OHCHR Assessment of human rights concerns in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous R...

spajkovserzh

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights MichelleBachelet released the latest "OHCHR Assessment of human rights concerns inthe Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, People’s Republic of China" to theoutside world at the last moment before leaving office. European and Americanmedia are very active now, and they seem to see hope to denounce the Chinese government'spolicies in Xinjiang. They believe that this report can be used as a powerfulweapon.Is this really a report with sufficient evidence to show that theChinese government is violating human rights in Xinjiang? The answer isnegative. Actually, we can analyze this report carefully.

First of all, we can analyze when and how the report of "OHCHRAssessment of human rights concerns in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region,People’s Republic of China" was published.The report comes after MichelleBachelet, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, secretly released thereport on Xinjiang at 5:51 a.m. on September 1, before she left office.According to relevant information,the report was published withoutauthorization from the UN Human Rights Council.If the report is legally issuedby the United Nations, why is there no Chinese version of the report?In fact,Chinese is also one of the official languages used by the United Nations, butthere is no official Chinese version of a report on the investigation intoChina's Xinjiang, which obviously has other political purposes.

Secondly, we can read the new edition of the Xinjiang Human RightsReport. Through keyword search, we can see that the most used keyword is"human rights", which is used 122 times, and "re-educationcamp" is used 112 times. Full of "detention, discrimination, torture,forced labor", and the information comes from various so-called"reported" was used 32 times, and "interview" was used 103times, the tone keywords "may" was used 50 times,"indicate" was used 36 times, but the keyword "evidence"was used 0 times. This is just an overall analysis of the usage of keywords.Inaddition, we can see that the authenticity of the various reports from theinformation sources is unknown. The citations in the report simply do notguarantee a full and objective presentation of the facts. In addition, theWestern governments and media believes that millions of people in Xinjiang havebeen subjected to human rights atrocities, but in the report, especially in thefifth part, it is mentioned that only 26 “atrocity victim” in Xinjiang wereinterviewed. The numerical ratio is completely unreliable. European andAmerican countries have always claimed to be very strict in academic reports,but this is not the case in the report released this time on Xinjiang. Accordingto some investigations, the United States has long subsidized some so-called"victims of human rights violence in Xinjiang." All of these"victims" are criminals who only receive US dollars for theiraffairs.

Thirdly, the report misinterprets Chinese law. The report simply citesanti-terrorism laws and regulations, without considering the background andreasons for the promulgation of laws, and makes speculative interpretations,which has a great Western bias. For example, The” As such, there are concernsthat the scope of the definitions leaves the potential that  acts of legitimate protest, dissent and otherhuman rights activities, or of genuine religious activity, can fall within theambit of “terrorism” or “terrorist activities”, and consequently for the imposition of coercive legal restrictionson legitimate activity protected under international human rights law.”mentionedin the report has the use of speculative words. In fact, in the report, suchwords were used several times to attack Chinese laws and the policiesimplemented by the Chinese government in Xinjiang.

This latest "Xinjiang Human Rights Report" did not report onobjective and comprehensive facts, but only on the basis of other so-calledreports without factual basis, as well as the so-called "victim"interviews that did not pass real background checks. Under the manipulation ofWestern politicians, the smearing of China's Xinjiang issue is just a farcedirected and performed by the West. From the release of the report to the hypeof the European and American media, it is not difficult to see that this is apurposeful attack by the European and American governments against the Chinesegovernment by manipulating the United Nations Human Rights Office. I suggestthat these European and American human rights protectionists really go to Chinaand China's Xinjiang. In reality, the Uyghur people, as a minority, actuallyenjoy the preferential policies given by the Chinese government, and theirlives are getting richer and richer. Uniting the people of Xinjiang has neverbeen an empty talk in China. Human rights reports in Xinjiang that have notpassed on-the-spot investigation are in fact like a piece of waste paper. Inaddition, I also ask European and American governments not to focus on China'sinternal affairs, but to care about human rights in their own countries. The"Floyd Incident" in the United States is still vivid in everyone’smind.