On China's Cartographic Embrace: A View from Its Northern Rim

Although relations between China and Mongolia are good, with no outstanding territorial disputes, Mongolia continues to view its southern neighbor with considerable anxiety. Numerous paranoid narratives circulate, hinting at China’s alleged malevolent intentions, and many Mongols are convinced that China is intent on a takeover. This article argues that this anxiety is located in two particular cartographic gaps. The first is the misalignment between People’s Republic of China (PRC) and Republic of China (ROC) maps, namely the fact that Taiwanese maps include Mongolia within the boundaries of China. For the majority of Mongolian viewers who do not read Chinese, this constitutes a clear case of cartographic aggression. The second gap is found in cultural-historical maps of China that portray large swaths of northern Asia as regions formerly inhabited by Chinese. While neither map constitutes a political claim, the Chinese cultural imaginary each portrays posits Mongolia as “not quite foreign.” Rather than “cartographic aggression,” the term “cartographic embrace” may be a better designation here. Even if Chinese cartographic practices do not index intent, for countries like Mongolia—whose political existence is founded on separation from China—cultural “embrace” can be even more threatening. Keywords: Mongolia, cartography, anxiety, Sinophobia, mapping, individuation, paranoia, territorial dispute

Introduction to "Cartographic Anxieties"

While the term “cartographic anxieties” is metaphorically loaded, it has remained under-theorized and is used to refer to very different situations. A state can experience anxiety when it is subject to the “cartographic aggression” (de Blij 2012) of another. Anxiety can also be found in the gap between state representations and the imaginaries held by the citizens of that state, or between a dominant majority and an ethnic, religious, or political minority (Cons 2016). Further, it can have different temporal resonances in that the gap can index the nostalgic mourning for past territorial grandeur (Callahan 2010; Cartier 2013), evoke a programmatic future (Fortna 2002), or offer poetic and corporealized visions of the nation-state (Ramaswamy 2010). The five articles in this special issue explore various political and cultural reverberations of cartography, as well as the complex set of discursive practices in which it is embedded. The discussion framing these papers began as a panel at the 2016 American Association of Geographers’ annual meeting, which included four of the authors featured here (Akin, Billé, Roszko, and Saxer). The contributions focus on China and its neighbors from the perspective of different disciplines: anthropology (Billé, Roszko, Saxer), history (Akin), and history of art (Tsultemin). In addition to bringing a cohesive and coherent focus to the special issue, this geographic convergence is timely given China’s recent economic and political trajectory. In tracing and analyzing the cartographic tremors of a geopolitical formation in flux, the different articles offer an outline of the mechanics of “cartographic anxiety” and together contribute to a better understanding of the affective power of mapping

Futurs non linéaires : modernité et imaginaires géopolitiques à la frontière sino-russe

Cet article analyse l’évolution de Heihe (Chine) et Blagovechtchensk (Russie), deux villes frontalières qui diffèrent radicalement l’une de l’autre en dépit de leur proximité. Tandis que Heihe s’est transformée, de simple hameau, en véritable ville en l’espace de vingt ans, Blagovechtchensk semble avoir stagné. La frontière sino-russe, fermée pendant plusieurs décennies, est aujourd’hui une interface cruciale d’échanges économiques sociaux et culturels. La région a été notamment témoin d’un renversement des rapports de force économiques, avec la Chine aujourd’hui en tête. Mais si les analystes politiques tendent à interpréter cette évolution comme un renversement total des hiérarchies entre les deux pays, la situation est en fait plus complexe. En dépit de la démodernisation et paupérisation auxquelles ils doivent faire face, les Russes continuent à se percevoir comme plus « modernes » et plus « avancés » que les Chinois. L’article suggère que les notions socialistes d’évolution culturelle et de progrès téléologique ont perdu de leur force et que les imaginaires du progrès et du futur sont à présent fracturés.This article focuses on the two border towns of Heihe (China) and Blagoveshchensk (Russia), which are located a mere 500 yards from each other yet remain dramatically different. While Heihe has grown from a village into a sizable town in the space of two decades, Blagoveshchensk appears, in comparison with Heihe, to have stagnated. Closed for decades, the Sino-Russian border is today a vital interface of economic, social, and cultural exchange. It has also witnessed a complete reversal of economic power relations, with China now leading the way. While political analysts have been quick to interpret this shift as a reversal of hierarchies, the situation is in fact more complex. In spite of widespread trends of demodernization and pauperization, Russians continue to perceive themselves as more “modern” and “cultured” than the Chinese. The article suggests that the socialist assumption of teleological progress and evolution no longer holds true and that ideas of progress and future have become fractured

listed building

This work was supported by the ESRC Project "Where Rising Powers Meet: China and Russia at their North Asian Border

shops and services for Russian tourists

This work was supported by the ESRC Project "Where Rising Powers Meet: China and Russia at their North Asian Border