Deja Vu

The Big Family of the Motherland

Tags:

China,

Dalai Lama,

Tibet,

Wen Jiabao

“China: New Rebukes of Dalai Lama,” The New York Times, Mar. 26, 2009.

The China Daily, the official English-language newspaper of China, published two editorials on Thursday denouncing the Dalai Lama and saying that “any attempt to split Tibet is doomed.” The editorials signaled that the Chinese government still considered the Dalai Lama a separatist and that it probably would not engage in any serious negotiations with him, even though the Tibetan government-in-exile said this month that it was ready to restart talks. Prime Minister Wen Jiabao said in mid-March that China would talk to the Dalai Lama only if he showed sincerity in renouncing what China calls separatist activities. The Dalai Lama insists that he wants only genuine autonomy for all Tibetan regions, not independence.

Freedom in Exile: The Autobiography of the Dalai Lama, by Tenzin Gyatso, Dalai Lama XIV, 1990.
The Dalai Lama’s Government-in-exile has had its seat in McLeod Ganj, Dharamsala, India, since 1959.

At the monastery I had an old Bush radio receiver which ran off a six-volt battery. Every evening, I would listen to the Tibetan language broadcasts of Radio Peking. Sometimes I did so with one or other official, but often I listened alone. The majority of the broadcasts were taken up with propaganda about the “Glorious Motherland,” but I must say that I was very impressed with much of what I heard. There was constant talk of industrial progress and f the equality of all China’s citizens. This seemed like the perfect combination of material and spiritual progress. However, one evening, as I sat alone, there was a very different sort of program. A harsh, crackling voice announced that a Seventeen-Point “Agreement” for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet had that day been signed by representatives of the Government of the People’s Republic of China and what they called the “Local Government” of Tibet.

I could not believe my ears. I wanted to rush out and call everybody in, but I sat transfixed. The speaker described how “over the last hundred years or more” aggressive imperialist forces had penetrated into Tibet and “carried out all kinds of deceptions and provocations.” It added that “under such conditions, the Tibetan nationality and people were plunged into the depths of enslavement and suffering.” I felt physically ill as I listened to this unbelievable mixture of lies and fanciful clichés.

But there was worse to come. Clause One of the “Agreement” stated that “The Tibetan people shall unite and drive out imperialist aggressive forces from Tibet. The Tibetan people shall return to the big family of the Motherland—the People’s Republic of China.” What could it mean? The last foreign army to have been stationed on Tibetan soil was the Manchu army in 1912. As far as I was aware (and now know), there was no more than a handful of Europeans in Tibet at that time. And the idea of Tibet “returning to the Motherland” was shameless invention. Tibet had never been part of China. In fact, as I have mentioned already, Tibet has ancient claims to large parts of China. On top of which, our respective peoples are ethnically and racially distinct. We do not speak the same language, nor is our script anything like the Chinese script. As the International Commission of Jurists stated subsequently in their report:

“Tibet’s position on the expulsion of the Chinese in 1912 can fairly be described as one of de facto independence . . . it is therefore submitted that the events of 1911-12 mark the re-emergence of Tibet as a fully sovereign state, independent in fact and in law of Chinese control.”

• Email /
• Print /
• Comment now