Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

JOINT COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 9 Apr 2008

Situation in Tibet: Discussion with Tibet Support Group - Ireland.

I welcome Mr. Anthony O'Brien, Mr. Neil Steedman and Ms Tsering Lhamo Gawathsang and look forward to their presentation. The subject of the discussion is the ongoing and very worrying situation in Tibet. As we are all aware, the situation in Tibet has become an issue of major international concern in recent weeks. There have been extensive reports of protests and demonstrations by the Tibetan people in the capital, Lhasa, and other locations in Tibet in defence of their human rights and religious freedom. What has worried the international community particularly is the response of the Chinese authorities to these events. Many reports from Tibet have told of severe human rights abuses by the Chinese military authorities in their attempts to crack down on the protesters and end the demonstrations. There have been reports of extensive loss of life, while access by journalists to the region has been curtailed.

From his place of exile in India, the Dalai Lama has spoken of his deep concern at events unfolding in Tibet. He has said he is deeply saddened and concerned by the use of arms to suppress the peaceful demonstration of the Tibetan people's aspirations that has resulted in unrest in Tibet causing many deaths, casualties, detentions and injuries. He has said that because of his moral obligation and responsibility to the Tibetan people he has repeatedly asked the Chinese leadership to immediately stop its suppression in all parts of Tibet and withdraw its armed police and troops. He has said that if this brings results, he will advise Tibetans to stop all current protests. In addition, Ms Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the US House of Representatives, who met the Dalai Lama on 21 March introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives on 3 April which, among other things, called on China to cease the crackdown, release prisoners, provide unrestricted access for journalists and independent international monitors to Tibet. It also called on the Chinese authorities to engage in dialogue with the Dalai Lama. In the broader international community there have been many calls for restraint by the Chinese authorities. There have also been calls for a boycott of the Olympic Games to be held in Beijing in August.

It is against this background of growing international concern about what is happening in Tibet and especially about reports of human rights violations that the committee has invited members of the Tibet Support Group - Ireland to make a presentation to it today. Before I ask them to make their presentation, I draw attention to the fact that while Members of both Houses of the Oireachtas enjoy absolute privilege in respect of utterances made in committee, witnesses do not enjoy such privilege. Accordingly, caution should be exercised, particularly with regard to references of a personal nature.

I invite Mr. Steedman to address the committee.

Mr. Neil Steedman

On behalf of all the members of the Tibet Support Group - Ireland, I thank the Chairman and members of the committee for giving us the opportunity to brief them on the situation that prevails throughout Tibet, particularly in the past four weeks.

Our written submission comprises ten documents. The first is a briefing document on the current situation in Tibet, prepared by Tibet Support Group - lreland, the main points of which will be included in my verbal presentation. Also included is the report of the International Campaign for Tibet of 3 April which provides more details about specific demonstrations up to that date. Other documents include: the resolution from Ms Nancy Pelosi in the House of Representatives; a statement issued by the Dalai Lama to all Tibetans on 6 April; an appeal from the Dalai Lama to all Chinese people worldwide, issued on 28 March; and a document entitled, Turning Point for Tibet, by Lodi Gyaltsen Gyari, published on 3 April. Lodi Gyari is the Dalai Lama's special envoy and leads the dialogue between the Tibetan Government in exile and the Chinese Government.

The written submission also includes an excellent article entitled, The Dalai Lama's Plot to Split and Humiliate China, by Gabriel Lafitte. As members may gather, the title is very much tongue in cheek. The article outlines what is happening and what is likely to happen in terms of the imprisonment, torture and extraction of so-called confessions by Tibetans. We have also included an interesting article entitled, A Chinese View from Taiwan, by Ruan Ming who was a member of the Chinese Communist Party and an adviser to Hu Yaobang. He is now living in Taiwan where he is an adviser to the President. He puts forward his own views as to what has instigated the current difficulties in Tibet.

We have also supplied members with a press release issued by the International Commission of Jurists on 18 March which called for an international investigation. The final document is entitled, Tracking the Steel Dragon: How China's Economic Policies and the Railway are Transforming Tibet, a major report recently published by the International Campaign for Tibet. As it is 260 pages long, I doubt if members have had a chance to read it in full. However, if they find time between now and the next break, I urge them to do so. It provides an in-depth and clear analysis of the situation in Tibet. For now, if they could read the four-page executive summary and the seven pages of recommendations, that would be fine.

After my verbal presentation, any questions that members may have can, I hope, be answered by one of us. I will answer political questions; economic and environmental questions will be answered by my colleague, Mr. Anthony O'Brien, while questions about the current realities of life in Tibet will be answered by committee member Tsering Lhamo Gawathsang who was born in Tibet and escaped over the Himalayas at the age of 17 years, as approximately 2,000 Tibetans do annually, a journey which takes about one month. In her group 30 left Lhasa but only eight survived to reach Nepal.

First, given his announcement last Wednesday, we take the opportunity to again express publicly our appreciation of the Taoiseach's support, not only for his decision to meet the Dalai Lama when he last visited Dublin but also for his support of the Tibetan people's right to self-determination which he publicly expressed while in opposition and also, to our pleasant surprise, as Taoiseach on a visit to Beijing. We wish the incoming Taoiseach, Deputy Brian Cowen, well and hope he will maintain Ireland's support for the Tibetan people's right to self-determination that Frank Aiken so strongly voiced at the United Nations from 1959 to 1965 and that the Taoiseach has reiterated in recent years.

The events in Tibet in the past four weeks have not come out of the blue, but are the result of nearly 60 years of occupation, economic marginalisation, human rights abuses and oppression of the culture, language and religion of the Tibetan people by China. This merciless repression, the term used by the Chinese, has been intensified in the past two to three years by an even more hardline policy imposed by Politburo member, Wang Lequan; Li Dezhu, head of the ethnic affairs commission, and Zhang Qingli, the current party secretary of what the Chinese call the Tibet Autonomous Region, TAR. The opening of the Golmud to Lhasa railway in July 2006 also intensified the plantation of Chinese settlers and the economic marginalisation of Tibetans.

The main causes of recent events are the 60 years of repression, hard-line policies and the railway, not the forthcoming Olympic Games in Beijing. The latter is, however, an influencing factor, not only for Tibetans who obviously know that the eyes of the world will be focused on China's response to any demonstrations in Tibet against Chinese misrule but also for the Chinese Government, for which the Olympic Games may provide convenient cover for a policy of provoking such a situation in a bid to solve the Tibetan problem. The document, A Chinese View from Taiwan, to which I referred, is by a former CCP official, Ruan Ming, who claims that the CCP has carefully staged the incidents in Tibet in order to force the Dalai Lama to resign and to justify future repression of the Tibetans.

Compared with the situation prior to the 1988 protests, conditions in Tibet are now even worse. Then the demonstrations were mainly confined to the Lhasa region but today demonstrations are taking place throughout all three provinces of Tibet, as well as in the Chinese provincial capitals of Chengdu and Lanzhou and even Beijing. Then the demonstrations were mainly confined to the Lhasa region but today they take place throughout all three provinces of Tibet - U-Tsang, Kham and Amdo - as well as in Chinese provincial capitals Chengdu and Lanzhou, and even one in Beijing. The Tibetan government-in-exile's current figure for confirmed dead is 140, while the Tibetan community in exile estimate, from telephone calls from all over Tibet, that it is at least 300 to 400. Some estimates rise towards the thousands. It is difficult to determine. The Chinese continue to make house-to-house searches and thousands of Tibetans have been arrested and imprisoned. China has moved tens of thousands of additional troops to lock down all Tibetan areas, all journalists and tourists have been expelled, many places have had their water and food supplies cut off and people are being shot if they leave the house.

Despite all this, protests are continuing throughout Tibet. Last Thursday, for example, at least eight Tibetans were killed in Tongkor near Kardze in Kham, which is now part of western Sichuan. Armed police fired on a crowd of several hundred monks and lay people after an incident in which monks were detained when they objected to an intensified "patriotic re-education" programme, including photographs of the Dalai Lama being thrown to the ground and the monks being ordered to denounce the Dalai Lama, which is a typical Chinese action.

More recently, just two days ago, in Tawu, in Kardze, Sichuan province, due to the protest by the nuns from Ratroe Nunnery on 2 April, armed forces continued to impose tight restrictions at the nunnery and, in addition, also announced that patriotic re-education classes would be started soon.

I have a message from Tibet that came out today and if Mr. O'Brien can find it, I will add it in later.

What can and should the Irish Government and this committee do in response? Silences of complicity, half-hearted declarations and other capitulations to commercial, diplomatic or sporting interests, at the expense of fundamental principles of human rights, including the Tibetan people's right to self-determination, would be grossly inadequate and bring a loss of democratic credibility to Ireland.

The Irish Government and its EU partners should recognise that the EU/China dialogue has failed miserably. I draw the committee's attention to one comment from the statement by Lodi Gyari, the Dalai Lama's chief representative in talks with Beijing. In this case, he is speaking of the talks between the Tibetans and the Chinese:

It is imperative that those governments advising both sides to continue with the dialogue process ask the Chinese leadership to provide assurance of real and concrete progress in the dialogue process.

The same should apply to the EU's dialogue process with China. Real, tangible targets should be set and China should be held accountable if they are not met. This EU/China dialogue has been going on since 1997 and the situation now is far worse than it was then.

This committee should take the US Speaker of the House of Representatives, Ms Nancy Pelosi's, proposed House Resolution 1077 as a model and immediately bring similar motions to the Dáil and Seanad. I was not aware that Senator Norris has already tabled a motion and I know nothing about it, but I welcome his move. In particular, as Ms Nancy Pelosi's resolution does, this committee and the Irish Government should call on the EU to seek to establish an office in Lhasa to monitor political, economic and cultural developments in Tibet and to provide consular protection and citizen services in emergencies, and not to permit China to open any further diplomatic missions within the EU unless such an office is established in Lhasa. I realise it will be much more difficult to get 27 countries to agree to that than one country in the case of the US, but difficulty should not dampen the efforts to try to achieve it.

The Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, whoever he or she may be in four weeks' time, should announce that he or she will not attend the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympic Games in August next. A representative of the Irish Government, or Member of Dáil Éireann or Seanad Éireann, should not attend the opening ceremony. Might I point out here that we, the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan community are not asking for a boycott of the Olympic Games. What we are asking for is a boycott of the political propaganda event that the Chinese are making of the opening ceremony. The committee may have questions about that later.

All Members of the Dáil and Seanad should urge members of the Olympic Council of Ireland and of the Irish Olympic team - the individual athletes - not to participate in the opening ceremony. By all means, let them go and have their games, let them take part, let them win medals and stand up on the podium if they win, but they should not take part in such a propaganda exercise.

In Ireland, Government funding is withdrawn from any golf club that chooses not to accept women as full members. At the very minimum, Government funding should be withdrawn from the Olympic Council of Ireland if it chooses to take part in such a propaganda exercise that the Chinese have made it. I have seen several people on the television stating sport and politics should not mix. It is the Chinese who are making this Olympic Games into a political event for very deliberate reasons.

The Irish Government should consider how it can help Tibetan people directly - those within Tibet, those living as refugees in India and Nepal, or those living in Ireland. There is now a community of approximately 25 Tibetans living in Ireland.

We thank the committee again for its invitation to make this submission and now invite members questions, which, I hope, one or other of us can answer.

I thank Mr. Steedman for that summarised introduction.

I thank Mr. Steedman for his contribution. We, in Fine Gael, oppose the position China has taken in Tibet and how in recent years the Han Chinese appear to go into Lhasa and take over businesses and positions of power. My understanding is that the population of Lhasa has greatly increased in recent years, particularly since the opening of the railway in 2006. What is the background of the Chinese coming into Lhasa? Are they coming from one region in China? Is it an orchestrated settlement campaign or are there economic opportunities that individual Chinese people see and seek to exploit?

We have always been conscious of Tibet and it hits the television screen to a greater extent at various times. Has it been relatively calm prior to 2006? Would I be right in my understanding that people in Tibet saw the establishment of that railway link as something that would benefit them, that it was something they welcomed prior to 2006 but now they are not so sure? Was there unrest prior to that over the past decade?

On the specific points Mr. Steedman raised, one of the actions we called for in recent weeks is that the Government extend an invitation to the Dalai Lama to visit Ireland when he comes to London. I understand he will come to London in May. The Minister informed me that it is not the role of the Government. It does what it can but it will not invite someone who it sees effectively as the head of a religious order. Maybe this committee should extend a invitation to the Dalai Lama to address the committee. I do not know whether that is practical in the timeframe or if it is possible, but it is something we should do given that the Government cannot do it. The Dalai Lama was in Derry in the recent past and a representative of the Government met him on that occasion. I would like Mr. Steedman's views on the practicality of that.

Of the five issues Mr. Steedman raised, the first is reasonable and I support that. I have an open mind on the second issue. No Irish Government representative has been invited to the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games to date. I note that some Governments have been invited but I was informed by the Minister in the Dáil this morning that no political representative of the Irish Government has been invited.

I have an open mind on this issue and I also refer to the fourth action in this context. I oppose the notion of the athletes boycotting the opening ceremony. Sport and politics should be separate. Meaningless gestures involving athletes taking the hard decisions are an easy cop out. It might be populist but it is not the road to go down. Reference is made in the documents to the loss of democratic credibility by Ireland. Notwithstanding that, I do not favour embroiling sportspeople in this issue.

The fifth paragraph refers to the Government helping Tibetans in Nepal and refuges in Indian and Tibet. I am very supportive of that and, hopefully, Irish Aid can examine how it can assist. The organisation provides funding to the region generally, although none of the countries is a programme country. However, it could improve on this.

Mr. Steedman mentioned the motion tabled in the US House of Representatives. The EU should set up an office in Lhasa but it might not be desirable or practical to prevent China from extending its diplomatic representation in the EU. Each member state has a sovereign decision to make on its foreign policy and, therefore, this would not be achievable and would not benefit anyone. China has many faults but it might have moved somewhat in recent times, albeit slowly. That may not be the case with regard to Tibet.

Mr. Steedman stated in his submission that things are worse than before. While I appreciate that, I think back to Tiananmen Square. I do not say the Chinese are great because they did not turn the tanks on the public but the country has a population of 1.4 billion, three times larger than the EU. It uses half the world's cement. This will be a long, slow process. One of the documents refers to the environmental impact of development decisions and states the EU should act with China in addressing environmental issues. There is no point in us turning off a light bulb in Ireland if half the world's cement is being used in an environmentally unfriendly manner.

I am also conscious of China's involvement in Africa. European countries have plundered the continent through the centuries and they have provided token aid in recent years. I would not like the Chinese to do the same. They are extracting minerals from Africa currently and one cannot oppose the concept of trade provided that it happens on a fair basis.

Reference was made to "silence of complicity" by Mr. Steedman. Exports from Ireland to China in 2006 amounted to €800 million and last year it increased to €1.2 billion. This trade primarily involved computers and chemicals. Ireland imported more than €4 billion worth of Chinese goods in 2006 and this increased to almost €5 billion in 2007. How come in the five actions Mr. Steedman proposes we should take, notwithstanding his opening statement, he does not say we should examine the trade implications, which is our strongest weapon if we are serious? I do not say we should but if we are serous about this, is this not something we should consider?

Several trade missions to China have been undertaken since the late 1990s headed by the President, the Minister for Finance and the Taoiseach. I read all the speeches they made and only one contained a fleeting reference to human rights issues, as they sought to increase trade between both countries. Does Mr. Steedman have a view on that? Are we moral cowards behind it all? How is it that in the five measures he proposes he does not refer to reducing trade? I wish to put the following question to everyone present. Do we have Chinese goods in our homes? I hazard a guess that I have some and I am sure Senator Norris might have an odd--

Not a Chinese thing, not a newspaper owned by Rupert Murdoch and, following the Deputy's contribution, not a leaflet from Fine Gael either.

We know the Senator's letterbox is bolted up so we do not bother.

Other members are waiting.

I am finished. It is not often I consume the time of the committee, unlike other members. When I get into a flow, please refrain from interrupting. I thank the Chairman.

I thank Mr. Steedman for his presentation. We are all concerned about human rights in China and Tibet. The Government has raised the issue on many occasions both in Dublin and Beijing. I am particularly concerned about the loss of life and people being imprisoned in Tibet. Access to Tibet for independent observers and the media should be easier in order that accurate information about what is happening can be gathered. I would like violence to end in the country and I have an open mind on whether Ireland or other countries should boycott the Olympic Games. Dialogue is fundamentally important and I would like to see dialogue between China and Tibet. For example, only when dialogue took place was progress made in Northern Ireland. Perhaps that is the way forward. I agree with Deputy Timmins that when the Dalai Lama visits Britain, we should invite him to appear before the committee.

The Labour Party is very concerned about recent events in Tibet. We had hoped the awarding of the Olympic Games to Beijing would have led to improvements in human rights in both China and Tibet, with particular reference to mass public executions, press restrictions, access to information and freedom in Tibet. Unfortunately, the awarding of the Olympic Games has not led to the benefits envisaged in the human rights area.

The motion tabled by Senator Norris and my party seeks an opening of dialogue between the Tibetan people and the Chinese authorities. Tibetans seek autonomy for their region, not independence. Within China, limited autonomy exists in a number of regions. China has special administrative zones such as Hong Kong and Macau. The Tibetans seek an autonomous region and the Dalai Lama has stated this is not about independence. The Chinese are engaged in a campaign of misinformation stating the goal is independence.

As Deputy O'Hanlon said, dialogue is the way forward and we have learned that from our own experiences over the past number of decades. The motion, if passed by the committee and the Houses, will demonstrate there is a sense that the Chinese need to act in this regard. We do not call for a boycott of the Olympic Games, as that would be in nobody's interest. However, dialogue is the way forward and we are pushing for the motion to be passed.

I welcome the delegation from the Tibet solidarity group, whose work I know and value very much. I am sorry Deputy Timmins has left because it was in part a spectacular own goal by Fine Gael to suggest that the Tibetan people welcomed the railway. I very much doubt it but perhaps we will hear that some aspects may be welcomed.

I think Deputy Timmins stated it was welcomed initially and subsequently the situation seems to have changed.

The Chairman is most helpful and I thank him for his gracious assistance.

I am not really asleep here.

Is the Chairman applying for entry to Fine Gael?

I am making notes on the Senator's wonderful contribution.

I thank the Chairman.

I would like to digest it.

I would be surprised if it were welcomed, but I suppose it is possible. There is no doubt that the Chinese have driven an economic burst in Tibet, but it has benefitted the Chinese. Let us remember there has been a cultural genocide in Tibet. There are approximately 6 million Tibetans and approximately 8 million Han Chinese and they are being smothered. This is the serious political issue. If we examine the language employed by the Chinese authorities, we see it is not exactly peaceful. I heard them state they will crush the separatists and smash the revolt. Today at lunchtime on the radio, the puppet governor of Tibet spoke about extreme measures, total repression and stated that people would be severely punished for protesting.

This makes an important point about politicisation. It is a shameful thing and a terrible reproach to all of us that the Olympic torch should be driven through Tibet. To do so is to drive a stake through the heart of democracy in flagrant defiance of the human rights of the people in Tibet. I visited China many times and I admire the Chinese people. I admire their culture and history. They are an ancient noble people. I have also been to Tibet and I have seen the results of the policy. It is arrogance and a most appalling, patronising attitude on the part of the Chinese to state that they are required to drag the Tibetans into the 21st century.

With regard to the political issue, I welcome the wise words of Deputy O'Hanlon. He retained an open mind about the question of the boycott because he understood the nature of the boycott as explained so excellently by Mr. Steedman. I will return to this matter. I greatly welcome his suggestion that the Dalai Lama should be invited to this committee. This is a real breath of fresh air and innovative thinking. I strongly support this and suggest we act upon it this very day and that the committee write to the Minister for Foreign Affairs expressing this view.

The briefing we received is mixed. At the beginning, the Department of Foreign Affairs acknowledges that China occupied Tibet. One occupies something which is separate. One occupies another country. It mentions the annexation of Tibet. One does not annex a province. One annexes an independent country. There has been a slide and regrettably we appear to have acceded to the notion that Tibet is part of China although we clearly know morally it is not. It is perfectly separate.

In James Joyce's Ulysses, a discussion takes place on the nature of nationality and what comes up are language, religion and geographical separation. Tibet qualifies under every single heading. I can state this because I have been to Tibet as well as to China. Cement was mentioned. The first things one sees when one enters Lhasa is the most enormous cement factory I have seen in my life. It is not there for the benefit of the Tibetans. It is so vast it has its own housing estate, electricity and railway. It is an enormous city. I was in another city, a traditional Tibetan city the name of which I forget. It was encased in a Chinese military establishment. It becomes a metaphor for the experience of Tibetans. It is in a type of sarcophagus, like the one encasing the nuclear station which exploded in Russia.

It is a terrible situation and it is a political situation. The games are political. Perhaps in an ideal world they would be separate but they are not. We know this perfectly well and we are blinding ourselves if we think they are not. Will somebody tell me why the leaders of so many countries propose to turn up there? They are people who would not know the difference between jujitsu and an egg and spoon race. They are not going there because they are admirers of athletic prowess. They are going because they can do side deals. Follow the money, honey. This is what it is all about. We know this perfectly well. It is the same reason the committee we established in the Seanad to inquire into rendition, which we now know did take place through Shannon Airport, collapsed. Follow the money, honey. Deputy Timmins was quite right on this aspect of it.

I hope the athletes will absent themselves. I return to James Joyce, who stated at the Literary and Historical Society in UCD in 1903 that absence is the highest form of presence. In this case, this is exactly what would happen. By absenting themselves, the athletes would be morally present to make a dignified non-violent protest against the occupation, dismemberment and cultural genocide taking place in Tibet.

I sadly welcome the clarification on Ireland's position. We seem to have slid into accepting the one China policy. At least it is now out in the open because I wondered. In 1959, Frank Aiken, a remarkable man who was a Fianna Fáil Minister for Foreign Affairs, ensured Ireland was one of two countries which supported the human rights of the Tibetans when they were, as the Department of Foreign Affairs briefing note states, invaded, occupied and annexed. David Andrews, whom I have the honour of knowing well and with whom I worked, has taken a similar principled position.

I was a member of this committee when Michael O'Kennedy asked how the policy had changed without recourse to the Irish Parliament or this committee. Perhaps the Chinese Ambassador changed it. He wrote in The Irish Times informing the Irish people what our policy was. Again, it is the money. The athletes could boycott the opening ceremony and could still compete. One understands - we are all human - people who have trained hard, are going for gold and want to represent and honour their countries. They will be competing with athletes from all over the world and that should go ahead. However, let us make this small protest.

I do not mean to denigrate but after all, it is only a game. In Tibet, we are talking of death, murder and what seriously amounts to genocide. I hope we will encourage athletes to make this dignified protest. It does not conflict with any of the obligations of the athletes towards their hosts. In the circumstances which confront us, we can do no less.

References were made to motions tabled in my name on Tibet. I have had the honour of meeting the Dalai Lama on several occasions, in this country, Scotland and Dharamsala. What moved me so immensely on the last occasion I met him, which was in India, was that he told me he was praying not only for the welfare of his own people but for the spiritual and moral welfare of the Chinese who were damaging themselves by their barbaric actions inside Tibet. It is well worth reading his reasoned and passionate appeal to people. It is a gentle appeal. When he states he is moved to tears when he thinks about the tragedy in Tibet many people in this country also feel the same.

To her eternal credit, Mary Robinson also met the Dalai Lama and it was a skilful piece of work by a wonderful woman who recognised what she used to describe to me as the margin of appreciation. She was the first person of that standing in our society and she opened the way. I honour President Mary McAleese for meeting him as well and the Minister of State, Deputy Michael Kitt. I hope a strong position will be taken on Tibet to defend human rights.

I look forward to our own mild motion which simply asks the Government to do what it may well be doing already, that is, to encourage the Chinese to open dialogue with the Dalai Lama. I am sure there will be other suggestions from other people and I hope we can pass some of these motions unanimously.

I would like those who believe sport and politics should be kept separate to remember that they are not. Perhaps they should be but they are not. This situation was calculated to be exploited by the Chinese. Thank God for the courage of the reporters of Reporters San Frontières who interrupted the ceremony and hung a poster. Thank God for journalists with the courage and decency which statesmen and stateswomen have not had so far.

We should follow in that tradition and recognise that sport and politics on this occasion are inextricably mixed and we would be mad, cowardly and foolish to pass up the opportunity to act in this modest, moderate way and to request our athletes to absent themselves and allow the Irish flag to pass with dignity unaccompanied by our athletes as an indication of our commitment to democracy. That will register with China because very little else we do will. It is little to ask in the face of what is going on in Tibet.

I support the calls for the Dalai Lama to appear before the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs. If he comes here, we should ask that he is met by the highest officeholder in the land, the Taoiseach, and afforded every courtesy. The leader of any country which suffers as Tibet does should be met with courtesy and dignity by the leaders of our country. The people would expect nothing less. Yesterday the President of the European Parliament addressed the Seanad. The Senators among us might suggest that the Dalai Lama also do so.

In ancient Greece their athletes came together in times of war but this is akin to the 1936 Berlin Olympics. It will be used by China as a publicity exercise. We should make a statement in support of Tibetans who have died and acknowledge the Tibetans' right to self-determination because, as a country, we know what that experience is like.

In terms of a boycott by athletes, I feel for the athletes because they are in the middle of what is turning into a political storm. The 1936 Olympics, however, was precursor to worse things. Perhaps some of my learned colleagues will explain this to me, but I read reports that some Olympic councils have told their athletes not to speak out against China, including New Zealand and possibly Britain. If they have done so, it beggars belief that democratic countries have told their athletes not to voice their opinions, if they have an opinion. These are athletes, they are not politicians. It is our job to speak out. If the Irish flag was not accompanied as it moved through the Olympic stadium, it would be a powerful message that we do not support China's actions.

I also support Resolution 1077 by the US House of Representatives which I believe is going through at the moment and other resolutions. We need dialogue to take place and we need the relevant authorities in the EU to set targets. Dialogue has been going on for 11 years and we need targets along with that. I will add to Senator Norris's motion later.

I thank Mr. Steedman and his delegation not only for the excellent presentation but for providing us with a copy of it in advance and for all the ancillary documentation. It allowed the committee to prepare in a manner which is not always possible. I support the call made by my colleague, Deputy Timmins, that the Dalai Lama be invited to appear before the committee. The Chairman might raise the following matter with his colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs. As I understand, the Irish position is that the Government recognises the Dalai Lama as a renowned world spiritual leader but that it does not recognise him as a political leader. Consequently, if he appears before the committee, which I would like him to do, are we to exchange views on spirituality or are we permitted to ask political questions? The Chairman might clarify that.

The Government's position seems to be quite clear. Mr. Steedman suggested that the Government should support the right of the Tibetan people to self-determination. I understand the Dalai Lama is prepared to accept the sovereignty of China even though he was appointed head of state of Tibet in the 1950s and is now in exile. Is Mr. Steedman saying the same thing in different ways, that is, that the sovereignty of China would be recognised, that this is the view of the Tibetan movement under the Dalai Lama and that the demand is not so much for self-determination but for the farthest extent of autonomy available? In looking for autonomy, is it under the umbrella of one China, two systems or is there some other formulation? I presume there is no contradiction between the position Mr. Steedman stated today and that of the Dalai Lama as briefed to us.

I support the call for dialogue. It is the essence of success in any situation and we should open that dialogue. I am sorry that the situation has worsened. I have watched television programmes and have seen the human rights abuses, including torture, detention and arrests. I could not watch such programmes without speaking out. It is very important that we invite the Dalai Lama as it would be a good occasion for us to express our views. I am not sure we should boycott the Olympic Games. We should not mix sport and politics.

A Senator

It is just the opening ceremony.

That may be so but I do not believe we should mix sport and politics. If we can get around this without doing that, we should do so. I support the motion to enter into dialogue as soon as possible.

I call Senator Chris Andrews.

I thank Mr. Steedman and his delegation for the very concise, clear and balanced contribution. I am happy to be here in whatever capacity.

The Deputy would be very welcome in the Seanad.

Any House will do.

The Deputy looked so senatorial.

Thank you. I thank the delegation for its presentation. It is important we receive clarification on a number of issues, as there is confusion in regard to the boycott. Tibet Support Group-Ireland is looking not for a boycott of the Olympic Games but an abstention from the opening ceremony by officialdom and the Olympic Council of Ireland. This course of action, if taken, would not impact on the athletes who do not decide where the Olympic Games are held. We would not get agreement in this regard. Therefore, we must be practical.

Senator Daly asked if athletes were speaking out on this issue. Athletes have spoken out about it. Team Darfur, a group of international athletes competing in the Olympic Games, has spoken out. The setting up of this organisation indicates athletes are not happy about what is happening. Perhaps they should issue a clear statement expressing their dissatisfaction at China's actions not alone in Tibet but in Darfur.

As Senator Norris stated, sports and politics are closely linked, although this should not be the case. The reality, however, is that China has politicised the Olympic Games.

Bringing the torch through Lhasa was a political act. It is similar to members of the Orange Order trying to walk through Catholic areas and communities in Northern Ireland.

If that is not a political or provocative act, I do not know what is. Given the similarities between Irish and Tibetan history, it would be extremely disappointing from an Irish point of view if we did not express our dissatisfaction. The Chinese have clearly politicised the Olympic Games by bringing the torch through various places and asking ambassadors to carry it through London. That was a political act.

It is a red herring that politics and sports are not linked; it is a notion that does not stand up to serious scrutiny. In 1908 Ireland became the first country to boycott the Olympics Games which were held in London. For this reason we should not get up on our high horse and say we are above boycotting the games. The proposed boycott would be a specific and targeted action. It would demonstrate Ireland's disapproval of what was happening in Tibet. The Government and the Olympic Council of Ireland should not attend the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games unless genuine and meaningful negotiations take place.

I thank the delegation for attending. I will continue to support its reasonable request for support. I wish it well.

I am sorry I missed Senator Norris's initial contribution. Lest there be any misunderstanding about my question on the railway, as I understand it, the Chinese authorities, prior to the construction of the railway line, created the impression that the Tibetans would welcome it. I am seeking to establish what was the view of the Tibetans prior to construction of the railway line and what did they believe it would achieve.

I ask Mr. Steedman to bear in mind that we cannot stay here all night. Another meeting is due to be held in this room at 5 p.m.

Mr. Neil Steedman

I thank members for their comments, each of which is most welcome and deeply appreciated. I have found the information I was missing during my initial presentation. I would like to read for members a message I received yesterday from a Tibetan following a telephone call from his family:

They express extreme concerns about many neighbours and other Tibetans who are being rounded up with no explanation. There are constant raids and people disappearing every day for no apparent reason. Some have used the term "second cultural revolution" to describe what is to come in Tibet. That is certainly the fear of the Tibetans in Tibet. People are apparently cleaning their houses to rid of or hide any pictures of His Holiness. People in Lhasa are fearing the worst possible consequences but their hopes are not diminished.

According to my notes, Deputies and Senators have made at least 34 points and I will try to cover all of them as best I can. I thank members, in particular Deputy Timmins, for their references to Irish Aid. Many of them spoke about the possibility of inviting His Holiness to Ireland.

I will clarify a matter for Deputy Timmins. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, explained during our meeting with him that, according to protocol, the Irish Government could not invite a religious leader, be it the Dalai Lama or the Pope, to visit Ireland. However, he went on to say that if His Holiness were to come to Ireland, the Government would be more than happy to meet him and make all the necessary arrangements in that regard, namely, security and so on. I understood this to mean that if we could get the Dalai Lama to come to Ireland, the Government would be happy to meet him. Deputy Noonan asked the pertinent question that if the Dalai Lama did visit Ireland, would one have to limit oneself to asking him religious questions. If the Government is happy to meet him, I doubt they will have a half hour debate on Buddhist philosophy and enlightenment. Mr. O'Brien will reply to the questions on the Olympic Games.

We understood Deputy Timmins's question was about the railway and the short answer is no; the Chinese were wrong. The vast majority of Tibetans were fearful of it. Some may have looked on it as an advantage but the vast majority were and still are fearful of it.

Mr. O'Brien will respond to some of the questions asked, following which Ms Tsering Lhamo Gawathsang will outline the situation for Tibetans and whether there was a deliberate policy on immigration.

Mr. Anthony O’Brien

I thank the committee for meeting us. I would like to address, in particular, Deputy Timmins's questions about the railway and economic opportunities in Tibet and why it is that the Chinese are being planted there. Chinese people gain great advantages in going to Tibet because they are subsidised in so doing. It is a government-sponsored move. In the 1980s a Chinese demographer, whose name escapes me, said Tibet could support 100 million Chinese people. We must take into account the size of Tibet which is often referred to in the media as the Himalayan enclave or kingdom. The Himalayas lie at the southern border of Tibet which stretches to approximately 1.5 million square kilometres.

On the economic opportunities in Tibet, there are several reasons the Chinese are there. As in the case of Sudan, they are there primarily to extract its mineral resources. The oil reserves are reckoned to amount to trillions of barrels in the Taklimakan Basin where the country borders on Shinjang. There are 120 useful industrial minerals in Tibet - known in Chinese as Xizang Zhizou which means “western treasure basket”- including gold, coal and uranium.

The other aspect of the Chinese presence in Tibet, which also connects directly to the railway, is the military presence. Tibet is like a huge fortress in the middle of Asia. The average altitude in Tibet is 15,000 ft. and the Himalayas and other mountain ranges are all around it. Thus, it gives China a military edge over its competitive neighbour, India, and China has not yet got a settled border with India. An interesting article, partly contributed to by the Chinese scholar Mr. Steedman, showed that the border between what is now Chinese Tibet and India was settled at the Simla convention by the British in 1903, 1908 or thereabouts. At that time Britain was dealing with Tibet as an independent country because the Qing dynasty had collapsed. There was no Chinese presence of any note in Tibet. Britain was playing its game against Russia and when the Simla convention settled that border between India and what is now China, it settled it with Tibet, but China does not recognise it. In some of the recent articles on this discussion, reference was made to the danger of the Indian Government's position with China right on its border and so many unsettled territories from Kashmir right across to Arunachal Pradesh.

One aspect of the railway line which is never discussed is that the Chinese railway does not finish in Lhasa. It stops there and it is the main station, but it is due to be extended southwards to Gyangze and Shigatse, which are the two other large cities just behind the Himalayas. One of the reasons for this is that China has large military depots in Golmud where the Lhasa link starts, in which it has rail-based nuclear missiles. This means that with the railway coming down behind the Himalayas, China can, in a matter of hours or a day at most, move these missiles to just behind the Himalayas if it decides things are getting rough with India. It can also quickly move in masses of troops. The recent "Dispatches" documentary on Tibet showed western journalists who at that stage were in eastern Tibet and western China filming military convoys, stretching a distance of four or five miles, moving into Tibet. The scale of this activity is vast.

There are, therefore, mineral resources in Tibet. People who live there receive subsidies. By and large the Chinese do not like living in Tibet because of its high altitude. Also none of the food they like to eat grows there and it has to be transported in.

With regard to the Chinese presence in Tibet, Senator Norris said there were 8 million Chinese and approximately 6 million Tibetans. There are 6 million Tibetans in greater Tibet, which is Tibet as the Tibetans recognise it and not the Tibet autonomous region, which has 2.5 million Tibetans. When the Chinese invaded in 1951, they annexed just over half of the landmass of Tibet. The northern province Amdo is now Qinghai and the southern province of Kham is distributed between Gansu, Yunnan and Sichuan. Lhasa is only one city in Tibet. Interestingly, most of the protests have been happening not even in the autonomous region of Tibet - where everything is locked down so tight one cannot come out of one's house and the same now applies right across Tibet - but in Amdo and Kham. Lhasa, as a city, is now an area covering something more than 35 sq km comprising Chinese buildings, a large proportion of which are owned and developed by the military. Approximately 1 sq km is Tibetan and even there the Chinese carried out extensive demolition of the old Tibetan quarter in recent years. Members will note I used the term "Tibetan quarter", as it is not even a Tibetan city. The Chinese carried out a large amount of demolition to ensure their personnel carriers and tanks could get down the streets. The tanks were rolling on the streets of Lhasa after these recent protests. That was filmed by some Western journalists.

The Chinese presence in Tibet is strategic, economic and to provide room for its people. Interestingly, the one-child policy does not apply in Tibet as strictly as it does in China. Many Chinese immigrants go there to have another child.

That fairly extensively deals with the position there. Ms Tsering Lhamo Gawathsang will tell the members what is it like to live under the boot, as it were, of the Chinese.

Ms Tsering Lhamo Gawathsang

Will I speak about what happened in Tibet?

Mr. Anthony O’Brien

Explain the Lhasa immigration - the pan-Chinese movement.

Ms Tsering Lhamo Gawathsang

The first time the Chinese began work on the railway in Lhasa, the line from China to Tibet, many Tibetan people were angry about it. They asked the Chinese not to do that and wrote many letters but the Chinese did not listen. China wanted to move some of its population to Lhasa to change Tibetans' traditions and culture and they also wanted to change the mindset of members of the young generation, such as myself. The Chinese sell alcohol and cigarettes very cheaply. One can buy a cigarette for 2 cent or 3 cent. One can drink all night and discos are open all night. One can get in free to a disco during the week and there are also many gambling houses. One can gamble with one's house and other material things, but they are only material things.

I was born in Tibet. I do not know when I was born because I was separated from my mum when I was two years of age. That was a disaster in my life. I escaped from Tibet when I was 17 years old. I know what the Chinese are doing to my people. I know what is going on. Let us be clear about this, China has no right to be in Tibet. When I lived in Tibet I could not go to school. We paid a different rate of tax and did not get anything. We paid for the Chinese Government. My parents and I worked. I worked when I was seven years old. I was separated from my parents because I was not allowed to live with them and I went to live with my aunt. The Chinese killed my brother. He was a good student and he went to study in Beijing. My dad and my relatives paid for him to go to school there. He returned to Tibet when he was 22 years old and on his return the Chinese killed him because he was intelligent and had a very good education.

Tibet is an independent country because my family can be traced back seven centuries. Each generation had a book which was passed down and now belongs to my parents. It clearly shows that Tibet is an independent country, far removed from China. That is the first point. The second point is that position of Tibetan girls is worst in China. If a girl has a baby, they put it down the toilet. If one is ill and has no money, one cannot go to the hospital and one might die. Tibetan children have no authorisation to go to school. In my city young Chinese girls and boys carry their school bags and go to school. I dream that I could have gone to school and have done something different.

My family is Tibetan. My English is not good. My grandfather is the leader of my small village. When the Chinese came in 1946 they went back because they believed it was much easier. The Chinese killed my grandfather when he was 42 years old. At that time my father was three. Ten children were left and five died because of hunger. They could not get any food. They have never stopped their coercive policies in Tibet right up to the third generation - my generation. It was very hard for Tibetans to live in Tibet with the Chinese. They have to ask for everything they need and whatever one gets has to be paid for.

For those who say the Olympic Games have nothing to do with politics I have a very good answer. The Chinese Government forced the peasants and the poor people to construct the Olympic stadium without pay. I must ask whether members of the committee would be happy to attend the opening ceremony in the knowledge that these poor people did not receive a penny for the work they did. I do not believe anybody would be happy to attend such a ceremony if he or she really respects human life and has regard for human rights. This has nothing to do with politics. The Chinese Government did wrong in this regard, while flaunting its economy to the world, yet neglecting to pay the workers who constructed the buildings for the Olympic Games.

In constructing the stadium they demolished a good deal of housing in which poor people lived, to show the world China is a rich country. Many of the people who built the stadium had nowhere to sleep at night. Their hands were broken in the construction process, just to show the world that China is a very rich country. Even the Chinese themselves do not condone this behaviour by the Government. EU member states should be aware of the facade behind the Chinese propaganda and respect human rights. If they do not, it makes little difference, and their representatives should attend the opening ceremony. However, if they have regard for the evidence, as I have outlined, then they cannot attend.

Mr. Neil Steedman

A million Chinese have been displaced to construct the Olympic facilities which have been built by prison inmates and unpaid poor labourers. Deputy Noonan raised a very good point about self-determination and general autonomy and asked about the situation in that regard. I refer him to point No. 7 in the Dalai Lama's statement to the Tibetans. Deputy Timmins pointed out that we had referred to the trade implications. Some of those in the Tibetan movement ask for a boycott of Chinese goods. We do not, and it is fair to say that a majority of the Tibetan group does not. Neither does the Dalai Lama.

The Chinese comprise a fifth of the world's population and there is no reason, in the normal course of events, why the rest of the world should not trade with China - aside from the difficulty of getting hardware or electrical goods without buying Chinese goods. However, we say the Irish Government and the EU should adopt far tougher policies as to the working conditions in Chinese factories. In particular any trade carried out with companies either sourcing materials or goods from Tibet, as opposed to China, should strictly adhere to very specific guidelines which the Tibetan Government in exile has laid down. These are more than reasonable and may be found on its website. I thank the committee very much for inviting us.

Ms Tsering Lhamo Gawathsang

We are not seeking a boycott of the Olympic Games, although we do not believe EU or Irish representatives should attend the opening ceremony.

My English is not very good, but if it was I could bear witness to the terrible things that have happened in my life since I was two years old, but which I am unable to speak of. If the committee has regard for human rights it will appreciate the enormity of the coercion being exercised on Tibet by China. Six of my family are dead and I must bear witness to that each day and to the plight of many other Tibetan families. Children are locked into toilets and young girls are forced into prostitution, which is terrible. If people really respected human life and human rights then the ceremony of the Olympic Games should not be allowed to take place in China, because of the terrible things that are happening there.

Not only do they not respect Tibetans, but neither do they have regard for their own Chinese people. I love Chinese people and indeed, all the peoples of the world. I want one day to become free and see everybody happy. If there is enough food to feed people and preserve life, that will help sustain happy families, and that is the main thing. The Dalai Lama is seeking respect for human rights, not looking to assert his authority. People should be allowed to practise the religion they believe in. If we are not allowed this, we cannot do anything. If Ireland and the EU respect that position, their representatives should not attend the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games in China because that will break people's hearts, instead of showing solidarity with them.

I thank Ms Tsering Lhamo Gawathsang for her very clear contribution. Everyone has understood it clearly. She speaks much better English than she believes. Her speech is very clear.

I thank Mr. Steedman and Mr. O'Brien for coming along as well. The question was raised about the Dalai Lama. I have just noted here what point No. 7 said. The Dalai Lama was seeking genuine autonomy for the Tibetan people within the sovereign People's Republic of China, to preserve their identity, promote their religious and cultural heritage and protect human rights. It has been suggested that we should invite the Dalai Lama to come and meet us. If members are agreed we shall get in touch with the Dalai Lama's office to invite him to meet the committee, on either a formal or informal basis, during his forthcoming visit to the UK.

The question of human rights abuses has been raised very eloquently. We will take up the issue of human rights abuses in Tibet with the Minister for Foreign Affairs and ask that Ireland push for a strong EU position on Tibet at the meeting between the European Union and China on human rights in Ljubljana in Slovenia on 15 May 2008, which is very soon. Several members raised the question of having an EU office in Lhasa. We will write to the Minister and make a request in this regard, with the agreement of members. These are the main points. The different views on the Olympic Games have been recorded and we will make them known to the Minister.

I am a rather confrontational person and I apologise if I have ruffled feathers, although I am sure my old friends across from me will not bear any grudge. Considering what has been said by Ms Tsering Lhamo Gwathsang, I believe strongly it would be indecent of us not to consider our position with regard to the Olympic committee. It has been made very clear that it is just a matter of asking the athletes not to attend the opening ceremony. They will still compete and we hope they will win medals. The request in this regard was so passionate and direct, that I beg my colleagues to agree to it. It is a practical step that we have been asked to make.

I am entitled to state - in the presence of my friend Senator Mark Daly - that Senator Ormonde, who expressed worry and originally believed there should be no boycott, changed her mind on the proposal. This was before we heard Ms Tsering Lhamo Gawathsang. I appeal to my colleagues to recognise the passionate defence, ignore my loud mouth and ignorant remarks and think of this young woman and what she has suffered.

We agree that no Government representative should attend the opening ceremony, although I am aware that none has been invited. We would prefer to leave athletes out of our considerations. We certainly appreciate the very powerful contribution Ms Tsering Lhamo Gawathsang has made. We will take up the issues separately.

I have written to Pat Hickey of the Olympic Council of Ireland asking him to abstain but I have not yet heard back. I hope he will pass on my views.

I support my colleagues Deputy Chris Andrews and Senator Norris. I second the proposal that the Olympic Council of Ireland should ask that our athletes not attend the opening ceremony.

We can convey to the Government the views of the committee on Government attendance at the opening ceremony.

That is nonsense and I will not stand for it. I am really furious. There is genocide and murder taking place. I say with tears in my eyes that not accepting the proposal would be a shame on this committee, including the Chairman, Deputy Timmins and his colleague Deputy Noonan, whom I believed had more guts and feeling. They are alienating the Irish people, who will be sickened by us.

I was trying to ask the Senator to move his motion.

Senator Norris displayed intolerance for which he condemns others. I ask him to withdraw his remarks.

He has no monopoly on moral indignation and should not come in here and lecture us. He put forward no proposal to cut back on trade. My side of the House is the only one that brought up the issue. Senator Norris made no proposal on it.

The Deputy will not--

The Dalai Lama has not asked for trade cuts.

On the use of the soft option--

Senators and Deputies--

Government officials, yes, but not the soft option--

Senator Norris has a motion before the committee.

Senator Norris launched a personal attack on me. I did not express any view on the Olympics today.

That is why I said it.

The Senator does not know where I stand.

Senator Norris is such an autocrat he can now see into my mind.

Senator Norris and Deputy Noonan--

I regret that Senator Norris has sought--

We have heard all the contributions.

- -to make a political issue out of this matter when, by and large, we certainly realise the terrible difficulties the Tibetans are enduring. We condemn the Chinese unreservedly. I regret that the Senator--

Everybody recognises that.

Ms Tsering Lhamo Gawathsang

I have very good proof of the situation in my country and I have expressed my emotion in this regard today. It is not easy for me. I was separated from my parents when I was two years old because of the Chinese and escaped when I was 17. That is not easy. We cannot force the committee to adopt a particular stance but if the members really respect human rights and human beings, they should support us.

Let us be clear that there is no question of members not respecting human rights. Very definite actions are being taken by the committee and the Government will be asked to take them.

I ask that the Chinese ambassador be invited before the committee so we can raise these issues with him. It is very important--

Mr. Anthony O’Brien

One essential point that we miss and which needs to be stated clearly is that the Tibetan Government in exile and Ministers of the Dalai Lama have been negotiating with the Chinese behind the scenes for the past six years and more. Every single time, the Chinese move the goalposts and do not engage. It should be made clear that when we are talking about a dialogue - the EU dialogue has produced no improvement in human rights at all - it must somehow be made concrete. God only knows how to do it but it must happen.

That is related to what I said in summing up. We will ask the Government to take into account the points made on the attendance of Government representatives at the opening ceremony.

Barr
Roinn