By The Diplomat | Created at 2026-08-14 19:25:41 | Updated at 2026-08-14 23:15:22
9 hours ago
The 17th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies (IATS) Conference, scheduled to be held at Kathmandu University, Nepal, from August 23-29, was cancelled on August 5 and later shifted online. The cancellation was done by the organizers, at the formal request of the Nepali government.
The IATS conference is one of the premier academic forums for Tibetan culture, history, language and religion. The conference was set to bring together scholars from 40 countries, including India, China, and the United States – many of whom had already arranged and paid for costs to attend the conference in Kathmandu. The conference had been in planning for four years, as Nepal was selected to host the seminar in 2022. The abrupt cancellation of the conference on grounds of “security concerns” highlights both Beijing’s ironclad grip and bid to assert authority over Tibetan Buddhism.
The cancellation came after Chinese officials expressed concerns over pro-Tibet activists using the platform for demonstrations. Notably, Nepal’s security agencies had ruled out the possibility of a security threat to the event.
The pressure came not only from Chinese diplomats but, most remarkably, a religious figure. The Venerable Master Yinshun, former vice president of the Buddhist Association of China and a member of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) and abbot of the Chinese Temple of Nepal, visited Nepal on July 29. Following his visit, combined with diplomatic efforts by Chinese Ambassador to Nepal Zhang Maoming, around a dozen scholars from the Tibetan Policy Institute in India withdrew their participation from the conference.
The cancellation of the conference is consistent with Beijing’s recent efforts to exert control over Nepal’s association with Tibetan Buddhism. This is seen in several pre-emptive and proactive measures taken by Beijing to curb Tibetan Buddhism’s influence in Nepal. Earlier this year, Zhang, China’s ambassador, warned the home minister of Nepal, Sudan Gurung, against any government-level participation by Nepal in the oath-taking ceremony of the penpa tshering held on May 27 in Dharamshala, India. The penpa tshering is the highest executive authority of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA). Notably, the oath-taking ceremony was also attended by the 14th Dalai Lama.
The CTA functions as the government-in-exile for the Tibetan people globally. Around 91,000 Tibetans registered their vote for the 2026 elections that elected the penpa tshering across India, Nepal, Bhutan, Europe, the United States, and other parts of Asia and Africa. In a bid to delegitimize the elections and the support for the CTA, a Global Times editorial characterized the elections as illegal and the CTA as an illicit “separatist organization.”
These efforts are not unique to Nepal. China has accelerated its efforts seeking to control narratives and perceptions related to Tibet around the world. Beijing’s bid for control over Tibetan Buddhism in particular comes at a crucial time: the Dalai Lama is now 91 years old, and he has announced that his trust, the Gaden Phodrang, would have the sole authority in recognizing his future reincarnation. Beijing responded swiftly, maintaining that the selection of the Dalai Lama’s successor would be determined by Chinese law.
The succession of the 14th Dalai Lama poses a strategic challenge to China. The Himalayan landscape spanning across India and China has been the site of border disputes between India and China, most recently the Galwan clashes of 2020. Many locals of the Himalayan region in the states of Sikkim, Ladakh, and Arunachal Pradesh in India are adherents of the Tibetan strand of Buddhism. Notably the Dalai Lama celebrated his 91st birthday in Ladakh – a demonstration of the expanse of influence of the Tibetan strand of Buddhism over the Indian Himalayan landscape.
The long-established cultural traditions of the locals of the Himalayan region, along with their reverence and faith in the Dalai Lama, delegitimize Chinese claims of normative authority in dictating Tibetan Buddhist practices. China has consistently maintained that the next Dalai Lama will be born in Chinese territory as opposed to the 14th Dalai Lama’s declaration that the next Dalai Lama may be born in India.
In recent times, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has shown increased attention toward the management of monasteries in its bid to establish control over the Tibetan strand of Buddhism. The CCP has taken on a more intrusive role, as seen during Li Ganjie’s tour of Gansu and Sichuan earlier this year. Li heads the United Front Work Department (UFWD). During the tour, he emphasized legal, standardized management of Tibetan Buddhist institutions and the need for socialist principles to guide Tibetan Buddhism.
One of the primary tasks of the UFWD in China is to generate favorable receptions for Chinese policies not only domestically but also overseas. In this context, Li’s interest in the management of monasteries is geared toward enhancing the CCP’s control over perceptions of Tibetan Buddhism both at home and abroad.
In many ways, its attempts to control Tibetan Buddhism expose the CCP’s discomfort with religion in general. An increasing number of the urban middle class in China are turning to religious and spiritual practices. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, a growing number of individuals in China have been attracted to the sense of community that religion provides. Chinese Buddhist institutions are perceived by many as corrupt and criticized for excessive commercialization, whereas Tibetan Buddhism is viewed as more esoteric. This sentiment has grown over the years with the rise in cases of embezzlement and corruption in Chinese Buddhist monasteries and temples. A rising number of the younger population in China are attracted to the day to day practices in Tibetan Buddhism as a key to a more balanced lifestyle.
Tibetan Buddhism will continue to pose a challenge to China as it aspires to ascendancy in the global order. Despite China’s hawkish diplomatic efforts, normative and moral authority continue to elude Beijing.
