this post was submitted on 04 Feb 2025
54 points (92.2% liked)

Global News

3025 readers
412 users here now

What is global news?

Something that happened or was uncovered recently anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to have global implications. Just has to be informative in some way.


Post guidelines

Title formatPost title should mirror the news source title.
URL formatPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefixOpinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.


Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. No social media postsAvoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

Icon generated via LLM model | Banner attribution


If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://scribe.disroot.org/post/1873878

The Chinese government is maintaining severe restrictions, conditions, and controls on Uyghurs who seek to travel abroad in violation of their internationally protected right to leave the country, Human Right Watch said today. The government has permitted Uyghurs in the diaspora to make restricted visits to Xinjiang, but with the apparent aim of presenting a public image of normalcy in the region.

Since the start of the Chinese government’s abusive Strike Hard Campaign in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region in 2016, Chinese authorities have arbitrarily confiscated passports of Uyghurs in the region and imprisoned Uyghurs for contacting people abroad. While the authorities are now allowing some Uyghurs to apply for or are returning passports for travel internationally, they exert tight control over those who travel.

“The modest thaw in China’s travel restrictions has allowed some Uyghurs to briefly reunite with loved ones abroad after having no news for years, but the Chinese government’s travel restrictions are still used to oppress Uyghurs in Xinjiang and in the diaspora,” said Yalkun Uluyol, China researcher at Human Rights Watch. “The Chinese government continues to deny Uyghurs their right to leave the country, restrict their speech and associations when abroad, and punish them for having foreign ties.”

...

top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Geobloke@lemm.ee 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)
[–] randomname@scribe.disroot.org 1 points 17 minutes ago

@Geobloke@lemm.ee

So what is a reliable source for China?

[–] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 7 points 1 day ago

Hexbear and ML in hysterical applause.

[–] pancake@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Hopefully those restrictions are eventually fully lifted. Though I wouldn't rush on that after hearing how the Syrian Uyghur fighters planned to "liberate Xinjiang", it's also important imo to prevent local "bad apples" from colluding with such groups abroad.

[–] Skua@kbin.earth 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Are a few Syrian fighters such a threat to one of the world's most powerful militaries that it justifies blanket travel restrictions on 26,000,000 people? I wouldn't want to see, for example, the UK banning travel in and out of its areas with high Muslim populations just because some people in Syria called for the overthrow of the UK

[–] pancake@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

While a few Syrian fighters might not everthrow the government, they are an example of the risk faced by the local population. Xinjiang used to have a huge terrorism problem, people would demonstrate asking for local authorities to step in and take measures. Consider that most people in Xinjiang are not affected by the specific travel restrictions, and therefore don't mind having them in place if that makes the region safer. Call that a "tyranny of the majority" if you wish. Restrictions will be lifted over time as the risk goes away.

[–] Skua@kbin.earth 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Consider that most people in Xinjiang are not affected by the specific travel restrictions

This is very much at odds with the text of the article unless your position is that most people in Xinjiang would never leave Xinjiang anyway, and also most of the diaspora would not travel to Xinjiang. Barring them from travelling to countries with large Muslim populations seems particularly notable given the importance of making a pilgrimage to Mecca within the religion

[–] pancake@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I think you're making an overly broad interpretation of the text of the article. The restrictions only apply to "sensitive" countries, not all countries with large Muslim populations. Xinjiang law explicitly grants Muslims the right to pilgrimage to Mecca. I mean, how could those restrictive laws have passed in the first place if most people in the region were against them?

[–] randomname@scribe.disroot.org 1 points 6 minutes ago

@pancake

I mean, how could those restrictive laws have passed in the first place if most people in the region were against them?

As someone already said, the answer is obvious but you may have (intentionally?) ignored a simple fact. The Chinese government pursues a dictatorial policy, it doesn't matter "if most people in the region were against them" as people have no say.

[–] Skua@kbin.earth 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The restrictions only apply to "sensitive" countries, not all countries with large Muslim populations.

Saudi Arabia is on the list according to HRW https://www.hrw.org/report/2018/09/10/eradicating-ideological-viruses/chinas-campaign-repression-against-xinjiangs

I mean, how could those restrictive laws have passed in the first place if most people in the region were against them?

The answer to this is very obvious, is it not? Xinjiang is part of China, and as such Xinjiangese law is subject to Chinese law

But besides that, Uyghurs are not an outright majority of the population of Xinjiang. The Xinjiang government absolutely could - hypothetically - pass laws that every Uyghur opposes and retain majority support.

[–] pancake@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 day ago

As the article in this post states, some "sensitive" countries can be visited for specific reasons, like Kazakhstan. Pilgrimage to Mecca is protected by the China Islamic Association.

My point is that those restrictions serve a purpose of mitigating violence in the region, which is still a risk nowadays, and are being toned down as this risk diminishes, seeking proportionality. Hopefully they'll be phased out.

[–] Jin008@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Yes, this is true! Palestine? I don't know what you're talking about.

[–] randomname@scribe.disroot.org 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] Jin008@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

This stuff is obviously bullshit, and funded by the west. Decrying China for being anti-muslim and putting people into "concentration camps", while simultaneously supporting the illegal settler colonial operation in Palestine

[–] celeste@kbin.earth 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Are you denying these restrictions exist entirely? I agree with you that it sucks that we're only hearing about it as a distraction from atrocities our own governments are committing, but do you think it's not happening at all?

[–] Jin008@lemmygrad.ml -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yea, I am. There used to be more controls about this stuff, but that was because China literally had lots of bombings from these Islamic fundamentalist groups. You can't expect them to just let this stuff go and not have anything done.

That is not to say they could have done better and I'm not critical, but China has taken the best approach to this (which the Islamic Cooperation Community supported) which is re-education and re-integration with society.

They just continue to harp on these points with anecdotal evidence and no concrete sources. It is bullshit.

[–] celeste@kbin.earth 1 points 10 hours ago

I appreciate you taking the time to answer.

[–] Skua@kbin.earth 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The site clearly has an entire section about Palestine. Unfortunately more than one bad thing can happen at once.

[–] Jin008@lemmygrad.ml -3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

But Palestine has heaps of evidence, this does not. Only anecdotes from questionable sources. They keep harping on about this to try to foment dissent and tear China apart.

[–] Skua@kbin.earth 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

They have an entire section of the website dedicated to Palestine. The button is right there at the top. They published two articles about it yesterday. This is the most ridiculous whataboutery I have ever seen

HRW's job is to investigate human rights abuses. Their job is not to only report on well-documented human rights abuses. They investigate to improve the documentation of those cases.

[–] Jin008@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, because Palestine is an undeniable issue that is as obvious as gravity, whereas this Uyghur stuff isn't. Them reporting on a true genocide doesn't stop them from being a western mouthpiece to parrot propaganda against their enemies.

Here's some reading and videos about the Uyghur stuff:

  1. https://redsails.org/the-xinjiang-atrocity-propaganda-blitz/#the-real-xinjiang-story
  2. https://youtu.be/p57qyMAySYc
  3. https://youtu.be/gygxrdNmzUQ
[–] Skua@kbin.earth 1 points 9 hours ago

"It's ridiculous that HRW is using interviews with Uyghurs as evidence. Also, here's two interviews with Uyghurs as my evidence."

[–] randomname@scribe.disroot.org 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Only anecdotes from questionable sources

What is a good source about China?

[–] Jin008@lemmygrad.ml -3 points 9 hours ago

Alot of the time the west uses Adrian Zenz (who you can read his Wikipedia page on why he is not trustworthy and is doubted even among European academic circles)

Here’s some reading and videos about the Uyghur stuff:

  1. https://redsails.org/the-xinjiang-atrocity-propaganda-blitz/#the-real-xinjiang-story
  2. https://youtu.be/p57qyMAySYc
  3. https://youtu.be/gygxrdNmzUQ