There is no doubt that the arrival of a railway line in Lhasa in 2006 has an enormous impact on the human rights situation in Tibet. The railway impacts both economic, social and cultural rights, an integral part of the body of international human rights, as well as civil and political rights – such as rights to free speech and political participation.
Major transportation infrastructure projects – such as railways or highways – have often been used as part of poverty alleviation strategies. Many have contributed to reducing poverty. This railway, like transportation arteries built into the Amazon, have less to do with poverty alleviation, and more to do with political and commercial interests.
Historically, the role of railways in a colonialist context had to do more with military and political control and resource extraction, with only marginal benefit accruing to the locals. No one understood this better than the Chinese. In 1859 Li Hungchang, Viceroy of Jiangsu, objected to the construction of a proposed British railway from Suzhou to Shanghai on the grounds that “the construction of railways was deemed to be beneficial to China only when undertaken by the Chinese themselves.”1
Fearful of western imperialist intentions, the government ordered the removal of the Shanghai-Wusung line, the first railway ever built in China, in 1877. The British undertaking was viewed as a national security threat that would encourage “invasions of Chinese territory” and threaten its “independence as a nation.”2
Unlike south China and Taiwan which were subjected to Chinese resettlement under the Qing Dynasty, imperial expansion to the north and west involved relatively few physical manifestations, a model Europeans’ used in their overseas dependencies. Control was asserted in Mongolia, Tibet, and Xinjiang without the commission of large numbers of troops or settlers, relying instead on a system of administration that blended into existing national structures and customs.
The railway accelerates the settling of large numbers of Chinese in Tibet, their take-over of many sectors of the economy in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) and the erosion of Tibetan language and culture.
However, railways can be a neutral technology capable of benefiting, subjugating or even ignoring surrounding populations. In themselves, railways do not necessarily cause migration, exploitation of natural resources or significant cultural impacts. It is political and economic forces that determine the impacts of railways – particularly in remote areas where transport is otherwise limited.
If political will existed, regulations could sharply reduce the number of Chinese settling in Tibet, provide beneficial rail tariff structures for Tibetan industries, and address other aspects of the new railway. However, it is clear that the purpose of this railway was to more fully integrate Tibet culturally, economically and politically into the Chinese nation.3
Tibet’s small population and limited demand for inter-regional transit are not sufficient to justify the official estimate of US $4.1 billion for the railway’s construction as well as its substantial operational costs.
The decision to build and maintain the Gormo-Lhasa railway was based primarily on political considerations rather than economic ones. Former Chinese President Jiang Zemin famously said that, “Some people advised me not to go ahead with the project because it is not commercially viable. I said this is a political decision.”4 In 1997, Politburo member Li Ruihuan said:
“Expanding Tibet’s economy is not a mere economic issue, but a major political issue that has a vital bearing on Tibet’s social stability and progress. This work not only helps Tibet, but is also related directly to the struggle against the Dalai Lama’s splittist attempts.”5
These political objectives are still deeply woven into China’s nationalist discourse with the emphasis on territorial inviolability and control.
Civil and Political Rights
The most obvious impacts on freedom of speech are the denial of public debate and opposition toward the railway. It would be extremely risky for Tibetans to object to the railway or its impacts in their area, given the high priority of the project. Dissenters, according to a former official, would be accused of being ‘splittists,’ a serious charge generally reserved for Tibetans and other ‘minority nationalities.’ Even some Party officials and Chinese scholars are said to have been reluctant to express any public criticism of the project because of its strong backing by Jiang Zemin and Zhu Rongji.6
That no serious criticism of the railway could occur in Lhasa is extraordinary given the mammoth size and impacts of the project. The lack of meaningful consultation with the Tibetan populace, and the atmosphere of fear surrounding dissenting opinions are clear evidence of infringements on civil and political rights. The very restricted atmosphere for civil and political rights predated the railway and is not thought to have worsened civil and political rights, but neither has there been any notable improvement.
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
The International Campaign for Tibet interviews hundreds of Tibetans every year, both in Tibet and those who have just crossed the border to Nepal and India. We have yet interview a Tibetan who predominantly supports the railway. Virtually all Tibetans cite negative impacts of increased Chinese settlers and their dominance in the economy. Overall, nearly all Tibetans say that the railway is creating more problems than its solving. Tibetans who travel to China appreciate the ease of using the railway compared to the bus. And Tibetans cite a desire to see more modernization in Tibet, so long as it is not primarily benefit Chinese.
While the railway’s construction could significantly increase resource extraction from the Tibetan Plateau with little or no benefit to Tibetans, Tibetans appear are far more concerned about Chinese influx than environmental implications. If the TAR had sufficient autonomy to retain a significant amount of revenue from resource extraction that it could use as it wanted, I suspect that would ameliorate some of the opposition to large scale extraction operations.
Without changes in policy, the current pattern of growth and development will accelerate, increasing dominance by Chinese settlers in the modern urban economy and widening the economic disparity between Tibetans and Chinese. Ultimately, the influx of Chinese is likely to dilute the distinct Tibetan culture, language and religion and undermine Tibetans’ right to self-determination.
Tibetans face questions of serious and long-term consequence regarding the railway that are not easy to answer and will continue to spark debate in sectors of Tibetan society. Many Tibetans support better transportation facilities within Tibet and believe that their own government prior to 1959 neglected transportation infrastructure. However, Tibetans know that the trade off for this significant infrastructure development is a significant increase in Chinese settlers and their impact on the social, economic and cultural life in Tibet.
A Tibetan Proposal to Improve Rights in Tibet
While officials, experts, advocates and others engage in a debate about the motivation and impacts of the railway, the most important voices – those of the Tibetans in Tibet – often go unheard. Ultimately, the most important question is what kind of development do Tibetans want, and how much do they want to be integrated into China. There will be diverse answers to these questions, as there would be in any society, but the process is vital and would be reveling.
Only a few Tibetans based in Beijing have been able to carve out a political space to somewhat openly discuss their opinions about some of the ramifications of the current Chinese development strategy in Tibet such as Woeser and Phuntsog Wangyal. Even though they are both prominent individuals, albeit in very different ways, they too have to constantly be aware of not overstepping bounds of what they can say, without suffering unacceptable consequences. One other very insightful voice has emerged, apparently from Lhasa who wrote a 10 point proposal addressing many of the impacts of the railway. Ironically, in his entire paper, he doesn’t mention the railway a single time and this must have been a very conscious decision, possibly based on the consequences of delving into that issue. But the railway serves as a backdrop to his paper because he directly deals the impacts of “people coming from outside” and how to reduce those number.
I have included each of his 10 points and then excerpted a few sentences about each one from his text which is much longer. He uses a pseudonym and wrote this in Chinese in April of this year.7 On several occasions, the writer underscores that his purpose is to help maintain the unity of the motherland, to deflect suspicions that he is using these arguments to “split” the country. His final point compares policies toward Tibetan exiles and Taiwan, and urges Beijing to follow the Taiwan example.
1. Maintain and establish a unique traditional economic environment and atmosphere in the ethnic regions, and formulate protective policies with substantive significance for the nationalities’ economy.
In order to avoid the disastrous road of ‘American Imperialism’ I suggest that there should be “Ethnicized, Modernized, and Localized” reforms carried out to Tibet’s economic policies. “Ethnicized” refers to macro-economic policies which are changed to protect the Tibetan people’s dominant position in the Tibetan economy, granting economically preferential and beneficial policies.)
2. External economic factors should respect religious and cultural beliefs in nationality areas.
At present, in the course of Tibet’s economic development, people coming from outside … bring with them … brothels and bars and dance halls. … It is hoped that some necessarily restrictive measures can be placed on the rampant spread of Tibet’s non-local entertainment culture.
3. Permit the Dalai Lama and other overseas Tibetans to visit Tibet in a private capacity and provide channels of communication for them.
In order for both sides to eliminate misgivings, both sides can jointly adopt simplified procedures for clearing immigration control, for appointing and organizing the members and structure of visiting groups ahead of time, and for agenda planning and ensuring a certain amount of secrecy around travel plans. As far as the Chinese government is concerned, this would be a strategic achievement of epoch-defining significance.
4. Re-appraise Tibet’s “new countryside construction project”, protecting the rights of people to live independent lives.
There is enormous legal and moral doubts of whether citizens’ rights to live independent lives have been infringed upon by concentrating so many herders’ and peasants’ homes alongside roads. Raising people’s standards of living isn’t solely about living in concentrated communities close to roads or about living in homes that all look the same.
5. Respect the cultural traditions of the nationalities, thoroughly implement the TAR’s relevant rules and regulations on protecting and developing the Tibetan language.
In the 1980s the TAR government formulated regulations on work to develop the Tibetan language. But with regard to current usage of the Tibetan language, the regulations can only be described as nominal. … In order to truly develop and protect the Tibetan language, we should … draft new regulations for the development and protection of the Tibetan language.
6. Stop large, environmentally destructive mining projects.
Strengthening the protection of Tibet’s natural environment directly impacts neighboring ecological systems and indeed those of the entire world. This in itself should be reason enough to stop large, environmentally destructive mining projects.
7. Strengthen the moral training and education of a small number of government religion workers, and relax administrative controls on religious work units.
It is suggested that administrative controls at religious work units, as well as all other methods of inappropriate interference in activities, should be relaxed.
8. Carry out the systematic construction of education in nationalities’ traditional culture and the fine arts.
With regard to education in culture and the arts, it is nowhere near enough to simply open an academy of art of Tibetan theater group; with regard to Lhasa there are palaces and folk art classes for the systematized strengthening of Kalu, Nangma, and Duixie, but there is no systematic, specialized or long-term education work on these art forms in the arts education systems described above.
9. Exercise overall control over the numbers of outsiders coming to the region to work.
Tibetans need outsiders to come to supplement the economy, but it is not simply suppressing and reversing the numbers of outsiders going to Tibet that will make the Tibetan people attain true happiness. It is only by increasing controls on the transfer of labor out of Tibet that both parties – both nationalities – can achieve long-term stability and development. … There should be large-scale overall controls on the numbers of workers coming to Tibet.
10. Extend the same policies to Tibetans inside and outside Tibet as those granted to Han people either side of the Taiwan Straits, recognizing, supporting and encouraging exchanges between Tibetans at home and abroad, and stopping the total exclusion of Tibetan society abroad.
If Tibet is a part of China, then they are naturally overseas Chinese, and they shall imminently be afforded the same “united treatment” as Taiwanese compatriots to return to the motherland. Conversely, if one denies, denies in a different form or avoids using taboo or ‘sanctioned’ words as a means to avoid the problem of their actual existence, this amounts to self-denial of Tibet’s sovereignty.
