I was rereading Robert D. Kaplan’s “The Man Who Would Be Khan” about Seargent Wilhelm and the good work he is doing in Mongolia (sorry, no link—subscribers can read the article at TheAtlantic.com) and found this juicy tidbit on the future of terrorism in Central Asia:
[Mongol’s first priority is] securing borders not against a conventional military threat from China (such security would be impossible) but against illegal border incursions, criminal activities to finance terrorism, and transnational terrorism itself, particularly by the Uighur separatists of western China. Aided by the Chechens and the broad militant Islamic network, Uighur extremists represent the future of terrorism in Central Asia.
Woah, that’s quite a statement. Central Asia hands, do you think he’s correct?
Here’s how I see it: having been to Xinjiang (albeit just for ten days), I saw that some Uighur’s are very discontent and the Han Chinese are very racist. There are tensions, perhaps similar to what Soviet Central Asia was like in the 1970s. But when it comes down to it, independence is largely a fascination of the Uigher elite and inteligensia, not the average people. The area is developing slowly but surely. I saw more economic activity in Urumqi than in Almaty, Kazakhstan (and the later is often called the most kickin’ place in former Soviet Central Asia). I feel a romantic attachment to Uighur independence and autonomy, and a desire—based in national self-interest—to screw China at every chance I get. But I’d name Ferghana Islamists and Taliban remnants first and put Uighurs as a distant third at best if I was asked to name the future of terrorism in Central Asia. Am I wrong?
ALSO: this via Saru, the East Turkestan Information Center.

Comments to this entry
Nathan
April 26, 2005
6:02 pm
If there is to be a rise in Uighur terrorism, one can definitely point to totalitarianism and lack of opportunity as the cause. While you point out that there is enormous economic activity in East Turkestan, again I ask, how does the village look? The area is quickly becoming Han, and Han receive the benefits of the growth with a "Uighurs need not apply" sign hanging up all over the place. (A friend of mine on the way back from living in the area was told right after she arrived that she was to no longer speak to Uighurs - she was there, in the eyes of her overseers, to benefit the Han.) It'd be one thing if the growth was raising all boats at an equal rate...
mark safranski
April 26, 2005
7:04 pm
Which is not to say the Chinese won't someday provoke a widespread revolt but so far the animosity is more potential than active
praktike
April 26, 2005
7:42 pm
Nathan
April 26, 2005
8:27 pm
Alas!
Curzon
April 26, 2005
8:39 pm
Dave
April 26, 2005
9:25 pm
Mutantfrog
April 26, 2005
9:30 pm
Curzon
April 26, 2005
9:47 pm
MF -- yeah, but remember there are "12 Chinese citizens in Guantanamo captured in Afghanistan, I doubt they're anything but Uyghur, no?":http://www.style.org/campdelta/
praktike
April 26, 2005
10:09 pm
Curzon
April 26, 2005
10:18 pm
Simon World
April 27, 2005
3:00 am
Bill at By Dawn's Early Light thinks India is choosing America over Europe and France Josh at One Free Korea links to a Westerner's experience in the Pyongyang Soccer Riot Curzon at Coming Anarchy and Praktike at Liberals Against Terrorism both exce...
Rex Rufus
April 27, 2005
10:30 pm
Dave
April 28, 2005
12:06 pm
a) They really are
b) The US military doesn't know what it's talking about
c) The comment is intended for the Chinese government
And it might be all three. I've never heard any rumors the past two years of any attacks by anybody on anything except for the bus that blew up. There have been reports from outside Xinjiang of attacks and attempts on military targets within the province - not exactly something I would hear from my local nan seller. So maybe 1 is true and there are some attacks but on non-civilian targets and since this is China, information on attacks on military targets will be highly secret.
Then there's the possibility the US military doesn't know anything and Xinjiang is a black hole when it comes to intelligence. This is possible, like when my friend gave a paper on Xinjiang while doing his MA and had two US intelligence agents in the audience pepper him with questions. He had visited Xinjiang for about a week.
Then there's the possibility that since this is about US military involvement in a country bordering China, maybe the focus on Uighur extremists is more political - share a goal with China so as to maintain a more cooperative relationship with the PRC.
If there are any Uighur extremists, my view is that they must be pretty underground and learned a few things on keeping quiet and secure cells - because the PRC is not giving anybody much of a chance to organize anything independently in this province - Han or Uighur.
Curzon
April 28, 2005
12:15 pm
Thanks as always for the "on the ground" perspective.
Mutantfrog
April 28, 2005
1:35 pm
Dave
April 28, 2005
4:16 pm
nabetz
June 10, 2005
4:54 pm
I have a fair number of friends/family in northern Mongolia and I've never heard them speak of a Uigher problem. One of them--rather well informed--didn't even realize that there were such a thing as Uighers in Mongolia. So, if the Uighers are going to be a source of terrorism in Mongolia, by all appearances the folks in Mongolia aren't that concerned about it. Which makes me wonder whether it's a real problem or not.