1/6/09; (5 Items)
President Obama has asked Australia to resettle 17 Uygur detainees from Guantanamo Bay (“Obama pressures Rudd over Gitmo inmates,” May 30-31). I was interested to read that the Chinese Government has involved itself – most persuasively – in this matter. China has lobbied Australia not to accept the Uygur detainees, whom it describes as terrorists. But the Government of China is inclined to regard Uygur as terrorists in any case, because of confrontations over land and settlement in Xinjiang province in China, where the Uygur live. In 1998 I was privileged to travel overland through the Khunjerab Pass into Xinjiang from Pakistan and to see the magnificent Silk Road city of Kashgar, an old Uygur capital.
I have been informed by subsequent travellers and in the bulletin of the Uyghur American Association that indigenous populations in Kashgar are being transferred to outlying settlements and historic precincts of the Old City have been dismantled in order to make room for Han Chinese immigrants. “Terrorism” appears to be the word for Uygur resistance to the enforcement of this kind of policy in the region.
The Australian Government will consider whether to resettle the Guantanamo detainees. Australia was complicit in the Guantanamo scheme, as well we know, and my own view is that, if the detainees are to be released and cannot be returned to China for fear of torture, Australia should take them. Whatever we decide, the involvement of Beijing in this particular process of our decision-making is hypocritical and most intrusive. It should be discouraged. Ian Bedford; Summer Hill;
See; http://www.smh.com.au/lettersTortured souls
Malcolm Turnbull cites the “incontrovertible fact” that detainees released from Guantanamo had re-established links with al-Qaeda (“Turnbull says no to Gitmo detainees”, smh.com.au, May 30). What did he expect they would do after five years of unlawful detention and torture at the hands of the American military? Open a Sunday school? David Grant Ballina
Detainees a US issue
1/6/09; http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/letters/index.php/ theaustralian/comments/detainees_a_us_issue/
It may be argued that as a proactive ally of the US, the Howard government was complicit in the rendition and detention of alleged terrorist combatants at Guantanamo and Australia has some responsibility in finding a solution for resettlement of the remaining detainees. The policy however, was entirely the brainchild of the Bush Administration, which (somewhat typically) failed to think the process through, and must accept therefore to resolve on its own the fate of unrenderable former, suspected or potential terrorists. There should be no obligation either on allies involved in the conflict or third countries to accept them. After such a long period of detention with now clear evidence of inhumane treatment, their guilt or innocence should be determined without further delay and they should be returned to their country of detention or origin if found innocent, or detained on the US mainland if found guilty. Graeme Noonan; Phillip Island, Vic
Uighur group added to USA list of terrorist Organisations
Zamira Eshanova/Bruce Pannier: 1/9/02
The East Turkestan Islamic Movement, or ETIM, has become the first branch of the Uighur separatist group to be added to the U.S. list of terrorist organizations. U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage publicly announced the decision during a trip to the Chinese capital, Beijing. “After careful study, we judged that [ETIM] was a terrorist group and that it committed acts of violence against unarmed civilians, without any regard for who was hurt,” Armitage said. U.S. Embassy officials in Beijing, commenting on the decision, said that the Xinjiang-based group had been planning attacks against U.S. interests abroad, including the U.S. Embassy in Kyrgyzstan. An article published on 29 August in the U.S. newspaper “The Washington Post,” reporting on the ETIM allegations, cited Kyrgyz Foreign Minister Askar Aitmatov as saying there was reason to believe the Bishkek embassy had in fact been targeted, but he gave no details. The U.S. decision came as a surprise for many Uighurs and international observers. Adding the little-known group to the U.S. terrorist list, they say, may have a negative impact on other Muslim Uighurs living in China’s western Xinjiang province.
See: http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/eav090102.shtml
Urgent Notice – To all inns and bathhouses of the administrative district:
20/10/08
In compliance with a request from the local PSB substation, starting today, investigations will be carried out on the lodging circumstances of all individuals of “Tibetan” and “Uyghur” ethnicity residing at inns and bathhouses of the Haidian District. Reinforce inspection and verification of any lodger matching the description above and report all cases to the local dispatch station. Furthermore: every inn and bathhouse, when registering travelers, must double-check and accurately fill out the registration form. All who receive Tibetan or Uyghur individuals for lodging must immediately report to the local dispatch station. Officer to Contact: Wu Hu Cell Phone: 13801093916; Huayuan Dispatch Station On-Call Phone Numbers: 62014692 62032656
Minority individuals from “sensitive” regions being monitored in hotels is not something new – as far back as July, before the Olympics, there was a news report by Globe and Mail about how the unfortunate parties to a forced, mass Uyghur exodus from Beijing were invariably denied access to an inn or hotel after pulling out their ID cards identifying them as Uyghurs.
See: http://www.thenewdominion.net/395/the-uyghur-civil-rights-movement-no-uyghurs-in-our-hotel/
‘Uighurs Need – Not apply’
Bruce Gilley; 23/8/01 Far Eastern Economic Review
The Market trader in the oasis of Turfan does not even bother to pull down the corrugated metal gate of his small shop. Unprompted, he launches into an acerbic attack on Beijing’s plan to accelerate development in the largely-Muslim northwest region of Xinjiang. Fellow traders listen and nod consent in the 45-degree Celsius noonday heat.
The campaign, the trader says, is nothing but an attempt by Beijing to “steal” resources for the benefit of Han-dominated China. It is also a way to encourage more “coolies” from the rest of China to flood the region, boosting its Han population from the current 41% to over half in order to dilute its ethnic identity. “They’ll never let Uighurs get rich,” the middle-aged trader says, referring to the largest ethnic group here. “They don’t trust us enough.”
The outburst underlines a simple truth about the year- old campaign to develop western China, in which Xinjiang is a key part. Beijing hopes it will weaken the hold of Islam among minority groups in Xinjiang and strengthen their
ties to the rest of China. But the campaign in Xinjiang could actually heighten opposition to Chinese rule. Current plans mean most Uighurs won’t benefit as much as Han Chinese. Alienation will also rise with expected large inflows of Han.
Meanwhile, the handful of newly enriched Uighur business- people could be a source of new funding for nationalists.
Analysts say the potential backfiring of the campaign reflects a dilemma that colonial powers have faced throughout history. Everyone from the British in India to the French in Vietnam has discovered that it is hard to buy off nationalists, they say. The only real solution is to grant the occupied peoples greater autonomy, if not outright independence.
“Regardless of whether there is any real trickle down, Uighurs will likely resent the campaign,” says James Millward, an expert on the region at Georgetown University in Washington. “What stands out in people’s minds is the emotional impact of occupation, [not] whether that presence is doing positive things for the economy.”
Any failure to pacify an increasingly restive Xinjiang will be a growing burden on China’s future. China needs the undeveloped oil and gas reserves of Xinjiang, which account for a third of its total, to fuel its rapid development. Unrest in the region is also a diplomatic sore point in China’s relations with other countries, especially Muslim nations like Malaysia and Saudi Arabia. Uighur nationalism dominates discussions of the six-nation Central Asia security grouping that Beijing leads. Domestically, meanwhile, unrest in Xinjiang has a chilling effect on badly needed political reform in China by providing a boost to voices arguing the need for a strong central government.
“Xinjiang is a key to China’s overall development so it is important to solve the separatist problem here soon,” says Guo Dongsheng of the Xinjiang Economic Strategy, Development Centre, a private think-tank in the region’s capital Urumqi.
Drawing Xinjiang into a closer relationship with the rest of China through economic development has been a project of China’s rulers ever since the Qing dynasty conquered the region in the mid-18th century. Even before the “Go West” campaign, Xinjiang enjoyed huge economic subsidies from the rest of China. Of $2.4 billion in public fixed investment last year, for example, 80% was centrally funded and 5% came from foreign aid.
While Xinjiang’s per-capita GDP at $900 last year was slightly above the national average, the picture changes dramatically outside the Han-dominated cities. The two-thirds of the population living in rural areas, mostly from ethnic groups, earned just $195 per person last year.
A central aim of the development drive in Xinjiang is to bolster ethnic incomes ‘in order to dilute allegiance to Islam. “When the economy develops, the people’s focus will gradually shift from religion to the joys of worldly pleasures,” says a chapter on Xinjiang in a book published by the Central Organisation Department of the ruling Communist Party in June.
But it is already apparent that Hans are likely to benefit most. Most new projects so far involve funnelling money into Han-dominated state industry, especially the oil sector.
Beijing wants to boost proven oil reserves in Xinjiang by a third to 3.3 billion tonnes and gas by two-thirds to 1,160 billion cubic metres by 2005, with commensurate production increases. That will attract large numbers of Han workers. “Uighurs are simply not hired by Chinese firms. At job fairs, ‘Uighurs need not apply’ signs are standard,” says Millward.
Any Han influx would worsen resentment. Census figures from November show that the Han population grew by 32% to 7.5 million in the 1990s, compared to growth of 16% to II million for the non-Han. That means Hans are now 41% of the population of 18.5 million, up from a mere 4% in 1949.
Other new funds are earmarked for the military-run development organization called the
Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, or bingtuan, which was set up in 1954 to consolidate control of Xinjiang through economic development. Today it employs 2.5 million people, virtually all Han Chinese, representing 13% of the region’s population and a third of all Han there.
There are some signs that ethnic groups will benefit from the campaign.
But it is not clear this will weaken opposition to Chinese rule.
Indeed, some Chinese officials voice fears in private that the campaign will result in the rise of “bourgeoise nationalists” — Marxist code for rich people who agitate for change. The region’s most famous businesswoman, Rebiya Kadeer, was sent to prison last year for eight years after being convicted of providing state secrets to foreigners.
Beijing, like colonial powers before it, is learning the hard way that short of granting Xinjiang real autonomy, if not outright independence, it is in a no-win situation. Says Guo: “Originally, the central government saw this as a way to weaken support for the separatists. Now they realise it will be more complicated.”