The focus of these sanctions is the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, commonly referred to as Xinjiang, in northwest China. Developing this inland region has been a priority for China, transforming the traditionally agricultural region into a manufacturing hub that takes advantage of its rich deposits of minerals and oil. Xinjiang is a major producer of solar panels. The region is also responsible for 86% of Chinese cotton production; over 20% of the world’s cotton comes from Xinjiang. 

Multiple countries, including the United States, have accused China of committing genocide against the Uyghur people. The Uyghurs are a majority muslim population living in Xinjiang. They speak their own language and view themselves ethnically linked with Central Asian nations like Mongolia, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan. The Uyghurs have committed no crime other than being part of the ethnic minority in China. Data shows that 12% of the adult population of Xinjiang was in a camp or prison between 2017-2018. This translates to 1.2 million Uyghur and Turkic minority adults. Many of those imprisoned are held in forced labor camps and factories. The BBC reported in December 2020 that a half a million people were being forced to pick cotton in these camps.

It is, of course, important to note that China has emphatically denied human rights abuses in Xinjiang.

The United States has made it clear it plans to sanction more companies in China that continue to be associated with forced labor. “One of our highest priorities for 2023 is to add additional entities to that list,” said Robert Silvers, DHS undersecretary for strategy, policy and plans. The Department of Homeland Security is also focused on convincing other countries to adopt similar enforcement plans. “We are very aware based on credible reporting that there’s a significant number of companies that are operating in Xinjiang that are engaging in these abhorrent practices, and we want to name them, and we want to ensure that their goods do not come into this country.”

The postal codes and companies that trigger warnings for the UFLPA is likely to expand over the coming months. However, Silvers indicated that it is possible for companies to remove themselves from the banned list, if they are able to prove that they are no longer engaging in practices that violate the UFLPA.