The Return of Cultural Genocide?

The Uyghur Minority in China: A Case Study of Cultural Genocide, Minority Rights and the Insufficiency of the International Legal Framework in Preventing State-Imposed Extinction

“…12 Article 2 of the 2003 Convention recognizes the significance of protecting the 'intangible cultural heritage' of groups, which may consist of "the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills." 13 These UNESCO Conventions recognize that "the destruction of both tangible (such as places of worship) as well as intangible (such as language) cultural structures" (Bilsky and Klagsbrun 2018) would have devastating effects on the continued existence of minority populations. It is these elements of cultural heritage and existing cultural practices that, although protected by international legal instruments, are most often the targets of cultural genocide practices.…”

“…The bond between culture and minority groups included in all of the above-mentioned instruments clearly demonstrates that the practice of cultural genocide is intrinsically linked to minority groups. Lemkin himself emphasized that "the essence of genocide was cultural-a systematic attack on a group of people and its cultural identity; a crime directed against difference itself" (Bilsky and Klagsbrun 2018). It is this difference in culture which separates and distinguishes a minority group from the majority population and often is targeted in the one of the most severe forms of minority discrimination-cultural genocide.…”

“…While cultural genocide can manifest itself in many ways, one practice is identifiable as "forced assimilation policies towards a group" (Bilsky and Klagsbrun 2018), which, as the next section will show, has been the foundation of the Chinese approach towards the Uyghur minority throughout history. Thus, while it is the treatment of the Uyghur minority in recent years that has sparked calls of cultural genocide from the international community, the following section will outline the historical context of abuse of the Uyghur minority and their culture in China.…”

“…While discussion of the amendment of the definition of genocide has not yet arisen, the jurisprudence of the ICC and the ad-hoc criminal tribunals have become "symptomatic of a growing awareness of the limits of international law in regard to cultural genocide" (Bilsky and Klagsbrun 2018). For example, the case of Prosecutor v Krstic, 82 which saw the ICTY hand down its first prosecution of the crime of genocide, recognized that practices of "ethnic cleansing became genocide" 83 in the instance of Srebrenica.…”

“…In addition, destruction of cultural property during times of armed conflict constitutes a war crime under the jurisdiction of the ICC and in 2016, the case of Prosecutor v Al Mahdi 84 resulted in a sentence of 9 years for this war crime. In doing so, the court "rendered its first verdict that deals entirely with cultural destruction" (Bilsky and Klagsbrun 2018). These decisions have demonstrated that the ICC and the ad-hoc tribunals appreciate the importance of culture and recognize its destruction as a criminal offence.…”