China as a state has been known for its retaining of culture and ethnicity for a long time. The Chinese communist party (CCP) in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR) has been involved in repression and violence against the Muslim Uighur community in the region. There have been various human rights organizations questioning the human rights violations within the region. The Chinese have been accused of possible genocide against Uyghurs and other Muslim communities in the region. The Chinese government is said to have detained more than one million Uyghurs against their will over the past few years in a large network of what the state calls "re-education camps", and sentenced hundreds of thousands to prison. The repeated violence of the Chinese government in the region brings in the questions of security and power. The power of life and death is essentially the right to take life or let live. The Chinese government's repression of the minority community and extorting them to abide by certain norms puts forth the power over life and death with the sovereign. While one might say that this right to take life or let live is being replaced by the power to foster life or disallow it to the point of death, the power or control over life and death remains without detaching insecurity rather is growing towards furthering securitization through other forms.
When we look into the Copenhagen school’s approach to securitization, the act of security is taken to signify the presence of an existential threat to something that can threatened or the referent object as a threat to its survival. Apart from this, for securitization to be successful, the target set of audiences must accept the move. However, this becomes a problem with non-democratic states where authority can break free from normal rules. This can be witnessed within a non-democratic state like China where despite not much favor such securitisation and larger resistance from within and outside the state is able to proceed with its ideal of securitising certain issues at its convenience. In China, there have been various threats raised by the voices of leadership within the state as a part of legitimizing security policies that are enacted against minority groups in China which does not conform to the CCP’s perception of acceptability rather than a larger group of people. The Chinese government tends to protect its original ethnic community – Hans and their way of life that the state seeks to promote and protect which then becomes the referent object of security that is threatened by the “Islamisation” of China.
Securitization is supposed to be a positive thing that protects society and its citizens, but scholars have started asking the question if it is true to an extent. In the case of China, it claims that it provides security to its citizens and protects its citizens, however, its attempt to provide security to a particular community, not only deprives security of another set of communities but also necessitates their elimination for providing security to whom the Chinese government claims to be legitimate citizens of the state. In this sense, the Chinese attempt at securitization of the Uyghur has been counter-productive in the sense that it was not just the Chinese state that failed to assimilate Uyghur to the Han Chinese way of life, but also Uyghurs from different parts brought acts of violence which continued for almost thirty years as a response to increasing repressive security practice of the Chinese government. This might be a successful securitization process from the perspective of the PRC and this might continue for a long period, However, this would then bring up the question of whether securitization is positive or that desecuritising things is the move forward.
While the question of the validity of securitizing moves in China remains, the construction of the Uyghurs as a threat brings in questions of the power of the state in doing so and the relevance of securitization itself. The East Turkistan forces were directly and indirectly presented as a threat. The subject of securitization is indirectly presented as dangerous or evil. The Chinese media has constantly portrayed East Turkistan forces as an existential threat to the security of the country as animals or infected individuals. The Chinese ministry had claimed that China was being threatened by terrorism and that the East Turkistan forces were trained terrorists. Through this the Chinese ministry produces the fight against these supposed-to-be terrorists as an important part of the global fight against terrorism, thereby magnifying the size of the threat with international consequences. There was also other news claiming the group to be a ‘grave public hazard’. The Chinese also linked the group with Al Qaeda and the 9/11 attack. The Uyghur community was then being constructed as a security threat and the creation of a suspect community. The linkage of Uyghur separatism as terrorism through invoking the US-led ‘war on terror’ made the US unwilling to criticize the human rights violations of China against the Uyghur community, which further led to the acceptance of securitizing moves of oppressive states. Regulation played an important role in the portrayal of threats, this generalization was facilitated by law. There were broad formulations of terrorist laws that possessed the risk of placing human rights activism or religious activities under the category of international terrorism, there was no precision as to what should and should not be considered terrorism(Palencia, 2021). This depicts the role of speech and discourse in securitization. However, the performative power of speech needs to be located within broader structures of meaning and power. The speech is a bodily act, it is said to be the blind spot of speech. The implications of the body are integral to the constitution of its identity (Hansen, 2000). The discourse is essentially accompanied by bodily threats as we can see in the case of China through its depiction of biopower in terms of disciplining the Uyghur community through re-education camps and surveillance, biometric data collection, and forced sterilization of Uyghur women. The Uyghur women are being forced to marriage with Han men and their stripped of their agency. While there have been voices coming across the globe, voices from these women are being silenced as the CPC could harm their families if they refuse to obey orders. This puts women with a very limited possibility of speaking about its security problem while there is little engagement of gender in securitization itself and subsuming gender-based security into broader forms of security rather than a gendered referent object.
The Chinese government's actions against its minority communities, particularly the Uyghur community, involve numerous human rights violations and crimes against women. Through its implementation of securitization and biopower frameworks, the government's approach raises questions about the complexities and motivations of security and securitization itself.
References
Ole, Wæver. 1995. “Securitization and Desecuritization.” InOn Security, edited by Ronnie Lipschutz. New York: Columbia University Press.https://www.libraryofsocialscience.com/assets/pdf/Waever-Securitization.pdf
Hansen, Lene. 2000. ‘The Little Mermaid’s Silent Security Dilemma and the Absence of Gender in the Copenhagen School’. Millennium 29 (2): 285–306.
Foucault, Michel. The history of sexuality: An introduction. Trans. Robert Hurley. New York: Vintage 95 (1990). (Selection: Part Five: Right of Death and Power over Life)
Palencia, E. R. (2021). Uyghurs in Xinjiang: The Construction of a Suspect Community. Comillas Universidad Pontificia.
Christopher Baker-Beall & Robert Clark (2021): A “Post-Copenhagen” Analysis of China’s Securitization of the Uyghur: A Counterproductive Securitization?, Democracy and Security, DOI: 10.1080/17419166.2021.2020037
Maizland, L. (2022, December). Uyghur Women and Forced Marriages in China. The Diplomat. Retrieved from https://thediplomat.com/2022/12/uyghur-women-and-forced-marriages-in-china/
Grammaticas, D. (2013, May 7). China Xinjiang: 'No such thing' as re-education camps, say officials. BBC News. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-22278037
I would like to appreciate how this analysis sheds light on the troubling situation faced by the Uyghur community in China, where the government's actions have sparked international concern. It reveal the deep-seated dynamics of power, control, and discrimination at play. The discussion around securitization and the construction of threats highlights how authoritarian regimes can manipulate narratives to justify repression. It's a stark reminder of the consequences when security becomes a tool for oppression rather than protection. Additionally, the insights into the gendered dimensions of these atrocities, particularly the targeting of Uyghur women, add another layer of complexity and injustice to the situation.
How the implications of the Chinese government's efforts to assimilate and "re-educate" the Uyghur population. How do these measures undermine the Uyghurs' cultural, linguistic, and religious identity, and what are the long-term consequences?
Your analysis offers a complex relationship between state power dynamics and human rights breaches in China's treatment of the Uyghur people which we have talked about tin our course about China in Global Politics. By examining the rhetoric of securitization and its impact on oppressed people, particularly the Uyghurs, you show the critical need for intellectual involvement and international conversation to confront systemic human rights violations. It was an insightful read!
When we discuss China and its utilization of measures like re-education camps, surveillance, and forced sterilization, it showcases a troubling manipulation of people's bodies and identities to uphold control. Do you believe that the negative consequences of securitization are rooted in the ideologies embraced by governments?
Thank you for addressing the critical issue of violence and repression faced by the Uyghur community in China. I'm curious about the potential long-term consequences of the international community's reluctance to criticize China's human rights violations against the Uyghur community. How do you think this acceptance of securitizing moves by oppressive states might impact global efforts to address human rights abuses and uphold international norms in the future, especially considering the growing influence of authoritarian regimes on the world stage?