The Tibet Policy and Support Act, approved by the US Senate earlier this week, closes a turbulent year in US-China relations. The House of Representatives passed the legislation in January. It will become law after the President of the United States passes it.
The previous version
The TSPA is an amended version of the Tibet Policy Act of 2002, which came into effect during the Bush Administration. But in an indication of how important he considered relations with China, President George W. Bush distanced himself from this congressional action and wrote strong words against it in his signed statement, in which he affirmed the administration’s right not to implement. parts of the law. He wrote: “Unfortunately, the Law [H.R. 1646] it contains a number of provisions that inadmissibly interfere with the constitutional functions of the presidency in foreign affairs, including provisions that purport to establish foreign policy that are of great concern. “
He also said that his approval of the Act did not constitute his adoption of the various policy statements in the Act as the foreign policy of the United States, and said that these would be taken only as “advisory” statements, “giving them due weight that courtesy between the legislative and executive powers should demand, to the extent that it is compatible with the foreign policy of the United States ”.
America and China today
Relations between the United States and China have become much more difficult in the past two decades, particularly worsening in the Trump Administration, and more so in 2020 on issues ranging from the pandemic to trade tariffs, and its building of global coalitions against the ambitions of the Chinese superpowers. Earlier this month, the Foreign Company Accounting Act was enacted, targeting Chinese investments in the U.S. At the beginning of the year, President Donald Trump enacted the Hong Kong Home Rule Act.
President Trump is not expected to adopt a Bush-like view on the TSPA, which introduces stricter provisions on Tibet, in addition to teeth in the form of a threat of sanctions, including travel bans on Chinese officials. How the Biden Administration, which is expected to frame its own policy in China, views the TPSA remains to be seen.
Still, most American administrations, including the Trump Administration, have generally maintained a diplomatic balance between relations with China and support for Tibet and the Dalai Lama. The State Department has a separate section on Tibet in its annual reports on human rights and religious freedom. But there has been no real push for talks with the Dalai Lama or on the release of political prisoners.
The Dalai Lama
Among the most significant amendments is that the TSPA states that the policy of the United States is to oppose Beijing’s attempts to install its own Dalai Lama “in a manner incompatible with Tibetan Buddhism in which the succession or identification of Buddhist lamas Tibetans, including the Dalai Lama, should happen without interference … “
The legislation refers to the ‘Measures on the Management of the Reincarnation of Living Buddhas’ by the Chinese government in 2007, and a March 2019 statement by the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson that the “reincarnation of living Buddhas, including the Dalai Lama, must comply with Chinese laws and regulations and follow religious rituals and historical conventions. ”He also refers to the installation in China of a 6-year-old boy in 1995 as the 11th Panchen Lama, and to the statements of the current Dalai Lama in which he explains the traditions that must be followed in the selection of a Dalai Lama, and that the authority to recognize the reincarnation of a Dalai Lama rests with him and his officials.
📣 JOIN NOW 📣: The Telegram channel Explained Express
The Act also establishes that the policy of the United States is to hold accountable senior Chinese officials, accomplices or who have been directly or indirectly involved in the identification or installation of a candidate chosen by China as the future 15th Dalai Lama of Tibetan Buddhism “who “a flagrant violation of internationally recognized human rights” has been committed, resulting in sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Responsibility Act. The law, named after a Russian tax lawyer who died after being imprisoned while investigating Russian tax officials for fraud, authorizes US officials to impose travel bans globally.
Other provisions
The TPSA has introduced provisions aimed at protecting the environment of the Tibetan Plateau, calling for greater international cooperation and greater participation by Tibetans. Claiming that China is diverting water resources from Tibet, the TPSA also calls for “a regional framework on water security, or to use existing frameworks … to facilitate cooperative agreements between all riparian nations that would promote … agreements on seizure. and the diversion of waters originating from the Tibetan Plateau. ”While the 2002 Act said the United States should establish a“ branch ”in Lhasa, the TSPA ups the ante by changing that to a“ consulate. ”It acknowledges the Central Tibetan Administration, whose Prime Minister Lobsang Sangay takes credit for ensuring that the Senate passes the legislation for a vote.
In a statement, Sangay said: “By passing the TPSA, Congress has sent its message loud and clear that Tibet remains a priority for the United States and that it will continue its strong support for His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the CTA. It is a momentous milestone for the Tibetan people. “
What china says
China had previously said that the TPSA “gravely violated international law and basic norms governing international relations, interfered in China’s internal affairs and sent the wrong message to the forces of ‘Tibetan independence’.” After the passage of the bill by the Senate, China said it “resolutely opposes” the “adoption of bills containing such negative content about China.” The problems related to Tibet, Taiwan and Hong Kong … are China’s internal affairs that do not allow foreign interference. ” A spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs urged the United States to “stop meddling in our internal affairs under such pretexts, refrain from signing the bills or implementing the negative content and elements in them that target China and undermine China’s interests. “.
If India is pleased with this latest American complaint to China, it has not said so openly. India has mostly refrained from playing the Tibet card against China and, like the United States, has a one-China policy. It was only this year, in the current Ladakh standoff, that he used special forces made up almost entirely of Tibetan exiles to occupy strategic heights on the southern bank of Pangong Tso.
.
