THE CONTINUING IMPRISONMENT OF MUSLIM UYGHURS IN CHINA

By Griffin Asnis

In what is possibly the largest contemporary mass incarceration of a minority population in the world, over one million Muslims are reportedly detained in internment camps in China’s western region of Xinjiang, where the Muslim Uyghur population totals 12 million. Some speculate—including Dolkun Isa, president of the World Uyghur Congress—that as many as two million Muslims are currently imprisoned, based on information provided by released prisoners. Nevertheless, the relative silence of the international community regarding China’s cultural genocide is stunning.

Chinese government officials initially denied the processes of forced assimilation and acculturation, which had begun in earnest under the government of President Xi Jinping. Yet—in light of mounting pressure from the international community, government officials have acknowledged the existence of such camps, though they regard these institutions as centers for learning, offering educational and vocational training to Muslim ethnic minorities. Known euphemistically as re-education schools, these clandestine facilities are purported to counter Islamic extremism through the cultivation of vocational skills as well as training in the Chinese language. Falling well short of education, however, the camps’ inhumane methods of indoctrination signify a blatant, and systematic, attempt to ethnically cleanse the minority Uyghur population.

Accumulating evidence from individual accounts, satellite imagery, and leaked official documents provide limited insight into Xinjiang’s sprawling network of re-education camps. Satellite images have captured footage of ongoing, large-scale camp construction. Images of the camps from above depict large prison-like structures, looming watchtowers, and razor wire fences. Various accounts of physical and psychological torture—even death—from former detainees reveal a horrifying reality within the walls of the detention centers.

Prisoners are detained with neither the aid of an attorney nor a trial for months and, in some cases, years, as they are compelled to renounce their religious affiliations and assert steadfast allegiance to the Communist Party. Detainees are often subjected to continuous brainwashing with Communist propaganda and coerced into memorizing and reciting political songs. Because police forces effectively thwart access to the camps and closely surveil foreign journalists who travel to Xinjiang, independent accounts from detainees are increasingly rare.  

The Chinese government’s reach extends well beyond the perimeters of its internment camps, however. Within the Xinjiang province, Muslims are consistently exposed to ethnic profiling as well as encumbering travel restrictions. During Lunar Year celebrations, authorities in the region have reportedly forced Muslims to consume pork and alcohol. Several draconian laws forbid parents from selecting certain names like Mohammed for their babies, and even ban long beards and headscarves, too. In fact, these institutionalized forms of cultural persecution are reflective of a broader mission to cleanse Muslim minorities of their distinct culture—one which has transpired over many years. What’s more, a system of forced labor is emerging from these internment camps in western China, in which minorities are forced to accept jobs at newly constructed textile factories for free or at a low cost. In this case, it seems the Chinese state’s ostensible goal to re-educate its Muslim inhabitants is not as much an attempt to thwart Islamic terrorism as it is an endeavor to forcibly assimilate a significant minority population into a Chinese-speaking, industrial workforce.

The Chinese government must be held accountable for its egregious violations of human rights by the international community, and its unjust practices must be unequivocally condemned. To remain silent is to trivialize a moral travesty.

WHAT CAN U.S. AID REALLY DO IN THE NORTHERN TRIANGLE?

By Anna Bickley

More than 100,000 asylum-seekers—the highest number in more than a decade—reached the United States’ southern border in March 2019. Many came from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras—known also as the Northern Triangle of Central America—to escape violence and limited economic opportunity. 

However, this influx of refugees does not seem to be reflected in American policy. The United States plans to admit a maximum of 18,000 refugees in 2020—the lowest number admitted since 1980—under strict new admissions ceilings set by the current presidential administration. Additionally, the current administration has slashed aid in Central America, much of which was intended for the Northern Triangle, from nearly $700 million to $530 million with plans to decrease further in the coming years. 

At the moment, many of the most dire problems facing the citizens of the Northern Triangle— especially gang violence, crime, struggling educational systems, national disasters, and limited economic opportunity—can be traced back to the government’s lack of necessary resources to deal with these issues. In 2013, the attorney general of Honduras stated that his office only had the resources to investigate one-fifth of all homicide cases in the country with the highest murder rate in the world. Honduras and the other nations in the Northern Triangle need funds to deal with the pervasive issues that are driving people to seek asylum in other countries; however, they are severely lacking in the institutional capacity to gather such funds. 

Due to frequent tax evasion in the Northern Triangle, only an estimated 70 percent of wage-earners in Guatemala and one-third in El Salvador pay any personal income tax. Tax collection rates in the Northern Triangle are among the lowest in the world with Honduras’ tax revenue at 19 percent of GDP, El Salvador’s at 16 percent, and Guatemala’s at merely 10.3 percent. 

Targeted aid has helped to improve tax collection in the past. In 2004, USAID partnered with the Salvadoran government to improve El Salvador’s revenue collection capacity and audit systems at the national tax collection agency. The $10 million investment helped El Salvador to raise an additional $1.5 billion in taxes without increasing tax rates. Similar investments could drastically increase the capacity of Northern Triangle governments to solve many of the social and political issues that push people to flee to the U.S. in the first place.

However, increased revenue would be ineffective against government corruption. Northern Triangle governments continually rank among the world’s most corrupt—in all three nations, former presidents are currently serving prison sentences. Corruption costs Honduras an estimated $367 million a year, or 4.3% of GDP, and El Salvador approximately lost $550 million to corruption in 2015 alone.

Some recent anti-corruption initiatives have had positive outcomes. Guatemala's UN-backed International Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG) was established in 2006 to prosecute corruption cases. Within three years of its founding, impunity levels for serious crimes dropped from 95 to 72 percent with homicide rates steadily falling ever since. In 2015, CICIG’s investigations led to the arrest of Guatemala’s sitting president Otto Pérez Molina who is currently awaiting trial for corruption. Historically, the U.S. Congress contributed about a third of CICIG’s $18 million annual budget. 

Finally, many are driven from their homes in search of greater economic opportunities abroad. In part due to the lack of tax revenue and the abundance of government corruption, the economies of the countries in the Northern Triangle are often stagnant and lacking in opportunity. Aid has proven to be successful in the past, especially in Guatemala wherein 2013 USAID agricultural programming helped increase rural farmers’ sales and created 20,000 new jobs in agriculture.

Though it is unrealistic to expect Congress to funnel infinite aid into the Northern Triangle and see results, it seems counterproductive to slash aid in the region given its historical success and importance. Instead, a strategy to address the root of the crisis in the Northern Triangle is more vital than ever before. A plan which would include domestic initiatives to strengthen porous tax regimes and combat corruption could be a major game-changer for many citizens who desperately wish to stay in their country but cannot due to these issues. 

BREXIT: NOT QUITE A DISASTER FOR EVERYONE

By Matt Heller

The EU has won. The tumult and chaos that has been left in wake of the UK’s inability to work out a Brexit deal, and Parliament’s continued failure to find a way forward is nothing but a wholesale victory for the EU in their handling of Brexit negotiations. Why, one might ask, would the EU seek to make a process so difficult that greatly affects the economies of its now 27 Nation bloc? Simple, to send a message.

When the British unexpectedly voted on June 23rd, 2016 to leave the EU, they were not alone in their Euroskeptic opinions. The alt-right had been rising in Europe, ever since the migrant crisis of 2015 brought out vitriolic, nationalist rhetoric as a form of backlash against the largely nonwhite, Islamic immigrants. The alt-right rallied behind anger at Muslim immigrants whom they felt threatened their way of life, and largely opposed the EU and the liberal ideas of free movement across borders that it embodied. Well before the Trump Presidency in the United States brought fear of the alt-right into the minds of most Americans, it had been surging in Europe. By 2015, UKIP was a powerful political force in Britain, in opposition to the EU and a perceived threat of rising “Islamization” at home. Similar groups rose up throughout Europe, notably PEGIDA in Germany, and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who further increased his anti-EU and anti-immigrant rhetoric as the migrant crisis continued.

Then, following the Leave victory in the Brexit vote, these right-wing groups surged further. French politician Marine Le Pen’s National Front came a strong second in the 2017 elections, as did Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who called to ban the Quran in the Netherlands, the same year. Other right-wing movements grew too, Poland’s Law and Justice Party took the majority of the Sejm (Parliament) in 2015, Germany’s right-wing populist party Alternative for Germany came in third in the 2017 Bundestag elections, and just recently Italy’s Euroskeptic, populist parties Lega Nord and the 5 Star Movement entered into a coalition government following their victories in the 2018 Elections.

The rise of these groups posed an existential threat to the EU, one they hoped to stop by making an example to dissuade nationalists from pushing further exits from the EU. They did this by hardballing negotiations as much as possible with Britain, taking almost two years to get a divisive agreement with May’s government. During this time of uncertainty about the future, the pound sterling took repeated hits, Britain lost foreign investment, and their economic growth slowed to a trickle. To any other country considering their own EU exit, this would have proved quite daunting. Further considerations that Britain had such a troublesome divorce in spite of having only a single land border with the EU, an independent currency, and a diverse array of non-European trading partners, would make it even harder for a smaller, more interconnected country, like Hungary, to ever dream of escaping from the EU.

By using Britain as an illustration of just how challenging an EU withdrawal agreement is to make, the EU is successfully able to stop anti-EU sentiment from politically dividing the bloc further. Even with their rising right-wing parties, EU members like Italy and Poland are shying away from an attempt at an EU withdrawal anytime soon; with all the trouble Britain is going through, the risk is simply not worth the reward.

Britain is the case study for EU-withdrawal; they were the first and best-positioned country to do so and from the moment the ballots came up “Leave,” the rest of Europe was watching them. Given the current chaos, it is clear that other nations in Europe will not be following their lead, representing a victory for the European Union.