Statement of Paula J Dobriansky
(USA | March 7, 2002)
Statement of Under Secretary Paula J Dobriansky, Special Coordinator
for Tibetan Issues, House International Relations Committee US
Policy Considerations in Tibet
Mr Chairman and Members of the Committee,
I am delighted to appear before you today to testify on U.S. policy
considerations in Tibet. I truly appreciate the interest and support
Members of this Committee have provided on this issue. I would
also like to thank the Dalai Lama's Special Envoy, Lodi Gyari,
the International Campaign for Tibet, the myriad of experts,
including Richard Gere who is with us today, and non-governmental
organizations that have met with me over the past year.
I was appointed 10 months ago to serve as Special Coordinator for
Tibetan Issues concurrently with my portfolio as Under Secretary for
Global Affairs. The U.S. Government's policy goals are two-fold: first
to promote a substantive dialogue between the Chinese government
and the Dalai Lama or his representatives, and second, to help
sustain Tibet's unique religious, linguistic, and cultural heritage.
Mr Chairman, as you and your colleagues know, disputes over
Tibet's relations with the Chinese government have a long, complex
history, dating back centuries. Rather than focus my testimony on
the distant past, I would like to describe the current circumstances
in Tibet, highlighting key developments over the past year and the
areas on which I have focused since my appointment.
Current Situation in Tibet
The situation on the ground in Tibet remains grave. The State
Department's annual Human Rights Report for 2001, in the section
on China, clearly states that tight controls on religion and other
fundamental freedoms remain serious problems. The report describes
in detail widespread human rights and religious freedom abuses,
including instances of arbitrary arrests, detention without public
trial, torture in prison, and official controls over Tibetan
monasteries and institutions on monks and nuns.
Tibet remains China's poorest region even though China has
devoted substantial economic resources to Tibet over the
past 20 years. Language problems severely limit educational
opportunities for Tibetan students, illiteracy rates are said to
be rising, and non-urban children in some regions are chronically
undernourished. Some reports suggest that privatization of health
care, increased emphasis on Chinese language curriculum, and
continuing Han migration into Tibet are all weakening the social
and economic position of Tibet's indigenous population.
Key developments
In October 2001, we resumed our bilateral human rights dialogue with
the Chinese. We made clear from the outset that our expectation was
that these talks are to be substantive and results oriented. We
also reiterated that the terrorist attacks of September 11 serve
as a powerful reminder that the futures of responsible nations of
the world are intertwined and that we must work together to ensure
peace and stability for all.
We used this human rights forum to raise individual cases of
concern. Most notable is the issue of the welfare and whereabouts of
Gendhun Choekyi Nyima, the boy recognized by the Dalai Lama as the
Panchen Lama, and his parents, who have been held incommunicado
now for 7 years. The Chinese maintain that he is a "normal
schoolboy" living in China. Despite our urgings to the Chinese to
allow the boy and his family to receive international visitors,
they refuse to allow direct confirmation of his well-being.
It is hard to understand why, if the boy is thriving as they have
indicated in the past, it would be difficult to arrange a brief
visit to confirm his status. Indeed, concern about the boy grows
each day that his fate remains uncertain. Verbal assurances are
not sufficient to allay international concerns. Agreement to such a
visit would send a very positive signal to the world about China's
intentions with regard to religious freedom.
In January, as a humanitarian gesture, the Chinese Government did
release Ngawang Choephel, the Tibetan ethnomusicologist and former
Middlebury College Fulbright Scholar who was incarcerated in 1995
on charges of espionage. We were pleased with this development;
along with many Members of Congress, the Administration had pushed
hard for such a step. Still, we made it very clear to the Chinese
that occasional and individual releases of political prisoners are
simply not enough. It is more important than ever that we work
together to narrow differences on issues such as human rights
so that obstacles that have slowed the pace of the development
of our bilateral relationship can be moved aside. As Secretary
Powell stated before this very Committee just a month ago, candid,
constructive, and cooperative relationship is what we are building
with China — candid where we disagree, constructive where we can
see some daylight, and cooperative where we have common regional
or global interests.
My Role
Last May, the President, Secretary Powell, and I got to hear
firsthand about the situation in Tibet from the Dalai Lama. Our
conversations with him left me convinced of the Dalai Lama's interest
in pursuing dialogue with China's leaders. He also remains firmly
committed to seeking 'genuine autonomy' for Tibet within the
framework of the People's Republic of China.
Last summer, Secretary Powell went to Beijing to set the groundwork
for President Bush's scheduled visit to China in October. Shortly
thereafter, Foreign Minister Tang traveled to Washington to follow
up on the Secretary's initiatives. During the Foreign Minister's
visit, I was included in bilateral discussions which afforded an
opportunity to raise concerns about Tibet directly with one of
China's most influential leaders. The President went to Shanghai in
October and had his first summit meeting with President Jiang. The
two leaders had a full agenda that encompassed joint cooperation
against terrorism and other security concerns, bilateral economic
and defense ties, religious freedom, human rights, and Tibet.
The last time the leaders of our two countries got together in China,
President Jiang left then-President Clinton with the impression
that progress on the Tibet issue was imminent. The Chinese leader
publicly expressed a readiness, albeit with pre-conditions, to
meet with the Dalai Lama. Unfortunately, he soon retreated from his
statement, and instead of the beginning of substantive and direct
dialogue, the 1998 Clinton-Jiang Summit seemingly marked the end
of communication between the two sides.
I accompanied President Bush on his trips to Shanghai and Beijing.
On both visits, the President urged the Chinese leadership to negotiate
directly with His Holiness or his representatives, noting that the
Dalai Lama's call for genuine autonomy was sincere.
In December, I traveled to Norway to meet with the Dalai Lama and
to get his perspective. Later this month, I plan to meet with EU
counterparts to solicit their views on the situation in Tibet and
best means to foster dialogue.
Conclusion
Widespread knowledge of China's poor human rights record in Tibet
harms its international reputation and credibility. Tibet, in other
words, is a difficult issue for China internationally, and a problem
for U.S.-China relations. As Beijing approaches its 2002 Communist
Party Congress, it is my impression that China's leaders see the
Tibet issue as a complex political task with considerable domestic
political risks. Fears of loss of central control in Tibet, the Far
West, or even in coastal China, are deep-seated. China's leadership
has drawn lessons from the break-up of the Soviet Union.
Examples worldwide of domestic instability based on ethnic strife
demonstrate that mutual collaboration, reasonable compromise and
protection of ethnic, cultural and religious rights are the best
course of action for protecting national sovereignty and stability
over the long-term. Indeed, the lessons of the recent past, properly
construed, make the case for why Beijing should engage the Dalai
Lama on the future of Tibet.
The Dalai Lama can be an asset to the difficult challenge of
regional and national stability. He indisputably represents the
opinion of most Tibetans, and his moral authority transcends
Tibetan interests. If the Chinese government fails to engage with
the Dalai Lama who vigorously seeks dialogue and a mutual solution,
Tibetan resistance could intensify and the potential for political
upheaval could grow.
Resolving the situation in Tibet would be a win for both the Chinese
Government and the Tibetan people. China stands to gain on a number
of fronts. First, finding a resolution to the Tibet problem would add
stability in China and provide more opportunities for cooperative
economic growth. Second, the international spotlight on this issue
will dim, thus removing a major impediment for engagement with
China. Third, China will show itself to be serious about adhering
to international standards on human rights and being a respected
player in the international community. Tibetans stand to gain, what
is most important to them — the preservation of their culture,
linguistic and ethnic heritage.
Conversely, much will be lost if this situation is not resolved.
As President stated at Qinghua University in Beijing,
"In a free society, diversity is not disorder.
Debate is not strife. And dissent is not revolution.
A free society trusts its citizens to seek greatness in
themselves and their country."
Open dialogue among all citizens and a fundamental protection of
basic rights under the rule of law are
key ingredients for internal stability —
a goal that both the Chinese and Tibetans seek.
The lack of resolution on this issue will be a stumbling block
to fuller political and economic engagement with
the United States and others.
Three days from now, the Dalai Lama will commemorate his forty-third
year of living in exile. The Dalai Lama has shown enormous courage
in articulating his position on autonomy for Tibet within the
People's Republic of China. Should the Chinese reach an agreement
with the Dalai Lama, they will open to the next generation a road
to peace, advancing both Chinese and Tibetan interests.
We look for the Chinese to begin the journey down this road.
In closing, I would like to thank you for this opportunity to
testify today. I look forward to working with you now and in the
future on this extremely important issue.
|