Home > Opinions > Exposing China's propaganda and lies

Exposing China's propaganda and lies

By Tsering Wangchuk | Tibet.net

Tsering Wangchuk Photographer unknown

In June, this writer published a response to Du Xinyu’s article denouncing Tibetan democracy as a PR stunt meant for scoring political brownie points. Du’s “signed article” was widely published by the official Chinese media in Chinese, English and Tibetan.

Although this writer’s rebuttal had conclusively invalidated all his accusations in a fairly resounding manner, Du Xinyu still had the gumption to knock out yet another follow-up piece, which again turned out to be more or less a rehash of the same bland allegations based on shoddy facts and hollow arguments.

If that article is any indication, Du Xinyu takes excessive comfort in self-delusion and denial — or perhaps he is merely pandering to the whims of his superiors, judging by his total disregard for intellectual honesty and his penchant for lies and deceit in defending the indefensible.

As in his previous article, the writer is again crying foul. He mourns that the “senior interlocutors of Tibetan government” have been picking on him merely for writing a critical piece, hurling derisive comments like “shameless” and “propaganda stooge of the Chinese Communist Party.” Whereas, in reality, he claims to be only an ordinary observer of Tibet, and not a member of the CCP.

However, we still have absolutely no doubt as to his affiliation with the CCP. The way he has been going at His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the exile administration, he could pass for an official spokesman! His jargon does not gel with his cover of being merely “an ordinary Tibet observer”, and he appears to be masquerading as an innocent victim to cajole sympathy from the gullible public. Sounds lot like a wolf wailing in lamb’s skin?

If all this were merely a matter of making some criticism, as he likes to claim, I wonder whether he could muster enough courage and display the same tenacity in contributing an equally critical take on, say, the corruption or wrongdoings of any Chinese leader. No need to guess on that?

In a reciprocal gesture, Du Xinyu identified this writer as one of the top “interlocutors” of the “Dalai clique,” which is totally inaccurate. I am also an ordinary Tibetan from a humble background, who was groomed by the Chinese education system, and had for many years worked in several media and propaganda departments of the Chinese government. We were eventually forced to escape from Tibet when we simply could not put up with Chinese oppression.

Du’s recent article once again exposed his profound ignorance, if not stupidity, regarding exile Tibetan issues. In addition, all that Du has done was to regurgitate verbatim the same old CCP rhetoric about His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan administration. His article deserves not even a customary courtesy of acknowledgment. But in light of the fact that many people rely on the internet for information, I could not help myself from putting pen to paper and setting the record straight for yet another time. Here I shall point out some of his misunderstandings and misinformation.

As a popular saying goes, a ghou1 never gives up on eating the “proverbial”, and Du keeps on employing the same old lies and deceit. In the most ridiculously laughable instance, he claims that no one from “the Dalai clique” has so far been able to refute the facts in his previous article that Tibetan democracy is a “theocratic autocracy” that “mixes religion with politics”. He then gives himself a self-congratulatory pat, saying “They have absolutely no answer!” One could almost see him doing a victory jig.

Be that as it may, it is a truism that the Tibetan administration based at Dharamshala, India, is deemed by all Tibetans, in or outside Tibet, as their sole legitimate government, firmly grounded on the principles of truth, non-violence, and democracy. Furthermore, the governments and parliaments across the globe also recognise this fact, whether in letter or spirit. That is the reason it has come to be the proverbial “thorn in the flesh” for the CCP, and they keep on taking digs at Tibetan democracy, denouncing it as a public relations exercise.

The truth is that the Tibetan democratic system belongs to an altogether different league, separate and way ahead of the “socialism with Chinese characteristics” that excels only in the sense of “hanging out a sheep’s head to sell dog meat.”

That His Holiness the Dalai Lama has made relentless efforts to completely democratise the exile system of governance is a universal fact. We Tibetans never fail in counting our blessings that unlike the democratic experiences in other parts of the world, ours has been a totally top-down initiative. “It is a gift from His Holiness the Dalai Lama.”

At the same time, the Tibetan people have always been unanimous in urging, in fact begging, His Holiness the Dalai Lama to continue performing his legitimate responsibility as the leader of the Tibetan people.

After the Chinese armed repression in Tibet, when His Holiness the Dalai Lama in 1959 took refuge in India, he at once began the democratisation process with a series of reforms, including the promulgation of a draft democratic constitution in March 1963. “The Guidelines for Future Tibet’s Polity and Basic Features of its Constitution,” issued by His Holiness in 1992, categorically stated that he will not hold any political position in the future democratic government of Tibet.

The buck of Tibetan political leadership today stops at the Kalon Tripa, who is directly elected by the people through free and fair democratic elections based on the Charter of Tibetans in Exile, the highest law governing the functioning of the Tibetan administration. In fact, all major policy decisions are deliberated and approved only by the Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile; its members are also directly elected by the people.

Factor in all that and it becomes candidly clear why His Holiness the Dalai Lama represents the highest aspirations and interest of the entire Tibetan people. Even a great many Chinese also speak highly about the system of Tibetan polity.

If Du Xinyu still refuses to appreciate a system that upholds rule of law and democratic elections, a system in which the ultimate power rests in the hands of the people, his notion about democracy is certainly questionable. He should therefore try comparing the Tibetan system with his “people’s democratic dictatorship.”

Explaining how the Tibetan administration clamps down on dissenters, Du Xinyu liberally quoted Chime Ringzin, whom he identified as an exclusive member of the inner hub of “the Dalai clique”! As I know, and so do the rest of the people, Chime has been secretary of the Delhi-based Dhogyal outfit. (Its estranged members have been lavishly patronised by China, especially in the recent past, only to be exploited as their choice weapon against His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the exile administration.)

My question, then, is when and in what capacity was Chime ever affiliated to the Tibetan administration? To suggest that he belonged to the inner coterie of “Dalai clique” is outright rubbish.

Du also reiterated the same old flimsy allegation that “the Dalai clique” has in the past carried out political hits on at least 10 dissenters, without substantiating this with even a logical explanation, let alone any concrete evidence. In actuality, it was the Dhogyal people that created global headlines by brutally murdering the former director of Institute of Buddhist Dialectics, along with two of his students, here in Dharamshala. All those accused in the murder later escaped to Tibet, reportedly under official patronage of the PRC.

To cite another absurd allegation, Du claimed that the former speaker of the present Tibetan parliament, Karma Choephel, was forced to resign from the post of speaker merely because he was a staunch supporter of Tibetan independence.

The facts are, when the present 14th Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile took office in 2006, the voting on the new speaker resulted in an unusual “hung parliament,” that is, a tie between two contestants, Karma Choephel and Pempa Tsering. Even after the Tibetan Election Commission conducted voting three times, the tie remained unbroken. Eventually, an arrangement was worked out by which Karma Choephel and Penpa Tsering were to share the post of speaker in two equal terms.

Du Xinyu followed that up with another shocking and outrageous allegation that the present Kalon Tripa, Prof Samdhong Rinpoche, led a mob of over 200 people in assaulting and burning down the office of Delhi-based Chushi Gangdruk, headed by Athar. This again is an out-and-out lie.

On the day of the incident, which Du has maliciously distorted to suit his narrative, the Kalon Tripa was not even present in Delhi. The actual truth is that around May 1994, some functionaries of the Delhi-based office of Chushi Gangdruk had raised hackles across the Tibetan community by meeting and signing a “joint declaration” with members of the Bodsog Lekhung (Mongolian and Tibetan Affairs Commission, Taiwan). Furthermore, the Tibetan parliament had already passed a resolution banning any form of relations with Bodsog Lekhung for various reasons.

Consequently, numerous members of Chushi Gangdruk had approached the Tibetan parliament expressing their staunch opposition to the “joint declaration”. In this context, on 14 July 1994, a group of local Tibetans, led by some MPs and camp leaders, gathered outside the office of Chushi Gangdruk, demanding explanations. Some people denounced the declaration as invalid, while others called for the resignation of those complicit in making that “joint declaration.” The volatile situation could have easily turned nasty had the local Tibetan welfare officer and others not arrived in the nick of time and pacified the crowd into dispersing. The allegation of an attempted assault on the office of Chushi Gangdruk or Arthar is therefore entirely a figment of Du Xinyu’s creativity.

As in his previous article, Du Xinyu again implied that the Tibetan administration had a role in the assassination of Gungthang Tsultrim. The exile community however is in no doubt that the authoritarian tendencies of Gungthang Tsultrim led to bitter rivalry and infighting within the Tsokhag Chusum faction that Gungthang Tsultrim headed. Many believe this to be the main reason behind his assassination, especially if you go by the Indian court ruling on this case.

Du Xinyu then quoted a piece by Jamyang Norbu, saying a reward of 200,000 rupees was declared for anyone who would murder Pema Bhum, a reputed Tibetan scholar. The truth however was quite a bit different. Soon after Pema Bhum arrived in India, he had published an essay that was highly critical of Tibetan religion, leading to protest by a group of monks.

Yet, appreciating the academic scholarship of Pema Bhum, the Education Department employed him in its publication section. As of now, he is working as a researcher in the US. Thus, to say that the Tibetan administration has offered reward for murdering him is just a bald-faced lie.

Finally, Du quoted a recent incident that the Tibetan administration and parliament came down hard on a blogger for his scathing comments. Here again, Du has twisted the whole thing to suit his own narrative.

Actually Kesang, the person concerned, is still here in Dharamshala. On 18 August 2008, he was disqualified from a staff recruitment test conducted in the Chinese language, as his academic credentials were found to have been forged. While vetting his documents, officials found significant discrepancies between his actual college degrees and the information stated on his resume. This was the only reason why Kesang went online, crying foul.

Lest Du might again complain that Tibetans are keeping mum on his allegations, and in case he continues peddling more lies in future, rest assured that this writer will be more than happy to yet again explain the truth.

NB: The article was originally posted on Boxun in Chinese language. It has been translated and adapted into English by Dhundup Gyalpo.

Copyright © 2010 Tibet.net

Published in Tibet.net