Free Tibet Campaign, working in solidarity with exiled Uighurs, opposes the West - East pipeline on the grounds that China is exploiting resources which rightfully belong to people under occupation, and that the project is part of China's Western Development Plan designed to consolidate political control of Tibet and East Turkestan. PetroChina is also active in Tibet, having completed in the last year a gas pipeline from the Tsaidam Basin on the Tibetan plateau to Lanzhou in Gansu Province. PetroChinaÕs intention is that these two gas pipelines will link up in the future to meet demands for energy in eastern China.

Free Tibet Campaign additionally believes that there are fundamental problems in conducting meaningful Social Impact Assessments for such political projects in China, where there is no freedom of information and no independent organisations representing civil society. Since UNDP China must operate with the permission of the Chinese government, it is questionable whether it is in fact possible to conduct an independent survey in China. Extensive correspondence with UNDP China has revealed a number of concerns about conduct of the survey. UNDP China's report is not due to be published until mid July, making today's signing by Shell, Exxon and Gazprom premature.

"Shell, ExxonMobil and Gazprom have joined BP as partners with PetroChina; the company delivering the Chinese government's political objectives", said Alison Reynolds, Director of Free Tibet Campaign. "UNDP's Social Impact Assessment, though not yet published, appears to be no more than a rubber stamp seal of approval. The fact remains that this pipeline is unlikely to be in the interests of the Uighur people, and we fear that UNDP's association with the project will lend it an endorsement that it does not deserve."

A cursory examination of UNDP's survey questionnaires which were today made available to Free Tibet Campaign reveals some worrying omissions. Demographic changes, cultural degradation or the possibility of social unrest are not listed amongst the prompted answers about possible negative impacts of the pipeline. Households apparently knew very little about the project, but Free Tibet Campaign has not been able to establish what information was provided beyond fact sheets from Shell, which would undoubtedly place the project in a positive light. Most people would only have learned about the pipeline from State media or local cadres.

"We are concerned that UNDP is being used as cover for corporate involvement in China's exploitation of colonized areas," added Ms Reynolds. "By committing themselves further to PetroChina, Shell and its partners are demonstrating strong support for China's political objectives in East Turkestan and risk causing harm to oppressed and vulnerable people."

Notes:

1. Correspondence has so far not revealed detailed information about how the survey was conducted, including who conducted the survey beyond Tsinghua University and the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (a prestigious university - source of many of China's top leaders and an arm of central authority that conducts innumerable tasks for the government.) No information has been provided about who "independent international social experts" apparently involved in the survey are. The Executing Agency is MOFTEC (Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Co-operation).

2. UNDP has stated that "[its] involvement in carrying out a social impact assessment is not about putting the basic premise of the project in question but rather to try to identify in the best possible way what the local communities want to get out of it." This statement underlines the political nature of the project and suggests that expressing opposition to it was not an option. The questionnaires provided to Free Tibet Campaign contain a limited number of open questions, but most are closed. The official nature of the survey imply that the results will be what the questioning team wish to hear, otherwise known to sociologists as "agreement response set." (World Bank Inspection Panel finding: "practical alternatives are neither identified nor systematically compared." (Para 35)

3. UNDP's definition of affected people is unclear. Tibet campaigners have asserted that, since the resource heritage of Uighur people is to be extracted and transported to eastern China, many millions of ethnic Uighurs could be defined as 'affected people'. The questionnaires provided include one for Rural Households, one for Urban Households, an Interview Protocol for "Stakeholders and Focus Groups" and a questionnaire for local officials or leaders in villages and counties within 5km of the pipeline.

4. Uighurs in exile have expressed concern that the West East pipeline project will fuel greater immigration of Chinese into East Turkestan (Xinjiang), further eroding their cultural identity. There have been examples of sentences for Tibetans criticising Chinese immigration into Tibet. Namlo Yag, sentenced in 1994 in Haixi prefecture for "independence activities" which included criticism of immigration, told the Tibet Information Network in 1999, after the World Bank's consultation on a resettlement project in Tibet that "Those Tibetans who expressed their dissent have stepped off the cliff. Now my biggest wish is that they should be protected, and that international organisations should do what they can to help them."

Contact: Alison Reynolds +44 20 7833 9958 mobile +44 7711 843884