By now, you likely know of the accusations against China's treatment of about 1 million Uyghur Muslims. In the recent few years, China has significantly increased its "reeducation" efforts towards this sect of Muslims, creating detention centers and enforcing brutal measures to control the population and affirm one's loyalty to the communist party. This behavior has garnered heavy criticism and condemnations from humans rights groups and many western countries. However, the response from primarily Muslim nations, especially in the Middle East, has not been what one might expect.
Two years ago, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt were among 37 countries that signed a letter to the U.N. Human Rights Council praising China’s “contribution to the international human rights cause” while claiming that China restored “safety and security” after facing “terrorism, separatism, and extremism." That letter was not an outlier. When Saudi ruler Mohammed bin Salman traveled to China last year, he stated that China “China has the right to take anti‐terrorism and de‐extremism measures to safeguard national security.” Some Islamic organizations have made similar statements. Further, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the UAE have arrested exiled Uyghur Muslims living domestically and even sent them back to China.
Obviously, the effect of money is not usually overestimated. Many of the Middle Eastern countries such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Egypt, which have praised China, greatly depend on China for investment and business. Other countries that haven't spoken in favor or against China (like Qatar or Iran) also greatly depend on Chinese investments.
Nonetheless, economic explanations can only go so far, and the political and cultural complexities of Islam likely play a part. Uyghur Muslims are a minority, and so some journalists believe that their removal would help strengthen the reigning groups in Muslim society. While primarily Muslim nations may dislike certain sects or groups of Islam, China is against the greater Islam. This makes the motives of the two different groups aligned now but offers no guarantees for peace in the future.
This relates to our recent economics discussions about GDP and the fear of stagnant growth. China supplies many Middle Eastern countries a spectacular amount of their GDP and invests heavily in Muslim countries, allowing and promoting growth. This growth is so important to many political groups that they may pass on the ethical option to allow for growth to continue in society.
Questions:
1. Should the Muslim counties denounce China's treatment of Uyghurs? Is it worth the potential fallout?
2. At what point (if at all) should a country sacrifice economic gain and take the moral high ground?
6 comments:
It seems as though the struggles facing the Uyghur are not going anywhere and, worse, their battle may become even greater as Muslim nations continue to stay silent amid the obvious human rights abuses facing the populations in China. According to The Guardian, in 2019, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Algeria and other Muslim-majority states blocked a UN motion by western states to allow "independent observers" in China in able to monitor their treatment of the Uyghur. Unfortunately, the blocked motion was only the tip of the iceberg. Many other Muslim nations have been bought off by money as China continues to grow more prosperous with the Belt and Road Initiative. The alliances between China and the Middle Eastern countries only grow stronger as they are bribed into silence as the Uyghur are forced to endure the terrible atrocities of mass sterilization, detention centers, and conversion to the Communist Party.
While in theory we would hope that these Muslim nations would take the morally right position, it is understandable the difficult position they are put in and why they might decide not to speak up. Let's take Egypt for example. Egypt's population is around 100 million, and the leaders of Egypt are primarily focused on protecting the best interests of those 100 million, as most country leaders are (or at least, should be). If they speak up in an attempt to protect the 1 million Uyghers (which, of course, could have no effect on what China does), it could economically hurt the 100 million Egyptians, so rationally, it is understandable why they wouldn't take that risk.
However, it is most likely not a great idea to try to side with China. Like that "First they came..." poem, China might be coming for the Uyghers first, and as the article says, China is also against Islam in general, and therefore might not be a great idea to trust their "help." Therefore, in my opinion from what I know, it's probably better for them to speak up now for the Uyghers, since it's not great to be relying on China anyways.
Because of the many economic ties Muslim nations have with China, many of them won't speak in opposition, or will do so in a more coded manner. Through its Belt and Road infrastructure program, China has invested billions into many countries, also making them become more influential and involved with the United Nations. In addition to these economic ties, they are seeking for political support. Many Muslim nations are looking toward's China's support in their opposition against the Trump administration. I think a possible important step would be for the United States to continue to strongly denounce this genocide, as there are some Muslim nations like Turkey and Malaysia, who resisted China's lobbying. Hopefully other countries denouncing this will lead by example; communities across the globe must continue to spread awareness for this issue and take action.
Beyond financial and political connections with China, it is quite possible that Islamic countries are not responding negatively to China’s treatment of Uyghurs because they feel no sense of identity with them. The Uyghurs are widely recognized as an independent ethnic minority (even by the Chinese government), so despite the fact that the majority of Uyghurs identify as Muslim, majority Muslim countries may feel no obligation to speak up on their behalf. Even if Muslim countries do feel a sense of unity with the Uyghurs due to their shared religion, that may not be enough grounds for them to take a stance. These past four years in the US, the Trump presidency has undoubtedly brought about a wave of anti-Islamic sentiment perhaps best exemplified by Trump’s “Muslim ban;” however, responses from majority-Muslim countries seemed to be few and far between. Though the severity of these situations is different, the point remains that aside from the economic and political pressure that China exerts, majority-Muslim countries probably don’t care enough about foreigners to jeopardize their own citizens, no matter the cultural similarities. Ultimately, this probably makes sense, as any government’s first priority should be to ensure the well-being of their own citizens.
It's really hard to say what the Muslim-majority countries should do in this situation; as the original poster pointed out, these countries heavily rely on China for their economic stability and as Eric said above me, there is the possibility that Islamic countries don't see the Uyghur Muslim population in China as part of their identity as followers of Islam - as much as China is against Islamic faith as a whole. It wouldn't be right or fair of any outside group to force Muslim-majority countries to speak out against China or fault them for not doing so when you take those things into account.
I suppose where countries should draw the line to take a moral high ground is when the moral high ground includes defending their own citizens, as that's the only clear condition to having a state in the first place. Economic gain is not as important as the lives of one's citizens. Again, there's room to claim that this definition should also include defending the lives of other people in different countries, but this should be the one hard and fast line.
Post a Comment