Menu

FIND US ON:

Facebook badge

youtube badge

flickr badge

Tibet at heart of MPs debate on UK relations with China PDF Print E-mail
[22 November 2013] On 19 November, Westminster Hall in the House of Commons hosted a three-hour debate on the UK's relations with China. With the recent trade deals between the two countries and the Prime Ministers upcoming trip to China in early December, the economic relationship was expected to dominate. However, MPs consistently raised human rights, with the issue of Tibet being a significant component of the debate.

The debate was moved by Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin, Con). MPs who raised Tibet during the debate included Kate Hoey (Vauxhall, Lab), Martin Horwood (Cheltenham, Lib Dem), Simon Hughes (Bermondsey and Old Southwark, Lib Dem), Stewart Jackson (Peterborough, Con), Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East, Lab). The
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Mark Simmonds responded on behalf of the government.

In response to the numerous speeches and interventions on Tibet, the government noted its serious concerns about human rights in Tibet and reiterated its policy in calling for meaningful dialogue between Chinese and Tibetan parties to address and resolve the underlying grievances of the Tibetan communities.

Index
1. Brief excerpts from debate mentioning Tibet
2. Selected excerpts featuring Tibet, human rights and UK-China relations
Read the full three hour debate on the UK parliament website - Part 1 I Part 2


Brief excerpts from debate mentioning Tibet

House of Commons logo19 November 2013: House of Commons: Debate on UK relations with China
Debate moved by Mark Pritchard


Kate Hoey (Vauxhall, Lab): Does [Mr Pritchard] agree that it is shocking that the InterContinental Hotels Group, whose headquarters is in London, is building a new hotel in the centre of Tibet? That is not acceptable to the Tibetans who have fought so long for the right to be free in their own country.

Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin, Con): The InterContinental Hotels Group is an important British company employing a lot of people around the world. Clearly, it must make commercial decisions with the information available. I would hope that it had some dialogue not only with the Chinese authorities but with Tibetans in exile and the people in Tibet who are being oppressed by the Chinese authorities. I will come to Tibet later in my speech. If InterContinental did not consult, I hope that it will learn lessons from the example of Tibet.

Stewart Jackson (Peterborough, Con): [Mr Pritchard] talks about the international community being minded to take a tough approach, but as we speak there are human rights abuses in Tibet. There is self-immolation, and dissidents are being driven into the Dharamsala mountains. There is collective punishment and an attempt to eradicate the culture and language of Tibet. Is that not something on which the international community should be taking a tough stance, rather than kowtowing and acquiescing in the bullying of China when, for instance, the Dalai Lama visits various international communities?

Mark Pritchard: ...I have met the Dalai Lama twice, for which I am glad. I am proud to have had the privilege of meeting him, and what the Chinese Government are doing in Tibet is completely unacceptable. There has been suppression of the Buddhist religion and oppression of the Tibetan people There needs to be a peaceful resolution to the Tibet question, and human rights in Tibet must be recognised.

The Chinese must stop bullying individuals; they must stop bullying Tibet; and they must stop bullying other Governments, too.

Simon Hughes (Bermondsey and Old Southwark, Lib Dem): On Tibet, many of us are very supportive of better links with China The Chinese do not yet appear to understand that nobody is seeking to threaten Chinas control of Tibet; we are just seeking, with the Buddhists, to argue for their religious freedom and for a certain degree of autonomy for them to live their lives in the old parts of China, as they would choose to do.

Mark Pritchard: We are hopefully arguing for the upholding of the Chinese constitution itself. The Chinese authorities need not fear freedom of religion. The suppression of religion, not the freedom of religion, is what causes instability in societies.

China must end its economic strangulation of, and mass economic discrimination against, Tibet. That deliberate policy has forced thousands of Tibetans to abandon their traditional rural lives and move into new housing colonies in urban areas where non-agricultural jobs are controlled by the Chinese state. Tibetans are now a minority in such urban centres because of Chinas encouragement of mass Chinese migration.

The Buddhist religion continues to suffer Today, the number of monks allowed to enter monasteries is strictly controlled and limited. Any references to, or images of, the Dalai Lama are banned.

Chinese political oppression - and that is what it is: oppression - has responded to uprisings with extreme violence. Some 300,000 Chinese soldiers are now posted in Tibet. China has repeatedly violated UN conventions through the extensive use of torture against Tibetan political prisoners, including monks and nuns. The Chinese regime has also wreaked huge environmental damage throughout Tibet.

Kate Hoey: Does [Mr Pritchard] agree that, although the Chinese reaction to the Prime Ministers meeting with the Dalai Lama was rather upsetting, the Prime Minister should, when he visits China in the near future, specifically raise with the Chinese Government the position of Tibet, including all the political prisoners in Tibet and the way in which Tibetan culture is being ruined?

Mark Pritchard: The Prime Minister will set out the case for human rights but the realpolitik is that we need to engage with China on all sorts of levels.

Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East, Lab): ... China is particularly vulnerable to the impact of climate change, with increasing temperatures and rising sea levels a threat to its long coast line. Glacier melt in Tibet is also a serious concern.

...As to Tibet, while we respect Chinas sovereignty, we cannot ignore the serious human rights issues that arise - the disturbing number of self-immolations and the reports of arrests because a friend or relative has self-immolated. It is important that the UK should continue to raise concerns about the treatment of people in Tibet and promote dialogue.

Mark Simmonds (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs):
Where there are additional concerns about human rights, we raise them We continue to discuss human rights issues with the Chinese authorities, including Tibet.

We continue to have serious concerns about human rights in Tibet. We believe that meaningful dialogue is the best way to address and resolve the underlying grievances of the Tibetan communities, and we urge all parties to restart talks as soon as possible. However, the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary have stated clearly that our policy is unchanged, and is consistent with that of the previous Government, in that we recognise Tibet is part of China. The Prime Minister has no plans to meet the Dalai Lama.


Selected excerpts featuring Tibet, human rights and relevant references to the UK-China relationship

House of Commons logo19 November 2013: House of Commons: Debate on UK relations with China
Debate moved by Mark Pritchard


Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin, Con): China is now the worlds second largest economy and its largest exporter and importer of goods However, countries cannot exist on economic prosperity alone.

People and societies make a country or a civilisation, not volatile stock markets, trade or the buying of goods and services. Yes, those things are the lifeblood of outward prosperity, but it is the prosperity of the human spirit that helps to advance civilisations: the freedom of the individual to determine their own destiny for good or ill, to determine whether to turn left or right and what they believe and to dream, imagine, create and innovate. This is about social growth, not just economic growth. Whether Chinas leaders can recognise that will determine Chinas future and success. Markets rise and fall, but the human spirit always seeks to soar, wherever it is.

Kate Hoey (Vauxhall, Lab): Does [Mr Pritchard] agree that it is shocking that the InterContinental Hotels Group, whose headquarters is in London, is building a new hotel in the centre of Tibet? That is not acceptable to the Tibetans who have fought so long for the right to be free in their own country.

Mark Pritchard: The InterContinental Hotels Group is an important British company employing a lot of people around the world. Clearly, it must make commercial decisions with the information available. I would hope that it had some dialogue not only with the Chinese authorities but with Tibetans in exile and the people in Tibet who are being oppressed by the Chinese authorities. I will come to Tibet later in my speech. If InterContinental did not consult, I hope that it will learn lessons from the example of Tibet.

Despite the UKs positive relations with China, in many areas China lets itself down, remaining in a cold war mentality, where communism still triumphs over consumerism, irrational fear still triumphs over freedom and ideology usurps individualism.

We have good relations with China, but how the Chinese authorities treat the Chinese media - I am focusing on the communist party, not the Chinese people - reveals quite a lot. Article 35 of the Chinese constitution guarantees freedom of speech, assembly, association and publication, but these rights are subordinated to Chinas ruling communist party. With its tight control over print, broadcast and online media and through the use of its central propaganda department, there is no freedom of the press or media in China.

It is an unnecessarily paranoid regime - a paranoia that shows weakness not strength. The Chinese authorities need to stop imprisoning journalists and bloggers and need to either try those journalists in an open, televised court or release them from jail. Chinas claims to modernity need to be manifest in the updating of its freedoms and laws, not just in the updating of its roads, bridges, buildings and infrastructure. Without such changes, Chinas claims of modernity are false - a mirage.

China needs to unblock access to the BBC Chinese Mandarin website, blocked since 1999, and Chinas jamming of the BBCs English short-wave service, which also affects the reception in other Asian countries, should end.

China needs to do far more to stop the persecution of religious minorities. Again, this is a contravention of its own constitution, international law and UN conventions. Many cases exist today of Christians, Buddhists, Muslims and others, including Falun Gong, being imprisoned, beaten and tortured. Churches and other places of worship, outside the heavily controlled state religious institutions, face attack daily. The Christian house church movement is particularly prone to attack, being within the Protestant Christian religion.

Stewart Jackson (Peterborough, Con): [Mr Pritchard] talks about the international community being minded to take a tough approach, but as we speak there are human rights abuses in Tibet. There is self-immolation, and dissidents are being driven into the Dharamsala mountains. There is collective punishment and an attempt to eradicate the culture and language of Tibet. Is that not something on which the international community should be taking a tough stance, rather than kowtowing and acquiescing in the bullying of China when, for instance, the Dalai Lama visits various international communities?

Mark Pritchard: ...I have met the Dalai Lama twice, for which I am glad. I am proud to have had the privilege of meeting him, and what the Chinese Government are doing in Tibet is completely unacceptable. There has been suppression of the Buddhist religion and oppression of the Tibetan people. There has been burning - since the late 1940s probably 6,000 monasteries and churches have been destroyed. From memory, there are some 300,000 Chinese troops currently in Tibet, which is unacceptable. There needs to be a peaceful resolution to the Tibet question, and human rights in Tibet must be recognised.

My hon. Friend used the term kowtowing. I am a subject of Her Majesty the Queen. I am a UK citizen, and I will meet whomever I want to meet. I will not kowtow to anyone from any other country. The Chinese must stop bullying individuals; they must stop bullying Tibet; and they must stop bullying other Governments, too.

Simon Hughes (Bermondsey and Old Southwark, Lib Dem): On Tibet, many of us are very supportive of better links with China The Chinese do not yet appear to understand that nobody is seeking to threaten Chinas control of Tibet; we are just seeking, with the Buddhists, to argue for their religious freedom and for a certain degree of autonomy for them to live their lives in the old parts of China, as they would choose to do.

Mark Pritchard: My right hon. Friend makes an important point. We are hopefully arguing for the upholding of the Chinese constitution itself. The Chinese authorities need not fear freedom of religion. The suppression of religion, not the freedom of religion, is what causes instability in societies.

The Chinese Government should educate their population on the threat to some of the worlds most endangered and vulnerable species and unblock websites so that people may access that information themselves. Even the Tibetan antelope has been driven to the brink of extinction due to the Chinese authorities destroying its habitat with forced land use changes and unregulated hunting.

The Chinese invasion of Tibet has resulted in the death of hundreds of thousands of Tibetans and the imprisonment and torture of thousands more. In 1959, the Dalai Lama, Tibets political and spiritual leader, fled into exile in India followed by more than 100,000 Tibetans, and established the Tibetan Government in exile.

China must end its economic strangulation of, and mass economic discrimination against, Tibet. That deliberate policy has forced thousands of Tibetans to abandon their traditional rural lives and move into new housing colonies in urban areas where non-agricultural jobs are controlled by the Chinese state. Tibetans are now a minority in such urban centres because of Chinas encouragement of mass Chinese migration.

The Buddhist religion continues to suffer. The Chinese have destroyed more than 6,000 Tibetan Buddhist monasteries and shrines since 1949. Today, the number of monks allowed to enter monasteries is strictly controlled and limited. Any references to, or images of, the Dalai Lama are banned. As I mentioned, I have had the privilege of meeting the Dalai Lama twice, and I have made it clear whom I will meet and not meet.

Chinese political oppression and that is what it is: oppression has responded to uprisings with extreme violence. Some 300,000 Chinese soldiers are now posted in Tibet. China has repeatedly violated UN conventions through the extensive use of torture against Tibetan political prisoners, including monks and nuns. The Chinese regime has also wreaked huge environmental damage throughout Tibet.

The third plenary of the 18th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China met last week. Many of the decisions made at that important gathering are welcome, but those decisions must be implemented, not just announced - the Chinese are very good at press releases, but we need to see action on the ground that changes peoples lives for the better.

Kate Hoey: Does the hon. Gentleman agree that, although the Chinese reaction to the Prime Ministers meeting with the Dalai Lama was rather upsetting, the Prime Minister should, when he visits China in the near future, specifically raise with the Chinese Government the position of Tibet, including all the political prisoners in Tibet and the way in which Tibetan culture is being ruined?

Mark Pritchard:
The Prime Minister will set out the case for human rights, which the Foreign Secretary and other Foreign Office Ministers do consistently, but the realpolitik is that we need to engage with China on all sorts of levels. That said, I believe that the Prime Minister will want to avoid any perception that the United Kingdom and its Government, and therefore its people, are kowtowing to the Chinese and I am sure that that perception will not be allowed to form when he visits China.

[From Chinas recent plenary session] I also welcome the announcement that fewer crimes will be subject to the death penalty. Such measures should be introduced this year, not next year. I also hope that that will lead to the complete abolition of the death penalty.

In conclusion, Chinas economic rise has been impressive, but if it is to be sustainable, its economic progress needs to be matched with more freedoms for its people and with foreign policy restraint. The Chinese are great historians, great diplomats and great survivors. The Communist party will know that it cannot hold back the tide of its own peoples rising aspirations, growing expectations and more informed view of their place in China and the rest of the world. The partys future will not be secured by stirring extreme nationalism or fostering xenophobia. Chinas Communist leaders need to allow change or sooner or later they will be changed. They can work with their people or against their people. Let freedom reign in China.

Martin Horwood (Cheltenham, Lib Dem): ...We can talk about many positives when discussing China There are, however, many alarm bells... I will quickly run through seven alarm bells. Domestic human rights is only one of them and is still a major problem. Reports in the last year from Human Rights Watch, Freedom House, Amnesty International, Pen International and Reporters Without Borders have put China in the bottom few countries of the world in terms of respect for human rights and for freedom of expression. Many of them put Tibet in the worst category of all. The most recent Foreign Office human rights report, issued in 2012, still mentioned the use of unlawful and arbitrary measures to target human rights defenders... These included enforced disappearance, house arrest, restrictions on freedom of movement, communication and association, extrajudicial detention (including re-education through labour (RTL), black jails and involuntary psychiatric committal) and harassment of family members. Human rights defenders also continued to be subjected to criminal charges and procedurally flawed trials, often involving the poorly defined category of offences encompassing endangering state security. Diplomats and media were repeatedly refused access to their trials.

That kind of active physical oppression is mirrored on the internet, where, as hon. Members have said, access to sites such as Google and the BBC is restricted. It is clear that China is far from being a good example to the rest of the world on human rights.

As Chinas economic power grows, so does its influence in many other parts of the world. Its record on its impact on human rights in other countries is also pretty terrible. Regimes such as Sudan and Zimbabwe have benefited from Chinese patronage. Despite supposed international trade sanctions, China provides a large amount of funding to the North Korean state.

Topically, the Chinese Government have been friendly towards the Government of Sri Lanka, openly providing weapons and military equipment, which was used against the northern Tamil population There is also, I am afraid to say, the close relationship between China and Syria.

We are somewhat like rabbits caught in the economic headlights: we see the enormous value of trade and business, and we are so worried about any risks to it - particularly after the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister met the Dalai Lama, resulting in the freezing of relations with top officials for several years - that we try to brush the complex picture of policy I have described under the carpet in the pursuit of economic relationships.

It was rather sad that the coalition agreement, of which I am, in many respects, very proud, had only one line about China. It said: We willseek closer engagement with China, while standing firm on human rights in all our bilateral relationships.

In other words, we will pursue trade, and we will perhaps go through the motions of the rather formulaic human rights dialogue we have with the Chinese Government. However, we do not seem to have appreciated the complexity of Chinas impact on democracy, the environment, human rights, trade and peace all over the world.

The Government need to have a more comprehensive and holistic China policy Democracies around the world might also need to develop a comprehensive and holistic response to this emerging superpower. Simply pursing trade at the expense of everything else could be quite a dangerous policy in the long run, and we have to be a little cautious about that.

Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East, Lab): ...China is particularly vulnerable to the impact of climate change, with increasing temperatures and rising sea levels a threat to its long coast line. Glacier melt in Tibet is also a serious concern... Interestingly, there have been dramatic increases in environmental protests in China, and surveys indicate considerable support for more robust environmental regulation.

As we heard, after the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister met the Dalai Lama last year, the bilateral relationship became rather strained, and it was reported that the Prime Ministers visit to China was postponed as a result. He was not welcome in the country, and ministerial contact was reportedly cut off.

Following the thawing of relations it seemed that the Chancellor, on his recent visit, was keen to reassure China that the Prime Minister had no further plans to meet the Dalai Lama. Undoubtedly the trip took place in delicate circumstances, and reportedly there were tensions between the Treasury and the Foreign Office about how to reconcile Chinas strategic importance, particularly on the economic front, with its human rights record. The answer - I hope that the Minister will agree - is that neither can be ignored, which is why human rights were central to Labours strategy for building a closer relationship with China.

...The Government recently published their action plan on business and human rights, which said that the promotion of business and respect for human rights should go hand in hand. There is concern that the Treasury in particular has not signed up to that script. Following the Chancellors visit, I tabled a question asking what discussions he had had with the Foreign Secretary before he went about human rights in China and the Governments action plan on business and human rights. I also asked what discussions the Chancellor had during his visit about freedom of expression, freedom of association, the rule of law and Tibet.

Somewhat mysteriously, the question seemed to be transferred to the Foreign Office. I received a letter from there, telling me that it had been sent back to the Chancellor for a response. The Chancellor chose not to respond, and passed the question to the Economic Secretary to the Treasury, who had not even been on the trip, although I believe the Financial Secretary had. The Economic Secretary responded on 4 November at column 11W but would not tell me whether the Chancellor had discussed human rights with the Foreign Secretary or with officials he met in China.

That is not really good enough. When the Chancellor goes on a trade mission, we expect him to be concerned primarily with economic matters, but human rights should be woven through our bilateral relationship with any country, and should be raised as part of the delegation.

The UK cannot strengthen its relationship with China by being timid; we must acknowledge where China has made progress and be frank where there are shortcomings.

...As to Tibet, while we respect Chinas sovereignty, we cannot ignore the serious human rights issues that arise - the disturbing number of self-immolations and the reports of arrests because a friend or relative has self-immolated. It is important that the UK should continue to raise concerns about the treatment of people in Tibet and promote dialogue. The UK-China human rights dialogue is one cornerstone of our bilateral relationship. The 20th round took place in January 2012, and the Foreign Offices March human rights update reported that it was waiting for China to respond to the proposed dates for the 21st round. That was not included in the June or September updates, but I hope that progress is being made and that the Minister will agree that it is important to continue that long-standing dialogue and get the 21st round in the diary as soon as possible.

From next year, the UK will be working with China on the Human Rights Council. Given that the Foreign Secretary has said that his priorities for the UKs term on the council include championing freedom of expression and freedom of religion and belief, it is important for the UK to press its new colleagues on the council on such issues and to emphasise the value of visits by UN special rapporteurs, as well as championing the issues globally.

To conclude, we support constructive long-term engagement, but it needs to be political as well as economic engagement across Government. The long-planned autumn statement has now been rearranged because of the Prime Ministers visit to China next month. The number of the Prime Ministers overseas trips has given the impression that he is concentrating on trade to the exclusion of human rights, so I hope that the Foreign Office will ensure that he is fully briefed on the UKs commitment to the UN guiding principles on business and human rights and on the reasons why the Foreign Office includes China among its countries of concern.

Mark Simmonds (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs):
Chinas rise represents a huge opportunity for Britain, but it has clearly prompted bilateral and regional stresses, which it is important for us to understand and to help to manage.

We are particularly keen to encourage investment from China -as from elsewhere in the world- in our infrastructure, which we hope will bring about 200 billion of projects over the next five years.

Investment is only part of the story. Our bilateral trade with China is now worth more than $70 billion a year and we are on track to meet the target of $100 billion a year by 2015. UK exports of goods and services to China have increased 10% in the past year alone, and are growing at the fastest rate of any major EU nation.

In addition to our efforts to support British businesses, we want to help China to improve the environment for foreign business by developing the rule of law and enabling a stable, secure and corruption-free environment to allow foreign business to thrive there. My hon. Friend the Member for The Wrekin and the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Martin Horwood) were absolutely right about the necessity and importance of encouraging the Chinese not to block flow of information through the BBC or Google. We strongly believe that a modern knowledge economy must be built on the free flow of ideas. Freedom of expression is a fundamental right. We continue to raise concerns about freedom of expression with the Chinese authorities, and outline our position in our annual human rights report that the hon. Member for Cheltenham quoted.

I turn now to the important issue of human rights... It is right to say that our prosperity, security, values and global interests are clearly interconnected. As my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has said, we must have a foreign policy based on our values, and the Government believe that respect for human rights is good for economic growth. We want China to continue to succeed. We believe that the development of an independent civil society and the application of human rights under the rule of law are essential for Chinas long-term prosperity, along with the free flow of ideas that is an essential part of the growth of a knowledge-driven economy. That is why we welcome the reforms announced during the recent third plenum to deepen judicial reform, end re-education through labour camps and increase reproductive rights.

On the specific point my hon. Friend made about the ending of re-education through labour camps, although I acknowledge that we are still waiting for the detail about the time frame under which we hope that will be delivered, we welcome the progress that has been made. The new leadership is serious about both economic and financial reforms, and those other reforms. We hope that the authorities will plan not just to abolish reform through labour camps but to end all forms of arbitrary and extra-judicial detention. That is a priority for our engagement with China and was a key part of the statement we made on 22 October that was referred to by the hon. Member for Bristol East.

Where there are additional concerns about human rights, we raise them. To give confirmation to the shadow Minister, we are seeking to agree dates for the next human rights dialogue with the Chinese Government in 2014. We continue to discuss human rights issues with the Chinese authorities, including Tibet We are concerned about the continuing arrest and disappearance in China of activists, lawyers and journalists and others who attempt to exercise their right to freedom of expression and association.

[W]e remain concerned about the restrictions placed on freedom of religion in China. Freedom of religion and belief is a fundamental right, and we believe that everybody should be free to practise their religion according to their beliefs, in accordance with the international frameworks to which both the United Kingdom and China are party. We made a statement at the United Nations universal periodic review of China on 22 October, focusing on concerns about extra-legal and arbitrary detention, ratification of the international covenant on civil and political rights, freedom of expression and association, the death penalty, Tibet and Xinjiang. We consulted civil society when drawing up our recommendations. We also fund an array of strategic projects focused on areas including the rule of law, the death penalty, womens rights and civil society.

We have different histories and systems, however, and are at different stages in our development, so there will be areas where we disagree. That is why we are committed to continued dialogue and that is why the Prime Minister told the House of Commons that we want to have a strong and positive relationship with China to our mutual benefit.

I turn now specifically to Tibet, so that colleagues will be under no illusions. The issue was raised by my hon. Friends the Members for The Wrekin and for Peterborough (Mr Jackson), the right hon. Member for Bermondsey and Old Southwark (Simon Hughes), and the hon. Members for Vauxhall (Kate Hoey), for Cheltenham, and for Bristol East. We continue to have serious concerns about human rights in Tibet. We believe that meaningful dialogue is the best way to address and resolve the underlying grievances of the Tibetan communities, and we urge all parties to restart talks as soon as possible. However, the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary have stated clearly that our policy is unchanged, and is consistent with that of the previous Government, in that we recognise Tibet is part of China. The Prime Minister has no plans to meet the Dalai Lama.

We continue to work with China at all levels, not just with central Government, but at provincial and local level on a multilateral basis to try to encourage process and improvement in environmental standards, and to encourage the use of renewables and energy efficiency, which are a key component of this important agenda.

We are entering a new phase in our relationship with China. The United Kingdom has significant expertise that complements Chinas needs, not just in the private sector but in the Government sector. Our global interests are more closely interlinked than ever. We will continue to approach UK-China relations constructively based on our values and shared interests. We can deliver real prosperity and security benefits for the UK, China and Asia.

Read the full three hour debate on the UK parliament website - Part 1 I Part 2


Tibet Society, the worlds first Tibet support group, was founded in 1959. Funded by its members, it has been working for over 50 years to seek justice for Tibet through parliamentary lobbying, campaigns and actions. Help keep Tibet alive by joining Tibet Society today. (Annual membership 24; Family 36; Life 500)
 
ImageJoin Tibet Society I Donate
More details about membership
 
< Prev   Next >

© 2017 Tibet Society
Joomla! is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL License.
Template Design by funky-visions.de