Publications

---

Annual Report 2001

THE RIGHT TO EDUCATION

More than one third of the asylum seekers who escape into exile from Tibet every year are under the age of 18.¹ A principal motivation for many young people — and the impetus for families sending their children alone into Nepal and India — is the lack of access to high-quality, affordable education in today’s Tibet. The critical concerns identified by refugees recently arrived from Tibet are the costs of attending school, their inaccessible locations, the poor educational facilities and low quality of teachers.

The right to education is enshrined in the International Convention on the Rights of the Child (ICRC)² , where the responsibility of states in upholding the rights of its children is outlined. Of particular relevance to Tibetan children, the Convention specifies that a child’s education should be directed toward “the development of the child’s cultural identity, language and values, [and] for the national values of the country in which the child is living…”³

In violation of this, in 2001 the PRC has continued to force those Tibetans who are able to access education to receive their schooling in an alien language, in an environment which belittles and demeans their culture and heritage. Far from condemning the prevalence of under- and poorly-educated children, China continues to develop a curriculum that increasingly and openly discriminates against Tibetans in their own country.

Education is also recognised as a fundamental right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).⁴ Article 26 enshrines that “...everyone has the right to education directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms”. Similarly, the International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) states that: “…education shall enable all persons to participate effectively in a free society…”⁵ With a view to achieving this right, “...primary education shall be compulsory and available freely to all, [and] secondary education…shall be made generally available and accessible to all by every appropriate means, and in particular by the progressive introduction of free education”.⁶

Having ratified both the ICRC and ICESCR, Beijing is bound to incorporate their Articles into its National Law. While certain articles of China’s Constitution (examined in detail later) purport to uphold these principles, reports from research conducted this year by international bodies — and recent refugee accounts — reveal the vast differences between Chinese rhetoric and the reality for children in Tibet.

China has acknowledged the right to education as fundamental in its Constitution, which states that, “...citizens of the People’s Republic of China have the duty as well as the right to receive education”.⁷ Despite this provision, a vast number of children who belong to China’s 55 recognised minority nationalities are denied this right.⁸ In the PRC’s 2001 White Paper on Modernisation in Tibet, Beijing proclaimed that “The state has invested enormously in developing education...in 2001 Tibet has 956 schools of all kinds, with a total enrolment of 381,100 students. The enrolment ratio of school-age children has increased to 85.8 percent, the illiteracy rate had declined to 32.5 percent...”⁹

However, in many rural areas there are simply no schools for children to attend, and those that exist cater only to those who can afford the fees. An estimated 80 percent of Tibetans reside in rural areas, with incomes that do not allow their children what has become the “luxury” of attending schools. A case from Keru Township, Dege Jomda County, in Chamdo Prefecture, “TAR”, exemplifies the difficulties faced by Tibetan families in attaining literacy. A nomadic mother reported that there were no schools in her area to send her children to, and at the nearest school the fees were beyond her means at 500 yuan (US$58) per year. She claimed that in addition to the fees, parents were obliged to provide the school administration with 8 gyama (4kg) of butter and 30 gyama (15kg) of meat. She could afford to send her son to school for only four months.¹⁰

A 21-year-old youth from Tsodrung Township, Chentsa County, Malho “TAP”, Qinghai, said that there is a primary school in the township which the local government spent 10,000 yuan (US$ 1,176) on establishing. However, the school has only around 60 to 70 students, as the fees are beyond the means of an average Tibetan family.¹¹

A monk who has escaped to India reports that in his area of Lukhang Township, Gergye County, Ngari Prefecture, “TAR”, there are 10 villages inhabited by nomads and farmers. The school that exists for the entire area was constructed in 1997; prior to that there was no school at all. With fees of around 500 yuan (US$59) per year, a reported 90 percent of the children are unable to attend school.¹² There are large disparities between education in China’s populous east, with almost 100 percent school enrolment, and the China-controlled rural west, where less than half the population has access to even six years’ schooling.¹³

Where educational institutions exist, the quality of facilities and standard of teaching are further impediments to quality schooling. A nomad from Rangpo Town, Sog County, in Nagchu Prefecture, “TAR”, reported that, “Owing to no incentives or facilities for the teachers and students, the attendance [at school] is only about 30 percent. The reason for poor attendance can also be attributed to a lack of proper regulations. The teachers also have little free time [to teach] since they all are engaged in their own nomad or farm work which provides them a livelihood.”¹⁴

In the past 20 years ...only 15 students from Tingri County completed their high school studies. Those finishing higher studies were all the children of county officials

A number of parents view the poor quality of education as being actively detrimental to their children. At Ponda primary school, in Jidon village, Markham County, Chamdo Prefecture, “TAR”, the standard of teaching was such that parents — mostly nomads and farmers — withdrew their children despite the risk of fines of up to 1,500 yuan (US$176). “The school is a school in name only,” one parent complained, “after three years [my son] had hardly learnt the Tibetan alphabet, but has learnt all the vices like stealing and playing cards; the students learn nothing from school.”¹⁶

The situation for Tibetan students does not appear to improve at the secondary level of schooling. In the villages of Shekar Township, Tingri County, Shigatse Prefecture, “TAR”, a farmer reports that the majority of children discontinue studies after completing middle school as their parents are unable to afford the “exorbitant” fees for further study. In the past 20 years, the farmer claims, only 15 students from Tingri County completed their high school studies. Those finishing higher studies were all the children of county officials.¹⁷

Discriminatory practices

Tseten is a teacher in a primary school in Dhitoe County, Jyekundo “TAP”, Qinghai. According to Tseten, “...there is a well-established school in my county, but in this school there are only children of Chinese nationality, children of Tibetans who work under the Chinese, and children of rich Tibetan businessmen. There isn’t a single child from a nomadic or farming background. They go to a different school, and after they complete primary school most of them cannot opt for further studies as they are not able to pass the entrance exams, having not learnt anything. Moreover, the teachers say the nomad children are dumb, that they won’t learn anything. The teachers are all Chinese, and even if a nomad child did well in his or her exams the chance of getting a job is highly doubtful.”¹⁸ Throughout 2001, many children have reported discriminatory attitudes from both pupils and teachers. This manifests in bullying and harassment of Tibetan children, condoned by Chinese teachers, and labour and chores Tibetans are expected to perform during school hours while the Chinese students are exempted.¹⁹ Chinese students are also reported to have preferential access to facilities and services.

Chinese students often paid lower [school] fees, received free food and supplies that Tibetans had to purchase themselves, and at some racially mixed schools, enjoyed separate, higher quality, classrooms — or even had wholly separate schools with better facilities.²⁰

The discriminatory attitudes extend to the derision of Tibetan culture in its entirety.

Tibetan children are taught that their cultural heritage is “feudal, backward and primitive”, whereas the alien Han culture is portrayed as “civilised and advanced”. This “doctrine of superiority” is specifically prohibited by The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), which “...condemns all propaganda and all organisations which are based on ideas or theories of superiority of one race or group of persons of one colour or ethnic origin”.²¹

Ratified by the PRC in 1981, ICERD seeks to protect all, including children, from discrimination. “Discrimination between human beings on the ground of race, colour or ethnic origin is an offence to human dignity and shall be condemned…as a violation of the human rights and fundamental freedoms proclaimed in the UDHR.”²²

But China’s current education system has the effect of creating and perpetuating racial discrimination against “minority nationalities”. Minority groups, such as the Tibetans, live in geographically remote and inaccessible areas, exacerbating the discrimination of access to facilities, and attracting adequately qualified teachers.²³ This is despite the PRC Constitution guaranteeing that, “...all nationalities in the PRC are equal...discrimination against and oppression of any nationality are prohibited…”²⁴

Despite the actions that international bodies condemn, and the rosy claims of the PRC, Tibetan students feel overtly discriminated against. A 14-year-old Tibetan girl claims that the Chinese studying at her school branded the Tibetans less intelligent and poor students. “They say that the Tibetans are of an inferior class, and consequently look down upon us with a superior attitude.”²⁵ A teacher confirmed that because Tibetan students face problems when attempting to comprehend the Chinese language, “the poor performance of Tibetan students is looked down upon and teachers make taunting remarks [toward them].”²⁶

Children report being told that Tibetan Buddhist practice — the heart of the nation’s identity and culture — is “backward behaviour” and an “obstacle to progress”.²⁷ They are taught that their Tibetan history is but an insignificant component of Chinese history, that their language is redundant, and their religion a “mark of shame”. ²⁸ From a young age Tibetans are therefore infused with a sense of inferiority and systematically denied alternate options for education.

Children ... are taught that their Tibetan history is but an insignificant component of Chinese history, that their language is redundant, and their religion a ‘mark of shame’

In a Tibetan school in Rebkong County, Malho “TAP”, Qinghai, there are 300 students with a separate class for the 30 Chinese students. Although the grounds are of a reasonable size, all the buildings, both residential and educational, including toilet blocks and dining areas, are quite derelict. Many windowpanes are broken, doors damaged and the general state of the building is poor. Many areas suffer for lack of maintenance. Whereas in a Chinese school of a similar size in Barkham County, Sichuan, the facilities are in good order and the building is fairly modern. The grounds are in good repair and even have flowerbeds and facilities such as watertaps near the playing areas. There is a large U-shaped building with large windows, surrounding a basketball court, all of which are well maintained.²⁹

Studying in an alien tongue

China’s 1984 law on Regional Autonomy and the 1995 Education Law guarantee the right of minority nationalities to use their own language in education.³⁰ However, in practice minority languages have been regarded as second-class within the Chinese education system.

Reports from Tibet indicate that the Beijing Chinese dialect, putonghua, is becoming the main language of instruction in Tibetan schools. Recent changes to the provision of education in the “TAR” involve primary level teaching of mathematics and the Chinese and English languages solely through the medium of Chinese.³¹ If this trend continues, it will mean the only subject taught in Tibetan in the “TAR” is the Tibetan language itself.

The Chinese medium of instruction puts those Tibetans who are able to attend school at a major disadvantage. One teacher explains that at his school, in Jyekundo County, Jyekundo “TAP”, Qinghai, most of the teachers were Chinese. The Tibetan students were all from rural areas and reported difficulties in understanding Chinese.³² A 14-year-old student observes that at his middle school, Chinese was the main subject and other subjects, such as Chinese history, mathematics, were all taught in Chinese³³ . Another 14-year-old student reveals the bias built into the system. “The Tibetans learn Chinese but the Chinese do not learn Tibetan.”³⁴

Because Tibetan language is not seen as being relevant to a quality education, a prosperous future is perceived as possible only with fluency in Chinese. In many cases, Tibetan students opt to study Chinese rather than Tibetan, as this appears to offer prospects for future job opportunities.³⁵

For Tibetan students who leave school unable to fully comprehend either Tibetan or Chinese, their ability to communicate with the older generations, or understand the history of their own country, is jeopardised. A girl from Tsolho “TAP”, Qinghai, noted that in the later years of her schooling Tibetan was taught at high school, but “was not deemed important, it was taught by Chinese and contained no Tibetan aspects of religion or culture”. One 16-year-old, also from Tsolho “TAP” laments that she cannot speak or write Tibetan well as all her teachers were Chinese.³⁶

Nepotism and corruption are also reported to be commonplace in the Chinese educational system. A Tibetan schoolteacher in Gyalkon Township, Dartsedo County, Sichuan, points out that “...as a Tibetan, there are limited educational opportunities”.³⁷ The teacher states that certain courses are open to all for applications, but a candidate with good financial standing gains entrance quicker and easier. Parents have been known to arrange admission for their children by offering bribes to the authorities that range from 5,000 to 10,000 yuan (US$ 588-1,176). Similarly, if a candidate is connected in some way to the school principal, then it can be assumed admission is guaranteed.

Conclusion

Education is the most fundamental right guaranteed in all national and international laws. But every year thousands of children are sent from occupied Tibet by their parents for education by the exile government in India, under the Dalai Lama. These children not only suffer being separated from their parents at an early age, but also risk their lives by walking across the high and cold terrain of the Himalayas. Many die en route and more have been arrested and detained by the Chinese government without trial.

The year 2001 saw the PRC celebrating the so-called 50th anniversary of its “liberation” of Tibet from a “feudal past”. Yet, in the 21st century many children on the plateau have never seen the inside of a schoolroom. For those who have access to schooling, discrimination is clearly evident in the curriculum, the treatment of Tibetan students, as well as the more tangible issues such as facilities, teaching standards, cost and location. This is certainly leading to the escalating numbers of under-educated and subsequently unemployed young Tibetans. These factors exist to the detriment not only of Tibetan children, but also to the very future of Tibet. The conditions are so critical that parents increasingly feel the only option for their children’s education is to run the risks of sending them into exile.

The world community is called upon to take stronger steps towards pressing the Chinese government to give free and equal education to Tibetan children. If the trends of the last 50 years of Chinese colonisation continue, the whole culture of Tibet will atrophy and die under Beijing’s policy of unification and assimilation.