Thursday, 5 April 2018

Chinas Campaign Against Uighur Diaspora Ramps Up


Chinas Campaign Against Uighur Diaspora Ramps Up
In its attempts to control Uighurs abroad, the Chinese government is holding families hostage.
BY MARTIN DE BOURMONT      APRIL 3, 2018
Mahmut, a Uighur living in a Scandinavian country, describes 2017 as the “saddest” year for his family. Born to secular Muslim parents, Mahmut, who asked to be identified by a pseudonym, says his family’s troubles began in late 2016 when the Chinese government pressured a cousin and his wife to return to China’s far western region of Xinjiang from Egypt.

Local authorities threatened to imprison his parents and confiscate their property if his cousin, who was studying theology, did not return. When Mahmut’s cousin arrived in Xinjiang, the authorities jailed him and his wife.
Then, in early summer 2017, Mahmut tried to call his mother, who was recovering from a recent hospitalization. No one picked up, and Mahmut feared for the worst.

Communication with his parents was already sporadic, and when his father finally picked up the phone, Mahmut could sense fear in his voice. “Your mother went to study,” he told Mahmut, saying that community service officials had instructed her to go.

As Beijing continues its clampdown on Xinjiang, the state is using overseas Uighurs’ families in China as a way to pressure them.

As Beijing continues its clampdown on Xinjiang, the state is using overseas Uighurs’ families in China as a way to pressure them.
 And over the past year, the Chinese government has intensified its campaign to surveil and intimidate the diaspora, according to Uighurs and outside experts following the issue.

“This is clearly part of the determined push to silence overseas critics,” says Kevin Carrico, a lecturer in Chinese studies at Macquarie University in Sydney. “Whether Uighurs, Tibetan, Han, Australian, or American, anyone who is outspokenly critical of the party-state’s increasingly ridiculous policies is going to eventually feel pressure.”

A Turkic-speaking minority, Uighurs in China and abroad have faced increasing repression from the state over the past few years in response to a low-level insurgency in Xinjiang, a reaction rights advocates argue is vastly disproportionate.

In Xinjiang, the government has established a sophisticated surveillance network that mixes informers, guards, and high-tech measures such as a DNA database, and thousands of Uighurs — potentially up to 10 percent of the ethno-national group — now languish in re-education camps.

With Xinjiang locked down, China is now looking to rein in the Uighur diaspora, often outspoken in its opposition to Beijing’s rule. Last year, China ordered some Uighurs studying abroad to return home or risk having their families punished. In Europe, Chinese police contacted Uighurs in France demanding personal information, and China also detained relatives of six U.S.-based reporters working for Radio Free Asia’s Uighur service.

Parhat, an American citizen — who also asked not to be identified by his real name — faced problems similar to Mahmut. In October 2016, police arrested Parhat’s niece under the pretext that her laptop contained copies of forbidden Islamic texts.

She was released after a month, only to be arrested again in June 2017.
Parhat decided to return, in part to arrange new care for his sister, who was ill and had been cared for by his niece. Landing at a major airport in eastern China, security personnel detained him for more than three hours with no explanation.

When he finally arrived at the small city in Xinjiang where most of his family lives, Parhat’s older brother told him that police officers had paid him a visit a few days before his arrival. The police had asked Parhat’s brother to “take him to us.”

Two days later, Parhat was detained by public security officials, who took him to a squalid hotel room, where they confiscated his phone and personal documents, including his passport. Holding a packet of what seemed like hundreds of names, the officials began reading them out loud and asking if he knew people who worked at the Uyghur American Association.
“The guy was telling me how big a crime I committed because I helped those people to escape and join ISIS,” Parhat says.

Parhat was released later that evening on the condition that he agree to continue talking to security officials. Instead, he fled Xinjiang, intending to book an earlier return flight to the United States from a city in eastern China. As Parhat waited to go through security at the airport, officials began to pull Uighurs out of the line. Terrified, Parhat pretended not to speak Chinese and showed his American passport.

After passing for a foreigner, Parhat got through the checkpoint.
Parhat’s brother-in-law was not so lucky. Following Parhat’s escape from Xinjiang, his brother-in-law was arrested. “Nobody knows where he is,” Parhat says.
Alongside the surveillance and detention system, the Chinese government applies another tactic that seeks to turn loved ones and trusted confidants against one another, says James Millward, a professor at Georgetown University and the author of Eurasian Crossroads: A History of Xinjiang. “There are cases of Uighurs communicating, clearly under duress, and saying scripted things to deliver a message to relatives or friends abroad,” Millward says.
According to Ilshat Hassan, a prominent Uighur activist in the United States, this practice goes back many years.

In 2009, Hassan — who left Xinjiang in 2003 — received word from his now ex-wife that he would be offered a good job with a high salary, among other benefits, if he returned home.

Later, a former university classmate of Hassan’s, now working as a police officer, called him in 2012 and said he would be reunited with his wife and son if he behaved well.
The pressure campaign may not be entirely new, but technology has made it more powerful.

“It’s the technological element that was not there before,” Millward says. “So many people communicate via WeChat and phones and Skype, [and] because the internet is so controlled now, the Chinese state can know of all communications like that. They know and can visit a family within hours or minutes even of a contact from abroad. Many families have had to delete contact information from their phones.”

For those like Parhat, the consequences of the Chinese government’s policies in Xinjiang reverberate far beyond its borders. “The whole of Xinjiang was like a prison,” Parhat says. “Once you get in, it’s very hard to go out.

“Relatively few people who have made it through these [re-education camps] and made it out have felt it wise to share that information internationally,” says Sophie Richardson, Human Rights Watch’s China director. “Most of what we know about, from a small handful of sources, really, is people being obliged to sit for hours at a time and listen to lectures about the merits of Xi Jinping thought, for example.”

For those abroad, such as Mahmut, answers about what has become of their relatives sent to the camps are hard to come by.
Sending coded messages to a cousin outside of Xinjiang, Mahmut learned that his mother had been placed in a re-education camp.

Mahmut began to call relatives in Xinjiang, only to find they were too afraid to speak to him. “They don’t answer,” Mahmut says. “Or they hear my voice and don’t talk and cut the connection.”

The cousin also told Mahmut that the Chinese government had recently recalled a distant relative from Turkey, only for the relative to die under mysterious circumstances in a Xinjiang prison.

Then, in January, Mahmut lost contact with his father. Neighbors reported that he, too, was in re-education.


Sunday, 1 April 2018

Pakistan used non-State actors in Kashmir in 1947, Dr Shabir Choudhry


Pakistan used non-State actors in Kashmir in 1947
Dr Shabir Choudhry      31 March 2018

No matter what critics say, bitter fact is that people of Jammu and Kashmir are a confused lot. They are more confused and divided now than they were in 1947.

Pakistani sponsored ‘jihad’ in Jammu and Kashmir started in 1947; and despite death of tens of thousands of innocent people it has not ended yet. All the signs are that because of Pakistani obsession to capture Kashmir at any cost, this ‘jihad’, bloodshed and destruction will continue.

Leaving aside the thinking and wisdom of those who oppose unity and independence of the divided State; to me it is sad to note that even many nationalists of Jammu and Kashmir who are apparently endeavouring for unification and independence of the former Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir have failed to shun their communal thinking.

They claim the entire State of Jammu and Kashmir, yet they miss no opportunity to criticise and belittle the Maharaja Hari Singh who was also a great nationalist; and who tried his level best to protect and enhance the interests of people and the State. Some of us, demand restoration of the State Subject Ordinance, which shows wisdom and nationalism of the Maharaja Hari Singh, but don’t regard themselves as citizens of the divided State.

Some accuse him of being a communal Ruler; and others call him inept and cowherd. Some others claim his right to rule Jammu and Kashmir ended in 1946, because, to them, the State was on lease for 100 years. It is sad that these social media scholars, with communal thinking provide no evidence to support their contention; and as a result, their fairy tales only add to the confusion of the people and divide us further.

The plot gets comical when some ‘Socrates’ claim that the Maharaja Hari Singh was deposed by a man called Ghulam Nabi Gilkar, who used a fake name of Anwer to issue a statement from Rawalpindi; and appointed himself as a President of Jammu and Kashmir. On strength of this statement published in Pakistani Military and Civil Gazette, these ‘Socrates’ claim that Maharaja Hari Singh’s right to rule was ended on 4 October 1947.

With no disrespect to the struggle of those who stood up against injustice and heavy taxes of the Maharaja, especially against Muslim subjects, it is imperative to dismiss this false propaganda, which says:

 ‘after the Maharaja was deposed and a revolutionary government came into existence; the Azad Kashmir Army (this government and army did not exist on grounds in first week of October) invaded all the areas of what are part of so called Azad Kashmir and was knocking at the doors of Srinagar, when Pakistan in order to stab the independence of Jammu and Kashmir established a government of Azad Kashmir on 24 October 1947’.

Anyway, leaving aside these fairy tales spread by imaginary ‘warriors’ of famous fiction writer Nasim Ijazi to boost morale of the Muslims of South Asia; facts provided by some Pakistani writers tell us a different story.

A Pakistani army officer, Major Agha Humayun Amin, in his book ‘The 1947 -48 Kashmir War – The war of lost opportunities’, writes:

‘The Muslim League high command had asked Mian Iftikhar Ud Din, Minister for Refugees to prepare a plan aimed at ensuring that the Muslim majority State of Kashmir should join Pakistan. Brigadier Akbar Khan then serving in the Pakistan GHQ wrote an appreciation ‘Armed Revolt Inside Kashmir’ on Mian Iftikhar Ud Din’s request. It appears that Mr Jinnah had tasked Liaquat to Handle the Kashmir business.1

According to Major Agha Humayun Amin, there were three principal parties in the whole invasion affair of Jammu and Kashmir.

1/ Senior Muslim League leaders like Sardar Shaukat Ayat and former Major Iftikhar Ud Din who were ‘ordered by Mr Jinnah to do something to help Kashmiri Muslims.

2/ Khurshid Anwar (and army officers like Brigadier Akbar Khan and Indian National Army officers.

3/ The tribesmen. 2

Major General Akbar Khan in his book, ‘Raiders in Kashmir’, writes that two weeks after the partition of India and creation of Pakistan, he went to Murree to start his work. This is where he met some Muslim Conference leaders, including Sardar Ibrahim Khan.

When this most important military assignment was given to him, Akbar Khan was Brigadier and posted as Director of Weapons and Equipment at GHQ of Pakistan. In his ‘appreciation’, Armed Revolt inside Kashmir’, he highlighted strategic, military and economic importance of Jammu and Kashmir. To him, if Jammu and Kashmir became part of India then India could:

‘establish such stations anywhere within a few miles of the 180 miles long vital road and rail route between Lahore and Pindi. In the event of war these stations would be a dangerous threat to our most important civil and military lines of communication. If we were to protect this route properly, it would take a major portion of our army to do so and we would thereby dangerously weaken our front at Lahore. If we were to concentrate our strength at the front, we would give India the chance to cut off Lahore, Sialkot, Gujrat and even Jhelum from our military base at the Pindi’. 3

Major General Akbar Khan further writes that even in peace time the situation could not be acceptable because Pakistan ‘would be permanently exposed to a threat of such magnitude that our independence would never be a reality’. 4

After giving details of economic importance of Jammu and Kashmir and how Pakistan heavily relies on this he concludes:

‘Kashmir’s accession is not simply a matter of desirability but absolute necessity for our separate existence’. 5

Those Muslim citizens of Jammu and Kashmir who are still fooled by the Pakistani propaganda that Pakistan cares and love people of Jammu and Kashmir should, now after 70 years, open their eyes. The Pakistani planned tribal invasion in name of jihad was designed to protect Pakistani military, strategic and economic interests; and welfare of the people was not their concern. In any case, in clear violation of the Standstill Agreement and Islamic teaching, the Pakistani government dishonoured their written agreement and attacked its weak neighbour.

Brigadier Akbar Khan, in line with instructions of the political leaders of the Pakistan, emphasised in his Plan that presence and involvement of the Pakistan government must not be visible. The entire matter should be presented as a local uprising of Muslims of Jammu and Kashmir against ‘cruel Hindu despot’. The British Officers of the Pakistani army mustn’t know anything about this either.
 
To review the Plan and finalise the matters, a meeting of senior leaders was held in Lahore in early September which was presided by the Prime Minister of Pakistan. Although the copies of the Plan were circulated to the participants of the meeting, Akbar Khan had to make a presentation to the participants, which included Liaquat Ali Khan, Prime Minister of Pakistan, Brigadier Akbar Khan, Mian Ifitikhar Ud Din, Sardar Shaukat Ayat, the Finance Minister Ghulam Mohammed who later became Governor General of Pakistan.

In this meeting, all the details were finalised and logistics were worked out. Shaukat Ayat was appointed overall in charge of this operation. Ghulam Mohammed was to provide all the necessary funds. Col Azam Khanzada of the Ordnance Cops was to take care of arms and ammunition. He even agreed to secretly divert arms to Kashmir; and report that the ‘faulty’ equipment ‘would be shown as dumped in the sea’.

Maharaja’s 9,000 army had approximately 2,000 Muslims which included some officers too. The Planners of the Tribal attack agreed that these 2,000 Muslims should be persuaded to change side in name of Islam and jihad, and fight against the Hindu Maharaja. Furthermore, it was agreed that India’s only route – land access from Jammu should be cut off; and a strong-armed group was selected to control the Srinagar airport to ensure that India does not fly in troops.

Brigadier Akbar Khan also took in confidence Brigadier Sher Khan at the GHQ who was Director Intelligence. He was to provide all the necessary information needed for the success of the operation. Also, some former Indian National Army officers were tasked with certain duties. Apart from that, Air Commodore Mr Janjua agreed to use Pakistan Air Force to provide essential help in transporting weapons, ammunition, winter clothing and tents etc. 6

According to the Plan, Major Khurshid Anwar, who was appointed by Liaquat Ali on recommendation of Finance Minister Ghulam Mohammed, was to command the northern force of tribesmen to attack on Muzaffarabad Srinagar axis. Major Zaman Kiani of the Indian National Army was to ‘command the Southern force tasked to operate against the Kathua area in South’.

Those who call the Maharaja Hari Singh cowherd, assert that his forces could not face challenge of ‘Azad Kashmir Army’ and rebels in Muzaffarabad and other parts of so called Azad Kashmir. Azad Kashmir Army, at that time, was just like the 4 October government, a fairy tale.

The Maharaja’s small army, 9,000 included around 2,000 Muslims. Gilgit Scouts was a separate military force, which was established by the British to protect and enhance their interests, and that is exactly what they did when they were ordered by their boss Major WA Brown on 1 November 1947.

This small army was scattered all over the towns of Jammu and Kashmir and was not is a position to defend the State territory. Because of the religious hatred, which engulfed the entire Indian Sub - Continent, some advisors were sceptical about loyalty of the Muslim soldiers of the Maharaja army.

Major Aslam Khan, an officer of State Forces and Military Cross of Second World War also joined the tribesmen. Major Aslam Khan was a son of Brigadier Tor Gul, who was a loyal subject of the Dogra Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir before 1947. When around 2000 tribesmen moved from Abbottabad the Muslim guard platoon of 4 Jammu and Kashmir Infantry also joined the raiders.

With treachery of about two companies of Muslim soldiers, the State troops were further weakened in areas of Muzaffarabad; and tribesmen and rebel soldiers ‘successfully’ cleared Muzaffarabad – Domel area by 23 October. From there on, Major Agha Humayun Amin, wrote, ‘there was practically nothing between Muzaffarabad and Srinagar to stop the tribesmen.’

In Baramulla, according to Major General Akbar Khan, out of 14,000 inhabitants only 3,000 survived. The rest perished in the first Pakistani sponsored ‘jihad’ in Jammu and Kashmir. 7

All historians, including many Pakistani nationals agree that Baramulla was conquered on 24 October 1947; and small army of the Maharaja was demoralised and was on the run. Muslim units of the army on this border joined the aggressors; and helped them to commit human rights abuses and loot and kill citizens of Jammu and Kashmir.

The tribesmen and their masters could have taken over Srinagar without any challenge. However, their priority was different. They were busy looting, kidnapping and raping women; and celebrating their conquest. This clearly shows so called ‘liberation’ of Kashmir was not on their priority list.

Major Khurshid Anwar who was commanding the tribesmen sent a messenger to negotiate a deal as to what post he was to get once Kashmir was liberated. 8

Major Agha Humayun Amin, in his book claims that there was also an issue of – Crores of the Maharaja’s treasury. Major Khurshid Anwar and the Tribesmen believed this treasure belonged to them, as according to the verbal agreement everything that was removable was theirs. This huge amount of money was also removable. Others thought it belonged to Pakistan as it was official treasury, and did not belong to the public; and they were permitted to loot and plunder everything that belonged to the people.

Some people claim Pakistan started using non - state actors to advance their political and imperial agenda during General Zia’s time. This is not true. Pioneer of this policy was Major General Akbar Khan, who on clear instructions of Pakistani political leadership of that time, planned an attack on Jammu and Kashmir by using tribesmen and some local people to capture Kashmir. At that time, term ‘proxy war’ was not coined; but it was a proxy war, which Pakistan started by violating a Standstill Agreement with the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir.

This unprovoked and un- Islamic attack was launched in name of jihad to capture Kashmir. It resulted in death of tens of thousands of innocent citizens of Jammu and Kashmir. In this brutal expedition, our women were raped, kidnapped and resulted in forced division of Jammu and Kashmir.

Pakistan did not win the war it launched in 1947, but it developed a military doctrine of using non-state actors to advance their foreign policy and imperialist wars. Credit should be given to them that they successfully fooled people of Pakistan and Jammu and Kashmir since 1947. They also, to a large extent, fooled the world community; and still claim to be victims.

Despite all the pressure, their proxy war and strategy of using non-state actors has not ended. This mean more trouble in South Asia.

References:
1.   Major Agha Humayun Amin, ‘The 1947 -48 Kashmir War – The war of lost opportunities’, page 3
2.   Ibid, page 4
3.   Raiders in Kashmir, page 9
4.   Ibid, page 10
5.   Ibid, page 10
6.   Ibid, page 19
7.   Ibid page 29
8.   Ibid page 38