Home > Opinions > Race for Tibet

Race for Tibet

By Roy Strider | Tibet Sun

Roy Strider Photographer unknown

Enforcing control measures by banning the nomad culture, one of the fundamental pillars of the ancient Tibetan tradition, and relocating the nomads in fenced ghettos similar to concentration camps, China once again indicates that while Tibet is important to the Chinese authorities, the people of Tibet are not. The recent meeting between Barack Obama and the Dalai Lama remained low-key and the way the Buddhist spiritual leader was escorted out by the back door of the White House symbolises the US policy regarding Tibet.

The optimistic Tibetans, gratified that the meeting was taking place at all — regardless of its insignificant outcome — turned into shock after the pictures were leaked into the press the next day. Millions were insulted by images of their leader walking by trash bags waiting to be picked up due to delays caused by the snowstorms. Chinese newspapers spread the word that the Dalai Lama was thrown out of White House with the American trash.

Is Tibet really worth not much more than the American garbage?

It is clear that China aims to challenge the position of the United States as the biggest superpower in the world.

If the diplomatic languages were any indication, the meeting of two Nobel Peace Prize laureates in the White House showed that Tibet is not as important to Washington as many people in the world, including the Tibetans themselves, would like to see. Many believe that Obama met the religious leader just because it was almost impossible to avoid the meeting on account of his Nobel prize. However, regardless of the hopeless outlook of the Tibetans, the over half a century old conflict has potential to become a far more important issue in the struggle between US and China than it has been up until now.

The US needs China to solve the nuclear crisis of Iran and North Korea as well as to fight climate change and the international financial crisis. China, however, no longer needs the US to the extent that it used to.

The rhetoric of China reveals that they are aware of their strength, and unwilling to yield an inch. In order to become the new leader, China is building up the strongest military in the world and an economy that is capitalist but not democratic. China beats their competitors with their own weapon by stripping capitalism of the democratic aspects that disguise it in the west and thus making their version of capitalism in its honesty and ruthlessness hardly beatable. It is called the capitalism with Chinese characteristics.

China strongly disapproves of any foreign recognition of the Dalai Lama or their involvement in the debate on the question of Tibet.

The present events reveal the speciousness of the Chinese policy that was also seen in Copenhagen where Denmark and the US were once again forced to face the territorial ambitions of China. The hope that China would sign the Copenhagen deal was lost. The patient “grab and hold” strategy of the Chinese triumphs over US foreign policy that is on the one hand trying to please China and on the other hand selling weapons to Taiwan and, however modestly, hosting the Dalai Lama.

The US is being held hostage by a predicament that they have themselves created and China must be pleased. Should Washington’s accusations against Beijing concerning financial manipulations be true, difficult as they are to prove, the US economy will also be seriously affected.

Whereas the Soviet Union, as the old enemy of US, was slowly but surely weakening, China is increasingly getting stronger. In order to fully understand the situation, the US leaders should perhaps have to be born in a country ruled by a dictator.

Without question, Tibet is the biggest trump card that could be used against China in the international platform although it was discarded during the Beijing Olympics. At the beginning of the last century, the British used Tibet as a buffer between themselves and the Russians. Similarly, the Western countries may soon use Tibet as a buffer to hinder China by uniting in a front against China on the basis of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Some countries could even make Tibet an important part of their foreign policy, though in this case the motivation would mainly be economically-driven.

China is very much aware of its Achilles’ heel on the roof of the world and is trying to fix the problem as soon as possible. Should a truly democratic referendum in Tibet take place, the majority of votes would support any of official Beijing’s views as a result of resettlement of loyal Chinese citizens in the TAR region.

The US has used Tibet against China before. From 1956, CIA trained and armed the Tibetan to weaken the Reds. The fighters, trained in Colorado in Camp Hale military base, even believed that the US would give them a nuclear weapon to fight the Chinese. However, the operation Shadow Circus was abandoned as soon as there was a change in Washington’s political course.

By playing the Tibetan card at this point, the US might find allies among the rest of the western countries whose position is weakened by increasing power of China. While the independence of Tibet was not even considered by the US government half a century ago, the Himalayan country might now get a real chance to achieve more freedom.

It may as well happen that the western countries, stunned by the increasing influence of China, will take a unified position concerning the discrimination of ethnic groups like Tibetans or Uyghurs and use that to put pressure on China. In this case Tibet has an opportunity to get closer to the autonomy and basic human rights promoted by the Dalai Lama.

Issues vital to corporations and governments have often no use to the average people. To the latter, the ownership of the modern capital rarely matters. Although the Tibetans have so far turned to the UN and different nations and governments for help, the solution for the problem lies probably elsewhere. We, the people, are the key to the solution.

The Tibetans should turn straight to the people, not the governments so that everybody would demand their politicians to take action in the matter of Tibet. Adding a new competitor in the race for Tibet would give governments a strong reason to rely more on the political will of their voters to support Tibet.

The race for Tibet should really include three parties. China might win by eliminating the problem of Tibet one way or the other. The western countries might use Tibet to stop China and get back their former dominant position.

Or could the people of the world win the race?

Copyright © 2010 Roy Strider

Published in Tibet Sun