Newsroom /

Unfit to Print: Rubio Blasts New York Times for Withholding Uyghur Genocide Info.

The Senator Wants Answers on Docs that Potentially Link Xi Jinping to Atrocities.

Photo for: Unfit to Print: Rubio Blasts New York Times for Withholding Uyghur Genocide Info.

Key Points

  • In 2019, the New York Times printed a story on China’s human rights abuses in Xinjiang.
  • More than 400 pages were obtained from a government whistleblower.
  • Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) wants all pages released – but NYT insists it will not publish them.

Back in 2019, the New York Times printed a bombshell report reviewing 403 pages of internal CCP documents discussing the crackdown on ethnic minorities in Xinjiang. According to the Times, the papers offered “a striking picture of how the hidden machinery of the Chinese state carried out the country’s most far-reaching internment campaign since the Mao era.”

The report was chilling; a wakeup call for the international community. For the first time, Americans learned of Xi Jinping’s call for “absolutely no mercy” in China’s efforts to control the Uyghur population —pages and pages of violent directives, surveillance strategies and more.

A truly shocking report – but was it the whole story? Marco Rubio isn’t so sure. Years later, the Senator is still demanding the Times release all of the documents received from the whistleblower.

According to Fox News, “Rubio again requested the Times answer inquiries he first submitted last month that questioned its failure to release in full 403 pages of leaked documents – including a 2014 secret speech by Xi that ordered the rounding up of Uyghur populations.”

“Critically important information was contained within the hundreds of pages that were hidden—and continue to be hidden—from the American people and governments across the globe,” Rubio wrote to The Times.

Rubio specifically wants more information around the revelation of Xi Jinping’s order that “those who should be seized should be seized, and those who should be sentenced should be sentenced.”

“To sit on this information that we know that they’ve had for at least two and a half to three years is really concerning, and it just tells you this is a selective release of information they possess,” Rubio told Fox News.

“My fear is, as damaging as this revelation has been to the Communist Party of China, after all this time there might be additional things in there that are damaging,” Rubio says. “[The documents] might even imply that our political leaders are aware of what has been happening there for some time and made arrangements not to discuss it.”

The Times insists it will not publish the papers in full in order to protect the identity of the whistleblower. But now that point may be moot, as the Uyghur Tribunal has released a nearly-identical (although incomplete) set of papers to the public.

“Did the Times consider simply transcribing and making the full documents public or releasing the full documents to a select group of experts, as the Uyghur Tribunal has just done, given the importance of these documents, to assess and help stop an ongoing genocide?” the senator questioned.

“I would like to remind you that the New York Times is still withholding nearly 86 pages of critical documents that could inform the American people, policymakers, and business leaders of critical information surrounding Xi’s direct involvement in atrocities,” Rubio added.

It’s no secret Rubio wants repercussions for China’s human rights violations in Xinjiang; the Senator pushed for a provision in the $770 billion dollar National Defense Authorization Act that prohibits the U.S. from buying products made in forced labor camps by Uyghurs.

And, according to recent polls, most Americans likely support him in that policy push.

“A recent Economist/YouGov poll found that 69 percent of Americans believe China is either an enemy or unfriendly to the United States,” the Washington Post reports. “A Gallup poll finds 79 percent of Americans view China unfavorably, with 41 percent viewing it very unfavorably.”

What are you waiting for, New York Times? Release the pages.