Today's reports about the Dalai Lama threatening to resign if the protest violence continues are interesting. They confirm for me that the emigre communities, as well as some people in Tibet, are coming in behind extremist factions amongst the separatist groups, factions that openly espouse the killing of Han Chinese as acts of great virtue. Would a threat by the Dalai to resign if separatist violence continues worry the Chinese authorities? I think not. It is more than likely an attempt on his part to reassert control over the separatist movement.

Incidentally, don't overlook the fact that elections in Nepal are scheduled for April 10 and that Prachanda's Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) is set to make the major gains. Is it a coincidence that some of the most violent protests by Tibetan emigres have been in Kathmandu? The CIA and the Indians have been quite active in trying to block the advances of the Maoists and to keep Nepal's fratricidal King in power - the CIA are past masters at this sort of destabilisation. You gotta love conspiracy theories....and how often they turn out to be true!

Nathan, I empathise with your love of country and agree that peaceful methods can't resolve antagonistic contradictions. However, there is an element of Han chauvinism in the mix on the part of some of those new settlers in Tibet - I've heard Han Chinese describe Tibetan Chinese as "lazy and dirty - like your Aborigines". The Party needs to deal with this as a matter of urgency.

My full comment (to date) is at http://mike-servethepeople.blogspot.com/2008/03/tibetan-issue-must-be-dealt-with.html

UN -Resolution 1723 (XVI) Recognition of Tibet's right to self-determination
1961, the UNGA adopted Resolution 1723 (XVI), in which it explicitly recognised the right of the Tibetan people to self-determination.

The UN called on the PRC to cease "practices which deprive the Tibetan people of their fundamental human rights and freedoms, including their right to self-determination." Four years later, in 1965, the UN General Assembly expressly reaffirmed this resolution in UNGA Res. 2079 (XX).

The International Commission of Jurists' Legal Enquiry Committee on Tibet reported in its study on Tibet's legal status concluded -

"The Chinese Government cannot deny the fact that Tibet was independent between 1911 and 1951 without distorting history."

The 783 Treaty of Ch'ing-shui.
Signed following the route of the Han Chinese army, capture of the capital Ch'ing-shui (X'ian) and flight of the emperor in 763 CE. The text was recorded on three identical stone steles. One stele was placed outside the Imperial Palace in Chang'an. One on the Sino-Tibetan border on Mount Gugu Meru. The third in front of the main gate of the Jokhang Temple in Lhasa. Under the text, China clearly acknowledged Tibet and China as being two separate and Independent nations. The steles on Mount Gugu Meru and Imperial Palace in Chang'an have been removed or destroyed by the Chinese. The original in Lhasa had been recorded on numerous occasions and accurately translated. The 1186 year old stele is recognised by China and recorded as a genuine historical document, its validity recognized by the CCP. China retranslated the text to change the original intention and outcome to comply with its own rewrite of history ignoring scholars' translations and its own records.

Mongolia has more right to Tibet that China.
History shows that Tibet succumbed to the Mongol influence of Kublai Khan during the time of the Yuan Dynasty when the Mongols ruled China. The Yuan Dynasty was not Chinese, it was Mongolian.

Hard research often produces a different outcome that the fallible human memory.

Arthur Thomas

Communicat

To boycott Beijing Olympics would not help at all. I have been taught to learn from history since I was young in primary school. My teachers told me the history might be repeat but in different way. So we need prepare ourself always. In last 200 years, China had been forced to open. And then she was separated and occupied by different countries like UK(HK), Japan (ShanDong Province) and so on. It was just like a meat on dinner table. The fears of losing land again always exist in our heart. So we won't accept any advise or suggestion which lead to the possibility of losing our land. Since you do not have such experience, I am not sure if you can understand the feeling. About current China, I hope you can go to China and experience yourself. The Olympic games brings us lots of changes in human rights and other fields. We (all Chinese) respect this opportunity to show our progress and shortage in every field. We are glad to hear any advice which can help us getting better. But it can not be the price of losing our land.

Mike Thanks for your comments. It looks like you know China and Chinese very well. There may have an element of Han chauvinism in Tibet. It is similar in Australia (sort of). Like you mentioned in your article, many non-indigenous Australians display assumed superiority towards Aboriginal Australians. But it should not become the excuse of being independent. I agree the Party needs to deal with it urgently. Actually we have lots of special policies for those national minorities. For example the single child policy only apply to Han. The students of national minorities can get into better school/university with lower score in kind of VET exam.

All (normal) Chinese have a base-line, which is keeping our current land integrated. TW and Tibet can not become independent

Nathan C. I no more like western, or Korean, or Japanese, or even Chinese, corporations operating the way they do in such countries as China and India than you do.It is cynical, it is greedy and China is allowing such corporations both environmental and labour subsidies that do the Chinese people and indeed the rest of us no long-term good. As always, those at the top of the economic pile collaborate with each other, of whatever nationality, to get rich and stay rich, and those at the bottom suffer. However, violence comes from frustration, and that too is a universal truth, and peole do not become violent and frustrated without due cause. Most people like a quiet life. China should do something positive about the frustrations felt by Tibetans, rather than liberating them unto death with machine guns.

NathanC,

There is a question which you need to answer.

Why shouldn't Tibet, or Taiwan for that matter, become independent if that is what the people of those lands want?

You say "it can not be the price of losing our land". But have you considered that's exactly what many in Tibet feel now? That they've lost their land?

I am no great fan of the Dalia Lama or the feudal theocracy that used to exist there, but I do concur with Lenin's sentiments on the rights of nations to self-determination. China does not seem to respect the ideology it professes to be aligned to.

With all respect to their beleifs, by having their monesteries, the Tibetans may have found a way of a maintaining a numerically stable population, (something the Chinese seem to be unable to do in spite of "single child" policy).

What is happening in Tibet is important, whether it is considered part of China or not. If a system of government denise the ability of a large section of the community to advance socially, economically or academically, than it can cause tension or violence. (A classic case of this was the Apartheid regime in South Africa.)

The problem is that that Chinese may behave in a similar fashion elsewhere, which will likely to store up tensions that will effect everybody, and not just the Tibetans.

Incidentally, the Chinese marched into Tibet largely because of its enormous and untapped natural resources.