Last week, the Dalai Lama embarked on an international tour to keep the issue of Tibet alive ahead of the Olympics. His talks with leaders in Berlin, London, Canberra and elsewhere, which will continue through part of the Games, are aimed to maintain pressure on Beijing to address Tibetan discontent.
A degree of calm has returned to the region, but developments indicate that the storm continues — out of the public eye. Last month, the authorities tried 30 Tibetans in closed-door proceedings for their alleged roles in the protests that erupted in Lhasa in March, Human Rights Watch reported. Those sentenced were denied fair legal representation.
The regional government then paraded those 30 people at a public rally to announce their sentences — anywhere between three years and life in prison. Beijing proudly called this an “open court.”
As the weeks pass, more reports of secret trials will likely emerge as China makes public the sentences handed down against scores of demonstrators. Although Beijing has averred that the protesters instigated violence, its refusal to present evidence in open trials casts its charges in a dubious light.
Likewise, fresh arrests of apparently peaceful protesters indicate that the crackdown continues. Last week, Sichuan police told Radio Free Asia that “many” Tibetans had been detained in recent weeks. Three monks and 14 nuns were arrested in separate incidents last week alone.
Other reports indicate that authorities have stepped up “patriotic education” of Tibetan children, with the goal of teaching them to value Chinese culture above their own.
None of this is anything new. Arrests of dissidents and anyone else perceived as a threat weren’t uncommon in Tibet before the March protests and there is no reason to think that this would subside after the strongest show of local discontent in decades.
This is evident in the context of China’s growing intolerance of dissent around the country. At the National People’s Congress in March, Beijing revealed that arrests of “political criminals” hit an eight-year high last year. The violators include those who agitate for independence or autonomy, or petition against human rights violations.
As the Dalai Lama renews his efforts to highlight these and other disturbing developments, he will need to win strong support from key leaders to engage Beijing. But with China pressing countries to spurn the spiritual leader, governments will be loath to upset Zhongnanhai.
The Dalai Lama’s visit to Germany this week differed from a trip last fall in that he did not meet German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who was abroad. The Tibetan spiritual leader in exile instead spoke at the Reichstag and met Development Minister Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul. That sparked concern that Berlin may not be prepared to risk another falling-out with Beijing. Likewise, observers made much of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s decision this week to receive the Dalai Lama not at Downing Street but at Lambeth Palace, a subtle but telling signal.
How Berlin and other governments respond to the ongoing abuses in Tibet will be a crucial ingredient if progress is to be made. The people of Tibet have made their pain and frustration clear at enormous personal cost and are still suffering the ramifications. Without increased pressure on Beijing by the international community, they can do little more to secure the nominal freedoms China has granted them.
But the world’s attention span is short, as is the media’s. With news out of Tibet far less sensational than a few months ago, there is a risk that its plight will again drift out of the world’s consciousness.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with