UPDATE:
Following the publication of the report in May, the Chinese government ordered the shutdown of Gongmeng's Legal Centre in Beijing on 17 July 2009, and cancelled 53 of their lawyers licenses based on unproven grounds.

These drastic measures highlight how the Chinese authorities are neither willing nor capable of dealing with constructive criticism, even when it comes from the Chinese people.

The Beijing academics report

In May 2009 a report (“An investigative report into the social and economic causes of the 3.14 incident in Tibetan areas”) was released which sought to analyse the root causes of the protests that swept across the Tibetan Plateau in Spring 2008.

The report is based on fieldwork and interviews with Tibetans conducted by scholars in the Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR) and in Gannan Autonomous Prefecture in the Amdo region of Tibet (Ch prov: Gansu).

 The field work was conducted over a one month period following the spring 2008 Tibet protests. A braod range of Tibetan society was interviewed including: monks, scholars, farmers, nomads, artists and entrepeneurs.

 The report was issued by the Gongmeng Law Research Center, Beijing, which is a Beijing-based lawyers’ organisation and thinktank. Several of the report’s authors attended the prestigious Beijing University Law Centre.

The report is significant because:

• It appears to be directed at key decision-makers on Tibet policy and is unprecedented in offering direct criticism of the Chinese government’s policy in Tibet.
• It is the first analysis on the root causes of the spring 2008 protests to have emerged from inside China.
• It is indicative of the existence of progressive views on Tibet in China and is likely to encourage others in China who are critical of Tibet policy to speak out.
  

The report is bold in its findings and concludes:

• That China’s strategies to ensure “stability” in Tibet have failed.
• That China’s intensive propaganda offensive has significantly deepened existing ethnic tensions in Tibet.
• That the Chinese government’s claim that the protests were planned by “hostile foreign forces” and “Dalai clique” are simplistic, and that the reasons for the protests were far more complex, including deep-seated resentment of policies that Tibetans felt were not relevant to them.
  
  

Constraints and what is missing in the report:

• The report’s findings are presented in a relatively cautious manner which appears to be an attempt not to alienate policy makers so as to maximise the chances that its findings will have impact and be accepted.
• Caution is seen in the way in which the protests are presented as the result of the failure of policy only.
• Politically more sensitive issues that undoubtedly lay behind the protests – the rejection by Tibetans of the Chinese government’s legitimacy in Tibet, the role of the Dalai Lama and the relationship between Tibet and China – are ignored.

Tibetans protest across the country in Spring 2008

The report's contents

The first chapter sets out and describes the Chinese government’s policy of modernisation and reform in Tibet from 1949. It then details the impact of the policy of modernisation on Tibetans, arguing that the policy of modernisation has caused major problems, particularly marginalisation, which were at the root of the spring 2008 protests.

 It recognises that that a very rapid process of change from a traditional, closed and religious society to an open and “marketized” society has been imposed on Tibetans. It states that, due to this process, “the Tibetan people face multiple schisms and dislocations” and acknowledges that “this hurried process…….are not the result of choices made by Tibetans”.

 In a sub-heading to this chapter, the report claims there has been an “increasing marginalisation of Tibetans in the modernisation process”.

 Pointing to the way in which most Tibetans have been excluded from modernization, the report observes "Tibetan people have no way of quickly entering the comprehensive modernisation process”.

 Tibetans’ failure to benefit from modernisation is stated to be “related to the question of opportunity and is also connected to the question of skills. With regard to Tibetans there are enormous problems in these two areas in the current process of modernisation in Tibetan areas”.

Tibetans take to the streets in Labrang, March 2008

Marginalisation through lack of opportunity

 “Because Tibetans lack capital and skills, this is contributing to them becoming increasingly marginalised”.

 The report points to the increasing marginalisation of Tibetans by citing the influx of Han Chinese migrants into Lhasa. Such marginalisation was important in developing a sense of resentment that led to the protests, according to the report. The report states that Han Chinese migrants have come to dominate that key industries in Lhasa including restaurant ownership, taxi driving and tourist services.

“To a large extent, non-Tibetans control all major aspects of the local economy. Economically, in terms of skills and in terms of adapting to value systems, Tibetans have no way of competing with non-Tibetans in the modernization process.”

The report also found that many Han Chinese running businesses refuse to employ Tibetans who they feel are “lazy”.

The sense of marginalisation, loss and unfairness brought on by the economic and social changes created by modernisation policies has strengthened a sense of ethnic identity among Tibetans and has exaggerated differences between the ethnicities. The report states that a sense of “relative deprivation” has emerged in Tibetan society and has been an important factor in strengthening Tibetan nationalist sentiment.

The failure of government education policies in Tibet

The report found that the majority of Tibetans in Gannan TAP were only educated to elementary school level and that “the level of education among young people are far lower than in Han areas”.

Impact of modernisation policy on the religious life in Tibet

The report senses that the Chinese government’s modernisation policy in Tibet has increased the secularisation in Tibetan life and that “young monks have a sense of crisis”.

Chinese troops clash with protesters during the 2008 Tibetan uprising

 

Government “errors” in handling the 2008 protests:

The report:

• Criticises the government for seeking to blame protests on foreign forces and states that the protests escalated because of the government’s “over-propagandizing” of reports on so-called “violence”. The report states that govt propaganda and reporting of protests as violent encouraged Hans to form racist attitudes towards Tibetans who were presented “as a people incapable of gratitude”.
• Finds that racist feelings towards Tibetans extended from society into official policy following the spring 2008 protests:
  

“Local policy turned to strict monitoring where everyone was suspect, “everyone has to pass a political test,” which was bound to lead to even more Tibetans becoming discontented, and created discord and dissension far and wide. Even more dangerous was that this suspicion and exclusion of Tibetans slowly spread to many places in the interior and there was some very unfair treatment. During the course of the panel’s interviews, many Tibetan elites said that they had been heavily searched at airports and hotels, and that their sense of patriotism had suffered.”

Conclusions and recommendations

The report concludes that the government should:

• “Earnestly listen to the voices of ordinary Tibetans and on the basis of respecting and protecting each of the Tibetan people’s rights and interests, adjust policy and thinking in Tibetan areas to formulate development policies which are suited to the characteristics of Tibetan areas, and which accord with the wishes of the Tibetan people.” 
• “Guide the rational development of economic structures in Tibetan areas, paying particular attention to guiding all Tibetans to share in acquiring ample benefits from opportunity and development.”
• “Pay close attention to the living situation of young Tibetans, and with the greatest good faith resolve current education problems in Tibetan areas, particularly the problems of rural education and education for farmers and nomads, and by means of subsidies and guidance entice children to complete nine-year compulsory education. Continue to develop and encourage training mechanisms for highly skilled personnel in Tibetan
  areas, and to optimize specialized knowledge structures among college students…… Education and training must be regarded as the most important long-term resolution to the question of Tibetan areas.”
  
  Read more in this Times report