The Guardian wrote yesterday:
Australia joins global condemnation of China over Xinjiang amid deteriorating ties
Australia has stared down a potential backlash from China by joining with nearly 40 countries to voice grave concerns about “gross human rights violations” in the Xinjiang region and call for independent observers to be granted unfettered access.
The United Nations has 193 member states. "Global condemnation" and "nearly 40 countries" thereby do not seem to fit well.
Indeed. After 16 paragraphs of dubious allegations against China we learn:
[China’s ambassador to the UN, Zhang Jun,] pointed to counter-statements, including one made by Pakistan on behalf of 55 countries that opposed interference in China’s internal affairs under the pretext of Hong Kong.
Cuba also issued a joint statement on behalf of 45 countries backing the Chinese government’s position that its actions in Xinjiang were related to counter-terrorism and de-radicalisation efforts.
I have failed to find the two counter-statements and to check how many states signed both. But Ambassador Zhang has said that nearly 70 countries had backed either or both.
That is not a majority of UN member states but it shows that 'global affirmation" for China's Xinjiang policy is a more truthful expression than the "global condemnation" the Guardian has chosen.