askchapo

Do you mean the bit before where it says "2017-2019 and potentially thereafter"?

Of course interviews are few and anonymous, and information is scarce: much of the premise of the report is that it's hard to get access, and that anyone known to be giving testimony will be at risk of harm.

What you are doing is interpreting based on the report, and on other evidence - but the discussion earlier and elsewhere in this thread is that the UN report itself goes against the genocide claim, and that people just don't read it. But it seems to me, if one is to simply read it, it's clear the UN believes there were, and probably still are, serious and systematic human rights violations against the Uighurs.

As to 'genocide' as a term, I do think it's fashionable - a buzz word - like 'terrorism', often bandied around when the author wants people to feel the thing is truly serious and unpardonable, but not always with good care as to the meaning. Hence it gets often argued about with respect to various events, even in cases when the main facts of the event is mostly undisputed.