Xi Jinping (习近平) on Foreigners “Pointing Fingers” at China (With Video)
Vice-president Xi Jinping (习近平) , China’s probable successor to President Hu Jintao, just gave a speech to overseas Chinese in Mexico on February 11, and discussed international intervention:
“There are some foreigners who had eaten their fill and had nothing better to do, pointing their fingers at our affairs. China does not, first, export revolution; second, export poverty and hunger; or third, cause unnecessary trouble for you. What else is there to say?”
“有些吃饱了没事干的外国人，对我们的事情指手画脚。中国一不输出革命，二不输出饥饿和贫困，三不去折腾你们，还有什么好说的.”
The following video clip of Xi’s speech is from a news program of a Hong Kong TV station:
Read also: China: “Stay away!” Vice president Xi warned in Mexico by Bob Chen of the Global Voices online.
POSTED COMMENTS: 102 Responses
If Germany had only put the German Jews into concentration camps without starting WWII, what would have been there to say?
A bit of a sensationalist comparison, but yes, what an incredibly glib, obnoxious blow-off. I’m sure looking forward to this guy being in charge. Well, on the other hand, maybe it’s because I usually only hear the other “leaders” giving speeches, but at least this guy speaks something like a human being.
“There are some foreigners who had eaten their fill…”
Sounds and looks funny to me…
Guessing from the picture he has eaten his fill, too.
And an issue is an issue – irrespective of who is bringing it up.
He’s just beating the “them against us” drum and hoarding “his” Chinese people behind his bandwaggon…
Perhaps Hu Jintao has selected Jinping so that after a year of folly, Hu can come back to “save” the CCP…………
Well well China is a big country and old civilization and She definitely has no need for foreign busy body to meddle in her internal affair. So any hectoring will be fruiless
We know now the socalled “free market” and “Advanced Financial innovation” is nothing more than giant ponzi scheme and once for all validate the socalled “immature, primitive financial system” that China has been following as the right way of running economy. So all you western know all mind your own business. Let China do their own thing
As long as the Han controled PRC continues to wage a cultural-genocidal war against the Tibetan people (and a few other so called “minorities”) then millions of Tibetans and thier friends will be there to throw dirt in the face of the PRC.
When the Japanese invaded China did you wish other people (i.e. the US and allies) would “mind their own business”? Because you know the Japanese told all of them to do just that!
China has been on the defensive for far too long, and at last, one bold Chinese leader has stood up to confront the hypocritical West’s relentless criticisms of China.
Democracy is not the only political system for people to choose. In Germany, democracy had brought Hitler to power, and the Jews and other Europeans had had to bear the brunt of his genocide. In Taiwan (a self-ruled province of China), democracy had given Chen Shui-bian eight years of rule, during which he embezzled state funds and extorted millions of dollars from the businesses.
Democracy polarizes every nation: Republicans and Democrats in the USA; the blue and green camps in Taiwan, etc. Individual freedom in democracy is so morally corrupt that American bank CEOs dared openly pay themselves and their cohorts millions of dollars whilst receiving government bailout during the current financial crisis of their own making. Shame is democracy: drug addiction, pornography, gangsterism, street barbarism – you name it, you have it.
The world needs a better political system and China can surely play a great part in helping it evolve. Unlike the selfish individualism that the West preaches, China’s Confucian ethics teach harmony and civility. In this respect, China can offer the world Confucian ethics mingled with modern scientific thought.
@Tan Hear hear you have taken the word out of my mouth. As fellow Nanyang Chinese we can see clearly the wisdom and humanity of Chinese civilization. In contrast to those 10 cent dissident who for most part consist of farmer background that got stipend or scholarship from the west and who is blinded by the razzmatazz and bright light of Holywood. Insecure of their own culture slavishly held the western democracy as the best thing since slice bread. No wonder they got nowhere with the majority of Chinese people They are totally dicredited and become just footnote in History 20 years after TAM and democrazy got nowhere in China!
How is it possible a “mature” goverment is totally unable to deal with the slightest critisim? And that both, internally and externally. A grown man, especially a vise president would (should;-) not give a rats arse about anybody pointing fingers. Ohhh yeah we are loosing face, right?! What a joke.
Yes, Tan, Hitler was able to use the inadequacies of Germany’s democratic post-WWI constitution to usurp power.
You can read up on this one wikipedia and elsewhere.
Germany learned its share and passed the so-called Grundgesetz, the German post-WWII constitution, on May 8, 1949.
It is pretty cheap therefore blaming democracy per se for the rise of a dictatorship. At the same time in history Stalin and Mao rose from Communist systems, and each of them is responsible for tens of millions of deaths as well.
The other Chinese blogger had this to say:
“We are so lucky. It turned out that all other people’s two-party systems, multi-party systems, separation of power, which have worked for several hundred years, are all wrong. They are all on the wrong path. We just started and we’re already on the right path.”
“我们真该庆幸，敢情人家搞两党制、多党制、两院制和三权鼎立，搞了至少二三百年了，却搞错了，走的是错误路线，而我们一抬脚便走的是正确路线！”
They are all on the wrong path. We just started and we’re already on the right path.”
And last count they are numbered 7000 people out of 1.3 billion people statisticaly BIG ZERO, NADA, ZIP,
Who numbered 7000? And who did the counting? I am not aware of any such statistics?
Can you provide more details?
Another Chinese netizen had this to say:
“Who says I am pushing for a political system to change immediately?
I’m just to make sure people understand that a democratic system is better than now.
Any immediate change would effect people’s live.
But as least we Chinese, our government have to educate our people that free speech is good thing, open media is a good thing.
So this way the top leader could get feed back of their work of local and central sections immediately from people, even rumors will be immediately noticed.
So this way the leaders and people know who are starving and who likes Chen Shui Bian stealing money?…
Even wise emperor wants to know exactly what their people think asap, so things won’t get worse that can’t be fixed.
If we had open media 10 years ago, would that many tofu buildings built for schools in Sichuan, so our children were buried in there? Would the milk scandal last for years to be noticed?
If one of those controllers were published by media, many building are fixed, many babies would not suck that crap, in the end people, all of us suffer and our leaders are in shame!
And only this way, people understand their rights, so government don’t need to guard for riots, and their voice be heard and people are satisfied, corrupted officials be replaced, things are fixed quickly.
Even Zi Chan 子產 knows that 防民之口﹐若防川。block people’s mouth like block gushing river.”
Sounds reasonable to me, and that’s not from a foreigner but from a Chinese who is “minding his own business”…
To jh, I was not advocating a return to dictatorship, as you have wrongly claimed. Let me repeat that the world needs a new political system because Western democracy, as sheer hypocracy, has failed badly and has been responsible for the current financial crisis.
Some three hundred and fifty years ago, Baruch Spinoza first conceived the ideas of democracy, ideas that influenced John Locke and later Thomas Jefferson, leading finally to the American Declaration of Independence. At that time, the works of Confucius were not known to the West and Spinoza could not have read Confucius. China, rich in Confucian ethics, can play a major role in helping a new political system to evolve. In this new system, harmony and civility must prevail over the West’s selfish individualism, hatred and barbarism.
Who numbered 7000? And who did the counting? I am not aware of any such statistics?
Can you provide more details?
That is the numbered of people who sign the declaration 88
How is it possible a “mature” goverment is totally unable to deal with the slightest critisim? And that both, internally and externally. A grown man, especially a vise president would (should;-) not give a rats arse about anybody pointing fingers. Ohhh yeah we are loosing face, right?! What a joke
When you spread lie and inuendo the other side has the right to responde to the stereotyping Isn’t that what democracy is all about. So what you suggest China should lie dead and accept lie and unsubstantiated war mongering. Just show the hypocricy of the west!
Tan, I know. Don’t get me wrong…
Surely, there is something to learn from Confucius – as well as from Zhuang Zi whom I personally prefer (and both of which are quite incompatible, unfortunately). Have you read Zhuang Zi?
China has an adorable history of human civilization, and, in fact, I can’t wait for it to return to those heights.
The world has much to learn from China as well as from India. And that is happening anyway – in both directions.
It’s “One world, one dream” after all, isn’t it?
Only 7000 out of 1.3 billion prepared to think critically, responsibly, …
Don’t be unfair to your countrymen, George. They deserve better.
And besides, why would the CCP bother to censor and all that, if you were right?
Only 7000 out of 1.3 billion thinking critically, responsibly, …
Don’t be unfair to your countrymen, George. They deserve better.
The CCP would hardly have all that censorship in place if you were right. Right?
Do point finger at me, please.
I dont have enough food to fill myself, and work 12 hours a day in South China. …
@Martin
I dont have enough food to fill myself, and work 12 hours a day in South China
I don’t know where you got the idea that people are hungry in China I guess you are one of those nabob know nothing red neck that never read newspaper China is not India And China long ago solve the the food adequacy NOBODY I SAY NOBODY GO HUNGRY IN CHINA
As far as working 12 hour I can say China pride themselve in work hard and earn their living. Instead of borrowing money spending binge on credit card and speculating on real estate and 1 month vacation.No wonder their economy is in such a mess
[...] “There are some foreigners who had eaten their fill and had nothing better to do, pointing their fingers at our affairs. China does not, first, export revolution; second, export poverty and hunger; or third, cause unnecessary trouble for you. What else is there to say?” (Translated by China Digital Times ) [...]
Wow, look at all the exciting banter I have missed in the last few days :)
Let me put my opinion this way: If the policies imposed in Tibet are a product of Chinese civilazation and hence Confucian ethics, then this confucious fellow was a real bastard! Why do you think a colonialist-Napoleonic-’Hitler-esque’-hippocritical authoritarian regime in Tibet has anything to do with “civilization”? Also, I hope George and Tan Lye understand the political systems in Tibet and China Proper are completely different. Confucious may have been a great man with great ideas, but NO Tibetan in Tibet would really understand this or give a damn because the PRC’s policies in Tibet are nothing short of completely racist and colonialistic.
Again: When the Japanese invaded China did you wish other people (i.e. the US and allies) would “mind their own business”? Because you know the Japanese told all of them to mind their own business, while they were murdering in Nanking!
Well, one has to admit to the achievements of China’s ancient civilization.
But one also has to see that the Great Wall ended much before where Tibet starts!
So the Tibetans never were Chinese, it never was their Confucius (or Zhuang Zi). They had their very own distinct civilization which was much closer in script, literature and religion to India than to China.
So what Confucius is to the Chinese the Dalai Lama is to the Tibetans!
Now, you try to demonize Confucius and see how much the Chinese will like it…
Moreover the Chinese model of forced assimilation is not suitable as a model for the rest of the world. A government that shoots minority people risking their lives to flee across Himalayan glaciers to get an education of their own liking like rabbits and calls this “normal border management” is appalling at the least!
China as a model for the world? No thanks!
Why do you think a colonialist-Napoleonic-’Hitler-esque’-hippocritical authoritarian regime in Tibet has anything to do with “civilization”?
China liberate Tibet for the same reason that the Union crushed the secessionist south during the American civil war to preserve national integrity and abolished slavery So it has nothing to do with teritory conquest of Napoleon or Hitler
No one exterminate Tibetan If anything China action prevent Tibetan from being extinct because to many young man either become monk or slave
Statistic doesn’t lie and you can check it yourself that for the majority of Tibetan live did indeed improve
Of course the loosing side of the rebellion will whine to no end but aside from lip service from crafty politician no one take them seriously. So wake up and smell the coffee
Tibet colonialist, Napoleonic, ‘Hitler-esque’… What a lot of bull, George!
But there’s no point in arguing with you anyway…
@sr:
I’m sorry I did not include Tibet when I wrote the world has much to learn from China and from India.
Tibet’s distinct culture has much to give to the world as is evident by the sympathy and support that the Tibetans enjoy the world over.
As the world’s environment and climate is going down the drain fast, the Tibetans wisdom of living in accordance with their natural environment, their sense of renunciation and compassion will be more relevant in the future than China’s outdated model of reckless industrialization.
As Gandhiji has said:
“The world can provide for all the needs of humanity but not for its greed.”
George_*, You’r position in regards to Tibet are a joke! You are merely exposing the fact you are a BS communist-rhetoric artist. Enough said.
The similarities of Hitler and Napoleon are due to China’s racist and expansionist policies, respectively.
Your biased, tampered, debased ’statistics’ is all you pro-colonialists ever can reference when in regards to Tibet, because you have been hard-pressed and probably will never be able to force/coerce/bribe enough actual Tibetans to claim they are happy with China’s colonization. Need I say it again COLONIZATION! What race of people were happy under any sort of colonization? The answer is none. Especially one as disgraceful as the PRC.
As the world’s environment and climate As Gandhiji has said:
“The world can provide for all the needs of humanity but not for its greed
Tell that to million who lived in slums of Mumbay where they lived in squalor and deprivation
Remember 400 million have no access to toilet in India Some Nirvana!
Yes, George, a toilet is a need. You are right. But that is where your insights end. India Some Nirvana … blabber … blabber …
Hello George,
You are right that, materially speaking, the living conditions of many Tibetans have improved over the last thirty years.
Why, though, do you believe that this development could only have been achieved through Chinese intervention, rather than Tibetans’ of their own accord? If you are at all familiar with modern Tibetan history, you will know that modernisation was a topic of urgency and importance to leaders in Lhasa in the first half of the twentieth century. Due to political circumstances at the time, however, they were unable to make progress in this regard.
And, furthermore, why do you believe that China had the right to impose its version of “liberation” on Tibetan areas? Many Chinese object strongly to America’s invasion of Iraq as a hegemonic strategy, and insist that all countries should respect the notion of national sovereignty. Little respect has been shown to Tibet by China, however.
It alarms me that you have no idea of the degree of cultural erosion experienced by Tibetans. Where do you get your information from? Have you been to Tibetan areas? Do you know any, or many, Tibetans? Why is it that your obvious love of your country leads you to adopt the nationalist party line on every issue? Can you accept that your government’s historical policy may, in some areas, be damaging and misguided?
jh, no worries.
Tibetans don’t need validation or credit from others for the greatness of their culture ;)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article5739057.ece
Guess now the CCP propaganda department will have to censor Darwin as well.
Not an easy job, all this censoring – you plug one hole and it starts leaking from another…
Why, though, do you believe that this development could only have been achieved through Chinese intervention, rather than Tibetans’ of their own accord? If you are at all familiar with modern Tibetan history, you will know that modernisation was a topic of urgency and importance to leaders in Lhasa in the first half of the twentieth century. Due to political circumstances at the time, however, they were unable to make progress in this regard.
Tibet with short growing season and no infrastructure to speak will not even last a day without heavy subsidy from Central goverment 95% of the Tibet budget come from Central goverment We too many failed states.
Culture will evolve with time that is inevitable. The only cultural that stay the same reside in the museum. Well tallking about cultural erosion I assume that you are korean judging from your name. You should worry more about korean loosing their culture due to large conversion to Christianity than worrying about Tibetan loose their culture.
Why you think Tibetan are loosing their culture when 96% of them still speak Tibetan. And the preservation of Tibetan culture is subsidize by goverment. Just this year they published the Story of King Ghesar. and China has been spending vast amount of money to the preservation of cultural relic including Potala palace and Norbu Linka that is completely restore
You comparing apple and orange America invade a sovereign country recoqnized the world over as independent country . No one recoqnized Tibet as independent country.
China soveregnity in Tibet was never been questioned as such it is justify to crushed rebellion and maintain teritorial integrity.
We have too many failed states. East Timor anyone
Due to political circumstances at the time, however, they were unable to make progress in this regard.
It more due to intrasigence and resistance of the Theocracy that they failed to modernized. Read the story of Ngaboi Ngawang Jigme
the commander of Khasag army. He is one of those modernist youth that was sent military academy in England. On coming back he become the commander of Khasag army. Knowing how futile the resistance against China He recommend accomodation with China and insists that Dalai Lama sign the 17 point agreement.After the rebellion he was imprison for a while then serve distinctly for many years in TAR administration
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ngapoi_Ngawang_Jigme
George, why do you continue to be so silly. From your name you are English and should have learned that colonization can only lead to heartache, long term pain, and a lot of wasted time/money/energy for both sides of the situation. Not to mention massive racial tension.
Everything you are mentioning is a direct cause and effect from colonialistic tactics. Tibet was well on it’s way to modernization during the time of the 13th Dalai Lama. Under the terms of the Tibetan people themselves. Not by some foreign force. How did the Chinese like their experiences with foreign invasion and forces??
“Tibet with short growing season and no infrastructure to speak will not even last a day without heavy subsidy from Central goverment”
–Give me a break, stop your scheming. This is nonsense. Though I’m not naive: it will be very difficult for Tibet IF tomorrow the PRC rightly uprooted it’s colonization of Tibet. BUT that is a direct result of the colonization itself. With the organization of the TGIE and the spiritual leadership of the 14 Dalai lama the Tibetans will work it out for themselves. You are either incredibly naive and/or ingnorant to not realize this!! How do you think the Tibetan people/culture flourished and produced one of the most respected religions/philosophy in the world, that is just now unfolding to the world.
True Autonomy and/or complete Independence is the only way to correct the evils that have gone on in Tibet for the past 50 years!
China Proper is named accordingly. Because Tibet has ALWAYS been a self sufficient state (period).
“China soveregnity in Tibet was never been questioned as such it is justify to crushed rebellion and maintain teritorial integrity.”
It HAS been questioned, for example by the International Commission of Jurists in its report on Tibet in 1960.
Furthermore, on 6 July 2000, the European Parliament passed a resolution calling on “the governments of the Member States to give serious consideration to the possibility of recognising the Tibetan Government in exile as the legitimate representative of the Tibetan people if, within three years, the Beijing authorities and the Tibetan government in exile have not signed an agreement on a new Statute for Tibet, through negotiations organised under the aegis of the Secretary-General of the United Nations”.
The three years are over…
George, nations are born to this day – like Kosovo.
If the PRC cannot provide circumstances for the Tibetans to live happily within the PRC, they have at least as much a right to break away as the PRC has to crush them violently.
At least as much!
After all, we are living in the 21st century and not in Qin Shi Huangdi’s time – however much many Chinese may be wishing for it…
It HAS been questioned, for example by the International Commission of Jurists in its report on Tibet in 1960.
It has no value whatsoever other than platitude They are private body that has no jurisdiction whatsoever!
Sofar none of the EU member recoqnized Tibet as independent and it won’t be in a long time. There are thousan of resolution that languished in US Congress or European parliament
Well, we will see, George.
In family matters, if a custodian fails to look after his ward properly custody is rightfully withdrawn…
But we have lost track. The Tibet issue is foremost, as has been said a thousand times, a human rights issue.
The Tibetans, in principle, have been prepared to live together with the Chinese for a long time. It is the Chinese who are abusing their demographic, economic, military and politic power with respect to the Tibetans. If that can be righted, which it eventually will, Tibetans can – as the Dalai Lama says – profit from being part of the PRC.
China will not win the hearts of its Tibetan population by force and sloganeering. This failed policy is only driving the Tibetans ever further away…
The fact that no country will formally recognize Tibet as an independent country is because it has been invaded and occupied by the PLA scum and so it is not a independent country due to said invasion. Before this time, it was recognized by foreign powers when it suited the foreign powers. “foreign recognition” should not be a test of statehood. Statehood should be determined by generally accepted government and the governments reach of it’s implementation of laws, taxes, livelihood provisions/services, etc.. Let alone the presence of a completely different race of people and culture! All of which were present in Tibet in the form of the Tibetan people and the Tibetan Government (now called TGIE) with the Dalai Lama as the head for over 700 years.
In family matters, if a custodian fails to look after his ward properly custody is rightfully withdrawn…
But we have lost track. The Tibet issue is foremost, as has been said a thousand times, a human rights issue.
Now who give the west the right to withdraw the custodian GOD JH you seem to forgot that you don’t live in 18th century anymore. The west has long ago lost their power and prestige to influence world event. And no one should under any illusion as to the China’s resolve to maintain her teritorial integrity. Just ask the Indian or Vietnamese, US
Statehood should be determined by generally accepted government and the governments reach of it’s implementation of laws, taxes, livelihood provisions/services, etc
He Hongkong has all of those and some more They even has parliament, constitution, Head of state. That does make Hongkong an independent country?
SR you seem to keep forgeting that China is a multi ethnic state It has been from the very beginning. The fusion of HUA and XIA latter incorporate other ethnic group the KHitan, Yurchen, Manchu, etc. On their free will Look after 3000 years there are today STILL 56 minorities in China each with their own language culture a living breathing language. Now have you heard Cherokee,Lackota spoken IN US only 200 years after the first white man landed in New England That show who is more tolerant
George, the particular circumstances attending to each “designated” minority group in China are not identical, a fact of which I am sure you are aware. The quiescence of some ethnic groups to the Chinese polity should by no means be taken to mean that Tibetans’ resistance to inclusion is unreasonable or unwarranted. China’s beloved “multi-national state” is achieved through overt and indirect sinicisation policies. You are right that many ethnic groups still put on traditional dress and sing and dance for tourists. Would you call that “living breathing” culture? If such groups are compliant in this process, we must assign them some agency in the erosion of their own culture. However, the point is that many Tibetans are alarmed and angered that their own indigenous way of life in subject to repression and undue control and manipulation by the Chinese government.
In any case, none of your responses have addressed the current and past human rights abuses in Tibet. Perhaps you can offer some comments in this regard, focusing on China’s policy and track record, rather than pointing the finger at other countries.
“The fusion of HUA and XIA latter incorporate other ethnic group the KHitan, Yurchen, Manchu, etc.”
–George, these are peoples that the Han have had close ties with throughout Chinese history. The Tibetans are a completely different story. Throughout history Tibetans and Chinese (especially Han) have never gotten along very well. The saying “like oil and water” is not a stretch here. Hence, the added bad blood in Tibet because of the dispicable colonialist tactics.
“On their free will Look after 3000 years there are today STILL 56 minorities in China each with their own language culture a living breathing language.”
—You said it yourself George, On their free will! Tibetans will never freely consider themselves Chinese or even Tibetan-Chinese. Tibetans will be Tibetans loyal only to the Dalai Lama and their Phayul. It’s been just over 50 years. The sooner the PRC realizes this the better for everyone! Their is no choice in this matter, it is as real as the Himalayans are tall. Tibet has got to be truely autonomous or completely independent for any kind of harmony to be attained. In fact so much damage has been done by this colonization, that even if true autonomy or independence was attained tomorrow it would take many years for the Tibetan people to recover from the constant state of fear, racism, prejudice, cultural oppression, torture at the hands of the Chinese. No time like the present to start the healing.
However, the point is that many Tibetans are alarmed and angered that their own indigenous way of life in subject to repression and undue control and manipulation by the Chinese government.
Nothing but BS Unsubstantiated rumor What repression are you talking about. 96% of Tibetan still speak Tibetan .Tibetan languages are taught at primary and secondary school True they are not taught at University level. There are Tibetan language radio and Televison channel.Tibetan study is promoted at the University.
They mantained and subsidized All the temples. Nobody is forbidding them to practiced Religion True some of the temple are closed now but that because they play politic instead learning buddhist scripture,
Nobody tolerate politic from puplit in the west. Why is this double standard when it come to China? other than hate and dislike for whattever reason!(maybe insecurity?)
China even promote affirmative action which is struck out in the west.Giving them advantage in admission to college
Now even after doing all this they still feel threatened then maybe this socalled culture is so weak and fragile that is not worth saving!
Let me tell you Chinese is forbidden to practice religion or speak their language in Indonesia. They cannot go to University for advanced degree. Most of lucrative business are reserve for native. TheY have to change their name to Indonesian name That is what I called DISCRIMINATION!Yet did Chinese culture die NO BECAUSE CHINESE CULTURE HAD ALL THE VIGOR AND VIRILITY!.
The Jew were forcibly removed from Palestine twice and Has to live in exile first in Babylon then during the romand time spread all over Europe. Heck the German try to exterminate them and reduced from 5 million to 1 million people. Now did the Jew loose their culture NO BECAUSE JEWISH CULTURE IS STRONG AND VIRILE
THE LIST GO ON AND ON ARMENIAN!
Now You want to talk Human right what Huaman righ did the Chinese transgress If you mean “self determination”
Yes because independent is NOT IN THE CARD PERIOD!
Let me tell you culture is the RESPONSIBILITY OF FAMILY,CHURCH,TEMPLE AND NOT THE STATE!
It up to Tibetan family and temple to nurture their won culture So far China DOES NTO IMPLEMENT INSTITUTIONAL DISCRIMINATION AGAINST TIBETAN.
True they loose or cannot compete in Job market and business but that has nothing to do with the state. It is up to them to improve their competitiveness by improving their education and skill Then it is up TO THE MARKET!
It is up to Tibetan family and temple to nurture their own culture So far China does not implement institutionla discrimination against Tibetan
George, Obviously wasting my time going back and forth with you. You even ignore stories on this website.
George, Obviously wasting my time going back and forth with you. You even ignore stories on this website.
Nobody said China is democracy. The rule is that you need permit to demonstrate If you don’t then you break the law
‘need permit’….? How convenient. What a joke. Reminds me of the “official protesting site” during the Beijing Olympics. Where no one had even a single complaint about anything…right George. Now that was in China Proper, where freedoms are much more relaxed!
Did you know in Tibet Proper you have to have a “permit” for any gathering of Tibetans over a certain number? In other words Tibetans need official permission from a foriegn force to celebrate thier own cultural festivals. And jeez is it any surprise that most of the Tibetan cultural festivals have not been celebrated properly. And now that Tibetans are saying that they dont want to celebrate their New Years (Losar) the Chinese in many instances are forcing them to celebrate…in fact many Tibetans have been offered wages for celebrating and/or threatened to lose their jobs if they don’t. Chinese presence in Tibet is a sick farce.
I am a Tibetan, until this year I have lived in Tibet for twenty five years. I understand the situation in Tibet. The pain in the hearts of Tibetan people is not something Chinese can understand. I am afraid that if occupying Chinese government does not allow Dalai Lama to return to Tibet and give Tibetans freedom, Tibetans will endure in their fight against China until last breath. In our hearts, your government has no authority. We only listen to the Dalai Lama, and our spiritual life is always more important than material.
need permit’….? How convenient. What a joke. Reminds me of the “official protesting site” during the Beijing Olympics. Where no one had even a single complaint about anything…right George
Yes SR even in some democratic country you need permit to demonstrate at public places. I still rememer vividly Overseas Chinese student was denied permit to counter demonstrate against the pro Tibetan crowd The reason given is to prevent melee.
As to why Tibetan was subjected to harsh restriction on assembling,is because if too many of you gathering around with nothing to do. You people start burning lootin and beating up on innocent passerby!
But if you behave nicely, they might let you demonstrate like they do in Hongkong.
Mind you they also give you such privilege to Tibetan in 1951 but what you do with such gesture of magnamity. You people revolt! Action invite Reaction that is the law of universe
Tibetans will endure in their fight against China until last breath. In our hearts,
Good then start rebellion again instead of whining No on is going to deliver your freedom on the silver plate Just like anything else you have to earn it!
“and our spiritual life is always more important than material”
I heard this line before So I don’t have to work hard all I do is praying until I see my neigbor getting rich by sheer hardwork Since I couldn’t have it I might as well burn,loot. and killed my neighbor
George, you wrote:
“You people revolt!”
That’s the point exactly. Even you don’t consider the Tibetans Chinese. Why should they?
Your argument, in fact, illustrates the Chinese colonialist attitude perfectly.
It’s a shame the Chinese should be whining about past colonial atrocities by Western powers when they perpetrate them to this day on the Tibetans!
And, yes, I know your answer: China “owns” Tibet and the Tibetans because no one is challenging that claim internationally. This is a sham – and you know it!
Those people that are affected the most, namely the Tibetans, they themselves challenge it!
And that is what really matters – in fact, the only thing that matters.
I was watching some old news broadcasts from CCTV and all they show is young pissed off Tibetans in the streets throwing rocks and pulling down store front gates. They dont show a single clip of the many protests that took place all over Tibet before the March 14th riots in Lhasa!! It was the beating, arresting and jailing of peaceful marchers, mostly monks, who were doing nothing more than marching and singing songs!!
George, so don’t tell me “But if you behave nicely…”. You are using the same logic as the white black-slave owners of the 1800s.
“They dont show a single clip of the many protests that took place all over Tibet before the March 14th riots in Lhasa!!”
Hahaha, of course they don’t, they don’t fit the official narrative. Most Chinese don’t appear to be aware that these apparently happened (and that the response to them was what spurred the violence) at all; they think that references to “peaceful protests” are what the bad, bad western media call the “smashing, burning and looting” that occurred on the 14th.
MAC, good point. You took the words from my mouth. Most Chinese have no idea the day Tibetans comemorate the last revolt in 1959 is annually on March 10th, and this was the day the peaceful protests occured.
jh, your post on ‘”India to Impose Duty on Chinese Aluminum Imports”| February 20th, 2009 at 4:49 pm’ reminded me of what a close friend told me just today, who went to a conference at Stanford University regarding the melting Glaciers in Tibet. Their was a large panel that discussed the issue of global warming and the massive affect it will have on the entire Asian continent (actually I think there is a post on CDT regarding this new research). For the most part apparently everything was totally focused on the scientific research and the affects environmentally with a lot of geologists from the US and China. Until one of the female Chinese geologists threw in at the end of her portion of the lecture… “the affects of global warming is why the Chinese government is relocating the Tibetan nomads”. My friend, and I upon hearing this, could not believe that such ignorance would come out of a supposedly scientific mind. What she was doing is trying impress everyone with her portion of the insights on the issue with interesting scientific data on glacial movements and water flow to impress everyone to get some kind of rapor and then drop some BS communist rhetoric hoping that her positive rapor would dumbfound people to try make them swallow a steaming pile of nonsense. You know what I mean? Like the global warming has nothing to do with the roads and railways the government has built to supply thier colonialists, or maybe the gazzillion tons of coal they are excavating and burning all over China every few months! Of course not right…its the Tibetan nomads. Which just so happens to be the last group of people in Tibet that have not been oppressed by the PRC. ANYWAY, my point is that you are one of the people, like the ones in the audience of this lecture, that stood up and called her out, because you can see through all the Chinese’s great history, culture and people and see the truth behind all the deception and hippocracy unravelling with regard to the PRC’s actions in Tibet.
“They dont show a single clip of the many protests that took place all over Tibet before the March 14th riots in Lhasa!!”
I must give it to you SR You are master at White washing, obfuscation and twisting the even. Let recall what is really happen here Couple of Lama shouted at public places with staetment that they wanted Dalai Lama to return to Tibet. Well DL is not only religous leader but he is also Head of state socalled TGIE In other word Political statement, DEMONSTRATION!
As such he is liable to arrest. The next day rumor swirling that He was man handle Hundred of Tibetan went out demonstrating again Public distrubance Police come to arrest them They resist and Force is being used Hell it is no different than what they do during Watts Race riot. they call in the national guard in 65 Just to refersh you memory your Here the PBS
http://www.pbs.org/hueypnewton/times/times_watts.html
And Yes China should learn How to deal with people who resist arrest Here How they do it at LA Rodney King Police brutality
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROn_9302UHg
@ Mac judging by your response you have the memory and morality of 10 years old because you are oblivious to those facts.
and When the Tibetan has issue with Goverment policy whoy don’t they burn the police station or any symbol of goverment instead of innocent by stander
Let me guess because they are coward and afraid of retribution So any innocent passerby is fair game. So much for the bravery of Tibetan
And one more thing I thought they are buddhist and foreworn revenge and other earthly feeling and passion. Since when is the infinitely compassion Buddha teach people to take revenge on the innocent and weak?
Uh huh, because I said it was just and right for innocent Chinese to be killed.
Lengthy comment, George, and a lot of ranting about (as usual)…
You started of with:
“They dont show a single clip of the many protests that took place all over Tibet before the March 14th riots in Lhasa!!”
Now, did they or didn’t they?
That would be more relevant than quoting a 65 incident in some other country (btw, this is called ‘deflection’ and it is commonly used to whitewash the CCP atrocities).
How about the Burmese army shooting demonstrating monks? Or the Chinese army shooting its own students in Tiananmen? You don’t have to go back to 65 for examples.
But, in other words, you are suggesting that China as a civil society is lagging at least some 40 years behind. And you are right there. I agree fully.
“Couple of Lama shouted at public places with staetment that they wanted Dalai Lama to return to Tibet.” —Yes, George I’m sure among the walking and singing some monks may have yelled a little bit. And of course they would yell about bringing the rightful leader of the Tibetan people back to the Tibetan people!!!
“The next day rumor swirling that He was man handle Hundred of Tibetan” —If by ‘He’ you mean HH the XIV DL, you and the PRC propoganda machine are flat out wrong. So wrong in fact, it’s hardly worth mentioning. You are merely wishing and hoping that your old Chinese saying “a lie told a 1000 times becomes truth” will work. This might work in China, but to the world your true character becomes more and more suspect.
“and When the Tibetan has issue with Goverment policy whoy don’t they burn the police station or any symbol of goverment instead of innocent by stander” —First, I dont think that any Tibetan should riot. But I’m saying that while enjoying my basic human rights! Second, the “innocent by-standers” are an unfortunate symbol of the evil colonialist PRC. And I’ve heard that some of these Chinese shop owners have always been very disrespectful of the local Tibetans. No less in the Tibetans own rightful capital. I’m not trying to excuse anyone’s actions, just trying to be naturally compassionate toward my countrymen.
“Since when is the infinitely compassion Buddha teach people to take revenge on the innocent and weak” —Since never. That’s when. The violence is due to the oppression! Do you really need someone to spell it out for you? Seriously…the one person who is telling the Tibetan people to be non-violent and compassionate towards all Chinese, is the one person the PRC is “demonizing”. Do you understand the hippocracy here??? I will not reply to you anymore until you answer this question with your mind and heart open!!
But, in other words, you are suggesting that China as a civil society is lagging at least some 40 years behind. And you are right there. I agree fully.
Well you are showing me the InternationaL of Jurist resolution surprise surprise dated 1960! duh You think that those jurist ARE smarter than British goverment who is unequivocal in their statement that CHINA HAS SOVEREIGNITY OVER TIBET PERIOD!
That the resolution by the ICJ stems from 1960 is no surprise but fits into the historical context. Why?
Because that was after the Chinese violently surpressed the Tibetan uprising in 1959 and Tibetans fled by the tens of thousands into exile.
At about the same time there were UN resolutions on the question of Tibet like the following:
United Nations General Assembly – Resolution 1723 (XVI)
New York, 1961
The General Assembly,
Recalling its resolution 1353 (XIV) of 21 October 1959 on the question of Tibet,
Gravely concerned at the continuation of events in Tibet, including the violation of the fundamental human rights of the Tibetan people and the suppression of the distinctive cultural and religious life which they have traditionally enjoyed,
Noting with deep anxiety the severe hardships which these events have inflicted on the Tibetan people, as evidenced by the large-scale exodus of Tibetan refugees to the neighboring countries,
Considering that these events violate fundamental human rights and freedoms set out in the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including the principle of self-determination of peoples and nations, and have the deplorable effect of increasing international tension and embittering relations between peoples,
1) Reaffirms its conviction that respect for the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is essential for the evolution of a peaceful world order based on the rule of law;
2) Solemnly renews its call for the cessation of practices which deprive the Tibetan people of their fundamental human rights and freedoms, including their right to self-determination;
3) Expresses the hope that Member States will make all possible efforts, as appropriate, towards achieving the purposes of the present resolution
Sadly, the situation has not improved since…
In any case, this again is not related to the issue that we were talking about, which is that China is lagging way behind as a civil society.
If anything, it is further proof for it:
50 years and zero progress on the civil and human rights of its Tibetan citizens!
BTW, the British government has not said: “CHINA HAS SOVEREIGNITY OVER TIBET PERIOD!” That is what YOU have said!
I have read Miliband’s statement, and I will provide a few quotes for your enlightenment:
“The British Government have a strong interest in the dialogue between the Chinese Government and the Dalai Lama’s representatives, although we are not party to it. No Government that are committed to promoting international respect for human rights can remain silent on the issue of Tibet, or
disinterested in a solution to its problems.”
“We have consistently made clear that
we want to see the human rights of the Tibetan people respected, including through respect for their distinct culture, language, traditions and religions.”
“We are also concerned about more immediate issues arising directly from the unrest of this spring,
including the situation of those who remain in detention following the unrest, the increased constraints
on religious activity, and the limitations on free access to the Tibetan autonomous region by diplomats
and journalists. These issues reinforce long-held unease on the part of the Government about the underlying human rights situation in Tibet.”
“Other countries have made similar points. But our position is unusual for one reason of history that has been imported into the present: the anachronism of our formal position on whether Tibet is part of China, and whether in fact we harbour continued designs to see the break-up of China. We do not.
Our ability to get our points across has sometimes been clouded by the position the UK took at the start of the 20th century on the status of Tibet, a position based on the geopolitics of the time. Our
recognition of China’s “special position” in Tibet developed from the outdated concept of suzerainty.
Some have used this to cast doubt on the aims we are pursuing and to claim that we are denying Chinese sovereignty over a large part of its own territory. We have made clear to the Chinese Government, and publicly, that we do not support Tibetan independence. Like every other EU member state, and the United States, we regard Tibet as part of the People’s Republic of China. Our interest is in long-term stability, which can only be achieved through respect for human rights and greater
autonomy for the Tibetans.”
Of course, you can look it up yourself on the internet if you don’t believe me…
But more likely you will again throw some other bits and pieces at me which have nothing to do with all the above…
The last paragraph says it all No more this BS of suzeranity instead
“we regard Tibet as part of the People’s Republic of China.”
As to We wish, We hope and We strongly advocate It just sdmonition with no legal connotation
Our
recognition of China’s “special position” in Tibet developed from the outdated concept of suzerainty.
Some have used this to cast doubt on the aims we are pursuing and to claim that we are denying Chinese sovereignty over a large part of its own territory. We have made clear to the Chinese Government, and publicly, that we do not support Tibetan independence. Like every other EU member state, and the United States, we regard Tibet as part of the People’s Republic of China.
jh that is really outdated China wasn’t even represented at that time. He psoition was hijacked by Taiwan. Now in any legal proceeding you are entitled to defend yourself If You are not present then those legal proceeding is illegal or non binding
The General Assembly,
Recalling its resolution 1353 (XIV) of 21 October 1959 on the question of Tibet,
Gravely concerned at the continuation of events in Tibet, including the violation of the fundamental human rights of the Tibetan people and the suppression of the distinctive cultural and religious life which they have traditionally enjoyed,
Her position in UN was occupied by Taiwan
George, thanks for sticking with the subject this time… ;-)
Suzerainty may not have been BS at ITS time. Instead, what Miliband is saying, is that it is outdated in OUR time.
What he does not say, though, is that Britain recognizes past or future sovereignity of China over Tibet.
All he says is that the current British government regards Tibet as part of the (current) People’s Republic of China.
This is mainly to make clear that Britain has no intention to break up the PRC on the matter of Tibet. Instead, like all other countries and individuals that have an interest in this matter he points out the human rights problems.
Basically, he wants to officially invalidate the pretense claim of the PRC government that Britain, the US or other critics seek “to split the motherland” in the disguise of supporting the Tibet cause.
Again, China has been given another boon as an incentive to engage seriously with the Tibetans – and again, China has not moved an inch.
Surely, the British will have learned something from this episode as well…
jh you contradict yourself with your convoluted logic
“What he does not say, though, is that Britain recognizes past or future sovereignity of China over Tibet.
All he says is that the current British government regards Tibet as part of the (current) People’s Republic of China.”
How could it be that Britain recoqnized Tibet as part of Tibet and at the same time doesn’t recoqnized China’s sovereignty over Tibet? If it part of China then all the laws of China apply in Tibet and that is called sovereignty!
Here is definition of sovereignty
Sovereignty is the exclusive right to control a government, a country, a people, or oneself. A sovereign is the supreme lawmaking authority.
And once you recoqnized the sovereignty of a Nation you cannot easily change at will
1 Adherents to the concept of a Westphalian system trace it back to the Peace of Westphalia, signed in 1648, in which, it is claimed, the major European powers agreed to abide by the principle of territorial integrity. In the Westphalian system, the interests and goals of nation-states were widely assumed to transcend those of any individual citizen or even any ruler.
2 The principle of the sovereignty of states and the fundamental right of political self determination
3 The principle of (legal) equality between states
4 The principle of non-intervention of one state in the internal affairs of another state
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westphalian_sovereignty
I am sorry, George. I did not make myself quite clear…
What I was implicitely relating to is the claim that is often posted by Chinese netizens (or even politicians), namely that “Tibet always has been and always will be part of the PRC”.
This claim as far as it relates to the past and to the future is not supported by Miliband’s statement.
Instead, he is only relating to current political circumstances.
And, you are right, under current circumstances the PRC is exercising sovereignty over Tibet – albeit not a benign one in the eyes of the people that are affected, i.e. the Tibetans, nor in the eyes of the world community (with the exception of other Communist countries or dictatorships).
But mind you, as your quote says:
“2 The principle of the sovereignty of states and the fundamental right of political self determination”
The fundamental right of political self determination applies to the Tibetans as well!
Since when has history been frozen at any particular point in time?
History is always in the making…
Besides, this was not the point anyway.
The Tibetans are not challenging Chinese sovereignity but its implementation.
And here, I am repeating myself, China is lagging way behind and is still behaving like some post-WWII Communist dictatorship.
China itself is driving the Tibetans away with its policies, no one else.
jh apparently you didn’t read the link that I provide. You got it wrong what it meant by “political self determination” is the right of STATE to choose their own ideology. It has nothing to do with individual right here what it says
“In the Westphalian system, the interests and goals of nation-states were widely assumed to transcend those of any individual citizen or even any ruler.”
JH let be realistic Tibet is just strategicaly to important to be independent and with to 2 million people she is no position to impose her will on China. The only realistic solution is Autonomy and China did grant her autonomy from 1951-1959 But DL and his clique abused that trust and so much bad blood since then.
“Tibet is just strategicaly to important to be independent and with to 2 million people she is no position to impose her will on China.”
—George, what does strategics have to do with the right of independence from a foreign power. The British and Japanese could have easily used that excuse to the Chinese as well, and I’m sure they did. AND of course you are subscriber to the PRC annexation tactics so you think there are only 2 million Tibetans in Tibet. Tibet is the Tibetan Platueau and always has been. There are around 8 million Tibetans in this region.The last historicly Chinese city to the west in China is Chengdu. Everything West of this city is TIBET! Your BS in stating that China granted Tibet autonomy from ‘51-’59 is more communist meddling with realities of the situation. The PLA slime invaded in ‘49-’50. With a cowardly passive-aggresive tactic by specificaly stating they were marching in “temporarily”. The Buddhist nation of Tibet, with a new teenage leader and no military to protect itself, unfortunately believed them. Until more and more soldiers came they were forced into talks that were nothing more than a formal passive-aggresive forced invasion. All treaties signed were signed under duress and not even upheld by the authors of the plans i.e. the PRC. It was never the PRC’s intention to grant true autonomy. Only a means to imply to the world that China had authority over a land it had NO authority over prior to the invasion. As a matter of fact the PRC hardly had authority over China Proper, they were in the midst of the Chinese revolution.
btw, you still have not answered my question about the sheer hippocracy of the PRC with it’s demonization of HH the DL and the treatment of the missing Panchen Lama and communist chosen replacement…???
sr again and again I say Tibet was NOT AN INDEPENDENT NATION. The whole world agree on that. So your whole notion of China violating another nation is just BS.
The 17 points agreement grant Tibet Autonomy and has been ratified by local Khasag goverment
Here the testament from the person who sign it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ngapoi_Ngawang_Jigme
TAR population is 2.6 as of 2000 census. What used to be called Amdo and Kham has been incorporated into China proper by Qing way back in 1780. So they are not counted as Tibet. The mere fact that they are populated by the Tibetan doesn’t prove it they they belong to Tibet . They migrate into those area just the same as Qiang, Hui and other monority! So your comparison is invalid and inappropriate. Tibetan Kings never exercise sovereignty at those area.
Case in point DL 14 was born in those area but then Khasag Goverment has to pay ransom money in order to allowed him to become DL
Dalai Lama and Panchen Lama need Beijing approval to become official that has been the custom since DL the 6th all the way to DL the 14 th.
So Beijing has a say as who will get appointed to be Dalai Lama and Panchen Lama. There is document kept in national museum signed by Dalai Lama the 6th, attest to that arrangement
“jh apparently you didn’t read the link that I provide.”
Well, I did, George. But maybe YOU didn’t!? Because, following on from your quote, wikipedia says:
“These principles are common to the way the “realist” international relations paradigm views the international system today, which explains why the system of states is referred to as “The Westphalian System”.
Both the idea of Westphalian sovereignty and its applicability in practice have been questioned from the mid-20th century onwards from a variety of viewpoints. Much of the debate has turned on the ideas of internationalism and globalization which, in various interpretations, appear to conflict with Westphalian sovereignty.”
You like to stick with the idea of Westphalian sovereignity because it fits your purpose which is to ward off the Tibetans’ right of self-determination. But with any view, some balance is required (which is so well demonstrated in the wikipedia article itself).
Just two more observations before finishing this line of argument:
1) There was no Westphalian system before 1648. So the idea appeared at some point in time due to circumstances.
It may also pass away at some point in time due to circumstances.
History does not get arrested by anyone.
2) It is obviously a Western concept. I find it funny that a Chinese netizen like you who has no qualms in rejecting democracy as a Western notion should be upholding this principle.
It only goes to show that “it doesn’t matter whether the cat is white or black as long as it catches the mice” – which is to retain control of Tibet regardless of the plight of the Tibetans themselves.
sr, you shouldn’t get too agitated…
Calling the PLA of 1949 “slime” is unnecessarily harsh. It was (and unfortunately still is) the Chinese understanding that Tibet is part of “family of Chinese nationalities”. Like it or not.
And George is right: some 6 million Tibetans don’t have the power to throw their extended family of 1.3 billion (who happen to have the guns too and no qualms to use them) out of their home. Like it or not.
And, returning to this article, the apparent heir of the CCP throne doesn’t look any more enlightened or accomodating than the current one.
There is no Gorbatchov in sight. Like it or not.
I think that is why His Holiness (who Himself likes to admonish people about “unrealistic thinking”) is following the Middle Way, and even said with some pride (and a wink, I guess): “I can’t wait to become a Chinese citizen.”
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article3952770.ece
The Tibetans will make proud and worthwhile members of the Chinese family of nationalities once some insight (or even empathy) is making inroads into Zhongnanhai. One day, even this will happen…
George, imagine what the world would be like if every single nations existence depended solely on the recognition of the rest of the world! Of course, that would be a great rule of law for the dominant nations with huge militaries. It really doesn’t matter what you say, because independence is just in the Tibetan people’s blood.
The Qing had some very minor influence in Amdo and Kham for a period of barely 70 years around the time as you say (mid-late 1700s). Though the Central Tibetan government went about business as usual. And anyway, how Beijing inherits the influence that past long dead dynasties had is ridiculous!
What are you talking about; Tibetan Kings exercise sovereignty over China at one point. I don’t know what your talking about.
My family is from no more than 50 miles West of Chengdu and they attest that everyone in the region going back generations upon generations all followed the rule of law from the Tibetan Government in Lhasa. As attested in the 100s of mass protests all along the Eastern borders of Tibet (Amdo and Kham) up to this day!
The past Dalai Lama’s were given official approval from the Mongol emperors! A custom that became merely a formality after the Yuan(sp?) dynasty. Just to remain with custom a mongol, manchu, han official was allowed to attend the ceremonies of the subsequent DL’s. They had NO say in who was or who was not appointed the DL after the end of the great Mongol empire.
And yes some small pockets of Eastern Tibet, especially northern Amdo, were “controlled” by warlords, in the manner a gangster will impose taxes for protection in his neighborhood. But this has nothing to do with soveriegnty, only the unfortunate presence of thugs/bandits in small pockets of a desert land.
The 17 point agreement was signed because Mao and his cronnies would not let anyone leave until it was signed. And even then, the agreement was not held up by Mao and the PRC. As I said it was forcefully ratified merely to passive-agressively legitimize, in some round about fashion, their mere presence in Tibet. Because without it Mao knew that he had absolutely no way to legitimize rights in Tibet.
JH, You are right I should definitely not get agitated. But in this case i’m not really agitated. I don’t really see slime as harsh when referring to the PLA, just a good description. The manner in which they moved across Tibet in 1949/50 was much like puss that oozes out of a soar. Promising they would only be in Tibet for a short time. Burning and looting Monasteries. Executing monks, and forcing children monks to shoot their teachers. Then imposing their rule’s and laws over the already existing Tibetan laws and customs. If you’ve heard some of the personal stories that I have heard from family, i would bet you would think the same of the PLA.
Unfortunately for the PRC, especially with the way things are now, Tibetans will never consider themselves in the Chinese family. But who knows if things REALLY do improve (and fast) maybe family in-laws :)
You like to stick with the idea of Westphalian sovereignity because it fits your purpose which is to ward off the Tibetans’ right of self-determination. But with any view, some balance is required (which is so well demonstrated in the wikipedia article itself).
JH the relations between states are governed by certain conventions and norms Sofar the acceptable norm of behaviour between states is called westaphalian sovereign. Which basically codified the common sense approach that we all know in our everyday life.
Would you meddle or interfere with you neighbor family affair? Even if he hit his wife you cannot just barge in and pretend to be hero. The best thing that you could do is called in police(UN in state affair).
You just don’t arbitrarily erected fence on your neighbor property or even trespass your neighbor property.
And whether he paint his house pink or green that is none of your business because his home is his castle. He alone can decide what best for his home
That principle has serves the world in good steed for 3 centuries
Now that the chance of war in western countries are zero and with the advanced of American new interventionist policy.
This principle prove to be handicaped for their ideology. Therefore they try to move the goal post(change the rule so to speak).
Their first application of ocalled “self determination” is Kosovo. But when it come to Ossetia or Abkhazia they change their mind and invoke the “teritorial integrity” So double standard and inconsistency as usual .
Kissinger and other wise man has criticize this self determination thing and warned it will lead to chaos and war. How precient of him
Now about democracy China at present social and economical condition is in no position to follow democracy because it will only lead to chaos and stability
Here what Fareed Zakaria the editor of Newsweek observed that democracy can only developed in economically advanced country. If democracy is introduced prematurely it will lead only to populism which end in economic catastroph and political despotism. Case in point most African countries and your old homeland of Germany.
@SR monk are combatant in civil war so they will bear the brunt of war and in war people do get killed. No one say the war is pretty. It is ugly and debasing That’s why people like Ngawang Jigme try to prevent war at any cost because He know the consequent of war and he believe autonomy is the best deal for Tibet and still believe in it.
Here is the account of Tibet insurgency from FEER
http://www.feer.com/politics/2008/march/from-the-archives-1959-tibetan-insurgency
George, Thank you for the link to the story. Though to tell you the truth I’m a little confused, because from my point of view it exacts all my points about the illegal invasion of Tibet by the PRC’s troops (Though I’m at work and so did not read it word for word). Granted because they were written so long ago by foreigners, that at the time knew very little of Tibet, they get many facts a little wrong (for instance the name of the Khampa warriors was not “4 rivers 6 bridges” and they were regarded by all Tibetans as freedom fighters) but the many basic facts are there.
In all over a million Tibetans died after the PRC’s illegal invasion of Tibet. All from either direct combat, death in Chinese goulages, torture and famine.
“….. that is none of your business because his home is his castle.”
—This is very true George. The Tibetan Platueau has and always will be the Tibetan people’s Castle. And so the Chinese colonialist-imperialists need to grant actual, real and meaningful autonomy…or to leave Tibet and Tibetan people alone.
SR Don’t forget that there is no reporter on site So this is 2nd or 3rd hand account mostly from refugee .You have to take it with pinch of salt.
FEER is known as rabid anti China and anti Communist News organization. They were popular in 60’s when it is hard to get news from Mainland China but now they are irrelevant and marginalize and reduced to bimonthly magazine.
There are cruelty on both side But the insurgency start not in TAR but in Qinghai because the Commie start implementing Land reform and fiercely resisted by the Land owner including this Khamba fighter
“The Khamba tribesmen, who are said to have borne the brunt of the fighting against the Chinese, are admittedly fierce warriors who do not know the meaning of fear. It was their bitter resistance to Socialist education and the “democratization” plans of Peking that led to the killing or wounding of many thousands of Communist Chinese and their supporters. There is no way of confirming the Tibetan reports that as many as 50,00 perished.
Eventually they lost and sought refugee in TAR. Dalai Lama is undecided but thru the advice of his brother Thondup Gyatso he threw his lot with the rebel
Your figure of 1 million is definitely not true. Since the total Tibetan population in TAR and other province, is only 2 1/4 million.I quote
” This 1.2 million death statistic is, however, disputed by Western scholars because of a general lack of reliable data. (A Tibetan population census in 1953, before the uprising, put the entire population at just 1,273,969, so the death toll is unlikely to be this high.) Chinese authorities naturally put the casualty figure of the Tibetan uprising much lower at 87,000, which is no doubt a large underestimation,”
And someone from Free Tibet movement did research in Dharmsala but he can’t find any record
George, that has been quite an engaging “conversation” and a worthwhile exchange after all. What do you think?
So, where do we stand “at the end of it”?
For my part, I’ve learned one thing or the other (thanks also SR for your valuable contributions), but – not unlike you – my point of view has not basically changed.
I guess, if we were talking democratic parties, I would still be a liberal Green and you would probably still be leaning rather far left (or right, which is really the same). Fortunately, in a democracy we could still keep our convictions regardless of different opinions on different matters. In China, we couldn’t – that is, *I* couldn’t.
And that is where the crux of the issue is, isn’t it?
From what I have gathered about the constitution of the PRC, it can’t be as bad as its current implementation makes it look like. As it is, it is overridden by the party whenever deemed necessary.
Do you find this acceptable? Who are these CCP guys who usurp the right to ignore the constitution or interpret it solely in their way? It reminds me of George Orwell’s ‘Animal farm’ where some pigs also deem themselves “more equal” than the others…
How can there be rule of law and a basic sense of personal security if the constitution is not upheld by those in power?
Look at India. For all its faults, it has states which have been ruled democratically by Communist state governments (there is no country that supports the same diversity anywhere in the world).
These governments seem to have done good work in the eyes of the electorate, otherwise they would not have been reelected. Nevertheless, even though being Communist and wishing to be allmighty, these guys still have to answer to independent media, an independent judiciary and the electorate. And they have to rule in accordance with the constitution.
But whereas I think that is how it ought to be, you apparently don’t.
And that is a pity…
I guess it’s alright holding your position as long as you (or family or close friends) are not at the receiving end.
Unfortunately, the Tibetans are – and have been for 60 years now.
“You have to take it with pinch of salt.” –Yes, heresay is not admissible in most courts. And so I would encourage you to go to anywhere in India to find and talk with any one of the thousands of Tibetans that has come across the largest mountain range in the world every year, for 60 years, looking for freedom. Or if you go to Tibet (Tibetan Plataue) with an open mind and heart a Tibetan might actually open up to you and tell you the obvious. Anyway, if you have to take foreign journalism from countries with relative ‘freedom in the press’ with a pinch of salt; then you would have to take journalism from China with all the salt in an ancient Romanian salt mine.
The claim of Tibets population being 1,273,969 is simply laughable. Once again I’m sure the census was taken in a region only known of now as the TAR or something like it. I mean really, how do you come up with the 9 people at the end? Did they use some microsoft excel sheet word count function? How silly. Seriously….China just recently claimed that they relocated 400,000 nomads! How the hell does that make sense. I mean Tibet Proper has always had a lot of nomadic people but never much more than sedentary families! So if you take the whole of Tibet..and I mean Utsang, Kham and Amdo…. You will find somewhere in the realm of 7-8 million Tibetan people. As for the 1.2 million that have died post-1950, yes of course one might be able to argue + or – a few hundred thousand. But what does that give us 800,000 to 1.5 million dead…whats the difference really? You must know that this figure has been accumulated over a period of time. Not just from 1950 to ‘53.
As for China and democracy, I don’t know that the masses of Chinese in China would grasp this style of government very well. Though this is of course coming from a person who has never been to China or really ever deeply known any Chinese person and their family….so i will not be able to attest to the correlation of family cohessiveness to a democratic system on a microscale for the Chinese society since I believe that the society is shaped by the basic family system. Maybe someone could answer this…could the basic traditional Chinese family (from China) function and flourish under the democratic value system?
JH, from personal experience I agree with you very much. India is truly an amazing society and a model democratic country in some respects. I had no idea that some of the states within India were essentially communist and function under the democratic national government. That is great and a testament to the democratic system. I love India and can’t wait to go back, only this time I will go to Tibet as well.
George,
Thank you, for discussing Tibet with an understanding of history. When I was younger, I accepted and admired the Dali Lama. Now, older and wiser, I see him as the largest exporter, promoter of what Edward Said termed “Orientalism”. He utilizes these constructed notions to promote his agenda, capturing the hearts and minds of individuals who are unaware of what his mythical Tibet/Shangri La really contained. These constructed notions have become the normative view towards Tibet.
I laughed when newspapers claimed that the CCP, had been able to censor the movement of information in Tibet. If you have a cell phone that can make international calls, (I use a blackberry) your phone and internet services go to a satellite by passing the great firewall of China. I guess for many, their image of Shangri La doesn’t contain hordes of tourists.
China becoming a democracy simply because it has interjected some market economy features into their economy and communism required advanced industry. Oh, is democracy is a mechanist feature of a market economy? Thank you George, for acknowledging that a country so creative in its transition from plan to market, does not need to follow in the footsteps of conventional forms of government.
am, I can’t follow your logic…
Who is locking out tourists from Tibet?
It seems strange that the Tibetans are supposedly so happy (and all those naive Westerners fooled by Orientalism), if at the same time China refuses entry to independent travellers, observers, media and the UN human rights inspectors while blanketing the country with army and PAP.
As the old proverb goes:
“It is better to see once than to hear a thousand times!”
I have seen it twice with my own eyes, and I can only recommend it to everyone…
am, another note:
You may be older now, but I doubt whether you’ve become wiser…
Are you suggesting that if a Tibetan monk has a mobile with China Mobile, his connections are routed via satellite and the provider China Mobile wouldn’t have a clue what he is talking or texting?
Did you win your blackberry in the lottery?
You will find somewhere in the realm of 7-8 million Tibetan people. As for the 1.2 million that have died post-1950, yes of course one might be able to argue + or – a few hundred thousand. But what does that give us 800,000 to 1.5 million
My number is based on 1950 census. Of course there are more than 7 milion Tibetan now both in TAR and what is called Amdo and Kham
Those 1.5 million death is nothing but fantasy. You can calculate is yourself. Assuming there are only 2.25 Million people in 1950. If 1.5 million dead that will leave only .75 million people alive. Excluding old people and children(30%), that will leave around 0.5 million couple of which if we also exclude old couple that will only leave 300 thousand child bearing couple.
Now assuming there are now 7.5 million Tibetan, there is increase of 6.8 million tibetan over 50 years. So the p the average infant born per year, is 130 thousand. Now divide 300,000 by 2 and you got 150,00 fertile wommen. In other word every women in Tibet has to be pregnant at the same time. inorder to reach the present 7.5 million Tibetan statistically impossibility!
Whether I was in China or not is irrelevant. And I never say I never been to China nor do I say I don’t have relative in China
George, you assuming there were only 2.25 million Tibetans in 1950 is just plane wrong. The Chinese census takers in 1950 were told only to count what the tactical colonialist PRC told them to count, which was the Tibetans living in the TAR. In other words, they did not count Amdo or Kham back in 1950! So in reality there is roughly three times (3x) that many Tibetans on the Tibetan Platueau in 1950. The Chinese count of Tibetans in the TAR is actually consistent with the Tibetan censuses of around 7 million Tibetans in Tibet Proper (everything West of Chengdu). In addition, keep in mind both Tibetan and Chinese censuses probably don’t take into account most of the many nomads all over the Tibetan Plateau.
I WISH the 1.2 million Tibetan deaths directly because of the Chinese colonialist invasion and occupation were a bad dream….but they are unfortunately not.
“May the Tibetans be happy in Tibet, and the Chinese happy in China”!!
No the TAR population is 1.25 million
WISH the 1.2 million Tibetan deaths directly because of the Chinese colonialist invasion and occupation were a bad dream….but they are unfortunately not
But where is the proof. Nobody has yet to find mount of skeleton or the mass grave. Well with so many Free Tibetan roaming TAR and other Tibet inhabitant they will be found or somebody will point it to them as “smoking gun proof” Where is the Treblinka, Auscwhich, Buchenwald of Tibet? None found sofar!
Just like recent mantra of 200 people killed in recent Riot but no name When TGIE recall name . They are still alive or non existent name So much for the credibility of TGIE
I never doubt the ferocity of fight and Yes a lot of people get killed I just disputed the fantastic number
George, you are right. One has to question any such big number and see it in relation:
Estimates are that Mao’s rule has cost the lives of some 50 million Chinese. This number includes direct murders related to “class struggle”, cultural revolution, mass collectivization, deaths due to famines caused by CCP policies and so on.
That would have roughly be one out of ten Chinese whose death is to blame on Mao or the CPP at the time.
If we apply this ratio to Tibetan areas assuming in China’s favour that Tibet was not worse off than China proper itself, that would give us an estimate of 600000 Tibetans killed due to the Chinese invasion of Tibet.
I reckon that is still 600000 too many…
jh,
I am very sorry that you have not been to China or have not been their recently, I recommend visiting if you are unable to live there for some time. If you have not been recently it is changing at a rate you need to see to understand.
Buying a cell phone, not connected to China Mobile is very easy. I was referencing western media in the area at various time and not monks. But have you been to any of the Dali Lama’s teaching, talks… anything, did you fail to notice the use of technology at these events?
Technology is global and I think your assumption that these monks are living in a static environment, only speaks to a latent embrace of “orientalism”.
Have you read anything on decolonizing oneself? If you would like some book titles, I would be happy to provide you with some suggestions.
Please do not argue that you can not get in to Tibet. If you have a journalist visa, then it would be much more difficult however two of the leading American journalist in China, do not have journalist visas.
Please consider formalizing yourself with immigration and migration theories. I think this would help for you to understand why movement between the provinces would not cease.
I understand that you do not agree with George or me. I too failed to understand the Dali Lama as the leader of a theocracy and the horrors that occurred. I failed to understand the auspicious sect of Tibetan Buddhism. I didn’t know that only that the division of labor was based on serfdom and slavery. I embraced the idea/concept of Tibet. I failed to understand the the smile the Dali Lama mentions the Tibetan use to have when they saw him. It was not until I embraced writers like WEB Du Bois, Franz Fanon and Paul Laurence Dunbar. It was in understanding the smile, that I feel a conviction to explain to those who have not questioned the Dali Lama, to do so.
I am older and with age I know I am not wiser. I have just learned to ask more question of myself and of others.
Why will the Dali Lama only give brief answers when questioned about serfdom and slavery in Tibet?
Please research the history, read the accounts from Germany, Great Britain, recorded accounts from Nepal in Japan.
If you are not comfortable questionings than you are not comfortable with your belief.
I wish you the best.
am,
I have been to China seven times over the years, and I have travelled independently in central Tibet and Eastern Tibet, nowadays part of Sichuan province.
And I have seen and listened to the Dalai Lama on a number of occasions.
I have also been interested in the Tibet issue for more than a decade, reading news regularly on all kinds of outlets.
I have not had a cell phone in China, and while I am aware of the market presence of China Mobile, there may also be other providers.
Are you suggesting that these providers will not be subject to government control? I doubt it.
Who should decolonize oneself? I am not sure that I understand.
I have never in my life been colonized but was lucky to be born in a free democratic country.
The Tibetans have been trying to decolonize themselves for almost 60 years, but that is probably not what you are refering to.
As for the horrors under the Tibetan theocracy, it seems to me to have been less than under Mao’s and his successors’ CCP. During Mao’s rule in China some 50 million were killed directly or indirectly, in (Greater) Tibet probably in between half a million and 1.2 million.
That is what I call a horror!
But I agree with you. I am all for a full-fledged secular democracy in Tibet without involvement of monastic institutions. Tibet can be religious AND democratic – just like India is. No need to mix up the two.
China is playing the “serfdom” card because it has no other. There was feudalism in China as well at the time, so it really is a joke.
It is only to have “some” justification for their invasion of Tibet because – not unlike Iraq – their lie of liberating the Tibetans from imperial forces was a lie only. One that no one is buying anymore…
As much as the US don’t belong into Iraq, China does not belong into Tibet.
Tibet has always been an alien part of China.
jh as usual you quote number without knowing where you got those number
As George prove in other thread those number quoted by Free Tibet is nothing but lie In Fact the fertility rate of Tibetan is only 16%
http://www.unescap.org/esid/psis/population/database/chinadata/tibet.htm#pop
And the number death for GLF is nothing but the fantasy of Historian Farquahar from China Journal that spread those lie
The official number of death is only 16 million and most of it due to natural disaster. There is this demographer I believe her name is Judith Banister who extrapolate the official number and add it up to 50 million nothing but a big lie that has been regurgited since then.
Here is the link study it first before you open your mouth
http://www.monthlyreview.org/0906ball.htm
Banister calculates the total number of under-reported deaths in this period by first calculating the total number of births between the two censuses of 1953 and 1964. She does this using data derived from the census and data from a retrospective fertility survey carried out in 1982. (Participants in the survey were asked to describe the number of babies they had given birth to between 1940 and 1981). Once the population of 1953 and 1964 is known, and the total number of births between these two years is known, it is possible to calculate the number of deaths that would have occurred during this period. She uses this information to calculate a total number of deaths for the eleven year period that is much higher than official death rates show.
To estimate how many of these deaths occurred in the Great Leap Forward, Banister returns to the official Chinese death rate statistics. She assumes that these figures indicate the actual trend of deaths in China in this period, even though they were too low in absolute terms. For example, she assumes that the official death rate of 25 per thousand in 1960 does indeed indicate that a huge increase in the death rate occurred in 1960. However, she combines this with her estimates of under-reporting of deaths in the period 1953-1964 to come up with a figure of 45 deaths per thousand in 1960. In years in which no famine is alleged the death toll also increases using this method. In 1957, for example, she increases the death rate from the official figure of 10.8 per thousand to 18 per thousand. Banister then compares the revised death rates in good years with the revised death rates in alleged famine years. Banister is then able to come up with her estimate of 30 million deaths excess deaths during the Great Leap Forward.36
Depending on the simi card (readily available) you place in the phone the minutes show as prepaid and you connect via satellite you do not need to use a provider in China.
Why does anyplace or area (defined by lines) need to be any precept?
As it stands, do you really feel that the Dali Lama’s contentious relationship with China, is helping the people of Tibet (in Tibet)? Can you conceive of answering this question without invoking the Dali Lama’s claims?
Serfdom in China if one could use this term could in a very slight way be compared to policies used by the CCP. The tax records and land transfers since the Han Dynasty clearly show that serfdom was not part of the society.
I have struggled to understand the logic my society has allowed me to embody and find it very difficult to escape from. I have included a link discussing some of the writers who have helped me be come more aware of this logic.
I also do not live in a democracy nor did I grow-up in a democracy. I live a society where democracy is a word, an ideology, that only exists for a limited sect yet, they claim it is for all. My country also had a religious orthodoxy, anti-communism. I guess we live in very different worlds.
My country helps other countries establish democracy, in December 2006, my country claimed an artificial superiority in Saddam Hussein’s execution and that same month hosted Pinochet funeral.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/447481/fanon_and_cesaire_colonialism_and_decolonization.html?cat=37
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/447481/fanon_and_cesaire_colonialism_and_decolonization.html?cat=37
Bravo Minister Yang Jiechi you speak loud and clear!
“The Dalai Lama’s side still insists on establishing a so-called Greater Tibet on a quarter of Chinese territory. They want to drive away Chinese armed forces on Chinese territory and ask all non-Tibetans to relocate themselves, people who have long spent their lives on that part of Chinese territory. You call this person a religious figure?” Yang said.
“Would Germany, France or other countries accept that a quarter of their territory be separated? Please keep in mind that China was always a supporter of German reunification.”
The difference between China and Dalai Lama has nothing to do with religion, human rights, ethnic relations and culture. It is an issue of whether to defend China’s unity against attempts to separate Tibet from China, he said.
John,
what Yang Jiechi says is one thing, what the Tibetan representatives have said another:
http://www.tibet.net/en/index.php?id=78&articletype=press
http://www.tibet.net/en/index.php?id=343&rmenuid=11
John, you should not mistake propaganda for the real thing.
And this Yang Jiechi should wash his mouth for putting words into other peoples’ mouths!
am,
GSM mobile phone connections are all routed via terrestrial transmitters. Satellite phones are a rare exception.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phone
I have had a look into the first article and it didn’t click with me. As you say, it may well be that we live in different worlds.
But so do the Tibetans and the Chinese. And that wouldn’t have to be a problem if the Chinese allowed the Tibetans to live their lives according to their visions – even within one China. See my previous links in my reply to John.
jh,
Cell phones that have international (world) capabilities are all satellite. The phones have the capability to change modes internally. The simi cards can be programed to show prepaid minutes allowing one to operate the without China Mobile as the carrier. If the phone is registered for the country one is in when calling it will not move to satellite mode. This can be removed by simply buy a phone outside the country, buying a gray or black market good internally, wiping the cell and using a simi card that is not linked to the country where one is making the call. I hope that clears things up for you. In the US only certain brands are world ready. However the majority of all cell phone should in Europe have this technology.
I do not consider wikipedia a legitimate source for information. Call Cingular or At&t and ask about their cell phones.
Their vision, hhmm do you mean the Dali Lama’s vision? And what is HIS vision? How will Tibet function if his demands are met? Will the Chinese Tibetans welcome a return to theocracy? Why does the Dali Lama need to rule Tibet?
Tibet should be like India, hhmmm so which lucky group would become Tibet’s Dalits? India case system speaks to Tibet’s history. Why does the Dali Lama refuse to discuss the atrocities in Tibet not caused by the CCP? How does the Dali Lama remove his ego but not face the pass transgressions that occurred in the place he claims to represent?
My father taught me two important lessons, that I apply to the Dali Lama’s rhetoric:
“People listen to the loudest not the smartest.”
and
“No one or thing can change the past, you can try to deny it, you can try to hide it, and/or hide from it but you will never change it. Unless you can face the past and acknowledge it, the past will haunt you.”
i hope you have a nice day.
Am
Side note, please consider these question do not contain any form of provocation: Would you/Do you support human sacrifice if it is for religious reasons?
Would you feel differently if you found out Buddhism developed much later and closer in date to the common era?
My father taught me two important lessons, that I apply to the Dali Lama’s rhetoric:
“People listen to the loudest not the smartest.”
and
“No one or thing can change the past, you can try to deny it, you can try to hide it, and/or hide from it but you will never change it. Unless you can face the past and acknowledge it, the past will haunt you.”
Great quote AM! That certainly apply to Dalai Lama
I will add quote from all place Bible as to the parable of Roman Coin. Jesus Christ holding the roman coin, he ask his follower whose picture is on this coin? To which the crowd yelled Caesar.
So Jesus said Give to Caesar what belong to Caesar and give to god what belong to god!
Which vision, am?
Didn’t I provide two links and pointed explicitely to them?
If you want to discuss what is contained in those official documents of the Tibetan government in exile, that is fine.
And would you mind reading a bit more thoroughly? I wrote:
“Tibet can be religious AND democratic – just like India is. No need to mix up the two.”
This is called a secular democracy accomodating all religious as well as non-religious faiths.
So Hui as well as Communist Han would also be covered and enjoy the very same rights.
BTW, did you know that even the Chinese constitution is supposed to guarantee the freedom of religious belief?
To answer your question:
I don’t support human sacrifice for any belief.
In fact, may I return your question:
Do you support the slaughter of students on Tiananmen and Tibetan monks and nuns for political reasons, i.e. the survival of the Communist party which is also just another form of belief?
As I said, I don’t.
George, am, John — Why do you people always resort to lies, confusions, misunderstandings and crazy interpretations.
There is no point for any Tibetan, Especially HH the DL himself, to defend his/her culture, society, political structure to foreigners/outsiders. Why? It is up to you to open your mind and experience Tibetan culture for yourself. No Tibetan would waste his/her time in defending it against someone who has already made up his/her mind with no knowledge in the first place!
BTW, HH the DL has already set up a democratic Tibetan Government in D’sala that has been functioning for many years now. What makes you think he would go back to a theocracy of the past? You know his predecessor started reforms of the theocracy way before Chinese colonialization. And it was sure to continue.
“People listen to the loudest not the smartest.”
and
“No one or thing can change the past, you can try to deny it, you can try to hide it, and/or hide from it but you will never change it. Unless you can face the past and acknowledge it, the past will haunt you.”
AM–Please do this for me, and actually for yourself. Find a nice quiet place where you feel comfortable. Try to center your mind for calm collected thinking that is void of ego, jealousy, greed, chauvanism…and then think about your fathers very interesting concepts. This exercise should lead you to the truth. Tibetans in Tibet, deserve to live the way that they want to live. Why is it so hard for Chinese to understand that Tibetans don’t want to be considered Chinese, or even Chinese-Tibetan??? Your use of the term “Chinese-Tibetan” speaks volumes about what the PRC has been trying to do to Tibetan identity in Tibet Proper for the last 60 years! Just because apparently the Manchus have accepted this ‘Chinese’ identity does in NO way mean that Tibetans ever will. So sorry.