China Blocks Foreign Reporters From Covering Tibetan Protests

May 12, 2008

Chinese officials have barred foreign journalists from entering large parts of western China to cover recent incidents of Tibetan protests. The closed areas include the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR), about half of Sichuan province, and parts of Qinghai, Gansu, and Yunnan provinces, according to a March 20 Deutsche Welle article and an April 10 Wall Street Journal (WSJ) article.

Chinese officials have barred foreign journalists from entering large parts of western China to cover recent incidents of Tibetan protests. The closed areas include the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR), about half of Sichuan province, and parts of Qinghai, Gansu, and Yunnan provinces, according to a March 20 Deutsche Welle article and an April 10 Wall Street Journal (WSJ) article. Foreign journalists trying to enter or leave the areas reported incidents where local police locked them in a hotel overnight or threatened to confiscate their footage, according to the Foreign Correspondents Club of China (FCCC) and an April 5 Associated Press (AP) article (via the International Herald Tribune). The Tibetan protests, many peaceful but some of which have been violent, began on March 10 in Lhasa, the capital of the TAR. The protests spread quickly to the Tibetan areas of Sichuan, Gansu, and Qinghai provinces, where most of the reported protests have occurred. Foreign reporters and journalists' advocacy groups say the travel ban contravenes foreign journalist regulations intended to fulfill a commitment China made in its successful bid for the Olympics, according to a March 17 Committee to Protect Journalists statement and the April 5 AP article. According to the International Olympic Committee's (IOC) bid evaluation, China promised "no restrictions on media reporting and movement of journalists up to and including the Olympic Games." On April 10, IOC President Jacques Rogge, referring to the restrictions on travel to the TAR, said that the foreign journalist regulations are "not yet fully implemented" and that he had asked China to implement the regulations "in full" and "as soon as possible," according to an April 11 Washington Post article.

China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Qin Gang said at a March 25 press conference (English, Chinese) that the travel restrictions are intended to ensure the safety of journalists. He also said "it is legal and reasonable for local governments to take some restrictive measures," and noted "some foreign governments also warned their citizens against traveling to these areas." Even before the protests, China continued to require journalists to obtain a special travel permit to visit the TAR, despite the "no restrictions" nature of its commitment for the Olympics. An MFA official said this was "due to restraints in natural conditions and reception capabilities." Since the protests began, the government has organized supervised tours to Lhasa and Xiahe, in Gansu province, for a limited number of invited journalists, according to an April 10 New York Times (NYT) article. During the government-managed trip to Lhasa, AP reported that the journalists were "frequently monitored, and even followed," according to a March 26 article.

The travel ban appears inconsistent with international human rights standards. While such standards recognize that freedom of expression may be restricted in order to respect the rights or reputations of others, or protect national security, public order, public health, or morals, such restrictions "shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary." (See Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.) The ban, however, appears more than necessary for the protection of foreign journalists, the justification provided by Chinese officials, given its geographic scope and the nature of the threat. Foreign journalists indicate that the borders of the closed off areas extend far beyond reported protest sites and that the size of the closed areas is much larger than in conflicts in other parts of the world, according to the FCCC Web site and a March 18 Christian Science Monitor article. While there have been reports of violence, officials have at various times claimed that conditions in closed areas are "completely normal" or that "social order and stability has been restored." (See, e.g., a March 20 MFA press conference (English, Chinese) and the April 5 AP report.) Furthermore, during both government-supervised media tours, groups of monks used the opportunity to voice their grievances to the journalists, suggesting that instead of being targets of violence, foreign reporters might be welcomed by protesters eager to have their messages heard.

The ban also appears to be motivated by political concerns rather than the safety of foreign journalists. Widespread censorship of the Internet and domestic and Western news of the protests has been reported. (See, e.g., a March 17 Guardian article, a March 17 NYT article, and a March 18 WSJ article.) Officials and the state-controlled media have sought to discredit the Western media by focusing on their "biased" and "unfair" reporting of the protests. (See, e.g., an April 8 MFA press conference (English, Chinese) and a March 31 People's Daily article.) These actions suggest that officials are concerned about the political impact of unsupervised coverage of the protests, particularly by Western media.

Meanwhile, journalists also report problems interviewing and reporting on Tibetans in areas outside of the closed zones.

  • In the Sichuan capital of Chengdu, police prevented ABC News from filming in a Tibetan neighborhood on March 16, according to the FCCC Web site.
  • The April 5 AP article reported that on April 3 plainclothes officers followed a reporter in Danba, Sichuan, and questioned the Tibetans she interviewed.
  • Officials also stopped journalists from covering a small candlelight vigil by Tibetan students at Peking University on March 17, according to a March 20 Reporters Without Borders article.

In a March 26 statement, the FCCC said it was "extremely concerned about recent reports that sources in Tibetan areas and elsewhere have experienced various forms of intimidation." The FCCC said that it had received 50 reports in March of violations of the regulations that occurred as journalists attempted to cover the protests.

For more information about the foreign journalist regulations, which went into effect on January 1, 2007, and expire on October 17, 2008, and China's mixed progress in implementing the regulations in 2007, see a previous CECC analysis.