Arguing Cultural Genocide in Tibet - International Campaign for Tibet

154 Pages·2012·11.53 MB·English

60 Years of Chinese Misrule
Arguing Cultural Genocide in Tibet
60 Years of Chinese Misrule
Arguing Cultural Genocide in Tibet
AreportbytheInternationalCampaignforTibet
Washington,DC l Amsterdaml Berlinl Brusselsl London
www.savetibet.org
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
TheInternationalCampaignforTibet(ICT)report,“60YearsofChineseMisrule/ArguingCultural
GenocideinTibet”isdrawninpartfroma2011drafttext,“Tibetocide,”writtenbytheDepartment
ofInformationandInternationalRelations(DIIR)oftheCentralTibetanAdministration.Thefinal
versionofthereportwasproducedbytheICTWashington,D.C.officewithanoutsidewriter,
whobroughtacoherentsenseofnarrativetothisambitiousprojectandskillfullywovetogether
themanycomplexissuesthatitseekstoaddress.TheICTstaffinAmsterdam,Berlin,Brussels,
London,andinthefieldalsoprovidedessentialeditorialandsubstantivesupportthroughoutthe
process.Inaddition,thisreportwasreviewedatvariousstagesbyinternationallegal,policyand
Tibetexpertswhoprovidedinvaluableguidanceandsuggestionsthatimproveditimmeasurably.
Finally,manyTibetans—includingICT’sownTibetanstaff—providedimportantinformationused
inthisreport.ICTisespeciallygratefultoourexpertadvisorsandreviewers,andothersfortheir
contributionstothisreport.ThanksalsotoBillWhitehead,whosediscerningeyemadepossiblea
quickturnaroundindesignandpublication.
Anyerrorsoromissionsinthisreportaresolelytheresponsibilityofitsauthors.
Coverphoto:TibetanBuddhistmonkstandingatthedoorsofhismonasteryinBarkham(Chinese:
Ma’erkang),TibetanareaofSichuanprovince.Heisflankedbypropagandaposters:onhisright,
MaoZedong,DengXiaopingandJiangZemin;onhisleft,HuJintaosurroundedbyTibetanwomen
standsinfrontofthePotalaPalace,Lhasa.Photocredit:GillesSabrie
Stampimage:Thestampimageappearingthroughoutthereportwasusedina2011protestin
Tibet.TheTibetanscriptinsidetheheartreads‘Tibet’andthescriptsurroundingtheheartreads
‘LongliveHisHolinesstheDalaiLama.’
FOREWORD
Thisreport,“60yearsofChineseMisrule/ArguingCulturalGenocideinTibet,”isintendedto
provideabase-lineunderstandingofTibetancultureandtheChinesepoliciesandpracticesthathave
deliberatelysoughttocontrolanddestroyit.Assuch,thereportinvitesdiscussiononthecircum-
stancesthatdefineculturalgenocideinTibet.TheInternationalCampaignforTibetparticularly
welcomesacloserlookatissuesofevidenceandintentbygenocidescholars.Byreleasingthisreport
inApril2012,duringInternationalGenocidePreventionMonth,wehopeitwillcontributeto
internationaleffortstopreventandcombatgenocideinallitsmanifestations,andtotherealization
ofaworldwherefundamentalhumanrightsandhumandignityareupheldbyallgovernmentsand
effectivelyprotectedthroughinternationallegalinstruments.
Whilewehopethisreportwillmakesuchacontribution,itsspecificpurposeistomakeapersua-
sivecasethatthesituationinTibet—thepatternofoppressionthroughoutthe60yearsofChinese
rule,uptothecurrentcrisis—requirestheinternationalcommunitytorespondinaqualitatively
differentmannerthanithas.Wewelcomeaconstructiveexaminationoftheconceptsputforward
inthisreportbyinternationallawandcountrystudiesexperts,humanrightsadvocates,policy
makers,peopleswhoseculturalrightshavebeenabusedbythestateandotherswhohaveastake
inunderstandingthekindofculturalandhumanrightsviolationsthathavecharacterizedthe
situationinTibet.
MaryBethMarkey
President,InternationalCampaignforTibet
April2,2012
NOTEONGEOGRAPHICALTERMS
Tibetwastraditionallycomprisedofthreemainareas:Amdo(northeasternTibet),Kham(eastern
Tibet)andU-Tsang(centralandwesternTibet).TheTibetAutonomousRegionwassetupby
theChinesegovernmentin1965andcoverstheareaofTibetwestoftheDrichuorYangtzeRiver,
including part of Kham. The rest of Amdo and Kham have been incorporated into Chinese
provinces,andwhereTibetancommunitiesweresaidtohave‘compactinhabitancy’inthese
provincestheyweredesignatedTibetanautonomousprefecturesandcounties.Asaresultmostof
QinghaiandpartsofGansu,SichuanandYunnanprovincesareacknowledgedbytheChinese
governmenttobe‘Tibetan.’ICTusestheterm‘Tibet’torefertoallTibetanareascurrentlyunderthe
jurisdictionofthePeople’sRepublicofChina.
CONTENTS
SUMMARY......................................................................................................... 3
INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 9
CULTURALGENOCIDE:AWORKINGDEFINITION....................................................... 15
EARLYTIBETANCULTURE...................................................................................... 23
IndigenousReligiousTraditions ............................................................................ 25
IntroductionofBuddhism.................................................................................... 26
MonasticEducationSystemanditsImpact................................................................ 28
Reincarnation................................................................................................... 30
TibetanLanguage............................................................................................ 34
TibetanScientificThought.................................................................................. 34
PRINCIPLESANDSTRUCTURESOFCHINESECOMMUNISTRULEINTIBET .................... 37
IdeologicalandNationalistRoots........................................................................... 38
TibetanAutonomywithChineseCharacteristics .......................................................... 42
LegalFramework ...................................................................................... 43
Extra-LegalFramework:theRoleoftheChineseCommunistParty................................ 45
DEVASTATIONOFTIBETANCULTURE ..................................................................... 53
TheMaoEra:Revolution,RepressionandResistance...................................................... 53
InvasionandOccupation ............................................................................. 54
TheGreatProletarianCulturalRevolution .......................................................... 60
TheReformandPost-ReformEras........................................................................... 64
Assaultonthe‘DalaiClique’.......................................................................... 67
IndoctrinationthroughEducationandLanguage................................................... 72
EconomicandDemographicPolicies ................................................................. 73
Twenty-firstCenturyTibet:Coercion,CrackdownandControl.......................................... 75
ReligioninServiceoftheParty:TheCommunistPartyasLivingBuddha......................... 78
i. TibetanSelf-ImmolationsandOtherProtests.................................................... 86
WesternDevelopment,NomadSettlementandPopulationInflux:GraspingwithManyHands... 89
i. TheWesternDevelopmentPlan .................................................................... 90
ii. NomadSettlement ................................................................................. 92
iii.PopulationInflux..................................................................................... 96
ThreatstoTibetanIntellectualLife................................................................... 98
i. ExclusionthroughEducationandLanguage..................................................... 99
ii. AttacksonIntellectuals.............................................................................. 102
STRUGGLEFORCULTURALSURVIVAL .................................................................. 115
CulturalResilience.......................................................................................... 115
TibetanWriters....................................................................................... 120
TibetanPopularMusic............................................................................... 122
ChineseCulturalHegemony............................................................................... 123
TIBET,CULTURALGENOCIDE,ANDTHEGENOCIDECONTINUUM................................ 129
RespondingtotheRealDangerofCulturalGenocideinTibet........................................... 136
CONCLUSION..................................................................................................... 143
RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................... 145
1
60 YEARS OF CHINESE MISRULE • ARGUING CULTURAL GENOCIDE IN TIBET
2
INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN FOR TIBET
SUMMARY
T
hisreportisanexaminationbytheInternational Tibet, Cultural Genocide
Campaign for Tibet of the impact on Tibetan and the Genocide Continuum
cultureofChineseCommunistPartyruleinTibet.
Itspublicationcomesatatimewhenthesituationonthe
Becausetheterm‘culturalgenocide’isnotcodifiedin
Tibetan plateau has reached a critical inflexion point.
internationallaw,therehasbeensomeambiguityabout
Having compiled this report, ICT makes the following
whetheritisanappropriatelabelforthesituationinTibet
findings:
andwhat,ifanything,theapplicationofthislabelmeans
•The Chinese authorities have engaged in a consistent fortheTibetanpeople,theChineseauthorities,andthe
effort over 60-plus years to replace authentic, organic internationalcommunity.Thisreportaddressesthese
Tibetanculturewithastate-approvedandcontrolledver- ambiguitiesby:
sion that comports with the ideological, political and
•Developingaworkingdefinitionfor‘culturalgenocide,’
economicobjectivesoftheChineseCommunistParty.
rootedintheconventionalinternationallegaldiscourse
Thisefforthasbeenpursuedthroughintentionalpolicies
ofgenocideandinternationalhumanrightslaw;
thataredesignedtofundamentallyalterTibetanculturein
awaythatrobsitofitsessenceandturnsitintosome- •ReviewingthehistoryofChineseCommunistruleinTibet
thingthattheChineseauthoritiescanmanage. withafocusonideologicalandpoliticalpolicydriversand
themannerofimplementationofthesepolicies;
•ChineseCommunistruleinTibethasexhibitedapattern
ofrepression,relativeliberalization,vigorousreassertion •AnalyzingthehistoricalandpresentsituationinTibet
ofculturalidentitybyTibetans,andrenewedrepression. inrelationtotheaforementionedworkingdefinitionof
Thispatternisrootedintheapplicationofpoliciesthat culturalgenocide,andplacingthisanalysiswithinthe
privilegetheChineseparty-state’sinterestsoverthoseof genocidecontinuum;and
theTibetanpeople.Thesepoliciesare,inturn,basedona
•Articulatingthebasesforstrongerinternationaleffortsto
setofideologicalandnationalisticprinciplesthatperme-
reversethecurrenttrendofculturallydestructivepolicies
atethethinkingofChineseleadersandhavetakenholdon
inTibet.
asocietallevel.
Byexaminingthehistoricalrecorduptothepresentday,
•Chinesepoliciesandpracticesofculturalrepressionand
particularly the documented actions and attitudes of
destructionaresosystematicandpersistentinTibet,and
successiveChineseCommunistleaderswhohaveshaped
theireffectsaresoserious,thattheycontainelementsof
andcontinuetoshapeTibetpolicy,thisreportfocuseson
culturalgenocide.
thecoreaspectsofculturaldestructioninTibetandhow
•These elements of cultural genocide, combined with theyaredeeplyembeddedinthepoliticalstructureofthe
certainconditionssuchas:ahistoryofactsofgenocide People’s Republic of China. This report highlights the
against Tibetans as a religious group,1 unprecedented responsibilitiesoftheChinesegovernment,notonlyasthe
communaltensions,andofficiallysanctionedstatements perpetratorofhumanrightsabusesagainsttheTibetan
thatprovokeprejudiceandhatreddirectedatTibetans, peoplebutalsointheirself-selectedroleastheprimary
have been recognized as precursors to conventional guarantorofTibetans’culturalrights.Thereportdemon-
genocideelsewhere,andshouldsensitizetheinternational strates that the Chinese state has not only failed in its
communitytotakerobustactioninthecaseofTibet. responsibilitytoprotecttheTibetanpeopleandtheirrights
under Chinese and international law, it has been the
3
60 YEARS OF CHINESE MISRULE • ARGUING CULTURAL GENOCIDE IN TIBET
primaryviolatorofthoserights.Thisculturalrepression whoseworkchallengesorrunscontrarytotheparty-state’s
has been most visible and most intensely felt by the definednarrativeforTibet;arrestandtortureofTibetan
Tibetansinthefollowingcoreareas: writers,artistsandotherswhoengageinculturalexpres-
sionthatchallengestheparty-state’sdefinednarrativefor
Attacksonreligion.TheChinesegovernmenthasfocused Tibet;andthe‘Disneyfication’ofTibetancultureinafash-
oncontrolling,andunderminingwhentheyareunableto ionthatcommoditizesit,primarilyforthebenefitofnon-
control,TibetanBuddhismaspracticedbythevastmajor- Tibetans.
ityofTibetans.Theyhaveaccomplishedthisthrough:in-
tenseregulationofandcontroloverreligiousinstitutions; DiscriminationagainstTibetansanddelegitimization
policiesthatdiscourageaverageTibetansfromengagingin ofTibetanculture.Tibetanshavebeensubjecttoconsis-
religious practice; patriotic education, propaganda and tentdiscriminatorypracticesunderChineseruleonthe
otherpoliticalcampaignsthatarefundamentallyopposed basisoftheirethnicity,religionandpoliticalbeliefs.They
tobasictenetsofTibetanBuddhism;manipulationoffac- havebeentargetedforbothofficialpunishmentandsocie-
tionswithinTibetanBuddhisminordertoexacerbatein- talostracismbasedonexpressionsofthosebeliefs.The
ternaldivisions;andovertrepression,includingrhetorical party-statehasengagedinacontinualpolicyandpropa-
attacksonTibetanreligiousleaders,andthepublichumil- gandaeffortthatcharacterizesTibetancultureasbackward
iation,detention,imprisonment,andtorture,collective andsomethingtoberemediatedthroughastate-directed
punishmentandkillingofreligiousleadersandadherents. modernizationprocess.Chinesepoliciesandthemanner
ofimplementingthesepoliciesshowaconsistentdisregard
Imposition of inappropriate economic development for Tibetans’ human and cultural rights. These are not
policies.Chinesepolicieshavetargetedculturallydistinct merelyindividualviolations;rather,theChinesestatehas
Tibetanpastoraliststhroughforcedsedentarizationand clearlytargetedTibetansasagroup.
other policies, including poorly developed and imple-
mentedenvironmentalprotectionefforts.Thesepolicies Thereportfindscompellingevidencethattheparticular,
andpracticeshavenotonlydeprivedTibetansoftheirliveli- intentionalpoliciesandpracticesofthepresentChinese
hoodsbutalsoofanintimateconnectiontothelandand governmentarerootedinandhaveservedtoexacerbatea
environmentthathasexistedforthousandsofyears.The highly unstable dynamic across the Tibetan plateau.
Chineseparty-statehasappliedeconomicdevelopment Thecurrentdynamic,sinceatleastMarch2008,including
policiesthatareheavilyreliantonextractiveindustry,in- theself-immolationsandotherformsofprotestagainst
frastructure,andthemigrationintoTibetofalargenumber ChineseruleinTibet,ispartofabroadercontextthat
ofnon-Tibetans.ThesepolicieshavedeprivedTibetansof should be viewed against the indicators that genocide
controlovertheirownfutureandthreatentomakethema scholarshaveidentifiedaswarningsignsofpre-genocidal
cultural,ifnotdemographic,minorityintheirownland. behaviorelsewhere.Thesewarningsignsinclude:
Attacks on Tibetan intellectual and non-religious Ahistoryofactsofgenocide.Followingattemptsbythe
cultural life. TheChineseparty-state’spoliciestargeting Tibetangovernmenttosecureinternationalsupportagainst
theintellectualandnon-religiousculturallifeofTibetans the Chinese invasion and occupation of Tibet, and in
include:denialofarangeoflinguisticrights,includingthe responsetothewidespread,systematicandtargetednature
righttodevelopandusetheTibetanlanguageasthelan- oftheviolenceandphysicaldestructionofthe1950s,the
guage of commerce, education and administration in InternationalCommissionofJurists(ICJ),agroupofinter-
Tibetanareas;impositionoftheChineselanguageanda national legal scholars based in Geneva, produced two
self-servingeducationalcurriculumonTibetanchildren, reportsonevidencerelatingtothequestionofgenocidein
while simultaneously denying them opportunities for Tibet.Its1960reportfoundthat“actsofgenocidehadbeen
culturaldevelopmentandexpression;denialofpublication committedinTibetinanattempttodestroytheTibetansas
andotherculturalexpressionforTibetanlanguagewriters areligiousgroup.”2
4
INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN FOR TIBET
Severe and systemic state repression.Since2008, largesse.Afterthe2008protests,adhocdiscriminatory
Lhasa and other areas have been placed under security practicestargetedTibetans,someofwhichcontinuetothe
situationstantamounttomartiallaw.Tibetansacrossthe present.
plateau have experienced increased restriction of their
rightstofreedomofspeech,assemblyandreligion,aswell Hate propaganda.WhileChinesestate-ownedmedia
aslarge-scaleroundupsofcivilians,suchasthosethathave arguably has become more plural in recent years, the
occurredintheNgabaareasinceAugust2011.Tortureand dominantnarrativesregardingTibetarefixedandremain
illtreatmentofTibetandetaineesisbrutalandendemic, the primary source of information on Tibet for most
andhasincludeddeathsincustody.Whilesomeofthese Chinese.ChinesepropagandanarrativesonTibetrunina
practicesarepresentthroughoutChina,thereisaqualita- limitedrangefromsoftchauvinistOrientalismtovirulent
tivedifferenceintheparty-state’sresponsetoprotestsand nationalistscreeds.Anti-DalaiLamapropagandaincreas-
unregulatedculturalandreligiousexpressioninTibet. inglyportrayshimasaprovocateur—includingcompar-
inghimtoHitlerandaccusinghimofseekingNazi-style
Inter-communal conflict.Instancesofinter-communal ethniccleansingofChinesefromTibet.
violencehavebeenpersistentfeaturesofChineseCom-
munistruleofTibet.TheChinesecommunityhasexercised Severe economic disparities.TheChineseregimere-
amonopolyonthecoercivepowerofthestate,andChi- mainsheavilydependentoneconomicgrowthasakeypil-
neseauthoritieshaveconsistentlyrespondedtoTibetans’ larofitspoliticallegitimacy,includinginTibet,although
largelynon-violentresistancewithdisproportionateforce many economists consider the PRC’s present level and
and attempts to blame Tibetans when violence occurs. modelofeconomicgrowthtobeunstableandunsustain-
Relationsbetweenthetwocommunitiesarepresentlytense able.3TheTibetaneconomyisevenmoreunbalanced.Itis
andthetrendisworsening. heavilyreliantonChinesegovernmentsubsidies,withthe
additionalaspectsofmassChinesemigrationanddomina-
Mobilization along lines of community cleavage. tionofeconomicopportunities,andashiftawayfrom
TheChinesecommunitycontrolstheleversofpoliticaland traditionallivelihoodsthroughwhichTibetanshadbeen
economicpowerinTibet,leavingTibetansfrustratedand self-reliant.
marginalized.State-runmediahaveexacerbatedcommu-
nitycleavageswithanti-Tibetanpropaganda,including Additionalriskfactors.Twoparticularinternaldivisions,
ominouscallsfora‘people’swar’inTibet.Historically,such bothofwhicharepresentintheTibetancontext,have
communitycleavageshaveheightenedthepotentialfor historically been among the most powerful triggers of
inter-communalviolence—suchasoccurredinLhasain genocidalbehavior:differencesofreligionbetweenthe
March 2008 and in the attacks on Tibetan students in aggressorsandvictimthatservetoalienateanddehuman-
ChengduinDecember2011.Intheseinstances,thecycle ize the victims; and struggles for greater autonomy, or
ofviolenceescalatedquicklyandbrokedownstarklyalong denial of the right to self-determination. As this report
ethniclines,asdidreactionstoit. makes clear, the Chinese party-state has zeroedin on
religionasthekeytotheircontroloverTibet.
Unjustdiscriminatorylegislationandrelatedmeas-
ures. The Chinese party-state’s historic narrative casts ThehighlycontentiousquestionofChineselegitimacy
Tibetansas‘backward’peoplewhorequireChineseassis- inTibetlikewiseservesasameta-narrativeforChinese
tancetomodernize.TheChinesestate’s‘positivediscrimi- culturalrepression,anditisoverlaidbythefailureofthe
nation’policies—boththosetoassistindividualTibetans, Chineseparty-state’sconceptionofautonomytoadequately
suchaseducationaladmissionspreferencesandfamily addressTibetans’desireforself-determination,particularly
planningexceptions,aswellasforcedprovince-to-province asitrelatestocontrolovertheirownculturaldestiny.The
financialassistancetoTibetanareas—contributetoaview systemofautonomy,aspracticed,ispredicatedonabelief
of Tibetans as indolent and ungrateful toward Chinese thattheChineseparty-stateisbetterpositionedthanthe
5