[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 63 (Wednesday, May 9, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4607-S4608]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Leahy, Mr. 
        Jeffords, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Levin, Mr. Wellstone, Mrs. Boxer, 
        Mr. Akaka, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Kennedy, Mrs. Murray, and Mr. 
        Torricelli):
  S. 852. A bill to support the aspirations of the Tibetan people to 
safeguard their distinct identity; to the Committee on Foreign 
Relations.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to address the tragedy 
that is unfolding in Tibet and, alongside Senators Thomas, Leahy, 
Jeffords, Lieberman, Levin, Wellstone, Boxer, Akaka, Feingold, Kennedy, 
Murray, and Toricelli introduce the Tibetan Policy Act of 2001.
  This legislation is intended to safeguard the legitimate aspirations 
of the Tibetan people in their struggle to preserve their cultural and 
religious identity, and to encourage dialogue between the Dalai Lama or 
his representative and the Government of the People's Republic of China 
about the future of Tibet.
  As many of my colleagues are aware, I have worked for well over a 
decade, since before I came to the Senate, to find the right balance 
for establishing a lasting, constructive dialogue between Chinese and 
Tibetan leaders. I have tried to do so with the best interests of both 
sides in mind. For years, I have tried to build trust and improve 
communication between Chinese and Tibetan leaders.
  For me this is very personal. I first met the Dalai Lama in 1978. I 
have watched him, I have seen him, I have talked with him many, many 
times.
  The Dalai Lama has pledged, over and over again, that what he wants 
is ``one-country, two systems'' approach, whereby Tibetans could live 
their life, practice their religion, educate their children, and 
maintain their language with dignity and respect among the Han Chinese 
people.
  I have had the opportunity to speak, at great length, with the 
President of China and other senior members of the Chinese leadership 
about Tibet.
  For years, I believed compromise, good will, and moderation were the 
right tools for tearing down obstacles and building cooperation between 
the peoples of China and Tibet.
  I have even carried messages between the Dalai Lama and the President 
of China seeking to bring the two together.
  In 1997, for example, I carried a letter from the Dalai Lama to 
President Jiang which, in part, stated that ``I have, for my part, 
openly and in confidence conveyed to you that I am not demanding 
independence for Tibet, which I believe is fundamental to the Chinese 
government.'' The letter also suggested that the Dalai Lama and 
President Jiang meet to discuss relations between the Tibetans and the 
Chinese government, and the ``maintenance and enhancement of those 
cultural, civic, and religious institutions that are so important to 
the Tibetan people and others throughout the world.''

  What I got back was essentially that the Dalai Lama was just a 
splittist and that his word was not good.
  I, for one, believe he is sincere, in his non-violence, in his 
dedication to being a monk, in his concern for the Tibetan people, 
heritage, and religion.
  Yet Beijing has consistently ignored promises to preserve indigenous 
Tibetan political, cultural and religious systems. Indeed, Beijing has 
not kept its commitments made twice by China's paramount leaders--Deng 
Xiaoping in 1979 and Jiang Zemin in 1997.
  I believe that the time has come for the United States government to 
increase our attention to enhanced Tibetan cultural and religious 
autonomy.
  And I feel that I can no longer, in conscience, sit quietly and allow 
the situation in Tibet, the wiping away of Tibetan culture from the 
Tibetan Plateau, in fact, to deteriorate further.
  In many ways, introducing this legislation, especially now, is a very 
difficult step for me. I have a strong, abiding interest in good 
relations between the United States and China, and I am fully aware 
that in the current environment there will be many in China who would 
rather dismiss this legislation out of hand than work together to 
address the underlying issues.
  But, the many reasonable overtures made by me, many of my colleagues 
in Congress, and other individuals and organizations throughout the 
world to work together with China over the past several years to 
address this issue have thus far failed to persuade Beijing to 
reconsider its approach to Tibet.
  And there does not appear to be a ``good time'' in U.S.-China 
relations to introduce this legislation.
  So I would say this to my friends in China that as they consider this 
legislation and its intent: I take this action now because I and many 
of my colleagues are at the point where we feel that this legislation 
is necessary to open Beijing's eyes to a simple truth: honoring the 
basic rights of minorities in China is not a threat to China's 
sovereignty, and running roughshod over its own citizens is not in 
China's best interest.
  I say this because many senior Chinese leaders, including Mao Zedong, 
Zhou En Lai, Deng Xiaoping, Hu Yaobang, and Jiang Zemin have 
acknowledged as much in the past.
  And I say this because the aspirations of the Tibetan people are not 
for independence, but for autonomy and respect for their cultural and 
religious institutions. As both the letter I conveyed to President 
Jiang in 1997 and the Dalai Lama's statement on the 41st Anniversary of 
the Tibetan National Uprising stated, ``my approach envisages that 
Tibet enjoy genuine autonomy within the framework of the People's 
Republic of China . . . such a mutually beneficial solution would 
contribute to the stability and unity of China, their two most 
important priorities, while at the same time the Tibetans would be 
ensured of their basic right to preserve their own civilization and to 
protect the delicate environment of the Tibetan plateau.''
  And I say this because I recognize that China is a rising great 
nation, with a rich culture and long history. Careful reading of its 
history shows that China, like the United States, draws real strength 
from its diversity, from its cultural, religious, and ethnic 
multiplicity.
  But, I am now convinced China's leadership will not modify its 
behavior in Tibet until it becomes crystal clear that China's behavior 
risks tarnishing its international image and burdening China with 
tangible costs.
  Unfortnately, the situation in Tibet today is dreadful, and promises 
only to get worse. Beijing is pursuing policies that threaten the 
Tibetan people's very existence and distinct identity, and Chinese 
security forces hold the region in an iron grip.
  As Secretary Powell stated in his confirmation hearing before the 
Foreign Relations Committee. ``It is a very difficult situation right 
now with the Chinese sending more and more Han Chinese in to settle 
Tibet.'' Chinese settlers are flooding into Tibet, displacing ethnic 
Tibetans, guiding development in ways that clash with traditional 
Tibetan needs and values, and monopolizing local resources.
  I do not want to debate the complex historical interactions that 
characterize the history of relations between China and Tibet. I am not 
interested in arguing about events in the past. What I am interested in 
is the quality of life and the right to exist as these concepts apply 
to Tibetans and Chinese today.
  And, without question, a strong case can be made that Tibet has fared 
poorly under Chinese stewardship during the past fifty years: Beijing 
has consistently ignored promises to preserve indigenous Tibetan 
political, cultural and religious systems and institutions, despite 
having formally guaranteed these rights in the 1951 Seventeen

[[Page S4608]]

Point Agreement that incorporated Tibet into China. And, as I stated 
earlier, Beijing has never seriously moved itself to carry through on 
promises to find solutions to the Tibet problem, promises made at least 
twice by China's paramount leaders, Deng Xiaoping in 1979 and Jiang 
Zemin in 1997. Tibet has been the scene of many grassroots movements 
protesting unwelcome Chinese intrusions and policies since 1956, when 
Beijing first began seriously disrupting Tibetan society by forcefully 
imposing so-called ``democratic reforms'' in the region. China's 
response to Tibetan protests has typically been violent, excessive, and 
unrestrained. In 1959, Beijing viciously and bloodily suppressed the 
massive popular protest known as the Lhasa Uprising. Indeed, it is 
estimated that nearly 1.2 million Tibetans died at the hands of Chinese 
forces during the worst years of violence, between 1956 and 1976. 
International commissions and third-party courts of opinion, most 
notably the International Commission of Jurists and numerous United 
Nations resolutions, consistently pointed fingers at China as a 
violator in Tibet of fundamental human rights and of the basic 
principles of international law.
  According to the 2000 State Department Country Report on Human Rights 
Practices: Chinese Government authorities continued to commit numerous 
serious human rights abuses in Tibet, including instances of torture, 
arbitrary arrest, detention without public trial, and lengthy detention 
of Tibetan nationalists for peacefully expressing political or 
religious views. Tight controls on religion and on other fundamental 
freedoms continued and intensified during the year.
  And, as Human Rights Watch/Asia reports, China's activities are 
targeting not just the present, but Tibet's future as well: Children in 
the Tibetan capital, Lhasa, are being discouraged from expressing 
religious faith and practicing devotional activities as part of the 
authorities' campaign in middle schools and some primary schools. 
Children aged between seven and thirteen in schools targeted by the 
campaign are being told that Tibetan Buddhist practice is `backward 
behavior' and an obstacle to progress. In some schools, children are 
given detention of forced to pay fines when they fail to observe a ban 
on wearing traditional Buddhist ``protection cords.''

  Corrupt officials. Oppressive police tactics and midnight arrests. 
Seizure and imprisonment without formal charges. Beatings and 
unexplained deaths while in custody. The steady grinding down of 
Tibetan cultural and religious institutions. The list of abuses in 
Tibet goes on and on. There is no need for me to repeat them here.
  I say all this as one who wants to work with China's leadership to 
help find a solution to this, and other, problems, and see a positive 
relationship between the U.S. and China, and between the people of 
China and the people of Tibet.
  I want to be a positive force for bringing Tibetan and Chinese 
leaders to the table for face-to-face dialogue.
  It is not my intention with this legislation to merely point fingers 
and lay blame. My intent in introducing the Tibetan Policy Act of 2001 
is not to stigmatize or chastise China.
  My intent in introducing the Tibetan Policy Act of 2001 is to place 
the full faith of the United States government behind efforts to 
preserve the distinct cultural, religious and ethnic autonomy of the 
Tibetan people.
  Specifically, the Tibetan Policy Act of 2001: Outlines Tibet's unique 
historical, cultural and religious heritage and describes the efforts 
by the United States, the Dalai Lama, and others to initiate dialogue 
with China on the status of Tibet. Codifies the position of Special 
Coordinator for Tibetan Issues at the Department of State, assures that 
relevant U.S. government reports will list Tibet as a separate section 
under China and that the Congressional-Executive Commission on the 
People's Republic of China will hold Beijing to acceptable standards of 
behavior in Tibet. Authorizes $2.75 million for humanitarian assistance 
for Tibetan refugees, scholarships for Tibetan exiles, and human rights 
activities by Tibetan non-governmental organizations. Establishes U.S. 
policy goals for international economic assistance to and in Tibet to 
ensure that ethnic Tibetans benefit from development policies in Tibet. 
Calls on the Secretary of State to make best efforts to establish an 
office in Lhasa, the Capital of Tibet. Provides U.S. support for 
consideration of Tibet at the United Nations. Ensures that Tibetan 
language training is available for foreign service officers. Highlights 
concerns about the lack of religious freedom in Tibet by calling on 
China to cease activities which attack the fundamental characteristics 
of religious freedom in Tibet.
  In addition, the Tibet Policy Act expresses the Sense of the Congress 
that: The President and the Secretary of State should initiate steps to 
encourage China to enter into negotiations with the Dalai Lama or his 
representatives on the question of Tibet and the cultural and religious 
autonomy of the Tibetan people. That the President and the Secretary of 
State should request the immediate and unconditional release of 
political or religious prisoners in Tibet; seek access for 
international humanitarian organizations to prisons in Tibet; and seek 
the immediate medical parole of Ngawang Choephel and other Tibetan 
prisoners known to be in ill-health. The United States will seek ways 
to support economic development, cultural preservation, health care, 
and education and environmental sustainability for Tibetans inside 
Tibet.
  The Tibetan Policy Act does not aim to punish anyone. I do not 
believe that threats or force will sway Beijing from its present 
course.
  But, I am convinced that we must send a clear message.
  I am under no illusion that passing the Tibetan Policy Act of 2001 
will immediately change the situation in Tibet.
  Nor am I under any illusion that changing current conditions in Tibet 
will be an easy process. It will be a long and difficult process 
requiring patience and perseverance.
  But I am hopeful that better, more effective efforts on our part and 
better coordination with like-minded members of the international 
community will encourage China to change its thinking and modify its 
behavior towards Tibet.
  To paraphrase an old Chinese proverb: you have to take a first step 
to start any journey. This legislation, I hope, is a first step in 
bringing together the Dalai Lama or his representative and the Chinese 
government to discuss the future of Tibet and to take action to 
safeguard the distinct cultural, religious, and social identity of the 
Tibetan people.
  I urge my colleagues here in the Senate, as well as my friends in 
China, to join with me in taking it.
                                 ______