Home > News Archive > Report of Lhasa events of March 1959

Report of Lhasa events of March 1959

Far Eastern Economic Review

Supplement – Tibet

I – THE FIGHTING

First news of the drama came in press reports from New Delhi dated March 23. These reported that fighting had been going on in and around Lhasa for three days and that there had been widespread demonstrations by the Tibetans against the Chinese regime. It was later reported that hostilities had ceased in the vicinity of the Indian Consulate near the Potala Palace, the Dalai Lama’s residence, which stands like a fortress on a high hill dominating the city of Lhasa. During the hostilities, the Chinese liberation forces used artillery and automatic weapons.

Thousands of Casualties

Fighting was resumed on the following day on a scale smaller than before, but it had apparently spread to other important centers in Tibet. Some 13,000 monks were stated to have joined the nomad tribesmen and casualties were said to run into thousands.

On March 24, a Kalimpong report stated that the uprising had been completely smashed by the Chinese but that the battle was going on very fiercely in other parts of the country. A large body of troops was moved into Lhasa and ordered to spread out throughout the country to bring the situation under control. These men were armed with modern weapons and machine guns but, it is said, they were unable to make full use of them due to their lack of knowledge of the mountainous Tibetan terrain. Communications were cut two days later but the sturdy Tibetans continued their resistance.

The Supreme Tibetan Council, calling upon its countrymen to continue the battle, denounced the Sino-Tibetan occupation treaty and declared Tibet’s independence of Peking. A demand was also made that the occupation forces should immediately be withdrawn. Pointing out that the affair would, in due course, be brought to the attention of the United Nations, the Secretary-General of which could hardly ignore such a move as he did Tibet’s appeal last August, the Supreme Council vowed to fight to the end for the independence of its homeland. “As long as there is a single Tibetan alive, we will fight our Chinese oppressors,” the Supreme Council said. “God will punish the Chinese Communists.”

Monasteries Destroyed

At the same time, Peking issued a communique dissolving the Tibetan administration and declaring that the Dalai Lama was being held under duress by the rebels, that the Supreme Council of Tibet had been dissolved, and that the Panchen Lama had been empowered to head the government pending the return of the Dalai Lama. On March 29, it was reported that the Chinese had shelled the Sera Monastery (two miles from Lhasa), which housed some 3,000 monks, and the Drespung Monastery (six miles from Lhasa), which housed about 10,000 monks. The former was completely destroyed and the latter heavily damaged. Later, both monasteries were surrounded and 13,000 monks were arrested and marched out. Large quantities of arms and ammunition, including hand grenades, crude bombs, rifles, guns and several boxes of ammunition, as well as a considerable quantity of foodstuffs, were seized and confiscated.

Following this engagement, in which more than 5,000 lost their lives, a military government was established by the occupation forces. Lhasa was swept clean of the rebels by March 30 and the city returned to normal. Shops and the market place were re-opened and social order was steadily restored. According to New China Agency claims, the local people expressed their pleasure at being freed from the disaster of rebellion.

Stern Chinese Warning

Thousands of Tibetans were rounded up during and after the fighting and carted off in trucks, either to be executed or sent to forced labor camps, and, according to press reports, hundreds were shot in the streets or hanged from trees after summary trials and the corpses of those hanged were left as they were as a stern warning to other Tibetans not to emulate them.

The Peking Government disclosed for the first time on April 1 that counterrevolutionaries from China Proper had taken part in the Tibetan rebellion. In a broadcast, Peking alleged that the Tibetans had revolted at the instigation of imperialists and in collusion with special agents of the imperialists and the Chiang Kai-Shek regime and counter revolutionaries — who had fled to Tibet from neighboring provinces and, since May and June last year, undertaken armed rebellion in some areas, “carrying out plunder, arson, murder, and rape everywhere.”

II – THE ESCAPE

At first reported to be under house arrest in his winter palace at Potala^[1], the 23-year-old Dalai Lama apparently succeeded in escaping before the arrival of the Chinese liberation forces. Indian reports stated that he and the members of his Cabinet had been spirited out of Potala Palace by the rebels a couple of days prior to the outbreak of fighting, and that he was believed to be leading the Tibetans in their battle against the Chinese occupation forces at a point where he was out of reach of the Chinese.

Aeroplanes, paratroopers and, it is said, some 50,000 troops, were sent out in a determined attempt to cut him off before he was able to reach the Bhutan, Nepalese or Indian borders, and it was thought that he and his mother and sisters were hiding in the mountains near Bhutan which abound in impassable valleys and caves.

On March 30, the New Delhi Evening News reported that the Chinese Communists had asked the governments concerned for permission to search the Indian, Nepalese and Bhutan missions in Lhasa for the Dalai Lama but, when they were informed that the Tibetan ruler was not in any of them, they did not press their request.

When it became known that he was still alive, the People’s Government issued a State Council Order to the effect that the Dalai Lama was being held under duress by the rebel Tibetan Supreme Council, the dissolution of which was ordered, and pending his return to his throne, the Panchen Lama was proclaimed new Chairman of the Preparatory Committee for the Autonomous Region of Tibet.

The Panchen Lama, regarded by many as a mere puppet, promptly accepted and promised full support to the Chinese in putting down the rebellion and thoroughly smashing the “shameless, traitorous intrigues carried out by the upper strata reactionary clique and the aid of the imperialists and the Chiang Kai-Shek clique.”

On April 2, Peking (according to the New China Agency) learned that the “abducted” Dalai Lama, “under duress by the rebellious elements,” had entered India with his entourage of 80 persons on March 31. He is stated to have evaded his pursuers and to be in good health. The Indian Government immediately granted him political asylum and treated him as an honoured guest.

III – REACTION ABROAD

On March 28, Communist China alleged — and India promptly denied — that the commanding centre of the Tibetan revolt was at Kalimpong, in Indian Bengal. In a communique making the charge, the Chinese Embassy in New Delhi declared that Sino-Indian relations must be guided by the Treaty of Co-existence signed in 1954. (This provides for respect of each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty, non-aggression, non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, equality and mutual benefits, and peaceful co-existence). China, said the communique, considered discussion on the internal affairs of a friendly country impolite and improper.

The Chinese charge was emphatically denied by the Indian External Affairs Ministry, which pointed out that its Government made it clear to Tibetan residents of Kalimpong that they would not be allowed to engage in propaganda activities on Indian soil against a friendly government. There had, it went on, been no unlawful activities in Kalimpong or elsewhere by these people or others, and it was entirely incorrect to say that Kalimpong was a center of any rebellious activities.

Mr. Jawaharlal Nehru, the Indian Prime Minister, also denied the Chinese charge and told Parliament that India should have friendly relations with Mainland China — but the latter could not dictate to India. As to China’s warning that China’s internal affairs should not be discussed by the Indian Parliament, Mr. Nehru said he wanted to make it clear that no external force could restrict Parliament. As to the question of admitting refugees from Tibet, Mr. Nehru asserted that no one would be allowed to cross the border unless they possessed valid passports or certificates to enter India, India could not open its borders to half the population of another country. Many Indian M.P.s were highly critical of this position.

Mrs. Lakshmi Menon, Deputy External Minister, accused Peking of challenging Mr. Nehru’s integrity and honesty, and said it was highly improper for the Chinese Embassy in India to circulate articles repeating Peking’s charges after Mr. Nehru had denied them.

Addressing a delegation of Tibetans whom he received in New Delhi on March 31, Prime Minister Nehru pointed out that, while he extended his sympathies to the Tibetan people, India was not in a position to intervene with China over Tibet.

Taiwan Promises Support

As expected, Taiwan was not slow in promising support to the Tibetans. In a message dated March 26, President Chiang Kai-Shek promised the people of Tibet self-determination after the overthrow of the Communist regime on China’s mainland. “If you remain firm and courageous, and if you continue to carry on the fight,” he said, “I shall lead your compatriots, civilian and military, to join forces with you on the mainland and fight shoulder to shoulder for the fulfilment of our sacred mission for national salvation.” The Nationalists promised to aid the Tibetans and assist in working out plans designed to con- the revolt.

The Chinese Communists were charged with killing some 10,000 Tibetans, including many religious Lamas, most of whom were locked up before being executed. Taiwan expects the revolt to develop into a major uprising and spread to the neighbouring provinces of Tsinghai, Sikang, Szechuan, Yunnan and Kansu, where there are more than two million Tibetans.

Indian Reaction

The Indian left-wing Praja Socialist Party held a public meeting in New Delhi to rally Indian support for the Tibetans. Mr. N. G. Goray, the party’s general secretary and a member of the House of the People (the Lower House of Parliament), said it was clear that the Tibetan uprising was a national struggle against Chinese “colonialism” and Peking’s suggestion that it was confined to Khampa tribesmen was a deliberate attempt to mislead world opinion. It was, he said, the whole Tibetan population which was fighting with bare hands against the massed might of Chinese militarism.

Daily newspaper in New Delhi demanded what the Hindustan Times described as a “realistic re-assessment of the basis of our foreign policy” against the background of the Tibetan happenings. The Hindustan Times, organ of the governing Congress Party and considered to be the closest to Mr. Nehru, did not mince its words. Under the headline, “Rape of Tibet,” it wrote:—“Let us hold our heads low to-day. A small country on our border has paid the ultimate penalty for its temerity to aspire for independence. Tibet is dead, and much else could die with Tibet if we do not even now heed the warning. There falls the shadow of China in lands all around us.”

The Times of India warned India to seek an early agreement on the India-Tibet border so that consolidation of Chinese power there would not lead to any encroachment of Indian territory. Peking’s military victory in Tibet, the paper said, was in fact a political defeat — it was an open admission of failure to create a popular base for Chinese rule in Tibet. London papers called upon Prime Minister Nehru to speak out boldly against the suppression of the Tibetan uprising. India must be wondering whether her passive good-neighbour policy has proved right, said the Daily Telegraph (Conservative).

The New York Times, under the title “The Conquest of Tibet,” says it is impossible to escape the cynicism and brutality in Peking’s announcement of the fighting. In the abyss of the Chinese Communist mind, a cry for independence was reactionary. The Tibetan revolt has stripped the veil of pretence from Peking.

IV – The Rebels’ Organization

Latest reports stated that Peking had rushed 100,000 crack troops to Tibet in an all-out attempt to crush the rebellious Khampa tribesmen. Trouble is reported to have broken out in Tsinghai Province and the Sinkiang Autonomous Region, north of Tibet, where the authorities are said to have imposed travel restrictions.

The Khampa tribesmen, who are said to have borne the brunt of the fighting against the Chinese, are admittedly fierce warriors who do not know the meaning of fear. It was their bitter resistance to Socialist education and the “democratization” plans of Peking that led to the killing or wounding of many thousands of Communist Chinese and their supporters. There is no way of confirming the Tibetan reports that as many as 50,00 perished.

Ever since the Chinese Liberation Forces, about 100,000 strong, entered Tibet in 1950, they have encountered nothing but — trouble. Discontentment, open rebellion and scattered clashes became so bad that, in July, 1956, the People’s Government in Peking officially announced that the original programme to lead Tibet along the Chinese road to democracy and Communism would be postponed for six years.

Most of the land in Tibet is owned by the monasteries and, when the Chinese sought to introduce land reform, they at once clashed headlong with the most powerful elements in Tibet – the Lamas, who are the backbone of the feudal quasi-religious Tibetan society.

They also came into conflict with the fierce tribesmen in the Kham country, in eastern Tibet. The Khampas are mostly nomad herdsmen. When told to surrender their land or pay high taxes, these people immediately rose and took up arms in guerilla warfare against the Chinese invaders. Tension grew stronger last July when the Chinese army authorities demanded that Tibetan troops should join hands with the Liberation Army in suppressing the Khampas. The Dalai Lama, however, refused to permit this and his action is believed to be one of the underlying reasons for the Chinese “invitation” to visit Peking.

Meanwhile, the Khampas took to the mountains and, in spite of high prices (U.S.$200 for an old rifle and U.S.$3 per round of ammunition, bought arms from underground channels. Resistance against the Chinese was built around an organization known as the Mi-mun (“anti-tyranny”), which is understood to have a membership of between 35,000 and 40,000, enjoying wide support from the Tibetan people.

In many ways, the guerilla tacties employed by the Mi-mun are similar to those used by the Chinese Communists when they fought against the Nationalist regime on the mainland in the years before 1949. Highways were sabotaged, supply depots attacked. Members of the Mi-mun became farmers during the day and partisan fighters at night.

Dalai Lama as Leader?

While not actually head of the Mi-mun the Dalai Lama did not refrain from giving it his tacit support. He received numerous memorials from the Mi-mun to take over the leadership and guide his people, but there are no records to show that he acceded to these demands.

The resistance movement continued to gain strength and there were occasions when it drove the Chinese forces to temporary refuge in the mountains, and occupied key positions. So serious did the situation become that, last October, Marshal Peng Teh-huai, Vice-Chairman of the People’s Government and Minister of Defence in Peking, visited Tsinghai (Tibet’s neighbouring province) to direct operations against the rebels. Comrade Peng’s efforts were, however, not entirely successful, for the fires of revolt have since continued to smoulder.

The rebellion grew bigger and more powerful and it is believed that, when the fighting broke out in Lhasa, some 310,000 Tibetans were engaged against the Chinese. Taiwan claimed to have contacted the rebels and to have given them support, but this could not be substantiated.

Peking’s Military Preparations

Peking divided the country into eight administrative areas, linked by a new network of highways with Lhasa as the hub. When any trouble breaks out in one unit, reinforcements can be rushed from the seven other administrative areas over highways which can handle heavy artillery with ease. At the same time, air drops can also be carried out.

[1] NOTE: Actually the Dalai Lama was at his summer palace, the Norbulingka — Editor

• Next FEER Report from May 1959
• Next FEER Report from April 1960

Copyright © 1959 Far Eastern Economic Review

Published in Far Eastern Economic Review, Vol. 26, No. 15, p. 502