On March 13 Tibet’s Exiled Prime Minister, Samdhong Rinpoche gave a televised interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRJFe-e-txI to Asia News Network that caused outrage and dismay for many Tibetans, when he asserted that Tibet was an internal issue of China. He also claimed that“As far as the Tibet issue is concerned, we have nothing to do with Western countries“ a bizarre statement that contradicts decades of political, financial and moral support for the Tibetan cause from western nations. including most notably the United States of America.
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’
Tibet’s political head, en route to Los Angeles, took time at Tokyo’s Narita airport (Wednesday April 22) to condemn recent sentences given to Tibetans for their alleged involvement in arson attacks during the Uprisings for Tibetan independence. The Dalai Lama charged communist China of concealing evidence in the trial, and demanded China conduct further investigations and disclose all the details. The Tibetan leader said the court decision indicated the extent of control exerted by communist China, noting such influence operated “without the rule of law.”
“Actually, everything is controlled by the party. So, all these sentences were politically reasoned…We have great reservation about these sentences.”
There remain a number of unresolved conflict issues, territorial disputes, and illegal occupations. Cases where a people are oppressed, under the unforgiving rule of a major military power, denied civil and political freedom and the right to self-determination and independence. Tibet being one such example. Would it be reasonable to imagine that other oppressed peoples would have a profound commonality with the plight of Tibet, an experiential understanding and empathy that could express a solidarity? Equally do Tibetans have a natural sympathy towards other nations who suffer similar injustices and violations? No doubt there are many that do, seeing within another political struggle and refugee experience natural allies. Are we though challenged by less clearly understandable associations?
Asker Palestinian Refugee Camp Nablus
Image: Travel Adventures
Take for example the Jewish-Tibetan exchange program. By all accounts a very worthwhile endeavour that affords considerable mutal benefit and cultural understanding between younger generations of the two cultures. A positive and welcome project. Yet its establishment did raise questions of a difficult nature, these have not been aired, touching as they do upon thorny ethical issues. However it is timely to give some exposure to such debate.
It is well known that within Israel there are many voices of dissent towards policies and actions which are denying Palestinians a range of basic freedoms, respected human rights activists and academics who champion greater rights for Palestine and its people. However, though the exiled Tibetan government, and the Dalai Lama, have rightly spoken-out on the historic suffering of Jewish peoples, and asserted the importance of learing lessons from the experiences and response of the Jewish community to such catastrophe, it seems to have offered only silence on the circumstances of the Palestians.
There is no Palestinian-Tibetan friendship association, nor expression of political or moral solidarity with the countless thousands of displaced Palestinians, who suffer the most appalling conditions inside refugee camps, denied any prospect of returning to their homeland. Yet beyond the obvious distinctions, not least a willingness by the Palestinians to engage a campaign of armed resistance, there are parallels between the situation of the two peoples, most importantly the desire for an independent state and the free expression of their cultures. Similarly too both have experienced the hardships of exile and the considerable challenges of refugee-life, although it may be argued that Tibetans have to some degree secured a greater degree of improvement, albeit achieved with fewer numbers of refugees and not hindered by conflict, military subjegation, enforced partition and other erosive pressures.
A conspicuous reason for the apparent reluctance of the Tibetan adminstration to establish links with Palestinian people could well be a desire not to associate itself with armed aggression and the subsequent tragedies which surely follows such actions. The Tibetan cause after all has been defined by the Dalai Lama and his government as being non-violent. During the cordial discussions between Jewish and Tibetan religious and community figures one wonders if all forms of violence are rejected, are the courageous actions exercised by the Jews of Warsaw Ghetto dismissed as a form of terrorism to be distanced from? Perhaps Dharmsala’s indifference towards the sufferings of fellow refugees has more a prosaic explanation, in that the international financial support received by the exiled Tibetan Government maybe comprised in part of donations from Jewish supporters?
Shatila Palestinian Refugee Camp, Lebanon
Image: Ectronicintifada
Whatever the reasons, the Palestinian children of the refugee camps continue to suffer a range of privations, what a shame that they, unlike Jewish students, are not allowed an opportunity to experience the educational and social successes of the exiled Tibetan community and its cultural riches.
What’s your view on this? Should the exiled Tibetan Government encourage contact betwen Tibetans and Palestinians? Or do you feel such an association would be counter-productive to Tibetan interests?
Following China’s recent announcement that its is allowing tourists to visit Tibet (the world’s only case of holiday-makers enjoying the delights of a prison) the Dalai Lama, addressing a press conference in New Delhi, charged communist China with concealing the brutal suppression of the Tibetan people. The Tibetan leader said:
“I appeal to the Chinese government to allow unbiased journalists, the Indian media and tourists to go to Tibet and thoroughly investigate whether Tibetans are happy or not. If the Chinese government has nothing to hide, they should allow.If conditions in Tibet are really good, there is no reason to expel all the foreigners, tourists and the media people,”
Samdhong Rinpoche, Prime Minister of the Tibetan government in exile, has extended an unreserved welcome to the offer, reportedly made by Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, of holding more talks with the Dalai Lama’s representatives. This is something of a volte face for the Chinese leadership which had earlier launched an attack against Western countries which it asserted were exploiting the Dalai Lama.
Desperate for any sign of accomodation with Beijing Samdhong Rinpoche welcomed the reported offer of further talks:
“This is something which we need to welcome, and we are always ready to send His Holiness’ envoys at any time, and we have already given our inspiration [?] in writing in the last round of dialogue in November last year. Now, there is a set agenda. So, no problem to discuss with them.”
More controversially responding to Wen Jiabao accusing the West of exploiting the Dalai Lama] Samdhong replied:
“If there is any truth, they should establish with evidences. As far as the Tibet issue is concerned, we have nothing to do with Western countries. We consider this is an internal matter of the People’s Republic of China, and if the People’s Republic of China is willing to deal with us as an internal matter, we are absolutely ready.“
Confirmation of what has already been noted as may be seen at:
“If Rimpoche believes the Tibetan issue is the internal affairs of the PRC what is he doing heading a Tibetan government in exile in a foreign country with the aid of Western governments?”
