[Joint House and Senate Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
FORCED LABOR, MASS INTERNMENT, AND
SOCIAL CONTROL IN XINJIANG
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
OCTOBER 17, 2019
__________
Printed for the use of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available at www.cecc.gov or www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
56-600 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS
House Senate
JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts, MARCO RUBIO, Florida, Co-chair
Chair JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma
MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio TOM COTTON, Arkansas
THOMAS SUOZZI, New York STEVE DAINES, Montana
TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey TODD YOUNG, Indiana
BEN McADAMS, Utah DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
CHRIS SMITH, New Jersey JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
BRIAN MAST, Florida GARY PETERS, Michigan
VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri ANGUS KING, Maine
EXECUTIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS
Not yet appointed
Jonathan Stivers, Staff Director
Peter Mattis, Deputy Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Statements
Page
Opening Statement of Hon. James P. McGovern, a U.S.
Representative from Massachusetts; Chair, Congressional-
Executive Commission on China.................................. 1
Statement of Hon. Marco Rubio, a U.S. Senator from Florida; Co-
chair, Congressional-Executive Commission on China............. 3
Statement of Hon. Chris Smith, a U.S. Representative from New
Jersey......................................................... 5
Statement of Hon. Todd Young, a U.S. Senator from Indiana........ 5
Zenz, Adrian, Non-resident Senior Fellow in China Studies at the
Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, and author of
``Beyond the Camps: Beijing's Grand Scheme of Forced Labor,
Poverty Alleviation and Social Control in Xinjiang''........... 7
Turkel, Nury, Washington-based attorney and Chair of the Board
and co-founder, Uyghur Human Rights Project.................... 8
Posner, Michael, Jerome Kohlberg Professor of Ethics and Finance
and Director of the Center for Business and Human Rights at
NYU's Stern School............................................. 11
Lehr, Amy K., Director of the Human Rights Initiative at the
Center for Strategic and International Studies and former legal
adviser to the U.N. Special Representative on Business and
Human Rights................................................... 12
Appendix
Prepared Statements
Turkel, Nury..................................................... 43
Posner, Michael.................................................. 48
Lehr, Amy........................................................ 54
McGovern, Hon. James P........................................... 56
Rubio, Hon. Marco................................................ 57
Submissions for the Record
Zenz, Adrian, ``Beyond the Camps: Beijing's Grand Scheme of
Coercive Labor, Poverty Alleviation and Social Control in
Xinjiang''..................................................... 59
Zenz, Adrian, supplemental material.............................. 84
The Citizen Power Institute of Citizens Power Initiatives for
China, ``Cotton: The Fabric Full of Lies'' (A Report on Forced
and Prison Labor in Xinjiang, China, and the Nexus to Global
Supply Chains), submitted by Nury Turkel....................... 87
Lehr, Amy K. and Mariefaye Bechrakis, ``Connecting the Dots in
Xinjiang--Forced Labor, Forced Assimilation, and Western Supply
Chains,'' a report of the CSIS Human Rights Initiative......... 163
Uyghur Human Rights Project, ``Repression Across Borders: The
CCP's Illegal Harassment and Coercion of Uyghur Americans,''
submitted by Nury Turkel....................................... 207
CECC Truth in Testimony form..................................... 254
Witness Biographies.............................................. 255
FORCED LABOR, MASS INTERNMENT, AND SOCIAL CONTROL IN XINJIANG
----------
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 2019
Congressional-Executive
Commission on China,
Washington, DC.
The hearing was convened, pursuant to notice, at 10:00
a.m., in room 419, Dirksen Senate Office Building,
Representative James P. McGovern, Chair, presiding.
Also present: Senators Rubio, Daines, Young, Merkley, and
Peters, and Representatives Suozzi, Smith, Kaptur, and
Hartzler.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES P. McGOVERN, A U.S.
REPRESENTATIVE FROM MASSACHUSETTS AND CHAIR,
CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA
Good morning, and welcome to today's Congressional-
Executive Commission on China hearing, ``Forced Labor, Mass
Internment, and Social Control in Xinjiang.''
In the last year Chinese authorities have expanded their
network of mass internment camps where 1 million or more
Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims have been detained and
subjected to torture, extended solitary confinement, and
political indoctrination, and deprived of food. Children of
detainees are reportedly often placed in orphanages, welfare
centers, and boarding schools. Some scholars and human rights
groups argue that these practices may amount to crimes against
humanity.
Outside the camps, the Chinese government has become more
efficient in the use of technology to control and suppress.
Some
observers have described the surveillance system as an open-air
prison.
Recent reports indicate that Uyghurs and other Turkic
Muslims are increasingly sentenced to lengthy prison sentences
on vague charges. One case is that of Uyghur scholar Ilham
Tohti, who is serving a life sentence in spite of his
dedication to nonviolence and reconciliation. He is a
``Defending Freedoms Project'' prisoner of conscience and his
congressional advocate is Representative Jim Langevin of Rhode
Island.
Meanwhile, the practice of Islam has also been
criminalized. Mosques have been destroyed, Islamic dress has
been forbidden, and fasting for Ramadan has been disallowed. It
is in this context that new information has come to light
detailing the widespread use of a government-subsidized and
large-scale system of forced labor in both mass internment
camps and in factories throughout Xinjiang. Satellite imagery,
personal testimony, and official documents indicate that
detainees in camps, and some who have been released, are forced
to work in food, textile, and other manufacturing jobs.
Products reportedly produced with forced labor include
textiles, such as yarn, clothing, gloves, bedding, and carpet;
electronics, including cell phones and computers; food
products; shoes; tea; and handicrafts.
In January 2019, the U.S. company Badger Sportswear stopped
importing clothing following reports that it was made with
forced labor by internment camp detainees. In May 2019, the
Wall Street Journal linked the supply chains of Adidas,
Campbell Soup, H&M, Kraft-Heinz, Coca-Cola, and Gap Inc. to
forced labor.
On October 1st, U.S. Customs and Border Protection issued a
withhold release order on garments produced with prison or
forced labor by Hetian Taida Apparel, which has exported
products to Costco. Current U.S. law prohibits the import of
any product made with forced labor. Any U.S. or international
company that produces or has a supply chain in Xinjiang may be
complicit in forced labor and human rights violations.
In 2002 China ratified the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The ICESCR affirms the
right of all people to self-determination and non-
discrimination, to freely choose and accept work, to enjoy just
and favorable conditions of work, including the right to
remuneration, and to take part in cultural life.
All of these policies and practices I have just described
violate the ICESCR as well as the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights. China is failing to comply with international
human rights obligations it freely assumed.
There is no question that the U.S. should be doing more to
help the Uyghur people. In April, Senator Rubio and I, and over
40 Members called for Global Magnitsky sanctions against Chen
Quanguo, the Xinjiang Communist Party Secretary, as well as
Chinese officials and companies complicit in gross violations
of human rights. And last week, we expressed support when the
Administration added 28 Chinese companies to the Entity List
and applied visa restrictions on some Chinese officials.
Right now, there are important bills in Congress that
should pass including the Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act,
sponsored by Senator Rubio, Representative Suozzi, and
Representative Chris Smith, and the Uighur Intervention and
Global Humanitarian Unified Response Act, sponsored by Chairman
Brad Sherman.
I look forward to hearing any and all recommendations about
what more can and should be done, including whether it is
feasible for companies to conduct reliable inspections and
audits of supply chains in the region. Congress stands in
solidarity with the Uyghur people, and we want to do all we can
to support the full exercise of their human rights.
Finally, before I begin, I would like to recognize Nury
Teyip, who is here with us today. His brother, Tashpolat Teyip,
was the president of Xinjiang University and is a renowned
scholar. Tashpolat Teyip was disappeared in March 2017 and was
sentenced to death with a two-year reprieve.
Last month, we learned from Amnesty International that he
may have been executed. I condemn his detention in the
strongest possible terms and call on the Chinese government to
release him immediately.
Having said that, I'm now happy to yield to the Co-chair of
the Commission, Senator Rubio, for his opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO, A U.S.
SENATOR FROM FLORIDA AND CO-CHAIR, CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE
COMMISSION ON CHINA
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is an important hearing.
Thank you for convening it. It is also timely.
I want to thank all of our witnesses. Your research and
your advocacy have done a lot to inform us and the world about
what's happening--the atrocities being committed in the
Xinjiang region by the Chinese Communist Party.
Through the decades, the crimes of the Chinese Communist
Party have been as consistent as they have been egregious. Yet
somehow, these tyrants maintain the ability to shock the world
even further with their cruelty and their callousness.
The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region in the last two years
has experienced the classic forms of Communist totalitarianism
combined with the application now of new and advanced
technologies. The difference between the Chinese Communist
Party's crimes of the past and those of the present is the
motivation. The past was about power alone. The present is now
about power, but also about profit.
Chairman Xi Jinping and his henchman, Chen Quanguo--who, by
the way, used to oversee Chinese brutality and repression
inside Tibet, so he's a specialist at this--revived
collectivization to force Uyghurs into the harness of the
Chinese Communist party-state. Just as collectivization created
famines that harmed millions in China, this new effort is
blazing a trail of human suffering.
The problem goes much deeper than simply one million or
more Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities detained and forced to
work in what can only be called concentration camps. For those
able to escape the camps, they face the full power of the
Chinese party-state mobilized against them and their families
inside and outside of China. Hundreds of thousands, if not
millions, of Uyghur men and women have been forced to go
through a regimen of military discipline and political
reeducation in preparation to take jobs in satellite factories.
The Chinese Communist government offers incentives for
Chinese companies to exploit this labor as the cost of doing
business in coastal provinces rises. And what of the families,
the children, and the elderly? They're removed from their
family's care so the adults can work in the factories. Instead
of the warm embrace of their families, the young and the
elderly are forced into the stifling custody of the Chinese
Communist Party.
For the children, this means the loss of their language,
their culture, their faith, their heritage. For the elderly,
this means loneliness and isolation in their final years. Their
children and grandchildren will never hear the stories of lives
well lived, of hardships conquered, or the importance of faith
and values in a brutal communist-governed world.
Today's hearing, however, is not about this alone. It is
about understanding how the Party integrates labor and social
control, and the national security and moral risks for
individuals and companies that deal with China. The network of
detention facilities and factories has turned Xinjiang into a
forced labor camp roughly the size of the states of California,
Montana, Texas, and Florida combined.
Millions of Uyghurs and other predominantly Muslim ethnic
minorities labor in textile and light manufacturing and are
prohibited from practicing their faith. Simply put, this is
slavery--the slavery of socialism with Chinese characteristics.
Earlier this month the Trump Administration announced
sanctions, as the Chairman said, targeting Chinese officials as
well as governmental and commercial entities for these severe
human rights abuses, and I believe that these also constitute
crimes against humanity. We all welcome these steps. We also
believe more can and should be done to resolve one of the
world's greatest ongoing tragedies and to hold its perpetrators
accountable.
I hope the House will soon pass S. 178, the Uyghur Human
Rights Policy Act that the Senate passed last month. The bill
would require the Administration to gather information about
the situation in Xinjiang and China's efforts to suppress
international awareness of it.
China's efforts to silence Uyghurs and turn the world's
attention away from the ongoing atrocities in Xinjiang have
included the coercion and the intimidation of American citizens
and residents here and abroad. This is an outrage that must be
addressed.
The U.S. Government needs to do its part to ensure that
Americans and the world are aware of what the Chinese
government is doing in Xinjiang and have the freedom to express
their views. Despite the efforts of our witnesses today,
Americans--and American companies in particular--are all too
unaware of what is taking place.
For example, the National Basketball Association maintains
a residential training camp in Xinjiang, seemingly oblivious to
the contradiction between speaking out about societal issues
here at home, which they have the full freedom to do, yet
staying silent about China's oppression.
Only after the U.S. Commerce Department added the Chinese
artificial intelligence company SenseTime to the Entity List
last week for its role in facilitating all of these crimes did
MIT begin to review its relationship with the firm.
So it's long overdue for Americans and important
institutions in academia and the private sector to wake up and
fully realize the real risks of doing business with China.
So I thank all of you again for being here today. I thank
you, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to the discussion.
Chair McGovern. Thank you very much.
I yield briefly to any of my colleagues who want to make an
opening statement. Mr. Smith.
STATEMENT OF HON. CHRIS SMITH,
A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW JERSEY
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, for the past two years the Commission has
shined a bright light on the massive, outrageous human rights
abuses occurring in the Xinjiang region of China. To that end,
I, joined by my good friend Tom Suozzi, introduced the Uyghur
Human Rights Policy Act of 2019, H.R. 649, with 110 cosponsors,
and the companion bill, as Senator Rubio has pointed out, has
already passed the Senate. So I hope we take that up
immediately.
We have used our congressional platform to advocate for
action on this Commission and to hold Chinese businesses and
officials accountable for crimes against humanity. I commend
the Administration for speaking out about dire human rights
abuses over the past year, particularly Secretary Pompeo and
Vice President Pence.
I also applaud the action taken just last week to restrict
visas for certain Chinese officials and to place 28 Chinese
governmental bodies and businesses on the Commerce Department's
Entity List. Of course more needs to be done.
We should also be looking really aggressively at using
Magnitsky sanctions against individuals because this is
absolutely outrageous. As a matter of fact, we talk about
crimes against humanity--this is genocide. They are trying to
destroy the Muslim Uyghurs--they being the Chinese
dictatorship--and the world needs to do far more than we have
done to date. The world cannot remain silent when the Chinese
government conducts a high-tech police state whose goal is the
destruction of the entire ethnic minority population. And they
are using every means at their disposal to do so.
I would point out--we talk about how they are using gulags
and forced labor--that has been a staple, as we all know, of
the Chinese dictatorship's exploitation for decades. I
actually, after Tiananmen Square, joined Frank Wolf. We went
and visited Beijing Prison No. 1 where the activists--40 of
them that were there that we knew of--they were in Tiananmen
Square asking for democracy. They were making jelly shoes and
socks in Beijing Prison No. 1 for export. So this is just part
of their apparatus that has now gone into hyperdrive, extended
to the people of Xinjiang.
So we need to speak out. I believe that more countries,
especially those with Muslim leaders, need to speak out more
aggressively than they have. The OIC has done some, but it
needs to do more. And the world and the U.N., all of us need to
coalesce around--this has to stop. This is genocide.
Chair McGovern. Thank you very much. Senator Young.
STATEMENT OF HON. TODD YOUNG,
A U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA
Well, I thank you for holding this hearing. It is important
to be here today. This strikes me as modern-day slavery
consistent with China's disregard for all manner of human
rights; the basic dignity and freedom of all these individuals
has been undermined and it appears they are being persecuted,
in part, for their faith.
It strikes me that the United States is standing up for the
Muslim world during this time, which is really important, as we
stand up for the freedom of religion of all people. And I think
it's a really important time to hold this hearing.
So thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will have some more questions
later.
Chair McGovern. Okay. Thank you very much. Mr. Suozzi.
Representative Suozzi. I'll wait.
Chair McGovern. All right, well, thank you.
And I am now pleased to introduce our esteemed panel of
expert witnesses this morning.
Adrian Zenz is a nonresident senior fellow in China Studies
at the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation. Dr. Zenz has
done pioneering work documenting the scope of mass internment
camps by analyzing Chinese government procurement documents,
construction bids, and domestic security budgets. He's also
helped document the mass institutionalization of children whose
parents have been detained in mass internment camps and the
incentives offered to Chinese manufacturers to employ forced
labor.
Nury Turkel is an attorney and serves as Chair of the Board
for the Uyghur Human Rights Project, a research and advocacy
organization that he cofounded in 2004. He has published
commentaries on policy and legal matters in publications such
as the Wall Street Journal and Foreign Policy. Born and raised
in Kashgar, Mr. Turkel received his law degree from American
University. He is the first U.S.-educated Uyghur lawyer and is
a fluent speaker of Uyghur, Chinese, and Turkish.
Michael Posner serves as the Jerome Kohlberg Professor of
Ethics and Finance at NYU Stern School of Business. He is the
director of the Center for Business and Human Rights at the
school, the first-ever human rights center at a business
school. Prior to joining NYU Stern, Mr. Posner served in the
Obama Administration as Assistant Secretary of State for the
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. As a member of
the White House Apparel Industry Partnership Taskforce in the
mid-90s, he helped found the Fair Labor Association, an
organization that brings together corporations, local leaders,
universities, and NGOs to promote corporate accountability for
working conditions in the apparel industry.
Amy Lehr is the director of the Human Rights Initiative at
the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Ms. Lehr
leads the initiatives work on human rights around the world,
with a particular focus on how technology affects human rights
and labor rights, and the importance of a values-based foreign
policy.
Ms. Lehr's core expertise is in the area of business and
human rights. She spent a decade in private practice advising
companies and international institutions on how they can
respect human rights in their global operations. Previously,
she served as legal adviser to John Ruggie, U.N. Special
Representative for Business and Human Rights, and in that role
helped develop the U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and
Human Rights.
Thank you all for being here.
Dr. Zenz, we will begin with you.
STATEMENT OF ADRIAN ZENZ, NON-RESIDENT SENIOR FELLOW IN CHINA
STUDIES AT THE VICTIMS OF COMMUNISM MEMORIAL FOUNDATION AND
AUTHOR OF ``BEYOND THE CAMPS: BEIJING'S GRAND SCHEME OF FORCED
LABOR, POVERTY ALLEVIATION AND SOCIAL CONTROL IN XINJIANG''
Salaam, and thank you for having me today.
In 2017, China's Xinjiang region embarked on probably the
largest incarceration of an ethno-religious minority since the
Holocaust. Despite international criticism, Beijing has
persisted in this campaign. The reason for this is now clear.
All along there was a long-term strategy behind it.
What I am presenting today is in a number of ways more
shocking than the reeducation campaign itself. It is more long-
term, more all-encompassing, more intrusive, and more devious.
Within this grand scheme, the camps only represent one piece of
an entire puzzle.
Beijing's long-term strategy in Xinjiang is predicated upon
a perverse combination of coercive training and labor,
intergenerational separation, and complete control over family
units. Much of this is being implemented under the heading and
guise of poverty alleviation.
In my research I've identified three schemes by which the
state seeks to place the vast majority of minority adults into
different forms of coercive, or at least involuntary, labor.
Flow one pertains to persons in vocational training internment
camps. Camp detainees can end up in factories on internment
camp compounds, in industrial parks, which can be located near
camps or the camps in them, or village satellite factories.
The employing companies receive an 1800 Chinese yuan state
subsidy for each internment camp laborer they train, 5000 yuan
for each they employ, and a shipping cost subsidy of 4 percent
of their sales volume. In 2018, Huafu Corporation, which
operates the world's largest dyed yarn production in Xinjiang,
received half a billion Chinese yuan, or US$71 million in
subsidies from the Xinjiang government.
This means that Beijing is now turning its internment
campaign into a business of oppression where participating
companies benefit not only from huge government subsidies but
also from cheap minority labor. As a result, they will be able
to undercut global prices and turn Made in Xinjiang into a
multi-billion-dollar business model.
In one document, a company was promised the free use of
factories. The government paid for two-thirds of the upfront
investment cost and provided 500 internment camp laborers with
accompanying police guards. The factories came with security
equipment pre-installed and are being run in a semi-military
style management fashion.
In 2018, several Uyghur counties established large factory
compounds explicitly designed to employ internment camp labor.
One county alone commissioned a factory park with 335,000
square feet of floor space to be constructed directly on an
internment camp compound, providing forced labor for 1,560 camp
detainees.
Flow two in this scheme pertains to a vast government
scheme that puts hundreds of thousands of so-called rural
surplus laborers into centralized training lasting between one
and three months, involving one month of military drill in
order to produce standardized behavior, one month of political
thought indoctrination, and one month of vocational skills
training. Workers are then sent off to their new work
destination in large groups and live in factory dormitories,
often far from home.
This process might not be as coercive as internment camp
labor, but it shares many similar features indicating a high
degree of coercion.
Flow three places rural Uyghur women into village factories
equipped with nurseries for infants as young as a few months
old. Uyghur women are traditionally resistant to full-time work
because they care for the elderly and children. Government
village work teams have been working overtime to ``convince''
these women and their parents of the benefits of full-time
factory labor. Government documents note that factory work
transforms women away from traditional customs and backward
thinking and propels them into modernity.
One propaganda text on Uyghur women in a textile factory
states that the process of de-extremification causes minority
workers to become ``born again.'' The Chinese term used here
for ``born again'' is the same as in a Chinese Bible where
Jesus says you must be born again. Forced labor is equated with
salvation.
A particular concern is that all of these labor flows are
mixing beyond recognition. Graduates from internment camps now
work alongside workers from flows two and three. Products made
by any combination of these workers are then either directly
exported or shipped to eastern China, but then may form
components of products, or be repackaged, relabeled, and then
exported.
As a result, many or most products made in China that rely
at least in part on low-skilled labor-intensive manufacturing
can contain elements of involuntary ethnic minority labor from
Xinjiang. My findings call for a global investigation of supply
chains involving any Chinese products or product components.
The burden of proof should be shifted onto the Chinese
companies. By declaring any low-skilled labor-intensive item
manufactured in Xinjiang as potentially tainted with some form
of coercive minority labor, Chinese companies that seek to
export such products to the United States should conclusively
prove that these products have no connection to Xinjiang. If
they do, then relevant research teams must be permitted to
conduct full and randomized authentic due-diligence audits in
Xinjiang's factories, villages, and internment camps.
Thank you.
Chair McGovern. Thank you very much. Mr. Turkel.
STATEMENT OF NURY TURKEL, WASHINGTON-BASED ATTORNEY AND CO-
FOUNDER AND CHAIR OF THE BOARD, UYGHUR HUMAN RIGHTS PROJECT
Thank you, Chairman McGovern. Thank you, Co-chair Rubio,
and thanks to the other members of the Commission for directing
the attention of Congress to the abominable crimes committed
against Uyghur people in East Turkestan that China calls
Xinjiang.
Even as we speak, these crimes are tainting American
consumer products. I'm here to urge Congress to strong action
to end the unwitting complicity of the American public and to
create a legislative mandate for a much stronger U.S.
Government response to the ongoing Uyghur crisis by passing the
Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act without further delay.
Forced labor is a deeply embedded tool of repression,
punishment, and control in China. Over a decade ago in 2008,
the Uyghur Human Rights Project reported on the systematic
program of coercive labor transfer that targeted young Uyghur
women to be sent to factories in coastal Chinese provinces. The
authorities used a combination of deception, pressure, and
threats to round up thousands of young Uyghurs against their
will. These programs had the dual effect of separating families
and placing Uyghurs in involuntary factory settings far from
home.
Today we are seeing a convergence of the Strike Hard
campaign of mass internment with the pre-existing state plan to
relocate the textile industry to the Uyghur region. As
documented in the recently published report by Citizen Power
for China, new subsidies encourage companies to shift factories
to the region. Government documents outline a plan to have at
least a million textile industry jobs in the region by 2023.
The manager of a factory known to use detained-labor camps
stated in a TV interview: ``With the support of the government
we have already recruited more than 600 people. We plan to
reach 1,000 workers by the end of this year. We plan to provide
jobs to 1,500 people by the end of 2019.''
One of those workers reported that she got paid less than
half of the minimum wage. She was also not allowed to leave and
continued to endure forced indoctrination and was threatened
with being sent back to the camp if she refused to sign a
contract.
We want to thank CBP for its October 7th withhold release
order on goods produced by Hetian Taida in a factory in the
Hetian Taida vocational education training center. But it's
extremely disturbing that U.S. companies were still sourcing
from the company until then.
Two weeks ago, baby clothes produced by Hetian Taida were
on the shelves at Costco. The company has now pulled these
products, but it is hard to understand how the goods got to the
store shelves in the first place given how long this
information has been public.
But it is not just Hetian Taida. U.S. enforcement must step
up the pressure so that all goods sourced from the companies in
the Uyghur region receive scrutiny commensurate with the
extremely high risk of forced labor in the supply chain.
Asphyxiating social control facilitates forced and
involuntary labor. The techno-totalitarian system of
surveillance and intimidation put in place by Xinjiang
authorities means that any attempt to resist orders puts one
and one's family at great risk. As in the case of the 2008
labor transfer program to the eastern factories, many Uyghurs
are currently being forced to work in factories under the so-
called poverty alleviation program. Uyghurs don't have a
choice. Refusing to participate in these programs could result
in being sent to the camps.
This is the same dynamic as in the state program
encouraging marriage between ethnic Han Chinese men and Uyghur
women, which is promoted and celebrated in the state media
outlet. Uyghur women consenting to these marriages must be
assumed in the vast majority of cases to have consented under
extreme duress. If a young Uyghur woman were to decline a
marriage proposal from a Han Chinese man, she and her family
could be labeled as extremists and sent to the camps. Uyghurs
cannot say no.
As a Uyghur individual living overseas recently described
to the BBC, there is an atmosphere of horror: ``Everyone feels
like they are being watched all the time. There is a huge sense
of fear. People tell me they sleep in their clothes because no
one knows whether at night they might be taken away.''
Uyghurs outside of China are also subject to
extraterritorial surveillance and coercion. Our latest report
on this issue documents these ongoing and flagrant violations
of federal law on U.S. soil.
As one Uyghur American said about being contacted by
Chinese state secret agents, ``They are telling us, `We are
watching you. Wherever you go, you are still Chinese.' Even
though you are outside of China, it does not mean that they
can't do something to you, because they have your friends,
children, parents and relatives.''
Agents of foreign powers are surveilling and terrorizing
our own fellow American citizens with threats to send their
remaining family members to the camps if they speak out about
what is happening in their homeland. Given this system of
intimidation and terror both inside and outside of China,
corporate supply chain due diligence is impossible.
The complete secrecy surrounding the camps and horrific
means of total control that is hanging over those who are not
in the camps means that the free flow of information has been
cut off to an extent rarely seen in modern times. No
independent auditor or supply chain certification process can
collect reliable information from workers, factory management,
and local government. No interviews can be treated as
uncoerced.
Because due diligence is impossible, no company can provide
assurance that products sourced in the Uyghur region qualify
for legal import into the United States or any country that
bans the import of forced labor products. If existing legal
authorities are insufficient for Customs and Border Protection
to issue withhold release orders commensurate with the risk of
allowing illegal goods into the United States, Congress must
act to shift the burden of proof to the companies that wish to
import products sourced in Xinjiang or that were produced with
Xinjiang-sourced cotton.
I have some additional recommendations that I would like to
share with you when time permits. Thank you very much.
Chair McGovern. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Turkel appears in the
Appendix.]
Chair McGovern. Mr. Posner.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL POSNER, JEROME KOHLBERG PROFESSOR OF
ETHICS AND FINANCE AND DIRECTOR OF THE CENTER FOR BUSINESS AND
HUMAN RIGHTS AT NYU'S STERN SCHOOL OF BUSINESS
Thank you, Chairman McGovern, Chairman Rubio. I want to
first thank you, especially, and Congressman Smith, for the
leadership you've displayed on human rights over the years.
When I was in the government, I was called quite frequently
to come to various places in Congress to defend things that we
were doing. We needed prodding then and it was really, to me, a
welcome opportunity to come up here, but not everybody in the
State Department or the Government views congressional
appearances as their favorite pastime.
This is a particularly important moment for you to be
continuing to lead, and especially on this issue. All of you in
your opening statements laid out the various things that you
have done--you, Senator Rubio, and the Senate passing the
Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act, and Congressman McGovern and
Smith, what you've done, what you are doing now in getting the
House to pass a comparable or different bill that deals with
some restrictions, especially on technology.
It's really important that you keep doing that. And I think
the recent actions by the Administration, adding the 28
organizations to the Entity List, the October Customs and
Border withhold release orders, and the identification--
although without names--of individuals for visa restrictions.
None of that would have happened if Congress hadn't been on the
ball.
And there's more that the Administration can do. You have
mentioned the Magnitsky Act as one example. We need to name
names. We need to not only pass laws, but we need to implement
them and implement those regulations so that companies that are
doing business, and entities, leaders in that area really feel
the bite. So I just urge you to continue what you are doing.
I want to say just a couple of words about what the
Administration's done. I am often critical of the
Administration, and this is an area where I think Secretary
Pompeo and Deputy Sullivan have spoken out forcefully and said
the right things consistently, including at the U.N. General
Assembly last month. Their words are clear. They are clearly
concerned about what's happening in Xinjiang.
But their words are undermined by the ambivalence of the
Administration, and frankly, it starts at the top. The
President himself has been unable or unwilling to speak out
forcefully about human rights in China. And it's part of a
broader pattern.
At the Group of Seven meeting last month, Trump referred to
Egyptian President el-Sisi as ``my favorite dictator.'' In a
bilateral meeting, he called him a real leader who's done some
things that are absolutely amazing. He called the Saudi Crown
Prince bin Salman a friend, saying he's done a spectacular job.
He has pledged complete support for Brazilian President
Bolsonaro, saying he's done a great job for the people of
Brazil in all respects. He has praised Vladimir Putin as a
terrific person. The list goes on and on.
And it's not surprising then, that in August, when he was
asked about what was happening in Hong Kong, he said the people
of Hong Kong and China are going to have to deal with that
themselves; they don't need any advice.
With due respect, they do need advice. They need support.
They need help. People who are suffering human rights
violations in China need our leadership and that leadership has
not been forthcoming.
I will give you one quick example. At the UN Human Rights
Council, which we withdrew from, 22 mostly Western European
governments together called on the Council to condemn what's
happening with the Uyghurs in Xinjiang. We weren't there. We
did not participate. U.S. leadership is lacking in the world
now on these issues at a time when it's more needed than ever.
I want to just take my last minute to say a couple of
things about the business community. I'm at a business school.
Senator Rubio talked briefly about the NBA. What was striking
to me last week as the NBA caught itself up in an unnecessary
set of confused statements--they were debating whether or not a
general manager of a team even had the right to tweet
something. They didn't talk about the underlying issue--are
human rights and democracy being respected in Hong Kong? We all
need--whether on the commercial side, in government, or the
private sector or private individuals, we need to recognize
that what's happening in Hong Kong, what's happening with the
Uyghurs, is of interest and concern to all of us. We need to be
straightforward and we need to be stronger.
In my written testimony, I talk a lot about surveillance
technology, the so-called integrated joint operations platform
in Xinjiang, which is probably the most pervasive surveillance
program anywhere in the world. A number of American companies
have been involved in that as investors--there are some
examples in my testimony.
I think it is critical now--and this goes back to something
Senator Rubio said--it's critical now for the investment
community, for the technology community, for universities, to
double their efforts to think about what due diligence really
means and not involve themselves at all in supporting this
Chinese program of surveillance technology that's being misused
against this population.
Thank you very much.
Chair McGovern. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Posner appears in the
Appendix.]
Chair McGovern. Ms. Lehr.
STATEMENT OF AMY LEHR, DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RIGHTS INITIATIVE AT
THE CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES AND FORMER
LEGAL ADVISER TO THE U.N. SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE ON BUSINESS
AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Chairman McGovern, Chairman Rubio, and distinguished
members of the Commission, thank you for holding a hearing on
this important topic and for the opportunity to speak.
I've worked in the field of business and human rights for
over a decade, which will inform what I say. My program has
been focusing on both technology and forced labor in Xinjiang
and we issued a report today on forced labor in that region.
Can I submit this report for the hearing record?
Chair McGovern. Without objection.
[The report appears in the Appendix.]
Ms. Lehr. Thank you.
Forced labor in Xinjiang is unique and it requires novel
responses. Normal forced labor involves migrant workers who end
up indebted to recruiters and have their passports confiscated,
leaving them trapped in a foreign country. In contrast, in
Xinjiang, the Chinese state itself is organizing the forced
labor.
Moreover, it is part of a broader effort to cut minorities
off from their culture and religion and increase loyalty to the
CCP through detention, reeducation, and work. Forced labor in
Xinjiang may indeed rise to the level of a crime against
humanity, which I'm happy to expand upon later.
At CSIS our research confirmed and expanded on the work of
others who have spoken today. Our interviews with ex-detainees
confirmed, for example, that in some cases both ex-detainees
and the rural poor are being threatened with more detention if
they don't accept work assignments. Both groups are also being
paid far below the minimum wage in some instances, and the
populations of the rural poor and ex-detainees are being mixed
in factories.
We don't know the exact scale of forced labor in Xinjiang,
but there are some indicators. So for example, the government
of Kashgar, a region in Xinjiang, stated that it would send
100,000 reeducated individuals to work in factories. That is 20
percent of the entire Uyghur population of Kashgar. Even if the
Chinese government does not hit all of its targets, the numbers
are likely to be very significant.
Because some of the companies potentially involved in
forced labor in Xinjiang are linked to global supply chains,
action in this area can be part of the solution, although it
certainly won't be sufficient.
So what are these links? Xinjiang produces 84 percent of
China's cotton. A number of large Chinese yarn, textile, and
apparel companies operate in Xinjiang, along with many smaller
ones. This sector is on the rise because, as others have
mentioned, it is being subsidized heavily, including for taking
in reeducated workers.
In many instances, the companies operating in Xinjiang sell
to other enterprises in China that further process textiles or
other goods. The U.S. imports over 30 percent of its apparel
from China. So it's quite clear that some of Xinjiang's tainted
goods are indeed entering our stream of commerce. But when we
reviewed import records, less than 1 percent of Chinese
shipments arrive directly from Xinjiang to the U.S. So it's a
bit complex, the supply chains are.
Identifying Chinese suppliers using forced labor in
Xinjiang will require new approaches. For example, companies
cannot conduct their normal human rights due diligence such as
labor audits because it's such a suppressed place. And our
labor auditors actually don't have access to the region in many
cases now. Very few ex-detainees are willing to speak about
their experience because they're being terrorized, even abroad.
There are some red flags or indicators of forced labor that
can be identified through online research. These include--I'll
just give a few examples--hiring through government recruiters,
language that mentions employing ethnic minority graduates, or
companies that are getting certain kinds of subsidies, for
example, for training supplements for factories in Xinjiang,
aid to Xinjiang, and so forth.
So where does that take us in terms of recommendations? As
a starting place, U.S. foreign policy really should embody our
values, and we need to respond with an urgency that matches the
severity of these abuses. As others have mentioned, the
Administration should apply the Magnitsky sanctions and that
could be to individuals that are hiding some of these
companies, for example.
We do know that some of the companies involved in forced
labor in Xinjiang have a U.S. presence. And generally, I think
the more we can pursue companies directly involved in abuses in
Xinjiang, the better. And that wouldn't just be forced labor,
but also related to technology and even companies that are
building these factories and detention facilities.
A federal agency, perhaps the Department of Labor or
Department of State, should actually be funded to create a
public watchlist of companies in Xinjiang that trigger the red
flags we identified that indicate a risk of forced labor. That
would help CBP do its job, it would assist with Global
Magnitsky designations, and it would also put U.S. companies on
formal notice of the risks in their supply chain.
CBP's approach will need to reflect--in terms of using the
Tariff Act to seize goods that are produced with forced labor
abroad--their approach needs to reflect the fact that Xinjiang
is a police state. And so they probably are going to need to
make some assumptions based on certain of the red flags we
identified to enable seizures.
Companies have a stand-alone responsibility to respect
human rights. So they should be carrying out human rights due
diligence on their extended supply chains that come from China.
And again, that means not business as usual, but actually much
enhanced due diligence that will require new efforts and
learning on their part.
They could consider a ban on knowingly sourcing Xinjiang
cotton as well. That's obviously challenging given the
relationship between our economy and the Chinese economy and
certain sectors, but it is an option.
The U.S. Government itself should adopt our report's
recommendations on using red flags and due diligence in their
own procurement practices. Our procurement as a government is
enormous.
And last, I do think it's going to be really critical to
work with allies so they adopt similar measures on global
supply chains because there's a risk that what we shut out here
will simply go, let's say, into Europe.
Thank you very much for your time. I welcome your
questions.
Chair McGovern. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Lehr appears in the
Appendix.]
Chair McGovern. I'm going to yield to Mr. Suozzi first. He
is chairing another hearing at the same time as this. So we'll
go to him first for any questions.
Representative Suozzi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you
for your leadership. Thank you, Senator Rubio, for holding this
hearing as well. I want to thank my colleague Chris Smith for
his longstanding work on human rights issues, and especially
for working together with me on the Uyghur Human Rights Policy
Act of 2019.
I want to thank the witnesses for being here today. You see
the President on television with the leader of China and it
looks kind of like it's just another normal relationship, but
there is really something extreme going on that you're
educating the public about. And the American people do not
realize--despite the reports in major periodicals and reports
that you've done and people that pay attention like the people
on this Committee--most Americans do not realize what's
happening.
I sound like a broken record, but most Americans have
believed ever since Nixon went to China that the more that
China was exposed to the United States of America and the West,
that they'd become more like us, that they would adopt our way
of life as far as capitalism. They would adopt our way of life
as far as democracy and human rights.
And obviously that just hasn't happened. And this is one of
the most blatant examples of the way that the Chinese Communist
Party and government treat the people. It started with the
Tibetans, and we see it unfolding in the newspapers and on
television in Hong Kong. But this is really one of the grossest
examples of human repression that's taking place in the world
today.
China, as it makes its efforts to become more and more of a
global power economically, technologically, militarily, wants
to export its way of life to other people. And this is their
way of life. This is the way they want to treat their own
people.
So I want to go to you, Mr. Zenz, where you talked about
this as being an economic model. When most of us have looked at
this, certainly when I've looked at this, we've thought about
it as being a way to promote conformity, to repress people,
religious persecution, but you're saying that this is also an
economic model. And if you look at the industries that this
forced labor is being used for, it's usually low-skilled,
standardized mass production. It's not the future of high
technology and things like that. This is a way to get cheap
labor for standardized mass production.
How much of what's going on with the Uyghurs, especially,
and the forced labor that's taking place, do you see as being a
way to get conformity and repression of a religious minority,
and how much of it do you see as being an economic model? I
know this is not a precise thing, but is it a 50/50 thing, or
is it 80 percent repression and conformity and 20 percent
economic model? How do you view that?
Mr. Zenz. The primary goal of Beijing in Xinjiang is to
secure the long-term power and survival and rule of the
Communist Party. For a communist regime, securing power and
ideological supremacy through labor is ideologically
consistent. It goes hand in hand.
I argue that the ideological goals are primary, and the
economic goals are secondary. But even so, the economic goals
are very important because, as we have seen, economic success
is now the main driver of the CCP's power in the world, the
reason why China is powerful. And I believe they are extending
their business model in Xinjiang; they're killing a whole bunch
of birds with one single stone.
Representative Suozzi. So when they are using this economic
model, I think it's important for us to publicize the fact
that--and I was not even aware of the extent of this until I
prepared for this hearing--how many American companies are
using the products that are being produced from this forced
labor in Xinjiang.
So we see that there was a Wall Street Journal report back
in May of 2019, that supply chains of Adidas, Campbell Soup,
Kraft-Heinz company, Coca-Cola, and The Gap, and I see also--
and I don't know where this came from, but it is in some of my
materials that I prepared for this--that yarn reportedly
entered the supply chain for H&M and Esprit, that there's also
supplied clothing for Calvin Klein, Tommy Hilfiger, Nike,
Patagonia.
Is it even more extensive than the companies that I have
mentioned that are using these products that are being produced
with forced labor in these internment camps--reeducation camps?
Is it even more extensive than the companies that I have
mentioned here?
Mr. Zenz. Three points on this. The first point is that
this is subject to further research because it likely is much
more expansive than we all realize. Secondly, Xinjiang produces
84 percent of China's cotton. And China produces more than a
quarter of the world's cotton, supplying cotton to Bangladesh,
almost half of Bangladesh cotton, etc.
Now, we need to establish the exact dynamics of what all is
made with forced labor, what is made with involuntary labor. I
will give you one example. Hetian Taida--who was just subject
to a Customs and Border Protection detention order--days before
this detention order came into effect, Hetian Taida shipped 1.2
million items of baby pajamas and baby sleeper blankets with
the destination Costco. Costco was going to sell them and put
them up on a website until they decided to pull it.
I personally went to a Costco in Minnesota and asked about
these baby clothes. And they said, yeah, we had them; for some
reason we just got an order from management to pull them off
the shelves for now.
Representative Suozzi. So it's important that we remind
people that this is internment. People are being imprisoned.
People are being tortured. People are being forced to do things
against their religion, and they're trying to benefit from it
economically as well.
And the work that we are doing is to try and highlight this
and have them pay for this economically. Part of their goal is
economic. We want to really hurt them in their wallets. There
are other things we need to do as well, but the sanctions
efforts that we are trying to do to stop these products from
coming to the United States of America are also essential.
I just want to point out also that China is exporting these
practices to other parts of the world, including U.S. soil. And
there was a report in March of this year that a jury in
Brooklyn convicted the head of a Chinese construction firm for
engaging in a conspiracy to provide forced labor of Chinese
workers working here in the United States of America where
people were working 14-hour days, 7 days a week for several
years without receiving any pay, in the United States of
America, in Brooklyn.
We also have--the U.S. Department of Labor announced that a
Chinese construction company owed over $13.9 million to 2,400
workers on the island of Saipan, part of the U.S. Commonwealth
of the Northern Mariana Islands. The Chinese construction firms
hired to build the Imperial Pacific Casino Resort project
engaged in reprehensible labor practices. They employed workers
who entered Saipan on tourist visas and forced workers to labor
for over 12 hours a day with no days off, ignoring federal
minimum wage and overtime rules. And there is further ongoing
litigation regarding worker safety and forced labor.
China's goal is to become the dominant world power. They
have a plan to do it. We need to look at what it is they are
trying to accomplish. We know how they treat their people
already. We know how they treat the Uyghurs. We know how they
treated the Tibetans and are treating the Tibetans. We know
what's going on in Hong Kong. And they want to export this
throughout the world.
So I want to thank all of our witnesses today for their
excellent work that they've done leading up to this point, the
research they've done in helping to highlight this to the
American people. And I ask my colleagues here to work with us
to try and get our Foreign Affairs Committee to finally put our
bill forward on the Uyghurs to get this moving so we can join
with the Senate to try and get something passed to help make
this happen.
Thank you very much to everyone, and Mr. Chairman, thank
you so much for allowing me to go.
Chair McGovern. Thank you very much.
Senator Rubio.
Co-chair Rubio. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
Mr. Turkel, let me ask you this. It's clear from your
testimony that the horrific situation that Uyghurs are facing,
they're facing it no matter where they live, as their relatives
at home in the Uyghur region are either swept into the camps or
live in an atmosphere of constant and pervasive fear. As a
Uyghur American yourself, if you feel comfortable speaking
about this, can you tell us a little bit about how all of this
has affected your family personally?
Mr. Turkel. Thank you. Before I answer your question, I
would like to ask the Chairman for permission to enter these
two reports into the record. One is by my organization
profiling China's harassment activities, coercive activities.
And the second one is about labor, issued by a Chinese sister
organization.
Chair McGovern. Without objection.
[The reports appear in the Appendix.]
Mr. Turkel. Thank you very much.
First of all, Senator Rubio, I would like to thank you for
writing a letter early on to our ambassador, Ambassador Max
Baucus, to ask for his help to help assist my parents.
Two things that I thought I was over with--especially after
I arrived in the United States and became a U.S. citizen. One,
I would never talk about my past history being born in a
reeducation camp. Forty-odd years later, we're talking about
similar circumstances. And then, two, I thought after becoming
a U.S. citizen and licensed to practice in the United States, I
should be able to speak my mind. That is not happening to the
full extent.
The last time I saw my mother was when she was here in 2004
for my law school graduation. With all the efforts, including
Mr. Posner here, we have not made any progress. My father is 80
years old. Mom is 68. I do not think that I will ever see them
again unless the Chinese government allows them to spend the
rest of their lives here with their three American
grandchildren.
It's been difficult. It would be disingenuous for me to say
that I have a normal life. I don't. I would love to go back to
my life two years ago, even though it was sort of a weird,
strange, difficult life, but at least I was able to check up
with my family members, to say hello, you know, congratulate
them on significant dates.
Because of this software that the Chinese government forced
Uyghurs to install on their phones, the Uyghurs have been
disconnected. Even testifying at this hearing may cost the
lives of my parents. But, you know, it's the right thing to do.
I have to speak out. This helps me to overcome the sense of
anxiety, sense of guilt, sense of desperation and despair,
because speaking as the voice of the people is very empowering.
Co-chair Rubio. And I think anyone who hears your testimony
should be troubled. You're a United States citizen. Your
children are United States citizens and your family is being
directly impacted by the policy decisions, the coercion, the
repression of a foreign entity, and it's being applied even
here in the United States.
When people ask about this issue--first, this is not just
about something that's happening in China. It is terrible what
has happened over there. It is impacting people that live here,
on a regular and daily basis. And it's not just limited, by the
way, to people with your background from that region who have a
family there or were born there.
As we saw last week, the NBA has learned that you really
cannot ignore politics in China if you are doing business with
or in China because your business partner is the Chinese
Communist Party. In the case of the NBA, their partner is the
Ministry of Education. And in the case of these corporations--
and I think this is for the whole panel--the entity in China in
charge of joint ventures and foreign companies doing business
is the exact same entity that's in charge of standing up these
factories in these different operations in this region.
If all of you could elaborate, if somebody is listening
now, the corporate CEO, members of the board, even prominent
shareholders who think that they could somehow make money in
China, do business with China, but somehow avoid the political
implications and/or witting or unwitting complicity in what's
happening--I want to give the panel the opportunity to explain
to them why that cannot be the case and why that will get
harder and harder both from a realistic perspective--I think,
Mr. Turkel, in your testimony you talked about how due
diligence is impossible in this region--but even broader that
there is no way to escape this. If you're sourcing from there,
if you're doing business from there, particularly in the
Xinjiang region, you are engaged in not just witting or
unwitting complicity in these crimes, but you're engaged in
politics whether you like it or not and you're now forced to
make this decision between billions of dollars in revenue or
speaking out and losing it.
Mr. Zenz. I would say something right away. I would like to
support your point, Mr. Rubio, with one further important
aspect that you will find in my written testimony.
The links between Xinjiang and eastern China are growing
stronger by the day. So even if a company is doing business
with an eastern Chinese corporation in China or outside of
China, because of the mutual pairing assistance scheme by which
19 cities and provinces including Beijing, Shanghai, Guangdong,
and others, the biggest ones, the biggest business players, are
mutually linked with mostly Uyghur minority regions in
Xinjiang, especially southern Xinjiang.
And by design and default, they're investing billions in
the development of Xinjiang's minority regions. Now, this
development, especially in the past years, has been
predominantly to support the very business models that I've
testified about, the three flows of labor.
I have hard evidence that mutual pairing assistance monies
have directly funded internment camp labor by constructing
factories on the grounds of internment camps or right next to
them, expressly designated by government documents to employ
internment camp workers. And these links mean that China's
entire domestic supply chain is becoming tainted. The
implications of that heavily underscore the very point that you
have made, that doing business with China is not only a problem
because the CCP and Beijing dictate what you can say publicly
or not say about anything that they care about, but also
because doing business even in eastern China is now
increasingly impossible without in some way participating or
supporting the repression in Xinjiang.
Co-chair Rubio. If I can paraphrase, what you're basically
saying is there is not a single American today that has not
either worn clothes or used a tech device that is either funded
or has been directly created by forced labor in China.
Mr. Zenz. This is the trend because as we speak, it's
Beijing's policy to turn Xinjiang into the cheap manufacturing
hub of the Belt and Road. Xinjiang is already the center of the
Belt and Road. And this pertains to textiles, also to
electronics assembly. It pertains to food products, all kinds
of products.
This is a long-term strategy, and this is increasing
Xinjiang's share in the manufacturing of cheap goods, as we
have heard, because of rising labor costs in the east. It is
only going to increase its long-term government policy.
Mr. Posner. Senator Rubio, just to add one other dimension
which I mentioned briefly in my testimony, there are a number
of companies now that have been put on this Entity List--28
companies and government institutions. A number of them are
private companies that have gotten U.S. investment dollars. And
it seems to me one place to start would be to look at--there is
a company called Megvii, another called SenseTime. We know that
not only are private investment firms, let's say in California,
venture firms, investing, but also our public pension funds. In
fact, the majority of dollars are coming from public pension,
from state university funds.
I think one of the ways we can start to look at this is to
ask not only who's doing business, who's manufacturing, but
who's investing. Here we are talking about firms that are
involved in surveillance technology, facial recognition in
Xinjiang. They are being supported financially by U.S.-based
investors who say, I am not focused on that. We need to focus--
every American business that is connected to that needs to be
put on notice that this is now their responsibility as well.
Co-chair Rubio. I just have one final question in regard to
all this, and I am not claiming this is what is going to
happen. I think I know the answer you're going to give me, but
I think it's important to have it on the record.
How disastrous would it be if we wake up one day six months
from now to news that there's some sort of trade deal and as
part of this broader economic arrangement we have agreed, in
exchange for them buying more stuff from us, to stop doing
anything about this, to stop talking about this, to remove
companies from the Entity List--in essence, I get asked this
all the time--should this be related to the trade talks?
My answer has always been you don't want it related to the
trade talks because you don't want this to be something that
can be bargained away in exchange for more agricultural product
purchases or what have you. But how disastrous, how
demoralizing would it be on the global stage, not to mention to
the character of our nation, if somehow this became one of the
items to be negotiated. And I'm not claiming that it is, but
certainly trying to be ahead of the curve on this.
Mr. Posner. Well, I very much agree with your answer.
Ultimately, this is a very important relationship, the U.S. and
China. We've got security concerns. We have got economic
concerns. We have to make sure that the human rights concerns
are not subsumed by those other interests. We have to be
principled; we have to stand for our values. And these issues
have got to be dealt with on their own terms, and we can't
compromise them for other interests.
Ms. Lehr. Just to quickly add to that, I also think U.S.
leadership is so important because if we back off, especially
on the technology side--we know that these technologies are
being exported to other countries. And so when you just think
about the world we want to live in and the role of democracy,
it is just incredibly important. So maintaining a focus on
human rights regardless of what happens with trade is vital.
Co-chair Rubio. Just a final point that I would make, as my
time is up. Although the clock keeps jumping around here
somehow. I don't know, it's magical.
[Laughter.]
Co-chair Rubio. But it is a home field advantage, I think.
Chair McGovern. We are very liberal.
Co-chair Rubio. The point I want to make, and just in the
broader sense of it, the morality of this is clear. I think our
national security and national interest in being outspoken and
active on this is clear. I would just add, just if you purely
analyze this from a trade and economic perspective, how can you
fairly compete? You are talking about outsourcing. How could
you fairly compete with a nation who produces basically free
labor, compelled free labor competing with your workers and
your industries?
So it's wrong morally. It's outrageous, but it is also, I
think, the ultimate violation of any sort of trade agreement
you could possibly have that would be fair and balanced between
two countries. So anyway, the more you learn about this, the
more outrageous it is. It really is.
But thank you all for being here.
Chair McGovern. Thank you.
Before I yield to Representative Smith for his questions, I
just have a quick question.
It was reported this morning that Cotton On and Target
Australia have stopped sourcing cotton from Xinjiang due to the
concerns about forced labor and human rights abuses. And so I
am just sitting here listening, as we all are, to the expert
testimony here today on the widespread use of forced labor in
Xinjiang and the difficulties in determining whether or not a
particular factory is using forced labor.
I've met with American businesses. We've had these
conversations and they tell me they have complied with all the
rules and regulations that we have required of them and they
check all the boxes. But yet I don't really feel reassured that
they know for certain that they're not sourcing from places
that use forced labor.
I just want to ask; do you believe that the U.S. should ban
all imports from Xinjiang?
Ms. Lehr. I think that's a hard question. In terms of
potentially CBP having a WRO that bans all products or all
cotton from Xinjiang, it would obviously have significant,
immediate economic repercussions. And I think the challenge may
be--I think there's a problem with companies; Costco, for
example, is quite powerful--where they really should have
known.
There are situations where things will be many layers away
in the supply chain and companies may incidentally and
unknowingly still source. So it's never going to be a perfect
system.
And I think the question is, just what's the fastest way to
get us somewhere that puts pressure on the Chinese government?
So bans are one approach.
Another approach would be to start putting major, some of
the larger Chinese companies, on some kind of watchlist. It is
going to cause them specifically to feel pain. So a lot of the
companies in the pairing program that Adrian talked about would
probably make it onto that watchlist. And if anyone's going
to--to the extent you can put any leverage on the government,
it would be them. They are big enough to do it. So I think
there are different potential approaches.
Chair McGovern. And I ask the question because based on
some of the conversations I have had with U.S. businesses,
again, they can check a box, but I don't really feel that they
are trying hard enough to determine whether or not forced labor
is part of what they are producing. I just throw that out there
based on the news this morning.
Mr. Posner, do you------
Ms. Lehr. Could I just say very quickly--sorry, Mike.
Yeah, I think they need to really step up what they are
doing. The normal way that companies try to figure out if they
have forced labor in their supply chain doesn't work in
Xinjiang. They have got to change how they are doing it to be
taken seriously.
Chair McGovern. I guess my point is that we can lecture,
and we can urge, and we can tell them to do this, I just don't
really feel that they are.
Mr. Posner.
Mr. Posner. Yes, I was just going to add--I think one of
the advantages, one of the benefits of the Senate bill, the
passed bill, the Human Rights Policy Act, is that it requires
the U.S. Government to report more fulsomely on what's going
on.
And one of the things that they should and can be looking
at much more ambitiously is the use of forced and slave labor.
And to the extent that they make that link to companies in the
United States, that's the place to start. And my sense is we
need to shift the burden of proof. We need to say, if you know
that things are being produced with forced labor in Xinjiang,
then companies need to be absolutely sure that their products
are not being produced there.
We need to make it easier to connect those dots so that
companies feel the obligation--American companies and others--
not to do business.
Chair McGovern. Mr. Turkel.
Mr. Turkel. Yes. I would say in one word, yes. That is
necessary. We should also encourage other countries, our trade
partners, to take a similar measure. This has to be a global
effort. I applaud the Australian government for taking this
step yesterday with those companies. They are even looking at
others, such as H&M and other importers to implement similar
policies.
Chair McGovern. Mr. Zenz.
Mr. Zenz. Yes, I think at a minimum the burden of proof
should be shifted to the companies. That's a step that should
be done. So there should be much more restrictive practice.
But I actually do believe that a general ban on low-
skilled, high-labor-intensive manufacturing items from Xinjiang
is actually not unfeasible. It can be done because we have such
policy evidence, and we can continue to work on it, but we have
such evidence that this is a systematic policy.
In relation to the mutual pairing assistance, we have
evidence of the funding being put into it. We have evidence on
enough levels. I think this would send a much stronger message
to Beijing than anything else, including visa bans on Chen
Quanguo, or policy acts, travel bans, etc. I think this would
be the thing to look into and I think it can be done if done
properly.
Mr. Turkel. Can I add one more quick point?
We have been looking at very different ways to address the
humanitarian crisis and to force the Chinese government to
change its behavior. This is one of the ways that they may
possibly change, because the Chinese government has not
incurred any cost for their policies. Unless it becomes a very
costly operation, I don't think that they will change their
behavior. And also by banning everything, we may be able to
help manufacturers to start their tooling technician life all
over again.
Chair McGovern. Yes, I am just curious. Target Australia--
why isn't Target America doing it? It just--in any event, thank
you.
Mr. Smith.
Representative Smith. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you all for your tremendous testimony and your
leadership. Secretary Posner, great to see you again. In the
1990s, I held a series of hearings and worked very hard on the
whole issue of gulag labor. And George Bush--Herbert Walker
that is--and then Bill Clinton--had this weak and inadequate
policy of an MOU where they said, Oh, if we suspect something
is in violation of the Smoot-Hawley Act and is coming here,
prison-made goods, we will then tell the Chinese to
investigate. And within a certain time period, they'll give us
their answer, and end of story.
I went and visited two of the Customs people in Beijing who
are in charge of implementing that, and they were like the
Maytag repairman. They had no work. They said, Well, we never
get anything.
We have enabled, perhaps unwittingly over these decades
through very feckless and weak policies, the Chinese to
exploit. And why would they expect that there would be any real
penalty now when the world looks away, including in many cases,
the United States.
So the gulag labor issue has been with us a long time. It
is now being implemented with great, horrific consequences
against the Muslim Uyghurs. I say that as some background.
But we do have some tools that ought to be more
aggressively--hopefully the new bill will, as Secretary Posner
said, really increase that scrutiny and require a great deal of
application of our laws. The Trafficking Victims Protection Act
makes absolutely clear that this is in violation of U.S. law.
That ought to be used.
Yes, China is already a Tier 3 country, but there's a
sanctions regime that has not been imposed. It was not imposed
under Obama. It was not imposed because--they were Tier 3 for
one year under Obama, and it has not been imposed upon a whole
lot of countries. That needs to be brushed off and those
sanctions used there.
We also need, obviously, to use other tools that are at our
disposal. So I say we've got to just end mere words, and
rhetoric, and concern, and now use tools, laws that are at our
disposal.
If any of you could give us best estimates as to how many
people are in the Uyghur laogai or gulags? For years, some of
you know this. I know, Secretary Posner, that you know this.
Since my second term in 1983, I have pushed very hard on
the issue of forced abortion and coercive population control in
China, which is often implemented in a way--in terms of
discovery of pregnancies that were not agreed to by the
government, children that were not agreed to by the
government--at the factory level.
I remember John Avedon wrote a horrific piece about the
rape of Tibet and talked about how it was an act of genocide,
what they were doing there. When Rebiya Kadeer contacted me
about a mother carrying a child, who had been rounded up by
three dozen police in Xinjiang, I went to our ambassador. I
went to the Chinese ambassadors and said--are you kidding? All
those people to destroy one little baby and to exploit that
woman? That baby got a reprieve and was born, but the mother
was in the hospital being coerced to have an abortion.
What happens in the labor camps when a woman is pregnant?
Is she forcibly aborted? Does anybody know? Have we been asking
those questions as well?
So I guess--I have a lot of other questions, but I don't
have enough time. If you could speak to some of those issues,
if you would?
Mr. Zenz. The number of estimated detainees is, of course,
of interest and relevant in terms of coercive internment labor.
The problem with that is that the internment network is very
multi-pronged and much of it is heavy-handed on reeducation.
We have indication that one section of detainees is now
sentenced to prison terms. Another part is being kept in
intensive reeducation because they apparently have not been
broken yet, and apparently the ones on their best behavior are
being put in vocational training which is largely reeducation.
But then eventually--if they are on top behavior, they can
graduate. I am actually looking into some of this, so it is a
bit premature to give more details. But we are looking at
multiple streams and the ones that most comply with the
government are being sent into the factories for labor.
It's very important to look at all three flows of labor
that I've outlined in my research paper because the involuntary
or coercive labor issue goes far beyond the reeducation camps.
The training of rural surplus laborers, the official policy to
set up satellite factories in every other village, in every
second village in Xinjiang's minority regions, the co-optation
of nearly all adults, including women, into labor, means that
we are looking at a scheme--depending on how we define forced
labor--if we define forced labor as at least highly involuntary
at a minimum, we are talking millions, millions of minority
Uyghur and Kazakh adults.
If we do it more narrowly as internment camp labor taking
place in or near internment camps, we are getting smaller
numbers. But the problem is these people are being sent,
firstly, apparently, to forced labor right on the camp
compounds or nearby in industrial parks, often with police
accompaniment. But then after some time if they have behaved
well, they can then move on to satellite factories in their own
villages or industrial parks. So it is a successive scheme. We
cannot only pin this on internment camps or even prison labor,
which is also happening. The prison labor is a whole separate
thing in itself.
We need to track the entire development and related
policies, and on a scale of coercion of labor, we are talking
about a grand scheme that's encompassing basically almost the
entire minority population to an extent, with the exception of
the more highly educated; some of them are allowed to just
remain in government jobs and whatnot.
Mr. Turkel. There're different numbers being put out. The
most recent one was by Randall Schriver, the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific Security Affairs. He
stated up to 3 million.
Even if it is 1 million or 3 million, that is a significant
number. Let's say it's 3 million. That is four times the size
of the District of Columbia population. So this city has been
four times emptied out. That's the equivalent of that figure
put out by the Pentagon. And those people have names,
aspirations, and families.
So it's easy for us to say 1 million, 3 million, but the
entire generation has been wiped out. They have a specific
targeted age group, the people born in the 1980s and 90s. And
as you may have known, they have been collecting individual
information based on travel history, past teaching, like Mr.
Teyip's brother, and also a social context. So the artificial
intelligence gathered up these people.
So when you look at the survivors, when you look at the
survivors' testimony or talk to them, some villages are
completely emptied out. So the Uyghurs actually think this 3
million figure is a very conservative figure.
Ms. Lehr. I wanted to just pick up a little bit on the
medical-related issues. We don't have anything very clear,
specifically, on forced abortion. We have not heard very much,
but we did interview a number of former detainees. And one
thing we heard repeatedly that we weren't even looking for was
people being subjected to repeated blood tests, repeated
medical testing, often quite extensive; women being given shots
that they did not really know what they were for, not
consensual, which is a violation of international law, medical
testing without consent. So I think that's a whole other piece
that needs attention, and we just don't have enough yet to know
exactly what's going on.
Representative Smith. Are there any indications that organs
may be--the way they----
Ms. Lehr. You know, there are people who suspect it, but I
don't think we have heard anything that we could confirm that
with. Nury, do you have anything on that?
Mr. Turkel. No.
Mr. Posner. Okay. If I understand the slightly broader
point, and it goes back to something Senator Rubio said when he
asked the question about linking trade. All of the good will
and good intentions in this room, both on the part of all of
you, and witnesses here, pales in comparison to the direct
relationship between our President and Xi Jinping.
The Chinese Communist Party is a top-down, centrally
controlled apparatus. Xi is both the president of China and the
head of the Chinese Communist Party. And so on one level the
thing that is the most important is that there be a clear,
unequivocal message coming from the top of our own government.
That's what would make the greatest difference and it's why I
dwelled on it a little bit in my testimony, but there is such
an obvious disconnect between what people in the State
Department and these other agencies are saying and doing, and
what the President is saying.
And so again, I know none of you has the ability to control
the President's words or actions, but I think we need to keep
our eye on that part of the relationship. It's a critical
piece. And what happens at the top of the Chinese Communist
Party filters down throughout the system. That's where the
problem starts and we're not going to really solve this until
we have a more clear and unambiguous policy coming from the
top.
Representative Smith. Thank you.
Chair McGovern. Congresswoman Kaptur.
Representative Kaptur. Yes, I want to thank our co-chairs
this morning for just an excellent hearing and all of those who
have come to place on the record your very important
information.
The word ``communism'' is a very disturbing word to me. I
come from a family where two great-uncles--one died in one of
Stalin's gulags, and the other was sent to two of them and
survived. He got out in 1952 after Stalin's death.
So the whole philosophy, Dr. Zenz, that you referenced,
work sets you free--whether one looks at the Nazi Party or the
Communist Party, this whole idea that somehow forced labor
equals salvation, I would be very grateful for any additional
information you have from a philosophical standpoint about
where this sick idea comes from. That's not really my question
this morning, but I think that the Victims of Communism
Foundation . . . you are on to something extraordinarily
important that I think the new generation needs to learn.
In terms of the impact of U.S. business relations with
China, I'm wondering if in terms of China's balance of payments
with any country in the world, if any of you could state with
which nation China has the largest trade surplus. In other
words, more purchases from that particular country come from
China than China purchases from that country. Could someone
state which country purchases more of their goods than any
other?
Mr. Posner. I don't know the exact numbers, but U.S.
imports from China are number one.
Representative Kaptur. That is correct, the United States.
So if one looks at half a trillion dollars or more of trade
deficit annually, we are integrally woven into their practices.
I'm wondering, if you look at the purchase of U.S. debt, do
any of you know which country purchases the greatest share of
U.S. debt?
Mr. Turkel. China. I believe it's China.
Representative Kaptur. Yes. It's over a trillion dollars,
$1.13 trillion. So what China does is integrally woven into the
functioning of our society.
Mr. Turkel, I will do anything I can to help your family. I
am sure every Member up here would. Just know that we stand
ready to help families like yours. I welcome you to my district
to tell your story. If you're ever flying over Ohio, we would
welcome you.
Mr. Turkel. Thank you.
Representative Kaptur. We have a series we call ``At
Freedom's Edge.'' Your family is a living example of it,
globally. God bless you and God bless your parents.
Mr. Turkel. Thank you.
Representative Kaptur. I want to ask our witnesses, in
terms of the gulags that you referenced, is there a gender
difference? Are there more women working in these zones than
men, or is it equal? Does anyone wish to comment on that?
Mr. Zenz. Yes, the government has a quota for gender in
minority textile manufacturing. And it's supposed to be either
3:7 or 4:7, a ratio in favor of women. You also see that almost
all the propaganda accounts in Uyghur textile manufacturing,
especially connected to internment camps, show women.
Representative Kaptur. Are you saying it is four men to
seven women? Is that what you're saying?
Mr. Zenz. Yes. Yes, for textiles and manufacturing.
Representative Kaptur. Why is that?
Mr. Zenz. It is, of course, for traditional reasons because
traditionally Uyghur women, minority women, have engaged in
traditional forms of cloth making, dress, etc.
Representative Kaptur. All right.
I am reminded of the Triangle Shirtwaist fire in New York
City which spawned the development of what was called the
International Ladies Garment Workers Union in our own country,
and the struggle that women have had globally, to try to earn a
decent living for the work that they do, many in very unsafe
conditions and exploitative conditions.
I want to ask any of you, what are the average wages? If
you were to talk to an average American and just say look, this
is what American workers earn, what do Chinese workers earn
working in these zones?
Ms. Lehr. I can just give you a little anecdotal
information about what the minimum wage is and what we are
hearing people are actually being paid.
The minimum wage in Xinjiang is between 1400 and 1800 yuan
per month. But in fact, what we're hearing is that some of both
ex-detainees and the rural poor who are part of these poverty
alleviation programs are being paid sometimes not at all,
sometimes being paid maybe 300 yuan per year.
Representative Kaptur. Okay, what does that translate to in
U.S. dollars?
Ms. Lehr. A couple hundred dollars. The minimum wage should
be, I believe--Nury, you will get this more correct than me--
but a couple hundred dollars a month is the minimum wage.
Mr. Turkel. That is correct.
Ms. Lehr. But what they are actually being paid is just a
fraction of that. So people are being paid in a year what they
should be paid in a month.
Representative Kaptur. We don't even know that? We don't
even know what workers work for there? It's that hidden?
Ms. Lehr. We know what the official minimum wage is, but
there is an official government policy right now with regard to
minority labor--that they do not have to be paid it.
Representative Kaptur. None of you placed that in your
testimony, I don't believe. If you could provide any refinement
of that so that the American people could understand what's
really going on here, I think that would be quite helpful.
I also wanted to ask a question about fentanyl. In my
district this past weekend, 26 pounds of fentanyl were
collected by the DEA and several individuals were arrested. We
know that that comes from China. Have you ever come across this
issue in your work, and where that's manufactured and how it
gets here?
[The witnesses indicated ``no''.]
Representative Kaptur No? All right.
Thank you very much. That ends my questions, Mr. Chairman.
Chair McGovern. Thank you very much.
Senator Merkley.
Senator Merkley. Thank you all for your testimony and to my
colleagues from the House and Senate who are paying attention
to this issue.
Mr. Posner, you mentioned that it would be so important,
central, to have a message from the top. And I am concerned
that we haven't succeeded in getting President Trump to speak
to significant human rights abuses around the world--the ethnic
cleansing that occurred in Burma, driving 700,000 Rohingya into
the neighboring country of Bangladesh, 300 villages burned
down, massive systematic rape, assaults. And in this case--also
again a vacuum--and I think that all of us--Democrats,
Republicans, House, Senate, need to try to find a way to have
President Trump stand up on the international stage on both of
these issues.
As I was pondering the situation in the province, I was
reminded of the movie ``Gattaca'' from 1997. And in that movie,
there is a character named Vincent Freeman who because of his
DNA is assigned and categorized to be in a class that can only
do menial jobs. But he is determined to travel in space. So he
goes to extraordinary lengths to, basically, overcome the
government's systematic testing of urine and DNA. And this is
really before we had the ability to monitor DNA the way that we
can now--in 1997, twenty years ago.
And now we have this province that has an additional tool
that was not even dreamed of in the late 90s, of facial
recognition, and Vincent Freeman would have had a very hard
time overcoming that additional factor.
I am concerned that this model of a government exercising
extensive massive surveillance in combination with artificial
intelligence, with the data storage capabilities that exist at
this moment--let alone what is to come--is a tool that is very
difficult for governments to perhaps resist. We have a case of
our own government just saying that they want to take a DNA
record of every immigrant to the United States of America. And
so you can see that we're not immune from the collection of
massive amounts of personally identifying data that could be
used in all kinds of ways.
As we're listening to you, I'm sensing that we don't have
one clear path to be able to exercise more leverage. One of the
issues that has come up is how difficult it is for U.S.
companies to track where the products are originating, and
getting more difficult all the time, it sounds like. How can we
take that on? And if all of you can follow up with all of us,
we can think about what we can do legislatively.
Senator Rubio led a bill, the Uyghur Human Rights Act, that
passed on September 11th. It has a series of reports and
strategies in it. It has an amendment that I submitted that
called for--unless international monitors are allowed access,
it would trigger the Global Magnitsky Act. I don't know where
this stands in the House and if the House is prepared to take
it up.
Chair McGovern. We're working on it.
Senator Merkley. Great. That is terrific to hear because at
least that would be one tool to draw attention to this
situation. And I think as a result of the Senate examining
this, the U.S. Government, the executive branch, has now taken
action on October 7th and October 8th.
On October 7th, they set a series of export restrictions on
certain products to a host of provinces in China that could be
used in surveillance and so forth. On October 8th, they put in
visa restrictions on officials who are complicit in the
internment camps, the slave labor, and so forth.
I want to ask all of you, do you think there will be any
significant impact from the actions taken on October 7th,
October 8th? How would you like to see the Uyghur Human Rights
Act strengthened in the House, or should we just get the Senate
version passed quickly to try to get it to the floor, to get it
to the Oval Office and then seek another bill as we understand
more and have more defined strategies for applying leverage?
Mr. Posner. We had a little bit of discussion of this
earlier. I think both the Senate and the House bill have
elements that are quite useful. The Senate bill as I understand
it is more a reporting requirement for the State Department,
which I think is always helpful. But I think the House bill
also relates to sourcing restrictions and export controls,
especially relating to technology. So elements of both of
those, I think, are useful and you ought to be pursuing it.
The other thing I said in the opening is that all of those
restrictions, while they're very much in the right direction,
need to be enforced and that you need to have congressional
oversight. The companies that are doing the surveillance you
talked about in Xinjiang, in particular, are Chinese companies.
Those were put on the list in early October, but they're also
getting investment support from American investors. And I think
that's a place where there needs to be much more attention.
This integrated joint operations platform that the Chinese
are operating in Xinjiang is probably the most intrusive
surveillance program in the world. And what you mentioned,
facial recognition technology, is part of that. It's really
important that we pay attention not only to who's doing it, but
who's supporting it.
One positive thing I would say, we've talked a lot about
what companies should be doing. One company that really has
taken the issue of facial recognition on in an affirmative way
is Microsoft. They even took down a public facial recognition
technology they had up, when they realized that it was being
misused in China. So there are ways to deal with this, but most
companies are not doing what they need to be doing.
Mr. Turkel. The Entity List, I think it's very significant.
I never thought in my lifetime that I would see a government
that would sanction the entire police department in the Uyghur
region, which is very significant. And also, it's related to
me. That's the police department that has been harassing and
intimidating my parents, and that same police department
forcibly took my parents' DNA samples in 2015. So on a personal
level, it is very gratifying. In substance, as well, it is a
very useful step. The visa ban is also a significant step, even
though we don't know who the individuals are.
As for the bill, I think we should pass a bill for now, and
then talk about the other issues, make an amendment or
introduce another bill with more teeth. The Uyghur people have
been waiting for this body to do something legislatively to
force our executive branch to take a coherent policy step. So
it is imperative that the pending bill, H.R. 649, be finalized
as soon as possible.
Mr. Zenz. I would recommend making forced labor a separate
issue and bill because it is a really, really big issue even
though it's related. I think it's good to pass what you have
now, so that that's passed. I really suggest that a separate
forced labor bill be introduced because the implications are
also, as Mr. Rubio pointed out--there are some very real
business implications of making money off of oppression,
undercutting prices.
I would really suggest that that would really have some
teeth to scare the business community, the American business
community, the Western business community, to really put
sanctions on companies that have dealings with forced labor,
and to make that a really strong separate package. That would
be my recommendation.
Senator Merkley. This makes me think there's a premium on
us getting the Senate and House Members together to get a
strategy because so often we end up with a bill passed in one
chamber and not the other, and nothing makes it to the Oval
Office. Certainly I'll make myself available for any
discussions of that nature.
It was mentioned earlier that China is a Tier 3 country in
terms of labor practices, forced labor, and slave labor. That
puts it in a small group of very abusive countries, but the
real impact of that is related to foreign aid. And we don't
send foreign aid to China. So how could we strengthen the Tier
3 consequences in a real substantive way so that it would have
an impact on the types of practices we are seeing applied to
the Uyghur community?
Mr. Posner. Well, again, to me, the biggest issue is
enforcement. We had some discussion earlier about Customs and
Border Protection issuing withhold release orders on a few
companies that were using prison and forced labor in the
apparel sector.
The enforcement of what comes into the United States has
historically been extremely weak. We don't have the resources
to get at that. And there's no doubt that there are many, many
products coming into the United States that are products of
forced labor.
So I think part of this is really trying to figure out how
we bolster that and make sure that things coming into this
country are not the product of the practices that my colleagues
have been describing here today.
Senator Merkley. Well, we've also heard from all of you on
how difficult it is to sort out the sourcing. And we have in
Senator Rubio's bill a provision that is trying to open the
door to international inspectors. But it makes sense to me that
a piece of what we have to do is to greatly increase
transparency of the transactions taking place so that we can
track the products and apply pressure in appropriate fashion.
I want to encourage U.S. companies to do everything they
can on their own to understand their sourcing, but if they are
buying bulk cotton--it sounds like it's very difficult to
determine exactly all the roots of that supply chain.
Mr. Turkel. I would like to share a story. Recently an
Albanian journalist took a trip as part of the government-
sponsored Potemkin village visits. In one of his interviews he
asked one of the happy-faced Uyghur minority individuals if she
was Muslim. She hesitatingly said that she was not Muslim.
With that kind of lack of freedom core circumstance, it is
inconceivable that any worker would tell the true side of the
story, the real story. So it is impossible. I think that if
anyone claims, if any company claims that there is due
diligence being done, that is dubious at best. It is impossible
to accomplish that goal.
Senator Merkley. So even with inspectors or international
observers gaining access, that doesn't mean that they can
really tell what's going on in terms of testimony from people
they are interviewing.
Mr. Zenz. The Chinese regime, what we can see from these
organized tours to Xinjiang, has now had two years, or a year
and a half, to refine their shows--as I would call them--
putting on a show. And these detainees know if they don't play
along in the show, they're going to end up in a much worse
place than they are.
I think it's extremely problematic to conduct any
meaningful or reliable due diligence. I would still press for
inspections because intelligent people can read between the
lines. If you look at the BBC video on the camps, they did a
fantastic job and made surprise visits later on and were able
to record things spoken about 20, 30 feet away when the minders
were chiding the head of the reeducation camp about not having
the right answer at the right time.
But even so, I think it's much more necessary to look at
this from what the government has said on paper. The Xinjiang
government has made some very clear statements on paper. These
ought to be taken seriously. I am documenting them in my
research, and I think it's much more effective to come to the
conclusion of declaring Xinjiang an involuntary or coercive
labor zone by policy, or similarly, go on that level rather
than picking apart production supply chains, try to do
investigations. One can do both at the same time. But I would
really recommend doing the latter as well, and not just the
former.
Mr. Turkel. Senator, the issue is much bigger than just the
forced labor issue. I think we need to look at a broader
industry standard. If you stop this practice in a manufacturing
sector--we have--the universities are vulnerable because we
already know that one famous U.S. scientist, Professor Kenneth
Kidd, assisted the Chinese Public Ministry with DNA sequence
sampling technologies. And also, we have the winter Olympics
coming up.
So this has to be a multifaceted approach. We have to also
address the CCP's insecurity. Early on, there was a question
about the CCP. To the Chinese Communist Party, the Uyghur
identity, the Uyghurs' religious background, in and of itself,
is a threat. So they need to get rid of it.
So this has to be looked at on multiple fronts. The
Australian example, I think, has a lot to do with this Entity
List. So whatever happens in Washington on this particular
issue has global implications.
Senator Merkley. Thank you all. Amy, do you want to
comment?
Ms. Lehr. I was going to say something on a slightly
different topic, which was maybe another point of leverage that
I think needs more exploration. The extent to which, maybe less
than the forced labor realm, but with technology--maybe some of
the large state-owned enterprises that are building some of
these detention facilities and factories--are they listed or
are their subsidiaries listed in the U.S.? And if they are
involved in crimes against humanity, should they be able to be?
I just think that's another avenue we might be able to pursue
some of this from.
Senator Merkley. Thank you. I look forward to having my
team work with all of you on strategies that could be effective
in increasing our leverage. Thank you.
Chair McGovern. Thank you.
Congresswoman Hartzler.
Representative Hartzler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank
you to my colleagues for holding this very important hearing.
And thank you to each of you for your very, very important
work. I share Representative Kaptur's comments, Mr. Turkel,
that we stand ready to help you, your family, in any way that
we can.
I wanted to focus a little bit on Hikvision and Dahua. As
you know, these Chinese companies have profited greatly from
the surge in Chinese security spending, winning government
contracts for large-scale surveillance projects, and they've
provided much of the surveillance equipment used by officials
to monitor the ethnic minorities in Xinjiang.
On October 7th, 2019, the U.S. Department of Commerce, as
we've talked about, added 28 organizations located in China to
the Entity List which restricts American exports to such
organizations. And these companies, including Hikvision and
Dahua, were added due to their human rights violations and
abuses in China's campaign targeting ethnic minorities.
Additionally in last year's National Defense Authorization
Act, I included language prohibiting the Federal Government,
our Federal Government, and companies that contract with our
government, from purchasing Hikvision and Dahua video
surveillance equipment. I have an inquiry pending with the GSA
now to get a status update on the implementation of this
provision.
Ms. Lehr, what additional actions should the U.S.
Government and American investment firms take to ensure that
they do not purchase or sell to, or invest in, companies such
as Hikvision and Dahua?
Ms. Lehr. Well, I think Mike has touched indirectly on this
a number of times. I think there's a lot of work to do--maybe
not just in terms of purchasing, but actually who's funding. A
lot of these companies are developing this technology, and the
role of both venture capital and institutional investors in the
U.S.--our pension funds--that are funding their work.
And so I haven't thought of exactly the right mechanism to
get at that yet, but first of all, just more attention to it. I
think what surprised a lot of Americans is how their money is
being used. How you get at it legislatively . . . maybe Mike
has some ideas.
Mr. Posner. Well, actually, in my written testimony I
mention an investment firm called AMX which specializes in
high-performance computing for deep learning applications, and
they've partnered with Hikvision.
One of the things I think we have to really look at is who
the investment firms are, including the public pension funds,
and the university endowments that have a stake in companies
like Hikvision and the others that are on this Entity List that
just was added to in early October. I think that's really a
place we haven't put enough attention.
And we also ought to look at university partnerships
because some of this technology's being developed in
conjunction with U.S. technical experts who are working hand-
in-glove with Chinese companies to build surveillance
technology, facial recognition, and DNA testing. So there's a
lot of work to be done.
There's a company called Thermo Fisher, out of
Massachusetts, which actually sold DNA sequencers directly to
government authorities in Xinjiang for genetic mapping until it
was publicly called out earlier this year. They stopped doing
it. But how did that happen? What were they thinking? It seems
to me we've got a lot of work to do just to map the field of
where the investment dollars are going and how they connect to
the kinds of surveillance and bad use of technology we have
been talking about.
Mr. Turkel. Divestment is one of the things that we need to
look at. Hikvision makes one-third of the world's security
cameras. There have been reports that the American Teachers'
Union has invested in some of the technology companies in
question.
I always emphasize the global effort because the Chinese
government already tested out these surveillance technologies
by using Uyghur lives in their homeland. And now they're
exporting it. The New York Times reported that there are about
18 countries already in the process of adopting Chinese
surveillance technology. The question is very simple: What kind
of world do we want for the next generation?
Are we going to be dealing with this kind of surveillance
technology monitoring citizens' activities even if it is the
mildest of political opposition? Countries like Venezuela,
countries like Sudan, Iran and others have already adopted
these technologies. So I think it's a threat to the world that
needs to be looked at in a much broader perspective.
Representative Hartzler. Are you aware of any efforts at
the U.N. to look at this or discuss this?
Mr. Posner. Not meaningfully, no.
Representative Hartzler. Okay. Anything else you want to
say on the pensions investing, other than just that we need to
look at it? Do you have a way to go after that? I think that's
a very important point from this hearing. It's not just to
target and hold companies accountable, but to hold the pension
funds and the investors accountable as well, and as you bring
up, the universities are complicit in this.
Mr. Posner. One of the challenges we have in all of this--
this is what I call the dark side of the moon. We're dealing
with a place that has been essentially sealed off from public
visibility--independent journalists, diplomats, the U.N.
haven't got access.
So the first thing is we have got to find ways to get
greater insight into what's actually happening there and who's
involved. But then when we know, for example, on the issue of
surveillance technology or forced labor, I think we need to be
educating people in public pension funds, people in university
endowment investment offices, and private investment firms.
We need to set a new standard that says it's not okay just
to say this is one of many things we invest in and we have no
idea what they're doing. If it's a company involved in high
technology that's being used for surveillance or police
enforcement, security enforcement, the presumption ought to
be--you've got to be assuming that it's going to be misused in
a place like Xinjiang against the Uyghurs.
Ms. Lehr. I just want to add one thing. I agree with Mike
that this is the dark side of the moon. It is very hard to get
firsthand information. But you can get some information.
And so I think--one thing in our report is the idea of
having someone, maybe more than one person, fluent in written
Mandarin who's doing research in the U.S. Government and who
can start actually mapping out this world. It takes a lot of
work, and resources really need to be devoted to it. And then
even without the access to the ground, we can still start to
map this world.
Representative Hartzler. Okay. I wanted to close--my last
question, following up on something that Mr. Smith said too,
because I am also deeply concerned about reports of forced
abortions, forced use of contraception and sexual violence,
targeting the female ethnic minorities in the Xinjiang
detention camps. And there was a recent Washington Post article
highlighting the story of a woman who had her unborn baby cut
out of her body without the use of anesthesia. And there are
reports of women being raped by Chinese guards, impregnated,
and then forced to undergo an abortion while in prison.
This is nothing more than systemic torture. And as a nation
that values dignity and human life, we must shed light on and
work to stop these egregious acts.
You indicated earlier that none of you really have much
knowledge about what is happening with these reports of forced
abortion, sexual violence. Is there any more light you can shed
on this, and could the forced abortion policy and birth control
be part of China's plan to keep the ethnic Muslim population
down? Is there any documentation that this is part of their
official state policy, and what can we do, if anything,
additionally, as an international community, to stop China's
gross human rights violations?
Mr. Turkel. We're speaking about millions of people being
taken away, but we only have been able to speak to about five
individuals who have been in those camps. At least three of
those survivors have been telling us very consistent stories
about sexual violence, mysterious pills that they've been
given.
Last month I was one of the panelists at an event organized
by the State Department, and one of my co-panelists who is a
camp survivor told us that she no longer can conceive a baby
because of what she was given in the prison--and also the
Washington Post story that you reported also described very
gruesome sexual violence. But historically Uyghur women have
been sexual objects for the society.
And now forced marriage and other things on top of taking
away Uyghur children; every day when you turn on social media
you see a Uyghur woman forced to marry a Chinese individual. As
you know, there's a large number of Chinese bachelors who are
looking for wives, and the Chinese government is providing
incentives: housing, cars, and employment, as part of the
effort to lure Chinese bachelors to go to the Uyghur region to
marry a Uyghur woman.
So it sounds like a typical--it fits the definition of
cultural genocide. If a regime of government is focusing on
your children and your women, I don't think--I am sitting with
two lawyers here--it is pretty obvious there's cultural
genocide/ethnic cleansing taking place. That, I am pretty
comfortable stating.
Mr. Zenz. Yes. I would like to add to that.
Obviously, this is a very difficult topic to investigate,
and official documentation on this is basically nonexistent.
However, the evidence coming out of Xinjiang, thankfully, is
increasing. Just this morning, I read a new article of
testimony by Mrs. Sauytbay, who was a reeducation camp
educator--forced to be. She is now in asylum in Stockholm. She
has testified before, but I am just reading more detailed
testimony of hers that specifically gives more detail on sexual
abuse and details a particularly disturbing incident where
several hundred reeducation camp detainees were let into the
courtyard by the security guards and then one woman was forced
to undress and was raped by multiple policemen in front of all
of the detainees. And, of course, Mrs. Sauytbay, being the
teacher, witnessed this personally.
The purpose of this rape was to watch the responses on the
faces of the reeducation camp detainees, and those who showed
dismay, shock, or looked away were then taken away for further
punishment. Those detainees who did not express, or who were
expressionless and continued watching this horrific rape were
apparently considered as having made progress in their
reeducation conversion and were not punished.
Representative Hartzler. Unbelievable. Well, we have much
work to do. Thank you very much.
Chair McGovern. Thank you very much.
Senator Daines.
Senator Daines. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Some of you might
know I spent over half a decade working in China and Guangzhou
back in the 90s. Today I am very concerned with the ongoing
erosion of human rights across the region--everywhere from Hong
Kong to Urumqi.
I appreciate the work of this Commission. I believe it's
critical that we address these issues going on in Xinjiang and
bring more awareness to these forced labor camps, mass
internment, and other atrocities going on in the region.
The U.S. has been the global leader in human rights, and we
must continue to lead. The Trump Administration recently
demonstrated leadership with the blacklisting of companies
associated with human rights violations in Xinjiang and
elsewhere across China. I'm glad we're here today so that
Congress can continue to work to stop these ongoing atrocities.
Ms. Lehr, the Administration recently took steps to
blacklist eight video surveillance and artificial intelligence
Chinese companies, including SenseTime and Hikvision, due to
their support of human rights violations in Xinjiang. Could you
provide additional information about the role that technology
plays in human rights suppression in China?
Ms. Lehr. That's, obviously, a significant discussion. In
Xinjiang, specifically, a lot of the technology is being
perfected, so it's almost like a place to experiment and fine-
tune technology that's being used for social control. And then
I think what we are seeing is how that's going to seep into the
rest of China and also be sold to other countries.
So the social credit system in the rest of China is sort of
nascent still, but it is a way of really tracking people's
lives in detail and either providing them with state benefits
or denying them. Your ability to travel to another city, for
example, could be influenced by who your friends are and
whether they're considered problematic, whether you jaywalk.
It's a level of potential social control that honestly is hard
to get your mind wrapped around, but very significant.
And we know, for example, in Xinjiang that people are being
tracked for how much gas they're using and whether gas usage
changes because that's seen as a signal of something, whether
they go in and out of their back door or their front door. It's
pervasive in a way that is hard to really fully comprehend.
Senator Daines. The Trump Administration has taken steps to
blacklist eight of these video surveillance artificial
intelligence companies. Are you aware of any other Chinese
companies or perhaps key technologies that were not included in
this blacklisting that play a critical role in human rights
suppression in the region? Maybe said another way, are there
any others you would add to that list of eight?
Ms. Lehr. Off the top of my head, I don't have those names
for you, but there are people who are researching that in a lot
of detail who probably could add some names. I imagine that was
not all the companies that have been involved in developing
this kind of surveillance technology in China.
Mike, I know you have been specifically focused on this.
Senator Daines. Yes, are there a couple others that the
Administration ought to consider?
Mr. Posner.
Mr. Posner. I don't have a list of others. I would just add
to what Amy said, that I think we ought to view what they're
doing in Xinjiang under what they call the integrated joint
operations platform as a kind of predictor of the future of the
social credit index.
The government is trying to gather as much personal
information--blood type, physical characteristics, and movement
as they can. They have made it basically a suspicious activity
to use WhatsApp or Viper, which are encrypted. They've said
that if you don't carry your phone with you, that in itself is
a basis for suspicion and can lead to arrest.
So what we're really seeing is a kind of laboratory
experiment using the Uyghur population as the test case, or the
guinea pigs, to see how much information you can gather as a
means of social control. I think this is an area where we ought
to be looking and I think, as Amy said, others are trying to
figure out who else is involved. But we also ought to figure
out which American companies are investing in this vast
apparatus.
I will say one other thing. It's in my written testimony.
There are several places where I think Apple, which is a big
American technology company, has done things that I have
concerns about. I think they need to adopt a broader human
rights policy. One is--through a partnership with a Guizhou
cloud/big data company, that company has agreed to store data
on servers operated by state-run China Telecom. And I think a
company like Apple, a big strong company, needs to be highly
careful about who it's partnering with and what their
activities are.
Senator Daines. I spent 12 years in the cloud computing
business. In fact, I ran Asia-Pacific for our company for 5
years. I'd be very concerned about privacy in terms of any data
that is stored on servers in China. The words ``due process''
do not always work over there.
Mr. Posner. Right.
Senator Daines. I want to ask you, Mr. Posner, Secretary of
State Mike Pompeo has provided some of the strongest support to
the Uyghurs at the recent U.N. Council meeting, stating that,
``This is China's attempt to erase its own citizens'' and
requesting that countries resist China's demands to repatriate
the Uyghurs. How is the rest of the world responding to the
U.S. lead in this area and Secretary Pompeo's request for
support?
Mr. Posner. Senator, in my opening remarks, I gave praise
to Secretary Pompeo and also John Sullivan, the deputy, both of
whom have been quite outspoken. Sullivan also at the U.N.
General Assembly held a session on religious freedom where he
went out of his way to talk about Chinese violations.
I think consistently the Secretary of State and the deputy
have been very strong on this. My concern is--and I expressed
it earlier--their words are compromised by the inability or
failure of the President to echo a similar line. The notion
that, for example, the Chinese and the people in Hong Kong can
figure out what to do about Hong Kong. They don't need outside
advice. Or the suggestion, which was reported by CNN and
others, that he had a conversation with Xi Jinping where he
said, while we are negotiating a trade deal, I am not going to
talk about Hong Kong.
The world looks at the totality, and the President is the
primary spokesperson for the United States. And if he's not
echoing or even leading in the same direction as Secretary
Pompeo, it sends at best a mixed message and it allows somebody
like Xi Jinping to say, I'll listen to the guy I am talking to,
the President, and I can ignore the rest.
So I commend Secretary Pompeo. The challenge now is to get
a whole-of-government approach, and it needs to start at the
top.
Senator Daines. All right. Thank you very much. I am out of
time here but thank you. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Chair McGovern. Well, thank you. I appreciate everybody
here.
I just have one final question. Senator Rubio referenced
the whole NBA controversy in the beginning. And as you all
know, back in 2016 the NBA worked with a Chinese state-
controlled entity to open up the NBA Academy in Xinjiang.
To your knowledge has the NBA voiced any concern to their
partners over the detention of Uyghur athletes? The reason why
I ask is because we know that Chinese authorities detained a
19-year-old Uyghur, a rising soccer star, for 11 months for
``visiting foreign countries after he trained and competed
abroad.'' I am not sure what that is all about.
They have detained a 24-year-old aspiring professional
soccer player. He was detained for being in contact with his
cousin who had fled to Turkey.
I have been watching this controversy unfold in the news,
and I guess the benefit of this controversy coming to the news
is that we are now focused on what's happening to the Uyghurs.
It shouldn't take that to be able to focus our attention, but
nevertheless, do you think the NBA should even be operating a
training camp there? If they were here, I'd say, What the hell
are you thinking? Are you that tone deaf, or are you so
interested in potential markets and making money that you're
willing to ignore the mounting evidence, much of which has been
made public, about the human rights atrocities going on there?
As I mentioned in my opening statement, some have described
what is happening there as crimes against humanity. If anybody
wants to comment--I just figured I needed to raise it because
it's been bugging me. So if anyone wants to comment.
Mr. Turkel. Yes. Lebron James said that the Rockets'
manager needs education. Actually, he himself needs to be
educated about what's happening. Not only the NBA, the other
U.S. companies. Mackenzie was holding a summer retreat in my
ancestral hometown, Kashgar, last summer. All the media is
covering the mass atrocities. So this needs to be looked at in
a much broader sense.
The NBA is losing its credibility. They have actual
leverage. I don't want to get into the history of the NBA, but
the NBA is such an important aspect of the Chinese people's
daily lives in China. So if they can use that to the benefit of
their own presence here in the United States or their image
internationally, this can be a very effective tool.
Mr. Posner. Just to add really quickly--press reports say
10 percent of the NBA's income is now generated in China. There
are 500 million NBA fans in China. They are estimating or
projecting that their income will be 20 percent in the next
five or ten years.
I think for a big company or big entity like the NBA, it's
critical not to--we're seeing a new normal where the Chinese
government has said, Not only is what we are doing in Xinjiang
or with Hong Kong right, but you're not allowed to talk about
it.
Chair McGovern. Right.
Mr. Posner. And the idea that somehow we are debating
whether or not a general manager of a team is allowed to issue
a seven-word tweet, leaving aside the merits of what he's
talking about, means that the goalpost is moving. And I think
this bipartisan hearing is so important because we reaffirm the
fact that these issues are very serious. They deserve attention
and we are, in fact, allowed to debate and discuss them.
It's critical for American companies--if they're going to
continue to do business in China, they've got to be able to
recognize that what their commercial interests are is one
thing, but you cannot prevent people from having a discussion
about values, about interests, and that's really what the human
rights issue is about.
Chair McGovern. And we should point out for the record that
the controversy was over a tweet about Hong Kong, not even
about what was happening in the place where they have their
training camp.
I don't know if anyone else has anything they want to add
to that. Look, I've always felt that while our businesses
certainly want to be able to take advantage of the Chinese
market, there's benefit to the Chinese government as well to be
able to do business with us.
And I've always been frustrated by the fact--and this is
the latest case--that they felt the need to apologize for a
tweet from a general manager about what has been in the
international news on a daily basis about what's happening in
Hong Kong. And I'll tell you if we can't--Speaker Pelosi always
likes to use this line--if we're not willing to speak out about
human rights in Xinjiang or in Hong Kong because we're worried
about the bottom line or about money, then we really lose the
moral authority to speak about human rights anywhere.
And I think one of the powerful things about what you heard
today is that there is virtual unanimity--Democrats and
Republicans, liberals and conservatives and moderates all
together--all are horrified by what is happening to the
Uyghurs. And there's a determination to do something more than
just issue a press release, more than just hold a hearing.
You've all come up with the legislation that is now pending in
the House--and the House has an obligation to try to move this
legislation that the Senate has already passed, that Senator
Rubio has championed, as quickly as possible, and other things
as well.
I thank you all for being here. This has been a very
important hearing. With that, the hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:07 p.m. the hearing was concluded.]
?
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
=======================================================================
Prepared Statements
----------
Prepared Statement of Nury Turkel
The human rights and humanitarian crisis taking place in the Uyghur
homeland of East Turkistan (designated by the government as the
Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region) has entered a new phase since CECC's
groundbreaking hearing on the crisis in July 2018. It is now clear that
Uyghurs and members of other Turkic ethnic groups are not only being
detained and tormented with cruel and unusual mistreatment and abuse.
They are also being swept into a vast system of forced labor. The
extra-legal internment camps are only one piece of this emerging
system, which involves prisons and village-based manufacturing as well.
It is becoming increasingly hard to ignore the fact that goods
manufactured in East Turkistan have a high likelihood of being produced
with forced labor.
forced labor as a deeply embedded
tool of repression, punishment, and control
Forced labor is a deeply embedded tool of control in China. A
regime of forced labor has become the fulcrum of the CCP's campaign of
forced assimilation in East Turkistan. Transforming the population from
one largely made up of independent farmers and traders into industrial
workers, subject to regimes of surveillance and control in factories
far from their hometowns, is a major part of the government's program
of ``stability maintenance.''
The link between forced labor and ``re-education'' goes back
decades. Despite the fact the government claimed to have abolished the
re-education-through-labor or ``laojiao'' system in 2013, extrajudicial
detention has continued under different names.
East Turkistan has been a particular locus of forced labor since
the establishment of the PRC. The Xinjiang Production and Construction
Corps (XPCC) is powered by forced labor, serving a function similar to
the Soviet Union's gulags. In addition to the XPCC prisons, there is a
decades-long history of forced labor in the XUAR prison system,
including in textile factories such as the Qixin Garment Company inside
the Xinjiang Women's Prison in Urumchi.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Han, Lianchao, August 2019, ``Cotton: the Fabric Full of
Lies,'' Citizen Power Initiatives for China.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Uyghur Autonomous Region, a system of forced agricultural
and infrastructure construction labor known as ``Hashar'' was
supposedly abolished in 2017, although similar forms of forced labor
persist, according to the State Department's 2019 Trafficking in
Persons report.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ U.S. State Department, June 20, 2019, ``Trafficking in Persons
Report June 2019,'' Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in
Persons, https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/2019-
Trafficking-in-Persons-Report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over a decade ago, in 2008, UHRP reported on the systematic program
of coercive labor transfer that particularly targeted young women to be
sent to factories in coastal Chinese provinces.\3\ Government cadres
used a combination of deception, pressure, and threats to round up
thousands of young Uyghurs against their will. Then, as now, the
program had a dual effect of separating families and placing Uyghurs in
involuntary factory settings far from home.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Uyghur Human Rights Project, February 8, 2008, ``Deception,
Pressure, and Threats: The Transfer of Young Uyghur Women to Eastern
China,'' http://docs.uyghuramerican.org/
Transfer_Uyghur_woman.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a long-term state plan to relocate the textile industry
in the uyghur region
Today, we are seeing a confluence of the ``Strike Hard'' campaign
of mass internment with a pre-existing state plan to relocate the
textile industry in the Uyghur Region. East Turkistan is the source of
over 80% of the total cotton produced in China, and the crop is heavily
subsidized.\4\ As documented in the new report on forced labor in the
cotton industry, published by Citizen Power for China, since the mid-
2010s, the Chinese government has developed plans to transfer the
textile processing on a large scale to the region, including the
production of cloth and finished garments. This addresses rising costs
in coastal areas for land, electricity, and above all labor, but in
addition, new subsidies encourage companies to shift factories to the
region. Government documents outline a plan to have at least a million
textile industry jobs in the region by 2023.\5\ A disturbing picture is
thus emerging of the government pushing companies to use cheap or
entirely unpaid Uyghur labor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ USDA, September 6, 2018, ``China: Cotton and Products Update,''
USDA Foreign Agricultural Service GAIN Report, https://
apps.fas.usda.gov/newgainapi/api/report/downloadreport
byfilename?filenameCotton%20and%20Products%20Update_Beijing_China%20%20P
eoples%20
Republic%20of_8-30-2018.pdf.
\5\ Darren Byler, October 11, 2019, ``How Companies Profit From
Forced Labor In Xinjiang,'' Living Otherwise, https://
livingotherwise.com/2019/10/11/how-companies-profit-from-forced-labor-
in-xinjiang/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The general manager of a factory known to use detainee labor,
speaking in a state TV interview released in December 2018, stated,
``With the support of the government, we have already `recruited' more
than 600 people.'' He said that since the founding of the new factory
in 2017, ``We have generated more than $6 million in sales. We plan to
reach 1,000 workers by the end of this year. We plan to provide jobs to
1,500 people by the end of 2019.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Darren Byler, October 11, 2019 ``How Companies Profit From
Forced Labor In Xinjiang,'' Living Otherwise, https://
livingotherwise.com/2019/10/11/how-companies-profit-from-forced-labor-
in-xinjiang/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
from camps to factories
It is clear that some individuals are being moved from the extra-
legal prison camps where the ``de-extremification'' program focused on
indoctrination classes, Chinese language, and indefinite detention, to
factories. While some factories are inside camp compounds, others are
in industrial parks, where individuals are forced to stay in on-site
dormitories and allowed to leave for onlyshort periods, if at all. One
woman, Dilnur Idris, told her sister in Australia via WeChat that she
had been sent from the camps to a factory and forced to work.\7\
Another woman reported being paid less than half the minimum wage,
though she received far less due to expenses incurred during her stay.
She was not allowed to leave, continued to endure forced
indoctrination, and was threatened with being sent back to the camp if
she refused to sign a contract.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ McNeill, Sophie, McGregor, Jeanavive, Griffiths, Meredith,
Walsh, Michael, Hui, Echo, Xiao, Bang, July 16, 2019, ``Cotton On and
Target investigate suppliers after forced labour of Uyghurs exposed in
China's Xinjiang,'' ABC Four Corners, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-
07-15/uyghur-forced-labour-xinjiang-china/11298750.
\8\ Byler, Darren, September 4, 2019, ``How Companies Profit from
Forced Labor in Xinjiang,'' SupChina, https://supchina.com/2019/09/04/
how-companies-profit-from-forced-labor-in-xinjiang/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While some detainees are being ``released'' into another form of
captivity in factories, others are being sentenced under absurd charges
in secret trials. As of 2017, the region accounted for 21% of arrests
despite making up only 1.5% of the population of China.\9\ The already
massive prison system is being rapidly expanded, and disturbing reports
of large numbers of people being transferred from the camps to prisons
are emerging,\10\ including reports of people being sentenced in ``open
court sessions'' for infractions inside the camps, such as failure to
study well.\11\ The prisons, too, have long been sites of forced labor
and given unfair trials, the sentences cannot be considered legitimate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Chinese Human Rights Defenders, 7/25/2018, ``Criminal Arrests
in Xinjiang Account for 21% of China's Total in 2017,'' https://
www.nchrd.org/2018/07/criminal-arrests-in-xinjiang-account-for-21-of-
chinas-total-in-2017/.
\10\ Xinjiang Victims Database, ``List: From prolonged detention to
prison, excluding victims from pre-Chen Quanguo period,'' accessed
October 9, 2019, https://www.shahit.biz/export.php?list=15.
\11\ Bunin, Gene, October 5, 2019, ``From camps to prisons:
Xinjiang's next great human rights catastrophe,'' Art of Life in
Chinese Central Asia, https://livingotherwise.com/2019/10/05/from-
camps-to-prisons-xinjiangs-next-great-human-rights-catastrophe-by-gene-
a-bunin/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In December 2018, the Associated Press broke the story that
clothing had been exported to the U.S. by a Chinese manufacturer
(Hetian Taida), in a factory in the Hotan Vocational Education and
Training Center, one of the many detention camps that have been
established across East Turkistan.\12\ This clothing was being sold to
U.S. supplier Badger Sportswear. Several weeks later, Badger Sportswear
announced that it had ceased sourcing from the company and all
companies with operations in Xinjiang, but continued to maintain that
it was skeptical that the goods had been produced by forced labor. This
was despite the fact that the factory and the re-education camp share
an address, the fact that satellite imagery confirms that they are in
the same compound, and the fact that the man of the company
acknowledged that the factory was employing ``trainees'' and was
located in the same compound.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Kang, Dake, Mendoza, Martha, and Wang, Yanan, December 19,
2018, ``US sportswear traced to factory in China's internment camps,''
Associated Press, https://www.apnews.com/
99016849cddb4b99a048b863b52c28cb.
\13\ Worker's Rights Consortium, June 24, 2019, ``Worker's Rights
Consortium Factory Assessment Hetian Taida Apparel Co. Ltd. (China):
Findings, Recommendations, and Status,'' https://www.workersrights.org/
wp-content/uploads/2019/06/WRC-Report-on-Hetian-Taida-China-June-
2019.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We wish to thank the CBP for issuing a withhold release order on
goods produced by Hetian Taida. However, it is extremely disturbing
that U.S. companies are still sourcing from the company despite clear
evidence of forced labor. Baby clothes produced by the company recently
went on sale at Costco; while Costco has now pulled the goods from
their shelves, they should never have gotten that far in the first
place, given how long this information has been public. U.S.
enforcement
must be stepped up to ensure that all goods sourced from companies
in the Uyghur Region receive scrutiny commensurate with the extremely
high risk of forced labor in the supply chain.
asphyxiating social control facilitates forced and involuntary labor
Asphyxiating social control facilitates forced and involuntary
labor. The techno-totalitarian system of surveillance and intimidation
put in place by Xinjiang authorities means that any attempt to resist
orders puts oneself and one's family at great risk. Those ``recruited''
directly from their villages into factories cannot be assumed to be
working of their own free will. Communist cadres have been sent to
Uyghur villages by the tens of thousands. They enter Uyghur households,
politically assess them, and push them towards work in the factories in
the so-called ``homestay'' program. As in the case of the 2008 labor-
transfer program to Eastern factories, Uyghurs do not have a choice.
Refusing to participate in the state's ``poverty alleviation'' programs
can get one labeled extremist and therefore sent to the camps. The
threat is often implicit, but according to some testimonies, it is
explicit. \14\ This is the same dynamic as in the state program
encouraging marriage between Han men and Uyghur women, celebrated in
Party media outlets. Uyghur women's consent to these marriages must be
assumed in the vast majority of cases to be given under extreme duress.
If a young woman were to decline a marriage proposal from a Han man,
she and her family could be labeled ``extremists'' and sent to the
camps. Uyghurs cannot say no.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Sophie McNeill, Jeanavive McGregor, Meredith Griffiths,
Michael Walsh, Echo Hui, Bang Xiao, July 16, 2019 ``Cotton On and
Target investigate suppliers after forced labour of Uyghurs exposed in
China's Xinjiang'' ABC Four Corners https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-
07-15/uyghur-forced-labour-xinjiang-china/11298750.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As one Uyghur living overseas described it to the BBC, there is an
atmosphere of horror where ``everyone feels like they're being watched
all the time . . . There is a huge sense of fear_people tell me they
sleep in their clothes because no one knows whether at night they might
be taken away.'' \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Andreas Illmer, October 11, 2019, ``Tashpolat Tiyip: The
Uighur leading geographer who vanished in China'' BBC News, https://
www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-49956088.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nor is asphyxiating social control confined to PRC borders. Uyghurs
outside China are also subject to extraterritorial surveillance and
coercion. UHRP's latest report, Repression Across Borders: the CCP's
Illegal Harassment and Coercion of Uyghur Americans, \16\ documents the
ongoing and flagrant violations of federal law on U.S. soil. As one
Uyghur American said about being contacted by Chinese state security
agents:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Uyghur Human Rights Project, August 2019 ``Repression Across
Borders: The CCP's Illegal Harassment and Coercion of Uyghur
Americans'' https://uhrp.org/press-release/new-uyghur-human-rights-
project-uhrp-report-details-how-chinese-government-engaged.
They are just telling us, ``We are watching you. Wherever you
go, still you are a Chinese.'' Even though abroad, it doesn't
mean they can't do something to you. Because they have your
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
friends, your relatives.
Agents of a foreign power are surveilling and terrorizing our own
fellow American citizens, with threats to send their remaining family
members to the camps if they speak out about what is happening in East
Turkistan.
due diligence is impossible in the uyghur region
Given this system of intimidation and terror, extended not only
throughout the Uyghur region and but also abroad, corporate supply-
chain due diligence is impossible. The complete secrecy surrounding the
camps, and the horrific means of total control hanging over those who
are not in the camps, means that the free flow of information has been
cut off to an extent rarely seen in modern times. Simply put, it is
impossible to conduct normal due diligence to determine whether a
particular facility is producing goods with forced labor. No
independent auditor or supply-chain certification process can collect
reliable information from workers, factory management, or local
government. No interviews can be treated as uncoerced. Recall that any
Uyghur who departs from the government-dictated script faces a high
risk of detention, torture, and possibly death in custody.
Because due diligence is impossible, companies cannot carry out
their claims to manage their supply chains in accordance with ethical
principles. By definition, no company can provide credible assurance
that products sourced in Xinjiang qualify for legal import into the
United States, or any country that bans the import of forced-labor
products.
The evidence is now clear that all manufacturing in the Xinjiang
Uyghur Autonomous Region is taking place under inhuman and degrading
conditions--under a nightmare totalitarian police state preventing free
choice and the free flow of information. If existing authorities are
insufficient for Customs and Border Protection to issue Withhold
Release Orders (WROs) commensurate with the risk of allowing illegal
goods into the U.S., Congress must act to shift the burden of proof to
companies that wish to import products sourced in Xinjiang or produced
with Xinjiang-sourced cotton.
recommendations
Recommendations for the U.S. Government:
1. Congress should act urgently to pass the Uyghur Human Rights
Policy Act, putting in place a legislative mandate for vigorous U.S.
Government action to respond to the Uyghur crisis.
2. Congress should ban the importation of cotton, textiles, and
garments originating from Xinjiang, until the policies of mass
internment and coerced labor recruitment are ended, and the conditions
necessary for due diligence have been established, including a free
press and unimpeded access for international observers and diplomats.
3. Congress should pass legislation to mandate clearer
transparency about suppliers and should publicly disclose to the
Securities and Exchange Commission and elsewhere the risk of forced
labor in their supply chain, and whether they have taken measures to
identify and address forced labor from Xinjiang and China in
specifically.
4. The Administration must vigorously enforce international trade
standards to address China's unequal subsidies to Xinjiang industries
that help fuel the use of forced labor in that region.
5. Congress should increase funding for the Uyghur Service of
Radio Free Asia in the FY2020 Foreign Operations Appropriations bill,
commensurate with the scale of the crisis, to enable it to carry out
adequate investigative journalism and to continue to uncover critical
evidence regarding the situation on the ground.
6. The State Department and Department of Education should conduct
a thorough review of all educational and cultural exchanges with the
People's Republic of China. There should be no government funding of
any programs involving the Chinese Ministry of Education as long as the
mass internment and unfair trials of intellectuals continue, and should
not resume until all educators and students are released and receive
reparations. At least 77 Uyghur and Kazakh university instructors and
hundreds of students are known to have been disappeared, sentenced, or
arbitrarily detained, figures which are just the tip of the iceberg.
\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Uyghur Human Rights Project, Oct 22, 2018, ``The Persecution
of the Intellectuals in the Uyghur Region: Disappeared Forever?''
https://uhrp.org/press-release/persecution-intellectuals-uyghur-region-
disappeared-forever.html and Uyghur Human Rights Project, May 21, 2019,
``UHRP UPDATE: 435 Intellectuals Detained and Disappeared in the Uyghur
Homeland'' https://uhrp.org/press-release/uhrp-update-435-
intellectuals-detained-and-disappeared-uyghur-
homeland.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. USAID's program to support international religious freedom,
including the new $25 million fund to protect religious sites,
announced by President Trump in September, should include--support for
cultural preservation, and research and documentation regarding Uyghur
mosques, shrines, and religious libraries.
8. Governments must jointly press for a UN-mandated independent
investigation. Most such investigations involve travel to the region
where mass atrocities are taking place. This will likely be impossible
in the case of the Uyghur Region. In that case, there should be an
official investigation even in the absence of access to Xinjiang, and
the U.S. should contribute funding to this effort.
9. Governments should continue to make joint statements of
condemnation.
10. Governments should jointly impose coordinated sanctions.
Sanctions should include visa denials, freezing of assets, a
modification of the EU-U.S. Tiananmen sanctions to add additional
restrictions, suspension of government funding of educational and
research exchanges, and export restrictions on textiles and on high-
tech tools for surveillance and racial profiling.
11. The U.S. and like-minded countries should back United Nations
action similar to the action on apartheid, including the 1960 Security
Council Resolution 134 deploring the policies and actions of the South
African government and calling on the government to abandon its
policies of apartheid and racial discrimination; the 1963 Resolution
181 calling upon all states to cease the sale and shipment of arms,
ammunition and military vehicles to South Africa; and the General
Assembly resolution of 1968 requesting that all states and
organizations ``suspend cultural, educational, sporting and other
exchanges with the racist regime and with organizations or institutions
in South Africa which practice apartheid.''
12. The Red Cross should be mandated to seek access to the camps.
There is an urgent need to collect information now so that families can
be re-united, before it is too late.
13. The silence of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation must
come to an end. To mobilize support for those members of the OIC that
are concerned about the Uyghur crisis, the U.S. can conduct bilateral
diplomacy and make funding available to NGOs who can translate
materials into relevant languages in these countries, bring witnesses,
and other focused programming to educate local civil society, religious
leaders, parliamentarians, lawyers, andothers.
14. In countries where the government or CCP influence operations
have succeeded in suppressing accurate reporting on the Uyghur crisis,
the U.S. Government should provide funding to human-rights advocacy
organizations to translate the available documentation,including
explanation of the satellite evidence, witness testimony, and of the
Chinese government's own announced policies, designed to eliminate
Islamic practices, force Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims to renounce
their faith and denounce Islam, and demolish and desecrate mosques,
shrines and cemeteries.
15. Conclusive evidence is rapidly emerging regarding China's
continued sourcing of transplant organs from prisoners, including both
Uyghur and Falun Gong practitioners, despite the government's continued
denials. The China Tribunal, a panel of jurists and medical
professionals, led by Sir Geoffrey Nice, Queen's Counsel, issued a
major report on June 17,2019. It concluded ``beyond a reasonable
doubt'' that China's lucrative organ-transplant system is heavily
reliant on prisoners' organs. The voluntary-donor system is
insufficient to provide a huge number of human organs needed for
transplantation surgeries, and China's organ-procurement program does
not meet minimal ethics standards. All cooperation withthe
transplantation field in China should be suspended, including a ban on
transplantation professionals from China participating in international
conferences, and from publishing in international scientific and
medical journals.
16. Congress should prohibit U.S. universities and companies from
using federal funds for joint research or other forms of cooperation
with China-based companies and governmentagencies building and
maintaining China's suffocating total-control police state--openly
based on racial profiling and designed to commit mass atrocities
against Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims.
17. Congress should request an update regarding U.S. Government
protection of Uyghur Americans and action to investigate and deter
illegal acts of coercion, threats, and reprisals by Chinese government
agents, aiming to intimidate Uyghurs and prevent them from providing
testimony about what is happening to their relatives in East Turkistan.
Recommendations for businesses, universities, and other private actors:
1. Companies must recognize that due diligence in the supply chain
is impossible, given the conditions of total control, mass internment,
widespread government-subsided forced-labor recruitment, and large-
scale government-sponsored prison/camp labor. Companies must suspend
all sourcing of cotton, textiles, and garments from Xinjiang.
2. Private companies must immediately end collaboration with
surveillance and racial profiling of Uyghurs, enabling arbitrary secret
detention and an Orwellian system of control-by-terror.
3. Pension funds, both private-sector and government, must divest
from these companies facilitating crimes against humanity, whether U.S.
or foreign, including those listed on the Shanghai, Shenzhen, Hong
Kong, and New York stock exchanges.
4. Researchers must end joint projects with China-based
institutions building the system of surveillance and racial profiling,
including in artificial intelligence, big-data programs, and bio-
engineering.
5. Scholars and universities should institute an academic boycott
in response to ``the crime ofthe century'' taking place in East
Turkistan. In 1965, U.S. and U.K. universities began an academic
boycott of South African universities in order to ensure that they were
not complicit in the system of apartheid. Scholarly collaboration,
publication of research, and participation in international conferences
were denied to those representing the apartheid institutions of South
Africa. UHRP urges a similar approach to the cultural genocide of the
Uyghurs.
______
Prepared Statement of Michael Posner
Senator Rubio, Congressman Smith, thank you for inviting me to
appear at today's hearing, which draws much-needed attention to the
plight of the embattled Uyghur community in China. At a time when core
human rights principles are being tested in many places around the
globe, I deeply appreciate the steadfast commitment the two of you have
demonstrated, along with others on this Commission, to shining a
spotlight on serious violations of human rights. When I served in the
State Department during the first Obama term, I often was summoned to
appear before various committees of Congress to discuss problematic
countries where we needed to step up our game. While Congressional
scrutiny is not a favorite pastime of State Department officials, I
valued the constructive prodding during those encounters. You pushed us
to do better, and you continue to play this important role.
I am now based at the New York University Stern School of Business,
where I direct the Center for Business and Human Rights. I appear here
this morning to offer thoughts and recommendations to the Executive
Branch, to Congress, and to the business community, on the challenging
questions they face in their ongoing engagements with China. I do so
hoping to offer a constructive critique of current efforts to engage
constructively and in a principled way with China, and to make
suggestions for going forward.
First I want to offer a little context. I teach business students
about human rights, and in my first class every semester, I discuss the
reduction of global poverty as an important metric of human rights.
According to the World Bank, in 1981, 88% of the people in China were
living in extreme poverty, surviving on less than $1.25 a day. Today,
that number has dropped below 5%. \1\ This dramatic progress is largely
attributable to China's impressive economic growth, about which the
Chinese people are understandably proud. An important factor fueling
this growth has been the government's embrace of a market-based system
and its move away from the economic orthodoxy of its past.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ http://bit.ly/32ph7R3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately, the Chinese government has refused to show a
concomitant willingness to reform its political system. The gross
abuses of human rights we see today against the Uyghurs in Xinjiang and
the efforts to crush democratic freedoms in Hong Kong are two striking
examples of this resistance. Since Xi Jinping came to power, the human
rights situation in China has grown worse, and in some ways
dramatically so. \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/country-chapters/china-
and-tibet
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Others on this panel will describe the desperate situation of the
Uyghur population in Xinxiang in greater detail. They have faced
systematic discrimination and persecution by the Chinese government for
many years. \3\ Recently, the scope and scale of these violations have
escalated dramatically. \4\ The imprisonment of more than a million
Uyghurs today \5\ makes it the most egregious example of arbitrary
detention anywhere in the world. Thousands more endure forced labor,
\6\ and virtually everyone in that community is subject to pervasive
surveillance and isolation from the outside world. \7\ The response of
the international community has not been commensurate with the extent
of these gross human rights violations, which is why this hearing is so
important.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-26414014
\4\ https://nyti.ms/2LihrcV
\5\ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-rights-un/u-n-says-it-
has-credible-reports-that-china-holds-million-uighurs-in-secret-camps-
idUSKBN1KV1SU
\6\ https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/16/world/asia/xinjiang-china-
forced-labor-camps-uighurs.html
\7\ https://www.hrw.org/report/2018/09/09/eradicating-ideological-
viruses/chinas-campaign-
repression-against-xinjiangs
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the last few weeks, some progress may have been made on U.S.-
China trade. If a preliminary agreement is consummated, and this is
still far from certain, the pact would obligate China to purchase $40
to $50 billion worth of American agricultural products annually. It
also would strengthen Chinese protections for American intellectual
property and give U.S. financial services companies greater access to
Chinese markets. In exchange, the U.S. government would forgo imposing
additional tariffs on $250 billion of Chinese products being imported
to the United States.
On a different track, in the last several weeks, various U.S.
government agencies have imposed new sanctions on China and companies
doing business there related to the government's mistreatment of the
Uyghurs. On October 1st, the U.S. Commerce Department added 28 Chinese
organizations to the so-called Entity List, preventing U.S. companies
from selling their products without U.S. government approval. \8\ These
entities were found to have been ``implicated in human rights
violations and abuses in China's campaign targeting Uyghurs and other
predominantly Muslim ethnic minorities'' in Xinjiang, and more
specifically, in ``China's campaign of repression, mass arbitrary
detention, and high-technology surveillance.'' \9\ The list includes
both government entities and private companies that provide
surveillance and artificial intelligence technology. \10\ According to
Professor Julian Ku of Hofstra University, this may be the first time
the Entity List has been used as a penalty for human rights violations.
\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/07/us/politics/us-to-blacklist-
28-chinese-entities-over-abuses-in-xinjiang.html
\9\ https://www.commerce.gov/news/press-releases/2019/10/us-
department-commerce-adds-28-
chinese-organizations-its-entity-list
\10\ https://fortune.com/2019/10/08/china-ai-us-entity-list/
;https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/07/us/politics/us-to-blacklist-28-
chinese-entities-over-abuses-in-xinjiang.html
\11\ https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/08/business/china-human-
rights-technology-xinjiang.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separately, the US Customs and Border Protection agency issued five
Withhold Release Orders banning products that were produced using
forced labor. One company on the list was the Hetian Taida Apparel
Company in Xinjiang, which U.S. officials determined was making apparel
products using prison or forced labor. \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/cbp-
issues-detention-orders-against-companies-suspected-using-forced
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reflecting similar human rights concerns, the State Department on
October 8th announced visa restrictions on unnamed Chinese government
and Community Party officials ``implicated in the detention or abuse of
Uyghurs, Kazakhs, or other members of Muslim minority groups in
Xinjiang.'' \13\ The State Department cited the Chinese government's
``highly repressive campaign'' against Uyghurs and other Muslim
minority residents of Xinjiang, and made specific reference to the
``mass detentions in internment camps; pervasive, high-tech
surveillance; draconian controls on expressions of cultural and
religious identities; and coercion of individuals to return from abroad
to an often perilous fate in China.'' \14\ By imposing these three
categories of sanctions, the U.S. government is signaling strong
condemnation of the ongoing repression of the Uyghurs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ https://www.state.gov/u-s-department-of-state-imposes-visa-
restrictions-on-chinese-officials-for-repression-in-xinjiang/
\14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adding rhetorical force to the administration's various actions,
individual officials have spoken out about mistreatment of the Uyghurs.
Secretary of State Pompeo in particular has condemned the persecution
of the Uyghurs, most recently at last month's UN General Assembly.
Secretary Pompeo told reporters: ``I want to make clear that China's
repressive campaign in Xinjiang is not about terrorism. It's about
China's attempt to erase its own citizens. We call on all countries to
resist China's demands to repatriate the Uyghurs.'' \15\ At a UN side
event, Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan condemned the Chinese
government's systematic campaign ``to stop its own citizens from
exercising their unalienable right to religious freedom.'' \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-un/pompeo-urges-
world-to-resist-chinas-
demands-to-repatriate-ethnic-uighurs-idUSKBN1W70KX
\16\ https://www.state.gov/deputy-secretary-john-j-sullivan-
remarks-at-the-human-rights-crisis-in-xinjiang-event/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
But sanctions and strong public admonitions have been undermined by
the administration's broader failure to prioritize human rights as a
consistent element of US foreign policy. The administration's continued
unwillingness to acknowledge the role of Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince in
the Khashoggi murder last year is one glaring example among many. \17\
Without a consistent commitment to promoting human rights norms, the
administration is far less persuasive in its efforts to promote
compliance with these international standards in China and elsewhere.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47182567
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This reluctance starts at the top. Time and again, the President
has resisted talking about human rights in general, and about Chinese
government violations in particular. In September, CNN reported that
the President had assured President Xi that he would not raise human
rights issues relating to Hong Kong while trade talks are ongoing. \18\
The effects of this promise rippled through the administration: Kurt
Tong, the then-US Consul General to Hong Kong and Macau, was directed
by the State Department to cancel two speeches he planned to give in
Washington discussing the human rights situation in Hong Kong. \19\ On
August 1st, when he was asked by reporters to comment on the situation
in Hong Kong, the President demurred saying only that the people of
China and Hong Kong will ``have to deal with that themselves. They
don't need advice.'' \20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/04/politics/trump-xi-hong-kong-
protests/index.html
\19\ Id.
\20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The President's cavalier and dismissive comments about human rights
in China and other places are now all too familiar. At the Group of
Seven summit last month, he referred to Egyptian President Sisi as ``my
favorite dictator,'' \21\ and before their bilateral meeting in New
York praised him as ``a real leader'' who has ``done some things that
are absolutely amazing.'' \22\ He recently characterized Saudi Crown
Prince Salman as a ``friend,'' saying he's done ``a spectacular job.''
\23\ He has pledged ``complete support'' to Brazilian President Jair
Bolsonaro, saying he is ``doing a great job for the people of Brazil .
. . in all respects.'' \24\ He still refuses to condemn the Russian
occupation of Crimea and Russia's continued interference in Ukraine's
democratic system and its support of armed insurgent forces in Eastern
Ukraine. He has praised Vladimir Putin as a ``terrific person.'' \25\
And despite their tumultuous relationship, the President has referred
to Kim Jong Un as being ``very talented.'' \26\ The list goes on and
on.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-awaiting-egyptian-
counterpart-at-summit-called-out-for-my-favorite-dictator-11568403645
\22\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-
president-trump-president-el-sisi-egypt-bilateral-meeting-new-york-ny/
\23\ https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-praises-saudi-crown-prince-
for-doing-a-spectacular-job-11561778810
\24\ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-environment-usa/
trump-pledges-complete-support-for-brazils-bolsonaro-idUSKCN1VH1OV
\25\ https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/g20-june-2019-intl-hnk/
h_0ac0caf83fde21799a2600d58fedea54
\26\ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/dictator-envy-trumps-
praise-of-kim-jong-un-marks-embrace-of-totalitarian-leaders/2018/06/15/
b9a8bbc8-70af-11e8-afd5-778aca903bbe_story.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The administration also continues to turn its back on, and even
undermine, multilateral approaches to human rights. The Uyghur crisis
provides a salient case in point. In February, ambassadors from 22
countries signed a letter to the president of the UN Human Rights
Council, calling on China to end its mass detention and surveillance of
the Uyghurs in Xinjiang. \27\ Australia, Canada, Japan, Britain,
France, Germany, and Switzerland were among the signatories, but the
United States was not. \28\ As a result of the American withdrawal from
the Human Rights Council, we are unable to lead multilateral efforts
under the auspices of that body. Instead, no government was the
principal sponsor of this effort, a fact that no doubt weakened the
effect of the statement itself. This was a missed opportunity to apply
global pressure to the Chinese government, a casualty of the
administration's go-it-alone approach to diplomacy. The U.S. government
can and must do better, and Congress needs to pressure the
administration to take more decisive action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-xinjiang-rights-
exclusive/exclusive-west-japan-
rebuke-china-at-un-for-detention-of-uighurs-idUSKCN1U51E1
\28\ https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/11/asia/xinjiang-uyghur-un-letter-
intl-hnk/index.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congressional oversight, such as what you're doing today, can have
a real effect. On May 9th of last year, Senator Rubio and
Representative Smith sent a letter to the U.S. Commerce Secretary
demanding answers about the sale by U.S. companies of surveillance
technology used by Chinese security forces. \29\ On August 28th of
2018, the chairs sent a bipartisan letter, signed by 17 legislators,
urging swift action by the executive branch in response to the
systematic discrimination and arbitrary detention of Turkic Muslim
minorities. \30\ Both letters were no doubt instrumental in achieving
the recent sanctions and exemplify one of the ways Congress can hold
the administration accountable. More recently, the Senate passed the
Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act of 2019, calling on bodies within the
U.S. government to prepare reports on China's treatment of the Uyghurs.
\31\ The Uighur Intervention and Global Humanitarian Unified Response
Act has also been introduced in the House, relating to sourcing
restrictions and export controls. \32\ The adoption of some form of
this legislation will be an important step in bringing attention to the
atrocities occurring in Xinjiang and will help to ensure a thoughtful
and cohesive response by the U.S. Government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ https://www.cecc.gov/media-center/press-releases/chairs-ask-
commerce-secretary-ross-about-sale-of-surveillance-technology
\30\ https://www.cecc.gov/media-center/press-releases/chairs-lead-
bipartisan-letter-urging-
administration-to-sanction-chinese
\31\ https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/178
\32\ https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/
1025?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22uyghur%22%5D%7D&s=1&r=5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. companies doing business in China also have a very important
role to play with respect to human rights, but to date, their record
has been uneven. The allure of doing business in and with China is
obvious. According to the World Bank, the Chinese consumer market is
now the third-biggest in the world after the U.S. and the EU. \33\
China also continues to be the largest global manufacturer of
electronics, apparel, toys, and many other products. \34\ Given these
economic realities, global companies will continue to look for
opportunities to do business in China. All too often, U.S. companies
have opted to pursue their economic interests, while paying
insufficient attention to how their words and actions affect the
broader human rights debate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/
NE.CON.PRVT.CD?most_recent_value_desc=
true&year_high_desc=true
\34\ https://www.brookings.edu/research/global-manufacturing-
scorecard-how-the-us-compares-to-18-other-nations/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last week's confrontation between the National Basketball
Association and the Chinese government is the latest example. After
Daryl Morey, general manager of the Houston Rockets, tweeted his
support for human rights and democracy activists in Hong Kong, \35\ the
NBA released starkly conflicting statements. The English-language
version expressed support for Moray's freedom of speech while
recognizing that his tweet had offended friends and fans in China; a
second statement in Mandarin, posted on the NBA's Chinese social media
account, said the league was ``extremely disappointed in the
inappropriate comment.'' \36\ NBA Commissioner Adam Silver subsequently
reiterated the league's commitment to free speech. \37\ As he did so, a
Chinese e-commerce platform, a sporting goods brand, and a sports news
website all suspended access to goods and coverage related to the
Rockets, and Chinese Television announced it would not broadcast NBA
exhibition games scheduled to be played in China. \38\ Lost in the
debate was the underlying question of how human rights in Hong Kong are
being seriously undermined by the Chinese government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/10/07/nba-china-
tweet-daryl-morey/
\36\ https://www.marketwatch.com/story/heres-how-the-nbas-apology-
was-different-in-china-and-the-us-2019-10-07?link=MW_latest_news
\37\ https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/10/07/nba-china-
tweet-daryl-morey/
\38\ https://www.marketwatch.com/story/heres-how-the-nbas-apology-
was-different-in-china-and-the-us-2019-10-07?link=MW_latest_news
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are special responsibilities for U.S. technology companies
operating China. The Chinese government continues to use advanced
technology to stifle dissent and to intrude on the privacy of its
people. Chinese authorities have attempted to justify this mass
surveillance as a tool to fight terrorism, \39\ but most of what the
system tracks has no relationship to threats of terrorism or extremism.
A recent Human Rights Watch report about the Chinese government's
``Strike Hard Campaign'' in Xinjiang highlights the risks. In that
region, the government has used what it calls the Integrated Joint
Operations Platform (IJOP) to perform sweeping surveillance of the
Uyghurs and other members of the Turkic Muslim minority. \40\ This app
collects huge amounts of personal information, including blood type and
other physical characteristics, education level, and religious and
political affiliations. The IJOP also reports on activities the
government deems suspicious, such as the use of encrypted communication
tools like WhatsApp and Viber. \41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/08/china-terrorism-
xinjiang-repression-islam.html
\40\ https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/05/01/chinas-algorithms-
repression/reverse-engineering-xinjiang-police-mass-surveillance
\41\ https://www.hrw.org/video-photos/interactive/2019/05/02/china-
how-mass-surveillance-works-xinjiang
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The IJOP surveils and collects data on every person in Xinjiang,
tracking their movements by monitoring the location of their phones, ID
cards, and vehicles. Information collected through the IJOP system is
used as a basis for house arrest or more formal detention. Failure to
carry a smart phone can itself be a basis for detention. In some
reported cases, U.S. companies and investors have played a role in this
system. Until it was publicly reported in February, Massachusetts-based
Thermo Fisher sold DNA sequencers directly to authorities in Xinjiang
for genetic mapping. \42\ California-based Amax, which specializes in
high-performance computing for deep-learning applications, partnered
with Hikvision--now on the Entity List, as well. Hikvision is one of
the world's largest producers of facial recognition and surveillance
equipment, \43\ and the company has won several security-related
contracts from the Chinese government in Xinjiang, totaling $260
million. \44\ One contract was for a ``social prevention and control
system'' feature on tens of thousands of cameras. \45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/03/19/962492-orwell-china-
socialcredit-surveillance/
\43\ https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/03/19/962492-orwell-china-
socialcredit-surveillance/
\44\ https://www.afp.com/en/news/15/chinas-blacklisted-ai-firms-
what-you-should-know-doc-1lb4wb1
\45\ https://www.afp.com/en/news/15/chinas-blacklisted-ai-firms-
what-you-should-know-doc-1lb4wb1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some U.S. technology companies have weighed the risks of doing
business in China and declined to pursue aspects of their business
there. Google, for example, did the right thing in 2010 when it
withdrew from China in the face of extensive government interference
with free expression. \46\ To date, the major internet platforms,
Google, \47\ Facebook \48\ and Twitter have limited their businesses in
China given the government's poor record on free speech and privacy.
\49\ Microsoft has been an industry leader in crafting safeguards
relating to facial recognition. \50\ The company even took down its
public facial recognition database when reports surfaced that Chinese
companies, including Megvii and SenseTime, both newly added to the
Entity List, were using the database to train their facial recognition
systems. \51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/jan/12/google-
china-ends-censorship
\47\ https://www.google.com/about/datacenters/location/
\48\ https://www.facebook.com/notes/mark-zuckerberg/a-privacy-
focused-vision-for-social-
networking/10156700570096634/
\49\ https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/7/20902947/nba-rockets-daryl-
morey-hong-kong-protests-tweet-internet-speech-censorship-china
\50\ http://bit.ly/35vEzxW
\51\ https://www.ft.com/content/7d3e0d6a-87a0-11e9-a028-
86cea8523dc2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
But it was disappointing to see Apple remove pro-democracy songs
from its Chinese music store, \52\ and Taiwan's flag from its iOS emoji
library for users in Hong Kong and Macau. \53\ Apple's Chinese iCloud
partner, Guizhou-Cloud Big Data, recently made a deal to move user data
to servers operated by state-run China Telecom. \54\ Apple also removed
the HKMap.Live app, thereby depriving Hong Kong citizens of the
capacity to track online the sites of demonstrations and police
actions. \55\ All of these actions seem guided by the company's desire
to preserve its status with the Chinese government. Apple maintains
that they are simply following local law. \56\ This alone is not a
tenable path. Instead, Apple and other technology companies need to
develop company-endorsed human rights policies that address privacy,
free expression and other rights issues, using international norms as a
baseline. Such policies will help businesses make these challenging
decisions in a more consistent and principled manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ https://www.fastcompany.com/90332656/apple-removed-this-pro-
democracy-music-in-china
\53\ https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-08/apple-
pulls-taiwanese-flag-emoji-from-iphones-in-hong-kong
\54\ https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/18/17587304/apple-icloud-
china-user-data-state-run-telecom-privacy-security
\55\ https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/09/technology/apple-hong-kong-
app.html
\56\ https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/oct/10/tim-cook-
apple-hong-kong-mapping-app-removal
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Investors must also face these questions head on. A range of U.S.
investors have been providing capital to Megvii and SenseTime.
According to one report, among U.S.-based institutions with stakes in
these two Chinese firms, ``public pension funds are the largest
committers of capital.'' \57\ Megvii representatives told Buzzfeed News
that the company does not ``have any access to the IJOP platform or the
[Chinese] national ID database.'' \58\ And while the company also
assured Buzzfeed that it requires clients not to use its technology for
the infringement of human rights, it did not provide details of how it
enforces this commitment. \59\ U.S. investors need to adopt more
stringent safeguards to avoid contributing capital to Chinese companies
that are involved in surveillance and related data-gathering,
especially in Xinjiang.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/us-money-funding-
facial-recognition-sensetime-megvii
\58\ Id.
\59\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
China and the U.S. compete fiercely for economic and political
influence in Asia, Africa, and elsewhere. But the two countries--
including their companies and investors--must find ways to interact
that allow for peaceful, fruitful competition and perhaps, on occasion,
cooperation. As I learned in government, saying this is easy; doing it
is very hard. But the U.S. government and American businesses must find
ways to navigate this terrain, allowing economic and political
cooperation when it is mutually beneficial, while always standing firm
in support of universal human rights principles.
Prepared Statement of Amy K. Lehr
Chairman McGovern, Chairman Rubio, and distinguished Members of the
Commission, thank you for holding a hearing on this important topic and
offering me an opportunity to speak.
I am the Director of the Human Rights Initiative at CSIS. My
program issued a report today on forced labor in Xinjiang, with a
series of recommendations to address these abuses. I have worked in the
field of business and human rights for over a decade, and the
recommendations reflect my practical experience.
Over one million Muslim minorities in Xinjiang are believed to be
held in extrajudicial detention facilities, where they are brainwashed
to abandon their religion and declare loyalty to the Communist Party.
The entire region of Xinjiang is covered by an unparalleled
surveillance system infiltrating every aspect of inhabitants' lives.
And now there are credible allegations that minorities, including those
who were detained, are being subjected to forced labor, particularly in
the textile industry. Today, I will focus on the issue of forced labor
in Xinjiang and why it is unique and requires novel responses.
Forced labor is always abhorrent, but the situation in Xinjiang is
uniquely abusive. The forced labor in Xinjiang goes beyond more typical
forced labor, which usually involves migrant workers who pay fees to a
recruiter and end up indebted, with their passports confiscated and
their movement restricted. Forced labor is not typically a centralized,
masterminded effort, where the state acts as the organizer as part of a
broader effort to cut minorities off from their culture and religion at
any cost. In Xinjiang's case, the Chinese state is playing this role.
The Chinese authorities believe that through re-education and work,
they can break the minority population's ties to religion, increase
their loyalty to the state, and stabilize the region. \1\ Forced labor
is part of a set of government policies seeking to accomplish this.
Other key elements include mass detention and what the government
considers to be ``poverty alleviation'' for minorities, and these are
all interlinked.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Emily Rauhala, ``China Now Says Almost 100 Were Killed in
Xinjiang Violence,'' Time, August 4, 2014, https://time.com/3078381/
china-xinjiang-violence-shache-yarkand/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forced labor in Xinjiang may rise to the level of a crime against
humanity. Why do I say this? International jurisprudence defines
several key elements of crimes against humanity: the act must be part
of a widespread or systematic attack; the attack must be against the
civilian population; and the attack must be launched on discriminatory
grounds, including ethnic or religious grounds. \2\ Such attacks in
many instances are violent, but are not always. \3\ Enslavement--
including forced labor--is enumerated as a potential crime against
humanity when carried out as part of such an attack. Indeed, the
Nuremberg trials after World War II found certain German industrialists
guilty of crimes against humanity, including the use of forced labor
associated with concentration camps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Akayesu, (Trial Chamber), September 2, 1998, para. 595
\3\ ``An attack may also be nonviolent in nature, like imposing a
system of apartheid . . . or exerting pressure on the population to act
in a particular manner.'' Akayesu, (Trial Chamber), September 2, 1998,
para. 581. See also Rutaganda (Trial Chamber), December 6, 1999. Para
70, and Musema, (Trial Chamber), January 27, 2000, para 205
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xinjiang appears to fit this pattern. Muslim minorities are being
forced to work at a significant scale in Xinjiang based on their
religion and ethnicity. It is part of a broader attack on them,
including widespread detention. As a result, the Chinese companies
playing a direct role in Xinjiang's state-sponsored forced labor are at
risk of complicity in international crimes. Our response needs to match
the gravity of the abuses.
At CSIS, our research confirmed and expanded on the work of others
speaking today. Forced labor in Xinjiang takes three primary forms.
First, there is traditional prison labor, which has long played a key
role in cotton and textile production in Xinjiang. It is believed that
increasingly large numbers of minorities are entering the formal prison
system in Xinjiang, where they may be forced to work. \4\ Second,
detainees and ex-detainees are being funneled into factories. Chinese
government planning documents and statements from detainees suggest
that this could be occurring at a significant scale. One credible
source told an Associated Press journalist that 10,000 ex-detainees, or
10 or 20 percent of the population in his county, were being forced to
work. \5\ The government of Kashgar, a region of Xinjiang, stated that
it would send 100,000 ``re-educated'' individuals to work in factories.
\6\ That is 20 percent of the entire Uyghur population of Kashgar. Even
if the Chinese government did not hit its targets, the numbers are
likely to be very significant. Third, there are indications that
Chinese authorities are coercing rural, poor minorities to enter the
formal workforce as part of the government's poverty alleviation
program, which is based on the idea that factory work will break their
ties with their culture and religion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Cotton: The Fabric Full of Lies: A report on forced labor and
prison labor in Xinjiang, China, and the nexus to global supply chains
(Washington, D.C.: CPIFC)
\5\ Dake Kang, Martha Mendoza, and Yanan Wang, ``US Sportswear
traced to factory in China's internment camps,'' Associated Press,
December 19, 2018, https://www.apnews.com/
99016849cddb4b99a048b863b52c28cb
\6\ Chris Buckley and Austin Ramzy, ``China's Detention Camps for
Muslims Turn to Forced Labor,'' New York Times, December 16, 2018
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Chinese government's efforts to move minorities into the
workplace, willingly or not, center particularly on yarn, textiles, and
apparel. Indeed, the government is offering significant subsidies to
textile companies and allows factories to pay these workers much less
than the minimum wage. \7\ Our interviews of ex-detainees indicate that
some are paid less in a year than the legal minimum wage for a month in
Xinjiang. This extraordinarily cheap labor creates significant
competitive advantages for these Chinese companies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Wusu City: The First Apparel Manufacturing Company Starting
Operations in September,'' The Government of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous
Region of China, https://web.archive.org/web/20180126102601/http://
www.xinjiang.gov.cn/2017/08/30/143690.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Chinese government helps funnel these workers to the factories.
The ex-detainees we interviewed were explicitly told that if they
refused to work, they'd be sent back into detention. At least some of
the rural poor moving into the workforce as part of the government's
poverty alleviation program were also reportedly threatened with being
sent to detention if they did not agree to the job placement. Like the
ex-detainees, they were also paid a pittance.
Forced labor in Xinjiang is one part of a much larger set of human
rights violations. The situation requires policy action on a number of
fronts, including diplomatic pressure. However, because some of the
companies potentially involved in forced labor in Xinjiang are linked
to global supply chains, action in this area can be part of the
solution.
To think about what leverage is available, we can consider how
Xinjiang connects to brands and consumers here in the U.S. China is one
of the world's largest cotton producers, with around 20% of the world's
production. \8\ But a more apt characterization is that Xinjiang itself
is one of the world's largest cotton producers, since it alone is
responsible for 84% of all of China's cotton production. \9\ Some of
that cotton is transformed into yarn and textiles in Xinjiang--indeed,
the world's self-proclaimed largest producer of colored yarn \10\--
Huafu Fashion--has a factory in Xinjiang and is accused of using ``re-
educated'' labor. \11\ Our research indicates that several other large
Chinese textile companies that sell to Western brands--directly and
indirectly--also have factories in Xinjiang that raise red flags. Much
of Xinjiang's cotton, yarn, and textiles then are sent into the rest of
China for further processing. Over 30% of U.S. apparel imports come
from China, \12\ and much of this is likely to be affected by
Xinjiang's forced labor several steps back in the supply chain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ China: Cotton and Products Annual,'' USDA Foreign Agricultural
Service, April 16, 2019, https://www.fas.usda.gov/data/china-cotton-
and-products-annual-3
\9\ Ibid.
\10\ ``World's largest textile mill for coloured yarns in
Xinjiang,'' Xinhua, August 25, 2018, http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/
2018-08/25/c_137418336.htm or https://perma.cc/SV96-V2B4
\11\ Ibid.
\12\ Sheng Lu, ``China's Changing Role in the World Textile and
Apparel Supply Chain,'' FASH455, November 2, 2018, https://
shenglufashion.com/2018/11/02/chinas-changing-role-in-the-world-
textile-and-apparel-supply-chain/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommendations
Our foreign policy should reflect our values. We must respond with
an urgency that reflects the severity and scale of these abuses.
The Administration should apply Global Magnitsky
sanctions on companies and their officers directly involved in forced
labor, responsible for building detention facilities, or knowingly
providing key technology for Xinjiang's pervasive surveillance. This is
an obvious and urgent step.
A federal agency--either the Department of Labor or
Department of State--should be funded to create a public watch list of
companies in Xinjiang that trigger red flags indicating a risk that
they use forced labor. We identify examples of those red flags in our
report. This watch list would help Customs and Border Protection assist
with Global Magnitsky designations, and also put companies on notice of
risks in their own sourcing practices.
Customs and Border Protection should develop unique
approaches to enable seizures of Xinjiang goods tainted by forced labor
that reflect the fact that Xinjiang is a police state. For this
authoritarian environment, Customs and Border Protection should assume
that some of the red flags we identified in our report are a sufficient
basis for a seizure. The aforementioned company watch list would put
Western companies on notice that certain suppliers could face seizures.
Customs and Border Protection should first conduct seizures on
shipments coming directly from Xinjiang to the United States, because
receiving companies should be on notice of the risks of their sourcing.
This would provide time for companies indirectly sourcing from Xinjiang
to identify red flags and adjust their sourcing practices.
The apparel industry should consider instituting a ban on
knowingly sourcing Xinjiang cotton, as they did for Uzbek cotton. This
would acknowledge the severity of the problem, although given the
dependence of the U.S. apparel sector on China, it will be challenging.
In the meantime, individual companies should carry out the due
diligence and reporting we identify in our report and shift their
supply chains as appropriate. Notably, traditional factory audits are
impossible to conduct credibly in Xinjiang, so companies should instead
use a combination of traceability and a red flags approach. If
companies do identify likely forced labor, they will not be able to
directly mitigate it in the Xinjiang context and will need to change
their sourcing.
The U.S. government itself should adopt the report's red
flags approach in its own procurement practices. Given the dollar value
of U.S. government procurement practices, this could be impactful.
Congress and the Administration must think more broadly
regarding what can be done about companies directly involved in the
centrally planned, gross human rights abuses in Xinjiang. Some of the
technology companies knowingly contributing to the surveillance state
in Xinjiang have a U.S. presence. It is suspected that large state-
owned enterprises helping to build the detention facilities there also
have a U.S. presence. They should be the U.S.'s primary targets
whenever we can reach them.
The U.S. should work toward building a broad coalition of
international allies who are committed to removing these abuses from
global supply chains. Each recommendation above, while vital, will not
effect change on its own. Our allies, who also have commitments to
protecting human rights, must hear from the United States that we want
to work together to cut off export markets for Xinjiang's tainted
goods. Strong U.S. diplomatic efforts will be essential. This work is
one aspect of ensuring that the goods we keep out do not simply slip
into other, lucrative supply chains.
Finally, simply indirectly pressuring Chinese companies
involved in abuses in Xinjiang will not by itself address the
underlying state-led abuses. These recommendations need to be combined
with a robust diplomatic effort and the use of other points of
leverage.
Thank you very much, and I look forward to answering your
questions.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. James P. McGovern
Good morning and welcome to today's Congressional-Executive
Commission on China hearing on ``Forced Labor, Mass Internment, and
Social Control in Xinjiang.''
In the last year, Chinese authorities have expanded their network
of mass internment camps, where one million or more Uyghurs and other
Turkic Muslims have been detained and subjected to torture, extended
solitary confinement and political indoctrination, and deprived of
food. Children of detainees are reportedly often placed in orphanages,
welfare centers, and boarding schools. Some scholars and human rights
groups argue that these practices may amount to ``crimes against
humanity.''
Outside the camps, the Chinese government has become more efficient
in the use of technology to control and suppress. Some observers have
described this surveillance system as an ``open air prison.'' Recent
reports indicate that Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims are increasingly
sentenced to lengthy prison sentences on vague charges. One case is
that of Uyghur scholar Ilham Tohti who is serving a life sentence in
spite of his dedication to nonviolence and reconciliation. He is a
``Defending Freedoms Project'' prisoner of conscience and his
congressional advocate is Representative Jim Langevin of Rhode Island.
Meanwhile, the practice of Islam has also been criminalized.
Mosques have been destroyed, Islamic dress has been forbidden, and
fasting for Ramadan has been disallowed. It is in this context that new
information has come to light detailing the widespread use of a
government-subsidized and large-scale system of forced labor in both
mass internment camps and in factories throughout the Xinjiang region.
Satellite imagery, personal testimonies, and official documents
indicate that detainees in camps and some who have been released are
forced to work in food, textile, and other manufacturing jobs. Products
reportedly produced with forced labor include:
Textiles, such as yarn, clothing, gloves, bedding, and
carpet.
Electronics, including cell phones and computers.
Food products, shoes, tea, and handicrafts.
In January 2019, the U.S. company Badger Sportswear stopped
importing clothing following reports that such clothing was made with
forced labor by internment camp detainees.
In May 2019, the Wall Street Journal linked the supply chains of
Adidas, Campbell Soup, H&M, Kraft Heinz, Coca-Cola, and Gap Inc. to
forced labor.
On October 1st, U.S. Customs and Border Protection issued a
``Withhold Release Order'' on garments produced with prison or forced
labor by Hetian Taida Apparel, which has exported products to Costco.
Current U.S. law prohibits the import of any product made with
forced labor. Any U.S. or international company that produces or has a
supply chain in Xinjiang may be complicit in forced labor and human
rights violations.
In 2002 China ratified the International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). The ICESCR affirms the rights of
all peoples to self-determination and non-discrimination, to freely
choose and accept work, to enjoy just and favorable conditions of work,
including the right to remuneration, and to take part in cultural life.
All of the policies and practices I have just described violate the
ICESCR as well as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. China is
failing to comply with international human rights obligations it freely
assumed.
There is no question that the U.S. should be doing more to help the
Uyghur people. In April, Senator Rubio and I, and over 40 Members
called for Global Magnitsky sanctions against Chen Quanguo, the
Xinjiang Communist Party Secretary, as well as Chinese officials and
companies complicit in gross violations of human rights.
And last week, we expressed support when the Administration added
28 Chinese companies to the ``entity list'' and applied visa
restrictions on some Chinese officials.
Right now, there are important bills that Congress should pass,
including:
The Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act by Sen. Rubio and Rep.
Suozzi and Rep. Chris Smith; and
The Uighur Intervention and Global Humanitarian Unified
Response Act by Chairman Brad Sherman.
I look forward to hearing any and all recommendations about what
more can and should be done--including whether it is feasible for
companies to conduct reliable inspections and audits of supply chains
in the region. Congress stands in solidarity with the Uyghur people,
and we want to do all we can to support the full exercise of their
human rights.
Finally, before we begin, I would like to recognize Nury Teyip, who
is here with us today. His brother, Tashpolat Teyip, was the president
of Xinjiang University and is a renowned scholar. Tashpolat Teyip was
disappeared in March 2017 and was sentenced to death with a two-year
reprieve. Last month, we learned from Amnesty International that he may
be executed. I condemn his detention in the strongest possible terms
and call on the Chinese government to release him immediately.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Marco Rubio
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is an important hearing, so thank you
for convening it. It's also timely. I also want to thank all of our
witnesses. Your research and your advocacy has done a lot to inform us
and the world about what's happening--the atrocities being committed in
the Xinjiang region by the Chinese Communist Party. Through the
decades, the crimes of the Chinese Communist Party have been as
consistent as they have been egregious. Yet somehow, these tyrants
maintain the ability to shock the world even further with their cruelty
and their callousness.
The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region in the last two years has
experienced classic forms of Communist totalitarianism now combined
with the application of advanced technology. The difference between the
Chinese Communist Party's crimes of the past and those of the present
is the motivation. The past was about power alone. The present is about
power, but also profit. Chairman Xi Jinping and his henchman, Chen
Quanguo--who by the way used to oversee Chinese brutality and
repression inside Tibet, so he's a specialist at this--revived
collectivization to force Uyghurs into the harness of the Chinese
Communist Party's state. Just as collectivization created famines that
harmed millions in China, this new effort is blazing a trail of human
suffering.
The problem goes much deeper than simply one million Uyghurs and
other Muslim minorities detained and forced to work in what can only be
called concentration camps. For those able to escape the camps, the
full power of the Chinese state is mobilized against them and their
families inside and outside China. Hundreds of thousands, if not
millions, of Uyghur men and women have been forced, after military
discipline and political reeducation, to take jobs in satellite
factories.
The Chinese Communist government offers incentives for Chinese
companies to exploit this labor, as the cost of doing business in
coastal provinces rises. And what of the families, the children, and
the elderly? The children are removed from their parents' care so the
adults can work in the factories. Instead of the warm embrace of their
families, the young and the elderly are forced into the stifling
custody of the Chinese Communist Party. For the children this means the
loss of their language, their culture, their faith, their heritage. For
the elderly this means loneliness and isolation in their final years.
Their children and grandchildren will never hear the stories of lives
well lived, of hardships conquered, or the importance of faith and
values in a brutal, communist-governed world.
Today's hearing, however, is not about this alone. It is about
understanding how the Party integrates labor and social control, and
the national security and moral risks for individuals and companies
that deal with China. The network of detention facilities and factories
has turned Xinjiang into a forced labor camp roughly the size of the
states of California, Montana, Texas, and Florida combined. Millions of
Uyghurs and other predominantly Muslim ethnic minorities labor in
textile and light manufacturing and are prohibited from practicing
their faith. Simply put, this is slavery--the slavery of socialism with
Chinese characteristics. Earlier this month the Trump administration
announced sanctions, as the Chairman said, targeting Chinese officials
as well as governmental and commercial entities for these severe human
rights abuses, and I believe that these also constitute crimes against
humanity. We all welcome these steps and we also believe more can and
should be done to resolve one of the world's greatest ongoing tragedies
and to hold its perpetrators accountable.
I hope the House will soon pass Senate bill 178, the Uyghur Human
Rights Policy Act, that the Senate passed last month. The bill would
require the Administration to gather information about the situation in
Xinjiang and China's efforts to suppress international awareness of it.
China's efforts to silence the Uyghurs and turn the world's attention
away from the ongoing atrocities in Xinjiang have included the coercion
and intimidation of American citizens and residents here and abroad.
This is an outrage that must be addressed.
The U.S. Government needs to do its part to ensure that Americans
and the world are aware of what the Chinese government is doing in
Xinjiang and have the freedom to express their views. Despite the
efforts of our witnesses today, Americans--and American companies in
particular--are unaware of what is taking place.
For example, the National Basketball Association maintains a
residential training camp in Xinjiang, seemingly oblivious to the
contradiction between speaking out about societal issues here at home,
which they have the full freedom to do, and staying silent about
China's oppression.
Only after the U.S. Commerce Department added the Chinese
artificial intelligence company SenseTime to the Entity List last week
for its role in facilitating the Chinese Communist Party's crimes in
Xinjiang did MIT begin to review its relationship with the firm.
It's long overdue for Americans and the private sector to wake up
and fully realize the real risks of doing business with China.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Witness Biographies
Adrian Zenz, Non-resident Senior Fellow in China Studies at the
Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation and author of ``Beyond the
Camps: Beijing's Grand Scheme of Forced Labor, Poverty Alleviation and
Social Control in Xinjiang''
Adrian Zenz is a non-resident senior fellow in China Studies at the
Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation (Washington, DC). Dr. Zenz has
done pioneering work documenting the scope of mass internment camps in
the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR), including through his
analysis of Chinese government procurement documents, construction
bids, and domestic security budgets. Recently, he has published and
contributed to groundbreaking research documenting the mass
institutionalization of children whose parents have been detained in
mass internment camps and the incentives offered to Chinese
manufacturers to employ forced labor in the XUAR.
Nury Turkel, Washington-based attorney and Chair of the Board,
Uyghur Human Rights Project
Nury Turkel is an attorney in private practice in Washington, DC,
specializing in regulatory compliance, with a focus on anti-bribery
investigation and enforcement, data privacy, and aviation. In addition
to his law practice, Mr. Turkel serves as Chair of the Board for the
Uyghur Human Rights Project, a research and advocacy organization that
he co-founded in 2004. He served as Executive Director until 2006. He
has published commentaries on policy and legal matters in publications
such as The Wall Street Journal and Foreign Policy and has appeared on
radio and television programs on CNN, BBC, Fox News, Al Jazeera, France
24, NPR, and ABC Australia, among others. Born and raised in Kashgar,
Mr. Turkel received a bachelor's degree from Northwest A&F University
in Xi'an, China. Mr. Turkel has a master's degree in International
Relations and a J.D. from American University. He is the first U.S.
educated Uyghur lawyer, and is a fluent speaker of Uyghur, Chinese, and
Turkish.
Michael Posner, Jerome Kohlberg Professor of Ethics and Finance and
Director of the Center for Business and Human Rights at NYU's Stern
School of Business, and former Assistant Secretary of State for
Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
Michael Posner is the Jerome Kohlberg Professor of Ethics and
Finance at NYU's Stern School of Business. He is the director of the
Center for Business and Human Rights at the school, the first-ever
human rights center at a business school. Prior to joining NYU Stern,
Posner served in the Obama Administration from 2009 to 2013 as
Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights,
and Labor. As a member of the White House Apparel Industry Partnership
Task Force in the mid-'90s, he helped found the Fair Labor Association,
an organization that brings together corporations, local leaders,
universities, and NGOs to promote corporate accountability for working
conditions in the apparel industry. From 1978 to 2009, he led Human
Rights First, a New York-based human rights advocacy organization.
Amy K. Lehr, Director of the Human Rights Initiative at the Center
for Strategic and International Studies and former legal adviser to the
U.N. Special Representative on business and human rights
Amy K. Lehr is the director of the Human Rights Initiative at the
Center for Strategic and International Studies. She leads the
Initiative's work on human rights around the world, with a particular
focus on how technology affects human rights and labor rights, and the
importance of a values-based foreign policy. Her core expertise is in
the area of business and human rights. She spent a decade in private
practice advising companies and international institutions on how they
can respect human rights in their global operations. Previously, Lehr
served as legal adviser to the UN special representative on business
and human rights, John Ruggie, and in that role helped develop the UN
Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.
[all]