Join our Mailing List

"As long as human rights are violated, there can be no foundation for peace. How can peace grow where speaking the truth is itself a crime?"

The Illusion of Calm in Tibet

July 12, 2008

The Economist (UK)
July 10, 2008

After a botched response to bloody riots in Tibet in March, the
Chinese authorities have ruthlessly restored order. But anti-Chinese
resentment is deep-seated

VISITORS to Rongwo Monastery, a sprawling 700-year-old complex on the
edge of the Tibetan plateau, might notice little untoward. There are
no open signs of protest, of the sort that presaged vicious rioting
in Tibet in March. But in one shrine a monk chants near a portrait of
the Dalai Lama, prominently displayed despite the government's
diatribes against the exiled spiritual leader. And police cars patrol
the streets nearby: nervous, say residents, that protests could erupt anew.

Security around Rongwo, as it is known to Tibetans (its Chinese name,
like that of the adjacent town, is Longwu), is far less visible than
it was a few weeks ago when police surrounded the monastery, raided
monks' quarters and took many away to jail. No police are to be seen
inside the hillside monastery. But a monk says some 200 of his
colleagues in the 500-strong community have been detained since
Rongwo joined the wave of protests that swept the plateau. Many are
still in custody, and, says the monk, it is "very tense". Near Rongwo
is a much smaller monastery, which until recently was a popular
destination for lovers of Tibetan religious artefacts, production of
which creates hundreds of jobs in the area. It is now all but empty
of visitors. A monk there says two of his colleagues have been seized
by security officials.

As Beijing prepares to host the Olympic games in August, the
authorities are trying, unconvincingly, to reassure the world that
calm has returned to Tibet and ethnic-Tibetan parts of neighbouring
provinces, such as Qinghai, to which Rongwo belongs, and much of
which is considered by Tibetans part of their historical territory.

On June 21st the Olympic torch was paraded through the Tibetan
capital, Lhasa, without incident but under huge security. Three days
later the authorities announced that foreign tourists would be
allowed back into Tibet for the first time since rioting erupted in
Lhasa on March 14th. But they were supposed to join guided tours and
stick to preset routes. On July 1st and 2nd Chinese officials held
talks in Beijing with representatives of the Dalai Lama, the second
such meeting since the riots. This time the Tibetans were treated to
a tour of Olympic facilities in Beijing. But the talks got nowhere.
The Dalai Lama's team agreed to talk again in October but said that
"in the absence of a serious and sincere commitment" on the Chinese
side, it would "serve no purpose."

Despite China's promises of greater openness for the Olympics,
foreign journalists still need special permission to visit Tibet. It
is usually refused. About 50, none of them from The Economist, were
invited to cover the torch parade in Lhasa, but were closely watched.
Your correspondent reached Rongwo without hindrance, but was stopped
twice at police checkpoints while leaving. Travellers say security is
much tighter in Tibetan areas of Sichuan where several demonstrators
were shot by security forces in March. In some monasteries police
have seized computers and mobile telephones from monks to suppress
news of the security operation.

Chinese officials want to win favour in the West by renewing talks
with the Dalai Lama's aides. The Dalai Lama is a moderate: many
Tibetans do not share his willingness to accept Chinese sovereignty
in return for genuine autonomy. But some Chinese officials see him as
the source of their Tibet problem. The Communist Party chief in
Tibet, Zhang Qingli, used the torch ceremony to assert that Tibet
could "thoroughly smash the separatist plots of the Dalai Lama
clique". Even the usually tongue-tied International Olympic Committee
expressed regret at the remark. Some government-controlled websites
omitted it in reporting the speech. This could reflect differences
over whether to seek a compromise with the Dalai Lama or to try even
harder to erase his influence.

Chinese leaders must be relieved by America's announcement on July
3rd that George Bush will attend the opening ceremony of the
Olympics. Relations with the West, though strained by recent events
in Tibet, have not been critically damaged. France's president,
Nicolas Sarkozy, had been the most outspoken of Western leaders in
linking the clampdown in Tibet to a possible boycott of the games.
But this week, after meeting China's president, Hu Jintao, at the G8
summit in Japan, he confirmed he would attend. Popular sympathy in
the West for the Dalai Lama and Tibet is outweighed by the fear of
antagonising China.

The leadership in Beijing, however, must also be asking itself
whether the crisis in Tibet could have been avoided. As the dust
settles, perhaps temporarily, it has become clearer that the unrest
could have been far better handled. The rioting could have been
stopped well before it engulfed the city, averting the deaths of the
20 or so ethnic-Han Chinese the government says were killed in fires
set by the rioters. And had the unrest been more quickly contained,
it might not have spawned sympathy protests across the plateau, even
in monasteries such as Rongwo, some 1,200km (750 miles) from the
Tibetan capital.

The security forces' response was highly unusual compared with their
usual tactics for dealing with protests in Tibet and elsewhere in
China. In 1993 the authorities quelled a riot in central Lhasa using
tear-gas and plastic bullets. This time they kept well away from the
rioting. Even if troops did shoot at people, it was not part of a
concerted effort to stop the unrest.

Your correspondent, who happened to be the only foreign journalist in
Lhasa at the time, reported in March that the rioting began to spread
along the city's main thoroughfare, Beijing Road, in the early
afternoon, "a short while" after a clash between monks and security
officials outside Ramoche temple some 200 metres up a side street.
But in fact the eruption of citywide rioting was slower than this
suggested. Witnesses speak of the unrest outside Ramoche temple
starting before 11.30am, well before your correspondent arrived at
Beijing Road around 1.30pm and saw the rioting fan out through the
narrow alleys of Lhasa's old Tibetan quarter.

Until just before then the unrest, including some stone-throwing by
Tibetans at police, was confined to a small area. Oddly, however,
your correspondent was nearby in a government car at around 12.30pm
and saw no sign of beefed-up security. Foreign tourists say three
lorryloads of paramilitary troops arrived at around 1.15pm. They
crouched behind shields at the junction of Beijing Road and the
Ramoche temple side-street. But the troops scattered within a few
minutes after being bombarded with stones. Some of them abandoned
their shields. Photographs show that several of the security
personnel, although carrying shields and wearing helmets, were in
civilian clothes. They did not look ready to defend themselves
against rioters, let alone to try to stop them.

Why not read the riot act?

There are a number of possible explanations for this half-hearted
response to such a big incident. It may have been simple bungling by
a security apparatus overstretched by an outbreak of large-scale
protests earlier in the week outside big monasteries on the edge of
the city. Or perhaps official decision-making was paralysed by
differences over what to do, and hindered by the absence of Mr Zhang,
the party chief, who was in Beijing at the time.

The slow and cackhanded reaction is puzzling nonetheless. China,
after all, faces tens of thousands of protests and riots every year,
most swiftly contained. This month in Guizhou province, some 30,000
people protested in Weng'an county at the authorities' handling of
the death of a girl they believed raped and murdered. It turned into
an ugly riot. But those involved were soon detained. There was also a
purge of the local political leadership, blamed for losing public confidence.

The security forces and political apparatus had long been nervous in
Tibet especially. Indeed they had been gearing themselves for just
such an outbreak of violence. The government's public claims that
Tibet was stable were disingenuous, as was their dismissal of past
unrest as ancient history. A series of anti-Chinese protests from
1987 to 1989 culminated in the imposition of martial law in Lhasa for
more than a year.

Since then, officials, not least the hardliner Mr Zhang, who was
appointed in 2005, have never let down their guard. In 2006 the
security forces, fearing attacks by Tibetan terrorists (not that any
are known to be active), staged what the government described as the
biggest protection operation in the region's history. The occasion
was the grand opening of Tibet's first rail link with the rest of
China. Official records say this involved a series of exercises for
dealing with terrorist and other "sudden incidents" (ie, riots),
heightened surveillance of monasteries and the deployment of
thousands of paramilitary troops along the railway line. In October
last year police and paramilitary officers in Lhasa rehearsed
rapid-response measures to cope with possible disturbances during the
national-day holiday and the Communist Party's congress in Beijing.

In 2006 officials responsible for religious and ethnic affairs in
Tibet circulated a secret document predicting that the train link
could create instability in urban areas. Sure enough, ethnic-Han
Chinese, many of them recent migrants hoping to profit from a
train-related tourism boom, were the main targets of the violence in Lhasa.

Even if officials had ignored such warnings, the protests at Lhasa's
monasteries on March 10th and 11th were the biggest in the city since
1989 and provided ample warning of bigger trouble ahead. And Tibetan
radicals outside China -- not including the Dalai Lama, who supports
the Beijing games -- had made no secret of their plans to use the
Olympics to publicise their grievances. On March 13th, the eve of the
riots, security in central Lhasa was visibly tighter than normal in
the city, which is ringed by military encampments. That day one of
the Dalai Lama's representatives sent a letter to a senior official
in Beijing, warning him that unless managed carefully the situation
in Tibet might become "difficult for all of us to handle."

Yet by 1.30pm on March 14th, as the riots began to spread beyond the
area near the Ramoche Temple, the security presence had all but
disappeared from that part of the city. Once the riots began to
spread, officials may have worried that any effort to control them
would lead to bloodshed that would damage China's image in the
build-up to the games. But it is also possible that some officials
actually wanted the violence to escalate, as a pretext to impose
blanket security on the city long before the Olympics. They might
have calculated that tensions in Lhasa were likely to present a
growing security headache in the run-up to the games, and that
foreign scrutiny would become more intense. By refraining from an
immediate bloody crackdown they might even gain international kudos
for avoiding a Tiananmen-style response. Chinese officials may have
been genuinely surprised that, in the event, Western reaction was
overwhelmingly negative.

This response was fuelled by a widespread perception outside China,
encouraged by reports from Tibetans in exile, that large-scale
bloodshed had indeed occurred. But it is still not known whether the
security forces shot anyone at all during the unrest of March 14th
and 15th in Lhasa. Figures used by Tibetans abroad have fudged the
issue. The Dalai Lama himself says more than 200 people have been
killed by Chinese security forces since March. But he and his aides
have provided scant detail. There is little doubt that several were
shot in other parts of the plateau, most notably in Sichuan, where
several dozen may have been killed.

In the case of Lhasa the Tibetan government-in-exile has published a
list of only 23 Tibetans killed on March 14th and 15th. But it is
unable to provide a consistent account of these incidents. In an
interview with The Economist in May, the Dalai Lama admitted he was
uncertain about how the unrest developed in Lhasa and the details of
any shooting by the security forces there: "There is a lot of
confusion and contradictory information."

No photographs have come to light from Lhasa of violence by police or
troops on March 14th or 15th, nor of any resulting casualties.
Photographs of dead bodies displayed in the streets of Dharamsala,
the seat in exile in northern India of the Dalai Lama, are said to be
those of Tibetans shot in Sichuan. Yet camera-equipped mobile phones
are widely used in Lhasa and internet services remained uninterrupted
during the rioting. Georg Blume of Die Zeit, a German newspaper, who
arrived in Lhasa on March 15th just after the riots, says he expected
to hear residents describe a massacre. But in nearly a week of
interviews he was unable to confirm any reports of killings by the
security forces.

The relay of the Olympic torch through Lhasa was much curtailed for
security reasons -- though officials claimed the truncation was
somehow related to the devastating earthquake in Sichuan in May.
Officials must have been deeply relieved. Their original plans for
three days of ceremonies across Tibet would have been a security
nightmare -- and would have been even worse had there been no
crackdown in March. Foreign journalists and tourists as well as a
sprinkling of Tibetan exiles would have poured in. Disgruntled
Tibetans would have sensed an opportunity.

Whether deliberate or incompetent, the authorities' failure to stop
the rioting at the outset has been a bigger setback for Tibet's
long-term stability and China's foreign relations than any official
is likely to have calculated on March 14th. Chinese officials
appeared to condone the xenophobic outcry triggered by Western
criticism of the clampdown. The party, after all, prides itself on
its nationalist credentials. But the outburst has also shaken party
officials. They are ever fearful that they might become the target of
their own citizens' anger. The earthquake helped restrain the
nationalist anger. But as Sharon Stone, an American actress, found in
May when she suggested that the earthquake could have been karmic
retribution for the clampdown in Tibet, it is easily reawakened.

A matter of trust

The Dalai Lama expresses little optimism. He says that because of the
unrest the Chinese government might now rally round the view held by
some of its officials that "they can't trust any Tibetans." It might,
he said, step up "demographic aggression" by sending more ethnic-Han
Chinese into the region. The Dalai Lama talks of reports that the
Chinese have fenced off land and speculates that this might be given
to settlers. He even says he had heard a report that 1m of them might
come in to Tibet once the Olympic games are over.

Such remarks suggest the enormous gulf between the Dalai Lama and the
Chinese government and the difficulty he and his aides face in
separating truth from rumour. Just as there is scant proof that the
"Dalai clique" is actively engaged in fomenting unrest, as Chinese
leaders claim, so there is little evidence that China is actively
seeking to change the ethnic mix of Tibet. Migrants from elsewhere in
China, mainly neighbouring Sichuan, are indeed flocking to the
region. But this is part of a nationwide flow of tens of millions of
job-seeking migrants into the richer cities of China that has
occurred since the 1980s. Tibet's problem is the pace of this influx.
No official figures are published. But it appears to have accelerated
rapidly in recent years thanks to a rapid growth in tourism, which
has received a big boost from the railway.

Sporadic discussions between Chinese officials and the Dalai Lama's
advisers over nearly three decades have achieved nothing. China has
not allowed the Dalai Lama's delegates to visit Tibet itself since
1980, following three trips there during which Chinese officials were
embarrassed by emotional displays of public support for the Dalai
Lama's team. The last trip they made to any part of the Tibetan
plateau was a visit to Qinghai in 1985. Deng Xiaoping, then China's
paramount leader, met a representative of the Dalai Lama in 1979. But
current animosities make such a high-level meeting hard to imagine today.

Chinese officials will be alarmed that unrest spread as far as
Rongwo. Qinghai, home to the biggest Tibetan population outside the
"autonomous region," had long been relatively peaceful and was ruled
with a lighter touch than Tibet itself. The practice is frowned upon,
but some monasteries there had greater freedom to display the Dalai
Lama's portrait.

Even now, amid a plateau-wide campaign of "patriotic education" in
monasteries during which monks in some places are being asked by
officials to denounce the Dalai Lama, two portraits of him were on
display at Kumbum, a monastery close to Qinghai's capital, Xining.
Yet official tolerance of such infractions in recent years has not
appeared to make Qinghai's Tibetans any more loyal to the party than
those in more tightly controlled Tibet.

Curbing official vitriol directed at the Dalai Lama would certainly
please Tibetans. But addressing their economic grievances, such as
Han domination of Lhasa's shops and taxi services, would help a lot
too. The officials who decided to stand back during Lhasa's riots may
well have gambled -- correctly as it turned out --  that the violence
would be directed mainly at businesses run by Hans and Huis (members
of a Muslim minority) rather than at symbols of party power.

The crackdown has been less astute. Officials have depicted the riots
as politically inspired, and have ignored the underlying ethnic and
economic grievances, which are rekindling pro-independence sentiment.
Hardly any political slogans were uttered during the unrest on March
14th. But as the riots started outside the Ramoche temple, a Tibetan
writer said she heard that a citizen, startled and delighted by the
authorities' failure to intervene, shouted "Tibet is independent!"
Few would dare even to whisper that openly now. But many Tibetans
still cherish the dream.
CTC National Office 1425 René-Lévesque Blvd West, 3rd Floor, Montréal, Québec, Canada, H3G 1T7
T: (514) 487-0665
Developed by plank