1 - Territorial Autonomy in Autocracy: 'Sham' Self-Government?

Territorial autonomy provides special forms of self-government for territorially concentrated minorities.  A go-to option to manage ethnonationalist demands, territorial autonomy is a global institution to recognize difference.  Despite a wealth of research devoted to autonomous regions in Western democracies and peace agreements, autonomy in autocratic countries has escaped study.  Along with historical examples in the Soviet Union and in Southeast Asia, contemporary examples include Tibet, Xinjiang, and other regions in China; Chechnya, Tatarstan, and other Russian regions; Zanzibar in Tanzania, and Karakalpakstan in Uzbekistan.  Is authoritarian autonomy simply fake, a sham, or does it in any way benefit titular minorities?  As studies of comparative authoritarianism have shown, non-democratic institutions have important effects.  Illustrated with case studies from New Order Aceh and Tibet, this paper emphasizes three core features of autocratic autonomy: The elevation of loyal ethnic elites; budget transfers; and support for language and cultural traditions.  This goes against claims of authoritarian autonomy being based on exclusion, exploitation, and assimilation.  This said, it remains true that autocratic autonomy is problematic, accompanied by surveillance and control, with controlled celebrations of distinction alongside repression creating the potential for conflict.