The “Olympics Diary” of a Tibetan

The following diary was originally posted in Chinese and provides a glimpse into life in a remote Tibetan area as the Olympics were being celebrated in Beijing:
The “Olympics Diary” of a Tibetan
By Tashibod
Today is Tuesday, July 22, 2008, and it is the tenth day since I came back to my hometown. Within these ten days, even when I refused to watch any TV and kept myself away from the internet, almost every day I could still hear about and see things concerning the Beijing Olympics in the home of a countryman in a remote area in Tibet. Therefore, today I decided to write a special diary – an Olympic Diary. I want to record all the details about how I felt about the Beijing Olympics in this remote place in Tibet when the Olympics were about to begin in Beijing, when I had no access to internet or TV.
July 22, 2008, Tuesday, The Olympics Blow against My Face
During breakfast my father, who had just come back from herding the cattle, said that there was a new bunker (diaobao) made up of sandbags at the end of the bridge over the big river, and fully armed soldiers were on duty. My father clicked his tongue in wonder and was amazed at the speed, saying “yesterday there was nothing, then this morning it suddenly appeared like this.” My family was discussing this while having breakfast. Though the old people could not remember the time when a bunker was built at the end of the bridge, no one was surprised at the appearance of the bunker. In addition, my family unanimously believes that this change was a preparatory measure taken by the government for the imminent Olympics. I was surprised to see my family’s natural and calm reaction

...
« Back to Article

56 Responses to The “Olympics Diary” of a Tibetan

  1. Jesse Le says:

    Interesting commentary. Does anyone know what the background of this ‘newcenturynews.com’ is? Is this a legitimate organization or is this yet another Fa Lun Gong organ?

  2. MAC says:

    It isn’t one I’ve run across before, but I’m going to say it’s FLG, seeing as if you go to the “religion” pulldown bar, the categories are Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and FLG. That doesn’t invalidate everything reported there, but really, FLG are far from honest or objective about the CCP, and I will admit that even as somebody who hates the CCP.

  3. George says:

    Well put it this way action always invite reaction. Tibetan can always riot and burned shops but Why these people surprised or complaint when the other shoe drop They are the one that are going to bear the brunt of clampdown and not their western supporter who live comfortably in the west. So keep on the cycle of misery by supporting the lost cause of Independence

  4. Tenor says:

    Communist china’s apologists They simply can’t digest the truh especially when it is told by Tibetan. Is it okay to supress and deny human rights? Is it okay to rule its citizen by intimidation? Why is China so insecure with Tibetan issue? Why is Tibet locked out for international media? What is going on inside Tibet that Communist China have to hide? Shame on Communist China. Internation community will never respect China so long as its citizens are treated like thier slaves.

  5. Dolkar says:

    This is a rare view of what is really happening in Tibet especially during this Olympic time, thank you for sharing this with us. The world needs to see this, as China is not allowing any reporters/westerners inside Tibet to find the facts/truth! Why are they sacred of 6 million Tibetans when they are 1.3 billion Chinese? I don’t blame the Chinese citizens as they are taught in schools and also from CCTV’s that Tibetans are barbaric and backwards and needs to be “civilized” like the Han Chinese! Until Tibetans are giving freedom/genuine autonomy as Dalai lama has been seeking for long time, China will not gain genuine International respect.

  6. Jesse Le says:

    Dolkar and Tenor: before you guys jump to conclusion, I think we need to verify the veracity of this report. The only thing worse than state censored news is fake news. The Fa Lun Gong has taken advantage of the information vacuum in China, and has been peddling fake news items far and wide, and this item may well be a FLG piece. (I am not saying that it is- I am just saying it is not verified)

  7. jh says:

    Jesse Le,
    how do you want to verify this report?
    Ask the writer to identify himself (so that he can be taken away for patriotic re-education or worse the next day)?
    How do you verify ANYTHING that is written on the internet or elsewhere?
    If you care about Tibet, go there and come to your own “conclusion”.
    Apart from that, it is pretty much common sense. If there are about 150000 Tibetans in exile, if the Tibet issue has been around for more than 50 years, if China does not allow any independent media nor Red Cross or the UN human rights commission into Tibet, censors the internet, and so forth, than most likely something is fishy…

  8. joyce says:

    Even if the report is true, so what? After what Tibetans did in March, what do you expect?

    CCP has been too liberal about minority issues. Cantonese and Shanghaiists (“Han”) have to learn Mandaria in public schools, why should minorities have bilingal education or even completely in their native tongues?

  9. jh says:

    @joyce:
    As you wrote, Cantonists and Shanghaiists are “Han”. They think of themselves of “Chinese”, sharing Confucian culture, the Great wall and so forth as their common heritage.
    Minorities have lived beyond the Great Wall and do not think of themselves as “Chinese”. That does not mean that they cannot live together in one China, but it means that they have the right to maintain their own culture and heritage.
    And there is nothing wrong if they learn Mandarin on top of it (Indians usually speak at least 3 or 4 languages).

  10. jh says:

    Sorry, that should have been
    “They think of themselves *as* “Chinese”
    in the first line…

  11. James says:

    When earthquake hit Sichuan province Most people doesn’t realized that Aba is predominantly Tibetan But PLA doesn’t ask if you are Tibetan or Qiang or whatever

    JH your idea of of categorizing people by race and ethnicity are revolting and remind me of Nazi Germany. Apropo talking about Nazi isn’t the teacher of Dalai Lama is ex nazi forgot his name

    No wonder DL is obsessed with racial purity. Before WWII those stupid nazis send people to tibet and proposed an Idea that aryan race come from Tibet No wonder those German are crazy about Tibetan, Realy coockoo idea

    Chinese doesn’t differentiate people by race or origin. The founder of the greatest Tang dynasty are mixed blood of Xianbei and Han, Manchu people rule China for 300 years and so is Mongolian but they are considered Chinese nonetheless because they work for benefit of China as a whole and Your Dalai lama can thanks Chien Loong emperor because he created the institutionn of Dalai Lama and he has to approve the appointment of Dalai Lama

    Admiral Zheng He is Hui muslim yet he is the greatest hero for Han Chinese If you go to South East Asia the people still remember him to this day

  12. jh says:

    James, can’t you for once read more thoroughly before jumping to emotional responses…
    I was talking about culture and heritage not race. It is really a waste of time to argue with you if you just don’t pay attention to what has been written or if you are too confused to respond rationally…

  13. sr says:

    James: I dont know about Manchu’s but I know some Mongolians and they definitely DON’T consider themselves “Chinese” as you say. I have spoken to many Chinese people and a few of them have this strange notion that it was a Chinese emperor that “created” the Dalai Lama lineage. This is rediculous and wrong. Tibetans and Mongolians have had a relatively close relationship as central Asian neighbors. Mongolians adopted the Tibetan form of Buddhism many years ago and, hence, Kublai Kahn and his family are the ones that gave the title Dalai Lama. Dalai lama is a Mongolian name, NOT Chinese(mandarin, cantonese).

  14. [...] language on Chinese language website, newcenturynews.com, and its English translation was posted on chinadigitaltimes.net. The blog provides a glimpse into life in a remote Tibetan area as the Olympics were being [...]

  15. Nangsa says:

    This is total racial discrimination against Tibetans by the Chinese Brutal Regime. The 2008 olympics was “Genocide Olympics”, this olympics is blood stained olympics.

  16. [...] language on Chinese language website, newcenturynews.com, and its English translation was posted on chinadigitaltimes.net. The blog provides a glimpse into life in a remote Tibetan area as the Olympics were being [...]

  17. George says:

    IT was the fifth Dalai Lama who formalised Tibet’s confederation with ancient China. He sought the intervention of the Qing dynasty (which replaced the Ming dynasty in 1644) for stabilising his position in Tibet. Emperor Shunzhi not only despatched troop s to consolidate the Dalai Lama’s power, but also gave him a gold seal denoting Beijing’s recognition. In 1720, with the help of the Chinese Emperor Kang XI, the King of Tibet was deposed and the 9th Dalai Lama was made the political head of Tibet as wel l. Since then, all succeeding Dalai Lamas (the present one in India is the 14th) made it the established practice to obtain Beijing’s seal of approval to ensure legitimacy as the Dalai Lama. Monarchy came to an end in China in 1911, but the government in Beijing continued to play its role in Lhasa. Thus, when on February 22, 1940, the present Dalai Lama was anointed, a representative of the Chiang Kai-shek government was especially despatched to Lhasa, and he officiated at the inauguration ceremony. Thu s the institution of the Dalai Lama itself has flowered under the Chinese umbrella and patronage.

  18. SR says:

    George: The 14 Dalai Lama’s throughout the years have had a priest-patron relationship with the many princes, kings and emperors of Asia. You and other communist supporters have got to stop completely overstating the involvement of outside forces in Tibetan affairs.
    Tibet has ALWAYS had its own monetary system, postal system, legal system, racial and religious identity regardless of what dynasty mainland China was in at the time.
    Regardless, what do all your misinterpretations and lies have to do with the current dire sitution in Tibet? …I’ll tell you, Nothing!
    Colonialist China needs to leave Tibet (and the Uighur nation) in order to restore balance and peace to the Asian Continent.

  19. George says:

    Which country might that be? I never heard India was involved here. If you are completely independent why the need for approval from Beijing ?

    Tibet was left alone because they are inaccessible and cannot support a large occupation force

    But they still have to follow the rule and law of Qing Dynasty It is not Priest Patron relationship as some revisionist Historian try to insinuate

  20. palden says:

    First of all, George is hardly knew history of “Cho-yon” or “Priest patron”. This relationship too developed with Mongol and Manchu empire, not with Chinese empires. In Chinese, there is a word called “Fan qing Fu Ming”, why? Manchus treated Chinese very badly and invaded their country and enslaved them, thus Chinese wanted to revolt the foreign occupation and re-assert their prosperous Ming Dynasty power and prosperous life for Chinese.

    Unless, you are a psychopath, you will not deny this fact!

  21. palden says:

    Jesse Lee, the diary is first appeared on the blog of Tibetan writer and poet, woeser. URL is http://woeser.middle-way.net

    Side note:
    China apologist like George and many others, first they will try to prove they are right with their perverted revisionist history with little in touch with fact, when their lies are falling like World Trade Center, they will resort to the satement, “Tibet is a lost cause”, thus try to discourage people. I think Tibetan people know better than apologist George and like-minded running-dog-propagandist and China apologist.

    If George is still reading my post, before responding to this comment, tell the Tibetan narration of their own history. Don’t throw in the western or Chinese jargon to make a point for the sake of making and point and feed your own ego.

    Palden

  22. jh says:

    While the meaningless battle over history is being waged, another experience by a Tibetan of the present, of the NOW…

    The fear in Lhasa (a poem by Woeser)

    A hurried farewell to Lhasa,
    Now a city of fear.

    A hurried farewell to Lhasa,
    Where the fear is greater than all the fear after ’59, ’69, and ’89
    put together.

    A hurried farewell to Lhasa,
    Where the fear is in your breathing, in the beating of your heart,
    In the silence when you want to speak but don’t,
    In the catch in your throat.

    A hurried farewell to Lhasa,
    Where constant fear has been wrought by legions with their guns,
    By countless police with their guns,
    By plainclothesmen beyond counting,
    And still more by the colossal machinery of the State that stands
    behind them night and day;
    But you mustn’t point a camera at them or you’ll get a gun pointed at
    you,
    maybe hauled off into some corner and no one will know.

    A hurried farewell to Lhasa,
    Where the fear starts at the Potala and strengthens as you go east,
    through the Tibetans’ quarter.
    Dreadful footsteps reverberate all round, but in daylight you won’t
    glimpse even their shadow;
    They are like demons invisible by day, but the horror is worse, it
    could drive you mad.
    A few times I have passed them and the cold weapons in their hands.

    A hurried farewell to Lhasa,
    Where the fear is now minutely scanned by the cameras that stud
    avenues and alleys and offices,
    and every monastery and temple hall;
    All those cameras,
    Taking it all in,
    Swiveling from the outer world to peer inside your mind.
    “Zab zab chi! º They’re watching us” _ among Tibetans this has become
    a byword, furtively whispered.

    A hurried farewell to Lhasa:
    The fear in Lhasa breaks my heart. Got to write it down.

    August 23, 2008
    On the road out of Lhasa

  23. George says:

    When presented with undeniable fact of History Those with agenda will try to weasel out their tight spot with worn out and tired argument “Manchu and Mongolian are not Chinese” Never mind that today there is no more manchu left in China They melted into the gene pool of Northern Chinese .Plus Manchu declare temselves to be Chinese Dynasty choosing Qing as their name Using Chinese institution and personnel. Most of the emperor intermarry with Chinese and Mongolian princess. Enlarged and defend the Chinese teritory

    It is like saying Norman are not British because they are originally Viking. Really?

    In order to pursuit their agenda of Independent Tibet, They will fasify and revised the history to suit their purpose

  24. Jesse Le says:

    Palden:
    Thanks for clarifying that this piece originated with Woeser. This attribution should have been included in the original piece.

    As to the history debate- let’s face it- Tibetan history does not dovetail easily into the modern concept of nation-states. This is a fruitless argument. We should argue purely from the standpoint of human rights and cultural preservation- both of these concepts are endorsed by the CCP in theory. I think people who are sincere about improving the lives of tibetans and Uighers should be pushing the dialogue this way, instead of talking up independence, which brings nothing but disaster to these people.

    By the way- I am constantly amazed at amount of info Woeser is able to put out from China. I wish her the best of luck.

  25. sr says:

    Everyone has an agenda.
    -The agenda for Tibetans is to protect our racial and cultural identity. For those of us outside Tibet this means keeping our culture alive and fighting for the rights of Tibetans unable to do so inside Tibet.
    -The agenda for the PRC, and sadly some Chinese people, is to cover up the Tibetan identity by any means necessary.

    Those with no facts and a lot of chauvanism will tell everyone with facts that they have no facts, because it doesn’t coincide with what they wish to be true.

    Are you the kind of person who would tell someone from the moon that their soil is pure white because of what you see from the earth. Even after the person from the moon tells you it’s actually grey, and it only looks white from the earth because of the reflection from the sun? Well…no matter what your answer you have already proven to be that person, you see. Bhor Rangzen

  26. sr says:

    Human rights are of course the major point of arguement with any fight against outright cultural genocide and attempted destruction of a racial identity. But you have to understand that Tibetan history dovetails just fine with concepts of a independent nation. Ever since China started their invasion in 1950 they have been lying to the rest of the world. For one example how many times have you heard that “Tibet has been apart of China forever”, then “Tibet has been apart of China for 3 thousand years”, then it’s down to a thousand years, and most recently I’ve heard 700 years. Soon maybe the PRC will finally fess up the truth and say “when we invaded is when we took over”…atleast this would be logical right.
    The only nation concept missing from Tibetan history is involvement with the rest of the world. This is because of extreme geographical isolation, some xenophobia, and the simple fact that Tibetans naturally have a hard time adjusting to low altitudes. In fact, thousands of Tibetans have died escaping from the colonialist PRC, simply because they were unable to acclimate to the elevation in India and Nepal.

    I share your amazement with Woeser’s ability to do what she does seemingly unfettered in China, truly unbelievable.

  27. George says:

    The “Patron-Priest” relationship (Tibetan: chöyön; Wylie: mchod-yon) held between the Chinese central authorities and the Tibetan local governments was one of superior to inferior. The 13th Dalai Lama, for example, knelt before the Empress Dowager and the young Emperor while he delivered his petition in Beijing. He was awarded the humiliating title of “Loyally Submissive Vice-Regent”, and ordered to follow China’s commands and communicate with the Emperor only through the Chinese Amban in Lhasa.[93][94]The kneeling before the Emperor followed the 17th-century precedent in the case of the 6th Dalai Lama.[95]

    Thomas Heberer, a leading China expert in Germany, declared in an article published on April 16, 2008 in the German daily Die Tageszeitung.

    “ No country in the world has ever recognized the independence of Tibet or declared that Tibet is an ‘occupied country’. For all countries in the world, Tibet is Chinese territory.[96]

  28. palden says:

    Jesse, Tibet was an kindgom with indepedent jurisdiction over its subjects. Nor did China was and still is fitting the definition of nation-state. Since china was not a nation-state, therefore, whether you like it or not, it was known as “dynasty”. I doubt “dynasty” fits the definition of nation-state either. China supposed to have stood up as a nation state on October 1, 1949, when Mao declared from the gate of heavenly, it was actually in the process of becoming a country and state. Remeber and don’t get me wrong, when Mao declared “Zhong Guo Ren Ming Zhong Yu Zhan Qi Lai Le (Chinese people finally stood up)” on that historic day for CHinese people, Tibet was an independent kingdom if not fit the definition of nation-state. It was after it, China launched on the expansionist ideology, thus built a modern empire.

    If you look at CCP structure China, it has every characteristics of a “dynasty” and “empire”. Chinese people needs to work for a true nation-state for China. In the meantime, Tibetan people will decide what best for them without having anyone tell them which one is good or bad.

    Palden

  29. George says:

    Throughout the Kuomintang years, no country gave Tibet diplomatic recognition.

    Regarding Tibet’s assertion of its independence status before its “invasion” by People’s Liberation Army, Goldstein documents the response of the India Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Nehru, 8 September 1950:

    “ Nehru responded bluntly: “The Government of India will continue the policy of the British period in considering Tibet outwardly a part of China but internally independent… ["Shakabpa wrote 'internally independent' but Nehru certainly said 'internally autonomous'," according to Goldstein in footnote 86, and the Tibetans' response following].” The Tibetans replied: “Because Tibet is independent please do not talk about ‘internal autonomy’ under China…” Nehru was a bit irritated by this and reply sharply to the Tibetans that it was not enough to speak about Tibet independence: such status had to be proved according to the law. [And Nehru rejected the Tibetan’s legal reasoning based on alleged "separate treaty" between Britain and Tibet in the Simla Convention of 1904. Nehru then replied to the Tibetans]: “There is no separate treaty like this and China never accepted the Simla Convention. The Chinese believe that Tibet is a part of China. Tibet thinks that because China didn’t accept Simla, it is independent but at that time Tibet did not make any clear decision. That was a mistake. And later when you had the time and the opportunity to do something [about "independence"] you did nothing and this was a mistake. During this period China has been very clever and have proclaimed widely in the internationally community that Tibet is part of China… ”
    “ Nehru advised the [Tibetan Yatung delegation who were about to negotiate with Beijing in April 1951] to admit that Tibet was a part of China, since it was seen as such in the eyes of the world. He also told them they would probably have to agree to Chinese control over Tibet’s foreign relations…

  30. sr says:

    George: You’r beginning to sound like a icon of chauvanism. Why do you chose words like superior, inferior and submissive?
    Palden: You are right about the troubles with comparing a dynasty with a nation-state. It is difficult for people with a formal western education to apply their references of society to Asian cultures and especially those of central Asia.

  31. sr says:

    Georger: If China never accepted the Simla agreement of 1914 why was the President of the Republic of China at the agreement (Ivan Chen, Officer of the Order of the Chia Ho)?
    It is a sad fact that Tibet was never involved in foreign relations with any country. And due to this self perscribed isolation, many countries namely China (Imperial, Republic and PRC), baselessly claimed Tibet to the outside world. All the while Tibet and Tibetans were independent in their country and content throughout history. This sort of reclusiveness is an unfortunate fact that has directly led to the situation for the last 60 years. But it is a travesty that China invaded in 1950 and slowly proceeded to rape, kill and oppress the land and people for nearly the last 60 years.

  32. George says:

    What I never heard Ivan Chen as president of China China only know 2 presidents after Qing Sun Yat Sen and Yuan Shi Kai

    And the idea that China is not state is just ridiculous .China was a State when most Euopran still live in a cave

    Chin Hsi Huang united China and promulgate 1 law(legalist), 1 written language, create bureacracy to run a the country, create Army to defend the border.Acknowledge by the surrounding country as chin state. Dynasty is just a name for the ruling family. Now are you saying Japan is not a state because Japan was run by Tokugawa shogunate for 200 years?

  33. George says:

    European sorry

  34. sr says:

    George: Though we never see eye-to-eye dont misunderstand me. When I talked about not being able to compare dynasties of the past to nation-states. I am merely outlining the fact that it is hard to apply the western definition of nation-state to the many dynasties or any other non-western society of the past. Most notably because this doesn’t take into account the age that the society was in. Evolution applies in this regard as well.

  35. palden says:

    It sounds George just took a western tradition where he came to realize history of Vikings in Europe. George, don’t play this kind of game with me as I am not an idiot who can be easily fooled.
    I am pretty sure George does not and will not accept himself as a “beast” similarly because he is eating as a beast does, or both the beast and George shares certain “genes” coz they both evolved over the millinia into present different forms known as George the human or homo-sapien or bull the beast. Therefore, don’t drag in a lot of history if that does not make sense.

    Whether George like it or not, Tibetan and Chinese does not share any bonds, be it in language, history, culture, psychology, and even religon. The first Chinese monk who tried to spread “Chan” the Chinese version of Buddhism in Tibet was defeated in a debate with “great Indian masters” at Samye in Lhokha in Tibet. Thus, Tibetans chose to follow the “great tradition of Nalanda”.

    George, if you are a true human without any chauvistic sense and idiotic nationalist zeal, while we are referring to histories of different empires which were not part of China regardless of they are existed to present day or not. Within this context, Manchuria was an empire in its own capacity and invaded China and ruled China regardless of people of Manchuria or better Manchurians existed today in Manchuria or in Chinese word, “DongBei”. Hopefully, you also watched the documentary “The last Emperor: Pu Yi” (Puyi tried to fight hard for his country of Manchuria when he was exiled, but ultimately failed. A failure of history!) It is also a fact, Mongol empire invaded China and many other empires during its existence. Therefore, historical legacy of Mongol empire is a legacy rightfully claimed by Mongolian people. If you are informed enough, there is a huge Genkhiskhan protrait on an entire mountain in independent Mongolia. Therefore, Chinese people don’t have the legal right to convert Genkhiskhan into so called “Cheng Ji Si Han” empire of Chinese Yuan. It is fair enough if you agree to the fact that China was ruled by invading imperial mongol armies. However, not just the CCP, Chinese people too rewrite people’s history and resorting to lies and deception. Just leave Mongol empire and manchu empire as foreign emperors ruled China. That is neat and real….no this and that!

    Reaging George’s relentless referrence to Melvin Goldstein, a mother of all running-dog-propagandist. I think George simply uses Goldstein because his writing is bit helpful for him in his argument. I tell you, Goldstein is now debunked in the areas of Tibet Study. Goldstein is exposed. Just read your guru Goldstein here: http://www.jamyangnorbu.com/blog/2008/07/19/black-annals-goldstein-the-negation-of-tibetan-history-part-i-tris/, http://www.jamyangnorbu.com/blog/2008/07/27/black-annals-goldstein-the-negation-of-tibetan-history-part-ii/

    To tell you, a website is coming to keep a track of all the Western, Chinese, and Tibetan running-dog-propagandist and expose their lies. Therefore, don’t think we are bunch of fools who can be fooled easily.

    Regarding George’s defence of China as nation and state simply because Chin Shi Huang promulgated legal codes, established language, created bureaucracy and so on so forth bulshit. First of all, all nations, empires, and tribes had their own languages, histories, rules and so forth, so that their own territory could be run smoothly. I don’t think an empire or nation can be existed in the complete absence of rules, language, history, religion and so forth. If George knows such a thing, please educate me. In defense of China as a nation state because of Qing Shi Huang, George actually answered our central argument here “Tibet was not part of China, neither was in the part nor will be in the future”. Ching Shi Huang Di united China, but Tibet was far away and existed in its own right. If George wants to show me and others, Tibet was part of Qing Shi Huang’s NATION-STATE, please do so, I want to see it and know it.

    George’s assertion that Europeans lived in caves when China became a state, the assertion itself shows either extreme stupidity or extreme chauvinistic pride which George is expressing. That is not a normal human will make, not a student of history will do.

    By the way, the definition of nation-state, it seems George is not even understanding the term, but using relentless here,

    according to Wikipedia:

    The nation state is a certain form of state that derives its legitimacy from serving as a sovereign entity for a nation as a sovereign territorial unit. The state is a political and geopolitical entity; the nation is a cultural and/or ethnic entity. The term “nation state” implies that the two geographically coincide, and this distinguishes the nation state from the other types of state, which historically preceded it. If successfully implemented, this implies that the citizens share a common language, culture, and values — which was not the case in many historical states. A world of nation states also implements the claim to self-determination and autonomy for every nation, a central theme of the ideology of nationalism.

  36. jh says:

    Jesse Le wrote earlier:
    “I think people who are sincere about improving the lives of tibetans and Uighers should be pushing the dialogue this way, instead of talking up independence, which brings nothing but disaster to these people.”

    What “disaster” is he talking about? The Tibetans would give everything if they could determine their own future as the people of Mongolia or Bhutan who share their heritage do. Surely, these places are able to manage themselves, and so has Tibet in the past.
    It is quite appalling how often non-Tibetans think they “know better” what is best for Tibet.
    Even assuming that Chinese intentions on the so-called “peaceful liberation” of Tibet were somewhat sincere, they should by now easily have realized that the Tibetans don’t want the kind of rule that they received since then. And the longer the Chinese government and Chinese people keep antagonizing Tibetans inside and outside Tibet the more Tibetans will long for their own nation-state.
    It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy…
    Tibet may not have the political backing for independence yet but it has the moral one, and politics at some stage have to follow morals – even in China…

  37. Wangchuk says:

    Tibetans inside Tibet in their own words express their feelings about the oppression they experience under Chinese rule. Most Tibetans don’t speak Chinese or have internet access so they are unable to publicly express their opinions & experiences. However, in March 2008, thousands of Tibetans from all different classes gathered in the streets of over 50 Tibetan cities & towns & demonstrated for Tibetan freedom & the return of the Dalai Lama. Those demonstrations were ruthlessly repressed by Chinese paramilitary troops. Over 100 Tibetans were killed and thousands injured. Over 5,000 Tibetans were arrested & to this day over 1,000 Tibetans are still in detention. Throughout the history of PRC rule in Tibet, Tibetans have rose up against the occupiers on 3 major occasions: in 1959, 1989 and 2008. China keeps proclaiming the Tibetans resistance dead, but it is alive & well & will re-surface again & again until Tibet is finally free of Chinese colonialism.

  38. George says:

    “Lie repeated thousand time will become the truth” Dr Goebels (Gauleiter NZP)
    To JH after after reading this paste and cut from Internet tell me who has the moral highground to govern Tibet

    Shangri-La (for Lords and Lamas)

    Religions have had a close relationship not only to violence but to economic exploitation. Indeed, it is often the economic exploitation that necessitates the violence. Such was the case with the Tibetan theocracy. Until 1959, when the Dalai Lama last presided over Tibet, most of the arable land was still organized into religious or secular manorial estates worked by serfs. Even a writer like Pradyumna Karan, sympathetic to the old order, admits that “a great deal of real estate belonged to the monasteries, and most of them amassed great riches. . . . In addition, individual monks and lamas were able to accumulate great wealth through active participation in trade, commerce, and money lending.” The Changing Face of Tibet: The Impact of Chinese Communist Ideology on the Landscape (Lexington, Kentucky: University Press of Kentucky, 1976), page 64. Drepung monastery was one of the biggest landowners in the world, with its 185 manors, 25,000 serfs, 300 great pastures, and 16,000 herdsmen. The wealth of the monasteries went to the higher-ranking lamas, many of them scions of aristocratic families, while most of the lower clergy were as poor as the peasant class from which they sprang. This class-determined economic inequality within the Tibetan clergy closely parallels that of the Christian clergy in medieval Europe.
    Slave and Serf
    In 1953, the greater part of the rural population — some 700,000 of an estimated total population of 1,250,000 — were serfs. Tied to the land, they were allotted only a small parcel to grow their own food. Serfs and other peasants generally went without schooling or medical care. They spent most of their time laboring for the monasteries and individual high-ranking lamas, or for a secular aristocracy that numbered not more than 200 wealthy families. In effect, they were owned by their masters who told them what crops to grow and what animals to raise. They could not get married without the consent of their lord or lama. A serf might easily be separated from his family should the owner send him to work in a distant location. Serfs could be sold by their masters, or subjected to torture and death. Tibetan Interviews,

    A Tibetan lord would often take his pick of females in the serf population, if we are to believe one 22-year old woman, herself a runaway serf: “All pretty serf girls were usually taken by the owner as house servants and used as he wished.” They “were just slaves without rights.” Tibetan Interviews, He needed permission to go anywhere. Landowners had legal authority to capture and forcibly bring back those who tried to flee. A 24-year old runaway serf, interviewed by Anna Louise Strong, welcomed the Chinese intervention as a “liberation.” During his time as a serf he claims he was not much different from a draft animal, subjected to incessant toil, hunger, and cold, unable to read or write, and knowing nothing at all. He tells of his attempts to flee:

    Torture and Mutilation in Shanghri-La

    In the Dalai Lama’s Tibet, torture and mutilation — including eye gouging, the pulling out of tongues, hamstringing, and amputation of arms and legs — were favored punishments inflicted upon thieves, runaway serfs, and other “criminals.” Journeying through Tibet in the 1960s, Stuart and Roma Gelder interviewed a former serf, Tsereh Wang Tuei, who had stolen two sheep belonging to a monastery. For this he had both his eyes gouged out and his hand mutilated beyond use. He explains that he no longer is a Buddhist: “When a holy lama told them to blind me I thought there was no good in religion.” The Timely Rain, 113.’)” Some Western visitors to Old Tibet remarked on the number of amputees to be seen. Since it was against Buddhist teachings to take human life, some offenders were severely lashed and then “left to God” in the freezing night to die. “The parallels between Tibet and medieval Europe are striking,” concludes Tom Grunfeld in his book on Tibet. The Making of Modern Tibet rev. ed. (Armonk, N.Y. and London: 1996), 9 and 7-33 for a general discussion of feudal Tibet; see also Felix Greene, A Curtain of Ignorance (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1961), 241-249; Goldstein, A History of Modern Tibet 1913-1951, 3-5; and Lopez, Prisoners of Shangri-La, passim.’)”
    Mortality and Life Expectancy
    After the Democratic Reform in Tibet, mortality declined by a large margin. The decrease in the mortality rate has slowed down since 1970. The mortality rate had fallen from 28 per 1,000 in the 1950s to 6.60 per 1,000 in 2000.
    The first period, 1952 – 1958 : was characterized by high mortality and low fertility. The total number of the population in Tibet was slightly increased in this period.
    If we consider the Tibet Autonomous Region only, then according to the census conducted in 2000, as referred to in Wikipedia, “there were 2,616,300 people in Tibet, with Tibetans totalling 2,411,100 or 92.2% of the current regional population. The census also revealed that the Tibetan’s average lifespan has increased to 68 due to the improving standard of living and access to medical services.” In 1950 the average lifespan was only 35, and “infant mortality has dropped from 43% in 1950 to 0.661% in 2000.”

    Genocide
    In fact, as Michael Parenti has pointed out in his article on Friendly Feudalism: the Tibet Myth, “both the Dalai Lama and his advisor and youngest brother, Tendzin Choegyal, claimed that ‘more than 1.2 million Tibetans are dead as a result of the Chinese occupation.’ But the official 1953 census – six years before the Chinese crackdown -recorded the entire population residing in Tibet at 1,274,000.33 Other census counts put the ethnic Tibetan population within the country at about two million. If the Chinese killed 1.2 million in the early 1960s then whole cities and huge portions of the countryside, indeed almost all of Tibet, would have been depopulated, transformed into a killing field dotted with death camps and mass graves – of which we have not seen evidence. The thinly distributed Chinese military force in Tibet was not big enough to round up, hunt down, and exterminate that many people even if it had spent all its time doing nothing else.” When the total number of Military during the conflict is no more than 200,000 Since China doesn’t need large army to suppress the rebellion because most battle are won from the air. Tibet is beyond tree line no Hiding place for the rebel
    If there is genocide where is the extermination camp or mass grave ?

    Swamping and Han Immigration

    As Barry Sautman, who is Associate Professor of Social Science at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology points out in his study on Tibet and the (Mis-)Representation of Cultural Genocide, “the state sponsored transfer [of Han Chinese] to Tibet is on a small scale. From 1994 to 2001 the PRC organized only a few thousand people to go to Tibet as cadres. Most serve only 3 years and then return to China. Those who move on their own to the Tibet Autonomous Region usually return to China in a few years. They come for a while, find the cities of Tibet too expensive, and then return to China. Some of the 72,000 Chinese who maintain their hukou [household registration] in Tibet don’t really live there. Pensions are higher if your household is registered in Tibet.”

    These facts are supported by articles in the Columbia Journal of Asian Law and by an Australian Chinese demographer in Asian Ethnicity in 2000, and show that the claims of ethnic swamping in Tibet are misleading. “What I think these articles show,” says Barry Sautman, “is that there is no evidence of significant population losses over the whole period from the 1950s to the present. There are some losses during he Great Leap Forward but these were less in Tibetan areas than in other parts of China. Where these were serious were in Sichuan and Qinghai, but even there not as serious in the Han areas of China. There are no bases at all for the figures used regularly by the exile groups. They use the figure of 1.2 million Tibetans dying from the 1950s to the 1970s, but no source for this is given. As a lawyer I give no credence to statistics for which there is no data, no visible basis.”

  39. jh says:

    Wow, George, by cutting and pasting from the internet you gain the high moral ground… I mean, and I am sorry to say that, but how gullible are you? There are articles on the internet claiming *anything* from UFOs to 9/11 being a Jewish plot.
    Garbling up some articles simply does not prove anything. Would you mind bringing in some personal experience, please?
    I mean, I have been to Lhasa, Shigatse, Gyantse, Kardze, Dege, Kangding, all across the Indian Himalayas, to Tibetan exile communities in North and South India etc.
    Now you go to these places, talk to Tibetans and then you tell me *first hand* that what I have written is not your own experience. Otherwise, please be fair and simply acknowledge that you don’t have a clue yourself about what you are talking about…

  40. George says:

    Being a tourist in Tibet doesn’t qualify you as an expert in Tibet. Statistic does tell the story of Tibet BTW those statistic are from UNCAD If you cannot refute the statistic Please stop lying and spread the rumour

  41. George says:

    You trust most of “free Tibet website” Even though most of them never been to Tibet themselves let alone corroborated the rumours, lie that they put on their website Yet you accused me of being gullible Now who is gullible here

  42. sr says:

    George: Your a complete lunatic! and your ego is out of control. Wow…HH the Dalai lama was right, you are a good teacher. Ohm Mani Padme Hum (Those of us who have actually listened to HHDL speak know what I’m talking about).
    When you take data from biased shite sources, makes your reference nothing more than biased shite. I mean come on…your sources are nothing but info coming directly or indirectly from China! Either Chinese people or westerners with Chinese connections.
    Among all the other BS in your references is this pathetic claim that there are only 2 million Tibetans in Tibet. There might be 2 million Tibetans in the TAR but you are conveniently not counnting the majority of Tibetans who live in Kham and Amdo. Nice try.
    “Being a tourist in Tibet doesn’t qualify you as an expert in Tibet”, are you kidding, you must be joking! I suppose if you were a colonialist in Tibet does make you a expert?

  43. sr says:

    Being in the research field I can’t help but frame this discourse into the research proffession.
    I picture George as a self proclaimed scientist who deliberatly falsifies his data in order to prove his theory. Even though there is mountains of empirical data against it. Plane and simple, George you need psychological assistance. Strike that you need psychiatric assistance because you most definitely need pharmaceuticals.
    I think a little psychological exploration is in order. Where does the obsession some Chinese people have with Tibet come from? Of course the political obsession is obvious, but what about the common Chinese person? What do they have to gain from claiming Tibet as China and Tibetans as Chinese? Seriously please…

  44. palden says:

    Goerge is so pathetic, he just got no brian and independent thinking. When he Mentioned the Melvyn Goldstein, I thought he would go on to cite all the running-dog-propagandists. Yes, today when I am reading this comment section again, George went to all cite all the propagadist one by one, from Anna Louise Strong to Michael Parenti to Barry Sautman. I am too familiar these faces and names. George even casually cited earlier visitors to Tibet witnessed this and that. Who are visitors? The last British embassador to Lhasa? The Henrich Harrier? He did not give any names.

    George said Anna interviewed a run-a-way serf who got no education at all. However, in George’s world, the Girl not oly able to describe terror of past, but even able to speak English to Anna. Such a joke being made!

    George, all societies had faults, no exception to Tibet. Therefore, there is no excuse for invasion. Whatever Tibetans endured past, today we are not not welcoming Chinese in our homeland.

    It is like China is part of Europe because Europeans ruled China for many years. Even in modern day, because of raping and looting of Chinese masses by CHinese elites, Japanese had to come to the rescue of common Chinese masses, Chinese people should be grateful for Chinese liberation army for getting ride of all the Chinese oppressors and lords in Naking. It was not a massacre, it was simply getting rid of oppressors of humanity. So, China is part of Japan.

    Palden

  45. palden says:

    Corretion: NOT CHINESE LIBREATION ARMY, Japanese Liberation Army!

    A well chronicled running-dog-propagandists of Chinese communist party and leftist!

    http://www.jamyangnorbu.com/blog/2008/07/13/running-dog-propagandists/

  46. George_001 says:

    George said Anna interviewed a run-a-way serf who got no education at all. However, in George’s world, the Girl not oly able to describe terror of past, but even able to speak English to Anna. Such a joke being made!

    Now did you ever heard of interpreter There is such thing as interpreter you know

    George, all societies had faults, no exception to Tibet. Therefore, there is no excuse for invasion. Whatever Tibetans endured past, today we are not not welcoming Chinese in our homeland.

    I am responding to the “Moral ground to govern that JH ask” I say they have no moral ground whatsoever after treating the tibetan like a “talking animal”

    Now now who is jumping up an down after their fake Shangri La exposed as hell on earth If you cannot shoot the message You now try to shoot the massenger So much for fair and balance view

  47. jh says:

    @George:
    You wrote:
    “You trust most of “free Tibet website” Even though most of them never been to Tibet themselves let alone corroborated the rumours, lie that they put on their website Yet you accused me of being gullible Now who is gullible here.”

    Sorry, but do care at all to read before you reply…?
    I wrote about personal experience. I have never quoted any “free Tibet website”, neither did I claim that I trust any.

    So I am asking once more:
    where is your personal experience in all of this? Do you have any?

    If, again, you don’t answer that simple question I really can’t be bothered any longer to reply to your comments which so far have not shown any substance at all…

  48. jh says:

    @George_001:
    Your comment is such a mess, I’m not getting it…
    What is “fake Shangri La”? The happy Tibet (except for the occasional riots) that China presents or the happy Tibet before the Chinese invasion?
    What is hell on earth? Chinese labour camps, prisons, torture etc. or the feudal society in Tibet before the Chinese invasion?
    Who shoots whom? Chinese border guards Tibetan nuns and children as they escape to India or Tibetans shooting, well, I don’t know whom???
    Are your thoughts as confused as your comment?

  49. jh says:

    After having looked at numerous comment sections in all kinds of international media, I am yet to read my *first* comment by a Tibetan defending the current Chinese rule in Tibet. Interestingly, it is only Chinese bloggers who do…
    I mean, would I have considered Japanese views only about the occupation of China at the time? They would surely have argued that Japan was more advanced, that China was a backward feudal society and that they were only bringing modernity… Why have the Chinese been so ungrateful then?

  50. palden says:

    George, you exposed Shangrila? Haa, you must be kidding. Tibetans never claimed their land is shangrila, even there is no word for this Shangrila in Tibetan. If you ever find one, please write it here. It is West’s obsession with imagination and stupidity took little bit far. There never has so called Shangrila, maybe people like you believed it and now you think it is exposed. If you still wnt to believe into your stupidity, go to Tibetans Areas in Karze where Chinese government especially created a place to satisfy your ego of Shagrila which is known as “Xiang Ke Li la”.

    Therefore, no one is jumping up and down whatever you say about Tibet. Tibet was a human society with its own leader, culture, religion, language, history and so forth. That differentiate us from Chinese. So, go home!

    NG

  51. sr says:

    I’m posting a video journal about a Tibetan man who escaped from Tibet 11 years ago and who went back to Tibet just three months before the March 14 uprising, and subsequent brutal crackdown that continues today.
    http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=7982410976871193492

  52. jh says:

    sr, thanks for posting the BBC video. I’ve just watched it.
    What can I say? A lot of what was shown I have seen with my own eyes, and even though I try to tell myself that the Dalai Lama’s approach of seeking meaningful autonomy only is accomodating and “realistic” (is it really? so far it has not yielded any results), my heart tells me there is only one solution that restores justice to the Tibetans:
    RANGZEN!

    The Chinese can’t be trusted. In Vienna again they have been back-stabbing India. They will only seek their own advantage and trample ruthlessly on others. Tibetans will *never* be happy under Chinese rule…
    Bod gyalo!

  53. jh says:

    There is another argument why Tibet should be independent.
    Tibetan culture is reaching as far as Kalmykia in Russia, Mongolia, all across the Indian Himalayas, Bhutan and Nepal (if not others as well). The Chinese have robbed these people of their cultural heartland. Tibetans are not a minority of China but stand tall on their own!

  54. sr says:

    jh, I share most, if not all, your sentiments. I watched it for the first time last night and I could not stop thinking about it all night.
    In regards to the PRC, all I feel is anger and hatred. And when I hear or read people trying to justify the PRC’s actions in Tibet, it makes me sick to my stomach. These people do not realize that the PRC’s policies and actions in Tibet are completely separate from what they currently are in proper China. Even though there are vast injustices in proper China now, they pale in comparison with what is going on in Tibet.
    The PRC and sadly many Chinese people are blinded by their own ego, or according to Freud their id, when communicating in regards to Tibet.
    As a Tibetan-American I am committed to raising awareness about the plight of the Tibetans inside Tibet. As are all other Tibetans refugees and their children and their children, etc… This will go on as long as the colonialist Chinese are in Tibet, and the signs in Tibet are written in Chinese and not Tibetan. I guarantee it.

  55. palden says:

    JH and SR, Chinese people are fundamentally brainwashed. The CCP even brainwash takes place even at minutest micromanage while the person is growing up.

    For example, in first grade, there is two chapters about Loving PRC, Great Wall of China, Beijing as capital and so forth. Subsequently, they will teach you about How the CLEVER and SMART PRC’s PLA defeated Japanese armies or how a smart Chinese trickedand killed Japanese army. Also, there are chapter dealing how Chinese people were insulted in the west. I clearly remember a chapter (not which grade) about a Chinese student in Europe was asked to enter through a hole in the wall which is for dogs to enter, which was trying to tell that Chinese people were treated like dogs by white people. There are numerous stories like that. Due to this inculcation hatred to other people, I sometimes wonder HHDL’s love and compassion actually be stood by CHinese people. These are also the root of crazy Chinese nationalist sentiment. For anyone, who talks about Tibet or its human rights condition, to them its became a breaking-up of China and another colonial expansion.

    As a child, being Tibetan, taught such a thing. Everything was at total oods with who I am and what family’s asperation.

    I need to look at Tibet from greater view, geo-politics changes, but know one can tell. Until that happens or will force to happen if necessary as time demands such a force to be used, I think Tibetans and their supporters should not be given up.