The Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 set into motion the liberation of slaves from the shackles of forced labor in US cotton plantations. It almost beggars belief that 156 years later, the cotton industry has again become mired in slavery — but this time on another continent, in China’s Xinjiang.
The Wall Street Journal in May reported on forced labor in Xinjiang’s cotton sector, lifting the lid on the industry’s dirty secret and implicating some of the world’s largest fashion brands, including H&M, Esprit and Adidas, in modern-day slavery.
More information has since come to light, following a separate investigation by the Australian Broadcasting Corp (ABC) that aired on Nov. 1 suggesting that cotton from forced labor camps in Xinjiang might have been indirectly sourced by Japanese retailers Muji and Uniqlo, as well as Australian branches of IKEA.
The companies identified so far are likely just the tip of the iceberg. China last year produced nearly one-fourth of the world’s cotton supply, of which 84 percent came from Xinjiang, the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies said in a report.
Beijing’s systematic internment of Uighur Muslims and other Muslim minorities living in the region has been well-documented.
However, US-based Uighur activists on Tuesday released research indicating that the number of imprisoned people might be greater than previous estimates of 1 million, and that nearly 500 camps and prisons have been constructed in the region.
Detainees are forced to learn Mandarin, renounce their faith and swear loyalty to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), and many are being held indefinitely. Beijing’s “re-education camps” are nothing more than forced labor camps or, more accurately, concentration camps.
Uyghur Human Rights Project chairman Nury Turkel on Oct. 17 testified to the US Congress that Uighurs and members of other Turkic ethnic groups were being “swept into a vast system of forced labor,” saying that it is becoming increasingly hard to ignore the fact that goods manufactured in the region have a high likelihood of being produced with forced labor.
The Australian Strategic Policy Institute’s Nathan Ruser told the ABC: “It’s increasingly difficult to separate coercive labor practices in Xinjiang from legitimate sources.”
“Basically, you have a business environment where over 1 million potential employees will be coerced into labor, and a government and business environment that actively encourages firms receiving these workers,” Ruser said. “There is also a lack of any legitimate access to the region — with the coercive social controls in the region, it is impossible to have a frank conversation with factory managers or even employees.”
Evidence of forced labor proves what many observers have long suspected: Beijing is using its concentration camp inmates as a source of cheap labor to sustain its cotton industry.
What can be done to combat this abhorrent situation? First, businesses should be conducting due diligence to ensure that cotton produced by slave labor does not end up in their supply chains. It is simply not good enough for Western or Japanese corporations to hide behind subcontractors and third-party auditors to create plausible deniability.
Second, consumer power is key. Consumers must vote with their feet and boycott companies that continue to sell items produced by forced labor.
Xinjiang’s “cotton gulags” are not just a stain on China, they are an indelible stain on the global fashion industry. It is time for people to take a stand and demand that products are not made by slave labor from Xinjiang’s concentration camps.
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
Birth, aging, illness and death are inevitable parts of the human experience. Yet, living well does not necessarily mean dying well. For those who have a chronic illness or cancer, or are bedridden due to significant injuries or disabilities, the remainder of life can be a torment for themselves and a hardship for their caregivers. Even if they wish to end their life with dignity, they are not allowed to do so. Bih Liu-ing (畢柳鶯), former superintendent of Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, introduced the practice of Voluntary Stopping of Eating and Drinking as an alternative to assisted dying, which remains
President William Lai (賴清德) has rightly identified the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) as a hostile force; and yet, Taiwan’s response to domestic figures amplifying CCP propaganda remains largely insufficient. The Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) recently confirmed that more than 20 Taiwanese entertainers, including high-profile figures such as Ouyang Nana (歐陽娜娜), are under investigation for reposting comments and images supporting People’s Liberation Army (PLA) drills and parroting Beijing’s unification messaging. If found in contravention of the law, they may be fined between NT$100,000 and NT$500,000. That is not a deterrent. It is a symbolic tax on betrayal — perhaps even a way for
RSS