The United Kingdom generally takes a soft approach due largely to a strong desire for profitable trade with China. In November 2008, Foreign Secretary David Miliband stated that "we (the British government) regard Tibet as part of the People's Republic of China'.

Britain’s position on the legal status of Tibet matters enormously because it is the only major power to have dealt directly with the Tibetan government before China’s 1950 invasion and occupation of Tibet. Its position was based on treaties it signed with the Tibetan government, notably the Simla Accords of 1913 which established the boundaries between Tibet and British-administered India. Britain did not deal with Chinese diplomats during this period, but Tibetans who crossed the border into the British Indian Empire on Tibetan passports and who were considered the legitimate representatives of an independent Tibet. Britain then recognised Chinese suzerainty in Tibet, but only provided that China accepted Tibet’s autonomy; China never did and therefore even the British offer to recognize China’s suzerainty remained contingent only.

This view was emphasised by then British Foreign Secretary, Lord Curzon, in 1920 when he also stated that Britain had viewed Tibet as de facto independent since 1912. The British position was re-iterated in 1943 when the then Chinese foreign minister asked Anthony Eden for Britain’s position on the status of Tibet.

Free Tibet has been campaigning to secure a parliamentary inquiry into Britain's weakened Tibet policy. Click here to read more.

·       Click for UK statements on Tibet

·       Click for UK relations with Tibet

·       Click for UK relations with China