Tibetan Monk Shot By Chinese Police After Setting Himself on Fire

During the Monlam prayer festival of the Tibetan New Year, a monk set himself on fire and was then shot at Kirti monastery in Aba County, an ethnic Tibetan area of Sichuan province. It is not known whether he is alive or dead. From Telegraph: Pro-Tibet activists in London and Hong Kong reported that the monk, called Tabe and said to be in his twenties, walked out of Kirti monastery, an important seat of worship in a majority Tibetan area of Sichuan province, at around 1pm. He was carrying a hand-drawn Tibetan flag carrying a picture of the Dalai Lama. He is said to have walked down the main street into nearby Aba town, dousing himself with petrol, finally immolating himself in front of numerous witnesses. […]Armed police, who have flocked into Tibetan areas of China in advance of the 50th anniversary of the uprising that saw the Dalai Lama flee into exile on March 10, surrounded the monk. Three were seen to be carrying guns, and according to one account, three shots were heard. Tabe then fell to the ground, where the police extinguished the flames. He was then put into the back of a police van and driven away. Two days ago, three ethnic Uighurs set themselves on fire in Beijing’s Wangfujing to air grievances before the coming National People’s Congress session. For more information, see this CDT post. ...
« Back to Article

78 Responses to Tibetan Monk Shot By Chinese Police After Setting Himself on Fire

  1. ten chen says:

    Time is up for Tibetan people to show their guts. how on the earth can police shoot 3 times when the person is on fire. I truely belief it is time now or never. I hope the good chinese people stand behind us and give a good kick to the communist regime.

  2. MAC says:

    “I hope the good chinese people stand behind us and give a good kick to the communist regime.”

    You’re absolutely dreaming if you think that more than a tiny handful of the Chinese population has sympathy for Tibetans, let alone that they will “stand behind you,” I’m sorry to say. Isn’t that obvious by now?

  3. jeff says:

    Rumor mill.

    • Paulina Hartono says:

      I’m not sure what you mean by that. Though it’s true that there are some hazy details surrounding the event (e.g., were there more complex motivations for the monk Tapey, what is his current status, etc.), it has now been confirmed by a number of eyewitnesses and has been picked up by several large news outlets.


  4. newgenerationtb says:

    Chinese people are like robotics and produced in such a manner brainwashing with tale of western humiliation of Chinese. I don’t think Chinese people will support Tibet even if they know about Tibet’s history. I think it is not necessary for Tibetans to have Chinese people’s support as well. To kill Chinese is an easy business, but first let try to soft-approach.

    Remember, the lif-lines of Chinese people, the rivers are in Tibet. Something can easily be done to it, but I am not going to say how and when, then Chinese people will be just f**ed up!


    • Paulina Hartono says:

      Undoubtedly, the history of China-Tibet relations is complex — and I write this not as an excuse to gloss over this very important subject, but to ask for the sensitivity that such complexity demands. Comments that compare Chinese people to robots or imply that killing Chinese is even a possible secondary option, are unnecessary, to say the least.

  5. jeff says:


    OK. It is confirmed by Xinhua. But still I don’t think it is right for Dalai Lama to let his people die this way. Religion is good, extreme is not good. If you have been in Tibet long enough, you will understand the situation there. There are huge numbers of poor young underage boys enter Monasteries without proper school educations (It is illegal, but the Chinese government never enforce it.). These young Lamas of yellow hat sect will do anything to answer Dalai Lama,s call. Unfortunately the call is political. Just feel sad about those young boys.

  6. jh says:

    Victim to the blame game…

    jeff, would you mind to provide a link to any recognized media outlet in which the Dalai Lama is calling his people to immolate themselves or use violence against anyone including themselves?

    Chinese border guards in the Himalayas shoot unarmed Tibetan refugees that try to flee Tibet for a life in freedom and dignity like rabbits. And they shoot a monk who has set himself on fire three times.
    That is not political, is it?
    And only the Dalai Lama is to blame (maybe he has provided the ammunition, too)…

    Actually, I feel pity for those young soldiers and border guards who get brainwashed into thinking that Tibetans are enemies who have to be shot if they protest or flee.

    How about Hu Jintao’s big lie of a “harmonious society”?

  7. MatthewTan says:


    A lot of news about “Tibet” are anti-China propaganda. Have to be very careful.

    You said Xinhua confirmed it – can you provide the link please? I have been searching Xinhua for hours.

    Self-immolation is one of the means the Tibetans-in-exile have been advocating times and again. While I believe it might actually happen, I still want to read the confirmation from Xinhua.

  8. ten chen says:

    I am Tibetan myself and I respect The Dalai lama as my god king that deoesn’t mean that i have been controlled by him. so far he has done that but now more more Tibetan people are going further than that and i am sad that every blame goes to His Holiness The Dalai lama that makes me angry. I beleif he is the force of friendship but thats upto communist regime to think about. in the future what ever course we or individual take, it will be ours will and wishes only. Matyrdom is individual sacrifice for the benefits of others.

  9. MatthewTan says:

    Chinese people and all people of the world – DON’T BE FOOLED BY DALAI LAMA.

    From his own mouth from pro-Dalai site.


    http://www.tibet.ca/en/newsroom/ … amp;m=6&p=3-2_2

    “People must talk about
    independence,” He said. “That is good. We have the right to ask for
    independence, but we need to think of our methods to struggle for
    independence. Only prayers will not get independence, and only slogans will
    not get independence.” His Holiness stressed that Tibetans must carefully
    and systematically construct and implement a method to pursue independence.

    There are more examples:
    Download: http://repository.ust.hk/dspace/bitstream/1783.1/1192/1/sosc42.pdf

    Or, read it on Google Books.
    The Outlook for U.S.-China Relations Following the 1997-1998
    Chapter 10
    “The Year of the Yak: The Tibet Question In Contemporary U.S.-China Relations”
    By Barry Sautman

    The words of the Dalai Lama that shown that he has not really given up independence AFTER 1987 — you can find them out pages 192-193. And his association with the Uyger separatists, page 186.

  10. jh says:

    I couldn’t open your links.

    Besides, the Dalai Lama respects the stance of many, particularly young Tibetans in exile who want nothing less than independence. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion and political goal. He certainly is also of the view that “Tibetans have the right to ask for independence”.

    That being said, he nevertheless seeks a “middle way” solution of meaningful autonomy within the PRC. You can read up on this on the website of the Tibetan government in exile:

    There are no secrets and you can get the words right from the horse’s mouth.

  11. George_234 says:

    Just like anything else The Free Tibet movement embelished the story to buttress their agenda of demonising China

    The Xinhua report said the monk’s name was Tashi, or Tapey in Tibetan, and that he was 24 years old.

    It said he attempted to set himself alight while holding a portrait of the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan independence flag.

    It said police “immediately put out the fire and sent the young man to hospital”, where he remained in a stable condition.

  12. Ah, so if Xinhua says so it’s obviously true. Finally, they have reported and that settles everything! Haha.

    Who knows, maybe Xinhua is right. Maybe they should let other reporters in…

  13. MAC says:

    Lots of ethnic conflicts involve lies and exaggerations from both sides, so you do have to be skeptical of the reports of the underdogs even if you’re sympathetic to them (maybe especially if you are, actually), but really, taking Xinhua at its word? Seriously?

  14. MatthewTan says:

    The Chinese Government has been waiting patiently for Dalai Lama to change for the past 50 years.

    In 1976, Deng Xiaoping was chatting with President Ford when he was in Beijing.

    Ford suggested to Deng: “The Dalai Lama should stay in India”.

    And Deng replied, “Yes. We wish him a long stay and a long life there…After 100 years, we will think about [the exiles problem].”

    But in 1979, Deng offered Dalai Lama the deal for him to return. But Dalai Lama talked BIG, and wanted GREATER TIBET INDEPENDENCE. So, Deng, Jiang, and Hu…three generations…all rejected his GREATER TIBET. The Chinese governments in 1914 Simla Agreement and 1934/35 also rejected GREATER TIBET. In 1946, the Tibetans asked for independence for Tibet, but was rejected by Chiang Kai-shek. They then satisfied themselves with autonomy until August 1949. The KMT was losing the war. The Tibetan local government waged an ethnic cleasing campaign against Han Chinese. The Communist took power. The Panchen Lama called upon the Communists to liberate Tibet. The US was attacking North Korea. China had no choice but to march into Chamdo. And the peace agreement was signed. Lhasa and the whole of Tibet except Chamdo was peacefully liberated.

    That’s history.

    Dalai Lama can forget about his Independence dream, or Greater Tibet dream. Anyone with any good sense will know that the Dalai Lama will seek independence some day, when the opportunity arises. This is because all his activities – his deeds, not just his words – are all geared towards independence. He can do a few things to convince the Chinese people that he has forever given up independence. But he will not do. I am still waiting for him.

    Dalai Lama can forget it. Even a “democratic China” will not all for “GREATER TIBET”.

    I am from Singapore, not PRC. I am not brainwashed, because I have access to every reading materials about Tibet.

    Latest from Xinhua:


    Origin of the title of “Dalai Lama” and its related backgrounder
    History of the Dalai Lamas
    The 14th Dalai Lama

    Deng Xiaoping said, “The Dalai Lama may come back, but must as a Chinese citizen. We have only one requirement, that is, patriotism. We have also maintained that it is never too late to be a patriot. ”

    “The cardinal principle is that Tibet is part of China. We ought to use this criterion to judge whether anything is correct or not.”

    In Nov. 1997, President Jiang Zemin delivered a speech at Harvard University in the U.S. After the speech, a question concerning talks between the Chinese Central Government and the Dalai Lama was raised. President Jiang answered the question in explicit terms: “As long as the Dalai Lama really abandons his advocate of Tibet independence, as long as he stops his activities to split the motherland, as long as he openly declares that Tibet is an inalienable part of China, as long as he acknowledges Taiwan is a province of China and the Government of People’s Republic of China is the sole legitimate government to represent the whole of China, the door of negotiations is wide open.”
    On March 26, 2008, in his phone conversation with U.S. President George W. Bush, President Hu Jintao made clear China’s policy concerning the Dalai Lama: “The Chinese Governemnt’s policy concerning the Dalai Lama has been explicit and consistent, and we have been maintaining contacts with him with maximum patience. So long as he abandons Tibet independence, halts activities to split the country, especially the present activities to instigate and design violent crimes all over Tibet and elsewhere in China, and activities to sabotage the Beijing Olympics, as long as he acknowledges Tibet and Taiwan are inalienable parts of China, we are willing to continue engaging him and holding talks with him.”
    It can be stated that the Chinese leaders’ attitude toward and policies on the Dalai Lama have been consistent, whereas the Dalai Lama’s attitude varies with the changes in the international situation.
    Oct. 6, 1959, Mao Zedong…”We hope for his return if he supports our proposition. As long as he acknowledges two principles, i.e., first, Tibet is part of China; second, he agrees to carry out democratic and socialist reforms in Tibet, then he can come back. ”
    China’s central authorities have not changed the policy formulated by Mao Zedong 57 years ago concerning the Dalai Lama who fled abroad, especially the first principle. With the passage of so many years, however, the Dalai Lama has not changed his attitude at all. Furthermore, he has become even more skilled in serving as a double dealer, and slipped further and further on the path of splitting the motherland.

  15. MatthewTan says:

    “His Holiness stressed that Tibetans must carefully
    and systematically construct and implement a method to pursue independence.”

    How can the Chinese trust him? According to Barry Sautman, the above statement has never been denied.

    Also, the Dalai Lama was celebrating and encouraging those Tibetans marching for independence.

    Read (revised link)


    For this reason, His Holiness explained the need for Tibetans
    to discuss what they want and to make a decision. “People must talk about
    independence,” He said. “That is good. We have the right to ask for
    independence, but we need to think of our methods to struggle for
    independence. Only prayers will not get independence, and only slogans will
    not get independence.” His Holiness stressed that Tibetans must carefully
    and systematically construct and implement a method to pursue independence.

    More of the same kind of statements by Dalai Lama and his brothers/sisters, etc.


    You MUST CLICK on this link.

  16. George_234 says:

    Ah, so if Xinhua says so it’s obviously true

    Sarcastic are you OTR?. Well After all those lie and doctored photo during the Last march Riot, Western press has no more credibility and professionalism then Xinhua.

  17. MAC says:

    Oh please, that’s nonsense and I think you know it. The western media has many faults (and there are portions of it that I won’t stand up for at all)- but western journalists are NOT working under the “guidance” of a government bureau whose job it is to decide what message should be conveyed and what should be put out there.

    Sure you can find examples of western reporters being fed the government line by their sources, getting facts wrong, or perhaps, intentionally or not, fitting the known facts into their own preconceived notions- basically inevitable if we’re to have daily newspapers with articles that are not all written by people with doctoral degrees in the study of the country they’re reporting on- but please don’t try to tell me that this is somehow in any way equivalent to receiving regular guidelines from the Central Propaganda (Oh, excuse me, they finally caught on to the negative connotations of the word, “Publicity” it is) Department, the violation of which can get a reporter or publication in serious trouble! Trying to draw an equivalency here is an insult to our intelligence.

  18. George_234 says:

    but please don’t try to tell me that this is somehow in any way equivalent to receiving regular guidelines from the Central Propaganda , the violation of which can get a reporter or publication in serious trouble!

    And don’t tell me it doesn’t happened in western press Here is the link

    Chinese jounalist fired because he dare to speak his own mind contrary to the editor guidance

    If anyone doubted that Free Speech is not free in the West – here is a concrete example why it’s not.

    By being profit driven, most media must survive by being “popular.” The problem is that to be “popular,” the media must report issues in a rhetoric, easy to digest, sound-bite fashion. In such environments, no serious discussion can be carried out.

    When someone like Zhang comes along, she challenges the ideologies held by the editors and readers. This threatens to make the paper unpopular – hence she must go.

  19. jh says:

    Well, George, I looked up your link…
    The issue is the sacking of Zhang Yadong, isn’t it? So, why do you provide a link to a Chinese bloggers’ web site? Well, at least it wasn’t anti-CNN… 😉

    How about getting the news less filtered but from the horse’s mouth:

    The background provided in your link omits some significant comments she made, and which resulted in her being suspended (That much for “unbiased” Chinese media…).

    In particular she likened the censorship of Falun Gong and Free Tibet websites by the Chinese government to blocking access to web sites that contain child pornography and fascism in Germany.

    Well, you have to know that this would not go down well with the public in Germany which has gone through both a fascist and a communist regime with all its propaganda, censorship and abuse of civil and human rights.

    Of course, there’s also people that claim that the holocaust didn’t happen…
    And the CCP apparently has already managed to wipe out the June 4 massacre from the Chinese public’s conciousness. So maybe that didn’t happen after all, and all the existing video footage is only a Western conspiracy to break up the motherland…

  20. I never felt comfortable with Germany’s bans on certain speech—or Britain’s for that matter. It’s a slippery slope. And the bans don’t seem to have stopped people from palling around with Neo-nazis, anyway.

    As to the Xinhua / Western media distinction, I think George is right about the profit motive in a lot reporting outside authoritarian states like China. Money-driven journalism IS a problem, a big problem… and could be more of a problem, as media consolidates under the economic downturn.

    But a systematic conspiracy to undermine China on the part of the media just doesn’t exist.

    So someone was fired in Germany? That’s the best you can do? And pictures of Nepalese beating up on protesting Tibetans were thrown in with reporting on events within the TAR? And a photo on CNN was cropped? (I never quite understood that last one… I suppose people thought the rock throwers were “bad” and therefore hidden, but I’m not sure the image quite plays itself out the same way abroad; my first reaction is usually to be sympathetic to rock throwers).

    I’ll never for the life of me understand why young people in China–or in the U.S. or in Turkey or anywhere else for that matter–feel a need to protect their country’s image. If someone is being mistreated in my country (and many are, both for racial and economic reasons), the last thing I want is for others in the world to forget about it–I’d want them to help me out in resolving the problem, embarrass my government, hassle my leader when he is abroad, etc.

    I can understand pointing out an editorial mistake or saying, hey, wait there’s too much of a slant on this. But putting all one’s energy into saying that NO problem exists, that those who are shot or bossed about should be shot or bossed about, that horrors abroad justify horrors at home… that seems messed up.

    Anyway, the point should be: what is happening in Tibet? How do we come to a solution that leaves Tibetans living better lives?

    This argument always runs the exact same path, though.

  21. sr says:

    I now think the PRC is literaly trying to push themselves out of Tibet by filling it with their own evil deeds. Either that, or the Chinese are trying to make lives so miserable and inhumane that when the Great XIV HH the DL passes away, they will then probably unveil their own hand-picked communist Chinese puppet DL (if that’s not the biggest hippocracy in recorded history, I’m not sure their is many bigger) to come in and -maybe- truly improve their lives just in hopes to get even a sliver of Tibetan people to support their Chinese puppet DL (If you think this is too far fetched, look at the story behind the current Chinese Puppet Panchen Lama). Of course this is just a theory to explain the reasoning behind this postings madness.

    Why would you shoot a man who has lit himself on fire? Lets all actually just forget the disgusting fact he was shot three times and realize this is the state of being for Tibetans in Tibet. Culturally and morally oppressed. And now apparently to the point of suicide. For all things Holy or Not, lets just realize their is no doubting the whole Tibetan region has been a colonialist state of the PRC now for nearly 60 years. If we have learned anything in the past from our human species’ existence it should be that colonialism is wrong, and should especially now never be tolerated in our globalized world.

  22. jh says:

    OTR, you write that “the argument runs the exact same path”, and that is true in a sense. The question is: where do we go after this observation?
    Let China get away successfully with its censorship and revisionism or “put up a fight”?

    Are labour rights won by declaring that anybody with proper senses would support them?

    We both know that the male youth of many nationalities used to head off into war rather jubilantly in European history. While it is sad, it is also true. Fortunately, Europe has learned some lessons and the hurray patriotism of the old days is history.

    In contrast, the Chinese youth is currently experiencing a fervent nationalism which is deliberately fuelled by CCP education and media control. In my opinion, the CCP could easily send a fair share of its youth into combat and they would jubilantly follow. So far, fortunately, they do it on the web only – except perhaps some border guards or soldiers who shoot fleeing or demonstrating Tibetans.

    Gandhi said something which I always took as a motto:
    “I am a learner myself. Wherever I see a truth, I take it up and try to act up to it.”
    Conversely, if I see falsehood and feel about it, I might also take it up and try to act against it…

    And while the argument may seem to go in circles, it has many facets and I am always learning…

  23. George_234 says:

    But putting all one’s energy into saying that NO problem exists, that those who are shot or bossed about should be shot or bossed about

    Now who keep this problem festering for so long? As Matthew Tan rightly pointed out in his posting. China bent their back backward to preserve the union and peace at the same time.

    Starting with granting Tibet Autonomy in exchange for once for all putting soveregnty issue in writing.

    It work for a while until indecisive and shifty Dalai Lama,sensing help is coming from US and India, decide to throw his lot with the rebellion that should not be concern to him at all.

    When his rebellion failed, he never ceased to engaged in destabilizing China in cahoot with CIA until he outlived his usefullness and sold downriver by the west.

    He then play “the waiting game” hope againt hope that China will implode and provide him with opening to declare independence.

    When China come out of CR he has another chance
    He should then grab the offer by DXP to come to China and let bygone be bygone

    AS DXP says “Everything is under the Table except independence” Maybe if he should grab the bull by the horn. He probably can wring a concession or two like they do in Hongkong. He didn’t reply to the offer

    But alas China never implode and time is running out. In desperation he see Olympic as opportunity to pressure China to make concession by playing into the race card. Well it blow back into his face and lined up Chinese population solidly behind the goverment policy

    He kept his hope of independece because he see encouragement from the socalled Tibet lobby who for their own reason kept the Tibet card alive inorder to stunt or destabilized China.

    In mean time he keep inciting his follower to keep doing this stupid act of immolation by burning oneself and prolong the misery

    That what you get if have theocracy. The tow doesn’t mix.I just don’t understand the west who never tolerate Theocracy in their own mids but go on to support Theocracy in Tibet.Anyone out there to explain it to me ?.

    The Pope doesn’t demand Italy to return Rome province to Him. Did he? And when refused, he encourage catholic to do immolation or demonstration. See What the carabinieri going to do with that kind of attitude!

    He should take page from Taiwan who now come to their senses and realized that their well being lie in working with China not in opposition to China

    So long as he harbor independence there will be no solution!

  24. Yes, there have been tactical mistakes on all sides. And I don’t care much for theocracy myself. Or one-party rule, which can often be essentially the same thing.

    But I think there’s a bigger question at stake here than whether H.H. the Dalai Lama is perfect or what designs he harbors deep in his soul (or says in various speeches) or whether China is sincere in wanting to develop Tibet, or whether Zhang Qingli is the horrible racist he appears to be, etc, etc.

    The bigger question is: leaving aside whether we agree with everything the Tibetan people demand, how do we stop them from being beaten up, often detained, too often tortured, sometimes shot for asking for something different? Surely, people have a right to demand whatever the hell they want.

    And if Tibetan people don’t seem happy with the FORM of development that China has chosen (basically, very much infrastructure-driven and mindless of economic disparities within the TAR, focused on building a “native elite”, etc, i.e. the British colonial system), how does China develop a form that people like?

    I’m not really saying anything one way or the other about independence here. And I’m sure you will respond that that’s the root of the problem, so why are we talking about anything else?

    I’m saying that there are concrete problems that are occurring right here and now. You say that the solution to those problems is for HHDL and the Tibetan exile community to be nicer. Will that spur China to make necessary changes? Has being nice done any good for anyone?

  25. A comparison might be made to Palestine. It’s a rough comparison, but it might be instructive nonetheless. Should the world really focus on whether Hamas has reasonable demands and whether it wants to destroy Israel? Or whether Hamas and Fatah have reached a consensus? I would argue no. That’s beside the point.

    Israel will be secure, as China will be. So, we no longer have to worry about that (unless you think that Hamas actually can destroy Israel or that Tibet will break away overnight or India will swarm over the Himalayas). In fact, in China’s case, there is even less reason to worry. Tibetans aren’t shooting rockets into Chengdu or Xining. They are rioting sometimes, but mostly protesting peacefully (e.g., peaceful protests from March 10-13, riots on March 14 last year).

    What we DO have to worry about is the weaker party, i.e. Palestinians or Tibetans. It’s their interests that are less secure. And that means talking to all of them, whether the stronger party finds someone among the weaker party to be asking for too much or employing the wrong methods, etc.

    Besides being wildly both immoral, blaming the victim is a dead-end. So, you won’t talk until people stop rioting? Or until they are more reasonable about their oppression? They will only become less “reasonable.” Basically, that just serves to avoid ever talking….

    But the assumption I’m making throughout is that you actually want to make the lives of Tibetans better, that you want them to be in control of their own destinies.

  26. George_234 says:

    Nice you say? I don’t see anything nice about effort to incite riot and burning 6 girls in shops. I don’t see being nice meant to disrupt the torch realy leading to Olympic with the purpose to humilate and pressure China.

    Where is this all nice thing? I don’t see it unless you wearing rose tinted glasses

    I once live in the city where the motto on police car says DEED SPEAKS LOUDER THAN WORDS

    If anything they didn’t budge an inch from their demand of independence. Even added demand for autonomy on socalled Kham and Amdo and complete control on Immigration. In other words still theocracy in all but name.

  27. Not sure where we’re disagreeing right here… I said that the powerful party won’t get far in a disagreement by demanding that the weaker party be nice. You responded by saying that the weaker party hadn’t been nice… how does that address my point? There’s still the question of what the powerful should do.

    What does the deeds / words dynamic have to do with the riot? At worst, you seem to be saying that HHDL said unreasonable things (about Kham and Amdo, about independence)—you aren’t asserting that he or others in the Tibetan government in exile crossed into Lhasa somehow and burned down shops, are you? Similarly, while Zhang Qingli called Tibetans children, no one would argue that he personally shot people near Tongkhor Monastery in Kardze County or elsewhere.

    So, the point is that rhetoric leads to deeds. True. But concrete reality also leads to deeds. The Israelis could be as nice as could be and so could Hamas or Fatah and the fact that Palestinians are bossed around by the IDF would still send Palestinians into the streets with rocks. They don’t need Hamas to tell them to do so.

    Do you really think the Tibetans were all following a secret plan on March 14? Do you think Chinese who killed Tibetans in the days and months afterward were told specifically to kill Tibetans? No, things take place because of a certain real dynamic, of angry people, of people with guns, etc.

    So, how do you change that dynamic? By changing rhetoric on the side you dislike? I doubt it, at least not in any big way.

  28. sr says:

    Matthew and George, Read about this Chinese journalist, Ms. Zhu Rui, who worked in Tibet from ’98-’01 for the governments sponsored Tibet newspaper:

    The ONLY possible thing that the Great XIV DL can be blamed for is giving the Tibetan people, all over the world, a sense of self respect, pride, admiration and above all else HOPE. Before you misslead this sense of hope, I will tell you it is based upon the realization that a person can truly embody compassion. He is a worldly icon of the 21st century that sits right beside Ghandi and ML King jr.

  29. George_234 says:

    Do you really think the Tibetans were all following a secret plan on March 14? Do you think Chinese who killed Tibetans in the days and months afterward were told specifically to kill Tibetans? No, things take place because of a certain real dynamic, of angry people, of people with guns, etc.

    DL refused to stop the demonstration saying he has no right to interfere with their demosntration He should know where it is going to lead

    I mean he is still in communication with his follower in Tibet thru pilgrim legal or illegal. Of course he doesn’t spell it outright but a nod here and a twinkle there. They will understand what are expected from them

    Notice that the riot always follow certain predictable pattern. Monk demonstrating without permit-> monk arrested->rumour in the air saying the monk is beaten or killed->riot follow
    Classic example of PsyOp operation

    For the monks he is demigod cannot go wrong. Religious operate in the realm of absolute but Politic operate in realm of compromise That’s why the two doesn’t mix If you mixed both you got tragedy that’s what happened in Tibet

    The way to forward is abolished Theocracy done with mixing politic and religion You have to choose like the way they do in the west!

  30. George_234 says:

    comparison might be made to Palestine. It’s a rough comparison

    I say it is wrong comparison China doesn’t go on shelling or bombing civilian Or bulldozing residential. To the contrary China provide free housing to 400,000 peoples

    China doesn’t appropriate other people land. She just defends what is rightly hers No one dispute that. There is no resolution in UN that say China should vacate Tibet. But certainly there is resolution in UN that say Israel wrongfully occupied Palestinian land and they should leave!

  31. ten chen says:

    george! i think you have a very misleading information. Dalai lama has said in international arenas that he is not seeking independence rather a genuine autonomy which is granted to Tibetan people as per the constitution of communist china. You know what autonomy means. that true autonomy is not in Tibet as communist said. evrything from daily lives to mining, policing is directly done by the communist party members. Tibetan and china is different in cultural and heritage and that cannot be changed by the communist idealogy. let me make it clear. invite dalai lama to chinese news media and listen to what he has to say don’t just listen to what the communist party says. every year hundreds of chinese people from mainland, taiwan, singapore, malaysia come to see The Dalai lama in India and his message is all the time same. I hope this clear some of your doubts. By the way have been to Tibet? I am Tibetan and the victim of communist persecution which force me and my families to escape.

  32. George,

    You are right that the Palestinian-Tibetan comparison is a bit of a stretch. While China has, indeed, bulldozed temples (pretty hard to dispute–just look at the photos) and forced nomads to settle whether they want to or not (and probably given housing to some who wanted it, too, to be fair), it hasn’t shelled Tibetans from the air. No argument there. And international statements and resolutions are, obviously, more in favor of Palestinians than the Tibetans.

    The two conflicts will doubtless have different outcomes, too. My guess is independence, eventually, for Palestinians and some form of autonomy for Tibetans.

    But I was pointing to a different dynamic: that in both cases there is a population that is clearly chafing at rule by another population. You imply that the only problem in Tibet is that the monks are fanatical and get everyone else riled up. I say that you’re dealing with second-order, super-structural stuff. Problems don’t happen because people are fanatical; people are fanatical because they are responding to problems.

    The base is: why can’t Tibetans choose their own leaders? Why are Party Secretaries and People’s Armed Police sent from Beijing to dictate things to a supposedly “autonomous” region? Why can’t people protest for whatever the hell they want? Why has the form of development Beijing has chosen for Tibet resulted in one of the greatest gaps between rich and poor WITHIN a province / autonomous region in all of China? Why are so many young people out of work and angry in Tibet? Why aren’t Chinese put on trial for killing Tibetans but only Tibetans for killing Chinese?

    On the more tangential point of HHDL’s responsibility for riots, you still haven’t given any proof—just that he “winked” or that monks’ protests look to you like psy-ops.

    This all seems premised on the idea that Tibetans are children, without any concerns of their own, that they’d be completely happy like good little colonial natives if weren’t for some charismatic, evil person dragging them into mischief…

    Again, I get people feeling insulted on behalf of countries now and then, even if caring about country x over country y is, ultimately kinda messed up. But not wanting to resolve the problems at the heart of things? It seems self-defeating.

  33. sr says:

    George, I have this feeling that you, and honestly so many other pro-PRC colonialists, are merely reading what some people have to say in order to try and dig up ‘info’ from Chinese operated websites/blogs to post here in order to tote the communist line.
    Have you read any of the articles by Ms. Zhu Rui? I hope you can read Chinese as most I think are in Chinese language.

  34. @ SR,

    I’d leave “communism” out of this. Maybe communism has something to do with certain attitudes toward religion on the part of the people who administrate Tibet, but otherwise I think Cold War contrasts (“communists,” “free world,” etc.) have less to say about the issue than comparisons with other conflicts over national self-determination.

    Tibet’s problems seem to resolve around much the same issues as you have in Kashmir, Turkey (Kurdistan), Chechnya, West Papua, the reservations and “territories” under U.S. rule (or Hawaii), Northern Ireland, etc. And the oppression is the oppression you get when one people rules another without much interest in the hopes and culture of the ruled.

  35. George_234 says:

    george! i think you have a very misleading information. Dalai lama has said in international arenas that he is not seeking independence rather a genuine autonomy which is granted to Tibetan people as per the constitution of communist china. You know what autonomy means

    I do know what he meant by autonomy is nothing but 2 stesp to independent He gives conflicting signals Inpublics he said he just want autonomy but in private He said otherwise just click on the lin that provide by Matthew Tan

    After what he did in 1950, Should China trust him again? You give me an answer and be honest. After being once cheated do you trust your girl friend again?

    Anyway at the end of American Civil war does the head of lossing side (the confederationist)General E LEE ask to be governor of Georgia? You know the answer NO He foresworn politic for the rest of his life. He become Lecturer at Southern private University And never get himself involve in politic or comment Basically he disappear That what Dl should emulate

    BTW it just perplexed me. Why is he so obsess with power and material thing? Isn’t he supposed to be living Buddha And the basic tente of Buddhism is to avoid Samsara(attachment to worldly thing like power and hate)

    And you are right there are hundred of Overseas Chinese who goes to see him and that is probably the extent of support that he got from overseas Chinese because I can tell you that the 40 Million or so Overseas Chinese will support China specially after the race riot that he condoned!

  36. Obviously, HHDL might well in his heart prefer independence and a lot of the conversation in the Tibetan community is, of course, about independence, but ultimately those things will be settled in negotiation.

    Who cares about who cheated on who… or about your stuff about material versus spiritual power… we’re not talking about girlfriends or philosophy, we’re talking about how to actualize a people’s right to control their own destiny. For all their talk about how Tibetans have politicized an issue, Chinese who support the current form of rule in Tibet never seem to grasp the politics of it and instead personalize the whole thing.

    Normal responses to a riot are: why did this occur? Why are people so angry? How did protests escalate into a riot? What are the political isues at stake here–rights, abuses, etc. That is how thoughtful people responded to the recent riots in Paris or the riots in LA several years ago. Or to the riots in Weng’an in China.

    Instead, most of what I hear you saying about TIbet is, “Look! It was a riot! It wasn’t peaceful! Chinese got killed (not just the normal killing of Tibetans)! Stop criticizing us! You’ve got bad motives!”

  37. P.S. Why all this focus on the one day–March 14 (your “race riot”)–when Han and Hui were killed? Why not focus as much on the violence that occurred in the days that followed? Is it because state violence is more acceptable than violence by ordinary people?

    Or is it because the deaths of Tibetans do not matter as much to you as the deaths of Han and Hui Chinese? If bloggers like you put as much attention into both kinds of deaths, I would have more patience.

  38. George_234 says:

    Why not focus as much on the violence that occurred in the days that followed?

    What violece are you talking about? Read James Milnes account on the event

    What the PAP does is penned the rioter to one end of Barkor street until they got tired then start arresting them one by one. Total there are 8000 people got arrested all of them has been released except 100 still in prison, 75 convicted 25 still pending trial What violence are you talking here?

    I also got tired of westerner imposing their dream and ideal to Tibet when they have no business at all to meddle in Tibet

    Listen the right of state transcend the right of individual that what is meant by state sovereignty

    “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.”

    Every country has the right to choose their own political system and if you don’t like it get out from it

    What would happened if every disgruntled group or individual has a right to independence or autonomy you got chaos !

  39. George_234 says:

    8. A main reason why so many in the West have taken part in the protests against China is ideological: Tibetan Buddhism, deftly spun by the Dalai Lama, is a major point of reference of the New Age hedonist spirituality which is becoming the predominant form of ideology today. Our fascination with Tibet makes it into a mythic place upon which we project our dreams. When people mourn the loss of the authentic Tibetan way of life, they don’t care about real Tibetans: they want Tibetans to be authentically spiritual on behalf of us so we can continue with our crazy consumerism.

    The philosopher Gilles Deleuze wrote: “If you are snagged in another’s dream, you are lost.” The protesters against China are right to counter the Beijing Olympics motto of “one world, one dream” with “one world, many dreams”. But they should be aware that they are imprisoning Tibetans in their own dream. It is not the only dream.

    9. If there is an ominous dimension to what is going on now in China, it is elsewhere. Faced with today’s explosion of capitalism in China, analysts often ask when political democracy, as the “natural” political accompaniment of capitalism, will come.

    Valley of tears
    In a television interview a couple of years ago, the sociologist Ralf Dahrendorf linked the growing distrust of democracy in post-Communist east European countries to the fact that, after every revolutionary change, the road to new prosperity leads through a valley of tears. After the breakdown of socialism, one cannot directly pass to the abundance of a successful market economy. The limited but real socialist welfare and security have to be dismantled, and these first steps are necessarily painful.

    For Dahrendorf, this painful passage lasts longer than the average period between (democratic) elections, so that the temptation is great to postpone the difficult changes for the short-term electoral gains. Fareed Zakaria, editor of Newsweek International, pointed out (2) that democracy can only catch on in economically developed countries: if developing countries are prematurely democratised, the result is a populism which ends in economic catastrophe and political despotism. No wonder the three formerly third world countries that are the most successful economically – Taiwan, South Korea, Chile – embraced full democracy only after a period of authoritarian rule.

  40. @ George,

    It is interesting to see which states still cling to the Westphalian idea of sovereignty and which don’t. In general, Europe seems to have drifted away from a strict sense that states are the only “individuals” on the international scene (and therefore the only actors deserving of “sovereignty”). The U.S., China, Russia, India and others have adopted a defensive posture of “mind your own business” to different degrees but aren’t all on the same page in terms of the rights and the state. Though plenty would say something about the state having a monopoly on violence and all that , few would say that the state absolutely transcends the individual. But anyway, that’s all a side question.

    On your point about economic development having to precede political development… I’m not sure how you can go off at others about being knee-jerk democrats and having ideological blinders and then advocate such a dogmatic version of Samuel Huntington developmentalism. Was it really important for Chile to go through Pinochet’s fascism to emerge “successful economically” and embracing “full democracy.” Wouldn’t Allende have done fine there instead?

    As to Westerners and Tibet… I’m not sure why their opinions figure into this at all. I ask what is best for Tibetans, how best to realize their needs, and you go on about how others view Tibetans. Well, what do you think Tibetans need? Are China’s development plans the best ones for meeting those needs? What other plans exist? What do you think Tibetans think are their needs? Geez… widen the conversation… think about some fundamentals…

    On your account of the riot… I still don’t understand why it seems impossible for you to discuss the killing that happened on days other than March 14th? Why are the killings in Kardze and elsewhere less important to you? Yes, it is sad that Han and Hui civilians were killed in Lhasa… but that was one day. ONE day. There were other days, too, and other places.

    I can understand why a government would choose to highlight one day over another (it looks better when your people are being killed, obviously, than when you’re doing the killing). But why should anyone else care? Why should anyone care about a government’s needs PR-wise? Why should anyone ever identify with a government of all things?

  41. jh says:

    Thanks for getting engaged again, OTR.
    I always “enjoy” your erudite, sober contributions a lot!
    They may seem wasted on George but there are others who read them as well…

  42. Actually, I’ve boiled things down. The only questions I want you to answer are:

    1) What do you think of the Tibetans killed AFTER March 14th? Should they have been killed? I know about that one day of rioting; I want to hear about something else.

    2) Is it possible that anything needs improving in Tibet or is it completely perfect? If not perfect, what is the best means of making an improvement? This is really an open question.

  43. (The above are questions for George, obviously).

  44. ten chen says:

    how do you know that there was 2 step. The dalai lama has welcomed any chinese leaders or press people to come to india and go through all the files, offices, schools and monasteries whether we have anything to do the march riot. the communist leaders are pussy. OK then invite the Dalai lama to china, talk face to face in live telecast so that all those brainwashed can be clean. whats is there to hide? if you are true patriot, write a letter to your leader to china as an act of patriotism to invite Dalai lama to beijing. there are so scared to face the reality because they live the life of lies, propaganda and corruption. look at each of the leaders starting from Hu Jintao to ministtrial levels, how many shares and investment they or their children or the family members own in state funded corporation. this was piece of leaked information that was posted in China digital times couple of weeks ago.

  45. George_234 says:

    The action of 100 or so criminal,hoodlum and dreck of society to burn, loot and mayhem is in no way represent the will of Tibetan people for change. They just vent out their own frustration in the name of Tibetan freedom. As such let the justice run its course.

    The fact that the “intifada” fizzled out should be a proof that the majority couldn’t care less about their agenda

    And If I were Tibetan I would stay away from those criminals It give bad name to honest Tibetan

    OTR I don’t believe in rumor, hearsay or inuendo. I go by official number of victim during this riot which is 22.

    Where most of the victims are Han Chinese. except for 2 Tibetan 1 police and i hoodlum who were killed during shoot out because the hoodlum resists arrest

  46. George_234 says:

    On your point about economic development having to precede political development… I’m not sure how you can go off at others about being knee-jerk democrats and having ideological blinders and then advocate such a dogmatic version of Samuel Huntington developmentalism

    Yes OTR you got it right knee jerk Democrat and peddler of democracy AT ALL COST read this of your so beloved poster boy of Democracy.Enjoy

    March 4 (Bloomberg) — Until May 2007, Meera Devi rose before dawn each day and walked a half mile to a vegetable patch outside the village of Kachpura to find a secluded place.

    Dodging leering men and stick-wielding farmers and avoiding spots that her neighbors had soiled, the mother of three pulled up her sari and defecated with the Taj Mahal in plain view.

    With that act, she added to the estimated 100,000 tons of human excrement that Indians leave each day in fields of potatoes, carrots and spinach, on banks that line rivers used for drinking and bathing and along roads jammed with scooters, trucks and pedestrians. Devi looks back on her routine with pain and embarrassment.

  47. sr says:

    After what he did in 1950, Should China trust him again? You give me an answer and be honest. After being once cheated do you trust your girl friend again?

    George, I see that your completely trying to turn this around, by switching the realities of history. It was the PRC that cheated the Tibetan Government: by first forcing the hand to sign the 17 point plan and then failing to abide by the laws of the same agreement! Besides that, I’m not sure what your even talking about in 1950!? Besides…this is not about trust. People of different race/culture/language/etc. will never trust eachother.

    “BTW it just perplexed me. Why is he so obsess with power and material thing?”
    –This is a joke right? Your just trying to be ironic right?? 🙂 good one.

  48. sr says:

    George, the Chinese have NO business in Tibet either!!
    Not just westerners. In fact, ever since the dispicable Chinese CR Tibetans have wished they had agreed to a closer relationship with the British Empire back before the PRC’s invasion in 1950. It’s too bad, at the time, Tibetans miss-trusted white people just a little bit more than a mortal enemy….maybe mortal enemy is a little harsh, but it’s not too much of a stretch. Tibetans and Han Chinese have never got along very well culturally. Just too different…not saying that they cannot live peacefully with eachother, they just have to have equal freedom to do so!

  49. sr says:

    George, after going through only a portion of the last few posts of yours, I can see that you are refusing to stick with facts. Especially when concerned with HHDL. No one is going to get anywhere with regurgitation of lies!
    HHDL was VERY upset with the violence in Tibet and even at reports of exiles who were getting angry. For god sake, HHDL even said that he was going to step down as head of the TGIE if the violence did not stop! Again please, you must stay on point and stop trying to corrupt the truth!

  50. @ George,

    Haha…. aiya, I still haven’t gotten you to talk about anything but March 14 and Lhasa. I suppose I’ll never hear from you about Kardze shootings or the suppressed protest at the National Minorities University in Beijing or the protests in Gansu and Qinghai. Oh, well. With some people you can only have certain arguments.

    And the idea that only 22 people died… why does it matter if a number is “official”? I suppose you believe the U.S., too, when it downplays the Iraqi body count. Or Israel when it says it will “investigate” the death of a Palestinian child. I.F. Stone put it best way, way back several decades ago when he wrote, “All governments lie!”

    I’m not sure what your article about sewage in India had to do with developmentalism as a theory. Was your point that because India has this problem (and doubtless many other problems), I should therefore agree with you that Pinochet was right in Chile? Do you know anything about Chile? Why did you use it as an example? Does sewage mean I have no option left but fascism?

    Besides, did I say India was my poster child for something? Not that I have anything against India, but that seems a little out of the blue. I’ll check my previous posts….

    In general, I’d say India falls short on some things and does well on others. The more democratic, transparent and socially just states of India, such as Kerala (run by a communist party, incidentally), tend to have the least corruption, highest literacy, etc. And Kerala didn’t get this standard of living first and only afterward go democratic–it was democratic from the beginning. So, I’m not sure that you could argue that democracy has been bad for India as a whole, though perhaps it has been bad at some levels.

    India has problems, of course. Just as China does. China’s problems are not simply the result of authoritarianism and India’s aren’t simply the result of democracy. There’s more at work in these places, as anywhere in the world.

    But there’s a bigger issue at stake here. You think that the powerful can do whatever they want. It’s fine, according to you, for Pinochet to murder thousands in a Chilean soccer stadium or for the PAP to kill “criminals,hoodlums and the drecks of society.” I imagine you would say it was fine for the LA police to tyrannize blacks before the ’92 riots, too. There’s only a problem, as you see it, when the less powerful “vent out their own frustration.”

    Me, I think nonviolence is the most effective method of political change. But sometimes throwing rocks has its place, too.

  51. jh says:

    It’s funny. The more precise OTR comments get, the more garbled George’s answers become…
    I don’t think he can handle that much straight thinking… lol

    But have fascists ever been reasonable?

    I am almost sorry I dragged you into this, OTR…

  52. George_234 says:

    Haha…. aiya, I still haven’t gotten you to talk about anything but March 14 and Lhasa. I suppose I’ll never hear from you about Kardze shootings or the suppressed protest at the National Minorities University in Beijing or the protests in Gansu and Qinghai.

    OTR you didin’t get it do you Didn’t I say I don’t believe in rumor mills!

    Here is what RFA say about Kardze shooting
    “witness report hearing gunfire” added one

    “There were gunfire but we are not sure if there is casualties”

    Would you then conclude that massacre actually happened? Of course you do because you can twist any rumor mill as Proof of Chicom fascist cruelty

    OTR anybody with intelligence can see that shot doesn’t necessarily directed at the person. It might be just warning shot to unruly and aggresive crowd to back off .Since he doesn’t see with own eyes and coming from RFA a wholly funded front store organization of CIA, I will considred it rumor mills!

    Now let talk about Gansu riot. Tibet was dragged from middle ages society to modern age in one fell swoop. Social and economic conflict is inevitable anybody expecting otherwise live in dream world It doesn’t mean automatically They want independence! To educate you on this subject read the following

    This is what Yoshie Shimatsu has to say about this riot

    As Tibetan horsemen charge like fiery embers over withered grass to attack a Chinese government outpost, the Dalai Lama and the Beijing government point fingers of blame for the firestorm sweeping the Tibetan Plateau. Far away from these vast grasslands, neither authority – religious or secular – has much of a clue as to what is happening here on the ground – a “range war,” the likes of which haven’t been seen since the gunfights of the American West in the late 1800s.

    Yoshie Shimatsu is Japanese American the former editor of Japan Time. Expert on anything about Tibet He spend years living in Tibet researching arcane subject like black hat Sect “No apologist for fascist commie” But he can see clearly the root cause of that riot

    And about hundred of ingrate and impressionable Student hold candle vigil I don’t take it seriously

    About India and Pinochet I will respond latter

  53. George_234 says:

    Yoshie Shimitsu conclusion

    Tibetan Buddhism have curbed the native population from the common trades practiced by the citizens of a modern secular nation-state. Instead, a multi-ethnic caste system is being perpetuated, with the Muslims doing the butchering, running restaurants and driving, the Nepalese crafting the jewelry and brassware, and the Chinese laborers building roads and raising power lines. Since the fifth Dalai Lama allied himself in the 18th century with a Mongol general and the Manchu emperor in Beijing, Tibet has been an ethnic checkerboard. And with rising expectations and ruthless greed, cultural and religious difference is a formula for ethnic vendetta.

  54. George_234 says:

    Yoshie A devout buddhist himself strong indictment against Tibetan Buddhism anythiing but a cry for independence

  55. Haha. Man, George… you can never deal with a statement directly and you never quite explain the purpose of your cutting and pasting.

    Laying out a full argument can be refreshing. True, it doesn’t lend itself to red herrings as easily (it becomes harder to distract others with ramblings about the the glories of Chilean fascism or the Indian sewage system in lieu of a substantive discussion of political reform, for example). But if you do make a stab at a coherent argument, you arrive somewhere more interesting, even if the argument itself fails.

    Nonetheless, I do think you’ve found some interesting information here. The situation that Yoshie Shimitsu (who is he or she?) found in Tibet rings true, at least up to a point. “Chinese laborers building roads and raising power lines” and “Muslims doing the butchering, running restaurants and driving” all fit certain cultural niches carved out for different groups in Tibet, but also speak to the unequal opportunities provided by China’s development strategy.

    If we leave aside the facile argument that everything bad in Tibet is the result of religion and everything good the result of enlightened outsiders, then we have some real, practical knots that need to be disentangled. For example, how do we provide more jobs for Tibetans in infrastructure projects? Why do Hui and Han businesspeople flourish? What is the impact of various language requirements for government jobs?

    Now, maybe, we can finally talk about real issues, rather than all this silliness about who is trustworthy and who is feudal and who hurt who’s feelings and why Xinhua is the word of God, etc…

  56. sr says:

    George, unfortuantely for our constructive conversation you are proving JH’s point correct in how your answers are becoming more and more garbled and even nonsequitur.

    Regardless, out of interest in this Yoshie Shimitsu character I tried googling him with no results. Can you provide a link?

  57. sr says:

    “..aiya” –OTR, are you Tibetan? Just wondering because aiya is what Tibetans usually say after a good laugh 🙂

  58. @ SR,

    Nope, not Tibetan. Not Han Chinese, either, though they also say, “aiya.” Come to think of it, maybe that could be a starting point for dialogue…

  59. sr says:

    George, Although I have no sense of context as to your quote from Yoshie I don’t see how it is a “indictment against Tibetan Buddhism” at all? In fact, because of the situation in Tibet for the last 60 years I see the unrestricted legalization of Tibetan buddhism as the saving factor in the whole region, and even in China Proper.

  60. sr says:

    haha, aiya! Nice. Yes it is true, healing racial tension is often found through a sense of commonalities. Good work OTR, it’s nice to ‘see’ you here.

  61. George_234 says:

    George, unfortuantely for our constructive conversation you are proving JH’s point correct in how your answers are becoming more and more garbled and even nonsequitur.

    I bring the present state of sewer in India, because I like to poke fun at you and him for unabashed admiration of India quote “for all her failing I admire India for her democracy”

    Common man failing? I said total catastrophe, when a country cannot even provide the most basic requirement of civilization to 665 million people!

    It just debasing and dehumanizing for so many people to have no latrine Of course Indian nationalist and their booster in the west try to rationalize this total failure by hubris of India more heterogeneous than China Because otherwise will invalidate their claim of Democracy superiority!

    Yes Indian democracy has something to do with it In underdeveloped country indvidual and group interest take precedent over common good and each one wil try to jockey for best position to achieve this end. Democracy facilitate this struggle for power with the result nothing get done You can take any example Thailand, Indonesia, India etc.

    Democracy for population with no ethic is dead end

    Any one with intelligence should observed this India and China is a good comparison both started from the same level of development with India clearly has all the advantages India is practically untouched by WW 2nd At the end of British colony the tresury is brimming with surpluses Indai has a well built infrastructure Railway line, School,Port,Road,Excellent civil servant . China is devastated by WW2 civil war, The treasury is empty, no infrastracture to speak about,Poor 600 million peasant.

    Fast forward 2008 Now the table is turn China GDP is 4 time as large as India
    China has 80,000 Highway, 90000 Rail line. Go to the Beijing and you land to the Best built airport in the world The level of poverty is reduced to 20 million Sure you got pollution and social conflict but who doesn’t.

    In due time those pollution well be taken care of Ever heard Kutznev curve ?
    Her si an excellent report by AEI athink tank on the pollution subject

    Basically it say as the country increase its wealth pollution will abate
    Several EKC studies conclude that sulfur dioxide pollution begins to decline at a per-capita income level in the range of $5,000 to $9,000, and particulates begin to decline at a per-capita income range from $5,000 to $15,000. China is still far from this range, with a current per-capita income of about $3,000. However, by some measures China’s SO2, ozone, and particulate levels may have already peaked and begun declining, offering preliminary evidence that the EKC is dropping and shifting to the left.

  62. OK, thanks for clarifying things. That was a lot more coherent.

    I still think you are being overly reductive by boiling down India and China’s differences to merely their different political systems, democracy and authoritarianism. As I said (and you never addressed), the most democratic states in India like Kerala are the best managed and the most developed by many measures–and they were democratic first, developed later.

    So, my hunch is that there are other factors at work. The fact that India was essentially a bunch of local fiefdoms with only fitful central rule before the British took over may be one. The form that British rule took, with its emergency powers for the center and bureaucracy at the local level, may be another factor. India’s constant diversion of conflicts with Pakistan and Kashmir (India’s Tibet, in a way) are others.

    Perhaps democracy, too, has been a problem for India, but I need more proof than just the fact that India has a parliamentary system and China doesn’t. India has the Ganges and China doesn’t. What does it prove? You have to map out the link.

    The Kuznets curve idea is interesting, but it’s not a universal phenomenon. Taiwan, for example, stayed at more or less the same level of income inequality as it grew. The same was true for India, incidentally, too. Mind you, I’m not commenting on how much they grew, but just that as they grew they did not see a Kuznets curve. Some countries, though, have indeed seen greater inequality accompany growth and then greater equality again after a certain point. It’s not a hard and fast rule, in other words.

    In general, I think you and I just have different philosophies. You are essentially right wing in outlook: reading stuff from conservative think tanks like AEI, praising military governments and fascists in places like South Korea and Chile, and speaking approvingly of tough measures against the “drecks of society.” Fine, there’s a long tradition of you guys. I, on the other hand, am on the left: skeptical of some people getting rich first (and Kuznets), inclined toward social democratic and democratic socialist government’s like Scandinavia’s or Allende’s, and sympathetic to the weak taking tough measures themselves. I like the drecks of society!

    If we’re basically at ideological loggerheads, there’s not much further this conversation can go. I was hoping we could get out of the bind by focusing on practical matters in Tibet, but you didn’t take me up on it. Well, so be it.

  63. sr says:

    I see that your very sneaky George. Why did you insert your own little nonsense into the Shimatsu quote? “Since the fifth Dalai Lama allied himself in the 18th century with a Mongol general and the Manchu emperor in Beijing, Tibet has been an ethnic checkerboard” –Try to be more careful when inserting your own version of the facts into someone elses article. I can’t really speak for the high desert lands of Northern Amdo but I’m very confident that Kham and most regions in Amdo were not a ‘checkerboard’ as you say. And I guarantee you their were no settlements of Han anywhere in Amdo and Kham before 1950! Anyway, this is a bit off topic.

    But the article by Shimatsu is a good example of twisted facts and cover-up by the PRC and her puppets. These Tibetans were shouting “Free Tibet” (Bhor Rangzen) as they road their horses to the government buildings and REPLACED THE CHINESE FLAG WITH THE TIBETAN NATIONAL FLAG!!! How could you possibly make a bigger statement!! There is no Tibetan who wants to be under the rule of foreign powers. Come on George it’s obvious. Stop fleecing your eyes. With the additional point of this article: the Tibetan monk shot by Chinese police as he was burning alive!

  64. John_01 says:

    Before you start huffing and puffing It turn out the purported shooting is nothing but a lie another black eye for Tibetan activist

    Activist groups reported police shot the monk when he protested in the flashpoint area of Aba in southwest China’s Sichuan province last week, and residents there contacted by AFP confirmed that they had heard guns fired.

    But the Xinhua news agency issued a report on Thursday saying another monk had confessed to making up allegations about the police shooting, and cited residents saying they heard no firing.

    “Jangkor, a monk at the Kirti Monastery in Aba County… said that he lied to ‘create greater disturbances so as to attract attention from overseas’,” Xinhua said, citing local police.

    It also said the monk who tried to set himself alight, 24-year-old Tashi, had no bullet wounds and was recovering at a hospital in the provincial capital Chengdu.

  65. Well, it’s always hard to sort out the details in these cases. Do you believe Xinhua? Do you believe what residents said to AFP? Mostly, readers are left to rely on their own instincts.

    Xinhua (and the state media generally) have made it a policy to be much more prompt about reporting “sensitive” stories and to report them in more detail. But this change has mainly been driven by a desire to control the way stories develop, as I understand it.

    It is worth noting that Xinhua wouldn’t have responded at all to this incident if it wasn’t first reported elsewhere. And Xinhua rarely “discovers” that a situation is worse than than it was initially reported—they tend to try to balance things out, make a tragedy seem mundane, insinuate foreign interference, etc.

  66. sr says:

    Oh John, I could have told you as soon as this story came out that in a few days or so the CCTV or Xinhua was going to do a cover up story! We just had to give the security forces enough time to kidnap a couple of monks torture, beat and intimidate them until they make up something to cover-up what happened. Then these forces usher in Xinhua to make it a “story”. The news.yahoo article is very keen and makes sure to mention that not only is Xinhua a government run news agency but they also mention how the whole of Tibet Proper is completely shut off from foreigners and journalists. Just so Xinhua has the chance to take their time and do cover-up work before too much of the actual real story comes out. They knew things like this were going to happen. When in regards to Tibet or Tibetans, Xinhua is a Joke!!! Give me a break.

  67. John_01 says:

    AFP as usual cut and add irrelevant comments to insinuate doubt into the readers

    The report itself give enough details like his mother name. Hell if you have relative in Tibet maybe you can confirm it by telephone look for Mekar

    “From the bottom of my heart, I very much appreciate the doctors, nurses and the government officials in Aba,” Tashi’s mother, 44-year-old Mekar, told Xinhua Thursday.”

  68. sr says:

    John….come on. Inject some common sense in to the tactical situation that is going on in Tibet Proper. Once you do this I will not have to state the obvious…time and time again 1.6 billion times over.



    Tibet Proper is CLOSED to all foreigners and journalists. Look at just a few of the many pictures available that show hundreds of Chinese armed guards, SS, Police, etc all over Kham and Amdo. The PRC knows the obvious. NO Tibetan wants to be governed by the Chinese, or by any acting Tibetan Chinese-puppet. Dont get it complicated with all the tactical complexities that CCTV, China Daily, Xinhua tries to throw in the pot. It’s very simple..Tibetans just want to live as Tibetans (Period). And since the PRC colonialists will not allow this basic human right…then YES, Tibetans will want Independence or at least a true Autonomy.

  69. John_01 says:

    Better still your relative can visit him

    Therefore, Tashi, along with his mother and three doctors and nurses, was transferred Thursday to the West China Hospital under the Sichuan University in the provincial capital of Chengdu, one of the best hospitals in Sichuan.

  70. It would be an interesting phone conversation:

    Caller: “Hello, may I speak to Mekar?”
    Response: [Crackle, beep, beep…click]

    I think there’s a very different dynamic at work in Tibet than in other places under Beijing’s rule. Unless a story really crosses a line into sensitivity elsewhere (such as in the case of the Dongzhou or Taishi Village incidents), you can usually follow up on it. And the Chinese practice of sending reporters to other provinces (away from where their papers are based) to carry out investigative journalism is still very much alive, despite new regulations.

    But in Tibet you basically don’t have domestic investigative journalism. There is nothing vaguely analogous to the “Southern Metropolis Daily” in Lhasa–or even anything like the rowdy right-wing Global Times. Why? Because Tibet is essentially run like an occupation–regardless of what you think of China’s right to be there, this much must be admitted.

    So, things can be made up. The same happens in occupations around the world. Ever hear of Jessica Lynch? Her story was basically created out of thin air by the Pentagon.

  71. sr says:

    Your right John, if any of my relatives were to talk to him they would have to physically go there and talk to him in person in order to really find out how he is doing.
    OTR, haha…just as your scenario suggests, all phone lines both landline and cell phone conversations are tapped and monitored by a very complex multi-lingual key word filters. Tibetans know that the only form of conversations can be held by secure cell phones, written or word of mouth.

  72. John_01 says:

    But in Tibet you basically don’t have domestic investigative journalism. There is nothing vaguely analogous to the “Southern Metropolis Daily” in Lhasa–or even anything like the rowdy right-wing Global Times. Why? Because Tibet is essentially run like an occupation–regardless of what you think of China’s right to be there, this much must be admitted

    But it doesn’t prevent “the mouth that bite the hand that feed her” Woesser from going to Tibet and do her “investigation” until she start take photos which is forbidden in China

    Last time I check she is still free to spread her lie and even give interview to foreign correspondent

  73. sr says:

    John, you bring up an interesting case. Though there is no doubt that she is an enigma. Which means that she is a very rare case of any freedom at all for a Tibetan. Though of course if you know anything about her, as I’m sure you do, she is half Chinese. Then if you know more you will find out that her father was chinese and happened to be a very high ranking PLA officer in Tibet. So she obviously is given leeway for some reason…Not to mention she does NOT live in Tibet!

  74. sr says:

    btw, what lie do you say Woesser is spreading? Please do tell…

  75. Yeah, which lie are you referring to? A difference of opinion is one thing (e.g. Tibet should or shouldn’t be independent) but lying is another ball game.