations are :

1. Autonomous Region Vice-chairman Hao Yi-dong’s “Announcement on Large-scale Relocation” issued in July 2001; 2. Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region’s Approval of the Development Planning Committee’s Bill on Implementing the Pilot Project of Ecological Immigration and Help-The-Poor Relocation passed in August 2001.

            More recently, in June 2003, Inner Mongolian authorities adopted a new land use policy to grant every Chinese citizen the right to “use the land first and complete the application later”, encouraging individuals and groups to come to Inner Mongolia to “open up” the lands. At the same time, the traditional nomadic life-style has been strictly restricted. Party Committees, as well as prefecture and municipality level authorities have extended the policy to “prohibition of livestock grazing” in their zeal to display loyalty to the central government.  

            The “ecological immigration” initiatives  also include projects such as “Ecological Development”, ““Help-The-Poor Relocation in Inner Mongolia””, “Urbanization” and sub-types of “Open Up” such as  “Highly Productive Intensive Agricultural Practice”, “Western Energy to the East”, as well as corporate activities concerning mining and factories.       

Where is the Chinese government going with “ecological Immigration” and how do they seek to justify it?  

There are three main goals:

1)      allowing Han Chinese from all parts of China proper to settle on Mongolian grasslands under the rubric of “opening up and constructing the grasslands”,

2)      displacing the Mongolian herders from their lands under the rubric of “concentrating nomadic population toward townships and cities” or “urbanization”,  

3)      eliminating Mongolian traditional way of life and promoting Han Chinese life style in the name of “regulating the structure of agriculture and animal husbandry.”

These 3 goals are not mutually exclusive aims, but rather together lead to the assimilation and sinicization of the Mongols. Statistics show that the Han population in Inner Mongolia has increased from the ratio of Han to Mongol 1:5 in 1947 to the ratio of Han to Mongol 6:1 today, so complete absorption is within reach.

            The government of China seeks to legitimize the negative social and political consequences of “Ecological Immigration” to the Mongols through various means, which in sum amount to little more than sloganeering and propaganda. The main justification is that ecological immigration is inevitable because the grassland eco-system has been severely damaged by the Mongolian ‘primitive and backward’ nomadic way of life. The authorities claim that the root cause of the sandstorms and the desertification of the grasslands is “overgrazing” by the local herders. But ironically, there is no Chinese term for “over-cultivation”, despite the non-sustainable farming practices of 12 million Chinese peasants cultivating the soil of Inner Mongolia every spring, compared to only 2.5 million Mongolian herding and semi-herding population, who lived in complete harmony with their environment for centuries prior to the influx of farmers.  

            Another popular slogan aimed to legitimize the displacement of the herders is “help-the-poor”. The government has stated that at least 800,000 herders and farmers are living in rural areas under extreme poverty, and these people must be removed from their lands within a few years (see “Overview of Implementing On-The-Spot Help-The-Poor Relocation in Inner Mongolia”, by Inner Mongolian Development Planning Committee, November 30, 2001). We’ll see later that the policy has actually increased poverty among the displaced and enriched only the privileged.

How is the “Ecological Immigration” policy being implemented?

            The Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region Development Planning Committee reported that starting from November 2001, 650,000 herders will be relocated from their lands to “small towns and elsewhere” within 5 years. Of these, 180,000 will be relocated to small towns and 470,000 will be relocated to “elsewhere”. Xin-Hua News confirmed that the project is being carried out and as of October 2002, 200,000 herders had already been relocated and the “livestock herding prohibition” area had reached 20% of total grassland area in Inner Mongolia. The same source reported that livestock herding has been prohibited on 60% of the total usable grassland area in Inner Mongolia.

            Let me provide three examples of how the policy has been implemented. I could give many more.

Example 1

Xin Hua News reported that China’s largest “Open Up Zone”, occupying 5,000 square kilometer grasslands equivalent in area to 10 Shanghai’s was set up in Ujumchin Left Banner’s Ulgai area, the last piece of well preserved best quality wetlands in Inner Mongolia. The source admitted that the main activities in this “Open Up Zone” are “cultivating grassland and growing plants” which have brought, the report says, “severe ecological destruction and no economic benefit”. The “open up” initiative based on “highly productive intensive agricultural practice” is touted by the government as more advanced and superior to Mongolian traditional “backward and primitive” nomadic lifestyle.

Example 2

Beijing Evening News reported in August 2001, that a firm named Oasis L.L.C. initiated a massive agricultural development project in western Inner Mongolia’s Alshaa Right Banner. The project occupied 2,680 hectare land and “blindly opened up large-scale of virgin land without taking into account the local natural condition”, creating an additional 141 hectare desert. The report says, this project “uses the age-old inefficient irrigation method “flood irrigation” which will permanently deplete the local water resource if the 2,860 hectare land is entirely opened up as specified in the contract.”

Example 3

The most common form of forced eviction is carried out in the name of a “National Project”.  This has taken place in all parts of Inner Mongolia. Shuluun-Khuhe Power Plant Project, one of the two largest projects launched as part of the Central Government’s “Western Energy to the East” initiative is a good example. According to a communication from local herders, by January 2002, 3,430 households with 14,691 Mongol herdsmen from this Banner had already been forcibly relocated from their lands and 500 hectares of grasslands was permanently lost. Ground-breaking started in July 2003, and now in the early stages of the project, the number of forcibly displaced herdsmen is increasing. The local government of Shand Som (Shang Du Su Mu in Chinese) has relocated the entire population of Huang-Qi Gachaa (Huang Qi Dui in Chinese), a village home to 84 households with 380 Mongolian herdsmen. Houses and other infrastructure were demolished and even the cemetery which is considered sacred to the Mongols has been dug up and removed to make way for the power plant construction. 

            The government has offered “compensation” to stifle the locals’ anger but with three conditions. One, each household shall be paid 10,000 RMB ($1,100 US). For this payment, the displaced Mongols shall be permanently barred from returning and shall individually and personally bear the responsibility of finding some other livelihood somewhere else. Two, households who do not choose compensation shall receive a 5,000 RMB ($550US) mud house built by the government. However, households who take possession of a mud house must borrow 5,000 RMB from the government to buy an imported Australian cow. Three, heads of households whose age is 60 or above shall not be eligible to borrow money from the government.

These examples show how economic considerations are at the heart of the implementation of the policy which requires the confiscation of the grasslands from the Mongol herders with little regard to appropriate compensation for losses. 

Let’s turn to how Mongols have been affected by the policy?

            Herders have not only been deprived of their right to occupy their ancestral lands following a government order to leave, but have also in practical terms been barred from returning. Consider Article 6 of “Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region Shiliin-Gol League’s ( Xi Lin Guo Le Meng ) Provisional Regulation on Implementing the Policies of Strategic Encirclement and Transfer” states that relocated herders will be allowed to return to their ancestral land after 5 years if and only if:

1)      they are able to manage the grassland “scientifically and rationally”,  

2)      the grassland administration authorities determine that the grassland can be reused,

3)      governments at Banner, County, City and Area levels approve the application.

These are conditions which can never be met by the Mongols. First, there is no assurance that the government will change their view that nomadic herding is “scientific and rational” land management since it has declared it as “unscientific, irrational, primitive, and rough” production. Second, the government has not defined what “reusability of grassland” means, and third, how would politically, economically, socially, and culturally marginalized groups of people ever get approval from so many levels of governments that have consistently been hostile to their conditions.

            So, who will be the people who can “scientifically and rationally” manage the grasslands and obtain approvals from those highly bureaucratic and corrupt governments? Of course, the Chinese individuals and groups who are politically, economically, and socially connected. Essentially, what is going on in Inner Mongolia is a population transfer process which settles Han Chinese immigrants on lands confiscated from the Mongols.

            The displacement of Mongols from their ancestral lands has not proceeded without some resistance. It has been harshly dealt with by the authorities who have mobilized police, security personnel, and “eviction workers” to carry out the relocation. This element of ‘force’ or ‘coercion’ is a clear indicator of human rights violations.  

            Complaints and letters of appeal from the evictees revealed that during the displacement process many herders have been arbitrarily arrested, detained, beaten up, and their private properties have been destroyed, demolished, and confiscated by the authorities. A complaint from eastern Inner Mongolia’s Bairin Right Banner testified to the authorities’ brutal actions as follows: “On one occasion, the government used as many as ten or so police cars, 20-some police motorcycles and nearly a hundred policemen and security persons to fight with bare-handed herders. Livestock have been driven away more than 30 times, 41 livestock have been plundered, 4 people have been beaten up and seriously injured, 2 old herders had fallen into a coma when the policemen intruded into their place to plunder their livestock. Not only the herders’ normal daily life has been seriously interfered with but also they have been arbitrarily fined 4,000 Yuan. This has brought the herders serious economic and mental stress.” (see “A Complaint By Bayan-Khan Township’s Zuun Khar Mod Gachaa and Khoroochin Gachaa’s Herders in Bagarin Rights Banner” from http://www.smhric.org/Hada/Evict_21.htm )

            The Authorities’ coercive actions are well documented in the news media. Xin Hua Inner Mongolia reported how the authorities used police to enforce the livestock herding prohibition (“Forest Police Ensure Encirclement and Sealing off of Grasslands and Prohibiting of Herding”, Xin Hua News, June 13, 2002). Inner Mongolian TV reported the arrest of  4 herders in eastern Inner Mongolia’s Zalaid Banner for organizing villagers to resist the government’s action of renting out their grazing land to outsiders. (“How Grassland Turn to Desert”, Inner Mongolian TV, July 24, 2004). A Radio Free Asia (RFA) report on February 7, 2005 has described the housing condition of the evicted herders of Shiliin-gol League as follows: An Uzemchin herder from Shiliin Gol League said on conditions of anonymity that officials “force us to abandon our land for three to five years. What they offer in exchange is a tiny hut in a town suburb and a one-time payment for the land ownership rights.” “If one wants to retain rights to the pasture, one is not given any money at all. I don’t know what to do.” Another herder from the Shiliin Gol League echoed his account. “I saw the homes they build for resettlers. They are too small, just like a matchbox. The kitchen is the size of a cupboard. I have three children. We simply cannot fit in, even if I move in and decide to buy one milking cow, this alone will cost three times what they offer as compensation for the land.”

             “South China Net” reported inadequate housing given to evictees in Havchil Immigrants’ New Village, Heshigten Banner, Chifeng Municipality. Using pictures taken from the scene the report shows that “many houses collapsed as soon as the construction team left,” and the rest of the houses’ “walls are filled with foam”, roofs are covered with straw, “posing imminent danger to the evictees living there”. (“Project of Immigration or Project of Fooling People?”, South China Net, July 1, 2004).

            According to appeals from eastern Inner Mongolia’s Bairin region, Shiliin-gol League’s Shuluun-huh and Huboot-shar Banners, local herders were involuntarily relocated and there was strong resistance by the herders (see “A Complaint By Bayan-Khan Township’s Zuun Khar Mod Gachaa and Khoroochin Gachaa’s Herders in Bagarin Rights Banner” from http://www.smhric.org/Hada/Evict_21.htm and “Power Plant Project Forces Local Mongols to Abandon Ancestral Lands from http://www.smhric.org/news_30.htm ).

            Under the slogan of “concentrating scattered herders to urban areas”, many elementary and middle level Mongolian schools have been demolished, abandoned, eliminated or relocated. Increasing numbers of parents have been forced to send their children to Han Chinese schools or to stop their kids from any kind of schooling. According to “China Labor Market”, the enrollment rate among the region’s 7,763 elementary schools has decreased 19.4% in 2003 compared to the previous year (“China Labor Market”, May 21, 2004).

            The human and social price paid for the consequences of ecological immigration are staggering. The immediate consequences on the livelihood of the herders include further impoverishment and marginalization, loss of identity, tradition, and education, escalation of cultural assimilation, emotional and psychological trauma. Because of the sudden change of environment and way of life, the evicted herders have lost their sense of community and livelihood. Homesickness and insecurity about the future is common. Since many herders have no Chinese language and professional skills with which they can survive in the Han Chinese predominant society, the numbers of jobless people has increased.

            Coercion, inadequate compensation for losses and a lack of social services and adequate housing are common experiences of the displaced herders.

How would international standards of human rights judge this policy?

            Let’s first consider the United Nations Forced Eviction and Human Rights Fact Sheet which states that “forced eviction involves the involuntary removal of persons from their homes or lands, directly or indirectly attributable to the state” (see “Forced Eviction and Human Rights Fact Sheet No.25). Communications and reports from both sides of evictees and evictors in Inner Mongolia confirm that the Chinese government’s ecological immigration policy leads to the forcible removal of herders from their lands.

            According to “Global Strategy for Shelter to the Year 2001”, “… all citizens of all states, poor as they may be, have a right to expect their governments to be concerned about shelter needs, and to accept a fundamental obligation to protect and improve houses and neighborhoods, rather than damage or destroy them.” Without any dialogue with those affected, this unilateral project is in clear violation of this basic obligation of the state. It has brought further impoverishment to the evictees. According to the “Report of Inner Mongolian Academy of Social Science Pastoral Area Economic Research Department” (August 2003), immediately after implementing the ecological immigration, average income of the evicted herders of 111 households in Sunid Right Banner’s Chihiragt Immigration Village has suddenly dropped from 2,872 yuan in 2000 (before relocation) to 848 yuan only in 2001 (after relocation), and by 2002 it dropped to 503 yuan only. And the average loan of every household increased from 0 to 7,000-8,000 yuan. These statistics show that the United Nations guidelines for compensation and resettlement of forced eviction have not been followed which statse that “at minimum, they [the evictees] should be no worse off than before relocation”. (“Forced Evictions and Human Rights” Fact Sheet, No.25)

            Herders’ rights to adequate housing have been denied during and after resettlement. According to the United Nations Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities Resolution 1995/29, “the practice of forced eviction constitute a gross violations of human rights, in particular the right to adequate housing, the right to remain, the right to freedom of movement, the right to privacy, the right to security of the home, the right to security of tenure … and a variety of additional rights.” After simply throwing the herders into the Immigrants’ New Villages and suburban agricultural areas, the government claims that it has already completed its duty to “resettle” the evictees, without following up with necessary plans for adequate housing and other social and medical services. Reports show that many herders were resettled into small mud huts and abandoned houses where heat, water, and electricity are not properly provided. So the UN Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities Resolution 1995/29 has also been clearly violated.

            According to Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which the government of China has signed, “in those states in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right in community with the other members of their groups, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion or to use their own language.” This kind of cultural, religious and linguistic rights must not be violated in any circumstance by any states especially those state parties including China who ratified it. However, under the slogan of “altering the production mode in grassland”, the Chinese government has mobilized its propaganda machines to undertake the so-called “social ideological work” whose main goal is to nullify the value of traditional nomadic lifestyle and promote the idea of transforming nomadic Mongolian culture into a fully sinicized one. Numerous articles and reports are published, on the one hand, blaming the life style and culture of nomadic herders for “destroying the grassland and causing the sandstorm”, and on the other hand, praising those model herders who have “modernized their thinking” and “finally said goodbye to the Mongol yurt”. All this propaganda has become an ideological mantra of the ecological immigration policy to achieve cultural assimilation. In so doing, they have violated the articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Conclusion

            The ecological immigration policy in its numerous forms such as “ecological construction”, “help-the-poor”, “encircling and transforming”, “arranging the structure of animal husbandry and agriculture”, and “western energy to the east” is political in nature designed to assimilate the Mongols into the greater Han population. As a large scale forced eviction directly carried out by the state, the policy has brought to the Mongols gross violations of their human rights and created a crisis in social, economic, cultural, physical and psychological conditions endangering the existence of the Mongols as a people in the region. Ecological Immigration is a painful, disruptive and involuntary process that is not only against the will of the local Mongols but also against nature.  

<Back>