Al-Qaeda Calls for ‘Holy War’ Against China
The plight of the Uighurs is beginning to inflame Muslim populations.
Last week, a leading al-Qaeda figure called for a holy war against the People’s Republic of China. Will extremists now begin attacking Chinese citizens and interests at home and around the world?
In a video posted on jihadist websites, Abu Yahya al-Libi, considered the third-ranking figure in al-Qaeda, urged Muslims to rise up against the “satanic” Chinese for their treatment of the Uighurs — Turkic Muslims living in the country’s northwest area. He also urged “a vast media campaign” to publicize their fate at the hands of “oppressive” China. “Today, a new massacre is being carried out by Buddhist nationalists and communists against the Muslim population in eastern Turkestan,” said al-Libi, referring to the name the Uighurs have given their homeland. “It is a duty of Muslims today to stand by their wounded and oppressed brothers.”
Those brothers — and their sisters as well — have in fact been wounded and oppressed by the Chinese, who have taken their land, denied them their religion, and tried to eliminate their culture. Beijing says their territory is inalienably a part of China, but the Chinese name for the Uighur homeland belies that claim. On the maps, it’s labeled Xinjiang — or New Frontier. In fact, the Uighurs share almost nothing with the Chinese — not ethnicity, language, religion, or culture. The Han, the dominant group in China, and the Uighurs do not even appear to belong to the same race. China’s Turkic Muslims are, in fact, a conquered people. Virtually none of them want to be a part of the People’s Republic.
The Uighurs established their own republic — East Turkestan — in 1944, but they quickly lost their independence after Mao Zedong sent the People’s Liberation Army to Xinjiang in 1949. Since then, there have been sporadic acts of Uighur violence, but the remarkable aspect of this struggle for self-determination is, considering all the circumstances, how peaceful it has been.
Beijing, however, says Uighur society is full of terrorists. But terrorism has in fact been rare. Most incidents of violence have been directed at security forces of the state, not civilians. And almost all civilian deaths have occurred during insurrections, such as the one that began in early July in Xinjiang’s capital of Urumqi, instead of as the result of targeted attacks. The Uighurs may be many things, but almost none of them are terrorists. That is why the Uighurs captured in President Bush’s war on terror — mostly on false information supplied by Beijing — are now being released from Guantanamo.
China somehow persuaded the Bush administration in 2002 to declare the East Turkestan Islamic Movement a terrorist organization, thereby permitting Beijing to brand all Uighur activists as militants. The American designation, however, has been questioned, in part because the weight of evidence suggests the group, often known by its initials ETIM, does not even exist.
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Gordon G. Chang is the author of Nuclear Showdown: North Korea Takes On the World and The Coming Collapse of China.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
40 Comments
1. Terry, Eilat - Israel:I have far more sympathy for Tibet. I also support Taiwan in it’s effort to remain independant of China. But more Muslim separatists? No thanks.
Oct 15, 2009 - 1:06 am 2. Proud_Kafir7908:If one day China goes from neutral/appeasing on jihad to an actual anti-jihad nation, we in the West stand to benefit greatly from it. Until mahoundianism is beaten back all the way to the Arabian Peninsula (the end of oil will help a lot with that, but it won’t do all that has to be done), it will still continue to be an enormous inbred bedouin savage threat to civilization wherever it’s allowed to flourish.
Oct 15, 2009 - 3:03 am 3. Michael:I’d like to see more evidence that ETIM does not exist and that these Uighurs are as innocent as Chang maintains.
I just re-read Thomas Joscelyn’s “The Uighurs, in their own words,” and got a very different impression than the one presented here.
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2009/04/the_uighurs_in_their.php
Oct 15, 2009 - 4:12 am 4. gboisjo:Unlike the US and Europe with all of there hyper sensitivities China will deal with the Ungers or any other insurrection within there borders in a straight forward no nonsense manner. A breath of fresh air to say the least. Al-Qaeda can do nothing to the Chinese.
Oct 15, 2009 - 4:42 am 5. Paul -Indiana:Do you suppose that the Chinese will read the Miranda rights to their terrorists?
Oct 15, 2009 - 5:26 am 6. Byron Dickens:Fantastic. The Chineese won’t screw around like we do.
Oct 15, 2009 - 5:28 am 7. Doc99:Uighurs wobble but they don’t fall down.
Oct 15, 2009 - 5:29 am 8. Dave M.:Between the Chicoms and the jihadis I’ll take the Chicoms any time. However, once the jihadis realize that the Chicoms will not provide them with any constitutional “rights” and will simply slaughter them without thinking twice about it, the cowardly Islamofacists will high tail it out of there. Eventually the jihadis will align themselves with the Chicoms because what is bad for the U.S. is good for both of them.
In the mean time, I am sure the jihadi Uighars will all be looking for political and religious asylum here in the U.S. and we will of course grant it to them.
Oct 15, 2009 - 5:31 am 9. anton:@8. Dave M.:
Oct 15, 2009 - 6:23 am 10. biblio44:You got that right. Islamofacists are only tough when they are bombing little girls or gang-raping helpless women, in a straight fight they run from our troops. The Chinese will be far less accomodating than we are on any sort of battlefield. They are also a lot less squeamish about assasination, so any of the AQ babbling heads that pops up can expect to get tapped by a ChiCom agent.
4. gboisjo: “Unlike the US and Europe with all of there hyper sensitivities China will deal with the Ungers or any other insurrection within there borders in a straight forward no nonsense manner.”
5. Paul -Indiana: “Do you suppose that the Chinese will read the Miranda rights to their terrorists?”
6. Byron Dickens: “The Chineese won’t screw around like we do.”
8. Dave M.: “…the Chicoms will not provide them with any constitutional “rights” and will simply slaughter them without thinking twice about it….”
This is exactly the attitude most commentators took when the Soviets attacked Afghanistan: The Russians won’t pussy-foot around, like we did in Vietnam, etc., etc. We’ll see.
Oct 15, 2009 - 6:54 am 11. arhooley:I’d like to know what the Bush administration got in return for pronouncing the ETIM a terrorist organization. The Chinese continue to call us racists and bullies for fighting jihadists abroad. Gordon, got any ideas?
Oct 15, 2009 - 7:11 am 12. Raymond in DC:Chang: “China’s Turkic Muslims are, in fact, a conquered people. Virtually none of them want to be a part of the People’s Republic.”
This is rich. The Christians of the 7th century Middle East, the Zoroastrians of Persia, the Hindus of India, the Berbers of Morocco were also “conquered people” who did not want to be part of the Islamic world. Karma’s a bitch.
The fact is that for more than a millennium most Muslims have lived in countries in which they are the majority. To live as a minority is “unnatural” and contrary to their theology. So it’s not surprising they will inevitably try to change that status by pushing for special rights, autonomy or independence.
Oct 15, 2009 - 8:14 am 13. Edward A.:For all those who admire the way China handles its dissidents unlike the USA, perhaps they should consider moving there.
Oct 15, 2009 - 8:51 am 14. tom:What?? Governments labeling all dissidents as terrorists? Why does that sound so familiar….
It’s a real shame “terrorist” has been used to paint a broad swath across every bit of oppression now and those that try and resist it. Another piece of fallout from the Bush administration- the misuse of a word.
Oct 15, 2009 - 8:52 am 15. Good Ole Charlie:Well, in contrast to Mr. Chang, I don’t think it’s a Bad Thing for the Uighurs to take one on the chin. The Muslim extremists will soon find happier hunting grounds (easier marks) elsewhere and slink away, leaving the natives to face the music.
Oct 15, 2009 - 9:27 am 16. Inrptrn:Famous Old Chinese Proverb: “Kill Chicken, Frighten Monkey”. Uighurs = Chickens; Monkeys = “Everyone Else”. Makes for a stable situation if you rinse and repeat until clean.
Worked for the Five Thousand Years Of Recorded History…should work for another century or so…
While assimilation at gunpoint is unpleasant, eventually it works. Better sooner than later…
This is nothing more than an attempt to radicalize Uighurs to be used as pawns in Al-Qaeda’s worldwide game of destruction and muslim domination.
The only positive that could come out of this would be China taking an active role in wiping Al-Qaeda from the face of the Earth.
The Uighurs as a peaople are caught in the middle and their fate will be decided for them.
Oct 15, 2009 - 9:57 am 17. Scott:10. biblio44:
This is exactly the attitude most commentators took when the Soviets attacked Afghanistan: The Russians won’t pussy-foot around, like we did in Vietnam, etc., etc.
Actually they didn’t. It was the covert US aid in the form of over a billion dollars in weapons and training that defeated the Soviets. Without it the Afghans would not have been able to stop the Soviets. The mujaheddin were able to bleed the Soviets, basically death by 1000 cuts. Afghanistan is pretty much a backward s**t-hole full of people who live the same as they did in the 7th century, it wasn’t worth the cost to them and its not worth the cost to us.
Both Bush and Obama made a HUGE tactical error in attaching our “military pride” to some half-baked poorly defined “mission” and/or “nation building” there. It was plain stupidity. If we just said “we’re going to hunt & kill AQ and the Taliban and that’s it” then we could have declared victory and left. However we’ve attached impractical and unachievable goals to our definition of victory there and when we cannot meet those goals we will suffer “defeat” even though our military can (and has) kick the crap out of them.
The problem isn’t our troops or their fighting ability or even the costs involved, its our national will. Our politicians and a very loud segment of our population don’t have the stones to actually wage a war as they once did. A war where the enemy is utterly defeated, take a look back at how Lincoln and his generals fought the War of Northern Aggression, look at William T. Sherman & “Unconditional Surrender” Grant. Lee was a very good general but refused to fight the war in the same way as the North, and it often left his much smaller armies near starvation, ill clothed, and in poor health. Also look at the Reconstruction period and how the South was ground under the boot heel of the North after the South was defeated. Today we have foolish rules that get our soldiers killed because we want to “make nice” and be “nationally well thought of”.
Oct 15, 2009 - 10:16 am 18. David W. Lincoln:Holy war, until the time where the Beijing Politburo and the deformed souls who divide the world into the dar al Harb and the dar al Islam, agree on something.
The degree of how credibility challenged the Sons of Allah are rivals the combined depths of the Grand Canyon, the Marianas Trench, all the valleys of the world, and all the trenches underwater.
Yet, they continue to dig.
Oct 15, 2009 - 10:23 am 19. myth buster:Biblio, there are two huge differences between Afghanistan and jihad against the Chinese. 1. We supported the mujaheddin with money and weapons because it was really convenient for us if the Russians lost- the jihadists have no such ally against China. 2. The mujaheddin in Afghanistan had the home field advantage, but here the Chinese do. The jihadists are too arrogant to notice their miscalculation until after they have suffered massive casualties. As far as China teaming up with the jihadists, I think the Chinese are more inclined to invade the Middle East, taking this opportunity to decrease their surplus male population. I’m not saying I agree with the Chinese ruthlessness against its own citizens, I don’t, but I am tired of the US being the only major power even trying to fight Islam.
Oct 15, 2009 - 10:27 am 20. Eric:Unlike we in the West the Chinese have no qualms about crushing their enemies without mercy. We however wring our hands, gnash our teeth and worry about what the world will think.
Oct 15, 2009 - 10:31 am 21. Booker T. Gain:@ Edward A.:
For all those who admire the way China handles its dissidents unlike the USA, perhaps they should consider moving there.
Perhaps you should learn the difference between dissidents and Islamic terrorists.
Oct 15, 2009 - 10:40 am 22. Booker T. Gain:… but I am tired of the US being the only major power even trying to fight Islam.
The voice of reason.
Oct 15, 2009 - 10:43 am 23. Inrptrn:“Today we have foolish rules that get our soldiers killed because we want to “make nice” and be “nationally well thought of”.
The ‘evil eye’ of international public opinion via mass media wherewith the West has developed a ‘guilty conscience’ (which the commies enforce to maximum effect)similar to that of original sin. This didn’t exist at the time of Grant and Lee.
Oct 15, 2009 - 11:13 am 24. gracie:China will not be like America. They will treat these people like the maggots they are and kill them… never blinking an eye.
BIG HUGE DIFFERENCE in Chinese dissidents and the Islamic terrorists.
Oct 15, 2009 - 11:30 am 25. Ruvy:Reading these comments really saddens me.
Not even the author comprhends what is going on. None of you comprehend that Islam is comprised of a number of really different strands of thought, and that it has heresies within it as well.
The Turkestani Muslims have been mostly influenced by the Sufi school of thought, and you will find among the Sufi the largest number of Muslims who actually are peaceful and peace-loving. In addition, you will find in Central Asia, where these Muslims live, the Muslim countries that are friendliest to Israel.
But Islam also has its heretics – and unfortunately these heretics control Islam today. These scum are the Wahhabi. What is going on is that the Wahhabi – through al-Qaeda – is trying to wrest control of the dominant faith of Turkestanis.
If you paid attention to what is going on, you would look to who can suppress or kill the Wahhabis trying to gain a foothold amongst Turkestanis. This does not include the Chinese Communists. It must be a Muslim who keeps his faith clean of the Wahhabi filth.
Oct 15, 2009 - 3:23 pm 26. Judith:The terrorists recently released from Guantanamo & photographed eating ice cream in the Bahamas, or was that Bermuda, where radical Uighurians…they travel. Their Muslim conflict is not a regional one just w/ China…they were captured in Iraq/Afganastan fighting the USA, too. If China wants to supress them, I won’t weep.
Oct 15, 2009 - 5:06 pm 27. JED:The working example of how the Chinese may handle the dissidents compared to the west is in how they handled their pirates on the open seas problem.
Oct 15, 2009 - 6:37 pm 28. Gordon Chang:Sorry, Ruvy, that you are saddened and angry. It would seem more of a problem for the nations of Islam to clean their own houses and not let the fight spill across the international playing fields. Ommission and passivity can be as counter-productive as pro-action.
Michael, the answer is that, considering the injustices they face, there are surprisingly few acts of terrorism.
Oct 16, 2009 - 8:14 am 29. Gordon Chang:gboisjo, China, like most authoritarian powers, will succeed against the Uighurs because it is brutal–and then it will spectacularly fail.
Oct 16, 2009 - 8:17 am 30. Gordon Chang:arhooley, great question. We got little from Beijing except stale or bad information. And we got a blackeye for surrendering our principles. The Chinese saw that the Bush administration could be compromised.
Oct 16, 2009 - 8:29 am 31. Gordon Chang:Raymond in DC, are you saying that it is wrong for the Uighurs to want the same freedoms you have in DC?
Oct 16, 2009 - 8:33 am 32. Gordon Chang:Edward A, thank you for making this critical point.
Oct 16, 2009 - 8:39 am 33. Gordon Chang:Good Ole Charlie, I suspect you do not live in Xinjiang.
Oct 16, 2009 - 8:41 am 34. Gordon Chang:Judith, if the Uighurs at Gitmo were terrorists, they would not have been released. Do you have evidence showing they were fighting against the U.S.? I suspect you do not. Neither did Washington.
Oct 16, 2009 - 8:49 am 35. Gordon Chang:Ruvy, thanks for injecting important information into this debate.
Oct 16, 2009 - 8:55 am 36. Scott:Ruvy:
The Turkestani Muslims have been mostly influenced by the Sufi school of thought, and you will find among the Sufi the largest number of Muslims who actually are peaceful and peace-loving. In addition, you will find in Central Asia, where these Muslims live, the Muslim countries that are friendliest to Israel.
Actually Ruvy these people are the “heretics” not the Wahhabi. If you look at the Koran (or Quran) and Sunnah you’ll see that this is true. Have you ever compared Mohammed to Abraham, Moses, Jesus, or Buddha? The differences are vast. Mohammed was a mass murderer, bandit, oath breaker, and pedophile.
Yes the earlier passages of the Koran are “peaceful” and present ideas similar to the Christian New Testament, however later passages abrogate these earlier verses and urge Muslims to conquest and oppresion. Also much of what is preached that is “good” applies only to other Muslims, kafir however can be treated horribly without it being immoral. In fact it is the duty of a Muslim to subjugate or convert non-believers by any means necessary.
Oct 16, 2009 - 9:25 am 37. Ruvy:Scott,
I’m not scholarly enough to debate Islam. More to the point, I’m not a Muslim myself. But this essay on Wahhabism will make clear why the Wahhabi are heretics to Islam. This website is my window onto the Muslim world outside of Israel. My own window looking out over the mountains of Samaria is my window on the Arab world in Israel.
shavúa tov
Have a good week!
Ruvy
Oct 17, 2009 - 10:13 am 38. Michael Lonie:I have my doubts about the Sufis being benign exponents of Islam. Some may be. Most will support the jihadists, I think, like other Muslims. The Janisseries were the cutting edge of the jihad for centuries under the Ottoman Sultans, spearheading the conquest of much of Christian Europe. The Bektashi order of Sufis had great influence among them. The Janissaries’ uniform had a long flap on its hat, supposedly reflecting the sleeve of a Bektashi imam blessing them as they went into battle early in their history.
A lot of Muslims dislike and fear the Wahhabis, and think of them as heretics. But the Saudis have been more or less buying up world Islam for the last three decades, and money talks. Islam is becoming more Wahhabi, and less local, every year. The spread of Wahhabi Islam is a greater triumph of globalization than the spread of McDonalds, as Mark Steyn pointed out.
Oct 17, 2009 - 8:50 pm 39. Jerry:“Actually Ruvy these people are the “heretics” not the Wahhabi. If you look at the Koran (or Quran) and Sunnah you’ll see that this is true”
Ah, good. Another idiot who’d already decided what the Quran meant before he read it and probably relies exclusively on the myriad little “We’re going to tell you what the Quran means so you don’t actually have to read it or think about it” books that the American right has been turning out since 9/11. And feels somehow that he’s qualified to tell a lifelong Muslim, for whom this is actually a faith and a way of life rather than a talking point, what he believes. It’s always nice when that happens.
“Have you ever compared Mohammed to Abraham, Moses, Jesus, or Buddha?”
Clearly, you haven’t. Maybe you should start with the Bible before you look into the Quran.
“The differences are vast. Mohammed was a mass murderer, bandit, oath breaker, and pedophile.”
As opposed to Moses whose God murdered Egyptian children for the sins of their parents. Who in the desert, murders 3,000 of his own Hebrew people for the crime of not following his god. Who has no problem walking into a country which his ancestors left voluntarily and where there were already people living, stealing their land and killing them off. Hell, the Bible condones genocide up to and including the murder of women and children (look up “Amalekites”).
When speaking of your own prophets in public, say only the good and gloss over the bad. When speaking of someone else’s prophet, say only the bad and ignore the good. Identity politics are so refreshing in their stupidity…
Nov 1, 2009 - 9:24 am 40. Smith:Uighurs are turkish.
Nov 12, 2009 - 11:09 amSend them all to turkey. All problems are solved.