Explaining the Chinese framing of the “terrorist” violence in Xinjiang: insights from securitization theory

Trédaniel, Marie; Lee, Pak K.

doi:10.1080/00905992.2017.1351427

Cited by 25 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In order to do so, it must deal firmly with various threats to security and territorial and Tibet as sites of existential threat legitimises massive investment in security apparatus and violence against inhabitants there. While agreeing with cognate scholarship inspired by the Copenhagen School of Securitisation that a good way to study China's militarised policies in Xinjiang (see Tredaniel and Lee 2017) and Tibet (Topgyal 2016) is through securitisation, the focus of this paper is not the specificities of securitisation but the wider explanation of why and how it is adopted, legitimised and normalised. Securitisation, this paper argues, is a product of the specific nature of nation-state building that China implements in Xinjiang and Tibet: China is a colonising nation-state.…”

Section: Securitisation Practices Of Chinamentioning

confidence: 95%

Colonization with Chinese characteristics: politics of (in)security in Xinjiang and Tibet

Anand

2018

Central Asian Survey

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

China as a victim rather than a proponent of modern colonialism is an essential myth that animates Chinese nationalism. The Chinese statist project of occupying, minoritising and securitising different ethno-national peoples of Central Asia such as Uyghurs and Tibetans, with their own claims to homelands, is a colonial project. Focusing on China's securitised and militarised rule in Xinjiang and Tibet, the article will argue that the most appropriate lens through which this can be understood is neither nation-building, nor internal colonialism but modern colonialism. It argues that the representation of Uyghurs and Tibetans as sources of insecurity not only legitimises state violence as a securitising practice but also serves contemporary Chinese colonial goals.

show abstract

Section: Securitisation Practices Of Chinamentioning

confidence: 95%

Colonization with Chinese characteristics: politics of (in)security in Xinjiang and Tibet

Anand

2018

Central Asian Survey

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Having often clashed with Chinese authorities, the Uyghurs have been subjected to a series of so-called strike hard campaigns, leading to mass arrests and detentions over several decades (Guiora, 2014, p. 51). Following the Al-Qaeda orchestrated attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001, like many governments around the world, Beijing leveraged the widespread fear of Islamist terrorism to justify extraordinary repression against the Uyghurs (Trénadiel & Lee, 2018, pp. 190–191).…”

Section: The Silence Paradox: How China Has Prevented Criticism From mentioning

confidence: 99%

Controlling Beliefs and Global Perceptions: Religion in Chinese Foreign Policy

Brasnett

2021

International Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the foundation of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has sought to control every aspect of religion in Chinese society. Recently, the CCP has increasingly leveraged religious institutions to disseminate a positive narrative of its religious policies in an effort to preserve or enhance its relations with countries that identify with those religions. This has enabled Beijing to avoid criticism and even increase international support despite widely reported violations of religious freedom in China. This article expands the concept of religious diplomacy to explain the PRC’s dynamic use of soft power, censorship and coercion in its international relations. Drawing on the examples of Buddhism, Christianity and Islam, this paper explores the CCP’s efforts to mobilize its religious institutions in order to (a) promote China’s unique religious culture, (b) strengthen domestic control through foreign relations and (c) preserve foreign relations by controlling international perceptions.

show abstract

“…The concept of securitization has been shown to bear explanatory power when applied to a wider range of issues, including ethnic tensions, national identities, and minorities issues (Butler 2020;Jutilia 2015;Trédaniel and Lee 2018). It has been used to show how specific minorities have been securitized or how parties involved in tensions/conflicts have performed as securitizing actors (Olesker 2014;van Willigen 2010).…”

Section: Analytical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Securitizing Borders: The Case of South Tyrol

Carlà

2021

Nationalities Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Situated at the interplay between ethnic politics, migration, border, and security studies, this contribution analyzes processes of securitization of borders in South Tyrol, an Italian province bordering Austria and Switzerland with a German- and Ladin-speaking population and a past of ethnic tensions. South Tyrol is considered a model for fostering peaceful interethnic relations thanks to a complex power-sharing system. However, the arrival of migrants from foreign countries and the more recent influx of asylum seekers have revitalized debates around the borders between South Tyrol/Italy and Austria and among South Tyrolean linguistic groups. The current COVID-19 pandemic has brought further complexity to the issue. I use the concept of securitization—the process through which an issue is considered as an existential threat requiring exceptional measures—in order to understand why and how borders become exclusionary and restrictive, shaping dynamics of othering. With this framework, the article explores how South Tyrolean borders have been subjected to (de)securitizing and resecuritizing moves in discourses and practices. In this way, I shed new light on debates on the articulation of borders and interethnic relations that are occurring due to recent international migration, consolidation of nationalist agendas, and the current pandemic.

show abstract

Explaining the Chinese framing of the “terrorist” violence in Xinjiang: insights from securitization theory

Abstract: The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record.

Cited by 25 publications

References 38 publications

Colonization with Chinese characteristics: politics of (in)security in Xinjiang and Tibet

Colonization with Chinese characteristics: politics of (in)security in Xinjiang and Tibet

Controlling Beliefs and Global Perceptions: Religion in Chinese Foreign Policy

Securitizing Borders: The Case of South Tyrol

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About