Right. What about Trump and the U.S. human rights abuses? China can respond that the U.S. jails children and takes them away from their parents. That's why Trump won't address human rights.
4
The American people should demand that the Trump administration forcefully stand against China in its despicable disregard for human rights. Unfortunately, that's not going to happen. Why? Because few of our citizenry care or are even aware of the true atrocities being perpetrated across the world.
Oh, but we are all aware of, and hold a strong opinion about, say, Trump's involvement with Stormy Daniels. Unlike the tragic brain washing imposed upon the Uighurs, we gleefully and willingly allow ourselves to be brainwashed into thinking that there are only three, maybe four or five, issues that matter to anyone, all of them domestic and highly partisan. We listen the cable news which feeds us the selected topics du jour, all designed to appeal to our simplistic predispositions so we will keep running back to our channel of choice, whether that be Fox, CNN or MSNBC. Each of them runs on a business model to keep us watching. It just so happens that that one might be more conservative or one more liberal. They are business seeking the advertising buck.
And, let's face it, who would want to endure extended programming about a human tragedy a world away, when we can all go into defcon one about the latest tweet.
We really care little about human suffering. It just doesn't get the ratings.
1
This purpose of this article to service American political purpose - using poor and disenfranchised Muslims as tool. If America really values the voice of Muslims in India, why does it collude with India in its suppression of Muslims in Kashmir, and Indian occupation of their land.
My suspicion is that Indian Government has paid these "Muslims" and paid for the banners they are carrying (written in Urdu & English) to garner favours with Trumpian America.
2
Is it up to the US President to crack down on human rights? Trade is interactive between the two countries and based, presumably, on agreements. Although China cheats and everyone, including the UN knows it. But human rights abuses are not the responsibility of one outside government. They are for the UN to address, and that's where it gets sticky. China should never have been admitted to the UN, much less with veto power. Frankly, Russia should have been kicked out too. Both are guilty of terrorizing their citizens. But, here we are. I wonder why the editorial board doesn't ask 'What will the UN do?'
Trump does not care about poor humans, so your answer is no.
3
Also, when dealing with China, we must consider the horrific widespread dog torture in places such as YULIN. (Google it if unfamiliar). Boiling, skinning, dismembering, beating, etc while still alive, are just a few of the methods they use to "tenderize" the meat before slaughter and consumption. And a good number of these suffering dogs and cats are stolen pets!! The US now has an official statement against this abomination in the form of H.RES.401. Human and animal abuse must not be tolerated anywhere.
Wagging our self-righteous finger at other nations is an exercise in futility. We have no right to unilaterally impose our values on other countries. We have serious problems of our own.
Let’s stick to what affects us with China like trade, spying, the militarization of the South China Sea and North Korea.
Isn’t that a big enough plate of issues? You want to scold them for mistreating Muslims while American bombs are killing Muslims in several countries? Get real!
4
Well the liberals and the NY Times did not stand up to China for invading and conquering Tibet, at least for long! And America's Zionists did not "stand up" to the Soviet Union during the Cold War, rather they usually conveniently 'forgot' the Second Holocaust because their ideological twins and often relatives killed that particular 6 million Jews, and also because to remember that human rights abuse might have morally obligated them to join our army and fight the communist attempts to take over the 3rd world in places like Vietnam, Latin America, Africa, Middle East … you know the 80% of the not develop world if lost that could have cost us the Cold War - really a Third World War fought after 1945. So apparently for uber elites like those manifest in the NY Times editors whether or not they 'stand up to' human rights abuses are determined by the most base convenience and cowardice and selfishness. Be assured that if there is more money to be made, or our pampered 1% can avoid combat or paying higher taxes ... by forgetting or ignoring China's having 1 million in re education Gulags or for that matter attacking and conquering the rest of Asia (they have already seized most resources in that region by organized crime poaching), or most of the rest of the world, our leaders will follow that 'let them do whatever they want' course of action.
Chinese treatment of Uighers is terrible
and should be condemned. But no country
is setting example of protecting human rights.
With Guantanamo, Abu Gharaib, treatment of
Immigrant families, shooting of blacks on
slight suspicion America has lost high ground.
Wonder how Guantanamo is different from
Chinese detention centers? Trump doesn't
raise human rights issues because he knows
better. In one interview last year he famously
asked a rhetorical question, are so innocent?
1
@s.khan Guantanamo has in total housed 775 prisoners taken off foreign battlefields under suspicion of engaging in terrorist activities. over time, nearly all prisoners who could be proved to be terrorists have been released, including some who have returned to the battlefield. I do not agree with Guantanamo being used in this way, I believe the prison should be closed and its occupants released or transferred to custody within the US, but in the difficult realities of the post-9/11 world, I can't think of a better way to have handled the situation.
China is being accused of housing tens of thousands of its own citizens in reeducation camps for the simple reason that they are Muslims and Beijing fears that they are disloyal. That is unconscionable and indefensible. Further, the US does have a right to criticize this because this is a matter that could affect the US in the future because if these draconian policies serve to radicalize Uighurs it could eventually be US citizens they attack.
China comports itself with the pretenses of a world-leading power. Actions like these belie the many reasons why China should not be entrusted with such power.
Donald Trump throws kids in cages - he probably wishes he could do what China does. There's no point in asking if Trump will do the 'right thing' - only what he thinks is good for Trump
1
So, the Editorial Board of the Times would rather the young muslims in China organize their own Saudi Wahhabism style madrassah run by ISIS than be educated in tolerance towards others.
China has the right idea. Educate these people that religion is only one part of life. Tolerance for others religions is necessary. The muslim religion is just one of many and they should not become jihadists but learn to live and let live.
If the Catholic Church were managed by the State and priests had to go to education seminars then we would not have had these priests abusing all these children on such a grand scale for so long. All priests would have had to have background checks, pass exams and be licensed. Because the Catholic Church is a Western Institution their abuse of their congregants children is "acceptable" and no one is promulgating economically sanctioning the Pope, Cardinals or Vatican.
The USA has incarcerated millions in jails, created internment camps for immigrant children, banned immigration based on religion, and allows tens of thousands to be shot annually by lax gun laws. Is this upholding human rights?
Really! America should just stop all of these foreign adventures. Bring the troops home. Build infrastructure and live good lives. Why support terrorists in the name of democracy. Just leave China alone!
7
China is not impacted by the US opinion on human rights. Their form of government does not guarantee human rights. To get what the US believes are basic human rights, the form of government in China would have to change. That is not likely to happen in the near future. The United Nations is useless in this matter as many of the members who sit on the human rights committees are the worst abusers.
2
To the Editorial Board:
Pardon my language, but are you freaking kidding me? Donald Trump lecture to anyone about human rights and targeting minorities? This is a satire piece, isn't it? If not, then the notion that Trump cares about anyone's human rights is ridiculous.
We have a "president" who is proud to target religious and ethnic minorities in this country. He has directed his Justice Department to put Hispanic infants and children in cages. He has told us that neo-Nazis and the KKK are some very fine people. He has pardoned a former sheriff who boasted about targeting Hispanic citizens in Arizona, and who was found guilty by a court of law.
In short, Trump has absolutely no interest in the human rights of anyone, outside of himself and his racist base. With his election, we as a nation have lost our right to lecture any other country about how to treat its minority citizens.
And understand that Trump will never change his views about our brown-skinned citizens, because his base doesn't want him to. Some 40% of this country loves that he is a bigot, a racist, and a xenophobe. This is one of his most appealing features to them.
So, New York Times Editor's Board, quite simply, we are no longer in a position to lecture others about human rights and the dignity of all people -- rights that our nation once proudly spoke of. We are no longer that nation, and it will be many, many years, if ever, before we may once again set an example for other nations.
6
Trump as a white knight for human rights? Almost funny.
Though I live in US, I must say China, who supplies me with virtually everything I own or expect to buy has done way more for me and my well being than has the USA and its stupid government. Don't make me choose sides.
4
Whoa! Good editorial.
The Chinese are treating the Uighars like Likud and Congress are treating the Palestinians. Trump and Congress will probably ignore the plight of Uighars for the same reasons: they are Muslim and don't offer kickbacks, monetary or political.
3
It is to be expected that all leaders (and peoples) should declare that human rights with not be negotiated, and that they are absolute for all. This is especially true of the American President that has the Constitution and Bill of Rights to defend.
Having said that and saying this, (which I have done so many a time) that we are all hypocrites when we demand of leaders one thing and do something in opposition to them every day.
We drive across town to the big box store (that does extensive business with China), buy products that have been imported from/made in China, and then call on our Chinese made phone to our friends to meet us for coffee.
We have more power in our pocket books to curb human rights abuses, than any leader on earth. However, we are ignorant, or just plain neglect that power to save a few pennies for ourselves.
Much like voting.
1
Donald Trump has shredded any credibility America might have had lecturing any other country about its treatment of its own citizens.
A know-nothing narcissist in hock to Russia and the Saudis is morally bankrupt.
If he was capable of thought, he'd be conflicted about playing trade chicken with China and wanting to contract with China for rendition of American Muslims.
All we can do at this point is to apologize for making Donald Trump the most powerful man in the world.
As his ex-SoS Rex Tillerson said, a moron, albeit one with that big doomsday button on his desk.
As the Chinese say, we live in interesting times. Trump would agree completely unaware they mean it as a curse.
3
Dear Editorial Board,
You wrote, "China has some legitimate concerns about instability in Xinjiang, and those Uighurs who have been involved in violence should be tried and punished."
How did you come to the conclusion that it is your right or responsibility to act as The Supreme Legal Conscience Of The World? Are you still oblivious to how pompously inappropriate your guidance and permission is? Stated clearly: you don't get to tell China what they can do or how they should do it. What you could do is report the ways that China is the world's greatest human rights abuser, but will China let you? And if you do, how long before they replace the Editorial Board?
2
What about human rights abuse here in America? Immigrants, poor people of color, prisoners, etc.?
3
Ironic that the high tech sector in the US has a 'progressive' culture. Yet Google with its liberal culture oozing political correctness is helping China's government systematically monitor citizens every keystroke.
This progressive facade is just that!
2
from when has Marco Rubio been interested that much in a Muslim minority?
1
It is to be expected that all leaders (and peoples) should declare that human rights with not be negotiated, and that they are absolute for all. This is especially true of the American President that has the Constitution and Bill of Rights to defend.
Having said that and saying this, (which I have done so many a time) that we are all hypocrites when we demand of leaders one thing and do something in opposition to them every day.
We drive across town to the big box store (that does extensive business with China), buy products that have been imported from/made in China, and then call on our Chinese made phone to our friends to meet us for coffee.
We have more power in our pocket books to curb human rights abuses, than any leader on earth. However, we are ignorant, or just plain neglect that power to save a few pennies for ourselves.
Much like voting.
2
Donald Trump criticizing China on human rights abuses would be a case of the ugly American wallowing in his hypocrisy.
3
What is the point of examining China's record of human rights abuses in this article when Trump never publicly addressed them in his initial meeting with President Xi Jinping at Mar-a-Lago in April 2017 and when he travelled to Beijing in November last year once failing to bring them up after his meetings with Xi and other world leaders in Beijing?
Either he doesn't understand the repercussions of human rights violations around the world, just doesn't care or prefers instead to pose in photo ops and play golf with foreign heads of state who are culpable of such atrocities?
In short, Trump has generally fallen short on human rights diplomacy as it relates to China and even countries like North Korea. If dollar signs are not attached to policies, he is not concerned nor empathetic in any discernable way.
3
The proper place to discuss such a matter is the United Nations, and the US should introduce the matter there in the appropriate groups.
1
No, NYT Editorial Board. He did not campaign on ending human rights abuses throughout the world. He has NO OBLIGATION and therefore NO URGENCY to address them. His obligation is to Americans and America first.
6
Actually, I think China and the Chinese of all ethnicities will be better off without religion. If China can free its peoples of Catholicism, Buddhism, Protestantism, Daoism, and Islam, then China and all Chinese will be better off.
Instead of sanctioning China, the US should end domestic racism, ban guns, help Native Americans, treat immigrants properly, and help the 100 million Americans who have fallen behind economically.
1
Trump is the last person you would want to stand up for anything or anybody. He is having enough trouble trying to save himself, which has always been his overriding priority.
His threats against China have been toothless and spineless, whether regarding China's expansion of artificial islands and consequent threats to international shipping, or his threat to declare China a 'currency manipulator'.
Trump cares as much about the Uighurs as he does about the spread of Wahhabism and Saudi genocide in Yemen.
Even Trump's 'trade wars', usually followed by 'exceptions' and walk-backs, are designed merely to shore up his political base of ignoramuses who believe these wars will create jobs. The latter have never head of Uighurs, so Trump would gain nothing politically by defending them. He could do so only as a gesture of humanity and pure principle .......... (Try not to laugh).
4
The PRC’s policy in Xinjiang is a poor shot at a major problem rising Islamic violence, the Times skips lightly into this because the reaction is a violation of basic human rights, no question but a little background would help.
If you take a map of China and lay it out flat and have information on the where about of the 55 minorities of China more that half of the map measured east to west is not-Han although 90% + of the population is Han. Now think of the western USA and the states that are a result of a land grab from Mexico and a rising Latino population and years to come. Not analogous but suggestive?
China like other states, Britain a good example, have become panopticon surveillance states with the technology found likely in your local police department. Authoritarian China has rushed some of that into the homes of ‘suspects; a new twist?
Indian Muslims have reasons to protest in their own land seldom mentioned by this paper.
What we are seeing is where the world seems to be headed, but why not protest when still possible.
China’s problem is in reality major and will continue to provoke a CCP reaction for years to come. Others no doubt watching.
Trump likes dictators and is jealous he can’t more openly abuse human rights here. Why would he attack foreign leaders for doing the same thing?
4
Well what else would you expect from communists who have to take an oath of atheism? How could they possibly understand the difference between any religion - and a political movement? Any other god they see as a danger to their god of power.
1
Trump will surely intervene when it is time for persecution of Christians because that will rile up his base. Don't hold your breath for any action now that it is Muslims who are on the receiving end of Chinese repression. For all we know, Trump could be happy about it....
2
On the contrary, we should follow China's lead. Suppression of religion is absolutely necessary to progress. Nothing useful or innovative ever comes out of countries that are dominated by religion, just look at the muslim world. Even in America, the states and regions who are most religious are also poorest, least productive and backwards. While all the centers of innovation are overwhelmingly secular and run by irreligious elites. Religion is good for nothing except soothing those who have nothing else. Bring on the repression!
1
The PRC’s policy in Xinjiang is a poor shot at a major problem rising Islamic violence, the Times skips lightly into this because the reaction is a violation of basic human rights, no question but a little background would help.
If you take a map of China and lay it out flat and have information on the where about of the 55 minorities of China more that half of the map measured east to west is not-Han although 90% + of the population is Han. Now think of the western USA and the states that are a result of a land grab from Mexico and a rising Latino population and years to come. Not analogous but suggestive?
China like other states, Britain a good example, have become panopticon surveillance states with the technology found likely in your local police department. Authoritarian China has rushed some of that into the homes of ‘suspects;’ a new twist?
Indian Muslims have reasons to protest in their own land seldom mentioned by this paper. What we are seeing is where the world seems to be headed, but why not protest when still possible. China’s problem is in reality major and will continue to provoke a CCP reaction for years to come. Others no doubt watching.
1
"Will Donald Trump Stand Up to China?"
That is a silly question which borders on the ridiculous.
China is not doing anything that Trump will not do in America if America does not stop him and his Trumpican Party in November.
Some of the alleged China abuses are already Trump abuses:
"Uighurs are being accused of having an “ideological virus” and are sometimes detained for nothing more than reciting a verse of the Quran at a funeral. Held in heavily guarded, often secret camps and cut off from their families..."
Trumpican-translation:
Mexican immigrants (many legal) are being accused of having a “criminal virus” and even Latino American citizens are sometimes detained for nothing more than speaking Spanish or looking Latino in public. They can disappear into heavily guarded, often secret camps and be cut off from their families. They can be deported without their children who can be caged, drugged and farmed out to undisclosed places around the country.
Muslims are being banned from entry and Christianity is being supported as a state religion.
Blacks are being targeted and protestors are being disparaged as anti-American, unpatriotic.
We don't need Trump to fake a stand against China because he has no moral ground to stand on and he has eradicated America's moral standing.
China's crimes against humanity merely presage the crimes against humanity that Trump would like to commit, and may if he and his immoral Trumpican followers keep the Congress in November.
2
Let's focus on human rights here in the USA. Show by example.
voter rights
every vote counts rights
gender rights
job equality rights
3
Remember Tibet, anyone? Buddhists haven’t made any progress for autonomous rule in Tibet in the six decades since the Dalai Lama fled and took refuge in India. This despite all the accolades, including a Nobel Peace Prize in 1989, and publicity that the Dalai Lama garnered for the Tibetan cause in the west.
So what chance do the Uighurs have? And, they are Muslims – not a religious minority that draws a lot of sympathy in the west after 9/11. Especially with Trump, who probably has not even heard of Uighurs and the Xinjiang province – he’d probably mistake it for President Xi Jinping – and not want to touch it. I can just imagine a late-night comic mimicking Trump, “Xi, a Muslim? I thought he was a commie?”
But seriously, Beijing is an authority to itself. Trump is not going to stand up to Xi or for the Uighurs unless there was money to be made from the deal. Maybe, he could impose tariffs on all goods produced in Xinjiang province that are imported into to the United States, until his pal, Xi, ends the Pol Pot reeducation camps in Xinjiang.
1
"Beijing’s human rights abuses"?
Judged by the 30 Articles of the UN Declaration of Universal Human Rights–to which both we and China are signatories, China's human rights record is far better than ours.
Of the Declaration's 30 Articles, China leads 26-2, with two draws. http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/.
Though China has made good progress in recent years, its lead is due to our own foolishness after 9/11, as President Jimmy Carter pointed out in these pages:
"The United States is abandoning its role as the global champion of human rights.
"Revelations that top officials are targeting people to be assassinated abroad, including American citizens, are only the most recent, disturbing proof of how far our nation’s violation of human rights has extended. This development began after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and has been sanctioned and escalated by bipartisan executive and legislative actions, without dissent from the general public. As a result, our country can no longer speak with moral authority on these critical issues.
"While the country has made mistakes in the past, the widespread abuse of human rights over the last decade has been a dramatic change from the past. With leadership from the United States, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted in 1948...."
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/25/opinion/americas-shameful-human-rights...
1
The Times is absolutely right to draw attention to the abuse of minority populations in China, but does anyone actually think that Chinese officials would care if the American government condemned their actions?
More to the point, there is no defensible reason for China to be our biggest trading partner. We are talking about a totalitarian communist system that offers one thing to US-based companies- dirt cheap production. That production comes at the cost of human-rights abuse and environmental devastation.
Trump may be a complete moron and worse, but to the extent that he is willing to take concrete action against the axis of bottom-feeding corporate sleaze and the Chinese slave labor cartels, he is going to find reluctant, skeptical, mildly nauseous supporters of that specific policy.
1
Had China detained and re-educated even one Christian, Trump and the GOP would be all over this, just as they were over Turkey’s detention of a single evangelical minister. But Muslim Uighurs? They’re not part of the base.
3
Let China deal with their human rights issue themselves. Why is that urgent to the USA?
Maybe if we let more in to our country they can all stay at your house!
Think about it!
Why would Trump stand up to China over its human rights abuses when he's blatantly guilty of them at home? The separation, or, to be correct, kidnapping of Latino children at the border with Mexico isn't phasing him one bit.
2
Does DT stand up for anything other than himself...the answer is no.
2
Of course he won’t. I have yet to witness Trump stand up to anyone. He simply hides behind others and shouts inane or vulgar insults. He's too cowardly to even face someone and say "You're fired" unless it's scripted on Reality TV.
3
How can Donald Trump -or any US President for that matter - "stand up" to China on human rights when the US is complicit and- under Trump - a direct partner in Israel's abuse of the Palestinians? Remember, what Israel is doing is illegal, morally indefensible and based on religion - much like what China is doing to the Uighurs, but even worse. Yet the Trump administration (and previous American administrations as well, though not to the same degree) is a willing partner and facilitator in that abuse. Beyond this, John Bolton has already declared international law and international bodies like the ICC "illegitimate" and made it clear that the US will decide what laws apply to it and which do not. How, under these conditions, is the US supposed to have any credibility at all when it tries to take the moral high ground with any other state? The answer is that it cannot. Moreso than with any other administration, if this admin invokes human rights in attacking China, it will be absolutely clear that it is doing so for strategic reasons and that it has absolutely no moral authority. Such an action does more damage to the cause of human rights more than anything else.
3
The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights consists of thirty articles, of which around ten are applied when enemy countries like China are harshly condemned by (so called) democracies.
Of the remaining twenty are some, very important, which western countries (not least the United States) blatantly violate. The social rights in the declaration are even right out discarded. They are viewed as "a letter to Santa Claus" (Jeane Kirkpatrick).
What kind of stomach do we have when we hold countries accountable for violating a universal UN declaration which we partly even reject ourselves?
Is hypocrisy in the very bloodstream of democracies?
3
First of all, I yield to nobody on this planet in my contempt for Donald Trump.
No, he won't stand up to China for Uighur (or anybody's) rights. This is both because he is a wimp and because he simply doesn't care.
However neither would have President Hillary Clinton. Unlike Hillary Clinton, or any other President, he is standing up to China on their implacable mercantilism and intellectual property theft, albeit with the clumsy, blundering bluster that is his hallmark.
It has to be admitted that this is useful, and could end up in a win-win situation:
America wins because the economic pain it causes here contributes to Republican electoral defeats.
America wins because the economic pain it causes in China contributes to a weakening of the aspiring world hegemon.
Dan Kravitz
1
The last country in this world that has any rights to complain about human rights abuses is the United States of America. It has a history of human rights abuses, beginning with the Chinese Exclusion Acts 1882, which effectively lasted more than a century, which some would argue are still persisting to this day. Its continued support of dictators all over the world — with real human rights abuses in their countries — who are friendly to America is hypocrisy of the Trumpian kind blatantly ignored when looking at themselves in the mirror.
While China is no saint when it comes to human rights abuses the constant demonising of Chinese globally — see American broad characterisation that all Chinese in America are spies — is only making Chinese uniting defensively, at an unfair Western world, still determined to bring China to her knees in kowtowing to their hegemonic economic and military superiority.
A bit of consistency is helpful if you want to persuade others to your cause. They watch what you do and not what you say.
4
@Mountern
Nice response.
Old enough to remember Radio Free Europe? Curious but not really that China is the recipient of the American-based Radio Free Asia. “Among Uighurs being detained are dozens of relatives of journalists associated with the American-based Radio Free Asia” the major source of these reports. China does have a policy of noninterference in others states and thus slow to sanctions in the U.N. but did come along on N. Korea and Iran; not an American problem. Time for US to ratify the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights perhaps as China has for what that is worth.
1
@Mountern
America WAS a force for good in the world before Trump. I don't think it is useful to go as far back as The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 because that was a completely different era that has no bearing to the world of the 21st century. But I would agree with you that America under Trump has lost all her moral authority and cannot preach anything to anybody anymore.
2
"a United Nations panel last month said up" .... "last month, the United Nations expressed alarm ..." . After reading this article, those unaware with the reality may wrongly assume the Uighurs are persecuted for months.
Reality is that Uighurs are persecuted, imprisoned, killed, tortured, humiliated ... for decades, but several administrations including the previous one, decided it was US best interest to ignore it.
3
What is necessary for the US is respect the UN and cooperate with it and other like-minded countries to condemn China for its human rights abuse. Trump's disdain to international cooperation rather encourages China to go their way.
Human rights, how can America even consider mentioning these words to any world leader or international forum. For no known reason other than falsified and pretentious reasoning America invaded and has caused the death of at least 500,000 Iraqis (possibly a higher quantity). This action lead to the current situation in both Syria and Libya where the daily death toll continues to rise. The support, and supply of weapons, to Saudi is creating a human rights issue of even greater magnitude in Yemen. These are not internment but deaths, the impact has led to the mass migration currently unfolding throughout Europe; what happen to their rights?
Within America itself this administration has wrongly incarcerated how many refugees simply trying to seek safety only to have their child taken and held in animal pens; many will never see the parents again. Shall we tabulate how many mass shooting deaths or innocent individuals being assassinated by the so called police force; this too is human rights
No America cannot utter a single sentence in defiance as it’s human rights record in well below any know standard let alone China’s.
1
Human rights, how can America even consider mentioning these words to any world leader or international forum. For no known reason other than falsified and pretentious reasoning America invaded and has caused the death of at least 500,000 Iraqis (possibly a higher quantity). This action lead to the current situation in both Syria and Libya where the daily death toll continues to rise. The support, and supply of weapons, to Saudi is creating a human rights issue of even greater magnitude in Yemen. These are not internments but deaths, the impact has led to the mass migration currently unfolding throughout Europe; what happen to their rights?
Within America itself this administration has wrongly incarcerated how many refugees simply trying to seek safety only to have their child taken and held in animal pens; many will never see the parents again. Shall we tabulate how many mass shooting deaths or innocent individuals being assassinated by the so called police force; this too is human rights
No America cannot utter a single sentence in defiance as it’s human rights record in well below any know standard let alone China’s.
Oh to see ourselves as others see us. The insanity of it. Wars - overt and covert - are the greatest abuse of human rights. Any country engaged in endless wars and military interventions needs to have the good grace and self knowledge just to shutup when it comes to decrying the human rights abuses of others. Just how delusional are we? Let's introduce some proportion here and decide logically who on the "human rights" side the international community should really be sanctioning. China faced with a Muslim territory containing some Muslims presenting what is interepreted as a terrorist/national security threat seeks to reeducate them demanding compulsory attendance at reeducation sessions lasting days, weeks or months depending on the case. (In some instances they return home each day.) The US faced with Muslim territories containing some Muslims presenting what is interepreted as a terrorist/national security threat declares war on the territory and kills, injures and tortures them and their families and indiscriminately bombs their cities into rubble creating millions of refugees. (Just recently see Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen and Libya we will leave out the many smaller ongoing deadly military interventions around the world particularly Africa). So who here is the greater abuser of human rights? To whom should we be directing our sanctimony? Ask the rest of the world. They have been telling us for decades. It's us. And they're right.
3
Old enough to remember Radio Free Europe? Curious but not really that China is the recipient of the American-based Radio Free Asia. “Among Uighurs being detained are dozens of relatives of journalists associated with the American-based Radio Free Asia” the major source of these reports. China does have a policy of noninterference in others states and thus slow to sanctions in the U.N. but did come along on N. Korea and Iran; not an American problem.
Time for US to ratify the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights perhaps as China has for what that is worth.
1
US sanctions long ago lost their credibility. They are always raised against countries with which the US disagrees on other issues. And when the victimized country betters its behavior they are seldom raised: usually some other excuse is found to keep them going.
1
China is exactly like one of the nation states as foretold in George Orwell’s 1984. The surveillance state. The state precedes the rights of the individual. The individual lives for the good of the state. If China does someday become the dominant superpower in the world militarily, economically, and culturally then liberty and freedom are in dire trouble.
18
@Mike L China is unlike any of Orwell's dystopian states because it has vastly improved living conditions for half a billion people who previously had been living in the most abject poverty. China has created the world's largest middle class, which was unthinkable under Big Brother.
One failed big brother experiment aka the Cultural Revolution which cost millions of people their lives, does not justify a state run corrupt capitalist system making up for decades of state run poverty with a more efficient electronic big brother system in place so the Communist Party retains power.
How can we accuse China of violating the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights when was are the ONLY industrialized country that has never ratified that pact?
Our history of standing up for human rights in other countries has been based on self-interest. Why would we intervene on behalf of a people with no oil or strategic value?
I will say that while our own history of human rights violations is nothing to brag about, we have made progress, albeit uneven, and are doing better than many places. We need to hold the belief that we are committed to human rights here and abroad and that this commitment should be renewed by this administration.
The one thing that stymies my imagination is Donald Trump making a speech in sympathy with the Uighurs.
24
Trump's 'get tough on China' to appease his base is already costing consumers more money, with the price of washing machines since he 'tariffed' China up 20% in price to American buyers.
For him, it is not about doing the right thing, it is to get praise from his shrinking base and Faux News commentators. Trump thinks all of the world is a business deal, with his so called rough and tumble New York real estate tactics supposedly working the world over.
It seems his efforts at restraining North Korea and its continuing development of atomic weapons has had little to no effect, but what the heck, he had a great snapshot moment with NK's leader Kim.
For The Donald, it's all about the ratings. And wealth and power, of course.
9
I didn’t read the whole editorial, but I’m going to assume it was satire or comedy. trump call China out on human rights? He has no credibility on that topic, to name just one area in which he has no credibility.
He could use tariffs or trade renegotiations to bludgeon China into submission regarding its stance on human rights, but I’m sure he’ll be easily distracted if China offers to cut him in on a condo deal somewhere.
24
The catch is, for Trump to heed the challenge to stand up for human rights in China, he would have to care. That Trump shows no interest in the human rights abuses of Saudi Arabia, Russia, Egypt, Turkey, the Philippines, interalia, more than hints at this being the farthest from a priority.
9
The only aspect of the former Soviet Union that made sense from a social control perspective was the official ban on religion. Religion inevitably breeds fear, separation, ignorance and entitlement--it always has, and it always will, whether in a free society or in an authoritarian one like modern day China.
4
Trump should have a little talk with Tim Cook of Apple to convince Apple to move production of their products to the US&A.
Apple charges over a thousand per phone. So they'll make a little less and we stick it to the Chinese who have been taking advantage of us for years by selling us shoddy products and stealing our intellectual property.
7
President Trump does not care two hoots about human rights. He instead admires dictators and autocrats. He could be hypocritical in many things but not when it comes to administration of totalitarian regimes.
20
Doesn’t the US have its own internment camps where it keeps the children separated from their parents? People who live in glass houses...
44
@Alan White
The US is not trying to force anyone to renounce their religion or destroy a culture whose language they don't understand because it isn't mandarin, and so therefore they cannot monitor them like they can the Han. The US has not detained millions because of their religious belief. China's constitutional article 35 guarantees the right of free speech, religion and assembly. But to America, these rights are sacred and enforced. How can you possibly compare persecuting Uighurs with protecting children whose families haven't been found yet?
1
How can Trump credibly stand up for Muslims anywhere? That train has already left the station.
27
Waaaa? Trump telling China about human rights would be like the pot calling the kettle black!!
26
Defending Muslims will be political suicide for Donald. Why would he do it?
11
To what possible good end?
If there’s anything likely to get China resolved to dig-in on trade, on its theft of intellectual capital, on global hacking, on its bellicose actions in the South China Sea, and on so many other matters on which we disagree … it would be the United States lecturing it on what it clearly regards to be an internal matter.
When was the last time the U.S. lectured France on its abandonment of its Muslim minorities to the dystopian ghettos surrounding Paris? And it’s not as if our own behavior with regard to minorities is above reproach – although we haven’t yet sunk to placing them in “re-education camps”.
There is an elite segment of our population apparently mesmerized by the conviction that there IS a Narnia, and that we collectively are Aslan the Lion, forever in there pitching to save the land from evil defined by that elite. The truth, however, is that ALL places where humans tread know evil, to one extent or another, and we do best by tending to our own knitting. Trump is seeking to be practical, and he certainly IS standing up to China on matters on which he believes we have a prayer of being effective.
That will need to be enough – in China OR in France (or in our own back yard).
11
@Richard Luettgen
Simple. To the good end of defending hundreds of thousands of innocent lives, of letting the Uighurs know the world has not forgotten them, of standing up for what is right.
You worry about China digging in on its other bad habits if it is called out on human rights abuses. On the contrary, if the world finds the bravery to denounce the racist detention of an entire ethnic group, perhaps it may finally discover the courage to speak out against other bad behavior from Beijing.
Your false moral equivalencies also betray a distressing cynicism. On the one hand, the scale of oppression against Uighurs in Xinjiang is almost unfathomably large, seeping in to every aspect of everyday life, and certainly far worse than France's or America's behavior. On the other hand, you are right to point this out, but not as a means to excuse China's actions. Rather, it is a reminder that oppression anywhere should be condemned in all its forms. Standing up to injustice is never wrong, regardless of how long you've been sitting.
With China's growing power on the world stage, staying seated is especially worrying. If the US, the West, and the world stay quiet now, for what will we finally speak? Current and would-be oppressors are watching.
I'll leave you with one more quote, this one from Elie Wiesel:
"Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented."
The silence here in Beijing is deafening.
14
@Richard Luettgen France's ghettoes -- or ours -- are hardly the equivalent of forced internment of hundreds of thousands of people. Are you suggesting by "tending to our own knitting," that we simply always ignore anything anywhere except here in our own country?
8
I do hate at this point to tattle
D. Trump is outmatched in this battle,
Purely on IQ's
Trump is bound to lose
The bars of his Playpen he'll rattle.
24
He only cares about him and what's in it for him. He is remarkably selfish among everything else we know about him.....nothing good of course. He keeps creating more and more chaos every day. He still doesn't understand that we the people will be paying more for imported goods. When will he grow up.
12
The only human rights Trump cares about are the right to bear AR-15s and the right to impose one's fundamentalist Christianity on others.
43
considering how Christianity has taken over the political process in the US, maybe we should consider some religious cleansing here. China appears willing to prevent religiosity taking over the politics of their country as it has here.
29