Please read the original post.

In anticipation of counterarguments from the Anti-PRC crowd, I am making this most to give my responses to potential objections to my findings.

“The immigrants from China are not Kazakhs”

This postulates that the non-ethnic Chinese immigrants that arrived in Kazakhstan are not ethnic Kazakhs since my original post did not definitively prove that. Now, with deeper research on the Kazakhstani source, I have come up with more conclusive evidence to prove that the immigrants are indeed Kazakhs.

First the Kazakhstani source defines 2 groups of countries immigrants come from.

CIS countries and “other countries” which means non-CIS countries. The sum of the total of arrivals from CIS countries and the “other countries” are equal to the total to the number of arrivals from “External migration - arrival by all flows”

Now, if we combine both the arrivals from China and Mongolia since they are both the largest source for Kazakh arrivals from non-CIS countries, we see that it mostly correlates with the number of Kazakh arrivals from “Migration with other countries - arrival”.

China -Blue, Mongolia - Red

қазақтар - Kazakh As we can observe particularly from the years of 2013 to 2021, most of the immigrants are from China rather than Mongolia. And the number of immigrants from China correlate heavily with the number of Kazakhs arriving from other countries.

Blue - Kazakhs from other countries, Orange - Immigrants from China

We can include that most immigrants from China to Kazakhstan are Kazakhs.

“The drop of immigrants in 2017 to 2018 proves restriction of movement”

This counterargument postulates that the 2017 to 2018 drop of immigrants proves that there is a restriction of movement.

First off, that drop could have been caused by some other factor rather than just restriction of movement and does not necessarily prove it. Second, like what I said in my first post, the issue is that the does not line up if the freedom of restriction movement claims. Which state that it began with passport confiscations and restriction from 2015 becoming harsher in 2016 to 2017. This is not supported by the immigration data which demonstrates the opposite with immigration increasing from 2015 to 2017. Furthermore, there is no more freedom of movement claim for the years of 2018. Basically, there is no given new harsher freedom of movement restriction to explain as to why the number of immigrants would only drop in 2018 rather than 2017. So, it is likely that these passport confiscations where overblown and are not an attempt at freedom of movement restriction. Lastly, given how harsh security is claimed in Xinjiang by the report, literally claiming that the Chinese government has the ability to track every ethnic minority, why was the drop only around 50% that does not seem like immigration became “extraordinarily difficult” or “impossible”, surely the government has the ability to reduce that number to 0. Also, after 2018 it begins to slowly increase until 2021. So, in summary, given that still thousands of ethnic Kazakhs were still able to leave China casts doubt that the PRC was doing any actual attempts at freedom of movement restrictions.

For the last counterargument I do not have a conclusive answer to, which is:

“China forced Kazakhstan to fake the data”

Although, at the end of the day it is just speculation until any actual evidence can be provided.

“China forced Kazakhstan to fake the data”

This one is self-explanatory.

If that were the case, wouldn’t Chinese media begin using this Kazakhstani data as a common talking point against Xinjiang claims. Isn’t that the point of faking data is to use it for propaganda and to convince others. Why is it only me who seems to be the only person who found this.

Also, if China did fake the Kazakh data, then why would they add a drop between 2017 and 2018 which could be used by opponents to claim freedom of movement restrictions.

Source of Kazakhstani data

Amnesty Report link ↩︎ Refer to “Restrictions on former camp detainees’ freedom to leave the country”