The English Conservative party annual conference, which lauched September 30, is expected to be a bumpy affair, dominated by fractious debates on Brexit. Away however from the infighting and nationalistic posturing on leaving the European Union another nasty mess spoiled the gathering. A female Chinese national, seemingly representing CCTV began haranguing speakers at a fringe event that was discussing issues of freedom and human rights in Hong Kong. One of the organizers of the meeting was assaulted by the woman, who was taken away by the police. Meanwhile demands have been made in Chinese media that the ‘Human Rights Committee of UK Conservative Party’ “should stop interfering in China’s internal affairs and stop meddling in Hong Kong affairs. The organizer of fringe event should apologize to the Chinese journalist.” SOURCE
Will Theresa May and her Conservative colleagues offer such an apology? You betcha, but it will be done behind closed doors! Will the Chinese ‘journalist’ be charged by police with assault? No way! Such is the level of appeasement towards China, a market of increasing dominance within the UK. especially as its political establishment contemplates the economic consequences of withdrawal from the EU!
We took down our previous post, as the subscriber who so kindly emailed it in a few hours back had not looked into the fine details of the Reciprocal Access To Tibet Act, formalized details of which we only just received to examine. From its various clauses and definitions it appears that it considers, what’s described as ‘Tibetan Areas’, as compromising all those regions which are regarded as traditional Tibetan territory. That being the case it is neither fair or accurate to claim that the Act applies only to that truncated area of Tibet, named by the Chinese regime as ‘Tibet Autonomous Region’. While we are happy to issue this erratum concerns remain, particularly should China permit free access within that area but deny such entry to other Tibetan lands under its occupation. Under such a situation what would be the US response?
Image via @tibettruth (double click for larger view)
RFA Tibetan Service Director Kalden Lodoe
A question. Why is Mr Kalden Lodoe, Tibetan Director of Radio Free Asia (Tibetan Service) approving from his colleagues output such as this?
“And in March 2008, a riot in Lhasa followed the suppression by Chinese police of four days of peaceful Tibetan protests and led to the destruction of Han Chinese shops in the city and deadly attacks on Han Chinese residents. The riot then sparked a wave of mostly peaceful protests against Chinese rule that spread across Tibet and into Tibetan-populated regions of western Chinese provinces.” (emphasis added) Source: RFA-Tibetan Pilgrim Sees Restrictions, Heavy Police Presence in Lhasa 2018-08-31
You would be forgiven on reading the quote above to wonder if it had been written by an official within China’s Ministry Of Foreign Affairs, or its propaganda channel, Xinhua news. Why do we say this?
The syntax used has a striking similarity with terminology used by official Chinese sources. The description as ‘a riot’ of the Tibetan response to a brutal oppression in Lhasa during 2008 is precisely the narrative used by China’s regime at that time. Seeking to denigrate and misrepresent Tibetans as rioters, engaged in criminal behavior, while conveninently ignoring the legitimate protests against China’s illegal and vicious rule. The reference to ‘deadly attacks on Han Chinese residents‘ is also borrowed from China’s disinformation on those demonstrations.
The closing sentence concludes by endorsing the fact-free claims of China’s regime regarding Tibetan territory by repeating their propaganda: ‘…that spread across Tibet and into Tibetan-populated regions of western Chinese provinces.’ The so-called western Chinese provinces referred to in reality are the traditional Tibetan regions of Amdo and Kham.
So if Chinese propagandists did not write such baseless drivel who did? Well the people responsible are employed by Radio Free Asia (Tibetan Service) in Washington DC. A body influenced and controlled by the State Department, via the US Agency For Global Media. There is also, so some have discussed, a pro-China sway within the organization, ultimately though the English version of such reports is down to a Richard Finney. An individual who consistently features such misleading and toxic propaganda into reports on Tibet, betcha his State Department controllers must be very pleased with his contributions. After all they have for decades appeased China’s bogus claim over Tibet!
Image via @tibettruth
Throughout the years of our activism and research on Tibet and its cause we’ve seen an increasing willingness from international academics to collaborate with China’s regime. Although aware of the censorship, human rights abuses and violent oppression of against not only Chinese citizens, but the occupied lands of Tibet, East Turkistan, Southern Mongolia and Manchuria, career and bank-balance considerations have taken precedence.
Thankfully there are those, when viewing China’s tyranny and toxic international leverage, choose not the path of self-serving silence but act with integrity and courage. One such individual is Prof. Anne-Marie Brady of the University of Canterbury, New Zealand, who has exposed and reported upon the growing influence of China’s communist party within countries around the world.
We salute you Ms Brady, stay strong!
Google’s widely condemned collaboration with the totalitarian government of China has reached new depths on the recent disclosure that its ‘in progress project-Dragonfly’ (specially designed to allow the Chinese state unprecedented degree of censorship and surveillance) will enable the authorities there to link online searches by users to their personal cell or landline numbers. Allowing the Chinese regime to monitor people’s queries, an invaluable resource if you are in the business of fighting against dissent, free-speech or ideologically corruput thinking. It’s every dictatorships dream technonology and has been made possible by the good folks of Google. Awesome job guys!
More at this excellent report from The Intercept https://theintercept.com/2018/09/14/google-china-prototype-links-searches-to-phone-numbers/
The long anguished discussions across the internet on the demise of the Blog seem to be realizing the concerns they articulated, with the rise and dominance of social-media platforms folks have gotten used to bite-sized, image-driven consumption. Seems there’s just too little time around to read word rich posts.
We’ve noticed that dynamic and mindful of where best, and how, our outreach on Tibet is manifest, we’re giving thought to maintaining this resource. Launched in 2009 it’s become a serious and forceful voice for Tibet, breaking stories, launching campaigns and exposing issues others have feared to engage with.
Outspoken, but always coming from a place of integrity we’ve been dedicated to the just cause of Tibet, in solidarity with the resistance and political aspirations of Tibetans inside occupied Tibet. Yet no matter the awesome committment. expertise and knowledge that maintains and creates this site, there’s a digital tide at work, the flow of which means less exposure and engagement.
Given that the purpose of our presence here is to reach out to the many who know little of Tibet and the plight of the Tibetan people we need to give sober assessment to its continuance, especially when there are other more active and populated platforms.