It's not quite as simple as that with regard to China.
In the wider context of Julnar's question, which has been slightly ignored and hijacked by Xinjiang (guilty), it's a complicated issue when you look at the roots of political Islam.
In Pakistan it came about as a result of the Sepoy Revolt and British favouritism towards Sikhs and Hindus to formulate the Raj's new middle classes, so began Deobandism in the N.W.F.P.
In Saudi it was different, they fought hard against the Turksin the Great War but promises of independence were forgotten by Britain and France, the endemic corruption and vice of the Saudi sheikhs has resulted in the political espousal of pious poverty, Wahabiism.
In Iran years of foreign interference (quasi colonialism) added to an alien form (to them) of radical secularism resulted in the Islamic Republic, or fundamentalism as we call it.
Turkey on the other hand went the opposite way a variety of pogroms against the Greeks and Bulgarians (19th century) resulted in the break up of their (Ottoman) empire later on in 1894 (Hamidian), then 1909 (Adana) and finally 1915-18 (Armenian genocide) against the Christian Armenians virtually wiped out that Millet, the remaining Greeks were expelled in 1915 too, this resulted in constitutional secularism wedded to political militarism to secure it, Kemalism, which survives to this day.
The difference with Turkey I feel is that the earlier massacres were about plunder and oppression, whereas the far more systematic (and cruel) last one was about the creation of a grand Turanian empire by the Young Turks led by Enver Pasha.
The Islamic nations in the east are relatively young politically, all western nations have perpetrated similar acts over the centuries, we've dealt with similar threats in the last century and so the world will resolve similar problems in the future.