Everything written here about how 90% of American “facts” concerning Uighurs in Xinjiang are derived from the inductive reasoning of a Christian evangelical in non-peer reviewed articles is completely true.

That said, I don’t see anything written here about the long history of the region which is now Xinjiang as a state or territory. The fact that nothing anyone has posted here discusses that long history demonstrates an inadequecy of analysis of historical conditions. It leads people to say things like, “Uh, a CIA did it” and move on as if everything is now resolved.

I recently listened to an episode of the Historic.ly podcast with Carl Zha, who I think is quite well informed on Chinese history but interprets that history in ways very different than me. In about five minutes he said 1) Xinjiang has always been part of China – 5000 years of Chinese history! 2) Xinjiang became part of China in the Qing dynasty – ~350 years of Chinese history! 3) Xinjiang has had ethnic separatist movements and has declared itself an independent state separate from Chinese rule numerous times in those last 350 years (as recently as the mid-20th century with Soviet backing). To summarize, Xinjiang has always been part of China, so long as “China” only begins with the Qing, and except for all of those times when it wasn’t.

To not see any contradiction in these statements is to not be able to see the region and ethnic conflicts as a whole in mainland China through any other lens but Chinese state orthodoxy. To not question why Xinjiang today is part of China while also not questioning why Mongolia today isn’t part of China is to just be caught in the currents of US and Chinese state propaganda with no critical awareness or historical analysis.

Approximately 50% of what you hear is outright propaganda, as we know the CIA’s affiliates churn out. We also see CIA assets pushing narratives on Reddit. The next 25% is poorly researched speculation by an evangelical end-timer, and the final 25% is an accurate description of the PRC’s response to far right, religious terrorism and separatism.

First, let’s just establish using safe, American sources that a bunch of Uyghur people went to fight with ISIS in Syria, then returned. Let’s also establish that there have been consistent terrorist attacks with significant casualties and that the CIA and CIA front-groups have funded and stoked Islamic extremism across the world for geopolitical gain.

Now, we need to consider potential responses.

The CPC could give up and surrender Xinjiang to ISIS. This option condemns millions of people to living under a fundamentalist Islamic State, including many non-Muslims and non-extreme Muslims. This option creates a CIA-aligned state on the border, and jeopardises a key part of the Belt and Road initiative, which is designed to connect landlocked countries for development and geopolitical positioning. This option also threatens the CPC’s legitimacy, as keeping China together is a historical signifier of the Mandate of Heaven.

The next option is the American option. Drone strike, black-site, or otherwise liquidate anyone who could be associated with Islamic extremism. Be liberal in doing so. Make children fear blue skies because of drones. When the orphaned young children grow up, do it all again. You can also throw a literal man-made famine in there if you want.

The final option is the Chinese option. Mass surveillance. Use AI to liberally target anyone who may be at risk of radicalisation for re-education. Teach them the lingua franca of China, Mandarin. Pump money into the region for development. When people finish their time in re-education, set them up with state jobs. Keep the surveillance up. Allow and even celebrate local religious customs, but make sure the leaders are on-side with the party.

Let’s take a moment to distinguish that last approach from that of Nazi Germany. Nazi Germany wanted to exterminate the undesirables. Initially it was internment in concentration camps with the outcome up in the air, with a vague hope of shipping them to Madagascar or palestine, but it later morphed into full extermination. All throughout, Nazi Germany was pushing strong rhetoric of antisemitism and stoking ethnic hatred in the public sphere.

There’s no evidence, including from leaked papers, that the goal of the deradicalisation programme is permanent internment or annihilation of Islam. In fact, the leaked papers have Xi explicitly saying Islam should not be annihilated from China:

Mr. Xi also told officials to not discriminate against Uighurs and to respect their right to worship. He warned against overreacting to natural friction between Uighurs and Han Chinese, the nation’s dominant ethnic group, and rejected proposals to try to eliminate Islam entirely in China.

“In light of separatist and terrorist forces under the banner of Islam, some people have argued that Islam should be restricted or even eradicated,” he said during the Beijing conference. He called that view “biased, even wrong.”

As for permanent internment, we know from leaks that the minimum duration of detention is one year — though accounts from ex-detainees suggest that some are released sooner.

Unlike Nazi Germany, there’s no stoking of inter-ethnic hatred or elimination of a specific culture; the CPC actively censors footage from terrorist attacks in China to avoid such an outcome. Xi doesn’t go on TV calling any ethnicity rapists or murderers. Uighur culture is actively celebrated in the media and via tourism. Xinjiang has 24,400 mosques, one per 530 Muslims. That’s three mosques per capita more than their western peers.

Could China’s approach be done better? Almost certainly. Is it the most humane response to extremism we’ve seen so far? That’s for you to decide.

(Reposted from here )