Read on Twitter
If I can find the time, I will try to publish a proper response to this very problematic article, but let me start with a twitter thread on why this argument is extremely deceptive.... 1/. https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3129325/xinjiang-what-west-doesnt-tell-you-about-chinas-war-terror
1st, its argument is a prime example of China’s “whataboutism” vs. the US – the US did horrible things in the name of the War on Terror; why can’t we? 2/20
The larger problem is the War on Terror’s ability to dehumanize any given Muslim population due to its lack of definition of what constitutes a ‘terrrorist.’ This opens the door for any state’s manipulation of the term to label those Muslims they do not like as ‘terrorists’ 3/20
Yes, it is despicable that the US used GWOT disingenuously as a pretext to invade Iraq, but it is also abhorrent that the PRC is using GWOT disingenuously to obliterate the native peoples of one of its regions. Both acts are reprehensible and can be condemned simultaneously 4/20
2nd, the article uses many inaccuracies and manipulations to assert that China faces a grave ‘terrorist threat’ from within the population of the Uyghur region. The author says “terrorism was spiraling out of control in Xinjiang and remains a serious threat today” Wrong! 5/20
Like many Chinese defenses of policies in the region, the article calls out the July 2009 Urumqi riots as the most abhorrent “terrorist act” allegedly carried out by Uyghurs. These riots had nothing to do with ‘terrorism,’ Islam, or ‘extremism.’ 6/20
They began as a peaceful student protest asking for justice for the killing of several Uyghurs in a factory in south China. Law enforcement violent suppression of the protest spun into street violence that led to ethnic violence – both Uyghur on Han and Han on Uyghur 7/20
These riots were a product of the tensions caused by rapid state-led development in the region and the associated in-migration of Han seeking economic opportunity, combined with the structural racism of the PRC’s justice system that failed to investigate the factory deaths 8/20
Next, he points to 2 of the 4 violent incidents allegedly carried out by Uyghurs inside China that do appear to be ‘terrorist acts,’ but for which there is no evidence connecting them to any organized ‘extremist’ group – Urumqi market and Kunming train station in 2014 9/20
He suggests that ETIM claimed responsibility for these attacks, but it did not. First, ETIM (actually called ETIP) was a small group of Uyghur militants in Afghanistan that never carried out any violence anywhere and ceased to exist in 2003. Furthermore… 10/19
The Turkistan Islamic Party (TIP), a small group in Waziristan that claimed the legacy of ETIP, never claimed credit for any violence in China, but only made videos praising such violence - and there is no evidence that they ever had any followers or presence inside China 11/20
These limited number of ‘terrorist attacks’ were likely carried out by a small number of disgruntled Uyghurs with no connection to global ‘terrorist networks’ or any organization, provoked by state violence and securitization in their homeland 12/20
He also writes “the UN identified thousands of Uygur Islamic State fighters in Syria and Afghanistan” – wrong! UN identified several thousands of Uyghurs primarily in Syria by 2014 - recruited to TIP from Turkey (maybe with Turkish gov’t help) after fleeing China post-2009 13/20
TIP in Syria is a real fighting force, but more mercenaries than terrorists, and there is no evidence they have ever carried out violence inside China. Also – they are not the Islamic State! Not all foreign fighters in Syria are ISIS! 14/20
In short, there has been violence in the Uyghur region for many years – both state violence against Uyghurs and Uyghur violent resistance to the state, but this has nothing to do with ‘terrorism,’ ‘extremism,’ or Islam 15/20
The idea that violence or resistance from the Uyghur population is attributed to radical Islamic beliefs inside China’s Uyghur region has given the state a pretext to suspect all Uyghurs of being ‘extremists’ and to incarcerate or violently ‘re-educate’ 100,000s 16/20
The policies in the region are NOT a response to a real or imagined ‘terrorist threat’ – they are a means of pacifying all Uyghurs, eliminating their voice, breaking their solidarity and attachment to territory to open the way for mass state-led development 17/20
Yes, the US is in an awkward position to criticize these atrocities because it was a US original sin to manipulate GWOT for other purposes. But, this does not absolve China of responsibility for repeating the same sins. 18/20
And, most importantly, there is no justification for the abhorrent atrocities being committed by the PRC against Uyghurs and related peoples, which ultimately amount to cultural genocide and are likely in violation of the UN Convention on genocide 19/20
This author is a western-educated former World Bank employee in Hong Kong, but that only makes him more adept at manipulating GWOT to justify atrocities, something western audiences have unfortunately become immune to since 9/11 20/20
By the way, if you want to dispute my analysis here, please read my book first since I articulate these points in much more detail with more evidence than 280 characters allow https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691202181/the-war-on-the-uyghurs
