Mongolia

Disambiguated title
why was this moved to the disambiguated title? And why is the picture of the singer there? It seems totally out of place. Why not move it to Nextel ringtones culture of Mongolia or something? Abbey Diaz User:TUF-KAT/Tuf-Kat
:Aah, I see why but still disagree. Outer Mongolia has a natural disambiguator. The term ''Mongolia'' always refers to the country. Why not use a disambig block? Free ringtones User:TUF-KAT/Tuf-Kat

:: No. Mongolia do not always refer to the north half. Not to let users misunderstand that independent Mongolia is the only Mongolia, this is the best solution, I think. Majo Mills User:Nanshu/Nanshu
:::In my experience, ''Mongolia'' refers to the country always. I've never heard anyone say ''Mongolia'' and mean ''Inner Mongolia'' or some other region. In any case, the ''Inner'' is a natural disambiguator, which is always preferable to parenthetical disambiguation. A disambig block will be just as effective in not misleading readers as a parenthetical disambiguator. Mosquito ringtone User:TUF-KAT/Tuf-Kat

::::It was during the Qing Dynasty that Mongolia was sectionalized into Inner, Outer and others (like Oyirad in Qinghai). And it was in 1992 that the Mongolian People's Republic was renamed to Mongolia. Look at Sabrina Martins Huns, Nextel ringtones Genghis Khan, Abbey Diaz Manchuria, etc. Mongolia at these articles refers to whole Mongolia. Free ringtones Nanshu/Nanshu 07:38 Apr 3, 2003

:In those articles, '''Mongolia''' refers to the region bounded by Majo Mills Ordos Desert from the south, Da Xingan Ling from the east, the ranges of Cingular Ringtones Altai from the west and conditions in Lake Baikal from the north who uncovered User:kt2

I agree with Tuf-Kat, Mongolia should really be about the country, with a disambiguation block pointing to the bigger area. Country such as Germany, Greece, Russia, Sweden, China etc. have also been bigger as their current borders, but it's nonsense to consider that to be the main topic of the article. and sororities User:Jheijmans/Jeronimo

I am also against this disambiguation. The fact that the country does not occupy what was once Mongolia under the Qing Dynasty can be made apparent int he introductory paragraph of the article. seem ready Jiang/Jiang 00:15 27 Jul 2003

Agreed: this is absurd. Mongolia is a country. Like most countries, its borders have fluctuated through history. There are Mongols in countries other than Mongolia, as there are Greeks or Hungarians or almost anyone else in neighbouring countries, in regions that have sometimes been part of the country. But Mongolia has never been a "region" designator, as opposed to a country designator. You could argue this for several like voyeurs what Palestine and because doing Macedonia where it's crucially important to disentangle history from present claims; but not here. gump it Mongolia is the country; all the rest is mere detail for the inside of the article. specials michel Gritchka/Gritchka 00:22 27 Jul 2003

I object. Putting the country article at "Mongolia" is something like calling South Korea as just "Korea". laws individual Inner Mongolia and drive southward Buryat Republic are certainly subnational entities of the Mongols. We shouldn't ignore them. park note Nanshu/Nanshu 01:53 27 Jul 2003

:No, Your analogy would only be sufficient if China annexed N. Korea and there was only one country with "Korea" in its title. It should be clear enough if we mention that the country of Mongolia does not control all of Mongolia. century borishansky Jiang/Jiang 04:18, 25 Oct 2003

::Hey, there live more Mongols in PRC than in the independent state of Mongolia. by abandonment Nanshu/Nanshu 01:15, 26 Oct 2003

:::that's besides the point. ve ever User:Jiang/Jiang

The People's Daily has no problem: [http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/data/mongolia.html]. Why should we? :''Alternate meaning: standing sentry Inner Mongolia'' can be posted clearly at the top. side chris Jiang/Jiaemotional remarks User talk:Jiang/'''ng''' 00:11, 24 Dec 2003

Any further objections? unskilled immigrants Jiang/Jiasaddam agrees User talk:Jiang/ng 02:07, 7 Jan 2004
-
Meaning of газар
Popsracer, I don't speak Mongolian, but I think "газар" means earth, land, place or so. sentinel in User:Nanshu/Nanshu

-
Central Asia or East Asia
See MediaWiki talk:Central Asia for discussion of a dispute.

Relocation, again
Mongolia should be moved to Mongolia (country) and Mongolia (region) to Mongolia.

Like Ireland (Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland) and Macedonia (Republic of Macedonia and Greece-controlled area), Mongolia is divided into more than one entity and it is a sensitive problem although lesser-known to Westerners. Unfortunately, the former Mongolian People's Republic doesn't bear any political title in its current official name. So it should follow the case of Georgia (Georgia (country)). Nanshu/Nanshu 03:46, 4 Sep 2004

:Disagree. See above. Inner Mongolia and others are natural disambiguators and any confusion can be made relevant in the into. Ireland is where it is due to its POV claims over the entire island, as is the Republic of Macedonia. No one is claiming that this location is not NPOV. Jiang/JiaUser talk:Jiang/'''ng''' 07:30, 4 Sep 2004

confusing intro sentence

in the intro passage it says "After the conquest of China by the Mongol Empire, much of Mongolia was ruled by China until an independent government was formed with Soviet help in 1924.".

Now, is it conquered by China or it conquered China?? If it conquered China as the setence means, than how is it ruled by China? Perhaps the passage needs some rephrasing for clarity. P0lyglut/Xah Lee 08:09, 2004 Nov 27

:Well, it was an innately unclear situation. China was conquered by the Mongols. China was then a part of the Mongol empire (as of course was Mongolia). After a century or so a native Chinese dynasty was established in China, but it kept control of (much of) Mongolia. For the rest of the time until 1924, most of Mongolia was under Chinese control most of the time. Good luck summarising that in a sentence. ;) Markalexander100/MarkUser talk:Markalexander100/1 07:51, 28 Nov 2004


::The Mongols were driven out of China in 1368, but the subsequent Ming dynasty did not have control of (much of) Mongolia, esp. not of Outer Mongolia. The Mongols continued to be a threat to China's northern borders, and Ming armys could not do much against them. The (Inner Mongolian) Chahar khanate became part of the Manchu Qing dynasty in 1636, and the (Outer Mongolian) Khalkh submitted to the Qing empire in 1691. I think some western parts, e.g. Khovd, of today's Outer Mongolia became part of the Manchu empire only in 1757 (Not perfectly sure about the last one).
::So: At least Outer Mongolia was independent from China for more than 300 years, then part of the Manchu empire for 230 years, then independent again. I think that's neither most of Mongolia nor most of the time. The sentence certainly needs rephrasing. yan

Joining China
Is there any suggestions among Mongolian politicians to join China? — Instantnood/InstaUser talk:Instantnood/ntnood 01:42, Jan 31 2005
:Not at all. Don't think they'd get '''any''' vote after suggesting something like that. You're trying to be funny, right?
:Was it you who set the 'disputed territories' link? I think Mongolia does not have any territorial disputes with anyone (not even with Taiwan anymore). yan
Some people writes so, but it's not easy to verify. The ROC has not formally renounced the claim on Mongolia and Tuva. — Instantnood/InstaUser talk:Instantnood/ntnood 13:47, Jan 31 2005
:They have, first in 1946 and apparently again in 2002. Try http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2002/09/10/167505.
:You can also go to www.mofa.gov.tw and check out the Foreign Embassies and Consulates in the ROC (it's filed under West Asia).
:Anyway, AFAIK Mongolia is not the only territory the ROC claims souvereignity on. Did you place a 'disputed territory' link on the China page, too? yan
::So, you have placed the link, even before I asked :)). I am still not convinced that some irredentism/irredentist claims from some far-away island, whose souvereignity is itself in serious doubt, make Mongolia a disputed territory. Especially when these claims have been renounced (at least formally enough for any practical purposes) in 2002.
::btw that www.mtac.gov.tw site is somewhat strange. They don't seem to to deal with Inner Mongolians at all.
A renounce have to be passed by the national assembly of the ROC, and that's the formal procedure. On official maps showing the entire ROC territories you will probably find that (Outer) Mongolia and Tuva are part of the ROC (tho the DPP government try not to publish such maps). The bilateral relations between Mongolia and Taiwan is sort of pragmatic, without dealing with the boundary issue. Therefore technically Mongolia is still a disputed territory.

Inner Mongolia is considered as several provinces by the ROC, but not "areas" like Tibet and (Outer) Mongolia.

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:sq7CfWtNsrYJ:www.armysky.com/bbs/dispbbs.asp%3FBoardID%3D10%26ID%3D1307%26page%3D664+%22%E8%92%99%E5%8F%A4%22+%22%E5%8A%A0%E5%85%A5%E4%B8%AD%E5%9C%8B%22+%22%E5%9C%8B%E6%9C%83%E8%AD%B0%E5%93%A1%22+-%22%E6%B0%91%E4%B8%BB%22&hl=en says some MPs do consider joining China an option. And according to a magazine published in Hong Kong, such opinion first appeared in 1995. In 2000, members of the legislature of a southern province suggested it again, and the parliament had a debate on it. — Instantnood/Instantnouser talk:Instantnood/od 09:04 Feb 1 2005

:This article (judging from altavista.com) said that some professor claimed he had gone to Outer Mongolia, and that some politicians in private conversations with that professer said they'd hope Mongolia joins China, is that correct ? I wouldn't really call that a 'source'. I understand it is easy to publish such stories in Hongkong, since it is quite a distance from Mongolia, and most people have likely never met (Outer) Mongolians.
:I think you'd be much more likely to find Mainland Chinese or South Korean politicians suggesting their countries should become part of Japan, or Vietnamese politicians suggesting their country should become part of France, than Mongolian politicians suggesting their country should become part of China.
:"Therefore technically Mongolia is still a disputed territory." - So if Northern Cyprus should decide to (at least formally) claim the Ottoman empire as it was before WWI, would that make Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia Turkey etc. all disputed territories?
The magazine said the parliament had a debate on it. So we'd better ask someone who can read the Mongolian language and check the records of the parliament and that provincial legislature.

The Ottoman Empire had ceased to exist, and the current Turkish government renounced all the claims formally. But the Republic of China is still there, without formally renouncing its claims (arguably tho). — Instantnood/Instantnouser talk:Instantnood/od 14:23 Feb 1 2005

: well, the Qing empire doesn't exist anymore either, and the current chinese government has never officially laid claims on mongolia. the republic of china is little more than a fiction now.
: the www.parl.gov.mn website doesn't seem to have anything from before 2002, and I am quite skeptical that the aimag's websites are more helpful. A quick google search for Монгол Улс Хятад нэгдэх их хурал 2000 didn't turn up anything useful either.
:Could it be that this Hongkong magazine referred to plans to open casinos in Dsamin-uud around 1997? Some politicians were accused of selling out the country to the chinese, because they had accepted cars etc as gifts from Macao-based casinos.
:Around 2000, there seem to have been some chain letters accusing mongolian politicians of wanting to annex Mongolia to China as well. Wasn't more than a conspiracy theory though. yan
The ROC government has maintained a stable existence for more than 50 years since its retreat to the island of Taiwan. Not until the 1980s it still regards itself as the only legitimate government representing the interest of China. It held the seat in the UN until 1971, and diplomatic relations with the United States until 1978.

The article that I mentioned was on the November 2003 issue of http://www.open.com.hk, titled "蒙古由共產專制和平轉型為民主國家". But that article isn't online. It says the proposal may be appealing to the nomadic people in Gobi in southern Mongolia. — Instantnood/InstaUser talk:Instantnood/ntnood 08:46 Feb 2 2005

:The ROC government stopped being the government of China in 1949. That they chose to deceive themselves until the 80's doesn't change that a bit. The reasons why so the majority of the UN voted for the ROC as legitimate chinese government were purely opportunistic, just as (until) now the international recognition of the "one china" principle is purely opportunistic.
:Did the article give any names of the politicians? Really, any Mongolian I have met so far (most of them from the north of the country though) was - to say the least - highly sceptical of china and the chinese, and accusing someone of being too friendly with china is apparantly used as a political weapon. If someone spoke out publicly for unification with china, he would not only severely damage himself, but his political party as well.
:I also can't see the logic that it would be advantagous for the herders if Mongolia joined China. They don't need visa to cross the border, and I think there are actually a lot of people that live more or less from the fact that there is a border (just look how Erlian and Dsamin-Uud have grown during the last years), similar to what is going on in the Russian far east.
:Could it be that the editors were confused by the usage of oewoer (southern) mongol (for Inner Mongolia)? yan

:Btw. Was article 4 of the ROC constitution (The territory of the Republic of China '''within its existing national boundaries''' shall not be altered except by a resolution of the National Assembly.) already the same in 1947?

The ROC wasn't voted to be the legitimate government, but remained to be without successful challenge, until 1971.

No name was mentioned in the article, only the years (1995 and 2000) were mentioned. I don't think the author was confused. What he actually wrote was the people of the southern provinces of Mongolia would get some economical advantage by becoming part of China, or as special administrative region like Hong Kong and Macao.

Perhaps 1948. Gotta double check. Perhaps you may be interested to have a look of an official ROC map at the article Political_divisions_of_the_Republic_of_China#Claims_over_mainland_China_and_Mongolia/Political divisions of the Republic of China. The international and provincial boundaries of 1947/48 are preserved on the map. — Instantnood/InstaUser talk:Instantnood/ntnood 16:27 Feb 2 2005

:In 1946, i.e. already before the ROC constitution was drafted, the ROC had accepted the independence of Outer Mongolia, see for example to http://memory.loc.gov/frd/cs/mntoc.html (=>National Defence, 1940-45) (or http://www.taiwanheadlines.gov.tw/20021004/20021004p2.html). So probably CKS was wrong when revoking the treaty in 1953? Since Mongolia was outside of the ROC's existing national borders of 1947 anyway (no matter if he asked the National assembly for approval or not)?
:I wonder how recent this official map is. Did you recognize the quote "While the Republic of China also has claimed sovereignty over outer Mongolia, in 2002 the Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other government agencies passed laws and made strong statements recognizing the Republic of Mongolia’s sovereignty over the area. Including '''removing outer Mongolia from the ROC’s official maps''' and the establishment of a representative office in Ulan Bator." on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_China ? Maybe you could provide a link to a website displaying the ROC's current official map?
:OK, the author's opinion was that Mongolians would be better off if they joined China. Still I have found no confirmation that joining China was actually discussed in the state or at least in one aimag's hural. Seems they discussed accusations towards some opposition MPs of being China's fifth column around 2001, though.

The government of ROC recognised the independence of the then Mongolian People's Republic in 1946, but reverted in 1953. It's hard to prove whether the National Assembly had ever endorsed the recognition between 1946 and 1953. Afterall the National Assembly has not modified the extent of ROC territories, which is essential to formally renounce the claim, until today. The ministries of interior, foreign affairs, etc., have taken a pragmatic approach to deal with the issues of Mongolia, regardless of the formal claim the country reserved. In other words practically the independence of Mongolia is not in doubt to ROC politicians, but technically the issue has not be formally and procedurally settled.

Since the DPP was in power, full maps of the entirity of ROC territories were no longer present on the government website (The DPP is pro-Taiwan independence). http://cartolab.geo.ntnu.edu.tw/product/atlaschina/Atlaschi.htm on a university website shows a full map of all ROC territories. A http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&lr=&q=%22%E4%B8%AD%E8%8F%AF%E6%B0%91%E5%9C%8B%E5%85%A8%E5%9C%96%22 will probably give you several full maps.

On rejoin, I have no confirmation either, and that's why I tried asking around on Wikipedia. — Instantnood/InstaUser talk:Instantnood/ntnood 10:26 Feb 4 2005

:The ROC had already recognized Outer Mongolia's independence when the constitution became valid in 1947 - i.e. there was no need for the National assembly to confirm Mongolia's independence or modify the extent of the ROC's territories, since Mongolia was already outside when the constitution became valid. Don't know what was required for territorial changes before 1947, though.
:The arguement resembles that discussion on whether Taiwan actually belongs to the ROC, according to the treaties of Shimonoseki and San Francisco. Though at the moment, I am leaning towards the opoinion that the ROC was wrong all the tome from 1953 on.
:Why don't you get someone who can speak mongolian and try asking around whether they want to join China at a mongolian forum :) ?

But Outer Mongolia is part of ROC on the map of the National Assembly, and a change of the boundaries have to be passed by the National Assembly.

The controversy of whether Taiwan is part of ROC would never been settled. ROC did not participate in the Treaty of San Francisco. It concluded the Treaty of Taipei with Japan on its own, which is more or less the same as the Treaty of San Francisco.

I don't know where I can join one. Is there any with people who can read English, and preferably Chinese (to read the materials I mentioned)? :-) — Instantnood/InstaUser talk:Instantnood/ntnood 12:48 Feb 5 2005

: That Mongolia appears in the maps of the General Assembly doesn't mean the General Assembly has it right. If the ROC has ratified the treaty with the Soviet Union from August 1945, and has recognized Mongolia before the 1947 constitution became valid, there is no need for the National assembly to recognize Mongolia's independence, since China's "existing national borders" of 1947 did not include Outer Mongolia.
: What if CKS had denounced the treaties of Aigun (1858) and Beijing (1860) as well? Would that mean that the only way for the ROC to return these territories to Russia would be a decision of the General Assembly? Even if the National assembly didn't play any role in the denounciation of these treaties?
: I guess you'd have to find someone who can speak Mongolian. http://forum.asuultserver.com/forum/ has some english captions, maybe they can help you.

I am not sure. The full maps of ROC currently in circulation and considered official have Mongolia as part of it. :Image:%26-20013%3B%26-33775%3B%26-27665%3B%26-22283%3B%26-20840%3B%26-22294%3B.jpg/This map (without the English transcriptions) was on the ROC government website until the pro-Taiwan independence DPP was in power. It might be possible that the national assembly and the people responsible for drafting the consitution did not ratify or endorse the renounce by Chiang and his government in 1946. Another possibility is that the national assembly changed the borders in (or after) 1953 following the revoke of the renounce.

Thanks for the suggestion. By the way, would you mind putting a time stamp after your messages? — Instantnood/InstanUser_talk:Instantnood/tnood 19:31, Feb 5 2005

:Did you have any success in verifying that HK newspaper's report yet? In a world where the majority of webmasters seem to be not even able to figure out what Hoh hot means in mongolian (Green http://www.google.com/search?hl=de&q=hohhot+%22green+city%22&meta=] City) I'd be highly sceptical of any information not coming from inside Mongolia.

:Was the recognition of Mongolia by the ROC in 1946 unconstitutional at that time, or was it not? And did the National assembly change the ROC's borders or did it not? yan, 10:42,Feb 12 2005

No not yet. Frankly it is not easy.

The Constitution_of_the_Republic_of_China/Constitution of the ROC went into effect in December 1947. Whether the recognition was constitutional is meaningless, as there wasn't any consitution. I am not sure if the National Assembly has ever ratified Chiang's recognition (and later revoking). The :Image:&-20013;&-33775;&-27665;&-22283;&-20840;&-22294;.jpg/map is said to be the map since 1948. — Instantnood/InstanUser_talk:Instantnood/tnood 11:04, Feb 15 2005

:I have read that the Sino-Soviet friendship treaty (of August 14th, 1945) was ratified by the ROC on December 5th, 1945 (and according to the LOC, the ROC did recognize Mongolia on Jan 5th, 1946). If that is correct, and the ratification extended to the protocols concerning (Outer) Mongolia's formal independence, IMHO that would mean that Mongolia has been outside of the ROC's 'existing borders' in 1947. A confirmation by the National Assembly would be just as unnecessary as a decision about the areas ceded to Russia by the treaty of Aigun.

:I am sceptical about :Image:&-20013;&-33775;&-27665;&-22283;&-20840;&-22294;.jpg/the map. The discussion seems to be more about claims re. the PRC, not re. Mongolia. I understand it might be hard to come across ROC maps from the period between 1947 and 1953. yan, 20:11, Feb 15 2005

That's the official map of the ROC until today (although it is now seldom used since the pro-independence DPP has been in power). As I have mentioned, it is hard to know whether the recognition by Chiang's government in 1947 had ever recognised by the guys who drafted the constitution, or by the national assembly. — Instantnood/InstantnoUser_talk:Instantnood/od 18:04, Feb 16 2005

:So you have actually seen an official map from before 1953, or have confirmed that the official map was never changed?
:The recognition was already on January 5th, 1946, one could even argue it took effect when the treaty with the Soviet Union was ratified on December 5th 1945.
:Is it necessary for foreign countries to be recognized by the guys who drafted the constitution (of the ROC), or the national assembly, if they are not to be claimed by the ROC? yan, 22:20, Feb 16 2005

Land border
Does the state of Mongolia share a land border with Kazakhstan? — Instantnood/InstaUser talk:Instantnood/ntnood 18:28 Feb 2 2005

: No, Mongolia shares border only with Russia and China.Sjv27/Sjv27 20:01, 3 Feb 2005
Thank you. How far is the nearest point between Mongolia and Kazakhstan? And how long is the western border between Russia and PRC? — Instantnood/InstaUser talk:Instantnood/ntood 10:01 Feb 4 2005

: According to http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html the "western" border between Russia and PRC is 40 km long. I'd estimate the nearest point between Mongolia and Kazakhstan to be something between 30 and 40km.Sjv27/Sjv27 12:04, 4 Feb 2005

Thanks a lot Sjv27. — Instantnood/InstaUser talk:Instantnood/ntnood 12:49 Feb 5 2005

Mongolian debt

"which the debt was settled on $250 dollars considering Mongolian hardship and losses of human lives during the Soviet Era."

It was settled for $250, an amount that many American children spend in a day? I do rather suspect this number is slightly higher...User:Comrade Tassadar/Comrade Tassadar