hinese authorities will never learn, said The New York Times in an editorial. They keep trying to "stamp out protests by repressed minorities"—such as Tibetan Buddhists and, this week, Muslim Uighurs—instead of working "toward political solutions that give Uighurs, Tibetans, and other minority groups more autonomy over their lives. Beijing’s rulers will never achieve the stability they covet until they deal with the root causes of these problems."
Washington certainly hasn't helped matters in China's Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region, said Eric C. Anderson in The Huffington Post. The Bush administration, in its rush to launch a global war on terrorism, branded an obscure Uighur group as terrorists. "In one fell swoop Washington blessed Han Chinese racism and granted Beijing a license to hunt Uighurs at will."
"If China does have a terror problem, continuing to anger its Muslim population is not the way to confront it," said Daniel Blumenthal in The American. And it certainly can't blame foreigners for the unrest, because "the West barely bats an eye about China’s repression." So the question is—after last year's violent uprising in Tibet, and now the Uighur demonstrations—"can we really call China a stable country?"
THE WEEK'S AUDIOPHILE PODCASTS: LISTEN SMARTER
- How my boyfriend and I learned to live on one income
- He said he was leaving. She ignored him.
- Affirmative action is doomed. Here's what progressives should do about it.
- Why the poor's investment of choice is so alarming
- 31 TV shows to watch in 2014
- Why Texas Republicans may want to cool the anti-Obama land-grab talk
- Why China's Communist Party is headed for collapse
- Why atheism doesn't have the upper hand over religion
- How to make perfect fried rice in 6 easy steps
- Why conservatives see rural America as the 'real' America
Subscribe to the Week