Skip to content

5 min read

Tibetan students campaign to defend Tibetan-language schools, 2010

Summary

On 30 September 2010, Qinghai party secretary Qiang Wei said that mandating Chinese-language instruction was “crucial” in all schools; in October 2010, between 1,000 and 7,000 Tibetan students aged 11-20 marched in school uniforms through Rebkong, Chabcha, Chentsa, Golok, and Beijing’s Minzu University demanding “Equality Among Nationalities” and “Expand the Use of the Tibetan Language.” [source: nv-database] Four UN Human Rights Council special rapporteurs issued a joint urgent appeal to China, and 300 Tibetan teachers petitioned the Qinghai government, but the protests ended after school administrators promised more Tibetan instruction. [source: nv-database] Students later reported that Mandarin remained the primary language of instruction; in March 2012 similar protests recurred. [source: nv-database]

Tactics used

Background

About 70 percent of students and teachers in Qinghai Province were ethnically Tibetan, and many identified as Tibetans living in China rather than as Chinese citizens. [source: nv-database] High school and university entrance exams already used Mandarin exclusively, but the September 2010 article in People’s Daily signalled an attempt to eliminate Tibetan-language classes from schools as well, prompting a province-wide student response. [source: nv-database]

What happened

On 19 October 2010, students from the National Senior Middle School of Rebkong County, in school uniforms, filled the streets at 7 AM, shouting “Equality of ethnicities, freedom of language” and demanding expanded use of Tibetan. [source: nv-database] They were joined by students from the National Middle School of Rebkong, Teachers’ School of Malho, Medical School of Malho, Rebkong Yifu Middle School, and the Boarding School of Rebkong County, with Buddhist monks reportedly joining the protest; outside sources estimated 1,000 to 7,000 participants. [source: nv-database] Police vehicles surrounded the protesters but took no immediate action; the protesters gathered at the People’s Government Building in Rebkong and dispersed after meeting with officials. [source: nv-database] That evening, the Governor and the Director General of the Education Department warned that “ringleaders” would be expelled if protests continued. [source: nv-database] On 20 October, about 2,000 students in Chabcha County protested from 6-10 AM with banners in Tibetan and Chinese; protests also occurred in Chenza, Tsigorthang Khrigha, and Drakar. [source: nv-database] On 21 October, around 3,000 students from Teachers Training College, Town Middle School, and County Middle School in Golok protested, and 700 students from Gedun Choephel Middle School protested in Rebkong. [source: nv-database] On 22 October, about 400 Tibetan students at Beijing’s Minzu University protested under the slogan “Preserve National Language and Expand National Education”; the International Campaign for Tibet issued a statement with formal recommendations, and four UN Human Rights Council special rapporteurs issued a joint urgent appeal to China. [source: nv-database] On 23 October, twenty students from the Tibetan Middle School in Chabcha were arrested after attempting to escape from security forces, and on 24 October several hundred high school students and teachers in Chentsa took to the streets, while a group of Tibetan former Chinese government officials and educationalists sent a detailed petition to the provincial education department. [source: nv-database] On 26 October, about 300 teachers sent a formal letter to the Qinghai authorities supporting Tibetan-language instruction, and around 300 students protested in Themchen Tsongon; solidarity actions continued worldwide through Students for a Free Tibet. [source: nv-database] On 18 November 2010 China issued a statement claiming the matter had been “resolved satisfactorily,” and students ended protests after school administrators promised more Tibetan instruction. [source: nv-database] However, students later reported that Mandarin continued to be the primary language of instruction and that Tibetan-language usage had not increased; similar protests recurred in March 2012. [source: nv-database]

Key people & organizations

  • Qiang Wei (Qinghai party secretary, opponent) [source: nv-database]
  • Tibetan students of Rebkong, Chabcha, Chentsa, Golok, and Beijing’s Minzu University [source: nv-database]
  • International Campaign for Tibet [source: nv-database]
  • Students for a Free Tibet [source: nv-database]
  • Four UN Human Rights Council special rapporteurs (right to education, cultural rights, racism, minority issues) [source: nv-database]
  • Group of Tibetan ex-Chinese government officials and educationalists [source: nv-database]
  • 300 Qinghai Tibetan teachers [source: nv-database]
  • Buddhist monks of Rebkong [source: nv-database]

Outcome

Verdict: lost.

The protests ended on 26 October 2010 after school administrators promised more Tibetan-language instruction, but in practice Mandarin remained the primary language of instruction. [source: nv-database] China issued an 18 November 2010 statement claiming the matter was “resolved satisfactorily,” without acknowledging the teachers’ letter or the increased troop presence. [source: nv-database] Per the source’s scoring rubric, the campaign scored 0 out of 6 points on achieving specific demands/goals, 1 out of 1 on survival, and 3 out of 3 on growth (4 out of 10 total). [source: nv-database] The Tibetan students’ movement survived and grew, and similar protests recurred in March 2012. [source: nv-database]

Lessons

  • Coordinating protests across multiple counties and a Beijing campus in a single week amplified visibility and forced a UN response, but the absence of a unified demand or escalation strategy left the campaign easy to demobilise [source: nv-database]
  • Symbolic concessions (a verbal promise of more Tibetan instruction) without policy change can end a protest without satisfying it; the school-administrator promise was a face-saving exit, not a reversal [source: nv-database]
  • Joint urgent appeals by UN special rapporteurs provide international cover and slow the regime’s worst reprisals, but cannot, on their own, prevent ongoing Mandarin-only instruction [source: nv-database]

Sources

Disclaimer: Included as a teaching example of campaign craft, not as endorsement.

Sources & verification

  • nv-database — grounding: primary — license: link-only
  • Rewritten: 2026-07-04 via t6_build.py

Last verified: 2026-07-09