Expert: The US is afraid of the inconvenient truth about the Uyghurs

Washington continues to criticize China and tell the world about “human rights violations” in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, but in reality it is afraid of inconvenient truths, writes expert and columnist Jerry Gray.

The expert pointed out that the situation with the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR) of the PRC was again in the spotlight after Uyghur academic Rahile Dawut was sentenced to life imprisonment in China. He noted that a few days earlier, the US Embassy in Beijing on its page on the Chinese social network Weibo published a link to the State Department’s March report “On the Observance of Human Rights in Countries of the World for 2022.”

“There are two interesting points here. The first is that the link to the report was published 6 months after its release. The second is that the Chinese government has not yet removed this link,” the columnist writes.

He recalled that ten weeks after the publication of the above report, US State Department head Antony Blinken was in Beijing and met with Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang, and then had a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping. Gray notes that if there had been tension in negotiations with his Chinese colleagues, Blinken would hardly have been allowed to meet with the PRC leader. He also points out that at the reception with Xi Jinping, the head of the State Department was extremely correct, and at a press briefing he stated that the parties agree on the need to stabilize relations.

The columnist also notes Blinken’s statement that there is a huge difference between what is said about US plans to “contain China” and what Washington actually does.

“It is common knowledge that China has been accused of human rights violations. But those who live in China and travel around this country know how big the difference is between accusations and reality,” he wrote.

Gray notes that Blinken spent 12 seconds on human rights issues during the half-hour press briefing.

“Only 12 seconds to highlight the ‘very serious problems’ his department reported 10 weeks earlier,” he writes.

Gray further notes that the status of XUAR is different from that of an ordinary province. “This is an autonomous region that is effectively governed by Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities. If you believe the accusations, it turns out that the Uyghurs are oppressing the Uyghurs,” he wrote.

He emphasizes that at one time there was indeed terrorist activity in the region; some people went to prison for their actions and remain there to this day. At the same time, the observer notes that these facts are not hidden from the public – moreover, any citizen of the PRC, as well as any foreigner, can freely visit the XUAR if they have a Chinese visa.

“I cycled more than 5,000 kilometers in Xinjiang, once in 2014, shortly after the events, and again in 2019. This was not an organized tour – I made a stop every 20-30 kilometers, talked with local residents in shops, restaurants and guest houses. They didn’t stop me, didn’t interrogate me, and didn’t even ask me what I was doing there, except out of curiosity. I was never asked to show what I photographed or filmed, nor was I forbidden to go somewhere,” Gray writes.

The columnist notes that any search query about XUAR on the Internet will produce many accusations against China. At the same time, he noted that if you look at it, the Chinese authorities acted quickly and adequately to stop the terrorists who were killing people right on the streets.

“Was there an abuse of power? It is likely that they took place during a large-scale operation to ensure security and prevent new terrorist attacks. But what country in the world can boast that its law enforcement agencies have never allowed this to happen?” writes Gray. The observer ironically notes that if such a country exists, it is definitely not the USA.

“Are there people in the XUAR prison who shouldn’t be there? Maybe. But, I repeat, is there a country in the world that would not mistakenly detain a citizen? If there is, it’s definitely not the USA,” the observer notes. He also notes that there are certainly no Uighurs in prisons in the region just because of their nationality, and anyone who has visited the region can tell about this.

Gray also notes that there are many accounts on social networks that talk about the daily life of the region, and entrepreneurs from the XUAR are active on Chinese trading platforms. “Ordinary street scenes, farmers, dancing locals, modern shopping centers and excellent infrastructure are all considered propaganda in the West,” he writes.

“Over 20 million people live on an area of ​​1.6 million m2, almost 12 million of whom belong to the supposed “oppressed minority.” There are questions whether this can be called a “Potemkin village,” the author notes.

Summarizing, he notes that in recent years, the XUAR has escaped poverty, and the Uyghur population has grown from 8.34 million to 11.62 million – against the backdrop of State Department accusations of genocide.

“Despite accusations of forced labor and oppression, 89.4% of school graduates enroll in higher education. Life expectancy in the region has risen to 72 years in just four decades. Doesn’t sound like oppression,” he writes.

Returning to the State Department report, he notes one more detail – it does not contain any evidence, but in its text the words “maybe” and “probably” appear more than 50 times in the context of the “oppression” of the Uyghur population. “In this regard, the only reliable conclusion suggests itself is that the report is “far-fetched,” writes the observer.

“As Blinken rightly argues, we need to look at the reality of the situation. And when we do this, we discover a very different story from the one presented in the State Department report,” Gray writes. Addressing the US Embassy in China, he recommends not getting carried away with accusations, but simply going to the XUAR and seeing with your own eyes what is happening there.

“The only reason not to do this is not wanting to learn the inconvenient truth. In the words of the State Department, we come to the conclusion that its report is probably false,” the author notes.