The Chinese diaspora ‘needs to rise up’ about atrocities against Uyghurs — Q&A with human rights lawyer Rayhan Asat

Rayhan Asat is one of the most vocal advocates today for the Uyghur people, her people, whose homeland in northwestern China is the scene of the Communist Party’s ongoing commission of what the United Nations says may be “crimes against humanity,” and what U.S. President Joseph Biden called a “genocide.” Among the roughly 1 million Turkic peoples detained, imprisoned, and forced into labor there — most of them Muslims — is Asat’s younger brother. Ekpar Asat was picked up by Chinese authorities and sentenced to 15 years in prison after returning from an educational exchange program in the U.S. sponsored by the Department of State. Speaking from London, Asat called for stronger human rights allies and reflected on the news of the growing conflict in the Middle East and the hypocrisy she sees in China and among global activists who are unwilling to confront China.

This is an edited transcript of our conversation.

—Jonathan Landreth

Asat will be at the NEXTChina 2023 conference in New York on November 2 in discussion with veteran human rights researcher Sophie Richardson and The China Project’s editor-in-chief, Jeremy Goldkorn: Get tickets here.

What do you make of China’s support for a two-state solution for Palestine and Israel? Is there any rhyme between China’s treatment of Uyghurs and Israel’s behavior toward Gaza?

Yeah, some argue that there is a rhyme, to some degree. But there’s also a fundamental difference. In a simplistic answer, first of all, China has been saying that Israel should not collectively punish the entire Palestinian population for the acts of Hamas, which would be considered a war crime. I don’t believe China, at this point, has even condemned Hamas’ attack as a gross human rights violation, while painting all Uyghurs as terrorists and separatists. In the Uyghur case, over the years there have been a few acts committed by individuals — not by any sort of organized group that triggered international humanitarian law violations. There exists no organized group in China that claims to represent the interests of Uyghurs and is supported by Uyghurs. But for individual acts, China collectively punished and continues to punish the entire population in the Uyghur region. Look at the irony right there.

Countries should not take China’s words seriously but, given the roles that the Western governments have played during the Israel-Hamas conflict in particular, they are making China look great, because China’s assuming a role of a peace-broker that it is not entitled to nor qualified to play when China, itself, is committing atrocity crimes and carrying out collective punishment. Just yesterday, Nazanin Boniadi, a renowned Iranian-British actress and human rights activist, raised her profound concerns about China’s role in the Middle East as not a peace-broker but as an autocrat forming a club with other autocracies to undermine the rules-based order.

People see that. I haven’t seen any legitimate Palestinian actors cheering on China’s call for peace or China’s attack against Israel. But China pundits seized the moment. If China genuinely cares about Palestenians and Muslims, then closing the prison camps and freeing Uyghurs can prove it. But we know they don’t care about Muslims and China is a very anti-Muslim country. A lot of people are calling China out.

There are lessons to be learned from this conflict. Any sort of atrocity cannot go on forever, because it only creates further tension between different ethnic groups where there’s a power dynamic that creates discriminatory treatment against the oppressed. Setting aside China’s human rights abuses at home, China has been the vote-blocker for many UN resolutions involving atrocity crimes, whether in Darfur or about the genocide in Myanmar. China supports many autocratic countries like Iran.

Uyghurs have been discriminated against for a long time. We didn’t get here overnight. We got here through years of repression and human rights abuses leading to atrocity crimes. During that period, any sort of movement by Uyghurs for self-determination, or expression of an aspiration for self-determination by a very tiny group (stressing the tiny), was cracked down upon as a “separatist movement,” as Uyghurs trying to separate the territory from China. Most Uyghurs did not harbor those sentiments. They just wanted to live with dignity. The ones who did harbor such sentiments were often victims of egregious human rights violations and exploitation. Their lived experience informed them China would not treat Uyghurs as equal citizens. They believed that Uyghurs must have statehood to live with dignity. Otherwise, their freedom would be infringed in the occupied territory. China brutally suppressed those moments instead of treating Uyghurs as equal citizens and winning back their hearts and minds. (Darren Byler, a writer for The China Project, brilliantly explains the settler colonialist practice in the Uyghur context).

There have been massacres in Xinjiang. For example, many of us grew up learning about the 1997 Ghulja Massacre. I see the irony too strikingly. China says Israel should heed the Palestinian struggle — advice China cannot follow itself. I don’t think anybody is taking China seriously, knowing what China really stands for, a country that built the largest concentration camps since World War II, in violation of its obligations under international laws and treaties

I’d also, to some extent, like to envision China being a peacemaker. The world is better off when autocratic states confront their atrocities and transition to democracy. Maybe China could play the peacemaker role when the West is hypocritical. But, to do that, China needs to first present itself as a credible stakeholder, which requires closing the prison camps and correcting the historical wrongs, building museums to confront its atrocities. I don’t think the current Chinese leadership is likely to heed that kind of advice, especially coming from me. China’s track record of supporting autocratic states and their repression betrays such a vision. But we must keep hope.

You said not many Palestinians are cheering China on. Flipping it, why are there not more leaders in the Arab world and the Muslim world shouting for humane treatment of Uyghurs?

Over the past few days, I’ve seen interesting parallels. Uyghurs have been talking about the Arab world’s silence as well as its endorsement of China’s atrocities against Uyghurs for economic gains. Many said, “Yes, the indiscriminate attacks against the entire civilian population in Palestine are absolutely unacceptable,” but also “the response from the Arab world to China was so hypocritical for years.” We’re more than a half-decade into the Uyghur genocide and they’ve been not just silent — they didn’t just abstain from the first United Nations resolution on the Uyghurs — they endorsed China’s policies and now-shifting positions to cry for Palestinians. It’s very difficult to hold these two thoughts together and build an understanding of the stance of the Arab world.

At the end of the day, these nations first and foremost look after their own national economic interests and their citizens’ interests. Let’s not forget that many times Arab nations have betrayed the Palestinian population in prioritizing certain trade and many other engagements between Israel and its allies. To what extent can we really say they are genuinely rallying around Palestinians?

Pakistan is cooperating with China to try to bring oil from the Persian Gulf overland and across the mountains into Xinjiang. Looking 10, 15, 20 years down the road, what do you think about the notion that there’s a petro-economy heading for your homeland, assisted by a neighboring Muslim nation?

Before I answer that, let’s call out the hypocrisy of The China Project’s allies and readers, your audience. How about that? I have been very frustrated. I’m not saying that Chinese people should speak about this issue more than Westerners or other people. Look, the Uyghur genocide has been enabled by the silence of the majority. China does want to continue to commit atrocity crimes. I am terrified that China is determined to continue these camps and turn them into permanent prisons that will break the victims. I must stress the complicity of the world and the enablers who are letting this happen in the first place. Just recently, there have been new arrests. Many in The China Project’s community — the powerful Chinese-American business community — have for years benefited from an era of prosperity that came from greater integration of the economies of China and the U.S. They could have stepped in to say, “We did want to see the economic relationship prosper, but not at the expense of Uyghur suffering.”

It took more than a year after the first widely-credible report of mass internment of Uyghurs before Sinica started to say “repression of Uyghurs” at the beginning of the podcast, and it’s never been “atrocities” or “genocide” or “crimes against humanity” — terms now used by the United Nations and the U.S. President. Sinica never dared to use words stronger than “repression.” Words matter. These elites sounding the alarm in good faith could have changed the course of history. If they truly love China, then they must change the history and trajectory.

But that’s just one example.

I have been very frustrated to see some of the people I know who are avid readers and engagers of The China Project — not just businesspeople, but scholars, law professors, journalists, thinkers — playing the role of activists when it comes to Zero COVID control, because it affects them. They could not travel back to China to continue their work or see their family and friends. It was affecting their people and interests. Everybody on Twitter kept talking about Zero-COVID, Zero-COVID. At that point, they were not afraid of criticizing China. They actually went to great lengths to criticize China as draconian. But ask them to talk about the Uyghur issue and they say, “Well, you know, I have family and friends there. Rayhan, you need to understand.” Well, you’re not afraid to criticize China’s Zero-COVID Policy. They tell me I’m brave. I’m not brave. I am shattered to pieces and trying to survive despite the circumstances. But I love my brother and community. They are silenced and I have to speak up for them. It’s outrageous when people choose silence and tell you to be brave. You’re not afraid of being an activist, but only when it benefits you. James Baldwin expressed his profound disappointment with the liberal whites by stating that “He blamed the cowardly obtuseness of white liberals who are so disconnected from the reality that they viewed black people as a symbol or a victim but had no sense of him as a man.” That’s how I view the powerful China watchers and Chinese-American elites. They claim to know better, and they are the entitled voice in America’s foreign policy. Our suffering is a footnote to them. They could go to bed feeling good about themselves if they mention the unspeakable human rights atrocities in one line. China watching became a lucrative profession at the expense of Uyghurs.

My people are dying in the camps and we are bleeding. Every cell in my body screams at the senseless. So, I’m really frustrated, disappointed and outraged by the complicity of many — not just the Muslim world or the West — but also a very powerful Chinese-American community that could turn things around for the Uyghurs as they did for COVID.

On Pakistan, first, we are dispossessed of our land, resources, history, culture, language and now liberty. The Uyghur region is very rich with resources that Uyghurs never had the right to explore. So, I don’t feel that a petro-economy is heading for my homeland but rather that a colonial state has deprived my people of agency, prosperity, freedom, culture, resources, and language. They wish to dehumanize us with concepts like “poverty alleviation” with cooperation from other autocratic states such as Pakistan.

Do you believe that U.S. companies subjected to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act are taking it to heart? Is any of them becoming a true ambassador for human rights in the Uyghur community, speaking up against China? Which companies are they and which ones get a failing grade?

I don’t think anybody is becoming an ambassador for the legislation if you look at the history, from lobbying against the bill to where we are now. But now, because this is a federal law, it has imposed a very demanding standard for companies to comply with the legislation to prove that their supply chain is not tainted with forced labor. So, what we see is that they’re forced to comply with the legislation, which is a good thing. Now, there is a reputational cost of non-compliance, but also they would be in violation of U.S. law — they would be breaching the obligation under the law. This changed the calculus of the companies. The biggest hypocrisy is that a lot of law firms refused to talk about the illegal forced labor issue before, because they were worried that China would get mad. Many of them have branches in China. The minute that the UFLPA became law, and their clients had to comply, the forced labor practices in these law firms were booming. These law firms are also very hypocritical, too. Let’s not forget that. It’s not so much championing but rather the full force of the law compelling companies to comply.

I was very encouraged when the Outlaw Ocean Project released a groundbreaking report in The New Yorker about how the entire fish industry is complicit in Uyghur forced labor. Before we talked about forced labor practices involving cotton, tomatoes, the telecommunication industry, and the entire textile industry — a lot of different sectors being tainted with slave labor. At this point, we can say that every sector is tainted with Uyghur forced labor — which is slavery. The New Yorker’s project would not have been possible without testimonies of courageous Uyghurs who are working as slaves under inhumane conditions. They exposed the horrors despite there being no room for resistance for Uyghurs. They took videos of themselves working in a fish factory and added background songs to express what was going on. That’s incredibly brave. One such song says, “Why can’t I go home?” That’s how they’re getting the story to the outside world. I’m glad that non-profits like this stepped in. It’s not so much corporations. It’s still non-profit, more mission-driven entities that are leading the effort.

In September, on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, three diplomats spoke on the record about the Uyghur crisis — representatives from Germany, the Netherlands, and the U.S.. Is there hope that others will use the UN platform to speak out on behalf of Uyghurs?

Would I say support is waning? I don’t believe so. The idea is, “How do we support the Uyghurs in a more meaningful way?” If we end up in a situation like last time, when the Western bloc proposed a resolution and a lot of countries ended up supporting China for economic reasons, then how does that look good? Would that harm the Uyghur community’s interests or address the ongoing atrocity crimes? That is the kind of calculation taking place in the minds of the West. Also, it’s far more complicated now that there are ongoing wars in Russia-Ukraine and now adding to the mix, the Middle East. Unfortunately, the Uyghur issue has been sidelined for other world events. The last UN resolution could have passed had the U.S. been diligent and organized. Sadly, it’s a missed opportunity. The Biden administration’s over-all China policy is giving mixed signals to European allies. Many are concerned that the Vice President failed to raise the plight of the Uyghurs in the East Asia Forum, and the administration has deployed more diplomats than any other country to prioritize trade. California Governor Gavin Newsom’s alarm-raising refusal to bring up the crimes against humanity in exchange for his climate agenda, which is inextricably linked to the exploitation of Uyghur slavery, is not just problematic but shameful.

I believe we still have the support of many countries. I have met with diplomats from the Global South, and many are horrified at what China is doing. They’re horrified. Except, they said, “Every time there is some sort of resolution on the Uyghur issue, we’re getting a lot of pushback. China is saying, ‘We give you money, so you have to say ‘No.’” There are a great number of calls from the highest-ranking members of the Communist Party to their heads of state. They’re just making sure they know that “your vote is bought for disengagement on human rights.” So that is one thing that has been happening. The second thing the Global South diplomats told me is that China has been inviting many of them to go to China. Everybody knows if they go then they’re going to see what China wants them to see. It’s not going to be an independent investigation. China has been forcing people and coercing them through all sorts of economic hooks, that they must go on this trip and paint Xinjiang with colorful descriptions.

The diplomats told me not to lose hope, because things would change. The countries cannot just keep turning a blind eye to China’s human rights abuses. What would ultimately change the calculus of the countries in the Global South, they don’t know. That requires a lot of push from people like me to meet them more. A lot of Uyghurs can’t meet diplomats and ambassadors. I’ve been fortunate to be in those kinds of discussions and dialogues. Thus, I feel immensely responsible to speak up on behalf of all those silenced. We need to keep them happening. It cannot just be Human Rights Watch or Amnesty International. All of us need to push back. Imagine if Chinese business executives or China watchers joined me in such meetings and expressed solidarity. I also hope that institutions like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International do more to incorporate Uyghur activists into their discussions with diplomats.

Many Uyghurs in the diaspora carry survivors’ guilt and try to get on with life despite great agony and pain, and many have written a lot, but it’s not enough. I need to write more. We need to write in Pakistan. We need to publish in different local media outlets. But then I ask myself why it is always that the oppressed need to do more when the perpetrator — an imperialist and colonialist country — seems to be unwilling and incapable of reforming its genocidal policy. During the first few years of this crisis, many Uyghurs tried to talk with journalists to raise awareness wherever we are, but we don’t have the resources that the Chinese state has. He’s disgraced now and was demoted, but the ‘Wolf Warrior’ diplomat Zhào Lìjiān 赵立坚, when he was in Pakistan, used to publish in local media under the name Mohammed. Every time there was condemnation and public alarm about China’s treatment of Uyghurs, Zhao kept writing in Pakistani media. If I wanted to do this, I’d have to do a lot of research, but Zhao, because he was a diplomat who could just ask somebody to write it for him, could publish in Urdu, the local language. There’s a huge power imbalance in terms of the resources the Chinese state has versus what we in the Uyghur community have.

China has been very good at co-opting the language of counterterrorism in many countries and using the lack of independent media to paint a very different narrative. They’re very resourceful. What’s happening in Xinjiang has nothing to do with counter-terrorisim. It’s also counter-productive as China is turning Uyghurs against itself. State violence and crimes against humanity do not produce model citizens but rather resentment against the perpetrator.

When authoritarian states — or, lately, the Taliban, as a non-state actor or bad actor example — want to control a population to maintain their power, making sure that there is no vibrant civil society, making sure that citizens are not informed, they look to China as the most advanced example of how to do precisely that. “Whatever China has, let’s copy it in our country.” The first time we saw something like that was when Iran was cracking down on Facebook. The 2010 Iranian Revolution was dubbed a social media revolution, and Iran was like, “Oh, we need to ban Facebook.” A week later, China banned Facebook, which up ‘til then was accessible in China. They really emulate each other. There are ample examples. When autocrats and bad actors look at the China model, they’ll say, “Wow! This is a very good way to do racial profiling. This is a wonderful way for the state to control my population to make sure that there’s no uprising.” Who do they learn from? China, the master of control. China is the leader in creating the Orwellian system.

Has the U.S. State Department, in whose International Visitors Leadership Program (IVLP) your brother, Ekpar was a participant, done all it can to secure his release from Chinese prison?

I don’t have a straight answer but I don’t believe so and believe the U.S. can do more. The U.S. government tells me that Ekpar’s freedom is a top priority and they will try everything, but I just don’t believe that they have deployed all the tools that are available to bring him home. I’m not so sure it is a priority yet because the International Visitors Leadership Network could have been activated. Five hundred heads of state are alumni of the program my brother Ekpar Asat was punished for attending. Many rallied around Ekpar including Harvard students, alumni and average Americans calling the State Department to secure his freedom. My brother was listed in the State Department’s Just Cause Campaign. A few people in that campaign were released, but these were people from Azerbaijan and Nicaragua, but not from China. Ekpar was the first one to be listed from China.

There has been a lot of discussion of separating trade issues from human rights. I don’t think we can separate them, because trade is your leverage. You need to put pressure. If I were a U.S. diplomat, I would frame it as “We would like to engage with you on trade, climate change, fentanyl, whatever, but there has to be some correction from your end, which means you release prisoners and close the camps. America is a democracy and I can not answer to Americans while turning a blind eye to crimes against humanity.” But China is very good at insisting on separating these issues. Beijing says “We need to talk about these issues separately,” and the U.S. is giving in to that. It cannot. That has been the legacy of the U.S. government in handling the political prisoners. For example, when President Obama was negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership, one of the requirements for Vietnam to be considered joining was for them to release political prisoners. And they did. Once Vietnam released 15 political prisoners, they were admitted. I don’t want to give President Obama too much credit as Ekpar’s enforced disappearance happened during his time in office, and his Ambassador to China, Max Baucus — who met my brother and selected him for the IVLP — has made no effort to bring Ekpar home.

People tell me that the U.S. has less leverage over China. I agree in comparison with Rwanda, where Congress could pull the aid or something like that to get people out. But there is leverage with China. It’s a question of how much you’re willing to deploy it. That’s a question for the State Department. I hope that they do everything they can for Ekpar, as they told me they would.

Secondly, many people within the broader Chinese community have been advocating for reinstating the Fulbright Program. So how are we okay with that? I mean, I believe in engagement and I think these programs are crucial. My brother had a great time coming to America. But my question for advocates of the Fulbright Program is why don’t they talk about the IVLP program and say, “We want to see these programs’ revival provided that any person who comes on these kinds of exchanges not be imprisoned, and those imprisoned must be released?” That conversation is totally moot. I don’t see it happening. Many powerful China-watchers and Chinese Americans are advocating for the Fulbright Program, because it benefits the Chinese population and increases engagement, but they’re just totally silent on Ekpar’s imprisonment for coming to America on an educational exchange program. So, it’s been very difficult for me to carry on these discussions seeing the Asian American community being totally activist on issues of their own concern and totally silent on Uyghur issues. I never turn a blind eye to racism of any sort. Many rightfully and powerfully speak up about racism against Asian Americans. We must deal with anti-Asian hate and I’m with them, but why do they talk about racism only when it affects them and remain silent when it affects Uyghurs? Why can’t they talk about the anti-Uyghur hate taking place in China that led to mass incarceration in concentration camps? Why can’t we reject racism entirely and forge solidarity?

Are you in touch with anyone in the Chinese government who can talk to you about your brother’s case?

I haven’t been in that kind of discussion, but I do hope some sort of direct dialogue may open up with the support of the State Department, Congress, or the right people and institutions. In a lot of instances, Uyghurs are not part of any dialogue. We often rely on the State Department’s readout to learn that they raised human rights issues. But we are not a part of the track-two dialogues. Institutions such as the Yale China Center have been hosting these track-two dialogues. But none of these dialogues include Uyghurs and that has to change. I want to be part of those conversations. If I were, I would advocate for my brother and the entire community.

There is this really disturbing thing that is happening in the broader activist discourse: people don’t trust each other and many fear that others are spies. China was also successful in sowing this distrust. But there are legitimate concerns about China’s transnational repression. There are people in our crisis who are not there for good reasons. They are just purely about anti-China hate. I don’t want those kinds of people. What I really want is for the Chinese-American community to be true allies. It’s been very difficult for me to navigate the space. My criticism is out of love for my community, and in the hope of influencing the broader Chinese American community. I grew up with Uyghur and the Chinese language. I grew up with many Chinese friends. If they were able to know what is happening, I can’t imagine they would be supportive of the Chinese government’s policies. This is why the Chinese American community must speak up. We cannot just let it go on like this. I don’t want them to speak up only when it serves their interests, like in the case of Zero-COVID. We need true allies — people who are principled in their support of Uyghurs, not people who are anti-China. I want people who are anti-authoritarian and anti-totalitarian in our support network. I hope that everybody who’s advocating for the Fulbright Program will say loud and clear that they want Ekpar to be released.

Have you been able to speak with your brother at all? And if so, how was that arranged?

No. Seven and half years have passed. I’ve never spoken to my brother Ekpar Asat. That’s been my heartbreak. His absence is growing stronger. He’s larger than life to me. Look at the sheer cruelty of this: my parents, when they’re allowed to speak with him, they go to a police station in Ürümchi. My brother is not in the room as he’s being held in Aksu, which is so far from our home. That’s a very deliberate attempt by China to further uproot him. I must mention that out of the seven-and- a-half years in prison so far, he was held in solitary confinement for three years. He joins the call from a prison cell in Aksu, monitored heavily.

Even in those rare moments when he’s allowed to speak with my parents, when there are two prison guards monitoring the call, Ekpar is shackled. I want to scream, “Release the fucking shackles on his wrists since he’s in prison and my parents are not even there!” At times, when he entered the video room, his ankles and wrists were bound in chains. Seeing my amazing brother in those horrific conditions looking visibly aged broke my parents. My mom was on her knees as she could not even stand. Ekpar tries not to show his condition to my parents. He gets emotional sometimes. How could he not? If he cries, he can’t wipe off his tears. My parents remotely witnessed how brutal his conditions are and I don’t know how they are still living with hope. He joins these calls in those kinds of conditions and one can only imagine how much worse they are off-camera. It’s really brutal. Now, they even forbid him from speaking to my parents in Uyghur. He has to communicate in Chinese with my aging parents.

I don’t know how I or my parents survived the past seven-and-a-half years. How is he getting by in these unimaginable conditions? This situation is too familiar to every Uyghur. It cannot go on like this. I want to embrace my brother and heal his wounds once he gets out. The China Project and the broader Chinese American community as a whole must speak up to end this atrocity. Any undeterred continuation of the atrocity crimes does not serve China either. The moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends toward justice. I hope my appeal does not go unnoticed.

Do you have any hope at all that Mă Xīngruì 马兴瑞, the CCP Party Secretary in Xinjiang now will loosen restrictions governing all aspects of Uyghur life?

When he arrived, there was hope, even if we knew he was going to be controlled. But Xí Jìnpíng 习近平, on his recent trip to Xinjiang, really doubled-down on his policies, Ma is getting directives from the senior leadership as to how to run Xinjiang. There was, initially, a new reckoning that, maybe, “Oh, this is not how things should be done,” because at least Ma seems to be much more educated than Xi or his predecessor. But no, I don’t see much hope with the tones coming out of the senior leadership. In any sort of crisis, historically, it ends with the people rising up against the totalitarian government. But I just don’t see how Chinese people would. Chinese people wouldn’t do that out of fear, ignorance and lack of solidarity. They wouldn’t. There is less sense of civic duty. There have been isolated acts of solidarity by Chinese people with Uyghurs, such as by Zhang Haitao 张海涛 and a few other Chinese human rights lawyers, but there is nothing approaching a mass movement. There is nothing like what we saw in the U.S. with the Civil Rights Movement, where black leaders worked hand in hand with white allies. China calls itself a Great Power 大国, but this literally just means a “big country.” If Chinese people really want to be “great,” and have moral leadership on the world stage, Chinese people cannot tolerate an ongoing genocide taking place against an ethno-religious population. We need urgent solidarity to tackle this crisis. Look around the world right now.

People around the world are rallying around Palestinians and the innocent hostages: they’re not just Palestinians or Jewish — white, black, everybody. That basic kind of civic duty — like we as citizens of the world owe it to our fellow citizens to speak up against injustice —  is not something that is deeply rooted in China. Few Chinese speak up for marginalized communities. That is not something innate, because the education system is not one in which you question authority. Chinese education is like, “You behave. You follow the rules. This is how you operate.” Sadly, even after leaving China, many refuse to learn about what’s happening. This is why the Chinese diaspora community who are in policy and business circles needs to rise up. Collective action can change what China has become. I hope this is not just me screaming at the wall and hearing my own voice bouncing back at me. That’s been the case for the Uyghurs.

I would strongly urge every academic who goes back to China to raise the ongoing atrocity. They can go to China and we can’t. They have a responsibility to inform. Chinese elites may be convinced, mistakenly, that “the Uyghur issue” is just a “card” to be played by the West, but our lives are not a game. It’s been just pure pain. The human rights issues are real, and incredibly well documented at this point. We urgently need people who are conscientious and genuinely friends of China, and who have respect from their Chinese interlocutors, to drive home the moral importance of the Uyghur issue.

This interview is far from a cry for help but I raised legitimate concerns, my hopes and aspirations that serve our collective humanity. Uyghurs have been peacefully advocating for their loved ones to be released. This issue is not going away until it’s addressed properly —  including China offering reparation for all the wrongs done to the Uyghur community. Ending this genocide would not only serve the interest of China but it would serve world peace. Violence breeds violence, a lesson China must learn.