September 12, 2009
Barely two months after the 2009 riots in Urumqi, the capital of Xingiang, China, remained far from normalcy, as there were reports of outbreaks of needle attacks. That led to the demonstration of Han Chinese to protest and accused the authority for not having been able to guarantee a minimum safety of the citizens.1.
The ethnic strife in Xingiang of 2009 as well as the March 2008 Tibetan Riots naturally drew increasing attention in the Western media. Recently, one of the most noteworthy commentaries in this matter has appeared in the Foreign Affairs magazine, which is a mouthpiece of the Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is considered to the most influential think tank for foreign policy in America and it has hundreds of its members who occupied the key positions in every administration since its inception. Five presidents with the exception of Kennedy in latter part of 20th century and all Secretaries of States as well as Secretaries of Defense have been a CFR member.2.
For this reason, the piece entitled: “China’s Western Front”, written by Christian Le Miere, the editor of Jane’s Intelligence Review, deserves close scrutiny. Jane’s Intelligence Review is a journal of military intelligence published in London. According to Mr. Le Miere, the author of this article, the root cause of the ethnic unrests in China is “the state’s encouragement of Han Chinese transmigration and consequent subjugation of local cultures…..The result has been growing resentment and self-segregation, which, in both cases, has led to violence.”3. Mr. Le Miere’s long-term solution to this problem is for China to adopt the Hong Kong and Macau models of government for China’s Western regions. By adopting such a model, the local governments will be granted “a high degree of autonomy” and “executive, legislative, and independent judicial power.”3. The local population will be guaranteed freedom of speech, press, assembly and religion. Moreover, under this model, the local authorities have the power of approving migration to the regions. In other words, the Chinese people have no freedom of movement in their own country. This is hardly consistent with the concept of human rights as espoused by the West, but Mr. Le Miere calls this the most appealing feature for this model of government.
Another arrangement the writer considers to be helpful to Beijing is the restoration of Dalai Lama as the head of the government in Tibet, as “the Dalai Lama would likely be less of a problem for Beijing in the region than outside of it…. Ultimately, such a solution would allow for linguistic and cultural—but not full political –independence from Beijing.”3.
Unfortunately, unlike what Mr. Le Miere is advocating, independence of Tibet and Xingiang has been the ultimate goal of the old Tibetan ruling class of aristocrats and monks, the same people around the Dalai Lama, as well as the East Turkistan separatists. With due respect to the intelligence of Mr. Le Miere, the problem of China ethnic strife cannot be simply blamed on China’s migration and cultural policy. Historically, it is a well known fact that American intrusion into Tibetan affairs began on the eve of Korean War. For over half a century, either through overt action of plotting guerilla warfare against China or covert action of actively providing financial support for the Dalai Lama and his exiled “Tibet Government” through CIA or National Endowment for Democracy, the United States has not ceased to detach Tibet from China.
In Europe, German state-financed foundations such as the Friedrich-Naumann Foundation have also supported the activities of Tibet “government in exile” against China since 1980s, when China was perceived to be the global competitor.4. Moreover, the German secessionist policy is also aimed at other vast regions of China, and that includes Inner Mongolia, Xinjiang.5.
Since 1970s, the CIA had already made contact with the Uyghur separatist leaders from Xingiang. One of the prominent exile politicians was Erkin Alptekin, who moved to Munich in 1971, and became “Senior Policy Advisor” to the director or Radio Liberty, which has close links to CIA.6.
With the dissolution of the Soviet Union, several of the Islamic groups from Central Asian Republics are integrated with the Uyghur movement from China. These groups received training from Osama bin Ladin’s Al Qaeda with the knowledge and support of the CIA, because the latter “thought they might use them if war ever broke out with China.”7. “The declared objective of these Chinese-based Islamic insurgencies is the ‘establishment of an Islamic caliphate in the region.’” This infringes on China’s sovereignty, but conforms to the U.S. geopolitical interests. “By tacitly promoting the secession of the Xinjiang-Uyghur region, Washington is attempting to trigger a broader process of political destabilization and fracturing of the People’s Republic of China.”8.
Although China actively supports America’s war on terrorism, Washington wastes no effort to intensify the process of splitting up China with the proclamation of the East Turkistan Government in exile on September 14, 2004. The ceremony was held at Capitol Hill under American flags, and the operation entirely financed by the National Endowment for Democracy, which is nearly 100 percent funded by the U.S. Congress. American officials attended the ceremony include Ambassador Nelson Ledsky, Morton Abramowitze, ambassador to Turkey, and Graham Fuller, a former senior CIA officer. Moreover, according to the Turkish media, the U.S. government put pressure on Turkey to be involved in the secessionist movement against China, which is directly against the basic foreign policy of Turkey.9.
Nonetheless, after relentless pressure, the government of Turkey became a willing puppet of America, as according to the Internet media Turk Pulse, with regard to the separatist movement in Xingiang, Washington is using some Turkish Americans, particularly Fetullah Gulen, “in order to get Turkey involved in the Xinjiang affair.”12.
Fetullah Gulen, “is one of the key operatives who have been fronting for the CIA in the radicalization of Central Asia, involving drugs trafficking, money laundering, and the nuclear black market, and false-flag terrorism.”12. Notably, in his application for a permanent visa with the States Department, Gulen provided a list of references included Graham Fuller and Morton Abramowitz.12.
In the destabilization of Xingiang region, “Turkey was the perfect proxy; a NATO ally and a puppet regime. Turkey shares the same heritage/race as the entire population of Central Asia, the same language (Turkic), the same religion (Sunni Islam), and of course, the strategic location and proximity.”12.
Consequently, in the aftermath of the riots in Xingiang, Turkey was the only Muslim country that wanted to raise the issue of the Xingjian Riots in the UN. The Turkish Foreign Minister condemned the violence and said “Turkey cannot stay indifferent or unconcerned to the plight of Uyghur Turks living in China’s Xinjiang territory.”14. Unfortunately, the foreign minister shamelessly twisted the facts that it was the Uyghur separatist elements that were killing innocent Chinese.
Germany also intensifies its effort to be involved in the secessionist movement against Beijing. Politicians in Berlin loudly demanded China to launch “speedy and unconditional investigations” into riots.4. The Munich based World Uyghur Congress, called for demonstration in front of the Chinese embassies all over the world, and even violent actions in Xingiang against the Chinese. The people in the World Uyghur Congress, with decades of anti-Chinese credential and active cooperations and assistances from German and U.S., have ties to terrorist networks. According to the German foreign policy source: “Alongside their contacts to western government circles, they also maintain close ties to the secessionists of the autonomous regions of Tibet and Inner Mongolia…The sympathy Berlin feels toward the Uyghur secessionists is based on hopes that the strategic rival, the People’s Republic of China, could be seriously weakened by the loss of an enormous amount of territory leading from Tibet to Xingiang to Inner Mongolia.”10.
To be sure, the loss of an enormous amount of territory by China has been the geopolitical objective of the Western imperial powers, who have completely forgot the past aggressions and atrocities they committed against the Chinese people, and still shamelessly wish to detach territory from China and commit covet actions against China.
Notably, the European Parliament Human Rights Committee invited Rebiya Kadeer, the president of the “World Uyghur Congress” to testify in Brussels. Rebiya Kadeer, a prisoner convicted for separatist activity in China, was released on medical parole. Kadeer accused the Chinese government of “cultural genocide” in Xingiang, and some 10,000 Uyghurs were missing following the riots, and teenage students were tortured in Chinese jail. Without hearing from China, the head of EU human rights committee called for an independent international inquiry of the July riots.
Thus, once again, accusation, distorted reports and false condemnation against China appeared in most Western media. China and the Chinese, the victims of violent riots instigated by the Western powers and their proxy Turkey, became the violators of human rights and oppressors of Uyghur people.
Humantarian interventions under the cover of human rights have been the hallmarks of imperial aggression against the weaker states with the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Central Asia, a region next to China’s province of Xingiang, rich in natural resources particularly oil and gas, has long been identified by the U.S. geopolitical strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski as a potential huge economic prize. However, given the global crisis of capitalism when the United States is in economic decline and a relative powerful China, it is impossible to commence direct military aggression against China as in the past. The United States and their allies can only resort to use proxy the likes of the Uyghur separatists and Turkey to create instability. At the same time, offers “autonomy” as an ultimate solution to the problems for Tibet and Xingiang. Ironically, this is the carbon copy of what the British imperialists demanded but rejected by China after having been defeated in their aggression in Tibet in 1913-1914.13.
Clearly, the solution offered by Le Miere insults the intelligence of the Chinese people, who have lived peacefully with as many as 55 different ethnic groups in China through centuries. Co-incidentally, the talks of genocide in China in the West have been going on since the founding of the People’s Republic. As early as in 60s, American writer Edgar Snow stated the following when he discussed China’s national minorities:
“In view of the record of thousands of years of Han co-existence with these non-Han people, current talk of genocide in China falls wryly from the lips of American officials whose ancestors seized a continent from native Indians and wiped out nations of them scarcely more than a century ago. The march of civilization? No doubt. But let us leave claims to moral superiority in the vestibule when we come to consider the present-day Han people’s relations with aboriginal subjects whom their ancestors neglected to massacre.”15.
Moreover, Mr. Le Miere’s solution of “autonomy” flies in the face of the declaration of Sandong Rinpoche, the “Prime Minister” of the Dalai Lama’s Tibetan “Exile Government”, who stated unequivocally that in an independent Tibet, all non-Tibetans in Tibet will have to “return to China, or if they would like to remain, be treated as foreigners, and not be allowed to participate in the political life.”16.
Obviously, China’s ethnic problem lies in the elimination of financial and other support of Tibetan and Uyhur separatist groups by the U.S. and other European governments, especially Germany. The solution, as this writer has stated in the aftermath of Tibetan Riot in 2008:
“It is obvious the solution of the Tibet problem for China lies in Washington, as no government should tolerate this kind interference or naked aggression from any country, let alone the so-called super power that depends on largess from China for every day loan, and its multinational corporations are reaping enormous profit from China. China must take a firm stand in dealing with Washington, openly and honestly, to the point of downgrading relations as a warning, otherwise the innocent Chinese citizens would have no security or safety in their country.”
This increasingly becomes an urgent agenda confronting China in the light of the July 5 Riots in Xingiang.
Reuters: “More Needle attacks in China’s Xingliang”, September 11, 2009
Blasé, Williams: “The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the New World Order”, Illiminali Conspiracy Archive.Com
Le Miere, Christan: “China’s Western Front”, September/October, 2009 Foreign Affairs
German-Foreign-Policy.Com: “Operation Against China”, April13, 2008
Ibid: March 17, 2008
Ibid: “Strategic of Attrition”, October 22, 2007
Margolis, Eric: “U.S. Trained Uighur terrorists”, July 31, 2009 Lukery.blogspot.com
Chossudovsky, Michel: “America’s War on Terrorism”, P 34 Global Research, 2005
Turkpulse.com:” Turkish-American Relations with the Second Bush Team”, November 9, 2004
German-Foreign-Policy.com: “The Future of East Turkistan”, July 7, 2009
World Bulletin: “EU rights head calls for independent international Uyhur inquiry”, September 2, 2009 Rense.com
Hussain Farooq: “Uyghur Nationalism, Turkey and CIA”, August 14, 2009 Pakistan Daily
Snow, Edgar: “The Other Side of River” P 589 Random House 1962
Today’s Zaman: “Turkish pressure mounting on China to stop killing in Xingiang”, September 14, 2009
Snow, Edgar: “The Other Side of River” P 596 Random House 1962
German-Foreign-Policy.com: “The Olympics Torch Relay Campaign”, April 8, 2008