TAR OFFICIALS TOUT BENEFITS OF NOMAD RESETTLEMENT PROGRAMS

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 CHENGDU 000090

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR EAP/CM, DRL AND G/STC
BANDKOK FOR USAID/MSTIEVATER

E.O. 12958: DECL: 4/6/2027
TAGS: ECON PHUM PGOV CH
SUBJECT: TAR OFFICIALS TOUT BENEFITS OF NOMAD RESETTLEMENT PROGRAMS

REF: 06 CHENGDU 969

CHENGDU 00000090 001.2 OF 002


CLASSIFIED BY: Kathryn Pongonis, Acting Consul General, United
States Consulate, Chengdu.
REASON: 1.4 (b),(d)




1. Summary: According to government officials in the Tibetan
Autonomous Region (TAR),policies to resettle Tibetan nomads and
pastoralists are not only good for the grassland, but are also
good for the people because they improve living conditions and
access to education and health care. In the TAR, five types of
resettlement programs provide subsidies of between USD 1290-3225
to individual households. During the course of the Eleventh
Five-Year Program (before 2010),the government hopes to
resettle over 220,000 households, or 80 percent of the rural
population in the TAR. Officials said the policy was warmly
welcomed and that an open and modern society had a significant
effect on enticing young Tibetans to abandon a traditional
herding lifestyle. While government officials paint a rosy
picture of Tibetan resettlement, critics express concern that
resettlement policies pose a threat to the important nomadic
component of the traditional Tibetan lifestyle. End Summary.


2. (U) During a March reporting trip to the Tibetan Autonomous
Region (TAR),CG, Beijing POLMINCOUNS, and Chengdu CONGENOFF met
with officials from the Naqu Prefecture Animal Husbandry and
Labor and Social Security Bureaus, and TAR Poverty Alleviation
and Animal Husbandry Bureaus, the principal offices tasked with
carrying out nomadic and pastoral resettlement work. "The
policy to resettle Tibetan nomads and pastoralists is not only
good for the grassland, but is also good for the people,"
according to Wang Jian, Director of the TAR Poverty Alleviation
Office (PAO). With a fixed dwelling and lifestyle, Tibetan
children have better access to education and families can get
health care. Wang said that resettlement takes numerous forms.
The TAR's "Rural Economic Housing Project" includes the
following five categories:

- nomadic resettlement;
- housing project for poor households;
- endemic disease relocation;
- house repair project for middle class people; and
- housing project for border households


3. (SBU) Unlike Tibetan areas outside the TAR, there is no
"ecological immigration" which is a program linked to the
Grassland Responsibility System and is not considered migration,
according to Wang. He added that ecological preservation
programs such as "Convert Pasture to Grassland" were not
successful.

The "Incentives"
--------------

4. (SBU) Households receive monetary "subsidies" for their
participation in the resettlement program which range from
10,000-25,000 RMB (USD 1290-3225) per household. According to
all officials in separate meetings, the subsidies are cash
payments which are not expected to be repaid. (Note: Other
Consulate non-governmental contacts in the TAR told us there is
a general belief that the resettlement "subsidies" are in fact
loans. End note.)


5. (SBU) Resettlement is a completely voluntary program,
according to Dozha (one name),Director of the Naqu Prefecture
Animal Husbandry Bureau. Nomads and farmers provide their own
labor to build their new homes. When queried about whether
resettled families are required or forced to sell their
livestock, Dozha responded that the government was in no way
involved in the sale of livestock, nor did it require such sale.
He added that some households might choose to sell some animals
in order to cover the additional costs of building their new
homes. In another meeting, a representative of the TAR PAO said
selling a couple of yaks "does no harm to a family" and can help
them raise 8000 RMB (USD 1032) toward the construction of their
new house. (Note: One yak currently sells for 4000 RMB
(USD516) or 14 RMB (USD 1.80) per pound in the TAR. End Note.)
Tsutrim (one name),Vice Director of the TAR Animal Husbandry

SIPDIS
Bureau said his office was developing a program of subsidies to
encourage sale of livestock because in general nomads are not
willing to kill or sell their animals.


6. (U) Wang of the TAR PAO said 25,000 households were
resettled in the TAR in 2006. In the Eleventh Five-Year
Program, there is enough funding from the central level to
accomplish the resettlement of 220,000 households in the TAR,
after which 80 percent of the rural population will be settled.

Is the Nomadic Lifestyle a Way of the Past?

CHENGDU 00000090 002.2 OF 002


--------------

7. (C) When asked about the effect of the resettlement program
on young Tibetans and whether they were interested in continuing
a lifestyle of herding, Wang of the TAR PAO said that the "open
society" affected Tibetan lifestyles more than just a
resettlement policy. "If society were not open, they would stay
with traditional ways, but because of modernization and contact
with the outside world they know about and desire changes in
their lifestyle." Wang insisted Tibetans have freedom to choose
their lifestyle and added that the PAO was in fact having a hard
time meeting the demand for settlement. He said, "everyone
living in a tent is not a good thing," and that the government
could "maintain the culture by preserving a few tents." Wang
stated, "they can remember their culture, but they don't need to
live the ancient lifestyle. We must remember that we are not
doing animal protection, we are doing human development." In a
separate meeting, Tsutrim of the TAR Animal Husbandry Bureau
echoed the sentiment that the resettlement policy was warmly
welcomed and that there is cooperation at all levels of
government.

Comment
--------------

8. (C) The Consulate's ability to solicit opinions on the policy
from resettled nomads and farmers in Tibet is quite limited.
Even though government officials paint a rosy picture, there is
at least some resistance to a policy that has been criticized by
outside observers as posing a threat to the important nomadic
component of the traditional Tibetan lifestyle. In private
conversations on a number of reporting trips, we have heard
general grumbling about lack of economic opportunities for
resettled families and inability to sell livestock at
fair-market prices.
BOUGHNER