While the Adrian Zenz stuff is suspect, there is actually a lot of very good faith analysis of the situation in China by people who (very much unlike the vast majority of people on this website) speak Chinese, have been to China, and actually want to encourage a balanced narrative about the CCP. A couple examples that immediately come to mind are some great articles from Made in China:

https://madeinchinajournal.com/2020/10/05/china-xinjiang-india-kashmir/ https://madeinchinajournal.com/2019/07/09/good-and-bad-muslims-in-xinjiang/

What these articles do a good job of doing is laying out the basis for current policy in Xinjiang (ie shift the centers of cultural and ideological power in order to quell separatist tendencies, terrorist or otherwise) while also showing the clear geneology these policies have with US war on terror rhetoric and broader shifts in the regime against ‘Islamist threats’. You will often here spouted that Muslim countries do not critique China and most of the critique comes exclusively from the NATO powers. This is true, because the former have clear economic ties with China that they are in no position to sever or put in jeopardy, and the US-backed NATO clique is escalating rhetoric against China. You will note that very few Muslim countries said anything about Kashmir, with the exception of Imran Khan in Pakistan, where the stakes are too high to not say anything. And I very much suspect most people on this chat will not approve of India also pursuing policies to defeat ‘terrorism’ and ‘separatism’ via manipulation of the education system, military occupation, securitization etc. The point here is that we should oppose all ideas that Americans are trying to help Uyghurs or promote freedom or whatever nonsense they spout. But to assume immediately that the opposite (that China simply wishes nothing more than to educate its backward populations to defang terrorism) reeks of frankly a colonialist mentality that suggests that wherever ‘Islamist’ politics is gaining traction, there is no material basis in this politics beyond ‘Muslims are mad and must be put in schools to cure them of their disease’. We must understand the material reasons as to why discontent is simmering in Xinjiang (and elsewhere - it is hardly the only restless border region).

Put another way, British policy during their war on Afghanistan in the 19th century was rather simple: Pathans have a violent, radical understanding of Islam, and the only language they will ever understand is that of terror. In other words, justification for a war program that consisted of burning villages, stealing children and putting them into schools to undo their ‘radical indoctrination’, etc. Obviously China isn’t going around butchering anyone (the initial takeover is a slightly different story, but anyway). But there is something to be said about the commonalities in governmental technologies - you securitize, you transform the educational system, you remake the religious landscape, you encourage migration from the center, etc. Just a quick look at demographics in Xinjiang and how quickly the Han population grew after the 70s will tell you a lot about the state of discontent in Xinjiang at the moment. Obviously there are actors who are under the thrall of ‘foreign’ influence, but if we step away from the discussion of camps and reeducation, everyone in Xinjiang is ultimately influenced by the reality of everyday policies in schools, on the street, racial profiling, etc, including those whose version of Islam is basically going to the mosque once a year to say your Eid prayers.