The Uyghur Policy Act of 2025 aims to address human rights abuses against Uyghurs and other minorities in China by strengthening U.S. coordination, promoting diplomacy, and advocating for access and oversight in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.
Young Kim
Representative
CA-40
The Uyghur Policy Act of 2025 expresses the sense of Congress regarding China's treatment of Uyghurs and other minorities, and it outlines several actions for the U.S. government to take, including coordinating with allies, supporting human rights advocates, and ensuring access to language training for Foreign Service officers. The Act requires the Secretary of State to develop strategies to address human rights concerns in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, advocate for access to detention facilities, and promote the release of prisoners detained for their ethnic or religious identities. It also directs the President to advocate for Uyghur rights within the United Nations.
The Uyghur Policy Act of 2025 lays out a multi-pronged approach aimed at addressing the ongoing human rights situation facing Uyghurs and other ethnic and religious minorities in China's Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR). It formally states Congress's findings that the People's Republic of China (PRC) is suppressing these groups and calls for an end to these practices, including mass detention, forced labor, and transnational repression. The core of the bill focuses on directing U.S. government actions, enhancing diplomatic efforts, and increasing visibility on the issue.
A significant chunk of this bill focuses on the State Department. Section 4 mandates the creation of policies and programs specifically to support Uyghurs and protect their distinct identity. This isn't just talk; it directs the State Department to actively connect with Uyghur leaders, push for the release of political prisoners (naming specific individuals like Ekper Asat and Dr. Gulshan Abbas in Section 3), and coordinate aid for rights advocates. It also requires working with other countries, especially through forums like the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, to build international pressure. Critically, Section 8 mandates Uyghur language training for Foreign Service officers and requires at least one Uyghur-speaking diplomat assigned to U.S. posts in China – a practical step to improve on-the-ground understanding. However, the enhanced coordination efforts outlined in Section 4 have a built-in expiration date, set to terminate five years after the Act becomes law.
The Act pushes for greater transparency and accountability. Section 7 requires the Secretary of State to develop a strategy within 180 days to pressure China into closing detention facilities and allowing unrestricted access for media, researchers, and international bodies like the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. At the United Nations itself, Section 9 directs the U.S. Permanent Representative to actively oppose any efforts to block scrutiny of the XUAR situation and to support appointing a special rapporteur to monitor and report on abuses. To help amplify Uyghur voices, Section 5 authorizes $250,000 per year for fiscal years 2025-2027. This funding, drawn from the existing United States Speaker Program, is earmarked for human rights advocates to speak at public forums, particularly in Muslim-majority countries. It's important to note, however, that Section 6 explicitly states no new money is authorized overall; implementation relies on existing appropriations, aside from the specific speaker program funds.
So what does this mean practically? For U.S. diplomacy, it means a more structured and mandated focus on the Uyghur issue, complete with language capabilities. For Uyghur advocates, it offers modest funding for public diplomacy efforts. For international relations, it signals a continued U.S. commitment to pressuring China on human rights in Xinjiang, potentially impacting broader diplomatic dynamics. The requirement for strategies and reports (like the one detailed in Section 7) aims to ensure follow-through, though the effectiveness hinges on execution and sustained international cooperation. The reliance on existing funds (except for the speaker program) and the five-year sunset on certain coordination efforts raise questions about long-term resourcing and impact.