The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Volume 5 | Issue 11 | Article ID 2575 | Nov 03, 2007

1

Nationalism and Globalization on the Inner MongoliaFrontier: The Commercialization of a Tamed Ethnicity

Li Narangoa

Nationalism and Globalization on the InnerMongolia Frontier:

The Commercialization of a TamedEthnicity

Li Narangoa [1]

Introduction: Imaging Urban Developmenton the Frontier

The history of Inner Mongolia during the lastcentury has been in important respects a storyof Sinicization. On the one hand, massiveimmigration by Han Chinese has transformedthe Mongol community into a minority of around20% in their homeland. On the other hand, as isthe case of other minority peoples in China andelsewhere, there has been a steady erosion ofthe distinctive identity of the Mongols,especially in urban regions. Many now speakand read no Mongolian and have adoptedChinese names, dress and other markers ofChinese culture. Visitors to the capital of InnerMongolia, Hohhot, as recently as ten years agowould have found it very similar in appearanceto a dozen or more Chinese cities of about thesame size. It comes as a surprise therefore that,in the last decade, the cityscape of Hohhot hascome to display a public Mongol identity thatdifferentiates it sharply from other cities inChina. This new public face of Mongol identity isnot a reflection of resurgent Mongolnationalism. Rather it represents a taming ofethnicity by the forces of tourism and themarket through processes of nationalization andglobalization.

Hohhot is located at the foot of the Dalanhar

(Ch. Daqingshan) mountain chain on average1040m above sea level. To the south andsouthwest of the city, the Tumed plain sweepsdown to the great northern bend of the YellowRiver. Today’s Hohhot developed from themerger of two towns constructed in the 16th and18th centuries respectively. The first town wasconstructed in the 16 th century under theMongol Prince Altan Khan (1507-1582) whoreintroduced Tibetan Buddhism to Mongolia andcreated the title of Dalai Lama ("Ocean ofWisdom"). [2] He named the settlement KökeQota, or ‘blue city’ and under his rule, it becamethe administrative, military and cultural centerof the Tumed Mongols who continue to live inthe adjacent area known as the Tumed bannerto this day. [3] Originally, Köke Qota was asmall castle town surrounded by a single wallonly one kilometre long; the town was calledGuihua (‘return to civilization’ or ‘taming thebarbarians’) in Chinese. In the late 17th century,the Manchu emperor Kangxi constructedanother wall outside the existing wall, enclosingareas where Chinese, Hui and Mongol artisansand traders lived. This was the beginning of amixed population within the city wall. Later, anadministrative office, which served the Chinesepopulation, was set up. In 1868 there wereMuslim rebellions in Gansu and the Qing court,fearing that the rebels might attack theirwestern outpost at Köke Qota, constructedanother much larger circular wall around thecity to include an expanded area which housedmany Chinese workers and traders. Thereafter,the city’s Chinese population grew more rapidly.

The second town was a garrison town which theQing court constructed to the east of theexisting town in 1737 and which they called

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

2

Suiyuan (‘pacifying the frontier’). This garrisontown was built in order to control the westernMongols of Tumed, Ulanchab, and Ordos. Ingeneral parlance, the original town of Guihuacame to be called the Old Town (jiucheng) andSuiyuan the New Town (xincheng). Whereas theold town had started as a town, the new townbegan as a mixed garrison settlement with HanChinese and Mongol banner garrisons. Later aManchu banner garrison was added and, stilllater, the Han garrisons were withdrawn. Duringthe late Qing period, the two towns were oftenjointly called ‘Gui-Sui’. During the period of theInner Mongolian Independence movement ledby Prince Demchugdongrob in the 1930s and1940s, the city was called Köke (‘blue’). When itbecame the capital of the Inner MongoliaAutonomous Region in 1954, [4] the name waschanged back to Köke Qota (Hohhot in Englishtransliteration, Huhehaote in pinyin). [5]

The leaders of the Inner Mongolia AutonomousRegion tried to imbue their capital with Mongolcharacteristics. Key buildings, including theInner Mongol ia Museum and Theatre,incorporated Mongol motifs. From the late1960s, however, the Cultural Revolution sweptover Inner Mongolia. Apart from destroying oldcustoms and ideas as elsewhere in China, theCultural Revolution in Inner Mongolia targetedwhat was portrayed as Mongol ethnicseparatism. Emphasising Mongol characteristicswas equated with separatist sentiment, [6] andin the following two decades, the cityscape ofHohhot presented the same concrete blockmonotone. In the late 1990s, however, the paceof change in the urban landscape of Hohhotbegan to accelerate: green spaces werecreated, high-rise buildings went up, betterlighting was installed. Most striking, ethnicidentity became a prominent element inHohhot’s cityscape. [7] The leaders of the cityand of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Regionworked closely with commercial and tourisminterests to highlight the multicultural characterof Hohhot and especially Mongol historical andcultural aspects in order to distinguish it from

other Chinese cities. [8] By making Hohhotdistinctive they aimed to restore the dynamiccharacter of the city that had historically been amajor trading town on the route to Russia andCentral Asia and to give it a global context. Inother words, the newly rediscovered ethniccharacteristics of Hohhot became a means oflocating and branding the city in a globalculture.

The development of Hohhot must be understoodin the context of the broader urbanization andmarket-driven economic forces sweeping China.The imperative of economic growth drivesChinese urban development. [9] Prior to the1980s, Chinese urbanization was limited by thecombination of state restrictions on urbangrowth, limitations on commerce and theprivate sector, and investment prioritiescentered on heavy industry and militarytechnology. The movement of people to citiesand towns as well as inter-city migration weresharply restricted. Since the reforms of 1978, bycontrast, marketization and relaxation ofcontrols on population movement have led toaccelerated urbanization nationwide. [10]Concurrent with the emphasis on modernizationand wealth creation, substantial initiative andresources have passed from the national levelto mun ic ipa l , county , and townsh ipgovernments, as well as to the private sector.[11] In contemporary China not only have largecities accelerated growth, but there has been anexplosion in the growth of small and mediumcities and towns. [12] Chinese cities have beencategorized into five different sizes: super largecities (chaoda chengshi, urban population ofover 2 million), very large cities (teda chengshi,population between 1 and 2 million), large cities(da chengshi, 500,000 to one million), middle-size cities (zhongdeng chengshi, 200,000 to500,000), and small cities (xiao chengshi100,000 to 200,000). [13] Hohhot had belongedto the category of a large city with itspopulation of under one million in recentdecades, but by the end of 2006 its urbanpopulation (non-agrarian) hit one million,

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

3

making it a very large city. [14] The ambition ofthe Inner Mongolia Autonomous Regionalgovernment is to develop Hohhot into a majormetropolis with subregional, national andinternational reach. In 2006, the InnerMongolian Autonomous government issuedregulations targeting the development ofHohhot and Baotou, the region’s steel center, assuper large cities (chaoda chengshi) meaningthat the population of each is projected to top 2million. [15]

This rapid urbanization and increasing interestin developing Hohhot to become a super largecity have to do with the broader idea of buildinga modern and global urban China. Imagebuilding has not only become a part of statepolicy in constructing what is described as asocialist, modern, environmentally sustainable,culturally sound and globally-oriented urbanChina; it has also become a source of pride forlocal officials and citizens, and a selling point forreg iona l and loca l governments andcommunities. This led to an emphasis onregional and local history, culture and heritagein urban planning and cityscape. Theme parksdevoted to traditional, historical and local/ethniccultures appeared first in the Special EconomicDevelopment zones along the Chinese coastand later spread to other regions. Whereas inthe first phases of the process many oldbuildings and historic city precincts werecleared to make way for roads and modernbuildings, later city planners began to payserious attention to heritage. Old temples,monasteries, mosques and anything that mightrepresent a city or town’s image wererenovated or reconstructed to attract touristsand investors. This urban development isintended not only to attract tourists and touristmoney, but also to demonstrate the advancedface of China to the outside world. As Dredgehas pointed out, Chinese economic discourseintersects powerfully with culture. Theenvironment, heritage and nationalism haveimportant implications for tourism planning andproduct development and vice versa. [16]

The Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, notablyits capital Hohhot, was one of many thatresponded to this image building project in thecontext of rapid urbanization. Innovations beganin the 1980s, but massive changes in thecityscape only became clearly visible from thelate 1990s. [17] In 2000, the Inner MongoliaAutonomous regional government proposed theso-called ‘357 project’, projecting goals of urbantransformation for Hohhot over 3, 5 and 7 years:the government projected minor change in 3years, medium change in 5 years and majorchange in 7 years. The plan envisioned annualinvestment of 100 billion yuan. [18] After aninitial frenzy of destruction, Hohhot’s urbandevelopment has stressed historical, ethnic andcultural heritage and an environmentallysustainable urban culture in which historicalheritages have been reconstructed.

I argue that Hohhot’s emphasis on historical andethnic cultural heritage was driven by economicand status interests consonant with the nationalChinese obsession equating urbanization withmodernization rather than by any desire topromote Mongol culture and ethnicity. In otherwords, ethnic culture and images, especiallyaspects of the nomadic Mongol culture, whichhad seemed utterly alien to ‘modern urban’ lifein the new China, moved to the very centre ofthe urban image construction project andbecome valued commodities not for their ownsake but rather for the sake of differentiatingChinese Hohhot from other Chinese cities.Ethnic heritage and culture, previously viewedas signs of backwardness, became the verymeans of catching up with the modernurbanization which is gripping coastal China, asymbol of the uniqueness of the city and ameans of presenting the city to the globalmarket. Paying homage to the visible orsuperficial ethnic culture and heritage forcommercial purpose does not preventassimilation of ethnic culture. This article showshow ethnic culture and cultural heritage havebeen promoted as par t o f the u rbandevelopment of Hohhot in the context of the

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

4

market economy and tourism, how the power ofselling produces and reproduces a selective‘uniqueness’ of ethnicity and of the region in anage of globalization and yet how these specialethnic and regional characteristics -- whateverglobal qualities they might have -- must beframed in the context of changing socialistideology, national politics and unity.

Cultural and Ethnic ‘Make-up’

The contemporary population of Hohhotconsists of Mongol, Chinese, Manchu, Hui(Muslim) and other ethnic groups. The officialdescription of the population composition ofHohhot states: ‘Mongols are the main body(mengguzu wei zuti), Han-Chinese are themajority (hanzu wei duoshu), and some 36nationalities [or ethnic groups] such as Manchuand Hui live together’. [19] In fact, Mongolscomprise a mere 14% of the total inhabitants ofthe city today. Nevertheless, Mongols areformally presented as the ‘main body’ of thecity’s inhabitants, as if to justify the name of theInner Mongolia Autonomous Region. This smallMongol population, however, is the largestnumber of Mongols to live in Hohhot at any timein its modern history. By 1949, 7,115 Mongolslived in Hohhot, representing only 3.4% of theinhabitants, while Hui, Manchus and HanChinese made up 4.9%, 1.2% and 90.5%respectively. The Mongol population of Hohhotincreased after Hohhot became the capital ofthe Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, [20]reaching 14,172 or 5.3% of the population by1954. By 1990, the Mongol population hadincreased to 98,381 or 10.4% of the inhabitants(Hui and Manchus accounted for 3.1% and 1.8%respectively while the rest were Han Chinese).[21] By 2006, the Mongol population hadreached 200,000 which represented almost 74%of the entire non Han-Chinese population ofabout 270,000, or 14% of the total inhabitantsof 1.43 million. [22]

This historical and ethnic composition is thebasis of the very recent ‘ethnicization’ of the

cityscape which in turn is hoped to boosttourism and the local economy. The core of thecity has been developed as four districts,namely Yuquanqu, Saihanqu, Huiminqu andXinchengqu. Set up in 1954, until 1960 thesedistricts were the only components of the city.In the last five decades, however, four adjacentcounties (Togtokh, Horinger, Qingshuihe andWuchuan) and the Tumed West banner [23]have been added to the city. The total areaunder Hohhot administration is 170,000 squarekilometers, of which about 120 squarekilometres comprises the central urban area. In2000, some adjustment was made to the districtdivisions, requiring approval by the ChineseCentral government. In recent years these fourcore districts have been developed followingdifferent emphases.

Yuquanqu (Jade Spring District) is the oldestpart of the city, dating from the 16th centuryand together with Huiminqu has generally beencalled the old town. Though originally built bythe Mongols and the centre of the TumedMongol administration, nowadays the districtemphasises historical monuments such astemples which were built under Manchu rule.Even the very name Yuquanqu supposedlyoriginated in the Qing period. It is said that in1694, when the Kangxi emperor was returningfrom a victorious military campaign against theZungar Mongols and arrived in the town ofGuihua (today’s Yuquanqu), his men and horseswere thirsty but there was no water to drink. Hishorse began to dig a ditch from which a springemerged. From that time forward, the springwas called Yuquan (Jade spring). Reportedly thespring (by then a well) was covered only in1976. [24] The district boasts historic Buddhisttemples and pagodas as feature attractions. Itsold temples have been renovated and a newpark constructed along with shops surroundingthe temples. Even the old grey concretebuildings which surrounded the temples werepainted in colours to match the temples.

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

5

Antique shops at the Dazhao Temple, Hohhot.There is even a market for large Mongoliantraditional objects such as this wooden cart.

The newly built entrance to the Dazhao Temple,Hohhot, with apartment houses freshly painted to

match in the background.

Huiminqu, the Hui or Muslim District, dates fromthe 17th and 18th centuries when Hui merchantssettled outside the town of Guihua. In 1950 thearea was proclaimed an autonomous HuiDistrict (huimin zizhiqu) but in 1954 its namewas changed to Hui District (Huiminqu).Huiminqu was completely renovated in ‘Muslim’style in 2006. By mid 2006 all 184 buildings onthe district’s main street (some 1150m long)had been rebuilt in ‘authentic’ Muslim style suchthat a brand new looking Muslim streetemerged from the old grey concrete buildings.[25] The architectural facelift was proposed byan American design company and the projectcost 65 million yuan. [26] The new look of thestreet is indeed impressive with its gold shiny

roofs and “muslim-style” motifs and colours. Iteven looks ‘authentically’ historical, especially ifone does not know that the façade wasc o m p l e t e d o n l y i n 2 0 0 6 . W h i l e t h ereconstruction affected only the facade of thebuildings, the result is an exotic and attractivestreetscape for tourists.

The main street of Huiminqu, Hohhot, after thecosmetic surgery in “Hui or Muslim-style”

Saihanqu (Beautiful District) has beenconst ructed as a ‘wh i te -n ight town’(baiyecheng), meaning that the district is somodern that, it is averred, night looks like day.The district, which is the most recentlydeveloped section of the city, emphasizes themodern features of light and water. [27] It islocated in the south eastern part of the city onwhat was formerly farmland which wasdeveloped into an urban precinct in 2000 whenHohhot redefined its district administration. Themain street of the area that linked the Baitaairport and the city center was lined with lavishlight designs, apparently oblivious to the cost ofthe energy consumed.

Xinchengqu (Newtown District), which hadoriginally housed Mongol and Manchu garrisons,was given Mongol cultural characteristics. In1990, 53% of the Hohhot Mongol populationl ived there and comprised 15% of thepopulation of the district, while the Manchus,who also had a garrison settlement there butarrived later than the Mongol garrison, todaymake up only 2.9% of the district’s population.

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

6

[28] The Mongol population is concentrated inthis district because, when the Inner MongolianAutonomous Region government moved toHohhot, government offices and culturalinstitutions, with a substantial Mongol staff,were located here. As the buildings in the HuiDistrict have been refashioned in the Muslimarchitectural style, so too have many oldbuildings in Xincheng been outfitted withMongolian ornaments, though not as drastic asthe former. Parks have been created in whichMongol style monuments dominate and Mongolarts are displayed. A Chinggis Khan square wasset up around a huge bronze statue of theMongol hero. New streets and parks have beencreated using the names of Mongol historicalpersonages. For example, a new main street inthis district is called Chinggis Khan Boulevard.This street, located in the northeastern cornerof the city close to Dalanhar (Daqingshan)mountain, will be the axis of a series of newlyconstructed cultural and landscape attractions:a large new theatre, a sports centre and aMongol Yuan cultural corridor.

Park benches with Mongol saddle motifs

In 2002, specialists from Tongji University inShanghai were invited to design the project. In2003, local planning and design specialistsreviewed the draft plan. In 2004, specialists,including city planners, landscape experts,economic analysts, architects and lightengineers from the US, along with local

specialists, worked on the detailed plan anddesign. This construction project and itsplanning in conjunction with internationalexperts was reported as an exemplary processfor building a beautiful streetscape to achieve‘international standards, [using] a strong localcultural atmosphere’. In November 2005, thecity council set up a commission to landscapeand design Chinggis Khan Boulevard. Anevaluation group (pingshenzu) of 11 academicsin the field of Mongolian history, culture, art andarchitecture was nominated as part of thecommission. The experts checked theauthenticity of the historical events, motifs andart forms involved. [29] The motto of theplanning and design group, which consisted ofinternational and national specialists, was:‘mobilize the steppe tradition, display adynamic culture, demonstrate an overall“human character” (renxing) in design, andmarry the ethnic cultural essence with domesticand international architectural elements.’ [30]The architecture along the Chinggis KhanBoulevard is modern, the amalgamation of‘ethnic contents’ is limited to superficialornamental and monumental decorations.

Brand new exclusive apartments in Hohhot withMongol rock painting motifs on the outer wall

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

7

Buildings refurbished with Mongol ornaments

Xincheng has been constructed as the symbolicfocus of Hohhot. The street was to represent‘the new outlook and symbol’ of Hohhot.Chinggis Khan Boulevard was to depict thesteppe and Mongol Yuan dynasty culture wouldbe the new symbol of Hohhot: according to HanZhiran, a Mongol who is the Party secretary ofthe city council, ‘as soon as outsiders see thisstreet they will immediately recognize it asHohhot’. [31] Constructing a Mongol culturalambience is the central theme not only in theXincheng district, but in Hohhot as a whole. Thecity has been made to take on distinctive ethnicMongol characteristics to represent the InnerMongolia Autonomous Region itself. Han Zhirandeclared that ‘a city has to have its own specialcharacter. Hohhot, as the capital city of aminority autonomous region, is to emphasizethe Mongol ethnic cultural character and tocarry this into every single building, to makebuildings cultural marks with a clearlydistinctive cultural composition and thushighlight Hohhot’s charm’. [32]

Alongside the majority Han Chinese, theMongols, Hui and Manchus form the main ethnicgroups. Currently, the ethnic cultural characterof the Mongols and Muslims has been embodiedin the urban development of Hohhot. TheManchu cultural emphasis, by contrast, is notvisible. The Muslim-style and Mongol-styleornaments and architecture and monumentsare emphasised in the Old (Huiminqu andYuquanqu) and New Town Districts where the

Hui and Mongol population are concentrated.The special characteristics are created as anemblem that distinguishes Hohhot from othercities and as a symbol of multiculturalism andethnic harmony. In other words, ethnicity isbeing used to highlight local distinctiveness.

Ethnicizing Hohhot and Tourism

In China, it is widely recognized that the ‘ethnicm i n o r i t y ’ a r e a s a r e e c o n o m i c a l l yunderdeveloped and the central government’sslogan is to develop the minority ethnic areasand enable them to catch up economically byencouraging minority regions to capitalize ontheir “wealth” – specifically their ethnic cultureand heritage. Since the 1980s, with theintroduction of economic reforms, it becamepossible, indeed people were encouraged, toemphasize the distinctiveness of InnerMongolia. Hohhot has long been regarded as afrontier town by the central government andplaced amongst the second ranked citiesnationally. But the Hohhot authorities weredetermined to catch up with other provincialcapitals. The city participated keenly in nationallevel projects and competitions. If promotingethnic culture had once been an indicator ofseparatism, emphasising ethnic local culturalcharacteristics become a road to success innational level competitions and attractingnational projects. In other words, competition atthe national level has driven the leaders of InnerMongolia, and Hohhot in particular, to embracethe local ethnic cultural character and heritage.

Two major national level projects boostedawareness of local heritage and ethnic cultureamong Hohhot and Inner Mongolia leaders. Thefirst was the campaign for the creation of anational level historical and cultural heritagecity in the 1980s. In 1982, the Chinese CentralGovernment issued a ‘law on preserving culturalheritage’ (Zhonghua renmin gongheguo wenwubaohufa) and nominated 24 cities as ‘historicaland cultural cities’ (lishi wenhua chengshi).Hohhot was not on the list. Nevertheless it

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

8

responded to this central government initiativeand promoted Hohhot’s historical and culturalheritage. Then in 1984, the municipalauthorities for the first time set up an office toadminister cultural heritage (HuhehaoteshiWenwu Guanlichu). In 1986, the city wasnominated as a national level ‘historical andcultural city’. [33]

The other event that has influenced theleadership in Hohhot to think actively about thehistorical and ethnic cultural heritage of the cityand its attractiveness for the rising tourismmarket has been the campaign to join the muchhyped Chinese project called Opening-up theWest (Xibukaifa). The grand project of Opening-up the West was a central government policythat aimed at developing the economy ofwestern China, including the Northwest,securing ethnic solidarity and social stabilityand contributing to national security. [34] Afeature of this policy was the creation of so-called ‘open frontier cities’ (yanbian kaifangchengshi). ‘Open’ in this context meant easieraccess for outside settlers, visitors andinvestment, as well as the possibility ofadditional government financial support. Again,Hohhot had to lobby to be nominated. It had toproject itself as culturally unique and important,using ethnicity and its ethnic cultural heritageas part of the campaign. It claimed that as afrontier city it could contribute much to ethnicunity and thus national security. The InnerMongolian leadership was determined to riditself of its ‘third world’ image [35] within China,and attract extra revenue from the centralgovernment. In 1992, Hohhot finally succeededin getting its ‘open frontier city’ nomination.

One more national level competition is crucial toHohhot’s image building and its relationship toits ethnic cultural image. That is the quest tobecome an Environmentally Friendly Model City.Since 1997, 47 cities have been designatedEnvironmentally Friendly Model Cities. Hohhothas yet to win this honour. There are 30 criteriafor an Environmentally Friendly Model City.

These range from clean air to clean water andfrom clean streets to a green environment. It isreported that Hohhot has only been able to fulfil18 of the 30 conditions. In the last couple ofyears, the leaders of the city have strengthenedtheir resolve to improve the city’s environment.The city council emphasized construction of agreen town with fresh air and dust-free streetsby reducing the use of coal for heating and bycontrol l ing automobile exhaust. Theirdetermination was demonstrated by theircampaign to achieve six goals: ‘blue skies, bluewater, green colors, comfort and quietness,tidiness and cleanliness, and sustainability’. Thecity council set up a group to instruct people atevery level of the city and to ‘craft a model[city]’ (chuangmo). [36] To achieve the goal of‘clean, beautiful, harmonious, unified andmodern’ [37], a so-called 86310 Green Projectwas launched on the occasion of the 60 th

anniversary of the Inner Mongolia Autonomousgovernment in August 2007. ‘8’ stands forconstructing eight cultural attractions, [38] ‘6’stands for constructing six parks, ‘3’ forcompleting three continuing park constructionprojects and ‘10’ for completing ten greenstreets. By June 2006, approximately 2 milliontrees had been planted. [39] Building anecologically sustainable (shengtai chengshi) andhuman-friendly city has been the goal in anattempt to present Hohhot as a model city to itspeople and to the central government. [40]

The Mongol steppe image would be engaged tohelp build an environmentally sustainable city.[41] Lawns were put in every school yard andstreet corner and in some places statues of‘grazing’ goats or sheep were installed. To bringthe steppes closer to city life, the area aroundHohhot was introduced as tourist attractions.Even areas more than 100 kilometres distantfrom the city were presented as ‘steppesaround the city’. [42] The Mongol steppes haveoccupied popular imaginations in two conflictingways: one as an idyllic green space for bothMongols and non-Mongols; the other as abackward and lonely place for non-Mongols. The

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

9

romantic image has now been further upgradedto a ‘heavenly’ place with endless green grassand fresh air, a place where rich but busypeople can relax. It was believed that linkingHohhot’s image of urban development with thefresh green Mongol steppe would present thecity as a model of environmentally sustainableecological urbanization (huanbaode orshengtaide). [43]

‘Lambs’ on the ‘Steppe’ in a city park

The emphasis on ethnic cultural distinctivenessis meant to complement Hohhot’s modestindustry and harsh climate and attract moretourists. In terms of industrial output, Hohhotcannot compete with the major coastal cities. Interms of a recreational tourism industry, it doesnot enjoy the year-round mild climate thatcoastal towns provide; its summer is short.Therefore, to make the city attractive to theoutside world, distinctive ethnic characteristicsoffer the most useful trademark. Moreover,though short, the summer provides a dry andrelatively fresh climate which most southernChinese cities lack. This is a basis for attractingvacation visitors. Tourism has been booming inChina. [44] In 2000, domestic tourists logged740 million visitor trips. [45] To compete fortourist dollars, ethnic cultural heritage hasemerged as the main source of regionaldistinctiveness. Along with maintaining asustainable environment, ‘steppe culturetourism’ (caoyuan wenhua luyou) has been one

of the ten major projects that the InnerMongolia Autonomous government hasproposed as part of its ‘Westwards opening’vision. [46] The fresh dry climate, the image ofa green and cool grassland and ethnic culturaldistinctiveness are keys to Inner Mongoliatourism.

Investment in the urban development of Hohhotas a city with ethnic characteristics was alsopart of the steppe culture tourism project. Theemphasis on urban development for tourismreflects a recognition that most of China’stourists are comfort-minded and will spend mostof their trips in cities with amenities such ashotels and superior dining. The countryside ismostly experienced in day trips. Overall, thequest of attracting tourism has worked. Frombeing a region that attracted very little internaltourism, Inner Mongolia is reported to havereceived more than 7 million tourists during thefirst half of 2006. The Hohhot area itselfreceived about 430,000 tourists during themonths of July and August. The region’s incomefrom tourism increased by 38%, and that ofHohhot by 41%, compared to the previous year[47], if we can believe this official survey.

From Cityscape to Cultural Industry

Success in transforming Hohhot’s cityscape andin attracting internal tourism encouraged theInner Mongolian authorities to plan furtherventures based on the area’s distinctive culturalidentity. ‘Whether a city can compete dependson its cultural resources, cultural atmosphereand cultural level,’ commented one official.‘Building a culturally distinctive city is animportant means of competing in the globalmarket’. [48] They began to refer to a regionalcultural industry (wenhua chanye) which was tobe developed as a means of strengthening theculture-based economy of the AutonomousRegion. An editorial of the Inner Mongolia DailyNewspaper (Neimenggu Ribao) described thecultural industry as the most essential elementin the regional economy, stat ing that

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

10

‘developing the cultural industry is an importantpath to building a socialist culture under themarket economy and to fulfilling people’sspiritual needs; it is also a new growing aspectof the development of an economics-orientedsociety’. The sense of domestic competition forcommercialized culture has become acute. ‘Ifwe do not develop and strengthen the culturalindustry of our region, it will be difficult tocompete in the future and [our] rich culturalresources might be “stolen” by others’. FromAugust 2006, the newspaper created a columndedicated to Steppe Culture (cuoyuan wenhua).[49] While the statements and reports were fullof hype and unsubstantiated connections,nevertheless they positively assess ethnicculture.

One manifestation of this new cultural industryis a theme park focused on Mongol customs andhistory. The Mongol Customs Park (Menggufengqingyuan) opened on the outskirts ofHohhot in July 2006 as a state-designatedpriority tourist project. It has been built as anAAAA level tourist attraction with an investmentof 4.5 million yuan. [50] Being recognized as anAAAA tourist site means designation as one ofthe best constructed and economicallybeneficial sites in the region. This is a “goldentitle” in terms of tourist attractions. [51]Amongst other things, statues of historicalpersons, Mongol soldiers and Mongol imperialcamps were recreated in the park. The park wasconstructed purely for tourism purposes; localpeople complain that it simply aims at cashingin on tourists, especially foreigners, offeringnothing to locals in a city that has little greenspace.

Newspaper announcement for the opening of themain hall of the Mongol Customs Park, Hohhot.Text reads: “Environmentally sustainable park:Mongol warrior camp has opened”. (Reprinted

from the Huhehaote Ribao, April 2006.)

Mongol warrior statue in the Mongol Customs Park

In addition, the Hohhot authorities introducedcultural festivals and memorial days which theyhoped would create opportunities to promotespecial event tourism. Until recently, there wasno regional festival, except for the anniversary

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

11

of the establishment of the Inner MongoliaAutonomous Government. In recent years,however, big festivals have been created andare celebrated on a massive scale.

The first such festival was the Zhaojun culturalfestival (Zhaojun Wenhuajie). Wang Zhaojunwas the Chinese woman who purportedlymarried the Hun chieftain Huhanye and becamea symbol of ethnic solidarity and peace. In herhonor, a large memorial was built in a suburb ofHohhot. The name Zhaojun was selected for thenew festival in part because a few industrialproducts already bore her name, hence theexpectation that the festival would promotelocal industry. There were also political reasons:the name or legend of Wang Zhaojun was asymbol of the solidarity of nationalities, andInner Mongolia (and specifically Hohhot) was tobe promoted as a model of national solidarity.[52] The festival was inaugurated in 1999 and isa 10-14 day annual festival featuring a majorconcert and other entertainment, conferences,packaged tourism and other cultural andbusiness activities. It has been held in July orAugust since its inception and its scale hasincreased steadily. The Zhaojun tomb, whichhad been merely a l ittle hil l in the wildlandscape on the outskirts of Hohhot, has beendeveloped into a major tourist attraction. Thefestival attracts tourists and raises awareness ofHohhot and Inner Mongolia far beyond theborders of Inner Mongolia. Each year theentertainment program highlights a theme andwell-known artists are invited from Beijing andother places to perform. The main theme for2002 was ‘Hohhot moves in step with the world’(Qingcheng yu shijie tongxing). [53] Each year,foreign guests and business people, especiallyfrom Russia, Mongolia and the Central Asiancountries, are invited to the festival either asguests or for business negotiations.

A curious manifestation of Inner Mongoliancultural activity is the Milk Days Festival(niunaijie), introduced in September 2006.Hohhot’s nomination as China’s milk capital

(Zhongguo rudu) in 2005 provided a hugemarketing opportunity which the city decided totransform into an annual event. The festival wasorganized by the Hohhot Party Commission andcity council in cooperation with the municipalparty propaganda department, Inner MongolianTV, Hohhot’s Daily Newspaper and the Yili MilkCompany. With its own flag and song, it toutsthe earnest motto: ‘Develop the city throughthe milk industry’. A procession passes throughthe town and a ‘Milk Princess’, ‘Milk Prince’ and‘Milk Baby’ are selected to heighten interest inthe procession, which is followed by eveningconcerts. [54] The aim of Milk Days is of courseto promote the very marketable milk productsof Inner Mongolia. The region’s two major dairycompanies, Yili and Mengniu, are both based inHohhot and a Zhongguo rudu (China’s milkcapital) sign was posted on every street cornerand on taxis and buses. Soon after thenomination in August 2005, a big open airconcert was organized and one of the best-known Mongol singers, Tengri, from Beijing, wasinvited to perform. Several thousand listenersgathered and the singer appeared on stage witha long hadag (Mongolian ceremonial scarf) anddressed in full Mongol costume. The main songperformed was Mongolian, but it was sung inChinese. The majority of the listeners wereChinese, and they were the main consumers ofthis ‘ethnic culture’. To mark the event, a hugemonument was erected in the city centre. Themonument was made of ‘milk tea’-colored (i.e.beige) marble: the upper part was a bucket-shaped arch with four walls, said to symbolizethe openness of Hohhot in all directions, whilethe lower part was in the form of a pair of cowhorn goblets, which were traditionally used todemonstrate brotherhood, alignment oralliance. And thus the pair of goblets symbolizes‘the great unity of the different nationalities(minzu datuanjie). On the front and back of themonument was written ‘China’s Milk Capital’ inMongolian and Chinese scripts respectively,along with Mongol-style motifs. [55]

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

12

Monument to commemorate Hohhot as the ‘MilkCapital of China' (in Mongolian)

Monument to commemorate Hohhot as the ‘MilkCapital of China' (in Chinese)

In short, the cultural industry that had beencreated on the basis of ethnic history, cultureand legends, combined with ideologicalelements, has been deployed to enhance theeconomic power of Hohhot and the region in the

global marketp lace. In th is context ,paradoxically, the emphasis on Mongol ethnicculture and steppe culture serves to make thecity more cosmopolitan. The milk industry ofInner Mongolia is entirely in non Mongol hands,but as a commodity milk plays upon memoriesof the central role of milk in the Mongol diet. Atthe same time, milk is a quintessentiallyWestern food with strong overtones ofmodernity. The smooth white liquid standssimultaneously for local ident ity andglobalization. In the words of one governmentofficial, ‘the more ethnic, the morecosmopolitan’. [56]

Hohhot: A Steppe Metropolis

Apart from the re-emergence of a local culturalheritage in the built environment of Hohhot andInner Mongolia, symbolic cultural images havealso been part of the urban image constructionand economic pursuits of the regionalgovernment. The images of the steppe and thecity had seldom been linked with urbanadvancement in modern times and in fact theyhad often been viewed as diametrically oppositephenomena. Now, however, the Mongol steppeis seen as an essential part of the urban imageof Hohhot.

In 2005, Hohhot launched a plan to project thecity as a ‘steppe metropolis’ (caoyuan dushi).According to the official statement, the concept‘steppe metropolis’ included improving theservice sectors and especially constructingbuildings and streets with ethnic and regionalcharacteristics; providing residents with apeaceful environment and strengthening thecultured atmosphere (renwen qifen). While thecity itself was referred to as a ‘steppemetropolis’, the airport at Hohhot was alsocalled a ‘steppe airport’ (caoyuan kunggang)and has been extended to serve as analternative to the Peking airport during the 2008Olympic Games in that city. [57]

From 2004, the World Steppe Cultural Festival(Shijie caoyuan wenhuajie) has been regularly

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

13

convened in Inner Mongolia. The first suchfestival was organized in Hohhot along with theZhaojun festival. The second was convened inBaotou, the major industrial city of InnerMongolia. The third in the series was held inOrdos. Hohhot, Baotou and Ordos areconsidered to be the golden triangle ofeconomic development in western InnerMongolia. The event mainly consisted of large-scale concerts in which steppe culture wasshowcased. Apart from the World SteppeCulture Festival, the Zhaojun festival has alsostrongly promoted the steppe image. The maintheme of the opening Zhaojun festival concertin 2006 was Tiantang caoyuan (“the heavenlysteppes”).

The keywords in Hohhot’s image building inrecent years have been the ‘steppe’ and the‘horse’. To build a culturally representative andglobally attractive city, the city council initiateda campaign to identify a suitable image and acompetition for the best motif from April 2005.The results of the competition were published inHohhot’s daily newspaper on 14th August 2006.No first prize was awarded, but there were twosecond prize winners, three third prize winnersand five honorable mentions. Nine out of the tenprize winners referred to steppe culture in theform either of the color green or of gallopinghorses. [58] However, the green grass in thecentre of Hohhot consists only of patches oflawns here and there which, moreover, aregreen during summer only; and the only horsesthat can be seen are engravings, or metal orstone horse statues. For a long time the onlygalloping horse was the stone statue atop theInner Mongolian Museum. [59]

Southward galloping horse on top of the InnerMongolia Museum

Horse statue

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

14

Horse sculptures

Emphasizing the Mongol steppe culture as asymbol of regional identity and urbandevelopment, however, is not only a culturaland economic issue, but also a political issue.The nomadic culture on the steppe iscompletely different from that of the agrarian-settler culture, the dominant culture of mostparts of rural China, and therefore i tdistinguishes the region from other areas ofChina. This distinctiveness, however, must notbe allowed to contradict the principle that InnerMongolia is an integral part of China, a part ofthe Chinese cultural and historical heritage. Tothis end, steppe culture has to be ‘correctly’defined. Research on steppe culture wasintensified from 2001, with researchers of theInner Mongolia Academy of Social Sciences.Their project was designated a “speciallyentrusted project” (tebie weituo xiangmu) bythe state, a significant project for the 60th

anniversary of the Inner Mongolia Autonomousregion. [60] Thus, from 2004 onwards, alongwith the World Steppe Culture Festival,academic conferences on steppe culture havebeen held annually. The third such conferencewas held in August 2006 in Dongsheng, with116 papers presented. [61] He Tianming, thevice director of the Historical Research Instituteof Social Sciences in Inner Mongolia has comeup with a most attractive definition for steppeculture. He maintains that the nomadic andsteppe cultures are different. Steppe culture, heargues, is a higher and more dynamic culturethan nomadic culture, and he has presentedsteppe culture, along with the traditionalChinese Huanghe (or Yellow river) andChangjiang (Yangzi river) cultures, as one of thethree main streams of Chinese civilization(Zhonghua wenming). He divided steppe culturehistorically into several distinct epochs. Theperiod between 209 and 906 AD, he argued,could be seen as the construction period of theregional culture and was mainly based onnomadic culture. The culture between the years907 and 1205 he saw as one of regional spatial

and economic expansion. The period between1206 and 1911 is presented as a period of fulldevelopment, during which time the basis waslaid for China’s unification and the steppe andsettler cultures absorbed and assimilated eachother. [62] His research can be understoodwithin the ideological framework of constructinga basis for integrating steppe culture intomainstream Chinese civilization. Some havehailed his work as the best contribution onsteppe culture to date.

The definition, according to the reports, is stillvague: ‘Steppe culture is the creation of jointefforts by indigenous peoples, tribes and otherethnic minorities or nationalities (minzu) and aculture of adjusting the steppe ecology. Thisculture includes the steppe peoples’ modes ofproduction and lifestyles, their customs, socialsystems, religious beliefs, sports, arts etc.’ [63]Steppe culture has been reported in romanticterms as a culture which ‘respects nature andecology’, and ‘its spirit is progressive,cultivated, heroic and positive’. [64] The partysecretary of the Communist Party of the InnerMongolian Social Science Academy, WuTuanying, argued that steppe culture andnomadic culture were different. ‘Steppe culturebelongs to a regional cultural type, like themaritime and river cultures, but nomadicculture belongs to an economic type of culturealong with the hunting culture and agriculture.… Steppe culture emerged from the steppeecology and spread all over the world. Not allsteppe areas developed a nomadic culture.’ [65]He also reportedly said that like the Egyptianand Yellow River cultures, steppe culture wasmuch older than nomadic culture.

One interesting aspect of this analysis is itsrejection of the conventional idea equatingnomadic life with steppe culture, arguinginstead that steppe culture constitutes a higherform of civilization. Nomadic culture has beenconsidered a backward and primitive culture inMarxist as well as modernization theory. Hisargument can be understood as an attempt to

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

15

elevate the regional cultural image and thus theimage both of Mongol civilization and Chinesecivilization as whole. This research on steppeculture has been a major project of theCommunist Party Propaganda Department’sState Planning Office and at the same time it isalso an Inner Mongolian Autonomous Regionmajor cultural development project. [66] Theessence of this project and its conclusion was toclaim that ‘steppe culture’ was ‘an importantpart of Chinese culture’, and thus developingHohhot as a city with a distinctive Mongol andsteppe culture was still framed within thecontext of the broader ‘Chinese civilization’.Interestingly, one of the nuances of theargument is its international element, namelythat steppe culture is a dynamic culture whichspans the globe.

Conclusion: Dressing up Hohhot

The city of Hohhot has been changing atbreakneck speed in recent years, and especiallysince 2005, in preparation for the 60 t h

anniversary of the Autonomous government.Most of the streets have been torn up, ready forre-paving or broadening, parks have beenconstructed, new buildings have been built andold ones renovated in the old ‘cultural’ style.The pace of change in Hohhot has been so rapidand extreme that a newspaper reported that‘those who return home from outside will notrecognize Hohhot’. [67]

Road construction and the building of newerand more spectacular buildings, were aimed atpromoting Hohhot’s image, its economicdevelopment and its place as a regional andglobal city. The emerging cityscape bringsmajor positive changes including an impressivenew ‘ethnic style’ along its new avenues. Thephysical changes, however, also have theirdownside. Most major roads in Hohhot havebeen rebuilt three to five times over the last 15years. Local people are fed up with this constantconstruction and call the roads of Hohhot ‘ziproads’ (lasuolu), meaning that they are as easily

opened and closed as a jacket zipper. The hastyconstruction and reconstruction of the localcultural heritage has also given rise to popularcr it iques centred on the fact that therenovations have mainly been made to improvethe facade but have done little for the interiorfacilities. The urgency to create a ‘beautiful’ and‘clean’ city to commercialize and commemoratethe 60 t h anniversary of the Autonomousgovernment in 2007 left little time to improveanything from the inside out. Local critics saythat the changes are nothing more than ‘puttingclothes and hats’ (chuanyi daimao) on the oldconcrete buildings.

The discourse of preserving or inventing ethniccultural heritage and characteristics in an urbanlandscape has never been so vigorous inmodern China in general, and in Inner Mongoliain particular. Urban development in China isshaped by an economic discourse which is tiedto cultural values and changing socialistideologies. In ethnically distinctive areas suchas Inner Mongolia, Tibet and Xinjiang, however,urban deve lopment has hard ly beenstraightforward. Urban development, along withtourism planning, involves the interplay ofnationalism and modernisation. Ethnic cultureand heritage was long considered backward,primitive and antithetical both to China’ssocialist civilization project and subsequently tothe modern, progressive urban culture thatsought to replace it. Emphasizing distinctiveMongol and other ethnic cultures initiallyseemed politically dangerous, even associatedwith separatism. Only in recent years, undermarket pressures, however, has ethnic culturecome to be both polit ically valued andeconomically prized. [68] For the first time,globally significant local characteristics havebeen emphasized and ethnic cultural heritagehas been seen as an inseparable part ofcreating a unique urban landscape. Hohhot is aprime example of this trend.

At the same time, the commercialization ofMongol culture constitutes an annexation and

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

16

subordination of Mongol identity to Chineseidentity. For centuries, Mongol identity wasregarded as a polar opposite of Chinese culture,an archetypal barbarian culture that should beresisted and/or transformed. As the politicalthreat of Mongol separatism recedes, theopportunity has arisen to appropriate Mongolmaterial culture as a romantic, perhapsprimitive version of Chinese culture. Moreover,points of similarity between Mongol and modernWestern culture, and the grassland culture havebecome symbols of cosmopolitanism in InnerMongolia. Ethnic cultural heritage has beenreconstructed as quickly as it was destroyedduring the Cultural Revolution in the 1960s. Butwhat is the meaning of the new culture for apeople cut off from essential elements of itshistoric heritage? The uniqueness of urbanHohhot and the region of Inner Mongolia as awhole, under present political circumstances,can only be viewed as unique within the newframework of steppe culture presented as oneof the three originating themes of Chinesecivilization and not something distinctivelyMongol. In the current discourses of economyand the cultural industry, profit and culturalunity now underpin political unity.

Promoting ethnic culture and heritage in thecityscape is a means of making the city moreattractive to domestic and internationalaudiences because they can offer values whichdistinguish one place from another. In otherwords, ethnic culture and cultural heritage givesHohhot a distinctive brand in the global marketand these elements constitute economic capitalfor the region. Promoting ethnic culture andheritage in an urban culture, however, does notnecessarily mean respecting the intrinsic valueof the cultural heritage, but rather adapting ormoulding that culture and heritage forcommercial and/or nationalistic purposes. In thecase of Hohhot the question remains whetherthat culture expresses Mongol interests orinterests of the Chinese state and Chineseentrepreneurs who hold dominant positions inthe autonomous region. It seems clear that

promotion of ethnic culture and culturalheritage will last only as long as leaders believein its commercial value and see that valuecompatible with political and market goals.

Li Narangoa is Reader in Asian Studies in theCollege of Asia and the Pacific, AustralianNational University. She is coeditor with OleBruun of Mongols from Country to City:Floating Boundaries, Pastoralism and City Lifein Mongol Lands, NIAS Press 2006.

She wrote this article for Japan Focus. Postedon November 15, 2007.

Notes

All photos were taken by Li Narangoa and LiChimge, unless otherwise noted.

[1] I would like to thank Uradyn E. Bulag,Robert Cribb and Mark Selden for theirconstructive and insightful comments onan earlier version of this paper. Anearlier version of this paper waspresented at the Symposium on UrbanDevelopment in Asia which was held atthe Osaka Metropolitan University inSeptember 2006.

[2] He constructed the Dazhao Monasteryhere in 1579 and initiated a translationprogram of Buddhist sutras. XilituzhaoMonastery, just across the street from theDazhao Monatery, was built in the 1780s.

[3] Today, the Western Tumed banner ispart of Hohhot and the Eastern Tumedbanner is part of Baotou.

[4] The Inner Mongolia AutonomousRegion was founded in 1947, well beforethe founding of the PRC in 1949.

[5] The name Qingcheng, a literal

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

17

translation of Köke Qota into Chinese, isalso used, but only in artistic or romanticcontexts.

[6] The Inner Mongolian RevolutionaryParty, which actually existed in the 1920sto 1940s became the main target of RedGuards.

[7] Hohhot with a population of 821,000 in1995 nearly doubled its population to 1.5million (including the farming population)by 2003. Zhao Xiuxing et al., Huhehaote“cheng zhong cun” xianxiang paoxi[Analysis of the “village in city” inHohhot], Nei Menggu Shifan Daxuexuebao, vol. 35, no. 2, March 2006: 106.

[8] The first Mongol-type building afterthe Cultural Revolution was the Hohhotcity office with a Mongol yurt-style roof.This design was taken from the ChinggisKhan mausoleum in Ordos built in 1956.Also, a mobile “story telling yurt” was putup in the heart of the town (thanks toUradyn E. Bulag for this information).

[9] For example, see George C S Lin,‘China’s industrialization with controlledurbanization: Anti-urbanism or urban-biased?’ Issues & Studies 34 (6), 1998:98-116; L J C and G H Cui, ‘Economictransition at the local level: Diverse formsof town development in China.’ Eurasiangeography and economics, 43 (2), 2002:79-103.

[10] For example, the number of bigcities (population number between500,000 and one million) increased from27 in 1978 to 78 in 2004, the number ofmiddle-size cities with a population

between 200,000 and 500,000 increasedfrom 59 in 1978 to 213 in 2004; thenumber of small cities with a populationbetween 100,000 and 200,000 increasedfrom 115 in 1978 to 320 in 2004 [ZH-Wikipedia, accessed on 17 September2007]; B Naughton, Growing out of thePlan, Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1995.

[11] J Logan (ed.), The new Chinese city:globalization and market reform, Oxford:Blackwell, 2002.

[12] George C. S. Lin, “The growth andstructural change of Chinese cities: acontextual and geographic analysis”,Cities, vol. 19 (5), 2002: 229.

[13] Available here, accessed onSeptember 17, 2007.

[ 1 4 ] I t w a s a c o m m e r c i a l a n dadministrative town until the 1950s andlater developed a textile industry andsteel plant.

[15] Manzhouli and Erlian were to bedeveloped international trade gateways.“Neimenggu zizhiqu renmin zhengfuguanyu yinfa jiakuai chengzhenhuafazhan ruogange guiding de tongzhi”[Inner Mongolia Autonomous Government’Regulation Announcement on PromotingUrbanizat ion] , Inner Mongol ianGovernment Document, [2006] no. 3,January 11, 2006, accessed on July 11,2007.

[16] Dianne Dredge “Development,Economy and Culture: Cultural HeritageTourism Planning, Liangzhu, China”, AsiaPacific Journal of Tourism Research, vol.

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

18

9, no. 4, December 2004: 405-23.

[17] Especially in preparation for the 50th

anniversary of the Inner MongoliaAutonomous Government in 1997 (ZhangYanjie, “Gouzhu xiandaihua shoufu dezuyin” [Constructing the ModernCapital’s Footprints], NeimengguXuenquan [Inner Mongol Propaganda],no. 3 1999). The first Gallop Bridge forcars was built for this occasion. Thebridge was not only to help regulateinner city traffic, but was also supposedto symbolize the advance of Hohhot. Theconstruction was a failure in terms ofdesign and aesthetics, too steep to beused for busy vehicular traffic and toougly to serve as a symbol for the city.

[18] “2005 Di er jie Zhongguo xibu(Ne imenggu) chengsh i j i anshezhanlanhui” [The second exhibition of citydevelopment in Chinese Northwest (InnerMongolia) in 2002, accessed on July 11,2007. The Hohhot leadership wasobsessed with road construction: Thecity’s roads have been broadened, pavedand repaved. Roads were built hastily,and with each new leader, the “old ones”were ripped up and reconstructed. This ispartly due to failure to consider water andsewerage plans, so that each time wateror sewerage pipes required repair oraugmentation, roads were torn up again.Corruption was also partly to blame.Constructing or reconstructing roadsoffers lucrative opportunities for all levelsof management and leadership. With thefrenetic rebuilding of the roads, the citylooks like a constant construction site. Inthis respect, contemporary China hassome resemblance to the “Construction

State” identified by Gavan McCormack,The Emptiness of Japanese Affluence,Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe, 1996.

[19] “Fazhan zhong de Huhehaoteyuanying nin” [A Developing HohhotWelcomes you], Neimenggu Xinwenwang,November 17, 2006, accessed on July 12,2007.

[20] The Inner Mongolian AutonomousGovernment was located first in Ulanhotin the eastern part of Inner Mongoliabetween 1947 and 1949 and then inKalgan (Zhangjiakou) between 1949 and1952. In 1952, it moved to Guisui andthus Hohhot became the joint capital ofSuiyuan province and the InnerMongolian Autonomous Region. In 1954,Suiyuan province was incorporated toInner Mongolia Autonomous Region andHohhot remained capital of the InnerMongolia Autonomous Region.

[21] Wang Junmin, “Mengguzu renkou dechengshihua jincheng” [The Urbanizationof the Mongol Population], ZhongyangMinzu Daxue Xuebao [Journal of theCentral University for Nationalities], vol.29, no. 144, May 2002: 29-32.

[22] “Fazhan zhong de Huhehaoteyuanying nin” [A Developing HohhotWelcomes you], Neimenggu Xinwenwang,November 17, 2006, accessed on July 12,2007.

[23] A Mongol administrative unit, similarto a county.

[24]Beifang Xinbao, May 4, 2006: 6.

[25] ‘Showfu “44331” gongcheng jinzhan

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

19

shunli’ [The capital’s ‘44331’ projectshave been progressing well], HuhehaoteRibao, July 5, 2006.

[26] 19,900 of the district’s 300,000inhabitants are Muslims. Available here,accessed on July 13, 2007.

[27] Since 2005, about 5.8 million Yuanhas been invested to develop this districtas a town without night and with water -totally modern situated in a greenenvironment. To create a beautifulnatural environment, about 30,000 winegrapes and 3,000 other fruit trees andflowers have been planted (‘Changyou“changle buyecheng” manbu “huapenyitiaojie”’ [Comfortably walking throughthe ‘long enjoyable white-night town’ andwatching the ‘street of f lowers’,Huhehaote Ribao, June 2, 2006].

[28] Wang Junmin, “Mengguzu renkou dechengshihua jincheng” [The Urbanizationof the Mongol Population], ZhongyangMinzu Daxue Xuebao [Journal of theCentral University for Nationalities], vol.29, no. 144, May 2002: 29-32.

[29] Huhehaote Ribao, May 20, 2006.

[30] Ibid.

[31] “Neimenggu sida biaozhixing jianzhugongcheng jinru quanmian shigongj ieduan” [Inner Mongol ia’s fourrepresentative construction projects all inprogress], Beifang Xinbao, 19 July 2005;“Hushi jiadi yong xiandai jianzhu jiajieMeng-Yuan wenhua” [Hohhot is the bestplace for marrying modern architecturewith Mongol-Yuan culture], BeifangXinbao, September 21, 2006.

[32] “Huhehaote: gaobinwei jianshecaoyuan dushi” [Hohhot: High qualitydevelopment of a steppe city], HuhehaoteRibao, July 5, 2006.

[33] By 2006 there were all together 99such cities, Hohhot being the only one inInner Mongolia. Wang Juan, “Lishiwenhua mingcheng Huhehaote de fazhanbaohu” [The Deve lopment andMaintenance of the Historical andCultural City of Hohhot], Neimenggudianda xuekan [Journal of Inner MongoliaRadio & TV University], vol. 73, no. 9,2005: 17-22.

[34] Hu Angang, “Jiakuai xibu kaifa dexinsi lu” [New Ways of FosteringWestward Development], Zhongguoguoqing fenxi yanjiu baogoa [ResearchReport on China’s Current Affairs], no. 8,2000.

[35] Uradyn E. Bulag, “Municipalizationand Ethnopolitics in Inner Mongolia”, inOle Bruun and Li Narangoa (eds),Mongols from Country to City: FloatingBoundaries, Pastoralism and City Life inthe Mongol Lands, Copenhagen: NIASPress, 2006, p. 67.

[36] “Ba Huhehaote jiancheng guojiahuanbao mofan chengshi” [MakingHohhot into an Environmental lySustainable Model City of China],Huhehaote Ribao, June 5, 2006

[37] “Shoufu chengjian yao yiren weibentuchu tese tigao pinwei” [In building aprovincial capital we must make peoplethe focus, highlight the distinctivenessand elevate the quality], Huhehaote

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

20

Ribao, June 9, 2006.

[38] The eight cultural attractions underconstruction include the Inner MongolianExhibition Center, Inner MongolianTheater, Inner Mongolian Sports Centre,Inner Mongolian Museum, InnerMongolian Youth Center, ZhaojunMuseum, Museum of Chinese products,and the Chinese Equine Museum(“Huhehaote: gaobinwei jianshe caoyuand u s h i ” [ H o h h o t : H i g h q u a l i t ydevelopment of a steppe city], HuhehaoteRibao, July 5, 2006).

[39] “Qingcheng ‘86310’ yuanlin huhuagongcheng jinzhan sunli” [Qingcheng’s“86310” green project has beenprogressing well], Huhehaote Ribao, June23, 2006.

[40] Huhehaoteshi renmin zhengfuwenjian, no 26, 2006 (March 29, 2006),p.28.

[41] “Ba Houhehoute jiancheng guojiahuanbao mofan chengshi” [MakingHohhot into an Environmental lySustainable Model City of China],Huhehaote Ribao, June 5, 2006

[42 ] “Sh iqu zhoub ian caoyuanquanjiechu” [Connecting with the steppessurrounding the city], Huhehaote Ribao,July 13, 2006.

[43] The biggest iron and steel industrialcenter in China is Baotou, which is alsothe biggest city in Inner Mongolia. It liesbarely 150 km from Hohhot. The heavyindustrial smoke from Baotou pollutes theair not only of that city but also ofHohhot. Moreover, until very recently,

most of the heating and cooking systemsin the region used coal fuel whichproduced a lot of smoke, and because ofthe Dalanhar (Daqingshan) mountainchain which half surrounds Hohhot, thesmoke is not easily dispersed in winter.Hohhot and Baotou had the image ofbeing two of the most polluted cities inChina and the constant reconstruction ofroads and buildings made the city appeareven dustier than ever.

[44] World Tourism Organization, 1997,in Dianne Dredge “Development,Economy and Culture: Cultural HeritageTourism Planning, Liangzhu, China”, AsiaPacific Journal of Tourism Research, vol.9, no. 4, December 2004: 405-23.

[45] There have been many organizedtours in recent years: arriving in bigcoaches, following tour guides with redflags, photographing hastily and scurryinginto shops to buy souvenirs.

[46] Tang Gongshao Su Shaoqiu, Xibu dakaifa: Zhanlue zhi’nan [Strategic guide tothe Westward Great Opening-up],Chengdu: Xi’nana Caizheng DaxueChubanshe, 2000, pp. 292-93.

[47] “Zongxiang zhuzhu nide zhangfang”[Always wanted to follow your lead],Beifang Ribao, August 18, 2006.

[48] “Zhaojun wenhuajie zhuli shoufufazhan duoying” [The Zhaojun festivalpromotes the capital’s development],Huhehaote Ribao, August 10, 2006.

[49] “Eerduosi hunli: minzu wenhuachanye de ‘Qing qima’” [Ordos Wedding:the rise of the ethnic cultural industry],

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

21

Neimenggu Ribao, August 17, 2006.

[50] “Menggu fengqingyuan zhengshikaiyuan’, July 29, 2006.

[51] China’s tourism destinations aregraded A, AA, AAA and AAAA accordingto the quality of the sites, the servicesoffered and their economic potential. Aand AA level tourist sites can be sodesignated by local tourist bureaux andauthorities. But to be recognized as AAAor AAAA level sites, the sites have to beevaluated by provincial and central stateauthor i t ies . ( J ing L i , “Tour ismEnterpr ises , the State , and theConstruction of Multiple Dai Cultures inContemporary Xishuang Banna, China”,Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research,vol. 9, no. 4, December 2004:320-21.

[52] “Suzao caoyuan lishi mingcheng,zhanshi shoufu wenhua fengcai” [Mouldsteppe historical town, display capital’scultural style], Huhehaote Ribao, July 24,2006. For more on Zhaojun and herchanging role in history, see Uradyn E.Bulag, The Mongols at China’s Edge:History and the Politics of National Unity,Lanham, Boulder, New York, Oxford:Rowman & Littlefield, 2002.

[53] In 2004, the Zhaojun festival wascombined with the first InternationalSteppe Culture Festival (shijie caoyuanwenhuajie). The main theme of thefestival that year was thus steppe cultureand the steppe was claimed to be the“first trademark and the greatest invisibleresource of Inner Mongolia”. “LiujieZhaojun wenhuajie jianjie” [Briefsummary of six Zhaojun festivals],

Huhehaote Ribao, July 24, 2006.

[54] “Shoujie niunaijie shengda kaimu”[The grand opening of the first MilkFestival], Huhehaote Ribao, September18, 2006.

[55] Xi Shui, Shanghai jiyou [ShanghaiPhilately], no. 6, 2006: 11.

[56] “Chengshi wenhua jianshe de hexinlilun: wenmai chuancheng xingxiangshe j i ” [The core o f c i ty cu l turedevelopment: transmitting the culturalpulse and designing imaginatively],Huhehaote Ribao, August 19, 2006.

[57] “Huhehaote: gaobinwei jianshecaoyuan dushi” [Hohhot: High qualitydevelopment of a steppe city], HuhehaoteRibao, July 5, 2006.

[58] Huhehaote Ribao, August 14, 2006.

[59 ] Th i s s tone ho rse once rannorthwards. Dur ing the CulturalRevolution that orientation, like so muchelse, came under attack: the north wasthe direction of Ulaanbaatar, rather thanBeijing. It was thus reversed and nowfaces south, towards Beijing.

[60] Beifang Xinbao, September 6,2006:6.

[61] “Woqu caoyuan wenhua yanjiu liluntixi chubu xingcheng” [The tentativeformation of an academic theory onsteppe culture], Neimenggu Ribao,August 18, 2006.

[62] “100 duowei zhuanjia xuezhe geicaoyuan wenhua xia dingyi” [Over 100

APJ | JF 5 | 11 | 0

22

experts offer a definition of steppeculture], Beifang Xinbao, August 21,2006.

[63] Ibid.

[64] Beifang Xinbao, August 29, 2006:1.

[65] Ibid.

[66] Ibid.

[67] Befang Xinbao, August 3, 2006.

[68] Where ethnic cultural promotiontranscends the official economic frame, itcan pose sensitive political issues. Therecent closure of a Mongol internet chatroom that aimed to attract funds fromMongols to help poor Mongol studentscontinue their study, and the jail sentenceof a Mongol intellectual, Hada, illustratecontradictory elements in ethnic policy.