Feed 
Have something to add? Join the discussion! Click here to leave a comment. No registration required!
You are Here: Home>> The Vance Report >>What the Torch on Mount Everest Means for the Tibetan People
Click Here to Subsribe to the 'The Vance Report' Feed
What the Torch on Mount Everest Means for the Tibetan People
Written by Robert Vance on May 3, 2008 – 11:41 amHmmm. I wonder what first words the Dalai Lama’s envoy will choose tommorrow when it meets with the Chinese government in Beijing? Could they be to effect of, “do you have to rub your torch in our faces by dragging it through our province and up the tallest mountain in the world which also happens to be in our province?” Probably not. If the meeting gets off on that ’sort of foot’, I’m sure it will be much briefer than even Tenzin Takhla, secretary to the Dalia Lama, predicted. However, there is no question that many Tibetan people are unhappy with the Chinese government’s plan to parade through their province what has become for them a symbol of opression and heartbreak.
I think that the idea of carrying the Olympic Torch to the top of Mount Everest (Qomolangma as it is called in the Tibetan language) was a brilliant idea by the Chinese government. Although the mighty mountain is shared by just Tibet and Nepal, it has been for many years an international symbol of athleticism, bravery, and sacrifice. When I visited Base Camp a few years ago, there were many people from all over the world who were gathered there to admire the majestic peak as well as scale its heights. It is just too bad that the world’s tallest mountain happens to be located in Tibet. Otherwise, carrying the torch to its peak would be a fitting end to the Torch’s long and arduous tour. Unfortunately, if and when the Torch does arrive at the top of Mount Everest, most Tibetans will not view it as a shining beacon to the world. Rather, they will see it as a burning reminder of the Chinese government’s dominance over their land and over their culture. The ascent of the torch will not be a victorious one for the Tibetans; for them it will as if someone raised a flag on the tallest place in their province and shouted, “Tibet is and always has been ours! We establish that assertion again today!” It will be a slap in the face of Tibet.
The world will standby and ‘applaud’ politely. The torch will come down the North slope of the mountain and eventually find itself being adored at the Opening Ceremonies. The Games will and must go on. But what about Tibet? Will the people’s voices be extinguished along with Torch at the end of August? I fear that this will be the case. The Olympics will come and go but the hearts of the Tibetans will continue to ache and by then few in this fickle world will feel their pain.
Join the forum discussion
on this post - (2) Posts
Other Recent Posts in The Vance Report
Don't miss...
- Trading Spaces
- China Working Visa Notes for ESL Teachers
- Why the No Plastic Bag Policy is Working in China
- Should China Shrug Off Olympic Slit-Eyed Photos?
- Stealing Phones in China
- Don’t be a Foreign Ghost!
- What People Are Really Celebrating on National Day in China
Robert,
Although you admit that Tibet is just a province of China, but you seem forget a important fact that China is a country consisting of 56 ethnic groups: Han as majority anTibetans as one of the many minority groups. Therefore, you can have Han Chinese, Tibetan Chinese, Hui Chinese,…etc. What’s wrong with any Chinese, Han, Tibetan or from any other ethnuc groups, claim that “Tibet was and will always be part of China”? By anology, If any Britains raise a UK flag in Irish soil, a New Yorker raise a flag in Hawii,or any Canadians raise a Canada flag in Quebec, should it be a slap in the face of Irish, Asia minority, or Quebec franch? If that is the case, then should China should use their resource and power to promote independence activities in those countries? As Chinese, we appreciate suggestions and advice of our international friends for improve of China in any aspects, but we will fight any vicious attempts to split our country no matter what is the disguise. Any people who advocate spliting activities are enemy of all Chinese including Hans and Tibetans. We don’t expect our enemy to stop their splitting activities, we only hope they will be brave enough to anounce their true intention and use “human right” as a weapon to attack China.
Cue nationalist rants stage left . . . . .
Everybody uses it: http://www.sandisk.com/tothetop/
Steve Xu,
You’re right. I do admit that Tibet is a province of China. In reality, there are few people who deny China’s sovereignty over Tibet. The Chinese people accuse the Dalai Lama of calling for an indepenent Tibet which is completely untrue. He is calling for a more autonomous Tibet but not an independent Tibet.
What I do not like or accept is how the Chinese government (and its people) try to use a distorted and twisted historical view as an excuse to stamp out(destroy) the culture in Tibet. The uniting of Tibet and China is not because of some link in China’s ancient history;Tibet is now part of China because the Chinese government has ‘recently’ forced their will on the region; The Chinese government has done much more with Tibet than just ‘make it part of the country.’ The government with the aid of the Chinese people has broken its promise that Tibet would be an autonomous region by flooding the province with Han People and goods in an attempt to drown the culture and bring the province in line with the rest of China.
I went to Lhasa for my first time in June, 2006, three days before the first trains started running from Beijing to Lhasa. I left to visit Everest and when I returned a week later, it seemed to me that Lhasa had been transformed. The ancient city was flooded with so many people and there were numerous caravans of Jeeps and vans carrying dignitaries to different parts of the province. I think that this train line between the capital of China and Lhasa was the final ‘nail in the coffin’ for the Tibetan culture.
So no Steven, I am not calling for Tibetan independence. Neither are any Western governments that I know of. I do however, stand by my post, in believing that the Chinese government will use the torch’s ascent up Mount Everest to assert its dominance over the Tibetan people and to remind them once again that Chinese (Han) culture will triumph over Tibetan culture at the end of the day.
This is not a ‘disguised’ attempt to promote Tibet independence. It is a ‘undisguised’ and unabashed attempt to point out that if the Chinese government and the Chinese people truly respect Tibetan culture, they should stop trying to eradicate it by drowning it out with Han culture.
Robert,
The Chinese history should not be fully analyzed with modern country definitions. Same as some other non-western “regions”. If you think “The uniting of Tibet and China is not because of some link in China’s ancient history;Tibet is now part of China because the Chinese government has ‘recently’ forced their will on the region”, then how about the once independent ethic groups in Japan and India? And if you are free, you can have a tour to the Lama Temple Beijing(Yonghegong) in Beijing, or ChengDe in Hebei Province. I just been there a week ago. You can found out the links between central government and the Tibet. Those are the best places to learn or understand Lamaism out of Tibet. And you will find a lot of Han Lamaism practicers there. Highly recommended.
And another point about “culture genocide” or your worries about Tibet culture, China is treated as cut-throat capitalism by a lot of outsiders, if Tibet culture can makes money as it does today, there is no way it will be eliminated. On the contrary, I worry that with so many people interested about Tibet culture, some people will fabricate some non-original stuff.
Culture is evolving, and it’s specially painful for Tibet, to evolve from middle age to internet era. It’s part of Modernization or Westernization. You can not leave Tibet isolated with world, right?
regards
Hi Yonder,
Thank you for your comments. I think you hit the nail ‘right on the head’ when you said that “if Tibet culture makes money as it does today, there is no way it will be eliminated.” The Chinese government does want to keep some aspects of the Tibetan culture alive; especially the parts of the culture that will bring in money to the government. So yes, the Chinese government will keep the temples open in Lhasa. Yes, the government will allow some semblance of Buddhism to exist. It’s about money, Yonder, not about respecting a culture. That is the travesty.
Robert,
Yes, My personally feeling is same when I paid 25yuan tickets at Beijing Lama temple, it’s too expensive. Considering the free tour in National Mall in DC, I would say that the cost is too high here in China. I haven’t been to Tibet yet, but I guess the entrance fee for temples in Tibet are not cheap.
But I don’t think that the government get financial benefit from Tourism income from Tibet. The statics shows that these income can hardly maintain the daily cost of those temples, especially with so many lamas or monks in temples. And I think the government try to use Tourism to promote Tibet economy. And history shows that richer society has less chances to harbor radical religious.
There are a few gold dragons in the ChengDe Lama temples, each made of over one ton of gold, you should check that out some time later, quite amazing.
The religion practiced in Tibet, it can be called either Lamaism or Tantra Buddhism, quite different with the Buddhism practiced by Han, or in Thailand and other counties in East Asia or South East Asia. Tantra Buddhism might be the only Buddhism sect which try to setup a theocracy world, which got worshiped from Adolf Hilter.
The Mahayana Buddhism are quite popular in China, I don’t think government plays role here. Tantra Buddhism is prevail in inner Mongolia and Tibet, and I think the government try to control it, since they have this kind of “living buddha” system. And at least several “living buddha” have different views as your impressions, The 10th Panchan, the No.2 Lama in Tibet was one of them.
The Tantra Buddhism needs reform, and I do think that the right person to do it is DaLai Lama, but only as a spirit leader, not a political leader. I do hope that his buddhism teaching can be performed in Beijing Lama temple again as 50 years ago, and his school can be opened offically as Panchan lama’s teaching school.
with regards
“And history shows that richer society has less chances to harbor radical religious.”
@yonder:
Assuming that the only problem is religious, then yes, but if the problem is nationalistic/separatist/ethnic issues, then there are a myriad of areas where history has shown this to be false, Northern Ireland as an example.
Not only have the Han people move to Tibet, there there thousands of Tibetans who have left the highlands and move to other parts of China such Beijing and Shanghai.
Why is that when Hans move to Tibet, they are guilty of cultural genocide and when white people move to China to teach English they are ok?
Yugung said,
“Why is that when Hans move to Tibet, they are guilty of cultural genocide and when white people move to China to teach English they are ok?”
@Yugung,
You need to get your facts straight. The Tibetans are now a minority in their own ‘autonomous’ province thanks to the flood of Han Chinese. Last time I checked, there are still at least ‘a few more’ Han Chinese people than ‘white people’ teaching English in China. Or am I wrong about that? I hope you are just being facetious when you compare what has happened in Tibet to foreigners coming into China to teach English.
I also want to remind you that you called me a ‘moron’ in another post because you thought I suggested that the CCP was responsible for the earthquake somehow. I actually said quite the opposite. I hope you will read my response.
http://www.teachabroadchina.com/chinese-government-earthquake-tibet/
RV said:You need to get your facts straight. The Tibetans are now a minority in their own ‘autonomous’ province thanks to the flood of Han Chinese.
I certainly think that everybody should get his or her facts straight.
I got my statistic from here:
http://www.npfpc.gov.cn/en/en2008-04/news20080411.htm
Out of a total population of 2.8 millions in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) ethnic Tibetan form 95.3% of the population in 2006.
The population movement in China is multidirectional. This is not unique to Tibet.
Large number of Tibetans have left Tibet and move to other parts of China. I am sure some of you have heard of the singer, Han Hong (Tibetan name: Ingdzinndroma).She is a very popular Tibetan singer and she is all over China.
I can’t think of many countries in the world where people in one part of the country is restricted from moveing to other part of the same country based on the ethnic origin.
I apologise to you and others in this forum for calling you “moron”.
@Yugung,
Unfortunately, the statistics that you presented in your last post are widely disputed. Based on those statistics, there would only be approx. 140,000 Han Chinese (and other non-Tibetans) living in Tibet. Without even looking at any other information, that number seems ridiculously low especially since we know that the Chinese government has agressively been sending and even sponsoring Han Chinese into the region since the 1950’s. I also want to point out that these statistics come from the Chinese government. Why should we believe them? The government has every reason to make us think that Tibetans are still the majority in Tibet.
Here are a few other sources of information. I realize that these are Western sources but at least you can know that the numbers you stated above are not necessarily fact. I was also only able to come up with limited sources because oddly enough much of the information that I found about population in Tibet is blocked. Coincidence? I think not.
http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2006/07/01/westerners_protest_beijing_tibet_rail/ (Scroll down to the bottom)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_treatment_of_Tibetans (Read what the Heritage Foundation has said)
http://www.sunstar.com.ph/static/pam/2008/05/04/oped/malu.gueco.html
There are many more sources that you can check out by doing a simple search on the internet.
The ‘large number of Tibetans’ who have moved to other parts of China are mostly looking better jobs and opportunities and were not sent by their government to try to take over a culture. Han Hong was sent to Beijing by her mother at a young age and probably never would have reached such greatness if it weren’t for the move. The rest of China is richer than Tibet and there are more opportunities. She still had to work hard to get to where she is today. Han Chinese who are moving into Tibet know that they will be treated better there than the ethnic Tibetans and will have a much easier time of making money.
RV,
I ve looked at all 3 websites.
They calimed that there are now 7 mil Hans in “Tibet”.
“Samdhong Rinpoche, prime minister of the Tibetan government-in-exile, estimates that Tibet has 2.3 million Tibetans, but 7 million Han Chinese — more than 100 times the number China officially gives.”
Do you seriouly believe that Tibet Autonomous Region Can support a population of 10 mil people?
The Wikipaedia’s claim is a little better.
They say there are 7.5 mil Hans in “Tibet”.
Here the “Tibet” refers to TAR +Qinghai+most of western Sichuan and part of Gansu. This is Dalai Lama’s “dream Tibet” made up of 30% of China’s land area.
In all these areas out side TAR, Tibetans were never the only ethnic groups. For centuries all sorts of people settle down along the silk road.
The earthquake area, Wenchuan, for example, was also claimed by the Dalai Lama as part of his dream Tibet. The Dalai Lama made all kinds of rediculous claim and few people in the west question his credibility.
How do you think these websites get their statistics?
Yugung,
You wrote “how do you think these websites get their statistics?” It’s a good question. No one really knows. You can’t trust those statistics just like you can’t trust the government’s statistics.
I do remember when I arrived in Tibet in 2006…three days before the first train was to arrive from Beijing. I made the trip to see Mount Everest and then returned to Lhasa a few days after the train had started running. It was a like a different city…a different feel…so many people…so many processions of cars carrying important dignitaries…it seemed crowded.
We don’t know for sure who is telling the truth about how many Han Chinese live in Tibet but we do know for sure that the Chinese government has been pushing people into that region since the 1950’s. Your comparison of Han Chinese moving to Tibet to Tibetans who resettle in other parts of China simply doesn’t hold water. Why would Han Chinese move to Tibet and face the harsh conditions there (altitude, relative isolation, etc) unless they had some government incentives?
As far as the Dalai Lama’s claims are concerned, there are ‘Tibetan towns’ which are outside of the TAR but certainly have tried to retain the Tibetan culture. In Sichuan and Yunnan for example, there are Tibetan towns that are supposedly off limit to foregners. My question is, have these towns also been overrun by zealous Han Chinese people? If the answer is yes, then the Dalai has got a point…it doesn’t really matter whether or not this ‘cultural genocide’ is taking place just inside of the TAR or also close by. We are talking about a group of people here (the ethnic Tibetans) who just want to be allowed to practice their religion and retain their culture.
My point is, in any country, it is the government that has the population statistics.
If you don’t believe them at least use some commonsense. Can TAR support a population of 10 mil people? China’s Goverment wouldn’t bother to manupulate those statistics please anybody about Tibet population.
There is no encouragement for people to migrate to Tibet. A Sichuan friend of mine went and work in Tibet. He can’t afford to bring his family because healthcare and education cost so must more for non-residense of Tibet.
You talk about tough life in Tibet, I agree.
Actually there are less Hans living in Tibet today than in the 60s or 70s. Too bad if you choose to believe Dalai Lama’s propaganda. There are also lot’s of Tibetans migrating out of Tibet to other areas of China.
China does the right thing in allowing people to move where they like. There is no point in listening to all the out cry in the west. There is a reason why USA spend millions every year on Radio Free Asia broadcasting Dalai Lama’s propaganda to Tibet. They have geopolitical motives that has nothing to do with real people of Tibet.
Yes, there are lots of tourists in Tibet. That is the economic lifeline in Tibet now.
Don’t forget, Tibet is the 2nd poorest province in China and it needs every tourist dollar it can get.
Macao and Hong Kong has more even more tourists. What’s the problem?
The Tibetan towns in Sichuan has just been opened to tourists just before the earthquake. They are now closed again.
For Yugung: Tibet was never part of China until 1951, when they were FORCED to sign the 17 point agreement.
As you know, the last chinese dynasty was the Qing Dynasty, yet what the chinese refuse to acknowledge, is the fact that the chinese never actually ruled China during this time, it was the Manchu who ruled china, and they most definately did not rule Tibet as well. The Manchu and the Tibetans were on friendly terms, but the Manchu did not rule Tibet, or even try to.
When the Qing Dynasty ended in 1912, Tibet still remained an independent country - right up until 1951.
And I noticed, for all your comments, you never once mention the fact that Tibetans are being killed, as they make their way out of Tibet to India. Why is it the chinese feel the need to express themselves about Tibet, and how supposedly good the Tibetans’ lives are, under the big thumb of the chinese, yet NONE comment about the fact the chinese army are killing Tibetans every day?!!
Yugung, please tell me - what do you think about this? Do you think it’s ok to kill innocent Tibetans who desperately want to leave Tibet? and please don’t insult me, by replying that the chinese army are innocent. They are anything BUT innocent, same goes for the chinese government.
Tibet was internatinally recognized as a part of China long before 1951.
To illustrate my point lets look at this US State Department document:
September 7, 1995
http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/bureaus/eap/950907WiedemannTibet.html
——
The United States considers the Tibet Autonomous Region or TAR
(hereinafter referred to as “Tibet”) as part of the People’s
Republic of China. This longstanding policy is consistent with the
view of the entire international community, including all China’s
neighbors: no country recognizes Tibet as a sovereign state. Moreover,
U.S. acceptance of China’s claim of sovereignty over
Tibet predates the establishment of the People’s Republic of China. In
1942, we told the Nationalist Chinese government then
headquartered in Chongqing (Chungking) that we had “at no time raised
(a) question” over Chinese claims to Tibet.
——-
Since Tibet is a part of China how can China invaded itself in 1951?
Let’s also get a few terminology straight.
Chinese = All the 56 ethnic groups of China, just like “Americans” refers to all the people of USA.
Hans = The majority ethnic group in China just like the whites
Man zhu or Manchus = one of the minority ethnic group in China.
The Manchus Royal Family ruled China for nearly 300 years during which time there were extensive intermarriages. By the time of 1911 Republican revolution most Manchus speak Mandarin and write mandarin. If you visit North Eastern China today you can hardly tell who’s Manchus who’s not Manchu and nobody really cares.
For the sake of winning debate point it was often argued that the Qing dynasty were not Chinese even though numerous treaties were sign by the Qing on behalf of China. Eg Hong Kong was ceded to Britain for example.
Whenever it suit their argument they will twist the facts to suit their argument.
China become the first pure single race country on earth.
Sara asked very politely: please tell me - what do you think about this? Do you think it’s ok to kill innocent Tibetans who desperately want to leave Tibet? and please don’t insult me, by replying that the chinese army are innocent. They are anything BUT innocent, same goes for the chinese government.
yugung:
It sounded like you already have the answer.
There are about 2,000 illegal border crossing at the Tibet Nepal border. These are illegal. The largest group are students going over to study English in India and most of them return to their family during school holidays. “Desperately trying toleave Tibet” is plain nonsense. There are also smugglers, criminals and pilgrims.
The border guards usually close one eye to these activities and mostly they get away with it. There are shooting incidences like any border in the world.I don’t like it but don’t tell me it doesn’t happen elsewhere. In LA police shoot drivers for speeding.
sara: The Manchu and the Tibetans were on friendly terms, but the Manchu did not rule Tibet, or even try to.
yugung: Is this fairy tale that u read?
The Qing court spend 1/2 of its budget on the war against the Nepalese invasion in 1790 and in 1792 created a mini-constitution for Tibet which lay down the rules for selection of Dalai Lama and Panchen Lama. Qing ruledTibet very seriously.
Yugung: No, this isn’t a fairy-tale, the Manchu ruled China during the Qing Dynasty, therefore when the Qing Dynasty ended in 1912, Tibet was still an independent country, so how on earth can the chinese say that Tibet has ALWAYS been part of China? You don’t know your own history!!
And how disgraceful of you to say that those Tibetans desperately trying to leave Tibet is plain nonsense. In the next sentence, you seem quite aware it is happening, but you think it’s ok. It’s typical of the chinese to not want to answer a direct question. If you ask them a direct question, they come back with “well what about the streets of LA, or what about Iraq…” You don’t want to answer any direct questions about China because (a) you can’t really excuse your government’s behaviour (and your own) and (b) you couldn’t care less about the Tibetan people.
You are a disgrace Yugung. and, for the record, Tibetans are NOT smugglers and whatever else bad you want to call them, they are being seriously oppressed by the chinese, and everyone, apart from the chinese, understand completely why they would want to leave Tibet.
You think it’s ok to shoot them down like animals. Shame on you. You’re evil.
Yugung: You asked me this: Since Tibet is a part of China how can China invaded itself in 1951?
My answer is: Why did China FORCE Tibet to sign the 17 point agreement then? What was the purpose?
You think you know ALL the answers, let’s hear what you have to say about this.
Forget it Sara, you’ll never get any straight answers from the chinese.
You have to remember they’ve been so brain-washed for so many decades, they don’t know the truth, even when it’s staring at them.
They don’t like to ‘lose face’ - and they would rather lie through their teeth, than tell the truth.
FREE TIBET - CHINA GET OUT OF TIBET.
And this is for Yugung - what type of monster are you?
To sara:
Don’t get hysterical ok.
Where is the proof that Tibet was and independent Nation until 1911？
It’s no use throwing a fit when you cannot come up with a reasonable answer.
Sara said this:
And how disgraceful of you to say that those Tibetans desperately trying to leave Tibet is plain nonsense. In the next sentence, you seem quite aware it is happening, but you think it’s ok. It’s typical of the chinese to not want to answer a direct question. If you ask them a direct question, they come back with “well what about the streets of LA, or what about Iraq…” You don’t want to answer any direct questions about China because (a) you can’t really excuse your government’s behaviour (and your own) and (b) you couldn’t care less about the Tibetan people.
Yugung:
I have answered your questions directly too bad you don’t get the message.
What China’s border guards did was international norm. Illegal border crossing risk being shot.
Sara:
You are a disgrace Yugung. and, for the record, Tibetans are NOT smugglers and whatever else bad you want to call them, they are being seriously oppressed by the chinese, and everyone, apart from the chinese, understand completely why they would want to leave Tibet.
You think it’s ok to shoot them down like animals. Shame on you. You’re evil.
Yugung
How would a border guard know who’s an infiltrator, who’s a smuggler?
The best way to spot a hypocrite is to compare her criticism of others with the way they conduct themselves.
Sara asked:
Why did China FORCE Tibet to sign the 17 point agreement then? What was the purpose?
Yugung:
Historical background in 1950
1) The government of Qing, the Republic of China government that suceeded Qing in 1911, and the entire world at that time all regarded Tibet as a part of China.
(hope u ve read the State Department document)
2) In 1949 the Main forces of Chiang Kai Shek’s army retreated to Taiwan.
3) In 1950 the Red Army arrived at Eastern Tibet.
4) In October 1950 China entered the Korean War. US and Britain wanted to use the Tibetans as canon fodder against China.
To avoid further blood shed and having to fight in two fronts, Mao proposed a 10 point peace agreement with the local Government to Tibet in which Tibet will be left very much unchanged while the central government took charge of defense and foreign affairs.
The Dalai Lama and his advisers decided to move to Yadung on the Sikkim Border. Their plan was to negotiate with the cental government for further autonomy. If that failed they would cross the border into Sikkim and join the CIA who had promised to fund their operation.
A delegation was sent to Beijing headed by the commander of the local militia, Ngapoi Ngawang Jigmei. By April 1951 the 10 point agreement was expanded to 17 point agreement. A copy was sent to the Dalai Lama at Yadung via India.
The Dalai Lama and his advisers agreed to the 17 point agreement and so, the Dalai Lama returned to Lhasa to welcome the Red Army who arrive in Lhasa in September 1951. Ngapoi Ngawang Jigmei is still alive. He must be 90++ now.
He tells everybody who bother to ask that the agreement was signed in a spirit of good will.
Hope I have answered ur question as directly as possible.
Hope Lenny get educated as well.
Some of you get the idea that when a country’s leader switch from one ethnic group to another its territory must change with it. Thus the argument that when the Qing got overthrown by the Repblicans its territory have to change accordingly.
Applying the same rule to South Africa, did Nelson Mandella not rule the same territory as the pervious white regime?
Or if Obama were elected president of USA will USA dissolved and returned to the natives?
The way to spot a hypocrite is to see if they practice what they preach.
Why is it that when I talk about Tibet I aften mention USA?
The reason is that CIA is the main culprit behing the Dalai Lama’s anti China campaign.
While USA have always recognized Tibet as a part of China, CIA have been chief funder for the Dalai Lama since the Korean war.
Declassified CIA document showed that the Dalai Lama was paid US$180,000 a year for his service to the CIA.
The other country actively engaged in sabotaging China is UK.
These people are very creative. Openly, they say nice things and behind China’s back they are funding all sorts of bogus NGOs to manufacture lies and half truth about China.
Lenny,
Hall mark of a brainwashed person is that:
1) Unable to write a coherent argument with out resorting to spurting slogans such as “free Tibet etc.”
2) Dismiss others as brainwashed to hide one’s own ignorance.
3) Habit of over generalization such as ” Chinese never XXX”
YUGUNG: Definition of brain-washing (also referred to ‘Stockholm Syndrome’ and should also be referred to ‘China Syndrome’)
(1) Forcible indoctrination, usually political or religious, aimed at destroying a person’s basic convictions and attitudes and replacing them with an alternative set of fixed beliefs.
(2) The application of a concentrated means of persuasion, such as an advertising campaign or repeated suggestion, in order to develop a specific belief or motivation.
[Translation of Chinese (Mandarin) xǐ nǎo : xǐ, to wash + nǎo, brain.]
If the cap fits…..
CIA involvement: http://www.takhli.org/rjw/tibet.htm
do you think the following Westerner were brainwashed by Chinese government?
http://discussions.pbs.org/viewtopic.pbs?t=68073
Have you read this book which may be fresh to you?
http://books.google.com/books?id=Ujvo4OMT-uAC&pg=PA41&sig=ACfU3U1tilrCv09XjlLZ935LjsVxHmC7yw&vq=%22The+Chinese+worked+tirelessly+and+with+a+sense+of+dedication+and+purpose.+Soon+after+arriving,+they+opened+the+first+primary%22&source=gbs_quotes_r&cad=1_0
Look at the description of following, “those agents were arrested and released after months, they were not mistreated”, Is Wiki also been brainwashed?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959_Tibetan_uprising
According to western sources, the 1959 uprising did not succeed because it lacked support from the Tibetans. “Even western sources never estimated that more than 20,000 were involved…this does not sound like mass support.” [5] This number might however be underestimated since according to chinese sources, PLA killed 86,000 Tibetans the days after the Dalai Lama’s flight.[6] The CIA officer, Bruce Walker, who oversaw the operations of CIA trained Tibetan agents, was troubled by the hostility from the Tibetans towards his agents: “the radio teams were experiencing major resistance from the population inside Tibet.” [7] The CIA trained Tibetans from 1957 to 1972, in the United States, and parachuted them back into Tibet to organize rebellions against the PLA. But with little support from fellow Tibetans they often fell to the hands of the PLA quickly. In one incident, one agent was immediately reported by his own brother and all three agents in the team were arrested. They were not mistreated. After less than a month of propaganda sessions they were escorted to the Indian border and released. [8]
http://www.escholarship.org/editions/view?docId=ft2199n7f4;brand=ucpress
http://books.google.com/books?id=Upwq0I-wm7YC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_summary_s&cad=0#PPA884,M1
http://www.case.edu/affil/tibet/currentStaff/goldstein.htm
Have you reviewed all of these websites?
YUGUNG, I am not getting hysterical, I can assure you - it’s the other way around.
No, you didn’t answer my question properly re. why did Mao force Tibet to sign the 17 point agreement, you merely stated events which led up to that point. So, again, I’m asking you what was the point of the agreement? If Tibet has always been part of China, as the chinese like to think, why bother with an agreement?
Also, shooting and killing innocent people at international borders is NOT common-practice. Let’s say, for argument sake, Tibet has always been of China - well then you’d have to say that China is shooting and killing their own citizens. Correct? The point being that the Chinese are so adamant there is NO human-rights abuse in China, yet they are killing their own people.
Of course, it’s not just the Tibetans who are being killed and oppressed. Falun Gong practitioners, and basically any chinese person who doesn’t agree 100% with the government’s policies, are detained, and imprisoned, for years. FACT.
What do you say to that you ’stinking number 9′? I am referring to you as such, since you seem to be educated, and this is what you would have been labelled as, during the Cultural Revolution.
You seem to have the same distorted mind as Crazy Mao.
YUGUNG: I suggest you read the following letter, written by Wei Jinsheng to Deng Xiao-Ping, from his prison cell. It concerns Tibet and the corruption of the CCP.
It is written both in Chinese and English.
Hopefully, you will learn something about your own history and Tibetan history.
Here’s the link: http://www.weijingsheng.org/doc/cn/23.htm
Sara ask?
No, you didn’t answer my question properly re. why did Mao force Tibet to sign the 17 point agreement, you merely stated events which led up to that point. So, again, I’m asking you what was the point of the agreement? If Tibet has always been part of China, as the chinese like to think, why bother with an agreement?
Yugung:
The 17 point agreement was signed to unite China and avoid further blood shed. The American who was fighting China in Korea wanted to prolong the conflict and make it as bloody as possible. The 17 point agreement lay down the ground rules for for both the central Government and the local government and the Dalai Lama and his adviser accepted it. It is normal for central Government and local Government to sign agreements on a wide range of issues.
Not only the Dalai Lama accepted the 17 point agreement, he even asked to join the Communist party in 1954.
Time Magazine; “Exile;” October 4, 1999; pp. 78,79
Excerpt:
I actually studied Marxist ideology and learned the history of the
Chinese revolution. Once I understood Marxism, my attitude change
completely. I was so attracted to Marxism, I even expressed my wish to
become a Communist Party member —–The Dalai Lama
——————
Sara:
Also, shooting and killing innocent people at international borders is NOT common-practice. Let’s say, for argument sake, Tibet has always been of China - well then you’d have to say that China is shooting and killing their own citizens. Correct? The point being that the Chinese are so adamant there is NO human-rights abuse in China, yet they are killing their own people.
Yugung:
Shooting of innocent people is wrong, but that doesn’t applied to people breaking the Laws eg illegal border crossing. No country is perfect. On a scale of 10 China is at least 6-7. I ve not heard of any Government officials who says that China is perfect.
Everybody agrees that the road ahead is challenging.
sara: Of course, it’s not just the Tibetans who are being killed and oppressed. Falun Gong practitioners, and basically any chinese person who doesn’t agree 100% with the government’s policies, are detained, and imprisoned, for years. FACT.
What do you say to that you ’stinking number 9′? I am referring to you as such, since you seem to be educated, and this is what you would have been labelled as, during the Cultural Revolution.
You seem to have the same distorted mind as Crazy Mao.
yugung:
The Tibetans are not opressed. CIA and their propaganda machines are trying to incite ethnic hatred in China. Radio Free Asia broadcast 11 hours a day to Tibet.
Patriotic citizens from USA and UK are joining the Government is demonizing China. China is just a normal country.
Falun Gong is a cult that has been funded by the CIA too. US channel millions of dollars every year via the friend of FLG to promote the cult to Chinese. Anything that brings misery to China is happiness to Washington.
Cultural Revolution was a long time ago. I don’t see any point is bringing it up.
Who cares if I m “filthy number 9″?
Seriously I think you have a very distorted mind.
Sara: I suggest you read the following letter, written by Wei Jinsheng to Deng Xiao-Ping, from his prison cell. It concerns Tibet and the corruption of the CCP.
It is written both in Chinese and English.
Hopefully, you will learn something about your own history and Tibetan history.
Here’s the link: http://www.weijingsheng.org/doc/cn/23.htm
Yugung:
Wei Jinsheng is just a nut case ok.
This guy doesn’t qualify to be a “filthy number 9″.
The US National Endowment for Democracy (NED which is a front for the CIA) funded a Wei Jinsheng Foundation for him. He made a fool of himself in US.
He was once arrested for speeding and he accused the US police for “fascism”.
He also got into ugly fights with other CIA puppets in US.
Don’t waste time reading his garbage. He is one of the least useful US puppet.
Yugung Said,
Shooting of innocent people is wrong, but that doesn’t applied to people breaking the Laws eg illegal border crossing. No country is perfect.
Robert says:
Hmm. If the CCP has made Tibet such a wonderful place to live, I wonder why so many people are trying to cross the border to Nepal? I cannot believe that you actually think it is OK for soldiers to fire on unarmed people who are doing nothing other than trying to make a better life for themselves. Yes, it’s illegal and yes the Chinese government has the right to try to stop them but killing unarmed civilians is never acceptable! As Sara stated, such brutality is not common practice around the world (except for China’s good friend and ally North Korea which frequently shoots people trying to cross the Tumen River into North Eastern China).
Yugung says,
Falun Gong is a cult that has been funded by the CIA too. US channel millions of dollars every year via the friend of FLG to promote the cult to Chinese. Anything that brings misery to China…
Robert says,
I happen to share your dislike of Falun Gong. I do think that they are a dangerous organization. But I am tired of hearing Chinese people claim that the CIA is involved with everything that goes wrong in China. You have no evidence to back those claims up.
The main problem I have with Falun Gong is that they have given a bad name to Christians in China. The Chinese government uses the Falun Gong situation as an excuse to persecute ‘real’ Christians who just want to practice their faith. Falun Gong and Christianity are two very different entities and should not be confused.
Lenny:
Definition of brain-washing (also referred to ‘Stockholm Syndrome’ and should also be referred to ‘China Syndrome’)
(1) Forcible indoctrination, usually political or religious, aimed at destroying a person’s basic convictions and attitudes and replacing them with an alternative set of fixed beliefs.
(2) The application of a concentrated means of persuasion, such as an advertising campaign or repeated suggestion, in order to develop a specific belief or motivation.
[Translation of Chinese (Mandarin) xǐ nǎo : xǐ, to wash + nǎo, brain.]
Yugung:
Stockholm Syndrome is a very extreme form of indoctrination and is rare.
I ve been label as brainwashed a few 1000s time.
It has become very predictable and I was fascinated by what kind of education/media these people hve to make them so arrogant, so consistently and uniformly ignorant.
I even did some simple research on the subject.
Noam Chomsky wrote about manufacturing of public opinion in the west.
That helps explains a lot of the arrogance and ignorance that I ve encountered all the time and I assure u this is not over generalization
This website is very interesting especially seen in the context of Tibet Propaganda.
http://library.thinkquest.org/C0111500/proptech.htm
Hope it helps you gain some insight about yourself.
“The Chinese government uses the Falun Gong situation as an excuse to persecute ‘real’ Christians who just want to practice their faith. ”
@Robert,
I don’t think Chinese government persecuted ‘real’ Christian. Every year I have seen more and more Church setting up in my surrounding area. More people have joined there and convert into Christian. That’s very popular here. I didn’t hear any persecution story here.
“If the CCP has made Tibet such a wonderful place to live, I wonder why so many people are trying to cross the border to Nepal?”
@Robert,
I think we are unable to give you any satisfied answer since what we said you will not believe.
I suggest you to visit Damsarla or Nepal to see what kind of life there for Tibetan. You may take some interviews with those who crossed the border or those tibetan tourist guide. You have more answers about it.
One thing I can be sure it’s not the reason simply as described by western media or Dalai Lama.
Robert: Hmm. If the CCP has made Tibet such a wonderful place to live, I wonder why so many people are trying to cross the border to Nepal?
Yugung:
The myth that everybody believes in was that people are pouring out of Tibet.
From what I know about these illegal border crossing is that these are mostly students who want to study English in India. They come back during school holidays.
There are infiltrators and smugler as well as pilgrims. They are not victims of persecution that the propaganda want you to believe.
It’s very cold especially during the winter and the border guards hate to come out of their camps. Most of the time people just walk across with out being caught. There are also possibility that bribes are given to secure border crossing. The number is not large about 2000 per year.
Robert says,
I happen to share your dislike of Falun Gong. I do think that they are a dangerous organization. But I am tired of hearing Chinese people claim that the CIA is involved with everything that goes wrong in China. You have no evidence to back those claims up.
Yugung:
When Lee Kuan Yew visited China ?2001, he brought up the issue of religion with President Jiang Zemin.Lee later said that he was convinced after seeing the evidence given by President Jiang that FLG is a political organization with foreign connection.
Given CIA’s tract record are u surprised?
Jason says,
“I don’t think Chinese government persecuted ‘real’ Christian. Every year I have seen more and more Church setting up in my surrounding area. More people have joined there and convert into Christian. That’s very popular here. I didn’t hear any persecution story here.”
Robert says:
Actually, I have personal experience with how the government in China treats real Christians. You can read about it here.
http://www.teachabroadchina.com/are-christians-still-persecuted-in-china/
I also personally know people who have gotten in trouble with the government for worshipping God. This is one issue that I am very familiar with. The churches that you are talking about are government churches. They have to register with the government and they are closely monitored.
Quite frankly, the CCP fears that religion will replace them as ‘God’ in China so they have to try to contain it. Again though, my point is that many of my friends in China seem to confuse Falun Gong with Christianity….they are very different.
Yugung says,
“When Lee Kuan Yew visited China ?2001, he brought up the issue of religion with President Jiang Zemin.Lee later said that he was convinced after seeing the evidence given by President Jiang that FLG is a political organization with foreign connection. Given CIA’s tract record are u surprised?”
Robert says:
I realize that Lee Kuan Yew is greatly respected in Asia but what does he have to do with the CIA and Falun Gong? Ok, so he made a state visit to China and Jiang gives him ‘evidence’ that the CIA is involved with Falun Gong? What exactly is this evidence? And so what if Lee agreed with Jiang? Just because he has a Chinese background doesn’t make him an expert on internal affairs in China.
Yugung says,
“From what I know about these illegal border crossing is that these are mostly students who want to study English in India. They come back during school holidays.
There are infiltrators and smugler as well as pilgrims. They are not victims of persecution that the propaganda want you to believe.”
Robert says:
Of course people aren’t pouring out of Tibet. Going to Nepal by foot is a tough journey. But you’re still trying to justify the murder of unarmed civilians who are crossing the border.
And how do you know that there are not victims of persecution trying to flee from China? I think that there is plenty of evidence to suggest that at least some of these people are seeking to flee Tibet for political reaons.
@Robert,
I have read your articles before. If you are saying the government asked for register and made some rules as persecution, I have no word any more. But for me, persecution means to be sent to prison due to believe in Christian. I wonder what’s real explaination in US about persecution. For me, it’s esaily to link to the christian persecution happpened in the earlier days.
I think China has the right to regulate religion. Under the regulation, you could enjoy your religion. Freedom doesn’t mean anarch. If I were Christian, I don’t think it would have had impact on my praying.
When you said “I also personally know people who have gotten in trouble with the government for worshipping God. ” There must be some reasons behind, not just for worshipping God.
When you said “government churches”, do you mean those Christian there are not the real christian? Jesus will not accept them to heaven? Only the underground chritians are able to go to heaven? Jesus told US citizens about that? Please read more carefully about the bible if Jesus said something like that?
I clearly understand that Christian is a good belief. Falungong is different. But can you guarantee that christian will not sometime involve into polictic issues in China? I have seen that underground church is potential problems.
In 1850s, one guy called “Hongxiuquan”, he accepted the christian. Later he missionized in his homeland, but he changed the christian a little bit, he said he was the second son of God, Jesus is the first one of God. He came to world to save the people as his brother. His “christian” became much faster and one day it’s enough to organize an army, then he attacked the government and occupied the Nanjing and became the “king”. That’s the example in the history.
And Falunggong is the another example. Although the christian itself is good, it is stil possible to be utilized as polictical weapon.
From those perspective, the regulation is necessary.
YUGUNG, you said: The 17 point agreement was signed to unite China and avoid further blood shed and not only did the Dalai Lama accepted the 17 point agreement, he even asked to join the Communist party in 1954.
Once again Yugung, you are distorting the truth. The Dalai Lama had no choice, but to accept the 17 point agreement, since it had already been signed by one of his ministers, not in Lhasa, but in Kham/Amdo (under duress).
Also, although the Dalai Lama was attracted to Marxism, he was repulsed by Chinese activity in the “liberation” of Tibet.
Like many of us, there are certain elements of Marxism which are attractive, for example, theoreticaly it’s more ethical than capitalism, yet in practice Marxism (Communism) has never proved to be ethical, nor beneficial to the majority of citizens. There is NO ’share the wealth’ or ‘we are all equal’. That’s rubbish.
Which communist country do you know of, that allows its citizens to go where they want, speak freely and have the same standards of living, as those living in non-communist countries?
Why don’t you read Animal Farm by George Orwell - this explains Communism quite simply.
And let me tell you something about your own history:
The renewed assertion of control over Tibet by the Qing government proved so intense that when Chinese troops arrived in Lhasa in 1910, the 13th Dalai Lama fled to India. He returned to Tibet in 1912 when the Chinese withdrew the troops in response to the 1911 revolution in China, and in January 1913 the Dalai Lama declared the independence of Tibet. The declaration was recognized by the British, who were colonizing South Asia, but not by China.
The 14th Dalai Lama, then, inherited his office on the basis of the belief that he was a reincarnation of each of the previous Dalai Lamas.
On October 26, 1951, Chinese troops again entered Lhasa. With the signing of the Sino-Tibetan Treaty, the Dalai Lama attempted to work within the strictures imposed by China, visiting Peking in 1954 and negotiating with Chinese leaders.
The Chinese attempted to use the Panchen Lama, the second spiritual leader, to counteract his influence, but this failed. With the Tibetan uprising in 1959, the Dalai Lama fled to India, where he set up his residence in Dharamsala, Himachal Pradesh.
YUGUNG: You say:
“From what I know about these illegal border crossing is that these are mostly students who want to study English in India. They come back during school holidays.
There are infiltrators and smugler as well as pilgrims. They are not victims of persecution that the propaganda want you to believe . It’s very cold especially during the winter and the border guards hate to come out of their camps. Most of the time people just walk across with out being caught. There are also possibility that bribes are given to secure border crossing. The number is not large about 2000 per year.
What exactly DO you know, Yugung? Nothing, by the sound of it. The majority of Tibetans crossing the so-called ‘illegal border’ are NOT students who want to study English in India, they are Tibetans of ALL ages, wanting to leave their beloved country since they are fed up of being oppressed by the Chinese.
If, as you say, they are students - why can’t they leave Tibet LEGALLY? Surely if they want to study English in India, they can apply for a visa and leave legally? Why try and leave Tibet illegally and risk being shot at and killed? YOU DON’T MAKE ANY SENSE.
And then you say the others (non-students) are smugglers and infiltrators. You seriously believe this? So, no Tibetan is actually leaving Tibet for political reasons? They love being oppressed, do they? They love the fact they are treated like second-class citizens in their own country. They love the fact they are continually criticised and beaten, because they refuse to denounce the Dalai Lama?
Let’s face it, the Chinese army is under instruction to ’shoot to kill’ any Tibetan wanting to seek a better life out of Tibet.
Finally, you say: Cultural Revolution was a long time ago. I don’t see any point is bringing it up.
The point is, Yugung, the CR is part of your history, like it or not, and yet the Chinese government have made hardly any real progress, in the way they treat their citizens. As Ma Jian stated in his book ‘Beijing Coma’ - “When people are denied access to their history, they lose their ability to make moral judgements. It can lead to a very dangerous situation: the nationalist, anti-western protests at the moment, against the reaction that the West has had to the Olympics torch relay, is a product of that”.
As for your comments re. Wei Jinsheng being a nut-case, this is typical of the Chinese. Anybody who does not agree 100% with the CCP, is referred to as a nut-case, or splittist.
If China DID become the next super-power, God help us all. You are all paranoid beyond belief, single-minded and who knows what havoc you could unleash.
FINALLY, THE DALAI LAMA IS NOT A SPLITTIST. HE IS TIBETAN, NOT CHINESE, SO GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.
FOR YUGUNG -
Watch this video and then tell me innocent Tibetans aren’t being killed.
This video CLEARLY shows the chinese army killing Tibetans, as they try and make their way out of Tibet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2ImZlolH08
Jason said,
“When you said “I also personally know people who have gotten in trouble with the government for worshipping God. ” There must be some reasons behind, not just for worshipping God.
When you said “government churches”, do you mean those Christian there are not the real christian? Jesus will not accept them to heaven? Only the underground chritians are able to go to heaven? Jesus told US citizens about that? Please read more carefully about the bible if Jesus said something like that? ”
Robert says,
Jason, you are putting words in my mouth. I never suggested that the people who attend government churches are not real Christians. I was simply pointing out to you that just because you do not OBSERVE persecution taking place does not mean that it is NOT happening. The churches that you know about are government churches so of course you do not know of any persecution. Do you have any connections with the undeground Church in China? Do you really know what is happening?
Jason said,
But can you guarantee that christian will not sometime involve into polictic issues in China? I have seen that underground church is potential problems.
Robert says,
I have talked with a number of people who are involved in the underground church in China and rarely have I ever heard anything about politics mentioned. Yes, of course there may be a few Christians who try to mix their religion with politics, but for the most part, Christians in China just want to have the right to worship God without the governement breathing down their backs. Is this too much to ask? Just because a few Christians here and there have gone astray (mixing politics with religion) does not mean that the Chinese government should decide that all Christian actitives which are not sanctioned by the state are evil.
Since you mentioned the Bible I will tell you that Jesus clearly stated that Christians should be peacemakers and that they should respect their governements. For the most part in China, Christians stay out of politics. They are not political activists.
When you say that you have seen that undeground churches have potential problems what exactly are you talking about? Do you have some personal experience that you can share with us?
Sara;
Once again Yugung, you are distorting the truth. The Dalai Lama had no choice, but to accept the 17 point agreement, since it had already been signed by one of his ministers, not in Lhasa, but in Kham/Amdo (under duress).
Also, although the Dalai Lama was attracted to Marxism, he was repulsed by Chinese activity in the “liberation” of Tibet.
yugung:
At the time of signing of the 17 point agreement the Dalai Lama was at Yadung right next the the Sikkim border. Get a map and look at it. If he and his advisers didn’t like the agreement he could just cross te border and the CIA was ready to fund his operation. He had a choice.
The 17 point agreement was sign in Beijing. Where did you get the idea that it was signed in “Kham/Amdo”? Kham is Kham and Amdo is Amdo. For haven sake look at a map.
The people signing the agreement are still alive. They can testify that the 17 point agreement was signed it in a spirit of goodwill for the sake of national unity.
Nobody force the Dalai Lama to apply for Communist Party membership. He did it himself and in fact he was rejected.
Sara was trying to invent history:
The renewed assertion of control over Tibet by the Qing government proved so intense that when Chinese troops arrived in Lhasa in 1910, the 13th Dalai Lama fled to India. He returned to Tibet in 1912 when the Chinese withdrew the troops in response to the 1911 revolution in China, and in January 1913 the Dalai Lama declared the independence of Tibet. The declaration was recognized by the British, who were colonizing South Asia, but not by China.
Yugong:
Recognized by the British?
Rubbish!
sara:
Which communist country do you know of, that allows its citizens to go where they want, speak freely and have the same standards of living, as those living in non-communist countries?
yugung:
Which country communist ot otherwise allow complete cross border freedom.
Is that the norm?
Sara: Watch this video and then tell me innocent Tibetans aren’t being killed.
This video CLEARLY shows the chinese army killing Tibetans, as they try and make their way out of Tibet.
Yugung:
I do not know the authenticity of the video, It doesn’t prove that they were innocent. Why do you keep saying that they were innocent. What proof have u other than ur overwhelming disire to bash China and gross ignorance.
Sara:
What exactly DO you know, Yugung? Nothing, by the sound of it. The majority of Tibetans crossing the so-called ‘illegal border’ are NOT students who want to study English in India, they are Tibetans of ALL ages, wanting to leave their beloved country since they are fed up of being oppressed by the Chinese.
Yugung:
U want people to believe that Tibet is human hell.
Too many foreigners have live and work in China. China is not perfect but people keep coming in. People don’t get shot at for no reason. Only the most ignorant will believe ur version of Tibet.
Sara:
If, as you say, they are students - why can’t they leave Tibet LEGALLY? Surely if they want to study English in India, they can apply for a visa and leave legally? Why try and leave Tibet illegally and risk being shot at and killed? YOU DON’T MAKE ANY SENSE.
Yugung:
The schools run by the Dalai Lama, funded with CIA money do more than just education.
Sara:
And then you say the others (non-students) are smugglers and infiltrators.
yugung:
Some of them are pilgrims. Read carefully.
Sara:
You seriously believe this? So, no Tibetan is actually leaving Tibet for political reasons?
Yugung:
The infiltrators are politically/financially motivated. The biggest fraction is still the students. Re-read what I wrote.
Sara;
They love being oppressed, do they? They love the fact they are treated like second-class citizens in their own country. They love the fact they are continually criticised and beaten, because they refuse to denounce the Dalai Lama?
Let’s face it, the Chinese army is under instruction to ’shoot to kill’ any Tibetan wanting to seek a better life out of Tibet.
Yugung:
Most of the police and border guards in Tibet are recruited locally. They are ethnic Tibetans. Tibetans are not treated as 2nd class citizen.
The Dalai Lama is on CIA’s payrole. Most of the Tibet propaganda come from organizations funded by the US and Uk government.
sara:
Finally, you say: Cultural Revolution was a long time ago. I don’t see any point is bringing it up.
The point is, Yugung, the CR is part of your history, like it or not, and yet the Chinese government have made hardly any real progress, in the way they treat their citizens. As Ma Jian stated in his book ‘Beijing Coma’ - “When people are denied access to their history, they lose their ability to make moral judgements. It can lead to a very dangerous situation: the nationalist, anti-western protests at the moment, against the reaction that the West has had to the Olympics torch relay, is a product of that”.
Yugung;
Really, i am open to any discussion about Tibetan history or Native Americans history, which ever you choose. The arrogance, and ignorance that you ve displayed is obvious to any intelligent readers.
Sara:
As for your comments re. Wei Jinsheng being a nut-case, this is typical of the Chinese. Anybody who does not agree 100% with the CCP, is referred to as a nut-case, or splittist.
If China DID become the next super-power, God help us all. You are all paranoid beyond belief, single-minded and who knows what havoc you could unleash.
FINALLY, THE DALAI LAMA IS NOT A SPLITTIST. HE IS TIBETAN, NOT CHINESE, SO GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.
Yugung:
Westreners are more keen on Tibet independence than the Dalai Lama who only ask for Autonomy.
Why are the priests holier than the Pope? It’s because their fear of a strong China and lacking in self confidence, constantly need to bad mouth China to gain self esteem.
Wei Jinsheng is a nut case. NED is wasting American tax money funding him (Wei Jinsheng Foundation funded by NED).
He is not even useful as a puppet.
Am I Paranoid?
Why is USA and UK spending millions of dollars funding all kinds of separatist groups in China.
Even declassified CIA document showed clearly that CIA paid the Dalai Lama for his service. You called that Chinese paranoia? U need to have ur head examined.
@Yugung,
If you are in China, you probably had to go through an anonymous proxy to view this video because it appears to be blocked throughout most of the Mainland. I guess the Chinese government is afraid of that video.
I remember when that video came out. It is not fake. The Chinese government admitted that those shootings did take place but they claimed that the solders were firing in self defense. Obviously, the video shows otherwise.
Look, in terms of them crossing the border illegally, you are right. They are not innocent. They were breaking a law. Does that give China the right to use deadly force against them? Since when is trying to cross a border a crime that is punishable by death? It’s one thing if the Chinese soldiers had arrested the people; it’s quite another to shoot people.
RV:
Of course people aren’t pouring out of Tibet. Going to Nepal by foot is a tough journey. But you’re still trying to justify the murder of unarmed civilians who are crossing the border.
And how do you know that there are not victims of persecution trying to flee from China? I think that there is plenty of evidence to suggest that at least some of these people are seeking to flee Tibet for political reaons.
Yugung;
u and I can perhaps agree on one thing, that the crossing was illegal. What do u expect a border guard (20 something) given order to guard the border to do in such situation? Is it his job to determine that 100% of the population are happy? Nobody likes to see people getting killed but those challenging the Law must know the consequence of their action.
RV:
If you are in China, you probably had to go through an anonymous proxy to view this video because it appears to be blocked throughout most of the Mainland. I guess the Chinese government is afraid of that video.
I remember when that video came out. It is not fake. The Chinese government admitted that those shootings did take place but they claimed that the solders were firing in self defense. Obviously, the video shows otherwise.
Look, in terms of them crossing the border illegally, you are right. They are not innocent. They were breaking a law. Does that give China the right to use deadly force against them? Since when is trying to cross a border a crime that is punishable by death? It’s one thing if the Chinese soldiers had arrested the people; it’s quite another to shoot people.
Yugung:
Those video have been around since ?2006.
Can’t remember where i saw it.
When there are sensitive areas where guards have order to shoot. This is not the same as death penalty
“When you say that you have seen that undeground churches have potential problems what exactly are you talking about? Do you have some personal experience that you can share with us?”
@Robert,
My question is why they need to be underground? They could do religion legally with registration. You have been lots of underground churchs and knows they have none related to politics. But how does government know about that? Does government have the right to know about it? You accepted that there are some people who does want to mix the politic with the belief, that means there are some potential problems existing.
I know Jesus told his believer to be peacekeeper. But from the history, did Jesus’s words really obey by his followers?
10 times Crusade, did Jesus tell them to declare the war? Is it peaceful?
America civil war? Both sides are christian, why both of Jesus’s brothers and sisters fought against each other. is it peaceful?
There were lots of war at the name of God. Is it right?
Why? It’s not because Jesus told them to be peaceful, it could be peaceful foreever. It’s because there are someone who utilize the name of Jesus to reach him own aim. And such kind of people is still existent.
The bible can be explained into different versions according to different sect. That’s why we could see Catholic, christianetc.
To those underground christian, the best way is to register in the government and become legal. Obey the law first, then conduct religion. Remeber underground is illegal, they violate the law first, government has the right to terminate it.
(Why do western sociaty so hateful of communism? Look at the heaven that Jesus provided for human beings. Is there anything different from what is described in communism definition? That’s the place where christians are eager for their eternal life.
Communism can hardly be implemented in the real world is because the people’s nature drawback (or original sin) which is difficult to be overcome.
It could be implemented easily in the heaven because none of us could be seen it when he is alive in the real world.)
Following is from M.A.Jones(perhaps it can provide some answers to Sara or others)
Link: http://discussions.pbs.org/viewtopic.pbs?t=68073
Yes cctang, I agree entirely. That’s why, in fact, the overwhelming majority of Tibetans who enter India as so-called “refugees” are young. For example, according to figures cited in the Tibet Bulletin of May-June 2005, children under 13 made up 20.58% of the total number of Tibetan refugees who entered India between the months of January to August, 2004. Those aged between 14-25 made up 40.23% of the total - so 61.21% were aged 25 or under.
As noted by P. Klieger et.al, in a study titled “Tourism, Politics and Relocation in Tibet”, published in the December 31, 1988 edition of Cultural Survival Quarterly, many exiles, even back then, returned frequently on temporary trips “without renouncing their status as refugees or as patriots.” Among the motivations for returning to Tibet, which were based on interviews with many young Tibetans in south Asia and Nepal, “were (1) to reaffirm their identity as Tibetans by visiting their homeland and (2) to make money as individual entrepreneurs, tour guides, ‘culture brokers’ and tradespeople in the booming foreign tourist market….Being largely adept in English and the history of Tibet according to the Tibetan government-in-exile” made them “eminently qualified for these tasks. Returning refugees, indeed, became native agents who could successfully compete with the Chinese in the development of tourism in Tibet, serving as an alternative to the Chinese historical propaganda aimed at these foreign visitors. Working in the tourist trade in Tibet, then, became not only an economic activity but an act of patriotism as well.”
Those older, poorer Tibetans who face few promising economic prospects in their homeland, are happy to agree to send their children to India for a free education on the promise that their children will return better equipped to make a living. The Indian journalist Mohammed Ahmedullah has interviewed many Tibetan refugees: “Some of the escaped Tibetans I spoke with,” he reported, “gave me the impression that their escape had been financed by someone else - perhaps the government-in-exile. Otherwise, how could poor peasants who earn less than a dollar a day raise the $150-250 it costs to pay for their escape?” he wrote in an article for the March-April 2000 edition of the Atomic Scientists.
So, we can see now roughly how it all works. As Klieger notes, “approximately 100,000 Tibetan refugees in India and Nepal have received nearly three decades of financial support from the West to maintain their institutions and identity in exile. Refugees have tended to accommodate this outside support within a traditional patron-client relationship (mchod-yon) that historically defined not only the responsibility of the Buddhist laity to maintain and protect the monasteries, but the ideal relationship between the ecclesiastic Tibetan state and the outside world as well. At the highest level, this outside support also defined the relationship between Tibet and the Chinese Empire during much of the Mongol and Manchu periods.”
So the West, as Klieger point outs, through the agency of foreign aid, “has become the new ‘patron’ of the Tibetan government-in-exile. Although donors probably did not intend for this modern humanitarian aid to fuel Tibetan nationalism, because it is coextensive with the traditional practice of patronage, exile institutions and individual refugees have largely interpreted it as such.”
You can see where I’m leading to here. In her study titled “The Problem with ‘Rich Refugees’ Sponsorship, Capital, and the Informal Economy of Tibetan Refugees” (published in Modern Asian Studies, 2006), Audrey Prost, of the Department of Anthropology, University College London, points out that “the Tibetan refugees in India have found employment in a number of different economic sectors, among them agriculture, trade and tourism. Dharamsala’s population is mostly employed in public services (the government sector) and private business, and by Tibetan standards constitutes a rather elite segment within the refugee community. Although the Tibetan government’s census reports low unemployment in Dharamsala, many exile Tibetans are employed part-time or on salaries that barely enable them to meet the costs of daily life. Some surveys have even reported as much as 80% unemployment among Tibetan youths. Many of Dharamsala’s families are living on the threshold of poverty despite being reported as employed, and are dependent on external funds to provide education for their children. This under-reported poverty is implicated in the growth of informal economies of exchange and reciprocity, such as sponsorship (rogs ram).
“The majority of Tibetan exile families in Dharamsala,” adds Prost, “receive some form of rogs ram for their children to see them through primary and secondary education, after which studies have to be financed either by the family, or again by foreign sponsors. Most newly arrived refugees I have spoken to argued that the term rogs ram is specific to exile and to the relationship which foreigners foster with Tibetan refugees either individually, or through a fundraising organ.”
Prost’s observations are supported by those of Klieger’s, who writes: “Western tourists visiting such large refugee settlements as Dharamsala in northern India and Kathmandu in Nepal are often considered as potential ‘bestowers of gifts,’ in the traditional patron-client categorisation system. Deliberately maintaining refugee status in exile rather than assimilating into the host society is an ideal usually equated with patriotism in diaspora communities. Tibetan exiles have political incentives to retain legal refugee status in south Asia.”
They quite clearly also have financial incentives to retain their legal refugee status. In order to maintain sympathy and financial support from Western patrons, the Tibetan Government in Exile needs to maintain a constant influx of arriving “refugees”. Financing journeys is but one incentive used to entice poor Tibetans to make the journey to India. The promise of providing their children with an education is another, as it the promise to provide religious blessings from the Dalai Lama himself.
The Tibetan Goverment in Exile and their supporters rarely mention the fact that so many refugees return to find employment, or that various incentives are offered in order to entice or to facilitate such journeys. Instead, for obvious reasons, they choose to present to the world a rather different narrative.
I have no doubt that many of the Tibetan refugees now living in India are genuine, that there are indeed those who have experienced real persecution at the hands of Chinese authorities. Many, I know, have indeed suffered terribly under Chinese rule, and have had good reason to escape. The traumas that some Tibetan refugees have suffered under Chinese rule have been verified by psychological assessments, and are hardly deniable.
But this is simply not the case with the majority.
Finally, I should add to this too, the fact that the Tibetan Government in Exile is by no means the only party with a financial incentive in bringing over large numbers of refugees. As Ed Douglas reported in The Guardian of October 28, 2002, an entire industry of smugglers exist to guide groups across the Himalayas during the winter season, when border patrols are less active. “Palkyi, 16, claimed she had paid $700 (£370) to smugglers who guide groups over the Himalaya mountains,” reported Douglas.
And the nun that was fairly recently shot dead by an over-zealous Chinese border patrol guard whilst making the trek to Nepal was a typical Tibetan “refugee”, in that she was young and motivated by the prospect of an education. According to The Guardian, she was aged 17, and was “shot in the back by Chinese border guards as they tried to stop a group of 73 refugees crossing the Nangpa La, a 5,800 metre pass 15 miles west of Everest, to Nepal…The nun was Kelsang Namtso from Nagchu prefecture, the only daughter in a family of six. Like many Tibetans, she had no access to education and planned to study at the Dolma Ling nunnery in India.” And like most of these young people, she was “sold” the dream of being able to gain a great education in India by profiteers. As Daniel Pepper, of The Christian Science Monitor reported in the October 25, 2006 edition, the nun in question, Kelsang Namtso, “managed to save nearly $1,400 for the arduous journey through the Himalayas. Half would go to the smugglers.”
The cowardly murder of this young woman is of course inexcusable, and the person or persons responsible ought to be held accountable for their behaviour. Sadly, such occurances are thought to occur almost yearly, which is probably true. It’s just that in this case, the word got out, along with video footage.
Still, this doesn’t change the fact that the majority of Tibetans who make this journey do so for educational and spiritual reasons, not because they supposedly face systematic human rights abuses under Chinese governance. As further evidence in support of cctang’s case, Daniel Pepper, of The Christian Science Monitor, also noted that “the estimated 2,500 to 4,000 Tibetans who try to reach India every year via Nepal, pay smugglers to bring them to India because obtaining the official travel permits and a passport can be too difficult. Most come seeking an audience with the spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhism, who resides in Dharamsala, in northern India.”
Pepper then backs up his statement with the following qualitative evidence:
“‘Our aim only is to get the blessing of His Holiness the Dalai Lama,’ says Ms. Wangmo, one of the nuns. ‘We were planning to go back afterwards, but now it won’t be possible after the trouble in the pass. If we go back to Tibet, the Chinese will definitely arrest us.’ The nun killed was typical of the many Tibetan refugees who make the journey: she was poor, young, and religiously motivated. At least half of those making the journey from Tibet are children, sent by parents who want their children to grow up with a strong Tibetan identity and who often cannot afford school fees at home. Among the group of Tibetans that just arrived in India, the youngest was a 7-year-old girl, Deki Pantso, who came without her parents.” [emphasis added is mine]
I rest my case.
M.A.Jones
Hangzhou
Last edited by M.A.Jones on Sat Jan 13, 2007 12:00 am; edited 11 times in total
[...] is of course still much work to be done. Forced abortions, persecution against Christians, and the treatment of Tibetans are among the issues that are still of great concern to human rights advocates worldwide. [...]
YUGUNG: You said:
At the time of signing of the 17 point agreement the Dalai Lama was at Yadung right next the the Sikkim border. Get a map and look at it. If he and his advisers didn’t like the agreement he could just cross te border and the CIA was ready to fund his operation. He had a choice.
The 17 point agreement was sign in Beijing. Where did you get the idea that it was signed in “Kham/Amdo”? Kham is Kham and Amdo is Amdo. For haven sake look at a map.
The people signing the agreement are still alive. They can testify that the 17 point agreement was signed it in a spirit of goodwill for the sake of national unity.
Nobody force the Dalai Lama to apply for Communist Party membership. He did it himself and in fact he was rejected.
NOW READ THE TRUTH YUGUNG:
Invasion and illegal annexation of Tibet: 1949-1951
After the military invasion of Tibet had started and the small Tibetan army was defeated, the PRC imposed a treaty on the Tibetan Government under the terms of which Tibet was declared to be a part of China, albeit enjoying a large degree of autonomy.
In the White Paper, China claims this treaty was entered into entirely voluntarily by the Tibetan Government, and that the Dalai Lama, his Government and the Tibetan people as a whole welcomed it.
The facts show a very different story, leading to the conclusion that the so-called “17 Point Agreement for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet” was never validly concluded and was rejected by Tibetans. The Dalai Lama stated Tibetan Prime Minister Lukhangwa as having told Chinese General Zhang Jin-wu in 1952:
“It was absurd to refer to the terms of the Seventeen-Point Agreement. Our people did not accept the agreement and the Chinese themselves had repeatedly broken the terms of it. Their army was still in occupation of eastern Tibet; the area had not been returned to the government of Tibet, as it should have been”. [My Land and My People, Dalai Lama, New York, Fourth Edition, 1992, p.95]
Diplomatic activity and military threats:
Soon after the Communist victory against the Guomindang and the founding of the PRC on 1 October 1949, Radio Beijing began to announce that “the People’s Liberation Army must liberate all Chinese territories, including Tibet, Xinjiang, Hainan and Taiwan.”
Partly in response to this threat, and in order to resolve long-standing border disputes with China, the Foreign Office of the Tibetan Government, on 2 November 1949, wrote to Mao Zedong proposing negotiations to settle all territorial disputes. Copies of this letter were sent to the Governments of India, Great Britain and the United States.
Although these three Governments considered the spread of Communism to be a threat to the stability of South Asia, they advised the Tibetan Government to enter into direct negotiations with Chinese Government as any other course of action might provoke military retaliation.
The Tibetan Government decided to send two senior officials, Tsepon Shakabpa and Tsechag Thubten Gyalpo, to negotiate with representatives of the PRC in a third country, possibly the USSR, Singapore or Hong Kong. These officials were to take up with the Chinese Government the content of the Tibetan Foreign Office’s letter to Chairman Mao Zedong and the threatening Chinese radio announcements still being made about an imminent “liberation of Tibet”; they were to secure an assurance that the territorial integrity of Tibet would not be violated and to state that Tibet would not tolerate interference.
When the Tibetan delegates in Delhi applied for visas to Hong Kong, the Chinese told them that their new Ambassador to India was due to arrive in the capital shortly and that negotiations should be opened through him.
In the course of negotiations, the Chinese Ambassador, Yuan Zhong-xian, demanded that the Tibetan delegation accept a Two- point Proposal: i) Tibetan national defence will be handled by China; and ii) Tibet should be recognised as a part of China.
They were then to proceed to China in confirmation of the agreement. On being informed of the Chinese demands, the Tibetan Government instructed its delegates to reject the proposal. So negotiations were suspended.
On 7 October 1950, 40,000 Chinese troops under Political Commissar, Wang Qiemi, attacked Eastern Tibet’s provincial capital of Chamdo, from eight directions. The small Tibetan force, consisting of 8,000 troops and militia, were defeated. After two days, Chamdo was taken and Kalon (Minister) Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, the Regional Governor, was captured. Over 4,000 Tibetan fighters were killed.
The Chinese aggression came as a rude shock to India. In a sharp note to Beijing on 26 October 1950, the Indian Foreign Ministry wrote:
“Now that the invasion of Tibet has been ordered by Chinese government, peaceful negotiations can hardly be synchronized with it and there naturally will be fear on the part of Tibetans that negotiations will be under duress. In the present context of world events, invasion by Chinese troops of Tibet cannot but be regarded as deplorable and in the considered judgement of the Government of India, not in the interest of China or peace”.
A number of countries, including the United States and Britain, expressed their support for the Indian position.
The Tibetan National Assembly convened an emergency session in November 1950 at which it requested the Dalai Lama, only 16 at that time, to assume full authority as Head of State. The Dalai Lama was then requested to leave Lhasa for Dromo, near the Indian border, so that he would be out of personal danger.At the same time the Tibetan Foreign Office issued the following statement:
“Tibet is united as one man behind the Dalai Lama who has taken over full powers. … We have appealed to the world for peaceful intervention in (the face of this) clear case of unprovoked aggression”.
The Tibetan Government also wrote to the Secretary General of the United Nations on 7 November 1950, appealing for the world body’s intervention. The letter said, in part:
“Tibet recognises that it is in no position to resist the Chinese advance. It is thus that it agreed to negotiate on friendly terms with the Chinese Government. …Though there is little hope that a nation dedicated to peace will be able to resist the brutal effort of men trained to war, we understand that the United Nations has decided to stop aggression wherever it takes place”.
On 17 November 1950, El Salvador formally asked that the aggression against Tibet be put on the General Assembly agenda. However, the issue was not discussed in the UN General Assembly at the suggestion of the Indian delegation who asserted that a peaceful solution which is mutually advantageous to Tibet, India and China could be reached between the parties concerned.
A second letter by the Tibetan delegation to the United Nations on 8 December 1950 did not change the situation.
Faced with the military occupation of Eastern and Northern Tibet, the defeat and destruction of its small army, the advance of tens of thousands of more PLA troops into Central Tibet, and the lack of active support from the international community, the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Government decided to send a delegation to Beijing for negotiations with the new Chinese leadership.
“Seventeen-Point Agreement”
In April 1951, the Tibetan Government sent a five-member delegation to Beijing, led by Kalon Ngapo Ngawang Jigme. The Tibetan Government authorised its delegation to put forward the Tibetan stand and listen to the Chinese position. But, contrary to the claim made in the White Paper that the delegation had “full powers,” it was expressly not given the plenipotentiary authority to conclude an agreement. In fact, it was instructed to refer all important matters to the Government.
On 29 April negotiations opened with the presentation of a draft agreement by the leader of the Chinese delegation. The Tibetan delegation rejected the Chinese proposal in toto, after which the Chinese tabled a modified draft that was equally unacceptable to the Tibetan delegation.
At this point, the Chinese delegates, Li Weihan and Zhang Jin-wu, made it plain that the terms, as they now stood, were final and amounted to an ultimatum. The Tibetan delegation was addressed in harsh and insulting terms, threatened with physical violence, and members were virtually kept prisoners.
No further discussion was permitted, and, contrary to Chinese claims, the Tibetan delegation was prevented from contacting its Government for instructions. It was given the onerous choice of either signing the “Agreement” on its own authority or accepting responsibility for an immediate military advance on Lhasa.
Under immense Chinese pressure the Tibetan delegation signed the “Agreement of the Central People’s Government and the Local Government of Tibet on Measures for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet” on 23 May 1951, without being able to inform the Tibetan Government.
The delegation warned the Chinese that they were signing only in their personal capacity and had no authority to bind either the Dalai Lama or the Tibetan Government to the “Agreement”.
None of this posed an obstacle to the Chinese Government to proceed with a signing ceremony and to announce to the world that an “agreement” had been concluded for the “peaceful liberation of Tibet”.
Even the seals affixed to the document were forged by the Chinese Government to give it the necessary semblance of authenticity.
The seventeen clauses of the “Agreement”, among other things, authorised the entry into Tibet of Chinese forces and empowered the Chinese Government to handle Tibet’s external affairs. On the other hand, it guaranteed that China would not alter the existing political system in Tibet and not interfere with the established status, function, and powers of the Dalai Lama or the Panchen Lama.
The Tibetan people were to have regional autonomy, and their religious beliefs and customs were to be respected. Internal reforms in Tibet would be effected after consultation with leading Tibetans and without compulsion.
The full text of what came to be known as the “Seventeen-Point Agreement” was broadcast by Radio Beijing on 27 May 1951. This was the first time the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Government heard of the devastating document. The reaction in Dromo (where the Dalai Lama was staying at that time) and Lhasa was one of shock and disbelief.
A message was immediately sent to the delegation in Beijing, reprimanding them for signing the “Agreement” without consulting the Government for instructions. The delegation was asked to send the text of the document they had signed, and wait in Beijing for further instructions.
In the meantime, a telegraphic message was received from the delegation to say that the Chinese Government representative, General Zhang Jin-wu, was already on his way to Dromo, via India. It added that some of the delegation members were returning, via India, and the leader of the delegation was returning directly to Lhasa.
The Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Government withheld the public repudiation of the “Agreement”. The Dalai Lama returned to Lhasa on 17 August 1951 in the hope of re-negotiating a more favourable treaty with the Chinese.
On 9 September 1951, around 3,000 Chinese troops marched into Lhasa, soon followed by some 20,000 more, from eastern Tibet and from Eastern Turkestan (Xinjiang) in the north. The PLA occupied the principal cities of Ruthok and Gartok, and then Gyangtse and Shigatse.
With the occupation of all the major cities of Tibet, including Lhasa, and large concentration of troops throughout eastern and western Tibet, the military control of Tibet was virtually complete. From this position, China refused to re-open negotiations and the Dalai Lama had effectively lost the ability to either accept or reject any Tibet-China agreement.
However, on the first occasion he had of expressing himself freely again, which came only on 20 June 1959, after his flight to India, the Dalai Lama formally repudiated the “Seventeen-Point Agreement”, as having been “thrust upon Tibetan Government and people by the threat of arms”.
In assessing the “17-Point Agreement on Measures for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet” and the occupation of Tibet two factors are crucial. First, the extent to which China was violating international law when the PLA marched into Tibet, and second, the effect of the signing of the “Agreement”.
The law governing treaties is based on the universally recognised principle that the foundation of conventional obligations is the free and mutual consent of contracting parties and, conversely, that freedom of consent is essential to the validity of an agreement.
Treaties brought about by the threat or the use of force lack legal validity, particularly if the coercion is applied to the country and government in question rather than only on the negotiators themselves.
With China occupying large portions of Tibet and openly threatening a full military advance to Lhasa unless the treaty was signed, the “agreement” was invalid ab initio, meaning that it could not even be validated by a later act of acquiescence by the Tibetan Government.
Contrary to China’s claim in its White Paper, the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Government did not act voluntarily in signing the “Agreement”.
IN FACT, MAO ZEDONG himself, in the Directive of Central Committee of CPC on the Policies for our Work in Tibet, issued on 6 April 1952, ADMITTED:
“Not only the two Silons (i.e., prime ministers) but also the Dalai and most of his clique were reluctant to accept the Agreement and are unwilling to carry it out. … As yet we do not have a material base for fully implementing the agreement, nor do we have a base for this purpose in terms of support among the masses or in the upper stratum”. [Selected Works of Mao Tsetung, Vol. 5, Foreign Language Press, Peking, 1977, p.75]
Your comments Yugung?
Is YUGUNG for real?
How can he/she say that MOST Tibetans going to India are students, and they return during the school holidays?
What does Yugung think that these ’students’ say to the chinese border guards upon their return, during the school holidays?
“Hi there, I crossed the border going out of Tibet illegally, but hey, I’m