Ahmet Tümer

The Uyghur issue is no longer merely a human rights topic; it has become a global case that tests the norms, legal capacity, and moral consistency of the international system. An issue of this scale and complexity cannot be managed through individual reactions or temporary agendas, but rather through institutional, sustainable, and strategic frameworks of thought.

It is precisely at this point that the role of think tank institutions becomes decisive.

Think tanks are non-state actors that nevertheless feed state-level strategic reasoning. They produce policy, shape narratives, guide decision-makers, and construct legitimacy frameworks in the international public sphere. For the Uyghur cause to be defended effectively and sustainably at the global level, institutions operating in this field must go beyond conventional report-writing and establish multi-layered strategic networks.

In this context, Center for Uyghur Studies is not merely a research center; it holds the potential to become an academic, analytical, and political legitimacy hub for the Uyghur issue. However, for this potential to be fully realized, the institution must be actively and institutionally integrated into the global think tank ecosystem.

The key reality here is clear: the Uyghur issue advances not through statements of goodwill, but through institutionalized and sustainable cooperation.

Building a Global Think Tank Network: Where to Begin?

At this stage, the first strategic step to be taken is clear. The Center for Uyghur Studies must sign formal strategic partnership agreements with think tank institutions around the world, without discrimination by country and without confining itself to specific regions, political blocs, or alliance structures.

These partnerships should not be symbolic. On the contrary, they must include concrete outputs such as joint working mechanisms, information and data sharing, and collaborative report production.

Through such a network, the Uyghur dossier would cease to be the voice of a single institution and instead become a shared agenda of numerous international think tanks. This would render the issue both stronger and more resilient.

Joint Production: From Visibility to Depth

The second phase is not merely about articulation, but about producing together. The international system gives far greater weight to jointly authored, documented, and interdisciplinary knowledge production than to individual statements.

For this reason:

• Joint reports should be produced in collaboration with international think tanks. These reports should address not only human rights violations but also forced labor, supply chains, international law, security, and geopolitical implications.
• Through joint conferences and roundtable discussions, the Uyghur issue should be brought into the analytical space of multiple disciplines.
• Beyond digital content, printed publications and academic compilations should be produced in order to build a lasting institutional memory.

Historic Responsibility and Leadership

The natural responsibility for this entire process rests on the shoulders of Abdulhakim Idris. He is not merely an advocate; through decades of experience, he has repeatedly demonstrated his analytical thinking capacity and strategic intuition.

What is expected here is not merely the articulation of the Uyghur issue. The true expectation is the ability to transform this issue into a permanent agenda item within the international think tank ecosystem.

This is not an easy task. However, history shows that major causes have critical turning points. And those moments require strong institutional leadership.

The analytical intelligence, networking capacity, and ability to correctly interpret institutional language that Abdulhakim Idris possesses can elevate the Center for Uyghur Studies into a permanent and taken-seriously actor within the global think tank landscape.