The Parliament of the City of Amsterdam votes to use “East Turkestan” instead of “Xinjiang”
The vote has marked history, although the mayor opposed the decision to the decision. A commentary on “Amsterdam lonely uudur”.
by Abdurehim Gheni Oighour
On April 9, 2025, Stephan Van Baarle, the leader of the Denk party in the Dutch parliament, proposed to replace the name “Xinjiang” with “East Turkestan”. The proposal required the Dutch government to use “East Turkestan” instead of the “Xinjiang” in all official communications related to the region. He pointed out that “Eastern Turkestan” is the historical name, while “Xinjiang” is considered a colonial term, and that the Uighurs prefer the name “East Turkestan”.
The Dutch Parliament, made up of 15 parts with 150 seats, requires more than 50% – or at least 76 seats – to pass a proposal. Although the proposal was supported by parties such as Groenlinks, PVDA, D66 and CDA, it was rejected because the leading political parties, prioritizing diplomatic and economic relations with China, opposed it. He failed to guarantee the 76 votes required. Despite the rejection, the proposal sent a strong political signal to the Chinese government and paved the way for a historic political debate to the Amsterdam municipal council.
On July 10, 2025, Suleyman Koyuncu, member of the Parliament of the City of Amsterdam of the Denk party, presented a proposal entitled “Those who recognize oppression recognized the East Turkestan”, pleading for the use of “East Turkestan” instead of “Xinjiang”. The proposal stressed that “Eastern Turkestan” reflects the historical and cultural identity of Uighurs, is favored by the Uighur diaspora, and that the use by the Chinese government of “Xinjiang” (which means “new territory”) is a colonial term which denies their identity.
The Parliament of the city of Amsterdam, made up of 13 parts with 45 seats, requires more than 50% – or at least 23 seats – to pass a proposal. The proposal to use “East Turkestan” instead of the “Xinjiang” was supported by PVDA, Groenlinks, D66, Partij Voor from Dieren and Denk, obtaining 26 votes and adopting the motion. Thanks to this historical political decision, the Parliament of the City of Amsterdam approved the use of “East Turkestan” on the colonial term “Xinjiang”, rejecting the designation by the Chinese government of the region with a name whose meaning designates a Chinese “new territory”.
Suleyman Koyuncu said about this historic decision: “Today, Amsterdam has not simply chosen a name; He declared his solidarity with a people confronted with oppression. He recognized the historical and cultural identity of Uighurs. This decision is a headlight of hope for all those who fight for human rights, freedom and cultural identity. ”
Unfortunately, this historic decision, a source of pride for the inhabitants of East Turkestan, was opposed to the veto by the mayor of Amsterdam, Femke Halsema, who argued that “East Turkestan” has a separatist connotation and is not an internationally recognized political name. This veto deeply injured the diaspora of East Turkestan.
On July 11, I invited Suleyman Koyuncu to my “Uyghur Teahouse Talks” program for a live discussion on the meaning of this historic decision and the reasons for the veto of the mayor Femke Halsema. The discussion can be seen here.
During the discussion, I asked Suleyman Koyuncu if the organizations of East Turkestan in the Netherlands could protest against the veto of Mayor Halsema. He replied that the veto could come from his lack of understanding of the Uighur Genocide and the history of the Uighur, suggesting that Uighur organizations in the Netherlands could express their dissent by writing letters. Inspired by his words, I immediately called my website and my social media platforms for all Uighur organizations and East Turkestan in the Netherlands to come together and protest urgently. I also noted that on July 28, 2025, marked the 11th anniversary of the Yarkand massacre.
In this context, I announced plans for a demonstration before the parliament of the city of Amsterdam to publish a declaration against the decision of the mayor. I asked why the Chinese government calls Tibet “Xizang” while the rest of the world uses “Tibet” without separatist implications. I pointed out that we strongly protested the protest of the declarations of the mayor Halsema, who undermine the national pride of the oriental Turkestanis, and asking me why the Chinese government labels the “Eastern Turkestan” as a separatist while Tibet does not make any accusation of this type despite a similar historical context.
In any case, the adoption by the Parliament of the City of Amsterdam of the name “East Turkestan” marks the first time that a local parliament in a Western country officially recognizes this name, creating a historic turning point in the oriental movement of Turkestan and the Uighur Identity struggle. This decision, made at a time when the continuous genocide of the Chinese government and crimes against humanity against Uighurs are systematically criticized by the United States government, Western countries, the European Union, the United Nations and NGOs such as Amnesty International, sends a powerful political signal to China. It serves as a direct response to the efforts of China to impose the name of “Xinjiang” on the international community, demonstrating that the rights of the Eastern people of Turkestan to preserve their identity are recognized on a global scale. This decision inspires hope among Uighurs and clearly signals the rejection of the oppressive policies of China.
In summary, the historical political decision of the Amsterdam Parliament is a political arrow drawn from the colonial policies of the Chinese government. It serves as a strong signal in the Netherlands and in the international community, supporting the Uyghours, it is enough to fight against the colonial policies of China and to mark an important stage in the recognition of their historical identity, ensuring a proud place in history.
