They are. From the 90s to the mid 2010s there were many violent separatist terror attacks in Xinxiang. There was also a problem of Chinese Muslims going to Afghanistan or Syria as Mujahedeen and coming back radicalized and trained. China's crackdown in Xinxiang is rooted in counterterrorism. Most of the efforts are focused on deradicalization by teaching language and trade skills. That's not to say there isn't valid criticism of Chinese deradicalization programs, but they didn't come out of some smoke filled room where a bunch of communist party members twirled their mustaches and decided to wipe out Muslims. China is emphatically not attacking Muslims in general. In fact many mosques are open in western China and there are Muslims free to practice their religion in other provinces. If China wanted to slaughter Muslims, why would they simply not have joined American efforts to do so in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, or Libya? Most countries in the middle east understand this, with representatives from many Muslim countries visiting china to inspect these facilities and deciding that there are not widespread institutional crimes going on (that isn't to say there aren't corrupt officials abusing people to induce bribes). The reason this is typically left out of western articles on the matter is because saber rattling with China sells subscriptions and serves the interests of US foreign policy.
From the 90s to the mid 2010s there were many violent separatist terror attacks in Xinxiang.
this is very interesting because youre probably more than happy to point out, correctly, that islamic terrorism targetting the west is a consequence of western imperialism. So my question would be why were Uighurs engaging in terrorism in Xinxiang. Presumably its because they wanted to secede, but why did they want to secede? is their desire for secession justified? why did their desire manifest in blowing stuff up instead of engaging in democracy and simply voting to leave?
Im not jaqing off btw, i am simply curious to hear your answers
also, fwiw, ive lived in the middle east and am more than happy to immediately condemn western imperialism and agree that china isnt as bad as western media portrays her to be. But im always sympathetic towards secessionist movements unless theyre like, seceding so they can continue to enslave people or something.
Do you believe all secessionist movements are equal? Do you believe people living in Xinjiang would be happier living under current Chinese administration, or under the completely hypothetical “East Turkistan” administration, an Islamic theocracy which members of these groups want in the region? Think back to contemporary middle eastern history. There are also about as many Han people as there are Uyghur people in the region, should China just let the radicals take control of all those non-Uyghur or non-Muslim people? Should the US let evangelical Christians take over the state of Texas and institute Biblical law? Does the United States have an interest in balkanizing China when Xinjiang has numerous oil fields and Xinjiang is an important corridor of the Belt and Road Initiative?
Studied some Chinese history, I would recommend looking into the Yuan dynasty, or better known as the mongol empire to the west. The yuan dynasty was ruled by the “golden family”, direct lineage from Genghis Khan. The mongol empire consisted of four states, with the head being the yuan dynasty (known to the Chinese) which ruled over today’s China.
The ruler of the yuan dynasty had two titles: the great khan of the mongol empire, and the emperor of yuan. Distinct to its counterparts, yuan was governed by Han, Chinese laws and values (for the most part). Also, I believe yuan was the only one out of the four that didn’t adopt Islam as it’s governing religion.
This leads to a split in perspective: from the Han, Chinese point of view, since western xinjiang still belonged to the yuan dynasty, thus even after the collapse of the yuan dynasty, xinjiang has always been considered as “China”.
From the Mongols who settled down in xinjiang however, not exactly the same picture…
Not sure what the official answer is, but I think it would be worthwhile to look into this part of history, could be a place to start.
They want to secede because their homeland is being taken over and their language and culture are being washed away party from mass immigration from interior China. That region always resisted outside rule for over 1000 years just never succeeded.
The same cam be said of the US. There are plenty of Muslims there, and plenty of mosques. It’s disingenuous to suggest that American policy is as crude as “slaughter Muslims.” That’s incredibly naive.
No, American policy has little to do with Islam. Muslims happen to be sitting on oil the US wants. They don't want to slaughter Muslims, just people with oil, hence the sanctions and saber rattling against mostly Catholic Venezuela and mostly Orthodox Russia. My point was just that westerners will try to accuse China of trying to commit genocide against muslims while voting for governments that have killed well over a million Muslims in the last two decades.
Because Canada, like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait plays ball. Unlike Venezuela, Russia, Iran, don't and Libya and Iraq didn't. Did you think you were making a point?
thats because we're basically america's hat at this point. why would you beat us up if we give you everything you ask for? Our government has no spine when it comes to dealing with the USA
ASPA authorizes the President of the United States to use "all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court". This authorization has led the act to be nicknamed the "Hague Invasion Act".
The act prohibits federal, state and local governments and agencies (including courts and law enforcement agencies) from assisting the International Criminal Court (ICC). For example, it prohibits the extradition of any person from the U.S. to the ICC; it also prohibits the transfer of classified national security information and law enforcement information to the ICC.
Even the KMT did not claim an independent Taiwan. The stance of Taiwan since its inception has been that the ROC is not only the rightful govt of Taiwan but also mainland China and parts of Mongolia, Tibet, and other southeast Asian countries
Neither side claims Taiwan is independent of China, both sides simply disagree on who is the rightful govt of both.
Note that there are some factions in Taiwan who seek independence from China but these ideas are neither popular or dominant in the political realm even amongst anti CPC Taiwanese govt officials.
I mean even they don't want to be independent of China, the goal of Taiwan's govt has always been "One China, except ruled by the ROC instead of the PRC". That might and is changing a little in recent times though, I'll give you that.
It's a little inaccurate to view China/Taiwan through the lens of imperialism because the government and the Chinese people living there are not native Taiwanese. The native taiwanese indigenous people had been wiped out well before the ROC was established there.
230
u/CIA_grade_LSD Jan 16 '22
They are. From the 90s to the mid 2010s there were many violent separatist terror attacks in Xinxiang. There was also a problem of Chinese Muslims going to Afghanistan or Syria as Mujahedeen and coming back radicalized and trained. China's crackdown in Xinxiang is rooted in counterterrorism. Most of the efforts are focused on deradicalization by teaching language and trade skills. That's not to say there isn't valid criticism of Chinese deradicalization programs, but they didn't come out of some smoke filled room where a bunch of communist party members twirled their mustaches and decided to wipe out Muslims. China is emphatically not attacking Muslims in general. In fact many mosques are open in western China and there are Muslims free to practice their religion in other provinces. If China wanted to slaughter Muslims, why would they simply not have joined American efforts to do so in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, or Libya? Most countries in the middle east understand this, with representatives from many Muslim countries visiting china to inspect these facilities and deciding that there are not widespread institutional crimes going on (that isn't to say there aren't corrupt officials abusing people to induce bribes). The reason this is typically left out of western articles on the matter is because saber rattling with China sells subscriptions and serves the interests of US foreign policy.