Written evidence from Tibet Society (CHI0035)

Executive Summary

• Tibet is considered one of the most repressive societies in the world. Chinese government policies have severely restricted basic freedoms in Tibet, such as the freedoms of expression, religion and movement. Despite harsh punishments and the risk of torture, Tibetans continue to protest for their rights to be respected.
• The UK government’s policy on Tibet needs immediate revision. The phrase, “[the UK] does not support Tibetan independence” should be dropped and replaced with “[the UK] calls on China to recognise the genuine autonomy of Tibet and enter into negotiations with Tibetan representatives”.
• The UK government should highlight human rights abuses in Tibet wherever and whenever possible, by issuing robust public statements, providing comprehensive reports and working multilaterally with like-minded countries.
• The UK government should set benchmarks for the UK-China Human Rights Dialogue, involve higher level officials and ensure greater transparency. Human rights should be included in all UK-China dialogues.

Introduction

1. This submission is in response to the Foreign Affairs Committee’s call for papers in respect to its inquiry on UK-China relations, announced on 7th December 2016.
2. This submission considers the current human rights situation in Tibet, analyses the UK-China relationship in terms of the Tibet issue and makes recommendations for the UK government.
3. Tibet Society works for the freedom of the Tibetan people and their right to self-determination. It was founded in 1959, within weeks of the flight of the Dalai Lama from Tibet following the uprising against China's occupation. Tibet Society was the world’s first ever Tibet support group.
4. For the purpose of this report, ‘Tibet’ refers to the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) and Tibetan regions in the Chinese provinces of Sichuan, Qinghai, Gansu and Yunnan. ‘China’ refers to the People’s Republic of China. To Tibetans, Tibet traditionally comprises three regions - U’Tsang (now the TAR), Amdo and Kham (now incorporated into Chinese provinces). To the Chinese government Tibet refers to the TAR only.

The current human rights situation in Tibet

China’s Tibet: A repressive society

5. Tibetans in Tibet live in one of the most repressive societies in the world. In February 2016, an independent study ranked Tibet as the second worst place for freedom and human rights; only Syria was ranked worse.[1] In January 2017, Human Rights Watch reported Beijing’s rule over Tibet remained “highly repressive” throughout 2016.[2]
6. Since Xi Jinping came to power in 2013, Tibet has seen additional restrictions on basic freedoms such as expression, religion and movement. Tibetans have faced increased surveillance, harassment, criminalisation and imprisonment, under the guise of ‘state security’ and ‘anti-separatism’. China’s recently introduced laws on national security, counter-terrorism and foreign NGO management are expected to further intensify the crackdown on civil society in Tibet.

The changing face of protest in Tibet

7. Since 2008, when Tibet-wide protests were quashed by the Chinese authorities, there has been a resurgence in Tibetan nationalism and the promotion of Tibetan culture and religion. There has been a corresponding increase in protests against China’s policies in Tibet.
8. Hundreds of Tibetans have been arbitrarily detained for peacefully expressing their views, such as advocating the use of the Tibetan language or sharing information about protests via social media. Dozens of singers, writers and bloggers have been detained and jailed for disseminating their views.
9. Since February 2009, there have been 145 self-immolation protests inside Tibet. However, the number of such protests has declined recently, with only three self-immolations in Tibet in 2016. The decrease may be down to the introduction of harsh punishments for those aiding self-immolators. In addition, collective punishments were announced for families, communities and monasteries associated with self-immolators.
10. As the number of self-immolations has declined the number of solo peaceful protests has increased. Since the beginning of 2015, there have been 31 known cases of Tibetans detained for undertaking individual public protests. Almost all have walked down a main street shouting slogans in support of the Dalai Lama with some also calling for freedom and human rights in Tibet. To date, five of the 31 have been sentenced, receiving prison terms of up to four years.

Political prisoners

11. The Chinese government routinely detains, tortures and imprisons Tibetans who speak out against the Communist Party regime and its oppressive policies in Tibet. Tibetans charged with political crimes are often held incommunicado, not allowed independent legal representation, have evidence against them extracted by torture and tried in secret.
12. There are 650 known political prisoners in Tibet.[3] Due to the lack of transparency by the Chinese government, the true number of Tibetans in custody on political charges is likely to be considerably higher. Many Tibetans are missing, assumed to have been detained or arbitrarily arrested.
13. Following release, Tibetan former political prisoners continue to face harassment and marginalisation. The authorities often place them under constant surveillance, akin to house arrest, and they have few employment opportunities. Monks and nuns are often barred from returning to their monasteries.

Torture and deaths in prison

14. In Tibet, detainees and prisoners are routinely subjected to physical punishments and torture as well as cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment. Prisoners in ill-health often are denied access to medical treatment. In recent years, the Chinese authorities have adopted a practice of early release for prisoners who are in ill-health to ensure they do not die in prison.
15. Since April 2015, four Tibetan political prisoners are known to have died, either in prison or shortly after their release. The most high-profile death was that of Tenzin Delek Rinpoche who died in custody on 12 July 2015. Despite calls from international governments, including the UK, the Chinese authorities have yet to conduct an investigation into his death.
16. In December 2015, the UN Committee Against Torture expressed serious concerns over continued reports of torture in Tibet. The Committee also rebuked China for failing to produce any evidence to back its claim that torture is not endemic and that it adheres to good practice.[4]

Religious Repression in Tibet

17. Despite the Chinese Communist Party being officially atheist, the government attempts to exert control over Tibetan Buddhism. Its policies have led to the arbitrary arrest and imprisonment of religious leaders, destruction of religious structures, closure of monasteries, intensive surveillance of monks and nuns, restrictions on religious practices in local communities and even the banning of reincarnation without government approval.
18. China’s policy on religion in Tibet is exemplified by the current situation at the Larung Gar Buddhist Institute in Serthar county, Sichuan.[5] China’s aim is to place the Institute under government control and ensure residents conform to Communist Party policy. The strategy, which began in July 2016, includes reducing the population size by half, to 5,000, via forced evictions and demolition of dwellings. Since July, three nuns have committed suicide in protest against what one of the nuns referred to as “the endless Chinese harassment of innocent Buddhists”.
19. The Chinese government continues its ongoing vilification of the Dalai Lama, including accusing him of being a separatist seeking to “split the motherland” and of instigating protests in Tibet including the wave of self-immolations.
20. China is also attempting to control the future of Tibetan Buddhism. In 1995, Chinese authorities abducted Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, who had been recognised by the Dalai Lama as the Panchen Lama.[6] China then installed its own candidate, Gyaltsen Norbu, who has been groomed to be a Communist Party mouthpiece. The Panchen Lama traditionally chooses the Dalai Lama’s successor. Gedhun Choekyi Nyima remains missing and China refuses to provide any evidence of his whereabouts or well-being and have denied all requests for access.

The UK’s engagement with China in relation to Tibet

UK policy on Tibet

21. The UK government’s policy on Tibet was last stated in Parliament on 18 June 2015 by Hugo Swire, then Minister of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO). Mr Swire said, “[I]t is the clear position of the British Government that Tibet is part of the People’s Republic of China, and that we do not support Tibetan independence.”[7]
22. The policy was also published earlier in the same year in the FCO’s Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy.[8]
23. The phrase “not supporting Tibetan independence” has crept into the UK policy on Tibet in recent years. Previously, when stating its policy, the UK government would call for China to “recognise the genuine autonomy of Tibet” and “enter into negotiations with representatives of the Dalai Lama”. These points seem to be now less in favour, if not dropped completely.
24. There is no apparent need for the UK government to state it “does not support Tibetan independence” other than to appease the Chinese government, given the policy already recognises China’s sovereignty over Tibet. In fact, it may harm the right to freedom of expression of Tibetans, as the Chinese authorities could see it as tacit support for their practice of punishing Tibetans who dare to speak out against China’s rule.
25. It also contradicts another UK policy, that of encouraging China to ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Article 1 of the ICCPR states, “All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.”

UK-China Human Rights Dialogue

26. The UK-China Human Rights Dialogue, though a welcome vehicle for the raising of key issues, has failed to deliver any tangible progress on human rights in China and Tibet. The process lacks transparency, is given considerably less priority than other UK-China dialogues and has no benchmarks for evaluation.
27. Following the latest UK-China Human Rights Dialogue in October 2016, the only public statement issued by the government was by junior minister Alok Sharma, who led the UK delegation. The statement gave little factual information, only noting a few cases had been raised and “senior officials discussed the full range of matters”. No mention was given to any response from the Chinese delegation or progress on any of the issues deliberated.
28. In contrast, the UK-China Economic and Financial Dialogue, held just two weeks later, was opened by the Prime Minister and led by the Chancellor. Numerous public statements were issued, press conferences held and outcomes publicised. Despite government claims that, “trade and human rights are not mutually exclusive; in fact, they are mutually supportive,”[9] human rights were not raised during the Economic dialogue.[10]
29. No benchmarks have been set to evaluate the UK-China Human Rights Dialogue. The FCO claims to “measure progress against our overall strategy and we report on it in the FCO Annual Human Rights report.”[11] However, the strategy and measurement of progress is not clearly identifiable in the report. Clearly defined and transparent benchmarks would be of great value to monitor China’s progress on human rights and the effectiveness of the Dialogue.

FCO Annual Report on Human Rights

30. In 2016, Tibet was virtually ignored in the FCO’s annual report on human rights. Tibet’s only mention was, “Requests for human rights monitoring visits to Tibet were refused.”[12] In previous years, Tibet was designated its own sub-heading in the China section.
31. By comparison, in 2016, the US State Department’s Annual Human Rights Report devoted 15 pages to Tibet. Its China section comprised 141 pages.[13] The FCO’s China section amounted to just over a half a page.
32. Overall, along with the reduction in updates from quarterly to every six months, the reporting by the FCO on the human rights situation in Tibet has been severely reduced. The implication of such a reduction is that either the situation in Tibet has improved (which it clearly has not) or Tibet has become less of a priority for the UK government.

Official visits to Tibet

33. China routinely denies or ignores requests for visits to Tibet by international bodies, foreign diplomats and the foreign media. Official visits to the TAR are rare, and only take place under strict supervision by the Chinese authorities, with restrictions on travel and interviews with local Tibetan vetted and monitored.
34. The last visit to the TAR by a UK Minister took place in 2009. The last visit by a UK diplomat was in June 2014.[14] However, this was an escorted visit, with security in the TAR described as “substantial and entrenched”.[15] China has since denied repeated requests by the UK to visit the TAR and sensitive Tibetan areas.

Raising Tibetan political prisoner cases

35. In recent years raising political prisoner cases with China seems to have taken lower priority and become a “box-ticking” exercise. The UK government needs to ensure that cases are raised regularly, robustly and, when appropriate, publicly.
36. The case of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, the abducted Panchen Lama, remains of major importance to Tibetans and to Tibet’s future. It should remain a case of priority with the UK government. The case was last raised in May 2014.[16]

Statements on Tibet and human rights

37. Arguments are often made that rebuking China in public over its human rights record has no effect and may damage relations, in particular, trade. However, there is no evidence to support the latter, indeed many countries that have been publicly critical continue to have significant trade relations with China. Remaining silent on human rights abuses is in no-one’s interest other than the abuser’s.
38. In the recent past, the UK has often hidden behind the veil of the EU, stating it supports the EU stance on China, rather than making a statement of its own. However, with Brexit imminent, the UK must have the strength of its own convictions and highlight human rights abuses in China and Tibet and promote a universal rights agenda.
39. The UK government, as well as making its own robust statements, should, where possible, work with like-minded countries and issue joint statements and undertake joint actions to promote human rights.
40. The historic joint statement at the UN Human Rights Council on 10 March 2016, in which the UK participated, was most welcome.[17] Twelve countries, including the UK, issued a joint statement criticising China’s human rights record. It was the first collective statement issued at the UN Human Rights Council. It is hoped the UK government will continue with similar actions on a regular basis.

Meeting the Dalai Lama and Tibetan representatives

41. Countries that invite or accept a visit by the Dalai Lama come under considerable pressure by the Chinese government. Trade sanctions and severing of diplomatic relations are threatened unless the visit is cancelled. However, there is little evidence to show that such threats result in any significant impact on long-term relations. Indeed, after Prime Minister Cameron met the Dalai Lama in private in May 2014, despite considerable hype about the damage to relations, trade with China continued to increase.
42. The UK government should uphold its own principles, and, given it calls for China to meet with Tibetan representatives, it should openly and publicly welcome the Dalai Lama and Tibetan government in exile representatives to the UK. Ultimately, the UK government should not allow China to dictate who it should and should not meet.

Pressure against protests during Chinese leaders’ visits

43. The Chinese government regularly pressures other countries to ban or restrict protests during visits of its leaders. Often, demands are made that security arrangements around the protests are to be directed by Chinese security personnel.
44. In October 2015, three protestors were arrested for peacefully demonstrating during Xi Jinping’s State Visit to the UK. The homes of all three were subsequently raided and items confiscated. After public and parliamentary outrage, the cases were dropped. As one MP said, the whole incident seemed to be “British police action with Chinese characteristics”.[18]
45. In 1999, UK police were found to have unlawfully removed Tibet flags and banners from protestors and illegally blocked demonstrations during Jiang Zemin’s State Visit to the UK. Similar heavy-handed tactics have been employed by other police forces across the world during Chinese State Visits. Cases have also been successfully brought against similar police actions in Denmark and Austria.

Economic interests in Tibet

46. With the vast infrastructure development of Tibet, the region presents an opportunity for business investment, particularly in the areas of natural resource extraction and tourism. In August 2016, Sichuan province was announced as one of seven Free Trade Zones opening business opportunities for British companies.[19] Sichuan incorporates a significant area of traditional Tibet and contains a large population of Tibetans.
47. Tibetans face discriminatory employment practices, which tend to favour Han Chinese, and have no say in the development of the region. Tibetans are only secondary beneficiaries, if they benefit at all, from China’s development and infrastructure projects in Tibet, which are primarily aimed at resource extraction, security and surveillance, tourism and supporting Han Chinese migrants.
48. Tibetans should be fully and openly involved in the consultation process of any business plan proposed for Tibet, and be free to benefit from any employment or investment opportunities.
49. The Tibetan plateau contains China’s only known deposit of lithium and some of China’s largest deposits of minerals such as copper, gold, lead and zinc. The UN has guidelines on minerals from ‘high-risk areas’, which the UK government has noted its intention to abide by through National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights.[20] Minerals from Tibet should be classified as ‘conflict minerals’ and subject to these guidelines.
50. There is a lack of information on Tibet available from the UK government to businesses operating, or considering operating, in China. The Overseas Business Risk service, despite its remit to provide “information on potential risks including human rights issues”[21] provides no mention of the human rights situation in Tibet in its section on China.

China’s Confucius Institutes

51. Confucius Institutes and Confucius Classrooms are state-run programmes to promote Chinese culture and language. There at least 25 Confucius Institutes and approximately 100 Confucius Classrooms in the UK.
52. Serious concerns over Confucius programmes have been raised in North America and Europe, which has led to several closures. Concerns include the censorship of ‘politically-sensitive’ topics such as Tibet, Taiwan and human rights, dissemination of Chinese Communist Party propaganda, funding irregularities and discriminatory hiring practices.[22]
53. As China promotes its own culture and values overseas, at the same time it has prohibited the teaching of so-called ‘Western’ values in classrooms in China. In 2015, the Chinese Education Minister called on universities to be on guard against the infiltration of Western ideas and avoid using teaching materials that “disseminate Western values”.[23]

Recommendations for the UK government

1. Meet the Dalai Lama and the Sikyong (the democratically elected leader of the Tibetan government in exile). Invitations to meetings at Westminster should be extended to Tibetan representatives and human rights defenders.
2. Remove “does not support Tibetan independence” from UK policy on Tibet. The policy should clearly call on China to allow genuine autonomy for Tibet and call for meaningful dialogue with Tibetan representatives.
3. Consistently call for the rights and freedoms of Tibetans in Tibet to be respected, as guaranteed under international treaties and laws as well as in China’s own constitution.
4. Raise Tibetan political prisoner cases, publicly and privately, at every available opportunity and at all levels of government.
5. Call on China to uphold its human rights obligations as defined under international treaties and in China’s own constitution, including: upholding the rule of law; allowing the freedoms of expression, religion and movement; ending the systematic use of torture; and, releasing all political prisoners.
6. Urge China to ratify and uphold the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
7. Make robust public statements condemning China’s human rights abuses in Tibet. The UK government should specifically urge China to end its repressive policies in Tibet, including its interference in religious matters, and to respect and protect Tibetan culture and language.
8. Work multilaterally with other countries on the issue of Tibet in order to convey the importance to China of resolving the grievances of the Tibetan people and to help find a peaceful solution to the current crisis in Tibet.
9. Utilise UN Human Rights Council mechanisms and the Universal Periodic Review of China’s human rights record to press for real progress in China and Tibet
10. Call on China to allow a UK Minister open and unfettered access to Tibet and allow similar visits by other international diplomats, observers and agencies, in particular UN Special Rapporteurs. Also, call on China to open Tibet and Tibetan regions to foreign media.
11. Set benchmarks for the UK-China Human Rights Dialogues, in order to ensure progress is made and to assess the effectiveness of the dialogues. Also, provide greater transparency to the Dialogues and involve a higher-level of government.
12. Include human rights components in all UK-China dialogues, to ensure human rights remain at the centre of UK-China policy and are not sidelined.
13. Comprehensively report on human rights abuses in Tibet, by expanding the FCO’s Annual Human Rights Report, and providing regular updates and Ministerial statements.
14. Inform all Ministers and senior civil servants that deal with China about the situation in Tibet, to enable them to raise human rights and other concerns with their Chinese counterparts regularly and consistently.
15. Update government advisory services on the situation in Tibet, in particular guides for doing business in China, such as the Overseas Business Risk service.
16. Ensure the National Action Plan for Business and Human Rights is adhered to by any British company or agency trading in Tibet or Tibetan regions, such that Tibetans are properly consulted, granted fair employment opportunities and do not have their human rights impinged upon.
17. Classify minerals extracted from Tibet as ‘conflict minerals’ and ensure businesses adhere to the appropriate UN guidelines.
18. Review the conduct of Confucius Institutes and Confucius Classrooms in the UK, and all cultural exchanges to the UK, to ensure they comply with UK law, are not being used for propaganda purposes, are not impinging on academic freedoms and are not discriminating against ethnic minorities including Tibetans.
19. Allow peaceful protests during Chinese leader visits to the UK, ensuring such protests are policed according to UK law and to not succumb to Chinese government pressure to sideline such protests or arbitrary detain peaceful protestors.
20. Ensure UK-government-funded programmes in China are accessible to ethnic minorities including Tibetans, and insist programmes promoting issues such as strengthening civil society and the rule of law are extended into Tibetan regions.
21. Be open and transparent in dealings with China.

January 2017