(begin text)

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to testify today onU.S. policy toward Tibet. This hearing is particularly timelycoming in the immediate wake of the April 21-24 visit toWashington of the Dalai Lama.

Background

There are over two million ethnic Tibetans living in the TibetanAutonomous Region of the People's Republic of China, and perhapsanother two to three million living in adjacent areas in China,notably in Qinghai, western Sichuan, Gansu, and Yunnan. About125,000 Tibetan refugees and their descendants live in India andNepal, and a few thousand others are scattered in other countries.There are about a thousand in the U.S.

For the Tibetans who live in Tibet, the last 50 years have beentumultuous. The entry of the People's Liberation Army into Tibetin 1951 brought to an end the period that began with the 1911revolution in China and the collapse of any effective Chinesepresence in Tibet. In 1951, Tibetan representatives signed a 17point agreement, which opened the way to the PLA despite the reservations of the Dalai Lama and his advisors.

Chinese inroads into the traditional Tibetan way of life touchedoff violent opposition by the late 1950's, leading the Dalai Lamato flee to India in 1959. Guerrilla warfare continued in someareas for a few years, but was effectively suppressed. TheCultural Revolution in the 1960's hit Tibet early and hard.The Panchen Lama, who had been supportive of the Chineseauthorities, was imprisoned for 15 years. Thousands ofmonasteries were closed and destroyed. Tibet sufferedirreparable cultural damage, and Buddhism came under attack as afeudal relic.

With the end of the Cultural Revolution there was a policy reviewleading to liberalization, beginning with the visit of the lateGeneral Secretary of the Communist Party Hu Yaobang to Tibet in1980. The inflow of Han Chinese into Tibet slowed. MoreTibetans were elevated to positions within the Region's politicalleadership. Greater sensitivity was shown to Tibet's religiousand cultural traditions. Monasteries were rebuilt and reopened.Many prisoners were released. The Dalai Lama sent a series ofdelegations to Tibet, and discussions with the Chinese began.Beijing indicated a willingness to accept the return of the DalaiLama and his followers to Tibet under certain conditions.

Nineteen-eighty-seven saw a major alteration in Chinese policytoward Tibet toward a harder line. The Dalai Lama placed a newemphasis on seeking contacts in the West in order to rallysupport against the weakening of Tibetan culture and religion.Late in the year, serious riots broke out in Lhasa in support ofindependence, followed by other outbreaks over the next few years. The Chinese responded with increased security measures,including crackdowns on monasteries. Martial law was declaredfor a time. Discussions with the Dalai Lama's representativeshalted. This trend has continued since then. A Work Conferenceon Tibet in 1994 placed heightened emphasis on economic growthover accommodation with the Dalai Lama and preservation ofTibetan culture.

Although reverence for the Dalai Lama appears to be near-universal,this is not to say that Tibetan politics are without fault lines.Factions, regional and sectarian loyalties, differences betweenreligious and civil authorities, arguments between modernizersand conservatives, and other splits have plagued the Tibetanpolity, among Tibetans inside and outside Tibet, throughoutthis century. Some Tibetans have worked with the Chinese evenin the most tense of times. Other young Tibetans today arecontemplating the use of violence in their frustration, despitethe Dalai Lama's clear and consistent advocacy of non-violenceand efforts to reach a negotiated solution with the Chinese overTibet's rights and status. Two generalizations appear beyonddispute: 1) There is considerable animosity between Han Chineseliving in Tibet and ethnic Tibetans; and 2) Most Tibetans aredissatisfied with current political arrangements andinstitutions in Tibet.

Efforts by the Dalai Lama and Beijing to reach accommodation havebeen on-again off-again for the last two decades. During theperiod of liberalization inaugurated by the 1980 Hu Yaobangvisit, the Dalai Lama sent several delegations at Beijing'sinvitation to observe conditions in Tibet. Subsequently, forreasons described above, the atmosphere for talks has soured.The Dalai Lama tried to revive a basis for discussion by puttingforward a new proposal in a speech in Strasbourg in 1988, inwhich he declared Tibet would accept autonomous status within thePeople's Republic of China, with the Chinese retaining certaindefense and foreign policy rights. China rejected the proposalas disguised independence for Tibet. The Dalai Lama declined aChinese invitation to visit Beijing for the Panchen Lama'sfuneral in early 1989, and the Chinese hardline policyculminated in a Politburo meeting late that year that decided theDalai Lama would not be part of the solution in Tibet. Talks withthe Dalai Lama have effectively been sidetracked since then,though contacts continue sporadically.

The Chinese government has devoted substantial resources to Tibetover the years: a 1980 report stated that China had given Tibetsubsidies equivalent to 4.2 billion dollars since 1952, andBeijing claims to have given a further 2.4 billion dollars sincethen for economic development.

Nonetheless, substantial economic problems remain. Tibet isChina's poorest region. While Tibet has experienced a substantialgrowth rate in recent decades, its growth has been slower thanmost other regions in China.

Not all Tibetans view Chinese investment and economic developmentin Tibet in totally positive terms. Many maintain that employmentin investment projects disproportionately benefits ethnic HanChinese and other non-Tibetans. Hundreds of thousands of non-Tibetans have come to Tibet in recent years to work either ondevelopment projects or to serve those who do. The "floatingpopulation" of Lhasa, the main city in Tibet, was recentlyestimated at over 200,000, as compared to its registeredpermanent population of 400,000. Inflows of non-Tibetans haveincreased tension and raised concerns over the loss of Tibet'sspecial character.

The autonomy that China grants to Tibet has resulted in somebenefits or privileges, notably relaxed family planning norms,use of ethnic Tibetan cadres in a majority of government jobs, and Tibetan representation in the National People's Congress.Perhaps 10,000 Tibetans have gone to secondary or tertiary studyin China's 10 Nationalities Institutes in other parts of China.

The human rights situation in Tibet is highly unsatisfactory.Chinese authorities commit widespread human rights abuses, withnstances of death in detention, torture, arbitrary arrest,detention without public trial, long sentences for Tibetannationalists for peacefully expressing their religious andpolitical views, and intensified controls on religion and onfreedom of speech and the press. The authorities permit manytraditional religious practices, but not those seen as avehicle for political dissent. The government continues toclosely supervise monks and monasteries, which it sees asbreeding grounds for Tibetan nationalism. Chinese authoritiesare seeking to increase the use of Chinese in education, down tothe first grade, a practice which has offended Tibetans in thepast. A fuller account of the situation is contained in the StateDepartment's human rights report published early this year.

The U.S. Role

What is U.S. policy toward Tibet? The United States considersthe Tibet Autonomous Region or TAR (hereafter referred to as"Tibet") as part of the People's Republic of China. Thislong-standing policy is consistent with the view of the entire international community, including all China's neighbors: nocountry recognizes Tibet as a sovereign state. U.S. acceptanceof China's claim of sovereignty over Tibet predates theestablishment of the People's Republic of China. For instance,in 1942, we told the Nationalist Chinese government thenheadquartered in Chongqing (Chungking) that we had "at no timeraised (a) question" over Chinese claims to Tibet.

Because we do not recognize Tibet as an independent state, theUnited States does not conduct diplomatic relations with therepresentatives of Tibetans in exile. However, the UnitedStates does try to maintain contact with a wide variety ofrepresentatives of differing political groups inside and outsideChina with views on Tibet. This includes contacts withindividuals in Dharamsala, Tibetans in the U.S., and visits toTibet by Embassy and Consulate General Chengdu staff.

The United States has urged China to respect Tibet's uniquereligious, linguistic and cultural traditions, and the humanrights of Tibetans as it formulates its policies for Tibet. TheUnited States encourages China and the Dalai Lama to hold seriousdiscussions aimed at resolution of differences at an early date,without preconditions. We have consistently asserted that anyquestions surrounding Tibet and its relationship to Chineseauthorities in Beijing should be resolved by direct dialoguebetween the Tibetans, in particular the Dalai Lama, and theChinese.

The United States stands for the protection of human rightsthroughout the world, and the human rights issue remains a keyelement of our bilateral relationship with China. Our policyseeks to improve respect for the human rights of ethnic Tibetans,and for all Chinese citizens. We have appealed for the releaseof Tibetan prisoners of conscience. We have called upon theChinese government to cease using force against peacefuldemonstrations in Tibet. Most recently, we spoke out when theconviction and sentencing of Tibetan monk Chadrel Rinpoche andtwo others was announced last week, apparently for his role inselection of a new Panchen Lama designated by the Dalai Lama asthe successor to the second-most revered position in Tibet'sBuddhist hierarchy. We have also called upon China to improveprison conditions and to end the abuse and torture of prisoners.

We have raised our concerns about Tibet consistently duringbilateral talks. Secretary Albright raised concerns over humanrights, including Tibet, both during her visit to Beijing inFebruary, and during Vice Premier Qian Qichen's visit toWashington in April. She repeated our call for a dialoguebetween Beijing and the Dalai Lama.

The U.S. Embassy in Beijing has frequently raised our humanrights concerns. It has raised the case of the Tibetanethnomusicologist Ngawang Choephel, who was sentenced to 18 yearsimprisonment late last year on the charge of endangering China'snational security. We have said that we cannot understand whysuch a sentence should have been imposed when there has beenno public explanation of why his activities were unlawful.Embassy and Consulate General Chengdu personnel visit Tibet fromtime to time to discuss the situation there with local officialsand observe conditions. Ambassador Sasser visited Tibet April16-18 and made a strong presentation of our views on humanrights in all of his official meetings there.

In addition to our bilateral efforts, we have also addressed ourconcerns about human rights in Tibet through multilateralchannels. We worked with like-minded countries at the U.N. HumanRights Commission in Geneva this year to table a resolution onthe human rights situation in China, including Tibet.Unfortunately, the Chinese countered with a no-action motion whicheffectively blocked discussion of the resolution and a vote onits provisions. The mere fact that a resolution was tabledsignaled our concern. The effort that the Chinese put intodefeating the resolution is a measure of their awareness andsensitivity on this issue.

The Dalai Lama would obviously be a key player if discussionsdevelop between the PRC and Tibetans living outside China. Asa sign of the great respect the President and Vice Presidenthave for the Dalai Lama as a religious leader, they have metwith him on a number of occasions, most recently on April 23.Secretary of State Albright and Assistant Secretary of StateShattuck met with the Dalai Lama on April 24, when he shared hisviews and concerns with some members of the Secretary's AdvisoryCommittee on Religious Freedom Abroad.

Other U.S. Activities

The United States provides humanitarian assistance to Tibetanrefugees in India and also contributes to the U.N. HighCommissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to assist Tibetans transitingNepal. Most U.S. government funding to the refugees in Indiagoes to the Tibet Fund, a U.S. private voluntary organization,to underwrite assistance programs for Tibetan refugees in India.These programs support reception centers, preventive health care,and income-generating projects, and they supply basic food,clothing, and clean water.

As part of the Immigration Act of 1990, 1,000 "displaced Tibetans"were given special immigrant visas, and have since resettledthroughout the United States. The United States InformationAgency provides scholarships for Tibetan students andprofessionals to study in the United States. Over 140 studentshave participated in this program since 1988, and almost allhave returned to India and Nepal upon completion of theirstudies to contribute to the welfare of the Tibetan refugeecommunities there.

The Tibetan Service of the Voice of America broadcasts two hour-long programs in the Tibetan language each day. Often, itinterviews ethnic Tibetans, and has interviewed the Dalai Lama onat least five occasions. VOA Tibetan Service broadcast signalshave been subjected to interference, with mixed success, almostfrom the first VOA Tibetan language broadcast. We have pressed the Chinese to cease interference with thosebroadcasts and have sought to resume technical-level talks toresolve the dispute over interference with VOA broadcast signals.Although China agreed to resume these technical talks during ourOctober 1994 bilateral human rights dialogue, the dialogue andthe technical talks have remained suspended.

Radio Free Asia began broadcasting to China in Mandarin September29, 1996, and in Tibetan December 2, 1996. The RFA signal israted as fair or good, and no jamming has been noted. I wouldadd that the Chinese Foreign Ministry in Beijing and Embassy hereformally protested at the time of RFA's initial broadcastoperations, terming the broadcasts a relic of cold warmentality and interference in China's internal affairs. Wereplied that RFA is a U.S. nonprofit private corporation,which receives grant funds from the Broadcasting Board ofGovernors, part of USIA, the purpose of which is to provideaccurate and comprehensive news and commentary, not propaganda.

Conclusion

In closing, Mr. Chairman, let me say that the treatment ofTibetans by the Chinese government in the 48 years since thefounding of the People's Republic of China has been harsh,inconsistent with international human rights norms, andunacceptable. There have been moments, notably in the early1950's and the early 1980's, when it seemed a more enlightenedpolicy by Beijing might prevail, but these moments proved short-lived. The U.S. Government will continue to speak out, publiclyand privately, about the abuses of human rights that mark PRCpolicy in Tibet.

At the same time, we do not believe that a challenge to Chinesesovereignty or resort to violence offers a way to improvement ofthe situation. No Chinese government for centuries has been prepared to accept the idea of an independent Tibet. There isno reason to believe this one will. The Dalai Lama has showncourage in accepting the impracticality of insisting onindependence, whatever his views on Tibet's historical status,and calling for an autonomous Tibet within China. Chinesespokesmen have responded by stating their willingness to engagein a dialogue with the Dalai Lama if he renounces independenceand pro-independence activities. The gap between the statedpositions of the two sides would appear to outside observers tobe bridgeable.

The problem appears to be one of will, especially on Beijing'sside. We hope that the parties will resume the dialogue thatlooked so promising in the 1980's. Preservation of Tibet's uniquecultural and religious traditions depends upon it.

But it is not only Tibetans who would benefit from more equitabletreatment. China as a whole would as well. Tranquillity andpublic order may be jeopardized by failure to satisfy fundamentalneeds of China's minority peoples. Maintaining order over arestive population is a drain on the scarce resources of a stilldeveloping country. And finally, what we hear so often fromChinese leaders is that, after a century of humiliation at thehands of Western powers, China demands above all respect.Chinese leaders will find that a different, more enlightenedpolicy toward Tibet would be a long step toward enhancing therespect they have earned from the economic transformation oftheir country.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

(end text)