Appeasing China, Tibet

Is The Ambition Of The Dalai Lama Returning To Tibet A Danger To The Tibetan Cause?

During recent public events and press statements the head of the exiled Tibetan Administration, Doctor Lobsang Sangay has issued a call to see the Dalai Lama returned to Tibet Source 

On the face of it such a goal would find no opposition from the global Tibetan community, often protests inside occupied Tibet, along with demanding Tibetan national independence also call for a return of Tibet’s spiritual and national leader. His Holiness has spoken of a hope to one day return to his beloved country. Is there though something darker behind this latest initiative, consequences which may not have been considered beyond the inner politics headed by Doctor Sangay and his Administration?

The reason we raise this question is that for years the Chinese regime has calculatedly responded to appeals for negotiations on Tibet by focusing upon the Dalai Lama. This is a cynical position engineered to avoid the matter of Tibet’s status in terms of its national and territorial sovereignty and the rights of the Tibetan people to external self-determination. China is acutely aware of, though can never concede, the reality of Tibet’s former independence and knows too that within international law it’s so-called ‘liberation’ of Tibet is more accurately and legitimately described and understood as a military invasion. These are subjects of the most intense sensitivity for the Chinese regime.

With that in mind the reader will see in a new light the conditions China imposes upon possible discussions on Tibet. It utterly rejects any notion of entering into talks with the exiled, Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) which it refuses to acknowledge, while contemptuously dismissing the office held by Lobsang Sangay. Instead it demands contact only with envoys of the Dalai Lama and when responding on the subject of Tibet is consistently intransigent and lays down a series of requirements directed at the Dalai Lama. In essence these demand a recognition that Tibet has always been a part of China and that he must give up what the Chinese regime describe as ‘splittist activities’.

As these political diversions serve China’s twisted agenda they come as no surprise, after all its totalitarian regime has been distorting and deceiving on the matter of Tibet and its status since 1950! What is more remarkable however is the recently adopted prominence, invested by Doctor Lobsang Sangay and the CTA, to promoting a return to Tibet of the Dalai Lama. It plays into the propaganda maneuvering of China’s authorities, enabling them to further manipulate and progress their uncompromising demands. But there’s another factor which adds to the concern at such a prospect.

The Central Tibetan Administration is actively promoting a dangerous set of compromises in an effort to bring China to the negotiating table, at the core of such concessions is a stated willingness to surrender Tibet’s lawful right to nationhood. Lobsang Sangay has gone much further in detailing the vision he has for the Tibetan people, a so-called genuine autonomy for Tibetans under the dictate of China’s rule and defined by Chinese national and regional law. Let that sink in for a moment and we are pretty sure the word which will surface is, surrender. Unless you are of a diplomatic persuasion then it may be realism.

For this politically suicidal objective to be realized China’s dictates require absolute compliance and at the very heart of such demands is the Dalai Lama. In launching this latest ambition to see His Holiness returned to Tibet is Lobsang Sangay offering further capitulations in the desperate hope of advancing his goal of seeing Tibetans living as a contented Chinese minority under the compassionate rule of China’s regime?

Appeasing China, Miscellaneous, Tibet

Exiled Tibetan Prime Minister Abandons Tibet’s Just Cause And Insults Reality Of Conditions Endured By Canada’s First Nations

Doctor Lobsang Sangay Abandoning Just Cause Of Tibetans And Ignoring Reality Of Conditions For First Nations In Canada
Doctor Lobsang Sangay Abandoning Just Cause Of Tibetans And Ignoring Reality Of Conditions For First Nations In Canada


Doctor Lobsang Sangay, exiled Tibetan ‘political leader’ has been at it again, banging the drum for a strategy which appeases the Chinese regime and actively abandons Tibet’s legitimate right to nationhood. Presently in Canada to seek political support for that dangerous compromise; described as a ‘Middle Way Policy’, he has been carefully associating nationalism with terrorism.

“Globally, you can see there is a decline of internationalism and liberalism compared to the 1990s, and there is an increase of nationalism and extremism around the world.” (Source: The Globe and Mail, 11/21/2016. Emphasis added)

A worrying similar line of argument is used by China’s government against Uyghurs, Tibetans and Mongolians seeking freedom from Chinese oppression!  Not that Doctor Sangay would wish to distance himself from the official thinking of China, he has after all dedicated his activities towards reassuring China that Tibetans are not seeking national freedom but only the fair application of current Chinese national and regional law on autonomy for so-called ‘ minorities’.

That he positions himself as the spokesperson of some 6 million Tibetans and claims to represent the political consensus is troubling. Particularly when viewed against the reality that inside Tibet dissent against Chinese rule is not articulating a desire for improved autonomy as dictated by the laws of China’s Communist Party regime. Tibetans enduring a miserable existence under Chinese rule are demanding their national freedom, an objective which according to his numerous comments, is anathema to Lobsang Sangay.

A process of abuse, marginalization and oppression all to familiar to Canada's native peoples.
A process of abuse, marginalization and oppression all to familiar to Canada’s native peoples.


Just how removed he is from the struggle and hopes of his own people is revealed by remarks he made during an interview with the Globe and Mail: “Our government will continue to have frank discussions with China, including on the respect for the rule of law and human rights of all Chinese citizens, including Tibetans. (Source: The Globe and Mail, 11/21/2016. Emphasis added)

The message is pretty darn clear and by rights should be setting off alarms across the Tibetan Disapora. That they have in place a leader willing to publicly concede that Tibetans are not a distinct people with a right to national, cultural, territorial and political freedom, but are in his view Chinese citizens seeking an equitable application of law, as framed by China’s regime!


And looking around the world what model does Doctor Sangay turn to that according to his thinking may support his vision of dutiful, law-abiding Tibetans as Chinese citizens enjoying a meaningful autonomy? Why, the federalism applying to Quebec and Canada’s treatment of ‘minorities’!

Quite how he reaches the conclusion that a democratic federalist structure, based upon values of human rights and individual freedoms can operate within China’s draconian Marxist inspired polity is beyond calculation! And this from a man who stated that his version of autonomy for Tibetans is not seeking democratic freedoms, (VIDEO link) makes the chance of a genuinely liberal federalist system benefiting Tibetans even more fanciful than it already is.

Meanwhile Doctor Sangay appears to have a curiously ill-informed understanding regarding the condition of native peoples living within Canada,

“I think Canada can proudly share its experience on how to solve minority issues,”.

Living conditions for Canada's native peoples reflect the neglect, indifference with which they are treated.
Living conditions for Canada’s native peoples reflect the neglect, indifference with which they are treated.


Really? So the pervasive racism, economic apartheid, social, and employment disadvantages that operate against First Nations are an illusion, or injustices of the past? If you think that Doctor Sangay then clearly you are ignorant of daily life as experienced by Canada’s aboriginal communities. As noted by a revealing article from Scott Gilmore:

“By almost every measurable indicator, the Aboriginal population in Canada is treated worse and lives with more hardship than the African-American population. All these facts tell us one thing: Canada has a race problem, too.” (Source: Canada’s Racism Problem? It’s Even Worse Than America’s. Macleans 1/22/2015)

Housing for Manitoba's native peoples is among Canada's most deprived
Housing for Manitoba’s native peoples is among Canada’s most deprived


Tibetans suffering under China’s merciless rule know very well the misery of being oppressed, marginalized and targeted by racism, and would recognize the plight of First Nations in Canada. What a pity that Harvard educated Lobsang Sangay is so worryingly unaware of the circumstances in which many Canadian ‘minority’ groups are surviving. How, we wonder, would he feel if a visiting dignitary to China declared that the Chinese government  ‘Can proudly share its experience on resolving minority issues’ while Tibetans are violently denied their freedom, forced from their lands into concentration camps and face an assault against their culture and national identity! It’s a litany of oppression that native people in Canada are familiar with, not only from history but the present.







Miscellaneous, Tibet

The Dangerous Delusions Of Negotiating With China’s Terrorist Regime


“I believe it is peace in our time” declared Neville Chamberlain September 30 1938. The English Prime Minister had just surrendered to Hitler’s demand that a region of (then named) Czechoslovakia be “given back” to Germany. Hitler was gifted with the Sudetenland the same year by the notorious Munich Agreement. The Allies were rewarded with World War Two.

As evidenced by Chamberlain’s appeasement of fascism there can be no reasonable understanding or accommodation, since within such systems there is a rigidity of ideology that excludes the acceptance of principles such as mutuality or equality operating. Oppressive governments consider such as a dangerous weakness, having the potential to erode their authority. It is the maintenance of control that consumes such regimes, from a psychological perspective totalitarian states exhibit a psychotic attachment to political power, ensured through a range of oppressive measures that generate compliance and subservience from people. The central currency of such governance is fear and violence, lacking, and contemptuous of, democratic accountability such regimes invest considerable economic, political and security resources to ensure a compliant and servile population. Such dictatorship is anathema to the universal values of human rights, civil, religious and political freedoms, it inflicts terror and suffering, promoting injustice, censorship and suppression.


Formerly known as the Exiled Tibetan Government the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) is engaged in an effort to seek reason and compromise from just such a regime, dispatching negotiating teams to Beijing, with proposals that have abandoned Tibet’s just and historic nationhood. Headed by Doctor Lobsang Sangay the CTA is seeking autonomy under communist Chinese rule, however the Chinese authorities consistently and forcefully reject such advances as unacceptable and insist upon a complete capitulation to their demands. Given the tyrannical and expansionist nature of the communist Chinese regime, with its fossilized totalitarian ideologies, such a reaction is utterly predictable. What’s surprising, and a source of growing dissatisfaction among Tibetans, is the determination of Doctor Sangay and his colleagues to persist in efforts to negotiate. Particularly when considering that the political reality suggests only one probable outcome, dangerous compromises from the Tibetan side.

Apart from the questionable political wisdom of trying to extract accommodation from a regime like communist China’s (stone and blood spring to mind) there is the broader ethical point of whether engaging in negotiations endorses the tyranny operating inside occupied Tibet. We should not forget that, as former political head of Tibet, in seeking an end to the suffering and cultural erosion of his people the Dalai Lama was acting with the highest of principles and compassion. Yet the fact Tibetan envoys have offered the Chinese regime worrying concessions (and would given a chance concede further) that would extinguish Tibet as an international issue and mean the death of Tibetan national identity, concedes that the tyranny which oppresses Tibetans has been rewarded.


There exists among an international community (with a vested and invested interest in maintaining the status quo with China’s regime on the subject of Tibet) support for a peaceful resolution, with Tibetans under Chinese rule with improved cultural autonomy. An objective not desired by Tibetans inside Tibet whose protests make very clear a demand for national freedom! However we cannot escape the reality that communist China is a totalitarian state that terrorizes its own people, and those of occupied lands such as Tibet, East Turkestan, Inner Mongolia and Manchuria. By negotiating with China, and offering such seismic compromises, the Central Tibetan Administration is submitting both legitimacy and support to that regime. Moreover, its preoccupation with securing progress in talks has had a corrosive influence upon its willingness or ability to forcefully criticize China’s catalog of atrocities which have been waged upon Tibetans. Indeed some have observed a distinct dilution of political critique, the emergence of a language that avoids creating negative reactions from Beijing. The illusion being manufactured here is one of two sides participating in a civilized and reasonable discourse, a reasonable effort to resolve some form of internal conflict. Not only is that a gross distortion of the facts, a betrayal of the political struggle operating inside Tibet which seeks independence, not autonomy, but reveals a craven appeasement, designed to encourage the Chinese regime. Yet the unjust and iniquitous nature of Chinese rule in Tibet should invite condemnation and resistance, not collaboration.


No analogy is ever perfect of course, and whenever we are exposed to the term Nazi-Germany there is an understandable reaction from some to assert no equivalence can be applied to current totalitarians states, given the unique horrors of that fascism. That well maybe the case. There are however a number of features of communist China’s rule in Tibet which form a disturbing reminder. A crude racism abounds in which Tibetans are seen as backward, uncultured and under developed compared to Han Chinese, while a policy of educational, health and economic Apartheid exists which discriminates against Tibetans in favor of Chinese colonists. Oppression of religion too, where the ideology-of-the-state is forced upon people through violence and intimidation. Censorship is endemic with no genuine civil and political rights. Tibetans are denied any fair and independent legal process, with arbitrary arrest common and politically motivated trials. A network of forced-labor camps house untold numbers of political prisoners, where systemic torture and abuse is common. Across Tibet women are subject to forced sterilizations, courtesy of a state-engineered population control policy, a chilling demographic assault upon Tibetans that serves up harrowing memories of Nazi Sterilization Laws. Meanwhile, China’s imperialistic ambitions in Tibet continue as it expands its control and assimilation policies, aimed at removing any trace of a Tibetan national identity. These oppressive measures are very much China’s Final Solution for Tibet.


The current initiative to negotiate, by its nature condones, excuses, marginalizes, rewards and justifies the tyranny China has waged upon Tibetans. It is a shameful placation of a regime which is adamantine in its resistance to offer concessions or agreements, and appeases China at the expense of Tibet’s right to nationhood and self-determination, which have been offered up as a political inducement. It is a difficult and painful process to observe Tibetan delegates conspiring with the communist Chinese authorities, issuing sweetened words of support and encouragement for China, offering concessions which trample across the political aspirations of Tibetans. History has shown time and again that appeasing tyranny does not secure greater freedoms or guarantee peace. What is observed by reasonable people as intelligent compromise and political realism, is ruthlessly exploited by authoritarian regimes as political weakness. The Central Tibetan Administration’s determination to negotiate a solution for Tibet may attract praise for its commitment to peace and human values, but within a political sense, the illusory consolation of appeasing Beijing will, as Winston Churchill observed on the 1938 Munich Agreement prove a “total and unmitigated defeat”.

Appeasing China, Demonstrations, News Item, Tibet

CTA Embarks On Campaign Promoting The Demise Of Tibetan Nationhood

Image:eluniversal adapted by @tibettruth

The Central Tibetan Administration, formerly known as the Tibetan Government In Exile, has announced Sunday July 20th that it is embarking an indoctrination campaign to convince Tibetan settlements across India of the merits of its utterly failed and politically suicidal solution for Tibet (Middle Way Approach).

This envisages and has as an objective of improvements on Tibetan autonomy under present national and regional laws as defined and enforced by the Chinese regime. It runs counter to the political struggle waged by Tibetans inside occupied Tibet, who have for decades resisted the illegal and violent occupation of their land and throughout have demanded independence for Tibet. That central political aspiration remains, yet Doctor Lobsang Sangay is evasive and callously dismissive of Tibetan nationhood and the legitimate objective of Tibet’s people by insisting that he is seeking not even basic democratic rights for Tibetans but only the application of current legislation on autonomy for ‘minorities’ from China’s authorities. See HERE

A few keywords come to mind here; betrayal, surrender, appeasement and insanity, while we would ask Doctor Sangay and his colleagues if they are willing to exchange their somewhat comfortable lives in exile for the questionable benefits of a life as a citizen of China under the tender mercies of the Communist Party of China?

Appeasing China, Miscellaneous, Tibet

What Happened To Doctor Lobsang Sangay?

Graphic: Adapted From Chattanooga Times Free-Press

After John Tenniel By @tibettruth

There are a number of characteristics by which we may recognize a politician, the majority of which are less than flattering, those who present themselves as champions of the people often find themselves criticized for corruption, indifference and of course double-standards. Curious how political parties are returned to office by an electorate that has previously suffered as a result of the policies and failed assurances given by politicians. Is it a masochism? A delusion that sees hope spring forth from the cynical rhetoric of those who promise so much, if only we grant them the keys to power!

The ability to sway public opinion is a critical necessity demanded of politicians, playing to a gallery, dropping words, concepts and emotions into a crucible of dreams, xenophobia, greed, prejudice, ignorance, bias and desperation. Like a conjurer it is all about distraction, timing and presentation, suspending the critical and replacing it with a belief in the illusory. Politics is surface and appearance,

No wonder then that principle finds it difficult to survive across the political landscape, at best it is allowed to bloom fleetingly, like everything in politics an ethical stand-point is disposable, a tool for the great game that has its moment only.Yet how we cheer and applaud when hearing a politician speak with conviction, now here’s someone who really cares, right?

Back in 2008 Tibetans gathered outside the United Nations to hear an address from Doctor Lobsang Sangay in which he moved people with his determination, sense of committment and assured dedication to the cause of Tibetan freedom. Here’s an extract:

Now let’s fast forward to 2013, an interview in which those former affirmations of  Tibetan nationhood were replaced with a narrative of surrender, compromise and appeasement. In this short extract Doctor Sangay insists that he is not seeking democratic rights for Tibetan in Tibet but only the application of Chinese national and regional laws on autonomy!

Shall we add ‘flexibility’ as another term into the lexicon of characteristics that identifies a politician, perhaps ‘realism’ could also explain the volte-face from Doctor Sangay? However from the perspective of Tibetans suffering under China’s tyranny, who are sacrificing their lives and well-being to assert Tibetan national freedom, very different words would apply!