What you may ask gives legitimacy to
the demands of Tibetans inside occupied
Tibet for independence?
That Tibet enjoyed prior to invasion by China in
1950 national governance and freedom?
Or is it based upon the fact that Tibetans are a
distinct people, with a unique culture, language
and history?
Could such a right be due to the reality
that in terms of international law Tibet may
be correctly defined as an independent nation
under illegal occupation?
The reasoning extends beyond these
factors, deriving from the tyranny and
cultural genocide waged against
Tibetans and their culture.
It is the fundamental truth that as a people
who are being violently denied their cultural,
political, civil and religious freedom Tibetans
recognize that only an end to Chinese rule
can offer genuine protection to their culture and
national identity.
Ofcause Tibetans has right, but demanding Independence leads in the situation in Tibet, where it is very dangerous to Tibetans to show their opinion. It leads in many oppresive even fatal attacks from Chinese officials.
The most important is we can say Tibetans 99% are for His Holiness Dalai Lama and Independence is not his demand but genuine Autonomy.
Heikki, Thanks for taking time to share your view, which we have featured. In reply we hope you would not dispute that Tibetans inside occupied Tibet have a right to determine the nature and objective of their cause. This right has been acknowledged by His Holiness on many occasions. “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. I must reiterate that the six million Tibetans inside Tibet must have the final say on the future of our country.” (Yale University October 1991) His Holiness was correct in stating that and his words remain just as valid in 2016. Given that we must respect the reality that in occupied Tibet people are demonstrating, very aware of the risks they take, to demand not ‘autonomy’ but for national liberation. There exists a wealth of eye-witness accounts, media reports and human rights investigations that testify to this truth. While you are correct to note the devotion of Tibetans to His Holiness it is a plain fact that they are not facing Chinese bullets to seek improved autonomy under the laws of the Chinese regime. So people beyond Tibet have a choice do they stand in solidarity with the aspirations of the Tibetan struggle inside Tibet or follow a proposal outlined by His Holiness, which he himself has gone on record as saying has failed?! That is our rejoinder to your contribution.