How China Uses Guantánamo’s Former Uyghur Prisoners to Justify the Mass Imprisonment of Uyghurs in Xinjiang Province

27.5.21

Uyghur prisoners in Guantánamo calling for their release in 2009 (above), and Uyghur prisoners in a “re-education” camp in Xinjiang province in 2018 (below).

Please support my work as a reader-funded journalist! I’m currently trying to raise $2500 (£2000) to support my writing and campaigning on Guantánamo and related issues over the next three months. If you can help, please click on the button below to donate via PayPal.





 

CNN is to be congratulated for recently publishing a detailed article about one of lingering injustices of the prison at Guantánamo Bay, involving the Uyghurs, a predominantly Turkic-speaking ethnic group from Xinjiang province, in the north west of China, whose cases I have reported on ever since I first began researching and writing about Guantánamo in 2006.

22 Uyghurs, captured crossing from Afghanistan to Pakistan in December 2001, ended up at Guantánamo, where the Bush administration, seeking cooperation from the Chinese authorities in the global “war on terror” that the US declared after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, obligingly designated the Uyghur prisoners as members of a largely non-existent terrorist organization, the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM).

This decision not only continues to blight the lives of the former Guantánamo prisoners, who were all resettled in third countries between 2006 and 2013, having been cleared of all wrongdoing by the US, but has also been used by the Chinese government to justify its ruthless imprisonment, since 2017, of at least a million Uyghurs in “re-education” camps, where credible allegations have been repeatedly made about how, as well as attempting to eradicate Uyghur culture, religion and identity through “re-education,” the camps also involve the forced sterilisation of Uyghur women, and the forced separation of children from their parents. There have also been numerous credible reports about Uyghur women being subjected to rape and torture.

In his article, CNN’s James Griffiths notes how the Bush administration not only designated ETIM as a Uyghur “separatist organization dedicated to the creation of [an] Islamic homeland in China, through armed insurrection and terrorism,” but also “went further” than the Chinese government at the time,”blaming ETIM for almost every violent incident in Xinjiang from the 1990s” onwards, a position the current Chinese government uses to justify its clampdown in Xinjiang, even though experts, like Sean Roberts, the author of “The War on the Uyghurs: China’s Internal Campaign Against a Muslim Minority,” maintain that “the picture Beijing advances of a cohesive, organized international movement directing terror attacks inside China is very misleading.” As Roberts explained, “My understanding is that there was not really any organized militant resistance, instead there were these isolated incidents [in Xinjiang],” but ”[w]hat happened after 9/11 was that the Chinese government tried to reframe all those incidents as being related to Islamic terrorism, and overtly saying they were funded by Osama bin Laden.”

For former Guantánamo prisoners, the taint of having been held at the prison has a horrible tendency to dog them after their release, despite their abuse by the US authorities, and the fact that almost all of those released were never charged or tried for any wrongdoing. Deprived of fundamental rights as “enemy combatants,” they can be harassed, prevented from travelling and refused passports, a situation that one day, if Guantánamo is ever closed for good, will need addressing.

For the Uyghurs, however, an additional complication was that the terrorist allegations not only made it difficult to find countries that were prepared to resettle them (after the US acknowledged that it was unsafe to return them to China, but refused to resettle them in the US); they have also continued to haunt them to this day. In 2019 and 2020 I wrote about how some of the former prisoners have married Canadian citizens, with whom they have children, but are not being allowed to join their families in Canada, because of the discredited terrorist allegations that first stuck to them at Guantánamo.

This is extraordinary hypocrisy on the part of the Canadian government, as Griffiths explains, not only because they have openly complained about the Uyghur “re-education” camps, whose rationale partly relies on discredited claims of Uyghur terrorism advanced by the US, but also because, while the Canadian government is arguing that the former prisoners are “inadmissible on security grounds” due to their alleged membership of ETIM, “The evidence that the Canadian government is relying on all emerged from their detention in Guantánamo,” as Prasanna Balasundaram, the lead lawyer on the Uyghurs’ case, explained.

Some good news for the former prisoners emerged last November, when the Trump administration finally “revoked ETIM’s designation as a terrorist group,” with a spokeswoman explaining that “ETIM was removed from the list because, for more than a decade, there has been no credible evidence that ETIM continues to exist. We assess that ETIM is now a broad label China uses to inaccurately paint a variety of [Uyghur] actors, including non-violent activists and advocates for human rights, as terrorist threats. China often labels individuals and groups as terrorists on the basis of their political and religious beliefs, even if they do not advocate violence.”

Whether this will help the former prisoners remains to be seen, but it is unlikely to change the Chinese government’s mind when it comes to the false rationale for its brutal “re-education” camps — although on that front it is noticeable that international criticism of China’s actions continues to mount. In March, the US, the UK, Canada and the European Union imposed sanctions on a number of Chinese officials for their role in the camps.

In a statement, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, while making an exaggerated reference to “genocide” in Xinjiang, nevertheless called on the Chinese government “to bring an end to the repression of Uyghurs, who are predominantly Muslim, and members of other ethnic and religious minority groups in Xinjiang, including by releasing all those arbitrarily held in internment camps and detention facilities.”

Sanctions alone will not exert suffice pressure on the Chinese government to close its camps, but the continued focus on what Blinken also called the “appalling abuses in Xinjiang” is to be welcomed. And for those who want to know more about how Guantánamo helped to feed this monstrous state of affairs, and how the former Guantánamo prisoners continue to be stigmatized, I’m cross-posting James Griffiths’ article below. I hope you have time to read it, and will share it if you find it useful.

These Uyghurs were locked up by the US in Guantánamo. Now they’re being used as an excuse for China’s crackdown in Xinjiang
By James Griffiths, CNN, May 15, 2021

The men crouched inside the cave, their faces streaked with dust, occasionally flinching involuntarily at the explosions overhead, which seemed to shake the entire mountain.

Outside was a vision of hell.

Vast plumes of smoke and debris were thrown up into the air as US B-52 bombers and fighter jets let loose a seemingly endless barrage of missiles. The noise from the bombardment could be heard from miles away, a deep, hollow booming sound as each bomb struck.

It was December 2001, and the target of the strikes was Osama bin Laden, orchestrator of the attacks on New York and Washington three months earlier. He was believed to be hiding out, along with a core of al Qaeda fighters, in Tora Bora, a cave complex south of the city of Jalalabad, in the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Whether Bin Laden was there at all remains disputed, but if he was, he managed to slip away, along with several other top al Qaeda leaders, avoiding both the aerial bombardment and US and Afghan troops on the ground. He would dodge US forces for another decade, before being tracked to a suburb of the Pakistani city of Abbottabad, where he was killed in 2011.

After two months of moving from cave to cave, steadily running out of food, their nerves fried by the constant bombings and fear of running into Northern Alliance troops combing the area for any suspected Taliban fighters, the men in the cave also made it to Pakistan.

They were Uyghurs, a Turkic-speaking, predominantly Muslim ethnic group from Xinjiang, a region in far-western China, also referred to by some as “East Turkestan.” While today the group is well known, due to international condemnation of China’s crackdown in Xinjiang — which politicians in the United States, Canada and the Netherlands have described as a “genocide” — in the early 2000s, few Americans had ever heard, or even knew how to pronounce the word Uyghur.

This began to change when it was revealed that almost two dozen Uyghurs were being held without trial in an offshore detention center in Guantánamo Bay, accused of being “enemy combatants” in Washington’s war on terror. Around the same time, the US also controversially added an alleged Uyghur militant organization, the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM), to a State Department list of terrorist groups.

After years of court battles and campaigns by their families and human rights groups, the 22 Uyghurs held at Guantánamo were all eventually declared “non-combatants” and gradually released, with the last three men finally leaving the detention camp in 2013.

None of them were permitted to settle in the US however, nor could they safely return to Xinjiang. Instead they ended up in a kind of legal limbo in the countries that agreed to accept them, mostly small European and Central American nations that are close to Washington.

From there, the former detainees have watched as the situation in their homeland, one that many of them intentionally fled decades ago, has only gotten worse. Many have lost contact with their families, some of whom are believed to have ended up in the sprawling detention camp system set up in Xinjiang, which Beijing claims is vital for “deradicalization” and “vocational training.”

The Guantánamo Uyghurs have also had to watch as China’s propaganda organs have deployed their own existence, and claims made by Washington about ETIM during the “war on terror,” as the justification for Beijing’s own ongoing crackdown.

After the last detainees were released in late 2013, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman denounced the move, saying “they are terrorists without any doubt.”

“These suspects are members of the ‘East Turkistan Islamic Movement,’ a terrorist organization designated by the UN Security Council,” spokesman Qin Gang said. “They will not only pose severe threat to China’s national security, but also to that of the recipient country.”

Since then, China’s propaganda around ETIM has only ramped up, with state media denouncing the group as the “black hand” behind almost all acts of violence in Xinjiang “for decades.”

“Even though America declared we were innocent, that we hadn’t done anything, China continues to say we worked with the Taliban and al Qaeda,” said Abu Bakeer Qassim, a former Guantánamo detainee now living in Albania. “They say Uyghurs are terrorists with links to al Qaeda, Taliban and ISIS. This propaganda has been really successful.”

In recent weeks, US President Joe Biden has renewed his commitment to end America’s longest war, promising to withdraw troops from Afghanistan in time for the twentieth anniversary of 9/11 this year. But for the Uyghurs, the war on terror will continue, with its rhetoric having been adopted by Beijing to justify a new round of repression under Chinese leader Xi Jinping.

Caught by war

As he fled US bombs across the mountains into Pakistan, Ahmet Adil was retracing his steps.

He says he had never intended to go to Afghanistan, but like many of the other Guantánamo Uyghurs — as they would recount in interviews with CNN and during tribunal testimony at the detention camp — ended up there from a lack of safe alternatives.

“The reason I left home first was that our family was going through economic hardship,” Adil said in an interview, speaking via an interpreter. “I decided to go to Central Asia and make money to provide for my family.”

One of the poorer regions of China, Xinjiang was largely controlled by what’s known as Bingtuan, a state-run paramilitary corps, and Uyghurs often found life there stifling, with opportunities few and far between and growing restrictions on religious and cultural practices.

Initially Adil crossed into Kazakhstan, which neighbors Xinjiang to the north and has long been home to a large Uyghur population, both Kazakh citizens and economic migrants. Adil stayed there for about a year, finding some work and sending money home, but while there were less restrictions than in China, it wasn’t easy, and Adil said he “gradually came to a decision to attempt to leave for Europe for [an] even freer life.”

He began looking for a way to reach Turkey, home to the world’s largest Uyghur diaspora. But with funds short, making the over 3,800 kilometer (2,400 mile) journey from Almaty to Istanbul was going to be difficult.

From Kazakhstan he traveled to Pakistan, again staying for almost a year as he searched for work and ways to continue westward. There was only one country between him and Turkey, Iran, but Adil says he could not get a visa, nor could he afford to fly. Returning to Xinjiang was no longer an option; he had heard of people being jailed or integrated after they had been abroad for some time, particularly in Muslim countries. China viewed Uyghurs who left the country with deep suspicion, especially if there was any suggestion they might have been radicalized.

For Adil, the situation was growing untenable: the authorities in Pakistan were known to be rounding Uyghurs up and sending them back to China.

Then he met a man who suggested he go to Afghanistan, where he knew of a Uyghur community living near Jalalabad, who could provide him shelter and paid work while he continued to save to go west.

Many other Uyghurs who would end up in Guantánamo provide similar accounts. Like Adil, Abu Bakeer Qassim said he left China to work in Central Asia until it got too dangerous, traveling first to Pakistan, from where he hoped to go to Turkey.

“We had Pakistani friends. They said go to Afghanistan, there is a Uyghur village there. You can learn your religion a bit more and then go to Turkey,” he said in an interview with CNN from Albania. “We went to Jalalabad and then up a mountain road. I later found out this was near Tora Bora.”

Another future detainee, Mohammed Ayoub, said he had been in Pakistan hoping to travel to the US, but was “aware at the time that the Pakistan government was increasingly rounding up Uyghurs to turn them over to the Chinese.”

Ayoub and another man traveled across the border to Jalalabad, where they were until the US invasion started, when they fled into the nearby mountains and eventually met up with “a group of five to six Uyghurs who also wanted to escape.”

Camp in the mountains

While it may seem in retrospect the worst possible place to be, Afghanistan in the late 1990s and early 2000s did present something of a refuge for those exiles in Central and East Asia with few other places to go.

The country was ruled by the Taliban, a hardline Islamist movement which had seized control in 1996 at the culmination of a multi-year civil war which followed the Soviet Union’s withdrawal in 1989.

Only officially recognized by three countries — Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates — the Taliban never controlled all of the country, and much of the border area with Pakistan in particular remained mostly lawless.

This was where mujahideen fighters, funded by the US and a host of Muslim countries to fight the USSR, had gathered in the 1980s to train and launch attacks against the Communist Afghan government and its invading Soviet allies.

In the late 1990s, one group who allegedly took advantage of this lawless environment was a small community of Uyghur nationalists, who set up a training camp in the mountains south of Jalalabad, with a view to initiating an insurgency inside China, “a goal [they] never came close to attaining,” according to Sean Roberts, author of “The War on the Uyghurs: China’s Internal Campaign Against a Muslim Minority.”

This settlement would later be compared — by both US and Chinese officials — to those run by al Qaeda, with files kept on the detainees at Guantánamo describing it as “a training camp in the Tora Bora Mountains that had been given to the [Uyghurs] by the Taliban.”

Roberts, who has researched the topic extensively and interviewed many of the men who passed through the camp, said this is a vast exaggeration.

While a handful of the Uyghurs there were militant, and might have dreamed of some future revolution in China, most were like Adil, he said, economic migrants cut loose by a lack of visas or safe paths to travel, hoping to find a way to go west.

“In the 1990s, there was a lot of pressure on Uyghurs from the Chinese government, focused on concern around ‘separatism,’” Roberts said in an interview. “A lot of people wanted to find ways to live outside China, and initially there was a pretty stable route into Central Asia, as well as a slightly less stable one into Pakistan.”

In the past, Uyghurs who pursued these routes could often stay indefinitely, sending money back home and living largely under the radar, but this started to change as China put pressure on its neighbors to kick them out in the late 1990s, worried about potential separatist movements growing next to its borders, Roberts said.

The small community which evolved in the mountains of Afghanistan was “not really an organization as a vision that had not been realized,” Roberts said.

Adil said that when he arrived, he found what was essentially a shanty town. He helped fix the place up, repairing houses, pumping water and clearing rocks. One day, he took a turn with an AK-47, one of a handful of guns in the camp, owned by the more militant residents, who spoke of needing to learn how to shoot in the event of a future revolution in the Uyghur homeland.

While this would later be used by Guantánamo interrogators as evidence to claim Adil was part of a terror group, multiple detainees said there was no real organization to speak of, just a few bored men with a gun and wild dreams they had little chance of realizing.

Qassim said that he too was trained with an AK-47, but this was at least in part for security, given ongoing fighting between the Taliban and the Northern Alliance.

“Afghanistan was at war, and every day we would have to stand guard,” he said. “You can’t stand guard without a weapon.”

In interviews and in records of interrogations at Guantánamo, all the Uyghur detainees said there was little if any connection between the camp and the Taliban or other Afghans — those locals they did meet they largely struggled to communicate with, due to a lack of a shared language.

What religious practice did occur was limited to daily prayers and studying the Quran, which many of the Uyghurs enjoyed because they had been denied the opportunity growing up in China where restrictions on Muslim worship ramped up considerably in the 1990s. The form of Islam being practiced in the Uyghur camp was mostly the Sufism popular in Xinjiang, rather than the far more austere, strict version of the religion advanced by the Taliban.

Captured and shipped off

Cut off from the rest of Afghanistan, let alone the wider world, few of the men in the Uyghur camp had any idea what happened in September 2001 until the bombing campaigns started weeks later.

Taliban and al Qaeda forces had fled into the mountains, where they were staging a rearguard action against Northern Alliance and American special forces, harried all the time by US air power.

The Uyghurs ran too, into the caves that crisscross the mountains and make them such a defensive location. There they sheltered, unsure of what to do, terrified of being killed by the bombs or shot by the invaders. Even if they were detained and survived, they feared they would be handed over to China.

“We got stuck in the mountains. The planes were all over the place,” Qassim said. “An old man told us to go to Pakistan, you’ll freeze here — the man said we don’t have any food either, we couldn’t get food for one week.”

After days of walking, the group of around 18 Uyghurs made it into Pakistan and found a village, where locals sheltered and fed them. But the hospitality was a charade: Pakistani soldiers surrounded the village and detained the Uyghurs, who later found out they had been sold for $5,000 bounties a-piece, according to US government documents.

“They sold us,” Qassim said. “They said ‘we caught them,’ we didn’t know anything. They blindfolded us and took us to [a] base. We stayed there for a month.”

They didn’t tell the Pakistanis that they were Uyghurs, for fear of being sent back to China, Qassim said. They gave false names — ones which sounded Arabic rather than Uyghur and would stick to them at Guantánamo — and claimed to be Afghan Uzbeks.

“We thought it would be bad to go back to China, for our relatives, or friends, it would be bad for everyone,” he added. “They said they would give us to America. We said that’s better. China is worse.”

After about six months, Qassim said the men were put on a plane and flown to Camp X-Ray, the newly established military prison at Guantánamo Bay.

Set up in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, as a place for interrogating and detaining terrorism suspects, Guantánamo Bay soon became an international symbol of US rights abuses during the so-called “war on terror.”

Detainees were held without charge and subjected to widespread abuse, including torture, with Washington claiming that the prison, located on a US Naval Base in southern Cuba, was not covered by the constitution, an argument the Supreme Court rejected in 2004. Following that ruling, multiple prisoners, including many of the Uyghurs, filed habeas corpus cases, forcing the US government to present the evidence it had against them, a move that often resulted in their eventual release.

Former US President Barack Obama promised and failed to close the Guantánamo prison, where 40 detainees are still housed — although that’s down from the high hundreds it housed at the height of the Global War on Terror. Earlier this year, the Biden administration made the same pledge to shut down the facility.

“Considering the violence that has happened at Guantánamo, we are sure that after more than nineteen years, you agree that imprisoning people indefinitely without trial while subjecting them to torture, cruelty and degrading treatment, with no meaningful access to families or proper legal systems, is the height of injustice,” seven former detainees wrote in a letter to Biden in January. “That is why imprisonment at Guantánamo must end.”

Two former Uyghur detainees approached for this article declined to be interviewed through their lawyer, citing a desire not to relive the trauma they suffered at Guantánamo.

A shadowy organization

Arriving at Guantánamo, blindfolded and shackled, the Uyghur detainees discovered they were being classed as “enemy combatants,” members of a group tied to both the Taliban and al Qaeda, a group most had never even heard of: the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM).

Official documents from Guantánamo, published by Wikileaks, described ETIM as a Uyghur “separatist organization dedicated to the creation of [an] Islamic homeland in China, through armed insurrection and terrorism.” They claimed that it had unified with the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, “to form a larger and more capable terrorist organization, which is now directly affiliated and supported” by al Qaeda and other terrorist groups.

Chinese officials go even further, blaming ETIM for almost every terror attack or violent incident in Xinjiang and other parts of the country since the mid-1990s through to today.

In November 2020, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said the group “has long been engaging in terrorist and violent activities, causing heavy casualties and property losses, and posing serious threats to security and stability in China, the region and beyond.”

A video released by state broadcaster CGTN the previous year compared the group to al Qaeda and ISIS, saying it “has attempted to recruit people on a massive scale, spreading a radical ideology that continues to cause chaos in many countries around the world.” While Chinese authorities boast of having defeated terrorism in Xinjiang, they argue that ETIM presents an ongoing threat, one that justifies the crackdown on Uyghurs and Islam generally.

The problem, say most experts, is that there is little independent evidence to confirm China’s claims of ETIM’s size and influence. While there was an uptick in violence in Xinjiang in the 1990s and 2000s, and some small radical Uyghur groups were known to be based in the Pakistan-Afghanistan border area, Roberts said, the picture Beijing advances of a cohesive, organized international movement directing terror attacks inside China is very misleading.

“My understanding is that there was not really any organized militant resistance, instead there were these isolated incidents [in Xinjiang],” he said. “What happened after 9/11 was that the Chinese government tried to reframe all those incidents as being related to Islamic terrorism, and overtly saying they were funded by Osama bin Laden.”

Many of the events now blamed on ETIM by Chinese authorities, such as ethnic unrest in the Xinjiang capital of Urumqi in 2009, were covered by the international media at the time, and had no links to terrorism and clear alternative motivations.

While groups overseas have claimed credit for some incidents inside China, little evidence has been given, and Roberts said this is akin to ISIS falsely claiming lone-wolf attacks in the US and elsewhere.

The picture is further confused due to the reason that Chinese state media initially suppressed coverage or ignored other incidents in Xinjiang now used to make the argument that the region was a hotbed of terrorism ahead of the recent crackdowns.

One thing is clear, however, beginning in 2002, Beijing’s narrative shifted from concern about nationalist separatists, to painting all Uyghur dissidents as Islamist terrorists. This transformation appears to have been inspired partly by and received a major boost from what today seems like an unlikely source: Washington.

In August of that year, the George W. Bush administration designated ETIM as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, a move that was quickly followed by United Nations sanctions, sponsored by the US, China, Kyrgyzstan and the new US-sponsored administration in Kabul.

At the time, the group was “virtually unknown among experts in the region,” Roberts said, and yet the US actually went further than China, blaming ETIM for almost every violent incident in Xinjiang from the 1990s in a preemption of the current propaganda line.

Speaking at a congressional hearing years later, Randall Schriver, who was deputy assistant secretary for East Asian and Pacific affairs at the State Department at the time of ETIM’s designation, defended the designation of ETIM as a terrorist organization, saying that the Bush administration came under pressure from Beijing to list multiple groups, and ETIM was the only one where there was any convincing evidence.

Other experts, both at the time and since, have expressed skepticism, however, particularly over the idea that ETIM could have been directing terror attacks in China while under the nominal protection of the Taliban, given that Beijing had relatively good ties with Kabul at the time.

Schriver acknowledged too that while the Uyghur community “is not immune to this uglier side of nationalism,” militants are “a very small minority within a minority.”

In comparing Chinese propaganda and the Bush administration statements, Congressman Bill Delahunt, who chaired the hearing, said it “appears to me that we took substantial intelligence information from the Chinese Communist regime and then used that questionable evidence as our own as a significant factor in the determination that ETIM was a terrorist organization.”

His colleague, Dana Rohrabacher, accused the government of designating ETIM “to appease the Chinese Government in a pathetic attempt to gain its support at the beginning of the war against Iraq.”

In response to a request for comment for this article, a US State Department spokeswoman said Washington had revoked ETIM’s designation as a terrorist group in November 2020.

“ETIM was removed from the list because, for more than a decade, there has been no credible evidence that ETIM continues to exist,” the spokeswoman said. “We assess that ETIM is now a broad label China uses to inaccurately paint a variety of [Uyghur] actors, including non-violent activists and advocates for human rights, as terrorist threats. China often labels individuals and groups as terrorists on the basis of their political and religious beliefs, even if they do not advocate violence.”

Cooperation with the Chinese on anti-terrorism was a rare bright spot in the Bush administration’s efforts to build stronger ties with Beijing, which were marred early on in his term by the mid-air collision of Chinese and US military planes over the island of Hainan.

Standing alongside then Chinese leader Jiang Zemin in Beijing in 2002, Bush welcomed “China’s cooperation in our war against terror.”

Collaboration between the US and China in the 2000s went beyond designating ETIM. Two years into their detainment, Chinese Communist Party interrogators were given access to the Uyghur detainees at Guantánamo, interviews which terrified the men, who feared their families could face repercussions or that they would be handed over to authorities in Beijing.

“During the interrogation, I didn’t answer any questions,” Adil said. “They threatened me by saying ‘when we bring you back to China, you will get what you deserve and will answer our questions.’”

Ayoub told CNN that “some of us talked, some of us didn’t.”

“But we were all worried that if the Chinese officials could come here and question us, that they could also take us,” he said. “I was in questioning for three hours, but I didn’t talk. I didn’t say a word.”

He added that the officials “threatened me and my family,” while Qassim said “we got really afraid when the Chinese came.”

“They asked me ‘where are you from?’ I said from East Turkistan — they said ‘no such place.’ I said yes there is,” Qassim said.

When the call to prayer was played over the camp speakers, Qassim said his Chinese interrogator was surprised, assuming the Americans would not allow such overtly Muslim practice.

“I told him, we pray, and get to fast here,” Qassim said. “They make mistakes but they don’t trample on our religion. We have the Quran, prayer, fasting. That was the good part [of Guantánamo].”

Speaking at the 2009 hearing, Shriver, the former State Department official, said it was “absolutely inappropriate and unacceptable” to have allowed Chinese Communist Party security officers to interview the Uyghur detainees.

China continues to view ETIM as a dangerous terrorist organization. Speaking in November after the US delisted the group, Wang Wenbin, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, said ETIM “has long been engaging in terrorist and violent activities, causing heavy casualties and property losses, and posing serious threats to security and stability in China, the region and beyond.”

Release into limbo

When they arrived at Guantánamo, all 22 Uyghur detainees were designated “enemy combatants” and told, to many of their surprise, that they were believed to be members of ETIM and linked to al Qaeda.

Throughout the next decade, the Pentagon gradually reversed this decision, and would eventually categorize them all as “no longer enemy combatants.”

The problem was then what to do with them. While Bush administration officials had said relatively early that the men would never be sent to China, for fear they could be tortured or executed, neither were they willing to resettle any former Guantánamo detainees in the US.

“We requested the US government to find a home for them, one where they would not later end up in China under diplomatic pressure,” said Nury Turkel, a lawyer who worked on behalf of the Uyghur detainees.

After years of campaigning by the detainees themselves, their lawyers, and human rights groups, the first batch of five detainees, including Adil, Ayoub and Qassim, were transferred to Albania.

With the election of Obama, who had promised to close the Guantánamo Bay camp, Turkel said there was a lot of optimism that the remaining Uyghurs would be released quickly, and might even be resettled in the US.

But these hopes faded as Congressional Republicans introduced the Keep Terrorists Out of America Act, in an attempt to block the Obama administration moving Guantánamo detainees to the mainland, and rallied media pressure against the White House. This made it more difficult to negotiate with other countries too, said Turkel, because they expressed skepticism at taking men the US had apparently deemed too dangerous to resettle itself.

There was also pressure from Beijing: cables published by WikiLeaks in 2010 showed that at one point Germany was considering accepting seven Uyghurs, but was “subsequently warned by China of ‘a heavy burden on bilateral relations'” between Berlin and Beijing should they do so.

Eventually, homes were found for all 22 of the Guantánamo Uyghurs, with the last men leaving the detention camp in 2013, for Slovakia, after years of negotiations between Washington and various allies, including Albania, over who would be willing to take the former detainees.

Release has not meant a return to normality, however. Adil said that life in Albania is itself a kind of detention, and his freedoms are still highly limited.

“We’ve been living in Albania for 15 years with severe restrictions,” he said. “Our life here can be likened to being in an open-air prison. All we have is a place of residence permit, and we can’t even access such simple services as buying a SIM card because of the lack of legal documents.”

Qassim said that the men had been promised passports, but this has never happened.

Albania’s Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs did not respond to a request for comment.

“It’s like we are prisoners again,” he said. “We didn’t just come here so we could die. I want to be able to live. I want to be able to send my kids to school abroad and visit them. They ask me — they say, people go to Turkey, let’s go visit, but we can’t.”

Attempts by some of the Uyghurs to leave the places where they resettled have so far been unsuccessful. Ayoub is part of a lawsuit three former Guantánamo detainees have brought against the Canadian government, trying to force Ottawa to allow them to travel to that country.

“We don’t have permission to work here [in Albania],” Ayoub said. “We’re unable to get passports, we’re not allowed to travel outside of Albania. We’ve been here for over 15 years.”

All three plaintiffs are married to Canadian citizens, but the authorities have refused to allow them to join them in Canada, arguing they are “inadmissible on security grounds” due to their alleged membership of a terrorist organisation: ETIM.

“The evidence that the Canadian government is relying on all emerged from their detention in Guantánamo,” said Prasanna Balasundaram, the lead lawyer on the case. “There is no credible evidence that Ayoub was ever a member of ETIM.”

He pointed to the apparent hypocrisy of Canada, whose parliament recently accused China of committing “genocide” in Xinjiang, of relying on the same evidence as Beijing in order to deny the entry of his clients.

“The problem is that for them to be deemed inadmissible on security grounds, the bar is quite low, below even the civil standard of proof,” Balasundaram said, adding he hoped increased attention to the general plight of the Uyghurs will pressure Ottawa to change its decision regarding his clients.

Global Affairs Canada, the country’s foreign ministry, did not respond to a request for comment about Ayoub’s case.

“There is this large misunderstanding [dating] from when we were caught up,” Ayoub said. “We were essentially victimized by politics. We were caught up in the politics between these nations.”

The US government has also retreated from its previous statements about ETIM, saying in a report in 2019 that there was a “lack of independent evidence that a group by that name is still active.” This culminated last year in the Donald Trump administration de-listing ETIM entirely, much to Beijing’s fury, with Chinese officials denouncing the move as a political one.

Ayoub said that when there was an attempt to resettle the Guantánamo Uyghurs, it was clear that many countries refused to take them because they were afraid of harming their economic relations with China, something he saw repeated in how numerous governments react to the current situation.

“Even most Muslim-majority countries are choosing to side with China,” he said. “The international community needs to stand together to put human rights above their economic interests. Standing on the sidelines to oppression only aids oppression, so everyone has a responsibility to stand up.”

* * * * *

Andy Worthington is a freelance investigative journalist, activist, author, photographer (of an ongoing photo-journalism project, ‘The State of London’), film-maker and singer-songwriter (the lead singer and main songwriter for the London-based band The Four Fathers, whose music is available via Bandcamp). He is the co-founder of the Close Guantánamo campaign (and see the latest photo campaign here) and the successful We Stand With Shaker campaign of 2014-15, and the author of The Guantánamo Files: The Stories of the 774 Detainees in America’s Illegal Prison and of two other books: Stonehenge: Celebration and Subversion and The Battle of the Beanfield. He is also the co-director (with Polly Nash) of the documentary film, “Outside the Law: Stories from Guantánamo” (available on DVD here, or here for the US, or you can watch it online here, via the production company Spectacle, for £2.55).

In 2017, Andy became very involved in housing issues. He is the narrator of the documentary film, ‘Concrete Soldiers UK’, about the destruction of council estates, and the inspiring resistance of residents, he wrote a song ‘Grenfell’, in the aftermath of the entirely preventable fire in June 2017 that killed over 70 people, and he also set up ‘No Social Cleansing in Lewisham’ as a focal point for resistance to estate destruction and the loss of community space in his home borough in south east London. For two months, from August to October 2018, he was part of the occupation of the Old Tidemill Wildlife Garden in Deptford, to prevent its destruction — and that of 16 structurally sound council flats next door — by Lewisham Council and Peabody. Although the garden was violently evicted by bailiffs on October 29, 2018, and the trees were cut down on February 27, 2019, the resistance continues.

To receive new articles in your inbox, please subscribe to Andy’s RSS feed — and he can also be found on Facebook (and here), Twitter, Flickr and YouTube. Also see the six-part definitive Guantánamo prisoner list, The Complete Guantánamo Files, the definitive Guantánamo habeas list, the full military commissions list, and the chronological list of all Andy’s articles.

Please also consider joining the Close Guantánamo campaign, and, if you appreciate Andy’s work, feel free to make a donation.

8 Responses

  1. Andy Worthington says...

    When I posted this on Facebook, I wrote:

    Here’s my latest article, a cross-post, with my own introduction, of a recent CNN article looking at how US support for the Chinese government’s assertion that the Uyghur prisoners held at Guantanamo were terrorists (members of a largely non-existent terrorist organization, the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement) not only continues to dog the men released from the prison between 2006 and 2013, to various countries around the world, but has also reinforced the Chinese government’s rationale for its brutal and horrendous “re-education” camps in Xinjiang province, where at least a million Uyghurs have been detained arbitrarily and subjected to human rights abuses.

  2. Andy Worthington says...

    David Barrows wrote:

    Very hideous. Interesting how we accuse the Chinese when we have gone along with one of their crimes against the Uighurs. We need to speak out against China’s ethnic cleansing of Uighurs. But we also need to admit our crimes at Guantanamo’s torture chambers and jails with reparations for all our victims and the imprisonment of all our government officials who made these crimes possible.

  3. Andy Worthington says...

    Thanks, David. Good to hear from you.

  4. Andy Worthington says...

    Hamja Ahsan wrote:

    John Pilger holds a different view to you.

  5. Andy Worthington says...

    Thanks, Hamja. I just looked up Pilger’s position, and found him discrediting one of the key western researchers into the camps: https://twitter.com/johnpilger/status/1364001548485894148

    That’s all very well, but is he, as a result, trying to claim that the camps don’t exist or that they’re not a significant infringement of human rights? I can’t tell, but I always get suspicious when the Old Left won’t accept criticism of China or Russia. To my mind we should be pretty skeptical of all the major powers.

  6. Andy Worthington says...

    Luk Vervaet wrote:

    Andy, old left or not, we should be sceptical of the actual campaign of the western powers against China and Russia. Those countries are no longer socialist countries, but rivals for the masters of the world. Those countries are using the same concepts and methods in the war on terror as we do here. But to talk about genocide and so on doesn’t correspond to the reality.

  7. Andy Worthington says...

    Good to hear from you, Luk, and thanks for your thoughts. I take your point about the use of the word “genocide”, but it does seem important that we don’t do too much to dilute what should be our concern about the existence of, and the scale of the “re-education” camps.

  8. Andy Worthington says...

    Here’s a useful article published two weeks ago by Al-Jazeera, ‘The faux anti-imperialism of denying anti-Uighur atrocities’, by the academics Azeezah Kanji and David Palumbo-Liu: https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2021/5/14/the-faux-anti-imperialism-of-denying-anti-uighur

Leave a Reply

Back to the top

Back to home page

Andy Worthington

Investigative journalist, author, campaigner, commentator and public speaker. Recognized as an authority on Guantánamo and the “war on terror.” Co-founder, Close Guantánamo and We Stand With Shaker. Also, photo-journalist (The State of London), and singer and songwriter (The Four Fathers).
Email Andy Worthington

CD: Love and War

The Four Fathers on Bandcamp

The Guantánamo Files book cover

The Guantánamo Files

The Battle of the Beanfield book cover

The Battle of the Beanfield

Stonehenge: Celebration & Subversion book cover

Stonehenge: Celebration & Subversion

Outside The Law DVD cover

Outside the Law: Stories from Guantánamo

RSS

Posts & Comments

World Wide Web Consortium

XHTML & CSS

WordPress

Powered by WordPress

Designed by Josh King-Farlow

Please support Andy Worthington, independent journalist:

Archives

In Touch

Follow me on Facebook

Become a fan on Facebook

Subscribe to me on YouTubeSubscribe to me on YouTube

The State of London

The State of London. 16 photos of London

Andy's Flickr photos

Campaigns

Categories

Tag Cloud

Afghans in Guantanamo Al-Qaeda Andy Worthington British prisoners Center for Constitutional Rights CIA torture prisons Close Guantanamo Donald Trump Four Fathers Guantanamo Housing crisis Hunger strikes London Military Commission NHS NHS privatisation Periodic Review Boards Photos President Obama Reprieve Shaker Aamer The Four Fathers Torture UK austerity UK protest US courts Video We Stand With Shaker WikiLeaks Yemenis in Guantanamo