Home » The UN and the repression of the Uighurs – Junko Terao

The UN and the repression of the Uighurs – Junko Terao

by admin
The UN and the repression of the Uighurs – Junko Terao

June 15, 2022 1:34 pm

What good is a UN High Commissioner for Human Rights if on her first visit to China in 17 years she does not and says nothing about the persecution of the Uyghur minority proven by thousands of documents and testimonies? The question is more than legitimate and the storm unleashed around Michelle Bachelet’s mission does not subside. The former Chilean president, who from experience knows well what it means to be tortured in a prison camp, is accused not only of keeping silent, but of taking a propaganda tour in Xinjiang and endorsing Beijing’s rhetoric, which justifies the persecution and the internment of one or perhaps two million Uighurs as a counter-terrorism activity (it was the “global war on terror” launched by the United States in 2001 that provided China with the pretext and language for its repressive campaign).

The high commissioner, who in the meantime announced on 13 June that she will not seek a second term “citing personal reasons”, defended herself by specifying that her six-day visit was not for the purpose of investigation. On her return, however, she received two letters of protest. An international group of experienced academics from Xinjiang, some of whom had been consulted by Bachelet’s staff to prepare for the mission, wrote to her expressing strong concern.

“In the academic field, a level of consensus like that reached by Xinjiang experts on what Beijing is doing to the Uighurs is rare,” they write, explaining that this consensus derives from the “extraordinary amount of evidence provided by China in official documents, some of which are were stolen but for the most part they were published on the internet by the institutions themselves ”. Added to the testimony and satellite images, “this evidence provides a detailed picture of what can credibly be called a genocidal plan.” Given these premises, academics criticize Bachelet not only because he did not condemn the repression of Uyghurs, but because he called the internment camps “centers for training and vocational education”, the name used by the Chinese government.

See also  Covid, infections run in prison, insufficient Ffp2 masks: one for every 16 people

Even harder is the letter from over two hundred organizations and human rights activists, demanding Bachelet’s resignation accusing her of whitewashing, that is, having covered up the Chinese atrocities in Xinjiang. Both letters ask for the publication of his office’s report on the matter, which has been ready for months but so far kept in the drawer, probably so as not to interfere with the organization of the visit to China. It must be said that already on the eve of Bachelet’s departure the expectations were not high, that it would have been a disappointing tour, we had guessed from the premises.

After the outbreak of the pandemic, the WHO director general’s condescending attitude towards China was discussed

Under the pretext of the anticovid measures, the tour took place in a closed circuit and without the presence of foreign journalists. In videoconference with Xi Jinping, Bachelet listened to the president repeat the usual refrain. According to Xinhua’s report, Xi “defended China’s human rights achievements and said that Beijing will not accept ‘paternalistic’ lessons”, reiterating that human rights “should not be politicized and used to interfere in the internal affairs of a state. “. But, above all, he warned that “any system or model blindly copied from other countries without taking into account the situation on the ground would not only be out of place, but could have disastrous consequences”.

The story is just the latest example of Beijing’s overwhelming power in international organizations, and at the United Nations in particular. Since 2018, Beijing has been the second largest contributor (with 12 percent) to the UN budget after the United States, and its influence in the various agencies of the organization continues to grow. Today there are Chinese officials at the top of the FAO, the International Telecommunication Union (Itu), the UN Industrial Development Organization (Unidp) and, until 2021, also the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). .

See also  Energy transition: Norway wants to release seabed for deep-sea mining

In 2016, Beijing had obtained the leadership of Interpol, a position held by Meng Hongwei until 2018, when he suddenly disappeared during a trip to China. Shortly thereafter, the Chinese government made it known that Meng had been jailed on corruption charges. It was clearly an internal showdown within the Communist Party, and Meng was joining the long list of disgraced Chinese leaders who have disappeared from circulation. The story raised doubts about Beijing’s reliability as a global player and a responsible presence in international organizations, in addition to the fears that emerged in 2016 at the idea that China would control the body in charge of the fight against international crime. Fears that re-emerged in 2021, when another Beijing exponent was elected amid much criticism as one of Asia’s two representatives on the body’s executive committee.

advertising

After the outbreak of the pandemic, for months he has been discussing the condescending attitude towards China of the WHO director general, the Ethiopian Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, elected in 2017 thanks to Chinese support. The pandemic also offered an example of Beijing’s style in global health management: “At first it acted opaque, keeping the scale of the crisis hidden, then it used quarantine and lockdown to control infections and promoted its model abroad, offering help to various countries, including Italy, and earning the approval of the WHO ”, reads a useful summary of the Council on Foreign Relations which traces the history of China’s rise on the global stage by stages.

See also  The Quito Cable Car is closed after the rescue of 75 people trapped by electrical failure

While in sectors such as the fight against climate change, Beijing does not seek to impose its models, in others, such as human rights, it behaves differently. “And if China (and Russia) manage to impose their standards, for example, in internet governance”, notes the CFR, “they could pave the way towards cyber sovereignty for other countries as well, leading to a world with two digital networks: one open and another closed and preferred by autocratic systems “.

This article is taken from a weekly newsletter that tells what is happening in Asia. You sign up who.

You may also like

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More

Privacy & Cookies Policy