China Sets Plan To Settle 470,000 Tibetan Herders
From Reuters:
Authorities in the Chinese province of Sichuan plan to spend 5 billion yuan ($732 million) to settle 470,000 Tibetan herders in permanent houses, state media said, as part of efforts to promote the development of ethnic Tibetan areas.
Rioting broke out in ethnic Tibetan areas of the southwest province earlier this year after Lhasa, the capital of neighbouring Tibet, was hit by violent protests against Chinese rule.
Over the next four years, the Sichuan government will build brick houses and villages including primary schools, clinics and offices for the Tibetan nomads, Xinhua news agency said in a report on Saturday.
Origin: , Reuters
POSTED COMMENTS: 31 Responses
Genecide——-This not the benevolent CCP doing this out of the goodness of their heart. Rather, it is a way to coral the nomads, bring them into tighter control, and in so doing, end the way of life of an entire minority population that will be the continuance of elimination of the Tibetan population as it is known. Gencide? YES!
You should learn to spell ‘genocide’ correctly before you start slinging that word around.
This policy may be wrong headed, and treading in the footsteps of a lot of other similarly failed policies the world over; but genocide it is not.
Evil Chinese government!!! Down with Chinese government!!!! This will surely increase conflict in Tibet if Chinese government continue their colonial policies!!!!! Even more suprising, most Chinese people support these policies….against the ‘barbarian’ Tibetan…Incredible!
When China let overgrazing they were blame for environmental degradation If they restrict grazing they are accused of Genocide I guess China cannot win can’t it ?
Now when most rural Tibetan are poor China is blamed for discrimination and negligence. How can you provide water,electricity and schooling when population are thinly spread apart Just impossible BTW The policy of resettling herder to village and township is not just directed to Tibetan It applied to Mongolian and other nomad
The truth is Tibet environment is very fragile with the larger herder population You just cannot prevent overgrazing It already happened in Mongolia
No genocide it is NOT
@John:
Strangely, the Tibetans did not have environmental problems like overgrazing and deforestation before the Chinese occupation…
Furthermore, the Tibetans generally do not want to live on charity in desolate concrete townships. Look at Mongolia. As soon as it became independent, Mongolians moved back to their nomad life in great numbers.
Why should some Chinese communist bureaucrats decide on the way of living of Tibetans with whom they don’t share anything, neither language, nor religion nor culture nor history?
Strangely, the Tibetans did not have environmental problems like overgrazing and deforestation before the Chinese occupation
True but due to improve heath care and decrease rate of infant mortality There more of them than before So you just can’t allow overgrazing. Large swath of China norh east were is in danger of desertification because of overgrazing
So the danger are real you cite Mongolia as an example I say you make a poor choice because just a couple year ago Mongolia was threatened with starvation and still now one of the poorest country in the world where alcholism is rampant .The time of free roaming nomad is over for good. Anyway like it or not Tibetan is dragged to modern world kicking and screaming Because leave it to themselves They become breeding ground for separatism and instability
John, stop your racist blabbering, Mongolia is richer than the poorest Chinese province and has much potential.
Please leave Tibet alone, do not put Tibetans nomads in brick prisons where they will suffer from hunger and poverty or else China will surely become like Jugoslavia. Generations of Tibetans will never forget your crimes!
John: “I guess China cannot win can’t it ?” There is absolutely NO way to win when the basis of the Chinese presence in Tibet is nothing but thousands of lies and a bunch of half-truths.
Improved health care and decreased infant mortality rate? Please…the improved health care is only provided to the colonialist Chinese settlers or a few Tibetans who have succumed to the oppressive foreign regime in Tibet.
Do you think they will have Tibetan classes in those new schools? Language, culture, History, etc. …Of course not! The so called “schools” are only there to preserve face for the regime, but mainly to serve the Chinese communist-colonialist regimes 50 year old directive to brainwash and oppress the Tibetan people. Which of course will do nothing more than create more racial tension and outright anger between Tibetans and Chinese in Tibet and beyond.
Jesse Le: True it may not be outright Genocide, but it IS outright Cultural-Genocide and covert racial-genocide!!
@sr I don’t know where you got your idea That there is no improvement in the life or ordinary Tibetan You must be ignorant Living in the cave or illiterate Here is data from UNESCAP
http://www.unescap.org/esid/psis/population/database/chinadata/tibet.htm
2. Population History
From 1952, Tibet’s population history can be classified into four periods as follows:
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.
The second period, 1959 - 1969 : may be defined as the relatively high growth period. The population increased to 1.4805 million in 1969, i.e. 0.2743 million more than that in 1959.
The third period 1970 - 1985 : was a period of rapid increase in population growth. The crude birth rate (CBR) fluctuated at 25 per 1,000, and the natural growth rate (NGR) continued at 18 per 1,000. The population increased to 1.9948 million in 1985.
In the present period, 1986 to now : population growth and CBRs and NGRs dropped a little, but they are still higher in China. In 2000, the CBR was 17.60 per 1,000 and the NGR was 11.00 per 1,000.
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 model of age-specific death rates is in the stage of transferring from the traditional “U-shaped” model to the modern “J-shaped” model. The death rates for males were higher than those for females. There was a wide gap between urban and rural people in the death rates. Mortality at all ages in Tibet was much higher than the national average. The death rates in each age groups in rural areas were higher than those in urban areas. The infant mortality rate was very high in Tibet with a great difference between the sexes. But the infant mortality rate had fallen from 430 per 1,000 in 1951, 91.8 per 1,000 in 1990 to 35.3 per 1,000 by the year 2000. In 1990, life expectancy in Tibet has reached 59.64 years, 57.64 for male and 61.57 for female.
STATISTIC OF EDUCATION IN TIBET
By 2000, Tibet had 4,361 schools of different types. They included four institutions of higher learning—Tibet University, Tibet Ethnic College, Tibet Institute of Agriculture and Animal Husbandry and Tibetan Medical College. There were also 16 secondary vocational and polytechnic schools specializing in such specialties as teachers?training, agriculture and animal husbandry, finance and economics, physical culture, arts, and posts and telecommunications, more than 90 middle schools and 4,251 primary schools including those run by villages. There were more than 300,000 students in these schools, a majority of them being Tibetan or from other ethnic minority groups. Tibet has also established more than 100 secondary vocational schools jointly with 26 provinces and municipaBy 2000, Tibet had 4,361 schools of different types. They included four institutions of higher learning—Tibet University, Tibet Ethnic College, Tibet Institute of Agriculture and Animal Husbandry and Tibetan Medical College. There were also 16 secondary vocational and polytechnic schools specializing in such specialties as teachers?training, agriculture and animal husbandry, finance and economics, physical culture, arts, and posts and telecommunications, more than 90 middle schools and 4,251 primary schools including those run by villages. There were more than 300,000 students in these schools, a majority of them being Tibetan or from other ethnic minority groups. Tibet has also established more than 100 secondary vocational schools jointly with 26 provinces and municipalities, with 13,000 Tibetan students studying in various parts of China.
lities, with 13,000 Tibetan students studying in various parts of China.
Teaching in Tibetan Language Stressed
In Tibet, most classes in primary schools are taught in Tibetan. However, it still needs a while (for instance, in training of qualified teachers, and compilation and translation of textbooks) to teach mathematics, physics and chemistry in Tibetan in schools at and above the junior middle school level.
Therefore, these schools currently conduct their teaching activities in four formats: first, offering Tibetan and Chinese language courses, with all other courses being taught in Tibetan; second, teaching some classes in Chinese and others in Tibetan; third, offering Tibetan language class, with all other classes taught in Chinese; and fourth, teaching the entire curriculum in Chinese.
According to the requirements of the regional government, graduates of senior middle schools should be familiar with both Tibetan and Chinese languages. Foreign language classes are offered in schools above junior middle school level that have proper conditions.
The Tibetan middle schools and Tibetan classes in certain provinces and municipalities directly under the Central Government all offer Tibetan language classes for junior middle school curriculum, taught by Tibetan teachers designated by the autonomous region. They independently plan their courses according to the national teaching program for regular middle schools and allowing for the actual conditions of Tibetan students.
First of all, lets keep this discussion civilized!! If I’m being foolish in my opinions then I will be the first to admit it. I work in the medical research field, so I know that you must always trust but confirm all data. And quite frankly all your data is EXTREMELY suspect!! Look at the references on this site. You cannot have tried to get more bias. This along with the history of the PRC in Tibet; scientifically all this data cannot be trusted. I mean give me a break… you site data that is from the 1950’s. This is the decade that the PLA was invading Tibet. How the hell can you model a census during the time of an invasion. Please dont make yourself out to be such a fool.
John: To your second post. Two simple questions. How can a school be taught in four different formats? And then why do you think every month hundreds of Tibetans young and old escape in the middle of the night over the largest mountain range on Earth to go to school in Dharamsala, India?
@John:
You wrote:
“However, it still needs a while (for instance, in training of qualified teachers, and compilation and translation of textbooks) to teach mathematics, physics and chemistry in Tibetan in schools at and above the junior middle school level.”
After having occupied Tibet for more than 50 years China has not been able to provide education for qualified teachers in basic subjects? What an appaling record of governance!
Maybe they should ask the exile government in India to send text books and teachers…
After having occupied Tibet for more than 50 years China has not been able to provide education for qualified teachers in basic subjects? What an appaling record of governance!
Maybe they should ask the exile government in India to send text books and teachers…
There is priority in life because of the backward condition of Tibet. Economy and infrastructure is overarching priority. Plus it take a while to train native Tibetan and inventing terminology for science meanwhile you have Chinese teacher and teaching material available. Anyway it considered good idea using mandarin as working language because it is in mandarin medium that those tibetan has to compete for jobs because what good having skill if you cannot communicate with the majority
Anyway back to topic
I just really can’t understand those westerner that like to condemn Tibetan to primitive life without running water , electricity .All in the name of preserving native way of life When they themselves enjoy the luxury of modern convenience It just another hypocrisy and perversion of morality
John
At this point I normally would just ignore your posts from this point on because it is very apparent that you are a ethnocentric-chauvanist. But unfortunately since I have found this site and others I have realized that this is a common theme. So I will try to do my part to dispell this ignorance.
You talk about “inventing terminology for science” when I guarantee you have no idea about the breadth of Tibetan language. Have you ever really talked to a Tibetan person face to face? In short, NO it is NOT a good idea to use Mandarin as a so called “working language”. This is the kind of ideals that is used by the PRC’s propoganda department to legitimize not teaching Tibetan language or culture in Tibetan schools. Besides, why on earth would Tibetan’s want to learn Mandarin, Cantonese, etc. when the Tibetan language is perfectly suitable for Tibetans. Is it because this kind of education would not be suitable for the Chinese colonialist dreams of assimilation?
You said, “just really can’t understand those westerner that like to condemn Tibetan to primitive life…”. Get realistic. Stop with these stupid political games. A question that is really to the point is why are so many common Chinese people so obsessed with the idea that Tibet has always been an integral part of China?? My father was born just West of Chengdu, the last TRUE Chinese city before you enter Tibet proper. Yes, there was no Chinese living here and especially no Chinese governmental presence of any kind in my father’s region. Furthermore, Tibet has always had it’s own monetary, postal and judicial system. Anyway back to the question. For fodder to respond please see the link of a new book review. It goes into some detail, though not as much as the actual book, on this very question. http://www.tricycle.com/reviews/who-owns-tibet
John, why should Tibetans have to compete in a foreign language for jobs in their own country? They have been the only inhabitants of their country right up to 1950. Till then there were virtually no Chinese living in Tibet.
On the Chinese take-over they were promised a high degree of autonomy in the so-called 17-point-agreement. This was never honoured by China.
If a Tibetan wants a job in Beijing, fine, he will have to compete in Mandarin. But if a Chinese wants to settle in Tibet, he should have to learn Tibetan, too. Surely, this is what you would expect in return.
The fact is that the Han impose their language, culture and way of life mercilessly on their so-called minorities. As a Tibetan student in Tibet has written:
However much we are taught in school that the aggressors have been the “evil” Japanese, for all minorities in China the actual aggressors are the Han!
One more comment:
If you study the article, you will notice that it says:
“Authorities in the Chinese province of Sichuan”
Now, the capital of Sichuan happens to be Chengdu which probably has a 99.9% Han population. Moreover in its government bodies there will be an equal proportion of Han bureaucrats.
Now, you tell me why these people should decide on the lives of half a million Tibetans whose language they don’t even speak. Are Tibetans just some kind of animals that you put behind a fence whether they like it or not?
Tibet is not a cultural issue. It’s a land issue.
Six million Tibetans are spread over about a fourth of the PRC’s territory. By Chinese standards, this is extremely sparse settlement. Much of it has been used, historically, by Tibetan herders, who, while they ranged over very large regions, did not really settle those regions like the Chinese did in China.
The result, from the Chinese perspective, is a lot of “unused” land - ripe for development and colonization.
The PRC is a colonial power. There is little doubt about it. China has always been an imperial power, but its colonial history is relatively recent. The problem, historically, has been lack of incentive - the Chinese population expanded outwards during times of war because they were forced to by invading armies; otherwise, they stayed at home: why bother going anywhere else when China was the most prosperous civilization for miles and miles?
Things changed with the advent of the modern world. Suddenly, nation-states were born that had resource and security interests across the globe. Modern industry requires abundant natural resources. Modern national security requires geo-political barriers. Tibet provided the PRC with both; therefore, it was annexed.
The PRC’s principle interest in Tibet is the land, not the people. If they could turn Tibetans into loyal Chinese citizens, great. If not, then Tibetans will be oppressed and loyal Han Chinese will be moved in to secure the land. There is nothing surprising about this - it’s been the modus operandi of colonial powers since colonialism began. The only reason Europe couldn’t accomplish the same in many of their colonies is due to a lack of people (at home) and strong resistance from large, existing populations. China, in Tibet, suffers from neither.
Today, places like America, Australia, Canada, Alaska, etc. are firmly in the grasp of European settlers. What of the natives? They were marginalized. Little excuse has been offered. The best that European powers have managed was to create “reservations” for those they displaced. These reservations are the living legacies of history’s victims.
What does viewing Tibet as a land issue tell us? Well, two things, primarily - first, until Tibetans constitute a large enough population to densely settle Tibet, their claim on the land will continue to be tenuous. Nomads may have been history’s greatest conquerors, but when it comes to nation-building, they still had to get off their horses and settle down like everyone else. If all Tibetans prefer to do is maintain a nomadic lifestyle, then the existence of their nation will continue to be imperiled. Simply put, land historically belonged to those who 1) lived on it, 2) developed it, and 3) could defend it. The modern world, insofar as it is more advanced, simply added a caveat for #3 such that peoples that are incapable of defending themselves may appeal to foreign powers for protection. Of course, whether those powers answer depends on them, and even if they do answer, their “protection” will typically come with strings attached.
Second, “first come first serve” is not a historically accurate definition of territorial rights. Tibetans may argue that no Chinese lived in Tibet until 1950, but that didn’t stop the British from colonizing Canada, and it didn’t stop Spain from colonizing South America. While acceptable conduct, with respect to nation-states, has changed since the days Europe expanded across the world, the basic idea - that more and more land are going to be settled by those with the means to do so - has not really changed. If Tibetans want all the lands of Tibet (however they define it) to be theirs, then they will have to fight for it - if not militarily, then demographically. In truth, that’s probably the better option, since fighting military against the PRC is suicide.
This might have been why the Dalai Lama has become more accommodating towards China. It used to be that everyone expected the PRC to collapse like the Soviet Union did, so the best option was simply to “tough it out” until China imploded, at which point it becomes a territorial free-for-all (securing the West as an ally is naturally useful when it comes time to define new national boundaries). But nowadays, it seems that such a collapse is not forthcoming. If disassembling China is not an option, then the only course of action is to secure Tibetans’ ownership of their land by settling it with Tibetans. This is why the Dalai Lama argues for cultural and religious autonomy - this ensures that Tibetans will not be assimilated. I would not be surprised if he also desired that currently Tibetans areas be off-limits to Han Chinese immigration. This secures Tibetans’ land rights which, as I’ve argued above is, is central to their ownership of Tibet.
Ultimately, this is a conflict of territorial interests. I have focused here on the plight of the Tibetans and their strategy, but clearly there is something to be said for the Chinese perspective and strategy, as well. In particular, the settlement of Han Chinese in Tibet is the single greatest threat to Tibetans’ claim on those same lands, yet it may not be something that Tibetans can prevent. Whereas a densely settled country could easily resist this form of colonization, what can Tibetans do if Han Chinese decided to move into places that Tibetans aren’t directly living on? The Tibetan wilderness is vast, and Tibetan claims on that wilderness are not based on massive existing settlement but on historical ownership. As I’ve argued above, historical ownership alone has seldom proved resilient against the encroachment of colonizing peoples. So is Tibet doomed, then? Has China already won?
Fortunately for Tibetans, the PRC is shooting itself in the foot in two respects. First, the one-child policy means that Tibetans have a higher birthrate than Han Chinese. This means that Tibetans will, presumably, grow faster as a demographic group. If so, then it is possible that Tibetans will maintain a large majority in Tibet and its surrounding areas for many years to come and settle the land en masse, thereby guaranteeing their ownership of it.
Second, the PRC is mindful of international opinion and has so far not engaged in a systematic colonization of Tibet. Sure, there are many Han migrant workers in Lhasa and such, but with the resources at the PRC’s disposal they could have built several cities in the area and flooded it with Chinese colonists. They could’ve done what they did in Xinjiang - where now half the settled population is Han Chinese and have been for decades. So long as Han Chinese migrants in Tibet are concentrated in the cities and do not own large tracts of land in the region, Tibetans will be able to lay their claims on those very same lands. In this respect, settlement of Tibet by Tibetans could actually help the Tibetan cause. Sure, the Tibetan nomads are no longer roaming the breadth of Tibet and that makes it possible for the PRC to settle those regions with Han Chinese, but they could’ve done that anyways and moved the Tibetans nomads into the interior of China proper, where they will almost certainly be assimilated and become irrelevant to Tibet’s territorial struggle.
With this in mind, I think that the best course of action, given that protests have not worked due to lack of strong foreign support (sure, the West “sympathizes,” but is it willing to back up its words with actions? So far, the answer is no.), is for Tibetan activists to pressure the PRC into settling Tibet with Tibetans and to stop oppressing Tibetan culture/religion. While calls for independence serve as a good rallying cry, the reality is that the PRC is unlikely to respond to such broad demands. Moreover, Tibet as it is now is not in the best of positions to make independence happen - some six million Tibetans, sparsely populating roughly a fourth of China’s territory, cannot fight the PRC nor win over the Chinese people to separatism (would the Chinese people be willing to give up a fourth of their present country to 1/200th the population?) What they can do, however, is win sympathy and therefore protection and a degree of autonomy. This could then serve as a basis for future independence (say, when Tibetans comprise a much larger group of people and are more firmly in control of their desired territories), if desired. Of course, it could also be that autonomy and protection are sufficient, in which case Tibetans and Chinese might be able to cooperate as equals in some future polity that does not involve the domination of one by the other. For that to happen, though, both sides have to be willing to move forward in a constructive manner - and right now the ball is in the PRC’s courts.
Tibetan nomads are being forced to make a huge transition to live in conclave cluster of concrete house. This will have a great ecological and traditional impact. Beijing needs to understand Tibetans first before they go about coming up with such policies. Do the Tibetan nomads wants to give up their traditional lifestyle? I wonder if Tibetans were given such a choice.
Maybe there is something to learn from policies used in Outer Mongol and Bhutan, countries closest to Tibet in culture and history and who have sizable population of nomads and how their identity and traditional lifestyles are protect.
Beijing is just going on with its policy of sinicization and turn Tibet into another region of China. A civilization is on the brink pf disappearing. Kudos to the Chinese rulers in Beijing.
eventine: I enjoyed reading your well organized essay. Though I think, like many people who do not have personal/familial stakes in the situation, you are overlooking and just have no idea of certain realities. Specifically with the strong and proud character of Tibetan people as a whole. The land of Tibet is a part of the Tibetan people and vica-versa.
A common misunderstanding is that Tibetans were all nomads and seems to be a big point in your essay. In fact, only a fraction of Tibetans were truly nomadic. A vast majority of Tibetans were settled prior to 1950. Though after the PLA invaded and the societal infrastructure was destroyed you can imagine many people were forced to become sort of nomadic in name. The effects on all levels of the Tibetan society were devastated by the invasion and subsequent actions of the foreign Chinese perverted and corrupted policies. Coincidentally, this is why, like I state in an earlier post, that the idea of conducting a national statistical census is rediculous and of no purpose.
The notion that Tibetans can take advantage of situations presently in Tibet by somehow slowly populating Tibet and therefore laying more claim just by sheer numbers is sort of nieve in my view. The whole point is that the Chinese policies in Tibet as they are now are set up to marginalize and hence erradicate the Tibetan culture as soon as possible. Chinese policies in Tibet are some of the most outright racist and demeaning on earth. For example the whole Chinese legal system does not work the same in Tibet as it does in China proper. In Tibet the Chinese are treated like some sort of embassadors that are exempt from legal action. And conversly the Tibetans are treated like animals and Chinese lawyers are actually discouraged to represent Tibetans in a court of law. They are actually threatened with losing their license if they do.
Furthermore, the Chinese policies, as they are currently, will never allow the Tibetans to form any true “community” of which they could draw any cultural strength. The current Chinese policy in Tibet proper is that every time there is a cultural festival they have to request a permit. Many times it is not granted or if it is and “too many” Tibetans show up the festival will be broken up forcefully and sometimes ruthlessly.
The current Chinese government in Tibet is very scarred of what you say is the only realistic path for the Tibetan people. And this only path you talk about is exactly what I’m sure HH DL is hoping for, a true autonomy and then once the Tibetan people recover (from 60 years of torture, rape, oppression and cultural genocide) they might have the strength to take advantage of their human rights, this might be 10, 20, 50, 100 years from now. But as devout Buddhists this is not much of an issue as long as the Tibetans in Tibet are able to somehow preserver thier culture.
sr: I thought about it a bit more and now I think the issue is primarily cultural for Tibetans, and land for the PRC. As you say, the preservation of Tibetan culture is necessary if it’s to have any national aspirations in the future. By contrast, my guess is that the PRC does not care about culture so long as they can get from Tibet what they desire - land, resources, geo-political security, and overall stability. This makes me think a mutually satisfactory arrangement is possible, though far from easy.
At any case, the gist of my post is that independence is difficult to achieve in the short-run because the PRC holds most of the cards. Normally, when independence succeeds it is with the backing of other great powers that’s in it for their own interests, and against the background of a host nation that can no longer afford to deny it to a large and determined population. Tibet lacks both - while the West and India are willing to provide moral support they are not willing to trash their relations with China to go further.
Furthermore, Tibetans are sparsely settled upon a very wide area (half of Tibetans actually live outside of the TAR, for example), and even if Chinese people can be convinced that the TAR is entirely Tibetan, they will still likely strongly reject tearing apart provinces like Qinghai, Gansu, and Szechuan to accommodate the Tibetans living there. It would set a politically dangerous precedent for China’s other minorities (who are scattered across *all* of China) and give the impression, to the majority Han Chinese, that their government is bending over for minorities and acting against the interests of the majority. This the CCP - or any nationalist government - will not allow as it would destroy their legitimacy and potentially lead to overthrow.
So in the short-term, at least, I agree that the protection of Tibetans and their culture should be the priority and not independence. If the dialogue could be shifted away from what the PRC deems “intolerable” (ie formal separatism), it might have a higher chance of success. Certainly, it should be in everyone’s interests to see an end of such practices as the PLA’s shooting of refugees fleeing Tibet and the local government’s detainment & torture of monks. If the PRC can be assured that ending such practices will not lead to Tibetan independence, they may be willing to give ground.
In the long run, the hope is that as Tibetans increase in numbers, political awareness, and China continues to reform, a more conducive atmosphere to independence will arise. Or, alternatively, better treatment, stronger protection, and greater autonomy will make Tibetans more willing to negotiate a compromise with the PRC that would maintain China’s territorial integrity. This, in turn, could dispel the fear of separatism and national disintegration that currently guides Chinese thinking and lead to a new way forward for both peoples.
What amazes me repeatedly is how much dissens the Chinese government actually does tolerate when it does not feel that its authority is threatened!
Look at Hongkong and the amazingly independent and critical reporting on the mainland in its media. I walked the streets of Hongkong in April with my “Free Tibet” t-shirt and NO ONE took offense at all! And the Falun Gong had a stand right at the ferry wharf with shocking posters and photographs.
It IS amazing if you think about it: this is also a territory of the same PRC!
I guess the main problem with Tibet is that because of its past (and unfortunately still ongoing) harmful policies in Tibet the CCP has alienated and antagonized the Tibetans inside Tibet as well as in exile (and equally their idealistic Western supporters) to such an extent, that it indeed fears Tibetan independence. And this has to be avoided at ANY cost!
It is a cultural issue, a land issue and, more significantly, a psychological issue…
jh: The difference is that there are so many foreigners and foreign powers using Tibet as a whip to hit China with. This is not the case with Hong Kong.
Frankly the best thing Tibetans can do is to stop associating with all the Hollywood movie stars and european politicians. You should fight for your rights as the tibetan minority, without antagonizing the Han majority, or denigrating chinese history, etc.
I know sr and others won’t want to hear this, but I believe the separatists are doing a lot more harm than good. You should all heed what the Dalai Lama said, and fight for autonomy rather than independence. Learn from the Uighur tragedy. When you try to fight for independence- first of all you will fail; and secondly all tibetans will be tarred and treated as terrorists; and finally you will achieve absolutely nothing other than selling a few t-shirts to Hollywood stars.
The story of Tibetan independent movement is the story of one missed opportunity one after another. They must get bad advise from their arrogant western supporter. Take 17 point agreement JH unless you know the history please refrain from spreading the lie It is not the Chinese who renegade on the agreement It is exactly your holy Dolly pardon me Dalai who repudiate the agreement and declare it to be invalid because he said it was signed under duress
The Chinese keep their side of the bargain and refrain from instituting land reforn in TAR but they do enforced the land reform in Amdo and Cham because they regard it as China proper. Since they were ceded from Tibet since 1780 But the nobility and land owner resist the reform and start the rebellion. Soon the rebellion spread to TAR and the Dalai waffle but due to the influence of his older brother Thondrup who recently passed away He was sway and flee to India
During DEng Xiao Ping reign in 80’s he was quoted to say “Let bygone be bygone and invite DL to come home and everything is on the table except Independence”
He should take the offer then Instead he follow his arrogant western advisor who probably think they can just wait out and sooner or latter China will implode. Well 2 can play the game and Now it is China turn to play the waiting game
Now no one has the stature of DXP with his revolutionary credential he probably can pushed for a deal
The tibetan demand for autonomy and exclusive immigration including Amdo and Cham is out of question No Chinese goverment whatever their color is going to agree on that. The question of Tibet has been settled back in 1959 The only thing that can be negotiated is the return of DL as a private citizen providing he foresworn politic and independence and take the oath of loyalty to Chinese nations. Too bad that Panchen Lama die young He is well respected in China and he is no patsy He admonished and criticize Chinese goverment after Cultural revolution and plead for better deal in Tibet
As to the allegation that China and Chinese desire Tibetan land in order to exploit the mineral wealth I say it nothing but BS and delusion
Why would any sane Chinese want to migrate to moonlike landscape above the tree line where the growing season is short and nothing but desolation.
Most of the hans that move to Tibet belong to 2 categories One is civil servant and military that must go there because it is their duties and the other are impoverished and hopeless Sichuaness that cannot earn a living in their native provinces.
There is no such thing as organized immigration to inundate the Tibetan. Most of them stay until they make enough money and go home
Because of the height some han babies was born with defect And The civil servant get hazzard money for serving in Tibet
As bussiness tibet is a money loosing proposition because 90% of Tibetan budget is supplied by Beijing. The mythical mineral wealth is hard to exploit because of poor infrastructure and too remote to be profitable Maybe in future but not now. China is in Tibet for one and only one reason Strategicaly Tibet form a natural barrrier to protect the heartland
Jesse Le:
You said “Frankly the best thing Tibetans can do is to stop associating with all the Hollywood movie stars and european politicians” …Oh my goodness, my stomach hurts from laughter. This is the most immature statement I have ever heard. What does this have to with anything?
Then you said, “You should all heed what the Dalai Lama said, and fight for autonomy rather than independence… When you try to fight for independence- first of all you will fail; and secondly all tibetans will be tarred and treated as terrorists”… HH the Dalai Lama seaks genuine autonomy, and has done so for at least the last 10 years. But what progress has been made? I’ll tell you, none! The PRC is just placating the Tibetan Government in Exile and the rest of the world to save some face, with no real intention of doing anything but what it has done = trying to wash out the Tibetan culture and people. This is why there are a lot of Tibetan people asking for inependence because even when HH the DL asks for only true autonomy nothing ever comes of it. So why should we placate any more. The DL has to do what he feels he has to as a political figure, but the Tibetan people are incredibly pragmatic, just as they are devout Buddhists.
“…denegrading Chinese history,etc.”…Believe me when I tell you this, The Tibetan people will stop “denegrading Chinese history” when Chinese stop lying and/or overstating past Chinese involvement in Tibetan affairs. In translation, we are not denegrading anything. That is not within the true Tibetan character. It is the perversion of Tibetan history by the PRC that is we are denegrading because they are just lies. To make any progress with the Chinese - Tibetan relations issues we have to accept actual historical facts (Not wishful thinking or egotistical dreams of the PRC) and work from there. If there is this continual lying and half-truths about OUR history, then we are never going to get anywhere. AND Tibetan people will continue to fight this nonsense as long as this occurs.
John: What you write is ironic, hypocritical and totally contrary to facts and what you yourself write. Stop trying to be some crazy version of the Drunken Master and read what you write before you post? You can blabber all you want but we as Tibetans know our history past and present. These random unverified facts will never get you far in the world view, both now and in the future if things continue the way they have.
Over the last 10-20 years of my life I have come across so many Chinese people, all with varying degrees of attachment to the strange belief that “Tibet has always been a part of China”. Recently I have become intrigued enough to ask a large email list that I have collected. A relative, who has done a lot of work in this area, replied with a very succinct response. Let me know what you all think:
1) “The Chinese Govt since the founding of the Chinese Republic in 1912 have been lying to the Chinese people about Tibet’s history & claiming sovereignty over Tibet. The PRC continued this myth for their own purposes. Nearly every Chinese alive today has learned since childhood that Tibet is part of China & for someone to say the contrary is like telling an American that George Washington never actually existed.”
2) “Chinese people still feel humiliation at the period in time during the 19th & 20th centuries when China was invaded by European powers & then Japan and was forced to cede territories & other concessions to these aggressors. They believe the Tibet independence movement is a Western creation to dismember China & seem to ignore the feelings of Tibetans. When someone says Tibet was once independent, they think it’s just a plot to weaken China again.”
3) “Chinese people believe their own culture is superior to other cultures & believe all the neighbors of China, including Tibet, naturally want to assimilate into China. It’s a paternalistic attitude but again the feelings of the other Asians, like Tibetans, Mongolians & Uyghurs, don’t come into play.”
4) “The majority of people in China only get one viewpoint, the govt’s views. They may not always agree w/ the govt or believe the Party is telling them the truth but on matters concerning nationalism they basically accept the govt’s propaganda at face value.”
@Jesse Le:
I do think that, practically, the Tibet issue is a psychological issue now.
The Tibetans’ plight for a nation of their own was not affirmed strongly enough while it may still have made a difference, i.e. before the Chinese invasion. The PRC and the Chinese people, as we have been shown since these years riots, are not prepared to let Tibet go - for historic reasons, strategic reasons, reasons of self-esteem…
It is sad for the Tibetans but it seems that is the frame within which the struggle for a higher degree of self-determination has to be waged.
And as a Tibetan in Tibet has said:
Most Tibetans would be happy if only they had the degree of freedoms that most Han (not the dissidents of course) already enjoy.
Fact is: China is opening up slowly but steadily.
But fact is also, that the CCP reacts mercilessly where it feels its authority is threatened.
Now, the Tibetans cannot be blamed for “putting up a fight” in the face of Communist control of their lives. After all they are *not* Chinese and because of their Buddhist culture and nomadic spirit they are a lot less prepared to give in to the all-pervasive party control than the Chinese were.
And the difference is: they are basically *still* living in a cultural revolution environment that the Chinese themselves have left behind decades ago.
I guess if many of the Chinese bloggers who reject any self-determination for the Tibetans lived in the same environment they would surely bite their tongues…
So, what to do? Tell Richard Gere and people who are lucky to live in free societies to shut up and stay away?
After all, they only want to “help”.
Moreover, the Tibetan government in exile has a democratic charter and has no right nor inclination to tell anyone to shut up or restrict his or her movements.
OK, Jesse Le, you recommend to the Tibetans “to fight for autonomy, without antagonizing the Han majority”.
So how do you go about it?
China’s media are censored, if you speak up on this issue you get arrested, re-educated, tortured…
The Tibetans in Tibet have been through this for more than 50 years.
So how do you go about it? You tell me!
Truth is that holy dalai needs to what he needs to do to beg western money for his people in india
“OK, Jesse Le, you recommend to the Tibetans “to fight for autonomy, without antagonizing the Han majority”.
So how do you go about it?”
It is not lack of Trying by the Chinese but the intrasigence of DL prevent compromise to be reached .They are betting on implosion of China that never come
At the heart of the issue is the question of Tibet’s status before Communist troops took control in 1950. The Chinese Government says that Tibet has been part of its territory for centuries, while the Dalai Lama says that it had been de facto independent for hundreds of years. He abandoned his calls for statehood when Deng Xiaoping, the late Chinese leader, sent word in 1979 that if he did, a negotiated settlement was possible. Soon after talks began on a Chinese proposal to grant Tibet more autonomy, and allow the Dalai Lama to return. “We should have accepted it then,” said Kungo Juchen Thubten, 79, who participated in three rounds of talks with China in the early Eighties. Those talks foundered as has every other round since
You didn’t answer your own question, Jesse Le. Would you mind to try again?
“It is not lack of Trying by the Chinese but the intrasigence of DL prevent compromise to be reached .They are betting on implosion of China that never come” -John, why would Tibetans or HH the XIV DL have to compromise a Human Rights issue, and the obvious signs and facts of Tibetan Independence pre-1950? The PRC has been asking the Tibetans to compromise their own history! No one in their right mind would agree to such things. Lets stop pointing fingers and just look at the facts. And no I don’t mean the obviously bias “history” coming out of China. It only takes a high school education or less to see through that BS.