Q. and A.: Christina Lin on China’s Antiterrorism Efforts

If China backs the UN taking action, maybe Xi can have a heart to heart with Putin about Russian obstructionism on the Security Council.
I think we all would rather the collective effort of the UN over obstructionism and individual nations trying to hobble together strategies to prevent instability from getting out of control.

To deal with jihadist problem in Europe, USA, China and elsewhere, just tracking down a few terrorists and the masterminds will not work. Several major efforts are required. (1) In the short term, arresting active jihadists minimize imminent harm to the citizens. (2) The root of jihadists' discontent and violent action is "Injustice". The desperate "Injustice Collectors" who had experienced or witnessed injustice and ill-treatment to themselves and their compatriots are not necessarily insane, poor or uneducated. While it is impossible to eliminate all injustice in society, something has to be done to address legitimate complaints. (3) An effort to "disperse" and "integrate" the minority groups, eliminate pockets of ethnic ghettos in cities and regions, is absolutely necessary. Reject wrongheaded "multiculturalism" and "accommodation". Adopt "melting-pot" policies. That's the success formula of great empires of the past, e.g. Tang dynasty. (4) Religions are the ignition sparks that ignite the "injustice collectors" and give them false sense of belonging, brotherhood and dignity. Outlaw the tribal religion that endorse vengeance. Declare the ideology and cult of exacting payback, an eye for an eye, as enemy of humanity and the State. Entrench the Golden Rule of "Do No Harm".

China, being a one-party regime, officially atheist and secular, in theory can deal with terrorists without hampered too much by political correctness. Will China take the lead?

Couldn't disagree more with the premise of one of these questions and the conclusion that Ms Lin draws at the end.

First, China's so-called policy of "non-interference" in other countries' affairs is propaganda. The government simply says it's not interfering while it interferes. Bribes in Africa to get desired outcomes, Ambassadors walking around Malaysia's Chinatown on the eve of an anti-Chinese protest, big money to Malaysia, announced this week, as "loans", are all interference in others' affairs. Beijing says China doesn't interfere because the Communist Party tolerates zero criticism of what they, as dictators, do in China and pretend they can legitimately take the high road when they are telling others to mind their own business.

So interfere they do, and none so bad as the "non-military" airstrips China is building right smack in the middle of huge oil and gas deposits in the South China Sea, right off the coasts of four neighbors and thousands of kilometers away from China. That interference is simply stealing from neighbors.

So the conclusion that the Middle East is the place for the US and China to start cooperation would suit China's leaders just fine, as it puts the South China Sea issue on hold, just what they want.

There's no way the US should cooperate with China anywhere until they back out of the South China Sea and start to follow the rules the rest of the civilized world follows.

Xi Jinping is the son of a revolutionary. Revolution is about gaining state power and establishing a governing ideology. Abu Bakr-al-Baghdadi is trying to establish an Islamic/Sunni state in Syria and Iraq. A political settlement would include the establishment and recognition of such a state. If China is at war with ISIS and Al-Qaida, they are in a good position to seek such a settlement. There is a plane at the bottom of the Indian Ocean with the Chinese victims of the war. The upcoming Treat of Mosul should present the new boarders for Syria, Iraq, and the Islamic Caliphate.

The stabbing deaths of 31 rail passengers at Kunming and the vehicle attack on pedestrians near Tiananmen Square are little different from Palestinian terrorist attacks on unarmed civilians in Israel. China should join forces with her newest growing trade partner, Israel, to exchange anti-terrorist tactics and technology. Only through cooperation and coordination with other nations, which are victims of terrorism, can China expect to make inroads against the common threats which threaten them all!

It's the old story: the enemy of my enemy is my friend. The U,S., Europe, Russia, and China now all face the common enemy: jihadist terrorism.

Yes and if China wants to be a hegemon they need to step up their world security options.

When commenting on the history of the region known since Qing times as 'Xinjiang' - '[a separatist movement Beijing has often linked to violence involving Uighurs, a mostly Muslim Turkic people native to Xinjiang]' - New York Times' editors might do well to keep in mind that the peoples now subsumed under the name 'Uyghur' or 'Uighur' moved into the region from Mongolia in connexion with the fall of the Uyghur Khanganate in 842. The Han have a history in the region which dates back more than a millennium earlier....

Henri

It's ironic that just because the West sees an excuse for separatists/terrorists in China, somehow there's no excuse for Islamic terrorism against the West. The policies of the West is what created ISIS. It's the policies of the West that is the reason behind the worst refugee crisis Europe has faced since WWII. You know why Obama seems to be having trouble dealing with ISIS? It's because ISIS was just an excuse just for a foreign power trying to change a government, namely Syria, to serve its interests. It's because the US has more influence over Sunnis than they do Shia. Obama was bragging about the US being energy independent. That's irrelevant because what's more important than that is controlling the world oil supply and that's determined by who controls the Middle East. That means protecting Sunni Arab control of oil in the Middle East over Shia Iran. And that means defacto being in bed with ISIS to rid Shia Assad in Syria. Obama is suspicious of Russia's motives in Syria when they only target Assad opponents not ISIS. Well Obama is using ISIS to weaken Assad. That's why Obama seems to have made no progress against ISIS. Obama is looking out for his legacy and he doesn't want to be a hypocrite like he made Bush with Iraq leaving boots on the ground. Obama has gone out the way to prevent that which is why he's resorted to outsourcing American foreign policy even trying to get China involved to which this article too is attempting.

What will China do about the terrorism including torture for anybody who opposes the Party?

The slaughtering of the three Chinese railway executives last Friday during a terrorist attack on Radisson Blu hotel in Mali may just be the straw that broke the camel's back.
China's willingness "to step up its global antiterrorism efforts" is welcome. As it prefers to act "under the "United Nations banner" rather than the "United States banner", it can, together with the other four permanent members of the UN Security Council, pass a resolution to fight ISIS. This will make the mission appear more universal. None of these five countries have been spared from terrorism, so they shouldn't have any reason to veto.