Xizang Panorama at KIMFF
The use of the term “Xizang” in place of “Tibet” by the Chinese government has sparked significant debate, particularly in the context of cultural and historical representation. This shift, rooted in China’s efforts to redefine the narrative around the region, became a focal point of contention at the 2025 Kathmandu International Mountain Film Festival (KIMFF), where a program titled “Xizang Panorama” drew widespread criticism for promoting Chinese state propaganda. This article explores the origins and motivations behind China’s adoption of “Xizang” over “Tibet,” the implications of this linguistic shift, and the controversy surrounding the film screenings at KIMFF 2025.
The Origins of “Xizang” in Chinese Discourse
The term “Xizang” is the Mandarin Chinese transliteration of the Tibetan region’s name, derived from the Tibetan term “Ü-Tsang,” which refers to part of the historical and cultural region of Tibet. Historically, “Zang” has been used in Chinese to describe the region and its people since the Yuan Dynasty (1271–1368). However, the term “Tibet” (or “Tubo” in earlier Chinese contexts) was widely used in both Chinese and international discourse to refer to the broader cultural and geographical area, encompassing not only the modern Xizang Autonomous Region but also parts of Qinghai, Sichuan, and other provinces with significant Tibetan populations.
The deliberate shift to “Xizang” in official Chinese narratives began gaining traction around 2019, when Chinese state media outlets started prioritizing the term over “Tibet.” This move intensified in 2023, when the United Front Work Department (UFWD), a key organ of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) responsible for managing ethnic and religious affairs, declared “Xizang” as the preferred term in its official communications. The change reflects China’s broader strategy to assert control over the narrative surrounding the region, distancing it from the historical and cultural connotations of “Tibet” that are associated with Tibetan identity, autonomy, and international advocacy for Tibetan rights.
Tibetan advocates argue that “Xizang” is a politically loaded term that aligns with China’s efforts to erase Tibet’s distinct cultural and historical identity. By limiting the term to the administrative boundaries of the Xizang Autonomous Region, China seeks to downplay the broader scope of Tibetan culture and history, which extends beyond the modern administrative borders. This linguistic shift is seen as part of a larger campaign to assimilate Tibetan identity into the framework of the Chinese nation-state, often described by critics as “cultural erasure.”
The Role of Media and Propaganda
China’s use of “Xizang” is not merely linguistic but part of a broader propaganda effort to reshape global perceptions of the region. This includes the production and dissemination of media, such as films, that portray the Xizang Autonomous Region as a harmonious, modern, and integrated part of China. These narratives often emphasize economic development, environmental conservation, and cultural harmony under Chinese governance, while sidelining or erasing the region’s history of political repression, cultural suppression, and human rights concerns.
The “Xizang Panorama” program at KIMFF 2025, held in Kathmandu, Nepal, is a prime example of this strategy. The program featured six Chinese-produced films, including one focused on the Sanjiangyuan region, which highlighted “vivid stories of harmonious coexistence” between people and nature. These films were presented under the banner of “Xizang Panorama,” explicitly using the Chinese-preferred term rather than “Tibet.” Critics, including Tibetan activists, filmmakers, and international organizations, condemned the program as a showcase of “weaponized storytelling” designed to promote China’s narrative and suppress Tibetan voices.
The Controversy at KIMFF 2025
The inclusion of “Xizang Panorama” at KIMFF, a respected platform for mountain culture and independent filmmaking, sparked outrage among Tibetan activists, Nepali artists, and global human rights groups. A coalition of 145 Tibet-related organizations, alongside Nepali filmmakers and cultural workers, issued statements calling for the immediate cancellation of the program. They argued that KIMFF’s decision to use “Xizang” and screen Chinese state-backed films constituted an endorsement of CCP propaganda and a betrayal of the festival’s commitment to truth and justice.
Tibetan filmmakers, including former political prisoners, expressed particular dismay, noting that the use of “Xizang” and the screening of these films undermined the struggles of Tibetans who have faced imprisonment and persecution for defending their cultural identity. An open letter from Tibetan filmmakers highlighted the festival’s role in amplifying China’s colonial terminology, describing it as a “distortion of Tibet’s history and identity.”
Nepali artists also voiced strong opposition, with many arguing that KIMFF’s decision reflected China’s growing influence in Nepal. A Tibetan activist in Nepal publicly exposed the festival’s actions, accusing it of facilitating the CCP’s “soft power” infiltration in the region. The controversy was further amplified on social media platforms like X and Instagram, where posts condemned KIMFF for promoting a “colonial term” and called for a boycott of the festival.
China’s Broader Strategy and Global Implications
The “Xizang Panorama” controversy at KIMFF is part of a larger pattern of China’s efforts to export its narrative on Tibet/Xizang globally. By promoting “Xizang” in international forums, such as film festivals, China aims to normalize the term and marginalize the use of “Tibet,” which carries connotations of cultural distinctiveness and international sympathy for the Tibetan cause. This strategy has been observed in other contexts, such as Bhutan’s adoption of “Xizang” in official communications in March 2025, a move that drew criticism from Tibetan advocates for aligning with China’s agenda.
The use of films as a medium for this agenda is particularly significant. Visual storytelling is a powerful tool for shaping perceptions, and China’s investment in films that portray “Xizang” as a thriving, harmonious region serves to counter narratives of oppression and resistance. By securing platforms like KIMFF, China gains access to international audiences, leveraging cultural events to legitimize its claims over the region.
Response and Resistance
The backlash against “Xizang Panorama” at KIMFF 2025 demonstrates the resilience of Tibetan advocacy and the global support for their cause. The coalition of 145 organizations, along with Nepali artists and activists, not only called for the cancellation of the program but also urged KIMFF to reaffirm its commitment to authentic storytelling and cultural integrity. Social media campaigns, including posts on X and Instagram, amplified these demands, with hashtags like #TibetIsNotXizang gaining traction among supporters.
The controversy also highlighted the challenges faced by cultural institutions like KIMFF in navigating geopolitical pressures. Nepal’s proximity to China and its economic ties with the CCP have raised concerns about Beijing’s influence over local institutions, with critics pointing to “Xizang Panorama” as evidence of China’s encroachment into Nepal’s cultural sphere.
Conclusion
China’s shift from “Tibet” to “Xizang” is a calculated move to redefine the region’s identity in alignment with the CCP’s political objectives. Beginning in earnest around 2019 and intensifying in 2023, this linguistic change is part of a broader propaganda effort to erase Tibet’s cultural and historical distinctiveness. The “Xizang Panorama” program at KIMFF 2025 brought this issue to the forefront, exposing the tensions between cultural representation, geopolitical influence, and artistic integrity.
The outcry from Tibetan activists, Nepali artists, and global supporters underscores the importance of resisting narratives that distort history and suppress marginalized voices. While China continues to promote “Xizang” through platforms like KIMFF, the resistance it faces reflects a broader commitment to preserving Tibet’s identity and challenging propaganda. As debates over terminology and representation persist, the controversy at KIMFF serves as a reminder of the power of language, film, and collective action in shaping global narratives.