Who's profiting from Xinjiang violence?

I WAS shocked and confused when I read the editorial titled "Who's profiting from Xinjiang violence?" in The Brunei Times of July 10, 2009. I was shocked because I do not understand how and why the editorial made such indiscriminate accusations of China based on groundless stories or even vicious rumours.

I was confused because the author of the editorial, who lives in such an Abode of Peace, chose to be blind to those rioters shattering peace through violence.

Within my knowledge, the editorial made several serious mistakes in its arguments.

The first mistake is to confuse the nature of the incident. The highly violent crimes in Xinjiang involved beating, smashing, looting and arson and caused at least 156 deaths, over 1,200 injuries and big losses of properties. Facts have proven that these are premeditated and organised crimes, directed by separatists abroad and implemented by separatists inside the country.

The World Uighur Congress (WUC) headed by the ethnic separatist Rebiya Kadeer made an issue of an ordinary case of public order in Shaoguan, Guangdong Province and directly masterminded the violence. Xinjiang police had obtained recordings of calls between overseas separatist Eastern Turkestan groups and their accomplices inside the country.

The WUC also incited trouble-makers through the Internet and other channels to "be braver" and to "do something big". The fact is already clear that the violent crimes were by no means incidental or spontaneous. They were well organised riots and targeted at innocent Han civilians. I believe any responsible government will not sit idle and let go of the crimes.

The second mistake of the editorial is to conclude, based on the biased and distorted reports of some western media, that China's Uighurs are among the most repressed peoples of the world. I wonder whether the author of the editorial has ever been to Xinjiang and how much he or she knows about Xinjiang and the Uighurs living there for generations.

If the editorial says the Uighurs have been discriminated against, how can it justify the remarkable achievements by China's Central government in developing Xinjiang economically and culturally and improving the living standards of both Uighur and Han peoples? How can it justify the great efforts by the Chinese government in protecting the freedom of religious faith and promoting the harmony among all ethnic groups in Xinjiang? And how can it justify the fact that minority people hold more than half of government posts, which are hotly contested in China's competitive job market?

Ironically, if Rebiya Kadeer recalled her own past, she would count herself among the numerous Uighurs who had benefited from China's policies to promote ethnic harmony.

Her story is a rags-to-riches one. She spent 40 years in Xinjiang and was listed as the richest woman in Xinjiang and the 8th richest in China's Mainland by Forbes in 1995. An AFP article on July 6, 2009 quoted Rebiya Kadeer as saying the deeper cause of the July 5 riot was "six decades of Chinese rule, during which the Uighurs have endured a litany of human rights abuses such as arbitrary detention, torture, discrimination and religious repression..."

Actually, "abuse" is hardly an appropriate word to describe the lives of Uighurs in Xinjiang — least of all in her own life, which started off in poverty, but flourished within 10 years. If her allegations of "discrimination" against the Chinese government were true, only Han Chinese would have been allowed such opportunities.

Her identity as a Uighur also allowed her to have six children while most of her Han counterparts were limited to only one. Her human rights abuse accusations, including religious repression, fall flat as achievements made by both local people and the government are a matter of record.

The third mistake of the editorial is to equal the Uigur separatists with the whole Muslim community in Xinjiang. The editorial accused that the Chinese government tried to curb the Uighurs' quest of separation by labelling them as terrorists. Well, I would like to quote Article 2 of His Majesty's Government's Anti-Terrorism (Financial and Other Measures) Act (Revised Edition 2008, Chapter 197 of Laws of Brunei) which provides that: "terrorist act" means the use or threat of action (whether in Brunei Darussalam or elsewhere) —

(a) where the action —

(i) involves serious violence against any person; (ii) involves serious damage to property;(iii) endangers any person's life;(iv) creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public;(v) involves the use of firearms or explosives; (vii) is designed to disrupt any public computer system or the provision of services directly related to communications infrastructure, public utilities, public transportation or public key infrastructure

(b) where the use or threat is intended or reasonably regarded as intending to —

(i) influence the Government or any other government; or (ii) intimidate the public or a section of the public.

A simple comparison between those provisions and the Xinjiang incident can lead any person with reason and conscience to the conclusion that what the rioters perpetrated are nothing but terrorist acts. But may I ask questions now? When has the Chinese government ever equalled the rioters with ordinary Uighur peoples? When has the Chinese government labelled the whole Muslim community in Xinjiang as terrorists?

I understand that some countries do link terrorism with Islam. But China is by no means one of them. On the contrary, China is exemplified to fight Islamophobia. Chinese leaders articulate on many occasions that it is not right to link terrorism with certain religion and race. The Chinese government spares no efforts in developing friendship and cooperation with all the Islamic countries, including Brunei Darussalam, as well as with the Organisation of Islamic Conference. China really shall not bear the accusation of Islamophobia.

Just as the vice chairman of Xinjiang Islam Association put, the violent crimes committed by a small group of Uighurs are against the tenets of the Al-Quran.

Those Uighurs can never represent the whole Uighur community in Xinjiang and other parts of China. Therefore, it seems a bit ridiculous for the editorial to claim that the Muslims who died in the riots were martyrs only because they died for their "faith".

According to my shallow understanding, Islam, with the word itself meaning peace and stability, is a religion that promotes peace and humanity.

According to the Islamic teaching, the crime of killing one innocent person is equal to that of killing the whole mankind. I believe Allah the Almighty (SWT)'s teaching is that a true Muslim must do good deeds rather than the violent crimes. So those who commit crimes in the name of Allah the Almighty (SWT) is a blaspheme to Islam rather than a grace, and they will not be martyrs but traitors.

Admittedly, the development of Xinjiang is far from perfect. Both Uighur and Han people face problems and challenges in economic and social development.

These are the very problems which the Chinese government and local people have tried to resolve through ethnic unity and lasting stability. But this is not what Rebiya Kadeer and other ethnic separatists want to see. And this is why they rioted up, committed atrocities, undermined ethnic unity and demolished social stability. So if you ask me who is profiting from Xinjiang violence. I think the answer is all those people who directed, committed and supported the violent crimes in Xinjiang.

Li Qiang, Chief of Political Section, Chinese Embassy in Brunei Darussalam