| |
|
Chinese Myths and Tibetan Realities In the wake of impassioned Tibetan protests, Chinese denunciations of Tibetan leaders and activists in exile have become ever more harsh and shrill. Chinese leaders have increasingly invoked the claim that Tibet is an "integral" part of China and that even the mildest demands for genuine autonomy are "diabolical" and "treasonous" in their essence. Tibet has been virtually placed under house-arrest and all independent sources of information have been blockaded. And even though the response from Western leaders has been fairly tepid, the rhetoric from Chinese supporters abroad has tried to portray a "world-wide imperialist conspiracy" to "destabilize" China. India's pseudo-communists have whole-heartedly joined in the frenzied attacks on the Dalai Lama (as though he were the very personification of evil, and intent on restoring a most barbaric form of "feudalism" on the innocent people of Tibet). Tibetan arguments for self-determination have been summarily dismissed as though only their Chinese rulers could have the authority to speak for them. Yet, nothwithstanding all the disingenuous attempts at discounting the Tibetan right to self-determination (which is a fundamental right enshrined in the UN charter), the people of the world, including the vast majority of Indians have developed a deep sense of empathy for the suffering of the Tibetan people. Soon after the Chinese government crackdown in Tibet, polls showed that 85% of South Koreans, almost 80% of Japanese, and over two-thirds of Europeans identified with the protesting Tibetans. Amongst Indonesians with an opinion, support for the Tibetans ran 4 to 1. In India, some polls indicated that 2/3rds of Indians found the Indian government's response to China to be weak and inadequate and a majority wanted the Indian government to assert its support for the Tibetan struggle more vocally. Yet, some left intellectuals in India (and abroad) persist with crude distortions concerning Tibet's history and whitewash or downplay China's numerous crimes in Tibet. Consider first, the oft-repeated claim that Tibet has always been an "integral and inalienable" part of China. An assertion, made repeatedly by the Chinese government and its many apologists, but accepted by no Tibetan scholar or Tibetan historian. For instance, the Tibetan language is completely unrelated to Chinese, but Tibetic languages (or dialects) are spoken throughout the Tibetan plateau and in Tibetan regions in Western China (that have been deliberately excluded from China's "Tibetan Autonomous Region"). Related languages are also spoken in Nepal, Bhutan and parts of Northern India. The Tibetan script is part of the Brahmic family and is thus related to Sanskrit and other Indian languages. (See this essay on Indian Languages) Whereas the courts in Korea and Japan adopted certain Confucian features in their own courts, Tibetan rulers based themselves on Buddhist edicts, and political systems in Tibet evolved quite independently from the Chinese. Other evidence suggests deep and abiding cultural links with India. For instance, Tibetan monasteries are repositories of the largest collection of Buddhist literature including many rare or unique copies of ancient Indian Buddhist texts that have now disappeared from India. There are also records of continuing contacts between Kashmiri Pandits and Tibetan Buddhists in earlier centuries. Tibetan music involves chanting in Tibetan or Sanskrit but never in Mandarin or any other Chinese dialect (or language). Buddhist culture is an integral part of Tibetan culture and is deeply revered, unlike China where Confucianism has tended to be politically dominant. The Tibetans are therefore a people quite distinct from the Chinese and that is also how they view themselves. Moreover, there is considerable evidence that prior to being invaded by the Mongol armies in the 13th C, Tibet was an independant kingdom. For instance, there is evidence that Tibeten king, Namri Lontsen sent an ambassador to the Chinese court in the 7th C. (hardly necessary if Tibet were an "integral" part of China). Tibet was brought under Mongol rule in 1207, but China was brought under Mongol rule in 1280 (two generations later). Tibet regained its independence in 1358, a decade before China.(Tsepon W.D.Shakabpa, Tibet: A political History, Potala Publication, 1984, p 81) Yet,
China now claims that Tibet became an "integral" part of China when it
was brought under Mongol rule. By this logic, India could
claim Myanmar, Sri Lanka or Malaya as "integral" parts of India (because they were all British colonies). China has further claimed that Tibet was part and parcel of the Ming Dynasty. However, several Western historians dispute this claim, and Tibetan scholars counter-argue that Tibet was ruled by a succession of lamas from the Phagmo Drugpa lineage who frequently declined invitations to China from ruling Ming emperors as a mark of their sovereignty.(Tsung-Lien Shen and Shen Chi iu, Tibet and the Tibetans, New York, 1973, p. 41.) (Tenzin P. Atisha, A Survey of Tibetan History, pp. 13-14.) It appears that in the 18th C, the Manchu Qing dynasty which had conquered China further extended its reach over Tibet in 1724, but a popular rebellion in 1750 led to a killing of the Qing-appointed Ambans (Resident Commissioners appointed by the Manchu Emperors).(Wikipedia, Tibet) Thus, it is apparent that while Tibet was invaded and sometimes conquered by invaders such as the Mongols or the Manchus, and for some periods of its history was forced to be part of empires that included China or ruled from Beijing (as in the case of the Manchus), it never voluntarily became a part of China. Even if one were to accept China's tenuous claims regarding Tibet being subjugated by Chinese imperial authorities (as during the Ming dynasty), one thing is quite apparent - that the Tibetans never wanted to be part of imperial China and thus did not see themselves as "integrated" with imperial China. This is a crucial point in deciding the question of Tibetan self-determination. To be subjugated by force by an alien empire is hardly the basis of modern definitions of self-determination. China's justification of its 20th century invasion and occupation of Tibet can only be justified if one believes in the logic of empires. By that logic, since the rulers of Pakistan have often claimed to be the religious, cultural and political heirs of India's Islamic invaders - the inheritors of the Mughal empire, India should accede to Pakistan. The arguments that the Chinese have advanced are in themselves proof that the Chinese have virtually no understanding of the concept of self-determination. A distinct people can be an integral part of another nation only when there is an element of volition in the arrangement. To conquer a people by force or through armed coercion is to colonize them. A colonizing nation has no right to speak for the "self-determination" of a people that it has colonized. Although most Chinese advocates appear to gloss over this vital aspect of Tibetan self-determination, some of China's defenders then switch to another tack. They argue that China's invasion of Tibet was a revolutionary act of "liberation", aimed only at freeing the Tibetans from a vicious and barbaric "feudalism". Consider first, the scenario where one accepts that Tibet was a political tributary or vassal state of the Qing dynasty. This clearly implies that any recent vestige of Tibetan "feudalism" would be the legacy of Manchu/Chinese subjugation and not something that was inherent in Tibetan culture or practice. It would then be up to the Tibetan people themselves to choose their own path of liberation from such externally dictated "feudalism". On the other hand, if Tibetan "feudalism" was a result of internal and independant development, then China could hardly claim Tibet as an "integral" and "inalienable" part of its territory and China's unapologetic admirers must then at least admit that the Chinese government has been lying about Tibet's history. For instance, Tibetans writing their own history freely acknowledge that pre-modern Tibetan society (like most other Asian societies) was backward and in great need for reform. However, they categorically deny the caricature of Tibetan "feudalism" painted by Chinese official histories. (The International Commission of Jurists in its 1960 report on Tibet states: Chinese
allegations that the Tibetans enjoyed no human rights before the entry
of the Chinese were found to be based on distorted and exaggerated
accounts of life in Tibet. Accusations against the Tibetan "rebels" of
rape, plunder and torture were found to have been deliberately
fabricated and in other cases unworthy of belief for this and other
reasons. Unlike most hereditary monarchies (such as the Mughals, or the many dynasties of China), Tibet's ruling Lamas did not enjoy hereditary succession but could be selected from peasant families from different regions of Tibet. The ruling system was inspired from the concept of choesi-sungdrel that derived from the Buddhist tenets of compassion, moral integrity and equality. Administrative positions were divided equally between hereditary lay officials and monks who were admitted into the monastic orders without discrimination from the ranks of artisans and the peasantry. A popular Tibetan saying reflects this: “If the mother's son has the knowledge, the golden throne of Gaden (the highest position in the hierarchy of the Gelug School of Tibetan Buddhism) has no owner”. It is notable that the traditional social and political structures in Ladakh and Sikkim (Buddhist kingdoms that maintained close ties to Tibet) echo this version of Tibetan history. Likewise, the history of Bhutan fits reasonably well in the framework provided by the Tibetan Youth Congress, but the Chinese versions don't seem to fit at all. (In his book, Tibet and its History, Hugh Richardson wrote: “Even communist writers have had to admit there was no great difference between rich and poor in (pre-1949) Tibet.”) Furthermore, any anthropological study of the Tibetan diaspora - especially Tibetan refugees in India would likewise reveal the authenticity of Tibetan versions of their history rather than the cynically manipulated versions of history produced by the Chinese authorities. While it may be true that the Chinese invasion of 1950 brought an end to the traditional land-owning structures prevalent in Tibet, Tibetan activists argue that the Tibetans were perfectly capable of reforming and modernizing their own society without Chinese assistance. In any case, even allowing that Chinese-initiated land reforms may have been a step forward at that time, China's subsequent rule of Tibet must be evaluated on its merits. A single radical or progressive act cannot be used to justify future repression or other continuing injustices. It must also be considered that perhaps the Tibetans may have reformed their traditional land-holding patterns in a different and better way - through the creation of cooperatives or other progressive methods that may be better suited to Tibet's ecology and culture. For instance, in India, cooperatives have done much more to accelerate modern development and raise standards of living than land reforms. While land reforms were a step forward in Bengal, it should be emphasized that land reforms alone are not a decisive factor in progress. On most counts, the state of Bengal trails most other Indian states, and Kerala is increasingly dependant on central procurement from the Northern Indian states for its food needs. It is a shame that India's so-called "Communist" parties have blindly accepted the Chinese version of history, and have thus completely denied the Tibetans their legitimate right to self-determination. Not once have they asked why the Tibetans want to be free of Chinese hegemony, branding the entire Tibetan diaspora as "CIA agents". A Tibetan Genocide Consider, for instance, the charge by the Tibetans that the Chinese have since the 1950 invasion committed genocide in Tibet. While independant analysts dispute the actual number killed, there is some unanimity amongst those who have investigated census records that 400,000 - 800,000 Tibetans may have been killed or exiled as a consequence of Chinese military actions in Tibet. (Warren Smith's analysis of Tibetan census records shows an inexplicable drop in population which by extrapolation leads to the 400,000 figure. Tibetan Nation: A History of Tibetan Nationalism and Sino-Tibetan RelationsISBN 0-8133-3155-2, p. 600. ) Others have cited figures that show that the total population of ethnic Tibetans in China dropped from 2.8 million in 1953 to only 2.5 million in 1964 (which through demographic calculations) suggests a figure of 800,000 dead or missing or forced into exile. (The Government of Tibet in Exile quotes an issue of People's Daily published in 1959 to claim that the Tibetan population has dropped significantly since 1959. According to the article, figures from the National Bureau of Statistics of the People's Republic of China show that the autonomous region of Tibet was populated by 1,273,969 persons. In the Tibetan sectors of Kham, 3,381,064 Tibetans were counted. In Qinghai and other Tibetan sectors that are incorporated in Gansu, 1,675,534 Tibetans were counted. According to the total of these three numbers, the Tibetan population attained 6,330,567 in 1959.[See Tibet Wikipedia Note] In 2000, the number of Tibetans as a whole of these regions was about 5,400,000 according to National Bureau of Statistics.[Tibet Wikpedia Note] In conclusion, the analysis of these statistics originating from National Bureau of Statistics shows that between 1959 and 2000 the Tibetan population decreased by about one million, a 15% decline. During the same period, the Chinese population doubled, and the worldwide population increased threefoldDuring armed actions to put down Tibetan rebellions, Chinese atrocities were so severe that even Baba Phuntsok Wangyal, a Tibetan communist leader, who held the important position of Vice President of Tibetan People's Political Consultative Committee protested against these atrocities and expressed his sympathy for the Tibetan struggle for freedom. This eventually led to his arrest and imprisonment. The PLA Artillery Commander in Lhasa Col. Cheng Ho-Ching defected to the Tibetan side, recounting how he had simply become disgusted with killings and repression of the simple Tibetan people. While serving in the PLA he had access to various official papers and records wherein he found that after severe fighting in Kham and Amdo around 40,000 Tibetans were killed. There is simply no easy way to rationalize such a significant demographic catastrophe. Nor is it possible to rationalize the systematic denial of Tibetan autonomy and cultural rights. For instance, take India's state of Jammu and Kashmir - a multi-lingual, multi-ethnic and multi-religious state. In the state, Ladakhis enjoy complete religious autonomy. The Indian government has no control on the selection or appointment of monastic orders. Likewise, in the Kashmir Valley, mosques enjoy complete autonomy from the Indian government even to the point of issuing extremely hostile and secessionary sermons. There is freedom of speech, assembly and non-violent political association. The state has its own autonomous universities, radio and TV stations, and newspapers and magazines in local languages. The police force and judiciary are made up of locals and outsiders have no right to purchase property in Jammu and Kashmir. With few exceptions, there have been regular elections in which more than a dozen different political parties have participated. The Tibetans enjoy none of these basic cultural and political freedoms in their so-called "autonomous" republic or regions. Although it appears that the urban Chinese economy has been booming, (especially in the Special Enterprise Zones), it has come at enormous cost. 80% of the most polluted cities in the world are in China and 70% of China's water resources are seriously polluted. Chinese citizens have to suffer from the world's highest number of toxic spills and industrial explosions. Consider (as just one example) a recent story headlined " Pollution turns Chinese river "red and foamy": (chinaworker.info, Thu, Feb 28, 08) Authorities cut water supplies to 200,000 people in central Hubei province Communities along tributaries of the Han River in Hubei Province were forced to rely on emergency water supplies, with at least 60,000 relying on bottled water. Water plant workers found that the Dongjing River, a tributary of the Han, had turned red and foamy, a Hubei based website reported. As a result, 200,000 people were without mains water supplies, according to Xinhua. The river contained elevated levels of ammonia, nitrogen and permanganate, a chemical used in metal cleaning, tanning and bleaching, according to tests. The pollution apparently flowed down from the Han River, the Hubei government said. In addition,(according to official estimates for 2007), almost 4000 miners perished in a series of mostly avoidable mining disasters. Roughly 80% of all mining accidents take place in China. Even adjusting for its higher GDP and coal use, China's mining death rate is more than an order of magnitude larger than India's. China's workers lose fingers and hands at an alarming rate - far higher than any other industrial nation. An estimated 100,000 die in work-related accident each year. Chinese manufacturing remains highly inefficient. Pan
Yue of the Ministry of Environmen said, " the economic strides made by China comes at a huge cost to
the country's environment which will soon overwhelm the country
creating millions of "environmental refugees." He further said, "We are
using too many raw materials to sustain this growth. To produce goods
worth $10,000, for example, we need seven times more resources than
Japan, nearly six times more than the United States and, perhaps most
embarrassing, nearly three times more than India." In contrast, just recently, Indian industry was ranked as the most energy efficient amongst all emerging economies. It
is therefore no surprise that Tibet's fragile ecology suffers too,
gravely hurting Tibet's rural economy and food supply (because of
shrinking forests, grasslands and Yak herds). There have also been reports of severe environmental violations by businesses run by Han Chinese party officials in Tibet and elsewhere in China. And while the Chinese government has been promoting a deliberate policy of encouraging Han Chinese settlers in Lhasa and other Tibetan cities, Tibetans suffer enormous discrimination in jobs and taxation. Two thirds of China's population living in absolute poverty are in Western China (which includes the bulk of China's Tibetan population). It is now estimated that a Tibetan's per capita income is only a third of that of a Han Chinese even as China has accelerated the extraction of precious raw materials from Tibet. According to a study by Social Anthropologist and Tibetologist Dr Melyvn Goldstein in Asia Survey(sep/oct 2003), taxes and fees had increased for rural Tibetans, and prices of essential products such as fertilizers, sugar, tea, cooking oil and rice had seen inflationary rises ranging from 107 % to 400% over the period of 1984-2000. However, the price of barley (the major produce of Tibetan farmers) had risen only 56% in the same period. The study also noted that " all individuals 18 to 60 years of age are required to provide 20 days of free labor annually adding that Tibetan farmers and livestock producers faced buyer cartels, heavy taxation and extra budgetary charges, and lacked access to micro-finance to enable them to buy trucks. The study also noted there was no effective agricultural education extension service to bring scientific advances to the farmers. It is little wonder that recent protests in Tibet have been as intense and widespread. For those who wish to see reality for what it is, the evidence is quite overwhelming. The Chinese government may try to present itself as a "socialist government", but numerous press stories (from a variety of sources) that point to brutal land grabs, property speculation and inequality (that exceeds levels in Brazil, the US and India), bely all such claims. A recent Yahoo News report by Francois Bougon quoted a Chinese victim of a lnd grab: "I have worked all my life, but now I don't know where I am going to live. A new apartment will cost me a huge amount of money". According to the families, the developers are offering 8,000 yuan (1,140 dollars) in compensation to move out, far from enough cash to purchase another house "For this amount of money you could just about buy enough space to put our bed," said one woman, who cited the going price of an apartment in Chengdu at about 3,000 yuan per square metre (10.76 square feet).
The workers also denounced what they viewed to be the collusion between
the government land bureaus and the real estate industry. Another report from Hong Kong by Lu Jianhui (Central News Agency) Mar 06, 08 described yet another land grab: According to a report by Hong Kong Oriental Daily, at about 9:00 p.m. more than 1,000 peasants in Fengling Village of Wanning City were confronted with over 700 public security officers and armed police. Alongside them were several hundred demolition workers and government officials who were appointed to demolish the peasants' homes without mercy.Villagers said the Wanning authorities confiscated 2306 acres farmland from the 12 villages on the Peninsula with neither approval of the 4,000 peasants in the area nor permission from higher authorities. Villagers were also forced to sign on a blank sheet of paper on which the authorities later filled in statements agreeing to accept the land compensation. In this way the authorities forged an agreement and made the land seizure look "legal" on paper. Some villagers noted that the authorities compensated the peasants for each mu (667 square meters) of land at 6,500 to 29,000 yuan ($914 to 4080) but sold the land at two million yuan ($281,401) per mu. The profit margin was too huge for the villagers to accept." Likewise, there are numerous reports of Chinese workers being made to work long hours without extra pay and of millions who are never paid on time, (sometimes for months), or paid only partially. Some employers abscond leaving behind thousands of workers with unpaid wages. Often, this has taken place with the connivance of corrupt Communist Party officials.There have even been reports of slaves in Chinese brick kilns and of Chinese school authorities (in poorer districts) requiring children fund their schooling by putting in long hours at mandatory summer work camps where they manufacture cheap goods for businesses headed by local party bosses. Without any democratic checks and balances, the Chinese government can do little to prevent such human rights violations and the Tibetans suffer the most. Popular Indian football captain Baichung Bhutia set an example when he refused to run with the olympic flame. Speaking to the Times of India he noted how he sympathized with the Tibetan cause and wanted to stand by the people of Tibet and support their struggle. It is a great shame that the Indian government has instead been more worried about not offending their Chinese counterparts, as if they were India's real rulers. Some Indian businesses have likewise pleaded for deference to Chinese wishes - not wanting to upset their growing commercial ties with China. However, it should be noted that the interests of a few Indian importers are not synonymous with the needs of the Indian people. Much of what India buys from China could just as easily be manufactured in India. More significantly, India's navratnas like BHEL have repeatedly warned of the dangers in depending too heavily on Chinese equipment suppliers. Whereas BHEL's boilers offer a Plant Load Factor (PLF) of around 90%, most Chinese suppliers hardly achieve a 60% PLF. Last year, a Chinese supplied boiler for a mega power plant developed cracks within the first few months entailing huge disruptions in the schedule. As for computer and electronics imports from China, India need hardly fear Chinese retaliation. Most high tech goods exported from China are manufactured on behalf of Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese or Western companies that are in no position to lose out on the Indian market. India's politicians need to get over their irrational fears of China and learn to do the right thing - which is to defend Tibet's right to self-determination. As a former Indian diplomat aptly stated, it is not the job of the Indian government to be "embarassed over China's embarassment". In neglecting to defend the people of Tibet in their time of need, Indians are also increasing their own vulnerability to Chinese blackmail. India needs to stand up to China, not only as a gesture of solidarity towards Tibet, but also for its own peace and dignity. Notes By and large, the Indian government has been exceedingly diffident in speaking up for oppressed communities in India's immediate neighbourhood. The most glaring example has been the virtual silence of the Indian government w.r.t the beleagured Tamils of Sri Lanka. Likewise, the Indian government has never stood up for the oppressed Chakmas or Hindu minorities of Bangladesh. Nor has it spoken up for the people of Gilgit and Baltistan, or Baluchistan. It has also distanced itself from the plight of Malaysia's Tamils. Part of this concern stems from fear of duplicitious applications of the exercise of self-determination by nationalities (or sub-nationalities) that claim to be oppressed but have no qualms about oppressing other nationalities. This can occur when the right of self-determination is arrogantly invoked by a sectarian and undemocratic grouping on behalf of a disparate multi-national entity. Granting unconditional rights of self-determination to a political grouping that is driven by religous fundamentalism can be especially problematic. For instance, for many years, Westerners remained oblivious to how Kashmiri Sunni Muslim fundamentalists had expropriated the right of self-determination for all Hindu and secular Kashmiris. For a decade and more, the West cynically ignored how such Kashmiri separatists did not represent the people of Ladakh, Jammu or Kargil, and were themselves guilty of severe human rights abuses within Kashmir. No nation can be extended the right of self-determination in a manner that infringes on the right of self-determination of others equally or more oppressed. But there is no such danger from the Tibetans or the Tamils in Sri Lanka (or Malaysia). These are oppressed people who are only speaking in their own self-defence. To grant them equal treatment or autonomy (or even statehood with reasonable limits that protected the security concerns of all sides) would not take anything away from anybody else. While Indians would be hypocritical to demand more of other nations than what they can deliver themselves, they can lend moral (and other support) support in situations where the mistreatment of oppressed nationalities is evident and discernible, and where the magnitude and scale far exceeds anything imaginable in India. It is therefore high time that more Indians join hands in exposing this timid and fretful aspect of Indian diplomacy, and press India's neighbours on providing at least those minimum democratic rights that are available to all Indians in its federal democratic constitution. While no government has the right to interfere in the internal affairs of another (as US imperialism has been prone to doing), when there is a clear constitutional and systematic violation of the fundamental rights of a nation within a nation, even the UN charter acknowledges that in such situations, it is no longer an internal matter for the oppressor nation, but an international matter for the oppressed nation. For instance, popular and progressive forces throughout the world united against apartheid. There is no reason why the people of the world cannot do the same for other oppressed people. It is precisely in that spirit that Bishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa has come forward in solidarity with the Tibetan struggle. More of us need to do the same. Tibet Solidarity Links www.tibetanyouthcongress.org www.phayul.com Related
Essays: Could the US-British Occupation of Iraq ever be called "Liberation"? A Letter from Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir The Struggle for Self-Determination and Democratic
Rights in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK) Secularism in the Context of the Two-Nation Theory The Colonial Legacy and India's Knowledge Infrastructure The Sonia-Manmohan Government: A Report CardBack for other selections from South Asian Voice for other articles on issues confronting India and the region. Also see South Asian History or Topics in Indian History for relevant essays that shed some light on the history of the subcontinent. (If you liked our site, or would like to help with the South Asian Voice project and help us expand our reach, please click here) To send an e-mail, write to india.resource @yahoo.com
|
