Image:huffingtonpost

The diplomatic shadow-play that is the US-China human rights dialogue resumes today  in Washington and according to the State Department, will feature discussions on: dissidents, religious rights, rule of law and Internet freedom. We can also expect some limited encouragement of China on talks with representatives of the Dalai Lama, although that prospect will not warm-the-hearts of Tibetans inside Tibet, whose goals are a free and independent nation, not a form of autonomy as dictated by communist China. There may, if political fortitude and integrity permit, be some representation on prominent Tibetan political prisoners, yet despite the positives which may emerge, usually involving a staged prisoner release by China, major human rights violations will be excluded from the agenda.

Herein lies the limitations of the dialogue, which many regard as a cosmetic exercise, in that consistently fails to address fundamental issues of oppression and injustice that deny people in China, Tibet and East Turkestan human rights. For example the occupation of those territories, and the violent denial of Tibetan and Uyghur national self-determination, are not considered by the State Department to be a violation of human rights. Would that core issue be successfully addressed then all other abuses which spring from China’s illegal occupation of those lands could effectively cease, however the ineffectual and cynical human rights choreography between the US and China, callously avoids that fundamental injustice, and simply postures at the edge.

Nether side, for their own national interest and political and economic advantage, wish to acknowledge that the right most demanded by Tibetans and Uyghurs is national and cultural freedom. Instead the focus is upon individual rights, which under UN and international law are considered the jurisdiction of the state, which in the case of Tibet and East Turkestan (though illegally occupied) is regarded as resting with the communist Chinese government. Within this context by negotiating with China on human rights, as they impact upon Tibetans, the United States affirms Tibetans as an ethnic minority (not as it rightfully should, a people). It also assumes that those limited rights, which do not include self-determination; “Self-determination is not a right of minorities. They must look instead to human rights: those of which are not the rights of ‘peoples’ “ (Minorities And Human Rights Law-MRG 1987) are extended to so-called minorities within China.

The decades-old litany of abuse and oppression within China, and occupied territories such as Tibet and East Turkestan, makes a mockery of UN statutes on such ‘rights’. It also exposes the singular failure of the US State Department’s policy on human rights within China, not only has it failed to moderate the grim excesses of China’s regime, it betrays the truth that Tibetans do qualify as a people, and possess within international law the right to self-determination.

If you find this post of interest it will be most helpful if you would kindly share on any social network/s which you may subscribe to. Use the buttons below to add the post so others may become aware of this issue. Many thanks

No more or less could be expected, it is course reasonable to conceive such a perspective, no matter how strident the calls for  democracy and human rights to prevail in China, there are not many Chinese voices to be heard championing independence for Tibet, East Turkestan, Manchuria or Inner Mongolia. Such a position was both predictable and understandable, it is more difficult to witness a Tibetan Administration auotcratically renouncing its nation’s right to self-determination, accepting its people as an ethnic-minority of China, and expressing a willingness to be subject to communist China’s laws on regional autonomy. This betrayal has been detailed in its so-called  ‘Memorandum on so-called Genuine Autonomy for Tibetans’, which along with a statement by the Dalai Lama were recommended bedside reading for those attending the Conference. There are Tibetan versions of this shameful capitulation, have copies been circulated inside Tibet? Certainly the Tibetan peope should be aware of the details of this document and its disasterous impact, if formalised and accepted by Beijing,  upon the future status of Tibet.

What would the family of  eighteen year-old Lobsang Nyendrak make of its treacherous surrender?

“On June 28, a young Tibetan, a student at the Guru Teacher Training School in Dzogong [county, of the Chamdo prefecture of the Tibet Autonomous Region] was detained for protesting in Chamdo city,” said a Tibetan man now living in Canada, citing area contacts. The student, Lobsang Nyendrak, 18, had walked to town with a friend earlier in the day, the man said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Nyendrak  then urged his friend to return alone to the school, saying he had “other business” to attend to. When his friend left, the source said, Nyendrak pulled out a hand-made banner along with a cloth bearing the colors of the banned Tibetan national flag.  He then walked through the the local market, calling out “Tibet is independent!” and “China quit Tibet!” “He walked straight toward the police station in Chamdo, calling on Tibetans to ‘rise up’ behind him,” the source said. Nyendrak was then immediately detained, according to witnesses.” (Source: RFA)

Image:smh

Tibet’s political and spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, during his visit to Poland compared (July 28) the plight of Tibetans to the sufferings  experienced by Poles during the Warsaw Uprising of 1944, during which Polish insurgents defied the tyranny of Nazi Germany.

‘Since 1956 in many parts of Tibet there is a similar situation. Even the Chinese, communist military sometimes used bombs, airplanes,’ he commented during a visit to a Warsaw museum

The Tibetan leader failed to draw upon other equally important parallels most notably the fact that  the Polish people, (unlike the objectives of  his own exile-Administration) had one desire, the restoration of Poland’s territorial and political independence, they were not seeking genuine autonomy with a bloody regime, or willing to remain under occupation as a minority people of a Nazi Empire.

Chinese Stormtroopers Occupy Kham's Towns

Image:phayul

According to a report by Voice of Tibet communist Chinese officials in the town of Ganzi (in Kham, East Tibet) have supposedly lifted the prohibition against Tibetans’ possessing and worshiping images of the Dalai Lama. However, the radical change of policy has generated widespread suspicions amongst local Tibetans who question the motivation behind this move. A statement given by a local monk from Drepung Monastery claimed that the communist authorities entered the town and insisted that the regime had never banned Tibetans from having images of the Dalai Lama and that Tibetans should their enjoy freedom-of-belief.  “The official stated that since Dalai Lama is leader of Buddhism, Tibetan followers can worship Dalai Lama’s image from now on. Later, the official gave Tibetans a large image of the Dalai Lama.”

The region is strongly supportive of Tibetan independence and had witnessed a number of demonstrations and individual protests, little wonder that many suspect the policy change is a political trap. Since the Lhasa Uprisings of 1987 communist Chinese authorities banned Tibetans from hanging and worshipping images of the Dalai Lama. Just several months ago Chinese security troops ransacked Tibetan homes in the area, and went on to publicly burn images of the Dalai Lama in front of local Tibetans.

“I earnestly urge the Chinese authorities to exercise restraint in dealing with the situation in a spirit of understanding and far-sightedness, I offer my prayers for those who lost their lives, their families and others affected by this sad turn of events,”

Spokesman Qin Gang informed a foreign press briefing that: “Such a move stirs strong indignation among the Chinese people,” claiming that it would threaten  the cooperation between Paris and Chinese cities, and destabilize the relationship between China and France.

Such bully-boy posturing by Beijing normally dissolves at the sound of trade deals,  along with the prospect of more foreign capital being invested in China.

Tibet's Leader Lands in Paris June 6

Image:reuters

The Dalai Lama, arrived in Paris today, amidst some concern the visit may unsettle recently restored relations between France and communist China. The Tibetan political leader is in France to accept an honorary citizenship of the French capital. He declared that the visit is not political;

“Once more I’m very happy to come to France. The main reason of my visit is to receive the honour citizen [sic] of Paris.”

Such comments will not reassure communist China, which has criticized European countries that have received the Dalai Lama during his European tour.

Hoping For Autonomy While Tibetans Are Struggling for Independence

Image:imageproxy

Tibet’s political leader, called upon the international community to undertake an independent assessment of the situation in his country and pressurize communist  China to end the “oppression”.

“Please, international community, judge whether there is a problem or not. Go there and investigate.” he told Dutch parliamentarians on Friday June 5 .

“In the case the majority of people genuinely are happy, then our information is wrong … and we will have to apologise to the Chinese government. If, on the other hand, there is real resentment to China’s … oppression, then tell the Chinese government they should accept the reality and should start a realistic approach. Force is not a solution.”

The  Dalai Lama also informed MPs that his faith in the communist Chinese authorities was becoming “thinner” as efforts to seek negotiation continue to falter. He again stressed that he was not seeking independence for Tibet, a message that is in stark contrast to the political aspirations of his own people, who continue their struggle against Chinese occupation in the hope of a free and independent Tibet.

Nancy Pelosi

Image:daylife

Ms. Nancy Pelosi will depart shortly for China, returning on May 31, could a less publicized part of her climate and trade mission, involve an attempt to try and revitalize negotiations between the communist Chinese authorities and the exiled Tibetan government? The Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives is close to the exiled Tibetan leadership and one wonders if she has volunteered to impress upon China, that the Dalai Lama is committed and sincere, when insisting that he seeks a “minimal autonomy”, in accord with the constitution of communist China, and that he now concedes that Tibetans are not a seperate and distinct people but a Chinese minority group?

As she flies into Beijing will she give a thought to the political aspirations of Tibetans inside Tibet, who are struggling for an outcome very different to that hoped for by their exiled Administration. Perhaps she will have sufficient time upon the flight to realise that the issue of Tibet is not about the Dalai Lama, or her other Tibetan friend, Samdhong Rinpoche. It concerns, as formerly recognized by the Tibetan leader,  the political wishes of the Tibetan people, whose courage, sacrifices and ongoing resistance against Chinese occupation has one common goal, independence for Tibet. When facing her smiling Chinese hosts will Nancy be able to promote a message that betrays that hope?

Samdhong Rinpoche Courts US Senators April 21

Image: Phayul/ICT

Here he is with former US Special Coordinator for Tibetan Issues, Paula Dobriansky and US  Senator Dianne Feinstein and Mr. Richard Blum. One wonders if he was detailing a statement made by the Dalai Lama during a recent press conference in Tokyo, http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jke-1OQ5ir-TDgS6rKzClU19A50A  in which the Tibetan Leader was quoted by Agence France Press as stating that:

“We have sincerely committed to remain part of the PRC for our own interest, for our  economic development, provided [we have] minimal autonomy to safeguard our culture, our spirituality and the environment.” (Emphasis Added)

Seems that ‘genuine’ autonomy was not sufficient to entice Beijing to enter serious negotiation, so ‘meaningful’ was proposed, that too having failed, the Tibetan Administration now offers ‘minimal’ autonomy! The next step of course is to accept communist China’s version of ‘autonomy’