Mr. Jing:
I watched some news on the webset of TIME. it is some reports about the tragedy occured in Xinjiang province, which has mentioned the conflict between force and local people, as what you have mentioned. But that kind of conflict was the consequence of that contingency, not the reason of that.

and another question:
do you deem a nation is proper to a country?
 it seems that the Europeans  care about that opinion very much, which can be seen from the word "nation". but it seems not very suited for china in the chinese opinion.
you know, from a historical view, settlement policies was adopted by governers even in the YUAN dynasty, when china was under the rule of a minority nation(you know I say that words without discrimination). and thanks to that policy, the comercial had been developed rapidly, and people tend to be less discriminating to each other, because any discriminations to the people who come from another ethnarch equals to discrimination to their own family. (I am not supporsed to advocate for the settlement policy, as which will arise to disappearance of special culture, but this problem is not the essence of our topic). So, what I want to say essentially, if Han chinese can suffer and live happily under the sway of a minority nation, and regard that effort of Mongolia empire as their own effort, treating an emperor as their own emperor, they (ancient chinese) might have no conception about notion but a country. Indeed, from the formation of society, I deem chinese people almost never separated their society into nations before modern time. How many Mongolians,obligated by the settlement policies, changed their motherland and pour into the south of China during YUN dynasty? They changed their custom from pasturage to agriculture, from roving to settling down. They was totally mingled with Han chinese and almost never come back to Siberian llano. Their offspring never tought themselfes as mogolianes or Han Chinese, not only because they are half-blooded but also they are separated into society ranks more than into nations. Ranks, in the ancient China, such as bureaucracy, landowner, peasant.
On the other hand, from a globalized view, Karl Max once wrote:"National differences and antagonism between peoples are more and more vanishing, owing to the development of bourgeoisie, to freedom of commerce, to the world market, to uniformity in the mode of production and in the condition of life corresponding thereto." Today, the world is prcisely situated into the condition as Max had predicted. No matter who in which nation wheather believing which religion or not, they had to participate in economic competion to survive. In other words, according to globalization, people more and more was separated essentially by economic relationships than  by the nationality, religion faith, cuture background. So I am confused, under the might of globalization, why so many people are caring extremely about their own national status? It seems being contravenced with the demand of capitalism, which requires the world with less barriers and less borders. Can you explain that?
you know, and you always know, I am not a advocater for selfish Han-ism, and I am not a Populist. what I cannot understand is what is precisely the essence of nation meaning?  How the nationality plays an importent roll in today's world, even more importent than to respect lives.
by the way, I called a friend this afternoon. She is from XinJiang province. She told me something, and because what she told me is what her parents witnessed, so I believed that is not rumor but truth. She said "indeed violence happend in earlier night. some uighus criminal start to kill Han chinese in some lanes stealthily, and the second day, i.e. july 5,largescale conflict was happened concequnentely "
I want you tought about it deeply and write back in english. first for communication, and also for studing.

xulang 090710