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, 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!

Appeasing China, News Item, Tibet

Solidarity With What Exactly?

Image:graphic by @tibettruth via original photo from mogru tenpa

In an interview in today’s Times of India  the political leader of the exiled Tibetan Administration, Doctor Lobsang Sangay, when asked if  he did not wish to break with China offered the following response:

“We are not challenging China’s sovereignty or territorial integrity. We seek genuine autonomy within the People’s Republic of China. That they refused.”  See Here

Such comments are to be expected from an individual who has been advocating the surrender of Tibet’s nationhood since his appointment to office, a similar appeasement was on display during last week’s meeting in New Delhi, promoted as the ‘Tibetan People’s Solidarity Campaign’. The event, featuring prominent Tibetan and Indian speakers, drew several thousand people and  launched a series of events across India and beyond, including a march lead by  Doctor Sangay and his colleagues.


It attracted the uncritical support of Tibetans and has been widely promoted across the Internet on social sites such as Facebook, yet a closer look at this campaign reveals it to be not entirely what it seems. No one publicly has even questioned with what exactly is the outpouring of solidarity dedicated? Is it directed towards the Tibetan struggle inside occupied Tibet? An action offered unreservedly in support of the demands made by the Tibetan people for independence? Does it have an altogether different purpose? Although hidden in plain sight, and thankfully invested with integrity by individual Tibetans who chose to carry their nation’s flag (take note Doctor Sangay) anyone with an eye for detail could not fail but notice indications that this campaign had been engineered by Lobsang Sangay and his advisers as a public mechanism to promote what has been a recent re-branding of the Tibetan issue. At this stage it’s useful perhaps for those with little knowledge of Tibet’s cause to offer a brief breakdown.

In essence Doctor Lobsang Sangay and his Administration have inherited, and become very enthusiastic advocates of, a strategy first proposed by the Dalai Lama in which Tibetan independence is abandoned, in favor of improved cultural, social and local governmental autonomy. Known as the Middle Way policy it has proved a singular failure,  a reality conceded by the Dalai Lama during a television interview. Despite being forcefully and consistently rejected by China’s regime, this proposal, formalized into a written document; the Memorandum On Meaningful Autonomy For Tibetans continues as the central strategy of Doctor Sangay’s Administration.

Now before the suicidal compromises of that proposal are considered China’s authorities have to be ‘encouraged’ to continue with what have previously been fruitless  negotiations. The Chinese leadership has made a number of thoroughly inflexible demands while remaining deeply suspicious of, and hostile towards these proposals, claiming them to be no more than a disguised attempt to restore Tibet’s sovereignty. This has resulted in the exiled Tibetan leadership jumping through an endless series of hoops in an effort to assuage Chinese suspicions and prove that it is acting in good faith. Within this context there is for Lobsang Sangay at least, no place for Tibet’s rightful nationhood and independence, as those issues are far too toxic and would mean the demise of ongoing efforts to seek negotiation with China.

Image:graphic by @tibettruth via original photo from mogru tenpa

This then is the background, the corrosive forces operating behind the so-called ‘Tibetan People’s Solidarity Campaign’ which explain the words of appeasement from Doctor Sangay, remarks that trample across the common political aspiration for independence expressed by decades of Tibetans protests in occupied Tibet.  In light of these circumstances was it any surprise that organizers of the meeting in New Delhi chose not to display on stage a single Tibetan flag, a symbol of Tibetan national identity, was it considered an action too negative for Chinese consumption? Did such considerations equally inform the timorous wording of the orchestrated slogans, which were made available by the exiled Tibetan Administration to participants?
The on-stream message of the event was tightly focused upon saving Tibet’s culture, protecting language, appeals to China to act compassionately, and requests for international and media support. Clearly the campaign was no display of political solidarity with the quest for Tibetan independence, but part of continuing restructuring of the Tibetan cause, imposed by an elite desperate to satisfy Chinese demands.


Meanwhile inside occupied Tibet the resistance to China’s illegal and brutal occupation continues, Tibetans face torture, forced labor and Chinese bullets to demand Tibetan independence, while in exile a handful of prominent Tibetans seek surrender with China and mobilize Tibetans onto the streets to support what has proved an inane and vacuous policy of appeasement. The people of Tibet deserve so much more than this cynical betrayal, they have every right to expect a genuine solidarity movement, in unison with their just struggle for an independent Tibetan nation.