Opinion | What an unforgivable insult to China and its civilization!
By Philip Yeung, university teacher
PKY480@gmail.com
I am disappointed and disgusted by OHCHR's report on Xinjiang. It is sloppy, biased, cowardly and culturally ignorant. It is like tossing a grenade into China's relationship with the UN.
The report is a slap on every Chinese face and a stain on the reputation of the UN agency for kowtowing to the US by rendering a verdict it dictated.
When America accuses, China stands guilty as charged. Case closed. It's a foregone conclusion.
The report tries to walk a fine line between an outright black-and-white verdict and a fudged one, with "may" as a hedging word, as in "China may have committed crimes against humanity". It is a cowardly evasion, for "may" covers a lot of territory, much of it grey. In the absence of rock-solid, iron-clad evidence, the UN report is sneakily damning China by insinuation. It is akin to a judge or jury giving a verdict that the suspect "may have committed murder". That is how ridiculous the report's finding is. It has no legal leg to stand on. It deserves to die an instant death as an official document.
This report displays a shameful ignorance of Chinese history and the Chinese national character. It is not worth the paper it is printed on, peddling the big lie as the gospel truth, chockful of sinister speculations, projections and tainted testimony by alleged victims who live in America's pocket. It recycles the same old tired anti-China propaganda. It offers nothing new, except more US-manufactured falsehoods or lies.
Lies have consequences, depriving the hard-working people in Xinjiang of their livelihood. Esquel the shirt-maker owned by MIT-educated Marjorie Yang, a businesswoman with a squeaky-clean conscience, is placed on the Xinjiang cotton forced-labor blacklist despite being cleared by an audit firm. America is playing geopolitics with people's lives.
This report is prejudice itself. It lacks the one thing that gives it any shred of credibility: an on-the-ground inspection free of political prejudgment. China is understandably wary of granting outsiders unfettered access to the re-education centers, knowing the visits will be twisted to hurt and humiliate the country. Western bigots come in with their minds closed, driven by a not-so-hidden agenda—to nail the Chinese for "crimes against humanity".
That is a nuclear-level indictment whose verdict is hanging on so little. Those three words are highly emotive, and packed with pure dynamite.
The case against China rests entirely on circumstantial or hear-say evidence. But even by such loose standards, it falls far short of the legal threshold.
The report is fatally flawed. Its writers know so woefully little about the historical and socio-cultural context of China.
A nation of 56 ethnic minorities, China's streets, unlike America's, are free of racial violence. There are no reported hate crimes. With an ethnically-friendly policy akin to Canada's "multicultural" model, backed up by generous "affirmative action" that benefits all minorities, these preferential treatments cover education, employment, reproductive freedom and mobility.
Even Macau and Hong Kong benefit from this policy. Local officials are held accountable for the livelihood of their ethnic constituents. China's official policy is "inclusivity". There are no "Han supremacy" followers, unlike white supremacy beliefs. The advantage to being a Han Chinese is a big fat zero.
Why does history matter to the truth? Down the dynasties, China had been invaded and even conquered by minority tribes, including the Mongols and Manchurians and even the Turks. But the conquerors or invaders were soon absorbed into the fabric of Chinese civilization. China practiced the "melting pot" theory long before its adoption by America. It grew bigger and better by assimilating the non-Han elements. Multiculturalism is good for China and its leaders know it.
How can you understand modern-day China without knowing its past, and its history of tribal assimilation and acculturation? Within this melting pot, there's no room for discrimination or persecution against minorities. Racism is unfashionable and politically incorrect in China. It has no market. If you believe otherwise, you are ignorant.
But when Islamic terrorists spilled rivers of blood in Xinjiang, the government sprang into action. America turned the world upside down after the 911 terrorist attacks, launching an illegal invasion that killed a million people, subjecting suspects to water-boarding torture tactics. China opted for re-education and retraining. Those sufficiently de-radicalized and occupationally retrained are released back into society. China deserves commendation for its humane approach, not condemnation. Where's the UN report on hell-hole Guantanamo?
China's loudest accusers are the proudest liberal democracies in America's orbit, each with a history of genocidal atrocities against their indigenous populations---Canada's murder of indigenous school children, Australia's decimation of its aboriginal population, America's wholesale slaughter of native Indians, its racist Chinese Exclusion Act, not to mention Britain's barbarities in India and other former colonies. Yet, these sinners are accusing China of imaginary heinous crimes. If this is not hypocrisy, what is?
China is too busy celebrating lifting 800 million people out of poverty and building breathtaking infrastructure across the country to pick on minorities. Instead, it wants to share its prosperity with them.
The authors of this report owe us answers: 1. How do you reconcile the glaring contradictions of preferential treatment of ethnic minorities against allegations of atrocities?
2. Isn't Xinjiang a hot bed of Islamic extremism—which has wreaked havoc in New York, London and Paris? Taming extremists is a common cause, not a crime. 3. How do you justify America's Guantanamo while condemning China's re-education centers? 3. The violent anarchy in Hong Kong lasted nine months, while the Capitol riots lasted one day, which America forcefully quelled. Why the double standard? Why slam China for restoring order, when university presidents were terrified by violent protestors, and 12-year-olds were manning the barricades? You expect China to let the riots fester forever?
China reacts. It does not believe in belligerence. 4. How do you explain that no Muslim country has joined the chorus of critics against China's so-called "genocidal" policies? Is it because they themselves have been victims of Islamic terrorism?
By invoking "crimes against humanity", you are ridiculously lumping China together with Nazi Germany, Japanese imperialist aggressors, US slaughter of a million innocent Iraqis, not to mention atrocities committed by white liberal democracies. Next to these evil doers, China comes out smelling like a saint. When you roll out that heavy artillery, you should scrupulously define the boundaries of that expression. It should never be bandied about so cavalierly, for it has lethal consequences. In legal proceedings, anyone applying it to China will be instantly laughed out of court.
China opted for a big-hearted large-scale re-education effort to de-radicalize extremists so that they can return to society as productive members. A positive and purposeful country, China promotes its melting pot theory, not a descent into depravity. By ignoring its history, the authors have slandered not only the Chinese government but a whole civilization behind it.
You owe the people of China an unconditional apology.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Philip Yeung:
Opinion | America’s incurable China complex
Opinion | "China is not Our Enemy"
Opinion | Warning to Pelosi: It's not too late to pull back from the brink
Comment