Letter |
OPEN LETTER TO INVESTORS AND INTERCONTINENTAL HOTEL GROUP EXECUTIVES
27 May 2011
We represent a network of tens of thousands of Tibetans and their supporters from across the
globe who are concerned about the planned construction and opening of the 2,000 room InterContinental Resort Lhasa, in partnership with Sichuan entrepreneur Deng Hong's company, Exhibition & Travel Group.
The presence of InterContinental Hotel Group (IHG) legitimises China’s occupation of Tibet and sends a misleading message to the world that the situation in Tibet is ‘normal’.
The attraction of the hotel will be the destination itself – Tibet. The ‘product’ is Tibetan culture, identity, religion and environment – none of which Tibetans themselves control.
WE ARE HERE TODAY TO URGE YOU TO WITHDRAW FROM YOUR AGREEMENT TO OPERATE THE HOTEL, CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND SCHEDULED TO OPEN IN 2012.
TIBET: OCCUPATION IS NO HOLIDAY
Far from being normal, the situation in Tibet is, in the words of the Dalai Lama, “hell on earth”: outward signs of a thriving religion such as monasteries, nuns, monks give the illusion of freedom of religion (but conceal strict government control); according to the United Nations, torture is widespread and routine in Tibet; Tibetans can be charged and face lengthy prison sentences for so-called acts of “splittism”, undefined in law, but which have included acts as simple as flying the banned Tibetan flag.
Under Chinese occupation Tibetans are denied the internationally recognised right to determine the use of their own land and resources. Since 1999, the Chinese government has supported the large-scale migration of Chinese settlers into Tibet; billions of Yuan have been pumped into the country to build infrastructure programmes, doubling the economy in the first half of the last decade. But contracts are mostly awarded to Chinese state-owned companies or to those close to the regime, giving them good reason not to criticise as they gain financially from the system that privileges some while exploiting the basic human rights of others. In an interview with The Washington Post, Deng Hong said “My business depends on the government”. Money goes into Tibet, but most of the money goes straight back out before it can touch Tibetan lives.
If InterContinental Resort Lhasa is completed it will further entrench China’s occupation of Tibet.
Tourism in Tibet – like in any conflict situation – threatens the reputation of investors.
IHG's own corporate responsibility commitments are virtually impossible to implement or monitor in Tibet. IHG’s presence in Tibet would violate the organisation’s principle of ‘do no harm’. Given that “most Tibetans are too frightened to voice any criticism of China openly” (the words of the BBC’s Beijing Correspondent on his last visit to Lhasa), how will IHG be able to carry out, for example, a social impact assessment? How will it be able to speak to local leaders to identify and resolve rights issues when the very people IHG should be speaking to are not free to express their opinions?
In 1997, the Holiday Inn, now part of InterContinental Hotel Group, pulled out of Lhasa after facing an intense campaign from Tibetan rights organisations.
