After Iran, will it be Tibet?

[Guest guest]

"Bipin" <bp16@u...> wrote:

May be that NehruChacha will help on this one from NarakLoka.

Will he?

Bipin

====

 

After Iran, will it be Tibet?

 

Sunanda K Datta-Ray

 

http://dailypioneer.com/indexn12.asp?

main_variable=EDITS&file_name=edit3%2Etxt&counter_img=3

 

6th Oct 2005

 

India's vote on Iran's nuclear status sent a tremor

through the

Tibetan settlements in Dharamsala as they prepared to observe the

55th

anniversary of the doleful events of October 7, 1950 when 40,000

Chinese

troops crossed the Drichu - Yangtze to the Chinese - river. If

closer ties

with the United States can prompt second thoughts on Iran, growing

rapport

with China might lead to a reappraisal of the predicament of more

than

80,000 Tibetan refugees (out of a 120,000-strong Diaspora) in this

country.

 

 

Not that anyone expects a drastic shift in New Delhi's

attitude to the

Dalai Lama. Nor can India disregard its own national interest. But

time and

again, Tibet has fallen through the crevices of history, sacrificed

to

imperial interests or at the altar of nonalignment. There was the

historic

blunder of New Delhi acknowledging China's "sovereignty" when it

meant

"suzerainty." Another blunder was highlighted on September 1 when

the

Chinese planted their flag outside the Potala to celebrate the 40th

anniversary of the creation of the "Tibet Autonomous Region" (TAR),

a

sleight of hand that neatly upstaged India's continued support of

Tibetan

autonomy. The autonomy enshrined in the TAR only deceives the world

as it

robs Tibetans of land and rights.

 

The 1.2-million sq km TAR is just a little more than half the

2.2

million sq km plateau that is the traditional Tibetan homeland. Even

this

truncated region is under threat from the $4.1 billion 1,142-km

Beijing-Lhasa railway, which must surely be one of the world's most

political lines. With 50,000 labourers working round the clock, it

will be

completed by 2007. Woe betide the remaining Tibetans, already in a

minority

in their capital, when it is.

 

"The primarily Han Chinese migrants are arriving so rapidly

that

Tibetans are becoming the minority in their homeland and are

beginning to

feel threatened," writes an ethnic Chinese, Francis Lim Khek Gee, in

Singapore's Straits Times. "The massive inflow of migrants has

significantly

heightened the competition for jobs in the TAR. On environmental

issues, the

Chinese Government has repeatedly pledged to do its utmost to

prevent

serious ecological degradation in the TAR as a result of

modernisation.

Critics, however, are not convinced. They point to rampant

construction,

widespread deforestation and water pollution.

 

"The need to balance rapid economic growth with the

maintenance of

social order and environmental health applies all the more to the

TAR as the

Tibetans have long memories: The hardships of the 1950s and 60s are

still

deeply etched in many people's minds," Lim adds, referring to the

devastation of the Cultural Revolution and the March 10, 1959

uprising by

the Four Rivers, Six Ranges guerrillas. About 1.2 million Tibetans

were

killed, and more than 6,000 temples and monasteries demolished.

 

According to official Chinese figures, Lhasa now has nearly

160,000

Han against 140,000 Tibetans. The latter are still in a majority in

the TAR

and old Tibet, 2.6 million and 4.6 million respectively, the Han

numbering

1.9 million and 3.3 million. But not only are more Han settlers

being

encouraged, but only the Chinese under state auspices can provide

the

sophisticated tourism infrastructure for Beijing's ambitious plan to

promote

Tibet as the "Roof of the World".

 

The Dalai Lama's Five-Point Peace Plan and Strasbourg Proposal

only

ask the Chinese to honour their own commitments. Even the 17-point

agreement

of May 23, 1951 that was signed under duress and brought Tibet's de

facto

independence (fully operational since the Qing dynasty's collapse in

1911 as

well as during earlier spells) to an end promised to preserve the

Dalai

Lama's status, functions and powers, and guaranteed the right of

Tibetans to

continue their existing linguistic, cultural and religious practices

unhindered. It also promised that agricultural, commercial and

industrial

reforms would be introduced gradually without damaging Tibet's

culture. All

this was confirmed when Deng Xiaoping announced his readiness to

consider

"anything except independence."

 

It is a truism to point out that none of these commitments

have been

honoured. But after stonewalling for seven years, Beijing did unbend

a

little in 2002 when direct contact between the two sides was

resumed. Since

then, there have been four rounds of talks, described as "dialogue"

rather

than "negotiations", the last in Berne only three months ago. Vice

Minister

Zhu Wequn, deputy head of the United Front Work Department, who led

China's

six-member delegation, appeared pleased that direct contact had

become

"established practice." But to what end?

 

The Dalai Lama is asking for far less than Tibetans enjoyed

until the

Chinese "liberation." His conciliatory Middle Way is not popular

with the

National Democratic Party of Tibet, which refuses to consider

anything short

of independence. Nor with 25,000 Tibetan Youth Congress members.

 

Restiveness is understandable for reasons that go beyond

politics. A

new consciousness is awakening among Tibetans in India as the

children of

men who built roads in Manali emerge as an embryonic middle class.

They are

not content to allow their ethnic plight to be exploited by peddling

factory-made sweaters in the streets. Nearly 500 Tibetans graduate

from

college every year and nearly 700 complete school. But 60 per cent

of the

educated young are without jobs.

 

The problem deserves attention when the Diaspora completes its

current

second round of elections for the Tsongdu (Parliament), which is the

highest

decision-making body for the entire Diaspora, with elected

representatives

from Europe and America as well. When the first ever elections for a

Prime

Minister (Kalong Tripa) were held in 2001, the Dalai Lama reflected

that he

had expected Tibetans to vote for a young, secular woman. Instead,

they

chose a 62-year-old incarnate monk, Prof Samdhong Rinpoche, who is

also a

respected academic.

 

India's is a difficult and delicate task. Unlike the US, it

does not

use the Dalai Lama for diplomatic gain. But its position vis-a-vis

China

will not be strengthened if it weakens the Tibetan pontiff's

authority. When

China complains of (and repudiates) unequal treaties, it must know

that

nothing could be more unequal than the 17-point agreement. When

China

aspires to global status, it must by word and deed invite global

confidence.

This it can do by recalling the immortal words on the Shol Doring,

the stone

obelisk raised in Lhasa in 823 AD at the conclusion of a Sino-

Tibetan war.

 

"Tibetans shall be happy in the land of Tibet, Chinese shall

be happy

in the land of China," reads the inscription. "The solemn agreement

now made

shall never be changed. The three Precious ones, all the Aryas, the

sun, the

moon and all the planets are invoked as witnesses."

 

Atheist China can disregard the witnesses but not its plighted

word if

it expects the world's respect. Nor can India hope to gain anything

except a

reputation for expediency by diluting the support it alone has

always

extended to the Dalai Lama's cause.

--- End forwarded message ---