China Digital Times

China news tagged with: Tibet history (10)

• Elliot Sperling: Tibet as ‘Hell on Earth’

  

  Elliot Sperling, professor at Indiana University, writes for the Far Eastern Economic Review about Chinese government propaganda about Tibet:

  There’s no doubt that Tibet’s traditional society was hierarchical and backwards, replete with aristocratic estates and a bound peasantry. And there’s no doubt that Tibetans, whether in exile or in Tibet voice no desire to restore such a society. Many Tibetans will readily admit that the social structure was highly inegalitarian. But it was hardly the cartoonish, cruel “Hell-on-Earth” that Chinese propaganda has portrayed it to be. Lost in most discussions is an understanding that Tibet’s demographic circumstances (a small population in a relatively large land area) served to mitigate the extent of exploitation. The situation was quite the reverse of China’s in the early 20th century, where far too little land for the large population allowed for severe exploitation by landowners. China’s categorization of Tibetan society as feudal (technically, a problematic characterization) obscures the fact that this socially backwards society, lacking the population pressures found elsewhere, simply didn’t break down as it ought to have and continued functioning smoothly into the 20th century. Inegalitarian? Yes. Sometimes harsh? Yes. But Hell-on-Earth for the vast majority of Tibetans? No. Traditional Tibetan society was not without its cruelties (the punishments visited on some political victims were indeed brutal), but seen proportionally, they paled in comparison to what transpired in China in the same period. In modern times mass flight from Tibet actually only happened after Tibet’s annexation to the People’s Republic of China.

  » Read more
  • March 27, 2009 9:49 PM

• The Heights Traveled to Subdue Tibet

  

  Edward Wong for the New York Times reports on the mysterious shroud that has been long-held over Tibet:

  Tibetans widely resent Chinese rule, and Chinese leaders fear that Tibetans could seize on this month, the 50th anniversary of a failed uprising, to carry out a wave of protests, similar to what took place a year ago. Part of the mission of the security forces is to evict foreigners so that whatever occurs will be kept hidden from the world.

  That, of course, has always been part of the problem with Tibet. China’s lockdown this month is only the latest episode in a long history of both Tibetans and Chinese trying to keep the mountain kingdom closed to the outside world. News of Tibet has always been difficult to obtain because much of the region lies on a remote plateau above 15,000 feet that is ringed by mountains. Information becomes that much harder to get when governments padlock the gate.

  Drawing a veil over Tibet has only encouraged outsiders to project their own imaginings and desires onto the hidden land, sometimes with disastrous consequences.

  » Read more
  • March 14, 2009 1:52 PM

• Dialogue on Tibet: Past, Present and Future

  

  While those at the polar ends of the Tibet debate may see it as a black and white issue, a few efforts have been made recently to show the complexity of the problems involved. China Pictorial, an official travel and photography magazine, reports on a conference recently held in Beijing to discuss the status and history of Tibet, attended by several China-based Tibet scholars and researchers and foreign journalists. The participants’ responses have been edited by China Pictorial:

  Did the Tibetan people enjoy democracy and freedom when the region was ruled by Dalai Lamas? Is it true, what some say, that China carries out “cultural genocide” in Tibet? Does Tibet need to develop and realize modernization?

  In the past, in China, such questions were seldom discussed in public forums. Recently, however, hosted by the Tsinghua International Center for Communication Studies (TICCS) in Beijing, an in-depth discussion on issues concerning Tibet’s politics, history, religion, economy and culture was carried out among Tibetan scholars and Western journalists at an academic workshop entitled “An Intellectual Dialogue on Tibet: Present and Past.” The viewpoints exchanged during the academic workshop tangibly represent a real dialogue among Chinese and Western media, as well as a positive discourse within academic circles. Such forums will present to the world a more complete picture of Tibet issues, so as to settle disputes and strengthen mutual understanding.

  In Foreign Policy Magazine, in an article titled “China’s West Bank?”, Alex Pasternack writes about ethnic tensions between Tibetans and Han Chinese, and acknowledges a subtle shift in tone on the issue from the Tibet government:

  Last week, as Chinese police fanned out across the Tibetan plateau, the chairman of Tibet’s government made a hushed departure from the official line on the unrest that erupted into violence there last year.

  “There were all kinds of people, some of whom weren’t satisfied with our policies, or had opinions about them, or because our government work hadn’t been fully completed,” Qiangba Puncog told reporters at the National People’s Congress annual meeting in Beijing, veering from the government’s oft cited condemnation of the Dalai Lama and his “splittist” clique. “Not everyone was a splittist.”

  If it was the conference’s most obvious and extreme understatement, it was also a rare public sign that Beijing grasps some of the complexity of its Tibetan quagmire.

  But this brief burst of enlightenment may not amount to much. Against the backdrop of the 50th anniversary of a failed Tibetan uprising against Chinese rule — and as a raft of other ominous anniversaries loom in a year of economic hardship — government officials are marching on a tightrope that could snap at any moment.

  » Read more
  • March 13, 2009 10:18 AM

• China to Mark Defeat of Tibet Uprising

  

  With the 50th anniversary of the failed Tibetan uprising approaching in March, and with memories of last year’s riots still fresh, Chinese leaders in Beijing have opted this year to mark the occasion by naming a “Serf Liberation Day.” From AP:

  A holiday to mark the “emancipation of millions of serfs and slaves” in Tibet will be decided on during a meeting of the region’s legislature starting Wednesday, Xinhua News Agency said.

  The entry of Chinese forces into Tibet in 1949 was followed by efforts to transform the Buddhist, feudal order into a socialist, secular society. Tibetans rebelled on March 10, 1959, to try an oust the Chinese, but the uprising ended after 20 days with the flight of the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan spiritual leader, into exile in India.

  A bill to decide on a holiday marking those events will be presented during the second annual session of the ninth Tibet Regional People’s Congress, Xinhua said.

  The bill is aimed at “reminding all the Chinese people, including Tibetans, of the landmark democratic reform initiated 50 years ago,” Pang Boyong, deputy secretary general of the Tibetan regional congress standing committee, said Saturday, according to the report.

  Meanwhile, McClatchy profiles Gyalwang Karmapa, the third-highest lama in the Tibetan religious order, who has been mentioned as a possible transition leader after the death of the Dalai Lama:

  The Karmapa is the first Tibetan Buddhist reincarnation to be recognized by both the Dalai Lama and Communist Party authorities of China. He made headlines in January 2000, at age 14, with his flight from Chinese-ruled Tibet into exile, traveling by foot and horseback, then by jeep and helicopter to India. Allegations of espionage, intrigue involving a forgotten amulet and squabbling within a monastery marked his early years in India.

  Exuding self-assuredness, the solidly built, 6-foot-tall Karmapa received several foreign journalists in a rare interview over the weekend at the university that’s his temporary home near the mountain headquarters of the Dalai Lama. The Karmapa talked of his love of music, his future role for Tibetan Buddhists and the lack of human rights in China.

  He criticized the Chinese government, which he said wanted “to create this ethnic conflict” that exploded in deadly rioting in Tibet in March. However, he spoke tenderly of the Chinese.

  “Since I am born as a Tibetan, I really care about the Tibetan people and Tibetan community. At the same time, I also love the Chinese,” he said.

  Read about the controversy over the selection of the Karmapa via Wikipedia. See also CDT’s coverage of last year’s riots in Tibet.

  » Read more
  • January 11, 2009 5:48 PM

• Elliot Sperling: Don’t Know Much About Tibetan History

  

  Elliot Sperling writes the following OP-ED in the New York Times:

  For many Tibetans, the case for the historical independence of their land is unequivocal. They assert that Tibet has always been and by rights now ought to be an independent country. China’s assertions are equally unequivocal: Tibet became a part of China during Mongol rule and its status as a part of China has never changed. Both of these assertions are at odds with Tibet’s history.

  The Tibetan view holds that Tibet was never subject to foreign rule after it emerged in the mid-seventh century as a dynamic power holding sway over an Inner Asian empire. These Tibetans say the appearance of subjugation to the Mongol rulers of the Yuan Dynasty in the 13th and 14th centuries, and to the Manchu rulers of China’s Qing Dynasty from the 18th century until the 20th century, is due to a modern, largely Western misunderstanding of the personal relations among the Yuan and Qing emperors and the pre-eminent lamas of Tibet. In this view, the lamas simply served as spiritual mentors to the emperors, with no compromise of Tibet’s independent status.

  » Read more
  • December 1, 2008 3:13 PM

• New Museum Offers the Official Line on Tibet

  

  A new museum in Beijing will offer the official view of Tibetan history – a source of much debate in the wake of unrest in the region. From the New York Times:

  History is often interpreted to meet the political objectives of whichever government is doing the interpreting. The historical relationship between Tibet and China is replete with claims, disputes and caveats. But the ruling Communist Party does not hesitate to eliminate any uncertainty and use history as a political tool to validate its hold on Tibet.

  Yet if the party’s unflinching line on Tibet’s historical status has effectively quashed any domestic dissenting views, it also has fueled Tibetan resentment. The authorities are now suppressing the largest outbreak of anti-Chinese unrest in Tibet in two decades, a violent uprising that many Tibetans trace, in part, to seething anger over cultural and religious repression.

  …The Communist Party clearly wants to counter what it regards as international misperceptions about Tibet’s status and has focused on history as an important arena to argue its case. The government has established more than 50 research institutions dedicated to Tibet and, by extension, to supporting the Chinese version of Tibetan history.

  In 2000, Zhao Qizheng, then the information minister for the State Council, or China’s cabinet, told scholars at a closed conference on Tibet that their research should be used to sway foreign opinion.

  » Read more
  • April 17, 2008 7:38 AM

• Don’t Know Much About Tibetan History

  

  In the New York Times, historian Elliot Sperling writes about the historical relationship between China and Tibet, which he says has been misrepresented by both sides of the debate:

  Here are the facts. The claim that Tibet entertained only personal relations with China at the leadership level is easily rebutted. Administrative records and dynastic histories outline the governing structures of Mongol and Manchu rule. These make it clear that Tibet was subject to rules, laws and decisions made by the Yuan and Qing rulers. Tibet was not independent during these two periods. One of the Tibetan cabinet ministers summoned to Beijing at the end of the 18th century describes himself unambiguously in his memoirs as a subject of the Manchu emperor.

  But although Tibet did submit to the Mongol and Manchu Empires, neither attached Tibet to China. The same documentary record that shows Tibetan subjugation to the Mongols and Manchus also shows that China’s intervening Ming Dynasty (which ruled from 1368 to 1644) had no control over Tibet. This is problematic, given China’s insistence that Chinese sovereignty was exercised in an unbroken line from the 13th century onward.

  » Read more
  • April 13, 2008 8:36 AM

• The Dalai Lama Makes Appeal to Chinese Citizens

  

  The Dalai Lama has issued an appeal to Chinese citizens to explain his position and how it differs from the official Chinese government version:

  Chinese brothers and sisters, I assure you I have no desire to seek Tibet’s separation. Nor do I have any wish to drive a wedge between the Tibetan and Chinese peoples. On the contrary my commitment has always been to find a genuine solution to the problem of Tibet that ensures the long-term interests of both Chinese and Tibetans. My primary concern, as I have repeated time and again, is to ensure the survival of the Tibetan people’s distinctive culture, language and identity. As a simple monk who strives to live his daily life according to Buddhist precepts, I assure you of the sincerity of my motivation.

  I have appealed to the leadership of the PRC to clearly understand my position and work to resolve these problems by “seeking truth from facts.” I urge the Chinese leadership to exercise wisdom and to initiate a meaningful dialogue with the Tibetan people. I also appeal to them to make sincere efforts to contribute to the stability and harmony of the PRC and avoid creating rifts between the nationalities. The state media’s portrayal of the recent events in Tibet, using deceit and distorted images, could sow the seeds of racial tension with unpredictable long-term consequences.

  For the official government view on Tibetan history, see this Xinhua backgrounder.

  On NPR, Christian Science Monitor reporter Peter Ford and Tibet expert Robbie Barnett discuss the situation.

  » Read more
  • March 28, 2008 9:28 AM

• Tibet Was, Is, And Always Will Be A Part of China?

  

  Chinese netizens have been attacking Western media coverage of the Tibet riots. Having received propaganda education for years, many believe that sloppiness or ignorance by the western media is in fact a conscious campaign to distort the facts, and that CCTV reports on the violence in Lhasa represent the whole truth. Here is an example on Youtube:
  

  Eastwestsouthnorth also has a post on this topic: China puts out its Tibet version .

  Recently, my friends in China have debated with me about the Tibet riots and most of them are eager to express their belief that Tibet belongs to China. Chinese overseas students also posted a slideshow to support their belief that Tibet was, is and always will be a part of China to counter demands for Tibetan independence.

  Xinhua has also published a backgrounder on the official view of Tibet’s history. See also a Washington Post report, “Protests May Only Harden Chinese Line.”

  For a different perspective on Tibet from a Han Chinese who has spent a lot of time there, read Tibet: Her Pain, My Shame, by filmmaker Tang Danhong.

  » Read more
  • March 26, 2008 10:26 AM

• Tibet Not Always Part of China: Chinese Historian – Ge Jianxiong (ËëõÂâëÈõÑ)

  

  Ge Jianxiong (ËëõÂâëÈõÑ) is a professor and director of Institute of Chinese History and Geography Studies of Fudan University. His following article “How Big was the Ancient China” is published on the China Review magazine and syndicated to China’s biggest internet portals like 163 and QQ. The translation is done by Letters from China blog:

  … How big was the 8th-century “China”? If “China” means the land of the Tang Dynasty, the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, which was ruled by Tubo/Tufan (ÂêêËïÉ), does not count. Tubo/Tufan was a sovereignty independent of the Tang Dynasty. At least it was not administered by the Tang Dynasty. Otherwise, there would have been no need for Tang Taizong to marry Princess Wencheng to the Tibetan king; there would have been no need to erect the Tang-Tubo/Tufan alliance tablet. It would be a defiance of history if we claim that since the Tang Dynasty Tibet has always been a part of China – the fact that the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau subsequently became a part of the Chinese dynasties does not substantiate such a claim … [Full Text]

  » Read more
  • February 20, 2007 7:58 AM

CDT BOOKSHELF

China Digital Times is run by the Berkeley China Internet Project | Copyright © China Digital Times | Powered by WordPress.