Day: March 25, 2024

On March 22, the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum hosted an event on human rights violations in Xinjiang, titled “We Don’t Even Know If They’re Alive”: China’s Mass Atrocities against the Uyghurs.

At the event, Naomi Kikoler, director of the museum’s Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, discussed the urgent need for international attention and action regarding the crisis facing Muslim Uyghurs in northwestern China.

Afterwards, RFA Uyghur reporter Shahrezad Ghayrat interviewed Kikoler, who has extensive experience in human rights advocacy, about the significance of the museum’s platform in raising awareness about atrocities committed against the Uyghurs based on their religious and ethnic identity. 

Kikoler also talked about the immediate need for protective measures for Uyghurs within and outside China, including asylum provisions and support for organizations documenting the crimes, and what role the international community should play to address the Uyghur issue.

The interview has been edited for length and clarity.

RFA: What is the significance of the museum hosting events like this? 

Kikoler: For the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, it is so critically important that we lend our voice to communities that are experiencing some of the most horrific atrocities that can be perpetrated. 

And for us, the plight of the Uyghur community is something that has been front and center for us for a number of years. There are few communities where there is such direct targeting purely on the basis of the Uyghur community’s religious and ethnic identity, where we see persecution at this level, and where we see crimes that really defy what we could even comprehend as being possible in terms of how people can treat each other. 

So for us, it was really an opportunity to show support and solidarity and use our platform to hopefully help compel much needed conversations, especially among policymakers. 

RFA: What are some key takeaways from today’s discussion, and what steps should be taken to address the Uyghur crisis moving forward? 

Kikoler: There are so many things that we need to take away. First and foremost is that there needs to be immediate efforts to try to protect the Uyghur community that is facing threats in China. There were a number of different strategies that were talked about that could possibly help provide relief. 

One of the things that really struck me are the threats facing the Uyghur community outside China, the fact that people face incredible risks coming forward and sharing their experiences — the fact that individuals may have family members detained in China [and] the fact that China threatens people who are living in the United States. 

There are efforts that local police enforcement can take and that the U.S. government can take to try to provide protection to the Uyghur community. The U.S., Canada [and] a few other governments have been taking important steps towards providing asylum for Uyghurs. But we have to be talking with many more countries about how to provide safe haven for Uyghurs who are able to get out of China and who need to be protected. 

And we need to be thinking about what other types of assistance and security can be provided when there are such high levels of intimidation [and] online threats. So for me, in a very practical sense, that’s important. 

Another component is just really doubling down and providing as much assistance as possible to Uyghur organizations that are trying to document the crimes that are being committed. That type of support is not just financial support and technical support, but it’s also looking at what information exists, even classified information, satellite information, [or] other information that the intelligence  community has that can be released [and made public to show the true nature of the Chinese government’s crimes. 

In doing so, that may help not just in the long-term efforts to advance justice, but it will also help get other governments aligned and hopefully work together to stop these crimes from happening. 

RFA: How should the international community address human rights abuses committed against Uyghurs in Xinjiang? 

Kikoler: The international community is absolutely essential in trying to come up with solutions and strategies that can help protect the Uyghur community. 

What I think is unfortunate is that China has been so deft at building relationships with key governments that they de facto silence governments from doing the right thing when it comes to protecting the Uyghur community. That’s true, tragically, for many countries that we would have thought would be natural allies. 

[There are] a lot of countries that now have business deals with China through the Belt and Road Initiative. Tragically, [there are] also a lot of countries that are part of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, where you would hope there would be a natural affinity. 

You have a group of people who are being targeted not just [because of] their Uyghur identity, but also [because of] their Muslim identity. And in that regard, we need to see a much more, coordinated outcry and effort to [apply] pressure to protect the Uyghur community. 

RFA: What are the most effective strategies for advocating for Uyghurs? 

Kikoler: I’m in awe of the efforts that are taken by the Uyghur community. The courageous journalists [who] are trying to shed light on what is happening is an incredibly important aspect of Uyghur advocacy. The tribunals that have been created, notably the tribunal in the U.K. to shed light on what is happening to the Uyghur community, helps to galvanize public attention and draw attention to it. 

I have just been astounded by how effective the Uyghur community has been in navigating the halls of Congress and parliaments around the world, but especially in Congress, finding allies in the Senate and in the House to come up with comprehensive legislation that actually reverses the onus and puts the onus on U.S. businesses to show they’re not using Uyghur forced labor. That’s absolutely brilliant! We’ve never seen anything like that in any other instance where these types of crimes are happening. It is putting more pressure on U.S. businesses to account for how they’re doing their work. 

The Chinese government is finding creative ways to get around that, and we have to be even more dogged then in the supply chain investigations and in putting a really big spotlight on U.S. businesses and what they’re doing. 

I’m hopeful that they’ll continue to be more legislation, including looking at dual-use technology and other forms of emerging technology, where research and design is being undertaken by American, Canadian and European businesses, and then being used to actually create conditions by which the Uyghur community is being surveilled, targeted and persecuted. 

There have been so many effective strategies already used by the Uyghur community. In a way, the responsibility now is not on the Uyghur community’s shoulders. The responsibility is on everyone else to actually listen and do something about it. 

Edited by Roseanne Gerin and Malcolm Foster.

Hong Kongers took to the streets of cities around the world over the weekend to protest a second national security law known as “Article 23” that critics say violates rights to freedom of expression and association, as governments updated travel advisories to warn citizens of an increased risk of detention.

In London, around 400 protesters holding banners that read “Free Hong Kong, Revolution Now!” — a slogan of the 2019 pro-democracy movement that has been banned in the city — rallied outside the British government’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office to protest the Safeguarding National Security Law, which took effect on Saturday.

They chanted, “Say no to dictatorship!” and “Hong Kong independence is the only solution!” as they marched through Chinatown en route to the rally, where some trampled the official flag of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in protest.

Rallies also took place in Sydney, Vancouver, Taipei and elsewhere.

The law is the second national security law to be passed since 2020, and will plug “loopholes” left by the 2020 National Security Law imposed on Hong Kong by Beijing in the wake of 2019 protests, according to the government.

But critics say Article 23 will likely extend the existing use of “national security” charges to prosecute peaceful dissent and political opposition, striking a further blow at human rights protections in the city.

The British government on March 22 updated its travel advice for Hong Kong to warn citizens that they could be detained or removed to mainland China for some offenses or prosecuted for “supporting individuals who are considered to be breaking the national security laws,” which includes statements critical of the authorities, including online.

Australia updated its advice on the same day to warn its citizens of an increased risk of detention if they travel to Hong Kong.

“Hong Kong has strict laws on national security that can be interpreted broadly,” the advice now reads. “You could break the laws without intending to and be detained without charge and denied access to a lawyer. We continue to advise … a high degree of caution.”

A Hong Kong government spokesman on Friday condemned the advice as “scaremongering,” saying such warnings were “tactics aimed at destabilizing Hong Kong.”

Avoiding political topics

Protests against the new law also took place in several Canadian cities including Vancouver, where around 300 protesters formed a human chain and sang the protest anthem “Glory to Hong Kong,” which has been banned from public performance or dissemination in Hong Kong.

Others carried placards calling for independence for the city, which has seen a sharp deterioration in its promised rights and freedoms since the 1997 handover to Chinese rule.

Some wore masks, reflecting recent reprisals by authorities in Hong Kong against overseas activists and their families back home.

Two protesters who gave only the nicknames Amy and Candy told RFA that they came to Canada through the lifeboat visa scheme, but they are careful to avoid mentioning politics when speaking with their families back home.

“You have to think carefully before you say anything, because if someone hears you, they could report you and get you arrested,” Candy said.

Amy added: “They want to find an excuse to target anyone they don’t like.”

A spokeswoman for protest organizers Vancouver Brothers who gave only the nickname Christine for fear of reprisals said the definitions of the “crimes” in Article 23 are very broad, and anyone could be targeted regardless of nationality.

She cited the arrests of Canadians Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor in China on “espionage” charges as retaliation for the Vancouver arrest of Huawei Chief Financial Officer Meng Wanzhou in 2018. 

“We want to call on the international community to please help save Hong Kong, and to impose sanctions on Chinese Communist Party and Hong Kong officials because they have taken away freedom and democracy in Hong Kong,” Christine told RFA.

‘Last nail’

In Sydney, dozens of protesters sang “Glory to Hong Kong” and watched performance artist Pamela Leung stage a work titled “The Last Nail,” depicting the Article 23 legislation as the “last nail” in the coffin of Hong Kong’s rights and freedoms. 

Protesters also carried placards pointing to more than 1,700 political prisoners since the first round of national security legislation was imposed on the city, and draped chains around the protest site.

“The chains are just a reference to political prisoners in Hong Kong — they actually reach much further than that,” a protester who gave only the name Ivan for fear of reprisals told RFA at the scene. “If governments don’t move to prevent it, they will extend and trap the whole world.”

In democratic Taiwan, former political prisoner Lee Ming-cheh told a rally organized by the Hong Kong Outlanders campaign group that if Taiwan didn’t pay close attention to China’s handling of Hong Kong, then its 23 million people could be next.

“China has never followed the law, doesn’t abide by its own commitments, and has ignored international law, so China will consider Taiwan, which it has never ruled, its territory,” Lee said.

“Taiwanese should stand in solidarity with Hong Kong. If there is no way to curb China’s destruction of the rule of law in Hong Kong … the next victim will definitely be Taiwan,” said Lee, who served a five-year sentence for “subversion” in a Chinese jail.

Harder for journalists

Former CNN China correspondent Mike Chinoy said the National Security Law and the Article 23 legislation will make it harder for foreign journalists to work in the city.

“The National Security Law and Article 23 are going to make people reluctant to talk to journalists,” Chinoy said, adding that the 2019 protest movement had likely “terrified” Chinese President Xi Jinping.

“There was always a lot of suspicion about Hong Kong because it was so Westernized and it was so separate,” Chinoy said in a recent interview with RFA.

“My sense is that they saw in Hong Kong a rebellious peripheral area heavily influenced by foreigners that was challenging the central government, and I think that must have absolutely terrified them.”

In a March 19 statement, former colonial governor Chris Patten said the law was “another large nail in the coffin of human rights and the rule of law in Hong Kong.”

“Governments and parliaments around the world will take note and so will international investors,” he said.

Chris Smith, chairman of the US Congressional-Executive Commission on China warned on March 22 that the new law could target employees of U.S. companies in Hong Kong and called on the business community to carefully assess the risks posed by the legislation.

Meanwhile, 88 parliamentarians from the United Kingdom, United States, Canada, EU and other countries said the law was a “flagrant breach” of China’s obligations under the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration, a U.N.-registered treaty governing the handover of Hong Kong to China.

Benedict Rogers, CEO of the London-based rights group Hong Kong Watch, said the Article 23 legislation was a “death knell” for Hong Kong’s remaining freedoms.

“We urge the international community to address the new threats posed by Article 23 legislation by imposing targeted sanctions, broadening lifeboat schemes for Hong Kongers, ensuring that the law is not applicable overseas and used for transnational repression,” Rogers said, calling for a review of Hong Kong’s special status, including the city’s separate Trade and Economic Offices in foreign countries.

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Malcolm Foster.

U.S. Attorney-General Merrick Garland on Monday accused the Chinese government of an effort “to intimidate Americans” and silence dissidents abroad by using a massive state-run hacking program.

The Chinese Embassy denied the claims as “groundless” and said they were part of an ongoing smear campaign by the United States.

Garland’s comment came as the U.S. Justice Department unsealed charges against seven Chinese nationals it says are part of a hacking program run by China’s Ministry of State Security, or MSS, and has targeted the White House, Congress and critics of Beijing.

“The Justice Department will not tolerate efforts by the Chinese government to intimidate Americans who serve the public, silence the dissidents who are protected by American laws, or steal from American businesses,” Garland said after the charges were announced.

“This case serves as a reminder of the ends to which the Chinese government is willing to go to target and intimidate its critics,” he said.

A Justice Department statement named the seven accused as Ni Gaobin, Weng Ming, Cheng Feng, Peng Yaowen, Sun Xiaohui, Xiong Wang and Zhao Guangzong. It said they were charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusions and conspiracy to commit wire fraud.

Their “vast illegal hacking operation” was aimed at both “economic espionage and foreign intelligence objectives” and targeted American private companies, journalists, elected officials, academics and Chinese dissidents living in the United States, it said.

Matthew Olsen, assistant U.S. attorney general in charge of national security matters, said that the seven indictments helped to “shed further light” on the “Ministry of State Security’s aggressive cyber espionage and transnational repression activities worldwide.”

The U.S. State Department said it was offering rewards for any information leading to the arrest of the seven accused hackers. The U.S. Treasury, meanwhile, issued a spate of related sanctions against hackers it said were also tied to the Ministry of State Security.

Hacking program

Known to cyber security experts as Advanced Persistent Threat 31, or APT31, the group was allegedly “part of a cyberespionage program run by the MSS’s Hubei State Security Department” in Wuhan.

The alleged hackers stand accused of both “testing and exploiting” the malware used to target people in the United States and of “conducting surveillance and intrusions” against specific people and companies.

Targeted American officials “included individuals working in the White House, at the Departments of Justice, Commerce, Treasury and State, and U.S. Senators and Representatives of both political parties.” Other prominent targets included Hong Kong pro-democracy activists, a defense contractor and an American opinion polling company.

The hackers sent out more than 10,000 emails since 2010, the Justice Department said, which had at times “resulted in successful compromises of the targets’ networks, email accounts, cloud storage accounts, and telephone call records” that lasted for years.

The emails “often appeared to be from prominent news outlets or journalists and appeared to contain legitimate news articles,” it said. 

However, they in fact “contained hidden tracking links, such that if the recipient simply opened the email, information about the recipient” was sent back to servers in China, including about their other devices.

They then “used this information to enable more direct and sophisticated targeted hacking” of their targets, including taking control of their home internet routers and devices, it said, enabling them often unfettered access to the professional and personal information.

The hackers typically used “zero-day” exploits, which refers to how long security vulnerabilities have been known to the wider community – meaning, essentially, that the holes had yet to be discovered.

Chinese denial

The charges follow FBI Director Christopher Wray’s recent warning that Chinese state-backed hackers were waiting to “wreak havoc” on critical infrastructure in the United States if ordered to do so by Beijing.

Chinese officials have denied those claims. On Monday, they continued to paint the accusations as being part of a smear campaign.

Liu Pengyu, the spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, told Radio Free Asia that China is in fact “a major victim” of cyberattacks and accused the United States of being “the origin and the biggest perpetrator of cyberattacks” worldwide.

He in turn accused American state-backed hackers of targeting Chinese critical infrastructure, a claim U.S. officials have denied.

“China firmly opposes and cracks down on all forms of cyberattacks in accordance with law,” Liu said, calling on U.S. officials to “stop smearing other countries under the excuse of cyber security.”

“Without valid evidence, the U.S. jumped to an unwarranted conclusion and made groundless accusations against China,” he added. “It is extremely irresponsible and is a complete distortion of facts.”

But the denials are unlikely to sway officials in Washington.

The U.S. Treasury Department on Monday said it had also issued sanctions against the Wuhan Xiaoruizhi Science and Technology Company, which it called “a front company” of the Ministry of State Security responsible for “multiple malicious cyber operations.”

A statement from the Treasury Department said that more Chinese nationals – Zhao Guangzong and Ni Gaobin – were sanctioned for their role in the “front company,” which it said specifically targeted critical infrastructure companies and was linked to APT31.

Zhao and Ni are specifically accused of targeting the U.S. Naval Academy and the U.S. Naval War College’s China Maritime Studies Institute in a “spear-phishing” attack that took place in 2010. 

The sanctions ban American citizens and companies from doing business with those targeted, including providing any banking and financial services, and bans those targeted from U.S. soil.

Similar sanctions were also issued by the United Kingdom, with British Foreign Secretary David Cameron calling the alleged hacking program “completely unacceptable” and a threat to freedoms worldwide.

“One of the reasons that it is important to make this statement is that other countries should see the detail of threats that our systems and democracies face,” Cameron said, adding that he had already raised his concerns directly with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi.

Edited by Malcolm Foster

A photo of Chinese President Xi Jinping with his eyes closed and frowning has been published by a number of media reports, sparking skepticism among Chinese-speaking social media users regarding its authenticity. Some claim that the photo has been digitally doctored.

But AFCL found the photo to be genuine. It was taken at “two sessions” in Beijing in early March by the Associated Press. 

The claim was shared on X, formerly known as Twitter, on March 13, 2024.

“This should be a fake picture made by foreign forces using AI,” the claim reads. 

The claim was shared alongside a photo of Chinese President Xi Jinping with his eyes closed and frowning. 

The photo was taken from a report published by the British tabloid Daily Mail Online on March 11.

“He [Xi] was spotted seemingly wincing after taking a sip of his brew while attending the closing session of the annual parliamentary meeting,” the caption of the photo reads. 

The photo has triggered doubts among Chinese-speaking social media users about whether it is authentic.

“Can anyone tell me if this photo is real and not?” one user asked in the comment section of Reddit. 

But AFCL found the photo to be genuine. 

Photo by AP

In the report by the Daily Mail, the publication attributed the photo to the Associated Press, or AP.

Keyword searches on AP’s archives found the corresponding photo published on March 11. 

“Chinese President Xi Jinping, rear, reacts after drinking from a cup at the closing session of the National People’s Congress held at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, Monday, March 11, 2024. (AP Photo),” the caption of the photo reads. 

The photo was also featured in AP’s “Pictures of the Week Asia Photo Gallery” on March 15. 

‘Rules’ in China

Radio Free Asia reported in 2011 that journalists in China have “rules” to follow when they report the activities of the country’s leaders. 

According to the rules, seen by RFA at that time, the images of the leaders must be “clean,” and that no one can be filmed sitting in an indecent position, smoking, playing with a pen, talking on the phone, or eating.

Other “rules” include not taking photos of fruits or people who are reading while holding umbrellas.

A former journalist Liu Yiming told RFA at that time that although these “rules” had always been unwritten at China’s state media, the media would definitely be held accountable by the authorities once violated. 

These regulations inevitably restrict press freedom. He said, adding that: “This definitely constitutes a restriction on press freedom.”

Edited by Taejun Kang and Malcolm Foster. 

Manila on Monday summoned a Chinese envoy to strongly protest the “aggressive actions” of the China Coast Guard in the South China Sea, following an incident that left three crew members aboard a Philippine supply boat injured.

The Philippines was on Saturday attempting to resupply troops stationed on a ship at Second Thomas Shoal, known locally as Ayungin Shoal, when China’s coast guard and maritime militia “harassed, blocked, deployed water cannons, and executed dangerous maneuvers against the routine RoRe [rotation and resupply] mission,” officials said.

Chinese water cannon blasts hurt three Filipino crew members and caused “significant damages to the vessel,” the Philippine Coast Guard said.

“The Department of Foreign Affairs summoned the Charge d’affaires of the Chinese Embassy this morning to convey the Philippines’ strong protest against the aggressive actions undertaken by the China Coast Guard and Chinese Maritime Militia against the rotation and resupply mission undertaken by the Philippines in Ayungin Shoal on 23 March 2024,” Ma. Teresita Daza, a spokeswoman for the Department of Foreign Affairs, said in a statement. 

China “has no right to be in Ayungin Shoal,” she said, a low-tide elevation that lies well within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone.

“China’s continued interference with the Philippines’ routine and lawful activities in its own exclusive economic zone is unacceptable,” said Daza.

Saturday’s incident was the second time this month that Philippine crew members were injured in a confrontation between Chinese and Philippine ships in the disputed South China Sea.

Tense incidents at sea have become more frequent lately, as Chinese ships try to block Philippine ships and boats from delivering supplies to Manila’s military outpost there. 

The Philippines in 1999 deliberately grounded an old navy ship on the shoal – BRP Sierra Madre – where it maintains a detachment of troops.

Four crew members aboard a military-contracted Philippine ship sustained minor injuries when a water cannon blast from China Coast Guard ships shattered the windshield on the bridge during the incident on March 5, according to Filipino officials.

“The Philippines urges China to take the correct track of abiding by international law and respecting the legitimate rights of other states like the Philippines, and to cease and desist from its continued violation of international law,” Daza said, adding the Philippine embassy in Beijing had also been instructed to lodge a protest with China’s foreign ministry. 

China claims nearly the entire South China Sea, including Second Thomas Shoal that is within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone. Vietnam, Brunei, Malaysia and Taiwan also have territorial claims to the sea.

A 2016 ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague dismissed China’s sweeping historical claims to the waterway, but Beijing has refused to acknowledge the ruling. 

 This frame grab from aerial video footage taken and released on March 23, 2024 by the Armed Forces of the Philippines shows a vessel described as a China Coast Guard ship (L) deploying water cannon against the Philippine military-chartered civilian boat Unaizah May 4 during its supply mission near the Second Thomas Shoal. (Armed Forces of the Philippines/AFP)

On Monday, China’s embassy in Manila said it had communicated its “strong opposition” to the Philippine government, which it accused of attempting to transport construction materials to the shoal – a claim that Manila has denied. 

“The China Coast Guard in response has implemented lawful regulation, interception, and expulsion in a reasonable and professional manner,” the embassy said in a statement.

It added that the international arbitration award in 2016 was illegal and therefore “null and void.”

Philippine Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro on Monday urged Beijing to take its claims of sovereignty in the South China Sea to international arbitration.

“If China is not afraid to state its claims to the world, then why don’t we arbitrate under international law?” Teodoro told reporters, adding Manila would not budge on its position.

“They are the ones who entered our territory. No country believes [their claims] and they see this as their way to use force, intimidate and bend the Philippines to their ambitions.”

Washington condemned China’s most recent actions as “dangerous” and said they “undermine regional stability but also display a blatant disregard for international law.”

“[The] People’s Republic of China (PRC) ships’ repeated employment of water cannons and reckless blocking maneuvers resulted in injuries to Filipino service members and significant damage to their resupply vessel, rendering it immobile,” said State Department spokesman Matthew Miller.

Jeoffrey Maitem and Mark Navales reported from Manila.

BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated online news organization.

Coup leader Senior Gen. Min Aung Hlaing said Myanmar will hold elections for the first time since the military seized power in 2021 if the junta can bring peace and stability to the country, Russian media reported.

But in an interview with the ITAR-TASS news agency, republished by pro-junta media, he admitted that nationwide elections may not be possible.

“If the State is peaceful and stable, we have a plan to hold the election in relevant sections as much as we can even if the election is not held nationwide under the law,” Min Aung Hlaing said, during the interview in Yangon on March 18.

After staging the coup coup d’état on the pretext of voter fraud and incorrect voter registration lists, the junta has not held elections for more than three years. 

The junta extended a state of emergency for another six months on Feb. 1, and achieving the peace and stability needed to end it appears to be a distant goal following a coordinated campaign by the country’s ethnic armies from the end of last year.

Since the Three Brotherhood Alliance of ethnic armies launched Operation 1027 in October and the Karenni Ethnic Armed Organizations staged Operation 1111 from  November, the military’s territories have decreased across the country’s ethnic states and even in areas like Sagaing traditionally occupied by the Bamar ethnic majority. 

Operating across Rakhine, Shan and Chin states, allied ethnic armies have taken significant territories in the country’s west and north. As of March 17, the Arakan Army controlled eight townships across Rakhine state and one to the north in Chin state. 

Since China brokered a ceasefire between the junta and alliance in early January, the Kachin Independence Army has stepped into the fray in Kachin state, claiming to have captured more than 40 junta camps as of Wednesday. 

Myanmar Democratic Party chairwoman Than Than Nu told Radio Free Asia  that even holding an election in more peaceful parts of the country may be challenging.

“Partial elections like this also exist in India due to … the political situation,” she said. 

“If the elections were to be held in Myanmar like this too, one thing that needs to be emphasized is the security situation in places where the election would be held.”

Translated by RFA Burmese. Edited by Kiana Duncan and Mike Firn.