China Power | Society | East Asia

Beijing Is Legalizing the Assimilation of Tibetans and Other Ethnic Minorities

China is amending its laws to weaken ethnic identities, including Tibetan language and culture. 

In recent years, the Chinese government has intensified policies in Tibetan areas that aim to reshape Tibetan identity through language, education, and cultural control. These measures are not isolated administrative actions but part of a broader national strategy centered on what Beijing calls “forging a strong sense of the Chinese nation community.” Under this framework, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) seeks to strengthen a unified national identity by weakening ethnic identities that might compete with the political narrative of the “Chinese nation.” Increasingly, these assimilationist policies are not merely administrative practices; they are being codified into law.

For decades, the Chinese state maintained tight political control over Tibet, particularly over Tibetan Buddhism and religious institutions. Yet in the realm of language and education, earlier policies were comparatively more accommodating than those of today. In 1994, the “Measures for Implementing the Compulsory Education Law of the People’s Republic of China in the Tibet Autonomous Region” stipulated that schools should “use Tibetan as the principal medium of instruction while gradually improving a bilingual Tibetan-Chinese education system.” Within this framework, Tibetan language education held a central place in the school system, while Mandarin functioned largely as a supplementary language.

At that time, Tibetan students also had institutional options in China’s university entrance examination system. Two separate examination tracks existed. One, known as “min kao Han,” required students to take exams in Chinese. The other, called “min kao min,” allowed ethnic minority students to take their exams in their own languages. While imperfect, this system acknowledged linguistic diversity and allowed Tibetan language education to retain meaningful institutional space.

This situation began to change dramatically after Xi Jinping came to power. Under the banner of achieving the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation,” Beijing increasingly began to view minority languages – including Tibetan – as potential threats to national unity. The policy shift reflects a deeper transformation in China’s ethnic governance doctrine.

Chinese policymakers and scholars now frequently refer to a transition from the “first-generation ethnic policy” to the “second-generation ethnic policy.” The earlier framework, developed during the Mao and Deng eras, formally emphasized ethnic regional autonomy and the protection of minority languages and cultures. Although implementation was uneven, the official policy at least recognized the legitimacy of cultural pluralism within the Chinese state.

The second-generation ethnic policy represents a significant departure from this approach. Rather than preserving ethnic diversity, it seeks to minimize the political and social significance of ethnic distinctions. Its central objective is the creation of a unified national identity centered on the concept of the “Chinese nation” (中华民族). In practice, this shift encourages linguistic assimilation, cultural homogenization, and tighter political integration of minority regions.

Language policy in Tibet provides one of the clearest examples of this transformation. Officially, the Chinese government continues to describe its education policy as “bilingual education.” In reality, Mandarin Chinese has increasingly become the dominant language of instruction, while Tibetan has been relegated to a secondary or optional subject. Core academic subjects such as mathematics, science, and history are now overwhelmingly taught in Mandarin.

This trend was reinforced by legislative developments at the National People’s Congress (NPC). In December 2025, the NPC Standing Committee revised the National Common Language Law, removing earlier provisions that allowed minority languages to serve as primary mediums of instruction in schools. The revised law........

© The Diplomat