Paper read by Mr. J.M.Mukhi, International Law Scholar , at Supreme Court of India at the symposium organized by Federation of Human Rights Organizations of India on 28.3.2008 on the subject GENOCIDE IN TIBET- WHAT THE WORLD SHOULD DO ?
International responsibility to stop genocide in Tibet and restore right to self-determination of Tibet -- J.M. Mukhi (28 March 2008)
GENOCIDE IN TIBET ; WHAT THE WORLD SHOULD DO ?
The Right to Self-Determination of Tibet and International Responsibility
J.M.Mukhi
28th March, 2008
Friends
Thank you for the kind words and kind welcome.
In March 1947 when Prime Minister Nehru was caretaker Prime Minister of the Interim Government of India, before independence, the flag of Independent Tibet proudly fluttered in New Delhi at the Asian Relations Conference along with the flags of other independent countries.
Tibet has a history of independence over centuries. During World War II, in spite of pressures from President Roosevelt and Winston Churchill, Tibet, like Switzerland, maintained its neutrality. China was at war with Japan and Germany, but Tibet was not.
In 1950 Communist China invaded Tibet. The Peoples' Army, as it was called, came attacking, pillaging and burning the poor and defenceless people of Tibet. Tibet had hardly an army to defend itself. I was at that time 22 years old and a student at the London School of Economics. A Deputy Minister of External Affairs, I think Keskar was his name, came on a visit to London and to the London School of Economics. I asked him why India was supinely indifferent to the invasion of Tibet. His words were lofty:
"Our policy is based on an understanding of Chinese psychology"!
So Tibet's independence was snuffed out.
Sadar Patel was dying. You should read his letter of deep anguish which he addressed to Prime Minister Nehru from his sick bed. It is dated 7.11.1950. He said:
" The tragedy it is that the Tibetans put faith in us; and we have been unable to get them out of Chinese malevolence... We had friendly Tibet which gave us no trouble.... As a result of the disappearance of Tibet China has expanded up to our gates ".
And to our eternal shame, we, India, through the late C.S. Jha, I.C.S, told the Security Council not to discuss the invasion of Tibet. Tibet was struck off the Agenda of the Security Council, and of the General Assembly.
The world slept and snored.
Meanwhile, the miseries of the Tibetan people were immense.
It was in 1949 that Communist China laid its claim in its maps on vast tracts of the territory of its neighbours Vietnam, Thailand, Burma, India and Nepal. In fact the whole of Arunachal Pradesh, then NEFA, was shown as part of China. In spite of that we struggled to get recognition for Communist China in the United Nations and other
fora ! We also launched the "Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai", and in 1954 we gave recognition to China's absorption of Tibet. All India Radio thenceforth referred to Tibet as the "Autonomous Region of China"!
But, then, China disputed the McMahon line.
At this time I was doing India's case with Portugal at the International Court of Justice at The Hague. The late Shri M.C. Setalvad, then Attorney General of India, was the leader of our team. The hearing had ended and we were awaiting Judgment. (This was the Right of Passage Case - the Dadra, Nagar Haveli Case. The Judgment finally came in our favour in April 1960.) On Christmas day in 1959 the then Foreign Secretary called me and asked me to look at and advise on the boundary question with China.
What was this McMahon line ?
I found that India did not have a border with China. Right from Jammu and Kashmir to Assam, India's border was with Nepal, Bhutan and Tibet. In 1914 the natural and traditional boundary was delineated in a map and was confirmed by an Agreement between Sir Henry McMahon, on behalf of India, and by Lonchen Shatra, Prime Minister of Tibet, on behalf of Tibet. So I set down to study the status of Tibet. I looked at Encyclopaedia Britannica and various other books and chronicles. Indeed there is a vast literature. You should read the book by Michael van Walt, The Status of Tibet. And of course, the International Commission of Jurists at Geneva under the leadership of our very own Purshottam Trikamdas, Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court, Mahatma Gandhi's disciple, gave two Reports on the International Status of Tibet and the Genocide that had happened there.
Today we are not concerned with the status of Tibet, or the invasion of Tibet, or whether the World should strive for Tibetan Independence or
Tibetan Autonomy.
Today we are concerned with Genocide in Tibet, gross violations of basic human rights, the trampling of Tibetan expression of aspirations under a military jackboot, with China not responding with words of solace and comfort but with bullets and ruthless repression.
What should the World do ?
That there is Genocide of the Tibetan people there is no doubt. Genocide is defined as a murder of a people. You destroy their culture, their language, their religion, their traditions and values, their spirit. You indulge in demographic aggression, you introduce into their land hordes of outside population and you reduce them to an insignificant and powerless minority with a third class status in their own land. You destroy their monasteries, humiliate and torture the monks, you interfere in their worship, you try to destroy the soul of a people for whom prayer is life and life is prayer. You take away from them the freedom even to keep and venerate the picture of their spiritual leader. It is a criminal offence to keep the picture of His Holiness The Dalai Lama. It invites brutal punishment.
Can we imagine the plight of the Tibetan People ? It is not only mass scale torture and denial of equal rights, it is subjection to constant fear. How would you or I keep our sanity or life if we have to hide a picture of Guru Nanak, Shri Rama or Shri Krishna and even of Mahatma Gandhi ? How would you or I feel if whatever we hold as our sacred scriptures such as the Ramayana, the Mahabharata, the Bhagavad Gita, the Puranas were put in the dustbin, and our children were taken away from us and brought up on Chinese language and on Communism ?
China has brought into Tibet 7 ½ million Chinese of the Han race. Tibetans are only 6 million. About 1 ½ million Tibetans have perished as a result of Chinese actions. For some details of Genocide and violations of Human Rights I recommend that those of you who are able to surf on the internet should go to the website of the Tibetan Centre for Human Rights and Democracy. The address is www.tchrd.org. You will find the Death Toll. Prisoners. Beatings. Torture. Destruction of Monastries and Temples. Persecution of Monks and Nuns. Arrests Detentions. Abductions. Forcible abortions.
A few days ago, I put a question to the French Ambassador in India:
" France is the home of the idea, the notion, of Liberty.
How does France react to the Genocide in Tibet ?
Does France have any influence with China ? "
He was good enough to say that France was talking to China.
Did you see a recent article in the Times of India by Jug Suraiya ? He said that out national bird is not the Peacock but the Chicken. He said that we are chicken-hearted, so it must be Chicken !
It is true that countries in Asia are paralysed by fear of China. In the past China has attacked its neighbours including Vietnam, Thailand and Burma. It is true that China has sited long range, middle range, short range nuclear ballistic missiles on the Tibetan plateau aimed directly at major Indian cities. It is true that, if Western countries are not paralysed by fear of China, they are overpowered by greed - greed for markets in China and trade with China.
But Europe has shown courage. The European Parliament has stood up for Tibet. Germany has shown courage, Chancellor Angela Merkel has made her position clear. President Sarkozy of France has also made his position clear. And the Speaker of the House of Representatives of United States, Nancy Pelosi has made her stand clear and has boldly and clearly condemned China's treatment of Tibet and the Tibetan people.
It is not that we as a people do not believe in standing up for what is right. We have the examples of Shri Rama and Shri Krishna who came to the rescue of the oppressed ones. From our childhood we have heard so many stories of demons oppressing defenceless people and our gods and heroes coming to the rescue of the oppressed. We have the example of Mahatma Gandhi who stood up against the mighty British Empire with all its arms and weapons, its air force and warships.
What the World should do is to call on China to put an end to repression; to talk to the Tibetan people; to restore to the Tibetan people their inalienable rights.
What is it that the Chinese have not done ? The China have invaded the sanctity of large and famous monasteries including the Sera, Drepung, Gaden, and harangued and persecuted the monks and nuns. They have destroyed and closed down more than 4000 monasteries, nunneries and temples. They have arrested monks and nuns and subjected them to torture. There have been many many deaths in monasteries and nunneries; there have been punitive restrictions on religious practices. There has been a violent and repressive curtailment of freedom of expression so much so that the most peaceful protests have attracted severe punishment. Hundred and thousands have been sentenced to imprisonment without trial 10 years and above. Arrest and denial are the order of the day. Long list of torture and disappearance. Open discrimination has taken place in case of education and health services. There have been innumerable instances of enforced miscarriage and infanticide. Inhuman treatment of children including torture of children particularly child refugees. Over and above all of this has taken place a population transfer with parts of Tibet being depopulated and hordes of people from Chinese Han race being brought in. The documentation and statistics and the photographs are horrifying.
Does this not all merit investigation ?
The International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion in the Reservations to the Genocide Convention Case observed that:
"The principles underlying the Convention are the principles recognized by civilized Nations as binding upon States even without any conventional obligation."
On 9.12.1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the Convention on the Prevention of the Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
Genocide comprises acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group. The acts of destruction include mental harm. The definition is very wide. The parties to the Convention have the right to call upon the competent parties to the Convention to take appropriate measures both for prevention and suppression of Genocide. The International Court of Justice has jurisdiction with regard to disputes including pinning responsibility on the parties for acts of Genocide.
The United Nations Commission for Human Rights also plays an eminent part in the field of human rights and monitors the Covenants and Conventions relating to Human Rights.
The World need not ask for full independence of Tibet but the World is entitled to ask for full autonomy of Tibet and for the reversal of demographic aggression.
Of course, if China does not listen, the World has several options:
1. First and foremost, if China does not adhere to International Law and does not apply or respect the Rule of Law and Human Rights in respect to the Tibetan people, the World should declare China an outlaw and boycott China's goods and trade.
2. Leading States can take up the investigation of Genocide in Tibet and find ways and means of raising the issue within the United Nations Charter and under the Conventions.
3. The Security Council or even the General Assembly can refer the question of Tibet for the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice at The Hague and the means of restoration of status quo ante.
I am proud of my country and its people for having given comfort and hospitality to the Tibetan people who have taken refuge here. India has always opened its doors to people who have fled from tyranny. India has taken in its embrace Syrian Christians, and, of course the Parsis. For them there is no question of returning to their former lands. But all the Tibetans in India and indeed all Tibetans scattered all over the world, are keen on restoration of their freedom so that they can go back and be with their kith and kin whom they have left behind.
The Tibetans are sincere Buddhists. Innately they are peaceful and non-violent. His Holiness The Dalai Lama is wedded to non-violence and compassion, even for the adversary. He has pleaded with young hot heads not to give vent to their anger with violence. And certainly not to bear any ill-will towards Chinese brethren.
Indeed, it seems that for the Tibetan people the only course is prayer, and fasting, and rousing the conscience of the World.
It is for the World to do something.
In 1946, when I was student at Government Law College at Bombay, now Mumbai, I had attended a Prayer Meeting of Mahatma Gandhi by the sea near Malabar Hill. What he said seared into my soul. He said in Gujarati:
" Hari no marag chhe shurano
Na kaam kayar jo "
The way to God is that of the brave. It is not the work of a coward.
I am a citizen of India, a citizen of the world, a human being. It is my right, and my duty, to speak out. An invasion in 1950, in spite of the United Nations Charter should not have been tolerated. In the 21st century, in an era of Globalisation and Liberalization, the Rule of Law and sanctity of Human Rights, there is no room for colonialism of any kind whatsoever. There is no room for Genocide or violation of Human Rights.
I am free not only to speak out, I am free to pray. I am free to pray in the morning to Bajrang Bali for the emancipation of the Tibetan people. I am free to pray morning, noon and night.
I urge on you to think of Tibet and the Tibetan people and to pray for them as often as you can.
Jai Bajrang Bali.
Thank you.
J M MUKHI
A - 27 Neeti Bagh
New Delhi 110049
India
Tel: (+ 91 11) 2652 3216
Fax: (+ 91 11) 2686 4679
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Chinese occupation of Tibet & impact on Indian security -- Vijay Kranti
Paper read by Mr. Vijay Kranti, Senior Journalist and Tibetologist at Supreme Court of India at the symposium organized by Federation of Human Rights Organizations of India on 28.3.2008 on the subject GENOCIDE IN TIBET- WHAT THE WORLD SHOULD DO ? Rajesh Gogna, Convenor. 2 April 2008
CHINESE OCCUPATION OF TIBET & IMPACT ON INDIAN SECURITY
-Vijay Kranti (Author is a senior journalist and Tibetologist) 28 March 2008
China’s geographic interface with South Asia is as old as its occupation of Tibet. Before People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of Mao forced the Dalai Lama’s theocratic government of Tibet to merge Tibet into People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1951, China never had even an inch of common borders with India, Pakistan, Nepal, Sikkim or Bhutan. Since time immemorial, no section of Tibet with these countries was ever governed or even remotely controlled by the writ or men from Beijing. This is how a border, known for centuries as ‘India-Tibet’ border, suddenly became ‘India-China’ border.
In the recent history of many decades before China’s occupation of Tibet too Tibetan currency, Tibetan Post and Tibetan check posts on the Tibetan side of Himalayas defined an exclusively Tibetan and non-Chinese character of Tibet’s borders with its South Asian neighbors.
Soon after Chairman Mao’s ‘People’s Republic of China’ (PRC) came into being in 1949, the new communist government announced its intentions of liberating Tibet, Sinkiang (viz. East Turkistan), Hainan and Taiwan. It was a public expression of Mao’s dream of a larger China. In his plans for a dominant China in Asia, Mao had a special role for Tibet. He was already on record announcing that “Tibet is China’s palm and Ladakh, Sikkim, Nepal, Bhutan and NEFA are its fingers.” Tibet, with its original population of about 6 million (1959 estimates) occupies over 25 percent land mass of today’s PRC.
Thanks to two factors, Mao’s job of occupying Tibet turned out to be much simpler than he would have expected. One, the super powers and other major international players had just emerged from a devastating world war. So, they neither had enough energy nor desire or resources to get into a new mess with a rogue regime. Moreover, Tibet was too far away and geographically too secluded to occupy an important place on their political radars. The second factor was a total indifference on the parts of Indian government who, despite being the most seriously and directly affected state, was lost in a dreamland created by a leadership that utterly lacked vision on matters related to national security and long term geo-political concerns. Rather, overwhelmed by the smiles and assurances of erstwhile Chinese Premier Chou En-lie about China’s role in Tibet, the Indian Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru went to the extent of dissuading the United Nations from taking any action against China for her action on Tibet. This provided a much needed ‘moral’ ground to the community of nations to keep off the China-Tibet dispute.
TWO DIFFERENT APPROACHES
What followed is a history of clear focus and smart action on the Chinese part in occupied Tibet and continuation of a policy dominated by suicidal indifference and confused vision on the part of India. Today China is far more entrenched inside occupied Tibet than India is along its own 4000 km long border region along this border. Today China’s defence machinery enjoys support of a massive network of roads, military establishments, logistic facilities, even nuclear facilities and communications network in occupied Tibet. For example, China’s Army along the Indian Himalayas is served by an end to end all weather roads along this border. These roads are further connected with the main Chinese highway network in Tibet at several points. In contrast, with the exception of Nathu-la in Sikkim, not a single Indian Army post along this entire border is supported by a pucca road. Linear road links along the border on Indian side don’t even exist as a concept. It was only after a barrage of Chinese claims and threats on Arunachal Pradesh that that the Indian government has suddenly woken up and has decided a few months ago (second part of 2007) to start work on such a few such roads.
DEMOGRAPHY : A COLONIAL TOOL
On the demographic front too, China has been consistently busy in changing the Tibetan character of occupied Tibet through massive population transfer. The first step in this direction was taken when the Amdo and Kham provinces of Tibet were chopped off Tibet and their parts were distributed among the surrounding Chinese provinces of Yunnan, Sichuan, Gansu and Quinghai. It was the remaining Tibet, comprising of the third province of U-Tsang and some other left over parts of the two eastern provinces, which was baptized as ‘Tibet Autonomous Region of China’ (TAR).
A comparative study of population figures of Tibet vis-à-vis other occupied regions in the western China would show how Beijing government has already inundated the Amdo and Kham regions of Tibet which were assimilated into neighboring Chinese provinces of Qinghai, Sichuan, Yunnan and Gansu.8
Tibet (Original) 6,000,000 (1959 estimates)*
Tibet (Truncated) i.e. TAR 2,616,329
Sichuan 82,348,296
Yunnan 42,360,089
Qinghai 4,822,963
Gansu 25,124,282
Source : (China Statistical Year Book-2002, China Statistics Press, p-100)
* Based on claims of deposed Tibetan government, headed by Dalai Lama. (Not included in above official publication)
RAIL TO LHASA : CHINA’S NEW WEAPON
Establishment of a direct railway link between China and TAR through the newly constructed Gormo-Lhasa railway line has finally removed the last psycho-social barrier which has so far been holding the Chinese citizens from permanently migrating to Tibet. The new frantic economic development of this region and systematic pumping of large investments into Tibet by the Beijing regime has paved way for the last push towards turning the already small population of Tibet into a meaningless minority in its own country. During his two recent photo expeditions to Tibet, this author was surprised to note that a local Tibetan in Lhasa finds it impossible to shop if he can not speak Chinese. Almost all malls and taxis are manned by migrant Chinese and cater mostly to the Chinese settlers.
Fast emergence of large Chinese settlements along Indian border in Arunachal and Tibetan regions near India-Tibet-Nepal tri-junction have already changed the demographic character of these border lands from Tibetan to Chinese in recent years. No wonder the Chinese leaders have been terming this strategy as the ‘last solution’ to Tibetan problem.
IMPACT ON SOUTH ASIA
It would be too simplistic, rather naïve, to believe that the impact of Chinese occupation of Tibet has been limited only to Tibet and the Tibetan people. Subsequent events in past 57 years have proved beyond doubt that no other development in Asia during 20th century had more impact on the geo-political character of South Asia than the fall of Tibet into China’s hands. Perhaps the best possible description of this development was expressed in the telegraphic message which the Indian Consulate General in Lhasa had sent to New Delhi following PLA’s attack on Tibet. It said, “Chinese have entered Tibet. Himalayas have ceased to exist”. Before Chinese occupation of Tibet it was a common belief in India that Himalayas were the protectors of India. But events after the fall of Tibet have shown that it was actually a free Tibet, which was standing as a security buffer between China and India.
When China fell to PLA, many political observers feared that Nepal, Bhutan and Sikkim would be next on Beijing’s list. But Chinese proved such fears wrong. One reason was that the situation of these Himalayan countries was far different from that of Tibet. Unlike Tibet whose leaders had kept it fully insulated from the world community, they were reasonably well interlinked with the rest of world. Attempt at occupying any of these countries would have invited tremendous international resistance which China could hardly afford.
NEPAL : CHINA’S SATELLITE
Instead, China adopted the policy of winning over countries of South Asia and using them as a lever to contain India. This tactics has yielded far more dividends than it could have hoped for by occupying one or more of them. Especially in the case of Nepal this policy has paid the best rewards. It is difficult to understand that despite consistent financial aid, close cultural and ethnic links, very favourable treaties and practically an open border policy with Nepal, the India diplomacy has proved an unparalleled disaster in Nepal. For all practical reasons Nepal has emerged a virtual ally, if not a satellite state, of China vis-à-vis India in recent decades. While anything Chinese is perceived as ‘friendly’ in Nepal, a slightest of provocation against India can lead to wide spread violent riots against Indian property and Indian traders in Nepal today. How effective is the influence of China over Nepalese political leadership, bureaucracy, army, police, intellectuals and media can be fathomed from the glairing example of Nepalese Maoists. Even though this extremist pro-China communist movement owes its existence to Chinese sponsorship in the form of training, funding and logistic support from across the border in occupied Tibet, ordinary Nepalese today has been made to believe that the Maoists draw their support from India.
China’s overwhelming influence and presence in Nepal has resulted into many serious problems for India. Nepal has emerged as a safe heaven for pro-China and other anti-Indian terrorist and separatist groups. India’s near open and porous border with Nepal has made the job of Chinese mentors of such groups very easy. Over past few decades the Chinese government has been able to ‘gift’ such a reliable network of highways to Nepal which are capable of taking the Chinese army with all ease to the Indian states of Uttarakhand, Bihar and West Bengal in the event of a direct clash with India.
BANGLADESH : ANTI-INDIA ALLY OF CHINA
It is equally shocking to note that Bangladesh has emerged as yet another reliable ally of China in the latter’s plans to encircle and contain India. A paradox of the story is that not only that Bangladesh owes its freedom to India but it was China who did its best to stop Bangladesh from getting international recognition after her birth in 1971. Today Bangladesh enjoys China’s security in the event of an attack from a ‘third country’. A nightmare of Indian security agencies is the link between anti-India forces of Bangladesh and Nepal. These agencies fear that Chinese government can use the links between such forces and Nepali Maoists in South-eastern Nepal to choke the 25 km wide corridor which offers the only land link between the seven North-Eastern Indian states and the rest of country.
BHUTAN : WORRIES FROM CHINA
Although Bhutan has close relations with India, the Chinese presence in neighboring Tibet has been keeping Thimpu rulers on tenterhooks. There have been many incidents of Chinese aggressive postures along Tibet-Bhutan border which keep Bhutan’s options limited in its relations with two giant neighbors. Presence of various anti-Indian terror groups in Bhutan which have direct or indirect support from Beijing have been using Bhutan as a safe heaven for anti-India activities. This too has been hampering Indian interests in the tiny Himalayan kingdom.
MYANMAR : CHINA’S PESSAGE TO INDIAN OCEAN
Thanks to Beijing’s material and political support to the Myanmar junta, China has emerged as the best and most reliable ally of the military dictators. China has cleverly used this advantage to liver its position in Asia, especially against India. No wonder, Myanmar has turned out to be a perfect operation ground for China supported anti-India militant outfits. Indian security agencies have expressed concern over China supported anti-Indian terror camps and China sponsored air strips in such Mayanmar areas near Indian border where the Yangoon government had no visible reasons to undertake such construction.
But worse has happened for India in the coastal regions of southern Myanmar where it has offered a direct land link to the Chinese Navy to register its presence in Indian Ocean. Although China never had any littoral access to the Indian Ocean, yet it has been able to establish its Naval basis in Coco islands of Myanmar which is just 40 km away from Indian naval bases at Andman and Nicobar islands.
PAKISTAN : COMMON INTERESTS WITH CHINA
One of the most serious fall outs of Chinese occupation of Tibet against India has come in the shape of a direct geo-link and military and political alliance between China and Pakistan. History of past six decades shows that this alliance has proved mutually suitable and profitable to both in their dealings with India. All subsequent Pakistani governments, irrespective of their political ideology or the size of uniform, have been surviving on a one-point political-military-social-cultural-economic national agenda --- going to any length to see India in trouble.
It is interesting to note that despite their alliance with the Western anti-communist block Pakistani rulers found no problem in joining hands with communist China after the Sino-Indian war of 1962. So much so that Pakistan has emerged as China’s most favoured ally, rather a proxy, in its attempts to contain India. China’s unparallel role in the nuclear arming of Pakistan; handing over of some strategic chunks of Aksai-Chin in Jammu and Kashmir territory by Pakistan to China; Pakistan’s permission to China to build Karakoram Road through Pakistani territory; and Islamabad’s recent decision to hand over Gwadar port in the Arabian Sea to Chinese Navy for the development of a naval base only underline the serious dimensions of Beijing-Islamabad strategic ties in this region.
All this has made it possible for China to move its army and Naval troops right upto Arabian Sea through Pakistan and to share the Pakistani naval base. This has posed very serious danger to India's security, especially along its Western coast. On the nuclear front too, any nuclear flare up between India and Pakistan is going to prove fruitful to China in every eventuality. While any serious damage or incapacitation of India by Pakistani nuclear strike will be a direct gain for Beijing, a lethal nuclear response from India to Pakistan too will be of no less political advantage to China vis-à-vis India -- the nuclear ‘aggressor’.
CONCLUSION
This way we see that the occupation of a free Tibet by China has not only hurt the national interests of Tibetan people but has also created many serious problems for other countries in South Asia too. In the case of India the occupation of Tibet has created more problems for her than any other country in the region.
The shifting of international borders and arrival of Chinese troops right up to the Indian borders for the first time in history has proved to be a highly expensive development for the Indian economy. Even going by moderate estimates, this single development across the Himalayas has forced a total change in the Indian priorities in spending its money. The Indo-Tibetan border, which used to be one of the most peaceful borders on earth, takes away almost as much money every five years for maintaining peace along on its newly designated 'India-China' borders as would be enough to provide clean drinking water, good education and dependable health services to every single village which stands deprived even 61 years after Indian independence.
Vijay Kranti
vijaykranti@yahoo.com
CHINESE OCCUPATION OF TIBET & IMPACT ON INDIAN SECURITY
-Vijay Kranti (Author is a senior journalist and Tibetologist) 28 March 2008
China’s geographic interface with South Asia is as old as its occupation of Tibet. Before People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of Mao forced the Dalai Lama’s theocratic government of Tibet to merge Tibet into People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1951, China never had even an inch of common borders with India, Pakistan, Nepal, Sikkim or Bhutan. Since time immemorial, no section of Tibet with these countries was ever governed or even remotely controlled by the writ or men from Beijing. This is how a border, known for centuries as ‘India-Tibet’ border, suddenly became ‘India-China’ border.
In the recent history of many decades before China’s occupation of Tibet too Tibetan currency, Tibetan Post and Tibetan check posts on the Tibetan side of Himalayas defined an exclusively Tibetan and non-Chinese character of Tibet’s borders with its South Asian neighbors.
Soon after Chairman Mao’s ‘People’s Republic of China’ (PRC) came into being in 1949, the new communist government announced its intentions of liberating Tibet, Sinkiang (viz. East Turkistan), Hainan and Taiwan. It was a public expression of Mao’s dream of a larger China. In his plans for a dominant China in Asia, Mao had a special role for Tibet. He was already on record announcing that “Tibet is China’s palm and Ladakh, Sikkim, Nepal, Bhutan and NEFA are its fingers.” Tibet, with its original population of about 6 million (1959 estimates) occupies over 25 percent land mass of today’s PRC.
Thanks to two factors, Mao’s job of occupying Tibet turned out to be much simpler than he would have expected. One, the super powers and other major international players had just emerged from a devastating world war. So, they neither had enough energy nor desire or resources to get into a new mess with a rogue regime. Moreover, Tibet was too far away and geographically too secluded to occupy an important place on their political radars. The second factor was a total indifference on the parts of Indian government who, despite being the most seriously and directly affected state, was lost in a dreamland created by a leadership that utterly lacked vision on matters related to national security and long term geo-political concerns. Rather, overwhelmed by the smiles and assurances of erstwhile Chinese Premier Chou En-lie about China’s role in Tibet, the Indian Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru went to the extent of dissuading the United Nations from taking any action against China for her action on Tibet. This provided a much needed ‘moral’ ground to the community of nations to keep off the China-Tibet dispute.
TWO DIFFERENT APPROACHES
What followed is a history of clear focus and smart action on the Chinese part in occupied Tibet and continuation of a policy dominated by suicidal indifference and confused vision on the part of India. Today China is far more entrenched inside occupied Tibet than India is along its own 4000 km long border region along this border. Today China’s defence machinery enjoys support of a massive network of roads, military establishments, logistic facilities, even nuclear facilities and communications network in occupied Tibet. For example, China’s Army along the Indian Himalayas is served by an end to end all weather roads along this border. These roads are further connected with the main Chinese highway network in Tibet at several points. In contrast, with the exception of Nathu-la in Sikkim, not a single Indian Army post along this entire border is supported by a pucca road. Linear road links along the border on Indian side don’t even exist as a concept. It was only after a barrage of Chinese claims and threats on Arunachal Pradesh that that the Indian government has suddenly woken up and has decided a few months ago (second part of 2007) to start work on such a few such roads.
DEMOGRAPHY : A COLONIAL TOOL
On the demographic front too, China has been consistently busy in changing the Tibetan character of occupied Tibet through massive population transfer. The first step in this direction was taken when the Amdo and Kham provinces of Tibet were chopped off Tibet and their parts were distributed among the surrounding Chinese provinces of Yunnan, Sichuan, Gansu and Quinghai. It was the remaining Tibet, comprising of the third province of U-Tsang and some other left over parts of the two eastern provinces, which was baptized as ‘Tibet Autonomous Region of China’ (TAR).
A comparative study of population figures of Tibet vis-à-vis other occupied regions in the western China would show how Beijing government has already inundated the Amdo and Kham regions of Tibet which were assimilated into neighboring Chinese provinces of Qinghai, Sichuan, Yunnan and Gansu.8
Tibet (Original) 6,000,000 (1959 estimates)*
Tibet (Truncated) i.e. TAR 2,616,329
Sichuan 82,348,296
Yunnan 42,360,089
Qinghai 4,822,963
Gansu 25,124,282
Source : (China Statistical Year Book-2002, China Statistics Press, p-100)
* Based on claims of deposed Tibetan government, headed by Dalai Lama. (Not included in above official publication)
RAIL TO LHASA : CHINA’S NEW WEAPON
Establishment of a direct railway link between China and TAR through the newly constructed Gormo-Lhasa railway line has finally removed the last psycho-social barrier which has so far been holding the Chinese citizens from permanently migrating to Tibet. The new frantic economic development of this region and systematic pumping of large investments into Tibet by the Beijing regime has paved way for the last push towards turning the already small population of Tibet into a meaningless minority in its own country. During his two recent photo expeditions to Tibet, this author was surprised to note that a local Tibetan in Lhasa finds it impossible to shop if he can not speak Chinese. Almost all malls and taxis are manned by migrant Chinese and cater mostly to the Chinese settlers.
Fast emergence of large Chinese settlements along Indian border in Arunachal and Tibetan regions near India-Tibet-Nepal tri-junction have already changed the demographic character of these border lands from Tibetan to Chinese in recent years. No wonder the Chinese leaders have been terming this strategy as the ‘last solution’ to Tibetan problem.
IMPACT ON SOUTH ASIA
It would be too simplistic, rather naïve, to believe that the impact of Chinese occupation of Tibet has been limited only to Tibet and the Tibetan people. Subsequent events in past 57 years have proved beyond doubt that no other development in Asia during 20th century had more impact on the geo-political character of South Asia than the fall of Tibet into China’s hands. Perhaps the best possible description of this development was expressed in the telegraphic message which the Indian Consulate General in Lhasa had sent to New Delhi following PLA’s attack on Tibet. It said, “Chinese have entered Tibet. Himalayas have ceased to exist”. Before Chinese occupation of Tibet it was a common belief in India that Himalayas were the protectors of India. But events after the fall of Tibet have shown that it was actually a free Tibet, which was standing as a security buffer between China and India.
When China fell to PLA, many political observers feared that Nepal, Bhutan and Sikkim would be next on Beijing’s list. But Chinese proved such fears wrong. One reason was that the situation of these Himalayan countries was far different from that of Tibet. Unlike Tibet whose leaders had kept it fully insulated from the world community, they were reasonably well interlinked with the rest of world. Attempt at occupying any of these countries would have invited tremendous international resistance which China could hardly afford.
NEPAL : CHINA’S SATELLITE
Instead, China adopted the policy of winning over countries of South Asia and using them as a lever to contain India. This tactics has yielded far more dividends than it could have hoped for by occupying one or more of them. Especially in the case of Nepal this policy has paid the best rewards. It is difficult to understand that despite consistent financial aid, close cultural and ethnic links, very favourable treaties and practically an open border policy with Nepal, the India diplomacy has proved an unparalleled disaster in Nepal. For all practical reasons Nepal has emerged a virtual ally, if not a satellite state, of China vis-à-vis India in recent decades. While anything Chinese is perceived as ‘friendly’ in Nepal, a slightest of provocation against India can lead to wide spread violent riots against Indian property and Indian traders in Nepal today. How effective is the influence of China over Nepalese political leadership, bureaucracy, army, police, intellectuals and media can be fathomed from the glairing example of Nepalese Maoists. Even though this extremist pro-China communist movement owes its existence to Chinese sponsorship in the form of training, funding and logistic support from across the border in occupied Tibet, ordinary Nepalese today has been made to believe that the Maoists draw their support from India.
China’s overwhelming influence and presence in Nepal has resulted into many serious problems for India. Nepal has emerged as a safe heaven for pro-China and other anti-Indian terrorist and separatist groups. India’s near open and porous border with Nepal has made the job of Chinese mentors of such groups very easy. Over past few decades the Chinese government has been able to ‘gift’ such a reliable network of highways to Nepal which are capable of taking the Chinese army with all ease to the Indian states of Uttarakhand, Bihar and West Bengal in the event of a direct clash with India.
BANGLADESH : ANTI-INDIA ALLY OF CHINA
It is equally shocking to note that Bangladesh has emerged as yet another reliable ally of China in the latter’s plans to encircle and contain India. A paradox of the story is that not only that Bangladesh owes its freedom to India but it was China who did its best to stop Bangladesh from getting international recognition after her birth in 1971. Today Bangladesh enjoys China’s security in the event of an attack from a ‘third country’. A nightmare of Indian security agencies is the link between anti-India forces of Bangladesh and Nepal. These agencies fear that Chinese government can use the links between such forces and Nepali Maoists in South-eastern Nepal to choke the 25 km wide corridor which offers the only land link between the seven North-Eastern Indian states and the rest of country.
BHUTAN : WORRIES FROM CHINA
Although Bhutan has close relations with India, the Chinese presence in neighboring Tibet has been keeping Thimpu rulers on tenterhooks. There have been many incidents of Chinese aggressive postures along Tibet-Bhutan border which keep Bhutan’s options limited in its relations with two giant neighbors. Presence of various anti-Indian terror groups in Bhutan which have direct or indirect support from Beijing have been using Bhutan as a safe heaven for anti-India activities. This too has been hampering Indian interests in the tiny Himalayan kingdom.
MYANMAR : CHINA’S PESSAGE TO INDIAN OCEAN
Thanks to Beijing’s material and political support to the Myanmar junta, China has emerged as the best and most reliable ally of the military dictators. China has cleverly used this advantage to liver its position in Asia, especially against India. No wonder, Myanmar has turned out to be a perfect operation ground for China supported anti-India militant outfits. Indian security agencies have expressed concern over China supported anti-Indian terror camps and China sponsored air strips in such Mayanmar areas near Indian border where the Yangoon government had no visible reasons to undertake such construction.
But worse has happened for India in the coastal regions of southern Myanmar where it has offered a direct land link to the Chinese Navy to register its presence in Indian Ocean. Although China never had any littoral access to the Indian Ocean, yet it has been able to establish its Naval basis in Coco islands of Myanmar which is just 40 km away from Indian naval bases at Andman and Nicobar islands.
PAKISTAN : COMMON INTERESTS WITH CHINA
One of the most serious fall outs of Chinese occupation of Tibet against India has come in the shape of a direct geo-link and military and political alliance between China and Pakistan. History of past six decades shows that this alliance has proved mutually suitable and profitable to both in their dealings with India. All subsequent Pakistani governments, irrespective of their political ideology or the size of uniform, have been surviving on a one-point political-military-social-cultural-economic national agenda --- going to any length to see India in trouble.
It is interesting to note that despite their alliance with the Western anti-communist block Pakistani rulers found no problem in joining hands with communist China after the Sino-Indian war of 1962. So much so that Pakistan has emerged as China’s most favoured ally, rather a proxy, in its attempts to contain India. China’s unparallel role in the nuclear arming of Pakistan; handing over of some strategic chunks of Aksai-Chin in Jammu and Kashmir territory by Pakistan to China; Pakistan’s permission to China to build Karakoram Road through Pakistani territory; and Islamabad’s recent decision to hand over Gwadar port in the Arabian Sea to Chinese Navy for the development of a naval base only underline the serious dimensions of Beijing-Islamabad strategic ties in this region.
All this has made it possible for China to move its army and Naval troops right upto Arabian Sea through Pakistan and to share the Pakistani naval base. This has posed very serious danger to India's security, especially along its Western coast. On the nuclear front too, any nuclear flare up between India and Pakistan is going to prove fruitful to China in every eventuality. While any serious damage or incapacitation of India by Pakistani nuclear strike will be a direct gain for Beijing, a lethal nuclear response from India to Pakistan too will be of no less political advantage to China vis-à-vis India -- the nuclear ‘aggressor’.
CONCLUSION
This way we see that the occupation of a free Tibet by China has not only hurt the national interests of Tibetan people but has also created many serious problems for other countries in South Asia too. In the case of India the occupation of Tibet has created more problems for her than any other country in the region.
The shifting of international borders and arrival of Chinese troops right up to the Indian borders for the first time in history has proved to be a highly expensive development for the Indian economy. Even going by moderate estimates, this single development across the Himalayas has forced a total change in the Indian priorities in spending its money. The Indo-Tibetan border, which used to be one of the most peaceful borders on earth, takes away almost as much money every five years for maintaining peace along on its newly designated 'India-China' borders as would be enough to provide clean drinking water, good education and dependable health services to every single village which stands deprived even 61 years after Indian independence.
Vijay Kranti
vijaykranti@yahoo.com
Chinese occupation of Tibet and Impact on Indian security
Paper read by Mr. Vijay Kranti, Senior Journalist and Tibetologist at Supreme Court of India at the symposium organized by Federation of Human Rights Organizations of India on 28.3.2008 on the subject GENOCIDE IN TIBET- WHAT THE WORLD SHOULD DO ? Rajesh Gogna, Convenor. 2 April 2008
CHINESE OCCUPATION OF TIBET & IMPACT ON INDIAN SECURITY
-Vijay Kranti
(Author is a senior journalist and Tibetologist)
China’s geographic interface with South Asia is as old as its occupation of Tibet. Before People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of Mao forced the Dalai Lama’s theocratic government of Tibet to merge Tibet into People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1951, China never had even an inch of common borders with India, Pakistan, Nepal, Sikkim or Bhutan. Since time immemorial, no section of Tibet with these countries was ever governed or even remotely controlled by the writ or men from Beijing. This is how a border, known for centuries as ‘India-Tibet’ border, suddenly became ‘India-China’ border.
In the recent history of many decades before China’s occupation of Tibet too Tibetan currency, Tibetan Post and Tibetan check posts on the Tibetan side of Himalayas defined an exclusively Tibetan and non-Chinese character of Tibet’s borders with its South Asian neighbors.
Soon after Chairman Mao’s ‘People’s Republic of China’ (PRC) came into being in 1949, the new communist government announced its intentions of liberating Tibet, Sinkiang (viz. East Turkistan), Hainan and Taiwan. It was a public expression of Mao’s dream of a larger China. In his plans for a dominant China in Asia, Mao had a special role for Tibet. He was already on record announcing that “Tibet is China’s palm and Ladakh, Sikkim, Nepal, Bhutan and NEFA are its fingers.” Tibet, with its original population of about 6 million (1959 estimates) occupies over 25 percent land mass of today’s PRC.
Thanks to two factors, Mao’s job of occupying Tibet turned out to be much simpler than he would have expected. One, the super powers and other major international players had just emerged from a devastating world war. So, they neither had enough energy nor desire or resources to get into a new mess with a rogue regime. Moreover, Tibet was too far away and geographically too secluded to occupy an important place on their political radars. The second factor was a total indifference on the parts of Indian government who, despite being the most seriously and directly affected state, was lost in a dreamland created by a leadership that utterly lacked vision on matters related to national security and long term geo-political concerns. Rather, overwhelmed by the smiles and assurances of erstwhile Chinese Premier Chou En-lie about China’s role in Tibet, the Indian Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru went to the extent of dissuading the United Nations from taking any action against China for her action on Tibet. This provided a much needed ‘moral’ ground to the community of nations to keep off the China-Tibet dispute.
TWO DIFFERENT APPROACHES
What followed is a history of clear focus and smart action on the Chinese part in occupied Tibet and continuation of a policy dominated by suicidal indifference and confused vision on the part of India. Today China is far more entrenched inside occupied Tibet than India is along its own 4000 km long border region along this border. Today China’s defence machinery enjoys support of a massive network of roads, military establishments, logistic facilities, even nuclear facilities and communications network in occupied Tibet. For example, China’s Army along the Indian Himalayas is served by an end to end all weather roads along this border. These roads are further connected with the main Chinese highway network in Tibet at several points. In contrast, with the exception of Nathu-la in Sikkim, not a single Indian Army post along this entire border is supported by a pucca road. Linear road links along the border on Indian side don’t even exist as a concept. It was only after a barrage of Chinese claims and threats on Arunachal Pradesh that that the Indian government has suddenly woken up and has decided a few months ago (second part of 2007) to start work on such a few such roads.
DEMOGRAPHY : A COLONIAL TOOL
On the demographic front too, China has been consistently busy in changing the Tibetan character of occupied Tibet through massive population transfer. The first step in this direction was taken when the Amdo and Kham provinces of Tibet were chopped off Tibet and their parts were distributed among the surrounding Chinese provinces of Yunnan, Sichuan, Gansu and Quinghai. It was the remaining Tibet, comprising of the third province of U-Tsang and some other left over parts of the two eastern provinces, which was baptized as ‘Tibet Autonomous Region of China’ (TAR).
A comparative study of population figures of Tibet vis-à-vis other occupied regions in the western China would show how Beijing government has already inundated the Amdo and Kham regions of Tibet which were assimilated into neighboring Chinese provinces of Qinghai, Sichuan, Yunnan and Gansu.8
Tibet (Original) 6,000,000 (1959 estimates)*
Tibet (Truncated) i.e. TAR 2,616,329
Sichuan 82,348,296
Yunnan 42,360,089
Qinghai 4,822,963
Gansu 25,124,282
Source : (China Statistical Year Book-2002, China Statistics Press, p-100)
* Based on claims of deposed Tibetan government, headed by Dalai Lama. (Not included in above official publication)
RAIL TO LHASA : CHINA’S NEW WEAPON
Establishment of a direct railway link between China and TAR through the newly constructed Gormo-Lhasa railway line has finally removed the last psycho-social barrier which has so far been holding the Chinese citizens from permanently migrating to Tibet. The new frantic economic development of this region and systematic pumping of large investments into Tibet by the Beijing regime has paved way for the last push towards turning the already small population of Tibet into a meaningless minority in its own country. During his two recent photo expeditions to Tibet, this author was surprised to note that a local Tibetan in Lhasa finds it impossible to shop if he can not speak Chinese. Almost all malls and taxis are manned by migrant Chinese and cater mostly to the Chinese settlers.
Fast emergence of large Chinese settlements along Indian border in Arunachal and Tibetan regions near India-Tibet-Nepal tri-junction have already changed the demographic character of these border lands from Tibetan to Chinese in recent years. No wonder the Chinese leaders have been terming this strategy as the ‘last solution’ to Tibetan problem.
IMPACT ON SOUTH ASIA
It would be too simplistic, rather naïve, to believe that the impact of Chinese occupation of Tibet has been limited only to Tibet and the Tibetan people. Subsequent events in past 57 years have proved beyond doubt that no other development in Asia during 20th century had more impact on the geo-political character of South Asia than the fall of Tibet into China’s hands. Perhaps the best possible description of this development was expressed in the telegraphic message which the Indian Consulate General in Lhasa had sent to New Delhi following PLA’s attack on Tibet. It said, “Chinese have entered Tibet. Himalayas have ceased to exist”. Before Chinese occupation of Tibet it was a common belief in India that Himalayas were the protectors of India. But events after the fall of Tibet have shown that it was actually a free Tibet, which was standing as a security buffer between China and India.
When China fell to PLA, many political observers feared that Nepal, Bhutan and Sikkim would be next on Beijing’s list. But Chinese proved such fears wrong. One reason was that the situation of these Himalayan countries was far different from that of Tibet. Unlike Tibet whose leaders had kept it fully insulated from the world community, they were reasonably well interlinked with the rest of world. Attempt at occupying any of these countries would have invited tremendous international resistance which China could hardly afford.
NEPAL : CHINA’S SATELLITE
Instead, China adopted the policy of winning over countries of South Asia and using them as a lever to contain India. This tactics has yielded far more dividends than it could have hoped for by occupying one or more of them. Especially in the case of Nepal this policy has paid the best rewards. It is difficult to understand that despite consistent financial aid, close cultural and ethnic links, very favourable treaties and practically an open border policy with Nepal, the India diplomacy has proved an unparalleled disaster in Nepal. For all practical reasons Nepal has emerged a virtual ally, if not a satellite state, of China vis-à-vis India in recent decades. While anything Chinese is perceived as ‘friendly’ in Nepal, a slightest of provocation against India can lead to wide spread violent riots against Indian property and Indian traders in Nepal today. How effective is the influence of China over Nepalese political leadership, bureaucracy, army, police, intellectuals and media can be fathomed from the glairing example of Nepalese Maoists. Even though this extremist pro-China communist movement owes its existence to Chinese sponsorship in the form of training, funding and logistic support from across the border in occupied Tibet, ordinary Nepalese today has been made to believe that the Maoists draw their support from India.
China’s overwhelming influence and presence in Nepal has resulted into many serious problems for India. Nepal has emerged as a safe heaven for pro-China and other anti-Indian terrorist and separatist groups. India’s near open and porous border with Nepal has made the job of Chinese mentors of such groups very easy. Over past few decades the Chinese government has been able to ‘gift’ such a reliable network of highways to Nepal which are capable of taking the Chinese army with all ease to the Indian states of Uttarakhand, Bihar and West Bengal in the event of a direct clash with India.
BANGLADESH : ANTI-INDIA ALLY OF CHINA
It is equally shocking to note that Bangladesh has emerged as yet another reliable ally of China in the latter’s plans to encircle and contain India. A paradox of the story is that not only that Bangladesh owes its freedom to India but it was China who did its best to stop Bangladesh from getting international recognition after her birth in 1971. Today Bangladesh enjoys China’s security in the event of an attack from a ‘third country’. A nightmare of Indian security agencies is the link between anti-India forces of Bangladesh and Nepal. These agencies fear that Chinese government can use the links between such forces and Nepali Maoists in South-eastern Nepal to choke the 25 km wide corridor which offers the only land link between the seven North-Eastern Indian states and the rest of country.
BHUTAN : WORRIES FROM CHINA
Although Bhutan has close relations with India, the Chinese presence in neighboring Tibet has been keeping Thimpu rulers on tenterhooks. There have been many incidents of Chinese aggressive postures along Tibet-Bhutan border which keep Bhutan’s options limited in its relations with two giant neighbors. Presence of various anti-Indian terror groups in Bhutan which have direct or indirect support from Beijing have been using Bhutan as a safe heaven for anti-India activities. This too has been hampering Indian interests in the tiny Himalayan kingdom.
MYANMAR : CHINA’S PESSAGE TO INDIAN OCEAN
Thanks to Beijing’s material and political support to the Myanmar junta, China has emerged as the best and most reliable ally of the military dictators. China has cleverly used this advantage to liver its position in Asia, especially against India. No wonder, Myanmar has turned out to be a perfect operation ground for China supported anti-India militant outfits. Indian security agencies have expressed concern over China supported anti-Indian terror camps and China sponsored air strips in such Mayanmar areas near Indian border where the Yangoon government had no visible reasons to undertake such construction.
But worse has happened for India in the coastal regions of southern Myanmar where it has offered a direct land link to the Chinese Navy to register its presence in Indian Ocean. Although China never had any littoral access to the Indian Ocean, yet it has been able to establish its Naval basis in Coco islands of Myanmar which is just 40 km away from Indian naval bases at Andman and Nicobar islands.
PAKISTAN : COMMON INTERESTS WITH CHINA
One of the most serious fall outs of Chinese occupation of Tibet against India has come in the shape of a direct geo-link and military and political alliance between China and Pakistan. History of past six decades shows that this alliance has proved mutually suitable and profitable to both in their dealings with India. All subsequent Pakistani governments, irrespective of their political ideology or the size of uniform, have been surviving on a one-point political-military-social-cultural-economic national agenda --- going to any length to see India in trouble.
It is interesting to note that despite their alliance with the Western anti-communist block Pakistani rulers found no problem in joining hands with communist China after the Sino-Indian war of 1962. So much so that Pakistan has emerged as China’s most favoured ally, rather a proxy, in its attempts to contain India. China’s unparallel role in the nuclear arming of Pakistan; handing over of some strategic chunks of Aksai-Chin in Jammu and Kashmir territory by Pakistan to China; Pakistan’s permission to China to build Karakoram Road through Pakistani territory; and Islamabad’s recent decision to hand over Gwadar port in the Arabian Sea to Chinese Navy for the development of a naval base only underline the serious dimensions of Beijing-Islamabad strategic ties in this region.
All this has made it possible for China to move its army and Naval troops right upto Arabian Sea through Pakistan and to share the Pakistani naval base. This has posed very serious danger to India's security, especially along its Western coast. On the nuclear front too, any nuclear flare up between India and Pakistan is going to prove fruitful to China in every eventuality. While any serious damage or incapacitation of India by Pakistani nuclear strike will be a direct gain for Beijing, a lethal nuclear response from India to Pakistan too will be of no less political advantage to China vis-à-vis India -- the nuclear ‘aggressor’.
CONCLUSION
This way we see that the occupation of a free Tibet by China has not only hurt the national interests of Tibetan people but has also created many serious problems for other countries in South Asia too. In the case of India the occupation of Tibet has created more problems for her than any other country in the region.
The shifting of international borders and arrival of Chinese troops right up to the Indian borders for the first time in history has proved to be a highly expensive development for the Indian economy. Even going by moderate estimates, this single development across the Himalayas has forced a total change in the Indian priorities in spending its money. The Indo-Tibetan border, which used to be one of the most peaceful borders on earth, takes away almost as much money every five years for maintaining peace along on its newly designated 'India-China' borders as would be enough to provide clean drinking water, good education and dependable health services to every single village which stands deprived even 61 years after Indian independence.
Vijay Kranti
vijaykranti@yahoo.com
CHINESE OCCUPATION OF TIBET & IMPACT ON INDIAN SECURITY
-Vijay Kranti
(Author is a senior journalist and Tibetologist)
China’s geographic interface with South Asia is as old as its occupation of Tibet. Before People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of Mao forced the Dalai Lama’s theocratic government of Tibet to merge Tibet into People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1951, China never had even an inch of common borders with India, Pakistan, Nepal, Sikkim or Bhutan. Since time immemorial, no section of Tibet with these countries was ever governed or even remotely controlled by the writ or men from Beijing. This is how a border, known for centuries as ‘India-Tibet’ border, suddenly became ‘India-China’ border.
In the recent history of many decades before China’s occupation of Tibet too Tibetan currency, Tibetan Post and Tibetan check posts on the Tibetan side of Himalayas defined an exclusively Tibetan and non-Chinese character of Tibet’s borders with its South Asian neighbors.
Soon after Chairman Mao’s ‘People’s Republic of China’ (PRC) came into being in 1949, the new communist government announced its intentions of liberating Tibet, Sinkiang (viz. East Turkistan), Hainan and Taiwan. It was a public expression of Mao’s dream of a larger China. In his plans for a dominant China in Asia, Mao had a special role for Tibet. He was already on record announcing that “Tibet is China’s palm and Ladakh, Sikkim, Nepal, Bhutan and NEFA are its fingers.” Tibet, with its original population of about 6 million (1959 estimates) occupies over 25 percent land mass of today’s PRC.
Thanks to two factors, Mao’s job of occupying Tibet turned out to be much simpler than he would have expected. One, the super powers and other major international players had just emerged from a devastating world war. So, they neither had enough energy nor desire or resources to get into a new mess with a rogue regime. Moreover, Tibet was too far away and geographically too secluded to occupy an important place on their political radars. The second factor was a total indifference on the parts of Indian government who, despite being the most seriously and directly affected state, was lost in a dreamland created by a leadership that utterly lacked vision on matters related to national security and long term geo-political concerns. Rather, overwhelmed by the smiles and assurances of erstwhile Chinese Premier Chou En-lie about China’s role in Tibet, the Indian Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru went to the extent of dissuading the United Nations from taking any action against China for her action on Tibet. This provided a much needed ‘moral’ ground to the community of nations to keep off the China-Tibet dispute.
TWO DIFFERENT APPROACHES
What followed is a history of clear focus and smart action on the Chinese part in occupied Tibet and continuation of a policy dominated by suicidal indifference and confused vision on the part of India. Today China is far more entrenched inside occupied Tibet than India is along its own 4000 km long border region along this border. Today China’s defence machinery enjoys support of a massive network of roads, military establishments, logistic facilities, even nuclear facilities and communications network in occupied Tibet. For example, China’s Army along the Indian Himalayas is served by an end to end all weather roads along this border. These roads are further connected with the main Chinese highway network in Tibet at several points. In contrast, with the exception of Nathu-la in Sikkim, not a single Indian Army post along this entire border is supported by a pucca road. Linear road links along the border on Indian side don’t even exist as a concept. It was only after a barrage of Chinese claims and threats on Arunachal Pradesh that that the Indian government has suddenly woken up and has decided a few months ago (second part of 2007) to start work on such a few such roads.
DEMOGRAPHY : A COLONIAL TOOL
On the demographic front too, China has been consistently busy in changing the Tibetan character of occupied Tibet through massive population transfer. The first step in this direction was taken when the Amdo and Kham provinces of Tibet were chopped off Tibet and their parts were distributed among the surrounding Chinese provinces of Yunnan, Sichuan, Gansu and Quinghai. It was the remaining Tibet, comprising of the third province of U-Tsang and some other left over parts of the two eastern provinces, which was baptized as ‘Tibet Autonomous Region of China’ (TAR).
A comparative study of population figures of Tibet vis-à-vis other occupied regions in the western China would show how Beijing government has already inundated the Amdo and Kham regions of Tibet which were assimilated into neighboring Chinese provinces of Qinghai, Sichuan, Yunnan and Gansu.8
Tibet (Original) 6,000,000 (1959 estimates)*
Tibet (Truncated) i.e. TAR 2,616,329
Sichuan 82,348,296
Yunnan 42,360,089
Qinghai 4,822,963
Gansu 25,124,282
Source : (China Statistical Year Book-2002, China Statistics Press, p-100)
* Based on claims of deposed Tibetan government, headed by Dalai Lama. (Not included in above official publication)
RAIL TO LHASA : CHINA’S NEW WEAPON
Establishment of a direct railway link between China and TAR through the newly constructed Gormo-Lhasa railway line has finally removed the last psycho-social barrier which has so far been holding the Chinese citizens from permanently migrating to Tibet. The new frantic economic development of this region and systematic pumping of large investments into Tibet by the Beijing regime has paved way for the last push towards turning the already small population of Tibet into a meaningless minority in its own country. During his two recent photo expeditions to Tibet, this author was surprised to note that a local Tibetan in Lhasa finds it impossible to shop if he can not speak Chinese. Almost all malls and taxis are manned by migrant Chinese and cater mostly to the Chinese settlers.
Fast emergence of large Chinese settlements along Indian border in Arunachal and Tibetan regions near India-Tibet-Nepal tri-junction have already changed the demographic character of these border lands from Tibetan to Chinese in recent years. No wonder the Chinese leaders have been terming this strategy as the ‘last solution’ to Tibetan problem.
IMPACT ON SOUTH ASIA
It would be too simplistic, rather naïve, to believe that the impact of Chinese occupation of Tibet has been limited only to Tibet and the Tibetan people. Subsequent events in past 57 years have proved beyond doubt that no other development in Asia during 20th century had more impact on the geo-political character of South Asia than the fall of Tibet into China’s hands. Perhaps the best possible description of this development was expressed in the telegraphic message which the Indian Consulate General in Lhasa had sent to New Delhi following PLA’s attack on Tibet. It said, “Chinese have entered Tibet. Himalayas have ceased to exist”. Before Chinese occupation of Tibet it was a common belief in India that Himalayas were the protectors of India. But events after the fall of Tibet have shown that it was actually a free Tibet, which was standing as a security buffer between China and India.
When China fell to PLA, many political observers feared that Nepal, Bhutan and Sikkim would be next on Beijing’s list. But Chinese proved such fears wrong. One reason was that the situation of these Himalayan countries was far different from that of Tibet. Unlike Tibet whose leaders had kept it fully insulated from the world community, they were reasonably well interlinked with the rest of world. Attempt at occupying any of these countries would have invited tremendous international resistance which China could hardly afford.
NEPAL : CHINA’S SATELLITE
Instead, China adopted the policy of winning over countries of South Asia and using them as a lever to contain India. This tactics has yielded far more dividends than it could have hoped for by occupying one or more of them. Especially in the case of Nepal this policy has paid the best rewards. It is difficult to understand that despite consistent financial aid, close cultural and ethnic links, very favourable treaties and practically an open border policy with Nepal, the India diplomacy has proved an unparalleled disaster in Nepal. For all practical reasons Nepal has emerged a virtual ally, if not a satellite state, of China vis-à-vis India in recent decades. While anything Chinese is perceived as ‘friendly’ in Nepal, a slightest of provocation against India can lead to wide spread violent riots against Indian property and Indian traders in Nepal today. How effective is the influence of China over Nepalese political leadership, bureaucracy, army, police, intellectuals and media can be fathomed from the glairing example of Nepalese Maoists. Even though this extremist pro-China communist movement owes its existence to Chinese sponsorship in the form of training, funding and logistic support from across the border in occupied Tibet, ordinary Nepalese today has been made to believe that the Maoists draw their support from India.
China’s overwhelming influence and presence in Nepal has resulted into many serious problems for India. Nepal has emerged as a safe heaven for pro-China and other anti-Indian terrorist and separatist groups. India’s near open and porous border with Nepal has made the job of Chinese mentors of such groups very easy. Over past few decades the Chinese government has been able to ‘gift’ such a reliable network of highways to Nepal which are capable of taking the Chinese army with all ease to the Indian states of Uttarakhand, Bihar and West Bengal in the event of a direct clash with India.
BANGLADESH : ANTI-INDIA ALLY OF CHINA
It is equally shocking to note that Bangladesh has emerged as yet another reliable ally of China in the latter’s plans to encircle and contain India. A paradox of the story is that not only that Bangladesh owes its freedom to India but it was China who did its best to stop Bangladesh from getting international recognition after her birth in 1971. Today Bangladesh enjoys China’s security in the event of an attack from a ‘third country’. A nightmare of Indian security agencies is the link between anti-India forces of Bangladesh and Nepal. These agencies fear that Chinese government can use the links between such forces and Nepali Maoists in South-eastern Nepal to choke the 25 km wide corridor which offers the only land link between the seven North-Eastern Indian states and the rest of country.
BHUTAN : WORRIES FROM CHINA
Although Bhutan has close relations with India, the Chinese presence in neighboring Tibet has been keeping Thimpu rulers on tenterhooks. There have been many incidents of Chinese aggressive postures along Tibet-Bhutan border which keep Bhutan’s options limited in its relations with two giant neighbors. Presence of various anti-Indian terror groups in Bhutan which have direct or indirect support from Beijing have been using Bhutan as a safe heaven for anti-India activities. This too has been hampering Indian interests in the tiny Himalayan kingdom.
MYANMAR : CHINA’S PESSAGE TO INDIAN OCEAN
Thanks to Beijing’s material and political support to the Myanmar junta, China has emerged as the best and most reliable ally of the military dictators. China has cleverly used this advantage to liver its position in Asia, especially against India. No wonder, Myanmar has turned out to be a perfect operation ground for China supported anti-India militant outfits. Indian security agencies have expressed concern over China supported anti-Indian terror camps and China sponsored air strips in such Mayanmar areas near Indian border where the Yangoon government had no visible reasons to undertake such construction.
But worse has happened for India in the coastal regions of southern Myanmar where it has offered a direct land link to the Chinese Navy to register its presence in Indian Ocean. Although China never had any littoral access to the Indian Ocean, yet it has been able to establish its Naval basis in Coco islands of Myanmar which is just 40 km away from Indian naval bases at Andman and Nicobar islands.
PAKISTAN : COMMON INTERESTS WITH CHINA
One of the most serious fall outs of Chinese occupation of Tibet against India has come in the shape of a direct geo-link and military and political alliance between China and Pakistan. History of past six decades shows that this alliance has proved mutually suitable and profitable to both in their dealings with India. All subsequent Pakistani governments, irrespective of their political ideology or the size of uniform, have been surviving on a one-point political-military-social-cultural-economic national agenda --- going to any length to see India in trouble.
It is interesting to note that despite their alliance with the Western anti-communist block Pakistani rulers found no problem in joining hands with communist China after the Sino-Indian war of 1962. So much so that Pakistan has emerged as China’s most favoured ally, rather a proxy, in its attempts to contain India. China’s unparallel role in the nuclear arming of Pakistan; handing over of some strategic chunks of Aksai-Chin in Jammu and Kashmir territory by Pakistan to China; Pakistan’s permission to China to build Karakoram Road through Pakistani territory; and Islamabad’s recent decision to hand over Gwadar port in the Arabian Sea to Chinese Navy for the development of a naval base only underline the serious dimensions of Beijing-Islamabad strategic ties in this region.
All this has made it possible for China to move its army and Naval troops right upto Arabian Sea through Pakistan and to share the Pakistani naval base. This has posed very serious danger to India's security, especially along its Western coast. On the nuclear front too, any nuclear flare up between India and Pakistan is going to prove fruitful to China in every eventuality. While any serious damage or incapacitation of India by Pakistani nuclear strike will be a direct gain for Beijing, a lethal nuclear response from India to Pakistan too will be of no less political advantage to China vis-à-vis India -- the nuclear ‘aggressor’.
CONCLUSION
This way we see that the occupation of a free Tibet by China has not only hurt the national interests of Tibetan people but has also created many serious problems for other countries in South Asia too. In the case of India the occupation of Tibet has created more problems for her than any other country in the region.
The shifting of international borders and arrival of Chinese troops right up to the Indian borders for the first time in history has proved to be a highly expensive development for the Indian economy. Even going by moderate estimates, this single development across the Himalayas has forced a total change in the Indian priorities in spending its money. The Indo-Tibetan border, which used to be one of the most peaceful borders on earth, takes away almost as much money every five years for maintaining peace along on its newly designated 'India-China' borders as would be enough to provide clean drinking water, good education and dependable health services to every single village which stands deprived even 61 years after Indian independence.
Vijay Kranti
vijaykranti@yahoo.com
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Please sign and forward: Petition to George W. Bush to boycott 2008 Beijing olympics
Dear Colleagues:
PETITION TO GEORGE W. BUSH TO BOYCOTT 2008 BEIJING OLYMPICS FOR SIGNATURE PLEASE
Enclosed herewith please find the URL for the Petition to President George W. Bush to Boycott 2008 Beijing Olympics.
http://www.petitiononline.com/Kataria/petition.html
You are requested to please spare a few moments and sign the petition by clicking on the URL.
k
PETITION TO GEORGE W. BUSH TO BOYCOTT 2008 BEIJING OLYMPICS FOR SIGNATURE PLEASE
Enclosed herewith please find the URL for the Petition to President George W. Bush to Boycott 2008 Beijing Olympics.
http://www.petitiononline.com/Kataria/petition.html
You are requested to please spare a few moments and sign the petition by clicking on the URL.
k
China barks, world obeys
China barks, world obeys
Claude Arpi (Pioneer, April 2, 2008)
[ It's not just India which has preferred to go soft on Tibet. Western countries have adopted a similar policy. The slavish attitude of most Governments has emboldened a brutal China to indulge in what the Dalai Lama calls 'cultural genocide' in Tibet ]
During the last few weeks, we have been hearing and reading that the Government of India has been chickening out on each and every issue - whether it is the India-US nuclear deal (after agreeing with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, it pretended to have 'forgotten' the draft when it met the Left parties on March 14), or the Tibetan issue.
Of course, South Block has an explanation for everything. On the Tibetan issue, for example, it says that when Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao visited India in April 2005, the Government had agreed to "recognise the Tibet Autonomous Region as part of the territory of the People's Republic of China and... not allow Tibetans to engage in anti-China political activities in India". This illustrates the wishy-washiness of the UPA regime which allows Beijing to twist New Delhi's arm.
When one reflects on the unrest in Tibet during the past fortnight, it is probably this type of vagueness which has created an immense sense of frustration among the Tibetans. And I am not speaking about the UPA Government's attitude alone. During the last decade, most heads of state have pursued similar policies. Business is more important, they say.
I remember an incident which was narrated to me by an eyewitness. In 1998, the world community celebrated the 50th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the General Assembly of the United Nations. Article 1 says: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood." A beautiful concept indeed!
Paris, the heart of the French Revolution, had logically been given the responsibility to organise the festivities to which all the Nobel peace laureates were invited. But while sending the invitations, the office of the French President 'forgot' one inconvenient Nobel peace laureate, the Dalai Lama. The French daily, Libération, was the first to break the story. Elysée Palace had to quickly backtrack and pretend that the postal service had 'lost' the invitation and that "a 'fresh' one would be sent to the Dalai Lama". The latter then decided to attend the celebrations.
The story is not yet over. During a private function, then French President Jacques Chirac was introduced to the Nobel laureates one by one. When he reached the Dalai Lama, instead of shaking hands, he simply ignored him and passed on to the next dignitary. When I heard this story, I could not believe it, but the person assured me that it was true. A few years earlier, Mr Chirac had openly spoken of "my friend the Dalai Lama".
When I recently interviewed the Tibetan leader, he alluded to the incident: "Your President used to be a close friend of mine... before he became President. Later he did not remember me (he started laughing), it did not upset me; it was his choice (and he laughed again)."
And this is only one story. The Dalai Lama must have lived through hundreds of such affronts. The Chinese Embassy has just to bark and any Western (or Indian) Government obeys. Last year, a large meeting of Tibet Support Groups was held in Brussels, the Tibetan leader was to address the gathering. When the Chinese Embassy threatened to cancel the visit of some Belgian Prince to China, Brussels immediately complied and asked the Dalai Lama to cancel his visit.
The slavish attitude of most Governments has emboldened China to go ahead with what the Dalai Lama calls a "cultural genocide". Hiding behind the most (in)famous of the Panchsheel Agreement - "mutual non-interference in each other's internal affairs" - the Chinese Government has continuously removed all traces of cultural identity in Tibet. The latest instrument of cultural purge is the railway line to Lhasa which brought four million Han Chinese to a city of a few lakhs in 2007.
Abandoned by all the great democracies, seeing that the 'negotiations' between the Dalai Lama's envoys and second-rank Chinese officials going nowhere, the despair began mounting in Tibet and Dharamsala. The summer Olympics were their last chance to get their voice heard.
It is true that the 'dialogue' between Beijing and Dharamsala has been one of the most frustrating processes, with the Chinese authorities clearly taking the Dalai Lama for a ride to gain time. China has never had the intention to give any autonomy to Tibet (as it should according to the Constitution of the People's Republic of China). Added to this, the constant insults against the Tibetan leader could only add to the frustration and anger of the Tibetans.
How can a dialogue be established when Tibet's Communist Party chief, Zhang Qingli, calls the Dalai Lama "a wolf in a monk's robe, a monster with a human face but the heart of a beast"?
Further, facts like the interdiction of displaying - or even having - photos of the Dalai Lama increase the discontent on the 'Roof of the World'. The Chinese have mentioned in one of their communiqués that Chinese shops have been burned in Lhasa by the demonstrators. When I visited the Tibetan capital in 1993, there were 12,000 Chinese shops in Lhasa for only 300 Tibetan shops. Fifteen years later, the situation is worse. How can the Tibetans not be frustrated and upset?
Whatever the motivations of Ms Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the US House of Representatives, were in meeting the Dalai Lama in Dharamsala, she did put the Tibetan issue at the right level: "The situation in Tibet is a challenge to the conscience of the world... the challenge we can help meet." The third-ranking US official added: "If freedom loving people throughout the world do not speak out against China's oppression in Tibet, we have lost all moral authority to speak on human rights anywhere in the world."
Yes, it is a challenge for the consciousness of the inhabitants of this planet when 'nations' such as Tokelau and Kiribati (or Kosovo) are recognised as 'independent' by the UN and Tibet is still colonised. Indians, who have been under foreign yoke for seven centuries, will understand this.
The only solution to the Tibetan issue is a change of regime in Beijing. Interestingly, Communist leaders have not always responded to the unrest in Tibet with the brutality we witness today. In May 1980, the Politburo of the CCP decided to send a high-level fact-finding delegation to the 'Tibet Autonomous Region'. The delegation was headed by the top party functionary, Mr Hu Yaobang, who was then the CCP general secretary. Reaching Lhasa, he was shocked to see the level of poverty in Tibet. During a meeting with the party cadre, he asked "whether all the money Beijing had poured into Tibet over the previous years had been thrown into Yarlung Tsangpo (Brahmaputra)".
Mr Hu Yaobang said the situation reminded him of colonialism. Hundreds of Chinese Han cadre were transferred back to China. The situation was better for a few years until Mr Hu Jintao became the party chief in Lhasa. His arrival corresponded to the worst riots and one year of martial law in Tibet.
Will China find a new Hu Yaobang? This is the most important question for its - and Tibet's - future.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/indexn12.asp?main_variable=OPED&file_name=opd1%2Etxt&counter_img=1
Claude Arpi (Pioneer, April 2, 2008)
[ It's not just India which has preferred to go soft on Tibet. Western countries have adopted a similar policy. The slavish attitude of most Governments has emboldened a brutal China to indulge in what the Dalai Lama calls 'cultural genocide' in Tibet ]
During the last few weeks, we have been hearing and reading that the Government of India has been chickening out on each and every issue - whether it is the India-US nuclear deal (after agreeing with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, it pretended to have 'forgotten' the draft when it met the Left parties on March 14), or the Tibetan issue.
Of course, South Block has an explanation for everything. On the Tibetan issue, for example, it says that when Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao visited India in April 2005, the Government had agreed to "recognise the Tibet Autonomous Region as part of the territory of the People's Republic of China and... not allow Tibetans to engage in anti-China political activities in India". This illustrates the wishy-washiness of the UPA regime which allows Beijing to twist New Delhi's arm.
When one reflects on the unrest in Tibet during the past fortnight, it is probably this type of vagueness which has created an immense sense of frustration among the Tibetans. And I am not speaking about the UPA Government's attitude alone. During the last decade, most heads of state have pursued similar policies. Business is more important, they say.
I remember an incident which was narrated to me by an eyewitness. In 1998, the world community celebrated the 50th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the General Assembly of the United Nations. Article 1 says: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood." A beautiful concept indeed!
Paris, the heart of the French Revolution, had logically been given the responsibility to organise the festivities to which all the Nobel peace laureates were invited. But while sending the invitations, the office of the French President 'forgot' one inconvenient Nobel peace laureate, the Dalai Lama. The French daily, Libération, was the first to break the story. Elysée Palace had to quickly backtrack and pretend that the postal service had 'lost' the invitation and that "a 'fresh' one would be sent to the Dalai Lama". The latter then decided to attend the celebrations.
The story is not yet over. During a private function, then French President Jacques Chirac was introduced to the Nobel laureates one by one. When he reached the Dalai Lama, instead of shaking hands, he simply ignored him and passed on to the next dignitary. When I heard this story, I could not believe it, but the person assured me that it was true. A few years earlier, Mr Chirac had openly spoken of "my friend the Dalai Lama".
When I recently interviewed the Tibetan leader, he alluded to the incident: "Your President used to be a close friend of mine... before he became President. Later he did not remember me (he started laughing), it did not upset me; it was his choice (and he laughed again)."
And this is only one story. The Dalai Lama must have lived through hundreds of such affronts. The Chinese Embassy has just to bark and any Western (or Indian) Government obeys. Last year, a large meeting of Tibet Support Groups was held in Brussels, the Tibetan leader was to address the gathering. When the Chinese Embassy threatened to cancel the visit of some Belgian Prince to China, Brussels immediately complied and asked the Dalai Lama to cancel his visit.
The slavish attitude of most Governments has emboldened China to go ahead with what the Dalai Lama calls a "cultural genocide". Hiding behind the most (in)famous of the Panchsheel Agreement - "mutual non-interference in each other's internal affairs" - the Chinese Government has continuously removed all traces of cultural identity in Tibet. The latest instrument of cultural purge is the railway line to Lhasa which brought four million Han Chinese to a city of a few lakhs in 2007.
Abandoned by all the great democracies, seeing that the 'negotiations' between the Dalai Lama's envoys and second-rank Chinese officials going nowhere, the despair began mounting in Tibet and Dharamsala. The summer Olympics were their last chance to get their voice heard.
It is true that the 'dialogue' between Beijing and Dharamsala has been one of the most frustrating processes, with the Chinese authorities clearly taking the Dalai Lama for a ride to gain time. China has never had the intention to give any autonomy to Tibet (as it should according to the Constitution of the People's Republic of China). Added to this, the constant insults against the Tibetan leader could only add to the frustration and anger of the Tibetans.
How can a dialogue be established when Tibet's Communist Party chief, Zhang Qingli, calls the Dalai Lama "a wolf in a monk's robe, a monster with a human face but the heart of a beast"?
Further, facts like the interdiction of displaying - or even having - photos of the Dalai Lama increase the discontent on the 'Roof of the World'. The Chinese have mentioned in one of their communiqués that Chinese shops have been burned in Lhasa by the demonstrators. When I visited the Tibetan capital in 1993, there were 12,000 Chinese shops in Lhasa for only 300 Tibetan shops. Fifteen years later, the situation is worse. How can the Tibetans not be frustrated and upset?
Whatever the motivations of Ms Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the US House of Representatives, were in meeting the Dalai Lama in Dharamsala, she did put the Tibetan issue at the right level: "The situation in Tibet is a challenge to the conscience of the world... the challenge we can help meet." The third-ranking US official added: "If freedom loving people throughout the world do not speak out against China's oppression in Tibet, we have lost all moral authority to speak on human rights anywhere in the world."
Yes, it is a challenge for the consciousness of the inhabitants of this planet when 'nations' such as Tokelau and Kiribati (or Kosovo) are recognised as 'independent' by the UN and Tibet is still colonised. Indians, who have been under foreign yoke for seven centuries, will understand this.
The only solution to the Tibetan issue is a change of regime in Beijing. Interestingly, Communist leaders have not always responded to the unrest in Tibet with the brutality we witness today. In May 1980, the Politburo of the CCP decided to send a high-level fact-finding delegation to the 'Tibet Autonomous Region'. The delegation was headed by the top party functionary, Mr Hu Yaobang, who was then the CCP general secretary. Reaching Lhasa, he was shocked to see the level of poverty in Tibet. During a meeting with the party cadre, he asked "whether all the money Beijing had poured into Tibet over the previous years had been thrown into Yarlung Tsangpo (Brahmaputra)".
Mr Hu Yaobang said the situation reminded him of colonialism. Hundreds of Chinese Han cadre were transferred back to China. The situation was better for a few years until Mr Hu Jintao became the party chief in Lhasa. His arrival corresponded to the worst riots and one year of martial law in Tibet.
Will China find a new Hu Yaobang? This is the most important question for its - and Tibet's - future.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/indexn12.asp?main_variable=OPED&file_name=opd1%2Etxt&counter_img=1
Scrap CPM and Chinese occupation of Tibet
Scrap CPM and Chinese occupation of Tibet
Karat of CPM utters the K-word; both CPM and Chinese occupation of Tibet should be scrapped, thrown into the dustbin of history.
CPM has shown its true colours as anti-national party. CPM owes allegiance to an extra-territorial power called China. It is time the genocide in Tibet perpetrated by the Chinese troops (calling it fraudulently, ‘peoples’ war’) is fully exposed and the Free World should start demanding immediate independence for Tibet, NOW.
Kalyanaraman
Free Tibet? Karat utters the K-word
- Leader draws parallel with Indian scenario, says protesters doing 'great disservice' to nation
OUR BUREAU (Kolkata, Telegraph, 1 April 2008)
A child at a rally for Tibet in Sydney on Monday. (Reuters)
Coimbatore/Behrampore, March 31: Prakash Karat today said those who supported the movement for an independent Tibet were doing "a great disservice" to India, which too faces the problem of secessionist demands.
"Those in India who want to join this chorus for an independent Tibet will be doing a great disservice to our own country. Are we going to support a free Nagaland? Or a free Jammu and Kashmir? Or those other secessionist demands?" the CPM general secretary asked.
Karat said he appreciated the central government's stand that anti-China activities would not be allowed on Indian soil. He favoured talks between Beijing and representatives of the Dalai Lama within the framework of the "one-China policy" to sort out their differences.
The CPM general secretary said there was a tendency to violate the sovereignty of nations in the "name of human rights" and "ethnic minorities".
He said he detected a "western design" in such attempts to break up nation states, and cited the instance of Kosovo. The CPM is against secessionism, whether it involves China, any other Asian country or a European nation, he said.
Karat attacked the BJP and National Democratic Alliance convener George Fernandes for their positions on China and Tibet.
The BJP has come out with a statement criticising the government's stand. Fernandes has urged the Centre to boycott China and refuse to allow the Olympic torch into India.
When he was defence minister in the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government, Fernandes had remarked controversially that China was India's enemy number one. Karat, however, cited how the Vajpayee government had to put on record that Tibet was an autonomous region of China.
"That is the correct position," the CPM chief said. "We want a dialogue between the Chinese government and the representatives of the Dalai Lama. Beijing has already said it is willing to hold talks provided the Dalai Lama does not want to go out of the framework of one China."
He added: "Some Indian politicians are toeing the line of certain western powers like the US which would lead to the break-up of larger states in the name of human rights or rights of ethnic minorities."
Asked for his reaction to the way Beijing had summoned Indian ambassador Nirupama Rao in the middle of the night to protest the attack on its embassy in Delhi, Karat said he was not well-versed in diplomatic practices.
In Behrampore, Murshidabad, foreign minister Pranab Mukherjee repeated the Centre's stand that Tibet was an autonomous region of China.
"In 1959, the then Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, had provided shelter to the Dalai Lama on condition that he would independently (with full freedom) preach his religion but would not indulge in any kind of politics that may affect India-China relations," Mukherjee told reporters after inaugurating a BEd College in Suti, Murshidabad, about 275km from Calcutta. "The Dalai Lama is an honoured guest in India and a religious leader. When the Dalai Lama left Tibet for India, it was a part of China. Today, too, Tibet is very much a part of China."
Asked to comment on Fernandes's demands, he said: "When he (Fernandes) was defence minister, he had said that China was enemy number one. Then he went on a trip to China. It was in 1959 that the Indian government had formulated its stand on China, and it is still unchanged."
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080401/jsp/nation/story_9081131.jsp
Karat of CPM utters the K-word; both CPM and Chinese occupation of Tibet should be scrapped, thrown into the dustbin of history.
CPM has shown its true colours as anti-national party. CPM owes allegiance to an extra-territorial power called China. It is time the genocide in Tibet perpetrated by the Chinese troops (calling it fraudulently, ‘peoples’ war’) is fully exposed and the Free World should start demanding immediate independence for Tibet, NOW.
Kalyanaraman
Free Tibet? Karat utters the K-word
- Leader draws parallel with Indian scenario, says protesters doing 'great disservice' to nation
OUR BUREAU (Kolkata, Telegraph, 1 April 2008)
A child at a rally for Tibet in Sydney on Monday. (Reuters)
Coimbatore/Behrampore, March 31: Prakash Karat today said those who supported the movement for an independent Tibet were doing "a great disservice" to India, which too faces the problem of secessionist demands.
"Those in India who want to join this chorus for an independent Tibet will be doing a great disservice to our own country. Are we going to support a free Nagaland? Or a free Jammu and Kashmir? Or those other secessionist demands?" the CPM general secretary asked.
Karat said he appreciated the central government's stand that anti-China activities would not be allowed on Indian soil. He favoured talks between Beijing and representatives of the Dalai Lama within the framework of the "one-China policy" to sort out their differences.
The CPM general secretary said there was a tendency to violate the sovereignty of nations in the "name of human rights" and "ethnic minorities".
He said he detected a "western design" in such attempts to break up nation states, and cited the instance of Kosovo. The CPM is against secessionism, whether it involves China, any other Asian country or a European nation, he said.
Karat attacked the BJP and National Democratic Alliance convener George Fernandes for their positions on China and Tibet.
The BJP has come out with a statement criticising the government's stand. Fernandes has urged the Centre to boycott China and refuse to allow the Olympic torch into India.
When he was defence minister in the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government, Fernandes had remarked controversially that China was India's enemy number one. Karat, however, cited how the Vajpayee government had to put on record that Tibet was an autonomous region of China.
"That is the correct position," the CPM chief said. "We want a dialogue between the Chinese government and the representatives of the Dalai Lama. Beijing has already said it is willing to hold talks provided the Dalai Lama does not want to go out of the framework of one China."
He added: "Some Indian politicians are toeing the line of certain western powers like the US which would lead to the break-up of larger states in the name of human rights or rights of ethnic minorities."
Asked for his reaction to the way Beijing had summoned Indian ambassador Nirupama Rao in the middle of the night to protest the attack on its embassy in Delhi, Karat said he was not well-versed in diplomatic practices.
In Behrampore, Murshidabad, foreign minister Pranab Mukherjee repeated the Centre's stand that Tibet was an autonomous region of China.
"In 1959, the then Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, had provided shelter to the Dalai Lama on condition that he would independently (with full freedom) preach his religion but would not indulge in any kind of politics that may affect India-China relations," Mukherjee told reporters after inaugurating a BEd College in Suti, Murshidabad, about 275km from Calcutta. "The Dalai Lama is an honoured guest in India and a religious leader. When the Dalai Lama left Tibet for India, it was a part of China. Today, too, Tibet is very much a part of China."
Asked to comment on Fernandes's demands, he said: "When he (Fernandes) was defence minister, he had said that China was enemy number one. Then he went on a trip to China. It was in 1959 that the Indian government had formulated its stand on China, and it is still unchanged."
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080401/jsp/nation/story_9081131.jsp
Protest Chinese genocide in Tibet and demand independence of Tibet
Protest Chinese genocide in Tibet and demand restoration of independence/sovereignty of Tibet
THE GFCH (USA) PRESS RELEASE (31 March 2008):
The Global Foundation for Civilizational Harmony (GFCH), USA is deeply disturbed and saddened by the turmoil that erupted in Lhasa following what began as peaceful protests. This has resulted in unfortunate loss of lives. China’s repressive policies in Tibet since 1951 have created tensions due to their impact on Tibetan religion, culture, and livelihood. We note with grave concern that the communist Chinese government has declared “people’s war” on Tibet and has used indecent and obscene language against His Holiness the Dalai Lama calling him “a wolf in the robes of a monk and one with heart of a beast”. We urge the communist Chinese government to show decent behavior towards His Holiness and exercise utmost restraint and caution while addressing His Holiness. We remind China that His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama is a revered spiritual leader of not only Tibetan Buddhists but also of millions of Buddhist-Americans and Hindu-Americans. We demand that the Chinese communist authorities allow an independent UN sponsored investigation into the volatile situation in Tibet. We urge the international community to ask the communist Chinese government to engage in substantive dialogue with His Holiness the Dalai Lama directly. We also urge the international community to boycott the Beijing Olympics on grounds of China’s violation of Human rights of Tibetans. The international community, the spiritual leaders and religious organizations should urge China to respect the fundamental and universally recognized right of all of Tibetan citizens to peacefully express their religious and political views and to release Buddhist monks and others who have been detained solely for the peaceful expression of their views.
The GFCH, USA also notes that Tibet was an independent nation and was enjoying the peaceful independence and sovereignty under Buddhist philosophy. It was only in 1951 that communist Mao’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) forced the Dalai Lama’s religious government of Tibet to merge Tibet into People’s Republic of China (PRC). At the time of Tibet’s occupation its population was estimated at six million Tibetans. In 2002, according to official Chinese demographic figures, the total population of Tibetans in these provinces is at about 3.5 million. While restoring public order and peace by using brute force, the Chinese government is suppressing the Tibetans culture, ethnic values, religious beliefs, and do not recognize or respect the fundamental universal right of all of Tibet’s citizens to peacefully express their political and religious views. Last year, the Chinese Communist Party led government introduced a repressive law interfering with Buddhist religious practices on reincarnation of living Buddha.
The GFCH, USA strongly condemns the cultural and ethnic genocide of Tibetan people over the last six decades by the Communist Chinese government that denies the right to self determination for Tibetan people. The GFCH, USA urges the Chinese Government to immediately stop demonizing His Holiness the Dalai Lama, stop interfering in the practices of Tibetan Buddhist religion and restore the independence and sovereignty of Tibet that existed before 1951.
GFCH Contact Information:
Vijay Shertukde, vijaygfchtibet@aol.com225-654-6313 Abhinav Dwivedi, abhinavd45@hotmail.com813-9920807 Dr. Adityanjee, 440-5036692 Dr. Manohar Shinde 818-470-2666
THE GFCH (USA) PRESS RELEASE (31 March 2008):
The Global Foundation for Civilizational Harmony (GFCH), USA is deeply disturbed and saddened by the turmoil that erupted in Lhasa following what began as peaceful protests. This has resulted in unfortunate loss of lives. China’s repressive policies in Tibet since 1951 have created tensions due to their impact on Tibetan religion, culture, and livelihood. We note with grave concern that the communist Chinese government has declared “people’s war” on Tibet and has used indecent and obscene language against His Holiness the Dalai Lama calling him “a wolf in the robes of a monk and one with heart of a beast”. We urge the communist Chinese government to show decent behavior towards His Holiness and exercise utmost restraint and caution while addressing His Holiness. We remind China that His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama is a revered spiritual leader of not only Tibetan Buddhists but also of millions of Buddhist-Americans and Hindu-Americans. We demand that the Chinese communist authorities allow an independent UN sponsored investigation into the volatile situation in Tibet. We urge the international community to ask the communist Chinese government to engage in substantive dialogue with His Holiness the Dalai Lama directly. We also urge the international community to boycott the Beijing Olympics on grounds of China’s violation of Human rights of Tibetans. The international community, the spiritual leaders and religious organizations should urge China to respect the fundamental and universally recognized right of all of Tibetan citizens to peacefully express their religious and political views and to release Buddhist monks and others who have been detained solely for the peaceful expression of their views.
The GFCH, USA also notes that Tibet was an independent nation and was enjoying the peaceful independence and sovereignty under Buddhist philosophy. It was only in 1951 that communist Mao’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) forced the Dalai Lama’s religious government of Tibet to merge Tibet into People’s Republic of China (PRC). At the time of Tibet’s occupation its population was estimated at six million Tibetans. In 2002, according to official Chinese demographic figures, the total population of Tibetans in these provinces is at about 3.5 million. While restoring public order and peace by using brute force, the Chinese government is suppressing the Tibetans culture, ethnic values, religious beliefs, and do not recognize or respect the fundamental universal right of all of Tibet’s citizens to peacefully express their political and religious views. Last year, the Chinese Communist Party led government introduced a repressive law interfering with Buddhist religious practices on reincarnation of living Buddha.
The GFCH, USA strongly condemns the cultural and ethnic genocide of Tibetan people over the last six decades by the Communist Chinese government that denies the right to self determination for Tibetan people. The GFCH, USA urges the Chinese Government to immediately stop demonizing His Holiness the Dalai Lama, stop interfering in the practices of Tibetan Buddhist religion and restore the independence and sovereignty of Tibet that existed before 1951.
GFCH Contact Information:
Vijay Shertukde, vijaygfchtibet@aol.com225-654-6313 Abhinav Dwivedi, abhinavd45@hotmail.com813-9920807 Dr. Adityanjee, 440-5036692 Dr. Manohar Shinde 818-470-2666
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
