Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
ive to the UN Commission on Human Rights, Mr. Long Xuequn, speaking at the fifty-third
session of that body in 1997, is quoted as saying that, “in China, there are no indigenous
people and therefore no indigenous issues” (Erni 2008:358).
The international community has regarded this statement as a declaration by fiat that Ch-
ina does not have to provide its minority nationalities with the rights commonly expected
by indigenous peoples. China has long had at least one delegate serving on the UN Per-
manent Forum on Indigenous Issues, a key advisory body to the UN Economic and Social
Council. However, the delegate was nominated by the Chinese government, in contrast to
most of the delegates, who are elected or appointed by the indigenous groups from the na-
tions they represent (UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues 2007).
9
This raises a more fundamental question of what the precise meaning of
indigenous
might be. Even the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, arguably the most
important international agreement on the proper treatment of the world's 300 million indi-
genous people, fails to provide a definition of the concept. Various bodies, including the
International Labor Organization, the UN Working Group on Indigenous Populations, and
even the World Bank, have formulated their own. These definitions include common ele-
ments such as descent from a group who inhabited a region prior to colonization or con-
quest by other groups; a degree of political autonomy and self-determination; and a collect-
ive effort to defend a shared cultural heritage (Bodley 2008).
Butnearlyallofthewordscomposingsuchdefinitions—the nouns,adjectives, andverbs
alike—are tainted by ambiguity. What does it mean to claim descent from a particular
group? What sort of time scale should be used when discussing the occupation of land or
claims over natural resources? What does it mean to maintain political autonomy or self-
determination, particularly in a region such as Yunnan, where the defining characteristic
has long been resistance to administrative control? And what exactly constitutes cultural
heritage when culture is constantly in flux—whether through internal processes such as
cultural innovation or through the exogenous forces of acculturation, assimilation, market
integration, or political repression?
Making a philosophical argument about the importance of cultural preservation and
autonomy in the context of dam-related resettlement is not as simple as it sounds and can
place one on the slippery slope toward essentialism. In Yunnan, such discussions seem in-
evitablytocomearoundtoideasofculturalpreservation,culturalautonomy,or,sometimes,
the rights of indigenous communities. After all, this is part of Zomia, a region where such
autonomy is a defining characteristic. Following a recent presentation I made at Minzu
University in Beijing on the topic of “cultural preservation and economic development,” a
doctoral student in anthropology offered some biting criticism:
