Chinese culture had a visible and pervasive influence on Tibet. In sharp contrast to the Chinese claim, Tibetan is not the language of communication and administration in TAR. As a result of the gross sinicization of the Tibetan people, most young Tibetans especially those living in the urban areas use Chinese language and tend to adopt various aspects of Chinese culture. Proficiency in Tibetan language has little practical use except for those who wish to become teachers of Tibetan language.  

Both at the school and the University level, a trend and a policy to undermine Tibetan language are in practice. Tibetan language has been continually undermined with great political motives and there is very little use of Tibetan as the language of communication, administration and education. Chinese language is generally used to teach various subjects in schools – even in those that are officially designated as "Tibetan" schools. In fact, proficiency in Chinese language is essential to receive a higher education. Prestigious universities provide instructions only in Chinese language, while few lower-ranked universities established to serve ethnic minorities allow study of only some subjects in Tibetan. [1] For instance, the University of Lhasa was founded in 1985 to provide training for both Tibetan and Chinese cadres who are to ‘advance Tibet's economic development'. But only one of the 17 courses is taught in Tibetan. The previous head of the University, who maintained that ‘the ultimate goal [of the University] is the establishment of the centre of Tibetan culture in China', was replaced by a Chinese official who does not even speak Tibetan. [2]

Chinese language is spoken widely, used for most of the commercial and official communications and holds the dominant position of communication in the government, commerce, and academia. Many young Tibetans seeking to get ahead are left with little choice but to use Chinese language rather than Tibetan. One leading Tibetan intellectual told the South China Morning Post in as early as 1992, “Without educated people in all fields, expressing themselves in their own language, Tibetans are in danger of being assimilated. We have reached a crucial point […] All hopes in our future, all protection of our heritage depends on this.” [3]  

The white paper claims that use and development of the spoken and written languages of the ethnic groups have been given priority in performing official duties but then even for a sporadic watcher of the XZTV broadcasted from Tibet, one can't fail to distinguish the fact that the prima lingua during the official meetings is but Chinese, be it written or spoken. Discrimination of the Tibetan language is both patent and latent in the Chinese communist system. For example the exams which were recently introduced for permanent employment in the public sector were held in Chinese. [4]  

The white paper maintains that the state has “earmarked 330 million Yuan for the second phase maintenance project of the Potala Palace and the maintenance of the two other great cultural sites of Norbulingka and Sakya monastery.” But what the White Paper fails to mention is that renovation of cultural sites such as the Potala Palace has become the obligation of the PRC after having attained the status of World Heritage Site accorded by UNESCO. And moreover these ‘cultural sites' are earning huge reserves of foreign exchange for China by attracting an ever-increasing number of tourists.  

In its White Paper, the Government claimed that since 1949 it had contributed approximately $36 million (RMB 300 million) to renovate and open over 1,400 monasteries and to repair cultural relics, many of which were destroyed before and during the Cultural Revolution. Despite these and other claims, many monasteries destroyed during the Cultural Revolution were never rebuilt or repaired, and others remained only partially repaired.

Furthermore, most of the developments in Lhasa are made at the cost of traditional Tibetan structures, which are demolished and replaced by the contemporary Chinese architecture, changing the fabric of the rich culture of Tibet. In recent years, TIN reported that there has been a large-scale destruction of traditional building such as the historic Gyalhakhang mosque, and complex situated on the corner of Deckyi Shar Lam and Mentsikhang Lam, causing a heavy loss for Lhasa's historic and cultural heritage. [5] The historic city of Lhasa is now dominated by high rise contemporary buildings such as the 13-storeyed building accommodating the central office of the Public Security Bureau (PSB), a massive concrete monument dedicated to the ‘peaceful liberation of Tibet', the ‘tourism monument', the ‘Snow Pearl' tower etc.  

Chinese authorities have failed to apply internationally agreed standards of protection to cultural heritage of Lhasa, and violated the standards of protection for the Potala and the Barkhor area as agreed by her with UNESCO. In addition to the destruction of historical buildings and the failure to take buffer zone into consideration, the Chinese authorities have failed in their duty to keep the UN agency informed of proposed transformations which violates the Article 56 of the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. [6]  

The White Paper's assertion that “the traditional styles of costume, diet, and housing are maintained”, fall in sharp contrast to the actual practices. Since 1949, China has expropriated Tibetan homeowners, looted their property, and carried out large-scale demolitions of traditional urban and rural settlements. For instance, as a result of China's implementation of the 1980 Lhasa Development Plan, there has been rapid and widespread destruction of Tibetan structures in Tibet's capital. In early months of 1990, more than ten percent of central Lhasa's then remaining traditional Tibetan housing were destroyed and over 3500 Tibetans were displaced. Between 1989 and 1993, more than the half of the traditional stone houses in the Barkhor, the central area of Lhasa, were demolished and replaced with buildings which conform to modern Chinese architectural styles. In 1994, the 17^th century historic village of Shol, which lies at the foot of the Potala, was razed to make room for a gigantic Chinese plaza. As a consequence of such demolitions, the historic Tibetan capital has been reduced to the “Tibetan quarter”, which comprises only 2% of Lhasa today. The situation in Tibet's rural areas is no different as forced evictions and demolitions occur at a large scale to accomplish China's dubious construction projects.  

Most tragically, during the earlier period of the occupation an estimated 6000 monasteries and monastic cities throughout Tibet were plundered and dynamited into rubble, depriving Tibetans of their most valued cultural and spiritual heritage. Although, limited reconstruction of these monasteries has begun, but most of them are financed by local Tibetans through donations and volunteer labour and monasteries, requiring Chinese permission.  

United Nations Secretary-General in its report stated, “Since the Chinese illegal invasion and subsequent colonization of Tibet in 1949-50, the occupying authorities have promoted housing policies with the dual purpose of the previously independent nation of Tibet. During the early years of the occupation, members of the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) systematically searched every house in Lhasa owned or occupied by opponents to the Chinese takeover. The families were evicted or forced to live with the livestock in the ground floor stables, with all possessions of any value requisitioned without warning or compensation. The unlawful expropriation of Tibetan homes was also commonplace. The Chinese often moved into the stolen homes of Tibetans, and began strengthening their control over the territory they had recently occupied.” [7]  

The traditional Tibetan houses are built to last for centuries. The main principle of Tibetan architecture is to adapt visually and practically to the surroundings including the climatic conditions. But replacements, in contrast, are creation of concrete with thin walls, unsuited for local conditions. New Chinese housing projects have clearly been designed with China's wicked intention to maintain social control. The architectural structures of the newly constructed buildings in Tibet are indistinguishable from a Chinese building. They are inappropriately structured that do not feature traditional Tibetan characteristics such as massive entrance doors, window lintels and balconies and are inappropriate to the Tibet's climatic conditions.  

The white paper maintains that both radio and TV stations in Tibet have special Tibetan-language channels, several newspapers, magazines and books are published in Tibetan language, and salvaging, editing and researching Tibetan cultural heritage have been undertaken. Had the Chinese authorities been really adamant and sincere in promoting Tibetan language especially through major communication means, they wouldn't continue to jam the Tibetan language radio broadcasts such as Radio Free Asia, Voice of America and Voice of Tibet. The radio and TV in Tibet are state-controlled and serve as a means to disseminate and promote the policies and positions of the government. China spends millions of dollars on purchasing equipments capable of blocking radio frequencies which air Tibetan language news. [8] Authorities have tried to jam broadcasts of the VOA by airing Chinese programmes on the same frequency. [9]  

Distribution of radio with fixed bandwidth and installations of towers to block the broadcasts are also done in order to keep the Tibetans cut off from the outside world and reality, blatantly infringing upon the Tibetan people's right to information. A free press group, Reporters San Frontières, claimed that China was using French technology to scramble foreign radio broadcasts in China, including the BBC World Service and the Voice of Tibet, based in Norway. It said Thales, the giant arms company owned by the French government, had sold the Chinese government antennae that were being used to block broadcasts. [10]                      

Reporters have no option but to strictly comply with editorial guidelines issued by the Chinese authorities. Editorial freedom is further constrained by the presence of party members in the highest positions of the broadcasting departments, who exercise a tight control over the content of the reports to be broadcasted thus ensuring its compliance with the government's directions. [11]   

Although the White Paper throws up a number of varied lists of newspapers and publications such as Tibet Daily, the Chinese government exercises control over the press, which is considered as the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) mouthpiece. The CCP committees are responsible for appointing government representation as the head of the newspapers. The newspapers that are not directly run by a CCP organ are subject to party control and influence through the party's propaganda department. The Press and Publication Administration, which is responsible for the day to day control of newspapers at the local level is subservient to the decisions of the party's propaganda department.

Controlling and tracking of phone calls made from and to Tibet is prevalently monitored in Tibet, directly contravening the freedom of expression in Tibet. Paris based group Reporters Without Borders have said that surveillance over text messages keeps an eye on political dissent contained in mobile phone messages. [12]  

The Tibetan folk ballads and songs also fell victim to the strong influence of Chinese culture. Most of the Tibetan music albums released from Tibet sound more like a Chinese song with strong nasal interference, which otherwise is alien to traditional Tibetan style. The music and words seem to be intentionally and skilfully manipulated so as to make it sound similar to the Chinese music, resulting in the fading-out of the distinct identity of the traditional Tibetan music. Chinese continually undermine the traditional Tibetan costumes and habits. Zheng Xiaoyun, a researcher with the Yunnan Academy of Social Sciences, told an international symposium on human rights, while stressing the need to implement changes in the traditional costume stated that some traditional costumes needed complicated sewing and might take four years to make. “They are also thick and heavy because of the use of silver and other decoration, and inconvenient for wearing for daily wear.” [13]  

The research and publication works of Tibetan cultural heritage such as the life of King Gesar are not independent with Chinese government exercising complete monopoly. The stories are distorted and fabricated to legitimise China's claim of sovereignty over Tibet. Ban on publications that could represent a threat to the country's unity as perceived by the Chinese authority is a widespread exercise in Tibet, the defiance of which leads to torture, long term imprisonment or even death. In a report broadcasted by the government owned TV Channel, Tibet TV, a list of banned publications was issued, which included ‘reactionary propaganda materials from outside the border, especially publications, audio video products and reactionary propaganda materials advocating Tibetan independence and undermining social stability and ethnic unity by the Dalai Clique.' [14]  

The recent report issued by Human Rights in China stated that Tibetan writer Woeser lost her job, home and freedom of movement because Chinese officials considered her writings overly favourable to the Dalai Lama. Woeser adds up to the millions of Tibetans who have been condemned and persecuted by China for practising their basic human rights of speech and expression. [15]  

Lack of Religious Freedom  

The Constitution of the People's Republic of China provides for freedom of religious belief, and the White Paper stated, "Tibetans fully enjoy the freedom of religious belief”. However, China's record with respect to the religious freedom in Tibet remained highly poor. Chinese authorities continue to violate religious freedom in Tibet by maintaining firm control on religious practices and places of worship in Tibetan areas.  

Tibetan Buddhism is not simply the “religion” of the Tibetan people, but it forms a distinguishing feature of the Tibetan national and cultural identity, and regulates the life of all Tibetans. Monasteries and nunneries are places of learning where students studied not only for their own practice but also to impart knowledge to the community. Prior to China's invasion of Tibet in 1949, there were over 6,000 monasteries throughout the country accommodating around 600,000 monks and nuns. During the period between late 1950s and 70s, the practice of Buddhism was outlawed and most temples and monasteries were destroyed by Chinese while the remaining ones were destroyed during the Cultural Revolution.  

Since the Third National Forum of Work on Tibet in July 1994, China's policy on religion underwent yet another clear shift. In addition to its earlier aim of maintaining ‘unity and stability', the political strategies included active, hands-on management of monasteries by government or Party authorities, “intense re-education” of monks and nuns, and campaign to root out support for the Dalai Lama.  

In 1998 the Chinese government launched the “Patriotic Education” campaign in Tibet, as part of its China-wide “Strike Hard” campaign which was aimed to stop “splittist activity”, such as support for Tibetan autonomy and allegiance to the Dalai Lama. It resulted in brutal oppression of the Tibetan monastic tradition.  

As against the Chinese rhetoric, the overall situation of the religious freedom in Tibet is appalling. In their perspective, Tibet's religious strength is closely linked with its defiant independence movement, Tibet's Buddhist religion unifies and defines the Tibetans as a distinct people from Communist China and constitutes an obstacle to China's economic “development” of the region.  

A report by the United States International Committee on Religious Freedom (USCIRF) in 2003 listed China as one of the five countries of particular concern. According to the committee, the Chinese government remains a particularly flagrant violator of international standards of religious freedom. Tibetans are imprisoned, tortured and subject to various forms of maltreatment for the mere exercise of their freedom of religion or belief, speech, association or assembly.  Keeping the portraits of the Dalai Lama, audio and videocassettes of His religious teachings are considered unlawful, leading to severe punishments or confiscation of land holdings. Monks and nuns are even forced to support the Chinese selected Panchen Lama Gyaltsen Norbu, and denounce H.H. the Dalai Lama and Gendun Choekyi Nyima, the real Panchen Lama.  

China has left no stone unturned in her attempt to replace Tibet's Buddhist belief system by an atheist socialist form. Realizing that Buddhism is the organizing principle of Tibetan society and a vehicle of Tibetan nationalism, Beijing has systematically attempted to substitute Tibetan Buddhism by a state-controlled surrogate version of Buddhism referred to in Chinese propaganda as ‘normal', i.e. patriotic religious practice. The Chinese authorities promptly and forcibly suppress religious activities.  

The Associated Press reported that, in November, Communist officials met with Buddhist leaders in Qinghai Province and warned that the Buddhist leaders would be punished if they failed to win greater support for Beijing's policies toward the exiled Dalai Lama and greater acceptance among their followers for Gyaltsen Norbu, the boy picked by the PRC as the reincarnation of the Panchen Lama.  

Security gets intensified during H.H. the Dalai Lama's birthday, sensitive anniversaries, and festival days in the TAR and in some other Tibetan areas as well. The Chinese government seeks to restrict religious practice to government-sanctioned organizations and registered places of worship and to control the growth and scope of the activity of religious groups. The students and faculty at Tibet University were restrained from participating in religious festivals specially the ‘Sakadawa' festival. The prohibition on celebrating the Dalai Lama's birthday on July 6 is still continued. In August, some Lhasa residents privately expressed unhappiness with city authorities' plans to fix the date of the Drepung Shoton festival, which traditionally varied according to the Tibetan lunar calendar, on August 18th in order to promote tourism.  

The possession or display of the pictures of H.H. the Dalai Lama is viewed as evidence of separatist sentiment when detaining individuals on political charges and could lead upto six years of imprisonment. Pictures of the Dalai Lama are not openly displayed in major monasteries and could not be purchased openly in the TAR. In February 2004, RFA reported that authorities frequently warn Tibetans that they would be punished if they do not surrender pictures of the Dalai Lama. In Sichuan's Karzde Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture and Lithang, authorities reportedly conducted house-to-house searches in 2003 and confiscated private displays of the Dalai Lama's photo. According to Amnesty International's 2002 Annual Human Right Report on China, a Tibetan woman, was reportedly sentenced to six years imprisonment for watching a video of the Dalai Lama at her home. The Government also continued to ban pictures of Gendun Choekyi Nyima, the XI Panchen Lama. However, the unrestricted photos of the "official" Panchen Lama, Gyaltsen Norbu, were not displayed or kept by Tibetans as Tibetans refuse to recognize him as the Panchen Lama.  

The White Paper stated that the TAR had over 46,000 Tibetan Buddhist monks and nuns and more than 1,700 venues for Tibetan Buddhist activities in an attempt to glorify their respect for the freedom of religious belief in the ethnic autonomous areas. Ironically, officials have cited almost identical figures since 1996, although the numbers of monks and nuns dropped at many sites as a result of the "patriotic education" campaign and the expulsion from monasteries and nunneries of those who refused to denounce the Dalai Lama or who were found to be "politically unqualified." Before the Chinese invasion, Sera had 8,000 monks, Drepung 10,000 and Gaden 5,600 monks. The Chinese government directive of 1997 stated that Sera is allowed to have a maximum of 300 monks, Drepung 400 and Gaden 200.  The so called 1,700 sites for Buddhists to conduct religious activities when compared to the 6000 plus monasteries that the communist Chinese destroyed in Tibet, gets reduced to mere defeated pretensions of a religious drama enacted by an atheist regime to salvage their pride from the rampant and systematic obliteration of Tibetan Buddhism that they have carried out and are still conducting in Tibet.  

The Chinese officials associate Buddhist monasteries with pro-independence activism. Tibetan spiritual leaders encounter great difficulty in re-establishing historical monasteries due to lack of funds, general limitations on monastic education, and government's denials of permission to build and operate religious institutions, which officials in some areas regard as a drain on local resources.  

There has been renewed emphasis on the patriotic re-education campaign, the resumption of the strike hard campaign, the establishment of re-education-through-labour camp, and the systematic obliteration of the ancient Tibetan practice of religious belief by the Democratic Management Committees to curtail and control religious activities in Tibet.

Under such inherent fear of inter linkage between Tibetan Buddhism and the Dalai Lama with that of Tibetan nationalism, Beijing has intensified anti-Dalai Lama campaign over the years through various restrictive measures such as “Patriotic re-education” campaign in Tibet's religious institutions. The “Patriotic re-education” campaign launched since 1996 requires the clergies to study communist ideology, and to denounce the Dalai Lama; imposes restriction on the strength of monk community and generally intrudes into the traditional religious studies and practice through constant surveillance over curriculum and activities. Also under this campaign, “work teams” are sent into monasteries and nunneries to “re-educate” monks and nuns. Since the initiation of the program, more than 12,000 monks and nuns have been expelled for disagreeing with the Chinese version of history and for refusing to denounce the Dalai Lama.  

The Chinese authorities have set up the government-controlled Democratic Management Committee (DMC) to control the monastic affairs and to crackdown on dissidents. Tens of thousands of religious practitioners have been expelled for refusing to denounce the Dalai Lama and their political beliefs. China holds secular control of monasteries by imposing quotas on the number of monks and nuns permitted, placing an 18-year age limit on the admission of novices, and the regular detention and torture of practitioners. Elderly monks and nuns are often forced into an early retirement.  

An independent survey conducted by Melvyn C. Goldstein and his associates in TAR pointed out that “Chinese government policy considers Buddhism in a negative light and constraints it in various ways. For example, limit on the number of existing monasteries or nunneries are enforced and there are prohibitions against the creation of new religious institutions. At the same time, the government also began to enforce more strictly a rule that prohibits males under 18 years of age from becoming monks.”

Amnesty International in its 2004 report on Tibet affirmed that ‘tens of thousands of people continued to be detained or imprisoned in violation of their rights to freedom of expression and association, and were at serious risk of torture or ill-treatment. Thousands of people were sentenced to death or executed. Freedom of religion, association and expression continued to be severely restricted. Over 100 Tibetans, mainly Buddhist monks and nuns, continued to be imprisoned in violation of their fundamental human rights, and arbitrary arrests and unfair trials continued'.   

Several instances can be cited which demonstrates the complete absence of religious freedom in Tibet. For example, in August 2001 thousands of Tibetan nuns, monks and Chinese Buddhist scholars were forced to leave the monastic institute and nunnery of Serthar in Kardze which was followed by the consequent destruction of the monastic university. As recently as May 2003, conflicts over attempts to rebuild some structures resulted in arrests and the enforced closure of the Institute to outsiders. After the abbot Khenpo Jigme Phuntsok's death in January 2004, Sichuan authorities forbade the province's Buddhist monks from attending his funeral; nonetheless, tens of thousands of Tibetan and Han monks defied the order to pay their respects.  

The XVII Karmapa Lama, Ugyen Trinley Dorjee, head of Karma Kagyu sect of Tibetan Buddhism and one of the most influential religious figures in Tibetan Buddhism, remained in exile following his 1999 flight to India. The Karmapa Lama stated that he fled because of the Government's control on his movements and its refusal either to allow him to go to India to be trained by his spiritual mentors or to allow his teachers to come to him. Even now, conditions remain tense at the Tsurphu Monastery, the seat of the Karmapa Lama, with a permanent police presence and intensified restrictions on monks.  
Although the White Paper affirms that the transmission lineage system of reincarnation of great lamas have been respected by the state and governments at all levels in Tibet, but in practice, the Government routinely maintained control over the process of finding and educating reincarnate lamas. The most pertinent example in the case being the Panchen Lama, Tibet's second most prominent religious figure. The Chinese Government continues to force Tibetans to accept Gyaltsen Norbu, the boy it selected in 1995, as the Panchen Lama's 11th reincarnation. The Chinese Government continues to refuse access to Gendun Choekyi Nyima, the boy recognized by H.H. the Dalai Lama in 1995, as the 11th Panchen Lama, and his whereabouts and well being are still unknown. Chinese officials have claimed that the boy is under government supervision, at an undisclosed location, for his own protection and attends classes as a "normal schoolboy." All requests from the international community for access to the real Panchen Lama to confirm his well-being have been refused. While the overwhelming majority of Tibetan Buddhists recognized the boy identified by the Dalai Lama as the Panchen Lama, Tibetan monks claimed that they were forced to sign statements pledging allegiance to the Government selected boy. The Communist Party also urged its members to support the "official" Panchen Lama. Gyaltsen Norbu made his third highly orchestrated visit to Tibetan areas in summer 2004, and his public appearances were marked by a heavy security presence.  

Similarly, the Government-approved reincarnation of the VIIth Reting Rinpoche was not accepted by most of the monks at Reting Monastery, as the selection procedure did not conform to the traditional Tibetan system of recognition. The Pawo Rinpoche, who was recognized by the Karmapa Lama in 1994, lives under strict government supervision at Nenang Monastery. In 2001, NGOs reported that he was denied access to his religious tutors and required to attend a regular Chinese school.  

The last few years have seen the persecution of several popular religious leaders in Tibet by Chinese authorities for their political loyalty to H.H. the Dalai Lama, and religious and social activism. For instance, Tulku Tenzin Delek and Bangri Tsamtrul Rinpoche are currently serving life term after their suspended death sentences were commuted to life imprisonment; Chadrel Rinpoche is still under house arrest after release from prison; and Geshe Sonam Phuntsok is reportedly in severe health condition after his release following a five-year prison term.  

In addition, the custodial death of Nyima Dakpa (a monk who carried a nine-year prison sentence); arrest of monks from Sichuan Province for performing prayer ceremonies for the Dalai Lama; restrictive measures imposed on traditional Tibetan festivals and cultural events; eviction of hermits from Chaksam Chori hermitage (Lhoka Gongkar and Chushul counties); the expulsion of monks and nuns from the institute and nunnery of Serthar in Kardze; the ban on the celebrations of the Dalai Lama's birthday and closure of the Ngaba Kirti Monastic School in July 2003 are some of the recent examples confirming the continued Chinese repression of the religious freedom in Tibet.  

Annigje Buwalda stated that there is “persistent pattern of the use of arrests, beatings, torture and imprisonment of religious minorities in the people's Republic of China. Rather than upholding its claim of religious tolerance and freedom contained within its constitution, China has been acting contrary to its obligation to uphold the freedoms of thought, conscience, religion, and belief enshrined within U. N. Declarations and Covenants.” [16]  

A sort of Second Cultural Revolution or Cultural Genocide has been committed to crush the culture and religion of Tibet. Arrest, savage beatings, torture of monks and rape of nuns in custody, and executions are routine. Moreover, there is strict official regulation of religious life, which includes daily political re-education of monks and nuns (conducted by States Security or Military Units permanently stationed at Monasteries or nunneries, a rigorous and intrusive supervision of the activities of all important lamas and monastic heads.  

Tibetan people continue to face high and varying degree of religious repression and persecution at the hands of the Chinese State. The religious repression in Tibet is so brutal that the very future and essence of the Tibetan monastic tradition is now in question. Tibetans are trapped in the contradictions between the promises of ‘freedom of religious belief' in the Chinese Constitution and applications of the atheist doctrine by the Communist Party.