Home > News Archive > Fighting still going on in Tibet

Fighting still going on in Tibet

Far Eastern Economic Review

Our Special Correspondent describes the developments in Tibet between April 7 and May 13 1959. This article is a sequel to that published in the REVIEW on page 501 of the April 9 issue.

Peking’s claims to have totally crushed the rebellion in Tibet notwithstanding, it would appear that unrest still prevails in the Land of the Lamas. The revolt seems to have been quelled in Lhasa and some of the remote areas but fierce fighting is still going on in the southern-part of the country.

Hsin Hua Agency reports that the People’s Liberation Army has captured a vast number of villages and crushed the rebellious Khampa tribesmen, with many casualties, at various places. In addition, it is said, many key points near the Loka border, the heart of the rebellion, and several thousand prisoners, have been taken. Only a few rebels have fled to the mountainous areas and these are being hunted down relentlessly. The Chinese Army has moved across the Tsangpo River by three routes and is carrying out mopping-up operations, while the rebels, under Amdotsong Gomputashi and other members of the nobility, flee in disorder when attacked. The latter, it is claimed, are receiving arms and supplies from unidentified foreign planes.

The rebel organization, known as “Four Rivers and Six Ranges”^[1] are said to have set up a vast military network throughout Tibet for the purpose of overthrowing the Chinese, is reported to have been broken up. This group, described as the scourge of Tibet, wrecked roads, ravaged the people, raided lorries, ambushed Chinese forces and government functionaries, and were fully armed.

While Peking’s aircraft heavily bombed the areas adjoining India’s northwest frontier in a bid to wipe out the rebel Khampas, ground forces, with the aid of pro-Chinese Tibetans, have been threatening them with complete annihilation, says Hsin Hua. Many hide-outs are reported to have been destroyed and a grim, bloody battle waged for days, with the Khampas finally retreating toward India, where 11,500 have now taken refuge.

Strict control is being maintained by the Chinese army at the border passes and the Tibetan markets near the border have been closed, with the result that there is a severe food shortage.

Large numbers of Tibetans have been sent away to unknown destinations, presumably, it is thought, to forced labour camps and Chinese [content missing in original]. Families from thickly populated provinces have been settled on the fertile land of the Tibetans.

About 150,000 Chinese troops are now reported to be guarding Lhasa’s population of 50,000 and a complete census has been taken to enable them to be traced at short notice.

In an effort to win over the support of the Tibetans, the Chinese Army authorities have ruled that Tibetan farmers may keep their own produce this year and they will not have to deliver any grain to the public granaries nor will they have to pay taxes until further notice.

Taipei reports that the rebels, who claimed to have slain a Peking general, may withdraw to the Burma-Yunnan border to join the anti-Communist forces.

Dalai Lama’s statement

Following his dramatic escape to India, the Government of which granted him political asylum, the Dalai Lama, Tibet’s temporal and spiritual leader, issued a statement categorically denying that he was being held under duress in India and emphasizing that he had entered India of his own free will. He accused China of interfering with Tibetan affairs, contrary to the 1951 agreement granting Tibet full autonomy, and expressed sincere regret over the tragedy which had befallen his country as well as the hope that the trouble would soon end without bloodshed. It had, he went on to say, always been accepted that the Tibetans were different from the Han people of China and there had always been a strong desire on the part of the former for independence. Under pressure and without alternative, said the Dalai Lama, Tibet accepted Chinese suzerainty on condition that they enjoyed full autonomy and that the Chinese would not interfere with their religion, customs or internal administration, but the Chinese had ignored this agreement.

The Tibetan ruler’s statement was issued about the same time as the Chinese Prime Minister, Mr. Chou En-Lai, was addressing the Second National People’s Congress in Peking and telling the deputies that the Dalai Lama had been abducted to India where he was being held in duress. Mr. Chou hoped that the Dalai Lama would free himself from the hold of the rebels and return to his motherland.

Shortly after making his statement, the Dalai Lama met Mr. Jawaharlal Nehru, the Indian Prime Minister, and told him why he had fled from Lhasa. Up to April 17, he is reported to have said, he had no idea that he would be leaving his capital but, when the gunfire became excessively heavy and shells fell perilously near his place, he and his retinue made up their minds to flee and they left six hours later.

Anti-Indian outburst

Release of the Dalai Lama’s statement led to an outburst of anti-Indian “imperialist” and “expansionist” attacks which have been going on since the middle of April up to the time of writing. Serious charges, distributed by the official Hsin Hua Agency, were made, alleging that the Indians had deliberately sought to make fools of Communist China, as the timing of the statement was arranged with care and detail and prompted by ulterior motives. “Slander,” “Imperialism,” “Expansionism,” “Invasion of Tibet,” “Destruction of Friendly Sino-Indian Relations,” “Diehards Must be Punished,” “Flagrant Calumny,” and “No Toleration of Indian Aggression,” were some of the expressions used in speeches at the National People’s Congress, public meetings, press articles, etc., and India was warned to mind her own business and keep out of Tibetan affairs. Mr. P. N. Menon, an Indian Foreign Ministry official who was deputed to meet the Dalai Lama and who released his statement denouncing Chinese rule in Tibet, was accused of acting as outright spokesman of the Tibetan rebels in India and branded as a “fool and blunderer,” while the statement was described as a fake, authored and dictated by others.

Anger and resentment over this anti-Indian campaign were voiced throughout India, the people of which stated that China had gone too far in alleging that the Dalai Lama was kept prisoner in India. There was great disillusionment over China’s apparent brutality in Tibet, and Peking’s hostile attitude was contrasted with Mr. Nehru’s moderate and conciliatory stand.

Moderation urged

On his part, the Indian Prime Minister told the House of the People, in the strongest statement ever made against a Communist country, that China was using cold war language, totally regardless of truth or propriety. The Dalai Lama, whose only wish was that fighting should end, was not held in duress: he could go to Tibet or anywhere he wished. He (the Dalai Lama) was entirely responsible for his statements and Indian officials had nothing to do with them. Mr. Nehru expressed the hope that China would win the Tibetans over by friendly cooperation in accordance with promises of autonomy which they had given. He said he had conveyed to China a deep feeling of regret at the charges made, especially during the National People’s Congress.

The principles of co-existence, which included mutual respect, were impaired, he said, but India would follow a policy of avoiding the development of a hostile feeling between the two countries and he hoped the Chinese would do likewise, for it would be a tragedy if such a feeling developed which could endanger relations and the peace of Asia and the world. Mr. Nehru called on the press and the public for moderation and expressed his regret over the action and grave discourtesy of certain irresponsible Indian elements who had thrown tomatoes at the portrait of Chairman Mao Tse-Tung. The Prime Minister urged his compatriots to avoid such incidents and to restrain their language and keep their tempers. He denied any expansionist aims on Tibet on the part of his country and said bet only interest was historical, sentimental and religious — not political. He looked forward for a quick and peaceful settlement of the Tibetan affair and hoped the present fighting and killing would cease.

In the course of another statement, Mr. Nehru said that India was standing by the Sino-Indian Treaty and voiced bitterness over China’s repeated charges, which coming from leaders of a country which India honoured and respected, were shocking to him. Despite their disagreement over Tibet, he said, India would continue to support China’s fight for admission to the United Nations, but her (China’s) charges were so fantastic that words seemed to have lost their meaning and he did not know how to reply. As to the charge that Indians were the “stooges and fools of Britain,” Mr. Nehru denied that this was the case.

Formal protests were made both by New Delhi and by Peking, the former against the tone of recent speeches criticizing India’s viewpoint on Tibet, and the latter against the insults to China and to Chairman Mao Tse-Tung, at whose portrait tomatoes were thrown.

Invited to visit India to help in the solution of the Tibetan affair, the Panchen Lama said that such a visit was not acceptable under present circumstances: the Tibetan problem was one that only the Tibetans themselves could solve. He criticized India for hostility shown to him during his stay there three years ago.

Mr. Nehru stated that such a reply was lacking in generosity and dignity by someone who had been India’s honoured guest.

[1] NOTE: The word “bridges” in source text from FEER has been changed to the correct “ranges” — Editor

• Previous FEER Report from 1959
• Next FEER Report from 1959

Copyright © 1959 Far Eastern Economic Review

Published in Far Eastern Economic Review, Vol. 26, No. 21, p. 705