The human cost of our cotton

Last week, the Coalition to End Forced Labour in the Uyghur Region called on world leaders gathering for the G20 Summit to ban products made with Uyghur forced labour. The northwestern province the Chinese government calls Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region is home to the Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslim-majority ethnic groups. Some 20 per cent of the world's cotton and 45 per cent of solar-grade polysilicon (used in nearly all solar panels) is produced there. Leaked documents show that nearly half a million Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities have been forced to labour in the cotton fields. And recent research at Sheffield Hallam University revealed that all Xinjiang's polysilicon manufacturers report participation in "labour transfer" or "labour placement" either directly or by their suppliers.

The US has taken action, banning shipments of goods implicated in forced labour and passing the Uyghur Forced Labour Prevention Act despite pushback from companies such as Nike, Apple and Coca-Cola. Last month, it was reported that the EU Commission also proposed an import ban. But although Ursula von der Leyen name-checked China's authoritarian ruler president Xi Jinping to praise newly established emission-reduction goals, she referred only vaguely to "25 million people out there" who are victims of forced labour. Subsequent statements from commission departments show a lack of consensus on who would enforce a ban, and a push for a watered-down version.

It is important, both pragmatically and as a statement of solidarity with those being exploited, not to allow products we already know are made with forced labour within our markets. But such bans are not enough when the Chinese government is ready to put a heavy fist on the other side of the scale.

Last year, Nike was reported to source 8 million pairs of shoes yearly from a factory thousands of kilometres from Xinjiang, staffed by hundreds of Uyghurs who received the same “patriotic education” reported in internment camps. A few months ago, seven of Apple’s suppliers were linked to forced labour; all but one were located outside Xinjiang. Both companies have defended their practices. More than 80,000 Uyghur workers were transferred to other regions between 2017 and 2019; state media has trumpeted a plan to move 100,000 “surplus labourers” out of Xinjiang from 2018 to 2020.

Cliff Taylor: Rural and urban Ireland will fight over who pays the price in climate debate

---

David McWilliams: Who do we want to be, the Greenland Vikings or their Inuit neighbours?

---

Light Entertainment - An Irish voice from the Charge of the Light Brigade

---

The Irish Times view on harassment in the arts sector: extensive and deep-rooted

---

This "labour transfer" further disrupts family and community ties, makes constant surveillance and "patriotic education" cheap and easy, and prevents young Uyghurs from marrying, having children, or freely practising their religion. And it muddies the waters so that any and every Chinese product might be tainted by forced labour somewhere in the supply chain. The EU's dismissal of concerns about forced labour in Xinjiang before concluding a massive investment deal with China at the end of last year indicates how unlikely it would be to countenance broader bans or restrictions on imports from China generally.

Destruction

Uyghur forced labour is not just about maximising profits. It is a means to an end. The Chinese government vehemently denies that that end is the systematic destruction of Uyghur ethnic, linguistic, cultural and religious identity and ultimately their existence as a distinct group. But is there any other purpose to discern in its actions towards the Uyghurs?

Mass internment has been proven many times over, by testimony from former detainees, documentation leaked from the Chinese government, and independent research based on satellite imaging.

Outside the camps, nothing is too personal for state intervention. Uyghur women describe being closely monitored, made to take regular pregnancy tests, have IUDs inserted or be permanently sterilised, and punished with huge fines for having too many children. (Official statistics show that the birth rate in ethnic minority areas of Xinjiang fell by nearly 50 per cent from 2015 to 2017; it since appears to have dropped further, but the data is no longer made available.)

The Civil Servant-Family Pair Up policy fêted in state-run media, “paired” 1.1 million civil servants with 1.69 million ethnic minority citizens in Xinjiang in just its first two years – meaning frequent home visits, meals and overnight stays, including sharing beds with female hosts. When officials are present in private homes, posting selfies of themselves helping children with homework, they are heavily encouraged to look out for suspicious behaviour, like owning multiple Qurans, avoiding alcohol and pork, excessive prayer, and general “untrustworthiness”. These, along with violating strict birth-control policies and seeking a passport, are among the reasons recorded for detention in “re-education” camps.

Ignorance may be bliss, but knowledge is responsibility. We cannot end the persecution of the Uyghurs tomorrow. But as individuals, we can check where cotton products and solar panels come from before buying. As consumers, we can avoid brands implicated in forced labour (a challenge for influencers: make the Nike swoosh and the Apple logo uncool). And as citizens, we can let our Government know its pandering to China’s government is a betrayal of Ireland’s supposed solidarity with the persecuted peoples of the world.

Blánaid Ní Bhraonáin is a recent law graduate