Did the UK Parliament really say there’s a Genocide in China?

First of all, it’s appropriate to point out that, unlike any of the people who voted on the topic, I’ve actually been to Xinjiang, I’ve travelled extensively and seen no evidence whatsoever of anything approaching a genocide — there are high security, barbed wire fences and walls in places that we don’t see in other parts of China and, for sure there is a high degree of surveillance. But all those things apply just as much (in fact, slightly more so) to me, a foreigner, as they do to the local people, be they Han Chinese, Uyghur, Kazakh, Tajik, Hui, Tibetan, Mongolian or any of the other dozen or more ethnic minorities in the region. When asked about the security and the restrictions, the only answer I’ve ever heard is: “It’s much safer than it used to be” And indeed, having spent weeks on a bike travelling thousands of kilometres across the Region, I can attest to the fact that its as safe a place as I’ve been in my life. It’s also a place that was, until relatively recently a target for internationally trained and equipped terrorists. Proof of which is not going to be given here, but easily traced online by any observant critical thinking person.

So, getting back to the “declaration of genocide in Xinjiang” made by the UK parliament, apart from my belief that it’s wrong, let’s find some perspective.

There are 650 “Members” of the House of Commons. It’s impossible to know how many of those 650 were in the House, but photographs and video footage of the time of the vote, show an almost empty room — only 6 people can be seen — it’s possible there were others outside of the camera view, but certainly, there weren’t more than 20 people present at any time.

In order for anything to be passed by the house a quorum is required, this is the minimum number of Members to establish something as being passed — that number is 40 — However, the Houses of Parliament don’t do anything as crass as count the Members, there is an honour system and a quorum is assumed. So, the 20 or so Members shout “Aye” or “Nay” when asked to vote and the loudest group wins the vote. In this case, although there were only a few people in the room, they all shouted “Aye” and the vote was passed.

Looking at the MP bringing the motion to Parliament, Nusrat Munir Ul Ghani, known as Nus Ghani. She’s intelligent and well-educated with a Master Degree from Leeds University. She was also a senior MP under former Prime Minister, Theresa May, but relegated to the backbenches under Boris Johnson. In her past, she’s done some great work in Children’s and women’s health charities. But she’s also worked for the BBC World Service, well renowned for their anti-China bias and was one of the MP’s recently sanctioned by China for her stance on the often alleged but as yet unproven “Uyghur genocide”. What’s interesting about Ms Ghani is that, despite being a Muslim, she’s never been seen on record anywhere as having been in contact with Muslim leaders, or anyone else inside Xinjiang — a clear aberration given that she’s so vocal on what she believes (and frequently alleges) happens in the region.

The Motion Ms Ghani put before the House is not binding, it’s not legislation, it is purely the opinion of a backbencher. It’s possible this could be elevated into proper business of Parliament and then become law at some future time but clearly from the number of MPs present, there is no evidence this will happen, in fact, quite the contrary, the Prime Minster and the house rejected a bill to accuse China of Genocide just a few weeks ago preferring to leave the matter to lawyers and courts qualified to make these judgements.

So, was Ms Ghani’s opinion even debated? No it wasn’t, between 2:41pm and 4:58pm a discussion took place with a total of 23 people involved, (https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-04-22/debates/6FA4F300-D244-443E-A48C-57378876DE54/HumanRightsXinjiang) but in a discussion where all 23 speakers have the same opinion, it can’t be called a debate. Once again, it’s worth noting that not one of the 23 “debaters” has visited China, let alone Xinjiang. What is more alarming, is the fact that more than 620 MPs didn’t attend, one very valid and possible reason, despite free speech being one of the bastions of UK democracy, is that anyone who speaks up against this narrative is considered inhumane, a denialist and would be ostracised by society, simply for having a point of view that differs from the proponents and questions the veracity of this narrative. Something which is apparent to anyone, including the writer, on social media who questions this line of thought.

The Inter Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), an extreme right wing multi-national group, which is, according to Ms Ghani organised by Luke De Pulford, are the architects of this Motion, hailed it as a great success, a unanimous judgement passed on China. However, they neglect to mention the fact that 23 or less, of a possible 650 Members were present for the vote, meaning 97% of the Members of Parliament didn’t bother to attend, discuss or vote, they also neglected to mention that it is a non-binding motion bought by a junior minister attempting to raise awareness to her own agenda and, despite their claims, is not the view of the British Government.

It was resolved by the 3% of Members in attendance: That this House believes that Uyghurs and other ethnic and religious minorities in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region are suffering crimes against humanity and genocide; and calls on the Government to act to fulfil its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide and all relevant instruments of international law to bring it to an end.

In other words, the few members of the House present during this vote, feel there is an issue and would like the government to act in accordance with their feelings. Something the government on 22nd March this year, already declined to do.

To add insult to the injury that many in the region are already feeling, in making the announcement, the speaker of the House referred to Xinjiang as “Jin Jang” and the Uyghur people as “Weejers” — at least if you’re going to support an ethnic group, learn where they’re from and how to use their name properly!

The “debate” and subsequent vote serve one purpose, and one purpose only: to be hoisted by its supporters as a victory whenever they want to show that they have support for their misguided efforts to smear their 3rd largest trading partner. Support which doesn’t seem to be coming from 97% of the UK Parliament. They may congratulate themselves on achieving a small victory, but that’s about all this motion provides, a small victory to small people.