Chinese Jihadist Ilham Tohti is not a Political Dissident

Ilham Tohti

Amnesty International, PEN and a number of other leftist groups have been begun campaigns in defense of Ilham Tohti and his students, a Muslim activist they describe as a “moderate scholar”.

Obama Inc’s Jen Psaki, who can’t be bothered to speak about genuine political dissidents detained in the Muslim world, rushed out to demand that, “Chinese authorities to immediately account for the whereabouts of Mr. Tohti and his students and guarantee Mr. Tohti and his students the protections and freedoms to which they are entitled under China’s international human rights commitments, including the freedom of expression.”

Good luck with that.

They claim that he is suffering without food. In reality he chose not to eat because prison authorities wouldn’t provide him with an Islamic diet.

Most of all they rapidly gloss over why he was arrested describing him as a supporter of separatism.

Ilham Tohti was detained after brutal Uighur Islamist terrorist attacks. Even his public statements repeatedly made excuses for Islamic terrorism and played the old blackmail game.

After the Tienanmen Square he said that, “The best thing would be for the authorities to take a step back and examine what drives people to such desperation in the first place.”

“Every time something happens, the government responds with one word: pressure. High pressure, high pressure, and even greater pressure. This leads to greater resistance and more conflict,” Tohti said by phone. “The government should reflect and take responsibility for what is happening in Xinjiang now and in the future.”

“The government should know that in Xinjiang there is a peaceful resistance to violence, as well as a violent struggle against violence. Some of it has nothing to do with terrorism or separatism,” Tohti said.

“A lot of people just cannot go on this way. They can’t turn to legal channels or the media; they have no way to protect their own rights or express themselves. What are they supposed to do? Some of them choose confrontation and agitation,” he said.

Most of us recognize such rhetoric as typical of the political arm of terrorist groups. CAIR, for example, commonly traffics in it in the US.

The premise is if you don’t strike a deal with us, you’ll have to deal with the terrorists, when they are actually one and the same.

The United States has freedom of speech. China doesn’t. And it has much less tolerance for terrorism. By arresting Ilham Tohti they are sending a message that they won’t be playing a game of Good Jihadist, Bad Jihadist.

By arresting Ilham Tohti, China is stating that it won’t negotiate with Muslim terrorists, the real ones or their “moderate” front men.

Ilham Tohti played the political arm of the Jihad, threatening the authorities with more terrorism unless they met their demands. That’s what these quotes amount to. Liberals can’t be expected to see it because they’ve long since become numbed to the implications of their own rhetoric.

China chose to crack down more instead of negotiate. Considering where negotiating with Islamic terrorists has gotten us, who is to say that they’re wrong.

  • Pete

    I have heard of two criticism of Chinese policy in relation to Xinjiang that have some truth to them

    One is that at a place of work ethnic Han get promoted to managerial positions and Uighurs do not.

    The other is that there are many ethnic Han migrating to Xinjiang.

    The Uighurs as an ethnic group cannot control who lives in Xinjiang. The American people cannot control who lives in America. In America we have quotas for university admissions, and job hiring & job promotion. Attorney General Eric Holder is willing to sue at the drop of a hat under the theory of disparate Impact. They do not have to prove intent. There may be no ill intent. It does not matter to Holder.

    If it is sauce for the goose, it is sauce for the gander.

  • AnonymousInChina

    “Most of us recognize such rhetoric as typical of the political arm of terrorist groups.” Actually, some of us recognize such rhetoric as typical of groups such as, you know, the Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence. What a shameful piece of ignorant nonsense. Why the writer, affiliated with an institution with “Freedom” in its name, would choose to carry water for the Chinese government and slander Tohti in this way is beyond me. Is supporting Chinese state repression now supposed to be a “conservative” position? You’ve come a long way, baby. This is not a left-right issue. It’s just a fact issue. This is an utter misrepresentation of Tohti, whom I have personally met and spoken with.

  • 阿一

    is this guy paid by China or Israel????? Tohti’s families and friends should sue him for describing him as a terrorist.

  • 阿一

    even many Chinese think that Mr. Tohti is a Uyghur professor and a dissident. why this NY-based so-called journalist for some freedom organizations target him as a terrorist? it seems that many people attempt to hijack the US and China to confront with the Islamic world in order to benefit for Israel. check his background and you will know what i am talking about.

  • Joe Hamilton

    What a pathetic piece you have written Mr. Grünfeld ! Who do you think you are ? You know what you can do with that book you are supposedly writing !!!!

  • Robin Munro

    This article is contemptible nonsense. Ilham Tohti is acknowledged by all shades of well-informed opinion on contemporary Chinese politics to be a rare voice for genuine moderation and dialogue between the Han and Uyghur peoples. His persecution and arrest by the Chinese authorities is an affront to human dignity, and will only serve to deepen the political crisis in China’s far north-westerly region, Xinjiang. Any responsible editor would have strangled this article by Daniel Greenfield at birth, as it is so logically and factually deficient.

    For example, in what possible sense can Ilham Tohti’s highly restrained and moderate comments (as cited above by Greenfield) in the aftermath of the June 4, 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown be construed as “mak[ing] excuses for Islamic terrorism and play[ing] the old blackmail game”? As an on-the-spot observer of the June 3-4 massacre in Beijing, I can assure Greenhill’s editor and readers that Islamic terrorism had precisely zero to do with the events on question. Not even the Chinese government has ever alleged or even hinted at any such connection.

    Thankfully, Daniel Greenfield stands alone in his bizarre conspiracy rant on Ilham Tohti. Greenfield comes across clearly as a Muslim hater who cannot distinguish between people of the book (the vast majority) and people of the sword (the fringe minority). Bigoted squibs like the above article of his do nothing but tarnish the reputation of U.S. journalism today.

  • Paul Mooney 慕亦仁

    I’m shocked and outraged that such nonsense can be published. What were the editors of this web site thinking? I’m amazed that biased writing such as this could be published anywhere. I’m a veteran of reporting on China for 25 years, and was an accredited journalist there from 1994 until 2012. Greenfield is really writing about something that he knows nothing about. His ignorance of the situation in East Turkestan and his bias toward Ilham Tohti, one of the most respected scholars in China, is mind-boggling. In fact, when I first read this, I assumed it was a commentary in the People’s Daily, which is not a positive reflection on the writer. I was shocked when I looked for the name of the author and found out he was not a Communist mouthpiece.

    As Greenfield doesn’t speak or read Chinese, and has no expertise regarding China, he has no idea of what Ilham Tohti stands for. I’ve read a great deal of Ilham Tohti’s writings and he’s no terrorist, but a voice of moderation. He made a serious effort to distance himself from Uyghur groups abroad in order to maintain his independence and to prevent himself from being wrongly accused of being a radical. If Greenfield could read Chinese, and not only rely on Party propaganda, maybe he wouldnt have made such a fool of himself. If a moderate voice of someone such as Ilham Tohti is silenced then there’s no hope for Communist Party rule in China.

    Greefield says people are glossing over why he was arrested. Does Greenfield have inside information on this? What’ the basis for such a claim? Has the Communist Party presented even a shred of evidence to prove that Ilham Tohti was a terrorist? No, not at all. Greenfield is apparently relying on Communist propaganda, which is shameful for someone who claims to be a scholar engaged in serious research.

    Please tell us where Ilham Tohti has made excuses for Islamic terrorism? He’s pointing out the reality and the Communist Party should thank him for his constructive advice.

    Ilham Tohti’s comments about government pressure are not a defense of terrorism, but a description of the reality in East Turkestan, Tibet and Inner Mongolia, and I’ve written and spoken about this myself many times in the past. The government is failing to reflect on what it’s doing wrong.Shouldn’t the CCP examine why more than 130 Tibetans have set fire to themselves over the past few years? And why violence is on the rise in East Turkestan, a place that didn’t really see any high degree of terrorism in the past? Tsering Woeser, a prominent Tibetan poet and commentator, and a close friend with Ilham Tohti, wrote a book last year about self-immolations in China, and she pointed to the fact that Tibetans had no channels to seek justice or voice their concerns. When people have their backs to the wall, they’ll adopt drastic measures.

    After all, the problems are increasing because of Beijing’s ruthless control of the area. I’ve travelled throughout East Turkestan and I’ve recorded and reported on the harsh abuses of the Muslim population there, which has until recently been quite moderate, Communist Party exaggerations of terrorist incidents aside. Talk to any serious scholar around the world who focuses on Uyghur issues and they’ll tell you this. If Mr. Greenfield was really an expert on radical Islam, he be aware of this.

    Greenfield quotes Ilham Tohti:

    “A lot of people just cannot go on this way. They can’t turn to legal channels or the media; they have no way to protect their own rights or express themselves. What are they supposed to do? Some of them choose confrontation and agitation,” he said.

    I don’t know how Greenfield can write that “This rhetoric is typical of terrorist groups.” Isn’t Ilham Tohti just talking about the basic rights that we as Americans supposedly treasure? Are people in China not also due the same respect we expect as Americans?

    Greenfield has this all wrong. The premise is that if you continue to harshly abuse people and restrict their religion, and allow no channel for people to get justice, the problems will only get worse. Beijing should thank Ilham Tohti.

    Ilham Tohti is no Muslim terrorist and it’s outrageous that Greenfield makes such a claim. He owes Ilham Tohti and the readers of this web site an apology.

  • Josh Stein

    This is the most manipulative, intellectually dishonest piece of hogwash I’ve ever read. Bravo, Mr. Greenfield. You have a promising career awaiting you with the Chinese government, which uses the same laughable manner of propagandizing.

    • Paul Mooney 慕亦仁

      Amazing that Daniel Greenfield, a writer for this web site, would be a sympathizer for the Communist Party of China. Who would have thought the nationalist right wing of American politics would be a propaganda tool for the Communist Party.

  • alexfranquelli

    The author clearly has no clue what he’s talking about.