Sigal Samuel answers 8 key questions about the Chinese crackdown on Uighur Muslims
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
1) Why are Uighurs targeted in the first place?
Stanislav1: Can you give us a quick history lesson on how this started in China?
Sigal: China has been worried for a long time that the Uighurs will want to split off from China and make Xinjiang an independent homeland (a lot of Uighurs refer to Xinjiang as East Turkestan). The Chinese paint the Uighurs as a separatist threat as well as a terrorist threat. So they claim “de-extremification” in camps is necessary for national security. There’s more background in this link, which you might find useful.
Capitalist_Model: Why are they targeting a fringe and such a specific religion?
Sigal: For China, it’s not fringe. The Uighurs are concentrated in Xinjiang, a very important region, both because it’s oil- and resource-rich and because it’s geographically central to China’s huge new infrastructure project, the Belt and Road initiative. China feels it needs to have tight control over Xinjiang; otherwise, that project could be jeopardized. And China has long feared that separatist Uighurs will try to create an independent homeland in Xinjiang.
2) What exactly goes on in the internment camps?
NYLaw: Is there any evidence of violence used in these camps in order to “re-educate” the Uighur folks who are unfortunately subjected to internment? How badly are they being treated?
Sigal: Unfortunately, all the evidence suggests that violence is being used and that the conditions in the camps are very bad. There have been reports of torture and death. We know this from detainees who’ve made it out of the camps, and from former guards there. You can also get a sense of what goes on in the camps by examining the lists of equipment that the Chinese government agencies order for the camps — in one case, that included 2,768 police batons, 550 electric cattle prods, 1,367 pairs of handcuffs, and 2,792 cans of pepper spray.
3) How do we know about the things that go on inside the camps?
uproxx4tron: Have you collected any evidence from the camps yourself?
Sigal: I haven’t seen the camps firsthand, but I’ve seen video from inside the camps and have seen Chinese government documents, construction bids, social media posts, etc. I really recommend checking out the work of scholars like Adrian Zenz and Timothy Grose, Uighur activists like @uyghur_nur on Twitter, and on-the-ground reporters like Josh Chin of the Wall Street Journal. Here’s one paper by Zenz that I think is especially illuminating.
4) How have the governments of Muslim-majority countries reacted to China’s crackdown on Muslim minorities?
hankhillforprez: What has been the response from the broader Muslim world, and specifically from governments such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Pakistan?
Sigal: The response from the broader Muslim world has been pretty muted on the whole. There have been a few exceptions. Malaysia and Indonesia have criticized China for the camps. Turkey released an unusually strong statement in February slamming China. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia’s crown prince has actually defended China’s “right” to place Uighurs in these camps, in the name of “national security.”
5) Is China’s strategy just an attempt to spur ethnic violence in order to justify more repressive policies?
LivingAncientHistory: If the Chinese Communist Party is effectively trying to de-Islamicize and de-Uighurize Xinjiang, then their policies of choice seem not only crude and ineffective, but potentially leading to the very opposite outcome: repression on ethnic lines leads inevitably to an invigoration of national feeling, with varying degrees of violence (Korea, Catalonia, East Timor, Palestine, Kashmir). Do you suspect this could actually be a strategy of the CCP to elicit violence in Xinjiang (e.g., suicide bombers and the like) in order to justify even more aggressive policies of repression and ethnic cleansing in the future? Or are they just really, really obtuse?
Sigal: I agree this will be an extremely ineffective strategy, and worse, it’s likely to backfire. This is what sociologists call “reactive ethnicity” — when you have a policy to ban a practice, so people double down on it in protest. My best guess is that China is not instituting this policy with the specific intention of eliciting violence, but that they really are seeking to indoctrinate (we’ve seen China use this strategy before, toward Falun Gong). But there’s not much point in speculating either way, I suspect.
6) How does Western Islamophobia factor into how neglected this humanitarian crisis has been?
TanktopSamurai: Do you think the way Muslims were presented in the Western media plays a role in the Western lack of popular response?
Sigal: Yes. I was really dismayed to see that when I published an article about how China is likening Islam to a mental illness, a lot of people on social media responded saying they agree with China.
One thought experiment I think is worth doing: How would the world respond if this were a story about a million Christians being locked up in internment camps? I’m pretty sure the global response to such a crisis would be unhesitating.
7) What is the difference between “internment camps” and “concentration camps”?
_BindersFullOfWomen_: Who came up with the descriptor of “internment camps”? Was it China or rather news agencies once they started reporting on it? I only ask because what I’ve seen and read about the camps likens them more to concentration camps of Germany in World War II than the Japanese internment camps established under FDR.
Sigal: Good question. Academic researchers and news agencies started using the term “internment camps” (and I use this term in my own reporting). For a long time, China was insisting that the camps are just innocent “vocational schools,” so the goal was to make clear they are not that. Some academics I interviewed told me they actually think the term “concentration camp” is more accurate here (and considering the electric cattle prods and other methods that are being used in the camps, there’s a solid argument to be made for that), but that they have so far avoided using the term because they didn’t want the public to think they were just being hyperbolic.
8) How can the international community help?
BrownBetaMale: Do you think there is any way for the international community to do anything about this? China is so economically tied to so many powerful countries that it seems doubtful anybody would step up and stop them.
Sigal: I think you’re right that China’s economic power is a big reason why the international response has been so muted. Here in the US, folks can call or write to their representatives to let them know this is a humanitarian crisis they care about and want to see political action on. They can show support for the Xinjiang Uyghur Human Rights Act, a bipartisan bill that recommends considering several responses to China’s crackdown, including imposing sanctions on Chinese officials involved in the camps.
I also think there are things people can do to support Uighurs in the diaspora. As China is trying to erase their culture back home, Uighurs in the US and Europe are trying to make sure their kids will learn the Uighur language, for example at Ana Care Uighur Language School in Fairfax, Virginia. People can support those institutions. Another thing I’ve found really gutting is that with so many parents in internment camps now, a lot of Uighur students in the US are no longer getting financial help from them. In some cases, the students were relying on their parents’ help to pay for college. People can consider starting a scholarship fund to help out.
Initial image: A Uighur woman passes the Communist Party of China flag on the wall in 2017 in Urumqi, China.
Wang He/Getty Images
There are lots of links in the OA.
Tags
Who is online
458 visitors
I don't see what anyone can do except be aware.
I'd like to weigh in on this as a "Devil's Advocate".
I was here when the Uyghurs carried out a planned massacre in Kunming. China is not so tolerant of violence as a tool for protest, or the kind of everyday shootings and massacres that continue to happen in the USA, and will use all necessary means to nip those things in the bud for the safety of its vast majority of peaceful citizens.
America did not need a massacre or even a peaceful protest by loyal Japanese-Americans to confine them to internment camps for the country's security.
So the Uyghurs want to separate from China. As everyone knows, China has a One-China policy and that is NOT going to change. How would the USA react if a lot of the citizens in Minnesota used violence and murder in their demands to separate from the USA and form a Sharia-compliant State independent of the Federal government? There was a time when the Quebecois in Quebec Province wanted to separate from Canada, and used violence and even murder of a politician to demand it - and Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Justin's father) declared Military Control of the whole country to stop them, and it worked.
It's interesting that the interviewee said this: "How would the world respond if this were a story about a million Christians being locked up in internment camps? I’m pretty sure the global response to such a crisis would be unhesitating." Well, in fact even WORSE than that is happening to Christians in the world these days, in countries like Pakistan, Nigeria, Egypt, and many other countries in the world and it's hardly even reported by the mainstream media, and there is little concern about it - it's not as if an Israeli IDF soldier were to accidentally step on the toe of a Hamas terrorist - THAT would make headlines.
I'm forever confounded by the people of a country that wants to be the world's policeman, shows little to the world of a peaceful lifestyle, and who want to dictate to the rest of the world what OTHERS must do - "Do what I say, not what I do", because we're "Holier than thou".
Cattle prods.
There are a lot of good things about China. Fortunately, because they will rule the world in a few decades.
Cattle prods are not good.
Yeah, tasers, that are used in the USA, are much better.
You know perfectly well what my opinion is of police violence in America.
But that has nothing to do with China's ugly repression of the Uighurs.
I stick with what I've already said. That "ugly repression" has made this country a lot safer to live in than France or the USA, IMO.
Unless you're Uighur. That's the topic. That tradeoff.
If you're Han, you're gonna be fine. If you're a tiny exotic minority, you're gonna be fine. If you're a significant minority, you're screwed.
Muslims live, work, run businesses and pray in their mosques all over China. They fit in with everyone here, no problems at all. When I was teaching both in a school and privately here I had Muslim students. They live happily and in peace all over China. There is no reason why the Uighur's could not just live in peace in China as well. I clearly set out my feelings about those who want to secede instead of being part of a nation in a comment above. If you're not happy, then just leave.
"When in Rome...."
Buzz,
You might want to read this article:
They were not part of Rome, and suddenly found themselves Roman.
You would have to copy and paste it - it seems that besides the NYT, TIME is also banned here, and I must say how upset I am that they seem to have recently banned Wikipedia. At least there are still some search info sites I can access.
One of the detriments of living here, I guess.
Sounds a lot like Tibet....But we know that the Chinese are ''protecting'' the Tibetans and would surely let them secede from China if it wasn't their need for the Chinese protection../s
And this is how China controls its people, through disinformation and misinformation. I am actually worried that if I print it here, we will be banned and I know as a fact we have been banned for short periods of time.
Pretty much Kavika!
That was wrong since they were always a country. But that is not the case here. And btw, the Québécois went on to try and get independence with Canada was willing to give them, but without the benefit of the Candian dollar. That they didn't want and so it died down. This has also been going on in Scottland, and the Scots could end up leaving the UK.
An ugly part of our history, just like the annihilation of the Indians. But also not one that I would hope we would repeat.
It's a bit more complicated than that. The British conquest of French North America was brutal. Murderous. The Brits used starvation and forced emigration.
The French-speaking population hasn't forgotten. They are... skeptical...
Then why isn't the world coming down hard on Canada for not allowing the French to secede? How come the world isn't coming down hard on the countries that don't allow the Kurds to have their own country? But then, after all, it's China that's different. Just like Israel is to blame for everything, including the huge rain of hundreds of rockets that were just fired from Gaza.
But they were allowed to vote and they voted no.
Which is disgusting. But we all know the reason why. It's because the Kurds are unimportant as compared to Turkey or Russia.
Buzz, how did we get there? This isn't about Isreal.
Je me souviens!
I am aware that the French hasn't forgotten, but that is not why they wanted to leave Canada. Just like the Scots, the net result will come down to economics.
Buzz... My first Comment was
So you did.