The Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile has launched a parliamentary advocacy campaign in New Delhi to draw attention to China’s newly enacted Ethnic Unity and Progress Law, warning that the legislation represents a significant escalation in Beijing’s policies towards Tibetans and other non-Han nationalities while raising broader concerns over cultural identity, transnational repression and international engagement with Tibet-related issues.
The delegation, led by Deputy Speaker Khenpo Sonam Tenphel and comprising Standing Committee members Lopon Thupten Gyaltsen, Lobsang Thupten Pontsang, Choedak Gyatso, Gonpo Dhundup and Gyaltsen Choekye Gagya, began the campaign on 27 July 2026 during the Monsoon Session of the Indian Parliament. Dividing into two groups, the delegation met Indian ministers and parliamentarians to discuss the implications of the People’s Republic of China’s Ethnic Unity and Progress Law, which came into force on 1 July 2026.
According to the delegation, the legislation provides a legal framework for accelerating the assimilation of Tibetans, Uyghurs, Southern Mongolians and other non-Han nationalities into a single state-defined identity by strengthening measures that affect their languages, religions, cultures and historical identities.
On the opening day of the campaign, Deputy Speaker Khenpo Sonam Tenphel, together with parliamentarians Choedak Gyatso and Gyaltsen Choekye Gagya, met Lok Sabha members Faggan Singh Kulaste, Prof. Saugata Roy, Virendra Singh and Balabhadra Majhi. A second delegation comprising Lopon Thupten Gyaltsen, Lobsang Thupten Pontsang and Gonpo Dhundup met Union Minister of State Prof. S. P. Singh Baghel, Lok Sabha member Dr. Rajkumar Sangwan and Rajya Sabha member Sujeet Kumar. Union Minister of State Ramdas Bandu Athawale later hosted the Tibetan delegation for dinner at his residence.
During the meetings, the delegation argued that the new legislation transforms existing administrative policies into national law, reinforcing restrictions on the Tibetan language, increasing state control over religious institutions, reshaping educational curricula and further eroding Tibet’s distinct cultural, religious and national identity.
“What were previously administrative policies are now reinforced through national legislation,” Deputy Speaker Khenpo Sonam Tenphel said, describing the measure as a significant escalation in Beijing’s institutionalisation of assimilation policies.
The delegation also highlighted the self-immolation of Tibetan activist Lobga Rangzen outside the United Nations Headquarters in New York on 2 July 2026. According to the delegation, Rangzen’s final appeal called for the restoration of a fully independent Tibet, arguing that only freedom in their homeland could fully safeguard Tibetans’ fundamental human rights, religious freedom and national identity.
Beyond developments inside Tibet, the delegation said the law could have implications for Tibetan communities overseas. It argued that the legislation reinforces efforts by the Chinese Communist Party to expand influence over Tibetans living abroad through intimidation, surveillance and pressure to conform to official narratives, raising concerns about transnational repression in democratic countries, including India.
The delegation urged Indian lawmakers to raise awareness of the legislation within Parliament, support the cultural, linguistic and religious rights of Tibetans and other affected communities, oppose transnational repression, recognise Tibet’s historical status prior to its incorporation into the People’s Republic of China, and encourage peaceful dialogue to resolve the Tibet-China dispute in accordance with the vision of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Members of Parliament also received official resolutions condemning the new law, expressing solidarity with conditions inside Tibet and addressing Lobga Rangzen’s self-immolation.
The advocacy campaign coincides with reports that Chinese diplomatic pressure has influenced preparations for the 17th International Association for Tibetan Studies (IATS) Conference, scheduled to take place in Kathmandu from 23 to 29 August. According to reports cited in the source material, Chinese officials expressed concern over the planned participation of researchers from the Central Tibetan Administration’s Tibet Policy Institute in their official capacity.
The reports state that, following discussions between China’s Ambassador to Nepal, Zhang Maoming, and Nepal’s Foreign Secretary Amrit Bahadur Rai, the Central Tibetan Administration decided not to send official representatives in order to avoid creating difficulties for the Nepalese government. However, Tibetan scholars who had already registered may still attend the conference in their personal capacities. The development has been described as evidence of Beijing’s diplomatic influence even without a formal public objection.
The conference remains one of the world’s leading academic gatherings devoted to Tibetan studies, bringing together more than 700 delegates from 39 countries. Participants are expected to include scholars from universities including Harvard, Columbia, Oxford and Cambridge, alongside researchers from China, Buddhist institutions in India, Taiwan and Japan, and representatives of the China Tibetology Research Center. Organisers have stated that preparations are being conducted in coordination with the Nepalese government and security agencies.
At the same time, renewed interest in Tibet’s historical connections with the wider Himalayan region has been reflected in the publication of two new books. Beyond the Himalayas: Rediscovering India’s Forgotten Geography by Bharat Nanda explores ancient trade routes, Buddhist centres and cultural links connecting the Indian subcontinent with Tibet, Xinjiang and Central Asia through historical evidence and travel accounts. Meanwhile, The Forest of Snow by Swami Ramananda Bharati recounts the author’s 1898 journey to Mount Kailash and Manas Sarovar, portraying a period when the Himalayan passes functioned as vibrant corridors for trade, pilgrimage and cultural exchange rather than political barriers. Together, the publications revisit historical trans-Himalayan connections that, according to the source material, have been profoundly transformed under contemporary geopolitical realities.
