AEC’B1948GC
MARCH2021
2
Foreword
This report is the first independent expert application of the 1948 Genocide Convention to the ongoing treatment of the Uyghurs in China. It was undertaken by the Newlines Institute for Strategy and Policy, in cooperation with the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights, in response to emerging accounts of serious and systematic atrocities in Xinjiang province, particularly directed against the Uyghurs, an ethnic minority, to ascertain whether the People’s Republic of China is in breach of the Genocide Convention under international law. For this purpose, dozens of experts in international law, genocide studies, Chinese ethnic policies, and the region were invited to examine pro-bono all available evidence that could be collected and verified from public Chinese State communications, leaked Chinese State communications, eye-witness testimony, and open-source research methods such as public satellite-image analysis, analysis of information circulating on the Chinese internet, and any other available source. The resulting report is a presentation of the facts that could be established together with careful analysis of whether China bears State responsibility for breaches of the Genocide Convention. We believe the conclusions are clear and convincing. We do not make any recommendations for action, but we do stand prepared to share our information and analysis with relevant institutions or actors interested in these findings. Dr. Azeem Ibrahim Director Special Initiatives Newlines Institute for Strategy and Policy
3
Executive Summary
1.This report concludes that the People’s Republic of China (China) bears Stateresponsibility for committing genocide against the Uyghurs in breach of the 1948Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (GenocideConvention) based on an extensive review of the available evidence and application of international law to the evidence of the facts on the ground.2.The examination was conducted by recognized independent experts on internationallaw, genocide, China’s ethnic policies, and the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region(XUAR).3.
Intent to Destroy
. Under Article II of the Genocide Convention, the commission of genocide requires the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, [a protected group], assuch.” The “intent to destroy” does not require explicit statements. Intent can beinferred from a collection of objective facts that are attributable to the State, includingofficial statements, a general plan, State policy and law, a pattern of conduct, andrepeated destructive acts, which have a logical sequence and result
—
destruction of the group as such, in whole or in substantial part
.
4.
High-level statements of intent and general plan
. In 2014, China’s Head of State,President Xi Jinping, launched the “People’s War on Terror” in XUAR, making the areaswhere Uyghurs constitute nearly 90 percent of the population the front line. High-levelofficials followed up with orders to “round up everyone who should be rounded up,”“wipe them out completely … destroy them root and branch,” and “break their lineage,break their roots, break their connections, and break their origins.” Officials describedUyghurs with dehumanizing terms and repeatedly likened the mass internment of Uyghurs to “eradicating tumors.”5.
Comprehensive State policy, pattern of conduct and repeated destructive acts.
a.
Government-Mandated Homestays.
Since 2014, the Government of China(Government) has deployed Han cadres to reside in Uyghur homes as monitors,resulting in the rupturing of family bonds. County governments further coerce,incentivize, and actively promote Han-Uyghur marriages.b.
Mass Internment
. In 2017, the XUAR legislature formally legalized the massinternment of Uyghurs under “De-Extremification” regulations. The top securityofficial and entities dispatched a manual and set of documents across the regionwith orders to police Uyghurs, “speed up the construction” and expansion of themass internment camps, “increase the discipline and punishment” within the campsand maintain “strict secrecy” over all information, which is not to “bedisseminated,” nor “open to the public.” The manual outlines the complex hierarchy