[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAINS, FORCED LABOR, AND
THE XINJIANG UYGHUR AUTONOMOUS REGION
=======================================================================
ROUNDTABLE
BEFORE THE
CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MARCH 11, 2020
__________
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
40-452 PDF WASHINGTON : 2021
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS
House Senate
JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts, MARCO RUBIO, Florida, Cochair
Chair JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma
CHRIS SMITH, New Jersey TOM COTTON, Arkansas
MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio STEVE DAINES, Montana
THOMAS SUOZZI, New York TODD YOUNG, Indiana
TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
BEN McADAMS, Utah GARY PETERS, Michigan
BRIAN MAST, Florida 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;
Cochair, Congressional-Executive Commission on China........... 3
Statement of Hon. Chris Smith, a U.S. Representative from New
Jersey......................................................... 4
Statement of Hon. Jeff Merkley, a U.S. Senator from Oregon....... 5
Statement of Hon. Jennifer Wexton, a U.S. Representative from
Virginia....................................................... 6
Statement of Hon. Thomas R. Suozzi, a U.S. Representative from
New York....................................................... 7
Nova, Scott, Executive Director, Worker Rights Consortium........ 9
Han, Shelly, Chief of Staff and Director of Engagement, Fair
Labor Association.............................................. 11
Vogt, Jeffrey, Rule of Law Director, Solidarity Center........... 12
Abbas, Rushan, Director, Campaign for Uyghurs.................... 14
A P P E N D I X
Prepared Statement
Abbas, Rushan.................................................... 30
GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAINS, FORCED LABOR, AND THE XINJIANG AUTONOMOUS REGION
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, 2020
Congressional-Executive
Commission on China,
Washington, DC.
The roundtable was held from 9:32 a.m. to 11:04 a.m. in
Room 2255, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C.,
Representative James P. McGovern, Chair, presiding.
Present: Senator Rubio, Cochair, and Senator Merkley, and
Representatives Smith, Suozzi, and Wexton.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES P. McGOVERN, A U.S.
REPRESENTATIVE FROM MASSACHUSETTS; CHAIR, CONGRESSIONAL-
EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to today's
Congressional-Executive Commission on China Roundtable on
Global Supply Chains, Forced Labor, and the Xinjiang Autonomous
Region.
Today I am proud to announce the release of a new China
Commission report detailing how global supply chains are
tainted with goods and products made with forced labor in
Xinjiang. I want to thank the Commission staff, including Luke
Adams, Megan Fluker, Amy Reger, Scott Flipse, and Steve Andrews
for their excellent research in this report. We are fortunate
to have such an effective and committed staff to support human
rights and the rule of law in China.
Over the past several years, the Chinese government created
and expanded a system of extrajudicial mass internment camps.
As many as 1.8 million Uyghurs and members of other Muslim
groups, including Kazakhs, Hui, and Kyrgyz have been
arbitrarily detained in the camps and subjected to forced
labor, torture, political indoctrination, and other severe
human rights abuses. With the coronavirus outbreak, Uyghurs and
other Muslim communities are even more vulnerable. There is
great fear about the risk of disease spreading within the mass
internment camps, where people are forced to live in close
quarters under tremendous stress and with health issues.
This situation raises serious humanitarian concerns and is
another reason why the repression of the Uyghurs and other
Muslim minority groups violates international rights standards.
Just last week, the Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of
Genocide at the Holocaust Museum determined that there is a
reasonable basis to believe that crimes against humanity are
being committed. We know forced labor is widespread and
systematic and exists both within and outside the mass
internment camps. These facts are confirmed by the testimony of
former camp detainees, satellite imagery, and official leaked
documents from the Chinese government.
We know that many U.S., international, and Chinese
companies are complicit in the exploitation of forced labor
involving Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities. Audits of supply
chains are simply not possible because forced labor is so
pervasive within the regional economy. Workers cannot speak
freely and honestly about working conditions, given heavy
surveillance and intimidation, and government officials face
strong incentives to conceal the use of government-sanctioned
forced labor. In June 2019, the State Department Trafficking-
in-Persons report found that Chinese companies were receiving
government subsidies to open factories in close proximity to
the internment camps and were exploiting forced labor.
In September 2019, U.S. Customs and Border Protection
banned the import of garments produced by Hetian Taida Apparel
Company, due to the use of suspected prison or forced labor in
its factories in the region. The Commission's new report finds
that products made with forced labor include textiles, such as
yarn, clothing, gloves, bedding, and carpet; electronics,
including cellphones and computers; food products; shoes; tea;
and handicrafts. Some companies suspected of directly employing
forced labor or sourcing from suppliers suspected of using
forced labor in public reporting include Adidas, Calvin Klein,
Campbell's Soup, Coca-Cola, Esquel Group, Esprit, H&M, Kraft,
Hines Company, Nike, Patagonia, and Tommy Hilfiger.
We were glad to see that on Monday the Fair Labor
Association directed its affiliates, including some of the
companies mentioned previously, to review their sourcing
relationships in Xinjiang and identify alternative sourcing
opportunities. Current U.S. law states that it is illegal to
import into the United States goods, wares, articles, and
merchandise mined, produced, or manufactured wholly or in part
by forced labor. Such merchandise is subject to exclusion and/
or seizure and may lead to criminal investigation of the
importer. Unfortunately, products made with forced labor are
still making their way into global supply chains and into our
country.
So today I am pleased to announce that Senator Rubio,
Congressman Chris Smith, Senator Merkley, Congressman Suozzi,
Congresswoman Wexton, myself, and other Members are introducing
the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act. This new legislation
prohibits imports from Xinjiang to the United States by
creating a rebuttable presumption that all goods produced in
the region are made with forced labor, unless U.S. Customs and
Border Protection certifies, by clear and convincing evidence,
that goods were not produced with forced labor.
The legislation also requires a secretary of state
determination about whether forced labor in Xinjiang
constitutes atrocities; requires a U.S. Government strategy to
address the forced labor situation, including a list of Chinese
companies engaged in forced labor and products produced
therefrom; provides authority for targeted sanctions on
individuals who knowingly engage with forced labor; and
protects U.S. investors by requiring an additional SEC
disclosure for companies working with Chinese entities engaged
in human rights abuses, including forced labor.
I want to thank the many groups who are supporting this
legislation, including the AFL-CIO. Any U.S. or international
company working in or with suppliers in Xinjiang should
reconsider whether they want to be producing products in a
region where there is evidence that crimes against humanity are
being committed. It is long past time for companies to reassess
their operations and supply chains and find alternatives that
do not exploit labor and violate human rights.
So today I'm pleased that we will hear from an expert panel
to examine the impact of forced labor on global supply chains,
as well as on U.S. and international consumers. And before we
hear directly from our expert panel, I'm proud to recognize
Cochair Rubio and other members of the Commission for their
remarks. So I'll turn this over to Senator Rubio now.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO, A U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA;
COCHAIR, CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA
Thank you. And I think we're all just learning how to do
the fist-bump, elbow-bump greeting.
First of all, thank you all for being part of this very
important discussion. I want to echo first what the chairman
talked about with our staff. They've put together a very
powerful document. And it's a document that should leave zero
doubt about the evil policies and practices of the Communist
Party of China toward Uyghurs, and toward other Muslim minority
groups. The chairman outlined, through the names of various
companies that he disclosed--I guarantee you there are products
from those companies in this very room right now, because we've
all bought them and we've all had to buy them.
But it's injected forced labor into American and global
supply chains. It's injected forced labor under the Christmas
tree. It's injected forced labor into the boxes we give over
for birthdays. And it's injected forced labor into many of the
things that we buy on a daily basis. And this is a disturbing
reality. It's one that we need to confront and we need to face.
And so the introduction of this bill today, the Uyghur Forced
Labor Prevention Act, is important. And the chairman's outlined
all the details of it, but the core of it is that it shifts the
burden of proof to companies that insist on producing in this
region. It shifts the burden of proof with the presumption
that, given these practices and what's detailed in this report,
we should assume that anything that's produced in this region
is produced through forced labor.
By the way, these practices of the Chinese Communist Party
in Xinjiang--this is one of the world's largest human rights
tragedies. It remains unimaginable, frankly, that this is
happening in the year 2020, where you have hundreds of
thousands of people subjected to military discipline, to so-
called reeducation--or what we know as political reeducation
and indoctrination. We have families that are being separated,
children being placed in orphanages and boarding schools, the
elderly forced into nursing homes, people forced to change
their names and abandon their identities. And commercial
satellite imagery shows that factories have and are being
placed next to or right inside these camps. And there's also
mounting evidence of forced labor in the cotton industry, in
agriculture, and in other light manufacturing.
The widespread forced labor documented in the report
clearly constitutes serious crimes sanctioned, perpetrated,
approved, and directed by the Chinese Communist Party through
their government. The Commission, in fact, noted in our annual
report that what is taking place there probably rises to the
level of a crime against humanity. And we're not the only ones.
As was mentioned previously, the Holocaust Museum just last
week concluded that what the Chinese government is doing to
Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities is a crime against
humanity.
Words, however, are not enough. And we must act and respond
quickly to these horrific crimes being committed by the Chinese
Communist Party. And this bill, I believe, does that. And we
hope that other countries will join in working on similar
legislation to ensure that the Chinese Communist Party and the
people responsible for this are collectively and individually
held accountable. Because this crisis will demand an
international response. And I will predict that history will
not look favorably on those who knew about it and did nothing,
and stayed silent, or even worse were complicit in these
crimes.
And so I want to thank all of you for being here. Again, I
want to thank our staff. And I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman,
and all the members who have come. Thank you.
Chair McGovern. I am now happy to turn this over to
Congressman Chris Smith of New Jersey, who is our top
Republican on the Commission on the House side, who is also the
cochair of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission.
STATEMENT OF HON. CHRIS SMITH,
A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW JERSEY
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And Chairman Rubio,
great to see you as well. And this is a historic bill. I do
believe it'll pass. I hope it'll become law.
You know, in 1991 Congressman Frank Wolf and I, soon after
Tiananmen Square, went to Beijing Prison No. 2 in Beijing, a
prison where there were at least 40 Tiananmen Square activists
who were being forced to make jelly shoes and socks for export
to the United States and elsewhere. We took copies, we took
samples, and we went to Customs and got an import ban pursuant
to the Tariff Act--the Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930. And that was
about it, despite the fact that gulags, laogai all over China
were making goods for export to the United States.
There was an MOU in effect--Bush used to tout it, Clinton
used to tout it--that wasn't worth the paper that it was
written on because when we had information we had to go to the
Chinese police and say: Will you investigate? And they would
come back 60 days later or so and say: ``No problem here.'' I
remember meeting with the customs people in Beijing on that
trip. And they were like the Maytag repairman. They had nothing
to do. There was no ability to investigate.
That is why the most important part of this bill,
recognizing that these are crimes against humanity being
committed against the Muslim Uyghurs--you know, this is a
horrific tragedy, as both the chairman and the Senate chairman
pointed out. The Holocaust Museum has called these crimes
against humanity. It is clear these are horrific crimes. The
rebuttable presumption is the core to this important piece of
legislation. It will say the presumption of innocence shifts,
and how they've got to prove, those who want to import these
products, that their supply chain is clear and clean of this
kind of horrific behavior.
This is a great bill. We are introducing it today. It's a
privilege to be part of this coalition. It's bipartisan and
bicameral. And we have four great people who will be bringing
further details to bear on this important issue. We need to
stand in solidarity with the Uyghurs and all oppressed peoples.
Thank you.
Chair McGovern. I'm now happy to introduce another member
of our Commission from the Senate, Senator Jeff Merkley of
Oregon.
STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF MERKLEY,
A U.S. SENATOR FROM OREGON
Well, good morning, everyone. And thank you to everyone
who's worked so hard to put this report together and to design
this bill, the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act. Your efforts
have kept it front and center in many people's minds when the
Chinese authorities would certainly much rather have swept it
under the rug. Nothing is more dear and more sacred to us here
in America than the concept of freedom. We have fought for our
own freedom and we've gone to war to ensure the freedom of
others around the world. We have marched. We have rallies. We
have protested. We have boycotted. And now we need to stand up
for those who are enslaved in China.
Time and time again we've stood up to dictators and tyrants
who have threatened freedom. We cannot sit on our hands and do
nothing as China repeatedly and systematically abuses the human
rights of the Uyghurs and other Muslim ethnic minorities. For
years, we have seen hundreds of thousands, even millions of
individuals interned, tortured, interrogated, and brutally
forced into labor camps by the Chinese government, stripping
individuals of their freedom, their future, and their culture.
And as we know from this latest report, this isn't an issue
that is improving. In fact, it's getting worse.
This system of slavery is expanding. The internment camps
are expanding. Between April 2017 and August of 2018, satellite
imagery shows 39 reeducation camps have tripled in size.
Without knowing it, Americans all across our country have a
connection to these human rights abuses through the products we
buy. Products, including popular name brands, have been made--
in whole or in part--in the Xinjiang region. And no matter how
much they try to make sure that forced labor is not part of the
supply chain, the access to information, the lack of
transparency, makes it impossible to be sure.
Just look at cotton. China is one of the world's largest
producers. Eighty percent of it comes from this region. How
much of that cotton is picked by Uyghurs and oppressed
minorities? There's no real way of knowing. Until we can know
and until we can do due diligence and ensure that supply chains
are not, in fact, comprised of enslaved workers, and until we
can ensure the freedom and liberty of oppressed minorities in
China, we should do everything possible to ensure that our
nation and the American people are not complicit participants
in the abuse of their human rights.
That's why I'm proud to partner with my colleagues here on
this bill blocking the importation of items produced in this
region. We need to tackle every aspect of this abuse, and this
bill is an essential and urgent step forward. I'm pleased to be
here with my colleagues making this case. Thank you.
Chair McGovern. I now am pleased to introduce
Representative Jennifer Wexton of Virginia, who has emerged as
a champion for human rights in this Congress.
STATEMENT OF JENNIFER WEXTON,
A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM VIRGINIA
Good morning. I represent a district in Northern Virginia
that includes one of the largest populations of Uyghur Muslims
in the United States. And before I was even sworn in as a
member of Congress, I attended a forum at a local mosque, the
ADAMS Center, where I met Uyghur Muslims living in the United
States, Ms. Abbas being one of them. And I heard story after
story of the horrors that their friends and families in
Xinjiang had been subjected to, how they had been disappeared
from their homes and placed in reeducation camps, how they had
in many instances been forced to renounce their faith and to
eat pork or drink alcohol.
And then once their reeducation was complete, how they were
forced to work as part of a work training program. This,
despite the fact that many of those who were disappeared were
physicians, professors, and other professionals. And how the
fruits of their forced labor have turned up in so many products
here in the United States--in the clothes that we're wearing,
in the shoes that we're wearing, in the food and tea that we
eat and drink, and in the electronics that we use every day.
So I want to thank the CECC and the NGOs who brought this--
who made this report happen. It's chilling. It needs to be
public. We need people to be aware of what is happening. This
rebuttable presumption, I cannot overstate how important that
rebuttable presumption is going to be in terms of disclosures
and everything else. Now, as a member of the House Financial
Services Committee, the disclosure part of it is very important
to me as well, because I believe that once U.S. companies,
shareholders, and consumers are aware of the horrors that are
going on in Xinjiang and beyond, they won't want to be a
participant in that system.
So this is fantastic legislation. I want to thank Senator
Rubio, Congressman McGovern, and the entire CECC for bringing
it to our attention and for introducing this legislation, which
I proudly support. Thank you.
Chair McGovern. And our final speaker before we go to the
panel is a member of our Commission, another powerful voice for
human rights in Congress, Representative Tom Suozzi of New
York.
STATEMENT OF THOMAS R. SUOZZI,
A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW JERSEY
Thank you, Jim. And thank you to all of my colleagues for
their good work here.
Good morning. I say this at every one of our gatherings
that, you know, in America, we've always believed, since the
1970s--since Nixon went to China--that the more China was
exposed to the West, the more they were exposed to our way of
democracy, the more they were exposed to Western economies,
they'd become more like us. That just hasn't happened. And we
have to keep on repeating the same thing over and over and over
again, because most Americans don't realize what's actually
transpiring right now in China. It's horrific.
Whether it's asking the Uyghur Muslims to eat pork, or
making Uyghur Muslims eat pork during Ramadan, or whether it's
the exile of the Tibetan government, or whether it's the
treatment of the students in Hong Kong, or most importantly
today the forced labor in Xinjiang, this is happening right
now, as we speak. And people are suffering because of it. And
this bill, which I'm so happy to be an original cosponsor of,
the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, is so important because
the only thing that the Chinese government will recognize is if
we prevent them from continuing to export these goods made
using forced labor into our marketplace.
I mean, it's hard to imagine. It's hard for anybody in
America to believe that there are forced labor camps, people
being forced to work with no pay, producing goods that are
being shipped into the United States of America. And it's names
that you've heard of. It's Adidas. It's Calvin Klein. It's
Campbell's Soup Company. It's Costco. It's Nike. It's H&M. It's
Patagonia. It's Tommy Hilfiger. And it goes on and on. So this
bill is an important step forward in bringing attention to this
very real situation that's happening, and in getting the
attention of the Chinese Communist Party as well.
So I want to thank my colleagues for their good work. I
want to thank the staff for the good work. I just want to
remind people that--you know, I just went to the 75th
anniversary of the Battle of the Bulge a few months ago. And in
preparation for that I read a book called ``Band of Brothers,''
which, you know, they did a TV series about and people have
heard of it. And when the U.S. soldiers were literally days
away, and only miles away from the concentration camps,
millions of people had already been killed. They were literally
miles away, days away from liberating the camps, they were
debating among themselves: Is this really happening, or is this
just propaganda? And we see now that, you know, the Holocaust,
which has been so well documented over such a long period of
time, people question it today.
It's going to take a lot of work and a lot of effort for us
to continue to beat this drum to get people to acknowledge
these atrocities that are taking place in China right now, as
we speak. So that's why the work of the folks standing up here
and so many others, the folks here sitting down, and all the
staff that have worked on this, and all of you who are involved
in this issue, is so important--to call the attention of the
world to this horrible injustice. Thank you.
Chair McGovern. Thank you very much. And let me again urge
everybody to read this important report. Again, I want to thank
the staff for an excellent job. This is a very powerful report.
I hope all my colleagues will read it. And I--and let me just
make a couple--I feel bad that everybody's standing here. We
should've had a bigger room. But there are some empty chairs up
here if people want to sit up here.
Let me just conclude with this. You know, you've just heard
from a very diverse group of elected officials up here who
represent both political parties, who represent vastly
different ideologies. Some of us are very liberal. Some of us
are very conservative. A lot of issues we can't come together
on. We have come together on this issue. And I want to
emphasize that point. And I'm hoping that the U.S. business
community is listening carefully. We are together on this. And
we believe it is long past time for companies to reassess their
operations and supply chains and find alternatives that do not
exploit labor and violate human rights.
And we are introducing this legislation today. And I want
to assure people that this is not merely a press release. We
intend to push this bill through the various committees, move
it to the House floor, move it to the Senate floor for a vote,
pass it, and send it to the President for his signature. So
this is not just us getting together and condemning the human
rights atrocities and the forced labor in Xinjiang and against
the Uyghurs. We are serious about moving this. And so to all
those in the business community who are doing business in a way
that will make them vulnerable to this legislation, now's the
time to reassess. We will be reaching out to them individually.
There will be more hearings going on, not just in the China
Commission but we have people on the Financial Services
Committee. We have--we were talking to the Ways and Means
Committee. And I'm on the Rules Committee. And we're going to
make sure this goes to the House floor. So I just say that
because this is a serious effort and this is an important
moment. And I want the U.S. business community, the
international business community--and I want China to know how
serious this is. And now I'm pleased to introduce our esteemed
panel of experts this morning.
Mr. Scott Nova is the executive director of the Worker
Rights Consortium, which is an independent nonprofit
organization that assesses working conditions in global supply
chains on behalf of universities, pension funds, and other
public entities. The Worker Rights Consortium has been
conducting labor rights investigations of factories in China
for nearly 20 years. The organization documented the use of
detainee labor, and its research has linked multiple brands and
retailers to forced labor in the region.
Ms. Shelly Han is chief of staff and director of engagement
at the Fair Labor Association. Ms. Han has worked with NGOs
around the world as a senior policy advisor at the Commission
on Security and Cooperation in Europe from 2006 to 2016. She
also worked in the executive branch in policy positions on
trade, national security, and immigration at the Department of
Commerce and Department of Homeland Security. Prior to joining
the government she worked in the private sector helping
companies do business and do the right thing in international
markets.
Mr. Jeffrey Vogt is the rule of law director at the
Solidarity Center, the largest U.S.-based international
workers' rights organization, helping workers attain dignity on
the job and greater equity at work and in their community. He
supports trade unions on labor law and policy and advocacy
before national, regional, and international tribunals. Jeff
has also served as the legal director of the International
Trade Union Confederation, a global organization that
represents over 200 million workers in 162 countries and
territories.
And finally, Ms. Rushan Abbas is the director at the
Campaign for Uyghurs, which she founded. She started her
activism work while she was a student, participating in pro-
democracy demonstrations at Xinjiang University in 1985 and
1988. Since her arrival in the United States in 1989, Ms. Abbas
has been an ardent campaigner for human rights of the Uyghur
people. She was vice president of the Uyghur American
Association for two terms and is a former reporter at Radio
Free Asia. In September 2018 her sister, Dr. Gulshan Abbas, was
abducted and became a victim in China in retaliation for
Rushan's activism here in the United States.
I want to thank you all for being here today, and we look
forward to hearing from you on this important topic. And again,
if people want to sit up here, they're more than welcome to do
so. I just feel bad that everybody's standing. But I appreciate
you all being here. And I'll turn this over to you.
STATEMENT OF SCOTT NOVA,
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WORKER RIGHTS CONSORTIUM
Chairman McGovern, Chairman Rubio, thank you for convening
this roundtable and for the opportunity to speak this morning.
The Chinese government's brutal campaign of oppression in the
Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, including widespread forced
labor, has been exposed in grim detail through firsthand
refugee testimony and the Chinese government's own documents.
Forced labor is integral to the government's strategy to
establish social control and cultural dominance through force
over the Uyghur people and other Turkic and Muslim groups.
While the government's clampdown on information has made
documentation at specific workplaces a daunting task, we know--
both from the specific documented cases and from the vast scope
of the government's program of forced labor as social control--
that the risk is broad. That virtually any workplace in the
XUAR, whether a cotton farm, a yarn spinning mill, or other
industrial worksite, is a potential locus of forced labor. The
implications for the apparel industry in particular are
profound, because many of these farms and factories are links
in the supply chains of major apparel brands and retailers.
Every year, the apparel industry imports more than 10
billion cotton garments into the United States. Roughly one in
five is produced, at least in part, in the XUAR. The apparel
industry sources 20 percent of its global cotton supply from
the XUAR. The Chinese government has established a major yarn
industry in the region to further supply apparel brands. It is
important to understand that the fabric that Chinese textile
mills fashion out of Xinjiang cotton and yarn feeds not just
garment factories in China but factories across the world, from
Bangladesh, to Vietnam, to Central America.
Further embroiling the apparel industry in the human rights
crisis in Xinjiang, several leading Chinese companies with ties
to global brands are active participants in the Chinese
government's labor schemes. This includes Esquel Group, a
partner of more than a dozen U.S. brands, Luthai Textiles,
Youngor Group, Huafu Fashion, and Shandong Ruyi, among others.
For apparel brands and retailers, the risk of complicity in
forced labor is enormous.
At the same time, the mechanism companies would normally
use to address labor rights risk in the supply chain,
conducting workplace inspections or audits, is no longer
feasible in the XUAR. Interviews with workers are an essential
element of any audit, especially when the issue is whether the
worker's labor is voluntary. Such interviews are only
meaningful if workers can speak candidly. No Uyghur worker in
the XUAR can possibly feel safe speaking candidly. The
government's ubiquitous surveillance apparatus makes the term
``confidential interview'' an oxymoron. And every worker knows
that contradicting the government's official position--that
there is no forced labor in the XUAR--will guarantee harsh
reprisals.
The only answer a worker can safely give to the question of
whether her labor is voluntary is ``yes.'' Attempts to conduct
audits under these circumstances have yielded predictable
results. The Hetian Taida Apparel Company operated a factory in
a reeducation camp in Hotan and another a few hundred yards
from the camp. Under the auspices of two labor rights
certification bodies, Worldwide Responsible Accredited
Production and Business Social Compliance Initiative, auditors
assessed the factory outside the reeducation camp and gave it a
clean bill of health as to forced labor. They did so despite
the fact that the parent company operated a facility inside an
internment camp, despite the facility's location next to this
camp, and despite the presence of what the Chinese government
calls ``camp graduates'' among the workforce. The auditors
interviewed workers, who unsurprisingly did not choose that
moment to denounce their employer and the Chinese government as
forced labor profiteers. In October, Customs and Border
Protection issued a detention order against all goods from
Hetian Taida because of overwhelming evidence that it uses
forced labor.
The Wall Street Journal exposed the involvement of Huafu
Fashion, a major yarn manufacturer, in forced labor in the town
of Aksu. Huafu promptly commissioned an audit from a leading
audit firm called Bureau Veritas. The result was another clean
bill of health. Bureau Veritas was also responsible for an
audit that found no forced labor at a glove factory called Yili
Zhuowan Garment, where credible refugee accounts had already
proven that forced labor was present. At this point, no firm
should be conducting audits in the XUAR. The only purpose labor
rights audits can serve in the XUAR now is to create the false
appearance of due diligence and thereby facilitate continued
commerce in products made with forced labor.
Given the substantial risk of forced labor at any farm or
factory and the absence of credible due-diligence methods, the
only option for brands and retailers that want to comply with
U.S. law and their own ethical standards is to exit the XUAR at
every level of the supply chain. While heavy dependence on
Chinese cotton, yarn, and fabric make exit a cumbersome
proposition, this cannot justify complicity in what the U.S.
Holocaust Memorial Museum has deemed crimes against humanity,
nor can it excuse breaches of U.S. law. No apparel brand wants
to be associated with the abuses taking place in Xinjiang.
Bearing in mind that it won't happen overnight, brands and
retailers must work with urgency to remove XUAR-produced
content from their supply chains and to sever ties with Chinese
companies implicated in forced labor. This is a goal they
should accomplish in months, not years. Stronger action from
the U.S. Government to block imports from the XUAR is also
crucial. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF SHELLY HAN, CHIEF OF STAFF
AND DIRECTOR OF ENGAGEMENT, FAIR LABOR ASSOCIATION
Good morning. Chairman McGovern, Chairman Rubio, esteemed
members of the Commission, I want to thank you for the
opportunity to be here today on this important panel on forced
labor in China. I'm pleased to be here. And as a matter of
organizational policy, I just need to state that the Fair Labor
Association (FLA) cannot endorse legislation, but we're really
looking forward to reading the bill.
As the world has learned about the human rights abuses in
Xinjiang, and particularly against the Uyghurs and other ethnic
minorities, the connection to global supply chains, including
evidence of forced labor, is really clear. The FLA works with
companies, universities, and civil society organizations to
improve labor conditions in global supply chains. And I want to
state clearly that forced labor is not acceptable anywhere in
our affiliate supply chains.
When a company finds forced labor, it can usually take
immediate action to not only stop the abuse but also find ways
to effectively remediate the labor violation for the worker. A
critical aspect of this remediation is direct engagement with
the worker. Through engagement, the company gets firsthand
information and can tailor any remediation of the abuse to what
is appropriate for that worker in that circumstance.
In the context of forced labor in Xinjiang or in other
parts of China, Uyghurs are not able to speak up or speak out
on their own behalf. That means that companies cannot engage
with them in the detection or remediation of forced labor,
which raises the risk not only for workers but also for
companies. We have provided guidance to our affiliates over the
past year and updated it as new information becomes available.
In January of this year, we informed companies that due
diligence in Xinjiang would not be able to reliably detect or
rule out forced labor.
The shift was based on three key factors. The first is
based on the Chinese government's restrictions on travel to
Xinjiang and the heavy surveillance presence there. The second,
we know that workers, factory management, and auditors may not
be able to freely communicate with brands or auditors. And then
three, we also know that suppliers and brands may not be able
to effectively remediate any forced labor that is found.
Last week, the FLA directed our affiliates to take three
actions. The first is to review their direct and indirect
sourcing relationships. The second is to identify alternative
sourcing opportunities. And the third is to develop time-bound
plans to ensure that their sourcing is in line with FLA
principles, including the prohibition of forced labor.
This directive applies to sourcing from Xinjiang,
everything from raw material to finished goods. It also applies
to production that may take place in another part of China. And
it also applies to production that takes place in third
countries, such as Vietnam or Cambodia, where the supplier is
sourcing raw materials, yarn, or fabric from Xinjiang. We all
agree that companies cannot be complicit in forced labor.
Companies must do their part, and we are working with them on
that effort.
We also know that this is not an issue that companies alone
can fix. It will take the collective action of business,
governments, multilateral organizations, civil society, unions,
and others to address the broader policies that are leading to
forced labor. Because the ultimate responsibility lies with the
Chinese government for resolving this issue, we'd like to
suggest that the CECC consider some specific steps the U.S.
Government can take to address this directly with the Chinese
government.
First, we believe the U.S. Government should actively
engage with the European Union and other governments
bilaterally to effectively engage the Chinese government.
Forced labor is not showing up only in U.S. supply chains. By
solely focusing on U.S. supply chains we risk losing the
critical mass that we need to focus the attention of the
Chinese government and effectively address the issue.
Second, the U.S. Government should establish a diplomatic
channel to address this issue directly with the Chinese
government. It could set up a bilateral dialogue focused
specifically on prison labor and forced labor, picking up where
the two governments left off some years ago with the--as
Congressman Smith mentioned--the 1992 MOU, because if forced
labor is not on the agenda, we will not see change.
Additionally, it's not clear that the Chinese government
and Chinese suppliers specifically fully understand the changes
to the Tariff Act that took place in 2016 and how the nexus
between the so-called poverty alleviation program applies to
forced labor. While companies have done a lot to educate their
suppliers on this change and what the risks are, the suppliers,
we believe, and also the Chinese government, still don't
understand what those changes are and how impactful they have
been. So the U.S. Government can help facilitate education in
China on this new legal requirement.
Thank you again for this opportunity. And I look forward to
your questions.
STATEMENT OF JEFFREY VOGT,
RULE OF LAW DIRECTOR, SOLIDARITY CENTER
Dear Chair Representative McGovern, dear Cochair Senator
Rubio, and dear members of the Commission, and my co-panelists,
thank you for the opportunity to participate in this roundtable
today.
The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of China is home to
over 13 million Uyghur and other Turkic Muslim peoples. The
government has claimed erroneously that the population
constitutes a domestic security threat and therefore has
implemented a program of so-called reeducation and de-
extremification. However, as many have reported, a key
component of this program is the use of forced or compulsory
labor, including in prisons and internment camps in the XUAR,
as well as the mobilization of workers from the XUAR to
manufacturers elsewhere in China.
Objects made in whole or in part from forced or compulsory
labor now include textiles and apparel, agricultural goods,
electronics, and many other manufactured consumer goods, which
are exported around the world, including to the United States.
This program in its design and execution brazenly violates
numerous international human rights norms and likely
constitutes crimes against humanity, as has been said before.
A reeducation program typically involves prison-style
detention, with some vocational training, indoctrination, and
finally release to factories in nearby industrial parks or camp
factories. The political reeducation is an extrajudicial system
that operates outside the criminal justice and regular prison
system. Government documents state that the released reeducated
minorities will be part of the manufacturing workforce and are
expected to assist the government in meeting its quota
requirements. These reeducation facilities are, quite clearly,
internment camps, complete with police stations, high
surrounding walls and watchtowers, a surveillance and
monitoring system, and other apparatus commonly found in
prisons.
There's a clear government policy to forcefully ensure that
former detainees are under the control of the government
through labor-intensive manufacturing jobs at factories built
in and near such centers, thereby ensuring a continuous implied
threat of return to the internment camp for refusal to
participate in this manufacturing. The exact number of former
detainees who have been coerced into working in a factory is
not known, but estimates based on interviews and government
statements are well over 100,000 former detainees who are
forced to work in garment and textile factories.
In addition to those in internment camps, there are some
within the traditional prison system. The Xinjiang Production
and Construction Corps administers its own prison system and
factories and forces its own prison population to conduct
commercial activities, many in cotton harvesting and
production. XPCC was the enterprise to establish the Xinjiang
cotton industry, and some estimates suggest that XPCC, through
its forced prison labor, produces about a third of China's
overall cotton output. This reeducation program is further
carried out in an environment of total surveillance, where
residents of the XUAR are subject to multiple and overlapping
systems of digital and in-person monitoring, collection of
biometric data, and even homestays by authorities. Those who
refuse to comply with public officials face severe retaliation
to themselves and to their families and communities.
The human rights situation related to the XUAR is a very
serious concern for the global labor movement. The state-
sponsored internment and forced labor of a population because
of their ethnic or religious beliefs is unconscionable and has
been widely condemned by unions worldwide. The government is in
serious breach of numerous international human rights
instruments, including, obviously, those of the ILO--the 1998
ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work
and ILO Convention 122 on employment policy, which is one of
the few conventions China has ratified, as well as the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,
which it has also ratified.
The government's mobilization of forced labor for the
export of manufactured goods to the U.S. likely violates
several U.S. laws, including 19 U.S.C. 2411, better known as
section 301 of our Trade Act, which allows the USTR to take
action against an act, policy, or practice of a foreign country
that is unreasonable or discriminatory and burdens or restricts
U.S. commerce, with any form of forced or compulsory labor
being deemed unreasonable.
The import of such goods also violates 19 U.S.C. 1307,
which allows the CBP to issue and withhold release orders to
exclude or seize goods and to take civil action against
importers. And of course, the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention
Act would further empower CBP to act accordingly. The CBP has
issued one WRO with regard to the import of goods from Hetian
Taida, but much more obviously can and should be done, as
members of this Commission have called for today.
Further, companies who source from the XUAR may also be
violating the civil and criminal provisions of the Trafficking
Victims Protection Act, which in 2008 was amended to include
supply chain language which would sanction those who knowingly
benefit financially or who receive anything of value as a
result of their participation in a venture which that person
knew or should have known has engaged in an act which is in
violation of that chapter, which would include, of course,
forced labor.
The global labor movement hopes and expects the U.S. to
take action using these and other tools at its disposal and to
encourage other major importers of goods from the XUAR,
including the European Union, to take similar action. U.S.
brands must, of course, also accept their responsibility to
extricate themselves immediately from the XUAR by ensuring that
none of their suppliers are using inputs linked to the
government-sponsored reeducation program. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF RUSHAN ABBAS,
DIRECTOR, CAMPAIGN FOR UYGHURS
Thank you for the opportunity to speak about China's
genocide and the world's largest government-directed human
trafficking forced-labor network. What's happening to Uyghurs
and other Turkic people is common knowledge by now. The Uyghur
ethnic identity is stigmatized, and their religion is
demonized. Racism and cutting-edge technology are used as a
weapon of Chinese nationalism to exterminate my people, while
challenging human dignity and basic survival rights.
My sister, Gulshan Abbas, a retired medical doctor, is one
of these victims. She was abducted by the Chinese government in
September 2018 in retaliation for my speaking out about China's
human rights abuses in East Turkestan at the Hudson Institute.
China has allowed no contact with her since her disappearance
and has not even provided proof of life or her whereabouts.
China claims that these sprawling camps are humane vocational
job training centers. This is a lie. Detainees include medical
doctors, academics, businesspeople, professionals, as well as
young people and the elderly--none of whom need job training,
while researched reporting indicates these camps serve to break
people's spirit and turn them into an abundant supply of forced
labor.
My question is this: Who is the buyer of my sister's forced
labor? The Gap, L.L. Bean, H&M? Is my sister in one of your
contractors' factories? Are you complicit in China turning a
doctor into a textile worker as a forced laborer in your
factories? Nike, is one of your largest factories in China
using my sisters-in-law as part of its Uyghur forced labor from
Hotan? One of them is a nurse, and the other is a teacher. Were
they transformed by the camps into modern-day slaves to produce
your shoes? What about younger Uyghur women forced to work
thousands of miles from home so that they would not bear
children, like my third missing sister-in-law?
When my sister was taken by China, I had no idea that
finding her again would involve finding out that U.S. companies
are so shockingly complicit in such disappearances. Seventy-
five years ago companies like Siemens, BMW, and Volkswagen used
forced Jewish labor, and are now once again complicit in their
suppliers' use of forced Uyghur labor, making today's
concentration camps a profitable venture. But this time the
rest of the world's top companies have joined in such
complicity.
U.S. law requires Global Magnitsky sanctions on individual
offenders and prohibits any trade in products made with forced
labor. So who's preventing enforcement of the law? Has Xi
Jinping been granted veto power over U.S. laws? Exactly what
part of ``never again'' translates into not sanctioning the
Chinese perpetrators of today's concentration camps, and not
separating them from their enablers?
China's coronavirus response is highly concerning, as
Uyghur forced labor is being used as disposable to reopen idled
factories and to be sent to Wuhan. China's rigid totalitarian
reaction created this global pandemic. Today, China is failing
to empty its concentration camps for people's safety with the
current spread of Wuhan virus. It saddens me to see the venal
ruthlessness of the world communities, as they are idle against
this genocide of my people. Not only is China getting away with
genocide, it is getting rewarded with hosting the 2022 Winter
Olympics.
It angers me to see my sister and the other millions of
innocent Uyghurs becoming the human collateral of international
trade deals and the economic benefits. It worries me to see
China become a power able to strongarm the world with trade
threats, the power of the Belt and Road Initiative, debt-trap
diplomacy, and the manipulation in the United Nations.
Furthermore, China is bribing and leveraging some politicians,
the media, and scholars around the world and has successfully
silenced international condemnation of its shameful crimes.
What do you think is going to happen if this remains
unchecked? Continuing to do business as normal with China today
is being complicit with genocide and supporting the spread of
China's totalitarian communistic nationalism to the world.
History will remember those who acted, and those who failed to
do so. We are all responsible for what happens next. Thank you.
[Applause.]
[The prepared statement of Ms. Abbas appears in the
Appendix.]
Mr. Stivers. Thank you. Thank you, panelists, for those
compelling presentations. We'll now start the question-and-
answer portion of the event. First I'd like to recognize
Congressman Smith for on-the-record questions.
Representative Smith. Thank you so very much. Thank you to
this tremendous panel for what you have helped enlighten us
with, to provide additional details, too. I have a couple of
questions. And to Ms. Abbas, so sorry for your sister. And, you
know, the Chinese government is so cruel that not only do they
incarcerate people, and jail and torture people who speak out
in-country, but when someone speaks out here--and you worked
for Radio Free Asia--many of the journalists there have seen
their entire families rounded up and sent to these forced labor
camps. I'm not sure there are too many precedents anywhere in
history where that kind of massive incarceration--Rebiya Kadeer
has had her entire extended family--and she's not unique in
that--rounded up and put into these reeducation/forced labor
camps. And it's just--it's despicable. And for us to be
complicit in any way, shape, or form in like manner is terribly
wrong.
To Mr. Nova, I have a couple questions to you real quick.
You know, you talked about the auditors and the Achilles heel
in decades of auditors going to China, interviewing people. Not
just in Xinjiang, but elsewhere as well, coming back with
glowing reports. I chaired hearings in the past with Apple and
others, where we got the auditor's report and then
simultaneously we looked and we found out that it was nothing
but a sham. How many of those have been allowed into Xinjiang
in recent days? What--how seriously does anybody take an audit
now? And I'm so glad you have punched holes in the fact of the
false appearances of due diligence. You know, it looks great to
the shareholders. ``We did it.'' And you didn't do anything. If
anything, you enabled by doing this false audit.
Shelly, if I could ask you--and Shelly, it's great to see
Shelly Han. She worked with great distinction as a senior
staffer of the Commission for Security and Cooperation in
Europe when I chaired it. And she talked in her intro about
working on legislation. We did the Azerbaijan bill, and she was
the one who did yeoman's work on that piece of legislation,
which helped get political prisoners out of Azerbaijan. So
thank you for that. But you mentioned, again, and thank you for
all your recommendations, that we work actively with the
European Union. Would you also extend that to the African
Union, which increasingly has Chinese companies, and they bring
their own laborers in, as we know, and the OAS? Because we see
a huge presence of Chinese companies and the--government and
companies all over. And they're usually one and the same.
And finally, to Mr. Vogt, if you could just speak to the
surveillance state; we've never seen anything like this
throughout all of China. And it seems it's with particular
ubiquitousness--(laughs)--if there's such a word--in Xinjiang.
There are no labor rights. Both Democrats and Republicans here
in the Congress--I've chaired hearings on the fact that ILO
standards are broken with impunity by the Chinese government
all the time. And now we see with forced labor it's gone to a
lower degree on that order. What does the UN do? What does the
ILO do? What does the Human Rights Council do when these rights
are being violated with such impunity? And I thank my friend
for yielding and look forward to your answers.
Mr. Nova. It's impossible to know exactly how much auditing
is happening right now in the XUAR and exactly where, because
in addition to the Chinese government's strenuous efforts to
prevent information from coming out of the region, the auditing
industry itself is quite opaque. There's very little public
disclosure. But we do know auditing is happening. We know of
specific audits conducted at specific workplaces as recently as
late last year.
And it's important to note that as the pressure mounts on
the global apparel industry and other sectors, as the pressure
mounts on specific Chinese companies to take action with
respect to these issues, there will be more demand for auditing
because companies like Huafu Fashion and Esquel will need
something to show their customers. Brands will need something
to show their customers. And so it's critical for auditing
firms, for certification bodies, to understand that they cannot
now be engaging in labor rights audits in the XUAR. And if
they're doing so, they themselves are complicit.
This is why our organization joined with one of the leading
researchers on human rights in the XUAR, Dr. Adrian Zenz, to
send a letter this week to major auditing firms and
certification bodies asking them to commit as a matter of
corporate policy to suspending all auditing in the XUAR. And
we'll be reporting on the responses of the audit firms and the
certification bodies to that request.
Representative Smith. Thank you. Shelly.
Ms. Han. Yes, thank you. Congressman Smith, you know better
than anybody what it takes to get the Chinese government to
change, or not change. And I think that your question is
exactly right. It's not just getting the European Union. It's
getting every government we can, every industry, and every
country that we can, to speak out about this because that will
create the critical mass where China has to listen. So I think
we're hamstringing ourselves if it's only a U.S.-led effort.
Representative Smith. Thank you. Mr. Vogt.
Mr. Vogt. Thank you for those good questions. With regard
to the ILO, and to your underlying point, yes, I think the
violations of fundamental labor rights have been a problem
within China for a very long time. And this Commission in
particular has shined a light on that consistently. The ILO, to
this point, has recently taken up a case filed by the
International Trade Union Confederation around the violation of
freedom of association, in particular the retaliation, and
arrest and disappearance of workers around the Jasic Technology
case just a couple of years ago. And we've seen a real
tightening of the space in which labor activists can work under
the Xi Jinping administration.
I mean, the ILO as a body, obviously, does what its
constituents tell it to do. So I think certainly the U.S.,
within the ILO system, can be trying to move this issue within
the governing body and trying to make this a discussion which
obviously, as you mentioned, touches the whole world. There
needs to be a global response. And the ILO is well situated to
do something about it, if it is called upon to do so. So that
would be good. And equally with regard to the United Nations,
the U.S. and others--a leading voice within these global
institutions, putting this on the agenda is something strongly
needed.
Representative Smith. I would just conclude--and I thank my
friend for yielding this time--I mentioned earlier about the
trip to China, to Beijing, in 1991, in March. We literally
got--and the warden at Beijing Prison No. 2 couldn't believe we
got into this horrible prison camp where men had shaved heads;
they looked like concentration camp victims, which they were.
And we took the products back, went to customs enforcement
here, and got an enforcement ban. And it closed down that
gulag--only to be opened up somewhere else. So it was a
horizontal transfer.
But I say this because the superficiality of having an
MOU--time and time again when I and others would raise it with
both the Bush Administration, that's George Herbert Walker, and
the Clinton Administration, they said: But we have an MOU with
China on gulag-made labor, to enforce Smoot-Hawley. And it
wasn't worth, as I said earlier, the paper it was printed on,
because we tell them of something that we think is happening,
and then they investigate and give us a report. Good luck with
that.
It's superficial. And I'm afraid that we may see some kind
of response that would parallel that as this legislation makes
its way. You know, that's why the rebuttable presumption is the
core of this legislation. And I think we all have to keep our
eye on that ball so that whole region is sanctioned for the
importation of slave-made goods. And I thank you.
Mr. Stivers. Great. Thank you. Now we'll open it up to the
audience for questions for the panelists. We don't have a
roving microphone, so if you all could speak up when you ask
your questions, and also please identify yourself. And if you
work for an organization, please identify that organization
also. And of course, Commission staff should feel free to ask
questions also.
Who wants to be first? Louisa.
Q: Thank you. Louisa Greve from the Uyghur Human Rights
Project. Thank you all for very powerful testimony, and
everyone on the Commission for powerful questions, and a great
report.
My question is about the Congress responding to the overall
crisis, the persecution of the Uyghurs. Just yesterday there
are now 50 cosponsors of the Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act, S.
178, and with the original cosponsor, Senator Rubio, who was
here, it's now a majority. Could we have some comments perhaps
from Mr. Smith about the path forward to get that passed?
Representative Smith. Obviously, the legislation passed
here, you know, the original bill. I had introduced a facsimile
that was then overcome by the Rubio bill that came over. But it
had 127 cosponsors. You know, the actionable part is probably
what has been the problem with that legislation. It's a very
good--you know, the idea that sanctions would follow. The
problem with the Senate is the filibuster. The problem with the
Senate is holds that could be put on any bill. I mean, we have
400-plus bills pending over there. I have one on combating
anti-Semitism. Still hasn't moved. There are others that have
holds. It is an institutional problem that you need 60 votes to
do anything in the United States Senate.
So 51, clear majority. I'm for scrapping the filibuster at
the earliest possible time because it so inhibits good
legislation that often passes the House. And you might want to
speak to this as well. But that is the problem--supermajorities
for just everyday bills that make a difference.
Mr. Stivers. Yes. I don't have any other comment, except to
say that from Congressman McGovern's standpoint, he's pushing
to get it passed in the Senate as soon as possible.
Questions for the panelists? Back there.
Q: Hi. Rayhan Asat. I'm an attorney actually working on
this particular issue. I know that internationally there is
legislation. For instance, in the U.K. their (inaudible) Act,
and in Australia, which was inspired by this specific
legislation. Is it possible for us to mandate and require
companies to, on their labels, make sure they state that it is
ethically sourced? Is this something that is ethically sourced?
Mr. Nova. In theory, yes. And certainly--I agree with the
premise of your question, that there should be transparency and
disclosure. Of course, the great challenge in such an
enterprise would be verification. There is a massive auditing
industry, as we were discussing earlier, in the garment sector,
and in other sectors, in electronics. And its track record is
poor in terms of actually uncovering the reality of what is
taking place in workplaces. So I think a label without an
effective verification mechanism would probably only serve to
create the appearance of progress, rather than to create
progress. But the idea itself is sound. The challenge is: How
do you ensure that there's genuine verification and
enforcement?
In the case of the issue of what's taking place in the XUAR
and U.S. corporations in particular, we do have strong U.S. law
ready, and other law that is now in process. And so hopefully
we will see the law actually serve as an effective mechanism
for addressing labor rights and human rights issues in global
supply chains in other countries that are not normally
addressed via U.S. legislation.
Mr. Stivers. Thanks. Sophie.
Q: Hi. I'm Sophie Richardson from Human Rights Watch. Thank
you for the fantastic panel. Maybe if any of you could tell us
a little bit about what you think the prospects are either for
activating more consumers--since a number of the brands that
you've identified are obviously hugely popular ones--but also
about the possibility of mobilizing shareholders? Thanks.
Ms. Han. I can't talk about consumers, because that's not a
role that we play in terms of activating consumers. We
certainly hope that they're interested in the responsible
sourcing of the companies that they buy from. But in terms of
getting them to pay more attention to it, I'd have to defer to
other organizations who specialize in that.
In terms of mobilizing investors, I think that that's
something that certainly we've all been thinking about on all
issues. And I've been a little bit surprised that some
investors haven't taken this up more quickly. But it's a good
idea.
Mr. Nova. There is growing interest in the investor
community. And I think there will be action and pressure coming
from that community.
With respect to consumers, one thing that is clear is that
brands and retailers in the garment industry and beyond
understand that this issue carries enormous reputational risk.
That consumers do not want to buy products associated with the
horrors unfolding in Xinjiang. And corporations recognize that
that risk is growing as there is more attention and scrutiny,
partly as a result of the work of this Commission and many
other actors in this process, and an increasing recognition on
the part of brands and retailers that there isn't an
alternative to leaving.
Mr. Stivers. Next question?
Q: I'm Allison Sherlock from the Eurasia Group. Ms. Han,
you briefly mentioned poverty alleviation in China. Could you
elaborate a little bit on the relationship between China's
domestic poverty alleviation campaigns and forced labor? Thank
you.
Ms. Han. Sure. And I want to be clear, I used the term so-
called poverty alleviation, because I don't agree with the
terminology. It's a Chinese government term. And really it
serves as an excuse by the Chinese government to place Uyghurs
in jobs.
Q: Hi. Cathy Feingold, international director at the AFL-
CIO and deputy president at the global labor movement
International Trade Union Confederation. I want to thank
everyone today--the panelists, the great work of the staff who
did this report, and really just go on record for our support
for the legislation today. We just released a press release
about this and really want to reinforce our commitment to
working with everyone here. It absolutely will take working
with all of you in government, with the business community, and
with civil society to really solve this problem. We need to act
quickly. We need to take these great conversations that are
happening in places like this and really move to action. So
thanks so much for organizing this today.
Mr. Stivers. Thank you, Cathy. And thank you for the AFL-
CIO's support for the legislation. It's really appreciated and
a big boost. Next question.
Q: Hi. Max Gelber, Uyghur American Association. Mr. Nova,
you talked about alternatives and the difficulty with companies
identifying alternatives in their supply chains. Could anyone
on the panel comment a little further about that, and how we
overcome that immense challenge, especially when we talk about
way upstream when it comes to raw materials like cotton in the
Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region?
Ms. Han. Yes. It is--it's not something that most companies
are used to doing. I think after the Supply Chain Act was
amended in 2016 and began being implemented, companies realized
that they did need to start looking downstream in their supply
chains, or upstream, whichever way you want to look at it. And
so we've been doing quite a bit of work with companies on
helping them map their supply chains and understand how they
can talk to different suppliers. Most companies' responsible
sourcing efforts focus on tier one, which is the manufacturing
level, that's the factory themselves, because that's where they
have the contractual relationship, and thus the leverage with
their buyer with that factory.
Most companies don't have any contractual relationship
further down. So wherever the yarn is coming from, or wherever
the textile or the fabric is coming from, they don't have that
relationship. There are exceptions to that, but in general. So
for them to understand, that does take time. And it depends on
the size of the company whether or not they have the types of
resources to figure that out. But we're working actively with
companies to help them understand those relationships.
Mr. Nova. But only the brands and retailers themselves know
at a great level of detail how this question can be answered.
Their supply chains are not transparent enough for anyone
outside to have a full understanding. There is no question that
there are logistical challenges in terms of alternate sourcing.
And that's something all of us need to understand. It's a
practical reality. At the same time, the brands and retailers
have the ability to move quickly if their goal is to move
quickly. And what brands and retailers should be doing is
finding out just how fast they can move to extract themselves
from a situation in which every day within their supply chains
they're complicit in human rights abuses.
Q. Can I ask a followup? It seems to me, given that there's
forced Uyghur labor being transferred to work in factories in
greater China, rather than simply in the Xinjiang Uyghur
Autonomous Region, that even if you were to deem the whole
region as a no-go zone for companies as an explicit forced
labor zone, that wouldn't capture all, maybe not even a
portion. Can you talk about that a little bit?
Mr. Vogt. You're absolutely right about that. And yes, I
think that's why many groups have been calling for action to be
taken not only with regard to those factories that are
physically housed within the XUAR, but also recognizing that
those factories are outside the XUAR, and frankly it was the
subject of the APSI report that came out just very recently,
that identified a number of the brands that people have
mentioned today; that those are not necessarily factories in
the region but are government-transferred workers from the
region to factories throughout China. So absolutely, it needs
to be a comprehensive plan that weeds out the entirety of the
forced labor apparatus, wherever it may be in China.
Mr. Stivers. OK. Next question. Commission staff? Megan
Fluker, one of the authors of the Forced Labor report.
Q: Sorry. You don't have to turn. (Laughs.) This is mostly
for Mr. Vogt, but anyone can kind of jump in. I think that
we've rightfully been focusing on the impact of this on Uyghurs
and other ethnic minority workers. But I'm curious, how does
forced labor within global supply chains impact labor rights
internationally, and potentially impact workers in the U.S.?
Mr. Vogt. Right. I think--I don't have the estimate right
off the top of my head, but the ILO routinely puts out the
number of people who are in forced labor in any given year,
which is, you know, tens of millions of people. So this is
being brought to our attention in large part because of it's
the factor of government policy that is driving this, again,
based on people's religious or ethnic identities; that there
are millions of people around the world who are in forced
labor, trafficked for forced labor. And in many cases, they are
working for products that are eventually exported around the
world, including here to the United States.
And again, we've seen CBP in the last couple of years
obviously taking action not only with regard to China, but a
number of other countries. Certainly the Trafficking Victims
Protection Act could be much more robustly used to weed out
forced labor and trafficking for forced labor in supply chains.
As I mentioned, it was specifically amended in 2008 to really
address supply chain issues. Others have mentioned the
Magnitsky Act. There are a number of tools that are available
to us. We just need a concentrated plan and the political will
to do it.
Mr. Stivers. Next question?
Q: Hi there. Michael Sutherland with the Congressional
Research Service. I was wondering if anyone on the panel can
speak to the role Bingtuan, or the Xinjiang Production and
Construction Corps, plays in the forced labor in the region.
Thank you.
Mr. Nova. The Bingtuan, the XPCC, has historically, and
currently plays a massive role in the cotton industry in
Xinjiang, still controlling about a third of all cotton
production. And apart from the acute crisis of forced labor via
the internment camp system and the broader use by the Chinese
government of forced labor as a means of social control in the
XUAR, the XPCC has long operated its own prison labor system,
further exacerbating the situation for Uyghurs and others in
the XUAR.
It is an indication of how deeply embedded the garment
industry has been in the XUAR, that the Better Cotton
Initiative, an important industry organization that does
environmental and social certification of cotton farms, a
partner of many of the leading brands and retailers in the U.S.
who use certified cotton from BCI in their production--that BCI
up until a year ago, as recently as less than a year ago, had
XPCC as a main implementation partner for its program in the
XUAR. Now, to its credit, it's important to note that BCI
either has announced, or will later today, that it is
suspending its licensing and certification operation in the
XUAR. This is a significant step for the industry.
They're doing so because they recognize that there is no
way to do credible labor rights assurance under present
circumstances. And I think that move by Better Cotton
Initiative, by BCI, is going to be the beginning of a broader
and accelerating process of exit by the garment industry from
the XUAR.
Mr. Stivers. Congressman Smith.
Representative Smith. Just very briefly. Mr. Vogt, on the
issue of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act . . . as you
may know, I'm the author of the original TVPA and co-sponsor of
the Wilberforce Act in 2008, which Howard Berman was the prime
sponsor of. Is it your view that the Trafficking in Persons
office is not doing what it could do? You know, we need to know
what you really think on this. Ambassador Richmond I think is a
very, very credible and effective leader of the TIP office.
What more can we be doing? And what constructive criticism can
we bring back to them?
Mr. Vogt. Thank you. As you know, there are the civil and
criminal provisions of the Acts. You know, I think certainly
there is much more forced labor that is linked to goods that
are being imported into the United States, so I think,
certainly, more resources to the TIP office could help with the
focus on supply chains. I think much of the work of the office
has really been focused on sex trafficking, and obviously
that's a very important issue. Both with regard to forced
labor, and in particular forced labor in supply chains, I think
there could be more resources and more fruitful output in that
direction. We do have a migration specialist in my organization
who I can have come back with more ideas on this, but certainly
I think the resources would be useful.
Representative Smith. That'd be great. I'd be more than
happy to put together a meeting with him and his top people and
you to talk about that. Thank you.
Mr. Vogt. Sure. That'd be great. Thank you.
Mr. Nova. Rushan had a comment on the Bingtuan.
Ms. Abbas. Yes, I just wanted to add a couple things on
that so-called poverty alleviation and also on the Bingtuan.
The Uyghur economy has been completely destroyed by the Chinese
Communist regime. The Uyghurs' wealth, and houses, and land are
being redistributed to Chinese settlers. And Bingtuan has been
operating, as Mr. Nova said, for years under the name of
political prisoners and the different systems, and also even
long before that, forced labor has been something that the
Chinese government was conducting for years under the name of
hashar, which is taking the Uyghur farmers and the Uyghur
people out, filling quotas from the neighborhoods and towns;
just take them out, just make them work for free. So basically,
hashar, what the Bingtuan was doing, is all just modern-day
slavery that the Chinese government was getting away with for
years. Just wanted to add that. Thanks.
Mr. Stivers. Thank you. I'll take a moment to ask my own
question. When we bring up this issue with companies, we
usually get an answer that they can't possibly monitor every
aspect of their supply chain because it's too complex and we
just don't understand the complexities there. Or the other
answer is that it will take too long; it will take years to
actually shift some of these supply chains. How would you
answer that question?
Mr. Nova. When you ask the sourcing director of an apparel
brand or retailer, the person who organizes and runs the supply
chain, the question: How long will it take to get out of
Xinjiang--and indeed, this question is being asked within
companies, of the sourcing directors, by the executives within
the companies responsible for labor rights issues--the answer
you'll get is something like three to five years. But the
reason that's the answer is because the sourcing director is
hearing the wrong question. The question the sourcing director
is hearing is: How long would it take if the company wanted to
avoid all inconvenience, all cost, all supply chain
disruption--if the priority is the company's immediate
interests. That's not the right question at this juncture.
There's going to need to be some inconvenience. There is going
to be some cost. There is going to be some disruption. The
priority has to be compliance with the law and the human rights
of people in Xinjiang. And if a corporation makes that the
priority, then the question can be answered not in a matter of
years, but in a matter of months.
Mr. Stivers. Amy Reger, from the Commission staff.
Q: I have two questions for you guys. One is, are there
currently sufficient alternative sources to the XUAR for cotton
and yarn? And the second question is, what have the recent
experiences with how companies have reacted to the impact of
the coronavirus situation shown you in terms of these
companies' ability to deal with supply chain disruptions?
Ms. Han. Sure. Amy, I can't speak specifically to the world
picture for cotton production, if we're just looking at cotton.
But it is something that companies are looking at. And it will
create huge shifts in markets, I think. But what we're looking
at is, we want to make sure that as the shift takes place, we
don't want to inadvertently then create more human rights
issues in the places where companies now will shift their
purchasing. So if it's India, or somewhere in sub-Saharan
Africa, or somewhere else where they're going to be sourcing
this cotton, we want to make sure that labor standards are
respected there as well. So that's what we've been focusing on.
And then in terms of the coronavirus, I'm not sure that I
have a lot to say. I think it's another lesson for companies in
supply chain flexibility. I think we all as consumers have seen
what overreliance, maybe, on a market can do. But I don't have
anything specific related to coronavirus and the Uyghurs.
Mr. Nova. And quickly, on the issue of alternate sources.
The primary issue here is cotton. Yarn is significant in the
XUAR but it's still less than 5 percent of China's yarn
production. Cotton is a bigger issue, because it's 20 percent
of the global supply. It's also a particularly important
supplier of what's called extra-long staple cotton. This is
longer fiber, higher-quality cotton. It's used, for example, in
better men's dress shirts. But there are alternative sources in
general, and for extra-long staple. The two next-largest
producers of extra-long staple cotton are the United States and
Egypt.
There are sources around the world for the various types of
inputs that the industry needs. I agree with Shelly that
shifting to new sources means addressing human rights issues in
the countries that become more important sources. But necessity
is the mother of invention. And it is necessary for brands and
retailers to find these sources quickly and access them.
Ms. Han. And I would also just add that the human rights
issues that are happening in Xinjiang are not the same as those
that are happening in India, or Egypt, or even in U.S. cotton
production. And we know there are ways to overcome those using
our traditional responsible sourcing methods. Whereas in
Xinjiang we can't. So you know, even despite those
difficulties, we still think that it's necessary.
Mr. Stivers. Thank you. Questions from the audience?
Q: Hi. Max Gelber, Uyghur American Association. Are there
any companies that you can point to that these companies should
benchmark themselves against, and say, well, they did a really
good job, let me follow in their footsteps--historically or
what they're doing right now?
Ms. Han. I can't speak to specific companies. I would get
in trouble for that. (Laughs.) We have a lot of members who do
a lot of really great work. And so I really can't call out one
more. But maybe Scott can.
Q: Name a few?
[Laughter.]
Ms. Han. Yeah.
Mr. Nova. No, I mean, we're not aware of a company that
has, at least publicly, acknowledged that it's extricated
itself from the XUAR at every level of its supply chain. I do
think, though, that in the not-too-distant future, there will
be companies that step forward and make that commitment and set
a model for the industry for others to follow. I do think that
companies will step up. That there is a recognition within the
garment industry in particular that this is not a normal issue.
This is not the usual labor rights or human rights issue that
the industry confronts. This is unprecedented, it's
fundamentally different, and it requires a fundamentally
different response.
Mr. Stivers. Didn't Badger Sportswear----
Ms. Abbas. I was just about to say----
Mr. Nova. Oh! After the documentation of forced labor at
the Hetian Taida factory, which we contributed to--although
it's important to note that it was the Associated Press that
first found the connection between that factory and Badger
Sport. Badger Sport is a relatively small brand in the U.S.
that's a licensee of universities. They did agree, in response
to a report we produced, not to do any sourcing from the XUAR.
Badger understands that in the context of garment assembly.
It's unclear to us whether Badger has extricated itself at the
level of cotton, at the level of yarn. They may have. Their
supply chain is much smaller. But they did at least make a
commitment not to do any sourcing, as they conceive of it, in
the XUAR.
Ms. Han. And I would just add that just because you haven't
read in the New York Times that companies are doing something,
it is happening. It has taken time, but there are companies
that are well on their way to taking actions that they think
are appropriate for their supply chain. (Laughs.) But it is
difficult to talk about it publicly at this moment, simply
because they may not be completely there and there's other
considerations. So I think that just because you're not reading
about it doesn't mean it's not happening. And hopefully they
will--as Scott said, they will be talking about that
eventually.
Q: Name a few companies that may be highlighted instead of
just one?
Ms. Han. Yeah, sorry. (Laughs.)
Mr. Stivers. She'll be happy to highlight companies that do
so.
[Laughter.]
Ms. Han. Yeah. Yeah.
Mr. Stivers. Sophie? Sophie Jin from the China Commission.
Q: Hi. I wonder if the panelists could speak to what you
think appropriate remediation by the companies ought to be in
this situation, and also perhaps by auditors as well.
Mr. Nova. Do you mean at the level of specific workplaces
where violations are identified? Or do you mean in----
Q: For workers who are victims who have been harmed by
forced-labor practices.
Mr. Nova. Does someone else want to take that?
Ms. Abbas. I think in many companies maybe they are not
aware of what's happening, and they are sourcing factories
there. So it's--we are not here to try to bash them or try to
blame them for what's happening. But really we hope that now,
with the ASPI report, they are going to just end what they are
doing in our homeland. And this is, as I mentioned in my
opening remarks, it's complicity with genocide. They need to
realize that ``made in China'' right now is almost like ``made
with forced labor''--when you look at every company almost, in
other parts of China--they are sending a few hundred to a few
thousand Uyghurs as, let's say, cheap labor or slaves. So they
need to investigate, and they need to look into stopping doing
business as usual with China. That's something that every
company should consider. Thank you.
Ms. Han. You know, remediation is really, after the problem
is found, how do you fix it? You know, how do you know--OK, you
found it, you've got to fix it. And, you know, for us,
effective remediation has at least two key elements. And the
first one is that the worker who suffered the abuse is made
whole . . . that there's some sort of way that they're made
whole because of the abuse. And then the second is that the
company identify the root cause or the underlying problem, so
that it doesn't happen again, and they can fix that within--
with their supplier, or however that issue may have come up.
You know, just as we can't do effective due diligence in
Xinjiang, we also think that it's really difficult to do
effective remediation as well. And so the tools that we
normally have in our toolkit for working on these issues around
the world require--you know, China requires us to revisit them
and find out what new things--what new methods we might need to
effectively remediate it.
Mr. Nova. I agree with Shelly that just as the traditional
auditing mechanisms aren't viable in Xinjiang, neither are the
traditional industry remediation mechanisms viable within
Xinjiang. Which is why the only answer is to exit. I think the
situation with respect to factories elsewhere in China that may
have imported labor from the XUAR is somewhat different and
more complicated. And we could talk about that. But within the
XUAR, there is no means of remedy.
Mr. Vogt. And obviously the reason why we're calling for
brands to be pulling out from the XUAR is not simply for the
purpose of pulling out, but in the expectation that it changes
government policy, and that it would not be possible for the
government to continue this policy of reeducation and so forth,
and internment, if essentially they're losing hundreds of
billions of dollars as the industry moves elsewhere. So I mean,
one of the expectations is that this realignment of the garment
industry would have that impact. Obviously we would also expect
people to be speaking out on this issue as a reason why they
are pulling out.
Mr. Stivers. Great. Thanks. I think we have time for one or
two more questions from the audience. Luke Adams, another
member of the China Commission staff.
Q: Yes. We've talked a lot about what governments can do,
what businesses can do. But what about consumers? I know we're
all consumers in this room. And I think I don't speak just for
myself when I say there's a little bit of concern. How do you
know when you're purchasing something--is this made with forced
labor from China? Is there--what can we do as consumers to be
better purchasers of items?
Ms. Abbas. When we look at the history, now history is
repeating itself. The concentration camps in Germany, first
built in 1933, and then twelve years later claimed millions of
lives, while the world community continued to do business with
Nazi Germany, enabling Germany's economy to murder more people.
So now when we look at what's happening to Uyghur, Kazakh, and
the other Turkic people, the first concentration camp in China
was built under the Strike Hard Campaign in 2014. Six years on,
the people are still doing business with China, traveling to
China, buying ``made in China''--enabling China's economy to
murder more people and continue its police state. So everyone
should remember, when they see the label, ``Made in China,''
this is complicity with China's crimes against humanity,
genocide against Uyghurs. So just stop buying ``made in
China.''
Mr. Stivers. Thank you. Any last questions? Well, I'd just
like to thank you--thank you to the panelists for your
excellent presentations and for your important work on forced
labor and human rights in Xinjiang. Thank you to the China
Commission staff for their important work. And thank you all.
You all are experts on this issue in some way. Thank you for
your excellent work on this. And for more information on the
legislation that Congressman McGovern and Congressman Smith
will be introducing in the House--they should introduce that
today--and the Commission's happy to provide any more
information on that legislation as it moves forward through the
process. Thank you.
[Applause.]
[Whereupon, at 11:04 a.m., the roundtable was concluded.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
=======================================================================
Prepared Statements
----------
Prepared Statement of Rushan Abbas
Congressman McGovern, Senator Rubio, and distinguished members of
the Commission, thank you for this opportunity to testify before you
today on behalf of my own missing family members and the millions of
Uyghurs disappeared into China's concentration camps and the world's
largest government-directed human trafficking forced labor network.
What is happening to Uyghurs and other Turkic people in West China
today is common knowledge by now. The Uyghur culture and ethnic
identity is stigmatized, and religion is demonized. Racism and cutting-
edge technology are being used in combination to exert control over all
Uyghurs and they become victims of Chinese nationalism.
My sister, Gulshan Abbas, a retired medical doctor, is one of these
victims. She was abducted by the CCP on the 11th of September 2018, in
retaliation for my speaking out at the Hudson Institute, a DC
conservative think tank, about China's human rights abuses in Xinjiang.
China has allowed no contact with her since she disappeared and has not
even provided proof of life or her whereabouts.
According to testimony from former inmates, detainees are subjected
to mental and physical torture. China claims that these sprawling camps
with barbed wire and armed guard towers are humane vocational training
centers. This is a lie. Detainees include medical doctors, academics,
professors, businesspeople, writers and professionals, as well as young
children and the elderly, none of whom need job training. The Uyghur
economy has been completely destroyed, and the government is
distributing Uyghurs' wealth and re-allocating their land to Han
Chinese.
China's final solution to the Uyghurs is disturbingly clear and
simple:
1. In addition to our religion, to attack our cultural norms, and
our language and ethnic identity.
2. To silence Uyghurs who have a voice and who are respected in the
community. The CCP is systematically targeting the Uyghur elite with
the goal of totally purging anyone who might produce, extend, or defend
Uyghur ideologies and values.
3. To eradicate Uyghur identity by forcing Uyghur girls and women
to marry Han Chinese. By forcing Uyghur women to share beds with Han
Chinese men while their husbands are in the camps/forced labor
facilities, the CCP is orchestrating mass rape. To unconditionally
supervise Uyghurs by inserting Han Chinese cadres inside their homes
under the ``Double Relative'' program, thus exposing women to sexual
abuse. How are more people not disturbed by this? Where are the
advocates, celebrities, and strong voices for the women's rights
movement and the feminist movement?
4. To target Uyghur children in an effort to wipe out the next
generation. Over 500,000 Uyghur children have been sent to orphanages
where they are indoctrinated in Chinese communist ideology. According
to an RFA report, these kids are locked up like farm animals and many
suffer severe injuries which oftentimes result in death.
5. To send Uyghurs to facilities where they are subject to forced
labor, in essence making them slaves. As per a recent report by ASPI,
Uyghurs who, as the Chinese claim, ``graduate'' from concentration
camps graduate into forced labor.
Well-researched reporting indicates these camps serve to break
people's spirit and to turn them into an abundant supply of forced
labor.
So, my question is this: Who is the buyer of my sister's forced
labor? The Gap, L.L. Bean, Calvin Klein, or H&M--is my sister in one of
your contractors' factories? Have you checked for the forced Uyghur
labor the Australian Strategic Policy Institute's report found? Are you
complicit in China turning a doctor into a textile worker as a forced
laborer in your factories?
Nike, is one of your largest factories in China using my sisters-
in-law as part of Uyghur forced labor from Hotan? One was a nurse and
another a teacher--were they transformed by the camps into pliant
workers and delivered as advertised under ``semi-military management''
to produce your shoes? And what about younger Uyghur women forced to
work thousands of miles from Xinjiang so they will not bear children,
like my third missing sister-in-law.
The Bingtuan, the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, is
most certainly by far the world's largest trafficker in persons for
both forced labor and sexual exploitation. Yet it is somehow not
sanctioned under existing U.S. laws. Why not? It's because China makes
due diligence impossible in Xinjiang. U.S. Customs and Border
Protection should immediately recognize Xinjiang as a Forced Labor Zone
and sanction any company enabling Xinjiang to profit from slave labor.
When my sister was taken by China, I had no idea that my search for
her would involve finding out that U.S. companies are so shockingly
complicit in disappearances. Seventy-five years ago, companies like
Siemens, BMW, and Volkswagen used Jewish forced labor and are now once
again complicit in their suppliers' use of forced Uyghur labor, making
today's concentration camps a profitable venture. But this time the
rest of the world's top companies have joined in such complicity.
U.S. law requires Global Magnitsky sanctions on individual
offenders and prohibits any trade in products made with forced labor.
So who is preventing the enforcement of the law? Has Xi Jinping been
granted veto power over U.S. laws? Exactly what part of ``Never
Again!'' translates into not sanctioning the Chinese perpetrators of
today's concentration camps and not separating them from their
enablers?
China's coronavirus response is highly concerning as Uyghur are
being used as disposable labor to reopen idled factories and to be sent
to Wuhan. It is China's authoritarian reaction that created this global
pandemic. Its actions to deny, keep quiet, misinform, punish
whistleblowers, and take a security crackdown approach, rather than one
that saves as many lives as possible, is precisely what we should not
emulate! Today, China is failing to empty its concentration camps for
people's safety.
It saddens me to see the venal ruthlessness of the world community,
as they stand idle against this genocide of my people. Not only is
China getting away with genocide, but it is getting ``rewarded'' with
hosting the 2022 Winter Olympics. It angers me to see my sister and
millions of other Uyghurs become the human collateral of international
trade deals and economic benefits. It worries me to see China become a
power able to strongarm the world with trade threats, the power of the
Belt and Road Initiative, debt-trap diplomacy, and manipulation within
the UN.
Furthermore, China is bribing and leveraging some key politicians,
the media, and scholars around the world and has successfully silenced
international condemnation of its shameful crimes. What do you think is
going to happen if this remains unchecked?
Continuing to do business as normal with China today is to support
the spread of China's totalitarian communistic nationalism to the
world, and to be complicit in genocide. History will remember those who
act and those who fail to do so. We are all responsible for what
happens next.
Thank you.
[all]