On 15 June 2009, around 10:30 AM local time, wrecking crews working on the “renewal” of Kashgar’s Old City demolished the Xanliq Madrasa. Eyewitnesses report that the medieval Islamic college, listed as an Autonomous Region-level protected cultural site, was knocked down without any protest or ceremony. According to speculation, the “royal” madrasa, apparently located in the yard of Kashgar No. 1 Elementary School, may have been torn down to make room for an athletic field.

Mahmud al-Kashgari, the 11^th-century scholar who compiled the Dīwānu l-Luġat al-Turk, is said to have studied at the Xanliq Madrasa in its heyday. In the 1860s, following a lengthy period of decline at the Xanliq Madrasa and in the Islamic scholarly community in East Turkestan in general, a wealthy merchant from Atush named Abdurusulbay funded its renovation. In exchange, the Xanliq Madrasa was to host primary schools funded by local luminaries. In 1883, it became home to the first experimental school in Xinjiang to mix Islamic and “scientific” curricula. This was founded by Abdurusulbay’s grandsons, Bawudunbay and Hüsäyinbay Musabayov. Although that school was short-lived, its successor, Atush’s Hüsäyniyä School, produced generations of students educated using modern methods. It also spawned a broad-reaching network of similar schools that played a major organizing role in pre-1949 social and political movements. Many of today’s Uyghur intelligentsia can trace their philosophical, political, and sometimes family roots back to the educational efforts that began at the Xanliq Madrasa. The ideology that arose from these movements still resonates today, often in opposition to official communism.

Judging from online message boards, reactions to the destruction have been a mix of righteous anger and self-criticism. Having heard that the Xanliq Madrasa was torn down, many Uyghurs have expressed resentment towards the PRC government. Those who have spoken out feel that the destruction is part of a government “plan” to destroy physical vestiges of Uyghur history and “rewrite” it. This is connected closely to a sense that the government favors Han Chinese development over Uyghur industry and Han Chinese historical sites over Uyghur ones. These feelings of ethnic repression and conspiracy are reinforced by the knowledge that the Xanliq Madrasa was recognized as a protected historical and cultural site, a status that, in this case, clearly afforded it no special status or opportunity for preservation. Many have invoked the destruction of the Cultural Revolution, when many such sites were torn down all across the PRC. Some look back even before 1949 to a historical disregard for Xinjiang culture on the part of “those foreigners” – the Han.

Others, while angered by what has happened, have expressed frustration over Uyghurs’ own lack of initiative in protecting what they see as their history. A frequent refrain is, “If only we had held a protest, maybe we could have stopped this.” Such complaints are typical of those gripes found on message boards all over the Web. Others have pointed out that the very lack of a protest shows that Uyghurs, while mourning for the squandered legacy of their “Grandpa Mahmud,” actually possess a very weak sense of history. Certainly, no one seems to have bothered photographing the madrasa before, during, or following its destruction, and no one on the Web seems to know anything about it, save for Mahmud al-Kashgari’s having studied there.

Perhaps the kindest conclusion we can draw is that there is no real institutional mechanism in place for dealing with ethnic and cultural grievances or, for that matter, for reporting problems of interest to a specifically ethnic audience. The Chinese system of regional autonomy does not allow for official organization by or on behalf of ethnic groups per se. While the Xanliq Madrasa, an institution that should resonate with all Xinjiang Muslims, has been claimed both by everyday Uyghurs and by official narratives specifically as an artifact of Uyghur history and culture, there was no clear way for someone who might have seen the demolition order to publicize it to Uyghurs. Even if word got out, there was no obvious way to organize on behalf of the madrasa’s preservation. All the same, any protest or other actions would certainly have been stunted by a pervasive feeling of helplessness where the preservation of non-Chinese historical sites is concerned, as well as a lack of leadership.

We mentioned in a previous roundup that Uighurbiz, an outspoken online community, was shut down, and that its owner, Ilham Tohti, dropped off the radar for a few days. A week ago, RFA posted an article about Tohti quoting anonymous sources "close to" Tohti saying he’s being closely monitored by the authories and has been told to remain silent. This likely is a backlash to some bold comments Tohti made about employment, discrimination, and XUAR Chairman Nur Bekri in an interview with RFA International after an academic trip to France.

Also from RFA, more details on the recently announced $440 million plan to demolish and renovate parts of Kashgar’s old city. This action is to be done allegedly do to earthquake hazard concerns and to "modernize" the area with electricity and water. An official at the Kashgar Cultural Relics office says the issue is already out of their hands; an official at the Kashgar Tourism Office vaguely and ominously states that "one of the city’s main tourist attractions" would also be "affected by the plan." My guess is the Id Kah mosque.

Researchers in Canada and the United Kingdom have published their research on Internet espionage conducted by the Chinese government. Of note to us is that part of their online counter-snooping lead them to servers in Xinjiang, which is apparently where intelligence units monitoring Tibetan independence groups are based. Huzzah for Xinjiang being China’s e-fort!

Finally, an LA Times article entitled "Clocks square off in China’s West" on the curious time zone issues present in Xinjiang, two time zones away from Beijing, yet officially on Beijing time. Now this isn’t news to most people familiar with Xinjiang, but the article is worth reading, argues Jeff Wasserstorm at The China Beat. As a China academic, Wasserstorm was expecting the usual "I can’t believe it’s not China" spiel by a not-so-deeply-embedded journalist, but was surprised instead to find an article with the right balance of journalistic curiosity, reliance on academic references, and historical/geographical context.