http://centralasia.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2008/04/16/xinjiang-terrorism-chinas-exaggerationfabrication/ The World Affairs Blog Network Sat, 07 Nov 2009 22:09:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 http://centralasia.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2008/04/16/xinjiang-terrorism-chinas-exaggerationfabrication/comment-page-1/#comment-2504 Central Asia » Blog Archive » Afghanistan: Progress, Problems, and Passageways Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:20:32 +0000 http://centralasia.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2008/04/16/xinjiang-terrorism-chinas-exaggerationfabrication/#comment-2504 [...] On a more somber note, Richard Weitz, who I have referenced before, attended a briefing by counterinsurgency specialists Bruce Hoffman and Seth Jones titled “America’s Counterinsurgency Conundrum: Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Quest for Stability.” Jones and Hoffman reported their findings from their experiences with the US 82nd Airborne Division in four Afghan provinces bordering Pakistan. The two specialists argue that the US military has improved its counterinsurgency methods of late, but that much more needs to be done to defeat the Taliban and bring stability to the region. Hoffman laments of the lack of resources given to the US effort by its government, arguing that way too much is being spent on Iraq. Both specialists argued for the international community to see this Islamic insurgency in Afghanistan and Pakistan as an ‘integrated whole.’ In other words, one is directly connected to the other and for success to be reached progress needs to occur on both sides of the border. Lastly, Hoffman calls this battle America’s ‘most acute foreign policy challenge.’ [...] [...] On a more somber note, Richard Weitz, who I have referenced before, attended a briefing by counterinsurgency specialists Bruce Hoffman and Seth Jones titled “America’s Counterinsurgency Conundrum: Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Quest for Stability.” Jones and Hoffman reported their findings from their experiences with the US 82nd Airborne Division in four Afghan provinces bordering Pakistan. The two specialists argue that the US military has improved its counterinsurgency methods of late, but that much more needs to be done to defeat the Taliban and bring stability to the region. Hoffman laments of the lack of resources given to the US effort by its government, arguing that way too much is being spent on Iraq. Both specialists argued for the international community to see this Islamic insurgency in Afghanistan and Pakistan as an ‘integrated whole.’ In other words, one is directly connected to the other and for success to be reached progress needs to occur on both sides of the border. Lastly, Hoffman calls this battle America’s ‘most acute foreign policy challenge.’ [...]

]]> http://centralasia.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2008/04/16/xinjiang-terrorism-chinas-exaggerationfabrication/comment-page-1/#comment-2489 The New Dominion » Xinjiang Links Galore. Sat, 19 Apr 2008 06:54:15 +0000 http://centralasia.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2008/04/16/xinjiang-terrorism-chinas-exaggerationfabrication/#comment-2489 [...] Speaking of plots and concealment, via the Foreign Policy Association’s Central Asia Blog we find a brief article by Hudson Institue scholar Richard Weitz on the recent Olympic terrorism plot unveiled and busted by Chinese authorities a few weeks ago. Real or not real? In a weirdly structured article Weitz spends ten paragraphs giving the usual “Xinjiang background” spiel, which is understandable since presumably most of his intended readers are not familiar with Xinjiang, but then he spends a hasty two paragraphs on the terrorist plot, basically saying since Xinjiang is of high strategic value, it is in China’s best interest to fabricate the terrorist plot, ergo, the terrorist plots were probably fabricated. Patrick Frost at the CA Blog argues that while the logic of skepticism is sound, the threat of terrorism in Xinjiang is real especially given the track record of violent terrorism in Xinjiang: with 200+ recorded incidents in the past few decades, surely some were fabricate, but conversely, surely some were real, correct? Between Frost and Weitz, I think the Chinese government’s strategy in withholding proof and evidence becomes a little more clear: by doing so, we’ll never know if it was a legit terrorist crackdown, nor will we know if it was a fabrication. I’m sure some sort of ancient Chinese wisdom (Sun-Tzu probably, if I bother to look) dictates that it is better for the others to not know either way than to know for certain something is real or not real. [...] [...] Speaking of plots and concealment, via the Foreign Policy Association’s Central Asia Blog we find a brief article by Hudson Institue scholar Richard Weitz on the recent Olympic terrorism plot unveiled and busted by Chinese authorities a few weeks ago. Real or not real? In a weirdly structured article Weitz spends ten paragraphs giving the usual “Xinjiang background” spiel, which is understandable since presumably most of his intended readers are not familiar with Xinjiang, but then he spends a hasty two paragraphs on the terrorist plot, basically saying since Xinjiang is of high strategic value, it is in China’s best interest to fabricate the terrorist plot, ergo, the terrorist plots were probably fabricated. Patrick Frost at the CA Blog argues that while the logic of skepticism is sound, the threat of terrorism in Xinjiang is real especially given the track record of violent terrorism in Xinjiang: with 200+ recorded incidents in the past few decades, surely some were fabricate, but conversely, surely some were real, correct? Between Frost and Weitz, I think the Chinese government’s strategy in withholding proof and evidence becomes a little more clear: by doing so, we’ll never know if it was a legit terrorist crackdown, nor will we know if it was a fabrication. I’m sure some sort of ancient Chinese wisdom (Sun-Tzu probably, if I bother to look) dictates that it is better for the others to not know either way than to know for certain something is real or not real. [...]

]]>