What are the provisions of the Resolve Tibet Act? How is it different from the previous laws passed by Congress?

Key provisions

The Resolve Tibet Act authorises the use of funds to counter Chinese disinformation about Tibet “including disinformation about the history of Tibet, the Tibetan people, and Tibetan institutions, including that of the Dalai Lama.”

The act also challenges the Chinese contention that Tibet has been a part of China since ancient times. It urges China to engage in meaningful and direct dialogue with the Dalai Lama or his representatives, as well as democratically elected leaders of the Tibetan community “without preconditions, to seek a settlement that resolves differences.”

Underlining the right of the Tibetan people to self-determination and human rights, the act makes a note of China’s duty as a signatory of two covenants — the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights — that advocate the same.

The Resolve Tibet Act seeks to recognise and address the multi-faceted socio-cultural identity of the Tibetan people, in particular their “distinct historical, cultural, religious, and linguistic identity.” Finally, it amends the TPA to define the exact geographical areas part of the Tibetan Autonomous Region.

Different from previous legislation

The Resolve Tibet Act is a bold successor to the two acts which preceded it.

The TPA, the first of its kind explicitly concerning Tibet, took a cautious stance in defining American policy on Tibet. While it flagged the ill-treatment of Tibetans, unlike the 2024 act, it recognised China’s claim that Tibet was an integral part of China.

The 2002 act encouraged the Chinese government to pursue dialogue with the Dalai Lama as a “constructive partner,” but reiterated his lack of intent in pursuing sovereignty or independence for Tibet, stressing instead on his desire for greater autonomy for Tibetans in China. The TPA even clarified that the US government did not maintain any official relations with the Tibetan government-in-exile, led until 2011 by the Dalai Lama himself, and would only meet him in his capacity as a spiritual leader, and Nobel Laureate.

The TPSA of 2020 pushed for constructive dialogue between the PRC and the Dalai Lama or his representatives, or democratically elected leaders of Tibet resulting in a “negotiated agreement”, encouraging international support towards the same. The Resolve Tibet Act underlines the need for such talks to be pursued without “preconditions” on the terms to seek a settlement that resolves differences.

The TPSA also stated that the matter of succession of the Dalai Lama was not of China’s concern and would best be left to Tibetan Buddhists.

Read the report on The Indian Express here.