Interrupting the assimilation of Xinjiang’s Uighur population would result in an unmanageable national security threat to China.
Numerous governments and civil society organizations around the world have accused China of massive human rights abuses in Xinjiang, and labeled Beijing’s inhumane and aggressive social re-engineering efforts in the region as “cultural genocide.”
Extensive evidence shows that China’s forceful ethnic assimilation policies in Xinjiang are aimed at replacing Uighur ethnic and religious identity with a so-called scientific communist dogma and Han Chinese culture. The total assimilation of Uighurs into the larger “Chinese family” is also Beijing’s official, central purpose of its ethnic policies in the region.
Consequently, numerous Western actors are escalating their political, economic and diplomatic pressure on Beijing to coerce it into stopping the program.
In the US, last year’s Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act condemns gross human rights violations of ethnic minorities in Xinjiang, and calls for an “end to arbitrary detention, torture, and harassment of these communities inside and outside China.”
During his presidential campaign, US President Joe Biden referred to the crackdown on Uighurs as “genocide,” and in the past few months imposed numerous political and economic sanctions on Beijing.
The UK has imposed sanctions on Chinese officials, and British lawmakers are discussing a genocide trade bill that, if passed, would seriously restrict trade with China.
Political parties in northern Europe are asking to end the EU’s free trade talks with China.
The list of measures goes on.
A consequence of the growing public outcry against Beijing’s assimilation policies in Xinjiang is the probable partial boycott of next year’s Beijing Winter Olympic Games.
After all, how could a country send its athletes to an event organized by a genocidal regime? Numerous representatives of Western governments have added their support for the boycott.
Canadian lawmakers have called for the relocation of the Olympics over the Chinese government’s reported abuses of Uighurs.
Australia has discussed the possibility of boycotting the Games, and Australian athletes were urged to support the boycott.
US Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg also discussed the possibility of boycotting the Games.
British Secretary of Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Dominic Raab said that a boycott of the Olympics was possible due to China’s mistreatment of Uighurs.
In September last year, more than 160 human rights organizations called on the International Olympic Committee to withdraw the Games from Beijing.
Again, the list of calls for the Beijing Olympics to be boycotted goes on.
Maybe more damaging than the possibility of the Games being partially boycotted is the growing economic cost that China is paying for not halting its assimilationist policies in Xinjiang.
Large Chinese conglomerates have been targeted directly for having production facilities in Xinjiang or using Uighur “slave labor.” Biden’s trade agenda is strongly shaped by issues related to Uighur forced labor.
Xinjiang’s massive cotton industry, representing 20 percent of global cotton production, is undermined by direct sanctions, and India, China’s regional competitor, is reaping the benefits.
Also, the until recently booming Chinese solar industry is seeing its sales plummet in Western countries.
Numerous global companies, such as Nike, H&M, Hugo Boss, Volkswagen and Burberry (to mention just a few), are under scrutiny and have been asked to prove that they are not sourcing labor or materials from Xinjiang.
Nike is experiencing mounting public pressure and has been shamed because some of its products are allegedly tainted by Uighur “slave labor.”
Despite the mounting Western political pressure, the substantial damage to China’s international standing and the massive economic cost that the assimilationist policies in Xinjiang entail, Beijing has neither recognized that its harsh policies are resulting in massive human rights abuses nor has it signaled that it is willing to reverse or halt them.
Assuming that Beijing is committing massive human rights abuses in Xinjiang, the following question needs to be addressed: Can Beijing stop its harsh assimilationist policies there?
The short answer is no.
Beijing cannot interrupt the forced assimilation of the Uighur population in Xinjiang because doing so would result in an unmanageable national security threat to China.
Despite the complexity of the situation, the core reason is relatively obvious: Uighurs’ despair and hatred toward China and its Han representatives.
This hatred is fanned by the ruthlessness of the assimilationist policies.
For instance, to ensure that all Uighurs renounce their ethnic identity and adopt the Chinese one, millions of them are for long periods held at re-education camps, which some have called “concentration camps.”
There, aggressive brainwashing, physical torment and humiliation are allegedly used to replace their religious beliefs and Uighur culture with communist dogmas and Han Chinese culture. Those who resist are punished harshly.
To prove that they have been successfully re-educated, Uighurs are asked whether they have memorized Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) policies, sing Chinese nationalist songs, eat pork, drink alcohol, and refrain from using the Uighur language, pray and fast.
Obviously, these Uighurs feel extremely humiliated and desperate, and it can be expected that they want to seek revenge against their Han tormentors.
Outside the camps, Uighurs are also suffering under the assimilation policies.
As a consequence of the massive detention of adults and family separation policies, tens of thousands of young children lose contact with their parents and are sent to orphanages, where they are brought up in a Han Chinese cultural environment.
Also, Uighur families are forced to accept thousands of Han Chinese officials to live in their homes as uninvited guests. These officials supervise and “guide” the families on how to reject Muslim values and Uighur traditions to become good Chinese citizens.
There are numerous accounts of Uighur women being coerced into marrying Han Chinese men.
The list of documented human rights abuses committed in Xinjiang goes on.
Obviously, Uighurs hate this situation and would do anything to hurt their Han abusers.
Given that the large majority of the more than 11 million Uighurs worldwide are going through this aggressive, humiliating, painful and devastating assimilation program, it can be assumed that at this stage, nearly 100 percent of adult Uighurs hate Han Chinese.
More importantly, most of them can be expected to be eager to hurt China if they were given a chance.
Hence, if the assimilation process is halted and Uighurs are allowed to enjoy basic freedoms again, many of them would use those freedoms to seek revenge and harm China in any way they could.
These millions of revenge-seeking Uighurs would pose a real national security threat to China, which Beijing might not be able to counter in any reasonable way.
The implications of this situation put Western governments and organizations in a difficult position. Consequently, they would have to stop demanding from Beijing to halt its brutal “genocidal” policies and limit their demands to asking for a softening of the assimilationist policies. Obviously, this is not a position that any Western actor could take openly.
Yes, there is massive evidence that Uighurs are put through an intensive and harsh assimilation program that aims to replace most of their ethnic identity with a homogenous Han Chinese one.
Still, the West should understand that no degree of political and diplomatic pressure, and no level of economic cost inflicted on China would coerce Beijing into halting the assimilation of ethnic minorities in Xinjiang.
Halting them would result in millions of extremely angry, revenge-seeking Uighurs trying to hurt China, resulting in an unmanageable national security threat.
Patrik Meyer holds a doctorate in politics and international studies and consults on conflict management.
On Sunday, 13 new urgent care centers (UCC) officially began operations across the six special municipalities. The purpose of the centers — which are open from 8am to midnight on Sundays and national holidays — is to reduce congestion in hospital emergency rooms, especially during the nine-day Lunar New Year holiday next year. It remains to be seen how effective these centers would be. For one, it is difficult for people to judge for themselves whether their condition warrants visiting a major hospital or a UCC — long-term public education and health promotions are necessary. Second, many emergency departments acknowledge
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
Victory in conflict requires mastery of two “balances”: First, the balance of power, and second, the balance of error, or making sure that you do not make the most mistakes, thus helping your enemy’s victory. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has made a decisive and potentially fatal error by making an enemy of the Jewish Nation, centered today in the State of Israel but historically one of the great civilizations extending back at least 3,000 years. Mind you, no Israeli leader has ever publicly declared that “China is our enemy,” but on October 28, 2025, self-described Chinese People’s Armed Police (PAP) propaganda
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
RSS