Image: graphic very kindly created by @anonriddler
Early next week an airliner will be departing the shores of England packed with a high profile trade delegation, a key component of British Prime Minister, David Cameron’s trip to China. The objective is to secure further deals with China’s regime and seek Chinese investment within the UK economy, which is becoming, like that of the United States, increasingly dependent upon China’s economy. Apart from various financial incentives and a green light on moving into areas such as nuclear, oil and gas, mobile communications and info-tech research the Chinese are being served a generous portion of appeasement on human rights and the issue of occupied lands such as Tibet and East Turkestan.
Not that Cameron will give a damn about such issues, he will be far too busy working for the benefit of (cough) ‘British interests’ which shall be represented by the reported presence of Ralf Speth, chief executive of Jaguar Land Rover, Premier League Chief Executive Richard Scudamore, McLaren sports car boss Ron Dennis, Royal Dutch Shell Chairman Jorma Ollila, London Stock Exchange Chief Executive Xavier Rolet, TalkTalk’s Dido Harding, Standard Chartered’s Peter Sands and GlaxoSmithKline’s Chief Executive Andrew Witty.
Thanks to the wonderful support and activism of our friends and subscribers, who took time out to contact the Mayor of Alameda in protest at the planned raising in that city of China’s flag on October 1 we were interested to note that yesterday a response was issued by Alexander Nguyen the Assistant City Manager. In his email Alex was very clear in claiming that the event was “not a formal City Hall event” and that it was “sponsored by our local Sister City Association….,”. So no connection then with the city authorities? Well the same day this claim was made, at 7.pm during a meeting of Alemada’s Social Service Human Relations Board, a Mr Robles Wong was appointed as a representative of City Hall to guess which body? You got it the Sister City Association! The very organization which Mr Nguyen was at pains to assert was sponsoring the ‘private’ flag raising event. Hmmm!
The fingerprints of Alameda’s civic authority seem to be all over this, and its fair to consider that they have influence and input, meanwhile we notice that Mayor Gilmore has thus far declined to issue a statement making clear that she nor her Council colleagues support flying China’s flag in the city, an act of appeasement that endorses China’s regime. Well Ms Mayor??????
As predicted in the previous post the ‘Special Meeting Of Tibetans’, convened recently by the body formerly known as the Exiled Tibetan Government, in Dharamsala, Northern India revealed itself as little more than a public exercise to endorse the long failed strategy of appeasement towards China’s Regime. In essence this seeks so-called meaningful autonomy, with Tibetans left under the tender mercies of China’s national and regional laws, in effect it would see Tibetans submitting to China’s claims that Tibet is part of China, and its people just another Chinese national minority. Anyone who has doubts on this should make a big pot of coffee and devote an hour to read carefully the Memorandum On Meaningful Autonomy For Tibetans a document which surrenders Tibet’s nationhood and is the suicidal basis of Tibetan negotiations with China’s authorities.
Yet, within the 31 recommendations agreed by the meeting was, naturally, a resounding approval to continue with a policy, which the Dalai Lama himself conceded has proved a singular failure
“The meeting resolved to pursue the Middle-Way policy to find a meaningful solution through dialogue with the Chinese government as per the past resolutions adopted by the Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile and wishes of His Holiness the Dalai Lama.” Source
Once again the struggle of Tibetans in occupied Tibet, who so bravely resist China’s tyranny to demand their nation’s independence, has been entirely ignored and marginalized by a cabal which draping itself in Tibet’s national flag, in truth has exchanged courage and determination with compromise and capitulation.
Lobsang Sangay was elected from within the exiled Tibetan community to the post of Prime Minister and travels the world articulating what he and his Administration consider to be the objectives of Tibet’s cause. What this urbane and media aware spokesperson chooses not to mention in his numerous interviews is the reality that the message he peddles is at complete variance with the political struggle being waged inside occupied Tibet. Not only that but the strategy which his declarations endorse, known as the Middle Way policy, has been conceded by the Dalai Lama as a failure. That sobering truth however has not prevented Lobsang Sangay and his colleagues from continuing to flog a very dead yak in their efforts to appease China’s leadership to return to what have proved utterly failed negotiations over Tibet.
His latest comments, featured in Foreign Policy again betray the common aspiration of Tibetans inside occupied Tibet, who face China’s tyranny to demand their rightful independence, while in the air-conditioned comfort of Washington Lobsang was assuring a reporter of The Cable that:
“If Tibet is granted autonomy, that could be a catalyst for moderation of China because if the Chinese government grants autonomy to Tibetans, for the first time they are accepting diversity within and accepting a distinct if not different people,“ (Emphasis Added)
This comment might be misread by some as the exiled Tibetan Minister implying Tibetans are in fact Chinese and belonging to the one big happy nation of the Motherland? Such a concession would not be entirely surprising given the record of dangerous surrender and appeasement which has characterized the efforts of the exiled Tibetan Administration in seeking compromises from China. Later in the same interview he claimed:
“We are asking for genuine autonomy within China, within the framework of the Chinese constitution. We are not challenging Chinese sovereignty or territorial integrity so we are willing to accept the One China concept,” (Emphasis Added)
Precisely who is Lobsang Sangay referring to when he talks of “we”? Clearly not those Tibetans who have for decades resisted China’s illegal and violent occupation of Tibet to demand independence. Nor is he speaking for Tibetans who self-immolate and have distributed leaflets calling for Tibetan independence, shouted slogans calling for the same, or as occurred on June 20 having doused themselves in gasoline and set themselves ablaze held aloft the symbol of Tibetan independence, the national flag of Tibet.
The exiled Tibetan Administration knows very well that Tibetans seek national freedom, a fact recognized on a number of occasions by the Dalai Lama, it is fully aware too of the stream of detailed accounts emerging from Tibet that documents protests, collective and individual that have as a central demand Tibetan independence. However this heartfelt and common aspiration is callously ignored in the pursuit of securing a condition of so-called autonomy in which Tibet’s rightful cause for nationhood is abandoned and Tibetans would remain under China’s bloody maw.
Double Click For Larger View
We would request folks to send a message of appreciation to Richard Boyd Barrett TD one of the few champions of truth, justice, human rights and freedom within Ireland’s Parliament who stood up for Tibet and questioned the Irish Government’s stance on placating China’s regime. He may be contacted directly via here: