This could be a big deal, although it has some potential downsides. "U.S. Says China’s Repression of Uighurs Is ‘Genocide’" nytimes.com/2021/01/19/us/…
A US govt legal designation of something as a "genocide" has traditionally been a difficult bureaucratic and legal task. See, e.g., the fight over the 2004 US designation of Sudan's actions in Darfur as "genocide" theatlantic.com/international/…
The Clinton Administration in 1994 appeared to have barred the use of genocide w/r/t Sudan for legal and policy reasons. The Bush Admin did quite a lot of fact finding and legal analysis, and was still not sure the evidence was strong enough.
They ended up announcing the designation, but there was a huge internal fight about it. I imagine a similar internal battle within the Trump Admin went on.
I am not an expert on the law of genocide, but I would imagine the problem here is specific intent. We know the re-education camps and forced labor, etc. is happening. But is it specifically intended to eliminate all Uighurs or Uighur culture? Or is it counter-terrorism?
Sadly, even if the effect is to essentially eliminate Uighur culture/people, that does not necessarily establish an intent to do so, as a legal matter. The ICJ in the Serbia/Croatia cases refused to find genocide due to lack of specific intent. news.un.org/en/story/2015/…
These legal issues, among other things, counsel for prudence in deploying the "g" word. The danger is that the US will make this designation, but other states and/or intl organs will not go along, making this look like a US-China dispute.
Having said all this, I am open to the likelihood that the Chinese govt really is committing genocide against the Uighurs. But we need to have the best evidence possible to make this claim, and (ideally) a broader intl consensus. I am not sure we are there yet.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
