Aug 03
“Family asks Rebiya Kadeer not to organize violence, undermine harmony”
Written by dewang on Monday, August 3rd, 2009 at 9:17 pm
Filed under:-mini-posts, politics | Add comments
Filed under:-mini-posts, politics | Add comments
According to an article on Sina.com, Xinhua reported Rebiya Kadeer’s family in Xinjiang province has officially asked Kadeer to not organize violence: “Family asks Rebiya Kadeer not to organize violence, undermine harmony.”
There are currently 2 comments highlighted: 44679, 44956.
If you are Kadeer’s siblings or relatives in China, what would be a practical and the “right” thing to do given the Urumqi riot? Do you agree with the family’s letter and why or why not?
There are currently 2 comments highlighted: 44679, 44956.
August 3rd, 2009 at 11:33 pm
Shafa!
From what I have read of Rebiya, she was married twice and she has a large extended family, not all of them necessarily in good terms with her. Besides, she certainly looks like a woman with a strong personality, and she climbed fast, so no doubt she left some sores on her way.
I am not trying to support Kadeer, I dont even think she is a good leader for the Uygurs. But to be fair, this kind of news utilizing somebody’s family is rather low, and I don’t see how it is significant except for the purposes of further brainwashing the population into thinking: “there is no problem in Xinjiang, it is just we been attacked by an evil creature”.
Like I wrote before, Kadeer can be and will be defeated, but perhaps now it is high time for the CPC to cut the Kadeer show and start seriously trying to fix the situation in Xinjiang.
August 3rd, 2009 at 11:40 pm
To me these letters real or not is not relevant.
The facts is that Rebiya Kadeer capitalized the rape incident and lied to Uighur mobsters that the Chinese police didn’t do enough to punish the Hans who killed 2 Uighurs.
August 3rd, 2009 at 11:54 pm
Moves like these are wholly trumped by the fact that China lacks a transparent criminal justice system. Other than a phone call to sibling she made before the riots began (Which Kadeer actually agrees that she made), we have no substantive evidence pinpointing her as the origin and organizer of the riots. As long as China has an opaque justice system, we’ll never get to see the trials against the criminal suspects accused of leading the riots in Urumqi. We’ll never be able to piece together a definitive picture of what happened, and even if the courts were to open their doors, we could never be sure that the (sure-to-come) confessions and witness statements weren’t coerced or fed to the witnesses. With the system itself as closed and secreted as it is, the government is forced to come up with more roundabout ways of pinning the crime on Kadeer – including getting her family in China to write pleading leaders. Again, we can’t be sure if these letters are sincere or if they were forced out of the family members. After all, we know that Kadeer’s two oldest sons are imprisoned for what appears to be wholly political reasons – Kadeer’s family members know that intimidation, harassment, and imprisonment are potential prices to pay by being associated with her.
Basically, I think the whole situation has been totally obfuscated by shenanigans on both sides of the issue. We’ll never know what really happened.
August 4th, 2009 at 4:00 am
What ULN said. This is low, unconvincing, and carries a suspicion of coercion.
August 4th, 2009 at 4:17 am
to you it’s a show put on by two clowns, to us in china it’s also a show put on with a system shielding it’s flaws. no transparency, no democracy, ordinary people here are just dead meat waiting for someone to eat.
August 4th, 2009 at 4:20 am
I am quite disappointed that the government so far has not produced much hard evidence to show that Kadeer directly incited / organized the riots. The phone call she made to her brother only indicated that she knew there would be violence / trouble one or two days in advance – which to me is not surprising for someone in her position. It is not sufficient to prove that she was the mastermind of the riots.
Reading the Kadeer children’s letter, I got a bad taste in my stomach. I think that the government is primarily using this letter for a domestic audience (to help paint Kadeer as the villian, hated by even her own children). The letter did not sound very sincere to me – the children were trying to assign too much blame to their own mother, without citing hard evidence. Even though the children voluntarily wrote the letter (which I seriously doubt given their circumstances), I would not publish it – this is a cheap shot that gives people bad taste.
It is a tragedy for the Kadeer family to have her own children turning against her publicly, and we are exploiting it for political purpose. I consider it a cheap shot.
But again, this incidence is consistent with my own analysis in terms of what the government can do in the short term. Suppression, heavy security, control and propoganda are the means for the short term, there is no other better way. But I hope that the government is also plotting longer term solutions to these very tough and complex race problems in China.
August 4th, 2009 at 4:29 am
@EugeneZ
Here’s the hard evidence:
According to recordings of calls, at 11 a.m. July 5, Kadeer said, as she called her younger brother in Urumqi, “A lot of things have happened, and we all know something might happen in Urumqi tomorrow night.”
On July 6, Kadeer held an emergency meeting with some senior members of the Congress to make plans to further stir up both domestic and overseas demonstrations and to call for intervention from foreign governments and human rights institutions.
http://www.china-embassy.org/eng/xw/t572151.htm
To me this is some hard evidence that Kadeer did plan this.
August 4th, 2009 at 5:06 am
@ Jason: I’m no fan of Kadeer’s but there is a difference between accusation and hard evidence. Unless Kadeer’s call is made available where others can recognize her voice, it’s not hard evidence. The article accuses Kadeer of holding a meeting with senior members to make plans to stir up demonstrations but again, this is an accusation and not hard evidence. Hard evidence would be tapes of what was said at the meetings, voice recordings, etc. Hard evidence is physical proof. At this point, I haven’t seen hard evidence pointing to Kadeer as the brains behind the killings but as Heyrat Niyaz said in the article admin posted:
“Yes, definitely. I believe that the July 5 incident was organized by “Hizb-ut-Tahrir al-Islami” [ILP, Islamic Liberation Party], an illegal religious organization that has spread extremely quickly in southern Xinjiang. I’ve studied this group, which was founded by an Afghan. When the Afghan died, a Pakistani doctor among his followers carried out a reorganization and recruitment drive. Whether in China, Afghanistan, or Pakistan, the ILP is an underground movement. In 1997, when the ILP had just begun to appear in Xinjiang, there were probably only several hundred members. According to statistics made public last year by the relevant agencies, the organization may now have close to 10,000 members in Xinjiang.
On July 5, I was on Xinhua South Road watching as rioters smashed and looted. More than 100 people gathered and dispersed in an extremely organized manner, all of them wearing athletic shoes. Based on their accents, most were from the area around Kashgar and Hotan, but I did not see any of them carrying knives. I suspect they were from the ILP because of their slogans. The rioters were shouting “Han get out!” [and] “Kill the Han!” Other than these [slogans], there was also “We want to establish an Islamic country and strictly implement Islamic law.” One of the main goals of the ILP is to restore the combined political and religious authority of the Islamic state and strictly implement Islamic law; it is a fundamentalist branch.
This organization is extremely disciplined and its composition rather unusual. It attracts young men around the age of 20, mostly from rural areas. In fact, this organization is extremely backwards, so that even among Uyghurs without any basic social underpinning, those with even a bit of education don’t have any interest [in the ILP]. The influence of groups like this that have infiltrated from abroad is ultimately quite small, because they bring nothing to the table. A serious attack from the organs of state power could totally wipe them out. There’s no need for anti-terrorism measures throughout society in Xinjiang.”
That seems like it has a lot more “meat” in terms of a theory about organizing the attacks than anything Kadeer did. Because it’s some amorphous organization, there’s no individual “villain” to pin the blame on.
August 4th, 2009 at 5:09 am
@Jason,
What you presented (the phone call) indicated that she knew something ahead of the riots, you would have to stretch the imagination a bit that she actually planned the riots. The meetings she called afterwards were even less relevant to the argument that she planned the riots.
I guess that I set my bar a little higher than yours for “hard evidence” that she actually planned and organized the riots. She might well have, and I am not a fan of hers either, but I have not seen enough evidence to reach the conclusion that you have reached.
To digress from the point above, I do think that Kadeer has become an enemy of China, and I think that she is being exploited by the anit-China forces around the world, or even taken advantage of by those with selfish intentions. She has become a bargaining chip for Japan, Australia in their dealings with China. Separated from her children, serving the needs to the evil(s) – She has gone to the dark side ! Reminds me of Star Wars – Anakin Skywalker – Darth Vader. Sad story !
August 4th, 2009 at 5:51 am
One thing I’ve noticed about both this and the 3.14 riots were that locals not involved knew about them before they took place. I don’t have any hard sources for this, but I do remember reading about worried Tibetans who hang out white scarves outside their living quarters to avoid smashing and looting. If the security police missed this, they need to get better at analyzing local conditions. The other possibility is of course that they too knew but didn’t bother to stop it, but I’ll leave that out for now. I believe they were taken by surprise.
The recruiting Hizb-ut-Tahrir al-Islami does in Xinjiang seems quite similar to what happens to young boys in Afghanistan, Pakistan and probably other parts of the Middle East. As EugeneZ said, there is the quick, temporary solution and the longer-term. I do believe islamism represents a potent social force not just in the Middle East but also China, so the government needs to consider its options very carefully.
August 4th, 2009 at 6:41 am
Hi Guys,
Heyrat Niyaz also said:
It’d be strange too if the Chinese government doesn’t already record RFA and VOA off the air.
Based on what I have read, I agree that to date, the Chinese government has not put forth hard evidence.
Jason, #2, said:
So, if Kadeer has knowledge about the ILP, use the Internet or VOA/RFA in providing “timing” for the “protest” and then fan the flame with lies about the Donguan factory incident, then that’s pretty low.
August 4th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
From the Sina post: “Please think about the happiness of us and your grandchildren,” they said. “Don’t destroy the stable and happy life in Xinjiang. Don’t follow the provocation from some people in other countries.”
People are living a good life here, they told Rebiya. “There are no difference between ethnic groups so long as you’re willing to work hard. There are many Uygur millionaires and countless new buildings in Urumqi, and Uygur people enjoy various preferential policies from the government.”
This is the worst kind of propaganda. Nope… no problems in Xinjiang. I hope everyone takes note of the first comment at the bottom of the Sina post (as long as its there). Great work.
Was this in Chinese originally? Why is it in English? Who is the target for the message?
August 4th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
I think it is quite ethical to persuade children to accuse their parents of serious crimes such as genocide. Ms Kadeer should return to China where she will get a fair and open trial for her alleged crimes.
August 4th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Kadeer’s children were born to her first marriage. Her second husband is a Uighur intellect and a hard-core separatist, who had enormous influence on her new political career.
The letters and interviews by Kadeer’s children are nothing but presenting two pieces of simple fact:
1) Kadeer was released earlier from jail and sent to exile in US to join her husband there for humanitarian reason. She should cherish her new found freedom. But she immediately broke her promise not to engage any political action against China in public.
2) Kadeer contacted her brother in China before the riot.
People with doubt on Kadeer should do some research on WUC. This is an umbrella organization consolidated various Uighur separatist organization.
=============
http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2009-08/04/content_11823314_2.htm
”
阿里木的童年是在父亲和哥哥的拉扯下长大的。在１７岁之前，他对母亲的记忆都是空白。“我一直很难理解妈妈会在我８个月大的时候就把我抛弃了。”阿里木说，“我感到母亲欠我的太多了。”
对母爱的渴望和追求曾经让阿里木做了一些傻事，他至今想起来还追悔莫及——
阿里木在新疆医科大学法医专业毕业后经商，但是在热比娅的灌输和影响下，他因为偷税漏税等违法犯罪行为被判刑入狱。
“当时办案单位到我们公司查偷税问题，妈妈便从国外打电话让我们浇汽油自焚，挂牌到广场去游行。”阿里木说，“我当时一句话都没有说，就把电话挂掉了。我无法理解，她作为一个母亲不疼我。作为父亲，我疼我的孩子，他们还需要我。所以我没有做，我也不会做的。”
“浇汽油自焚”这样的话让阿里木感觉“心很酸”。然而，更心酸的还在后面——
２００７年，阿里木因为偷税漏税７００多万元被判刑入狱。谈及此，阿里木觉得很不值得：“我是１９９９年以后兼任公司法人代表，以前是我妈妈偷的税。我妈妈在经营的时候，我继父几乎天天打电话给我们，教唆我们不要给国家交税。”
“
August 4th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
The fact Kadeer and WUC called for the 7/5 protest proves, as organizer of the illegal protest, they are at a minimum responsible for mismanaging the crowd that ended up killing 200 people.
Not only did Kadeer not call for calm after the Guandong factory browl, or before the protest, or after the riot – she has demonstrated mallace every step of the way by twisting facts and making baseless accusations of slavery, genocide, crack down, fabricating hundres of Uyghur deaths when the fact is most of the dead were Hans.
But these facts have somehow taken a backseat along with condemnation of the violence, while folks are focusing on rationalize the violence as justfiable in light of “legitmate grievances”.
Compare this with the recent ETA bombing mainstream reports, where “legitmate greivances” of the Basque minority, and calling on the Spanish government to end its oppresseion, is nowhere to be found – only condemnation of the violence.
Such double standard when it comes to China is utterly disgusting.
August 4th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
Hizb-ut-Tahrir al-Islami, whatever it is, sounds like a modern-day Uighur version of the Boxers from description, and I agree it is more plausible that they organized it.
On the other hand, blaming a signature ring-leader to rally the domestic audience isn’t new. I think it’s fairly similar to how Osama bin Laden was treated as the “mastermind”, even though Al Qaida is a fairly decentralized organization. Even down to releasing evidence, the target villain for 9/11 was already pinpointed before the videotapes came out — and those were just videotapes of bin Laden sitting around a cave with some others shooting the shits. Then there are some testimonies of captured terrorists, etc. All in all, not too different from Kadeer’s phone calls and these phony-sounding letters — which are rather incomprehensible to Western values, I mean children accusing their parents happens all the time in Western countries… it’s just not as serious an offense against ritual as in East Asia.
What I don’t understand is why Kadeer is trotted out at this time. She was a nobody. Now she becomes a chip to be played whenever she attempts to visit any place, which requires diplomatic capital to be expended (shows how weak China still is*). Maybe it is a probe to see who your enemies on the international stage are — kind of a with us or against us moment of truth. Or maybe on balance the domestic gains outweigh the drawbacks.
* I remember in the other thread, we talked about how no country would even think of admitting or hosting bin Laden after 9/11, and the point was made that well, Kadeer isn’t as much a terrorist as bin Laden. That is arguable, but putting that aside, I said the question isn’t about who is terrorist but rather a political question of who is welcome or not, because no country on good terms with the US would think of admitting or hosting any number of people unfriendly to the US, even a non-terrorist. The fact that so many countries do not care what China says is not an exoneration of Kadeer, but a standing challenge to the notion that China is in the “to be respected as an equal” category. Rather it still seems mired in the “we grudgingly must deal with you” category. All the things which the hosting of the Olympics symbolized could not and did not change that fundamental position. It’s well worth keeping in mind.
August 4th, 2009 at 5:47 pm
What Nimrod said.
August 4th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
@Nimrod – interesting ideas. However RK is a woman, and not precisely a model of islamic woman, I am not sure she could play the inspirational role of ObL. Looks odd.
Regarding “why Kadeer is trotted out at this time”: good question. An answer might be that nobody from either side knows. She managed to place herself at the right time in the right place, like opportunists will do. And by the time people started to ask questions it was already too late and there was too much written about her, and both sides were too far engaged to let go.We shouldn’t overestimate the degree in which governments can control a contoversy, they have their limitations too.
PS. Charles and company, give me a break with the negative votes. It is not every day I manage to get sofa!
August 4th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
Hi Nimrod, Steve, others,
I know many of you are suggesting the Chinese government made Kadeer really popular by making her the “mastermind,” whereas previously she was unknown. For me personally, I’ve never heard of her until Allen posted the link to the WSJ Op-Ed by Kadeer.
Maybe some of you have tried to research this more. I went to Xinhua’s Official Release section (http://www.chinaview.cn/urumqiriot/official.htm) to see when the government started issuing official press releases. Their earliest was July 7th 13:17 (Beijing time, I presume) where they mentioned Kadeer.
WSJ’s Op-Ed by Kadeer was dated July 8th.
My gut feeling tells me her Op-Ed was written in advance, because:
1. I doubt her English is that good.
2. If you put yourself in WUC’s shoes, its likley they’ve planned a “media blitz” to coincide with the “protest” or “riot” which they knew was going to happen.
Don’t you guys think its more plausible that the Chinese government had known she was going to have a media field day with some “Western” media?
Anyways, just a thought.
August 4th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
I agree with Charles Liu #15 with what Rebiya Kadeer is probably involved directly or indirectly involved with the July 5 movement. She basically sowed the seeds of hate and mistrust between the Uyghurs and the Hans by spreading lies and rumors about the mistreatment of Uyghurs in China. It is like yelling ‘fire’ in a crowded and dark movie theater. I agree with Nimrod that Kadeer is in the same league with Bin Laden where both has little directly influence, but has alot of indirect influence in the Separatist movement in the Uyghur region. The difference is that Kadeer is living comfortably in the US as an ‘refugee’ and Bin Laden is supposedly hiding in some cave in Pakistan. It is truly shameful that the US would allow this separatist asylum here in the States so that she can spread her propaganda here.
As for using their children as poster child for China’s propaganda, I don’t see what’s the difference when US Media reported that Bin Laden’s relatives publically said that they disowned Osama. I also blame on Western Media like WSJ for allowing this separatist to further spread the seeds of hate.
I think many people refer Kadeer as some Non-voilent civil rights activist like Ghandi or MLK, but I think that Kadeer is more like Malcom X who want to fight racial oppression ‘by any means necessary.’
August 4th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
pug_ster wrote:
I don’t see what’s the difference when Bin Laden’s relatives publically said that they disowned Osama.
+++++
Interesting thought and I don’t disagree. However, the letters here sound too much like statements of position… could have been packaged to be more sincere. Just saying…
August 4th, 2009 at 9:48 pm
huaren, this letter is as credible as one from an episode of the Simpsons.
It doesn’t read like a member of a family pleading to another, it sounds like CCP propaganda. I mean really are we to expect that Kadeer’s family would willingly write stuff like:
The party is wonderful, the government is kind, life is perfect in the people’s paradise. I mean, Jesus, Mao Zedong could have written it himself! Are all Chinese officials this crude, or just the ones in Xinjiang?
August 4th, 2009 at 10:20 pm
Hi Raj,
I agree with you that this is officially “sanctioned” by the Chinese government – otherwise it wouldn’t be an “Official Release” in the Xinhua section.
Why take a cheap shot at Mao?
I suggest referring to uln’s post #1. Makes sense to me her family from the first marriage don’t like her.
August 5th, 2009 at 4:30 am
Within a Chinese context, wouldn’t such a letter be quite possible from the family? I’ve read situations where family and 3rd parties posing as family would write letters of similar styles to deflate the tension around an issue. The family is out to protect itself from the king of the day; I’m reminded of all the kowtowing I’m reading in the 西游记.
It is something that the government should have been cautious about exploiting in a foreign context.
Exiled Uighur activist says China coerced children to criticize her.
Are two of her children who signed the letter in prison?
August 5th, 2009 at 4:31 am
The New Dominion has several posts on this topic, including links to video interviews.
August 5th, 2009 at 5:09 am
@Nimrod (#16): “On the other hand, blaming a signature ring-leader to rally the domestic audience isn’t new. I think it’s fairly similar to how Osama bin Laden was treated as the “mastermind”, even though Al Qaida is a fairly decentralized organization. Even down to releasing evidence, the target villain for 9/11 was already pinpointed before the videotapes came out — and those were just videotapes of bin Laden sitting around a cave with some others shooting the shits. Then there are some testimonies of captured terrorists, etc. All in all, not too different from Kadeer’s phone calls and these phony-sounding letters — which are rather incomprehensible to Western values, I mean children accusing their parents happens all the time in Western countries…”
I basically agree with this, but I do think there’s a difference inciting violence (if her phone call was that important) and secretly planning a mission for years on how to fly airplanes into buildings. From what I’ve been able to puzzle together (including the relevant parts of the 911 commission report and other news sources) Bin Laden was indeed the mastermind behind this plan and went ahead with it despite the protests of Taliban leader Mullah Omar, who had no interest in getting into a conflict with the US. After years of “war on terror,” though, Al-Qaeda has “outsourced” its violence to other groups that are willing to take part, and now exists in name only.
“What I don’t understand is why Kadeer is trotted out at this time. She was a nobody.”
I think the government’s strategy is to find a figurehead to put all the blame on. It worked with DL and RK (to judge from the comments I’ve seen), and to make Charles happy, it worked well with Bin Laden as well.
August 5th, 2009 at 7:02 am
huaren
I agree with you that this is officially “sanctioned” by the Chinese government
That is not what I said. The Chinese government is presenting this as some sort of honest/spontaneous communication. It is clear that if they really were written by some of her family members, they were told what to write by officials.
Why take a cheap shot at Mao?
Don’t be so thin-skinned. He was a famous propagandist.
I suggest referring to uln’s post #1. Makes sense to me her family from the first marriage don’t like her.
He hasn’t provided any evidence that they don’t like her, only speculated that they might not like her.
August 5th, 2009 at 9:22 am
More accusations from Rebiya’s family Alim is quoted as saying:
On a side note… annoyingly, danwei.org is still harmonized.
August 5th, 2009 at 10:22 am
Wow, supposedly those children are really trying their best to shame their mother, dirty laundry and all.
August 5th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
Chops, or get Chinese officials off their back. Certainly if I was writing something critical of a family member from my heart I wouldn’t make it sound like it had been composed by someone from a state propaganda office.
August 5th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Hi Raj,
Actually I meant to say “I agree with you to the extent that this is officially “sanctioned”…….”
I am thin skinned. Does it mean that you will be more sensitive in the future in our debates? 🙂
August 5th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
Talking about media blitz – Kadeer is indeed traveling around the world where-ever she wants to make some noise for WUC. She was in Tokyo. I wonder where is she is going next.
August 5th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
@ huaren: She’s riding her 15 minutes of fame for all it’s worth… well, I HOPE it only lasts 15 minutes! 😛
August 5th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
Here we go again: Another one of Raj’s hypocrisy:
He will never criticize Anti-China minions of distorting facts and lying but he will profusely criticize Chinese govt.
Where were you:
1. When the riots in Urumqi broke out, foreign media quoted claims from the World Uighur Congress that the police had machine-gunned Uighur rioters.
2. When the Wall Street Journal published an opinion piece by Rebiya Kadeer, the head of the World Uighur Congress, suggesting that 400 Uighurs had been killed.
3. When Al-Jaazera interviewed Mrs Kadeer and she held up a photograph that mistakenly showed riot troops in another city, at a previous riot.
August 5th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
Hi Steve,
You have been making a really good point about the fact that Kadeer is fringe. You know, I am in general agreement. Some do need to chill out and look at the weight of this thing with proper context. But don’t fault the people for being angry at those defending senseless murder (you are clearly not doing that.)
In the grand scheme of things, when HRW, HRIC and the likes finish riding her, she becomes nobody again. That’s kind of how this works.
For the career HRW, HRIC and the like, their livelihood is dependent on a rift of some kind between groups of people. At one point I can believe they were there to point out the problems, but to me, they have become “proactive”, because their kid’s education, their vacations, etc all depend on that “proactivity.”
This thought really sickens me. 🙁
August 5th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
huaren, could you say what you mean more clearly? What is something that’s “officially sanctioned” – something that’s written by officials? If you’re saying that they merely supported the statement, are you suggesting that an ordinary person would really write that unprompted?
As much as I wouldn’t want you to feel bad, I can’t predict something like you would object to me implying Mao wrote good propaganda. Certainly none of the Chinese people I’ve met/made friends with would have an issue with it.
Hi, Jason. Unless you have evidence that Kadeer’s article in the newspaper was written for her by the US government, I’m not sure what your point is. I wouldn’t have issue with these letters if I believed Kadeer’s relatives really wrote them unprompted. But they follow the exact format of CCP propaganda, so they’re not that credible.
August 5th, 2009 at 10:04 pm
@Raj
CIA aiding her separatist activities and her Al Qaeda Uighurs in 2001 is enough evidence that her article is planned by the US government which many of her points has been discredited.
August 6th, 2009 at 12:29 am
Hi Raj, #36,
When I said “officially sanctioned,” I basically meant officially allowed.
Well, you and I are not friends. If we are, I’d tell you it offends me. I recognize the disastrous mistakes made by Mao, but I also respect many great things he did for the Chinese people.
Maybe as a human being, I find you taking swipes at people I respect as being disrespectful to me. Is this a Chinese/Asian culture thing or its universal?
August 6th, 2009 at 5:04 am
@ huaren #35: You wrote:
“For the career HRW, HRIC and the like, their livelihood is dependent on a rift of some kind between groups of people. At one point I can believe they were there to point out the problems, but to me, they have become “proactive”, because their kid’s education, their vacations, etc all depend on that ‘proactivity.'”
This is a really good point and something I’ve noticed over time. When an organization is created to accomplish a goal and that goal is finally accomplished, you’d think the people in that organization would declare victory, shut up shop and go on to something else. But that never happens. This is their job, career, livelihood, it puts their kids through school, a roof over their heads and food on the table. They refuse to admit the game is over and they keep finding reasons to NOT declare victory. Remember HIV hospices? They were big business as people found they could make money by making terminally ill patients comfortable in their last days. Then retro-viral drugs were discovered that overnight made hospices obsolete. They screamed bloody murder because they had made big investments and were profitable but they simply ran out of patients.
For organizations like HRIC or HRW, some of these people might start off with good intentions but later they subconsciously see only the bad and never the good because it’s the bad that gets them noticed and brings in donations. Seeing only the bad and never the good? Hmm… sounds familiar, huh?
August 6th, 2009 at 7:54 am
huaren
When I said “officially sanctioned,” I basically meant officially allowed.
So you think that this was a heart-felt statement from Kadeer’s relatives? You think that anyone other than brainwashed unfortunates and propaganda offices think along those lines?
I also respect many great things he did for the Chinese people
I don’t think that he did nearly enough to make up for the negative impact he had on China. Policies like the Cultural Revolution weren’t “mistakes” because they were deliberate and he wanted them to happen. He he held China back and denied the people decades of development.
Maybe as a human being, I find you taking swipes at people I respect as being disrespectful to me. Is this a Chinese/Asian culture thing or its universal?
Plenty of people around the world react the same way, but it doesn’t make them right to do so, especially with a comment like mine that was not disrespectful and based on historical truth. If that truth’s too harsh for you to hear, well sorry I can’t help you with that.
August 6th, 2009 at 8:52 am
I agree with Raj on this one. The letter was so obviously dictated by officials that I didn’t even care to comment on that. A different issue is whether the family was forced to sign it or not.
Regarding Mao: for the good of the people, I don’t think any political leader in any country should be too holy to criticize. Even much less a leader who’s been dead already for 30 years, and who has been proven to do many unjust and even outright cruel actions.
BTW, has there been any post specifically dedicated to Mao on this blog? I can’t remember. At some point when there is no big news in the front page, it could be well worth discussing the figure of Mao and its meaning to the Chinese and the reasons for the respect that he gets even today in the mainland.
August 6th, 2009 at 9:30 am
Uln, I agree that a discussion of Mao would be interesting. I will look into putting something up later in the week/on the weekend.
August 6th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
@Raj and Uln,
We have at least three blog posts related to Mao:
Prices in the Mao era – a peasant’s view
A reconsideration of “grand democracy” of the CR, theory and practice
Was Mao Really a Monster?The Academic Response to Chang and Halliday’s “Mao: The Unknown Story”
August 6th, 2009 at 11:04 am
@Uln: If I remember correctly, the signature “facts” once wrote about the greatness of Mao. I can’t find the article or letter, though.
August 6th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Uln Says:
I agree with Raj on this one. The letter was so obviously dictated by officials that I didn’t even care to comment on that. A different issue is whether the family was forced to sign it or not.
+++++
Not necessarily dictated. However, they were written with the knowledge that they were for public consumption and that the intended audience was the scrutinizing authorities. Declaring positions, as I said.
August 6th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
Here’s an unbiased article about Mao: http://www.theglobalist.com/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=5796
August 6th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
It’s a pity that some here would take the time to critize Kadeer’s family for blaming her for the violence. Maybe those critizing Kadeer’s family would condemn their own family if coerced, but I doubt this is the situation in this case. If anything Kadeer’s family are more fearful of retaliation from the victims’ relatives than the government. The letters being made public serves multiple purpose and one of them is to let everyone (especially the victims’ family) know that they are innocent. One letter for apologizing to the victims/family cause they felt that their mother was involved and the other was to their mother urging her to stop her seperatist activity. Niether of the letter really critize Kadeer; the only criticism was what they believed to be the truth.
August 6th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Hi Steve, #39,
Well said and thanks for sharing about the HIV hospice care example. Btw, very encouraging for me to see other people “get” this. You’ve made my day for supporting this particular observation.
August 6th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Hi Raj, #40,
“he held China back and denied the people decades of development.”
Hmm, so am I reading you correctly – you are interested in what’s best for China, and you are interested in Chinese becoming wealthy, enjoy lots of freedom, and that sort of thing, right? If so, then I think you and I have a common ground.
August 6th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
I know this is way off topic, but I feel obligated to give Mao some justice.
First of all, Mao lived in an era when China was threaten with war with both the worlds nuclear powers at that time. The US has made repeated threats to use nuclear bombs on China and Mao has every right to believe they would. Though I can’t remember if the Soviets did or did not publicly threaten China with nuclear bombs, I have no doubt in a full scale war that they would use it. Because Mao’s unwillingness to bend his knees to the unreasonable demands of western power left him with only one option…..prepare for nuclear war. The problem with preparing for nuclear war is that he had to do it without alarming the whole country. It’s the same reasoning as the government not telling us the Earth is going to blow up tomorrow. Another thing he couldn’t do was have a debate about a nuclear war cause the chances are the hardliners would likely force the country into a nuclear war. Mao’s ultimate goal was to avoid a nuclear war without giving in to western demands. The CR and GLF in large part was to let them know that he was serious. Mao was aware that he couldn’t leave all the best eggs in one basket in a nuclear war so he had to come up with something to spread them out without alarming the public. In these desperate times alot of tough decisions had to be made and I do not necessarily think that they are all right. IMHO I agree that the CR and GLF failed most of their intended goals but it did achieve Mao’s ultimate goal, which was to avoid a nuclear war.
Here is a link to help everyone have a better understanding of what kind of people people Mao had to deal with during his leadership.
http://www.centurychina.com/history/krwarfaq.html
August 6th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
admin, in light of those other posts I won’t rush to put one up. I’ll try to think of a new angle.
huaren, I’m glad to hear we have common ground.
August 6th, 2009 at 9:56 pm
Heavensent Says:
I know this is way off topic, but I feel obligated to give Mao some justice.
First of all, Mao lived in an era when China was threaten with war with both the worlds nuclear powers at that time….
+++++
A little off topic, but I don’t think the Cultural Revolution was mainly to show the world Mao was serious. I suppose you could say the same about Kim Jong-Il these days, but fact of the matter is even in Mao’s time there was a somewhat more pragmatic path that most of the populace would have desired, but wasn’t followed. The Cultural Revolution was mistake however you looked at it, but Mao was successful in other ways.
I once read one of these apocryphal quotes supposedly attributed to Mao (to show he is monster, I suppose, but it is really just the dark humor he was known for), of him boasting that China did not fear total nuclear war, since, even if 300 million Chinese were instantly killed in the initial nuclear explosions, and 300 million more survivors fled all over the world as refugees, there were still going to be 300 million left to fight on the home front. — Now this was something more to your point. Far from inviting nuclear war, it showed the psychological nature of nuclear threats and the absurdity of using it to blackmail China and equating the possession of superior arms to morality.
August 6th, 2009 at 10:18 pm
Ahh, as much as I dislike R. Kadeer it’s pretty obvious that she herself does not have the capacity to organize the riot. Her press conferences are as scripted and fake if not more so than her kids interviews against her.
That said, the Chinese government’s plan to blame foreign influence makes good sense. It cools down the han population. There are Uighur communities across most major Chinese cities and pitting Uighurs against Hans would probably do more damage than good for both sides. The Hans have been fed the koolaid about how all the minorities love them for decades. If they found out that the Uighurs hate the hans so much as to chop not only themselves, but their entire family’s heads off the ethnic tensions between the two races will only get worse.
August 6th, 2009 at 10:25 pm
“IMHO I agree that the CR and GLF failed most of their intended goals but it did achieve Mao’s ultimate goal, which was to avoid a nuclear war.”
It’s difficult to defend the Cultural Revolution. Millions of Chinese wasted decades of their lives just because Mao was paranoid and wanted to purge anyone who was capable of leadership across the whole country. In the later stages of Mao’s life he was completely mad.
August 7th, 2009 at 3:05 am
@hzzz: “That said, the Chinese government’s plan to blame foreign influence makes good sense. It cools down the han population. There are Uighur communities across most major Chinese cities and pitting Uighurs against Hans would probably do more damage than good for both sides.”
That could be the reason why the Chinese government is always blaming ethnic problems on one person, or a small group of conspirators (like Dalai Lama or Rebiya Kadeer). To hear that the riots were organized by a shady organization that most people haven’t heard about, or that the reasons are complex, doesn’t usually soothe people.
I don’t think the government is stupid. They probably do this out of experience, whether it’s right or not.
August 7th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
@nimrod, hizz
I totally understand where you guys coming from. We tend to judge everything based on reasoning, but the truth is that many things in the past was not based on reasoning. Without Mao, China would definitely not have a permanent UN seat, and without a UN seat we (minorities) would not have any voice cause the other UN seats are all from the western himishpere and have a recent history of colonialism. I think that we can agree that reasoning was not part of western diplomacy until very recent history. I can only suggest that anyone who judges Mao should atleast try to understand Mao through his philosophy, quotes, and life story. I think most here would agree that the person Mao wanted to be and the person he was forced to be are 2 different persons.
August 7th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
By all accounts, Rebiya only had an elementary school eduction. She’s practically illiterate when she made her millions in China. I dare say she knows at most a couple of English words, yet she penned a WSJ op-ed right after the July 5th riot. And she boldly finished her pecie with :
“As I write this piece, reports are reaching our office in Washington that …. ”
So my question is, did she really write her op-ed?
And more, why hasn’t any western media or western readers, any of those who questioned the authenticity her children’s letters, exhibited the same zeal toward Rebiya’s numerous letters in western media?
I mean, it’s not a stretch to say Rebiya completely depends on the good will of NED/anti-China forces for hand outs. She would be out on the street tomorrow if she doesn’t dance to their tunes.
August 7th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
wukong wrote:
And more, why hasn’t any western media or western readers, any of those who questioned the authenticity her children’s letters, exhibited the same zeal toward Rebiya’s numerous letters in western media?
+++++
I think Chinese have a heightened sense of BS detection for things that people like Rebiya say just like Western observers of China have a heightened sense of BS detection for things that come of out China. When these dissidents start writing caricatured cliche-ridden op-ed pieces along “party lines” — there are also party lines among professional dissidents — it would serve well to apply a balanced portion of cynicism to them too.
August 8th, 2009 at 2:55 am
@Nimrod: I agree completely.
August 8th, 2009 at 3:35 am
@Nimrod
But the important difference is, China doesn’t say much about other nation’s internal affair, China doesn’t insist on preaching and lecturing others with “freedom” this and “rights” that. If there are “BS” out of China government, but it’s mostly about China own affair, and it’s for Chinese to decide its worth.
On the hand, the western media and certain sect of its people have been harping on China, over things big and small, all the time. It’s hard not to notice the BS when they are blowing it in your face. What happened the good old “MYOB” (Mind your Own Business)?
August 8th, 2009 at 5:55 am
I’m shocked to read that some posters would go so far as to blame the policies for the riots. If the domestic problems was enough to cause the riots then we must ask ourselves “why would Kadeer/wuc need to lie?” Why would Kadeer/WUC need to manufacture their own bullets if China provided them with more than enough as some here claims. It’s as silly as John getting beat up by Joe and then John telling the police he got ambushed by 20 people. For someone to lie like that it usually means they have nothing to lose and I think that is the situation here. Staying silent they lose….tell the truth they lose…..so the only chance to win is to lie.
August 8th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
wukong
China doesn’t say much about other nation’s internal affair
What happened the good old “MYOB” (Mind your Own Business)?
You mean like how China has not harrassed Japan over how it teaches its history?
Heavensent
I’m shocked to read that some posters would go so far as to blame the policies for the riots. If the domestic problems was enough to cause the riots then we must ask ourselves “why would Kadeer/wuc need to lie?”
Sorry, that has no relation to whether policy had anything to do with the riots. People exaggerate and lie for different reasons – because they don’t know all the facts, they want something to seem more significant, shock more people, etc. It’s like the prosecutor who could get an “enemy of the State” locked up for five years on something that person did do, throwing in a charge for something he didn’t do but has the death penalty. Or the man who gets beat up by one small guy but tells his mates it was five big lads.
There is a wealth of evidence as to why ethnic minorities like Uighurs have deep grievances. It isn’t the sole reason for a riot like those that happened, but it serves as the fuel.
August 9th, 2009 at 6:02 am
@Raj
“There is a wealth of evidence as to why ethnic minorities like Uighurs have deep grievances. It isn’t the sole reason for a riot like those that happened, but it serves as the fuel.”
Every country have citizens with grievances. Does that justify the killing of innocents? According to you the US government should be blame cause more innocent people are intentionally murdered here than in China. Yes people exaggerate and lie for different reasons and I’m starting to wonder whether you were lying when you said you were pro China….I’m starting to feel that you have a secret agenda I don’t know about.
August 10th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
Hi Raj, #62,
Its interesting you accuse the Chinese government “harassed” Japan about “how it teaches its history.”
For many Chinese people, they are actually upset the Chinese government is not as forceful against the Japanese watering down their atrocities in Asia during period leading up and through WW1 and WW2.
To me, what’s best for the Chinese, Japanese, and the Asia region is that Japan reconcile her history with the region so everyone there can move on. THAT, to me, is for the best interest of China. Yes, it means teaching Japanese youngsters the correct history – so they grow up seeing the world similar to other young people of Asia.
Maybe we really don’t have much of a common ground.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:31 pm
Heavensent (63)
Every country has citizens with grievances, but you don’t get all those citizens rioting like you did in Xinjiang. I said absolutely nothing to indicate that the rioting was justified, it’s to do with looking at why it happens. What happened shows something is wrong with life in Xinjiang.
In 1981 a riot in Brixton, London, involving thousands of people caused massive damage to property and injured hundreds of people. The British government could have taken the line you seem to suggest is appropriate, that the rioteers broke the law and therefore were wrong, so they should just be arrested and anyone sympathising with them was also wrong.
Instead, the government commissioned an inquiry. The Scarman Report published from the inquiry determined that Police regulations needed to be updated to be less discriminatory towards ethnic minorities. An independent complaints authority for the Police was set up a few years later.
When you have something like happened in Xinjiang or Brixton, it’s easy to just condemn the people who took part in the riots. But it doesn’t provide a long-term solution. The long-term solution comes from asking hard questions that you might not like the answer to. In the UK it was that the London Police force was at least partly racist – what might the answer be in Xinjiang about the Chinese authorities? That’s why I’m pro-China – I know full well that denial and blaming scapegoats like foreigners will produce no solutions, just placebos.
huaren (64)
Please do not put words in my mouth. I did not solely accuse the Chinese government of anything, I said “China”. That’s the whole country, including the government in part but also the media and people.
I made no comment on how Japan should treat its history. I was merely pointing out to wukong, who was complaining about countries not minding their own business, that China has itself interfered in Japan’s internal affairs. You may think that it’s a good thing it has done so or needs to do it more, but other countries also think it’s in the best interests of Chinese people and other people around the world that they try to convince the Chinese government to afford its citizens better human rights.
It’s hard to expect us to find common ground before you’ve given me an opportunity to speak on a particular matter.
August 12th, 2009 at 12:31 am
Hi Raj, #65,
Your use of the word “harass” is absolutely wrong. It means you are saying that the Chinese people, the Chinese government, and the Chinese media are wrong to push the Japanese government on the history text book.
To me, the Chinese government has been very responsible on this Japanese text book issue, because it is trying to be very pragmatic – balancing the desires of its citizens and the political situation in Japan.
Yes, I agree, China technically is meddling in Japan’s internal affairs on this issue. But, I think we all are not that naive to narrowly interpret the meaning of meddling in the internal affairs of some countries. In the Japanese text book case, it directly affects the peace and stability of Asia. China and Japan and all of Asia have a very reasonable “stake” in it.
August 12th, 2009 at 12:46 am
**sorry, off topic**
Huaran (64),
“To me, what’s best for the Chinese, Japanese, and the Asia region is that Japan reconcile her history with the region so everyone there can move on. THAT, to me, is for the best interest of China. Yes, it means teaching Japanese youngsters the correct history – so they grow up seeing the world similar to other young people of Asia.”
Who decides what the correct history is? Should it be the Chinese government? Or the Japanese government? Or the North Korean government? Or historians (if so, who? Many within a specific country are in disagreement even if we assume these can be divided along the nationality line).
Or should kids be taught to think for themselves by reading various, potentially conflicting narratives rather than memorise data and date points?
I would personally choose the latter.
Or, another solution would be to translate the major textbooks (let’s just focus on S. Korea, China and Japan) and the domestic textbook will get used as the main text but with the teacher referring to how the neighbours may be viewing the same event. I think this is workable even in the present education system that focuses a lot on tests and exams, memorisation of dates. (The other countries’ textbooks can be handed out to the students as reference texts so if they’re interested beyond what the teacher was able to refer to them in class, he/she can read them in private).
I personally see this as a relatively achievable goal as trying to come up with a unified history (has been attempted and will keep on being attempted) is fraught with problems.
August 12th, 2009 at 12:55 am
Hi bluetiger, #67,
It’s okay. Or the historians from Japan and China come together to agree on what’s fact and sort through the rest. I know this is happening – credit to both of the governments.
August 12th, 2009 at 8:42 am
Hi huaren(68),
Agree, such efforts are worthwhile in themselves (at least for the participants), though I am not so hopeful of the outcome. But a bridge is a bridge.
I do hope in such cases it’s in fact the teachers themselves or some organisation that’s making the effort and not the government.
My take is, governments (or specifically politicians and bureaucrats) should try to have as little influence over history as possible.
I always seem to be off-topic…and write way too much..ha ha
August 12th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
@Raj
It’s silly to compare XinJiang riot with riots from other countries or different riots period. People riot for different reasons and sometimes that reasoning is right and sometimes it’s wrong. If the government is always the one to blame than people will use riots to get whatever they want. In the case of Xinjiang I think the main motivation is seperatism and racism. If they are motivated by legit reasons than can you please expose it for us all. If they complain that they are opressed than how did their leader went from rags to riches? If they claim that the government is exterminating their culture/languange than how did they learn Uighur? Which policy or policies is responsible for the targetting of the Hans? I doubt you can find a legitiment reason for the riots, especially one which involves racism as deep as this one.
August 12th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
@bluetiger
“Who decides what the correct history is? Should it be the Chinese government? Or the Japanese government? Or the North Korean government? Or historians (if so, who? Many within a specific country are in disagreement even if we assume these can be divided along the nationality line).
Or should kids be taught to think for themselves by reading various, potentially conflicting narratives rather than memorise data and date points?
I would personally choose the latter.”
If history was written with the latter it wouldn’t be history anymore; it be fantasy. Wouldn’t it be rediculous to have to read like 100 books on just the Sino-Japanese war (and still not come out knowing what’s true or not). In the case of Japan I don’t see how it’s justified for them to deny the invasion or NanJing massacre. In a hundred years from now it will take more than a lifetime trying to understand the war. If you’re one of those prowar Japanese than I guess it would be great, but for those trying to learn from it, it be a nightmare.
Imho I think all history books with proven incorrect materials should be rewritten or discarded. It’s hard enough finding a neddle in a hay stack….imagine if you have to find a specific needle in a stack of needles…..
August 12th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
huaren (66)
Your use of the word “harass” is absolutely wrong. It means you are saying that the Chinese people, the Chinese government, and the Chinese media are wrong to push the Japanese government on the history text book.
huaren, huaren, huaren. Why do you jump to conclusions so frequently? If you knew the meaning of the word you would not have said any of that. Here’s what Merriam-Webster says.
China’s attitude most certainly caused huge annoyance in Japan by being so persistent over those historical issues in past years. You will be hard pressed to find many Japanese people who welcomed the constant hammering Japan received. My use of the word was absolutely right.
In the Japanese text book case, it directly affects the peace and stability of Asia.
That’s one view. Other people might counter that such a view is nonsense, that Asia’s stability has never been threatened by Japan’s stance over its history and that such an argument is just an excuse for China to meddle in Japanese affairs.
One can also argue the Taiwan problem affects the peace of stability of Asia – or indeed the Xinjiang problem (though to a different part of it). And of course the matter of human rights in China affects China’s stability, so it’s fair to say that anyone/any country that has an interest in what happens in China won’t be meddling unfairly if they pass comment on some issues.
August 12th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
Hi Raj,
Wow, and you don’t know the negative connotation of harass? Do we need to debate the definition of “is” too? 🙂
You could have easily used the word “push” too. Well, I guess you see this differently than I.
That’s why this open forum is so nice, no, because people can draw on their own experiences and knowledge to decide which perspective they agree with or not? And we don’t need to agree.
August 12th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
huaren
Sure, there are negative aspects to the word – that’s why the dictionary says “to annoy persistently”. That’s hardly positive, is it? If you associate harass with meaning complaining about something when you shouldn’t do/when you’re in the wrong, then you need to re-educate yourself and stick with the actual meaning. If you want to communicate with people it helps if you don’t invent your own meanings for words.
Do we need to debate the definition of “is” too?
If you want to be immature, that’s your choice. But the simple fact is that you were jumping to conclusions, as you often do on this blog. That’s your problem, not mine.
You could have easily used the word “push” too.
Except the word “push” doesn’t demonstrate how annoyed many Japanese people became at China’s nagging.
+++++
Heavensent (70)
Are you paying any attention to what I’m writing? It isn’t about saying the government is always wrong, it’s about having an objective, independent investigation into why these sorts of things happen. This was the worst violence Xinjiang had seen in what, a decade? It wasn’t a bar brawl that got out of hand. When things like the Xinjiang, Brixton, LA riots happen you need an independent report to ensure you know why it happened.
Alternatively you can just blame it on the foreigners. It won’t change anything but it will make the majority feel better.
In the case of Xinjiang I think the main motivation is seperatism and racism. If they are motivated by legit reasons than can you please expose it for us all.
With all due respect, given that you had to ask me that question it suggests your knowledge of the matter is rather limited. It’s very complex, but in a nut-shell it started over the murders of Uighur workers in Guangdong. People in Xinjiang protested because they heard about the murders but also believed that the Chinese government was ignoring it because the victims were Uighurs. As to why the protests turned into riots, good question. It depends who you ask.
But you’re not going to even begin to understand the matter with a “four legs good, two legs bad” analysis as has come from the Chinese government. If you want to know why it happened, you need an independent investigation that doesn’t start with the answer and then try to find a justification for it.
If they claim that the government is exterminating their culture/languange than how did they learn Uighur?
Sorry, since when was the government run by all powerful gods on earth? It can’t stop Uighurs from teaching things at home/in private, can it?
August 13th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
@Raj
You must of got confuse where. I never said or suggested that an independent report would not be welcome. But you here blaming policies or what not does not suggest you are voicing for an independent investigation. Shouldn’t you reframe from pointing fingers until then?
you wrote….
“Sorry, since when was the government run by all powerful gods on earth? It can’t stop Uighurs from teaching things at home/in private, can it?”
I merely asked how they learned Uighur. If they learned it from home than that’s all they had to say…..but I’m willing to bet you any day that most of them was taught in school as well. It seems like your the one starting off with answers and looking for evidence to support it. Did I not ask the question the way you would have? Your lobbying for an independant investigation doesn’t sound very convincing…..unless it supports your answers.
August 16th, 2009 at 5:01 am
Heavensent (71),
If you read a couple of books on a certain aspect of history, it’s easy to find that there are conflicting accounts, narratives, differing focus, etc. I would personally want to read at least 2 perspectives to get a fuller picture of something.
I remember reading 2 articles about the 1911 revolution and each was interesting in their own right but still painted the event in a differing light due to differences in emphasis, etc. i don’t think you can have a single book of truth (again even if you could, who decides what the truth is?). The best you’re likely to get is a view on the truth. Wouldn’t it be better for students to realise that people and countries (made up of people) have their perspective of its history (which is essentially the history of people). Trying to come up with data point is likely impossible and possibly futile. Shouldn’t the emphasis be more about trying to understand why some people have that specific pov? (isn’t this what FM is about – with main focus on current events which eventually becomes history as time passes?).
And anyway, I don’t think ‘Japan’ has a single view of history, whether referring to the Sino-Japan war or other aspects. Your reference to Japan’s denial of the Nanjing massacre should be qualified by stating that it’s made by some (many?) in Japan.
You may not be happy about the wording but you may want to take a look at the Foreign Ministry’s Q&A to see Japan’s official stance:
http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/q_a/faq16.html#q8
In Japan, you can publish books and articles that do not fit the ‘government’s view’ of history (even assuming such exists). Isn’t this a lot healthier than be bound by the government’s narrative of history (in private, sure, I understand researchers in China also question aspects of CCP’s view of history but on sensitive topics I understand from reading/talking to my professors that things are off-limits)?
I agree that proven incorrect historical details should be taken out. But a lot of books are about differences in viewpoint and these are harder to vet (and who vets the censors?).
It may be nicer (not talking about the actual deaths of course…) as it seems clear to hear that 300,000 people were killed in Nanjing. But should the focus be on this number alone? How do you prove it/disprove it? What if 300,001 people had been killed? Then are you saying that all history books stating that 300,000 people were killed should be taken off the bookshelf because it’s factually incorrect? I don’t think this is what you are saying but I use it to show you how hard history and finding the truth is.
I still think the value of reading various materials that may be conflicting is tremendous rather than read something that’s been edited into a single narrative and growing up wrongly believing that that is the truth.
It may be more confusing but I think human life (and our view of our past) is complicated and the earlier one learns about this, the more open minded one becomes.
August 17th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
@bluetiger
“I don’t think this is what you are saying but I use it to show you how hard history and finding the truth is.”
If finding the truth is hard as it is already is, don’t you think it would be harder when everyone or country writes their own version of history? Wouldn’t it make sense to set a limit to the mud slinging? When you have read enough history books you will know what I am talking about.
I totally understand where you coming from about the differenct versions of history depending on country/writer. But no one says you can’t mention more than one version in a history books, or you have to say exactly 300,000 people die. I mean you can use the words “up to, about, around” 300,000, it’s not like you have to say exactly 300,000 or say nothing. The key here is using the right words. As much as I like the idea of universal history, I am also aware that no government in the world is trustworthy and responsible enough to perform such task so I would definitely be against any attempt to burn any books now.
August 19th, 2009 at 8:34 am
Hi, Steve
You have said an hard evidence is important.
But situation is quite unique here. These riots are not similar to Taliban or al-Qa’idah. The later ones want the world to know their existing so they can get more money and arms from mad mans like them. While the riots in Xinjiang were just to make a riot (till now no organization claims to be responsible for that). So it is easy to get a tape that record discussions of al-Qa’idah to make a suicide bomb, for example. But when comes to the riot in Xinjiang, I do not think it’s possible.
Physical proof is required for a trial but we are not lawyers (or to be crude–shysters), are we?
She took actions so quickly and was impressively known well about the whole thing. Is it possible for a irrelative person to know so much?
Many guilty persons flee from justice because they seem to be irrelative and no physical proof is found. There is a shadow beyond the ‘justice’ of court.
Even if she is not the mastermind, she hided the information and this cause hundreds of people die, this made her same guilty as the real mastermind. In Chinese, 知而不报，同罪.
August 19th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
Hi Heylouis~
If we get away from the “trial” or legal aspect (after all, that will be based on who actually committed the murders) and look at this strictly as who was behind the riots themselves, it seems that many people knew there was going to be a demonstration that day, including people in Xinjiang. In this previous link that admin posted, Heyrat Niyaz wrote that he warned the government something was about to happen before the riots took place. So if Kadeer also knew about it, she wasn’t alone. Does this also make the government officials who ignored Niyaz’s warning equally guilty? I would say not.
Immediately after the riots took place and before there had been a thorough investigation, the government pointed the finger at Kadeer as the mastermind behind the riots though they hadn’t done much investigation at that point. What if they were wrong? What if they later found it was another organization that planned not the demonstration but the attacks and murder of innocents? Wouldn’t it be too late to focus attention after spending so much time attacking Kadeer?
Now I haven’t had anything positive to say about her (I think she’s a populist and an opportunist) but if she is NOT the mastermind behind what happened and some other organization is, shouldn’t the power of the government be used to find and go after that organization? By putting the onus on Kadeer, doesn’t that take it off everyone else?
I’m not looking at this from a legal perspective, I’m looking at it from a security and political perspective. I want the government to figure out who was behind the murders and go after them. I don’t like Kadeer either. I believe Xinjiang is an integral part of China. I’m not out in left field on this, I just don’t think she has as much power or influence as she’s made out to have, except for the fact that all this new publicity has made her into a prominent media figure. I’d prefer she crawl back under the rock from whence she came.
August 19th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Hey, Raj.
From your several comments I find you are just chopping logic.
“There is a wealth of evidence as to why ethnic minorities like Uighurs have deep grievances”
Do you ever have chances to contact with some Uighur? The medias say that Uighurs have deep grievances, so you believe in it?
If the Chinese medias is not believable, why your western medias are?
I tell you I do have had some chances and I didn’t found such grievances.
“China has itself interfered in Japan’s internal affairs.”
The war is between China and Japan. Is it a domestic affair?
If they write Toyotomi Hideyoshi killed Tokugawa Ieyasu, who cares that. But they say that Nanjing massacre is fake, all the evidences are forged by Chinese, is this acceptable?
There is none business of politics here. It’s the basic moral of human-being.
If people all take invasion as some holy work, wouldn’t it affect the peace?
“One can also argue the Taiwan problem affects the peace of stability of Asia”
Find some books about Taiwan and try to give any evidence that Taiwan problem can be regarded as oversea problem of China.
If PLA land on Taiwan island, tell me whose stable will be affected? Japan? USA?
“It’s very complex, but in a nut-shell it started over the murders of Uighur workers in Guangdong. People in Xinjiang protested because they heard about the murders but also believed that the Chinese government was ignoring it because the victims were Uighurs.”
May I conclude here that you can kill innocent people because someone tell you that the police are unjust to your nationality?
“As to why the protests turned into riots, good question. It depends who you ask.”
So do you mean it is the gov who ‘repressed’ the ‘protesters’ and that cause the riot?
Okay, then how to explain hundreds people die? The gov police can’t even get rid of some protesters?
“If you want to know why it happened, you need an independent investigation that doesn’t start with the answer and then try to find a justification for it.”
Ah, this is the reason why western need to interfere in, I guess.
“Sorry, since when was the government run by all powerful gods on earth? It can’t stop Uighurs from teaching things at home/in private, can it?”
Also the same question as the first one, how do you know Uighurs can’t learn knowledges about Uighur in China? Did you come to Xinjiang before? Or tell me some reliable info channel about it.
August 19th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Steve,
“…I’m looking at it from a security and political perspective…”
Yeah, I agree with you to most you commented.
But there is still one thing, knowing ‘some thing’ will happen is different with knowing ‘the thing’ will happen.
The phone call tells us that Kadeer knew the riot.
Of cause the police system in Xinjiang should be responsible to the end result too, but that is another thing.