lemontree

Great debate....as always I stand by the Tibetans. If one remembers the videos posted (taken by german tourists) last year about PAP border guards shooting dead unarmed Tibetan refugees escaping to Nepal, then the uprising should not be a surprise.

Inspite of all that the CCP would have the world believe in, resentment and and rebellion is just under the surface - and the crust is rather thin. The regular stream of refugees is proof enough.

__________________

Cheers!...on the rocks!!

Ray

I was waiting for that.

Afghanistan was attacked since it refused to hand over Osama bin Laden who organised the unprovoked attack on the US. It was a reaction to the then Afghanistan govt not conforming to the international protocol. It is not a conquest.

Iraq is again not a conquest. It was based on what the US perceived as an imminent threat to the US. The concept of pre- emptive strike is debatable. And even though US is the sole super power, it has faced flak on the issue as China is facing for Tibet.

However, you have to grant it to the US that it has not hidden the truth or blanked out the media. It is doing what it is doing in full international media glare and the US citizens themselves are divided over the war. They are not being pig headed. The US is also not ruthlessly massacring the Iraqis as a repression. The international media and even Jalzeera are free to roam Iraq and report what they like. The same is not happening in China or in Tibet. The lid is tight in Tibet and given the Chinese penchant to use brute force and crushing dissent, one wonders what is happening there. To use your favourite term, apples and oranges!

If you have followed my posts, I have stated that Independence of Tibet is no go even if the criticism continues.

__________________


"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

HAKUNA MATATA

Officer of Engineers

And I bit hook, line, and sinker.

Good setup, Sir. Very Good setup. **** chuckling manicly ****

__________________
Chimo

Ray

Becoming as good as the Chinese govt, what?

Out Chou en Lai-ing, what?

The Mao Chou en Lai combination was like the interrogation Mutt and Jeff technique.

Mao was the rough chap and Chou en Lai the polished statesman!

Fantastic combination indeed!

gunnut

I think the best solution, a solution that no one's happy with, yet has something for everyone, is for the south part of Taiwan to declare independence.

That way the pro independence Taiwanese get something (their own nation), the pro unification Taiwanese get something (the north part of the island), China gets something (re-unification), the world gets something (China granting independence to an independence movement). Yet no one's happy because Taiwanese lost something (half the island), the nationalist lost something (the other half), China lost something, (half the island), the world lost something (the other half).

__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

Adux

I have a better solution, Give Tibet freedom of choice. bin the one party system and adopt democracy. Taiwan, Hongkong, Tibet(if they chose too) and China all under one system of democracy!!!

gunnut

That's the plan. But it will be slow. CCP wants to guarantee territorial sovereignty first. Democracy will take decades to come. Bring about a total system change in a short time will produce nothing but chaos. Take a look at Russia's attempt at market economy. China took the gradual approach and it seems pretty successful. Political change will take longer.

Ray

Interesting logic.

The Black people could not rebel against the US because the US was not the original homeland of the Blacks that had been stolen by the white Americans!!

In fact, after they were freed, they had the option to return to Africa. In 1822, the American Colonization Society established Liberia as a place to send freed African-American slaves.

So where is the logic for comparison of the Blacks with the Tibetans?

Asia and Africa did not reject the western culture because the Europeans left and did not hang around.

It is a canard to state that the western media did not appreciate the effort of the Chinese to modernise Tibet. There are many articles and educated analysis in the western circles indicating the same. If you wish to look at issues with coloured glasses, the problem is yours.

Ray

Rather condescendingly arrogant.

Edit: I had written an equally condescending stuff on the issue of bandaging the feet of girls, but I edited and removed it since I was too embarrassed that I could be so insensitive and foolish!

The Tibetans may be Buddhists but that in no way is true that they cannot be brutal and aggressive.

I have seen Khampas and I would not like to meet them in a dark alley!

At the same time, I will say that I know many an overseas Chinese and Indian Chinese, who are not Buddhists, but are docile and great gentlemen and ladies!

ofelas

Colored glasses with a distinctly red tint, I might add.

Ray

flow

Elie Wiesel is a close friend of Dalai Lama, so he definitely pleads for him. Dalai Lama was a Buddhist, (yes, I said "was") but once he goes into politics, he becomes a politician. Any politician's words need to be questioned: did he tell the truth or is he defending his own benefit? Obviously, Wiesel did not doubt on this.

Wiesel says "I don't understand the Chinese hierarchy there, are they afraid of Tibet?" We can see from this sentence that he knows little about China. That's why he used the word "afraid".

The publisher insisted that "Led by Buddhist monks, protests had begun peacefully in Lhasa early last week but erupted into rioting on March 14, drawing a harsh response from Chinese authorities."

From his/her words, it seems the rioters were "forced" to make destruction. They killed innocent people, burned shops and smashed cars because the policy "forced" them to do so! If they were angry about the Chinese authorities, why didn't they take on conflicts only with the police? Under no circumstance, should they kill innocent people! Some Tibetans said that their destruction was not made randomly. Who they killed were all Hans, and those shops where operated by the Han immigrants, the cars were all Japanese cars used by the rich. As can be seen, their destruction was not driven by the "crackdown", but was well planned before hand. They targetted not on the government, but the Hans. Isn't it nationality racism?

Who knows whether this is a trap aboratively set up by Dalai? Imagine that Dalai ordered monks to have a peaceful parade first. Irrespecting how the Chinese government reacted, rioters made destruction on the second day. And then made an excuse that kiling people was not his idea, the Chinese government made it happen. The timing of this incident is very good, just before the Beijing Olympic games and Taiwan's election, which further confirms that the riot was aboratively planned before hand. Making incidents like Hollywood movies is a usual artifice of politicians. Why didn't the publisher think about it?

New York Times says the Chinese authorities executed "violent crackdown". But did the publisher see a bullet shell in Lhasa? Is there evidence showing the Chinese troops used weapons of destruction? Did they see soldiers and tanks going into Tibet only, then "assumed" that violent weapons were used? Journalists should be honest on the truth. If high-pressure water guns and tear bombs are "weapons of destruction", then every country executed "violent crackdown" to rioters.

Imagine that our houses were burned, and our family were kill by someone, would we call the police to arrest the criminals? If the criminals resisted, would the police use "violent" action to arrest them? The rioters made serious destruction in the city of Lhasa, police should definitely come out to stop them. Every country does so since this is a "must" to maintain the peace.

Wiesel says "All he (Dalai) wants is religious and cultural autonomy", ''(the autonomy) is fundamental to the preservation of the ancient Tibetan heritage.''

As far as I know, some Tibetans reject Hans just because they reject to live in the same way as the Han immigrants do. Some Tibetans, especially the elder ones, don't like doing business, they prefer their traditional way of living - depasturage and slavery. They deemed the opening of Tibet's economy as a breach of their traditional culture. If younger Tibetans accept the Hans' living style, they deem them betrayers. Under the progress of Globalization, the culture (including living style, religion, faith) of many western countries has entered into the developing countries in Asia. But the Asian did not reject this culture import. They welcomed the incoming cultures, at the same time, they insisted their traditional culture. This is much better than purely rejecting any incoming culture which is a "must be" under the opening of economy. The Tibetans deem the opening of Tibet as Hans' economic and cultural invasion, this is a kind of "nationality chauvinism". If Tibet goes independent, the western culture will have no way to go into Tibet as well. The US government's intension to make Tibet another economic colony will only lead to another riot in Tibet.

Demonstrating one's wants by killing innocent people, burning shops and smashing cars is somewhat like terrorists do. (hope they aren't) New York Times supports such terroristic action is anti-human. Think of how the Bush government react to terroristic destruction? It launched war with Iraq! It carried out more than "violent", but "brutal" action in the mid-east asia by kiling millions of innocent people and torturing the Islamic prisoners. Did they respect the human rights in other countries? Obsolutely no! So how can the US publisher blame Chinese authorities' reaction shamelessly?

I welcome international parties to surveil China's human rights problem, and urge the Chinese government to make improvements. This is good for the Chinese civilians. But using the method of making destructions and restraining China's economy growth harms Chinese people. I hope international human rights organisations help China CONSTRUCTIVELY instead of throwing China into Chaos, and avoid being used by some governments who don't want to see China becoming stronger.

kuku

It seems for the Tibetans, Chinese government and the Hans are one and the same thing.

They must have destroyed government property too, any ways let international media inside Tibet if you chaps care so much about international opinion, otherwise stop complaining.

Listen to your self for a second, no one will take your governments view over Tibetan leaders, and that should tell you something about the current form of government you have in your nation.

Does it even occur to you that there are more centers of power within the Tibetan community and the fact that these riots can be the result of a now or never feeling in Tibet.
or will you be happy if these riots and the murders happened after the Olympics?

All through your nations history you have stockpiled on more than enough weapons, no one is going to take Tibet away from you, all you need to do is to respect them and give them civil/ human / religious rights.

That is however a problem as no other community in China has this respect and these rights, hence peaceful integration is out of the question, only thing you can do is forceful integration, for that you had 60 years, and guess what.

This violence will go on, take this from us, we have seen this in our history.
No one will know.

Hear this now, no one will ever call the murders a good thing and as long as Tibet is a part of China, the Tibetans will find ways to protest against China and Chinese people. Will this have much of an impact on China, no it can just keep on occupying Tibet for as long as this power lasts.

Will you be willing to give the Tibetans religious autonomy?

All the Tibetan and their religious leaders fleeing China seem to suggest your government is interfering in their religious lives.

All reforms that would have happened if Tibet was a free nation would have been accepted much easier had it been free, now the Tibetans have a source to blame all their sufferings on, namely china and Chinese people.

USA and many others will keep on criticizing your nation, if you reverse the blame on every other nation on this planet, you start playing games i used to play when i was a child, take the blame someone throws at you and turn into a blame on them.

How will your government in its present one party system make the Tibetans feel as if they are a Part of China?

Criticism will continue, you will not mind much as it will be neutralized by your nations economic charm.
Well that choice is not yours to make and your government is not letting the media into Tibet, making them more and more suspicious.

Many organizations want the world to restrict China till they get democratic reforms rolling, once that happens expect more chaos.

No one will help you on your way to power will a waiting red carpet.

And they will keep coming at you on points like Dafur, Burma etc. while you stay in that position of power.

I have a feeling that your leaders will find ways around it, this is not the first time you have been under international criticism, however the more and more connected with the world you are the more and more you will have to listen to this criticism and respond to it.

__________________
cheers

Ray

As promised to Flow that I would reply to his comments and this article in particular, in his thread
why was my thread was moved?

where he commented:

and

Wiesel is a Holocaust survivor. He understand the horrors of a repressive regime and genocide.

While I would like to believe that there is no genocide in Tibet, yet the repression of minorities, be it in Tibet, Xinjiang or elsewhere, that is reported in the western media (and maybe with some degree of bias) is not totally out of context. Neither is the fact that there is a deliberate effort of the Chinese govt to promote a demographic change wherein the minority and singular status of a region is removed and a new Chinese identity based on the majority Han culture is incorporated.

From a scientific standpoint of governance of a vast nation with an immense spectrum of minorities with diverse culture, religion and tradition, the scientific imposition of a single identity is perfect. As perfect as the Nazi experiment to produce the Master Race!

However, no matter how innovative and successful that the scientific re-engineering of race to produce a single identity and race maybe, it is reprehensible from the angle of humanity.

In this context, the US example is what alone can create a single identity. So organise the governance and lifestyle that people voluntarily embrace the idea.

I appreciate the problems that minorities cause to the national identities, but it a fact of life and it has to be lived with. We have the same problems. Our method may not be ideal and it may not appeal to the majority, but we ensure that the unique cultural and religious identity of our minority states are not disturbed. The majority is denied citizenship and ownership in such states where the minority (in the context of All India equation) is the majority. Sikkim and Kashmir come to mind. Even those with a minority mother, but a majority father, are not allowed to be citizens of that State or have ownership.

I will also concede that even such concessions do not appease. But then that is life!

The protest started in a peaceable manner and then it became violent! Surely, unless one is repressive, there is no reason why the other lot should get violent!

That the Tibetans retaliated in savage like anger maybe correct. Must have! The years long re-engineering of their culture, tradition and religion must have boiled over.

Everyone like his culture, tradition and religion. But then the Communists have no religion and even the culture of the Chinese is not what they practice. Therefore, the niceties of Chinese culture is absent because it runs contrary to their form of governance through mind control and crushing of the truth! The very fact that the Communist Chinese are secretive and lack transparency indicates to this truth!

To state that the Chinese reacted as domesticated cats before a fire and slurping a dish of milk is totally ridiculous given its history (Cultural Revolution, Tiennamen Square and many other atrocities that the Chinese State controlled media and government blanked out as the protest at the Olympic Flame Ceremony!)

Let my analysis not be taken as a J'Áccuse of the Han race. No, not at all! All Hans are not Communists. They remain the good people steeped in their culture that they always were. I confine myself to the Communist and the Communist repressive govt of China.

The Chinese communists not only are repressive with the minorities. They are equally insensitive to the Hans. The BBC programme "Inside China" indicates the same. Very insensitive. Being citizens of democracies, we may not understand the importance of using such repressive and arbitrary actions that make China great. It is the cultural difference that prompts our belief. We think that the individual rights are supreme, while the Communists believe that the State's right is supreme. Even the individual loves that his country is supreme, but when he is deprived of his land without adequate compensation that would allow him to buy another dwelling, or his right to think and speak without fear of reprisal or re-education in a concentration camp, he too fails to see the 'bigger picture'!

I find no fault with what Wiesal felt.

Tibet shall never be free. That is the reality of history. However, they can be free to practice their belief.

Or is that asking for too much?

Officer of Engineers

No, it would not and not because it's communist or Han-Chinese but the very nature of a minority living within a majority. It would be seen as a bribe and most expect it to continue even after independence. Quebec's Sovereignty Association assumes that they still have a say in Ottawa, a seat in the Bank of Canada, Canadian government jobs, their own military and social services still being paid for by Ottawa - all after independence.

In fact, Kosovo is still reliant on Serbian electricity and roads within Serbia (ie free trade) after their UDI.

There is no reason to believe that Tibetans would be any happier or freer in a democratic China.