【24h】

Letters

机译:字母

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

You claim that "genocide" is the wrong word to describe the horrors of China's actions against the Uyghur population ("How to talk about Xinjiang", February 13th). Genocide is not a word that should be used lightly. You recognise that, as defined by the UN convention (and indeed by international law and American law), genocide does not necessarily entail the immediate mass slaughter of a group. Destruction of the group (in whole or in part) must be the intended result, but this may be achieved in a number of ways. In the case of the Uyghurs, in terms of the legal test, allegations include killings, causing serious bodily or mental harm, deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to destroy the group by way of concentration camps, forced labour and other atrocities, imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group and forcibly transferring Uyghur children to another group. These acts are supported by evidence of the specific intent to destroy this ethnoreligious group, a specific intent that can be inferred from the pattern and systemic nature of the atrocities.
机译:您声称“种族灭绝”是描述中国对UYGHUR人口的恐怖的错误词(“如何谈论新疆”,2月13日)。种族灭绝不是应该轻轻用的词。您认识到,根据联合国会议(以及确实由国际法和美国法律)所界定,种族灭绝不一定需要立即屠杀一组。对组的破坏(全部或部分)必须是预期的结果,但这可以以多种方式实现。就法律试验而言,指控包括杀戮,造成严重的身体或精神危害,故意造成按集中营地,强迫劳动和其他暴行摧毁集团的生命条件,强迫劳动和其他暴行,施加措施为了防止本集团内的出生,并强行将Uyghur儿童转移到另一组。这些行为得到了摧毁这一民族主义团体的具体意图的证据,可以从暴行的模式和全身性质推断出一种特殊的意图。

著录项

  • 来源
    《The economist》 |2021年第9234期|共1页
  • 作者

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号