The recent deportation of 40 Uighurs from Thailand to China has sparked international condemnation. Despite offers from third countries to resettle them, Bangkok proceeded with the deportation, fearing economic retaliation from Beijing. The decision raises serious human rights concerns, given the documented repression of Uighurs in China’s Xinjiang region.
The UN urged Thailand not to deport the Uighurs due to the risk of significant harm, including torture and persecution. However, Bangkok ignored these warnings. Notably, Indonesia — the world’s largest Muslim-majority country — has remained silent.
This silence is unsurprising. China is Indonesia’s largest trading partner and top investor, making Jakarta cautious about jeopardizing economic ties. Yet, by ignoring the deportation and broader persecution of Uighurs, Indonesia risks compromising its principles of human rights and solidarity with fellow Muslims.
Indonesia has long positioned itself as a defender of oppressed Muslim communities. The Indonesian Ulama Council has expressed concern over the Uighurs’ plight, emphasizing Islamic solidarity and fundamental human rights. Yet, the government remains reluctant to act.
Jakarta’s hesitation is tied to its deep economic reliance on China. Beijing has invested heavily in Indonesia’s infrastructure through the Belt and Road Initiative. Trade between the two nations surpasses US$100 billion, with Chinese investments shaping key sectors like energy, mining and digital industries. Any criticism of China risks economic repercussions.
This is not the first time Indonesia has stayed silent. In 2022, Indonesia joined 18 nations in voting against a UN motion to discuss China’s human rights abuses in Xinjiang. Jakarta dismissed the effort as political maneuvering, framing the Uighur issue as China’s internal matter.
Indonesia’s stance contrasts sharply with its vocal condemnation of Myanmar’s persecution of the Rohingya and Israeli policies toward Palestinians. This selective advocacy undermines its credibility as a principled defender of human rights.
While Indonesia might fear economic fallout, it cannot afford to remain passive in the face of grave human rights violations. There are strategic steps it could take to address the Uighur crisis while safeguarding national interests.
First, Indonesia must leverage its diplomatic ties with China to press for greater transparency and accountability. High-level dialogues should demand concrete commitments from Beijing to uphold religious freedom and cultural autonomy. Jakarta should stress that addressing these concerns would enhance China’s standing among Muslim-majority nations and strengthen bilateral trust.
Regionally, Indonesia should initiate ASEAN discussions on the deportation of Uighurs. Many ASEAN members, including Thailand, rely economically on China, but a unified stance could create diplomatic leverage. A regional dialogue on asylum seekers and refugee protection would reaffirm Indonesia’s commitment to stability and humanitarian principles.
Indonesia could also take a leadership role in providing humanitarian aid and asylum for Uighurs fleeing persecution. Given its history of sheltering Rohingya refugees, Jakarta could extend similar protections to Uighur asylum seekers under international refugee protocols, reinforcing its reputation as a compassionate regional leader.
As a key member of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Indonesia should push for stronger collective action on the Uighur issue. While the organization has voiced concerns, it has been largely ineffective due to political and economic considerations. Indonesia’s leadership could revitalize efforts to prioritize Uighur rights on the global Islamic agenda.
Finally, Indonesia should call on China to allow independent observers, including representatives from Muslim-majority nations, to assess the situation in Xinjiang. If China insists that claims of Uighur persecution are false, it should have no reason to prevent international scrutiny.
Indonesia’s silence on the Uighur issue is not just a diplomatic misstep — it is a failure of moral leadership. As the world’s largest Muslim-majority country, Indonesia has a responsibility to advocate for Uighurs while maintaining economic ties with China. By remaining silent, Jakarta signals that economic pragmatism outweighs fundamental human rights and religious solidarity.
The cost of inaction extends beyond foreign policy. It erodes Indonesia’s credibility as a defender of Muslim rights and weakens its moral standing on the global stage. If Indonesia continues to ignore the Uighurs’ plight, it risks being seen as selective in its advocacy.
Indonesia has the diplomatic weight and strategic influence to engage China on this issue in a way that is pragmatic and principled. The question is whether Jakarta has the courage to act. The world is watching, and history would remember which nations stood for justice — and which remained silent.
Muhammad Zulfikar Rakhmat is director of the China-Indonesia Desk at the Center of Economic and Law Studies in Jakarta.
After more than a year of review, the National Security Bureau on Monday said it has completed a sweeping declassification of political archives from the Martial Law period, transferring the full collection to the National Archives Administration under the National Development Council. The move marks another significant step in Taiwan’s long journey toward transitional justice. The newly opened files span the architecture of authoritarian control: internal security and loyalty investigations, intelligence and counterintelligence operations, exit and entry controls, overseas surveillance of Taiwan independence activists, and case materials related to sedition and rebellion charges. For academics of Taiwan’s White Terror era —
On Feb. 7, the New York Times ran a column by Nicholas Kristof (“What if the valedictorians were America’s cool kids?”) that blindly and lavishly praised education in Taiwan and in Asia more broadly. We are used to this kind of Orientalist admiration for what is, at the end of the day, paradoxically very Anglo-centered. They could have praised Europeans for valuing education, too, but one rarely sees an American praising Europe, right? It immediately made me think of something I have observed. If Taiwanese education looks so wonderful through the eyes of the archetypal expat, gazing from an ivory tower, how
China has apparently emerged as one of the clearest and most predictable beneficiaries of US President Donald Trump’s “America First” and “Make America Great Again” approach. Many countries are scrambling to defend their interests and reputation regarding an increasingly unpredictable and self-seeking US. There is a growing consensus among foreign policy pundits that the world has already entered the beginning of the end of Pax Americana, the US-led international order. Consequently, a number of countries are reversing their foreign policy preferences. The result has been an accelerating turn toward China as an alternative economic partner, with Beijing hosting Western leaders, albeit
After 37 US lawmakers wrote to express concern over legislators’ stalling of critical budgets, Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) pledged to make the Executive Yuan’s proposed NT$1.25 trillion (US$39.7 billion) special defense budget a top priority for legislative review. On Tuesday, it was finally listed on the legislator’s plenary agenda for Friday next week. The special defense budget was proposed by President William Lai’s (賴清德) administration in November last year to enhance the nation’s defense capabilities against external threats from China. However, the legislature, dominated by the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), repeatedly blocked its review. The
RSS