There are more than 15 million Uighur Muslims in China, the majority residing in the province of Xinjiang. Uighurs have been unsuccessful in their attempts to carve out a separate Islamic state for themselves in Xiinjiang, causing them to step up their terrorist attacks against civilians. But unlike the West, China doesn’t treat Islamic terrorism with kid gloves.
Stars&Stripes (h/t Henry P) When attackers from China’s minority Uighurs killed 37 people in a July rampage in far western Xinjiang, police responded by gunning down at least 59 of them. When three Uighurs allegedly killed a top state-appointed Muslim cleric, police shot dead two of them. When security forces led a raid on 10 suspected Uighur terrorists, they fatally shot all but one.
The incidents are part of a pattern raising concerns that Chinese police are excessively using deadly force in their bid to prevent more attacks by Uighur militants, who have killed dozens of civilians in train stations and other public places over the past few years. In some cities, patrolling SWAT units have already been authorized to shoot dead suspected terrorists without warning.
An Associated Press review of articles by China’s official Xinhua News Agency and other state media has found that at least 323 people have died in Xinjiang-related violence since April last year, when the unrest began to escalate. Nearly half of those deaths were inflicted by police — in most cases, by gunning down alleged perpetrators who are usually reported as having been armed with knives, axes and, occasionally, vaguely-defined explosives.
Beijing’s tight controls and monopoly on the narrative make it difficult to independently assess if the lethal action has been justified. And Chinese authorities prevent most reporting by foreign journalists inside Xinjiang, making it nearly impossible to confirm the state media numbers. Uighur exile groups and the U.S.-government funded broadcaster Radio Free Asia report far more violent incidents than Chinese state media do, and in some cases, higher death tolls and police shootings of Uighur protesters. But those reports are similarly hard to verify.
To understand just how tough it can be to determine whether China’s hand is being forced — or whether officials are recklessly lashing out at those who resist them — consider this recent series of confrontations in Xinjiang: On Aug. 1, police cornered a group of alleged terrorists in an abandoned house and shot nine of them dead, arresting one. In June, police gunned down 13 “mobsters” who allegedly attacked a local police station. In April, checkpoint police fatally shot a teenage Uighur motorcyclist after he allegedly attempted to grab their guns.
In many cases, the government’s accounts of violence are wildly divergent from overseas reports. Of the June incident, Uighur exiles said Uighur residents were simply protesting outside the police station when police fired at them and their truck, setting off a fire. In the teenager’s case, RFA reported that he had been shot after running a red light.
Who’s to say what really happened? Xinjiang authorities operate with a “deeply disturbing” lack of accountability, said Sophie Richardson, China director at Human Rights Watch. “If the use of force is justified, the Chinese government should be allowing independent, credible experts to review the evidence,” she said. “It should be making that evidence public.”
Experts in policing, terrorism and human rights, meanwhile, point to several aspects of the authorities’ crackdown that make it all too easy for security forces to open fire unnecessarily. China doesn’t have comprehensive laws defining terrorism and how authorities should respond. The Chinese leaders’ use of war-like rhetoric risks inflaming patriotic fervor instead of clear-headed rationality in the security forces. Above all, the ongoing “strike hard” campaign prioritizes tough, swift action over legal protections.
“Under the terms of the ‘strike hard’ campaign, they can dispense with the usual considerations about legality,” said Willy Lam, an expert on Chinese politics at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. “They don’t have scruples about shooting to kill suspects and they appear to be using disproportionately heavy force and firepower.”
The trend has alarmed overseas Uighur activists, who say many innocent Uighurs may have been killed. “The use of force by the Chinese security against Uighurs is really like it’s against foreign enemies,” said Alim Seytoff, President of the Uyghur American Association in Washington, D.C. “The extrajudicial use of lethal force is rampant.”
Though the death tally culled from state media is virtually impossible to independently confirm, and some foreign media have cited higher tolls, the figures still provide a sketch of the human cost of the unrest that has rocked the region over the past 17 months. The ruling Communist Party leader Xi Jinping, head of the new national security commission, has staked his political prestige on stemming the turbulence — but it has been challenging.
“They have been a lot more aggressive in using military-grade equipment to combat the terrorists and underground groups, and also summary executions,” said Lam, the Hong Kong-based analyst. “I think the major reason is that Xi Jinping thinks that unless they use extraordinary or draconian methods, they cannot solve the problem quickly.”
Elsewhere in China, police rarely use firearms to quell violence or mass unrest, preferring to deploy tear gas, water cannons and riot police with truncheons and shields. Although the anti-terror campaign is being carried out by SWAT and paramilitary police, the operation more closely resembles war than policing. “It’s exactly the opposite of a criminal case. In a criminal case, we say we only get the guy if they’re guilty. Otherwise, if there’s a slight bit of doubt, let them go,” said Professor Kam C. Wong, an expert on Chinese police at Xavier University in Cincinnati, Ohio. “In the case of terrorists, even when in doubt, we will get them.”
“In China, terrorists are to be treated as a contradiction between enemies and not contradictions amongst the people. They are afforded very few protections under the law,” Wong said. In that sense, China’s counterterrorism effort bears similarities to the United States’ anti-terror practices post-9/11, including assertions that deadly military force against terrorists— even if U.S. citizens — might outweigh their constitutional rights, he said.
Xi has cast the campaign in patriotic, militaristic terms, in one instance evoking the memory of a Ming-era Chinese military leader who fought Japanese pirates. “Sweat more in peacetime so you will bleed less in wartime,” Xi said in a pep talk to Xinjiang police during a high-profile April tour.
Special police units in cities such as Beijing and Guangzhou have recently been authorized to fire without warning at suspected terrorists engaged in violence. The eastern city of Xiamen and the province of Jiangsu went a step further — saying SWAT officers were allowed to shoot dead such alleged perpetrators. The government hasn’t specified how threats are to be assessed.
Xi has called for a “people’s war” — an effort to mobilize the public to act as informants, with rewards in some instances. But without a counterterrorism law in place, “and with emotions running high, the people would act like vigilantes,” said Wong.
Public information tends to be based on personal prejudice, racial profiling and ethnic animosities, making it unreliable and of dubious use, with innocent people likely to be implicated, Wong added.
Part of the problem might be Xi’s choice of words, saying he wants terrorists to be like “rats scurrying across the street, chased by all the people.” “They’re using rhetoric that’s very dehumanizing toward people,” said William Nee, Amnesty International’s China researcher. “It encourages an atmosphere in which excessive use of force is condoned.”
Catching terror suspects alive is a better approach anyway, because then you can interrogate them, said Raffaello Pantucci, a London-based terrorism researcher at the Royal United Services Institute, a defense think tank. “You can find out who their networks are, you can find out more information and you can then investigate that.”
(On the other hand, killing them means they won’t be breeding any more potential terrorists)
…
dragonfFIRE01 says
how many islamic states do they want? (rhetorical question)
Yudayajin-Samurai says
It’s such a shame that non democratic countries deals much better with non democratic factors then we do:(….
Peter says
WHAT MANY PEOPLE DO NOT COMPREHEND YET, IS THAT THE MOSLEMS ALL OVER THE WORLD ARE WAGING WAR ON THE INFIDELS (ALL NON-MOSLEMS)
i AGREE 100% WITH CHINA’S POLICY ON TERROR.
MOSLEMS DO NOT UNDERSTAND ANY OTHER LANGUAGE THAN FORCE.
WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO KEEP THEM UNDER CONTROL BY “DEMOCRATIC MEANS”
BareNakedIslam says
Peterplease don’t post in CAPS LOCK
NOCONTROLFREAKS says
Indian government sit up and pay attention, you bunch of poofters ! Muslims have been murdering and raping Hindus for 1400 years, but they weren’t able to touch China. Why – because of this. Indian military should burst into Al Qaeda hot spots and shoot the shit out of Muslim and Pakistani bastards. 15m Muslims in China is still huge and the Chinese government is making them shit blue bullets. India should do the same to Islam dogshit.
Karl says
Neither the west knows how to solve the piss-lam problem by themselves nor do they learn from those who know how to handle it. Unless the people kick out the liberals, leftists and human rights groups first and treat the piss-lims with a high dose of radiation the cancer called piss-lam will keep spreading.
Agnostic Zionist says
I read something like this and my crooked heart is actually touched and breaks a little. Why can’t the west round up these vermin and exterminate them en masse like the Chinese.
Sickening Islamic FILTH says
Thinking about moving to China after seeing this. Muslim FILTH understand only ONE thing – brute.force.
In the academic challenge of game theory, the ONLY thing that produces a positive outcome in any confrontation is TIT-FOR-TAT. The crusades proved this to be true.
In other words: Jack with me – I’ll jack you back.
ICE says
I see nothing wrong with the harsh treatment of the mohommedists. They will all be gone in approximately ten years. Then the world can get busy remaking itself into a better place.
joe faztino says
Excellent work China, very proud of showing the yellow bellied cowards of the free world on how to deal with cancer.
james says
A few months ago reports were coming out of children that was put in daycare while parents worked. I know China had the worse civil rights violations but the kids were being found with their heads cut off and the China’s government did nothing. Those kids were innocent and we here know who was doing it. Am glad they are doing the job now.
I know this may seem a little bit off the subject here . We are getting a problem here. The kid killed in Ferguson by the cop. Sorry I feel this is a excuse by Obama to disarm all of our police. Only one person seen to tell the truth its a 27 year old black girl who said the cop was attacked as he was getting out of the car and knocked back into the car.
The officer was beaten up badly in the car then his gun went off. Meaning the kid tried to steal it. The officer did get out after the beaten he got. It was said the kid had his arms up in the air but it seems his arms was in a tackle move like in Wrestling. After the beating and the attack on the gun. He had the right to use deadly force. People said the cop didn’t have the right to use deadly force.
Wrong the min. he went for the gun he had the right to use deadly force. But he didn’t he fired 5 shots in places were it wouldn’t of killed. But he still kept coming . If it was me the first would of took me down. But 5 something was wrong so he had to use the 6th to kill him. People say the autopsy is over wrong. They are waiting for blood and urine to come back that should explain more.
Am not discriminating because he is black no in the city I live in 7 black guys were murdered in their cells. The last one the ambulance was there found him in a pool of blood and still alive they were asked to leave . They were allowed back only after he was dead. 2 of his relative were on the city counsel they protected the police. Now the police can’t hold prisoners.
But in Ferguson 40 people were interviewed by the N.A.A.C.P and sent to the D.A. their stories were word for word. But under the law if non-police interviewed witnesses they can’t be used because they were tinted. But under Obama they don’t understand the law.
Like Obama-care at the SUPREME COURT has A Obama nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor she doesn’t understand the littlest bit of the law. She was a White House lawyer and worked on Obama care then heard the case . BASIC RULE OF LAW IF YOU WORDED ON IT YOU CAN’T HEAR IT. its CALLED BIAS.
Now you see how messed up our law is. And to go after all police to disarm them that’s a crime. Are we to have no protection when Obama terrorist friends hits the streets and our cops will have to run like they did in England.
Susan K says
Re Ferguson: I agree with you.
Think back to Boston and the Marathon bombing: they managed to get almost an entire city under lockdown for one guy hiding in one neighborhood. And everyone complied… like sheep going to slaughter.
How I wish the Obama tower of cards would crumble down to the ground.
Peter35 says
No, the Uighurs won’t get their own state anytime soon, the Chinese will say as they did about Tibet: “Well, we always considered Tibet part of China”. THEY considered it part of China!! But the Tibetans didn’t–and the world looked the other way.
I’m sorry for the Tibetans, but NOT for the uighurs–any muslims are dirt; ALL muslims are dirt!!
Peter says
I thought that protesting while wearing a mask was illegal in the states, or is that merely a proposed idea?
Tabitha says
Could be in some states…
Redneck says
It is illegal in Tennessee. The law states any type of hood or face cover cannot be worn in non winter weather and that such wear must be obviously made for cold-weather wear.
Pray Hard says
The ratio will probably have to go over 1,000:1 before Muslims actually start paying attention, maybe 10,000:1 or 100,000:1, whatever works, who knows?
Teri says
Poor poor little weegers! If they try their terrorist acts they get shot dead! I truly hate to say it but China is on the right track! Terrorist do not have rights! Stupid weegers try to take by force and get their asses handed to them, Yea!
Lincoln Applegate Hahn says
Let China, India, Russia, Europe, Israel and the US …. tighten the noose …. herd all Muslims into northern Pakistan …. we will create a Zion for Muslims …. then kill them all …. Sterbensraum (the opposite of Lebensraum) ! Monedas 1929 Comedy Jihad Think Big World Tour
nev says
sky news in the uk did a sob story on the Uighur mus-tards last week . had us all crying over the no beard no headbag rules , uighurs banned from shopping malls , why do the MSM do this muslim pandering ? or don`t they get it yet [nev uk]
Francisco Torres says
Doesn’t exist inocent muslims!!!!
" MUZZO-LINI says
Looks ok to me! This is much more effective than the pathetic way they treat Muslim criminals here in the UK: They get much kinder treatment than British offenders ( cultural differences, don’t you know, what garbage, everyone in the UK should be treated equally under British law.)
When you’re dealing with Muslim filth, this is what I always say:
” You’ve got to be cruel to be cruel.”
If they fervently wish for death then I think we should respect this cultural difference and help them on their way, then we’ll all be happy.
Muzzo.
scaredofislam says
I hope the chinese have no mercy on these bitches. They deserve none.
Free says
I suspect North Korea may be doing the same things China does
to stop Muslims from taking over. Muslims are being treated in
China just as Christians are being treated in Baconophobic countries.
LORD KABIGON says
Not so. In N Korea there is no place for any religion except the worship of the Kim family. In that way it is like ISIS. What China want’s is obedience. Hui muslims have no problems with the government and the government gives them no trouble. The ughers have problems because they do not accept the authority of the Chinese state.
Free says
Thanks for the correction Lord K
LORD KABIGON says
Chinese government thinks there is a problem in the way the Peoples Armed Police exercise authority. They contracted the IDF to provide Human Rights training.
LORD KABIGON says
You only need to capture one alive for debriefing. Kill the rest.
southern knight says
treat them the same way as they treat non muslims that is all they understand the 72 virgin introduction agency