Written evidence submitted by Dr. Gül Berna Özcan (XIN0080) Genocide against Uyghurs in China I am a Reader in International Business and Entrepreneurship at Royal Holloway, University of London and have been with this employment since 1998. Enterprise development in the post-Soviet states of Central Asia is one of my scholarship areas (Özcan, 2006; 2010; 2017, see my relevant publication below). I have conducted numerous fieldwork studies in the region since 2004 (including in Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic and Uzbekistan). The first phase of my research in Kyrgyzstan was supported by a Nuffiled Foundation grant followed by a Leverhulme Trust Research Fellowship (2005-2007). Throughout these 15+ years, I have come across and interviewed many different ethnic groups in the region. Among these, the Uyghur businesspeople displayed distinct characteristics. They maintained robust cross- border trade and entrepreneurial business ties with Xinjiang, and many had siblings, parents and other close relatives in the region. But, these people also lived in constant fear of being harassed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Unlike any other groups they were subject to extensive surveillance. This is distinct from the Dungans (ethnic Han Chinese Muslims) who also left China and did not feel threatened or bullied by China in the same way. In 2009, as a Social Science Research Fellow at the American University of Central Asia, I conducted a study on the role of religion and ethnicity in entrepreneurship and visited several Uzbek and Dungan settlements communities and also a Uyghur village. The Uyghur community was in shock as a result of mass arrests and martial law conditions in Xinjiang that followed violent clashes in 2008. Beijing simply described these events as caused by ‘East Turkistan terrorists’ and carried out indiscriminate collective punishment. Marginalised in social status, without access to resources and economic opportunities, Uyghurs and another Turkic minorities in Xinjiang have long been subject to the CCP’s ‘Han-ification’ policies and scapegoating. The current condition continues and amplifies practices that have been applied for decades. Throughout my work, I observed that Uyghur people are overwhelmingly law abiding, industrious and well-versed about their long history and distinct identity (Özcan, 2012). Despite the brainwashing efforts of jihadi groups among some disfranchised youths in Central Asia, the great majority of Uyghurs distance themselves from radical Islamists. I have frequently heard them condemn Salafi ideology as alien to their cultural identity, belief system and practices. Contrary to what the Chinese Communist Party propagates, a great majority of Uyghurs have always been against violent extremism despite decades of extremely harsh and brutal treatment. During my most recent trip in April 2019, I came across a distinctly different state of affairs. My research objective was to assess the local footprint and business practices of Chinese firms in Central Asia with a grant from the Kennan Institute of the Woodrow Wilson Centre where I had been a residential fellow between 2008-20091. I carried out interviews with busines people, government officials and NGO workers in various regions of Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. While exploring Chinese business investments in different regions, Uyghurs 1 See the video of my research talk on “China’s Business in Central Asia: Power and Anxiety” co- sponsored by the Kennan Institute and the Kissinger Institute, Woodrow Wilson Centre, Washington DC (20 February 2020). I also gave a webinar presentation on the persecution of Uyghurs for the British Association for Turkish Area studies on 31 October 2020. 1 who spoke Mandarin helped me to get access to local contractors of Chinese firms. Later I met entrepreneurs and small contractors who maintained family ties and trade with Xingjian. Many of these people related how their brothers, sisters and other relatives vanished in camps. All indicated that a new stage of racist political control and genocide was being committed against Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslim minorities in China. These individuals were under immense stress as they had no channel to communicate with their relatives. Typically, they carried two mobile telephones, one with the WeChat app to talk to their relatives and another with WhatsApp and other western software. They were extremely careful not to share any family information and knew that through direct surveillance the CCP was watching them and their relatives. The spying system the CCP has been operating for a number of years is now perfected with the use of artificial intelligence and other control mechanisms such as bio-data tracking (as documented by Human Rights Watch). At the time I was not fully aware of the character and scale of developments in Xinjiang. These conversations illustrated that female and male family members were taken to concenrtration camps while children vanished into state boarding schools. Kazakh and Kyrgyz people in Xinjiang were also subject to unlawful imprisonment. This led to many protests against China in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. Along with systematic racist surveillance and repression, concentration camps tear families and much of the social fabric apart. Heart breaking stories I heard support other evidence from Human Rights Watch, The China Cables, obtained by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, and related scholarship. All of these confirm systematic and racially motivated collective punishment. This aims to erase Uyghur identity and social consciousness, its social fabric, belief system, language, cultural sites (including cemeteries) and artistic heritage. This systematic attack has been conducted on the orders of the Chinese Communist Party and amounts to genocide according to the United Nations Genocide Convention of 1948. China’s actions and its surveillance capacity poses a great danger for democracies. If tolerated, its practices will give encouragement to authoritarian regimes and will put the lives of minorities in grave danger around the world. Recent events show how the CCP exercises internal repression, as against peoples in Tibet, Hong Kong and Mongolia. With its massive production capacity, China has become a vital market and production site for major western brands and other global firms. This feeds the CCP’s domestic as well as global power. The UK must act to end the race to bottom for profit maximisation at the expense of human rights. I would like to recommend the following actions: 1) The UK should put pressure on international organisations such as the UN Human Rights Council to abide by the Genocide Convention. The UK should also cooperate with the Commonwealth and European nations as well as its NATO allies to put pressure on China. This should aim in the first instance to shut down all detention centres. Chinese authorities must give accounts of missing people. While we know of the abduction of some, including intellectuals and academics such as Rahile Dawut and Ilham Tohti, we call for all the disappeared to be accounted for. It is outrageous that so many family members and especially children have been separated and they should all be united safely. The region should be opened to international observes and the leaders of the Uyghur diaspora. 2 2) The UK should use all diplomatic means through its bilateral and multilateral relations, including with nations which are members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, to put diplomatic and economic pressure on China. The Commonwealth is one such effective route for coordination. 3) There should be a UK visa and travel ban on Chinese officials (and their close relatives) who have been the key perpetrators and policy makers of this genocide. The China Cables and other sources present evidence on party leaders. The UK can coordinate this policy with the USA and other allies such as Canada, Australia and India. For example, the US introduced sanctions against two local masterminds of this genocide, Chen Quanguo, the top CCP official in Xinjiang, and Zhu Hailun, formerly Chen’s second-in-command in his capacity as deputy Party chief in Xinjiang. 4) Chinese firms and businesspeople who have been providing infrastructure, finance, technological support and management to the CCP’s genocidal practices should be put on a sanctions list. The US Treasury has recently introduced the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Executive Order2 to this end and the UK should cooperate with the US and other allies to make this a coordinated and effective international effort. 5) Many authoritarian regimes side with China and turn a blind eye to the Uyghurs’ plight. Worse, weak international responses to China’s crimes encourages autocrats and dangers freedoms around the world. China benefits from a fragmented western political stance. The UK must support democratic regimes and convince these leaders and their governments about the domestic political liability and future risks of siding with China. Further diplomacy in this direction is necessary especially in Central Asia as well as Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and Turkey. 6) Pure profit maximisation leads to a race to the bottom for regions as well as the environment more broadly. Diversification to developing nations is important to reduce global inequalities but this must not rest on exploitative practices. Government regulation, industry stimulus and investment will play a key role to discourage human rights abuses in Xinjiang as elsewhere.