An investigative report into the social and economic causes of the 3.14 incident in Tibetan areas
Gongmeng Law Research Center
Contributors: Li Kun, Huang Li, Li Xiang
Research: Li Kun, Huang Li, Li Xiang, Wang Hongzhe
I: Economic and social changes in Tibetan areas amid a process of rapid modernization
a) The centrally-directed rapid process of modernization
b) The social consequences arising from a process of rapid modernization under a specially formulated path
II: Hardships faced by young Tibetans born in the 70s and 80s
a) Serious problems in basic education
b) Vocational education and the lack of social opportunity
c) The sense of relative deprivation while living in a more open process of modernization as a catalyst for strengthening nationalist sentiment
d) The loss and forgetting of one’s nationality’s traditional culture and history
III: The main problems with structures of governance in Tibetan areas
a) The evolution of structures of governance in Tibetan areas
b) Problems in power structures within regional autonomy in Tibetan areas
IV: The government’s errors in handling the follow-up to the 3.14 incident
V: Problems of Tibetan religion and culture during this current complex phase
VI: Conclusion and recommendations
Appendices: [not available]
1) A review of the background history and culture in the Amdo and U-Tsang regions
2) Changes and modifications to the state’s nationality policies and legislation in Tibetan areas
3) Compilation of research and interview materials
4) Contact information for the subjects of this research
 U-Tsang, sometimes rendered as Central Tibet, is the Tibetan region roughly equivalent to the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR), which was established as a provincial-level administration in 1964; Amdo is the name of another Tibetan region mainly comprising modern-day Qinghai, as well as being the name a prefecture within the TAR. Throughout this report, the terms Tibet (Xizang), Tibetan areas (zangqu), and Tibetan regions (diyu), etc., have been used inconsistently and interchangeably, but it would appear that generally, the report broadly refers to Tibet as covering the various Tibetan autonomous jurisdictions as demarcated by the Chinese state.
 “3.14” refers to March 14, 2008, the date when peaceful protests over several previous days in Lhasa turned violent.
 The Hui are a Chinese-speaking Muslim people indigenous to large areas of northwest China.
 The ‘Two Basicallys’ (liang ji) is a centrally-led policy to ‘basically’ universalize nine-year compulsory education, and ‘basically’ eliminate adult illiteracy.
 The term menlu – using the characters for door and road – implies an advantage gained by nepotism or favor, and is very similar in meaning to the more commonly heard term guanxi literally meaning connection – or houmen – meaning back door.
There are currently no comments highlighted.
Page :1. admin's note
- admin's note
- Contributors, Table of Contents, and Notes
- I: Economic and social changes in Tibetan areas amid a process of rapid modernization
- II: Hardships faced by young Tibetans born in the 70s and 80s
- III: The main problems with structures of governance in Tibetan areas
- IV: The government’s errors in handling the follow-up to the 3.14 incident
- V: Problems of Tibetan religion and culture during this current complex phase
- VI: Conclusion and recommendations
139 Responses to “An investigative report into the social and economic causes of the 3.14 incident in Tibetan areas”
- A Chinese think tank investigates the roots of the March 2008 violence « Tibet Talk
- Xinjiang TLR: Happy ending for the party | CHINAYOUREN