Muslim children forced to drop 'religious' names in western China

**sister herb** · 06-03-2017

Saturday 3 June 2017

Children under 16 told ‘overly religious’ names such as Saddam, Hajj and Jihad must be changed amid pro-Communist rallies across Xinjiang region

Muslim children in China’s far western Xinjiang region are being forced to change their “religious” names and adults are being coerced into attending rallies showing devotion to the officially atheist Communist party.

During Ramadan, the authorities in Xinjiang have ordered all children under 16 to change names where police have determined they are “overly religious”. As many as 15 names have been banned, including Islam, Quran, Mecca, Jihad, Imam, Saddam, Hajj, Medina and Arafat, according to Radio Free Asia.

In April authorities banned certain names for newborns that were deemed to have religious connotations, but the new order expands forced name changes to anyone under 16, the age at which Chinese citizens are issued a national identity card.

The order coincided with millions gathering at 50,000 individual rallies across Xinjiang this week to pledge allegiance to the Communist party. More than a quarter of the region’s population sang the national anthem at 9am on 29 May and pledged allegiance to the Communist party, according to state media reports.

Xinjiang’s Muslims mostly belonging to the Uighur ethnic group, a Turkic people. The region has occasionally seen sporadic violence which China blames on international terrorist groups. But overseas observers say the vast majority of incidents are a result of local grievances.

Full article: https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-western-china

**سيف الله** · 08-19-2021

Salaam

Another update.

Taiwan is Nervous

And China not only knows it, it is openly mocking the fears of “the secessionists” in the aftermath of the US collapse in Afghanistan. From Global Times, the English-language Chinese newspaper that should be on your list of daily reads these days.

“Yesterday’s Saigon, today’s Afghanistan, and tomorrow’s Taiwan?” read some online posts by internet users in the island of Taiwan, implying that the so-called alliance that Taiwan has forged with the US is nothing but an empty promise that will eventually “leave the Taiwan people hurting alone.”

An Op-Ed in local Taiwan news site udn.com said that the unexpected end in Afghanistan has “shocked” US allies and partners, who have become wary of putting the safety of Taiwan in the hands of the US, as the latter may pull the same tricks played in Kabul.

The US withdrawal from Afghanistan will also have a global impact, especially weighing on its image and credibility, the Op-Ed in a Taipei-based news site said, as Washington’s strength in maintaining the global order will be challenged, and the power confrontation in the Indo-Pacific Strategy targeting China will be questioned.

“They should say the day before yesterday, Vietnam, yesterday, Taiwan and today, Afghanistan. Wasn’t the island abandoned by the US in 1979?” Chang Ching, a research fellow at the Society for Strategic Studies based in the island, told the Global Times on Monday.

As part of its latest efforts to play the “Taiwan card” in countering China, the Biden administration recently announced it would hold a virtual Summit for Democracy, which excited the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) authority of Taiwan. Since taking office in January, US President Joe Biden has taken various measures to demonstrate its deterrent against China, such as deploying military aircraft to the island, sending warships across the Taiwan Straits several times and dispatching senior officials to visit the island, blatantly playing the “Taiwan card” to ruffle China’s feathers.

However, the failure of the US in Afghanistan should serve as a warning to the secessionists in the island, who have to understand that they cannot count on Washington, as Afghanistan is not the first place where the US abandoned its allies, nor will it be the last, experts warned….

The US retreat from Afghanistan has taught the island of Taiwan an important lesson, that is, the cross-Straits relations must be resolved by Taiwan itself, as the US may choose to abandon the island at any time according to its own core interests, Chang Ya-chung, a Taipei-based political scientist and member of the Kuomintang, told the Global Times on Monday.

Furthermore, the US has never promised to send troops if a military conflict occurs across the Taiwan Straits, and only said that it would sell weapons to Taiwan to increase its military strength, Chang noted.

The US retreat from Afghanistan has taught the island of Taiwan an important lesson, that is, the cross-Straits relations must be resolved by Taiwan itself, as the US may choose to abandon the island at any time according to its own core interests, Chang Ya-chung, a Taipei-based political scientist and member of the Kuomintang, told the Global Times on Monday.

GLOBAL TIMES, August 16, 2021

Translation: Cut a deal while you still can. The US military isn’t going to even try to stop us, so we will take the island whenever we decide we’re willing to pay the price.

UPDATE: With some amazingly bad judgement that is only exceeded by his astonishingly poor timing, a presumably senile US Senator appears to have just handed China a casus belli to invade Taiwan. On Twitter, of all places.

A senior US senator, also a member of US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, on his social media revealed that the US has 30,000 soldiers stationed in China’s Taiwan island. Chinese experts said if this is true, it is a military invasion and occupation of China’s Taiwan and equivalent to the US declaring war on China.

If the tweet is correct, China could immediately activate Anti-Secession Law to destroy and expel US troops in Taiwan and reunify Taiwan militarily, experts noted.

In the tweet, Senator John Cornyn listed the number of US troops stationed in South Korea, Germany, Japan, China’s Taiwan and on the African continent to show how the number of US soldiers has dwindled in Afghanistan. But in the process, Cornyn revealed the shocking news that there are 30,000 US troops in China’s Taiwan island.

His tweet raised a wave of doubts among netizens with many commenting below his tweet: “how come the US still has troops in Taiwan,” “so the US army has a secret division in Taiwan,” “Cornyn must have mistaken the number,” and “this should have been before 1979.”

As a senior senator from Texas, who was once a Republican Senate Majority Whip for the 114th and 115th Congresses, and now a member of US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Cornyn should be aware of the US government’s military intelligence.

Thus, the possibility that the US is hiding 30,000 troops in China’s Taiwan island cannot be ruled out, and there is a probability the secret was accidentally spilled out by this senior US politician, Chinese observers said. As we know, the US has maintained military communications with China’s Taiwan including weapon sales and military trainings.

GLOBAL TIMES, August 17, 2021

If there are US troops present on Taiwan island, China will crush them by force: Global Times editorial

“If that is true, the Chinese government and the Chinese people will never accept it. It is believed that China will immediately put the Anti-Secession Law into use, destroy and expel US troops in Taiwan by military means, and at the same time realize reunification by force.”

I wish I could say that even the converged gay generals in the Pentagon couldn’t possibly be that stupid. But as unlikely and as ridiculous as a secret stash of US troops on Taiwan sounds, it’s exactly the sort of Smart Boy strategery that laid the foundation for the recent Afghan debacle.

https://voxday.net/page/2/

6 Reasons the US Will Abandon Taiwan

The Chinese government does not appear to be impressed by the response of Taiwan President Tsai or the US government to the recent US surrender to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

On Wednesday, Taiwan’s regional leader Tsai Ing-wen finally made a speech on the panic on the island triggered by Afghanistan’s situation. She declared that Taiwan’s only option is to make itself stronger, more united and more determined to defend itself. Just before Tsai’s speech, US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan on Tuesday responded to whether the US will abandon Taiwan. He said that “When it comes to Taiwan, it is a fundamentally different question in a different context” and the US’ “commitment” to Taiwan remains “as strong as it’s ever been.”

The statements of Sullivan and Tsai show the rapid collapse of the US-supported Afghan government has brought a real shock to the island. Both Washington and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) authorities are diffident about this, and they believe it is necessary to calm the doubts.

However, the empty words of Sullivan and Tsai were predictable. They would inevitably say so, and had to say so. As to whether Taiwan will show resistance when the mainland uses force to unify the island one day, they did not offer any convincing additional information.

Will the US abandon Taiwan? Fundamentally speaking, this is a matter of time and situation, and it will not be decided by a few elites in the US and Taiwan. We believe that as long as the mainland’s strength continues to grow, and as long as it prepares fully for military struggles and has a firm will to unify, then there is no doubt the US is doomed to eventually abandon Taiwan.

The six reasons provided are convincing, perhaps even conclusive. Regardless, it is clear that there is no possibility that the USA is going to go to war to defend Taiwan from China under any circumstances. While it’s true that the US commitment to Taiwan is “as strong as it’s ever been”, all that means is that the US was never intending to defend the island in the first place. Forget Afghanistan, the US doesn’t even defend its own borders these days.

The concept of “strategic uncertainty” only works as long as the opponent is genuinely uncertain about one’s intentions. And China, correctly, is now certain that the USA won’t do anything to prevent the inevitable annexation of what China has always considered to be a rebel province. At this point, it’s more uncertain that the US troops would even fight to defend South Korea in the event of a North Korean attack.

The shock and awe of Desert Storm has long since dissipated. The monopolar world is no more. And even if it takes a decade or more for the Israel-First imperialists in the USA to admit it, this is the reality of modern geopolitics.

Of course, all of this obscures the larger issue that absolutely no one in the media presently dares to discuss. Since the US military can’t, and won’t, defend Afghanistan, since it can’t, and won’t, defend Ukraine, if it can’t, and won’t, defend Taiwan, is it still even able to defend its greatest ally, Israel? While there is no question that all the neoclowns and their pet politicians are more than willing to have it do so, it is the question of its capabilities that is the much more relevant one.

https://voxday.net/2021/08/19/6-reas...bandon-taiwan/

**سيف الله** · 08-21-2021

Salaam

Not hard to believe.

Detainee says China has secret jail for Uighurs – in Dubai

Woman says she was held for days at a Chinese-run secret detention facility in Dubai along with at least two Uighurs.

A young Chinese woman says she was held for eight days at a Chinese-run secret detention facility in Dubai along with at least two Uighurs, in what may be the first evidence that China is operating a so-called “black site” beyond its borders.

The woman, Wu Huan, 26, was on the run to avoid extradition back to China because her fiancé was considered a Chinese dissident. Wu told The Associated Press she was abducted from a hotel in Dubai and detained by Chinese officials at a villa converted into a jail, where she saw or heard two other prisoners, both Uighurs.

She was questioned and threatened and forced to sign legal documents incriminating her fiancé Wang Jingyu, 19, for harassing her, she said. She was finally released on June 8 and is now seeking asylum in the Netherlands.

While “black sites” are common in China, Wu’s account is the only testimony known to experts that Beijing has set one up in another country. Such a site would reflect how China is increasingly using its international clout to detain or bring back citizens it wants from overseas, whether they are dissidents, corruption suspects, or ethnic minorities such as the Uighurs.

Uighurs extradited

The AP was unable to confirm or disprove Wu’s account independently, and she could not pinpoint the exact location of the black site. However, reporters have seen and heard corroborating evidence, including stamps in her passport, a phone recording of a Chinese official asking her questions, and text messages that she sent from jail to a pastor helping the couple.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said: “What I can tell you is that the situation the person talked about is not true.” Dubai did not respond to multiple phone calls and requests for comment.

Yu-Jie Chen, an assistant professor at Taiwan’s Academia Sinica, said she had not heard of a Chinese secret jail in Dubai, and such a facility in another country would be unusual. However, she also noted it would be in keeping with China’s attempts to do all it can to bring select citizens back, both through official means such as signing extradition treaties and unofficial means such as revoking visas or putting pressure on family back home.

“[China] really wasn’t interested in reaching out until recent years,” said Chen, who has tracked China’s international legal actions.

Chen said Uighurs in particular were being extradited or returned to China, which has been detaining the mostly Muslim minority on suspicion of “terrorism” even for relatively harmless acts such as praying. Wu and her fiancé are Han Chinese, the majority ethnicity in China.

Dubai has a history as a place where Uighurs are interrogated and deported back to China, and activists say Dubai itself has been linked to secret interrogations.

Radha Stirling, a legal advocate who founded the advocacy group Detained in Dubai, says she has worked with about a dozen people who have reported being held in villas in the UAE, including citizens of Canada, India and Jordan, but not China.

“There is no doubt that the UAE has detained people on behalf of foreign governments with whom they are allied,” Stirling said. “I don’t think they would at all shrug their shoulders to a request from such a powerful ally.”

However, Patrick Theros, a former US ambassador to Qatar who is now strategic adviser to the Gulf International Forum, called the allegations “totally out of character” for the Emiratis.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/...-holds-uighurs

**سيف الله** · 08-25-2021

Salaam

Like to share.

I'm the Department Head of the Occidentology Department **of The Quran Institute

Date: 6th August 2021

Organised by the Darman Foundation, Uyghur Spirit Youth Conference 2021

**سيف الله** · 09-02-2021

Salaam

Another update.

**سيف الله** · 09-02-2021

Salaam

Hmmmm I understand the need to economic investment and rebuilding but from the Chinese? Lets hope they dont gain too much 'leverage' over your country and society (dont want to end up in the same position as other countries eg Pakistan).

Afghanistan: Taliban to rely on Chinese funds, spokesperson says

With the help of China, the Taliban will fight for an economic comeback in Afghanistan, Zabihullah Mujahid tells Italian newspaper.

Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid has told an Italian newspaper that the group will rely primarily on financing from China following the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan and its takeover of the country.

In his interview published by La Repubblica on Thursday, Mujahid said the Taliban will fight for an economic comeback with the help of China.

The Taliban seized control of Afghanistan’s capital, Kabul, on August 15 as the country’s Western-backed government melted away, bringing an end to 20 years of war amid fears of an economic collapse and widespread hunger.

Following the chaotic departure of foreign troops from Kabul airport in recent weeks, Western states have severely restricted their aid payments to Afghanistan.

“China is our most important partner and represents a fundamental and extraordinary opportunity for us, because it is ready to invest and rebuild our country,” the Taliban spokesperson was quoted as saying in the interview.

He said the New Silk Road – an infrastructure initiative with which China wants to increase its global influence by opening up trade routes – was held in high regard by the Taliban.

There are “rich copper mines in the country, which, thanks to the Chinese, can be put back into operation and modernised. In addition, China is our pass to markets all over the world.”

Mujahid also confirmed that women would be allowed to continue studying at universities in future. He said women would be able to work as nurses, in the police or as assistants in ministries, but ruled out that there would be female ministers.

Afghanistan desperately needs money, and the Taliban is unlikely to get swift access to the roughly $10bn in assets here mostly held abroad by the Afghan central bank.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/...kesperson-says

Fair comment.

A good test will be whether the IEA will follow the Chinese propoganda line on whats happening to the Uighurs.

Oh dear

Having said that their position is better than other Muslim governments, and I understand he doesnt want more conflict and realitically there is not much they can do other than protest or provide shelter, but still beyond disappointing.

Bigger picture.

How China became the world’s factory

How did China evolve from an impoverished, agrarian society into the industrial power we know today?

**سيف الله** · 09-05-2021

Salaam

Another update

First They Shut Down Big Tech

Now China is gunning for the Hellmouth:

In a dramatic turn for the major studios, Hollywood’s share of China’s box office is in free fall, reportedly collapsing to less than 10 percent as Beijing aims to bolster its domestic movie industry while continuing to block major Hollywood releases from playing in Chinese cinemas.

The result is a potential existential crisis for Hollywood, which has bent over backwards to please China’s Communist dictators in the hopes of maintaining access to the lucrative Chinese market.

But the reverse has happened. Hollywood’s share of the China box office market has plummeted to just 9.5 percent so far this year, according to data from consultancy Artisan Gateway, as reported by Variety.

The stark decline comes as Hollywood imports are being edged out by domestic releases.

Last year, only two Hollywood releases cracked China’s top-ten grossing movies — Tenet and The Croods: A New Age. For 2019, only Avengers: Endgame and Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw made the top-ten list. A decade ago, Hollywood accounted for eight of China’s top-ten grossing movies.

Chinese audiences are instead gravitating toward home-grown movies in larger numbers, lifting the time-traveling comedy Hi, Mom and the buddy-cop adventure Detective Chinatown 3 to blockbuster status. Meanwhile, recent Hollywood titles like Disney-Pixar’s Luca and Disney’s Raya and the Last Dragon have failed to resonate with local audiences.

Even Universal’s dependable Fast & Furious franchise, which has been enormously popular in China, is showing signs of fatigue. The latest installment, F9, saw its China grosses plummet in the second week by a stunning 85 percent.

Hollywood’s decline in China comes as the Communist country has overtaken the United States to become the world’s largest movie market.

If you think it’s an accident that China increasingly appears to be targeting the neoclown strongholds in the USA, well, you’re not paying attention. It’s obvious that China is not so much focusing its “unrestricted warfare” on the USA per se anymore as on a specific and influential foreign demographic. My guess is that the media will be next, followed by Wall Street.

Believe it or not, there is not only considerably more freedom in the Chinese media than in the US media – by which I mean there are far fewer no-go zones – the rules are considerably more coherent and stable. Remember, I’ve not only been interviewed on Chinese state TV about trade and cryptocurrencies, I was asked more than once to return, most likely because both my predictions – contra the other experts – were correct. Do you think that would ever happen on Fox, CBS, ESPN, or even the Disney Channel?

Remember, China’s primary goal is to be left to their own devices. And their increasing engagement with the West appears to have taught them that unlike China, the USA is not a nation.

https://voxday.net/2021/08/29/first-...down-big-tech/

**سيف الله** · 11-13-2021

Salaam

Never forget.

Some history.

Previous protests.

Protests in the UK today.

**Murid** · 11-13-2021

I would recommend propagating sunnah duas and dhikr (and estegfar and shukr) to the Uygurs, so that they get more of bounties, Divine protection, barakah, mercy, help inshaAllah.

It is very hard in my opinion to help them otherwise. Help them with your duas.

**سيف الله** · 12-21-2021

Salaam

Another update.

We need to look at China to understand the terrible danger of Prevent

Prevent Watch’s Head of Research, Alim Islam, compares China’s counter-extremism policies to those in the UK and concludes they only differ in degree and scale.

In 2019, it emerged that UK counter-extremism “experts” had been working with China on “best practice” to demonstrate the use of “counter extremism” policies. This venture was funded by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

The counter-extremism “think tank” the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), ran a two-day event at taxpayers’ expense about “countering the root causes of violent extremism undermining growth and stability in China’s Xinjiang Region” and “to demonstrate the effectiveness of UK best practice in CVE and identify ways this can be adopted in China”.

At the time, Senior Associate Fellow Raffaello Pantucci claimed that RUSI was in China “to use British experts to influence Chinese policies” and that this had happened before the “situation in Xinjiang worsened.” The conference happened in December 2016.

Although news of China’s “re-education” camps for its Muslim Uyghur people were officially documented by the UN, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch in 2018, Human Rights Watch reported that the incarceration and “re-education” of Muslim Uyghur people began in May 2014, driven by China’s Strike Hard Campaign.

With Pantucci and his colleagues at RUSI and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office visiting China in 2016, two years after the inception of this programme of “re-education” of Muslims through incarceration, surely they must have known about it?

Since then, Beijing’s “re-education” of Muslims has included allegations of systemic rape, physical and other sexual abuse, to force the relinquishment of religion.

It is secularism at its most rabid, and its engine is a programme of surveillance, data gathering and sharing to target individuals, their families and networks of friends and associates. It’s particularly shocking missionary zeal turns on the fulcrum of education, or more precisely “re-education.”

The reports from China are shocking. But how is their programme different from what happens in the UK? Are the methods shared and their outcomes different simply in degree and scale? If so, what does this mean for the UK?

Prevent’s collection and retention of data on children

Government figures released in November 2021 for the period April 2020 to March 2021 showed 4,915 people were referred to Prevent. This is a decrease from the 6,287 referrals, likely due to the coronavirus pandemic. It is the lowest number of referrals since the year ending March 2016.

Of the ages from those referred who were known, the age category of 15-20 made up the highest proportion of individuals referred, that being 1,398 young people, or 29%. Referrals from the police accounted for 36% of referrals, the highest proportion.

Despite schools being closed for much of the year, the education sector still accounted for 25% of referrals. Individuals under the age of 15 accounted for 20% of referrals.

However, these Prevent referrals do not include instances where a child has been subjected to Prevent-type questioning, where they have been asked about their religious and political beliefs, but no formal referral has been made. Based on cases Prevent Watch has worked on, these non-referrals can have the same chilling effect and trauma as a referral.

The Prevent budget since the financial year 2015/16 has been an average of £44m a year. While the budget for Prevent has remained similar since this time, there have been wholesale cuts to healthcare.

For example, in the same period of time public health grants have been cut by 24%, approximately £1 billion. One question that arises is whether spending money on a failed policy is the best way to use the public purse.

Schools as Britain’s collecting points of data on Muslim children

Prevent stipulates that schools are required to teach British values under Prevent. Indeed, schools are a primary site of both British “re-education” and surveillance.

When an 8-year-old Muslim boy was separated from his classmates and – without his parents or any caring adult guardian – asked about Islam, the mosque he attends, whether he prays, his views on other religions, as well as being asked to recite verses from the Quran, Pantucci – from RUSI that advised China on CE policy – said that he “understood” why this would be necessary.

When a mother of three children under the age of 8 years old approached Prevent Watch for assistance, she told us that she had been so traumatised by the intrusion that she could not leave her home for two months. Her children had been approached by Prevent and questioned at school.

“The officer gestured with his finger that I should not even try to enter the room where they were interviewing my children,” she said. “The social worker was present, but he made no attempt to inform me about the process, nor did he appear to consider the impact on my children.”

For any child – let alone three siblings – to be put in such a situation based on imprecise, unclear, and indefinite meanings of “extremism” and “radicalisation,” which have been criticised by the courts, is naturally the cause of great anxiety to parents, and deeply damaging to trust.

As the mother told us: “I was not informed about what my children were being questioned about, and the nature of the questions. I was very concerned whether my children had understood the questions. I was also really worried that they had been asked misleading questions or had been unduly pressured.”

Application of Prevent might be lawful in letter but it is lawless in nature. It allows police to be involved where no crime is evident, even in cases of children. Children are criminalised and their data is collected.

Difficulty removing names from databases

The mother in the case above told Prevent Watch that she received the report outlining the “concerns” that Prevent had about her children (all under the age of eight) nearly five months later.

At that point, she found that her information and that of her children had been shared and discussed among different public authorities to assess whether intervention via the government’s flagship “deradicalisation” programme, Channel, needed to take place.

This had all happened without her knowledge. Neither she or her husband had been given the opportunity to challenge the process or see the data collected on them or their children, understand how it was being interpreted or know with whom it would be shared.

After three years of a protracted and frustrating complaints process to the local authority, the chief concern of both parents remains centred on how the retention of their data has impacted their children and will continue to impact their lives.

Much of their concern is centred on what data has been collected on them, how it is being interpreted by algorithms, with whom it is being shared, and how long it will take to be removed.

These concerns are justified. Our cases show repeatedly that the data collected through Prevent, often on young people who may be subject to questioning without parental consent or presence, is difficult to challenge or access except in a few isolated cases.

In one such case, had the parents not taken legal action to clear their son’s name after no concerns were raised, their son’s data would have been retained for at least six years under the police’s national retention assessment criteria (NRAC) policy, which does not differentiate between records of adults and children.

This means a Prevent interview or referral is a means of gathering data on Muslim children and placing this data on criminal record databases – in the case linked above, parents were shocked to discover their primary school-aged son’s name was not just on one database, but he was on ten.

In this case, when asked, the police refused to give any reassurance to the parents that their son’s records would not be used again, and they said they could not guarantee that the data would not feature in any criminal record checks.

This, even though there had been no concerns of “extremism” or “radicalisation.”

In cases of adults, Prevent Watch has documented several cases where data collection and retention are having a serious impact on lives, including a young adult who had his position at college withdrawn after information was shared between his secondary school and the college about his Prevent referral, despite nothing coming of it.

Islamophobia and algorithm prediction

When data is collected and retained with the aggressiveness pursued by Prevent it is providing an opportunity through which data on individuals – often young – is being trawled, collated and interpreted.

This creates a sort of new tyranny – that of “big data” – under which people must live with the knowledge that they are under the perpetual trawling of dubious algorithms.

The first test case for this “new normal” are Muslims: a recent article in Vox highlighted the intensely Islamophobic nature of artificial intelligence (AI), the so-called “brain” behind the algorithms that sort and “interpret” data, and – most troublingly – which are now being used to problematise behaviour and predict crime, all under the banner of “counter extremism.”

Prevent’s debunked escalator theory, more commonly known as the conveyor belt theory, according to a report by the Joint Human Rights Commission, “rests on the assumption that there is an escalator which starts with religious conservatism and ends with support for violent jihadism.”

However, the term “religious conservatism” is problematic; it is subjectively interpreted and often through a lens of fear and misunderstanding of Islam.

Records revealed by CNN showed that Muslims in China were sent to a detention facility for simply “wearing a veil” or growing “a long beard.”

Prevent Watch has cases where women have been reported upon starting to wear a head covering, and indeed, one Prevent training slide deck produced by the Home Office features a woman who adopts more modest dress as a cause of “concern” and “vulnerable to extremism.”

Data is difficult to remove from the surveillance state

Human Rights Watch reports that Beijing’s predictive policing programme, the IJOP is fed by aggressive data collection, including “DNA samples, fingerprints, iris scans, and blood types of all residents between the age of 12 and 65” particularly of Uyghur Muslims.

Like in the UK, “it is unclear exactly how authorities are using the biometrics, but the amount of information they have on people is enough to frighten many… particularly given that they have no ability to challenge the collection, use, distribution, or retention of this data”.

According to HRW, procurement notices for IJOP show that it is supplied by the Xinjiang Lianhai Cangzhi Company, a wholly owned subsidiary of China Electronics Technology Group Corporation, a major state-owned military contractor in China, which built the big data program to “collate citizens’ everyday behaviour and flag unusual activities to predict terrorism.”

Journalists should be encouraged to investigate links between these companies and entities in the UK. Like Prevent, the IJOP is an integrated, multi-agency operation. It is sold to the public in terms of patriotism (recall: “British values”) and keeping people safe, but it is a military programme.

All of this should also point us not primarily at Islamophobia and the need to get rid of Prevent, but to the deeper and more long-term question of big data, who regulates it, and how it is used?

For now, urgent questions must be asked about what accountability mechanisms are being put in place to check programmers and others who are deciding for us who “might be” a criminal within the toxic framework of Prevent and “counter extremism,” especially when these are our children.

https://5pillarsuk.com/2021/12/21/we...er-of-prevent/

**سيف الله** · 10-26-2022

Salaam

Another update.

Xi is in Complete Control

You may recall a few weeks ago that the globalist media was excitedly reporting that mysterious events in China, particularly around Beijing, possibly indicated that a coup against President Xi was taking place. You may also recall that I told you the idea President Xi’s control over the Party and the government was slipping was complete nonsense; the Chinese leader is not only very smart and extremely effective, but is far more popular with his people than are any of the political leaders across the former West.

And now, it is obvious to everyone that Xi is not only going to continue calling the shots, but is strong enough to continue rooting out the remnants of the pro-globalist faction in China:

Former general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), Hu Jintao, was forcibly escorted out of the 20th Chinese Communist Party National Congress at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing by Kong Shaoxun, the deputy director of the General Office of the CPC Central Committee, moments before the de-facto Emperor of China, Xi Jingping, was re-elected to another five-year term on Saturday.

At the first plenary session of the CCP’s 20th Central Committee on Sunday, Xi hinted at his intraparty purges that have made him the most authoritarian leader of China since Mao Zedong.

“Driven by a strong sense of mission, we have resolved to offend a few thousand rather than fail 1.4 billion and to clear out the party of all its ills. We’ve used a combination of measures to take out tigers, swat flies, and hunt down foxes, punishing corrupt officials of all types,” Xi said.

A video shows that Jintao was involuntarily escorted from the auditorium during the last day of congress on Saturday.

He refused assistance from a CCP aid and attempted to pick up a document on the table, an action which the paramount leader of China stopped by when he placed his hand on the document.

Another high-ranking CCP member to the left of Jintao was seen almost getting up from his seat before his companion next to him tapped him on the back to sit back down.

It’s hard to exaggerate the significance of this public arrest of Hu Jintao. Hu has been one of the leaders of the pro-globalist faction in China for decades. He was supposed to be the architect of the transition of the seat of The Empire That Never Ended from Washington DC to Beijing.

This probably signifies some massive changes coming soon, although what they will be is hard to say. Regardless, expect to see the anti-Russian emphasis in the media to shift soon to an anti-Chinese one, as China is by far the more serious threat to the tottering globalist world order.

https://voxday.net/2022/10/25/xi-is-...plete-control/

The Empire Flees China

You won’t be told what’s actually happening by the globalist media, and you definitely won’t be told why it is happening. But their coverage of events is usually sufficient to alert the informed observer as to what is actually going on.

As the FT writes, today, “thousands of wealthy people across China are headed for the exits as President Xi Jinping secures a third term, making him and the ruling Chinese Communist party even stronger than before.”

Recall that just hours after Xi not only was declared dictator for life but unceremoniously and in full view of the entire world had his centrist, globalist and pro-reform predecessor Hu Zintao escorted out of the building, guaranteeing that the rest of his rule will be a radical departure from heretofore accepted norms, and calling for the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” based on revitalizing the CCP’s role as the economic, social, and cultural leader, Chinese stocks cratered to multi-decade lows and the yuan plunged to a record low as the growing realization of the horror that is coming swept across the land.

As a result, China’s wealthiest were met with market turmoil on Monday when Chinese stocks crashed the most since 2008. According to Bloomberg’s billionaire list, the 13 richest Chinese lost $12.7 billion in just one day after mounting fears about Xi’s consolidation of power. But of course, it wasn’t just them looking terrified at the glowing green color on their screens (as a reminder, in China stock colors are inverted as red means up and green means down): it was everyone.

In any case, as hundreds of millions of Chinese savers now scramble to move as much of their assets as far away off shore from the lunatic fringe in Beijing as possible, we have been flooded with reports that wealthy families across Hong Kong and China are at a “tipping point” about triggering so-called financial “fire escape plans” to avoid the wrath of Xi and CCP, according to David Lesperance, a Europe-based lawyer who works with elite Chinese businessmen and who spoke with Financial Times.

“Now that ‘the chairman’ is firmly in place . . . I have already received three ‘proceed’ instructions from various ultra-high net worth Chinese business families to execute their fire escape plans,” Lesperance said.

Ignore all the rhetoric and the neo-liberal economic assumptions and focus on what the various parties mentioned are doing. What’s actually taking place is that The Empire That Never Ended, which intended to transfer its global center of power from Washington DC to Beijing, has finally abandoned its attempts to do so.

Xi Xinping was seen as an impediment, not an implacable obstacle, but the confirmation of his continuing power in the CPC and his ongoing anti-corruption campaign means that the imperial plans for China have failed. Ukraine appears to be the backup plan, but that is failing too, thanks to the Russians and their stubborn refusal to submit to the imperial order.

https://voxday.net/2022/10/26/the-empire-flees-china/

Interesting coming from an Emirati account.

Usually they are quite subservient to Western interests but looks like that's coming to an end as geopolitical power balances shift, (hence shilling for China now).

China may not behave like Western powers at the moment but as their power and influence grow this will change.

One example.

Sri Lanka hands over port to China to pay off debt

Hambantota port was signed over to Beijing on a 99-year lease because Sri Lanka cannot repay Chinese loans it took out to build the port in the first place

https://www.thenationalnews.com/worl...-debt-1.684606

Sounds familiar doesn't it?

Finally hes gullible to think the Chinese are your friends or respect your culture and faith. Just PR and self interest, (eg. Uighur's, the point of this thread).

**سيف الله** · 02-27-2023

Salaam

Like to share.

Blurb

Professor Haiyun Ma discusses the history of Islam & Muslims in China.

Haiyun Ma is a professor at Frostburg State University's Department of History. He is also the president of Zhenghe Forum that focuses on China-Muslim world relations. His scholarly work examines the history of Islam in China, as well as China’s relations with the Islamic world.

His articles, reviews, and opinion have appeared in Foreign Policy, Late Imperial China, Current Trends in Islamist Ideology, Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, China Brief, and others. He is often sought by news outlets for commentaries on China, Asia, or Middle East topics, and has been quoted or interviewed by the New York Times, BBC, The Nation, Deutsche Welle, Associated Press, and The Independent.

**سيف الله** · 03-27-2023

Salaam

Dont forget.

**سيف الله** · 04-07-2023

Salaam

Like to share. Good intro into the plight of the Uyghurs.

**سيف الله** · 05-19-2023

Salaam

Another update

3 Different perspectives on China rise as a great power.

Not the Next Ukraine

Taiwan makes it clear that it has no intention of permitting Clown World to sacrifice it in the name of containing or deterring China.

Taiwan Minister of National Defense Chiu Kuo-cheng (邱國正) on Monday said that the armed forces would not tolerate the destruction of any Taiwanese facility, in response to a suggestion by U.S. Congressman Seth Moulton that the U.S. should warn China that it would “blow up” Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC) if it attacked Taiwan.

At a conference organized by the California-based think tank Milken Institute in May, Moulton was asked what deterrence effect U.S. chip policy could have on China, to which he responded, “the U.S. should make it very clear to the Chinese that if you invade Taiwan, we’re going to blow up TSMC.” U.S. defense policy advisor and former government official Michele Flournoy quickly countered his remark, saying that if TSMC was destroyed, there would be a “two trillion dollar impact on the global economy within the first year” and “you’d put manufacturing around the world at a standstill.”

Before a session of the Legislative Yuan on Monday, Chiu was asked by the media to comment on Moulton’s statement. Chiu said that anyone who wants to bomb any facility in Taiwan, regardless of whether it is meant for defensive purposes, has exceeded defense norms, reported Liberty Times. The defense minister said that the armed forces are responsible for defending Taiwan and its people, materials, and strategic resources. Therefore, “if they want to bomb this or that,” the armed forces will not tolerate this kind of situation, Chiu said.

It’s very much for the good of the people of Taiwan island that their leadership is taking this stand. No doubt they’ve seen what the foreign leadership of Ukraine has done to the people of Ukraine, and even the most rabid proponent of independence would prefer reunification to that.

I still anticipate that the reunification of Taiwan with the mainland will eventually be as peaceful as the reunification of Hong Kong proved to be. Sure, there will be protests and much criticism from the globalist media, but ultimately, it should be possible for both Chinese parties to accomplish the inevitable without war or even violence.

https://voxday.net/2023/05/13/not-the-next-ukraine/

A view from the Western establishment

Cold War II: Niall Ferguson on The Emerging Conflict With China

Niall Ferguson is the Milbank Family Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution and the author of numerous books, including Doom: The Politics of Catastrophe and Kissinger, 1923–1968: The Idealist.

In this conversation, we cover the conflict over Taiwan: why it’s a cold war, when it started, how to avoid allowing it to become a hot war, and how to de-escalate and even win it. Along the way, Ferguson discusses the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the role of the United States and Western Europe in both conflicts, and how we can avoid once again living under the threat of nuclear war as we did in Cold War I.

Finally a view from a Singaporean diplomat.

Is it too late for the US to contain China? | The Bottom Line

Is it futile to resist China’s superpower status? Is it time for the United States to live with it?

Depending on the answer, the world could be heading towards more stability – or chaos.

Kishore Mahbubani was a Singaporean diplomat for more than 30 years and served as president of the United Nations Security Council. He tells host Steve Clemons that the US should get accustomed to a multipolar world it can no longer dominate.

Mahbubani argues that the "Asian century" has already begun and that Washington should not allow issues such as Taiwan to ruin their relations.

**سيف الله** · 05-28-2023

Salaam

More on de-dollarisation

Blurb

De-dollarisation is fast expanding via bilateral, multilateral, and institutional arrangements. #China is looking to undo the nature of the #dollar matrix.

**سيف الله** · 05-30-2023

Salaam

Another update

Don’t Talk to Clown World

The Chinese have apparently decided that there is no point in talking to the United States. It would be reasonable to assume that they have reached the same conclusion as the Russians, which is that the governments of Clown World are agreement-incapable.

China has rejected Washington’s proposal that their respective defense chiefs meet this week, the Pentagon said on Monday. The news comes amid a renewed diplomatic spat between the two countries.

“Overnight, the PRC informed the US that they have declined our early May invitation for Secretary [Lloyd] Austin to meet with PRC Minister of National Defense Li Shangfu in Singapore,” the Pentagon said in a statement to the Wall Street Journal, referring to the People’s Republic of China.

“The Department believes strongly in the importance of maintaining open lines of military-to-military communication between Washington and Beijing to ensure that competition does not veer into conflict,” the statement read.

The WSJ cited an unnamed US defense official as saying that China’s dismissal was “an unusually blunt message.”

According to the report, the Pentagon had wanted the meeting to take place on the sidelines of the annual Shangri-La Dialogue security forum. Li will speak at the event as part of his trip to Singapore from May 31 to June 4, the Chinese Defense Ministry said. The Pentagon said last week that attempts to establish contacts with their Chinese counterparts in recent months have failed.

The Great Bifurcation of the global economy continues apace.

Whether one is operating at the international, the professional, or the personal level, it makes absolutely no sense to talk to parties one knows to be dishonest. Once you permit any communication whatsoever with a liar, a gaslighter, or a manipulator, they will do their utmost to use literally anything you say against you in some way. Moreover, if you engage with them directly, they can invent your words out of thin air and turn the situation into a “he said, she said” scenario that leaves you in retreat and on the defensive no matter what you actually say. Any engagement is inherently disadvantageous.

Once you have determined that the other side is a bad actor, do not engage with them at all, ideally, not even to tell them you will not talk to them. But if it is necessary to RSVP, such as in the case of international diplomatic relations or formal invitations to family events, then simply checking “no” and refusing to provide any explanation whatsoever is the correct action. Remember, an explanation is an invitation to argue, and is itself a form of engagement and communication.

Note the way in which the Chinese a) declined a specific invitation to meet with the Secretary of Defense with “an unusually blunt message” and b) have not permitted the Pentagon to “establish contacts” at all. This is very wise, as it prevents the US propaganda machine from spinning the Chinese response due to the fact that there is nothing to spin.

https://voxday.net/2023/05/30/dont-talk-to-clown-world/

Chinas exercising its influence.

**سيف الله** · 06-06-2023

Salaam

Very interesting.

The capitalists are revolting over China

Western hawks face an unlikely resistance

After marshalling Europe in its proxy war against Russia, America is now determined to repeat this success against China. Here, the consequences for Europe could be even more significant than the economic shock of the past year. Yet, despite a few grumbles from Macron and others, European leaders are largely playing along with this increasingly aggressive approach: at last week’s biannual US-EU Trade and Technology Council, both parties claimed to “see very much eye-to-eye” on the issue.

Below the surface, however, views are hardening against the EU’s efforts to emulate America’s hawkish approach, which includes economic decoupling (or “de-risking”, as it’s now called) and increasing Nato’s presence in the Indo-Pacific. Over the past four years, von der Leyen has worked tirelessly to keep Europe aligned with America’s aggressive geopolitical strategy, often appearing to prioritise Washington’s desires over Europe’s strategic interests. No wonder Politico dubbed her “Europe’s American president”.

On China, von der Leyen has taken an increasingly tough line, recently urging Europe to “de-risk” its relationship. The bloc’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, has echoed her tone, calling President Xi’s support of Russia “a blatant violation” of its UN commitments. Brussels is also devising a Sustainable Corporate Governance initiative, which would force European companies to ensure that EU social and human rights standards apply throughout their supply chain. Germany has already introduced a softer version of the rule, which currently applies only to 150 companies, though the number is set to rise to 15,000.

Already many European companies are pushing back against the measures, claiming that they place an excessive regulatory and bureaucratic burden on industry at a time of massive economic challenges. Unsurprisingly, German companies are leading the charge: China is the country’s largest trading partner, with total trade last year of nearly €300 billion. Europe’s economic powerhouse has already taken a heavy it from its decoupling from Russian gas and other commodities; with its economy in recession and an inflation rate of 7.2%, Germany cannot afford to lose China as well. The same can be said for the EU as a whole.

The fact that the von der Leyen insists on mimicking the American strategy despite the bloc’s deep interdependence with China highlights the extent to which the EU, wedded as it is to a subservient interpretation of the bloc’s relationship to the US, is now a threat to Europe’s core interests. As Wolfgang Münchau noted: “The EU economy is not built for Cold War-style relations because it has become too dependent on global supply chains… The underlying reality of modern-day Europe is that it cannot easily extricate itself from its relationship with China.”

In this context, it is hardly surprising that German businesses are pushing back against Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s call to weaken Germany’s economic relationship with China. Abandoning China is “unthinkable” for German industry, Mercedes CEO Ola Källenius said in April, in comments that echoed across the country’s boardrooms — from Siemens to BASF to BMW, all of which have vowed to continue investing in the country. “We won’t give up on China,” Volkswagen’s chief financial officer made clear.

Yet while similar views are being expressed in Italy and France, China’s other two largest trading partners in the EU, it remains unclear whether this will translate into a decisive shift in Europe’s official China policy. For now, most national and EU leaders seem more interested in pleasing the US establishment than thinking about Europe’s long-term economic and geopolitical interests. However, European business leaders can count on some powerful allies in the US — not in Washington, but among fellow capitalists.

For in America, a similar revolt is brewing over the administration’s decoupling with China. Despite the fraying of Sino-American relations at the political level, several American CEOs have continued to visit China. While the bosses of J.P. Morgan, Starbucks, GM and Apple have all flown in since March, it was Elon Musk’s visit, which took place last week, that predictably caused the biggest shockwaves.

According to the Financial Times, “in just two days… Elon Musk had more top-level Chinese meetings than most Biden administration officials have had in months”, including with Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang. The foreign ministry quoted Musk as saying that he was willing to expand business in China and opposed a decoupling of the US and China economies, adding that he described the world’s two largest economies as “conjoined twins”. Musk’s trip coincided with that by J.P. Morgan boss Jamie Dimon, who in a speech in Shanghai called for “real engagement” between Washington and Beijing.

Such open defiance of Washington’s foreign policy stance by some of the most powerful CEOs in America represents a striking development. Critics of US-Western foreign policy and military interventionism have traditionally (and correctly) seen the latter as being essentially aimed at enforcing the Western-led global capitalist order — in other words, as being in the service of big business by opening up new markets, securing control of resources or intervening whenever Western business interests were threatened. As New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman put it in 1999: “The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist — McDonald’s cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the builder of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for [American corporations] is called the United States Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps.”

However, in light of the growing rifts between America’s economic and political elites, does this analytical framework still hold? It’s hard to see, after all, how the West’s aggressive US-led foreign policy — aimed at antagonising and militarising relations with China, the world’s second-largest consumer market and largest rare-earth mineral exporter, in the same fashion as it has with Russia — serves the “general interests” of Western capital, or even how it serves a strictly capitalist logic. How is Nato “helping McDonald’s”, to borrow Friedman’s phrase, by forcing it to exit Russia at a cost of more than $1 billion? No wonder major representatives of Western corporate interests aren’t peachy about the prospect of a new Cold War — not to mention an actual war with China, which would have devastating effects on the US and global economy.

However, their appeals today seem to fall on deaf ears in Washington and other Western national capitals. As Adam Tooze has observed: “The ‘peace interest’ anchored in the investment and trading connections of US big business with China has been expelled from centre stage. On the central axis of US strategy, big business has less influence today that at any time since the end of the Cold War”. Yet this begs the question: if US-Western foreign policy no longer serves the interests of big business, whose interests does it serve?

Well, there is really only one social class that stands to benefit from the militarisation of great-power relations: the military-industrial complex, Eisenhower’s description for the network of corporations and vested interests that revolve around a country’s defence and national security sector. What’s changed since the Sixties, however, is that these interests are no longer aligned with those of the Western corporate community — in fact, the two are diametrically opposed.

The paradox, of course, is that for decades big business has encouraged the continuous expansion of the military-industrial complex as a tool to promote its interests abroad. Yet in a Frankenstein-like twist of fate, the beast has been allowed to become so powerful that it has broken free from its masters — and is now turning against them. No longer is the military-industrial complex subordinated to the general interests of the capitalist class; rather, it is the latter that is increasingly subordinated to the interests of the military-industrial complex.

Now, the military-industrial complex follows a capitalist logic as well, of course: war, or even just the constant preparation for war, is clearly good for business. But, ultimately, it’s about more than just profits: it’s about ensuring the reproduction of the military class, which extends well beyond the big defence companies to include civilian auxiliaries in defence-related government agencies, think tanks, academia, and many others.

What’s slowly becoming clear, however, is that the old capitalist class doesn’t seem willing to go down without a fight. Indeed, we may be on the verge of a new historical class struggle: the owners of the means of production against the owners of the means of destruction. Whoever wins, the peculiar nature of this conflict should not be underestimated: the greatest resistance to the new Cold War isn’t coming from a global peace movement, but from the boardrooms of Western corporations. Faced with China’s supremacy, they have nothing to lose but their chains.

https://unherd.com/2023/06/the-capit...ng-over-china/

**سيف الله** · 06-09-2023

Salaam

Another update.

Blurb

Footage from China’s Yunnan province is believed to show Muslims from China’s Hui minority clashing with police after they were barred entry to a mosque. People online suggested the authorities were looking to demolish part of it.

With an unspecified number of local residents having been reportedly arrested by police, Hui Muslim (a Chinese ethnic group) activists living abroad told DW that authorities are still urging anyone who was involved in the clash to turn themselves in ...

while vowing to remove the domes and the minarets from the mosque as originally planned.

"Local residents are still resolutely pushing back against the government's efforts to demolish important structures of the mosque, and local authorities have not withdrawn the police who were deployed to help repel the clash that took place last week," said @Maj uismail1122 The Najiaying mosque is not the first Islamic religious site that has faced the threat of partial demolition of its structure. Over the last few years, mosques in Ningxia, Gansu, Henan, and even Beijing, have seen their domes and minarets demolished by local authorities and replaced with Chinese-style roofs

These efforts are part of the Chinese government's plan to "Sinicize" Islam, which aims at removing "foreign influence" from the religion while ensuring that it aligns with traditional Chinese values outlined by the Chinese government.

"In many of his speeches, there are indications that President Xi Jinping views foreign religious ideologies or traditions as threatening, and Islam is one that he is very concerned about," said @David stroup In 2019, China passed a law that aimed at Sinicizing Islam in five years, emphasizing that it's necessary to ensure Islam is "compatible with socialism," according to a report by China's state-run tabloid Global Times in January that year.

During a government meeting in September 2020, Chinese leader Xi reiterated the need to ensure the "healthy development of religion."

"We must do a good job in the field of ideology and carry out the project of cultural enrichment of Xinjiang," Xi said.

In September 2022, Wang Yang, former chairman of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, told leaders of the Islamic Association of China that they need to keep promoting "Sinicization of Islam," ...

and that they shouldn't be "ambiguous in their political stance of listening to the Party and following the Party at any time." @Hannah Theaker1 says some mosques in China have been demolished, while others are being merged together as part of a policy to reduce the overall numbers of mosques."

Theaker said the Chinese government has also closed down many religious schools and institutions while increasing ideological control of religious leaders.

"These measures have been accompanied by increased and often highly intrusive surveillance of mosque communities and non-Han communities, especially migrants."

Some overseas Hui Muslims told DW that many Chinese Muslims can no longer maintain a lifestyle that's in line with traditional Islamic rules.

"The Chinese government starts it by destroying the religious venues where Muslims practice their faith and then force us to assimilate into the religious norms established by them," said a Hui Muslim woman surnamed Ma, who lives in Malaysia, but keeps close contact with family members in China.

Stroup from the University of Manchester added that Beijing's Sinicization campaign essentially tries to establish a version of Islam approved by the Chinese Communist Party, with the ethnic communities becoming "a vehicle for party-state values."

"What we will probably see is a state-approved version of Islam that's overseen and dominated by party imperatives," Stroup told DW.

Many activists see very little room for Hui Muslims to push back against Beijing's efforts to "redefine" Islam.

The US-based Hui activist Ma Ju said despite local community pushback, their resistance is generally "very weak,"

and local governments will generally temporarily suspend mosque demolition efforts but won't abort their plans entirely.

"While the Chinese government won't completely eliminate Islam, they will try to break the social cohesion of the Muslim community in China, just like what they do to other organized groups and communities," he said.

With the Sinicization campaign being rolled out unevenly across China, Stroup argues that there haven't been many opportunities for the Muslim community to organize large-scale mobilization or resistance.

To summarise.

Meanwhile

Obvious response.

**سيف الله** · 07-16-2023

Salaam

Scraping the bottom of the barrel. But then again Abbas needs someone to pay his bills.

Palestinian Leader’s Endorsement of China's Xinjiang Policy Sparks Backlash

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas recently visited Beijing, where he met with Chinese leader Xi Jinping and expressed support for China's treatment of Muslim Uyghurs in Xinjiang. His endorsement of China's policies and denial of the mistreatment of Muslims in Xinjiang drew criticism from politicians and rights activists.

During their meeting Wednesday, in which Abbas sought economic aid, he and Xi issued a joint statement in which Abbas endorsed China's domestic and foreign policies while dismissing the human rights concerns in Xinjiang as Western concepts.

The United States and some other countries have designated China's treatment of Uyghurs and other Muslims in Xinjiang as genocide, and the U.N. human rights office has stated that China's actions in Xinjiang may constitute crimes against humanity.

China denies these allegations and considers them fabrications by anti-China forces.

Abbas said in the joint statement that China's actions in Xinjiang have "nothing to do with human rights" and are aimed at countering extremism and terrorism. He also emphasized Palestinian opposition to using the Xinjiang issue to interfere in China's internal affairs.

Xi expressed his willingness to support the Palestinians in achieving internal reconciliation and facilitating peace talks with Israel during their meeting in Beijing.

"The fundamental solution to the Palestinian issue lies in the establishment of an independent Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital," Xi said, according to Chinese state media.

'Criminal, disgraceful'

On Tuesday, Abbas' endorsement of China's actions in Xinjiang faced criticism from Devlet Bahceli, chair of Turkey's Nationalist Movement Party, which is an ally of the ruling Justice Party (AKP).

“Labeling Uyghur Turks as terrorists is unjust, false, sinful, criminal, disgraceful, malicious and a blatant display of disrespect towards the Turkic nation,” Bahceli said during a meeting in Ankara.

Uyghur activists also expressed concern over Abbas' endorsement, noting the absence of Palestinian organizations rejecting his stance.

Kuzzat Altay, a Uyghur activist and former president of the Uyghur American Association, said on Twitter that Abbas’ statements “further legitimize” Uyghur genocide.

According to Khaled Elgindy, a senior fellow and director of the Program on Palestine and Palestinian-Israeli Affairs at the Middle East Institute, China's repression of the Uyghur population undermines its ability to portray itself as an advocate for Islam or human rights.

“China’s interests in Israel-Palestine and in the region more broadly are strictly transactional rather than ideological — whether in terms of enhancing [its] international standing or its potential trade and other economic ties. The same goes for Abbas and other regional leaders, for whom China represents an important counterweight to the United States,” Elgindy told VOA in an email.

Elgindy said China is unlikely to play a significant role in mediating peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians because of its limited influence with both parties.

“Chinese-sponsored peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians would be a major diplomatic breakthrough. However, there is no chance of that happening. China simply does not have the kind of influence with both parties — particularly the Israeli side —needed to broker such an agreement,” Elgindy said.

Posturing seen

China's overtures and Abbas' visit to China, according to Elgindy, are posturing to enhance China's global standing and express dissatisfaction with the Biden administration's approach to the Palestinian issue.

Ghulam Yaghma, president of the East Turkistan Government in Exile in Washington, views Abbas' visit as part of China's broader objective to secure leverage over Israel and establish a stronger presence in the Middle East. East Turkistan is another name for the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of China.

"The broader strategic goal of China is no secret, as its aspiration to strengthen its position among the Arab world and gain dominance in the Persian Gulf is an essential part of its Belt and Road Initiative, aiming for global economic and political superiority,” Yaghma told VOA.

Salih Hudayar, prime minister of the East Turkistan Government in Exile in Washington, told VOA that China's support for the Palestinian cause is a deliberate strategy to divert attention from China's own occupation and alleged genocide in Xinjiang.

“The support rendered by China to the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian cause serves as a smokescreen to camouflage the Chinese occupation and genocide carried out in East Turkistan,” Hudayar said.

https://www.voanews.com/a/palestinia...0in%20Xinjiang.

Another reality check.

F1AWFgjWAAALuLformatjpgname900x900 1 - Muslim children forced to drop 'religious' names in western China