Over the past week, several reports were published in the US about the mass internment of Uighurs of East Turkestan, which started at about the beginning of last year.
The number of Uighurs incarcerated by the Beijing government has now reportedly exceeded the 1 million mark.
In the past week, three reports documented the building human rights crisis in great detail:
The Washington-based Uyghur Human Right Project (UHRP) issued a report titled “The mass internment of Uyghurs,” which states: “We want to be respected as humans. Is it too much to ask?”
The New York-based independent digital media company SupChina presented a detailed analysis titled: “China’s re-education camps for a million Muslims: What everyone needs to know.”
Foreign Policy magazine published an article titled: “China’s mass internment camps have no clear end in sight” by Rian Thum, an associate professor of history at Loyola University New Orleans.
The reports presented a haunting picture of the systematic indoctrination and repression of cultural identity in the internment camps, which are comparable to the gulag of the Soviet era.
The massive increase of the use of such camps by the Chinese regime represents a significant intensification of the much longer-lasting campaign by Beijing aimed at political repression, economic marginalization, curbs on religious practice, demographic engineering and sinification targeting the Uighurs.
The fact that at present more than 1 million people — out of a total of 11 million Uighurs — are incarcerated, means that a staggering 10 percent of the population has been pulled from their homes and regular livelihood.
As the UHRP report states: “While the intention of the camps remains undisclosed, reports of repetitive political indoctrination, sinification through Chinese language and culture sessions, and compulsory denunciations of Uighur culture and belief in Islam indicate the Chinese authorities are aiming to forcibly assimilate Uighurs.”
The report speaks of credible reports of deaths in custody, torture and systematic political indoctrination.
The SupChina report says: Xinjiang is now a totalitarian police state of historic proportions — it is widely cited as one of the most heavily policed places in the world today. Public security budgets have skyrocketed and futuristic surveillance systems have been pioneered in the region.
All of this is a wake-up call — if Taiwanese need yet another reason to be highly suspicious of Beijing’s advances and promises.
It shows clearly what would happen if Taiwan were to succumb to the pressures to accept the “one China” principle encapsulated in the so-called “1992 consensus” and “unification.”
What can or should Taiwan do in the face of such outrageously repressive behavior by China?
First, it is important to be informed and be aware of what is happening in East Turkestan, or Xinjiang. Reports like the ones above are extremely valuable and should be read, analyzed and distributed widely.
Knowledge is power.
Second, Taiwanese should speak out about the existence of the internment camps, and the systematic indoctrination and repression of cultural identity going on in them.
In this context, it is important to be reminded of the famous words of German pastor Martin Niemoller, who said [of the Nazi regime]: “First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out — because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out — because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out — because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.”
Third, it is important for Taiwan to be clearly supportive of the rights and freedoms of Uighurs.
World Uyghur Congress president Rebiya Kadeer has on many occasions courageously spoken out for freedom and democracy in Taiwan. It is time for Taiwanese to speak out for her and her people.
Gerrit van der Wees is a former Dutch diplomat who served as editor of Taiwan Communique from 1980 through 2016. He teaches Taiwan history at George Mason University in Virginia.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS