Tibettruth is getting increasingly outraged at the cold-hearted betrayal of the Tibetan struggle for independence, waged against China’s occupation of Tibet, by an exiled Tibetan Administration, which despite being acutely aware of the widespread resistance to Chinese rule and mass protests across Tibet for independence, tramples with arrogant indifference across the political aspirations of its own people, by pressing a policy of dangerous compromise with communist China (that seeks a negotiated agreement; the aims of which are to submit to Chinese rule with some form of so-called meaningful autonomy).
Meanwhile inside occupied Tibet the resistance to China’s tyrannical occupation is undiminished, the demand for Tibet’s national freedom expressed with an incredible courage and determination, political prisoners enduring the most horrific of abuse and misery, beyond the slave labor camps and ‘re-education canters’ a range of vicious measures suppressing freedom culture and religion. Still the heartfelt desire for Tibetan independence burns brightly, as witnessed by the Uprisings of 2008 and more recent reports that testify to a truth once acknowledged by Tibet’s political leader:
”It’s important for the Chinese authorities to recognize the true aspirations of the Tibetan people. Virtually all Tibetans long for nothing less than full independence for our country” (Dalai Lama March 10, 1990)
That ambition remains the same, what has changed is the degree of appeasement towards China by the exiled Tibetan Administration, a development influenced and encouraged by international political opinion that urges so-called realism and pragmatism on the Tibetan leadership to reach a solution with communist China’s regime.
A prominent and duplicitous voice advocating the abandonment of Tibet’s rightful nationhood is found among a number of Parliamentarians, indeed there exists an international Parliamentary alliance to promote such surrender which expends great energy calling for negotiations from China and supporting the Dalai Lama’s proposals for accepting Chinese rule in return for some form of improved autonomy. No doubt such political opinion, informed and advised by the strategic and commercial realities of their respective nation’s interests with China, is keen to see a ‘solution’ to the issue of Tibet, if only to remove what remains an inconvenient diplomatic distraction in relations with China.
The friendly advice and support offered to the exiled Tibetan Administration is forged from such national interests and as such is corrupt and cynical, it’s objective not to support the national identity of Tibet but to engineer the demise of Tibet as an international issue thereby enabling Tibet to be more effectively ignored as an internal matter of communist China. Of course there are some Parliamentarians who no doubt operate on the basis of genuine compassion and concern for the people of Tibet, convinced by the strategy adopted by the Dalai Lama as offering a reasonable and hopeful resolution. What such individuals fail to recognize however, and it is this which generates such offense, is that the Tibetan people themselves inside Tibet are facing Chinese bullets, prison and torture to demand their nation’s independence, not for the ‘autonomy’ envisaged by the exiled Tibetan Administration. Moreover Parliamentarians, so dedicated to democratic principle ,would surely agree with the Dalai Lama’s former assertion that:
“I have always stated that the central issue is that the Tibetan people must ultimately choose their own destiny. It is not for the Dalai Lama, and certainly not for the Chinese to make that decision. It should ultimately be the wishes of the Tibetan people that should prevail”. (The Dalai Lama Yale, 1991)
Why then are members of Parliament such as Mr Mario-Ambrosini of South Africa’s Inkatha Freedom Party issuing statements such as the following:
“Tibet is asking for what all Chinese deserve limited autonomy and all fundamental rights entrenched in the UN Universal Declaration. This is what the 5th World Parliamentarians Convention on Tibet not only supported Tibetan autonomy and human rights but also stressed how its aim was that of supporting rather than antagonizing China.” (Phayul September 17, 2010-Emphasis Added)
A Note to Mr Ambrosini
1) Let’s get a few points straightened out, ‘Tibet’ (by that you infer the 6 million people of Tibet, virtually all of whom live in occupied Tibet) is not requesting ‘limited autonomy’, that appeal is being made by Tibet’s exiled Tibetan Administration, which itself conceded that the most important fact is not the wishes of His Holiness but the political aspirations of Tibetans.
2) If you possess any knowledge of Tibet then you will acknowledge that inside that brutalized nation Tibetans are not taking to the streets to demand ‘limited autonomy’ but for their national identity and Tibet’s independence. Secondly, it is not for Parliamentary organizations to issue supportive recommendations of autonomy for the Tibetan people, Tibet’s cause belongs to its people and they express that when facing China’s tyranny to demand their nation’s freedom.
3) Lastly you grossly insult Tibetans who are fighting to preserve their national and cultural identity when you imply in your comments that Tibetans are Chinese.
May we enquire if you would have urged the oppressed Black people of South Africa to submit to the rule of Apartheid on the basis it was a realistic solution? Would you have welcomed foreign politicians recommending that the ANC reach a compromise solution with the Apartheid Regime? One imagines you would never have entertained such betrayal, so why are you promoting a sly capitulation for Tibet and misrepresenting Tibetans as Chinese? Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the realities of the Tibetan cause before issuing what are damaging and fallacious comments about another peoples’ freedom struggle?
Tibettruth has written to both Inkatha Freedom Party and Mr Ambrosini, if you wish to express your concern at the comments made by Mr Mario-Ambrosini MP he can emailed here: firstname.lastname@example.org
Please Share This Post On Any Of The Sites Below