Positional Border: China's Boundary Delimitation Report (Volume 1 and 2)

Author: Jin Ergang
Publisher:
Publishing Date: 2000-11-01
Features: This is a report on the boundary survey of provinces and counties in China. The book examines human civilization through the lens of boundaries, presenting social life from multiple perspectives, making it a must-read for policymakers and those concerned with societal development. The history of Chinese civilization spans five thousand years, with ancient texts referring to the land being divided into nine regions. According to the Rites of Zhou, the Great Director of the Earthly Offices was responsible for mapping the land of the state. Since the Zhou Dynasty, Chinese administrative divisions with written and mapped records have existed for about three thousand years, and since the establishment of prefectures and counties during the Qin Dynasty, it has been two thousand years. However, it was only in the 20th century that a serious nationwide boundary survey of provinces and counties was seriously considered. During the Republican era, the Nanjing Nationalist government proposed such a survey in the 1930s, but it was not realized due to the outbreak of the War of Resistance Against Japan. After 1949, numerous disputes arose in China's local administration due to boundary disputes between adjacent provinces and counties. Examining history, reflecting on the future, and considering the overall situation, in 1986, when Cui Naifu took office as Minister of Civil Affairs, he proposed a second nationwide boundary survey. After nearly a decade, by 1995, the Chinese government finally adopted the suggestion, and from 1996 to 2000, the preliminary survey of the land boundaries of provinces and counties was completed. It can be said that this completed a fundamental task of national social management. In the face of an increasingly complex and closely interconnected society, the management and coordination of social life cannot be carried out without clear administrative divisions. This survey can be considered one of the great undertakings in governing the state, and those who govern the country will greatly benefit from reading this book. Below are my personal insights from reading this book.
I. Clarifying boundaries is the primary way to end and prevent conflicts between adjacent areas over resources.
In my childhood, I heard stories from elders about feuds between tribes in pastoral areas, but I did not understand the reasons behind them, thinking they were merely ethical disputes and hatred. However, after reading this book, I realized that the situation is not so simple. Especially on the mysterious Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, I believed that under the influence of religion, the residents there would surely tolerate everything. But this book revealed that even different resident groups engage in violent conflicts over grasslands. This book cites examples of conflicts since 1949, from agricultural areas in the interior to fishing areas at sea, pastoral areas on grasslands, and recently, areas with mineral resources due to unclear boundaries, all leading to conflicts between neighboring residents. From large-scale armed clashes among villagers to battles supported by village Party committees or even higher levels of government, even two villages in Nan County, Guangxi, and Dushan County, Guizhou, due to disputes over the ownership of a well, sparked two armed conflicts. It has become a common practice for governments at all levels to protect their respective jurisdictions, and provincial governments are no exception. In the past, I read in historical texts about vassals fighting under the command of a great landlord, with the dead and injured being taken care of by their own villages. Today, in armed clashes led by village Party branches, there are clear regulations regarding the treatment of participants, the wounded, and those who are legally punished, which is truly eye-opening. Especially in the gold mining areas where Qinghai Menyuan County borders Gansu Tianzhu County, and the grasslands shared by Gansu and Inner Mongolia, from north to south, large-scale artificial deforestation and illegal logging have occurred. These examples show that unclear boundaries and the uncertainty of resource ownership among neighboring residents lead to frantic, exploitative development of non-renewable resources, which is extremely inefficient and destructive to the surrounding environment. The ecological damage caused to grasslands, forests, and fish populations is almost catastrophic. In the past 50 years, nearly one-third of China's land resources have experienced ecological degradation, which is undoubtedly related to this. This further proves, from another perspective, how important it is for human civilization to clearly define property rights and ensure that every part of society is responsible for its assets, protecting property rights so that those who illegally infringe on others' property can be punished promptly. Clarifying the administrative jurisdiction of land, forests, mountains, waters, water, and mineral resources is the basic prerequisite for determining the ownership and development rights of these resources. Therefore, clarifying boundaries is a crucial condition for the protection and rational use of existing resources.
II. Clarifying boundaries is the basis for defining responsibilities and authorities in the administrative power of adjacent parties.
According to the book, since the founding of the People's Republic of China, there have been over 1,000 inter-provincial boundary disputes, involving all provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions except Hainan Province. The disputed area covers 140,000 square kilometers, equivalent to the size of a medium-sized province. Among these disputes, grassland disputes cover 95,800 square kilometers, mineral disputes cover 4,200 square kilometers, land disputes cover 3,500 square kilometers, and forest disputes cover 2,900 square kilometers. Mixed disputes over grasslands, minerals, and forests cover 33,800 square kilometers. For many years, due to unclear boundary divisions, there has been great flexibility in administrative management. In areas with resource interests, adjacent regions have set up their own administrative bodies in the same area. For example, at Hongliuhe Station on the Lanzhou-Xinjiang Railway, where Xinjiang and Gansu have gold mining disputes, Xinjiang has set up the Hami Hongliuhe Meteorological Station, while Gansu has established the Dunhuang City Hongliuhe Administrative Committee. On the Qinghai-Xinjiang border, to compete for the Mengya asbestos mine, Qinghai has set up Mengya Town, while Xinjiang has established Yitongbalu Town. In areas without immediate economic benefits, both sides are reluctant to manage social order, creating blind spots in national administration. Over time, these areas are prone to the emergence of unhealthy social phenomena. Additionally, due to unclear boundaries, both sides exploiting resources increase administrative costs, and in some cases, the lack of daily management forces the administration to turn a blind eye. Therefore, after clarifying boundaries, the administrative authorities also face a clear jurisdiction and defined responsibilities.
III. Clarifying boundaries cannot be a one-time solution and leave everything worry-free.
Although the boundaries of provinces and counties across the country have been largely determined, this does not mean that the newly drawn boundaries will not cause new problems. First, due to natural conditions, some boundary markers may be damaged by geological or climatic factors. Boundary markers in deserts may be buried by shifting sand dunes, leading to unclear boundaries. Over time, the shifting centerlines of rivers and newly formed land in estuary areas due to sedimentation may also cause disputes between adjacent parties. Landslides and debris flows can move or even destroy boundary markers. Lightning strikes can also cause damage. Moreover, it is not impossible for boundary markers to be moved artificially. If new profitable resources are discovered near the boundary, there is a possibility of artificial movement of markers to compete for resources. Therefore, in addition to preserving the results of this nationwide boundary survey in graphical, textual, and electronic data, government departments and grassroots administrative bodies near the boundary lines still need to conduct regular inspections and maintenance. Faced with ever-changing social life, there must also be dynamic boundary management personnel.
IV. The mindset with which boundary surveys are conducted is crucial for both the success of the survey and the future of generations.
Boundary divisions have existed since ancient times, but in traditional China, the central dynasty considered itself the center of the world, and other regions were expected to be subservient. The idea that "all under heaven belongs to the emperor" was deeply rooted. Therefore, there were no serious boundary divisions between the central dynasty and vassal states. The emperor believed that the land was his own, and the titles of vassal kings required imperial certification to be legitimate. The vassal kings also governed the emperor's land, with the only difference being that some were vassal states and others were directly ruled by the emperor. This concept, inherited from the Western Zhou Dynasty, dominated all unified dynasties, including the Qing Dynasty. Under this concept, the central directly ruled regions and the vassal states did not have clearly defined boundaries, unlike the later concept of modern state sovereignty, which demanded clear boundaries and a struggle for every inch of land. For example, the story in the book about Emperor Yongzheng of the Qing Dynasty surveying the border with Annam (now Vietnam) reflects this mindset. In the third year of the Yongzheng reign, Gao Qizhuo, the Governor of Yunnan, was instructed by Emperor Yongzheng to survey the border with Annam. After carefully reviewing historical records, Gao Qizhuo believed that since the Ming and Qing dynasties, Annam had gradually advanced 240 li toward Yunnan and demanded the recovery of all territory according to the Ming Dynasty's boundaries. However, Emperor Yongzheng considered Annam "to have been loyal and commendable" since the beginning of his dynasty, so "it was better to reward them" rather than "disputing a small piece of land." He also believed that "all under heaven are children of the emperor," so he ordered not to make an issue of it. Fearing Gao Qizhuo's persistence, he replaced him with Eai, whom he believed would act impartially. After Eai took office, he adopted a compromise approach, but the Annam King was dissatisfied and submitted a letter to the emperor with strong language. The emperor considered the language disrespectful and refused his request. Later, the Annam King submitted another letter expressing "regret and gratitude," and the emperor ordered to show mercy and reward him, satisfying the Annam King's demands and setting the boundary. The emperor believed that if you were loyal, he would give you more territory and not make an issue of it, considering it an act of kindness for your generations of loyalty. If you were disrespectful, he would immediately revoke the decision, serving as a warning. Under this concept that "all under heaven belongs to the emperor, and all people are his subjects," the view of boundaries was not entirely the same as that of modern sovereign states. This is an issue to be noted when examining the modern Chinese relationship with past vassal states. (See Volume 1, pages 18–21)
Secondly, in boundary division, the question of whether to prioritize superiors or reality is crucial, as it concerns the lives and property of the people. The book describes the division of the Gansu-Qinghai border in 1958–1959, where unrealistic and disrespectful of the basic rights of the original inhabitants, the boundary was divided based on an inaccurate administrative map issued from above, leading to large-scale relocation. This caused significant property and unnecessary life losses for the Su Nan Yugur ethnic group and the Mongolian, Tibetan, Uyghur, and Han ethnic groups. The relocation made their lives and production extremely difficult and caused psychological harm, leading to negative political effects. It was only after the matter was brought to the attention of Premier Zhou Enlai that this wrong approach was stopped, avoiding greater losses. However, this caused serious aftereffects that are not easily eliminated in the short term. This is a serious lesson from boundary division. Local officials who consider the long-term interests of the people and show mutual understanding and compromise can benefit both sides in early boundary division. Otherwise, if disputes escalate, not only will natural resources be destroyed, but there will be armed clashes, with people either dying or injured. On a larger scale, a long-term state of confrontation may arise, where personal safety cannot be guaranteed, affecting production and life for a long time. This is not in the interest of the border residents. If officials are afraid of being blamed for losing territory and fail to show understanding or compromise when they should, the harm to local development cannot be compensated by giving up some land. Secretary-General Jiang Yi of Guilin Municipal Committee understood the profound meaning of the ancient saying "letting the other side have three feet more" and had a higher insight. By actively resolving the boundary dispute between Guilin and the Lingling area of Hunan, both sides showed mutual understanding and defined a long-standing disputed boundary. This was truly a great achievement for the people on both sides of the boundary, who had been severely affected by the long dispute. Later generations should take note.
V. The models for resolving maritime island disputes in the current global context and their implications for China's boundary survey efforts.
In Chapter 5, "The Unquiet Gulf," the book introduces many disputes over islands and coastal shoals between coastal provinces in China. It is evident that the disputing parties are competing fiercely for these exploitable resources, even resorting to violence. Some provinces have even deployed public security and armed police to occupy these islands. For these disputes, sometimes even central intervention cannot calm them down. Apart from the final resolution through central orders to sit down and negotiate or the appointment of special envoys by the center, there is a lack of other non-governmental mediation organizations to mediate and arbitrate. On one hand, this is because our society is not yet developed enough to have non-governmental mediation organizations, and we have not yet moved beyond the pre-modern state form where the government is and the people are unable to self-organize. Civilian non-governmental autonomous organizations and various mediation organizations are underdeveloped. On the other hand, irrational problem-solving mindsets and fixed patterns also contribute to the inability to reach consensus through mutual understanding. The book introduces the case of the sovereignty and economic 200-mile exclusive economic zone dispute over the Yamanen Island between Iceland and Norway, where a non-governmental mediation committee was formed. This committee hired experts to make authoritative determinations. According to expert assessments, the island does not belong to Iceland, but it was recommended that both sides develop it jointly. The governments of both countries accepted this suggestion. The book mentions that "such mediation committees are very popular in the West, such as in the organizations outside city local governments, which often mediate various conflicts and issues between cities." This phenomenon indicates, on one hand, the maturity of civil society in Western countries and, on the other hand, the better understanding of the relationship between people and people, and between people and society's resources, allowing them to coexist better with nature. Therefore, in the face of rights disputes, considering oneself while respecting others, rather than an exclusive mindset based solely on one's own reasons, is also crucial for whether disputes can be resolved and how.
The book introduces four models for resolving disputed maritime areas in the current world: the supranational management model, the joint management model, the agency model, and the joint operation model. The book uniquely points out that for a long time, our geography textbooks and political geography have only emphasized the imperialist colonialism and expansion of maritime hegemony, rarely mentioning the new trends of peacefully resolving disputed territories and jointly developing disputed maritime areas according to international relations norms and new provisions of international law since World War II, especially in the context of globalization. The idea proposed by Deng Xiaoping in 1984 to resolve maritime sovereignty disputes through "shelving sovereignty disputes and jointly developing" has formed various examples internationally, which are not introduced, misleading the public into thinking that maritime delimitation and island disputes "can never be resolved." This objectively encourages irrational nationalism and promotes the idea that relying on force and believing in force is the only way to resolve disputes. "For example, in the new situation where 240 maritime boundaries need to be determined worldwide (post-new maritime law—author's note), only the aspect of its arduousness is mentioned, without mentioning the basic fact that 154 have been successfully delimited, of which 132 have taken effect. For the most representative disputes, such as the Dokdo Islands between Japan and South Korea, the disputes over islands in the Aegean Sea between Greece, Turkey, and Cyprus, and the disputes over waters in Thailand among Thailand, Malaysia, and Vietnam, there is great attention. However, the current popular trend of "shelving sovereignty disputes, implementing joint development, reasonably sharing resources, and jointly bearing costs" in disputed maritime areas is deliberately avoided. This not only seals off and deprives the Chinese people of their right to know in this regard but also loses the reference for learning and in resolving such disputes. From a certain perspective, this is a form of 'closed-door policy' in marine boundary intelligence." The author of the book particularly regrets and expresses disappointment, saying, "It is a great pity and disappointment that to this day, there has not been a single case in inter-provincial disputes over islands, shoals, and adjacent waters in China's coastal areas that has adopted the 'shelving disputes, jointly developing' approach. This not only shows the imperfections in China's basic marine laws and the weakness and chaos in management but also indicates that China's measures in handling marine disputes have lagged behind other countries facing the same problems." (See Volume 2, page 348) Mr. Jin Su's bird's-eye view of the world's development trends indeed gave me many new insights.
The above points are what I gained from reading this book. However, I believe that the idea of peaceful coexistence and resolving disputes peacefully, which China advocates internationally, should not only be a principle in foreign relations but also a basic attitude for the people in handling boundary disputes between administrative regions and various social disputes. Only when governments at all levels and the people culturally move toward civilization and rationality can we avoid emotional and irrational reactions and behaviors in the face of disputes. At the very least, this will disrupt production and life order and damage resources. At the worst, it may lead to tragic losses of life. Additionally, the book reveals some little-known interesting facts, such as the fact that China's land area has not yet been accurately determined. In short, the book contains a wealth of information, and reading it from different perspectives yields different insights. I hope those concerned with national affairs will read it carefully.
The shortcomings of the book are that some materials are arranged somewhat chaotically. I hope the author will have the opportunity to rewrite it and arrange the materials from the perspective of readers' use.