Reasons why Tibetans rose up in anger

Natalia Soebagjo ,  Jakarta   |  Tue, 03/25/2008 11:44 PM

Ever since Genghis Khan opened his court doors to Tibetan Buddhists in the 13th century, the Chinese have considered Tibet part of China, despite being the country's only region inhabited by a single ethnic group with a culture totally different to that of the main Han Chinese ethnic group.

But with the demise of the Chinese empire and encroaching Western colonialism in the 19th century, what worked under Chinese principles and its tributary system became no longer tenable. Western powers arbitrarily began to draw borders around their colonies, Lord Curzon's "Great Game" politics came into play and the Chinese suddenly felt their western frontiers under threat.

Until then, all the Tibetans wanted was to be left alone and, for centuries, they were pretty much left alone by the Chinese. But after the British invasion into Lhasa by Captain Frances Younghusband in 1903, the Tibetans considered it an opportune moment to take a stand and end the political ambiguity of their homeland. After tripartite negotiations between Britain, China and Tibet, it was agreed Tibet would be divided into Inner Tibet in the east and Outer Tibet in the west, giving Outer Tibet full autonomy.

The situation changed, however, when the Chinese communists came into power in 1949. The new rulers in Beijing wanted to assert their historical claim to Tibet and sent their troops into the region in 1950.

At the time, the Dalai Lama was only 16 years old. With no international support, he had no choice but to compromise with the Chinese, agreeing to sign the "17-point Agreement for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet" in May 1951. Limited autonomy was granted to Tibet, allowing the Tibetans to maintain their traditional theocratic elite, religious practices and way of life, but under the firm control of Beijing.

Tibet was carved up and its people dispersed into neighboring Chinese provinces Sichuan, Qinghai, Gansu and even Yunnan, but the heartland of Tibet remained under the Dalai Lama's rule.

This situation did not last and in 1959, the Tibetans rebelled forcing the Dalai Lama to flee to India. With the Dalai Lama gone, the Chinese were free to impose their power.

Forty-nine years later, the Tibetans have once again rebelled. The exiled Tibetans in India intended to stage a 6-month long march from Dharamsala, the seat of the Dalai Lama's government-in-exile, beginning on March 10 until the Olympics in August.

With international attention on the Chinese Olympics, Tibetans have taken the golden opportunity to highlight their plight on the world stage. In honor of their commitment to China, the Indian government quickly put a stop to the planned march. Word quickly spread and Tibetan monks in Lhasa bravely took up the cause, protesting in peace. The protests turned violent within just a few days, spreading to Sichuan, Gansu and Qinghai provinces.

In the era of reform, the central government prioritizes economic development and Tibet, being one of China's poorest provinces, has experienced a large inflow of capital to spur its growth. Instead of winning the hearts and minds of the Tibetans, however, it has only served to increase resentment.

With the inflow of capital, there has also been an influx of Han Chinese, who, in the eyes of the Tibetans, are considered the only beneficiaries of the economic opportunities. The mega-construction of the 710-mile rail track, laid over inhospitable terrains of extreme temperatures and altitudes, costing more than US$4 billion to construct, no doubt will facilitate trade with the more prosperous eastern provinces of China, but it will also mean more Han migrants coming to Tibet.

From the central government's point of view, this can only bring benefits and indeed economic conditions in Tibet have improved, but the migration of Han Chinese into Tibet without understanding and appreciation of the sensibilities of Tibet spells disaster.

Even the Dalai Lama concedes in terms of "material development", the Tibetans have benefited and so he is not calling for secession, merely for greater autonomy and the freedom to practice their way of life.

In 1980, the somewhat more enlightened Hu Yaobang, former General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, apologized to the Tibetans for their maltreatment during the horrific Cultural Revolution. It was the closest admission of culpability ever; but in 1994 new guidelines were issued curbing the teaching of certain doctrines and texts essential to Tibetan Buddhism, including limiting the number of monks allowed in a monastery.

The Dalai Lama, who has been dealing with the Chinese for the past 60 years, understands full well what he is up against and does not want a repeat of the harsh crackdowns of the past. He continues to call for dialogue and peaceful means to a solution, although has made little progress. He understands violence would be "suicidal" and sees independence as an impractical option as it will not be supported by India and the U.S.

The young exiles, however, have lost patience for such a slow and conciliatory approach, bolstered by the fact the six rounds of talks with the Chinese since 2002 have not brought much change.

For the moment, the Chinese are playing a waiting game. They are counting on the possibility of a vacuum when the Dalai Lama passes away, as it is unlikely his successor will carry the same spiritual weight.

The second person in the Tibetan Buddhist hierarchy, with the authority to identify the next reincarnation of the Dalai Lama, is the Panchen Lama and the incumbent was chosen by the Chinese. Whatever the Chinese may say, his choice would never be recognized by Tibetans in exile.

Meanwhile, the Dalai Lama's own choice of the Panchen Lama is reportedly incarcerated somewhere in China. The Dalai Lama is proposing a referendum among Tibetan Buddhists to change the intricate reincarnation practice to allow him influence in picking his own successor. He is ignoring the fact the Chinese only recognize a Dalai Lama born within Chinese borders.

Dismayed by the violence committed by Tibetans, the Dalai Lama has threatened to resign as head of government-in-exile and as political leader, which is a shrewd move to end the violence. Using all his moral weight, he will have to convince the restless youth his middle way approach is still the most viable road to take.

It is clear the Chinese government needs to find a new approach in dealing with the unrest in their far-flung provinces. Economic progress is not enough without taking into consideration the cultural and religious sensibilities of local communities.

Tibet is not the only region vulnerable to unrest. The events there may well inspire the Muslim Uighurs in Xinjiang to likewise call for greater equality and recognition of their cultural rights.

The Han Chinese need to learn how to deal with diversity and respect differences because, for many, wealth and economic prosperity are not the sole criterion for contentment. For Tibet, as long as Beijing refuses to yield on political status issues, including allowing the Dalai Lama to return to Tibet, Beijing will have difficulty in weakening the Tibetans and will probably face stronger calls for independence in the future.

The writer is the vice-chairman of the Center for Chinese Studies, FIB-UI, Jakarta.

Copyright © 2008 The Jakarta Post - PT Bina Media Tenggara. All Rights Reserved.