Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_29776705-scaled

Biden cannot ignore Uyghur 'genocide' in Xinjiang

Trump's policy on the systematic oppression of China's Muslim minority was far too muddy.

Analysis | Asia-Pacific
google cta
google cta

Beginning in 2017, up to 1.8 million Turkic Muslims, many of whom are Uyghur and Kazakh, have been interned in re-education camps in Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. While imprisoned, they suffer bullying, brainwashing, and beatings simply for practicing Islam, mild acts of dissent, and contact with Uyghurs living abroad. 

In an interview with National Public Radio, researcher Adrian Zenz said this qualifies as a genocide, as the Chinese party-state is engaging in “suppression of birth,” a key criterion of the United Nations Convention for the Punishment and Prevention of the Crime of Genocide. In addition, the Australian Security Policy Institute has uncovered the presence of more than 380 of these facilities in Xinjiang, suggesting a widespread network of camps across the region with no end to the internment in sight.

The Trump administration’s response to this human rights crisis has been inconsistent. Earlier this year, Trump delayed censuring China on the mass internment of Uyghurs, citing his concern regarding trade talks with Beijing. On June 17, 2020, however, Trump signed the Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act of 2020 into law. This act condemns Chinese party-state actions in Xinjiang, requires continued monitoring for the potential use of sanctions, and discusses harassment of Uyghurs currently living in the United States. 

While the Trump administration has not labeled the atrocities in Xinjiang as a genocide, National Security Council Spokesman John Ullyot condemned Beijing’s actions, citing “horrific acts against women, including forced abortion, forced sterilization and other coercive birth control methods,’” among other human rights violations.

Now that a new administration is set to enter the White House in January of 2021, the question turns to how Mr. Biden should approach what appears to be a worsening situation. His administration should take the following three steps:

Engage in multilateral efforts to publicly censure China: The best way forward is for the Biden administration to work with allies that also have large Uyghur exile populations. In particular, the new administration should support Germany in taking greater action. While German politicians have spoken out earlier on this matter, Angela Merkel has avoided the issue, ostensibly to prioritize economic issues. These are not mutually exclusive, and the U.S. and its Western allies should both condemn the violence in Xinjiang and work to foster constructive economic relations with China. 

In addition, the United States and its allies should use their influence at the World Bank to ensure that China does not receive funding that would support the internment camps or the persecution of Uyghurs in any way. Finally, while it may seem as though working with Muslim majority states would be an appropriate strategy, this avenue is not expected to be fruitful. These states demonstrate less solidarity with the Uyghurs, as they continue to welcome Chinese investment

A consistent human rights stance: Aside from China, Mr. Biden should also challenge other countries that commit human rights atrocities. Doing so would present a contrast with the Trump administration, which ignored rights violations in Saudi Arabia, a United States ally. Trump also ceased to criticize North Korea after beginning discussions on a nuclear deal. Also, in the interest of a commitment to justice on United States soil, the new administration should protect overseas Uyghurs from harassment. Finally, the Biden administration should open the borders to Uyghurs who want to immigrate to the United States and grant them asylum. In addition to being a model of freedom at home, allowing Uyghurs to establish themselves permanently in the United States will serve as a way of protecting Uyghur culture outside of China.

Responsible technological cooperation: The United States can continue to work with China on technology, but it should make sure that it is not contributing to surveillance in Xinjiang. The Biden administration can commit to cooperating with China on green technology so that it may continue to make strides in reducing emissions. Even so, the new administration should ensure that American companies do not sell technology that would aid in the continued surveillance of the Uyghur population in Xinjiang.

The incoming administration has an opportunity to constructively engage with China without ignoring the human rights atrocities in Xinjiang. Articulating a firm stance without alienating Beijing is the best way for the United States to have a meaningful impact with regard to this issue.


Muslim worshipers kneel on prayer carpets outside of Id Kah Mosque at the end of Ramadan back in 2008 in Kashgar, Xinjiang province western China. (Pete Niesen/Shutterstock)
google cta
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
Dan Caine
Top photo credit: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., March 4, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza)

Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?

QiOSK

Gen. Dan Caine’s formulation of American war aims in Iran is remarkable not because it is bellicose, but because it is strategically incoherent.

In a press conference Tuesday morning, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not describe a limited campaign to suppress missile fire, blunt Iran’s naval threat, or even impose a severe but bounded setback on Tehran’s coercive instruments. He described a campaign against Iran’s “military and industrial base” designed to prevent the regime from attacking Americans, U.S. interests, and regional partners “for years to come.” In an earlier briefing he put the objective similarly: to prevent Iran from projecting power outside its borders. Rather than the language of a discrete coercive operation, this describes a war against a state’s capacity to regenerate power.

keep readingShow less
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.