A cartoon depicting Xi claiming “Progress in China’s Human Rights in 2014″
Photo: Tibet Post International
A White Paper entitled Progress in China’s Human Rights in 2014 was issued by the State Council Information Office of the People’s Republic of China on June 8.Citing their “tremendous achievements” in human rights issues, the government highlighted accomplishments such as poverty alleviation, freedom of speech, and protections for minorities over the past year.
Despite the optimistic tone of the report, many Pro-Tibet organisations remain critical of the situation in China, arguing that the White Paper covered up or misrepresented the human rights violations that impact on the Tibetan community. William Nee, a China researcher at Amnesty International in Hong Kong, wrote to the Agence France-Presse that certain details of the White Paper “[seem] to have been written in an alternative reality.”
One issue on which the Tibetans and the Chinese government disagree is that of China’s housing relocation project. The White Paper reports that 2.3 million farmers have been moved into “solid and convenient houses,” and emphasises the resettlement of these citizens from poverty-stricken areas. The Chinese government asserts that the rural impoverished population has decreased by 3.57 million, and maintains that “quality of life in Tibet…keeps improving.”
From the perspective of the Tibetan farmers, resettlement occurred by force and has not been an effective means of alleviating poverty. The traditionally nomadic families, who have been living sustainably off the landfor centuries, are now in urban centers where their skills are less relevant. The Tibetans are also concerned that this relocation has left their land vulnerable to potential environmental exploitation.
The two sides further disagree on the Chinese treatment of Tibetan cultural relics and historic sites. China maintains that such areas have been respected, and the White Paper highlights preservation and maintenance projects at the Potala Palace, Norbulingka and the Sakya Monastery, which used government funds and relied on “the latest construction techniques.”
The Tibetans, however, point to the destruction of thousands of monasteries, religious writings and sacred works of art to refute the point that China has been devoted to cultural preservation. Furthermore, Tibetans claim that any efforts to conserve their historic sites are merely attempts to boost China’s tourist economy. A 2014 Thematic Report from Tibet Watch asserts that “China seems to have realised that [Tibetan culture] may have financial value—if it can be marketed in line with Chinese state political beliefs.”
With both perspectives making different claims on a range of issues, it is clear that the matter of human rights in China must be explored further to discover the truth.
Print
Email