Evidence of meeting #102 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chinese.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Excellency Tudor Ulianovschi  Minister of Foreign Affairs and European Integration of the Republic of Moldova
Ivan Krulko  Co-Chair of Ukraine-Canada Parliamentary Friendship Group, Parliament of Ukraine (Verkhovna Rada)
Lobsang Sangay  Sikyong, Central Tibetan Administration

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bob Nault

Thank you, Dr. Sangay, and Mr. Genuis.

We'll go to Mr. Virani, please.

June 12th, 2018 / 4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Arif Virani Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Tashi delek.

It's a pleasure to see so many of you here, Dr. Lobsang, Ala, Pema, Ngodup, and all of the members of Parliament, both based here in north America and also based in India. It is truly a pleasure to have you here and to hear you open your statement by speaking Tibetan, which is very important and a matter of some controversy the last time we discussed Tibet at this committee.

As you know I'm the representative of a community that is the pride of the Tibetan-Canadian community. There are 7,000 constituents in my riding of Parkdale—High Park, and I take their concerns very seriously, both as their representative and also as the chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Tibet.

I wanted to ask you a number of questions. The first one I wanted to start with, Dr. Sangay, dovetails with the appearance of Pema Wangdu, who also goes by the name of Baimawangdui. He was here at the committee speaking about the situation of Tashi Wangchuk. That's the Tibetan individual who was detained in 2016 and indicted in 2017 on charges of “inciting separatism”.

As you know, his alleged crime was advocating for the cultural rights of Tibetans to study in their own language. His efforts to promote Tibetan language instruction were picked up by The New York Times. The government of Canada, our government, requested and was denied permission to attend his trial, which took place on January 4th. After the appearance of Pema Wangdu at this committee on May 22, he was actually sentenced to five years in prison. That prompted our government to issue a statement through the Embassy of Canada in China. It says:

Mr Tashi Wangchuk, a Tibetan language advocate was detained in January 2016 for peacefully raising concern about the lack of Tibetan-language education in Yushu County, and sentenced on May 22, 2018 to five years in prison for inciting separatism. Canada calls on the Government of China to release Tashi Wangchuk immediately and unconditionally. Canada urges the Chinese government to uphold its own Constitution and laws, and to respect its international human rights obligations. Canada supports the February 2018 United Nations Special Rapporteurs statement, which condemns the detention of Mr Tashi Wangchuk as the criminalization of linguistic and cultural rights advocacy.

Can you tell me, Dr. Sangay, what is your view of the importance of Tibetan language instruction in the Tibet Autonomous Region, and the arrest and subsequent conviction and sentencing of Mr. Tashi Wangchuk?

4:55 p.m.

Sikyong, Central Tibetan Administration

Dr. Lobsang Sangay

Thank you very much for the question, Arif. I know that you've been the chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Tibet. You are doing a very good job. Your statement, and also the video, went viral.

4:55 p.m.

Voices

Oh, oh!

4:55 p.m.

Sikyong, Central Tibetan Administration

Dr. Lobsang Sangay

Tibetans appreciate a lot what you have done so far, and urge you to continue to lead the support group in Canada.

I also appreciate your use of the words tashi delek, which mean “good wishes”. Unfortunately, the Tibetan delegation from the so-called Tibet Autonomous Region could not speak in Tibetan. That speaks for itself. It's more convenient for them to speak in Chinese, the language of their colonial masters, so that they can echo or parrot what the Chinese government wants them to say; there's nothing lost in translation, so that when they go back, they don't land up in trouble.

As far as Tashi Wangchuk is concerned, essentially what he was advocating was allowed by the Chinese constitution and laws. Article 4 of the Chinese constitution clearly says—quote, unquote—minorities should not only use their own language but should be encouraged to use their own language. That's what the law says. Tashi Wangchuk was essentially saying that Tibetan schools should have Tibetan as the medium of instruction along with the Chinese medium of instruction. This is allowed and encouraged by the Chinese constitution.

For advocating that, which was covered by The New York Times—essentially the largest and the most influential newspaper in the world—even after the coverage and that advocacy, he was sentenced to five years in prison for simply advocating for what is legal, what is provided in the Chinese constitution.

For Tibetans, the Tibetan language is very important, because ultimately.... I'm sure that the delegation that came here...they always say that Tibetans are masters of their own region. If they are the masters of their own region, Tibetan identity and Tibetan culture are essential, but Tibetans are denied.

The Tibetan language is an essential component of the Tibetan identity. If you lose your language, you lose an essential part of who you are: a Tibetan. By discouraging the Tibetan language.... For example, the medium of instruction at the college level, the high school level, and the middle school level is Chinese. It's part of the cultural assimilation. Over time, they want to make Tibet into a Chinatown and Tibetans into Chinese, and the first thing is to discourage the Tibetan language. As you know, 98% of Tibetan monasteries and nunneries were destroyed, and 99.9% of monks and nuns were disrobed in the 1960s to prevent them from practising Buddhism or religion.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

Arif Virani Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

Thank you, Dr. Sangay.

I want to ask another question. We also talked in the committee, about a month back, about the Panchen Lama, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, who the Dalai Lama recognized when he was six years old as the 11th Panchen Lama in Tibet. A few days after that recognition, he and his family were taken into custody by officials of the Government of China. They have never been seen again.

Our government, the Government of Canada, has requested information about the safety and whereabouts of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima on several occasions, dating all the way back to 1995. The United Nations has requested permission to visit this boy to verify his well-being. All of these requests have been denied.

Most recently, at this committee several parliamentarians raised questions to the officials from the TAR about the Panchen Lama. They confirmed indirectly that he his alive, which is a good thing, but access to him has still not been made available.

Can you tell me how the unknown whereabouts of the Panchen Lama affect the Tibetan community that you represent?

5 p.m.

Sikyong, Central Tibetan Administration

Dr. Lobsang Sangay

Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, the Penchan Lama, recognized by His Holiness the Dalai Lama, reflects the human rights situation in Tibet. At the age of five he disappeared. Next year it will be 25 years since his disappearance simply for being recognized as a religious leader. He'll be 30 years old. You can't blame him for being recognized as a religious leader by the committee appointed by the Chinese government, consisting of monks from Tashi Lhunpo Monastery, which is the main monastery of the Penchan Lama. Now his whereabouts are unknown.

The Chinese government says he wants to remain private, that he doesn't want to be disturbed. That's why they can't share with us where he is and what he is doing. If that is the case, then let his family members speak out, come out, and let them choose whether to reside in Canada or the U.S. and to speak for Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, the Penchan Lama. He is over the age of 18, which is when we all get the right to vote. He is an adult. Let him come out and speak of what he wants to do. Unless we see and hear him in person, we can't believe what the Chinese government says.

Essentially, the situation or the condition of the Penchan Lama encapsulates what is going on in Tibet. There is a denial of religious freedom and the basic human rights of an individual to practise his own religion and become or remain the spiritual leader of the Tibetan people.

5 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bob Nault

Ms. Laverdière, please.

5 p.m.

NDP

Hélène Laverdière NDP Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank all the witnesses for being here and for their presentations.

Dr. Sangay, thank you for such an interesting presentation.

As you can see, I have the privilege of speaking French here, my first language.

5 p.m.

Sikyong, Central Tibetan Administration

5 p.m.

NDP

Hélène Laverdière NDP Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

When we receive delegations, I sometimes think there are things we could learn from them. Perhaps you could give us a course on being polite during question period, since it all seems so polite in your parliament.

You mentioned the difficulties that Canadian officials have when trying to enter Tibet. It is also a great concern to us that we cannot go there.

I have one last point, which I will make briefly.

My colleague Mr. Virani asked certain questions that I wanted to ask. I thank him for that because I realize that I have five or six more questions and not enough time, unfortunately.

I would like you to elaborate on the concept of autonomy. What does autonomy mean to you?

I am a Quebecker. Quebec is a province with a slightly different system in Canada and a measure of autonomy. I would be very interested in knowing how you define autonomy.

Thank you.

5 p.m.

Sikyong, Central Tibetan Administration

Dr. Lobsang Sangay

Thank you very much for your questions. It's beautiful to hear your language. French is a beautiful language. We believe the Tibetan language is also quite beautiful, and ought to be preserved. It needs its own space in Tibet for the Tibetan people.

You are absolutely right. Going to Tibet is very difficult. Many members of Parliament have made requests. In fact, the UN's special rapporteur on human rights made the request, and the Chinese government agreed to allow him to visit Tibet. His term is ending in August, and he is actually not allowed....

That's why a bill is being moved in Washington, D.C. on reciprocity. Chinese members of Parliament and Chinese officials, journalists, and scholars, including the Tibetan delegation—those who are propagandists—can come to Ottawa, Canada. Similar access should be given to Canadians as well, though—Canadian diplomats, Canadian members of Parliament, and scholars. It's just about reciprocity. You come to our place and you are welcome, but we should also go.

Whenever the Chinese delegation comes, its members always say, “Unless you see things for yourself, you won't know what's going on. We don't trust your judgment or assessment because you have never been there.” That's what they tell me all the time.

Actually, I went to Beijing in 2006. They allowed me. I was an academic at Harvard Law School. When I requested to go to Tibet, which is just a three-hour flight, they said they didn't have enough people to receive me in Lhasa. I said, “I've come to China and you have 1.3 billion people. Don't tell me you don't have enough people to receive me.” Still, they didn't allow me.

I am a Tibetan. They always say, “You should go to Tibet and see for yourself. Then you will appreciate how good Tibet is,” but we are all denied that access. It's very important that we insist. The Chinese are welcome in Canada, and the Canadian members of Parliament and the diplomats in Beijing should have access to Tibet as well.

As far as autonomy is concerned, what we are asking is a little less than Quebec, in fact. We are essentially saying that what is written in the Chinese constitution, as far as minorities and Tibetans are concerned, should be implemented, so that Tibetans have their own language, their own culture, and their own administration. This is what we are asking for, including education. If the Chinese government implemented its own laws, we could take that as autonomy.

In fact, we submitted a document called “Memorandum on Genuine Autonomy” in 2008. Unfortunately, the Chinese government has denied implementation of those rights. Essentially, autonomy means having a Tibetan language, culture, and education, and administration of the region by Tibetans themselves.

5:05 p.m.

NDP

Hélène Laverdière NDP Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

I am also curious to hear more about your government—your parliament—in exile. So you have a form of opposition.

I will ask you a real question as a politician.

What are the political differences between the current administration and the opposition?

5:05 p.m.

Sikyong, Central Tibetan Administration

Dr. Lobsang Sangay

The good thing is that the Tibetan Parliament acts as both opposition and ruling party. Members are all elected on a regional basis, and they mostly act as individuals, so there is no opposition party per se. Our democracy is a party-less democracy. It's based on a Buddhist notion and the practical idea that if there is a political party in a country, the political party will sometimes act more for its party interests than for national or common interests.

That's why ours is a party-less democracy. We all act in the national interest, rather than for party interests. That's the idea. It's the Buddhist way of achieving consensus in all decisions, which is very difficult. That's the basis on which we are moving forward. So far it's working. Democracy without borders is working.

Don't give ideas to members of the Tibetan Parliament to have an opposition. If there is true opposition in the government, we in the executive will be on the receiving end.

5:05 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

5:05 p.m.

NDP

Hélène Laverdière NDP Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

That's very interesting.

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bob Nault

Mr. Virani, please.

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

Arif Virani Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

Dr. Sangay, I wanted to continue along a bit of a theme.

Hélène took one of my questions, so touché, Madam.

The issue of the reciprocation is an important one. It has been raised in different contexts by the Canadian Parliament and parliamentarians from many sides on a number of occasions. We had Mr. Pema Wangdu—again, Mr. Baimawangdui—here, and he said, “the door will only be more and more open to the outside world”. He also said, “I do believe that you...have a good chance” to go “to Tibet [and] have a look at it.”

I think what is frustrating is that we know there are Canadian-funded entities and Canadian-funded programs that exist in the TAR. I'll ask you two questions. Can you elaborate a bit on your response to Madam Laverdière in the context of a government, whether a Canadian government or any other government, that is having it funds delivered or is promoting projects on the ground in TAR and yet access isn't permitted...?

The second point is about the middle way approach. I'm glad you started with this at the outset, Dr. Sangay, because the more I learned about it, the more innocuous it seems, right? There are people who will characterize this as radical, revolutionary, independent, separatist ideas, and then when you understand it and read it, it is about mutual existence and mutual co-operation. It is about existing with Tibetan autonomy within a broader Chinese federation.

Like you said, it's very similar to many parts of the world, including what we have here in Canada. It's also a very peaceful initiative that was commenced by the Dalai Lama many decades before. Could you elaborate a bit on why you think the notion of the middle way has been altered or is being interpreted in ways that characterize it vastly differently from the way I've just described it?

For the last point, Dr. Sangay, could you touch on the current status of what we call the “Sino-Tibetan dialogue”, that Chinese-Tibetan dialogue? You yourself mentioned that you'd been in Beijing. I understand that from 2002 to 2010 there were as many as nine different rounds of negotiations, and then those negotiations came to an abrupt halt.

Why did that abrupt halt occur? What can be done to resurrect that dialogue? Certainly, as Canadians, our diplomacy over a series of decades I think has always been about brokering dialogue between different communities on the planet. How can that dialogue be resurrected and what can parliamentarians do to help?

Thank you.

5:10 p.m.

Sikyong, Central Tibetan Administration

Dr. Lobsang Sangay

Thank you for those very good questions.

You mentioned the name of the delegate who came and made the presentation, but we all must know that there are a few Tibetans who are sent around to speak on behalf of the Chinese government or parrot their propaganda. In the last 60 years, the most powerful person, even in the Tibet Autonomous Region, the party secretary of the Communist Party, has never been a Tibetan.

Even at a prefecture level or a county level, it's very rare to have a Tibetan as a party secretary. A Tibetan could be equally qualified, equally credentialed, but the post is always given to the Chinese. Hence, those who come here and speak supposedly for Tibetan people in actuality don't have power or authority in Tibetan areas.

Yes, you're right. It's not just the Canadian government and the American government that have provided funding for projects inside Tibet, but others. For transparency's sake, to evaluate and assess how the projects are going and whether they're beneficial or not, it's very important for the Canadian officials or the NGOs to go to the area and assess, but they are denied permission.

That's the tragedy: on the one hand, they accept the funding, and on the other hand, you will never know whether the project is implemented or not. It's in clear violation of international norms or of the agreement with a government that when it provides funding for projects it must see where the money is going. That is being truly denied. I think we all must push that access be given, hence reciprocity, not in terms of exact numbers—that three Chinese officials came here, hence three Canadians must go—but in terms of the idea that if you come, then we should go too.

As far as the middle way approach is concerned, you're right. I've had hundreds of rounds of debate with Chinese students and scholars. We explain to them that the middle way approach does not seek to challenge the sovereignty of China and does not challenge China's territorial integrity. It essentially means genuine autonomy, as per Chinese laws, and to remain within China. That's why the Obama administration said they supported the middle way approach: because it does not contradict the one China policy.

But the Chinese government and Chinese officials always say that the middle way approach is hidden independence, that there's something hidden, and that the Dalai Lama is always splitting.... People say that he's the most liked and most trusted person in the whole world. It's just the Chinese government and Chinese leaders who don't trust him. I say, “Don't you see that it's your problem when the whole world trusts Dalai Lama, and if you are not trusting, don't you think there is something wrong with your mindset?” Right? If you go with that mindset of distrust.... I remember saying that even if the Dalai Lama were to go to the caves of Malaya Mountains or into a submarine deep in the ocean, the Chinese government and leaders would still say, no, he's cooking up something up in the mountains, or he's cooking up something deep in the sea.

Essentially, it's the lack of trust, hence they try to spin it around and not accept the middle way as a win-win proposition, a win for China and win for the Tibetan people as well. China is becoming a world power, and you can have military power or money power, but if you want to have more authority, if you want to win respect, you must respect the fundamental rights of the Tibetan people. Unless you do that, you will not gain credibility and respect from the international community.

For China, there is a lot to gain, because Tibet is essentially a litmus test for China, and also for Canada, because China says they implement and the respect rule of law and human rights. If that is the case, then you should see the situation in Tibet and see that the middle way approach or genuine autonomy for the Tibetan people should be implemented. That's also for Canada, because Canada has true values: moral values and human rights values. If Canada is for these rights or values, then one should speak out for the Tibetan people as well.

Tibetans have been non-violent and peaceful for decades. In that sense, we have been the good guys in the whole world. Sometimes good guys don't get rewarded, but we would like some piece of a reward for being good.

If you look at the conflicts in Syria, or in Africa—with Boka Haram or just name it—everywhere in the whole world, they are all watching to see which model to follow: the violent ISIS model, the militant Buddhist model, the non-violent peaceful Tibetan model. If we're talking about violence and conflicts, the other conflict area will say let's follow the violent model because that gets more attention, more headlines, and more support. If the non-violent peaceful model of the Tibetan people is not supported, then essentially by default you are encouraging violence, and you are encouraging terrorism and militancy around the world.

For being a good guy, I think we deserve some attention and support as well. The fact that this committee is holding this hearing essentially is a support for the good guys, for which we are very appreciative.

As far as the Sino-Tibetan dialogue is concerned, the envoys of the Dalai Lama met with the Chinese representative for nine rounds, from 2002 to 2009. It's not as though there's no talking going on. There were talks between the envoys of the Dalai Lama and the Chinese representative, but there was no breakthrough. The final talk with the Dalai was in January 2010. For eight years there has been no dialogue between the two sides. Hopefully, with a nudge from the Canadian government leaders, there could be some breakthrough as well.

I know Canada is negotiating or talking about trade agreements. It's very important to have a trade relationship with China, but it's equally important that one must speak for human rights so the money and morals go together and one is not exchanged for the other.

Thank you.

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bob Nault

Thank you, Mr. Sangay.

Mr. Wrzesnewskyj, go ahead, please.

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Doctor, for appearing before our committee.

In 1981, the Communist Party declared that the great proletarian revolution “was responsible for the most severe setback and the heaviest losses suffered by the party, [country,] and the people since the founding of the People's Republic”, yet they never talked about Tibet in that rare moment of acknowledgement of the horrors of Communist Party rule.

I believe it was mentioned that of 6,200 monasteries that existed only six survived. That's less than 0.1% of thousands. Of 600,000 Tibetan monks and nuns, by 1979 virtually all had been murdered or disappeared. Often they were labelled monsters and demons, yet this policy of ethnocide seems to continue under the current regime.

In 2016, over 2,000 Buddhist monks and nuns were expelled from the largest Buddhist institute, the Larung Gar, and you referenced the desperation of Buddhist monks and nuns. One hundred and fifty have self-immolated. Buddhism is central to your identification as a people, but you also referenced that it's no longer the one road. There are now many roads. There are planes. There are trains. There is a wholesale repopulation of Tibet going on, so time seems to be of the essence.

How do you react to that particular reality? It seems as though the situation is no longer just desperate; it's almost at the point of being not recoverable. How much time is there? Time is of the essence.

5:20 p.m.

Sikyong, Central Tibetan Administration

Dr. Lobsang Sangay

The Chinese government's plan is to convert Tibet into Chinatown and through cultural assimilation make Tibetans into Chinese. That's why they are discouraging the Tibetan language in schools as a medium of instruction and so on and so forth.

Then through trains, railway lines, airports, and many of the roads, they have physical control of Tibet and Tibetan people. At the same time, the Tibetan struggle is a struggle of resilience and determination of the Tibetan people. You are absolutely right that 98% of those 6,000 plus monasteries were destroyed, and 99.9% of monks and nuns were disrobed in the 1950s and 1960s, but 60 years hence what has happened is that Buddhism is back in Tibet in private social space.

Government policy is to systematically destroy. Hence you rightfully pointed out, the Larung Gar monastery with 12,000 monks and nuns was demolished from August 2016 to August 2017 and reduced to 5,000 monks and nuns. That is further divided into two parts: one is the spiritual part and one is the academic part, as per the report of Human Rights Watch. They have stationed 200 Communist cadres to control and monitor the ins and outs of Larung Gar.

As we speak, Yarchen Gar with 5,000 plus nuns is being demolished. This is the reality. But from 98% destruction back in Tibet, Buddhist monasteries are now back. In exile, Buddhist monasteries have been rebuilt and revived and there are Buddhist centres all over the world, including in Canada. Oddly, China has become the largest Buddhist country in the world with 300 million to 400 million Chinese practising Buddhists. If there were a competition between the Dalai Lama and Mao Zedong, you can clearly see after 60 years that the Dalai Lama has won hands down.

From complete destruction, there has been a revival of Buddhism among exiled Tibetans around the world, back in Tibet, and also in China, so I am sure Mao Zedong must be thinking that he destroyed everything that was Buddhist in Tibet, but now Buddhism has come back to China in full force, so that's why it is a struggle of resilience. Tibet is non-violent and peaceful but we also have the mountain spirit of determination. Peacefully, quietly, we keep fighting step by step and we get to where we want to go.

Essentially, even though you say time might be against us, we think time is with us, because fundamentally our struggle is based on Buddhism, which is 2,600 years old and Communism is 100 years old. There is no competition between the two. If Buddhism has prevailed for 2,600 years, it will be there for another 2,500 years. With Communism gone to Cuba, with Raul Castro holding onto it, and with Kim Jong Un signing the treaty, if North Korea goes, then I think China will be the only so-called Communist country with a market economy in the whole world.

We do believe that Buddhism will again prevail and that peace will also prevail in the Tibetan Plateau, but the Chinese government's efforts at ethnocide, to essentially destroy anything Buddhist and anything Tibetan, are continuing. As well, it's also true that there is a population transfer, with of a lot of Chinese coming to the Tibetan Plateau and dominating the economy and the market. For example, in the capital city of Tibet, Lhasa, I think 80% if not 90% of shops, hotels, and restaurants are owned or run by Chinese. In fact, in the 1980s there were signboards, and the practice was also true, that they said they were hiring, and if you were Tibetan, they would give you 30 renminbi a day, and if you were Chinese they would give you 50 renminbi a day. That's essentially like having a signboard in Ottawa in a shop that said if you were Chinese they would give you $50 Canadiana day, and if you were a Tibetan or a Canadian they would give you Canadian $30 a day. That kind of blatant discrimination is still going on in Tibet.

This is in some ways a systematic effort to discourage and destroy the identity and very foundation of the Tibetan people in Tibet, but the resilience of the Tibetan people lives on and is still very strong. We have done it with the revival of Buddhism, and we will do it politically as well.

Thank you.

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bob Nault

Thank you, Dr. Sangay.

Colleagues, we're going to go a little over time because we want to finish the second round, so Mr. Genuis will go first and then Mr. Saini, and that will wrap it up.

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to pick up on a couple of things that have been discussed so far, so I'll mention them again quickly at the beginning.

On this issue of the religious question, my sense is that we are seeing the religious suppression in China change its form, but it is still very much there. Historically it was trying to stamp out religion, and now it's the government trying to co-opt and control religion. We see it with regard to their approach to prospective reincarnation. It's the only atheist regime in the world that also wants to control reincarnation. It's like democracy with Chinese characteristics; this is reincarnation with atheistic characteristics.

I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on the ongoing suppression, repression, of religion, but in a different form.

Do you think we should be funding projects inside Tibet? I could see taxpayers wondering, if we're not even able to monitor and see the results, how do we know the money is ending up in Tibet at all. But, of course, the people of Tibet need help and face very difficult circumstances. Is there a way we can help people inside Tibet, and know that we're doing it?

And finally, I wonder if you can comment on some of the overall trends with respect to Tibet and human rights in China. There was said to be dialogue happening, but that's no longer happening. Are there other areas in which we see a worsening of the situation or in which we see positive trends? What are we looking at?

Thank you.

5:25 p.m.

Sikyong, Central Tibetan Administration

Dr. Lobsang Sangay

As far as funding inside Tibet is concerned, I think we all must. We encourage any funding that can help Tibetan people inside Tibet. You can reach out to those villages and those communities where funding is needed, and where schools and hospitals are needed. They have to be educated and they have to be treated well, and the culture has to be preserved. For any funding that's been provided by the Canadian government or any government around the world, we always encourage and appreciate those efforts.

As for reincarnation, you're right to say “reincarnation with atheist characteristics”. It's true. In 2008 the Chinese government came out with guidelines, eight-point guidelines, that say any reincarnation of a monk has to be registered and approved by the Communist Party, the district Communist Party. Can you imagine that? The stamp of an atheist party is needed for our spiritual practice and spiritual leaders. Similarly, they are planning for what we call the reincarnation of the Dalai Lamas as well, but as I told you, if you look at the track record of 98% of monasteries and nunneries being destroyed and 99.9% of monks and nuns being disrobed, and at how they call His Holiness the Dalai Lama a wolf in sheep's clothing, a devil, and all of that....

With that kind of track record, I think the Chinese government has no credibility whatsoever in endorsing or recognizing reincarnation. It's almost like Kim Jong-un recognizing the next Pope and expecting all the Catholics to say, “Oh yes, we've got the next Pope because our Communist leader recognized the Pope.” That much of a lack of credibility is with the Chinese government when it comes to reincarnation. They are trying to co-opt and control religion in Tibet as well as China.

Overall, what is disturbing is that in Tibet they have imposed a grid system, or a social credit system, whereby the citizens have to give security to get subsidies. Essentially, you have to report or spy on your neighbours to get your essential subsidies such as sending your children to school or any kind of facilities from the Chinese government. They have also issued an ID card with second-generation biometric chips in it, so once you swipe it, your movements are tracked.

For example, in Lhasa, there's a check-post every 30 or 40 metres, so if anyone wants to go to the market, you have to swipe your ID card, and your movements are tracked. They now have built sophisticated software or an algorithm whereby they track the pilgrims from remote villages and nomadic areas who visit some of the places in Tibet. Once you swipe your ID card, your movements are tracked. Accordingly, they then come to a conclusion that a nomadic area or village might be problematic because most of the nomads or farmers have travelled to various places in Tibet.

That's a very, very sophisticated system. It is working so well that the party secretary of the Tibet Autonomous Region was sent to the Xinjiang Autonomous Region to implement the same grid system. This is being researched and reported by Human Rights Watch and other think tanks.

Now, also in Xinjiang, that system is working so well that the party secretary of Xinjiang has been promoted in the politburo. That's the 20-member leadership of China. China has so many provinces and so many cabinet ministers that to reach the top 20 you must have done something very, very good for the Chinese government. The party secretary of the Tibet Autonomous Region, now in Xinjiang, is among the top 20 because of this sophisticated system.

What is worrying for Canada—and what should be worrisome for Canada and the rest of the world—is that this software and algorithm will be sold to despots and dictators around the world. They will use that software to control their own people. The Chinese are very good at marketing and selling their products. This product will be on the market soon.

Hence, what is happening in Tibet will happen to you.