The International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant issued on Friday last week for Russian President Vladimir Putin delighted Uighurs, as Putin’s today signals Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) tomorrow.
The crimes committed by Xi are many times more serious than what Putin has been accused of.
Putin has caused more than 8 million people to flee Ukraine. By imprisoning more than 3 million Uighurs in concentration camps and restricting the movement of more than 10 million Uighurs, Xi has not only denied them the opportunity to live humanely, but also the opportunity to escape oppression.
The 8 million Ukrainians who fled their homeland and took refuge in Europe are lucky compared with the 15 million Uighurs who suffer under the occupation of East Turkestan, known as Xinjiang in China.
The ICC counted Putin’s bombing of Ukrainians for one year as one of his crimes. While Xi has not dropped bombs on Uighurs, he has broken up 1 million families through imprisonment, forced labor and forced sterilization.
The only difference between these murderers is that one can count the number of people Putin has killed: The UN recorded a civilian death toll of 8,231. With Xi, it is impossible to count, but he cannot hide them all.
The 700,000 detainees listed in Xinjiang police files only include people who were arrested in dozens of counties in East Turkestan. These people were captured because of their ethnic identity, because they were the original inhabitants of East Turkestan and because they refused to accept Sinicization.
That means the detainees in the files are prisoners of a smokeless war that has been going on for 70 years. While Putin has been rightly criticized many times for mistreating prisoners of war, Xi’s silent killing of prisoners is not even mentioned.
Although Xi has concealed the true number of those killed in the Uighur genocide, he cannot hide the genocidal orders he issued. Leaked documents exposed the order “to break their lineage, break their roots” and to show “absolutely no mercy” toward Uighurs.
Xi is blocking discussion of the Uighur issue at the UN, banning the publication of a Uighur report and not allowing an independent investigation of East Turkestan. Putin has not pleaded guilty, but Xi has on occasion unknowingly confessed.
For example: The 2017 and 2018 population statistics for China show that birth rates in Hotan Prefecture and the city of Kashgar plummeted.
German anthropologist Adrian Zanz concluded that 1 million fewer Uighurs were born during those two years — the peak of mass incarceration in the Uighur region. Putin might have killed 100,000 people, but Xi prevented 1 million Uighurs from coming into the world, killed many, and kept others in prisons and camps.
In Ukraine, houses have collapsed, but in East Turkestan, despite buildings still standing, 95 percent of the people inside the houses have been deprived of the right to live a normal life.
In some cases, the houses have even become tools of torture. Comparing the 44 Uighurs who died in the Urumqi fire caused by Xi’s COVID-19 lockdown policy with those who have died in during the bombing of Ukraine reflects the difference in the crimes committed by Xi and Putin.
More than 20 countries, including three members states of the UN Security Council, have recognized China’s policy on Uighurs as genocide or as at risk of causing genocide.
The EU and the UN have concluded that the situation is at risk of causing crimes against humanity.
Furthermore, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has committed the crime of 70 years of dictatorship over Chinese, and the death of 3 million people around the world from COVID-19, which originated in China.
By hiding the virus when it first emerged in China, Xi extended the damage and became the person to cause the largest death toll in the world.
It is only a matter of time before an arrest warrant is issued for Xi. The current ICC warrant should worry Xi more than it does Putin, as he is probably acutely aware that he will be next.
Kok Bayraq is a Uighur-American observer.
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Most countries are commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II with condemnations of militarism and imperialism, and commemoration of the global catastrophe wrought by the war. On the other hand, China is to hold a military parade. According to China’s state-run Xinhua news agency, Beijing is conducting the military parade in Tiananmen Square on Sept. 3 to “mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.” However, during World War II, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) had not yet been established. It
There is an old saying that if there is blood in the water, the sharks will come. In Taiwan’s case, that shark is China, circling, waiting for any sign of weakness to strike. Many thought the failed recall effort was that blood in the water, a signal for Beijing to press harder, but Taiwan’s democracy has just proven that China is mistaken. The recent recall campaign against 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, many with openly pro-Beijing leanings, failed at the ballot box. While the challenge targeted opposition lawmakers rather than President William Lai (賴清德) himself, it became an indirect
A recent critique of former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s speech in Taiwan (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” by Sasha B. Chhabra, Aug. 12, page 8) seriously misinterpreted his remarks, twisting them to fit a preconceived narrative. As a Taiwanese who witnessed his political rise and fall firsthand while living in the UK and was present for his speech in Taipei, I have a unique vantage point from which to say I think the critiques of his visit deliberately misinterpreted his words. By dwelling on his personal controversies, they obscured the real substance of his message. A clarification is needed to
RSS