Over 1.25 million sign online petition for Tibet dialogue
http://news.webindia123.com/news/articles/India/20080411/929552.html
Dharamsala April 11, 2008 9:45:06 AM IST
In what could be the fastest growing online petition, people across the world - from Rio de Janeiro to Rome and New York to New Delhi - have signed up to mount pressure on China for a dialogue with Buddhist spiritual leader the Dalai Lama on Tibet.
The online petition campaign launched by a global advocacy network - www.avaaz.org - has so far obtained over 1.25 million signatures to force China to discuss Tibet with the Dalai Lama.
"One million signatures in seven days is unprecedented. We believe it is the largest global online petition in history and the fastest growing internet petition ever - obtaining over a million signatures in just seven days," Avaaz campaign director Ben Wikler told IANS.
"If all the signatories of this petition joined hands in a line, it would stretch from London to Rome."
Hard copies of the petition - addressed to Chinese President Hu Jintao and carrying all the 1.25 million signatures - will now be stacked up outside Chinese embassies in most countries across the globe.
"As citizens around the world, we call on you to show restraint and respect for human rights in your response to the protests in Tibet, and to address the concerns of all Tibetans by opening meaningful dialogue with the Dalai Lama. Only dialogue and reform will bring lasting stability. China's brightest future, and its most positive relationship with the world, lies in harmonious development, dialogue and respect," the petition says.
"The petition is online, and it has been signed by citizens of every country on earth, as well as every inhabited, dependent territory. The only exception is Antarctica, where scientists are not allowed to participate in political activity.
"As of this moment, the petition has been signed by 13,159 people in India, as well as more than 100,000 each in the US and UK, and nearly a million in mainland Europe," Wikler pointed out.
Avaaz - which means 'voice' in several languages - itself exists as a virtual organisation on the internet and its staff reside in London, Rio de Janeiro, Buenos Aires, New York City, Geneva, and Manama. It is legally incorporated as an NGO in the state of New York in the United States, Wikler said.
The idea for an online petition started last month following the violence and protests inside Tibet against Chinese rule there.
The Tibetan government-in-exile based in this Himalayan abode of the Dalai Lama in the north Indian state of Himachal Pradesh is excited with the response to the petition and the overall reaction of people to the Tibet issue.
"This gives a lot of support to our cause. We are hoping that China too will see reason," a top Tibetan exiled government official, requesting anonymity, told IANS here.
"This is a clear message to the Chinese government that the Tibetan people have a vast amount of support around the world. The popularity of the 'Made in China' brand and the Olympics will be significantly affected by how China deals with Tibetan grievances," said Ricken Patel, executive director of Avaaz.
The greatest response to the petition has come from France, where 376,568 people have signed the petition. That's six per 1,000 French citizens and more than one percent of all internet users there, Wikler pointed out.
As a fraction of the population, the response is even greater in Switzerland, where nine per 1,000 Swiss citizens have signed, he added.
-Indo-Asian News Service
Showing posts with label Tibet. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tibet. Show all posts
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Friday, April 11, 2008
Tibet - Uri Avnery
Uri Avenery is another one of the writers I admire. He writes sense, he is not born to please some one to compromise the truth. I am pleased to be alive to read stalwarts like him - Mike Ghouse
http://www.avnery-news.co.il/english/index.html
Not You! You!!
"Hey! Take your hands off me! Not you! You!!!" - the voice of a young woman in the darkened cinema, an old joke.
"Hey! Take your hands off Tibet!" the international chorus is crying out, "But not from Chechnya! Not from the Basque homeland! And certainly not from Palestine!" And that is not a joke.
LIKE EVERYBODY else, I support the right of the Tibetan people to independence, or at least autonomy. Like everybody else, I condemn the actions of the Chinese government there. But unlike everybody else, I am not ready to join in the demonstrations.
Why? Because I have an uneasy feeling that somebody is washing my brain, that what is going on is an exercise in hypocrisy.
I don't mind a bit of manipulation. After all, it is not by accident that the riots started in Tibet on the eve of the Olympic Games in Beijing. That's alright. A people fighting for their freedom have the right to use any opportunity that presents itself to further their struggle.
I support the Tibetans in spite of it being obvious that the Americans are exploiting the struggle for their own purposes. Clearly, the CIA has planned and organized the riots, and the American media are leading the world-wide campaign. It is a part of the hidden struggle between the US, the reigning super-power, and China, the rising super-power - a new version of the "Great Game" that was played in central Asia in the 19th century by the British Empire and Russia. Tibet is a token in this game.
I am even ready to ignore the fact that the gentle Tibetans have carried out a murderous pogrom against innocent Chinese, killing women and men and burning homes and shops. Such detestable excesses do happen during a liberation struggle.
No, what is really bugging me is the hypocrisy of the world media. They storm and thunder about Tibet. In thousands of editorials and talk-shows they heap curses and invective on the evil China. It seems as if the Tibetans are the only people on earth whose right to independence is being denied by brutal force, that if only Beijing would take its dirty hands off the saffron-robed monks, everything would be alright in this, the best of all possible worlds.
THERE IS no doubt that the Tibetan people are entitled to rule their own country, to nurture their unique culture, to promote their religious institutions and to prevent foreign settlers from submerging them.
But are not the Kurds in Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria entitled to the same? The inhabitants of Western Sahara, whose territory is occupied by Morocco? The Basques in Spain? The Corsicans off the coast of France? And the list is long.
Why do the world's media adopt one independence struggle, but often cynically ignore another independence struggle? What makes the blood of one Tibetan redder than the blood of a thousand Africans in East Congo?
Again and again I try to find a satisfactory answer to this enigma. In vain.
Immanuel Kant demanded of us: "Act as if the principle by which you act were about to be turned into a universal law of nature." (Being a German philosopher, he expressed it in much more convoluted language.) Does the attitude towards the Tibetan problem conform to this rule? Does it reflect our attitude towards the struggle for independence of all other oppressed peoples?
Not at all.
WHAT, THEN, causes the international media to discriminate between the various liberation struggles that are going on throughout the world?
Here are some of the relevant considerations:
Do the people seeking independence have an especially exotic culture?
Are they an attractive people, i.e. "sexy" in the view of the media?
Is the struggle headed by a charismatic personality who is liked by the media?
It the oppressing government disliked by the media?
Does the oppressing government belong to the pro-American camp? This is an important factor, since the United States dominates a large part of the international media, and its news agencies and TV networks largely define the agenda and the terminology of the news coverage.
Are economic interests involved in the conflict?
Does the oppressed people have gifted spokespersons, who are able to attract attention and manipulate the media?
FROM THESE points of view, there is nobody like the Tibetans. They enjoy ideal conditions.
Fringed by the Himalayas, they are located in one of the most beautiful landscapes on earth. For centuries, just to get there was an adventure. Their unique religion arouses curiosity and sympathy. Its non-violence is very attractive and elastic enough to cover even the ugliest atrocities, like the recent pogrom. The exiled leader, the Dalai Lama, is a romantic figure, a media rock-star. The Chinese regime is hated by many - by capitalists because it is a Communist dictatorship, by Communists because it has become capitalist. It promotes a crass and ugly materialism, the very opposite of the spiritual Buddhist monks, who spend their time in prayer and meditation.
When China builds a railway to the Tibetan capital over a thousand inhospitable kilometers, the West does not admire the engineering feat, but sees (quite rightly) an iron monster that brings hundreds of thousands of Han-Chinese settlers to the occupied territory.
And of course, China is a rising power, whose economic success threatens America's hegemony in the world. A large part of the ailing American economy already belongs directly or indirectly to China. The huge American Empire is sinking hopelessly into debt, and China may soon be the biggest lender. American manufacturing industry is moving to China, taking millions of jobs with it.
Compared to these factors, what have the Basques, for example, to offer? Like the Tibetans, they inhabit a contiguous territory, most of it in Spain, some of it in France. They, too, are an ancient people with their own language and culture. But these are not exotic and do not attract special notice. No prayer wheels. No robed monks.
The Basques do not have a romantic leader, like Nelson Mandela or the Dalai Lama. The Spanish state, which arose from the ruins of Franco's detested dictatorship, enjoys great popularity around the world. Spain belongs to the European Union, which is more or less in the American camp, sometimes more, sometimes less.
The armed struggle of the Basque underground is abhorred by many and is considered "terrorism", especially after Spain has accorded the Basques a far-reaching autonomy. In these circumstances, the Basques have no chance at all of gaining world support for independence.
The Chechnyans should have been in a better position. They, too, are a separate people, who have for a long time been oppressed by the Czars of the Russian Empire, including Stalin and Putin. But alas, they are Muslims - and in the Western world, Islamophobia now occupies the place that had for centuries been reserved for anti-Semitism. Islam has turned into a synonym for terrorism, it is seen as a religion of blood and murder. Soon it will be revealed that Muslims slaughter Christian children and use their blood for baking Pitta. (In reality it is, of course, the religion of dozens of vastly different peoples, from Indonesia to Morocco and from Kosova to Zanzibar.
The US does not fear Moscow as it fears Beijing. Unlike China, Russia does not look like a country that could dominate the 21st century. The West has no interest in renewing the Cold War, as it has in renewing the Crusades against Islam. The poor Chechnyans, who have no charismatic leader or outstanding spokespersons, have been banished from the headlines. For all the world cares, Putin can hit them as much as he wants, kill thousands and obliterate whole towns.
That does not prevent Putin from supporting the demands of Abkhazia and South Ossetia for separation from Georgia, a country which infuriates Russia.
IF IMMANUEL KANT knew what's going on in Kosova, he would be scratching his head.
The province demanded its independence from Serbia, and I, for one, supported that with all my heart. This is a separate people, with a different culture (Albanian) and its own religion (Islam). After the popular Serbian leader, Slobodan Milosevic, tried to drive them out of their country, the world rose and provided moral and material support for their struggle for independence.
The Albanian Kosovars make up 90% of the citizens of the new state, which has a population of two million. The other 10% are Serbs, who want no part of the new Kosova. They want the areas they live in to be annexed to Serbia. According to Kant's maxim, are they entitled to this?
I would propose a pragmatic moral principle: Every population that inhabits a defined territory and has a clear national character is entitled to independence. A state that wants to keep such a population must see to it that they feel comfortable, that they receive their full rights, enjoy equality and have an autonomy that satisfies their aspirations. In short: that they have no reason to desire separation.
That applies to the French in Canada, the Scots in Britain, the Kurds in Turkey and elsewhere, the various ethnic groups in Africa, the indigenous peoples in Latin America, the Tamils in Sri Lanka and many others. Each has a right to choose between full equality, autonomy and independence.
THIS LEADS us, of course, to the Palestinian issue.
In the competition for the sympathy of the world media, the Palestinians are unlucky. According to all the objective standards, they have a right to full independence, exactly like the Tibetans. They inhabit a defined territory, they are a specific nation, a clear border exists between them and Israel. One must really have a crooked mind to deny these facts.
But the Palestinians are suffering from several cruel strokes of fate: The people that oppress them claim for themselves the crown of ultimate victimhood. The whole world sympathizes with the Israelis because the Jews were the victims of the most horrific crime of the Western world. That creates a strange situation: the oppressor is more popular than the victim. Anyone who supports the Palestinians is automatically suspected of anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial.
Also, the great majority of the Palestinians are Muslims (nobody pays attention to the Palestinian Christians). Since Islam arouses fear and abhorrence in the West, the Palestinian struggle has automatically become a part of that shapeless, sinister threat, "international terrorism". And since the murders of Yasser Arafat and Sheik Ahmed Yassin, the Palestinians have no particularly impressive leader - neither in Fatah nor in Hamas.
The world media are shedding tears for the Tibetan people, whose land is taken from them by Chinese settlers. Who cares about the Palestinians, whose land is taken from them by our settlers?
In the world-wide tumult about Tibet, the Israeli spokespersons compare themselves - strange as it sounds - to the poor Tibetans, not to the evil Chinese. Many think this quite logical.
If Kant were dug up tomorrow and asked about the Palestinians, he would probably answer: "Give them what you think should be given to everybody, and don't wake me up again to ask silly questions."
http://www.avnery-news.co.il/english/index.html
Not You! You!!
"Hey! Take your hands off me! Not you! You!!!" - the voice of a young woman in the darkened cinema, an old joke.
"Hey! Take your hands off Tibet!" the international chorus is crying out, "But not from Chechnya! Not from the Basque homeland! And certainly not from Palestine!" And that is not a joke.
LIKE EVERYBODY else, I support the right of the Tibetan people to independence, or at least autonomy. Like everybody else, I condemn the actions of the Chinese government there. But unlike everybody else, I am not ready to join in the demonstrations.
Why? Because I have an uneasy feeling that somebody is washing my brain, that what is going on is an exercise in hypocrisy.
I don't mind a bit of manipulation. After all, it is not by accident that the riots started in Tibet on the eve of the Olympic Games in Beijing. That's alright. A people fighting for their freedom have the right to use any opportunity that presents itself to further their struggle.
I support the Tibetans in spite of it being obvious that the Americans are exploiting the struggle for their own purposes. Clearly, the CIA has planned and organized the riots, and the American media are leading the world-wide campaign. It is a part of the hidden struggle between the US, the reigning super-power, and China, the rising super-power - a new version of the "Great Game" that was played in central Asia in the 19th century by the British Empire and Russia. Tibet is a token in this game.
I am even ready to ignore the fact that the gentle Tibetans have carried out a murderous pogrom against innocent Chinese, killing women and men and burning homes and shops. Such detestable excesses do happen during a liberation struggle.
No, what is really bugging me is the hypocrisy of the world media. They storm and thunder about Tibet. In thousands of editorials and talk-shows they heap curses and invective on the evil China. It seems as if the Tibetans are the only people on earth whose right to independence is being denied by brutal force, that if only Beijing would take its dirty hands off the saffron-robed monks, everything would be alright in this, the best of all possible worlds.
THERE IS no doubt that the Tibetan people are entitled to rule their own country, to nurture their unique culture, to promote their religious institutions and to prevent foreign settlers from submerging them.
But are not the Kurds in Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria entitled to the same? The inhabitants of Western Sahara, whose territory is occupied by Morocco? The Basques in Spain? The Corsicans off the coast of France? And the list is long.
Why do the world's media adopt one independence struggle, but often cynically ignore another independence struggle? What makes the blood of one Tibetan redder than the blood of a thousand Africans in East Congo?
Again and again I try to find a satisfactory answer to this enigma. In vain.
Immanuel Kant demanded of us: "Act as if the principle by which you act were about to be turned into a universal law of nature." (Being a German philosopher, he expressed it in much more convoluted language.) Does the attitude towards the Tibetan problem conform to this rule? Does it reflect our attitude towards the struggle for independence of all other oppressed peoples?
Not at all.
WHAT, THEN, causes the international media to discriminate between the various liberation struggles that are going on throughout the world?
Here are some of the relevant considerations:
Do the people seeking independence have an especially exotic culture?
Are they an attractive people, i.e. "sexy" in the view of the media?
Is the struggle headed by a charismatic personality who is liked by the media?
It the oppressing government disliked by the media?
Does the oppressing government belong to the pro-American camp? This is an important factor, since the United States dominates a large part of the international media, and its news agencies and TV networks largely define the agenda and the terminology of the news coverage.
Are economic interests involved in the conflict?
Does the oppressed people have gifted spokespersons, who are able to attract attention and manipulate the media?
FROM THESE points of view, there is nobody like the Tibetans. They enjoy ideal conditions.
Fringed by the Himalayas, they are located in one of the most beautiful landscapes on earth. For centuries, just to get there was an adventure. Their unique religion arouses curiosity and sympathy. Its non-violence is very attractive and elastic enough to cover even the ugliest atrocities, like the recent pogrom. The exiled leader, the Dalai Lama, is a romantic figure, a media rock-star. The Chinese regime is hated by many - by capitalists because it is a Communist dictatorship, by Communists because it has become capitalist. It promotes a crass and ugly materialism, the very opposite of the spiritual Buddhist monks, who spend their time in prayer and meditation.
When China builds a railway to the Tibetan capital over a thousand inhospitable kilometers, the West does not admire the engineering feat, but sees (quite rightly) an iron monster that brings hundreds of thousands of Han-Chinese settlers to the occupied territory.
And of course, China is a rising power, whose economic success threatens America's hegemony in the world. A large part of the ailing American economy already belongs directly or indirectly to China. The huge American Empire is sinking hopelessly into debt, and China may soon be the biggest lender. American manufacturing industry is moving to China, taking millions of jobs with it.
Compared to these factors, what have the Basques, for example, to offer? Like the Tibetans, they inhabit a contiguous territory, most of it in Spain, some of it in France. They, too, are an ancient people with their own language and culture. But these are not exotic and do not attract special notice. No prayer wheels. No robed monks.
The Basques do not have a romantic leader, like Nelson Mandela or the Dalai Lama. The Spanish state, which arose from the ruins of Franco's detested dictatorship, enjoys great popularity around the world. Spain belongs to the European Union, which is more or less in the American camp, sometimes more, sometimes less.
The armed struggle of the Basque underground is abhorred by many and is considered "terrorism", especially after Spain has accorded the Basques a far-reaching autonomy. In these circumstances, the Basques have no chance at all of gaining world support for independence.
The Chechnyans should have been in a better position. They, too, are a separate people, who have for a long time been oppressed by the Czars of the Russian Empire, including Stalin and Putin. But alas, they are Muslims - and in the Western world, Islamophobia now occupies the place that had for centuries been reserved for anti-Semitism. Islam has turned into a synonym for terrorism, it is seen as a religion of blood and murder. Soon it will be revealed that Muslims slaughter Christian children and use their blood for baking Pitta. (In reality it is, of course, the religion of dozens of vastly different peoples, from Indonesia to Morocco and from Kosova to Zanzibar.
The US does not fear Moscow as it fears Beijing. Unlike China, Russia does not look like a country that could dominate the 21st century. The West has no interest in renewing the Cold War, as it has in renewing the Crusades against Islam. The poor Chechnyans, who have no charismatic leader or outstanding spokespersons, have been banished from the headlines. For all the world cares, Putin can hit them as much as he wants, kill thousands and obliterate whole towns.
That does not prevent Putin from supporting the demands of Abkhazia and South Ossetia for separation from Georgia, a country which infuriates Russia.
IF IMMANUEL KANT knew what's going on in Kosova, he would be scratching his head.
The province demanded its independence from Serbia, and I, for one, supported that with all my heart. This is a separate people, with a different culture (Albanian) and its own religion (Islam). After the popular Serbian leader, Slobodan Milosevic, tried to drive them out of their country, the world rose and provided moral and material support for their struggle for independence.
The Albanian Kosovars make up 90% of the citizens of the new state, which has a population of two million. The other 10% are Serbs, who want no part of the new Kosova. They want the areas they live in to be annexed to Serbia. According to Kant's maxim, are they entitled to this?
I would propose a pragmatic moral principle: Every population that inhabits a defined territory and has a clear national character is entitled to independence. A state that wants to keep such a population must see to it that they feel comfortable, that they receive their full rights, enjoy equality and have an autonomy that satisfies their aspirations. In short: that they have no reason to desire separation.
That applies to the French in Canada, the Scots in Britain, the Kurds in Turkey and elsewhere, the various ethnic groups in Africa, the indigenous peoples in Latin America, the Tamils in Sri Lanka and many others. Each has a right to choose between full equality, autonomy and independence.
THIS LEADS us, of course, to the Palestinian issue.
In the competition for the sympathy of the world media, the Palestinians are unlucky. According to all the objective standards, they have a right to full independence, exactly like the Tibetans. They inhabit a defined territory, they are a specific nation, a clear border exists between them and Israel. One must really have a crooked mind to deny these facts.
But the Palestinians are suffering from several cruel strokes of fate: The people that oppress them claim for themselves the crown of ultimate victimhood. The whole world sympathizes with the Israelis because the Jews were the victims of the most horrific crime of the Western world. That creates a strange situation: the oppressor is more popular than the victim. Anyone who supports the Palestinians is automatically suspected of anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial.
Also, the great majority of the Palestinians are Muslims (nobody pays attention to the Palestinian Christians). Since Islam arouses fear and abhorrence in the West, the Palestinian struggle has automatically become a part of that shapeless, sinister threat, "international terrorism". And since the murders of Yasser Arafat and Sheik Ahmed Yassin, the Palestinians have no particularly impressive leader - neither in Fatah nor in Hamas.
The world media are shedding tears for the Tibetan people, whose land is taken from them by Chinese settlers. Who cares about the Palestinians, whose land is taken from them by our settlers?
In the world-wide tumult about Tibet, the Israeli spokespersons compare themselves - strange as it sounds - to the poor Tibetans, not to the evil Chinese. Many think this quite logical.
If Kant were dug up tomorrow and asked about the Palestinians, he would probably answer: "Give them what you think should be given to everybody, and don't wake me up again to ask silly questions."
Friday, March 21, 2008
Tibet - A search for Balance
Cyber Voices on Tibet - A Search For Balance
http://news.ncmonline.com/news/view_article.html?article_id=0db406a8bd056cbbd2119742f01dba4a
New America Media, News analysis, Xujun Eberlein, Posted: Mar 21, 2008
Editor’s note: While the mainstream media in China is sounding its regular propaganda on Tibet, the Chinese cyberspace is calling for more balanced reporting and providing multiple points of view and objective assessments as well as on the ground reporting. NAM contributor Xujun Eberlein’s book "Apologies Forthcoming" will be published in May.
Getting a clear picture of what is happening in Tibet is no easy task. Bias is evident in both the Chinese and Western media coverage. A number of interested and thoughtful bloggers, however, have managed to paint a plausible picture, from which one does get important on-the-scene observations that help spotlight what's going on.
Independent blogs that are carefully monitoring the media coverage on China and gathering balanced information and views include Danwei (English), Zuola (Chinese), and Zonaeuropa EastSouthWestNorth ( English and Chinese). In covering the Tibet unrest, they point out inaccuracies as they can, and add photos and observations. As yet, the clearest opening for resolving the conflicts seems to lie in reconciling China's historical claims to a framework for Tibetan Autonomy, although it's not clear whether it's too late to reach a compromise for the new generation.
Meanwhile, the authorities are pointing fingers. During a press conference in Beijing on Tuesday, China's Premier Wen Jiabao accused "the Dalai camp" of organizing, plotting and instigating the riots in Lhasa that began on March 10. He said he had "enough evidence to prove" the accusation, however no evidence was given.
On the same day, in Dhåramsala, while pleading "both China and the Tibetans — don't commit violence," the Dalai Lama theorized that "it's possible some Chinese agents are involved there. Sometimes totalitarian regimes are very clever, so it is important to investigate." An implausible theory given how desperately Beijing wants to keep human rights issues out of the news with the upcoming Olympics.
The cyber voices in China are largely "harmonized" – on major Chinese commercial websites one can only hear uniform shouting such as "Resolutely oppose separatism!" Fortunately though, there are a few individual websites and blogs providing multiple points of view and objective assessments; one of them is Zuola.com. This site operates on a principle that "media should not be owned by government; from government comes propaganda. We all know, as common sense, information from CCTV is not all that believable. Treat it similarly with Westerners' quoting of RFA."
While Beijing's blocking of international journalists and blog sites is plain stupid, if not unexpected, it is a bit more surprising that the preponderance of U.S. news reports have not been that insightful either. Mainstream media is quoting unverified or unconfirmed casualty figures and showing inappropriately edited photos. In one case, CNN cropped a photo that originally showed Tibetans throwing stones at a Chinese military vehicle. By cutting the right side where the Tibetan crowd is, the remaining part of photo becomes a scene of the vehicle chasing running people. This biased reporting was also caught by posters on Zuola.com, and it angered Chinese cyber readers, effectively pouring oil on the fire.
The U.S. media noticed that the unrest began on the day of the 49th anniversary of the 1959 Tibetan uprising, which resulted in the Dalai Lama's exile. There has been little, if any, mention however of the role of the CIA in supporting that uprising.
Given government and media biases, independent bloggers and tourists became more credible resources. An American blogger cyber-named Kadfly whose eyewitness photos are now widely spread on the Internet, gave first-hand accounts from Lhasa on March 14.
"I want to make one thing clear because all of the major news outlets are ignoring a very important fact. Yes, the Chinese government bears a huge amount of blame for this situation. But the protests yesterday were NOT peaceful. The original protests from the past few days may have been, but all of the eyewitnesses in this room agree the protesters yesterday went from attacking Chinese police to attacking innocent people very, very quickly. They appeared to target Muslim and Han Chinese individuals and businesses first but many Tibetans were also caught in the crossfire."
Because of this post, a few commentators insinuated that Kadfly was a Chinese agent, and he took down some of the photos yesterday.
A report by The New York Times' Jim Yardley asserts that "Tibet was effectively independent for decades before communist troops entered in 1950." This view is commonly held by Westerners, while the Western media fails to acknowledge the Chinese view that China has a historical claim of Tibet tracing back to Yuan Dynasty (13-14th century). During the Qing Dynasty, the government of China formally conferred the titles of Tibet's two spiritual and political leaders, the Dalai Lama and the Banchan (Panchen) Lama, one for "Front Tibet" and the other for "Rear Tibet." However, the act of conference is not considered significant from the Tibetan perspective today.
Because of these historical factors, to ask China to let go of Tibet's territorial rights would be as difficult as asking the United States to give up the American West.
On the other hand, the Chinese are not justified in denying their cultural and ideological intrusion of Tibet since 1950, which appears to be the historical reason for the Tibetans' anger today. In the dynasties from Yuan to Qing, Tibet's cultural and religious practice had been largely left alone by the emperors. The Dalai and Banchan Lamas effectively controlled most internal affairs. This changed after the Chinese army marched to Tibet in 1950 and, in the process, built a highway for the first time, through which the Chinese brought in goods, people and Communism without asking the Tibetans. Had the Communist government left Tibet as autonomous as it was during the dynasties, Tibetans might have had less modern but more independent lives.
While the Chinese cultural and political intrusion to Tibet is factual, the issue of Tibet's territorial rights may never be agreed upon by both sides. Unlike the Westerners who hear only one side of view and firmly support Tibet independence, the Dalai Lama knows better. Apparently realizing the infeasibility of requesting jurisdictional independence, the Dalai Lama maintains his high ground and calls for Tibet's autonomy instead.
In fact, Tibet's autonomy, provided its jurisdiction remains within China, may not be as far away as it seems. In the 1980s, a relatively more open-minded leader of post-Mao China, Hu Yaobang, visited Tibet to investigate policy and returned with strong recommendations for change. He subsequently carried out a political reform to allow more religious freedom in Tibet. Unfortunately, this reform was cut short by a series of riots in Lhasa and, in part because of this, Hu Yaobang was purged and the policies reversed.
China is under transition today and political reform is again called for. The current Tibet unrest and the Beijing Olympics may have actually provided an opportunity to China's leaders. When asked by Western reporters, Premier Wen Jiabao mentioned in Tuesday's press conference that his government would consider inviting independent international investigators to Tibet, a welcome gesture. It would be even wiser for Beijing to invite the Dalai Lama to negotiate the terms for Tibet's autonomy.
Yet Beijing is not the only obstacle to the Dalai Lama's mission; he is also facing a dissenting voice within the exile-Tibetans' camp. A Western blogger with unidentified nationality, China Hand, spotted the U.K.’s Daily Telegraph report on Tuesday that quotes Tsewang Rigzin, president of the Tibetan Youth Congress, as saying,
"There is a growing frustration within the Tibetan community, especially in the young generation." "I certainly hope the Middle Way approach will be reviewed. As we can see from the protests here and all over the world, the Tibetan people remain committed to achieving independence."
China Hand points out on his blog China Matters that, as the leader of the largest Tibetan emigre NGO, with 30,000 members and over 80 chapters, the TYC’s stated objective is to “restore Tibet's lost independence.” Tsewang Rigzin is working to "marginalize the Dalai Lama and undercut him as the leader of the worldwide Tibetan movement," says China Hand.
Tibet is not unique in presenting a complex set of political, economic, ethnic, cultural and religious challenges. Single-minded solutions do not seem likely to work.
Articles on Tibet
Articles by Viji Sundaram
A Tibetan in Nepal
http://news.ncmonline.com/news/view_article.html?article_id=0db406a8bd056cbbd2119742f01dba4a
New America Media, News analysis, Xujun Eberlein, Posted: Mar 21, 2008
Editor’s note: While the mainstream media in China is sounding its regular propaganda on Tibet, the Chinese cyberspace is calling for more balanced reporting and providing multiple points of view and objective assessments as well as on the ground reporting. NAM contributor Xujun Eberlein’s book "Apologies Forthcoming" will be published in May.
Getting a clear picture of what is happening in Tibet is no easy task. Bias is evident in both the Chinese and Western media coverage. A number of interested and thoughtful bloggers, however, have managed to paint a plausible picture, from which one does get important on-the-scene observations that help spotlight what's going on.
Independent blogs that are carefully monitoring the media coverage on China and gathering balanced information and views include Danwei (English), Zuola (Chinese), and Zonaeuropa EastSouthWestNorth ( English and Chinese). In covering the Tibet unrest, they point out inaccuracies as they can, and add photos and observations. As yet, the clearest opening for resolving the conflicts seems to lie in reconciling China's historical claims to a framework for Tibetan Autonomy, although it's not clear whether it's too late to reach a compromise for the new generation.
Meanwhile, the authorities are pointing fingers. During a press conference in Beijing on Tuesday, China's Premier Wen Jiabao accused "the Dalai camp" of organizing, plotting and instigating the riots in Lhasa that began on March 10. He said he had "enough evidence to prove" the accusation, however no evidence was given.
On the same day, in Dhåramsala, while pleading "both China and the Tibetans — don't commit violence," the Dalai Lama theorized that "it's possible some Chinese agents are involved there. Sometimes totalitarian regimes are very clever, so it is important to investigate." An implausible theory given how desperately Beijing wants to keep human rights issues out of the news with the upcoming Olympics.
The cyber voices in China are largely "harmonized" – on major Chinese commercial websites one can only hear uniform shouting such as "Resolutely oppose separatism!" Fortunately though, there are a few individual websites and blogs providing multiple points of view and objective assessments; one of them is Zuola.com. This site operates on a principle that "media should not be owned by government; from government comes propaganda. We all know, as common sense, information from CCTV is not all that believable. Treat it similarly with Westerners' quoting of RFA."
While Beijing's blocking of international journalists and blog sites is plain stupid, if not unexpected, it is a bit more surprising that the preponderance of U.S. news reports have not been that insightful either. Mainstream media is quoting unverified or unconfirmed casualty figures and showing inappropriately edited photos. In one case, CNN cropped a photo that originally showed Tibetans throwing stones at a Chinese military vehicle. By cutting the right side where the Tibetan crowd is, the remaining part of photo becomes a scene of the vehicle chasing running people. This biased reporting was also caught by posters on Zuola.com, and it angered Chinese cyber readers, effectively pouring oil on the fire.
The U.S. media noticed that the unrest began on the day of the 49th anniversary of the 1959 Tibetan uprising, which resulted in the Dalai Lama's exile. There has been little, if any, mention however of the role of the CIA in supporting that uprising.
Given government and media biases, independent bloggers and tourists became more credible resources. An American blogger cyber-named Kadfly whose eyewitness photos are now widely spread on the Internet, gave first-hand accounts from Lhasa on March 14.
"I want to make one thing clear because all of the major news outlets are ignoring a very important fact. Yes, the Chinese government bears a huge amount of blame for this situation. But the protests yesterday were NOT peaceful. The original protests from the past few days may have been, but all of the eyewitnesses in this room agree the protesters yesterday went from attacking Chinese police to attacking innocent people very, very quickly. They appeared to target Muslim and Han Chinese individuals and businesses first but many Tibetans were also caught in the crossfire."
Because of this post, a few commentators insinuated that Kadfly was a Chinese agent, and he took down some of the photos yesterday.
A report by The New York Times' Jim Yardley asserts that "Tibet was effectively independent for decades before communist troops entered in 1950." This view is commonly held by Westerners, while the Western media fails to acknowledge the Chinese view that China has a historical claim of Tibet tracing back to Yuan Dynasty (13-14th century). During the Qing Dynasty, the government of China formally conferred the titles of Tibet's two spiritual and political leaders, the Dalai Lama and the Banchan (Panchen) Lama, one for "Front Tibet" and the other for "Rear Tibet." However, the act of conference is not considered significant from the Tibetan perspective today.
Because of these historical factors, to ask China to let go of Tibet's territorial rights would be as difficult as asking the United States to give up the American West.
On the other hand, the Chinese are not justified in denying their cultural and ideological intrusion of Tibet since 1950, which appears to be the historical reason for the Tibetans' anger today. In the dynasties from Yuan to Qing, Tibet's cultural and religious practice had been largely left alone by the emperors. The Dalai and Banchan Lamas effectively controlled most internal affairs. This changed after the Chinese army marched to Tibet in 1950 and, in the process, built a highway for the first time, through which the Chinese brought in goods, people and Communism without asking the Tibetans. Had the Communist government left Tibet as autonomous as it was during the dynasties, Tibetans might have had less modern but more independent lives.
While the Chinese cultural and political intrusion to Tibet is factual, the issue of Tibet's territorial rights may never be agreed upon by both sides. Unlike the Westerners who hear only one side of view and firmly support Tibet independence, the Dalai Lama knows better. Apparently realizing the infeasibility of requesting jurisdictional independence, the Dalai Lama maintains his high ground and calls for Tibet's autonomy instead.
In fact, Tibet's autonomy, provided its jurisdiction remains within China, may not be as far away as it seems. In the 1980s, a relatively more open-minded leader of post-Mao China, Hu Yaobang, visited Tibet to investigate policy and returned with strong recommendations for change. He subsequently carried out a political reform to allow more religious freedom in Tibet. Unfortunately, this reform was cut short by a series of riots in Lhasa and, in part because of this, Hu Yaobang was purged and the policies reversed.
China is under transition today and political reform is again called for. The current Tibet unrest and the Beijing Olympics may have actually provided an opportunity to China's leaders. When asked by Western reporters, Premier Wen Jiabao mentioned in Tuesday's press conference that his government would consider inviting independent international investigators to Tibet, a welcome gesture. It would be even wiser for Beijing to invite the Dalai Lama to negotiate the terms for Tibet's autonomy.
Yet Beijing is not the only obstacle to the Dalai Lama's mission; he is also facing a dissenting voice within the exile-Tibetans' camp. A Western blogger with unidentified nationality, China Hand, spotted the U.K.’s Daily Telegraph report on Tuesday that quotes Tsewang Rigzin, president of the Tibetan Youth Congress, as saying,
"There is a growing frustration within the Tibetan community, especially in the young generation." "I certainly hope the Middle Way approach will be reviewed. As we can see from the protests here and all over the world, the Tibetan people remain committed to achieving independence."
China Hand points out on his blog China Matters that, as the leader of the largest Tibetan emigre NGO, with 30,000 members and over 80 chapters, the TYC’s stated objective is to “restore Tibet's lost independence.” Tsewang Rigzin is working to "marginalize the Dalai Lama and undercut him as the leader of the worldwide Tibetan movement," says China Hand.
Tibet is not unique in presenting a complex set of political, economic, ethnic, cultural and religious challenges. Single-minded solutions do not seem likely to work.
Articles on Tibet
Articles by Viji Sundaram
A Tibetan in Nepal
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)