VANCOUVER—Scholars of Chinese government policy are questioning the University of British Columbia’s decision to host a talk by a Chinese academic, accusing him of laying the ideological foundation for the internment of Muslims.

While one senior academic fellow says Hu Angang’s appearance at the university’s Institute of Asian Research last month should be investigated, UBC said not allowing him to speak would have undermined the school’s ability to challenge the status quo.

Hu, an economist and public policy expert at China’s Tsinghua University, considered the country’s most prestigious institution, appeared at UBC in April for an hour-and-a-half talk titled China: The Nexus of Economy, Climate Change and Renewable Energy.

He is known, among other things, for co-authoring the 2011 paper Second Generation Ethnic Policy, which advocated for the integration of China’s ethnic groups to form one national identity.

China expert Charles Burton of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, also a former diplomat, considers the document sinister.

“He has provided the ideological basis that justifies the internment and cultural genocide of the Uyghurs and Kazaks and other Turkic Muslim people in western China,” said Burton, who has focused on Chinese politics as an associate professor at Brock University. “He has a terrific amount to answer for.”

Read more:

The ‘forgotten’ Canadians detained in China

Canada tainted by Huawei’s human rights abuses, researcher suggests

Human rights complaint against a Chinese-language media company by journalist who claims he was fired for his political opinion will go forward

Over a period of weeks, Star Vancouver attempted to contact Hu about the concerns around his work. Hu did not respond to emails sent to him directly, to the Institute for Contemporary China Studies at Tsinghua University, of which he is the dean, and to his publisher.

Burton said Chinese academics usually seek to create papers that are useful to the government, as those are the ones that get funding. Since these papers are “written with a purpose,” he said, they are often used to craft policy.

For years China allowed special consideration to ethnic minorities to preserve their culture, spread the country’s growing wealth and promote national harmony, he said. Hu’s paper argued such policies should end and ethnic minorities should unify to become one identity with the country’s dominant Han majority, which makes up about 92 per cent of the population.

Internationally, China has been condemned by human-rights groups for its ethnic policies, particularly in Tibet and Xinjiang.

In a report earlier this month, Human Rights Watch said 13 million ethnic Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in China have been subject to “mass arbitrary detention, forced political indoctrination, restrictions on movement and religious oppression” since 2016. The organization estimates at least one million people are being held in political “education” camps.

James Leibold, an associate professor and expert in Chinese identity and race at La Trobe University in Australia who has written about Hu, said he “wouldn’t be keen” to have him speak at his institution.

“What the second-generation policy called for was a complete U-turn away from an accommodationist approach to a more assimilative approach to kind of forge an anvil of unity,” Leibold said. “The end result if you carry forth that policy would be the erosion of ethnic minority cultures, languages, religions and traditions.”

Though there’s nothing to show Hu’s work was used directly in crafting China’s current ethnic policies, Leibold said, “He’s certainly influenced the direction that China’s ethnic policy has taken.”

Hu’s co-author, Hu Lianhe, now works for the United Front Work Department in Xinjiang, according to Leibold. The UFWD is a government agency tasked with forwarding the Chinese Communist Party’s objectives.

In August last year, Hu Lianhe defended the actions of the Chinese government in Xinjiang to the United Nations, saying: “There is no suppression of ethnic minorities or violations of their freedom of religious belief in the name of counterterrorism.”

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

He added: “Those who are deceived by religious extremism ... shall be assisted through resettlement and education.”

But the controversy around Hu Angang doesn’t stop at his former writings on ethnic policy.

Last summer he was also the subject of a scathing letter circulating on social media by alumni of Tsinghua University who demanded his resignation for his “triumphalist” remarks regarding China, according to the South China Morning Post.

The letter slammed him for remarks exaggerating China’s greatness and declaring China is now ahead of the United States both economically and technologically, reported the Hong Kong newspaper.

Professor Paul Evans of the Institute of Asian Research (IAR) argued the decision to host Hu was based on free speech. Evans said Hu was invited to speak about China’s approach to climate change and economics on the heels of his latest book.

He said several UBC colleagues have met Hu over the years and regard him as a “major figure in Chinese intellectual circles.”

“On these and other matters, not everyone agreed with all of his views,” he wrote in an email. “But in keeping with our tradition of free speech, his views were listened to respectfully and then debated.”

Burton said he’d like to know more about how the scholar was invited to speak at UBC in the first place.

“The fact that they allowed this man to give a presentation and added credibility to him as a scholar is certainly something that the university should investigate,” he said. “As clearly it was a gross violation of their duty to do due diligence before they invite speakers to come on campus.”

The IAR’s Centre for Chinese Research, which hosted the talk along with the political science department, has a biography page for Hu. It lists nearly 40 articles he’s written going back more than 15 years. The Second Generation Ethnic Policy is not included.

Western universities seem to have a lax attitude toward people who don’t conduct most of their work in the English language, Burton said, but it doesn’t mean they shouldn’t do careful background checks before hosting speakers.

“Certainly, they’ve been responding to concerns about people like Jordan Peterson and American white supremacists, so why are they not applying the same vetting procedures for speakers who write in non-English languages?” he said.

UBC’s provost and vice-president academic, Andrew Szeri, said in a statement the university does not silence controversial opinions.

“The fundamental issue here is what the university stands for,” Szeri said. “I believe, and the Vancouver Senate statement on Academic Freedom clearly articulates, that UBC must be an open and inclusive forum, where members of the university have the freedom ‘to engage in full and unrestricted consideration of any opinion.’”

Read more about: