The Global Times published two articles about the translation of "Chinese" and "zhongguo ren" on June 14 and June 18. I think that understandings on the two words could not be based on historical sentiments. Neither can we impose some regional and national history explanations on the two words. In other words, we should not politicize the word "Chinese."

During international exchanges, especially in the international documents, using "China" and "Chinese" to represent zhongguo and zhongguo ren is not only common sense but also is given force by international laws. The word "Chinese" is usually a generic term for all the Chinese people living in China or overseas including Han-Chinese, Manchus, Mongolians, Koreans and the Hui.

It's almost always the case that nobody pays attention to your ethnicity in international communication. Among the Chinese people working and living worldwide, there are many Manchus and Mongolians, and they don't see their individual ethnicities as above their national identity, because their status as Chinese does not contrast with this, unless they have some privately held beliefs.

Tibetan and Uyghur separatists resent being described as "Chinese." But using China and Chinese to represent zhongguo and zhongguo ren is in line with international laws and accurate.

There are similar stories in international communities. For example, nobody says that the name "Vietnam" or "Vietnamese" suggests a single-ethnicity state.

According to a document released in 1979 by the Vietnamese government, Vietnam has 54 ethnic groups, including Viet, Khmer, Hoa, Tay and Nung. I've never heard that these ethnic groups say that they are not "Vietnamese," but only "citizens of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam."

Likewise, Russia has many ethnic groups including Kazakhs and Cossacks. And I've never heard of these people not calling themselves Russians because the term doesn't reflect their identity.

Some international forces intending to split China has nothing to do with whether we call ourselves "Chinese." Even if we use the most precise translated term, we could not prevent some people with ulterior motives at home or abroad from splitting China.

But if we dare not call ourselves Chinese, how could we expect others to support us on China's reunification?

We will never forget the painful history of Yugoslavia being torn apart, just because some people intentionally highlighted the distinctions between Serbs, Croats, and Albanians.

We should say with pride that we are Chinese and we are zhongguo ren.

The author is the chief representative in Beijing of the Zurich Bank. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn

Precise ethnic translations can thwart separatists