U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

47–764 PDF 2009

S. HRG. 110–751 

THE CRISIS IN TIBET: 

FINDING A PATH TO PEACE 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EAST ASIAN 

AND PACIFIC AFFAIRS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

APRIL 23, 2008 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware, Chairman

CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut 

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin 

BARBARA BOXER, California 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

BARACK OBAMA, Illinois 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

ROBERT P. CASEY, JR., Pennsylvania 

JIM WEBB, Virginia 

RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana 

CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska 

NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota 

BOB CORKER, Tennessee 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

ANTONY J. BLINKEN, Staff Director

KENNETH A. MYERS, JR., Republican Staff Director

—————

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EAST ASIAN

AND PACIFIC AFFAIRS

BARBARA BOXER, California, Chairman

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin 

BARACK OBAMA, Illinois 

JIM WEBB, Virginia 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska 

(II)

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Boxer, Hon. Barbara, U.S. Senator From California ............................................ 1 

Cardin, Hon. Benjamin L., U.S. Senator From Maryland ................................... 5 

Gere, Richard, President, The Gere Foundation, and Chairman of the Board, 

International Campaign for Tibet (ICT), New York, NY .................................. 26 

Prepared statement ...................................................................................... 30 

Gyari, Lodi, Special Envoy of His Holiness The Dalai Lama, Washington, 

DC .......................................................................................................................... 33

Prepared statement ...................................................................................... 38 

Hagel, Hon. Chuck, U.S. Senator From Nebraska ............................................... 5 

Marshall, Steve, Senior Advisor, Congressional-Executive Commission on 

China, Washington, DC ....................................................................................... 46 

Prepared statement ...................................................................................... 48 

Menendez, Hon. Robert, U.S. Senator From New Jersey .................................... 4 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, U.S. Senator From Alaska ............................................... 3 

Negroponte, Hon. John D., Deputy Secretary of State, Department of State, 

Washington, DC ................................................................................................... 5 

Prepared statement ...................................................................................... 7 

Sangay, Lobsang, Senior Fellow, East Asian Legal Studies Program, Harvard 

University Law School, Cambridge, MA ............................................................ 53 

Prepared statement ...................................................................................... 54 

APPENDIX

Responses to Additional Questions Submitted for the Record by Members 

of the Committee 

Responses to Questions Submitted to Deputy Secretary of State John 

Negroponte by Senator Richard G. Lugar .................................................. 61 

Additional Material Submitted for the Record 

An Appeal to the Chinese People by the Dalai Lama ................................... 63 

Seeking Unity Through Equality .................................................................... 67 

Tibetan Political Prisoners .............................................................................. 77 

Statement Submitted by the U.S. Commission on International Religious 

Freedom ......................................................................................................... 79 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Barack Obama, U.S. Senator From Illinois ... 81 

(III)

(1) 

THE CRISIS IN TIBET: 

FINDING A PATH TO PEACE 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 23, 2008 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON EAST ASIAN AND PACIFIC AFFAIRS, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:35 p.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Barbara Boxer 

(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Present: Senators Boxer, Feingold, Menendez, Cardin, Hagel, and 

Murkowski. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA BOXER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM CALIFORNIA 

Senator BOXER. The subcommittee shall come to order. 

Today, the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East 

Asian and Pacific Affairs meets to examine the ongoing crisis in 

Tibet and to review options for achieving a meaningful and lasting 

solution to this matter. 

The protests that began in Tibet on March 10, 2008, mark the 

latest chapter in the Tibetan struggle against Chinese oppression. 

For over half a century, the People’s Republic of China has chipped 

away at Tibetan culture, Tibetan religion, and Tibetan identity. 

Today, freedom of religion, expression, and assembly are all severely restricted. Flying a Tibetan flag, or even possessing an 

image of the Dalai Lama, is grounds for punishment, including arrest. 

The State Department’s most recent Country Report on Human 

Rights Practices details severe human rights abuses in Tibet, including, ‘‘torture, arbitrary arrest, and detention.’’ According to the 

report, repression of religious freedom is on the rise. 

The Government of China even ‘‘adopted new regulations and 

other measures to control the practice of Tibetan Buddhism, including measures that require government approval to name all reincarnated lamas.’’ 

The wave of largely peaceful protests that began in early March 

and that turned violent as the month wore on were met with an 

increase in so-called, ‘‘patriotic education,’’ by the Chinese Government. The Chinese Government’s patriotic education campaigns require, among other things, that Buddhist monks denounce the 

Dalai Lama as a separatist. 

It is clear that, during the protests, both Tibetans and Han Chinese suffered injuries and deaths, but, because the international 

2 

media was expelled from Tibet during the protests, reports differ 

on the numbers and identities of those killed and detained. Some 

reports indicate that up to 4,000 Tibetans, including monks, were 

arrested, with 1,000 expected to face trial by Chinese authorities 

before May 1. Tensions remain high, and the prospect of further violence is real. 

The Chinese Government claims that the Dalai Lama orchestrated the protests and the riots in Tibet, but the Dalai Lama has 

consistently denounced violence. He has said clearly, ‘‘I appeal to 

the Chinese leadership to stop using force and address the long 

simmering resentment of the Tibetan people through dialogue with 

the Tibetan people.’’ In addition he said, ‘‘I also urge my fellow Tibetans not to resort to violence.’’ So, the reports that you hear, saying that the Dalai Lama is behind the violence, don’t add up, because he’s very clear when he says, ‘‘I urge my fellow Tibetans not 

to resort to violence.’’ 

In a written appeal directly to the Chinese people on March 28, 

2008, the Dalai Lama reiterated—and this is important—that he 

has, ‘‘no desire to seek Tibet’s separation from China,’’ but that he 

seeks to, ‘‘ensure the survival of the Tibetan people’s distinctive 

culture, language, and identity.’’ 

While the eyes of the world are certainly on China as we move 

toward the Summer Olympic Games in Beijing, I certainly hope, 

and I know I speak for others, that the Chinese Government views 

the present situation as an opportunity to move the Tibet issue forward in a way that is acceptable to all sides. Any solution must respect the fundamental human rights and religious freedom of the 

Tibetan people. In pursuit of that settlement, the Chinese Government must engage in meaningful dialogue with the Dalai Lama. 

Today, we will hear from a number of distinguished witnesses on 

how to move forward toward peace in Tibet. 

On our first panel, we will hear from the Deputy Secretary of 

State, John Negroponte. Prior to his current assignment, he served 

as the first Director of National Intelligence. Secretary Negroponte 

has also served as a U.S. Ambassador to Iraq and as the U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations. 

On our second panel, we will hear from Mr. Richard Gere, the 

president of the Gere Foundation and the chairman of the board 

for the International Campaign for Tibet. Mr. Gere has been a tireless champion for the people of Tibet, as well as for a number of 

other causes. Mr. Gere will make a statement on Tibet before introducing our third witness, Mr. Lodi Gyari. Mr. Lodi Gyari is the 

Special Envoy of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Mr. Gyari was born 

in Tibet in 1949. He was forced, with his family, to flee to India 

in 1959, where he began his lifelong advocacy work on behalf of the 

Tibetan people. As the Special Envoy of His Holiness the Dalai 

Lama, Mr. Gyari is the top individual designated to negotiate with 

the Government of the People’s Republic of China. So, I say to my 

colleagues, we have a lot of people here today who really have an 

ability to change some outcomes. 

On our third panel, we will hear from Mr. Steven D. Marshall, 

a senior advisor to the Congressional-Executive Commission on 

China. He spent nearly two decades traveling and researching the 

human rights situation in China and the Tibetan areas of China. 

3 

He has served as an expert consultant on China and Tibetan issues 

for Members of Congress and the executive branch. 

And finally, we’ll hear from Dr. Lobsang Sangay, a senior fellow 

in the East Asian Legal Studies Program at Harvard University 

Law School. After graduating from college in India, Mr. Sangay 

won a Fulbright scholarship to complete his master’s degree at 

Harvard Law School. He subsequently went on to become the first 

Tibetan to earn a doctorate degree from Harvard Law School. For 

the last 13 years, much of his work has been focused on his Track 

II initiative, an effort to bring together Chinese and Tibetan scholars. 

So, I certainly look forward to hearing from all our witnesses this 

afternoon. And as we get through this, I hope, in my closing statement, to put out some thoughts of my own on how we can really 

move forward to find a resolution. But, I think it’s going to be good 

for me to wait until we hear from everyone, because we certainly 

have some great experts here before us. 

And it is my pleasure now to turn to the ranking member of the 

subcommittee, Senator Murkowski. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Madam Chair. I truly appreciate your holding this hearing. Very important. Certainly very, 

very timely. 

I, too, look forward to the testimony from the very distinguished 

panels that you have assembled, and I think that they will be in 

a position to give all of us a great deal of information, not only on 

this subcommittee, but, truly, to all those who care about Tibet. 

The loss of life as a result of the protests in Lhasa and the Tibet 

autonomous areas, whether it’s the loss of a Tibetan monk or a 

Han Chinese or any other civilian, I think we would all agree, is 

highly, highly regrettable. 

I believe that there’s a generally shared view within this room 

that, just as protests on the part of the Tibetan monks should be 

peaceful, the Chinese authorities must also differentiate between 

peaceful protestors and rioters. The aggressive tactics in this conflict have only served to escalate the level of violence and inflame 

passions, truly, around the world. 

I do share the concern of many about the inability of the international media and the nongovernmental organizations to freely report on the conditions in Tibet, for without this transparency it is— 

it’s truly difficult to distinguish the truth from the rumor. 

I’m also very concerned about the reports of the Patriotic Education campaign, where the Tibetan monks are forced to denounce 

their culture and denounce the Dalai Lama. Perhaps the inflammation of passions is the intentional; whether it’s to put pressure on 

the international community over the upcoming Summer Olympics 

and to highlight the plight of the Tibetan people and their culture, 

or to stoke a sense of nationalism to solidify opinion at home. What 

it has not done, however, is brought us any closer to resolving the 

future of Tibet. And, in fact, it appears to have done just the opposite. 

4 

During the course of today’s hearing, I’m hopeful that we’ll learn 

more about how the events of these past 6 weeks have impacted 

the prospects for a mutually acceptable long-term solution to Tibet’s future, and what role the United States can, and hopefully 

will, play in that solution. I do look forward to hearing the testimonies of the witnesses, their insights, and their wisdom that they 

can provide on this issue. 

And, with that, Madam Chair, I will conclude my remarks so 

that we can hear from our witnesses. And, thank you. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you very much. 

I’m going to call on our colleagues for 5 minutes each. 

Senator Menendez. 

STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you 

for holding this important hearing. 

You know, the recent developments in Tibet, in which Buddhist 

monks and other ethnic Tibetans were violently punished, and, in 

some cases, killed, for participating in protests, are disturbing, and 

they should be unacceptable to anyone who believes in basic 

human rights and in those freedoms that we enjoy. And it seems 

to me that the United States needs to be more than a spectator, 

it needs to be a strong voice of the world. We are reminded that 

these recent developments in Tibet are only the latest chapter in 

the long history of Chinese human rights concerns. 

And I get concerned, Madam Chair, when I hear Stephen Hadley, the President’s National Security Advisor, in his appearance on 

‘‘This Week’’ on April 13, in which he erroneously referred to Nepal 

seven times when speaking about Tibet. And I wonder, is that emblematic of the lack of focus of this administration on Tibet? The 

eyes of the world are on Tibet as China prepares for the Olympics, 

and we wish the administration’s eyes were so focused, as well. It 

has continued to employ what it calls ‘‘quiet diplomacy’’ in that approach, but, in my mind, that hasn’t had much visible results. Even 

at a time when our leverage is great, the Olympics are approaching, that vision that the Chinese talk about, ‘‘One World, One 

Dream,’’ well, it’s time to put that to a test. And when the need 

is even greater, with monks at risk of starvation in locked-down 

monasteries, with 4,000 in detention, with 1,000 in TAR facing 

trial by May the 1st, with patriotic education sweeps continue, 

what tangible results can we cite from the private-channel approach that we have seen the administration take so far? 

And lastly, Madam Chair, it seems to me that we have an access 

problem, a lack of visits by independent human rights monitors 

through religious institutions to evaluate the welfare of monks and 

nuns; international medical corps, the medical facilities in and 

around Lhasa, to evaluate the conditions of care for those injured 

in the demonstrations; accounting from the Chinese authorities for 

all the missing and the dead by name and location; and assurances 

that detainees will be processed according to international standards of due process and the rule of law. The United States has a 

lot of international tools at its disposal—the ICRC, the U.N. Commission—U.N. Human Rights Commissioner, U.N. rapporteurs— 

5 

that it can call upon to improve access and avoid bilateral obstacles. Why isn’t the administration engaged in those? 

So, I will cease there, because I’m looking forward to hearing the 

testimony of the Assistant Secretary. 

And, we will pursue those questions when the opportunity comes. 

Senator BOXER. Absolutely. Absolutely. 

And I’m very pleased that so many colleagues have come, because I know there are so many demands on their time. And I 

think it speaks to the importance of this issue. 

Senator Hagel. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CHUCK HAGEL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA 

Senator HAGEL. Madam Chairwoman, thank you. And I will 

withhold until we have an opportunity to hear our witnesses. But, 

thank you and our colleague, Senator Murkowski, for scheduling 

this hearing. It’s important, and it cuts to the essence of who we 

are as Americans, and it is a critical issue for the world. So, thank 

you. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you very much, Senator. 

Senator Cardin. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND 

Senator CARDIN. Madam Chairwoman, thank you very much. 

And I appreciate very much your holding this hearing. 

I agree with colleague Senator Menendez and his comments, and 

Senator Hagel. This is a defining issue for our country. 

What’s happening in Tibet cannot go unchallenged. The Chinese 

Government needs to be held accountable. The United States and 

the international community have options to become more effective 

in protecting human rights. 

I have the honor of chairing the Senate Helsinki Commission, 

which is well known for its record on human rights, internationally. And I think this Nation can play a stronger role. 

I look forward to hearing from our distinguished panelists, and 

I hope that we can become more effective in standing up against 

the violations of basic rights, by China or any other country. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you very much, Senator. 

And we’re now going to begin with our first panel. And he’s got 

that panel all to himself, The Honorable John D. Negroponte. And 

we’ll set the clock for 10 minutes so you don’t have to rush 

through. And we look forward to hearing from you. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN D. NEGROPONTE, DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE, DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, 

DC 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Thank you very much, Chairman 

Boxer, Senator Murkowski, other members of the committee. I’m 

pleased to be here today to talk about the situation in Tibet. I have 

submitted a longer statement for the record, and these are some 

brief oral remarks. 

A little over a month ago, what began as peaceful protests in 

Lhasa erupted into violence and loss of lives and property, spanVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:27 Mar 09, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\DOCS\47764.TXT MikeBB PsN: MIKEB
6 

ning the Tibetan areas of China. We are deeply troubled by the reports of bloodshed, arrests, and mistreatment of protesters in and 

around Tibet. The administration, at all levels, beginning with 

President Bush and Secretary Rice, has called for the Chinese Government to exercise restraint, and for all sides to refrain from violence. 

We have repeatedly urged China to engage in dialogue with the 

Dalai Lama directly and through his representatives. As the President has said, ‘‘There is no better person for Chinese authorities 

to talk to than the Dalai Lama. He is the undisputed spiritual 

leader of the Tibetan people, and is a man of peace.’’ The Chinese 

Government should seize the opportunity to talk to the Dalai 

Lama, as someone who has repeatedly stated, as you observed, 

Chairman Boxer, that he opposes violence and does not seek independence for Tibet. If Beijing does not engage with the Dalai Lama 

now, it will only serve to strengthen those who advocate extreme 

views. Public vilification of the Dalai Lama will not help defuse the 

situation. 

The United States Government recognizes Tibet as part of the 

People’s Republic of China, and we welcome a stable, peaceful, and 

prosperous China. We engage China as a growing economic powerhouse, as a nuclear Permanent-Five Member of the United Nations 

Security Council, and an increasingly important actor on the international scene. At the same time, we have serious concerns about 

the recent events, human rights conditions and limits on religious 

freedom in Tibet. 

The Tibetans have legitimate grievances stemming from years of 

repression and Chinese policies that have adversely impacted their 

religion, culture, and livelihoods. An increasingly influential China 

has the responsibility to protect and uphold the rights of its minority groups. Furthermore, stability in China, which is in our interest, will not be possible unless Beijing addresses Tibetan grievances. We want to see a confident, strong China that protects the 

human rights of its citizens and acts responsibly around the world. 

Accordingly, we urge the authorities in Beijing to reexamine 

longstanding policies in Tibetan areas that exacerbate tensions. We 

seek unfettered access to Tibet for diplomats and journalists, and 

the release of those protesters who expressed their views peacefully. 

I would like to underscore that our support for human rights in 

Tibet did not just start this year. We have engaged the People’s Republic of China on this issue since we established diplomatic relations in 1979. The President’s meetings with the Dalai Lama and 

his attendants last fall at the Congressional Gold Medal Ceremony 

honoring the Dalai Lama were strong signals of our support. We 

also show support for human rights in Tibet in our everyday working-level interactions with China. Our Office of the Special Coordinator for Tibetan issues, established over 10 years ago, is another 

example of our commitment to human rights and religious freedom 

for Tibetans. 

Let me now turn to the question of the Beijing Olympics. President Bush has announced his intention to attend the Olympics, and 

has made clear that he believes that it is important to show the 

1.3 billion Chinese people that we welcome their entrance onto the 

7 

international stage. The Dalai Lama has said that he supports Beijing’s hosting of the Olympic Games, and does not support a boycott. An Olympic boycott or sanctions could inflame tensions and 

polarize attitudes. Let me assure you that this administration will 

continue to take the opportunity—before, during, and after the 

Olympics—to urge improvements from the Chinese on Tibet and 

human rights. 

For Beijing and China’s Tibetan populations, there is a way forward. Through outreach and genuine dialogue, China and the 

Dalai Lama can begin to bridge differences, explore the meaning of 

genuine autonomy, and address longstanding grievances. 

As part of our China policy, I believe that the United States can 

play a constructive role by continuing to urge substantive resultsbased dialogue between China and the Dalai Lama to better the 

lives of Tibetans in China. 

We note that there have been six rounds of talks with the Dalai 

Lama’s representatives since 2002, with the last held in 2007. In 

the end, only the Chinese Government and the Tibetans themselves can address and resolve their differences. We look to them 

to do so peacefully and in accord with international standards of 

religious freedom and human rights. 

Thank you for your attention. Madam Chairman, I’d be happy to 

try and answer any questions that the committee may have. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Negroponte follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN D. NEGROPONTE, DEPUTY SECRETARY OF

STATE, DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, DC 

Chairman Boxer, Senator Murkowski, members of the committee, I am pleased 

to be here today to talk about the situation in Tibet. 

A little over a month ago, what began as peaceful protests in Lhasa erupted into 

violence and the loss of lives and property spanning the Tibet Autonomous Region 

and other Tibetan areas of China. The United States welcomes a stable, peaceful, 

and prosperous China, and we have a broad agenda with that country, which is a 

growing economic powerhouse, a nuclear P–5 member, and an increasingly important actor on the international scene. At the same time, we engage China in a way 

that is supportive of our political values—urging respect for human rights, religious 

freedom, and democracy. The United States recognizes Tibet as part of the People’s 

Republic of China, but we have very serious concerns about the recent events, 

human rights conditions, and limits on religious freedom there. The United States 

calls upon the PRC Government to exercise restraint in resolving the recent unrest 

and urges dialogue with the Dalai Lama, but it is up to China and the Tibetans 

to resolve their differences. In this testimony, I would like to touch on the recent 

events in Tibet, outline our response, and discuss next steps. 

RECENT EVENTS AND THE ADMINISTRATION’S RESPONSE

To the best of our knowledge, peaceful protests began in Lhasa on March 10, led 

by several hundred monks from three monasteries. Reports that Chinese police mistreated and arrested some of the monks angered Tibetans in Lhasa. On March 14, 

interaction between the protesters and the authorities in Lhasa descended into violence, including attacks on ethnic Han and Hui Muslim residents and their property. This violence led to a security crackdown and widespread arrests by the Chinese authorities. Over the next several days, protests spread to many other Tibetan 

areas of China. Chinese authorities have confirmed that security forces responded 

to protests in some areas with deadly force. Accurate information about the number 

of people killed or injured in the protests, riots, and subsequent crackdown and on 

the number of people arrested has been difficult to ascertain. While the Chinese 

Government has organized two tightly controlled trips for journalists and one for 

diplomats to Tibetan areas, it continues to restrict access to those areas, impose a 

virtual media blackout, and refuses access to the detainees. Last week, China’s 

state-run media acknowledged the detention of approximately 4,000 individuals in 

8 

Lhasa and in parts of Gansu province. Reports of mistreatment of detainees are 

numerous. 

We are deeply troubled by the reports of bloodshed, arrests, and mistreatment of 

detainees, and share the concerns of Members of Congress and the American people 

over these disturbing events. The President and Secretary Rice have called for the 

Chinese Government to exercise restraint and for all sides to refrain from violence. 

We urge all Tibetans to heed the Dalai Lama’s call for nonviolence as well. We have, 

at all levels of the administration, urged China to engage in substantive dialogue 

with the Dalai Lama directly and through his representatives. At the same time, 

we urge China to take a close look at longstanding policies in Tibetan areas that 

have created tensions because of their impact on Tibetan religion, culture, and livelihoods, to allow unfettered access to Tibet for diplomats and journalists, and to release protestors who expressed their views peacefully. We are also concerned about 

strident rhetorical attacks against the Dalai Lama. 

Since the outbreak of protests in March, we have spoken out about Tibet frequently and at the highest levels. The President expressed his concern to President 

Hu during a March 26 phone call. Secretary Rice has called Foreign Minister Yang 

and has spoken with him and publicly about the situation numerous times. I have 

personally discussed the situation with Chinese Ambassador Zhou Wenzhong and 

with the Dalai Lama’s Special Envoy, Lodi Gyari (LOW-dee GARE-ee), who I understand will be testifying in a few moments. On Monday, Under Secretary for Democracy and Global Affairs, Paula Dobriansky, met with the Dalai Lama in her capacity 

as Special Coordinator for Tibetan Issues. On the other side of the Pacific, our Embassy in Beijing, led by Ambassador Randt, has repeatedly pressed U.S. concerns 

with high-level officials in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Secretary Paulson also 

raised our concerns during his most recent trip to China. While we have made 

heavy use of our bilateral channels, we have also joined the European Union and 

others in raising our concerns at a March 25 meeting of the United Nations Human 

Rights Council in Geneva. Other leading members of the international community 

have joined us in calling for restraint and dialogue with the Dalai Lama. 

U.S. SUPPORT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN TIBET

I’d like to underscore that our support for human rights in Tibet did not start just 

this year. Our efforts with the PRC have spanned the history of our relationship 

since we established diplomatic relations in 1979. As the Secretary recently said, we 

show our support for human rights in Tibet in what we do every day in our working-level interactions with China. The President’s meetings with the Dalai Lama in 

both of his terms in office and his attendance at the Congressional Gold Medal ceremony honoring the Dalai Lama last fall are important demonstrations of support 

at the highest levels of the U.S. Government. The efforts of our Office for the 

Special Coordinator for Tibetan Issues, established over 10 years ago, are another 

tangible example of our commitment to human rights and religious freedom for 

Tibetans. 

The Tibetans have legitimate grievances, stemming from years of repression and 

Chinese policies that have adversely impacted Tibetan religion, culture, and livelihoods. In the months preceding the protests, restrictions on religious freedom were 

further tightened, leading to increased frustration among the local Tibetan population. In order to be a great and respected power, China will have to make real 

efforts to guarantee to its own citizens the internationally recognized rights and fundamental freedoms enshrined in China’s own constitution and in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. During the Secretary’s trip to Beijing in February, the 

Chinese agreed to resume our human rights dialogue. We hope to move quickly to 

resume the dialogue and use the opportunity to hold substantive discussions on the 

situation in Tibet at that meeting. 

As the President said, there is no better person for Chinese authorities to talk 

to than the Dalai Lama since he is the undisputed spiritual leader of the Tibetan 

people. He is also a man of peace. The Chinese Government should seize the opportunity to talk to those Tibetans, represented by the Dalai Lama, who oppose violence and do not seek independence for Tibet. If Beijing does not engage with the 

Dalai Lama now, it will only serve to strengthen those who advocate extreme views. 

An increasingly influential China has the responsibility to protect and uphold the 

rights of, and respect for, minority groups like Tibetans. Stability in China is also 

in our interest. We want to see a confident, strong China that protects the human 

rights of its citizens and acts responsibly around the world. Stability will not be possible unless Beijing addresses the grievances of the Tibetans and works together 

with them to preserve their culture, language, and religious freedom. 

9 

TIBET AND THE OLYMPICS

The Dalai Lama has said that he supports Beijing’s hosting of the Olympic Games 

and does not support a boycott. President Bush has announced his intention to attend the Olympic Games in Beijing and has made clear that he believes that it is 

important to show the Chinese people that we welcome their entrance onto the 

international stage. As our Secretary said recently, these Olympics are not just a 

moment of pride for the Chinese Government but also for 1.3 billion Chinese citizens. Calls for an Olympics boycott or sanctions could polarize attitudes on both 

sides. 

While, for these reasons, the U.S. Government wants to see a successful Olympics 

and does not support calls for an Olympics boycott, we recognize that some have 

a different view about a boycott. This position reflects real concerns, widely held in 

the United States and elsewhere, over China’s human rights record. Let me assure 

you that this administration will continue to take the opportunity before, during, 

and after the Olympics to talk to the Chinese about Tibet and human rights. We 

continue to urge China to fulfill its Olympics bid commitments to increase access 

to information and expand freedom of the press, including in Tibetan areas, as well 

as take other steps to improve its record on human rights and religious freedom. 

THE WAY FORWARD

Our policy toward China aims to shape the choices that Chinese leaders make 

about how to use their growing power. We use our bilateral discussions, as the 

President has noted, to make our concerns clear to Chinese officials and to encourage China to be a responsible actor at home and around the world. For the Chinese 

Government and the Tibetan people of China, there is a way forward. Through outreach and genuine dialogue, China and the Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader of the 

vast majority of Tibetans, can begin to bridge differences, explore the meaning of 

genuine autonomy and address longstanding grievances. As part of our China policy, 

I believe that the United States can play a constructive role in continuing to urge 

substantive, results-based dialogue between China and the Dalai Lama to better the 

lives of Tibetans in China. We note that there have been six rounds of talks with 

the Dalai Lama’s representatives since 2002, with the last held in 2007. In the end, 

only the Chinese Government and the Tibetans themselves can address and resolve 

their differences. We look to them to do so peacefully and in accord with international standards of religious freedom and human rights. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. 

I think each of us will have 7 minutes, and we’ll go back to a 

second round, if we need to. 

Secretary Negroponte, on April 2, 26 of my Senate colleagues 

joined me in sending a letter to Chinese President Hu Jintao about 

the situation in Tibet, and our letter called on the Government of 

China to do three things: First, to allow independent monitors and 

the foreign press unfettered access to the region; second, to release 

of those Tibetans detained for a peaceful protest; and, third, to engage in substantive dialogue with the Dalai Lama to restore stability and bring genuine autonomy to the region. 

Now, I was pleased to see that Undersecretary of State 

Dobriansky echoed those three requests in an op-ed that appeared 

earlier this week in the Washington Post. 

Now, Mr. Secretary, in your opening statement, you detail the 

high-level discussions that have taken place between United States 

and Chinese officials on Tibet, but you didn’t mention whether 

these high-level discussions have yielded any tangible results on 

these three matters: Allowing independent monitors and foreign 

press unfettered access, releasing Tibetans detained for peaceful 

protests, and engaging in substantive dialogue with the Dalai 

Lama to restore stability, et cetera. So, I guess my question is: 

Have these talks yielded any tangible results? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. What I would say in response, 

Madam Chairman, is, yes, as I mentioned, we have made 

10 

demarches at various levels, from the President on down. The 

President, the Secretary of State, myself, Ms. Dobriansky, our Ambassador, of course, on a very regular basis. But, I think that the 

results, thus far, I regret to report to you, have been minimal, at 

best. I would say, in one area, we pressed, very early on during this 

situation, for access by our consular officials who are stationed in 

the province adjacent to the Tibetan Autonomous Region, for access 

to Tibet, and that was—has not yet been granted. There was one 

group of diplomats, including an American embassy diplomatic official, who was given a guided tour of Lhasa at a fairly late stage 

in this situation. But, I’d say that, thus far, none of the requests 

and suggestions that we have made have been significantly addressed by the Beijing authorities. But, I have no doubt that they 

are aware, and vividly aware, of what it is that we are advocating. 

Senator BOXER. Well, I mean, it’s discouraging. I know that 

you’re discouraged that, so far, we haven’t seen anything bear fruit. 

And that’s one of the reasons, frankly, that I wanted to have this 

hearing. I’m hoping to push hard here, in our way, in each of our 

ways, to, maybe make some progress. 

Now, in 2002, President Bush signed the Tibetan Policy Act. 

That law states that the Secretary of State, ‘‘should make best efforts to establish an office in Lhasa, Tibet, to monitor, political, economic, and cultural developments in Tibet.’’ Now, I understand 

that such an office has not been established, and the United States 

monitors events in Tibet from our consulate in Chengdu, which is 

more than 750 miles away from the Tibetan capital of Lhasa. Do 

you agree that the United States should have a permanent diplomatic presence in Lhasa? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. The answer—the short answer to that 

is yes. We establish consulates in our respective countries, China 

and the United States, on a basis of reciprocity, and we each have 

given each other lists of cities in which we would like to establish 

consulates. And Lhasa is one of those cities listed in our list for— 

request for establishing a consular office. But, up until now, we 

have not been able to achieve that. In other words, it depends on 

the reciprocal consent of the Chinese Government. But, it is a priority for us to establish a consulate; and, were the Chinese Government to grant us permission to establish such a consulate in Lhasa, 

I’m confident that we could establish such an office in very short 

order. 

Senator BOXER. OK. Now, is Lhasa the first on that list of priorities? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. It is. 

Senator BOXER [continuing]. Of all of the cities? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Well, we have six or seven on the list, 

and Lhasa is not the first, but I think that, in today’s context and 

given the events that have happened, if the authorities in Tibet 

were to say that we were welcome to establish a consulate in 

Lhasa, I think we would promptly do that. 

Senator BOXER. Well, that’s not my question. I think, if this is 

truly a priority, and you don’t need to answer this, but I think we 

all know—all of us sitting here—that when we have requests to 

make, the priority of those requests are always very important. 

And, given what has happened in the Tibetan region, I would hope 

11 

you might go back and rejiggle these cities and put Lhasa at the 

top. I hope you consider speaking with Secretary Rice about that. 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. I think that’s a very fair suggestion. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you. Thank you. 

Let me ask you this. Do you, and I don’t mean to put you on the 

spot on this, but you’re a diplomat, and you’ll figure out how to answer it. [Laughter.] 

I know you have so much experience, because I’ve met with you 

over the years, but what I’m waiting for is an extremely strong and 

clear statement from the President on this issue, one that basically 

says, ‘‘I stand by the Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lama does not want, 

you know, to have a separate—is not a separatist, he wants to resolve this peacefully.’’ And I’m—because the President is going to 

the opening ceremonies and—I think—when I was asked about it, 

I just said, ‘‘Look, this is something that he could decide, but it 

doesn’t’’—because the—I feel bad for the athletes who have trained 

and all of that, so I understand all that, and I’m not being critical 

at all. But, what I think is important to do something. For example, make this strong statement, and also go to the Tibetan region. 

So, my question to you is: As a diplomat, do you think it’s possible that the President would consider making a clear, very strong 

and unequivocal statement, that he stands with the Dalai Lama 

and that his intention is, yes, to go to the Olympics, but also to go 

and visit the Tibetan region? Is that a possibility? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Well, let me answer it this way. The 

President, not only figuratively, but literally, has stood with the 

Dalai Lama. And you, perhaps, were at that ceremony, where he 

conferred the Congressional Gold Medal on the Dalai Lama. And 

that was a very strong statement, and one that was taken and 

done over the fairly vigorous objections of the Chinese authorities, 

but the President persisted and insisted on doing that. So, I don’t 

think there’s any doubt where the President stands on the issue of 

the Dalai Lama and human rights in Tibet. And, frankly, I can 

hardly think of a stronger advocate of human rights in our Government than the President of the United States. So, we’re going 

to—— 

Senator BOXER. So, do you think he would consider, or would you 

talk to him about, you know, visiting the Tibetan region? Because 

if he goes to China for the Olympics, it seems to me that could 

show a balance, that he’s going to the Olympics for the athletes, 

but he wants to make a statement, and he’s going to go to the Tibetan region. Any chance of that, that you’d support that recommendation? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. I will certainly convey that suggestion, but I would not want to give you any prediction—— 

Senator BOXER. OK. But, I hope you’ll consider it—— 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE [continuing]. As to what the likelihood 

there might be, right. 

Senator BOXER [continuing]. Because I think it would very important—yes, he did stand with the Dalai Lama, as did we all, but 

this is different because of the Olympics and because some world 

leaders are not going, et cetera, et cetera. I think his going to the 

Tibetan region, either before or after, would be very important. 

Well, I’ll stop—— 

12 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. But, I just want to make one more 

point. 

Senator BOXER. Yes. 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Madam Chairman, I do think it’s important to make, and I should have made it right at the outset. The 

President also believes it is very important, given the relationship 

we have with China and the different equities at stake, including 

human rights in China, that he have good relationships with the 

top Chinese leaders, so that he can engage them on these and 

many other delicate issues. So, I don’t think he wants, while totally 

supportive of human rights in China, he also wants to maintain the 

kind of relationship with Chinese authorities that permits him to 

get his message effectively across, and to not burn his bridges with 

the top Chinese leaders. 

Senator BOXER. Well, I don’t think I’ve suggested that. I don’t 

think—— 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. No, I don’t think you have. 

Senator BOXER [continuing]. Anybody has suggested it. And I can 

tell you this, when you really do have friends, you’ve got to tell 

them when you think they’re wrong. Otherwise, it isn’t a friendship. It’s not really a friendship. 

OK. Senator Murkowski. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

I want to continue this discussion about the dialogue. And you 

have said, Mr. Secretary, that—repeatedly—that the key is with 

the dialogue. And Paula Dobriansky, in her op-ed that the chairman mentioned, says, ‘‘Meaningful dialogue presents the only viable way forward.’’ And yet, I think all have expressed the level of 

frustration that the dialogue continues, and you have multiple 

rounds of talks, and we’re really not seeing that positive action, 

we’re not seeing the good results, or, really, results at all, coming 

forward. 

You’ve also just indicated, then, that sanctions, at least as they 

might fit in with the Olympics, would only serve to inflame the tensions, and that is not the route to take. Well, if we’re not making 

progress on dialogue, and sanctions are not the route to take because they only serve, further, to inflame tensions, what can we do 

more? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. We haven’t made progress—or, they 

have not made progress on dialogue, although, as you know, there 

have been discussions, in fits and starts over the past years, since 

2002, there have been seven sessions. There was dialogue previously, during the previous 20 years, ever since Deng Xiaoping, 

there have been sporadic efforts at coming to some kind of an understanding. So, I don’t think we should rule out the possibility— 

indeed, we shouldn’t lose hope that that kind of dialogue cannot be 

resumed at some point, and hopefully sooner rather than later. 

There’s also dialogue with our interlocutors in Beijing, and I 

think we have to keep bringing to their attention the concerns that 

we have about this situation. And I would have thought, given the 

outpouring of reaction that there’s been to the Olympics and some 

of the protests that have taken place in Europe and elsewhere, that 

they must be very mindful of the issues that this is creating for 

China’s image. And I would have thought that they have an interVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:27 Mar 09, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\47764.TXT MikeBB PsN: MIKEB
13 

est in thinking hard about what they can do, through a process of 

dialogue and other peaceful means, to work their way out of the 

very difficult and unsatisfactory situation in which they find themselves at the moment. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Well, and that was going to be one of my 

question, too, is, If you—you’ve recognized that it really is between 

Tibet and China, they are the ones who must resolve this issue. We 

can offer our input and help to facilitate, but, you know, sometimes 

maybe we’re not the best facilitator, or the best one to carry the 

message, so you look to others who can put that pressure. And, as 

you mentioned, the protests in Europe, the—yesterday—I guess it 

was yesterday—in response to demonstrations in China and the 

boycotts of the French companies, France sent three high-level diplomats to China to soothe the tensions over there, which makes you 

wonder whether China is essentially prepared now to use its economic clout to influence the international pressure on the subject 

of Tibet, or even Taiwan, a completely different subject from today’s hearing. But, it does make you wonder, How can we further 

attempt to influence China, when they don’t appear to be ‘‘influence-able’’? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Well, I guess—— 

Senator MURKOWSKI. It’s not a word, but—— 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. No—— 

Senator MURDOWSKI [continuing]. You know my point, here. 

[Laughter.] 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. I certainly do. And I think it’s hard, 

although I think that any country, China or any other country, in 

the world—cares about its international image. But, I think, more 

fundamentally, and as I said in my opening statement, they care 

about their own stability and the harmony of their own society. 

After all, Hu Jintao wants to create a harmonious society. Well, 

they’ve got some signs of fairly serious disharmony, if that’s a 

word, in Tibet and in the Tibetan-populated adjacent to the Tibetan Autonomous Region. So, I think they’ve got to be encouraged 

to see their way through this situation, and see their way to a 

point where they would realize and appreciate, I hope, that their 

own best interests are probably served by some kind of a dialogue 

about meaningful autonomy and some kind of a peaceful resolution 

of the Tibetan situation that is respectful of Tibetan human rights 

and their religion within the context of Chinese sovereignty. No 

one here is suggesting Tibetan independence. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Have we made any progress—you mentioned that, apparently, at least one guided tour was provided to 

a diplomat. In terms of the access that we have requested be given 

to diplomats and to journalists, is there anything there, that we 

can point to, where there has been a little bit of progress made? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. I believe there’s been a bit more access given to journalists. I have just been told that there were 

three tours for journalists. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. In recent months, then, or—— 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Since this crisis erupted. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Yes. 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. So, that’s to the good. I believe there’s 

been a bit of a reduction in the profile of the security forces, in 

14 

terms of the display of the army and so forth. And I think there 

probably are some measures that, if they were able to take, I think 

would perhaps help defuse this situation, such as lowering the security profile and taking a number of measures that wouldn’t be 

tantamount to offering independence or anything else. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. And we have encouraged or suggested that 

they do just that? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Well, I certainly would encourage the 

Chinese to do them. I mean, keeping the Liberation Army’s profile 

low, try to equip their police with less intimidating uniforms and 

gear, things like that. Certainly the more serious problems have to 

do with the Beijing authorities’ attempts to manage the religious 

affairs of the Tibetan people, which I think goes to the heart of the 

cultural questions at issue here. And also to stop, and Paula 

Dobriansky mentioned this in her op-ed piece, the vitriolic campaign against the Dalai Lama, who, after all, does not advocate 

independence, does not advocate boycotting the Olympic Games, 

and I said in my remarks, we believe is a man of peace. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you. My time is expired. 

Thank you. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator Feingold. 

Senator FEINGOLD. Thank you, Madam Chairman, for holding 

this timely and important hearing. 

Thank you, also, to the witnesses who come before this committee to provide us with your assessment of the situation in Tibet. 

Over the past few weeks, the waves of protests throughout Tibet 

have been met with brutal violence and an equally brutal crackdown. These tactics are a clear reminder of the injustices inflicted 

on the Tibetan people and the political and cultural and religious 

oppression that continues there. After almost 30 years, it is long 

past time for the Chinese Government to end these abuses and engage in meaningful dialogue with the Tibetan people, so I look forward to hearing more responses from Deputy Secretary Negroponte 

with regard to what actions the administration is taking to make 

clear to—this clear to the Chinese Government. 

The United States Government must use every available opportunity to engage China on its human rights record and its responsibilities as a key member of the international community. We cannot treat human rights as a side issue while we focus on trade or 

other pressing matters. And we cannot give China a pass, simply 

because of its power and importance. China is a great power, but 

it is not yet a good power. I hope this and future administrations, 

as well, will recognize that supporting human rights in China in 

and around the world is in our country’s interests and consistent 

with our country’s highest values. 

Mr. Negroponte, can you clarify what kinds of leverage the 

United States Government has with China when it comes to encouraging them to engage in direct dialogue with the Tibetan leaders? And have any new points of leverage emerged since the outbreak of the protests? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Well, I think that the most effective 

leverage, if one could call it that, Senator, is engagement with the 

authorities in Beijing, and to call to their attention the concerns we 

15 

have about this situation. In other terms, I think there are those 

who might advocate some kind of sanctions or a boycott of the 

Olympics and so forth, and, in our view, we think that that kind 

of behavior would seriously risk being counterproductive and would 

not advance us towards our objective. So, I think it’s through intense diplomatic dialogue. 

Senator FEINGOLD. Well, I understand, when Secretary Paulson 

was in China to discuss trade issues as a part of a routine economic exchange between the two nations, he agreed to raise concerns with—or, about Tibet. Can you elaborate on what is meant 

by ‘‘raising concerns’’ in this context? Has the administration conveyed concerns about the crackdown in Tibet directly to the Chinese Government? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. We certainly have. I cannot replay for 

you here the exact words of Secretary Paulson’s conversation, but 

as I mentioned earlier, even President Bush has raised our concerns about Tibet with President Hu Jintao. Secretary Rice has. I 

have, when I deal with my counterpart, the Executive Vice Foreign 

Minister of China. And what we basically say is, ‘‘We’re concerned 

about what we believe to be the abuse of the human rights and the 

religious rights and cultural freedoms of the Tibetan people, and 

we believe that you need to, you should, take measures to address 

this question through meaningful dialogue with Tibetan representatives.’’ 

Senator FEINGOLD. Given that India is host to the largest number of Tibetan exiles, what role do you see India playing with regards to Tibet and, specifically, in any dialogue, and how is the 

United States engaging with India on this point? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. I think I’d have to take that question, 

Senator. It’s a very good question, and I suspect that there have 

been discussions. I just cannot recall them at this particular moment. 

Senator FEINGOLD. If you could get that to me later, I’d appreciate it, Mr. Negroponte. 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Yes. 

[Ambassador Negroponte’s response follows:] 

India has hosted over 100,000 Tibetan refugees, the largest population outside 

China, since 1959, when the Dalai Lama and others fled China. The Indian Government provided many of the Tibetans who entered India before 1986 with registration certificates and residence permits, which could enable them to rent homes, operate businesses, conduct financial transactions, and travel internationally. Since 

1986, Tibetans have continued to enter India; after they receive an audience with 

the Dalai Lama they are often placed in various educational, vocational and religious institutions throughout the country. Tibetans regularly tell U.S. Government 

officials that the Indian Government treats them very well. 

Since 1991, the U.S. has funded reception centers and education, water, and 

health care programs for Tibetan refugees in India. Last year, for example, we provided $2.5 million to the Tibetan Refugee Reception Centers in Delhi, Dharamsala, 

and Kathmandu (Nepal) which provide food, accommodation, clothing and transportation fare to newly arrived refugees from Tibet. The Indian Government has been 

receptive to U.S. offers of assistance to Tibetan refugees. 

We are involved in quiet discussions with the Indian Government on the possible 

resettlement of some Tibetan refugees in the United States. U.S. officials at all levels regularly meet with both Indian Government officials and Tibetan exile leaders 

to confer about the situation in the region and to emphasize the U.S. position that 

China should engage in substantive dialogue with the Dalai Lama and address policies in Tibetan areas that have created tensions due to their impact on Tibetan religion, culture, and livelihoods. The Under Secretary for Democracy and Global AfVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:27 Mar 09, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\DOCS\47764.TXT MikeBB PsN: MIKEB
16 

fairs, Paula Dobriansky was in India on April 23 and 24 for meetings with the Indian Government, where a number of issues surrounding Tibet were discussed. 

Sensitivities in the India-China relationship, resulting in part from a longstanding border dispute and competition for regional influence, have limited India’s 

ability to facilitate dialogue between the Chinese Government and the Dalai Lama 

and his representatives. However, the Indian Government and its people have appealed to both the Chinese Government and the Dalai Lama and his representatives 

to resolve their differences through such a dialogue. 

Senator FEINGOLD. I note in your testimony that you discussed 

United States support for human rights in Tibet since 1979, and 

that, while a consular office does not exist in Lhasa, that you do, 

in your testimony, highlight the Office of the Special Coordinator 

for Tibetan Issues. How does this office coordinate with you on 

China policy, the Embassy in China, and other United States agencies? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Well, the coordinator for Tibet happens also to be the Undersecretary for Global Affairs, Ms. Paula 

Dobriansky, and we coordinate with each other directly. We consult 

on these matters. And Ms. Dobriansky has the lead on issues with 

regard to Tibet. And we work together in trying to implement the 

various policies that she advocates and for which she’s responsible. 

And she also relates, as well, to our Ambassador in Beijing on 

these issues. She maintains contact, of course, with the Tibetan 

community, including one of our panelists today, Mr. Lodi Gyari, 

and plays quite an active role in the issue of seeking to protect and 

advance the rights of the Tibetan people. 

Senator FEINGOLD. I’m also concerned about the arrest of those, 

by the Chinese Government, during the protests. Could you briefly 

discuss if the U.S. Government is aware of their locations and how 

they are being treated? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Well, the reports that we’ve had is 

that there have been many instances of mistreatment, but, as far 

as locations and the particulars of these instances, I would have to 

get that back to you for the record. 

[Ambassador Negroponte’s response follows:] 

In an April 10 report, the Congressional-Executive Commission on China cited an 

official Chinese report stating that over 4,400 persons had either surrendered voluntarily to authorities for engaging in ‘‘beating, smashing, looting, and burning’’ during riots, or had been detained on suspicion of engaging in such activities. Many 

of the individuals who surrendered voluntarily were subsequently released by authorities; however, Tibetan exile groups estimate that about 3,000 remain in custody. We have repeatedly asked for unfettered access to the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) and other Tibetan areas of China so that, among other things, U.S. diplomats could observe judicial proceedings against Tibetans charged in connection 

with recent events in Tibetan areas. Since the Chinese Government has denied such 

requests, we have not been able to independently confirm these numbers. 

As was widely reported in the international press last week, the Lhasa Intermediate People’s Court has issued sentences ranging from three years to life in prison to 30 Tibetans for their alleged participation in violent acts during the protests. 

We are concerned about reports that these individuals were not afforded basic protections of due process. We were particularly disturbed that criminal defense lawyers who volunteered to represent the detainees were denied permission to do so. 

Through our bilateral channels, the United States has raised, repeatedly and at 

the highest levels, our serious concerns regarding the status and treatment of those 

detained and arrested for their alleged participation in the protests. President Bush 

and Secretary Rice have spoken to their Chinese counterparts to urge restraint and 

the release of protesters who expressed their views peacefully. Ambassador Clark 

T. Randt at our Embassy in Beijing has raised the issue repeatedly with high-level 

officials in the Chinese Government. Officers from our Embassy and our consulate 

17 

General in Chengdu have repeatedly pressed Chinese officials at all levels for information regarding detainees, for unfettered access to the TAR and other affected 

areas, and for information on individual cases. to date, we have not received a positive response to our requests. 

We have called on the Chinese Government to ensure that all legal and administrative proceeding against persons alleged to have participated in violent acts during the recent protest throughout Tibetan areas of China are conducted in a manner 

that is both transparent and consistent with Chinese law and international human 

rights norms. We will continue to raise these concerns with our Chinese interlocutors, including as part of our upcoming bilateral human rights dialogue with China. 

Senator FEINGOLD. Is it something we’re working on? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. It certainly is, and it’s certainly a concern that we raise. 

Senator FEINGOLD. And what—— 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. But with limited access. 

Senator FEINGOLD. Yes. 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE [continuing]. I think it becomes a bit 

of a problem, and it’s one of the reasons we would like to be able 

to have direct access to the Tibetan Autonomous Region for our 

people. 

Senator FEINGOLD. Well, I’d—if—after this, if you could tell me 

what, specifically, we’re doing to try to—— 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Right. 

Senator FEINGOLD [continuing]. Get that done, I’d appreciate it. 

I thank you for your testimony. 

Thank the Chair. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you. 

Senator Menendez. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Madam Chairlady. 

And, Mr. Secretary, it’s good to see you again. 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Thank you. 

Senator MENENDEZ [continuing]. I have a great respect for you, 

been happy to have supported your nomination. We’ve worked on 

several things. But, I must say, when the Chair talked about your 

diplomatic ability to answer, it is being fulfilled richly today. 

I appreciate that you’ve said a lot, but I haven’t heard very 

much, and maybe that’s the way it’s going to be for the rest of the 

hearing. But, let me just ask you, what—I think Senator Murkowski was trying to get at this—what are the other policy options? 

If there are none, there are none. Let us know. But, what are the 

other policy options, what are the other levers, beyond this quiet 

diplomacy that is going on, that can be pursued, and that should 

be pursued? Because, I have to be honest with you, several decades 

after this quiet diplomacy that has been going on through various 

administrations, Democrat and Republicans alike, it seems to me 

that what we have is a string—a history of human rights violations, forced abortions, prison-camp labor, child labor, Tibetan ethnic cleansing, the exiling of the Dalai Lama, a support for a Sudanese Government that continues to pursue genocide in the Darfur 

region of the Sudan, a huge trade deficit that fuels the Chinese 

military industrial complex, and a country that largely owns our 

debt and constricts, I think, sometimes, some of our policy pursuits. 

So, from my perspective, this quiet engagement, this is the record, 

at least one perspective of the record, so give us some policy options here, if there are any, beyond this quiet diplomacy. 

18 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. I think I was fairly forthright with 

the chairman when she asked me, ‘‘Are these efforts that we’re 

making, thus far, having any effect with respect to the situation in 

Tibet?’’ and I said I didn’t think they had any particular effect, as 

yet, although I would like to hope that that situation can improve. 

You asked me what other levers do we have, what else can we 

do. As I said, I think the dilemma is that whenever one looks at 

using, or the possibility of using, various kinds of levers of influence, one has to do that in the context of, first of all, whether one 

thinks it would be effective with respect to the particular situation 

at hand, and the other is, one has to look at it in the context of 

the overall relationship. 

One encouraging piece of news, Senator, is that the Chinese Government has agreed to resume a human rights dialogue, bilateral 

human rights dialogue with us, which was suspended more than a 

year ago, and that we had been asking them to resume. And they 

have finally agreed to do that. They did that in the last several 

weeks. And we will be scheduling such a meeting in the month of 

May. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, we’re glad to hear we’re going to resume a dialogue that was suspended by the Chinese. That’s good. 

But, let me get to something more concrete. 

The reality is that we talk about the Olympics, which, in my 

mind, is the premier moment. And I agree the Olympics should not 

be boycotted, but there is a difference between boycotting the 

Olympics, which means not going to it, and having the President 

of the United States not go to the opening ceremony, which I think 

is a powerful message to the Chinese, but falls far short—our athletes will be able to go, the President may go to other events after 

that. But, the world will be watching at the opening, and it seems 

to me that the Olympic fundamental principles of Olympism, which 

are incorporated in the Olympic Charter, says the following, ‘‘The 

goal of Olympism is to play sport at the service of the harmonious 

development of man, with the view to promoting a peaceful society 

concerned with the preservation of human dignity.’’ And it further 

goes on to say, as part of the charter’s fundamental principles, 

‘‘Any form of discrimination with regard to a country or a person 

on grounds of race, religions, politics, gender, otherwise is incompatible with belonging to the Olympic movement.’’ Why not stand 

with the fundamental principles of Olympian—of Olympism and 

the Olympic Charter? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Well, I mean, obviously, we subscribe 

to those principles. 

Senator MENENDEZ. And why not, then, go to the opening ceremony, as a commitment to those principles? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. No, I understand your question. What 

I would say in reply is that the President has been invited to attend the Olympics in Beijing, he has said he would attend, and he 

has not made any change to those plans. But, as far as the situation in Tibet is concerned, there’s going to be an issue after the 

Olympics, as well. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, I agree, but one of your major levers 

will have been lost, and you haven’t described any levers to me, before, that have seemed to produce any great success. 

19 

Let me, finally, ask you—in 2007, Congress appropriated over $4 

million for programs in Tibet. And as the ranking—as the chairperson of the subcommittee on all of our foreign assistance, I’m interested—it included public health, education, sustainable development, environmental conservation, preserving cultural traditions, 

and protecting human rights. It requires that United States representatives to international financial institutions support projects 

in Tibet, only if they do not encourage the migration and settlement of non-Tibetans into Tibet or the transfer of Tibetan-owned 

properties. How effective have these programs been in achieving 

their goals? And what further measures can Congress take to—in 

terms of this type of foreign assistance—to achieve the efforts that 

we want in Tibet? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Apparently, Senator, since 1997, the United States Government has provided approximately $25 million 

in assistance to support ethnic Tibetan communities in China. 

These programs began as exchange programs through the old 

United States Information Agency, and have now expanded into 

community development programs managed by USAID. We also 

provide support to Tibetan-language broadcasting to China by 

Radio Free Asia and the Voice of America, and apparently we are 

planning to increase that level of broadcasting by about 30 percent, 

and we’re also providing humanitarian assistance to newly arrived 

Tibetan refugees in Nepal and India, in cooperation with the U.N. 

High Commissioner for Refugees. 

I think these are important programs, particularly, the broadcasting. I think the concern that we are able to show for the plight 

of the Tibetans through those broadcasts is important. But, clearly, 

none of these measures are as important as the fundamental improvement that could take place if there were a real, meaningful 

dialogue between the Chinese authorities and the people of Tibet. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator BOXER. Thanks. 

I’m going to give everyone an extra 5 minutes for a second round. 

And I will start off by saying, I think what you’re sensing here 

is a bit of frustration that, you know, there doesn’t seem to be an 

action agenda here. There seems to be goodwill and caring and 

compassion, but there is frustration—— 

I thought you left, Senator, but I will—I will finish my sentence 

and then—no, I’m going to yield to you. 

So, that’s the context in which I’m going to ask my second round. 

So, you can think about that. 

And now I’ll call on—no, no, Senator, please. You have a 7- 

minute round. Yes. 

Senator CARDIN. Thank you, Madam Chair. I was in the outer 

room with an appointment. I apologize for that. And I apologize for 

the disruption. 

Secretary Negroponte, you know from our prior discussions I 

have the utmost confidence in your diplomatic skills and your service to our country, but I must tell you, I disagree with the strategies that this administration and previous administrations have 

used in regards to China. 

We were told that if we engaged China, we will be more successful in the policies that we are trying to implement. So, we engaged 

20 

China on trade, and they don’t enforce our intellectual property 

rights. They subsidize, they manipulate currency, and they get all 

the advantages of the U.S. market. We have a huge deficit today 

with China as a result of it. We are told that dialogue will bring 

about change. And it hasn’t brought about change. 

We’re then told that, by dialogue, we can change the human 

rights records of that country. That was one of the main reasons, 

one of the main justifications given for normalizing trade relations 

with China. We find that the press is not free, the rights of dissent 

are not there. We are told that dialogue will make a difference, and 

it hasn’t. 

Now, in Tibet, we’re told, once again, that dialogue is the right 

course. In the meantime, the Chinese Government, as you point 

out, is manipulating the press to the point that the public within 

China supports many of the oppressive policies that the Chinese 

Government is using. This makes it even more difficult for us to 

see the types of changes in China that we would like to see. 

So, I must tell you, I have a hard time understanding this administration’s policy as it relates to China. I want to be at the table 

with China. I want the dialogue to continue with China. I don’t 

want to cut off relations with China. But, I think China today feels 

that they can do pretty much whatever they want to, that they 

have more leverage against us than we have against them. Therefore, the likelihood of them changing their course because of pressure put on by our country is minimal, because they don’t believe 

we’ll do anything. 

Now, tell me where I’m wrong. Because I hope I am wrong. I 

must tell you, I am deeply concerned about the passive policies of 

this country for many years, predating this administration, as it relates to our relationship with China. Today, I think we’re paying 

a heavy price, not just in the human rights violation, which is 

against our principles, but on international trade and many other 

fronts where China has not been helpful as a friend of the United 

States. 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. I would say this, Senator. I think it’s 

a much more mixed picture than the one that you paint. I think 

that engagement with China is a long-term proposition. If you look 

at the economic side, for example, our exports to China now are 

starting to grow at a very rapid rate. And I know we have a deficit, 

but our exports went up to $65 billion last year, up 18 percent from 

the previous year. 

Senator CARDIN. May I just challenge you on that issue? Because, of course, the trade imbalance has only grown since we have 

engaged China in normal trade relations, and the manipulation of 

China’s currency is still extreme. Even though we’ve seen a change 

in the United States values, the Chinese practice of holding their 

currency to ours has prevented a fair exchange that all economists 

say should take place between their currency and ours. 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Well, the renminbi, the Chinese currency, is now under seven renminbi to the dollar, which is the first 

time since 1994. So, there has been an appreciation. It’s appreciated about 18 percent since July 2005, when they abandoned 

their currency. But, all I’m trying to say is, this is a multifaceted, 

very broad relationship. I lead our dialogue with China, the soVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:27 Mar 09, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\47764.TXT MikeBB PsN: MIKEB
21 

called ‘‘senior dialogue’’ with my counterpart, and we talk about 

global issues, we talk about security on the Korean Peninsula. 

China is very important to the whole issue of the Six-Party Talks 

on North Korea. We talk about Darfur, where they’re sending an 

engineering battalion, and they have, I think, moderated their position with respect to the Sudan. And we work with them on such 

intractable issues as the question of Iran and its nuclear program. 

So, it’s a much more mixed picture, and I don’t think it’s quite 

so categorical as you suggested. 

Senator CARDIN. I would certainly agree with you that it is a 

complicated arrangement. I’m not sure there’s so much of a mixed 

message, but clearly on human rights and clearly on economic 

issues, we have not accomplished what was anticipated when we 

normalized relations with China. At that time we were told that if 

we could only communicate with China, if we could only bring 

them into the major powers in discussing responsibility and what 

it means to become a major power, that we would see dramatic 

changes occur. Yes, we’ve seen dramatic changes occur in China. 

They’re a lot more competitive, and they are unfairly penetrating 

our market, but we haven’t seen the type of responsible conduct 

that was at least part of the deal. 

I remember, when we normalized trade with China, we set up a 

commission that was supposed to look at human rights issues. That 

commission hasn’t been very active. And certainly, as we were told 

at the time, we’d have to put teeth into it because having that information and putting a spotlight on it wouldn’t be enough. Well, 

we put a spotlight on a lot of things, we talk a lot, and I appreciate 

the fact that the President met with the Dalai Lama. I think that 

was a very positive move, a very positive move. And we are putting 

a spotlight on this issue. And the international press has been pretty clear about it. But, we have to be stronger. We’re stronger with 

our closer allies than we are sometimes with those countries that 

we’re just timid about, and I just think it’s wrong. 

So, I would just urge us all to be more aggressive in making it 

clear to China that it’s wrong for the government in power to act 

as oppressively as they did in Tibet. It was wrong. They can’t justify it under any circumstances. There has to be a price to pay 

internationally when that type of conduct goes without correction. 

Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you very much. 

So, we’re going to have 5 minutes more, whoever would like to. 

And I think, again, what I was saying is that there is a sense 

of frustration on both sides of the aisle. It seems every time we get 

to a point, you know, again, we feel your compassion and concern, 

and I believe it’s real, but China’s important. China’s important. Of 

course China’s important. I voted to have normalized trade relations with China, even though I had a lot of concerns, because I 

don’t want to isolate China, but, at the same time, when you welcome China into the world, and we’re their biggest customer, and 

the good things that they’re getting because of our customers, 

you’ve got to be honest here, and you can’t be timid, as the good 

Senator from Maryland said. 

So, you know, I’m going to—just going to go through a few ideas 

with you, because what I’d like to see out of this administration is, 

22 

you know, a six-point plan, one of them being that we’re going to 

make opening a consulate in Lhasa our No. 1 priority of the new 

offices we want to open up. And that would be a good signal. No. 

1. We’re reviewing it, we’re moving it up on the list to No. 1. I 

think that would be good. 

No. 2, a strong statement by the President that, since he’s going 

to China, he will go to the Tibet region. I think that’s very important. 

Three—and this—I will ask you this question, because I don’t 

know the answer on this one—because our European friends are 

pretty strong on this—Germany, France, the United Kingdom—are 

you talking with them about this? Are you working on some kind 

of a plan where we could all work together on approaching China? 

Are you already doing this? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. There was a meeting of the Human 

Rights Council in Geneva recently, and we worked with our European friends on that issue. 

Senator BOXER. In what way did you work on the issue? What 

did you say we should do together? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Well, no, what I’m saying is that 

there was an expression of concern at that Council about what the 

Chinese are doing in Tibet, and we worked with our European 

friends on the statements that were made there. But, in terms of 

some kind of a concerted policy, I’m not aware that we have 

any—— 

Senator BOXER. OK. 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE [continuing]. Such initiative underway 

at the moment. 

Senator BOXER. OK. Well, that’s something I think we should 

consider, because unity gives strength. I mean, that gives more 

oomph to what we’re trying to do. 

Is the State Department insisting that there be U.S. diplomats 

at the trials of the Tibetans, those 1,000 people that we think are 

going to have a trial? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Well, we want—— 

Senator BOXER [continuing]. May 1? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. We want the maximum access possible, and, quite frankly, Madam Chairman, this was one of the 

first issues that I raised with the Ambassador of China when he 

came in to see me on this Tibet issue very early on, is, we really 

want access for our people, and as soon as possible. And I think 

it’s—— 

Senator BOXER. Has that been done? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE [continuing]. Something we should 

continue to insist upon—— 

Senator BOXER. OK. 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE [continuing]. And we have not been 

given adequate access. 

Senator BOXER. Right. 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. And we would like—— 

Senator BOXER. So, you are insisting—— 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Yes. 

Senator BOXER [continuing]. That there be U.S. diplomats at the 

trials and U.S. diplomats, journalists, and humanitarian missions 

23 

be allowed into the Tibetan region. Are you insisting verbally, or 

are you insisting in writing, or is it back-channel? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Well, no, this was in conversations 

that I had with the Ambassador of China when he came in to call 

on me officially at the Department of State. I didn’t say access specifically to the trials, I said access to Tibet. 

Senator BOXER. Are you aware that the U.N. is trying to get special rapporteurs on torture, extrajudicial killings, religious freedom, 

and the High Commissioner on Human Rights into the country— 

into the Tibetan region, rather? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. I wasn’t specifically aware of it, but 

I’m not surprised, and I think that would be good idea. 

Senator BOXER. All right. Well, let me just say—I mean, I think, 

just from the things that I’ve suggested—Senator Murkowski, Senator Menendez, Senator Cardin—I mean, I’m hoping—and what 

I’m going to do at the end of all this is just send you a letter about, 

you know, what an action plan—— 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Right. 

Senator BOXER [continuing]. Might look like, and maybe you 

could let us know. Because, I’ll tell you something, the days are 

going forward, the trials are coming, the Olympics are coming, the 

torch is going around the world, people are upset, there’s violence, 

and so on, the Dalai Lama says he doesn’t want, you know, a separate country, the Chinese says he does, and this thing is getting 

dangerous. And so, again, I just want you to know—and I will call 

on my colleagues to complete this round—how much I appreciate 

your coming here today. I think it’s important that you did. And 

we appreciate it, but we hope that you will be working with us as 

we formulate an action plan on this, so that it’s not just, ‘‘We’re 

trying. We’re upset, but China’s important.’’ You know, I get all 

that. But, we need to have an action plan, and I don’t think anything that any of us here have suggested is, you know, that far out 

of commonsense thought. So, will you work with us as we move forward? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Thank you for that, and we look forward to receiving your letter. 

Senator BOXER. That’d be great. And hopefully we can do a joint 

letter across the aisle. 

Senator Murkowski. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Madam Chair. I didn’t have a 

final question, but I appreciate your suggestions, Madam Chairman, in terms of action items. I think it is important to know that, 

as we all leave this hearing, that there is going to be more than 

just the same attempt at dialogue. 

One quick question for you, Mr. Secretary, in terms of the financial institutions that may be at play. What role does the World 

Bank play in Tibet? And—I’m asking the question, because we’ve 

talked about—well, perhaps, sanctions as they relate to the Olympics are not the way to go, but we know that, in dealing with other 

issues, sometimes the way to get attention is through the financial 

route. Can you enlighten me a little bit, in terms of the financial—— 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Right. 

Senator MURDOWSKI [continuing]. Institutions that—— 

24 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Yes. 

Senator MURDOWSKI [continuing]. Might be at play here? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Well, to the best of my knowledge, 

they have no role in Tibet. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. OK. 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE [continuing]. And, of course, China 

itself, at the moment, is in quite a favorable—— 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Right. 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE [continuing]. Financial position, with 

1.6 trillion, or almost 1.7 trillion, in reserves. And, in fact, they’ve 

invested quite a bit in the economic modernization of Tibet. I think 

that’s actually been one of the controversial issues for the Tibetan 

residents there, because there’s been an issue of the migration, the 

inward migration of Han Chinese into the Tibet Autonomous Region. So, the impact of modernization, I think, is one of the issues 

for the people of Tibet. But, no, there is no role, that I’m aware of, 

of the World Bank in Tibet. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Madam Chair, recognizing that we do have 

two other panels, I will reserve my time. Thank you. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. 

Senator Menendez. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just a couple of 

quick questions. 

Mr. Secretary, in the fiscal year 2009 budget, the President requested cuts to Radio Free Asia and Voice of America. These programs include Tibetan broadcasts, and we have been told that cuts 

in all broadcasts to the PRC are still planned. So, if we’re going to 

increase Tibetan—— 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. We are. 

Senator MENENDEZ [continuing]. Increases—well, then, I’m—assume the President’s going to change, or seek a further request 

from the Congress than what he submitted, because right now 

what we have is cuts, not improvements. 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. The current plan is to increase those 

broadcasts through the end of the fiscal year, and we’ll obviously 

have to address the issue you raise, because that budget was sent 

up, I believe, prior to the recent situation with respect to Tibet. 

But, we certainly don’t want to cut our broadcasts. 

Senator MENENDEZ. So, your increase was only because of the incidents that took place, is that—— 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Excuse me? 

Senator MENENDEZ. Your increase that you talked about is only 

because of the incidents—— 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. I believe so, yes. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Oh. 

With reference to the consulate question, isn’t it true that the 

Chinese wants consulates here in the United States? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Yes. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Isn’t it true that there’s reciprocity of agreement—we have to agree to those, as well? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Yes. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Is it true, then, if you were to say that 

Lhasa—‘‘If you don’t get Lhasa, you don’t get another consulate 

here in the United States,’’ that that would be leverage for you? 

25 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. That would be leverage. We have on 

our list six or seven consulates that we want in China, so in fact, 

I think we’ve asked for more in China than they have asked of us. 

But, in any case, I take the suggestion that Chairman Boxer put 

forward, which is that we, perhaps, ought to bump up the priority 

that we assign to Lhasa on our list of consulates that we would like 

to seek in China. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Finally, the International Olympic Committee’s evaluation of China’s 2001 Olympic bid documented that, ‘‘It 

was confirmed to the Commission that there will be no restrictions 

on media reporting and movement of journalists, up to and including’’—up to and including—‘‘the Olympic Games.’’ And, at that 

time, the Secretary General of the Beijing Bid Committee said, ‘‘I 

think we will give the media complete freedom to report, when they 

come to China. We have made our guarantees in our bid documents. All the world’s media will be welcome to come to China.’’ 

So, what steps are we taking to ensure that China abides by its 

commitment to the IOC to allow media access, including in Tibet? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Well, clearly that—what they’ve done 

with respect to Tibet is not consistent with that commitment, and 

I think we must continue to call that to their attention. 

Senator MENENDEZ. We have IOC representatives, don’t we, from 

the United States? Are we raising our voices, in this respect? 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Well, and we also have our own voice. 

Senator MENENDEZ. No, but this is the committee that ultimately 

oversees the bidding process and the fulfillment of the games. It 

seems to me that we have another point of leverage. 

I just don’t think—just to echo the chairlady’s comments, which 

I join in, totally—that the different points of leverage that are 

available to the United States Government are not being as 

proactively pursued as they can be. And I would hope that the message you take away from today’s hearing, and for others who 

couldn’t be here today, is that we are looking for a much more 

proactive policy. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you. 

Senator Cardin. 

Senator CARDIN. I’ll yield back my time so we can get to the next 

panel. 

Senator BOXER. OK. 

Well, thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. We—— 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator BOXER [continuing]. Do appreciate all the time. And, of 

course, you’re welcome to stay or leave. I know you have a—— 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Thank you. 

Senator BOXER [continuing]. Hectic schedule. 

Ambassador NEGROPONTE. Appreciate it. 

Senator BOXER. And we are honored to call up our second panel: 

Mr. Richard Gere, president of the Gere Foundation, and chairman 

of the board, International Campaign for Tibet; and Mr. Lodi 

Gyari, Special Envoy of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, in Washington, DC. 

Mr. Secretary, I see that—the cameras are here for you, right? 

[Laughter.] 

26 

Is that—they’re all following you. Or for me, for that matter. 

[Laughter.] 

[Pause.] 

Senator BOXER. What we’re going to do is—Mr. Richard Gere is 

going to make a statement, and then he’s going to introduce Mr. 

Gyari, and then we’ll hear from Mr. Gyari. 

So, Mr. Gere, whenever you’re ready, we’re ready for you. And 

we thank you very much for being here. 

STATEMENT OF RICHARD GERE, PRESIDENT, THE GERE 

FOUNDATION, AND CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN FOR TIBET (ICT), NEW YORK, NY 

Mr. GERE. I don’t know much about this media thing of microphones and this, but—— 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. GERE. Look, I’m just so pleased and—on many levels—that 

this meeting has taken place, but also the incredible education that 

you all have on this subject. It’s something that touches me very 

deeply. 

Madam Chairman, Senator Murkowski, and other members of 

the subcommittee, thank you for inviting me here today to speak 

on the crisis of Tibet. 

And, as we know, this is an incredibly vast subject, which is not 

just Tibet, but takes into account the entire area of Asia, and now 

the entire world. So, I’m going to confine myself to a smaller area, 

and—in a brief statement—and turn this over, actually, to my 

friend. 

I’m here as chairman of the board of directors of the International Campaign for Tibet, which advocates on behalf of the 

rights of Tibetans and a negotiated solution on the future of Tibet. 

I am here also to introduce and support my long-time friend and 

colleague Lodi Gyaltsen Gyari, who is the lead negotiator with the 

Chinese Government in his role as Special Envoy to His Holiness 

the Dalai Lama. 

Madam Chairman, it was only 6 months ago that we gathered 

here across the street in the Capitol Rotunda to witness a most 

moving and remarkable historic event. It was the awarding of a 

Congressional Gold Medal to His Holiness the Dalai Lama. It really was an amazing thing. For me, deeply emotional. I was humbled, 

and I was very honored to watch His Holiness receive from the 

United States Congress its highest recognition for his lifelong devotion to peace, compassion, and total nonviolence, and for speaking 

the truth about the condition of his people. 

Not only did the ceremony touch me spiritually, it made me 

deeply proud to be an American. I was there with the President of 

the United States, Members of Congress, both parties standing side 

by side with the Dalai Lama, in unified support of his efforts on 

behalf of the Tibetan people. By becoming the first American President to appear publicly with His Holiness, President Bush sent a 

clear signal of his commitment to put the United States on the side 

of human rights and religious freedom and to preserve the cultural 

and linguistic uniqueness of the Tibetan people. 

On March 10, a vortex opened up over Tibet, the unleashing of 

countless layers of frustration and resentment. The unrest inside 

27 

Tibet, which continues to this day, did not start because of the Beijing Olympics, it was not instigated by the Dalai Lama, no matter 

what the Chinese authorities have so offensively claimed; the spontaneous demonstrations and unrest which were the direct result of 

nearly six decades of brutal repression and calculated efforts to 

control religious practice and attack the very foundations of Tibetan religious, cultural, and ethnic identity. The cultural resolution is still alive and very well inside of Tibet. 

I’ve been especially disturbed by the news that some monks have 

resorted to suicide after being forced to denounce His Holiness the 

Dalai Lama as part of the oppressive patriotic education campaign 

now underway in monasteries and schools throughout Tibet. 

There’s a particular story, that moves me, of a monk named 

Lekstok, from Goman Monastery. Lekstok was an elderly man. He 

was 75 years old. After the demonstrations started, they were confined to their monastery. He left with two students to get some 

food and supplies. The Chinese security forces came upon them, 

beat them, threw them in jail, continued to beat and torture them 

for several days, released them. Lekstok and his two students went 

back to the monastery, and, very soon after, he wrote a note saying 

that he could no longer take the repression, and he killed himself. 

Please understand how deeply this offense is of denouncing His 

Holiness, what that feels like to a monk or a nun, and how much 

suicide violates one of the cardinal precepts of the Buddhist faith. 

You can sense how deeply depressed and tortured these people are. 

There’s actually another person here I’d like to introduce. Is 

Ngawang Sangdrol here? Yeah, this is a success story, in many 

ways. I want to make sure I have the information here. 

Now, Ngawang is a former Tibetan nun and a political prisoner. 

She was 13 years old when she was arrested, and she was detained 

and tortured for political activities. She’d go on to spend 11 years 

as a political prisoner in the infamous Drapchi prison in Lhasa. 

Her crime was to publicly call for freedom in Tibet and declare her 

love for the Dalai Lama. Thirteen years. 

The efforts of the current Bush administration and the U.S. Congress secured Ngawang Sangdrol’s early release from prison and allowed her to travel to the United States. Since then, she has served 

as a tireless advocate for the Tibetan people, traveling the world 

to share her firsthand account of repression in Tibet. 

We did have some effect, in this case; we did get her out of prison. And we can do these things, if we put our minds to it, and that 

really is the issue that we’re all speaking to. If we put our minds 

to it. 

Since Buddhism took hold in Tibet, 1,300 years ago, Tibetans 

have worked single-pointedly to rid themselves of anger and violence and hatred, turning these into the noble expressions of love, 

compassion, and forgiveness. This is their cultural legacy. But, they 

have been left with so little opportunity and have experienced so 

much brutality for so many years, they have reached the tipping 

point of despair and hopelessness. But, right now the whole world 

is watching. 

At the Congressional Gold Medal Ceremony, the President expressed his solidarity for the plight of the Tibetan people and embraced the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate and his cause of basic freeVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:27 Mar 09, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\47764.TXT MikeBB PsN: MIKEB
28 

doms and human decency in Tibet. Yet, today, when Tibetans are 

in their greatest moment of need, we have heard only a passing 

comment from the President of the United States. 

I was pleased to read the piece from Undersecretary Dobriansky 

that was published in the Washington Post on Monday, and it was 

a good article, following some previous very public fumbling on the 

issue, which was referred to before, when the National Security Advisor, Stephen Hadley, commented on the crisis, mentioning Nepal 

repeatedly, and, for some reason, didn’t say the word ‘‘Tibet.’’ I was 

beginning to wonder how we can trust this administration to do the 

right thing when they can’t even find Tibet, apparently, on the 

map. 

I’m still waiting for the President to throw some weight behind 

this issue and become publicly engaged. We’re looking for effective 

policies that yield results for those who are suffering now. We’re 

in a tug-of-war between freedom and repression; literally, survival 

and extinction. The cycle will not end until we see a negotiated solution grounded in genuine harmony and trust between the Chinese and Tibetan peoples. 

Let’s not be fooled by the Communist Party’s concept of a ‘‘harmonious society,’’ which is the catch phrase now that’s going 

around. We now know that this is a very hollow slogan. Genuine 

peace and stability do not emerge from the barrel of a gun. Genuine harmony between people is based on the ability to speak the 

truth. And this requires dialogue and goodwill, both of which, if we 

listen to the rhetoric coming out of Beijing, are in short supply 

among the Chinese leadership. 

We must avoid further alienating the Chinese people, who themselves have been victimized and are governed by the same leaders 

that are authorizing the crackdown in Tibet. It’s desperately important that we ensure that our Chinese brothers and sisters have access to the truth, and we must hope and pray that they will take 

advantage of the opportunity. 

Of course we applaud the Chinese for their extraordinary economic success and the sense of national achievement. It was interesting, when I was in San Francisco for the demonstrations there, 

with the passing of the torch. I became aware of this really interesting subtlety between ethnic pride and national pride. And what 

I was sensing there was a—of course there’s a sense of 

‘‘Chineseness,’’ and especially ‘‘Han Chineseness’’ in this moment. 

It’s not necessarily for the Communist Party or for any governmental system, but, of course, a natural sense of being Chinese and 

being proud of that. And we have to be aware of this distinction. 

At the same time, we must not fail to take pride in the principles 

that have made our own nation great, are enshrined in the universal declaration of human rights and hold in their realization the 

real promise of world peace. The United States and like-minded nations must do whatever we can to redirect Chinese ambition onto 

the path of democracy and human rights for everyone. 

Paradoxically, the present crisis can be seen as an opening to 

create a framework for the Chinese leadership themselves to initiate a meaningful results-based dialogue with the Dalai Lama. 

Surely, Chinese leaders, despite what they say, must realize that 

His Holiness, with his unwavering commitment to peace, nonVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:27 Mar 09, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\47764.TXT MikeBB PsN: MIKEB
29 

violence, and an autonomous Tibet within the structure of the PRC, 

is critical to the lasting stability of the region. 

For Tibetans and for the larger world, only the Dalai Lama can 

serve as a foundation of legitimacy for Chinese rule. Key to moving 

forward is developing a better understanding of the internal political dynamics within the Chinese leadership concerning Tibet. Are 

there differences of opinion? Are there voices of sanity there? 

One such light in the darkness is a recent resolution signed by 

over 100 very, very courageous Chinese intellectuals in the mainland demanding a rethinking of China’s Tibet policy, calling for an 

immediate end to the demonization of Tibetans. And from that I’ll 

quote, ‘‘We hold that we must eliminate animosity and bring about 

national reconciliation, not continue to increase divisions between 

nationalities. A country that wishes to avoid the partition of its territory must first avoid divisions among its nationalities. Therefore, 

we appeal to the leaders of our country to hold direct dialogue with 

the Dalai Lama. We hope that the Chinese and Tibetan people 

would do away with the misunderstandings between them, develop 

their interactions with each other, and achieve unity. Government 

departments, as much as popular organizations and religious figures, should make great efforts toward this goal.’’ 

We don’t know what’s happened to them, by the way, but I’m curious. 

This gives us tremendous wonder as to how and why Chinese 

leaders continue to make such wrong-handed policy statements and 

decisions that run so counter to their national goals. Are there 

Communist leaders brave enough to envision a positive resolution 

in Tibet that will enhance China internally and internationally as 

a nation of peace, prosperity, and genuine harmony? 

The one-party system has created a political culture that does 

not allow for unwelcome news to move up the chain. Field reports 

of growing hopelessness, anger, and resentment inside of Tibet—in 

the cities and villages, and among the nomads—have had little 

chance of making it to the desks of top officials. So, it’s not hard 

to imagine that the extent of the uprisings and the international 

reaction have caught them off guard. We know we are witnessing 

a complete breakdown of China’s Tibet policy. And I suspect leaders in Beijing are coming to realize this, too. 

If we learn more about the internal Chinese debate, we can identify opportunities for moving forward on a dialogue that benefits 

both China and Tibet as their interests are definitely not mutually 

exclusive. Key to this is President Hu Jintao himself. This is clearly a defining moment for him—tests his leadership, offers him a 

distinct opportunity, possibly for greatness. He was the party chief 

in the Tibet Autonomous Region during the 1989 crackdown. His 

rise to power was propelled by the hardline approach he held at 

that time. Some have suggested that Hu, with his background, is 

well positioned for a Nixon-goes-to-China moment on the Tibet 

question. Let’s hope that he has both the courage and the stature 

to heed the call. 

American leaders and other heads of state must urge him to 

seize the critical moment and remind him of the great lost opportunity for China and its—and his—emerging legacy if he does not. 

30 

Now, more than ever, instead of blaming the Dalai Lama, Beijing 

must reflect on the failures of its strategy for Tibet. It’s in his own 

long-term interest to recognize what led to the current instability 

and to engage, for the first time, to the genuine grievances of the 

Tibetan people, and embrace the Dalai Lama as a partner in earnest dialogue. I urge Congress to vigorously promote policies toward this goal before it’s too late. 

Finally, I want to express my deep appreciation for the political 

and programmatic support that the U.S. Congress has provided for 

the Tibetan people. It was suggested before, and it has been wonderful. It’s not always been easy to keep the financing and support 

there, but it has been there, and I thank you all for that. This support, from humanitarian assistance to refugees to Voice of America, 

Radio Free Asia, Tibetan Language Broadcasts, it’s all been crucial. 

It’s created a nation of people who still believe in the United States 

of America as a beacon of freedom. And, in a sometimes very dark 

world, that’s incredibly important to them. Of this support, the 

American people can be very, very proud. 

Over the years, it’s been my pleasure to get to know many Members of Congress and United States Government officials who work 

to advance Tibetan issues. Some are long retired, like Senator Claiborne Pell. Others, like Senator Moynihan and my dear friend Congressman Tom Lantos, are gone from us now. Julia Taft, who held 

the position of Special Coordinator for Tibetan Issues of the State 

Department, has also recently passed away. Just days before her 

passing, the International Campaign for Tibet awarded Julia its 

Light of Truth Award, which is very important to us, for her significant contributions to the public understanding of Tibet and its 

people. I know Julia also had many friends in the Congress who 

supported and respected her work to promote the best humanitarian engagement possible by these United States with those less 

fortunate around the world. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Gere follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RICHARD GERE, PRESIDENT, THE GERE FOUNDATION AND

CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN FOR TIBET, 

NEW YORK, NY 

Madam Chairman, Senator Murkowski, other members of the subcommittee, 

thank you for inviting me here today to speak on the crisis in Tibet. 

I am here as the chairman of the Board of Directors of the International Campaign for Tibet, which advocates on behalf of the rights of Tibetans and a negotiated 

solution on the future of Tibet. I am also here to introduce and support my longtime 

friend and colleague, Lodi Gyaltsen Gyari, who serves as lead negotiator with the 

Chinese Government in his role as Special Envoy of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. 

Madam Chairman, it was only 6 months ago that we gathered here, across the 

street in the Capitol Rotunda, to witness a most-moving and remarkable historic 

event—the awarding of the Congressional Gold Medal to His Holiness the Dalai 

Lama. I was honored and humbled to watch as His Holiness received from the 

United States Congress its highest recognition for his lifelong devotion to peace, 

compassion, and nonviolence, and for speaking the truth about the condition of his 

people. 

Not only did the ceremony touch me spiritually, it made me deeply proud to be 

an American and to see the President and Members of Congress, of both parties, 

standing side by side with the Dalai Lama in unified support of his efforts on behalf 

of the Tibetan people. By becoming the first American President to appear publicly 

with His Holiness, President Bush sent a clear signal of his commitment to put the 

31 

1This Week with George Stephanopolous, ABC, April 13, 2008. 

United States on the side of human rights and religious freedom, and to preserve 

the cultural and linguistic uniqueness of the Tibetan people. 

On March 10, a vortex opened up over Tibet: The unleashing of countless layers 

of frustration and resentment. The unrest inside Tibet, which continues to this day, 

did not start because of the Beijing Olympics. It was not instigated by the Dalai 

Lama, no matter what the Chinese authorities have so offensively claimed. 

The spontaneous demonstrations and unrest were the direct result of nearly six 

decades of brutal repression and calculated efforts to control religious practice and 

attack the very foundations of the Tibetan religious, cultural, and ethnic identity. 

The Cultural Revolution is still alive and well inside Tibet. 

Since Buddhism took hold in Tibet 1,300 years ago, Tibetans have worked single 

pointedly to rid themselves of anger, violence, and hatred turning these into the 

noble expressions of love, compassion, and forgiveness. This is their cultural legacy. 

But they have been left with so little opportunity and have experienced such brutality for so many years that they have reached the tipping point of despair and 

hopelessness. 

Now the whole world is watching. At the Congressional Gold Medal ceremony, the 

President expressed his solidarity for the plight of the Tibetan people and embraced 

the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate and his cause of basic freedoms and human decency 

in Tibet. Yet, today, when Tibetans are in their greatest moment of need, we have 

heard only a passing comment from the President. 

I was pleased to read the piece that Under Secretary Dobriansky had published 

in the paper on Monday. Following some previous very public fumbling of this issue, 

even from the President’s top National Security advisor (Two Sundays ago on ABC’s 

‘‘This Week,’’ National Security Advisor Steven Hadley commented on the crisis by 

erroneously mentioning ‘‘Nepal’’ seven times, never once uttering the word 

‘‘Tibet.’’ 1), I was beginning to wonder how we can trust this administration to do 

the right thing when they cannot even find Tibet on a map. 

I still am waiting for the President to throw some weight behind this issue and 

become publicly engaged. We are looking for effective policies that yield results for 

those who are suffering now. 

We are in a tug of war between freedom and repression, survival, and extinction. 

The cycle will not end until we see a negotiated solution grounded in genuine harmony and trust between the Chinese and Tibetan peoples. 

Let us not be fooled by the Communist Party’s concept of a ‘‘harmonious society.’’ 

We know now that this is a hollow slogan. Genuine peace and stability do not 

emerge from the barrel of a gun. Genuine harmony between people is based on the 

ability to speak the truth. This requires dialogue and goodwill, both of which—if we 

listen to the rhetoric coming out of Beijing—are in short supply among the Chinese 

leadership. 

We must avoid further alienating the Chinese people, who themselves have been 

victimized and are governed by the same leaders that are authorizing the crackdown in Tibet. It is desperately important that we ensure that our Chinese brothers 

and sisters have access to the truth, and we must hope and pray they will take advantage of the opportunity. Of course, we applaud the Chinese for their extraordinary economic success and sense of national achievement. At the same time, we 

must not fail to take pride in the principles that have made our own Nation great, 

are enshrined in Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and hold in their realization the real promise of world peace. The United States and like-minded nations 

must do whatever we can to redirect Chinese ambition onto the path of democracy 

and human rights. 

Paradoxically, the present crisis can be seen as an opening to create a framework 

for the Chinese leadership themselves to initiate a meaningful, results-based dialogue with the Dalai Lama. Surely China’s leaders, despite what they say, must realize that His Holiness, with his unwavering commitment to peace, nonviolence, and 

an autonomous Tibet within the structure of the PRC, is critical to the lasting stability of the region. For Tibetans and for the larger world, only the Dalai Lama can 

serve as a foundation of legitimacy for Chinese rule. 

Key to moving forward is developing a better understanding of the internal political dynamics within the Chinese leadership concerning Tibet. Are there differences 

of opinion? Are there voices of sanity? One such light in the darkness is the recent 

resolution signed by over 100 very courageous Chinese intellectuals demanding a rethinking of China’s Tibet policy and calling for an immediate end to the demonizing 

of Tibetans and I quote, ‘‘We hold that we must eliminate animosity and bring about 

national reconciliation, not continue to increase divisions between nationalities. A 

country that wishes to avoid the partition of its territory must first avoid divisions 

32 

among its nationalities. Therefore, we appeal to the leaders of our country to hold 

direct dialogue with the Dalai Lama. We hope that the Chinese and Tibetan people 

will do away with the misunderstandings between them, develop their interactions 

with each other, and achieve unity. Government departments as much as popular 

organizations and religious figures should make great efforts toward this goal.’’ 

This gives us tremendous wonder as to how and why, Chinese leaders continue 

to make such wrong-headed policy decisions that run so counter to their national 

goals. Are there Communist leaders brave enough to envision a positive resolution 

in Tibet that will enhance China internally and internationally as a nation of peace, 

prosperity, and genuine harmony? 

The one-party system has created a political culture that does not allow for unwelcome news to move up the chain. Field reports of growing hopelessness, anger, and 

resentment inside Tibet, in the cities, in the villages, among the nomads, have had 

little chance of making it to the desks of top officials. 

So it’s not hard to imagine that the extent of the uprisings, and the international 

reaction, have caught them way off guard. We know we are witnessing a complete 

breakdown of China’s Tibet policy. I suspect that leaders in Beijing are coming to 

realize this too. 

If we can learn more about the internal Chinese debate, we can identify opportunities for moving forward on a dialogue that benefits both China and Tibet as their 

interests are definitely not mutually exclusive. 

President Hu Jintao is key to this. This is a defining moment that tests his leadership and offers him a distinct opportunity for greatness. He was Party Chief in 

the Tibetan Autonomous Region during the 1989 crackdown. His rise to power was 

propelled by the hard-line approach he held at that time. Some have suggested that 

Hu, with this background, is well-positioned for a ‘‘Nixon goes to China’’ moment 

on the Tibet question. Let’s hope that he has both the courage and the stature to 

heed the call. American leaders and other heads of state must urge him to seize 

the critical moment, and remind him of the great lost opportunity for China and 

its- and his- emerging legacy if he does not. 

Now, more than ever, instead of blaming the Dalai Lama, Beijing must reflect on 

the failures of its strategy for Tibet. It is in its own long-term interest to recognize 

what has led to the current instability, and to engage for the first time with the 

genuine grievances of the Tibetan people and embrace the Dalai Lama as a partner 

in earnest dialogue. I urge Congress to vigorously promote policies toward this goal 

before it’s too late. 

Finally, I want to express deep appreciation for the political and programmatic 

support that the U.S. Congress has provided to the Tibetan people. This support— 

from humanitarian assistance to refugees to Voice of America and Radio Free Asia 

Tibetan language broadcasts—has been crucial and has created a nation of people 

who still believe in the United States of America as a beacon of freedom in a sometimes very dark world. Of this support, the American people can be very proud. 

Over the years, it has been my pleasure to get to know many Members of Congress and U.S. Government officials who work to advance Tibetan issues. Some are 

long retired, like Senator Claiborne Pell, others like Senator Moynihan, are gone 

from us. Julia Taft, who held the position of Special Coordinator for Tibetan Issues 

at the State Department has also recently passed away. Just days before her passing, the International Campaign for Tibet awarded Julia its Light of Truth Award 

for her significant contributions to the public understanding of Tibet and its people. 

I know Julia also had many friends in the Congress who supported and respected 

her work to promote the best humanitarian engagement possible by these United 

States with those less fortunate around the world. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much, Mr. Gere. 

You could stay at the table, if you wish, or you could take your 

other seat, however you feel more comfortable, because I know that 

we’re going to hear from Lodi Gyari. 

I just want to say to you, just for myself, that I’ve watched your 

work through the years for so many important causes. This one 

just has been extraordinary. And I just really do—and I say this 

to you, and I’ve said it to others, because I am from California, and 

I so support those from my State who give up their privacy. It’s 

not—I mean, we kid around about the cameras. They’re here, because you’re here. And this could be annoying to you. The fact is, 

you’re willing to give up your privacy for such a noble and honorVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:27 Mar 09, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\47764.TXT MikeBB PsN: MIKEB
33 

able cause. And for me, it’s really helpful, and for those of us here, 

because there’s just so much we can do to get the cameras here. 

And, believe me, we can’t compete with this. So, we are absolutely, 

just thrilled and delighted that you care so much that you would 

come here today and share your thoughts. 

And, by the way, you really did give us a very important, I think, 

picture into this whole issue that I don’t think we had before. 

So—— 

Mr. GERE. Well, thank you very much, Senator. 

I—just as a closing comment, this Tibet issue is not a small 

issue. There are 6 million Tibetans in the TAR and Tibetan regions 

that are now outside of the TAR, as defined by China since their 

invasion. This is an issue much larger than Tibet, and it has to do 

with—it speaks to who we are as a people—— 

Senator BOXER. I agree. 

Mr. GERE [continuing]. Who we want to be. As a nation, what do 

we really stand for? The values that are inherent in the Tibetan 

experiment, which was an extraordinary experiment, like the 

United States of America—they decided to make something new, 

something extraordinary that was really based on love and compassion and understanding, and institutions that would create more 

people of great love and great compassion and great sense of brotherhood and sisterhood. And that’s why we have to stand by them. 

We’re speaking to ourselves as we speak for the Tibetans. 

Thank you very much. 

Senator BOXER. Well, it does make us feel more noble when we 

take these issues on. 

And we’re very honored to have the Special Envoy of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, Mr. Lodi Gyari. 

And is 10 minutes enough time for you, sir? Are you—is that all 

right? 

Mr. GYARI. That’s good. 

Senator BOXER. OK. Very good. 

STATEMENT OF LODI GYARI, SPECIAL ENVOY OF HIS 

HOLINESS THE DALAI LAMA, WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. GYARI. Thank you very much, Madam Chairperson and other 

members of the committee. 

I’m really very grateful for this very timely hearing that you 

have called for. And, in fact, I would rather, before I start my presentation, make some remarks or observations of the very important, I think, exchange that you had with the Deputy Secretary of 

State. And I wanted to, at the very beginning, urge the Madam 

Chairperson and others that you follow up and work closely with 

the administration in the manner that you have suggested, because 

I do agree with some of your colleagues—Senator Menendez, for example. While we are very grateful to the administration, and particularly to the Congress, for your sympathy and for your understanding, but there has to be a little more than expression of sympathy, which, obviously, we very much appreciate. So, I think the 

number of, you know, issues that you have listed, I think, is a really very good starting point, because I think the Chinese Government—I do not, you know, claim to know so much, but I have dealt 

with them. You know, they are very, you know, serious, sensible 

34 

people, and they respect people when they are also very serious 

and they mean, you know, what you say. So, I think you need to 

send a very clear and precise message. 

And I think you did ask very good questions about leverage. And, 

you know, it was one of the most, I think, constructive hearings— 

I’m not saying that the other hearings that I have been to have not 

been constructive, but today I saw a real serious effort. 

I can also clearly see, Madam Chair, you have mentioned, that 

on both sides there’s a, really, kind of feeling of, you know, frustration. So—but, I think there was good beginning here today. And on 

the list of things that you’ve suggested, maybe also—and you did 

allude to that—I think, very close cooperation between the Western 

democracies, because this time we are also very gratified to see 

that the voices that you have across Atlantic—the Germans, the 

Brits, the—particularly the French and the Australians—everyone 

has, you know, really come out. So, I think one of your—you know, 

on the list of things that you wanted to suggest, if you could also 

very strongly encourage the administration that they work together 

with other world democracies. 

I would also like to urge the Congress, too, to reach out to your 

counterparts, you know, across, with the European Parliament, for 

example, which has taken a great leadership together with you on 

this issue, because this is, I think—it’s unfortunate, this tragic situation that is happening in Tibet. In a strange way, you know, it 

gives the people of Tibet new opportunity. So, I felt, you know, so 

much, you know, moved. 

And also, I want, at the very beginning, really emphasize on 

that, because I want something concrete to come out of, you know, 

this hearing, as is the intention of the chair and of the ranking 

member. 

I know you wanted, Madam Chair, that I come here today and 

share with you, first of all, you know, what, in our view, has led 

to the present situation, and what is the present situation, and 

what could be the future prospects. 

I will not mince words. The present situation, the tragic situation, is the result of misrule, mistreatment, policies of Chinese Government, period. I think everyone knows that. It is beyond any 

doubt. In fact, the ultra- leftist elements of the Communist Party 

took total control over the Tibet policy way back since 1957, and 

ever since—ever since, with regard to Tibet, the policy is conducted 

by the extreme leftist wing of the party. And this is the result of 

that—you know, that policy. 

And, as my friend and, you know, colleague, you know, Richard, 

mentioned, I also hope that President Hu Jintao and the present 

leaders will take this opportunity to really clean house, other than 

making, you know, baseless charges against His Holiness, which no 

one, you know, no one believes. What do other, you know, to investigate—first of all, to reexamine their own policy that has not 

worked, and then hold people responsible that has misled them for 

the last many decades. Misled them. And today, the Chinese leaders in Beijing feel embarrassed, feel unhappy. That anger or that 

unhappiness should not be directed towards His Holiness, but towards those within the system that has led them into this present 

situation. 

35 

At the same time, you know, while, you know, holding the Chinese fully responsible, if I may say so, candidly, I think the international community also has some responsibility. I will be very 

frank. Because I think, while there were expressions of sympathy 

for us periodically, sometimes, you know, very visible manner, but, 

to be very candid, you know, Tibet was not given the attention that 

it deserved. This, unfortunately, you know, Madam Chairperson, 

is—I mean, is not only with regard to Tibet. The only tragic situation happens when only, you know, many human lives have been 

lost, then it seems that the governments and the world really does 

wake up. Quite often, very late for the situation. But, I just hope 

that, with regards to Tibet, it is not too late. 

So, you know, while expressing my gratitude, I also, you know, 

want to be very candid to say that the world has not done enough. 

And I do hope that, you know, this is the beginning of a real serious, not just lip sympathy for the Tibetan people. 

But, I also wanted to say today that the fact that you are holding 

this hearing, Madam Chairperson, you are sending a very powerful 

message. This is something that I think many people don’t understand. In fact, I know that there are also few—fortunately few people who feel sometimes all, you know, the Western nations kind of 

lip sympathy for Tibet or holding of hearings sends the wrong message, it incites—it, in fact, makes the Tibetan people feel some 

sense of hope and they then do some stupid things. 

I wanted to tell you, it is totally the opposite. The fact that, in 

spite of so much suffering, that the Tibetan people have been able 

to maintain patience and not to resort to violence—No. 1, is the influence of the leader, His Holiness the Dalai Lama. And the second, 

the credit really can go to people like yourselves, who from time to 

time did send a message to Tibetan people, said that, ‘‘You are not 

totally forgotten. You are not totally forgotten.’’ And that is the reason why, in spite of so much suffering, that there has been certain 

degree of stability on the plateau. 

But, you are beginning to witness the Tibetan people—the Tibetan people are beginning to really, sometimes, you know, feel, 

you know, that they have been ignored for too long, and the symptoms are, you know, becoming very clear. 

I also wanted to—I know—I mean, many of you know, but sometimes I think people take it kind of very casually, you know, when 

we talk about nonviolence. Unfortunately, even among my own 

community, there are some people who think, ‘‘Well, nonviolence is 

something very passive, you know, something that, you know, 

make only, sometimes, weak people can, you know, important.’’ I 

will tell you that, in fact, I think, to struggle nonviolently is the 

most difficult struggle. Most difficult. You just can’t say that, ‘‘Oh, 

I have become nonviolent,’’ as if it is kind of declaration, and then, 

from that day on, you are nonviolent. No. Every moment, it is a 

new dedication that we have to make to remain nonviolent. And we 

can only do it, again, because of the leader that we have. 

I will just share with you how, a few years back, as the leader 

of the Tibetan Delegation, I had the opportunity even to go to my 

birthplace. If you see some of the footages of my visit, you see me, 

kind of, you know, with a smile, trying to be nice. But, I will tell 

you today of the pain that I was going through. I was visiting a 

36 

monastery that I grew up, because I was a young monk. Seventy 

percent of it is total ruins—70 percent of it in total ruins now. You 

know, a place that I grew up, you know, as a child, total ruins. And 

I actually visited—which my colleagues also, you know, do not 

know—I also visited the site where I know my grandmother was 

tortured to death. I also visited the site where my elder brother 

was starved to death. In spite of that, because of the leadership 

that His Holiness provide, because of the commitment that we have 

made to nonviolence, you see me all smiles with my Chinese counterparts. 

I’m sharing this with you because you understand and appreciate 

more the part of struggle that His Holiness has led us. So, please 

help us stay on this course, because this is not only important for 

us, this is also important for China. 

I’m sorry for being emotional. I was trying to be here, you know, 

all, you know, business and to making you a presentation. 

Senator BOXER. No, it’s very appropriate. Please. 

Mr. GYARI. But, let me also now, again, briefly touch—and I 

know that my colleague has done it, and also, in fact, you know, 

Deputy Secretary has also touched on that the situation on the 

ground is very explosive. Very explosive. There have been demonstrations in over 90 places, covering almost about 50 or nearly 

60 counties, both in the autonomous region, but outside of it. So, 

this clearly shows the danger, the intensity of the situation. And 

our biggest concern right now, Madam Chairperson, is not really 

the dialogue. I mean, dialogue is important. I assure you that we 

are absolutely committed, because that is the only way out. But 

right now His Holiness is so much saddened with the situation, his 

biggest priority right now is: What can he do immediately for those 

who have been detained—what will happen to them? Those who 

have been injured and are not having the possibility to get any 

medical help, because many of them are hurt—we know from the 

experience of 1987 and 1988, many would be dying right now because the choice for them is either to go to some kind of Chinese 

medical clinic, which may, first of all, not even accept them, but, 

if they do, that means immediate arrest and imprisonment. So, 

there are many who are literally dying without any medical help. 

I mean, I have talked, myself, with a person who’s a relative, 

was one of those who got shot in Lhasa. What did they do? They 

were from the eastern part of Tibet, from outside of Tibet Autonomous Region. They knew that if they went to the hospital or the 

clinic, they would immediately be arrested. Fortunately, for them, 

they had a vehicle. So, what they did is, they loaded this person 

who was injured and drove—left Lhasa, hoping that if they can 

somehow manage to reach their own native area, they may then 

be, through their personal connections, be able to provide some 

medical help. What happens? Because of excessive bleeding, this 

person dies on the way. I mean, this is just one example, because 

I know this as a firsthand information. And there are many such 

things happening. 

So, at the moment, our biggest concern is the plight of those arrested, those being tortured, and the very tense situation that they 

have created throughout Tibet, so much so that His Holiness, even 

in this hour of crisis, you know, had the wisdom to personally write 

37 

to Chinese President on the 19th of March, just a week after the 

major demonstrations that erupted in Lhasa—and I had the honor 

of forwarding that through my channels—offering—His Holiness 

said that, you know, ‘‘Look, you know, we must all, at the moment, 

try to walk together so that this tragic situation could be—could be 

brought under control.’’ 

Senator BOXER. Mr. Gyari, I’m going to ask you to sum it up in 

a minute, because we do have some questions. 

Mr. GYARI. Yes. Certainly, yes. 

Senator BOXER. And we have a third—— 

Mr. GYARI. Yes. 

Senator BOXER [continuing]. Panel. So—— 

Mr. GYARI. So, anyway, I just wanted to let you know that, you 

know, our biggest concern right now is the tragic situation. This is 

why we want you to help. And you have—— 

Senator BOXER. Yes. 

Mr. GYARI [continuing]. Also already alluded to that. 

And then, with regards to, you know, the other factor is, we are 

also very much concerned, because Chinese, you see, now as a result of the present situation, have started, you know, a massive 

kind of policy of discrimination against Tibetans. Now, this is fact 

that you see—you can verify, the State Department can verify— 

now every Tibetan, even if you’re a party member, if you are identified as a Tibetan nationality, you are only, now, allowed to walk, 

check into certain exclusive hotels throughout China. You cannot 

just—if you are Tibetan, mind you, you—not a Lama, not a nun— 

if you are Tibetan—you can be party member, but if your identity 

card says that you are a Tibetan nationality, you cannot even check 

into any hotel or any accommodation, as all other Chinese citizens 

can do. And if your identity card says that you are Tibetan nationality, you cannot get a passport easily; on the other hand, the Chinese at this—given passports very easily, because they would like 

the economic advantage to be taken. 

So, what I’m saying is that there is very dangerous discrimination by the Chinese Government to the Tibetans as people, and this 

is really leading into tremendous animosity between the two peoples. This is of great concern. 

Now, with regard to the future of dialogue, I will just summarize. 

As I said earlier—— 

Senator BOXER. Mr. Gyari, we’re going to have to finish your testimony in 1 minute, because I have to leave this room at a certain 

time, and I need to have time to—— 

Mr. GYARI. Certainly, yes. So, anyway, then let me just summarize—— 

Senator BOXER. So, I’m going to give you 1 minute, and then 

we’re going to ask you questions. 

Mr. GYARI. Yes. 

Senator BOXER. OK. 

Mr. GYARI. We are fully committed to the policy of engagement. 

You know, that I can assure you. Obviously, you see, when next 

round happens, it cannot be business as usual, because of the tragic situation. What we need is a clear assurance from the Chinese 

Government that they’re willing to discuss the matter seriously. 

38 

So, I think that will be, you see, you know, the—some of the 

main issues that I want to share. My written testimony is on the 

record, which I hope, you know, you will study carefully and reflect 

upon. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Gyari follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LODI GYARI, SPECIAL ENVOY OF

HIS HOLINESS THE DALAI LAMA, WASHINGTON, DC 

Madame Chairwoman and members of the committee, at this critical time for 

Tibet, I wish to express my appreciation to the Congress for its unwavering support 

for His Holiness the Dalai Lama and his efforts to find a peaceful solution for Tibet. 

I thank you for convening this timely hearing and Deputy Secretary Negroponte for 

his appearance. What he says on Tibet today will certainly be heard in Beijing. 

I would like to thank my dear friend, Richard Gere, for his introduction and, of 

course, for the years of hard work and splendid achievement he has produced with 

the International Campaign for Tibet and for His Holiness and the Tibetan people. 

You have invited me to present His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s views on the current crisis and his plans for achieving a comprehensive and lasting solution to the 

Tibet question. In brief, the current crisis is a manifestation of decades of Chinese 

misrule and mistreatment of the Tibetan people, influenced by ultra-leftist elements 

of the Party that took control of Tibetan policy as early as 1957, and made worse 

by decades of misleading information produced by local authorities for the central 

government. 

Among the most disturbing developments in Tibet is the segregation of Tibetans 

from Chinese society. Tibetans are now instructed to stay or return to their registered place of residence; they are prohibited from accessing services, like hotels, 

unless specifically designated for their use; and they are routinely harassed and detained simply because they are Tibetan. Chinese servers in many restaurants are 

choosing not to serve Tibetans. 

The Chinese Government, which, as a tenet of its economic growth strategy has 

encouraged travel for its citizens, restricts travel for Tibetans. If you are a Tibetan 

nationality, you are required to attain several clearances before you are issued a 

passport. In some Tibetan areas, such as my own Nyarong County in Kanze Tibetan 

Autonomous Prefecture, Tibetans are not even allowed to leave the country. This 

and existing social and economic disparities are reducing Tibetans to second-class 

status, giving every appearance of Tibet being a back-water colony and not a harmonious part of a multiethnic China that Chinese leaders are promising. 

Professor Phuntsok Wangyal, founder in 1942 of the Tibetan Communist Party, 

who became one of the first victims of the ultraleftists, wrote to Chairman Mao and 

Premier Zhou—in his own blood from his prison cell on a copy of the Communist 

Party Manifesto—that ‘‘fascism, and Great Han Chauvinism are the main irreconcilable enemies of all the Tibetan people.’’ That advice is as relevant today as it was 

in the early days of the People’s Republic of China. 

While the Chinese Government readily accuses His Holiness the Dalai Lama of 

‘‘splittist activities,’’ ironically, it is they that have adopted deeply divisive strategies 

to address the question of Tibet. 

The Tibetan people are grateful for the global outpouring of sympathy for what 

is occurring in Tibet, but we must also acknowledge that the international community has for too long lacked sufficient will to push for a resolution of the Tibet question. It is unfortunate that the world seems to wake up to a situation only when 

it already has become a tragedy, with much loss of life and devastation on the 

ground. The Chinese leadership may not like the fact that what they have considered to be an ‘‘internal affair’’ is now an international issue. Nonetheless, it is a situation of their own making, for which they must bear full responsibility. They can 

no longer pretend that there are not fundamental problems in their policies in Tibet. 

On Monday, the Washington Post ran an editorial, ‘‘The Way Forward in Tibet,’’ 

written by Under Secretary Paula Dobriansky, the Special Coordinator for Tibetan 

Issues. Its publication coincided with the Under Secretary’s meeting with His Holiness in Ann Arbor, Michigan, where he was giving teachings. We appreciate this 

comprehensive public statement on the part of the Bush administration, which included that ‘‘the best way for China’s leaders to address Tibetan concerns is to engage in dialogue with the Dalai Lama.’’ We have heard this same message from 

Deputy Secretary Negroponte. 

39 

We have been seized with the situation in Tibet since March 10 when the demands of a group of monks for religious freedom and the release of others who had 

been jailed for celebrating the honor bestowed on His Holiness last fall—the Congressional Gold Medal—sparked an outbreak of anger and aggression against the 

Chinese presence in Lhasa and, tragically, the loss of many lives. 

Demonstrations have continued and spread throughout Tibet—and the number of 

the Tibetan dead, missing, and detained continues to rise. Chinese forces continue 

to conduct acts of retaliation and intimidation against the Tibetan people, including 

the most contemptible attempts at reeducation, even of school children by Communist Party work teams. A climate of tension and fear exists that the Tibetans 

have not experienced since the time of the Cultural Revolution. 

SITUATION IN TIBET

Individually and collectively, people around the world have denounced China’s actions and attempted to intervene. Hundreds of Chinese intellectuals have boldly 

signed an open letter condemning Beijing’s response to the crisis. The U.N. High 

Commissioner for Human Rights requested—and was denied—urgent permission to 

visit Tibet. The European Parliament and the U.S. Congress moved quickly to pass 

resolutions calling on the Chinese Government to show restraint and to engage directly with His Holiness to find solutions for the underlying causes of the problems 

in Tibet. Beijing has heard this same message from heads of state and eminent persons around the globe. 

We continue to ask that the international community to press for immediate remedies for the suffering of the Tibetan people, the most critical of which is access by 

journalists, diplomats, and humanitarian missions to Tibet. 

We would like to recognize the important contribution of the Tibetan language 

broadcast services at Voice of America and Radio Free Asia, and Voice of Tibet, 

which have served as a critical line of communication in and out of Tibet. 

In brief, with little official information available, we can report that: 

• Chinese Government authorities have acknowledged the surrender or detention 

of some 4,000 Tibetans. • We know of numerous deaths as a result of Chinese forces firing into crowds 

of demonstrators in several areas of Tibet. 

• Many monasteries have been sealed off and under lockdown across Tibet, and 

monks within subjected to many deprivations and punishments. 

• Police have been carrying out house-to-house night raids in Lhasa, in villages 

and nomad encampments, dragging away many Tibetans. 

• Hundreds of Tibetans have been loaded onto the new train in Lhasa and taken 

away to prisons in China. 

• Large numbers of Chinese forces have been sent to all the Tibetan areas where 

demonstrations have occurred. In the Amdo and Kham areas of eastern Tibet, 

demonstrations have been widespread and large-scale, and retaliation has been 

brutal. 

• One or more instances of protest have been reported in at least 52 county-level 

locations, as well as Chengdu (the capital of Sichuan), Lanzhou (the capital of 

Gansu) and Beijing. 

• More than 98 protests have been counted so far, and they are still happening. 

In only one of those protests, as far as we are aware, has violence been used 

against Chinese civilians. 

• In recent weeks a new wave of protests has begun, in response to stringent patriotic education campaigns in monasteries and requirements to denounce the 

Dalai Lama. The actions of the authorities are doing nothing to create stability—they are provoking further resentment, despair, and unrest. For instance, in a raid on Labrang Monastery on April 15, Chinese forces smashed 

altars in monks’ cells and burned images of the Dalai Lama that some monks 

had kept at great risk. At Tongkor Monastery in Kardze, photographs of His 

Holiness were trampled upon. When monks and laypeople protested about the 

actions of the work team and called for His Holiness to return to Tibet, troops 

fired into the crowd, killing 15 Tibetans including monks, a young woman, and 

a teenage boy. 

• In the Tibet Autonomous Region alone, authorities have announced that they 

will try some 1,000 Tibetans by May 1. China has virtually closed the TAR. 

With the exception of two show-tours, no journalists or diplomats have secured 

permission to visit the TAR since the crisis began, so these trials will be carried 

out absent outside observers. 

We urgently ask the international community—especially those governments involved in rule-of-law programs with China—to insist that the legal cases of Tibetans 

40 

detained as a result of the current crisis are considered according to international 

standards of due process, and that political prisoners be treated humanely. 

We welcomed the reminder yesterday in a State Department statement that ‘‘the 

intentional withholding of necessary medical treatment for political reasons is a serious violation of human rights.’’ 

CHINESE MISSTEPS AND TIBETAN EFFORTS TO ENGAGE

It is difficult to watch events unfolding in Tibet. I have long warned that such 

a crisis could be provoked by Chinese policies such as authorizing the Communist 

Party to recognize reincarnate lamas—or by unique actions Beijing has taken—such 

as the abduction of the young Panchen Lama. Friends of China knowledgeable 

about Tibet have cautioned that moving progressively harshly to constrain the 

Tibetan Buddhist identity while creating circumstances that facilitate the movement 

of hundreds of thousands of Chinese up and onto the Tibetan plateau would 

heighten tensions. 

Beijing must now reverse course. Chinese leaders must look to the underlying 

causes of the problems, conduct whatever housekeeping may be necessary in their 

personnel and policies, and reach out to His Holiness and the Tibetan people in the 

spirit of inclusion and mutual benefit so that together we can achieve peace in 

Tibet. 

The situation in Tibet has of course created conditions that make our engagement 

with Beijing difficult. Throughout the period of crisis, I have been using existing 

channels of communication with Chinese officials to convey our urgent concerns. 

What I have been hearing back is nothing but the usual rhetoric, very similar to 

what Chinese Government spokespeople are saying publicly. On March 19, His Holiness, himself, sent a letter to Chinese President Hu Jintao. We continue to make 

efforts to begin a discussion on a peaceful way forward. As a first step, His Holiness 

has offered to send a delegation to Tibet that we believe could ease anxiety among 

Tibetans and contribute to the restoration of calm. To say, as some media have reported, that we are in discussions with the Chinese Government is unfortunately 

an overstatement of fact. 

From the onset of this crisis, we have expressed our concern to Beijing about 

whipping up nationalist sentiment against the Tibetan people and His Holiness, 

even blaming the so-called ‘‘Dalai clique’’ for inciting the demonstrations. Such 

charges are baseless. 

We are asking for an international impartial investigation of the true causes 

which have led to the recent crisis. 

His Holiness has been deeply concerned by the deep division that has been created in the minds of the Chinese and Tibetan people within a period of several 

weeks, and will likely endure for the foreseeable future. His Holiness is deeply saddened by this, particularly because he has made so much effort to outreach to the 

Chinese people on a personal level and because he knows that real stability depends 

on tolerance, mutual understanding, and peaceful coexistence. 

On March 28, His Holiness issued a public appeal to the Chinese people, reflective 

of his many initiatives to connect with them. Many of these initiatives have been 

warmly received. We have increasingly seen among many Chinese in and outside 

China, a new fascination with the Tibetan culture, an emerging consideration for 

the protection of Tibet’s fragile environment, and also a kind of renaissance of 

Tibetan Buddhism in China. These developments had been very encouraging. 

If possible, I would like to request that the full text of His Holiness the Dalai 

Lama’s Appeal to the Chinese People be included as part of the record of today’s 

hearing. 

OVERALL ISSUE OF TIBET

On the overall issue of Tibet, the position of His Holiness remains unchanged in 

key areas. First, his commitment to the Middle Way is unwavering. He is not seeking independence for Tibet but, rather, genuine, meaningful autonomy for the 

Tibetan people within the People’s Republic of China. Chinese law makes considerable commitments to regional national autonomy, so there exists already a legitimate platform for discussion. However, the prevailing system lacks legal assurances 

that provisions of autonomy are not given by the state on the one hand and taken 

away by the state on the other hand. This is the crux of the problem with autonomy 

and why His Holiness is seeking ‘‘genuine’’ or ‘‘meaningful’’ autonomy. 

Second, His Holiness is uncompromising in his commitment to nonviolence. This 

is not just the core principle of the Tibetan struggle. It is the message he carries 

around the world in his public teachings. As the spiritual leader of the Tibetan people, it defines his very existence. Even at this time, His Holiness believes that the 

41 

principle of nonviolence is so essential to the Tibetan identity that he has said repeatedly that he would disassociate himself from a Tibetan movement that departs 

from a nonviolent path. 

Third, His Holiness remains fully committed to a policy of engagement with China 

to resolve the issue of Tibet. It is in this area where I have the honor to serve His 

Holiness at chief negotiator with the Chinese Government, a process the Tibetans 

have been engaged in on an on-and-off basis since 1979. After serious efforts by us— 

and the urgings of many in the international community—we were able to reestablish a formal dialogue with Beijing in 2002. We have had six rounds of dialogue 

since that time, the most recent in June/July of 2007. Those discussions have served 

the purpose of providing the opportunity to build relations and convey our positions. 

The Tibetan position entails a single ask—that we are able to maintain the distinctive Tibetan identity into the future. Central to this ask is the political right of 

autonomy. According to the Chinese Government’s own analysis of its law on regional ethnic autonomy, the Tibetan people are entitled to the full political right of 

autonomy; full decisionmaking power in economic and social development undertakings; freedom to inherit and develop our traditional culture and to practice our 

religious belief and freedom to administer, protect, and be the first to utilize our 

natural resources, and to independently develop our educational and cultural undertakings. 

The other central point is that such autonomy must be provided to all Tibetans 

living in contiguous Tibetan areas, an area roughly defined by the geography of the 

Tibetan plateau, governed by a single administrative unit under a single unified 

policy. 

The recent tragic events in Tibet clearly demonstrate that even though Tibetans 

have been divided among different provincial administrations, they remain unified 

by their identity and their aspirations. A piecemeal solution for the future of Tibet 

that takes into account only the Tibetans in the TAR would not resolve the Tibet 

problem. This has been tried in the past and has failed. 

A WAY FORWARD

In the 4th and 5th rounds of our dialogue with the Chinese, we had expansive 

discussions around these issues, and both sides came away with a very clear understanding and a sense that we were moving forward. However, during the 6th round, 

we saw a hardening of the Chinese position. 

We cannot pretend that if our next round of discussions were held now, it would 

be business as usual given the scale of the crackdown and the fact that protests are 

continuing almost daily. The present emergency situation must be resolved before 

we can really talk about the future. However, if both sides are determined to find 

a solution through genuine engagement—and it is my duty today to assure you that 

His Holiness remains fully committed to that effort—then, we will find a way. However, the true sentiments of the Tibetan people, evident in the current crisis, have 

given both sides the clear mandate that when we next talk, we can waste no time; 

rather, we must deal with the real issues and produce results so that genuine peace 

is at last restored in Tibet. 

Therefore, we ask of those advising both sides to continue with the dialogue process that they press the Chinese side to provide assurances of their commitment to 

real and concrete progress. 

We believe that China’s way forward in Tibet envisages two possible scenarios. 

The more hopeful scenario is that Chinese leaders realize that, in spite of some constructive efforts to improve the lives of the Tibetan people, many Tibetans are profoundly unhappy—and some have even shown their unhappiness at the cost of their 

own lives. In this scenario, a sensible approach would be for Beijing to commit to 

constructive dialogue with His Holiness or his representatives whereby genuine and 

meaningful autonomy for Tibetans and unity and stability for the PRC are assured. 

The second scenario reflects the more rigid Chinese attitude. In this scenario the 

Chinese Government continues to implement repressive measures and looks forward 

to a final solution where Tibet’s unique identity is subsumed and entirely assimilated into China. We might suspect that such a policy—which would include the 

intensification of the anti-Dalai Lama campaign and in-migration of Chinese settlers—would further develop after the Beijing Olympics in August. In either scenario we see a strong role for the international community. 

On the humanitarian side, we are asking that governments engage international 

human rights mechanisms—such as U.N. human rights rapporteurs and private 

NGOs, like the International Committee of the Red Cross and Doctors without Borders—in coordinated efforts to press the Chinese Government for access to Tibet so 

that the immediate suffering of the Tibetan people can be addressed. 

42 

On the political and diplomatic side, we are respectfully requesting of all our 

international government contacts that they meet with Chinese officials in discussions on remedies for the underlying issues that have contributed to the current crisis, and urge dialogue. 

We have been encouraged by the active engagement of many countries, including 

the Germans, Australians, British and, particularly, the French in this regard. 

Even, India and Japan, who have sensitive relations with China, have felt the need 

to speak out by calling for restraint and dialogue. Just last week, the Japanese 

Prime Minister challenged the Chinese Foreign Minister’s attempt to characterize 

Tibet as a domestic issue, saying that China had to ‘‘face the fact that Tibet had 

become an international problem.’’ 

In stark contrast, the Government of Nepal, which shares a long history with 

Tibet, has behaved in a most reprehensible manner, cracking down on Tibetans who 

live in Nepal and have been protesting in solidarity with the brothers and sisters 

inside Tibet. Nepal is acting almost as an extension of the brutal regime on the 

other side of the Himalayas, a reaction that has many Nepalese deeply disturbed 

and ashamed for their government. 

I would like to close my testimony by mentioning the recent passing of Julia Taft 

who served the United States in many capacities, including as the second Special 

Coordinator for Tibetan Issues, appointed by Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. 

Julia was an extraordinary friend of Tibet and would have been a powerful advocate 

in this time of crisis. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you, Mr. Gyari. 

I am very touched by your testimony. And I really do appreciate 

the fact that you believe these types of hearings can be very helpful. 

You know, many, many years ago, I was involved in the issue of 

human rights in the former Soviet Union, and I was very fearful, 

at first, to shine the light on what was happening, because I 

thought it would lead to more abuse of the people there. And I was 

really taught, by the very people who were suffering, that I was 

wrong, that you must shine the light of truth on these matters. 

And I think that’s key. One of the many things that I am very concerned about is the fact that the Chinese Government keeps saying 

that the Dalai Lama wants independence, and that he fans the 

flames of hatred among the Chinese toward those in the Tibet region. 

And I guess I need to ask you: How can we help on this? I mean, 

one PRC official said, ‘‘The Lhasa incident has once more exposed 

the separatist essence and the hypocrisy and deceitfulness of the 

alleged peace and nonviolence of the Dalai Clique.’’ And, you know, 

meanwhile, the Dalai Lama is saying, ‘‘We need to find a peaceful 

and mutually beneficial solution.’’ He has no desire to seek Tibet 

separation. And yet, the PRC puts out these very inflammatory 

statements. 

And I guess my question—because it worries me—is: Is this 

going to lead to the Chinese people just getting very worked up and 

upset at those from the Tibet region? Do you see this as something 

that is happening now, that they’re spreading this nontruth about 

what the Dalai Lama has done, and they’re saying he’s responsible 

for this—are you worried about—— 

Mr. GERE. Oh, yes. 

Senator BOXER [continuing]. The impact? And how can we get 

the truth out? 

Mr. GYARI. We are very much worried. In fact, to cover the 

wrong policies of the Chinese Government, I think the Chinese 

Government is playing a very dangerous game, and, in fact, I think 

43 

it is a very unpatriotic—if I can use that term—of making this into 

almost a ethnic conflict between—— 

Senator BOXER. Yes. 

Mr. GYARI [continuing]. The Chinese and Tibetans, which I think 

us unpardonable, because China talks about, you know, harmonious society. On the other hand, you see the Chinese Government 

deliberately creating this rift between the Tibetans and Chinese. 

Well, I do not know what we can do to—you know, but as far as 

we’re concerned—especially, His Holiness, is making so much effort 

in the last few weeks. One of his main focuses has been trying to 

reach out. He’s been writing to the Chinese people. Tomorrow, he 

will make exclusive, again, appeal to Chinese Buddhists and other, 

you know, people who believe in the religion, explaining to them, 

asking their help, so that the Chinese Government do not create 

this rift, you know, between the peoples, which I think will be, you 

know, as I said, you know, we are very much worried, and, you 

know—but, you know, we are doing what we can, and we certainly 

also need to help here. 

Now, about the—as I said, I think, unfortunate policy of Chinese 

Government, not his Holiness. He made it very clear that he is not 

seeking independence. Even now, under such difficult circumstances, he’s repeating, every day, you know, many times, that 

he is not seeking independence, that he’s looking for solution within the framework of the People’s Republic of China. 

Senator BOXER. Well, let the word go out from this committee 

that we—we’re very concerned, and we expressed our concern to 

the Chinese Government, that the way to resolve this is through 

peaceful means and sitting around the table and working it out, 

not by inflaming passions and, you know, spreading violence. It 

would be terrible. 

So, I have one last question for you. It’s my understanding—am 

I right on this?—that China has sealed off the Friendship Bridge. 

Is that correct? Is the Friendship Bridge still sealed off? 

Mr. GYARI. Yes. Not only that, you know, one of the things that 

really worries us is that China has made the Nepal almost an extension of the PRC. You know, not only they have a—but we know, 

or we have information, that the Chinese officials have been very, 

you know, casually crossing over to the Nepal side, conducting—— 

Senator BOXER. But, is it true that the bridge has been sealed 

off? Because the Associated Press says that it’s sealed off and that 

no refugees have arrived at the U.N.-run Tibetan Reception Center 

in Katmandu. Normally 200 to 250 flee Tibet each month. So, is— 

I’m just trying—because, since I’m going to come up with this list 

of six or seven action items, I guess I want to know, is that bridge 

still closed? 

Mr. GYARI. It is closed. 

Senator BOXER [continuing]. As far as you—— 

Mr. GYARI. In fact, you know, we were speaking with the person—you know, our city has a staff there. There’s only, now, about 

three or four people at the Refugee Settlement Center, where we 

normally have several hundred at this time of the year. 

Senator BOXER. OK. 

Mr. GYARI. So, the Chinese have sealed up the borders, and they 

are flooding Tibet with armed personnel. So, this is the situation. 

44 

Senator BOXER. Very, very, very worrisome. 

Well, I want to thank you so much, sir. You have been a very 

important witness. 

And I’ll ask Senator Murkowski to finish up this panel with 5 

minutes or whatever she needs. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator BOXER. Seven is fine. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. And thank you, Mr. Gyari. Your testimony 

was very compelling this afternoon. I certainly appreciate your 

words about the difficulty and the struggle to maintain a policy of 

nonviolence. Your very personal stories are really, again, very, very 

compelling. 

I will tell you, listening to the responses from Secretary 

Negroponte, understanding Undersecretary Dobriansky’s comments 

that she has made in her op-ed about—a recognition that the preconditions, as she terms them—the preconditions for dialogue that 

China has called on, that China has asked for, have been met. And 

I think that they understand that those have been met. And yet, 

they must find other areas where there is disagreement so that 

they don’t have to engage in that dialogue. And your very specific 

examples of how, even what might be considered a small act, denying a Tibetan citizen the opportunity to check into a hotel, for instance, can increase the tension—and you used the term ‘‘ethnic 

conflict’’ that is being built in China through incidents just such as 

that; or whether it’s the issuance of passports—you’re treating your 

citizens differently, depending on where they are coming from. And 

if you want to further inflame ethnic conflict, you, kind of, build up 

through smaller incidents like this and hope others on the outside 

don’t notice. So, I think the record should reflect that we’re noticing. 

I wanted to ask you, during the Dalai Lama’s recent visit to the 

United States, he had noted that there had been some contact at 

that time between Chinese officials and his representatives 

through some back-channel means shortly after the initial protests. 

Can you elaborate a little bit on what these contacts may have 

been and if, in fact, they have yielded anything? 

Mr. GYARI. Thank you very much, Senator. 

First of all, I was very happy to see Paula Dobriansky’s opinion 

piece. She and I went together to meet with His Holiness that very 

day. And I think that reflects the policy of the present, you know, 

administration. 

Answering specifically to your question, His Holiness is referring 

to the contact, that I mentioned, with my counterparts, as I mentioned earlier, as early as 19th of March, you know, just, you know, 

almost, you know, a week after the situation. You know, we got in 

touch with them. I am in touch with them. But, unfortunately, at 

the present moment what is coming through that channel is more 

rhetoric than anything constructive. But, we are mentioning those 

connections. There has been, I think, a little bit exaggerated report 

in the section of the media, as if, you know, these contacts are 

bringing some results. But, I must, you know, disappoint you all 

to say that so far it is bringing no concrete result. 

But, we are mentioning those contacts. We will mention those 

contacts, because we do consider those contacts very important. 

45 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Of the action items that Chairman Boxer 

mentioned, whether it is, you know, encouraging President Bush to 

visit Tibet when he is in China for the Olympics, any of the other 

action items that she mentioned, the consulate in Lhasa, what 

would you consider to be the most significant action item that we 

could take? 

Mr. GYARI. Most important, you know, I think, is the one that 

you also have on the top of your list, is U.S. diplomatic presence 

in Lhasa. I think the recent, you know, situation has proven beyond doubt that the lack of diplomatic access on the plateau is one 

of the reasons, to be very frank today, even the Secretary, you 

know, was unable to provide you with as much information that 

you wanted, and neither do we have that. So, I think, you know, 

I would say that among the list, you know, all of them are very important, but the most important, I would say, and besides, as part 

of your Tibetan Policy Act—in fact, I think the administration is 

obligated to not only act on that, but really put it on high priority, 

because it has been there for several years. You know, I really do 

hope that, as one your colleagues had alluded, that with the Chinese, not only you said that you want that, but, you know, unless 

you get your consulate in Lhasa, she will not get any consulates, 

that, you know, she would like to have in your country, you know, 

for all kind of economic and other access which China is, you know, 

very much after. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you. I appreciate that. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator BOXER. Senator Murkowski, that was an excellent question, and I think what you brought out is that having eyes and ears 

on the ground is so crucial, because there’s so much disinformation. 

And it’s a dangerous situation, with the shutting off of the bridge 

so you can’t even find out what’s really happening. 

So, I just want to thank you so very much, sir—— 

Mr. GYARI. Thank you very much. 

Senator BOXER [continuing]. Mr. Gyari, and we’ll—— 

Mr. GYARI. Thank you very much. 

Senator BOXER [continuing]. Work closely with you—— 

Mr. GYARI. Thank you very much. 

Senator BOXER [continuing]. As we move forward. 

Thank you. 

And now we’d ask our final panel, Mr. Steve Marshall, senior advisor, Congressional-Executive Commission on China, Dr. Lobsang 

Sangay, senior fellow, East Asian Legal Studies, to come forward. 

[Pause.] 

Senator BOXER. Gentlemen, I understand you’ve been told 5 minutes, and we’ll give you 6, in case you want to slow down a little 

bit. So, each of you will have 6 minutes, and we’ll start with Mr. 

Steve Marshall, senior advisor, Congressional-Executive Commission on China, Washington, D.C. 

Mr. Marshall, welcome. 

46 

STATEMENT OF STEVE MARSHALL, SENIOR ADVISOR, CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA, WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. MARSHALL. Chairman Boxer and members of the committee, 

thank you very much for the opportunity to testify here today on 

the events in the Tibetan areas of China and on the prospects for 

peace. 

My experience on the Tibetan Plateau began in the mid-1980s, 

and I’ve visited many of the areas, townships, and monasteries 

where the protests and crackdowns are taking place. I witnessed, 

at close range, the events in 1989 that led to martial law in Lhasa. 

I know that Tibetans are facing very serious consequences. 

The cascade of Tibetan protests began in Lhasa on March 10, 

2008. By the end of March, it had swept across much of the ethnicTibetan area of China. Except for periods of armed conflict between 

Tibetan and Chinese forces, and periods of politically driven social 

chaos, no Chinese Government has been confronted by an upsurge 

of Tibetan discontent as widely dispersed, sustained, and popular 

since the Chinese Communist Party established the People’s Republic of China in 1949. 

Chinese public security forces, mainly the People’s Armed Police, 

moved swiftly to establish lockdowns in each protest site. As of 

today, the situation in Tibetan protest areas is as grim as it is 

fluid, and it will negatively impact tens of thousands of Tibetans. 

Chinese security forces and government authorities are sealing off 

protest areas, cutting communications networks, and confiscating 

communications equipment, including mobile phones and computers. As a result, the information flow today is much less now 

than it was a few weeks ago. Unconfirmed reports tell of severe 

abuse and maltreatment to detainees, including inadequate food 

and water, severe overcrowding, and beating. The authorities have 

reportedly transferred substantial numbers of detainees away from 

their areas of residence, often to locations unknown to their families. 

Very little information is available about the legal process facing 

thousands of detained Tibetans. Aggressive implementation of political indoctrination campaigns is following swiftly in the wake of 

crushed protest. Reports are emerging of anger at the new campaigns by monks who refuse to comply with official demands to 

condemn the Dalai Lama. A second wave of detentions is taking 

shape. Authorities compel ordinary Tibetans to assembly publicly, 

denounce the Dalai Lama, and state that he was behind the protest 

and riot activity. 

A number of issues led to and result from this crisis. Two key 

factors distinguish the current protest from those of March 1959 in 

Lhasa and from the March 1989 protests and rioting that led to 

martial law in Lhasa. 

First, the 2008 protests have spread far beyond Lhasa in the 

Tibet Autonomous Region, and into Tibetan Autonomous Prefectures located in Qinghai, Gansu, and Sichuan Provinces. 

Second, the protesters have continued to persevere, even as Chinese security forces established and tightened lockdowns. The total 

of official acknowledged detentions is rising steeply, but the official 

47 

figures reflect only the fraction of protests that Chinese officials 

wish for observers to see. The actual numbers are far higher. 

Officials have released no information at all about the actions of 

security forces against Tibetan protesters in more than 40 of the 

counties where peaceful protests have reportedly taken place. 

The Chinese leadership chose to blame the Dalai Lama for the 

protests and for the resulting pre-Olympics news reporting that has 

been critical of China. At the same time, they chose not to acknowledge Tibetan dissatisfaction with policies that have not delivered 

the rights and freedoms nominally protected under China’s constitution and legal system. 

Are there Tibetans in exile who set out to encourage protest activity in the runup to the Olympics? Yes, there are. But Chinese 

officials have provided no evidence at all that links the Dalai Lama 

to such objectives and activities. 

Chinese officials are also blaming the Dalai Lama for Tibetan violence during rioting in Lhasa and in other locations. They do so 

by seeking to hold him personally accountable for the views of individuals and groups in what Chinese authorities call the ‘‘Dalai 

Clique.’’ 

Are there Tibetans in exile who acknowledge interest in a violent 

struggle for Tibetan independence and who have encouraged destructive action in China during the pre-Olympic period? Yes, there 

are. But the Dalai Lama’s actions and his public statements and 

his consistently pacifist counsel to Tibetans, wherever they live, 

place him at odds with violent intentions and actions. 

China’s policies toward Tibetans have been the root case of protests and riots. There is no credible evidence to support Chinese 

government claims that the Dalai Lama or the ‘‘Dalai Clique’’ manipulated Tibetans into protesting and rioting. 

Communist Party power over China’s legislative and regulatory 

process allows the government virtually unlimited ability to oppose 

unpopular programs among Tibetans. The function and legitimacy 

of Tibetan Buddhism has been especially hard hit since 2005. Tibetan protestors and their widespread calls for Tibetan independence have provided an unprecedented referendum on China’s autonomy system. Weak implementation of the regional ethnic autonomy law is a principal factor preventing Tibetans from protecting 

their culture, language, and religion. The Chinese leadership’s refusal to recognize the role of Chinese policy in driving Tibetan discontent, and their insistence on blaming the Dalai Lama, puts the 

Chinese leadership in an increasingly risky position. 

Senator BOXER. OK, I’m going to ask you to—— 

Mr. MARSHALL. Thirty seconds. Fifteen seconds? 

Senator BOXER. Yes. You can have 30. 

Mr. MARSHALL. Tibetans will not accept a Chinese-appointed replacement of the 14th Dalai Lama. There is no reason at all to suppose that Tibetans will come to terms with Chinese policies. To assert otherwise, as Chinese do, is a gross miscalculation that could 

lead to local and regional security being put at heightened risk for 

decades to come. There can be no prospect for a durable resolution 

to the current crisis unless the Chinese Government implements an 

ethnic autonomy system that respects the rights of ethnic minoriVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:27 Mar 09, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\47764.TXT MikeBB PsN: MIKEB
48 

ties to manage their own affairs and that engages the Dalai Lama 

in that process. 

Thank you, Chairman Boxer. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Marshall follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF STEVEN MARSHALL, SENIOR ADVISOR AND PRISONER DATABASE PROGRAM DIRECTOR, CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA, 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Chairman Boxer and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity 

to testify today on the events in the Tibetan areas of China, and on the prospects 

for ‘‘peace.’’ 

My experience on the Tibetan plateau dates to the mid-1980s, and I have visited 

many of the areas, towns, and monasteries where today’s protests and crackdown 

are unfolding. I witnessed at close range the events of 1989 that led to martial law 

in Lhasa. I know that Tibetans are facing very serious consequences. 

The cascade of Tibetan protests began in Lhasa on March 10, 2008, then, by the 

end of March, had swept across much of the ethnic Tibetan area of China. Except 

for periods of armed conflict between Tibetan and Chinese Armed Forces and periods of politically driven social chaos, no Chinese Government has been confronted 

by an upsurge of Tibetan discontent as widely dispersed, sustained, and popular 

since the Chinese Communist Party established the People’s Republic of China in 

1949. Chinese public security forces, principally the People’s Armed Police (PAP), 

moved swiftly to establish lockdowns in each protest site. 

As of today, the situation in Tibetan protest areas is as grim as it is fluid, and 

will negatively impact tens of thousands of Tibetans. Chinese security forces and 

government authorities are sealing off protest areas, cutting communications networks and confiscating communications equipment (including mobile phones and 

computers). As a result, the flow of information from protest areas is much less now 

than it was weeks ago. Unconfirmed reports tell of severe abuse and maltreatment 

to detainees—beating, inadequate food and water, and severe overcrowding. Authorities reportedly have transferred substantial numbers of detainees away from 

their areas of residence, often to locations unknown to their families. Very little 

information is available about the legal process facing thousands of detained Tibetans. Aggressive reimplementation of political indoctrination campaigns is following 

swiftly in the wake of crushed protests. Reports are emerging of anger at the new 

campaigns by monks who refuse to comply with demands to condemn the Dalai 

Lama. A second wave of detentions is taking shape. Authorities compel ordinary Tibetans to assemble publicly, denounce the Dalai Lama, and state that he was behind the protest and riot activity. 

A number of issues led to and result from this crisis. 

• Two key factors distinguish the current protests from the March 1959 Lhasa 

uprising and the March 1989 protests and rioting that led to martial law in 

Lhasa. First, the 2008 protests have spread far beyond Lhasa and the Tibet 

Autonomous Region (TAR), and into Tibetan Autonomous Prefectures (TAPs) in 

Qinghai, Gansu, and Sichuan provinces. Second, the protestors have continued 

to persevere even as Chinese security forces established and tightened 

lockdowns. 

• The total of officially acknowledged detentions is rising steeply—but the official 

figures reflect only the fraction of protests and resultant detentions that Chinese officials wish for observers to see. The actual numbers are far higher. Officials have released no information about the actions of security forces against 

Tibetan protestors in more than 40 of the counties where peaceful protests reportedly took place. 

• The Chinese leadership chose to blame the Dalai Lama for the protests and for 

the resulting pre-Olympics news reporting critical of China. At the same time, 

they chose not to acknowledge Tibetan dissatisfaction with policies that have 

not delivered the rights and freedoms nominally protected under China’s Constitution and legal system. Are there Tibetans in exile who set out to encourage 

protest activity in the runup to the Olympics? Yes, there are; but Chinese officials have provided no evidence that links the Dalai Lama directly to such objectives and activities. 

• Chinese officials also blame the Dalai Lama for Tibetan violence during rioting 

in Lhasa and in other locations. They do so by seeking to hold him accountable 

for the views of individuals and groups in what Chinese authorities call ‘‘the 

Dalai clique.’’ Are there Tibetans in exile who acknowledge interest in a violent 

49 

struggle for Tibetan independence, and who have encouraged destructive action 

in China during the pre-Olympic period? Yes, there are; but the Dalai Lama’s 

actions and public statements, and his consistently pacifist counsel to Tibetans—wherever they live—place him at odds with violent intentions and actions. • China’s policies toward Tibetans have been the root cause of the protests and 

riots. There is no credible evidence to support Chinese Government claims that 

the Dalai Lama (or ‘‘the Dalai clique’’) manipulated Tibetans into protesting and 

rioting. Communist Party power over China’s legislative and regulatory process 

allows the government virtually unlimited ability to impose unpopular programs among Tibetans. The function and legitimacy of Tibetan Buddhism has 

been especially hard-hit since 2005. • Tibetan protestors, in their widespread calls for Tibetan independence, have 

provided an unprecedented referendum on China’s autonomy system. Weak implementation of the Regional Ethnic Autonomy Law is a principal factor preventing Tibetans from protecting their culture, language, and religion. The Chinese leadership’s refusal to recognize the role of Chinese policy in driving 

Tibetan discontent, and their insistence on blaming the Dalai Lama, puts the 

leadership in an increasingly risky position. • Tibetans will not accept a Chinese-appointed replacement of the 14th Dalai 

Lama nor is there any reason to suppose that they will come to terms with Chinese policies. To assert otherwise, as the Chinese do, is a gross miscalculation 

that could place local and regional security at heightened risk for decades to 

come. There can be no prospect for a durable resolution to the current crisis unless the Chinese Government implements an ethnic autonomy system that respects the right of ethnic minorities to manage their own affairs, and engages 

the Dalai Lama in that process. 

The surge of events began on the anniversary of the date in 1959 when the 14th 

Dalai Lama fled People’s Liberation Army artillery shells and escaped into exile. 

When Tibetans learned of their loss, the result was the 1959 Lhasa Uprising. Fortynine years later, 300 monks of Drepung Monastery attempted to walk to the center 

of Lhasa, the capital of the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR). Their protest march 

was the largest by orders of magnitude since the current period of Tibetan dissent 

began in 1987. Security forces halted the monks and turned them back. Hundreds 

of Sera Monastery monks made a similar attempt the next day and were blocked 

by security forces. On March 14 a protest in Lhasa’s Tibetan quarter turned into 

a riot that PAP let go unchecked for most of the day. The level of destruction and 

loss of life surpassed that of the March 1989 Lhasa riots, when President Hu Jintao 

served as the TAR Party Secretary, and authorities did not put a decisive end to 

the events until midnight of the third day, when the PLA marched into Lhasa and 

initiated 14 months of martial law. 

The dispersal and persistence of protests even as PAP established and maintained 

lockdowns distinguishes the 2008 events from those of 1989 and 1959, and makes 

them more significant. By early April, unofficial sources reported Tibetan protests 

in more than 50 county-level administrative areas. Nearly two-thirds of the counties 

are located outside the TAR in Tibetan Autonomous Prefectures (TAPs) that the 

Chinese Government established in Qinghai, Gansu, and Sichuan provinces. The 

scale of popular participation tests China’s assertion that the protests are the result 

of instigation by ‘‘a small handful’’ of supporters of ‘‘the Dalai clique.’’ Most protests 

and protestors were peaceful, according to unofficial accounts, but in some locations 

(Lhasa, Aba county in Sichuan, and several counties in Gannan TAP in Gansu) 

Tibetans attacked government offices, private businesses, and citizens. China’s 

state-run media has focused exclusively on such incidents, broadly characterizing 

the protests as ‘‘riots’’ and the protestors as ‘‘rioters’’—a troubling signal that authorities may seek to mask prosecution of peaceful protestors who exercised their 

basic human rights as justifiable state action against violent criminals. The Tibetan 

Government-in-exile and some advocacy groups, on the other hand, have sometimes 

described as ‘‘peaceful protests’’ those events during which Tibetans caused property 

damage and personal injury. 

The totals of officially acknowledged detainees are rising steeply, but international onlookers are glimpsing only the incidents and consequences that Chinese 

officials wish for them to see. In the nine counties where authorities have reported 

rioting on specific dates between March 14 and March 19, the protests resulted by 

early April in more than 20 fatalities caused by Tibetan rioters and more than 4,400 

persons in police custody after they surrendered voluntarily for participating in rioting or were detained by police for doing so. At least half of the 4,400 persons had 

been released by early April, according to official reports. 

In more than 40 of the counties where such protests reportedly occurred, Chinese 

officials have provided no information about the actions of security forces against 

50 

peaceful Tibetan protestors. Authorities took measures to prevent Tibetans from 

sharing information about the protests and their consequences including confiscating cell phones and computers in lockdown locations, turning off cellular transmission facilities, and interfering with Internet access, according to unofficial 

accounts. International journalists and foreign journalists have been barred from entering Tibetan areas. Based on fragmentary, unconfirmed reports, the protests have 

resulted in more than 140 deaths of Tibetan protestors and an additional number 

of Tibetans detained for peaceful protesting estimated to number in the thousands. 

Faced with a choice between blaming the protests on the Dalai Lama, or acknowledging acute Tibetan dissatisfaction with policies that do not deliver the rights and 

freedoms nominally protected under China’s Constitution and legal system, the Chinese leadership blamed the Dalai Lama. Even as protests continued to pop up in 

secured areas, the Party-state apparatus moved to restore ‘‘stability’’ by reasserting 

and strengthening the very policies that stoked Tibetan frustration in the first 

place. In the most ferocious attack on the Dalai Lama since China’s era of economic 

reform began in 1978, TAR Party Secretary Zhang Qingli, a Hu Jintao protege who 

like his mentor served the Communist Youth League and gained field experience 

in Gansu province, described the Dalai Lama as ‘‘an evil spirit with a human face 

and the heart of a beast.’’ Aggressive campaigns of ‘‘patriotic education’’ spread 

through counties where Tibetans had in previous days and weeks used protests to 

reject the tenets of Party-led indoctrination. Officials confronted monks, nuns, students, farmers, and nomads with demands to sign or thumbprint statements denouncing the Dalai Lama, accept as legitimate the Panchen Lama installed by the 

Chinese Government in 1995 (instead of Gedun Choekyi Nyima, the boy whom the 

Dalai Lama recognized as the Panchen Lama), and agree that Tibet has been for 

centuries a part of China. 

There are Tibetans in exile who set out to encourage protest activity by Tibetans 

in China in the runup to the Olympics, but Chinese officials have provided no evidence that links the Dalai Lama directly to such objectives or activities. Nonetheless, the Chinese Government holds the Dalai Lama personally responsible for statements and actions of Tibetan groups that he does not seek to control and that do 

not seek to be controlled by him, that do not support the Dalai Lama’s policies, and 

that do not have previously demonstrated capacity to exert significant influence on 

events in the Tibetan areas of China. China’s Ministry of Public Security (MPS) presented in an April 2 Xinhua report ‘‘evidence’’ that ‘‘the Dalai clique’’—and by extension the Dalai Lama—‘‘masterminded’’ the March 14 riots in Lhasa, a charge that 

the government later expanded to include Tibetan rioting in other provinces on 

other dates. All of the alleged events that the MPS characterized as evidence applied to persons and groups that the report refers to collectively as ‘‘the Dalai 

clique.’’ None of the alleged events that the MPS characterized as evidence showed 

a direct link to the Dalai Lama. 

MPS ‘‘evidence’’ linking the Dalai Lama to the protests and riots focused principally on the Tibetan People’s Uprising Movement (TPUM, www.tibetan 

uprising.org), an alliance formed in January 2008 of five India-based Tibetan 

groups, chief among them the Tibetan Youth Congress (TYC). TPUM’s Web site 

states that the groups aim to ‘‘revive the spirit of the Tibetan national uprising of 

1959’’ and to ‘‘seize the Olympic spotlight and shine it on China’s shameful repression inside Tibet.’’ The groups seek Tibetan independence and reject the Dalai 

Lama’s Middle Way Approach to accept Tibetan ‘‘genuine autonomy’’ under Chinese 

sovereignty. TYC President Tsewang Rigzin told the Wall Street Journal on March 

20 that he disagrees with the Dalai Lama’s policy and observed, ‘‘I don’t see people 

out on the streets protesting for a ‘Middle Way.’ ’’ 

There are also Tibetans in exile who acknowledge Tibetan interest in a violent 

struggle for Tibetan independence, and who have encouraged destructive action in 

China during the pre-Olympic period, but the Dalai Lama’s longstanding policy of 

nonviolence, and his consistently pacifist counsel to Tibetans, place him at odds with 

any such intention. Then-TYC President Kalsang Phuntsok said in December 2005 

that some TYC members are attracted to ‘‘violence-infested movements,’’ such as 

those in the Middle East, that they see ‘‘achieving results’’ (Reuters, December 29). 

In February 2007, former TYC President Lhasang Tsering told approximately 200 

Tibetans attending a public forum in India that the Olympics provide an opportunity to sabotage public infrastructure in China during an Olympic countdown 

when Chinese officials ‘‘most need to be well-behaved.’’ Likening Tibetan activists 

to ‘‘mosquitoes who barge into bedrooms bringing in epidemics,’’ he told the 

attendees, ‘‘For a committed activist you don’t need CIA’s support to cut a telephone 

line in Beijing or throw an iron rod on the power cables in Shanghai. These kinds 

of sabotages can be done by any ordinary person, and can weaken the power from 

inside. Sometimes the whole city goes dark by one simple but technically correct 

51 

act.’’ (http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=15653). The Dalai Lama, on the 

other hand, has repeatedly urged Tibetans to refrain entirely from violence. On 

April 6, he called on Tibetans living in exile to ‘‘not engage in any action that could 

be even remotely interpreted as violent.’’ 

The Chinese Government has not provided a convincing argument that the Dalai 

Lama (or ‘‘the Dalai clique’’) manipulated Tibetans into protesting and rioting—instead, credible analysis supports the observation that China’s policies toward Tibetans resulted in such actions. Increasing Tibetan resentment against Chinese policies 

that impact diverse areas of Tibetan life—religious and economic, urban and pastoral—sheds light on why monks, townsfolk, and nomads risked participating in protests across a wide swath of the Tibetan plateau. 

The function and legitimacy of Tibetan Buddhism—the core of Tibetan culture— 

has been especially hard-hit since 2005. New legal measures closely regulating 

monastic life in the TAR took effect in January 2007. Nationwide measures establishing state supervision of the centuries-old Tibetan tradition of identifying, seating, and educating boys whom Tibetans believe are reincarnations of Buddhist 

teachers took effect last September. The government can use such legal measures 

to remold Tibetan Buddhism to suit the state. The anti-Dalai Lama and patriotic 

education campaigns antagonize Tibetans in general, but they are especially harmful to Tibetans who regard the Dalai Lama, in his capacity as the spiritual leader 

of the Gelug tradition of Tibetan Buddhism, as their guide on the Buddhist path 

toward enlightenment. Zhang Qingli, since his arrival in the TAR in November 

2005, has raised the Party’s attack against the Dalai Lama to a post-Cultural Revolution high. 

The Qinghai-Tibet railway, a premier project of Great Western Development 

program, entered service in July 2006 and is reconfiguring the economic and employment outlook for Tibetans in Lhasa and nearby urban centers. Based on Congressional-Executive Commission on China analysis of fragmentary and sometimes 

contradictory official information, more than a half million railway passengers, most 

of whom are likely to be ethnic Han, may have traveled during to the TAR during 

the first 18 months of operation to seek work, trade, and business opportunities. 

The railway’s impact could overwhelm Tibetans and sharply increase pressure on 

the Tibetan culture. Another state-run program to settle Tibetan nomads into compact communities is nearing completion throughout Tibetan areas, and has resulted 

in severe disruption to an important sector of the Tibetan culture and economy. Nomads have participated in the recent protests in substantial numbers, placing some 

counties on the protest map for the first time since 1987. 

Communist Party control over China’s legislative, governmental, and policymaking process, as well as contradictory provisions in Chinese laws and regulations, 

support the government’s unrestricted ability to implement unpopular programs 

among Tibetans. A core failure of the legal framework is the weak implementation 

of China’s Regional Ethnic Autonomy Law (REAL), the state’s principal legal instrument for managing the affairs of ethnic minorities. The REAL declares in its Preamble that the practice of autonomy conveys the state’s ‘‘full respect for and guarantee of ethnic minorities’ right to administer their internal affairs.’’ In practice, the 

right of Tibetans to protect their culture, language, and religion, and to manage policy implementation on issues such as economic development and the environment, 

is extremely circumscribed, if not negligible. Instead, the government prioritizes economic development programs that drive economic growth at a brisk rate, such as 

Great Western Development, but the Han population benefits disproportionately because much of the funding is channeled into infrastructure construction and urban 

development. 

Tibetan protestors, in their widespread calls for Tibetan independence, have provided an unprecedented referendum on China’s autonomy system. Did they speak 

for the Tibetan majority who kept silent (and safe)? In a society without a free 

press, and in which opposition to Party policy can lead to imprisonment, no one can 

know for certain. By systematically failing to implement the REAL’s core commitment to allow ethnic minorities to run their own internal affairs, the Party has demonstrated to Tibetans that their cultural outlook under the status quo is bleak. Ironically, the Party has undercut the Dalai Lama’s campaign to persuade Tibetans to 

set aside the goal of independence and instead accept ‘‘genuine autonomy’’ under 

Chinese sovereignty. Many believe the Dalai Lama is the only person sufficiently 

influential among Tibetans to prove himself a decisive factor in working with the 

Chinese leadership to transform ethnic autonomy into an enduring success. 

The Chinese leadership’s refusal to recognize the role of Chinese policy in driving 

Tibetan discontent, and their insistence on blaming the Dalai Lama, places the leadership in an increasingly risky position. If the leadership were to take advantage 

of the Dalai Lama’s offer to help lead Tibetans toward compromise, then hard-liners 

52 

would cast it as capitulation. In such circumstances, the leadership would recoil and 

back away from compromise in an attempt to preserve its power unchallenged. Instead, the Party has signaled that it may wait for the Dalai Lama to pass away, 

calculating perhaps that when the Dalai Lama’s life comes to end, so will the issues 

that China associates with him. The Chinese Government will use the legal measures that it has already issued to supervise the selection of a new Dalai Lama, and 

pressure Tibetans to express their acceptance of the matter. Eventually, the government may hope, Tibetans will leave the 14th Dalai Lama in the past. 

If the leadership believes that Tibetans will accept a Chinese-appointed replacement of the 14th Dalai Lama and come to terms with Chinese policies, it could 

prove to be a miscalculation that places local and regional security at heightened 

risk for decades to come. As the impact of Chinese legal measures and policies continue to diminish the core elements of Tibetan culture—religion, language, and selfidentity—the Dalai Lama installed by China will grow from boyhood to maturity 

and into old age. Many Tibetans may see in him a provocative symbol of Tibetan 

loss and humiliation, promoting deepening of Tibetan resentment. The recent protests, spread throughout a vast area beyond Lhasa, answered by a military-style response and intensification of the policies that fueled the eruption in the first place, 

may have already sewn the seeds for what someday could become the next generation of Tibetan protest. 

The prospect for a mutually beneficial and durable outcome could decline from 

poor to virtually nonexistent unless the Chinese Government resolves to fully implement the ethnic autonomy system, and to engage the Dalai Lama in that process. 

If Chinese and Tibetans—along with their friends, neighbors, and partners—see in 

the current wave of Tibetan protests a daunting challenge, then each side should 

contemplate the potential outcome during a future scenario in which the 14th Dalai 

Lama may no longer be available to urge Tibetans to back away from violence. Will 

a future Chinese President be able to explain persuasively to China’s citizens why 

the leadership failed to meet with the Dalai Lama when they had the opportunity? 

The current Chinese leadership would do well to ask themselves the following question: Will a future Chinese President believe that a persuasive explanation even 

exists? 

Chairman Boxer, the staff of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China 

has prepared a list of concrete recommendations to address the current crisis. I 

would ask that this list be submitted for the record for the committee’s consideration: 

1. Commence direct talks between the Chinese Government and the Dalai 

Lama; 

2. Distinguish between peaceful protestors and rioters, honor the Chinese 

Constitution’s reference to the freedoms of speech and association, and do not 

treat peaceful protest as a crime; 

3. Provide a detailed account of Tibetan protest activity in each location 

where such activity took place; 

4. Provide details about each person detained or charged with a crime, including each person’s name, the charges (if any) against each person, the name and 

location of the prosecuting office (‘‘procuratorate’’) and court handling each case, 

and the name of each facility where a person is detained or imprisoned; 

5. Allow access by diplomats and other international observers to the trials 

of people charged with protest-related crimes; 

6. Allow international observers and journalists immediate and unfettered access to Tibetan areas of China; 

7. Ensure that security officials fulfill their obligations under articles 64(2) 

and 71(2) of China’s Criminal Procedure Law to inform relatives and work 

places (monasteries in the case of monks) where detainees are being held; 

8. Encourage and facilitate the filing of compensation suits under Chinese law 

in cases of alleged wrongful arrest, detention, punishment and other official 

abuses during the recent protests; 

9. Permit international observers to monitor closely the implementation of 

China’s new Regulation on Open Government Information, which comes into 

force on May 1, 2008, with special emphasis on implementation in Tibetan 

areas; 

10. Strictly enforce the Regulations on Reporting Activities in China by Foreign Journalists During the Beijing Olympic Games and the Preparatory Period, 

with special emphasis on access to and in Tibetan areas of China. 

The Congressional Executive Commission on China (CECC) invites members of 

the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Members of Congress, and the global 

Internet public to visit the Commission’s Web site (http://www.cecc.gov) for addiVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:27 Mar 09, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\DOCS\47764.TXT MikeBB PsN: MIKEB
53 

tional information and updates on the unfolding events in the Tibetan areas in 

China. Please visit the Commission’s Political Prisoner Database via a link on the 

CECC home page or at http://ppd.cecc.gov for information about Tibetans and other 

Chinese citizens detained or imprisoned for exercising their human rights. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so very much. 

And then, last, but certainly not least, we welcome you, Dr. 

Lobsang Sangay. You have been very patient. Senior fellow, East 

Asian Legal Studies Program at Harvard University Law School. 

And I just want to thank both of you, in this panel, for coming 

forward. 

We look forward to your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF LOBSANG SANGAY, SENIOR FELLOW, EAST 

ASIAN LEGAL STUDIES PROGRAM, HARVARD UNIVERSITY 

LAW SCHOOL, CAMBRIDGE, MA 

Dr. SANGAY. Thank you, Madam Chairperson—Senator Boxer, 

and members of the subcommittee, for the honor of speaking before 

you today. 

I also appreciate the Senate’s strong support for Tibet; specifically, Senate’s letter to President Hu Jintao and the Senate’s Resolution on Tibet, passed recently. You have demonstrated your leadership, and the convening of this hearing attests to your commitment to end the crisis in Tibet. 

I also agree with our Special Envoy, Lodi Gyari, that the recent 

uprising in Tibet is a failure of 50 years of Chinese Government 

occupation and misrule in Tibet. Like him, my family also suffered 

great deal. One of my aunts was pregnant and had to jump into 

river with an infant in her hand, because she found the weekly humiliation too much to bear. And my uncle also died of hunger in 

prison. So, in that sense, nonviolence is tough, dialogue is tough. 

Having said that, I still believe that meaningful dialogue between 

His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the Chinese Government can 

bring a lasting solution to the Tibet issue. 

China wants to be a great nation. History has shown, greatness 

cannot be bought in the marketplace and cannot be bought with 

force. Greatness has to be earned. 

In the last 50 years, China has transformed itself from a poor nation to booming economy. The world is mesmerized by its rapid 

modernization and economic growth. It is yet to be determined 

what kind of greatness is China heading for. 

The way China treats Tibet will reflect what kind of powerful nation China becomes. The present situation presents both a crisis 

and a tremendous opportunity. Now is the time for the Chinese 

leadership to demonstrate, not only its strength, but also its reason, as well as its compassion, to try to build a harmonious society 

for all. 

The scale and magnitude of the recent uprising in Tibet reflects 

the tipping point for the Tibetan people. As is often the case in ethnic conflict, when economic marginalization combines with cultural 

assimilation and political crackdown, you have all the elements of 

a potent and dangerous situation. 

If the tragedy in Tibet is not at rest soon, unfortunately the possibility of escalating tension and conflict are not a question of ‘‘if,’’ 

but ‘‘when.’’ 

54 

Now, what can the Senate do? As Madam Chair asked the question—and you would like to have action plan, and I have a suggestion. A first step would be to allow the Dalai Lama to be seen and 

heard by the Chinese people. 

Specifically, on March 13, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said, on 

Hong Kong television, that Dalai Lama should use his influence to 

end violence in Tibet. I believe the Chinese Government should 

allow the Dalai Lama to respond to Premier Wen Jiabao’s call. In 

order for this to happen, the Chinese Government should allow the 

Dalai Lama to speak directly to the people in Tibet. 

If the Chinese Government is serious and sincere, then instead 

of demonizing him and blocking him out, they must allow his voice, 

his image, and his message of peace, justice, and reconciliation to 

reach the Chinese public directly. If the Dalai Lama were allowed 

to transmit a message to Chinese media in China to use his authority amongst Tibetan people to ensure peace and harmony of the 

Olympic Torch passing through Tibet and the Games itself, this 

would be a significant step forward in dialogue. This would demonstrate to the Chinese public and Chinese leadership the sincerity 

of the Dalai Lama. 

Finally, I strongly believe that our first priority is to build trust 

between Chinese and Tibetan people. Mutual understanding will 

require both sides to take some risk. Allowing the Dalai Lama’s 

message to be heard inside China would be a powerful first step. 

Let me conclude by saying, in my current position at Harvard I 

have worked earnestly and in good faith on facilitating people-topeople exchanges between Chinese and Tibetan scholars, which 

have led to six very productive sets of meetings over the past 6 

years. I sincerely believe dialogue is the pathway to harmony, and 

I also believe it is possible. 

Now is the time for His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the Chinese Government to sit down face to face and reach a lasting and 

mutually agreeable solution. I pray that American leadership, 

through your Senate office, will strongly support this approach. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Sangay follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. LOBSANG SANGAY, SENIOR FELLOW, EAST ASIAN

LEGAL STUDIES PROGRAM, HARVARD UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL, CAMBRIDGE, MA 

Thank you, Chairwoman Senator Boxer, and members of the subcommittee, for 

the honor of speaking before you today. I applaud the actions of the Senate during 

this crisis, most notably the Senate letter to President Hu Jintao, sent on April 2, 

and the Senate resolution passed on April 9 (S. Res. 504—110th Congress (2008)). 

You have demonstrated your leadership, and the convening of this hearing attests 

to your commitment to support a positive way forward out of the current crisis. 

There is now a window of opportunity for meaningful dialogue between the two 

sides to find a lasting solution to the Tibet issue. The issue will not go away, and 

the earlier it is addressed, the better it will be for all. 

CHINA AS A GREAT NATION

China wants to be a great nation. History has shown that greatness cannot be 

bought in the marketplace. Greatness must be earned. In the last 50 years, China 

has transformed itself from a poor nation to a booming economy. The world is mesmerized by its rapid modernization and hopes that along with its economic growth, 

forward strides will be made by and for its people in all spheres, not just economic. 

The way China treats Tibet will reflect what kind of great nation China becomes. 

The present situation presents both a crisis, and a tremendous opportunity—an opVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:27 Mar 09, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\DOCS\47764.TXT MikeBB PsN: MIKEB
55 

portunity for the Chinese Government to demonstrate legitimacy in its leadership 

and confidence in its position by sitting down to negotiate with the Dalai Lama. 

Now is the time for the Chinese leadership to demonstrate not only its strength, 

but also its reason and its compassion as it builds a harmonious society for all. 

HISTORY AND NATIONALISM

For China, the building of the modern nation-state was a response to a bitter history of Western imperialism during the late Qing Empire. Nation-state building was 

an effective way to fend off further foreign encroachment in a world dominated by 

Western norms of international practices. The Chinese Government today perceives 

the Tibet issue from the perspective of Chinese nationalism, but fails to understand 

that Tibetans also perceive themselves as victims, or rather victimized by former 

victims of Western imperialism. The inability of the Chinese Government to move 

beyond the constraints of this type of nationalism presents a huge obstacle to confronting the core issues facing the Tibetan people. 

New thinking is needed for the nation of China to continue its evolution toward 

greatness. Let us be optimistic in anticipating that in contrast to the war-ridden 

20th century, the 21st century will be dominated by themes such as globalization, 

interdependence, and cross-cultural understanding and tolerance. The Dalai Lama’s 

middle path approach of seeking genuine autonomy within the framework of China 

has substantial legitimacy in the context of China’s own rich history. 

A HISTORIC OPPORTUNITY

The scale and magnitude of the recent uprising in Tibet reflects a tipping point 

for the critical mass of the Tibetan people. As is often the case in ethnic conflict, 

when economic suffering combines with political issues relating to identity and dignity, you have all the elements of a potent and dangerous situation. If the tragedy 

in Tibet is not addressed soon, the possibility of escalating tension and conflict are 

not a question of if, but when. 

China has a historic opportunity before it. As it rises to the world stage to host 

the Olympic Games, now is the time for it to extend its hand to the Dalai Lama 

and the Tibetan people to enhance its proper place as a leader amongst nations. 

STEPS FORWARD

A significant step would be for the Chinese Government to allow for the normalization of the Dalai Lama within China. This is the first step toward genuine dialogue—to allow the Dalai Lama to be seen and heard by the Chinese people. 

Specifically, the Chinese Government should allow the Dalai Lama to respond to 

Premier Wen Jiabao’s call for him to use his influence to restore calm and order 

amongst the Tibetan people. In order for this to happen, the Chinese Government 

must allow the Dalai Lama’s message to be heard inside China. Instead of attacking 

him and blocking him out, they should allow his voice, his image and his message 

of peace, justice, and reconciliation to reach the Chinese public directly. If the Dalai 

Lama were allowed to publicly transmit a message inside China, to use his authority amongst the Tibetan people to ensure peace and harmony of the Olympic torch 

passing through Tibet, and the Games itself, this would be a significant step forward in dialogue. It would also demonstrate to the Chinese public, and the Chinese 

leadership, the sincerity of his position. It would open up space for Chinese and Tibetan people to work together toward a harmonious common future. 

At this critical juncture, another urgent need is to enable the Chinese and Tibetan 

people to have more access to the free flow of information. Controls over access to 

information in China pose a serious impediment to China’s progress. Specific to 

Tibet, the fact that foreign correspondents are denied access to Tibetan areas only 

undermines China’s own interests and position. Here, it is imperative that we continue to do what we can to support the process of opening up windows and channels 

to information, knowledge and understanding for the mutual benefit of Tibetans, 

Han, and for China itself. 

Finally, as a beneficiary of the Fulbright Program, which facilitated my enrollment in Harvard Law School in 1995, I have come to see the strategic value of academic exchanges. In my current position at Harvard, I have worked earnestly and 

in good faith on facilitating people-to-people exchanges between Chinese and Tibetan scholars which have led to six very productive sets of meetings over the past 

6 years. Ultimately the Tibet issue has to be addressed through dialogue between 

Chinese and Tibetan people. 

The suggestions I have put forward here are based on one principle, and that is 

that our first priority is to build trust between the two sides. There is nothing more 

urgent now than to create momentum for mutual understanding and that will reVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:27 Mar 09, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\DOCS\47764.TXT MikeBB PsN: MIKEB
56 

quire both sides to take some political risk. The first step toward this is to allow 

the Dalai Lama’s message to be heard, not in the West, but inside China itself. 

I pray that American leadership will actively support this approach. Having engaged in promoting dialogue between Chinese and Tibetan scholars for the last decade, I strongly believe dialogue is the best way to solve the Tibet issue peacefully. 

Senator BOXER. Well, I so appreciate both of your statements. 

Mr. Sangay, I’m very interested—and I think Senator Murkowski 

is, as well—in what we can do to allow that kind of communication, 

because a message of peace from the Dalai Lama would go a long 

way, I think, to making sure that the people in Tibet get the message and the—within the Tibet region and the rest of China, as 

well. Because what is worrying me, as I said before to Mr. Gyari, 

is my concern, as I read the press—and this is just from the press, 

I don’t know if it’s true—that there’s more and more strain between those outside Tibet and those inside Tibet. In other words, 

I’m fearful that the majority of the Chinese people are, maybe, getting more hostile toward the Tibetan people. I don’t know if that’s 

true, so maybe that would be my question. Do you think that 

there—what do you think, if you could characterize the views of the 

majority of the Chinese toward the Tibetan people—would you say 

that they have an attitude, as we say in America, ‘‘Live and let 

live,’’ or, ‘‘Gee, we don’t understand them,’’ or—what do you think? 

Because we know so little about—can’t find out, really, the true 

public opinion. But, your sense of it, what do the—most of the Chinese people feel toward the Tibetan people? 

Dr. SANGAY. Until the recent uprising, I feel most of the Chinese 

were ignorant of what was going on, or they really did not care, because, you know, Tibet is in the western region, which is marginal 

in their day-to-day life. 

Since the uprising, because of the Chinese Government one-sided 

or overemphasis on the afternoon of 14 March riots in Lhasa, I 

think it has unleashed, unfortunately, Han Chinese chauvinism 

and nationalism toward Tibetan people. That has distorted the 

image of Tibetan people. And that begs the question, actually—because, on the one hand, the Chinese Government projected Tibet 

and Tibetan people before the uprising as peaceful, loving, grateful, 

loyal, and smiling citizens of China. After the protests, now the Tibetans are projected as disloyal, ungrateful thugs, vandalizers, and 

killers. Now, which image is true? You know? That, I think, the 

Chinese people has to ask, because they were being given one 

image for the last 50 years, now they are given the other image. 

I think this distortion of image calls for a need for the Chinese people to hear His Holiness’ message of peace—— 

Senator BOXER. Yeah. 

Dr. SANGAY [continuing]. Directly. And then—that’s why we propose this, because Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao himself proposed 

this. He said Dalai Lama should use his influence to end violence 

in—— 

Senator BOXER. Right. 

Dr. SANGAY [continuing]. Tibet. 

Senator BOXER. Right 

Dr. SANGAY. That’s the proposition. And I think the—through the 

office of Senate and the U.S. leadership to respond and say, ‘‘Well, 

let Dalai Lama hear—let the Chinese people in China and Tibetan 

people in Tibet hear what he has to say.’’ 

57 

Senator BOXER. It’s a good point, because the Chinese leadership 

has said that—has challenged the Dalai Lama and said, ‘‘Tell them 

to stop the rioting,’’ and—which he said, ‘‘Look, I’m not behind it.’’ 

But, if he could address everyone, I think that is a very, very smart 

recommendation, and I’m going to discuss these recommendations 

with my colleague here, and I—I hope that, perhaps, we’ll put that 

on the list. But, we’re going to have a bipartisan action plan, and 

that’s certainly something I’m going to recommend. Thank you. 

And, Mr. Marshall, first of all, you’re very wise to have, as one 

of the—I think, deputy staff director, Charlotte Oldham-Moore, because, basically, she taught me everything I know about this region 

of the world, and I miss her very much. She used to work for me. 

And my loss is your gain. But, I’m very happy to see Charlotte 

here, and wanted to welcome—— 

Mr. MARSHALL. We’re fortunate. 

Senator BOXER. I wanted to welcome her. 

And this is my last question. And it is this. Mr. Marshall, you 

and I are sort of on the same path of this action plan, and you’ve 

come up with some ideas in your written testimony. And one of 

them is what the international observers should do: They should be 

granted access to trials, given immediate access to the Tibetan 

areas of China, a couple of other things. My question is this. Are 

there international observers that are both credible and acceptable 

to the Government of China? 

Mr. MARSHALL. The foreign diplomats who are already in China 

would be one of the most ideal and easily available resources, because they are allowed to attend trials and other legally oriented 

events. So—— 

Senator BOXER. OK 

Mr. MARSHALL [continuing]. If they were able to do this, that 

would be great. Almost any international observer who is not closely aligned with one or another—— 

Senator BOXER. All right. 

Mr. MARSHALL [continuing]. Political position—— 

Senator BOXER. So, people who are already in the country, that 

they trust. Very good. 

Mr. MARSHALL. I believe—— 

Senator BOXER. No, that’s very, very helpful as we come up with 

this action plan. 

So, I just want to thank you very much. I’ll turn over, to close, 

to Senator Murkowski. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

And my apologies to you, gentlemen, I had to step out, so I 

wasn’t able to hear most of your oral testimony here, but I have 

had an opportunity to prepare some questions for you. 

Mr. Sangay, your comments about the need for all of China to 

hear from the Dalai Lama, I think, just speaks to the point that 

we have made in letters, in committee, here, that there must be 

greater access to the international media, greater access to the 

nongovernmental organizations in the areas, so that we can know 

what is truly being said, and others can know, fully and fairly, 

what is being said. Most important, there. 

Mr. Sangay, you have—you’ve said, in the past, that you believe 

that—and this is your statement—‘‘With the passing of the Dalai 

58 

Lama, Tibetans will become more radicalized.’’ I’m wondering if 

that is still your position, and whether or not the events of the last 

few weeks have either shifted or perhaps strengthened that view. 

What is happening out there, kind of, for the future of Tibet? 

Dr. SANGAY. I just want to thank you, first, for accepting our 

proposition, or at least my proposition. It’s true, still, the information inside China and Tibet are distorted. Radio Free Asia and 

Voice of America are trying their best to disseminate information, 

but it’s still jammed and blocked. And they deserve support. 

Now, as for radicalization of Tibetan people, yes, unfortunately, 

I do think so, because one key factor that, I feel, is the age of His 

Holiness the Dalai Lama, because for any agreement to work, time 

if of the essence. You need time, not just to negotiate the deal, but 

it has to implement. To effectively implement it, it takes time. And 

then, His Holiness is already 73 years old. And then—that’s why 

I think one of the reasons of recent uprising in Tibet is because of 

His Holiness. And that is made very clear by the protests and uprising in 90-plus areas, because the universal and united slogan of 

all the Tibetans, man and woman, nomads and farmers, everybody 

was same thing. There was ‘‘Long live the Dalai Lama. We want 

him back. He is our leader. He should be back to the land he was 

born, to the land where people are still loyal and dedicated to him.’’ 

They desperately want to see him. 

Now, if that situation—if that prospect dims, I think Tibetans 

will be more frustrated, more radicalized. Because, as it is, there 

is economic marginalization, there is cultural assimilation, there is 

political control. Now, on top of that, the emotional threat that they 

have with His Holiness and the faith that they have with His Holiness, if they see the prospect that he’s not going to be seen or returned to Tibet, that would definitely radicalize the Tibetan people 

inside Tibet, unfortunately. I’m sad to say it. And that would not 

be a scenario which will help the Chinese Government, China, and 

also the Tibetan people. And that situation, we must avoid. For 

that to happen, I think we need a process through which, you 

know, dialogue has to take place. And for that to happen, His Holiness’ message of peace, his voice, his image has to be transmitted 

inside China, so the Chinese people can hear him and decide for 

themself what kind of leader he is. The rest of the world knows 

what kind of leader he is. But, the Chinese people should decide, 

not just rely on, you know, one-sided distorted image that they’re 

trying to project. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. So, when you hear the comments that were 

made earlier by Secretary Negroponte, that the policy perspective 

or the policy push that we make is continued, and meaningful dialogue, you look—you must be frustrated even more than some of 

those who are engaged in that dialogue, because you’re saying 

there’s a timeliness, there’s an imperative here. You have a leader 

who is not getting younger, and the situation could become worse 

for China, should there not be resolution in the very short term. 

Dr. SANGAY. Yes, there is a corelationship between dialogue not 

working and violent or uprising in Tibet. For example, in 1951, His 

Holiness the Dalai Lama was in the border of India. He could just 

cross over. But then, his representatives in Beijing signed what— 

so-called 17-point agreement with the Chinese Government. 

59 

Though it was signed under duress and force, His Holiness felt, you 

know, ‘‘I will give one more try to work out with the Chinese Government,’’ and he returned to Lhasa, and he tried his best to work 

with the Chinese Government. But, by 1959, the—His Holiness realized, and—realized that Chinese Government was more interested in consolidating their position in Tibet, rather than implementing their own agreement, which was forced on Tibetans. So, 

he had to flee. That led to the major uprising in Lhasa in 19-— 

Lhasa and all over Tibet in 1959. 

Now, in 1982 and 1984, His Holiness the Dalai Lama sent two 

delegations to Beijing to negotiate with the Chinese Government on 

the future prospect of Tibet, because the then leader of China said 

anything other than independence can be discussed. With that 

premise, he sent his representative, but upon the arrival in Beijing, 

they were told that, you know, they will make five-point offer to 

the Dalai Lama to restore his political position and status. But, His 

Holiness the Dalai Lama made it very clear at that time, he said, 

‘‘I’m not interested in my own political position, but I’m interested 

in the welfare of 6 million Tibetans.’’ 

Now, after 1984, it was very clear that the liberal and more moderate leader, Hu Yaobang, was losing power, and then that led to 

the closure of the negotiation. Then, 1987, 1989–87, 1988, 1989 uprising happened in Lhasa and neighboring areas. 

Now, recently, since 2002, His Holiness sent six delegations as— 

he was chief negotiator, he went. Since 2002—the six delegation 

went. Each time, they came back empty-handed. Right? And then, 

that led to—that is one of the reason the—for the recent uprising, 

because Tibetans in Tibet felt that they want to see His Holiness 

the Dalai Lama back, but they felt that these—the dialogue—socalled dialogue—is just, you know, a waste of time or that the Chinese Government is just taking Dalai Lama for a ride. And that, 

kind of, I think, fueled resentment and that led to the uprising. So, 

there is a co relation between dialogue not working and an uprising. And the key is always been His Holiness the Dalai Lama. So, 

Tibetans in Tibet, they want to see, they are desperate to see His 

Holiness the Dalai Lama back, and if that is not fulfilled, it will 

be tragic for all of us, and then situation inside Tibet will be unfortunate for all of us. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Well, thank you. 

I want to appreciate—I appreciate both of you being on the 

panel, but also for the very important perspective that you have 

shared with us. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. It’s great to be 

your partner as we work on this. 

And I was told that the last Tibet legislation that’s been referred 

to was really just advisory. It said we should do this and should 

do that. And I’m thinking maybe some of the things that we agree 

on maybe we should write some legislation. So, let’s work together 

as a followup to this. And I think that Secretary Negroponte certainly opened the door to working with us. So, let’s do that. 

And I’d ask unanimous consent that the record be kept open for 

additional statements until the end of the week. 

60 

Senator BOXER. And I ask unanimous consent that an appeal to 

the Chinese people by the Dalai Lama, be included in the record; 

that remarks prepared for delivery by Mr. Gyari—it’s—the speech 

is called ‘‘Seeking Unity Through Equality’’—be included in the 

record; that the names of ten Tibetan political prisoners, submitted 

by the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, be submitted for the record; and that the statement for the record from 

the Commission on International Religious Freedom be included in 

the record. 

[The information referred to above can be found in the Appendix 

to this hearing print.] 

Senator BOXER. And, with that, I think we conclude the business. 

Again, we thank everybody for their patience and for their testimony. 

And we stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 5:08 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(61) 

A P P E N D I X 

Responses to Additional Questions Submitted for the 

Record by Members of the Committee 

RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE JOHN

NEGROPONTE BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. In the view of the Administration, what is the current status of the commitments made by China when it was seeking to host the Olympic Games? 

Answer. When Beijing was selected as the host city for the 2008 Olympic Games, 

the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and Beijing’s Organizing Committee for 

the Olympic Games (BOCOG) signed a ‘‘host city compact’’ specifying the terms 

China was to fulfill as host of the Games. We are not privy to this agreement, but 

we know that in addition to addressing such matters as security and pollution controls, China made certain commitments regarding press and media freedom. In its 

Olympic bid application, BOCOG stated that there would be ‘‘no restrictions on journalists in reporting on the Olympic Games.’’ BOCOG stated in its September 2003 

Olympic Action Plan that ‘‘in the preparation for the Games, we will be open in 

every aspect to the rest of the country and the whole world.’’ 

At the end of 2006 China promulgated temporary rules for foreign journalists, 

which became effective in January 2007 and eliminated the requirement for journalists to seek approval from authorities before conducting interviews. However, these 

regulations specifically exempted the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR), where special 

permits continued to be required for reporters. The Foreign Correspondents Club of 

China reported earlier this year that the regulations improved overall reporting conditions for foreign journalists, but that problems with enforcement of the regulations 

remained a challenge. Since the unrest in Tibet, access to Tibetan areas has been 

restricted and tight controls have been imposed on communications limiting information flow from those areas. 

We are deeply concerned by these restrictions and have pressed Chinese officials 

at the highest levels to provide access to all Tibetan areas for media, diplomats and 

international observers. Such controls on the press and the free flow of information 

not only damage China’s international reputation, but also run counter to China’s 

promise to open China to the world, increase media access, and allow foreign reporters greater freedom to report in all parts of China before and during the 2008 Olympic Games. 

Question. In the administration’s dialogue with China over Tibet issues, have the 

Chinese been forthcoming as to why they will not sit down and talk directly with 

the Dalai Lama? Have they laid out any specific pre-conditions before they will 

agree to such talks? 

Answer. On April 25, the Chinese government announced that Chinese officials 

would meet with the Dalai Lama’s representatives for ‘‘private’’ discussions. A meeting between Chinese officials and the Dalai Lama’s envoys took place in Shenzhen 

on May 4. We see this as a constructive first step towards what we hope will be 

substantive, results-based dialogue. With respect to pre-conditions for direct talks 

with the Dalai Lama, Chinese authorities have repeatedly stated that he must take 

measures to end acts of violence, refrain from ‘‘sabotage’’ of the Olympic Games, and 

curtail his ‘‘separatist’’ activities. As stated in Under Secretary Dobriansky’s April 

21 op-ed in the Washington Post, the Dalai Lama has met China’s pre-conditions, 

in that he has repeatedly and publicly said that he does not seek independence, renounces violence, and supports China’s hosting of the Olympics. In our view, harsh 

rhetoric against the Dalai Lama is counterproductive and serves to further enflame 

ethnic tensions. We continue to believe that the path to genuine stability in Tibet 

is through substantive dialogue with the Dalai Lama and his representatives, and 

we have made this clear to China’s leaders. 

63 

Additional Material Submitted for the Record 

An Appeal to the Chinese People by the Dalai Lama 

Today, I extend heartfelt greetings to my Chinese brothers and sisters around the 

world, particularly to those in the People’s Republic of China. In the light of the 

recent developments in Tibet, I would like to share with you my thoughts concerning relations between the Tibetan and Chinese peoples, and make a personal 

appeal to all of you. 

I am deeply saddened by the loss of life in the recent tragic events in Tibet. I 

am aware that some Chinese have also died. I feel for the victims and their families 

and pray for them. The recent unrest has clearly demonstrated the gravity of the 

situation in Tibet and the urgent need to seek a peaceful and mutually beneficial 

solution through dialogue. Even at this juncture I have expressed my willingness 

to the Chinese authorities to work together to bring about peace and stability. 

Chinese brothers and sisters, I assure you I have no desire to seek Tibet’s separation. Nor do I have any wish to drive a wedge between the Tibetan and Chinese 

peoples. On the contrary my commitment has always been to find a genuine solution 

to the problem of Tibet that ensures the long-term interests of both Chinese and 

Tibetans. My primary concern, as I have repeated time and again, is to ensure the 

survival of the Tibetan people’s distinctive culture, language and identity. As a simple monk who strives to live his daily life according to Buddhist precepts, I assure 

you of the sincerity of my personal motivation. 

I have appealed to the leadership of the PRC to clearly understand my position 

and work to resolve these problems by ′′seeking truth from facts′′. I urge the Chinese 

leadership to exercise wisdom and to initiate a meaningful dialogue with the Tibetan people. I also appeal to them to make sincere efforts to contribute to the stability and harmony of the PRC and avoid creating rifts between the nationalities. 

The state media’s portrayal of the recent events in Tibet, using deceit and distorted 

images, could sow the seeds of racial tension with unpredictable long-term consequences. This is of grave concern to me. Similarly, despite my repeated support 

for the Beijing Olympics, the Chinese authorities, with the intention of creating a 

rift between the Chinese people and myself, the Chinese authorities assert that I 

am trying to sabotage the games. I am encouraged, however, that several Chinese 

intellectuals and scholars have also expressed their strong concern about the Chinese leadership’s actions and the potential for adverse long-term consequences, particularly on relations among different nationalities. 

Since ancient times, Tibetan and Chinese peoples have lived as neighbors. In the 

two thousand year old recorded history of our peoples, we have at times developed 

friendly relations, even entering into matrimonial alliances, while at others we 

fought each other. However, since Buddhism flourished in China first before it arrived in Tibet from India, we Tibetans have historically accorded the Chinese people 

the respect and affection due to elder Dharma brothers and sisters. This is something well known to members of the Chinese community living outside China, some 

of whom have attended my Buddhist lectures, as well as pilgrims from mainland 

China, whom I have had the privilege to meet. I take heart from these meetings 

and feel they may contribute to a better understanding between our two peoples. 

The twentieth century witnessed enormous changes in many parts of the world 

and Tibet too was caught up in this turbulence. Soon after the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, the People’s Liberation Army entered Tibet finally 

resulting in the 17-point Agreement concluded between China and Tibet in May 

1951. When I was in Beijing in 1954/55, attending the National People’s Congress, 

I had the opportunity to meet and develop a personal friendship with many senior 

leaders, including Chairman Mao himself. In fact, Chairman Mao gave me advice 

on numerous issues, as well as personal assurances with regard to the future of 

Tibet. Encouraged by these assurances, and inspired by the dedication of many of 

China’s revolutionary leaders of the time, I returned to Tibet full of confidence and 

optimism. Some Tibetan members of the Chinese Communist Party also had such 

a hope. After my return to Lhasa, I made every possible effort to seek genuine regional autonomy for Tibet within the family of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). 

I believed that this would best serve the long-term interests of both the Tibetan and 

Chinese peoples. 

64 

Unfortunately, tensions, which began to escalate in Tibet from around 1956, eventually led to the peaceful uprising of March 10, 1959, in Lhasa and my eventual 

escape into exile. Although many positive developments have taken place in Tibet 

under the PRC’s rule, these developments, as the previous Panchen Lama pointed 

out in January 1989, were overshadowed by immense suffering and extensive destruction. Tibetans were compelled to live in a state of constant fear, while the Chinese government remained suspicious of them. However, instead of cultivating enmity towards the Chinese leaders responsible for the ruthless suppression of the Tibetan people, I prayed for them to become friends, which I expressed in the following lines in a prayer I composed in 1960, a year after I arrived in India: ‘‘May 

they attain the wisdom eye discerning right and wrong, And may they abide in the 

glory of friendship and love.’’ Many Tibetans, school children among them, recite 

these lines in their daily prayers. 

In 1974, following serious discussions with my Kashag (cabinet), as well as the 

Speaker and the Deputy Speaker of the then Assembly of the Tibetan People’s Deputies, we decided to find a Middle Way that would seek not to separate Tibet from 

China, but would facilitate the peaceful development of Tibet. Although we had no 

contact at the time with the PRC—which was in the midst of the Cultural Revolution—we had already recognized that, sooner or later, we would have to resolve the 

question of Tibet through negotiations. We also acknowledged that, at least with regard to modernization and economic development, it would greatly benefit Tibet if 

it remained within the PRC. Although Tibet has a rich and ancient cultural heritage, it is materially undeveloped. 

Situated on the roof of the world, Tibet is the source of many of Asia’s major rivers; therefore, protection of the environment on the Tibetan plateau is of supreme 

importance. Since our utmost concern is to safeguard Tibetan Buddhist culture - 

rooted as it is in the values of universal compassion - as well as the Tibetan language and the unique Tibetan identity, we have worked whole-heartedly towards 

achieving meaningful self-rule for all Tibetans. The PRC’s constitution provides the 

right for nationalities such as the Tibetans to do this. 

In 1979, the then Chinese paramount leader, Deng Xiaoping assured my personal 

emissary that ‘‘except for the independence of Tibet, all other questions can be negotiated.’’ Since we had already formulated our approach to seeking a solution to the 

Tibetan issue within the constitution of the PRC, we found ourselves well placed 

to respond to this new opportunity. My representatives met many times with officials of the PRC. Since renewing our contacts in 2002, we have had six rounds of 

talks. However, on the fundamental issue, there has been no concrete result at all. 

Nevertheless, as I have declared many times, I remain firmly committed to the Middle Way approach and reiterate here my willingness to continue to pursue the process of dialogue. 

This year, the Chinese people are proudly and eagerly awaiting the opening of the 

Olympic Games. I have, from the start, supported Beijing’s being awarded the opportunity to host the Games. My position remains unchanged. China has the world’s 

largest population, a long history and an extremely rich civilization. Today, due to 

her impressive economic progress, she is emerging as a great power. This is certainly to be welcomed. But China also needs to earn the respect and esteem of the 

global community through the establishment of an open and harmonious society 

based on the principles of transparency, freedom, and the rule of law. For example, 

to this day victims of the Tiananmen Square tragedy that adversely affected the 

lives of so many Chinese citizens have received neither just redress nor any official 

response. Similarly, when thousands of ordinary Chinese in rural areas suffer injustice at the hands of exploitative and corrupt local officials, their legitimate complaints are either ignored or met with aggression. I express these concerns both as 

a fellow human being and as someone who is prepared to consider himself a member of the large family that is the People’s Republic of China. In this respect, I appreciate and support President Hu Jintao’s policy of creating a ‘‘harmonious society,’’ 

but this can only arise on the basis of mutual trust and an atmosphere of freedom, 

including freedom of speech and the rule of law. I strongly believe that if these values are embraced, many important problems relating to minority nationalities can 

be resolved, such as the issue of Tibet, as well as Eastern Turkistan, and Inner 

Mongolia, where the native people now constitute only 20% of a total population of 

24 million. 

I had hoped President Hu Jintao’s recent statement that the stability and safety 

of Tibet concerns the stability and safety of the country might herald the dawning 

of a new era for the resolution of the problem of Tibet. It is unfortunate that despite 

my sincere efforts not to separate Tibet from China, the leaders of the PRC continue 

to accuse me of being a ‘‘separatist.’’ Similarly, when Tibetans in Lhasa and many 

other areas spontaneously protested to express their deep-rooted resentment, the 

65 

Chinese authorities immediately accused me of having orchestrated their demonstrations. I have called for a thorough investigation by a respected body to look 

into this allegation. 

Chinese brothers and sisters—wherever you may be—with deep concern I appeal 

to you to help dispel the misunderstandings between our two communities. Moreover, I appeal to you to help us find a peaceful, lasting solution to the problem of 

Tibet through dialogue in the spirit of understanding and accommodation. 

With my prayers, 

THE DALAI LAMA, March 28, 2008. 

67 

Seeking Unity Through Equality 


lodi-1.eps
68 


lodi-2.eps
69 


lodi-3.eps
70 


lodi-4.eps
71 


lodi-5.eps
72 


lodi-6.eps
73 


lodi-7.eps
74 


lodi-8.eps
75 


lodi-9.eps
76 


lodi-10.eps
77 

Tibetan Political Prisoners 


ten1.eps
78 


ten2.eps
79 

Statement Submitted by the U.S. Commission on 

International Religious Freedom 


USCIR1.eps
80 


USCIR2.eps
81 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Barack Obama, 

U.S. Senator From Illinois 

Madam Chairwoman, I commend you for holding this hearing today. Like you, 

I’ve been deeply concerned about the recent events in Tibet. I welcome our witnesses, including Deputy Secretary of State Negroponte and Lodi Gyari, the special 

representative of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Lodi has held six rounds of dialogue 

with the Chinese Government over the past several years in search of a solution 

that will bring genuine reconciliation between the Tibetan people and the Chinese 

Government. A negotiated settlement between China and the Dalai Lama remains 

the best hope for a resolution of this crisis. Right now, the most important thing 

is to seize this moment when the world’s attention is focused on Tibet to reach an 

agreement that will guarantee religious freedom for the Tibetan people, protect Tibetan culture and language, and provide meaningful autonomy for Tibetans in the 

areas of economic development and environmental protection. 

The Dalai Lama has met all of the conditions that China requires for dialogue 

to succeed. The Dalai Lama recognizes that Tibet is part of China, and he does not 

advocate independence for Tibet. The Dalai Lama supports engagement and dialogue with China. Even after the recent violence, the Dalai Lama has indicated his 

continued support for holding the Olympic Games in Beijing. And the Dalai Lama 

acknowledges that China has brought economic development to the Tibetan plateau, 

improving the standard of living for millions of Tibetans. 

Most importantly, the Dalai Lama is a man of peace. I had the privilege of speaking with the Dalai Lama during his trip this month to the United States. He reiterated to me that he continues to condemn the violence that erupted recently in Lhasa 

and other Tibetan cities. This commitment to peace, nonviolence and religious tolerance is why the United States Congress honored the Dalai Lama with the Congressional Gold Medal last October. 

China should recognize the opportunity that exists to begin a new chapter in Tibet’s troubled history. That new beginning should start with an understanding of 

the origins of the recent unrest. There is little mystery about why Tibetans remain 

unhappy. The Tibetans who took to the streets in March were clear about their 

grievances. They want the freedom to practice their religion and maintain their culture without state interference—rights guaranteed to China’s nationalities under 

the PRC’s constitution—and they seek a meaningful voice in Tibetan affairs. 

For decades, China has kept tight controls on Tibetan Buddhism, and for decades 

China has directed the economic affairs of Tibet without listening to the Tibetan 

people. China’s repressive policies are not unique to Tibet—Chinese in other parts 

of the country also routinely express their frustration at the government’s failure 

to respect their fundamental human rights. 

The fact that Tibetan unrest is not unique also tells me that the United States 

response to the unrest must go beyond simple condemnations of China’s conduct. We 

need to redouble our efforts inside Tibet—with funding for nongovernmental organization such as the Bridge Fund—to strengthen the voice of the Tibetan people in 

the areas of economic development and cultural preservation. And throughout 

China, we need to do much more to foster respect for the rule of law, religious freedom, transparency, and accountability in government. China’s heavy hand in Tibet 

is a symptom of a much larger problem—the failure of the Chinese Government to 

listen to the legitimate grievances of its people and to respond constructively to 

those complaints. 

Thank you again, Madam Chairwoman, for convening this important hearing. 

Æ