| |
Muslims
sidelined as China seeks
superpower status
By
M. S. Ahmed
China’s growing status as a new superpower and its role in the US-led “war
against terrorism” have left Chinese Muslims to the dubious mercies of
Beijing. This gives Beijing a licence
to pursue, without hindrance from the “international community”, its policies
of mass-murder and torture of members and supporters of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM)–
and indeed those of other groups that support the independence of the
Muslims of Xinjiang region.
Beijing’s horrific human-rights violations in the region, known as East Turkestan to the pro-independence Muslims, are well documented. Yet the UN and its human-rights organisations
refuse to receive any complaint against these violations, and states that
are eager to impress the “new superpower”, or to belong to the anti-Islamic
alliance that claims to be waging war on “international terrorism”, list
ETIM as a terrorist group and help Beijing against it. The international
press and human-rights organisations rarely mention the issue, and prefer
to cover Beijing’s treatment of the peoples of Hong Kong, Tibet and
Taiwan.
China set out to improve its relations with other countries after the end
of the Soviet Union (and the international communist bloc) in 1990, exploiting its status
as a “demographic superpower”. It
even established diplomatic relations with Israel in
1992, and for the rest of the decade cooperated
in several military technology projects, including China’s
own fighter-aircraft programme. This
military cooperation proved so fruitful that the US felt
it necessary to put pressure on Israel to
cancel a lucrative contract to supply airborne warning and control planes
(AWACS) to China in 2000. Washington was afraid
that Beijing might use this technology against Taiwan,
instead of against Islamic movements.
In fact, the US backs the close cooperation between Israel and
China to fight Islamic groups, such as Hamas and
ETIM, that seek to end the occupation of Muslims
lands.
China has also developed close relations with the US, based
on their shared desire to trade and to fight “international terrorism”. Relations began to improve when China condemned
the attacks in September 2001, and promised to cooperate with the “war
on terrorism”. In late October
of that year president Bush made his first official
visit to China, to attend a summit meeting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation
(APEC), which was dominated by the issue of terrorism. At the end of the year Bush signed proclamations
granting China “permanent normal trading relations”, to begin on January 1, 2002. He also revoked the Jackson-Vanik
regulation preventing communist countries from having normal trading relations
with the US if they
restricted emigration. In late
August 2002 the US listed ETIM as a terrorist organisation for the first
time, in return for the introduction by Beijing of the “Regulations on
Export Control of Missiles and Missile-related items and technologies”:
a move that seems to assure the US and Israel that Muslims will not acquire
missiles and technologies.
China has also steadily consolidated its relations with Russia and
the former Soviet republics of Central
Asia in pursuit of the same objectives,
namely to fight Islamic resurgence and expand trading links. The despotic rulers of the republics and China have
a common interest in suppressing the growing resistance of Islamic groups
to their rule and in developing and transporting the petroleum and gas
deposits of the Caspian Sea-Central
Asia region. In the late 1990s China and
Russia, along with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, formed the organisation known as the Shanghai Five, renamed the Shanghai
Cooperative Organisation (SCO) at their annual meeting in June 2001, when
Uzbekistan became the sixth member. The
importance Beijing attaches to relations with the Central Asian republics was demonstrated
when Hu Jintau, on
his first state visit as president, went to Kazakhstan in June 2003. One of the ‘security”
strategies adopted by these countries is full cooperation in sealing their
boundaries to prevent help in any form from reaching Islamic organisations
from sympathisers.
Beijing’s determination to starve ETIM of aid was demonstrated in 2000 when
it began to improve relations with the Taliban, who, along with the West,
it considered to be an “Islamic terrorist entity”.
Its ability to conquer its suspicions of those it historically
and traditionally distrusts, in order to serve its ‘security” and economic
interests, has also been proven by the development of close relations
with India, another
“demographic superpower”. Like
China, India occupies
Muslim lands whose people (the Kashmiris, for
instance) are denied self-determination.
Under their economic arrangement, India will
concentrate on developing services, while China will
devote its resources to advancing industries. This economic relationship potentially poses
a threat even to developed countries’ business interests in “developing
countries”. But any gains made
by the new partners will not benefit their Muslim regions, and a substantial
part of those profits will be spent on fighting Islamic groups, which
are dismissed as “separatist terrorists”.
China already
deprives East Turkestan of its legitimate share of the benefits of its recent economic development.
According
to the historical record, Islam arrived in China as long ago as 651 CE. So it
is not surprising that the number of Muslims there is large, or that they
occupy large areas that are historically their own. But Beijing insists that
their number is much smaller than the estimates of Muslims or of non-Chinese-government
sources. In 1997, for instance,
the official record put the number of Chinese Muslims at 18 million, while
unofficial estimates put the same figure tens of millions higher.
But the authorities are not content with claiming the number of
Muslims to be “insignificant”; they are also importing millions of non-Uighur
non-Muslim Chinese into East Turkestan, in order to change the Muslim Uighur majority
into a numerical minority. Moreover,
mass-murders and arrests of Muslims there, coupled with tens of thousands
of disappearances, are not only carried out to defeat (or at least seriously
weaken) ETIM, but are also designed to force the local people to transfer
to other regions, where they will become numerically insignificant minorities.
That
the international community is silent on these developments cannot be
denied. For instance, the world’s
media, which recently gave a great deal of attention to Chinese affairs,
were totally silent on events in East Turkestan, while covering the non-events in Hong Kong and
Tibet in great detail because they were ‘serious human rights violations”. And, while ignoring the sufferings of Chinese
Muslims, the media sympathised with non-Muslim minorities in Muslim countries.
The London-based Economist on September 11 published a long article
on China, but failed even to mention the Chinese Muslims, while discussing
in a separate article the problems faced by Christians in the Indonesian
island of Sulawesi. There was also the inevitable coverage of the
suffering of the people of Darfur at the hands of
the “Islamic” regime in Khartoum. But the refusal to pay any
attention to East Turkestan is not confined to the media. While,
for instance, senior officials of the UN, the EU and other western countries
have recently been flocking to Darfur, no one has visited East Turkestan.
Clearly
the Chinese Muslims are out of sight and out of mind, facing a grim future.
But their worst problem is the indifference of Muslim countries,
some of whom are actually on Beijing’s side, engaged in the “war on terrorism”. The way out, not only for the Muslims of East
Turkestan but for all Muslims, is clear: we
have to topple the corrupt and anti-Islamic rulers in the Muslim world
who consider Islamic movements to be their natural enemies and western
‘superpowers’ to be their protectors.
The need to rid ourselves of them applies not only to Chinese Muslims
but also to the rest of us. Our
dire problems will not be solved without drastic and determined action.
|
|