Flux Mulder

This really shows the extent to which its narrative on Xinjiang has actually backfired on the U.S. They recently released at the UN a "Joint Statement on the Human Rights Situation in China" on the topic (usun.usmission.gov/joint-sta…), which China responded to with its own joint statement entitled "Opposing the Politicization of Human Rights" (un.china-mission.gov.cn/eng/…). Besides the US, only 14 countries signed their statement, including Israel which tells you everything you need to know about this group's actual commitment to "human rights," especially towards Muslims. The other signatories are 7 European small states (Albania, Czechia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, North Macedonia, San Marino) together with Australia, Japan, Palau, Paraguay, Ukraine, and the UK. Which means the US haven't even managed to mobilize countries that are traditionally their closest allies: they're missing 2 out of the so-called "five eyes" (Canada and New Zealand didn't sign) and 4 out of the G7 (Canada, France, Germany and Italy aren't signatories). In other words, more than anything what the U.S.'s statement says is "we're very isolated geopolitically and almost no-one follows us anymore on this narrative." China's response, on the other hand, has an impressive 85 signatories that together represent nearly half the world's population (vs just 7% for the US's statement). Even more telling, China's response represents the immense majority of the world's Muslim countries (including countries such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Nigeria and Pakistan) when the only Muslim-majority country on the US's list is Albania. Which says an awful lot when the US's statement is purportedly about defending "Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities": Muslim states in their immense majority prefer to sign a response statement denouncing the US's rhetoric around Xinjiang as "politicization of human rights and double standards, [and] interference in States’ internal affairs under the pretext of human rights." I had a look at similar past statements at the UN on these topics and the West-led peak coalition seems to have been 51 countries in 2023 with this "joint statement on human rights violations in Xinjiang": gov.uk/government/speeches/j… At the time, the entirety of the G7 was signing as well as almost all European countries. And, at the time, China's response (un.china-mission.gov.cn/eng/…) gathered 72 countries. Which means that on this topic, while the Western coalition has collapsed from 51 to 15, China's supporting coalition has actually grown from 72 to 85. All in all, the irony is almost perfect: the Xinjiang narrative was clearly designed to drive a wedge between China and the Muslim world, and to reposition itself as speaking for Muslims by championing what it thought it could build into a "cause célèbre". However, it's now painfully obvious that this strategy hasn't only failed, it's been inverted: far from distancing itself from China, the Muslim world is siding WITH China to denounce the U.S.'s Xinjiang rhetoric as shameful "politicization" of human rights and "double standards." And rather than divert attention from America's own appalling record when it comes to the treatment of Muslims, they instead put a spotlight on it given the spectacular absurdity of co-signing a statement defending Muslim minorities together with Israel.