(TibetanReview.net, May30’25) – China continued to tightly restrict or altogether deny access to Tibet in 2024 to all categories of prospective visitors, but especially diplomats and other officials as well as journalists and Tibetans living abroad, said the US State Department May 29. The department’s Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs released the report in compliance with Section 4 of the Reciprocal Access to Tibet Act of 2018.
The finding means that officials of the Chinese government responsible for this situation could face sanctions.
The report said Chinese government regulations and procedures that have historically impeded travel to the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) and Tibetan areas outside the TAR for US diplomats and officials, journalists, and tourists remained in place in 2024. In the case of other International visitors, traveling to the TAR continued to require the approval of TAR government travel permits.
The report said no US official has been able to visit the TAR since 2019. This was despite the fact that in 2024, US officials made five requests for official travel to the TAR, with none of them being approved. Before that, in 2023, all three requests were not approved.
* * *
In 2024, the TAR continued to be the only area of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that the government required diplomats and other foreign officials to formally request permission to visit.
While diplomats and other foreign officials did not require a permit or prior notification to travel to Tibetan areas outside of the TAR, China’s security forces used conspicuous surveillance to intimidate, monitor, harass, and restrict their movements, whether on official of personal travel.
No consular officer has been able to visited the TAR to conduct American Citizen Services since 2019. Before that, local officials in the TAR had been responsive to consular requests to provide assistance to US citizens but occasionally delayed their response to emergency access requests, the report said.
On the travel of international visitors to the TAR for tourism, Beijing imposed regulations the like of which did not apply to any other provincial-level entity in the PRC. They were required to obtain an official confirmation letter issued by the TAR government, which reports to the central government in Beijing, before entering the TAR. The letters were booked and received through travel agencies officially registered with the Chinese government, with only guided group-tours being permitted.
Besides, the Tibet travel permit did not allow visits to all areas within the TAR. Some areas were generally closed to visitors and required supplemental permission from the TAR Public Security Bureau. Tourists planning to visit certain border areas, such as Mount Everest, also required a military area entry permit from the Military Affairs Office and a foreign affairs office permit from the TAR Foreign Office, the report said.
On the other hand, there have also been reports of increased access granted to foreign influencers and travel bloggers, some of whom have been promoted by Chinese state media for their positive coverage of the situation in Tibet.
* * *
Tibetan Americans have regularly faced restrictions on their travel to Tibetan areas. They are subjected to a stricter screening process than other US citizens. Their applications are processed through the United Front Work Department (UFWD) and often require a letter from a relative or host in the Tibetan area, an in-person interview with the Chinese Embassy or Consulate officer in charge of Tibetan affairs, and submission of personal documents such as copies of naturalization certificates, birth certificates, school and work records, affidavits, and other materials, the report said.
Even if finally permitted to visit Tibet, they face more frequent harassment by security officials in Tibetan areas than in other parts of China, including requirements to report to the local UFWD office where some were reportedly interrogated, threatened, and forced to download tracking software on their phones.
This drives some members of the Tibetan American community to self-censor their behavior in the United States out of fear of retribution against their family members in Tibet or fear of losing future access to Tibet and threats from Chinese officials, the report said.
* * *
In yet another sign that Tibet is much more strictly controlled or restricted than other parts of the PRC, Chinese regulations did not regularly require international journalists to obtain prior permission to travel to any part of the country other than the TAR. The Foreign Correspondents’ Club of China (FCCC) has been cited a saying Beijing has rejected the vast majority of US journalists’ requests to visit and report from the TAR.
When access is at all granted, security officials monitored and controlled these journalists’ movements at all times. The FCCC’s 2023 annual report was cited as saying only one foreign journalist was granted permission to travel to the TAR.
China usually relies on organized group tours of the region for registered reporters selected by Chinese authorities. However, Beijing suppresses their ability to report about Tibet by intimidating and preventing Chinese nationals from interacting with them while maintaining strict control over the information conveyed.
* * *
The report said the Chinese government did not disclose its decision-making process for granting permission to travel to the TAR, nor did it share the names of officials involved in issuing travel permits to US citizens to visit the TAR.
In the case of US official requests to visit the TAR, they are assessed on a case-by-case basis. The TAR Foreign Affairs Office generally required a diplomatic note for any official visit, accompanied by a list of trip attendees. Once the TAR government received a request, it reportedly informed a foreign affairs leading committee, consisting of representatives at the prefectural, provincial, and central levels from the UFWD, Ministry of State Security, Ministry of Public Security, People’s Liberation Army, and MFA. This committee reviewed requests, although frequently, no specific response was provided, the report noted.