pressured by Beijing for their engagement on Tibetan rights, including on the question of the Dalai Lama's succession. 5. That with stronger coordination, the EU and its member states are better placed to make a meaningful contribution to the protection of human rights, and to peace and security across Asia. 6. That China's Law on Promoting Ethnic Unity and Progress, adopted on 12 March 2026 and entering into force on 1 July 2026, represents a profound rupture in China's legal order and a clear departure among the peoples of China. The law – which the European Parliament condemned by 439 votes on 30 April 2026 – codifies forced assimilation and threatens to erase the cultural, religious and linguistic heritage of Tibetans, Uyghurs, Mongolians and the Hongkong people. In particular, Articles 15 and 16 subordinate minority languages to the national common language and impose unified, State-compiled curricula, while Article 20 obliges parents not to transmit to their children any concept deemed unfavourable to ethnic unity – provisions incompatible with binding obligations China has freely accepted: the prohibition of racial discrimination, in purpose or effect, in the enjoyment of educational and cultural rights (Articles 2 and 5 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, acceded to by China in 1981); the right to take part in cultural life and to education respectful of one's identity (Articles 13 and 15 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, ratified in 2001); and the right of every minority child to use their own language, practise their own religion and preserve their identity (Articles 8, 29 and 30 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, ratified in 1992). Under Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, China may not invoke this statute to escape those obligations, which the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination had already found to be infringed by such assimilationist practices in its 2018 Concluding Observations on China. Its extraterritorial reach extends even to Tibetans living abroad. Moreover, Article 63 purports to impose legal liability on organisations and individuals outside China – including Tibetans, and those who support them, resident in the European Union – for conduct that is lawful where it takes place. This assertion of extraterritorial jurisdiction over foreign nationals corresponds to no recognised basis of jurisdiction under international