Op-ed by Tommaso Franco, geopolitical analyst, member of the IISS and Chatham House, and a Junior Fellow at the Swiss Institute for Global Affairs (SIGA).
[…]
Under the pretext of fighting terrorism, the CCP pursues a policy of “sinicization,” a systematic strategy to forcibly assimilate the Uyghur population. What was once a peripheral province is today China’s most militarized zone: a veritable open-air prison. Michelle Bachelet, the former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, recently acknowledged “serious human rights violations” committed in Xinjiang that could constitute “crimes against humanity.” As early as 2005, Human Rights Watch raised the alarm, claiming that the systematic repression of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang is a deliberate political strategy that ultimately benefits the state of China.
Most importantly, what happens in the Xinjiang re-education camps extends beyond China’s borders and encroaches on the international community. China is demonstrating to the world that cultural and religious identity can be rewritten or erased in the name of state stability and economic development. If the “Great Wall of Iron” system prevails without meeting cohesive global resistance, the risk is that the Xinjiang model will become an export product: a world where technology serves not to liberate humanity, but to perfect its imprisonment.
[…]
The heart of the Xinjiang system is “grid-style social management.” This massive control apparatus rests on a sophisticated digital surveillance system and predictive policing. Through a massive database called the Integrated Joint Operations Platform (IJOP), the state used AI to cross-reference personal information data such as private messages and spending habits in order to create lists of “suspicious” people. Cities are fragmented into zones, each monitored by a pervasive network of facial recognition technology and police stations. Big data, smart cameras and biometric databases track every breath of daily life.
[…]
One example of how Beijing is isolating the Uyghurs is China’s relationship with Afghanistan. Following the withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan and the subsequent fall of Kabul in 2021, China has taken a proactive turn in its Afghanistan policy. Beijing is moving to fill the strategic vacuum left by Washington. For China, Afghanistan is a fundamental piece in stabilizing the Xinjiang border and for securing BRI trade corridors. China had already woven a dense diplomatic network with the Taliban. This is evidenced by over 140 diplomatic meetings between Afghanistan and China and the welcoming of Chinese Ambassador Zhao Sheng in Kabul.
The pact is clear: oil, humanitarian and technological investments in exchange for security and silence. China has eliminated tariffs on Afghan goods, signed a $540 million oil contract (which has since been broken) and pledged $13 million in humanitarian aid. This support is the price for a guarantee of vital importance: the Taliban have ensured that Afghan territory will never serve as a base for Uyghur militants of the ETIM [The separatist group East Turkestan Islamic Movement fighting for the independence of East Turkestan, called Xinjiang in China]. It is a game Beijing knows well, having already woven similar threads with Mullah Omar, ex-supreme leader of the Taliban, in 2000.
[…]
The Taliban, while presenting themselves as defenders of the faith, have cynically sacrificed the Uyghur cause in exchange for economic oxygen and international legitimacy. This collaboration allows both regimes to proceed with internal repression without interference. Beijing offers Kabul a crucial lifeline to mitigate UN sanctions while the Taliban grant China privileged access to Afghanistan’s vast and unexplored mineral resources.
[…]
The use of security rhetoric to justify the destruction of an identity creates a disturbing bridge between Beijing’s strategies and other dark pages of history and recent events. Xinjiang was made to be a model of digital authoritarianism, and now that model is being exported. China is challenging the foundations of international coexistence. The immense scale of the repressive operation in Xinjiang rules out the possibility that this is an isolated case of abuse. Absolute stability has been prioritized over fundamental rights, and such a strategy will not stop at Chinese borders.