The Uyghur situation

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Many thanks to krop for his helpful posts on this complex and difficult matter. Simplistic and ahistorical arguments on either side only impair our understanding of the actual situation.

Thank you, I respect your opinion and am glad my efforts are useful. This video by Alex is interesting. He is a Han Chinese from Xinjiang and I find his perspective interesting. He is not trying to hide the division in the community but instead tries to explain its context while showing what the streets in Urumqi look like. The Chinese government is very clear that there are two things they will not tolerate and that is sedition and promoting separation. In Canada the Bloc sends MP's to Ottawa but they still take the Oath of Allegiance and swear to be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. In the US state Governors can talk about secession but history tells us what happened the last time someone tried to hive off a major part of the United States to form a new country.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxUNr8VdH7k

The Left Bitches succinctly sum up what's really behind this and other US propaganda ploys against China and Russia:

https://twitter.com/ml_1maria/status/1391370953050017796

"The sun is setting on the US empire, but the US does not want to let go of its global hegemony, and it's just scared shitless..."

kropotkin1951 wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/05/06/1024621/china-apple-spy-uygh...

So is it your belief that the Chinese are a more efficient spy regime than the 5Eyes? I think then they are getting good value for their yuan given the amount the US alone spends on its seventeen agencies, yes seventeen separate spy agencies, and none of them can do what these Chinese hackers have done. Proof positive that the Chinese communists are as inscrutable as Charlie Chan.

Yes, but when the 5Eyes hack, it's good hacking. When the Chinese Communist Party hacks, it is very bad hacking.  Everybody knows that.

Aristotleded24 wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I think that the first step is researching the issue beyond the regime change media in the West. The French are fighting terrorism from within a segment of their Moslem minority and they are using many of the same measures as the Chinese in Xinjiang.  The Americans are three centuries into a cultural and genocidal system that continues to incarcerate more people per capita than any other regime on the planet. On the prairies where you live around 90% of women in prisons are indigenous and the numbers are even worse for indigenous youth in the prison system.

I guess the problem I have is that objectively it seems the Chinese are less brutal than we are. Strange how the imperial media condemns a policy in China and praises the same policy in France. It seems that the people that might be affected are not as enthused as some. But hey lets not do any analysis lets just be King Solomon and cut the baby in half.

There's nothing at all incompatible between mistreating someone and occasionally being nice to them. In fact, many abusers are nice to their victims because that helps gain compliance. That's especially the case where the abuser has complete control over something the victim needs. An objective analysis may prove you correct that the Chinese are less brutal than the United States and other Western governments, but for me talk of China doing things like providing health care and education only muddies the waters.

You are absolutely right that there is hypocrisy by our leadership class on this issue. China has never had a reputation as being a country that has respected human rights. So in that context it's fair to ask, why are those Conservative MPs who are now raising the issue of Uyghur genocide standing with a party that entered into a free trade agreement with them? If Western governments were so concerned about human rights in China (espeically after the Tianamen Square massacre of 1989) why did they continue to do business with China? Why were Western-based companies that did business with China allowed to do so and not seriously sanctioned by any Western government?

So you support sanctions against people in other countries? How very imperialist of you. What is your list of offenses that you want our government to use so they can enforce collective punishment against citizens of countries we say that they have no control over?

For a Canadian talking about water and health care and human rights in the same paragraph is unfair. Its not like the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruled over five years ago that we were in breach of our obligations to not discriminate in the provision of services like water. I think now we are up to nine separate compliance orders that the government has ignored. So clearly the Canada's MP's who voted 266-0 to condemn China do not consider clean drinking water in First Nations communities a human right, even if the CHRT does.

More whataboutism on this thread than at an AIPAC convention.

You sir, are a putz.

 Perhaps because it wasn't.

Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth

http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html

"For the rich lamas and secular lords, the Communist intervention was an unmitigated calamity. Most of them fled abroad, as did the Dalai Lama himself, who was assisted in his flight by the CIA..."

"Very telling that the same people who are screaming about Xinjiang are silent about Palestine."

https://twitter.com/_SecondThought/status/1391921761697009666

Perhaps a good thing. If they join in beware of traps and 'steering'.

As we watch the only democracy in the Middle East celebrate Eid with fireworks for their Moslem residents in Gaza I warn you that these images of the genocide taking place at the same time in Urumqi are truly mind blowing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plo-sjCXZno&t=18s

Josh, I think I know who you are and that you'll be running for political office. In your own mind, and as a poicy issue how do you balance the wish to condemn our own and other nations' treatment of minorities, agsinst the wish to preserve 'the economy' - in particular good economic realtions with other countries? (It's not a trick question - I have no axe to grind on the subject :))

Edzell wrote:

Josh, I think I know who you are and that you'll be running for political office. In your own mind, and as a poicy issue how do you balance the wish to condemn our own and other nations' treatment of minorities, agsinst the wish to preserve 'the economy' - in particular good economic realtions with other countries? (It's not a trick question - I have no axe to grind on the subject :))

I doubt Josh will answer. I've tried to get him to clarify how he views human rights as they relate to the way they are used (geo)politically and he has never explained his views other than to be extremely cagey. I think he sees human rights as separate from politics but he will probably come on here to say that he never said that. That's about as much clarification as I've seen him attempt.

melovesproles wrote:

Edzell wrote:

Josh, I think I know who you are and that you'll be running for political office. In your own mind, and as a poicy issue how do you balance the wish to condemn our own and other nations' treatment of minorities, agsinst the wish to preserve 'the economy' - in particular good economic realtions with other countries? (It's not a trick question - I have no axe to grind on the subject :))

I doubt Josh will answer. I've tried to get him to clarify how he views human rights as they relate to the way they are used (geo)politically and he has never explained his views other than to be extremely cagey. I think he sees human rights as separate from politics but he will probably come on here to say that he never said that. That's about as much clarification as I've seen him attempt.

I would agree.  There's nothing more important than human rights.  I won't be deterred simply because I happen to agree with a particular country's socioeconomic system.  Nor will I accept at face value charges regarding violations of same made by countries with a vested interest in undermining a particular system.  Which is why groups like AI and independent journalists are so important.

josh wrote:

Which is why groups like AI and independent journalists are so important.

Please explain why you disagree with the article I posted, that is one of many that show that AI is not an independent organization. Or do you not even bother reading anything that disagrees with the US medias narrative? This is 2021 not 1985, the AI and most of the other NGO's that started out as independent voices have been compromised for years.

I agree with Josh completely that independent journalism is the only way to have freedom of the press. That is why I go to sites like Grayzone because that is what they do. The one child policy was only for the majority Han population and all 52 ethnic groups were exempted. The currency of China has the Uyghur language on it. Part of the genocide is evidence that the state provided women from religious areas with birth control and jobs and day care for their children. Yes indeed if you actually read the reports they are complaining about daycare, "the separation of children from their parents." They also claim that the children are being sent to schools were they are being taught Mandarin. Imagine being taught the official language of the country you live in, that must be genocide right?

The AI starts its piece with this bit of blatant one sided propaganda.

"Ethnic minorities living in Xinjiang have long faced discrimination and persecution. Lawful activities many of us take for granted can be considered a reason to be sent to an internment camp or a prison, where detainees are subjected to a relentless forced indoctrination campaign, physical and psychological torture and other forms of ill-treatment."

From an American perspective there are many things a Chinese person of any ethnicity cannot do. One is certainly open carry a machine gun to the capital nor are they allowed to smoke pot legally. Oh yes and the big one for the Chinese state, thou shalt not try to overthrow the government by engaging in sedition which includes partnering with foreign people to effect regime change.

The question I have for Josh is why does he think that allowing terrorism to flourish in a country is good for the human rights of the inhabitants. In Canada the first order of our constitution, like most British inspired ones, is "Peace Order and Good Government." One cannot ignore the terrorist attacks that a small separatist minority of the Uyghurs carried out prior to the crackdown. Thirty and forty people killed in various attacks not only in Xinjiang but also in Beijing and other Chinese Han cities. The East Turkestan separatist want to ethnically cleanse their homeland, I say that because they say it. When they controlled parts of Xinjiang during the terrorism period they enforced Islamic laws on citizens against their will.

Here is a little background about the actual facts in Xinjiang compared to other provinces and autonomous regions in China.

Both the rapid surge in Uyghur population growth rates and the increased margin of the Uyghur majority over the Han population of Xinjiang in recent years are the result of the one-child policy imposed on Han Chinese couples by the Chinese government in 1979.

According to China specialist Martin King Whyte, the one-child policy was accompanied by a long-term pattern of abuses in its implementation, including “intrusive menstrual monitoring, coerced sterilizations and abortions, staggering monetary fines for ‘over-quota’ births, smashing of furniture and housing of those who resist and withholding registration for babies born outside the plan.”

Uyghur families, however, were exempted from the one child policy. Urban Uyghur couples were allowed to have two children, and rural Uyghur couples three. In practice, moreover, rural Uyghurs often had large families, with as many as nine or ten children in some cases, as even Zenz acknowledged.  

In 2015, the Chinese government announced a relaxation of the decades-long one-child limit on urban Han couples, allowing urban couples to have two children and rural families to have three. In Xinjiang, where birthrates routinely exceeded previously established limits, local officials urged the equal application of family planning policy between Han and Uyghur couples.

In July 2017, Xinjiang’s regional government ended the exemption on the old child limits for Uyghurs. Uyghur couples were thus expected to follow the same limitations recently imposed on Han couples: two children in urban areas and three in rural regions.

As the Chinese government has freely acknowledged, a 5 percent decrease in the birth rate in Xinjiang between 2017 and 2018 was the result of the equal enforcement of family planning policy across ethnic lines.

While eliding this point, Zenz also overlooked the fact that China’s overall birthrate has fallen precipitously in recent years across the demographic spectrum as the population ages and contraceptives become more widely available through programs like the government’s annual free distribution of one billion condoms. For example, in the city of Guangzhou, which is far from Xinjiang, the rate of newborn babies has plunged to its lowest point in a decade.

Cherry-picking and distorting source material, framing free healthcare as genocide

Also in 2017, China’s National Health and Family Planning Commission announced a $5.2 billion healthcare investment in Xinjiang, stating its intention to strengthen a brittle health infrastructure in impoverished, rural areas of the region. 

According to Chinese government statistics, maternal and infant mortality rates in Xinjiang were nearly halved by 2018, while average life expectancy rose as a result of increased public health investments. A 2019 study by Lancet described China’s improvement of maternal health and infant mortality reduction as a “remarkable success story.” Another study that year by the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences arrived at a similar conclusion. How these positive health indicators could serve as proof of genocide was left unexplained by Zenz, who simply omitted the numbers from his report. 

https://thegrayzone.com/2021/02/18/us-media-reports-chinese-genocide-rel...

In the meantime the federal government in Canada is building a pipeline with taxpayer money through unceded territory and stealing the land. Land is life and we are taking their land. This very day thugs from the private company building the pipeline are carrying out genocide on my behalf. This is a granddaughter of one of the indigenous leader who started the international organizations that led to UNDRIP. Of course in Canada we have "accepted" UNDRIP but as a subset of Canadian law and ranking below the Indian Act.

In the meantime while the goons are busy in Blue River:  WHAT ABOUT CHINA

HAPPENING NOW Trans Mountain pipeline WORKERS & security invade Secwepemc Safe Zone at Tiny House Warriors village in Blue River. Trans Mountain is ramping up to Battle us out for our UNCEDED Secwepemc Territory. #secwepemcduty #secwepemcsafezone #secwepemcsaynotmx #secwepemcmedicine #secwepemcstories

— with Beverly Manuel and

8 others in Blue River, British Columbia.

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10158837156184442&set=a.10150125100...

That is a good report. Given that many diplomats from over a hundred countries have concluded the same thing it appears that AI has somehow missed the boat. I will not believe them instead of all the diplomats in the field. Especially since its whole report appears to be based on eye witness accounts. Even with witnesses who are trying to remember carefully it is acknowledged that eye witness accounts are the least reliable of the types of evidence. That is of course if you don't count rumor as evidence. Here is section from the Italian report that is appropriate. No one is saying that China has not detained thousands if not tens of thousands of suspected terrorists, not even the Chinese. They do claim to be winning the war on terror by twin strategies of training for those that have not committed criminal offenses for employment and massive infrastructure development to improve the economy. In response AI and other "human rights" defenders will claim that boycotting the economy of the area will help the people. An interesting take on the old saying, "the beatings will continue until morale improves."

The report said that Xinjiang was once deeply harmed by terrorism, and the Chinese government adopted a temporary and permanent solution to solve the problem. The Chinese government has responded in two ways: one is to establish a new international organization to assist in counter-terrorism, such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to cooperate with neighboring countries, and to cooperate more with Central Asian countries in counter-terrorism; the second is to formulate new laws, through laws and other means, to help counter-terrorism. To curb terrorism and provide more tools, including carrying out education and training in accordance with the law. The Chinese government has thought of a way, and it is an effective way.

The report believes that China’s anti-terrorism and de-radicalization actions are based on the rule of law, respect for human rights, and protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the parties involved.

The report pointed out that between 2018 and 2020, more than 1,200 representatives from more than 100 countries, including UN officials, UN permanent representatives, diplomats, journalists, and representatives of religious institutions, were able to visit Xinjiang. No suspicion of race or ethnicity was found. Evidence that religious prejudice suppresses local residents. The report pointed out that the “vocational education and training center” helps people who have violated the law to reintegrate into society. Such policies have also been imitated by countries such as Kazakhstan and Indonesia. Many scholars and visitors affirmed the above-mentioned policy adopted by the Chinese government, believing that it can solve the problem fundamentally and achieve the goal of “de-radicalization”.

https://www.newsdirectory3.com/italy-releases-research-report-on-xinjian...

Q: Recently, the Italian Institute of Politics, Society and Economics, the Italian Institute of International Diplomacy, and the Italian Eurasian Mediterranean Research Center jointly released a research report entitled “Xinjiang: Understanding Complexity and Build Peace”. Fabio Massimo Palandi, an Italian international relations scholar who was responsible for organizing the writing of the report, said that he had witnessed the full freedom of religious belief of Uyghurs and other minorities in Xinjiang, and could not find anything about the so-called ” For signs of “forced labor” and “genocide”, the West has no evidence for allegations of the Xinjiang issue. What is China’s comment?

A: I have also noticed this research report written by several independent researchers and signed by dozens of internationally renowned scholars, politicians, and journalists. Also noticed that the Italian international relations scholar Palandi who organized the report said recently that some think tanks, scholars and media in the West concocted false reports and unwarranted allegations about Xinjiang, causing serious negative effects. These people and institutions are all Public anti-China individuals and organizations whose so-called reports are packaged as independent reports. Western governments have accordingly introduced sanctions against Xinjiang, but these measures have no basis. The purpose of these measures is not to protect human rights at all, but to suppress and contain China. . Because of this, Parandi and other scholars decided to write a report that was as objective and independent as possible to help the international community realize that Xinjiang was deeply endangered by terrorism and extremism. The anti-terrorism and de-radicalization measures adopted by the Chinese government in Xinjiang are It is based on the rule of law, respect for human rights, and protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the parties, and has achieved remarkable results. This is the righteous word of a scholar and deserves respect from all walks of life.

https://www.breakinglatest.news/news/italian-scholars-claim-that-there-is-no-evidence-for-western-accusations-on-xinjiang-ministry-of-foreign-affairs-words-of-justice-deserve-respect-from-all-walks-of-life_sina-technology_sina-com/

Impressive.  If the Chinese government does say so itself.

I tried googling these three institutes, but found no websites.  And no reference to Fabio Massimo Palandi beyond this report,

josh wrote:

....

https://www.breakinglatest.news/news/italian-scholars-claim-that-there-is-no-evidence-for-western-accusations-on-xinjiang-ministry-of-foreign-affairs-words-of-justice-deserve-respect-from-all-walks-of-life_sina-technology_sina-com/

Impressive.  If the Chinese government does say so itself.

I tried googling these three institutes, but found no websites.  And no reference to Fabio Massimo Palandi beyond this report,

Shockingly, there is a language in Italy which is not English (or should I say, 'Merican) and if you should venture to look up the untranslated names of the (poorly translated) institute names you may find the hinted suggestion of Chinese fabrication somewhat deficient.

The original name of the report is "Xinjiang. Capire la complessità, costruire la pace" as it appears on the Istituto Diplomatico Internazionale site.

There is an English translation button at the top which gives the names of other institutes involved:

https://idi-international.org/en/7647-2/

"The report Xinjiang is online. Understanding Complexity, Building Peace, jointly promoted by EURISPES-Laboratorio BRICS, International Diplomatic Institute (IDI) and Centro Studi Eurasia-Mediterraneo.

The report, realized by a group of independent researchers, aims to provide an objective and clear picture of the real situation in the Xinjiang region."

https://idi-international.org/en/7647-2/

There is also a link to the actual report:
https://idi-international.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/New-Report.pdf

Google translate will an ok job on the text for anyone interested.

It is a substantial report and concludes with a long list of academics the heading of which is titled (translated):

"List of signatories (updated) who have shared the
objectives of the research group: the need for debate
national and international quality and balanced, as well as the
need to support understanding-centered peace initiatives
and mutual respect."...

WATCH: "Former chief of staff to US Sec-State Colin Powell, retired Army Colonel Lawrence B Wilkerson on Xinjian..."

https://twitter.com/DanielDumbrill/status/1290456155286900737

Pondering wrote:

So only the Hans women were abused. That isn't better. 

The one child policy was a very authoritarian and repressive policy. That was not genocide but population control. The Uyghur's like all 52 ethnic minorities were spared the worst effects of it. India is set to overtake China's population and a large percentage of them are living in extreme poverty. The average Chinese person lives ten years longer than the average Indian. China with its polices has eliminated extreme poverty and is looking at peaking in population before 2025 while India is still on an upwards trajectory. Is it better to have no population control and starving masses or population control with strict measures that bring prosperity and long life to the people who are born?

melovesproles wrote:

josh wrote:

As is well known, for some years now highly politicised anti-Chinese propaganda campaigns have targeted the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, often spreading groundless, non-verifiable or outright false information, triggering on these bases a sanctions war and causing serious damage to international relations. There is a dramatic lack of unbiased and alternative documentation on the topic, especially by researchers who have lived and studied in China and Xinjiang.

Yes, I see they came to it from an unbiased perspective.

Are you saying that if the researchers lived and studied in the US, they would be more 'unbiased'? 

No, I'm saying they didn't set out to do an unbiased report.