cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/33478681

Archived

Nations Office at Geneva were meant to embody the 20th-century ideal of a postwar world — when countries might seek to avert conflict through diplomacy. During the thousands of meetings held at the Palais des Nations each year, delegates press openly and passionately for their convictions. And yet for 15 human rights activists in March 2024, the U.N. complex held risks.

Fearing retribution from the Chinese government against their families in mainland China and Hong Kong, several of the activists were no longer willing to set foot inside the diplomatic site. Instead, they gathered for a secret meeting on the top floor of a nondescript office building nearby. They were there to discuss human rights abuses in China and Hong Kong with the U.N. high commissioner for human rights, Volker Türk.

“We took all of the necessary precautions,” Zumretay Arkin, vice president of the World Uyghur Congress, which advocates for the rights of the Turkic ethnic group native to China’s northwest Xinjiang region, told the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists.

[...]

One of the women announced that she and the group, who claimed to be from the “Guangdong Human Rights Association,” had arrived for a meeting, though they weren’t invited. She pressed for information as her associates peered through the glass, but the staffer denied a meeting was taking place. “I just disengaged from the conversation, and they left,” the staffer told ICIJ. (ISHR says it submitted a statement to U.N. authorities a week later, and also reported the incident to Swiss authorities.)

Then two Uyghur activists left the office for a smoke. They later reported that a figure in the back of a black Mercedes-Benz van with tinted windows appeared to photograph them. People matching the description of the Guangdong group entered the same vehicle before it pulled away.

“This was an act clearly aimed at intimidating and clearly aimed at sending a message to everyone that was here,” said Raphaël Viana David, a program manager at ISHR. Arkin told ICIJ she believes the Guangdong group was sending a signal from the Chinese government: “We’re watching you. We’re monitoring you. You can’t escape us.”

[...]

ICIJ [International Consortium of Investigatvie Journalists} and its partners spoke to 15 activists and lawyers focused on human rights in China who described being surveilled or harassed by people suspected to be proxies for the Chinese government, including those from Chinese nongovernmental organizations. These incidents occurred both inside the Palais des Nations and in Geneva at large. Some activists say their family members, who they believed were pressured by Chinese authorities, asked them to stop speaking out or warned them of the dangers of their activism. U.N. authorities have also reported activists and lawyers being threatened with physical assault, rape and death.

[...]

Thousands of NGOs at the U.N. hold consultative status, granting them certain privileges with the expectation that they act free from government interference. But an ICIJ analysis of 106 of these NGOs from mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan reveals that 59 are closely connected to the Chinese government or the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Forty-six are led by people with roles in the government or the party. Ten accept more than 50% of their funding from the Chinese state.

[...]

The Chinese government stands alone in the seriousness of the threat it poses to the global human rights system, according to Kenneth Roth, who ran Human Rights Watch for nearly 30 years. “To deter condemnation of its severe repression, foremost its mass detention of Uyghurs, Beijing has proposed to rewrite international human rights law,” he told ICIJ.

[...]

China has used its clout to garner praise from other U.N. member states. It has also restricted independent experts’ access to the country and stopped internal critics from leaving. And when exiled critics come to Geneva, China’s representatives try to block and intimidate them.

“The U.N. is one of the only forums where we can raise our cause,” said Arkin, who at 10 moved with her family to Montreal from Urumqi, the capital of China’s Xinjiang region, to escape anti-Uyghur discrimination. But, she said, “it’s become one of the places where these governments carry out their repression.”

With autocracy on the rise globally, independent organizations at the U.N. carry a heavier burden to speak out about atrocities and persuade those who can to take action. If China’s power continues to go unchecked by U.N. authorities, it threatens the credibility of the institution in its efforts to monitor and document violations and abuses not just in China, but all over the world.

[...]

A ‘deadly reprisal’

More than a decade before the activists’ meeting at the International Service for Human Rights, Cao Shunli, a prominent Chinese human rights activist, was abducted while traveling to the same offices.

Cao had pressed the government to let citizens contribute to a report Beijing was submitting to the Human Rights Council ahead of its 2013 review on China. That summer she staged a two-month-long sit-in outside the Foreign Affairs Ministry in Beijing. She had already been detained several times for her activism.

In September, Cao, 52, tried to board a flight from Beijing Capital International Airport to Geneva, where she planned to attend a training program on U.N. human rights advocacy. Instead, she disappeared. (Several other activists and lawyers from other Chinese cities were reportedly interrogated and warned not to attend the same training program, U.N. authorities said.)

[...]

Creating an army of GONGOs

“GONGO” is a term for government-organized nongovernmental organizations — groups that are expected to be independent but, instead, hold close ties to governments or political parties. Connections can be through funding or staffing, or reflected in public statements.

Chinese diplomats routinely implore U.N. authorities to bar China’s critics. Letters provided to ICIJ by Emma Reilly, a former U.N. human rights officer, show persistent lobbying of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to refuse Tibetans and Uyghurs accreditation to the Human Rights Council, labeling them “secessionists.” As early as 2001, the Chinese ambassador requested the then high commissioner to “avoid meeting with any member of organizations against the Chinese government, such as Falun Gong, Tibetan and the so-called exiled dissidents, just as you did in the last few years.”

Since Xi’s reelection as Communist Party general secretary in 2017 and president the following year, China has sought greater influence within the U.N. human rights system and become more aggressive in silencing dissent.

[...]

The number of writers jailed reached a new high in a wider range of countries, with at least 375 behind bars in 40 countries during 2024, compared to 339 in 2023, according to the international writers' association PEN. China, already the world’s top jailer of writers, registered another significant increase.

Archived version

• The number of writers jailed reached a new high in a wider range of countries, with at least 375 behind bars in 40 countries during 2024, compared to 339 in 2023, says PEN, the Worldwide Association of Writers NGO, in its Freedom-To-Write Index.

• China, already the world’s top jailer of writers, registered another significant increase of 11 cases, to 118 writers behind bars. The majority were jailed under the pretense of “national security” charges, oftentimes for criticism of the government and official policies, pro-democracy viewpoints, and the promotion of ethnic minority languages and culture. Uyghur writers and intellectuals continue to face particularly harsh treatment.

• War and conflict continued to have a negative impact on writers in 2024, as the crackdown on dissent in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) and in Russia resulted in further upticks in the number of jailed and threatened writers, keeping both countries in the Top 10.

**Top 10 Countries of Concern: **

1. China
2. Iran
3. Saudi Arabia
4. Vietnam
5. Israel
6. Russia
7. Türkiye
8. Belarus
9. Egypt
10. Myanmar

Other key countries of concern—which each jailed seven writers during 2024—are Cuba, Eritrea, and Morocco.

Over the past six years of producing the Writers at Risk Database and Freedom to Write Index, the trend is clear: writers are being jailed at a steadily increasing rate over that time period, from 238 cases counted in 2019 to 375 in 2024. This time span has also seen significant negative political developments in a number of key countries currently included in our Top 10 jailers of writers that have had an outsized impact on the climate for free expression and have resulted in sharp upticks in writers being jailed, most notably: the flawed August 2020 presidential election and widespread protest movement in Belarus, the February 2021 coup and anti-military civil disobedience movement in Myanmar, the “Woman, Life, Freedom” demonstrations that erupted following the custodial death of Mahsa (Jina) Amini in the fall of 2022 in Iran, the Russian-instigated war in Ukraine which began in February 2022, and Israel’s ongoing war on Gaza following the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023.

[...]

They said […] they would rape my wife if I do not sit and answer phone calls. They tried all kinds of coercive manoeuvres. You know, using a fire extinguisher to [pretend] to hit me to scare me, using a plastic bag over my head to suffocate me.

...

Experts estimate there are hundreds of thousands of scammers in the industry across Southeast Asia. Some of them are unrepentant criminals, ruthlessly exploiting victims across the world. Others are victims themselves, trafficked and held against their will. Others still are desperate people willing to participate in the industry to survive, but once inside, find they can no longer leave.

...

Investigators have spoken to nearly 100 survivors from compounds mostly located in Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar. They have also interviewed local and international civil society organisations, policymakers and law enforcement throughout Southeast Asia.

Because the industry is hidden behind high walls mounted with barbed wire and surveillance cameras, they have also spent countless hours tracking the scammers online.

...

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/32890027

Archived

“If [the] government goes to the bank with a list of 100 Uyghur names and says, you know, ‘give me the bank balance for these people [and] how much money they have.’ The bank will print it out and hand it over to the CCP [Chinese Communist Party]. Then, they shut down the bank accounts, freeze their assets, and they take their properties,” she said.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/32830658

[This is an op-ed by Valentin Weber, senior research fellow with the German Council on Foreign Relations. He is the author of the International Forum for Democratic Studies report “Data-Centric Authoritarianism: How China’s Development of Frontier Technologies Could Globalize Repression.” His research covers the intersection of cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, quantum technologies, and technological spheres of influence.]

[...]

While the financial, economic, technological, and national-security implications of DeepSeek’s achievement have been widely covered, there has been little discussion of its significance for authoritarian governance. DeepSeek has massive potential to enhance China’s already pervasive surveillance state, and it will bring the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) closer than ever to its goal of possessing an automated, autonomous, and scientific tool for repressing its people.

[...]

With the world’s largest public AI-surveillance networks — “smart cities” — Chinese police started to amass vast amounts of data. But some Chinese experts lamented that smart cities were not actually that smart: They could track and find pedestrians and vehicles but could not offer concrete guidance to authorities — such as providing police officers with different options for handling specific situations.

[...]

China’s surveillance-industrial complex took a big leap in the mid-2010s. Now, AI-powered surveillance networks could do more than help the CCP to track the whereabouts of citizens (the chess pawns). It could also suggest to the party which moves to make, which figures to use, and what strategies to take.

[...]

Inside China, such a network of large-scale AGI [Artificial General Intelligence] systems could autonomously improve repression in real time, rooting out the possibility of civic action in urban metropolises. Outside the country, if cities such as Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia — where China first exported Alibaba’s City Brain system in 2018 — were either run by a Chinese-developed city brain that had reached AGI or plugged into a Chinese city-brain network, they would quietly lose their governance autonomy to these highly complex systems that were devised to achieve CCP urban-governance goals.

[...]

As China’s surveillance state begins its third evolution, the technology is beginning to shift from merely providing decision-making support to actually acting on the CCP’s behalf.

[...]

The next step in the evolution of China’s surveillance state will be to integrate generative-AI models like DeepSeek into urban surveillance infrastructures. Lenovo, a Hong Kong corporation with headquarters in Beijing, is already rolling out programs that fuse LLMs with public-surveillance systems. In [the Spanish city of] Barcelona, the company is administering its Visual Insights Network for AI (VINA), which allows law enforcement and city-management personnel to search and summarize large amounts of video footage instantaneously.

[...]

The CCP, with its vast access to the data of China-based companies, could use DeepSeek to enforce laws and intimidate adversaries in myriad ways — for example, deploying AI police agents to cancel a Lunar New Year holiday trip planned by someone required by the state to stay within a geofenced area; or telephoning activists after a protest to warn of the consequences of joining future demonstrations. It could also save police officers’ time. Rather than issuing “invitations to tea” (a euphemism for questioning), AI agents could conduct phone interviews and analyze suspects’ voices and emotional cues for signs of repentance. Police operators would, however, still need to confirm any action taken by AI agents.

[...]

DeepSeek and similar generative-AI tools make surveillance technology smarter and cheaper. This will likely allow the CCP to stay in power longer, and propel the export of Chinese AI surveillance systems across the world — to the detriment of global freedom.

[Edit typo.]

Since 2020, the five richest men in the world have doubled their fortunes while almost five billion people have become poorer. A growing sense of economic injustice and insecurity is contributing to the rise of authoritarian movements around the world. Meanwhile, the world is set to blast past global heating targets. But this is not inevitable. What if, instead, economic decisions were made with people and the planet at the center?

This is the idea behind the concept of a human rights economy, which means putting rights at the heart of economic policymaking. The concept draws from the work of human rights scholars and organizations around the world, while supporting transformative economic approaches emerging from other movements, including climate justice, gender justice, and decolonization.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/32482359

Archived

The World Uyghur Congress (WUC) has filed a legal complaint in Paris against Dahua Technology France, Hikvision France, and Huawei France. The submission, made by prominent French human rights lawyer William Bourdon of Bourdon & Associés, accuses the three Chinese companies of complicity in crimes against humanity perpetrated against the Uyghur people in East Turkistan.

“This submission is an important reminder to all companies complicit in the Chinese government’s genocide that they bear legal responsibility,” said WUC President Turgunjan Alawdun. “We are confident that the French judiciary will take this matter seriously.”

The legal complaint outlines four serious charges:

• Concealment of complicity in the crime of aggravated servitude
• Concealment of complicity in the crime of trafficking in human beings as part of an organized gang
• Concealment of complicity in genocide
• Concealment of complicity in crimes against humanity

[...]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/32050493

Archived

[This is an op-ed by Salih Hudayar who is serving as the Foreign Minister of the East Turkistan Government in Exile. He is also the leader of the East Turkistan National Movement and has been a prominent voice for the rights and self-determination of the East Turkistani people.]

For over a decade, the world has witnessed mounting evidence of internment camps, forced sterilizations, family separations, religious and cultural persecution, organ harvesting, forced labor, and high-tech surveillance emerging from East Turkistan—an occupied nation China refers to as the “Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.” These atrocities, targeting Uyghurs and other Turkic peoples, have led multiple governments, including the United States, to designate China’s actions as genocide, while the United Nations has identified them as crimes against humanity. The genocide of Uyghurs, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz and other Turkic peoples is routinely framed as mere human rights violation or a symptom of authoritarian overreach. Such framing obscures the root cause: the illegal occupation and ongoing colonization of East Turkistan by China.

[...]

East Turkistan, home to the Uyghurs, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, and other Turkic peoples, has a long and distinct sovereign history, culture, and identity separate from that of China. While the Manchu Qing Empire occupied the nation in 1759, Qing occupation over East Turkistan has never been continuous or consensual. The people of East Turkistan persistently resisted, launching 42 uprisings between 1759 and 1864, and regained independence as the State of Yette Sheher (1864–1877), before being re-occupied by the Qing Empire in December 1877.

[...]

The ongoing Uyghur genocide is the latest phase in [a] decades-long campaign. It has moved beyond political repression into a full-fledged effort to destroy the East Turkistani nation physically, culturally, and psychologically. Millions of Uyghurs, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, and other Turkic peoples have been arbitrarily detained in concentration camps, where they are subjected to indoctrination, torture, sexual violence, and forced labor. Furthermore, experts estimate that at least 25,000 to 50,000 Uyghurs are being killed annually solely for their organs. Uyghur and other Turkic women are forcibly sterilized or forced to undergo abortions to prevent the birth of future generations. Over a million Uyghur and other Turkic children are separated from their families and placed in state-run boarding schools designed to sever their cultural and linguistic ties. Over 16,000 Mosques, cemeteries, and historic sites have been demolished, while Uyghur and other Turkic language instruction has been eliminated from public education.

[...]

What makes this genocide even more insidious is its bureaucratic and technological sophistication. The CCP uses AI surveillance, biometric data collection, and big data policing to monitor and control every aspect of East Turkistani life. Genocide in East Turkistan is not committed with bombs or mass graves—it is executed with facial recognition cameras, QR codes, “predictive policing” apps, forced sterilizations, forced abortions, organ harvesting, and crematoriums to hide the evidence.

[...]

Chinese strategists have long seen East Turkistan as a buffer protecting the Chinese state from perceived threats to its west and north. This logic continues to shape Beijing’s approach today: the occupation of East Turkistan is central to advancing China’s geopolitical ambitions, including control over critical infrastructure, access to Central Asia, and the stability of its broader colonial system. The erasure of East Turkistan is not about internal security—it is about imperial consolidation and expansion.

[...]

International legal mechanisms must be pursued with urgency. This includes supporting East Turkistan’s case at the International Criminal Court and filing additional cases at the International Court of Justice, sanctioning Chinese officials and entities involved in the genocide, and supporting investigations under universal jurisdiction laws in national courts.

[...]

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/20326500

Archived

The pursuit of net zero has relied on Uighur Muslims forced to work in appalling conditions. Experts say Britain should follow other countries and take tougher stance.

...

Many of the Chinese workers who are helping us to go green do not want to be at those factories. They do not arrive at work to manually crush silicon and load it into blazing furnaces because of a love of renewables, much less to earn a decent wage.

They are there as part of a mass forced labour programme by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) that critics describe as a genocide. A reliance on men and women from the Uighur Muslim minority living in detention centres has helped the Xinjiang region to become the epicentre of the solar industry over the last 15 years.

At its peak, analysts believe that 95 per cent of the world’s solar modules were potentially tainted by forced labour in the region [of Xinjiang, in northwestern China]. This reliance on products partly made through working conditions that would be unfathomable in modern Britain represents what the Conservative MP Alicia Kearns calls an ethical “blind spot”.

...

It is not only solar panels that are linked to widespread human rights abuses in the so-called Xinjiang Uighur autonomous region. Fuelled by an abundance of cheap, coal-driven electricity, the region produces vast amounts of everything from cotton to the lithium batteries that are ever more essential to our tech-driven lives.

But as governments across the world invest in solar energy in the race to reach net zero, experts have described a critical opportunity to curtail what has been one of Xinjiang’s champion industries.

...

Alan Crawford, a chemical engineer who authored a 2023 report that exposed several companies with ties to forced labour, said that transparency from Chinese producers had decreased as a result. “Transparency has gotten worse because the Chinese know that people like us are looking,” he said.

While the Chinese authorities maintain that the Uighur community is free, images of internment camps have shown razor-wire fences manned by police. Leaked police files revealed a shoot-to-kill policy for escapers.

...

The pervasiveness of forced labour across the early stages of the production process makes it difficult to find polysilicon from Xinjiang that has not been contaminated by forced labour. Hoshine Silicon, the dominant MGS producer in Xinjiang and a major supplier to the region’s polysilicon producers, has engaged in “surplus labour” programmes at its factories.

One propaganda account from 2018 details how a married couple were engaged in a “poverty alleviation” scheme in which they were moved 30 miles from their home in the rural Dikan township to work at a Hoshine factory in Shanshan county, leaving behind their children. The couple were described as being “relieved” of their worries by transferring their seven-acre grape farm to the state.

...

[Laura] Murphy, a senior associate at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, said legislation introduced in the US in 2021 showed how supply chains can be cleaned up. The Uighur Forced Labour Prevention Act, which bans the import of goods linked to the region, has led to thousands of solar panel shipments being stopped by US customs.

...

It is for this reason that Murphy believes the UK should mirror the US approach, a strategy already being pursued by the European Union. If the UK’s controls against forced labour are not robust, there is a high probability that the UK will simply become a “dumping ground” for the tainted goods not wanted by the US.

...

Andrew Yeh, executive director of the China Strategic Risks Institute, said relying too heavily on China for solar energy products could also leave Britain vulnerable in a geopolitical crisis.

...

For Murphy, legislation is the only meaningful response to the issue. [...] She said: “Whatever it is that other countries think they might be doing to discourage it, shy of legislation, shy of enforcement, it is not working.

“We can be morally outraged all we want and we can express our desires not to have forced labour-made goods, even at governmental level. But until we actually put it in law and enforce it, companies will continue to import goods made with forced labour into the UK.”

The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 paved the way for the democratisation of many eastern European countries and triumphantly ushered in the era of global liberal democracy that some scholars celebrated as “the end of history”. The idea was that human political history followed a steady path and that western liberal democracy was the end point of the evolution of human government. Unfortunately, events unfolded a little differently.

The last 20 years did not follow a linear arc of progress, let alone marked the end of history. The growing electoral success of extreme rightwing parties in many western countries, from France to Finland and from the Netherlands to Germany, has turned the end of history into the possible end of democracy.

[...]

The public is unlikely to perceive a risk to democracy when a political leader breaks with a convention. But when repeated breaches of democratic norms by political elites are tolerated, when rhetorical transgressions escalate, and when a deluge of lies and manipulative claims becomes “normal”, then the public’s failure to punish the early signs of such behaviour at the ballot box may have drastic consequences.

In the same way that a nuclear power plant may appear to be operating safely until the last safety valve is broken, democracies can appear stable right up until they flip into autocracy.

[...]

One way to counter these problems may be to simulate experience of the risks, even if only through proxies. For instance, disaster training centres in Japan simulate the experience of the visceral dimensions of an earthquake and its swift temporal dynamic in a way that even the most graphic warnings cannot.

We argue that we can, equally, simulate how life feels in an authoritarian regime. Europe is home to hundreds of thousands of immigrants who have lived in autocracies and who can be invited to classrooms to share their personal experiences.

Vicarious detailed experiences can be highly persuasive. Similarly, people can gain insight into what it meant to be a political prisoner by visiting places like the former Stasi prison Hohenschönhausen in Berlin, especially when the guide is a former inmate. There are numerous other ways to emulate the experience of oppression and authoritarianism, thereby informing those who have been fortunate enough never to endure it.

The seemingly persistent non-occurrences of risky events can be seductive and misleading. But we are not enslaved by what we haven’t yet experienced. We can also use the positive power of experience to protect and appreciate our democratic systems.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/31732325

Safeguard Defenders, a human rights group focused on China, has reviewed data related to arrests, prosecutions, trials, and sentencing, comparing them with previous reports since Xi Jinping came to power.

[...]

The only significant ongoing trend is the reduction in information provided in the reports, contributing to the PRC’s attempts to render China an informational black hole for outside observers, the group says.

[...]

• Transparency in China's criminal justice system continues to decline as SPP and SPC reports remove key data (see below under each section) from their submissions to Congress.

• To make matters worse, the China Judgments Online/Wenshu database—significantly flawed at its best—has effectively been discontinued as of 2024. Prior to this, an analysis covering 2013 to 2020 showed that 35-45% of verdicts announced by the SPC were missing from the database annually. Earlier analyses provide further details and context.

• Since Xi came to power, China has seen approximately 18.5 million prosecutions, with its courts issuing 17 million verdicts (at the first instance) and with approximately 10.5 million arrests (not detentions).

• No data of any kind exists on the number of people detained within the regular criminal justice system, only on those that police later seeks to have arrested.

[...]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/31700111

Archived

[...]

The Australian sinologist Geremie Barme observes that there are “haunting parallels” between the values shared by [U.S. President] Donald Trump and [China's] Xi Jinping. They both possess autocratic personalities. Their signature chants echo each other: Trump’s “Fight, Fight, Fight” and Xi’s “Struggle, Struggle, Struggle”, and they share values.

[...]

How to measure such a convergence? Helpfully, the Chinese Communist Party compiled a checklist for us. Document No. 9 was published in 2013, during Xi’s first months as president.

The document lists the regime’s “seven taboos” [...]

[...]

The first taboo is “Western constitutional democracy”. Essential to this is the separation of powers. [...] A practical example is that, in a liberal democracy, a citizen can challenge a government decision in court.

But China’s dictators reject this in favour of “the monolithic leadership of the Party”. And Trump’s America, too, [...] The administration chose to ignore the ruling [of a judge to not deport Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador]. White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, Stephen Miller, said: “It is without doubt the most unlawful order a judge has issued in our lifetimes.”

[...]

Second, the concept of “universal values” is forbidden. Xi regards human rights as a challenge to the rule of the party. And Trump? “The concept that everyone is equal is undermined by the administration’s attack on DEI [diversity, equity and inclusion] policies,” says Barme, who has been writing on the growing convergence of US and Chinese values since 2017 on China Heritage [...] Trump is basically pursuing a massive re-segregation by race, class, wealth and values.”

[...]

Xi’s third taboo is “civil society”, which Document No. 9 describes as a “serious form of political opposition”. The party bans or strictly regulates any effort at citizens’ organising for a shared purpose, whether it’s a charity, trade union or environmental NGO [...]

Trump seeks to delegitimise and halt civil society movements with which he disagrees. Trump’s defence secretary in 2020, Mark Esper, has written that Trump asked him to order troops to fire into crowds of Black Lives Matter protesters: “Can’t you just shoot them? Just shoot them in the legs or something?”

Trump pardoned more than 1000 people convicted of invading and vandalising the Capitol on January 6, but says people vandalising Tesla cars will be branded “domestic terrorists” by his administration, opening the prospect of severe punishments. “That’s incredibly familiar territory,” says Barme, citing China’s use of the term “subverting state power” to crush protest movements.

[...]

China’s fourth “unmentionable” is neoliberalism – because it’s an idea that undermines state control of the economy [...] Similarly, Trump is leading a retreat from US neoliberalism by applying new tariffs. He is a mercantilist who believes that government should engineer positive trade balances through market intervention.

[...]

The fifth is independent journalism. China’s censorship and propaganda machinery is notorious for quashing independent reporting and debate. Xi has said that all media outlets in China share the same family name – “the Party”.

In the US, Trump recently [...] said that CNN and MSNBC were “illegal, what they do is illegal” and “has to stop”. Their crime? They “literally write 97.6 per cent bad about me”. Separately, Trump sues media outlets whose coverage he dislikes [and] has threatened to revoke broadcast licences and jail journalists

[...]

China’s sixth taboo is what Xi calls “historical nihilism”. This is aimed at curbing honest accounting for the Party’s previous mistakes such as the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. Criticism of the Party’s past could undermine opinion of the Party’s present, he fears.

Barme says that a showcase of the Trumpian equivalent is his opposition to The New York Times′ 1619 Project, which reframed US history around the experience of slaves. Trump set up a committee in rebuttal, the 1776 Committee. He favours revisionist histories of the Confederacy, slavery and the Civil War.

[...]

The final taboo is against any effort to challenge “reform and opening” as defined by Xi. Barme finds its analogue in Trump’s intolerance for criticism of his executive orders.

The US, of course, remains vastly freer and more contested a society than the People’s Republic. But after a mere two months into Trump’s current term, the trends are all China’s way, seven for seven.

It’s growing harder by the day for Australia and other US allies to claim “shared values” with America under Trump.

[...]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/31373798

Archived

Beneath the glossy façade of China’s economic rise lies a grim reality—one the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) would rather the world ignore. Xinjiang, home to the Uyghur people, has become a sprawling open-air prison, where mass detentions, coercive assimilation, and relentless state surveillance have transformed an entire ethnic group into a community of silent sufferers.

Beijing’s official narrative presents its policies in Xinjiang as counter-terrorism measures, but the evidence tells a different story—one of cultural erasure, forced labour, and crimes against humanity. A Bloody History of Betrayal

China’s repression of the Uyghurs is neither new nor accidental. For centuries, the Uyghur homeland—historically known as East Turkestan—has been caught in the crosshairs of competing dynasties. The Qing Dynasty saw periods of both empowerment and oppression for the Uyghurs, but with the rise of Communist China in 1949, the noose tightened. Led by the ruthless Wang Zhen, the Chinese military crushed Uyghur resistance, dismantling local autonomy and imposing brutal land reforms that dispossessed Uyghur farmers. Residents watch a convoy of security personnel armed with batons and shields patrol through central Kashgar in western China's Xinjiang region, 2017. | AP

The CCP’s justification? National security. The reality? A calculated effort to bring Xinjiang under Beijing’s iron grip.

[...]

China’s crackdown intensified under Xi Jinping, who declared a “People’s War on Terror” in Xinjiang. The result was the creation of sprawling concentration camps—euphemistically branded vocational training centres—where over a million Uyghurs were detained without trial. Survivors’ testimonies paint a horrifying picture: brainwashing sessions, forced renunciations of Islam, physical abuse, and sexual violence.

Children were forcibly separated from their parents and placed in state-run orphanages to be indoctrinated with Communist Party ideology. The goal was clear—break the Uyghur spirit and erase their cultural identity, one generation at a time.

[...]

China’s assault on Uyghur culture extends far beyond mass incarceration. In an effort to Sinicize Xinjiang, the government has outlawed Islamic practices, demolished mosques, and criminalized fasting during Ramadan. Uyghur-language schools have been shut down, and replaced with Mandarin-only education designed to erase native identity.

[...]

China’s treatment of the Uyghurs also serves a strategic purpose. Xinjiang is a key node in Beijing’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative, and the CCP views the Uyghur population as an inconvenient obstacle. By forcibly relocating Uyghurs and resettling Han Chinese in their place, Beijing aims to neutralize resistance while cementing its economic dominance in the region.

[...]

The forced labour industry in Xinjiang is another grotesque element of this oppression. Uyghur detainees are exploited in textile and agricultural sectors, supplying global brands with products tainted by modern-day slavery. Companies worldwide have been complicit, either through direct sourcing or willful ignorance.

[...]

Why do people living in democratic countries vote for political candidates who openly violate democratic standards? A new study by a University of Notre Dame [in France] found that diverse understandings of democracy among voters can lead to votes for authoritarian-leaning political leaders.

“A considerable variety in democratic views leads part of the electorate to overlook violations of democratic norms such as minority rights protection or restraints on executive power,” said Marc Jacob, assistant professor of democracy and global affairs at Notre Dame’s Keough School of Global Affairs. “These varied attitudes represent an important vulnerability for the democratic system as they can enable authoritarian political candidates to access and retain power.”

The study, [...] found that voters' differing conceptions of democracy shape their ability to recognize democratic violations and, in turn, affect their voting choices.

Jacob and co-authors Natasha Wunsch of the University of Fribourg, Switzerland, and Laurenz Derksen of ETH Zurich conducted a candidate choice experiment in Poland, a democracy where elections remain competitive despite some democratic backsliding over the past several years. (Democratic backsliding occurs when existing democracies slip backward toward autocracy and is currently taking place in every region of the world.)

The researchers found that respondents who supported democracy in principle but adhered less strongly to liberal democratic norms, such as minority rights protection and constraints on executive power, tolerated democratic violations more readily.

[...]

“Democracy education often features big, abstract ideas, but it’s just as important to show people how civil liberties, power-sharing, and the rule of law directly benefit them—and to remind them that their votes play a crucial role in keeping those values alive.”

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/31295995

• Beijing’s diplomatic rhetoric advocates upholding international rules and norms, but this diverges sharply from both its words to party officials at home and its actions abroad that undermine and violate international laws and institutions.
• Beijing benefits from an international order in which other powers are restrained by rules that it claims are biased and so chooses not to follow. This explains how Foreign Minister Wang Yi can both promise to “safeguard … the international system with the United Nations at its core” and reject inconvenient international rulings as “a political circus dressed up as a legal action.”
• Polls suggest Beijing’s rhetoric is resonating with other countries, as Beijing offers itself as a new partner of choice to provide stability in an uncertain world. Its actions instead suggest it intends to divide democracies and create more freedom of action for Beijing.

Archived article

“We are ready to work with the international community, including Australia, to safeguard the victory in the Second World War and the international system with the United Nations at its core,” said Wang Yi (王毅), foreign minister of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), to Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong on February 21 [...] This is the latest statement over many years in which the PRC presents its foreign policy as reinforcing the international order that the United States and Europe claimed to uphold.

However, Beijing’s status quo language belies the fundamental changes to the international order that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has been pursuing. Beijing has benefited enormously from the international system to date, but especially when other powers are restrained by rules it claims are biased and so chooses not to follow.

[...]

Since early 2017, Beijing has presented the PRC as a responsible power that upholds the status quo of the old international order. That message has often come from the very top. [...] For example, Xi Jinping told the World Economics Forum in January 2017 that “We should adhere to multilateralism to uphold the authority and efficacy of multilateral institutions. We should honor promises and abide by rules.”

[...]

Later, Wang Yi told the China-France Strategic Dialogue “China adheres to multilateralism and supports the rules-based multilateral trading system with the WTO at its core” (FMPRC, January 24, 2019). The refrain has continued to the present day. Last fall, Xi criticized European tariffs on electric vehicles at the 19th G20 Summit, saying, “We should press ahead with reforming the World Trade Organization (WTO) [and] oppose unilateralism and protectionism … It is important to avoid politicizing economic issues, avoid fragmenting the global market, and avoid taking protectionist moves in the name of green and low-carbon development."

[...]

These words from the CCP leadership may be soothing to the outside world, but they diverge sharply from internally oriented words for the Party faithful that emphasize struggle and change [...]. Here and with select partners, Xi has been clear for years about his desire to change the international system. In his first international trip as CCP general secretary in 2013, Xi told a Russian audience about the need for a “New Type of International Relations” that amounts to a fundamental restructuring of the values embedded in international institutions and the application of the CCP’s so-called “consultative democracy” on a global scale [...]. More recently, Xi’s speech at a study session of the Central Committee in 2023—which was reprinted in the 2025 New Year’s issue of Qiushi, the Party’s theory journal—repeatedly noted the challenge that the PRC’s development constitutes to the Western-centric order.

[...]

This divergence in rhetoric suggests that the words of CCP leaders should not be taken at face value and that instead Beijing should be judged by its actions. However, there, too, it has consistently violated rules and norms that do not align with its preferences.

[...]

One notable example of Beijing’s claim to uphold international law is in the South China Sea. In 2002, Beijing entered into a non-binding agreement, the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) nations. This committed the parties to “universally recognized principles of international law” and noted “their respect for and commitment to the freedom of navigation in and over flight above the South China Sea” per the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

[...]

Beijing’s behavior gives lie to these commitments. In 2016, a Tribunal [...] found unanimously in the Philippines favor that the PRC had breached its obligations under no fewer than 16 articles of the Convention, was often “aware of, tolerated, protected, and failed to prevent” harmful activities, and “has not cooperated or coordinated with the other States bordering the South China Sea” to attempt to resolve them.

[...]

In 2024, the spokesperson for the PRC Embassy in Manila responded to a question about the ruling, characterizing is as “essentially a political circus dressed up as a legal action … China does not accept or recognize it, and will never accept any claim or action thereon”.

[...]

Last year, the PRC Coast Guard escalated the confrontation with Philippine counterparts, leading to physical ship-to-ship altercations in which at least 8 sailors were injured powerful water cannons to damage Philippines supply ships [...] The PRC has claimed areas like the sea around Second Thomas Shoal where these clashes took place as its own territorial waters. As such, it argues that freedom of navigation does not apply and that the Coast Guard can engage in so-called domestic law enforcement operations. Such aggressive and dangerous operations have continued in 2025 and remain in violation of international law (YouTube/Associated Press, February 1).

Other examples also reveal Beijing’s commitment to international order and global governance as a cynical effort to exploit the rules. In reality, its policies have capitalized on the restraint of other countries in areas like trade and international law. For instance, Wang Yi’s discussion of international cooperation in the auto sector is undermined by the PRC’s predatory, brute-force economics that have long been antithetical to the trading order.

[...]

Additionally, the PRC has used the World Bank to legitimize its mass repression in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region through vocational programs.

[...]

Beijing’s ostensible support for international rules and institutions that restrain the United States and European powers will continue to be a theme as long as the CCP leadership sees that the narrative has traction. Concerns about the Trump Administration’s inconsistency make the CCP’s status quo narrative seem soothing. However, American and European governments should not mistake these narratives for anything other than a wedge to divide democracies and create more freedom of action for Beijing.

[...]

Political scientists and economists have traditionally argued the more economic prosperity a country has, the more democratic it becomes - but Professor Ian MacKenzie from University of Queensland’s School of Economics in Australia says the relationship is not simple.

“When a country’s income is very low, survival is the focus and the marginal benefits of consumption of material goods is very high,” Professor MacKenzie said.

“Essentially, when you don’t have much, an extra dollar is very, very valuable to you.

“Because of that, you won’t invest time in political activism, you’ll invest it in working to increase your income.”

Professor MacKenzie, along with economists Dr Dario Debowicz (Swansea University), Professor Alex Dickson (University of Strathclyde, Glasgow) and Associate Professor Petros Sekeris (Toulouse Business School), looked at data from every country between 1800 to 2010 to analyse their income and democratic score.

They hypothesised the relationship between the income of a country and its level of democracy is not linear but instead forms a U-shape.

Professor MacKenzie said when societies reach a high level of income, the curve shifts towards increased democratisation.

“As income increases, there comes a turning point at which your income has increased so much you start to value improvements in political freedoms,” he said.

“People feel more empowered to challenge authorities.

“A lot of people believe there is no link between income and democracy, or that there is a positive link – as in more income equals more democracy.

“What we’ve shown is that it’s more complicated than that.”

Professor MacKenzie said China was a country to watch in that it has experienced extraordinary economic growth over the past 4 decades while remaining an authoritarian state.

“The U-shaped theory suggests political uprisings could occur if economic growth continues,” he said.

“China has many citizens who are benefitting from the country opening its markets and increasing its GDP (gross domestic product) so there’s a lot of evidence to suggest they may start craving democratic principles.”

The research was published in Springer Nature.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/31273505

Switzerland is often considered the human rights capital of the world due to the presence of numerous international organisations. However, for Uyghurs and Tibetans living in the country, who still feel they can’t escape China’s surveillance, intimidation and threats, it’s also seen as a place where they often confront their cross-border oppressors.

“We are aware that we are subjected to surveillance, especially on the internet,” Arya Amipa, co-president of the Tibetan Youth Association in Europe, who lives in Switzerland, told SWI swissinfo.ch. “We keep receiving suspicious emails asking us to send confidential data, such as renewing our email passwords, from what at first glance appears to be our email provider. It’s only when you look closer that you notice the email address changes when you hover over it.”

Amipa believes that the Chinese government is behind these phishing operations with targets in the Tibetan diaspora communities. So “we have to protect ourselves by using end-to-end encrypted messengers, two-factor identification, and VPN clients”, even when communicating with others in Switzerland.

[...]

A recently released report, “Situation of Tibetans and Uyghurs in Switzerland”, based on the findings of a University of Basel study commissioned by the Swiss government. This details extensive surveillance and pressure tactics by Chinese authorities against Tibetan and Uyghur individuals residing in Switzerland.

The research report [commissioned by the Swiss government and published by the Swiss University of Basel] concluded that it’s “highly probable” that members of the Tibetan and Uyghur communities in Switzerland are “systematically monitored, threatened, and co-opted by actors from China”. The Swiss government added that “the extent and intensity of the forms of pressure identified in this research report are more likely to be underreported than overreported”. This is partly because the perpetrators often operate in the shadows and the targets fear reprisals if they speak out about their experiences.

[...]

China’s transnational repression has become a hot topic over the past year, but the phenomenon is not new. Some Western governments have taken steps in recent years to address the issue more meaningfully.

[...]

The World Uyghur Congress confirms that Uyghurs face increasing levels of transnational repression abroad through surveillance technologies including WeChat and the Integrated Joint Operations Platform (IJOP), a policing program based on big data analytics in Xinjiang, harassment through video and phone calls, malware, spyware, hacking and espionage. But “we are not aware of any resources or tools available to address this issue within the Swiss context” it [said].

[...]

Some 8,000 Tibetans are estimated to live in Switzerland, making it one of the largest Tibetan exile communities outside India. The Uyghur community, however, is in the double or low triple digits. Both communities have awaited the Swiss report for years.

[...]

Switzerland followed a “change through trade” approach regarding China for decades. That means Switzerland believed that trade would bring about positive changes, including a greater emphasis on human rights, as China gradually opened up. But the past ten years have shown the opposite to be true. China’s treatment of Tibetans and Uyghurs, including the diaspora, has deteriorated sharply.

Regarding the actions of the Swiss authorities, the research report indicates that a perceived tightening of restrictions on peaceful demonstrations and asylum practices is described as a form of pressure.

For example, the documents of Tibetans in Switzerland used to give “stateless” as their country of origin. Now it says “China”. This change forces Tibetans to have regular contact with the Chinese consulate, exposing them to registration and further surveillance and intimidation by Chinese officials who remind them not to engage in political activities.

Migmar Dolma, a 33-year-old Swiss citizen of Tibetan heritage, expressed [...] her disappointment at the Swiss authorities’ hesitance and failure to address the violation of the democratic rights of Tibetans in the country.

At a political demonstration in 2014 [in Switzerland], she was forcibly grabbed, pushed and held to the ground by Chinese embassy officials. She filed a complaint against an unknown person in the footage, but the case was rejected by the public prosecutor. She believes the decision was politically motivated.

The benefits of democratic societies go beyond greater personal freedoms and liberties. A new study by a UC Riverside economics professor has found that democratic systems of government also lead to higher participation by women in the labor market.

[...]

To understand this phenomenon, [UC Riverside Associate Professor and study author Ugo Antonio] Troiano found evidence that democratic rule reduces discriminatory attitudes toward women in the workplace.

[...]

The study also suggests that democracies create more female role models, further encouraging women to enter the labor force.

Troiano said his findings align with what we know from political economy and development economics: people are inspired by leaders who resemble them. If all political figures are men, young boys are more likely to aspire to leadership positions, while girls are not. Democracies help correct such imbalances.

“The role model hypothesis suggests that when young women see other women in professional roles during their impressionable years, they are more likely to pursue careers themselves,” he said. “Male dictators may serve as role models only for boys, while female politicians, who are more common in democracies, are more likely to inspire girls as well.”

[...]

Troiano’s findings carry important implications for policymakers. Policies that protect democracy are not just about protecting political rights—they also have tangible economic benefits, particularly for women. Free and fair elections, gender-inclusive governance, and legal protections for women may also be effective tools for increasing female labor market participation and the resulting economic benefits, Troiano said.

[...]

Previous research shows that greater female participation in the workforce can lead to reduced poverty, higher GDP growth, and increased innovation.

Troiano’s research builds on the work of Harvard University economist Claudia Goldin, who won the 2023 Nobel Prize in Economics for research that documented the historical barriers women face in the workforce and the economic factors influencing gender disparities. While Goldin provided a historical and economic analysis of gender disparities, Troiano demonstrated how political and institutional structures around the globe influence these disparities over time.

[...]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/31226135

[This is a piece by Dr. Kerry McElroy, cultural historian and founder of The Sága Project: An International Women's Journalism and Oral History Collective.]

In 2022, numerous phone calls were intercepted between Russian soldiers and wives and girlfriends about raping Ukrainian women. Roman Bykovsky and wife Olga Bykovska went viral on one such call, in which the wife laughingly encouraged her husband to rape Ukrainian women as long as he used a condom.

From the first year of the war into the second and third, the greatest site of sexual war crimes has moved from civilian young women to male POWs. One of the favorite "games" of the occupying Russians has involved spinning the wheel of the field telephone then making a call, electrocuting the prisoner connected to its wire. It has varied genital electrocution, known as "Zelensky’s Call", with anal electrocution, known as "Biden’s Call".

[...]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/31223771

Archived

In January 2025, Memorial Human Rights Center members visited Ukraine and conducted the first monitoring mission by Russian observers since the start of the full-scale invasion. They visited the Kyiv, Kharkiv, Mykolaiv, Kherson, and Chernihiv regions, along with the cities of Poltava and Odesa. During the trip, Memorial’s team documented violations of international humanitarian law and war crimes committed by the Russian army. The group plans to present its findings later this spring. Meduza spoke with Memorial observer Vladimir Malykhin about what he saw in Ukraine and why the monitoring mission is crucial to improving our understanding of contemporary Russia.