It’s been almost 50 years since the Tibetan god-king fled across the Himalayas and created his government-in-exile. Decades later, the Dalai Lama and his followers are still in Dharmsala.
And the struggle for Tibet? That, they increasingly say in the hilly, northern Indian town, has been futile.
“We have failed to bring any positive change inside Tibet,” said Samdhong Rinpoche, prime minister of the government-in-exile. “The majority of Tibetans are increasingly frustrated and want more forceful change.”
Now, nearly everything is on the table for discussion. Starting today, exiled Tibetans from around the world will gather in Dharamsala, called together by the Dalai Lama for a six-day meeting that could end years of carefully moderated policies toward Beijing.
In a town of often-feuding exiles, many now have at least one thing to agree upon: Their movement has reached a crossroad. The Dalai Lama is growing old, a young generation of activists want tough talk toward China and Beijing is moving thousands of ethnic Han Chinese into Tibet.
“In 10 or 15 years, when we look back at this, we’re hopeful that we’ll see this as a historic conference,” said Tsewang Rigzin, president of the Tibetan Youth Congress, one of the more militant activist groups. “We know that we have to be rational and reasonable, but we also need to change the political stand of the Tibetan people.”
For 20 years, the exile movement has been guided by the Dalai Lama’s “middle way,” which rejects demands for outright independence but calls for limited autonomy for Tibet. Until very recently, the Dalai Lama had insisted on conciliation, repeatedly telling Beijing that progress for Tibet could come only through talks, and insisting he did not want independence.
Conciliatory talk, though, brought little but disdain from China.
Instead, Beijing derides the Dalai Lama as a “splittist,” saying he really wants a Tibetan nation. For years, talks between Beijing and the Dalai Lama’s envoys have ended in stalemate.
Last month, the man who turned patience into an art form appeared to finally grow impatient.
The Dalai Lama said in a speech that after years of pursuing the middle way “there hasn’t been any positive response.”
“As far as I’m concerned, I have given up,” he said.
From those statements came his call for the special exile conference. Many specifics remain vague, but any issues can be discussed (though policy changes would require approval by the government-in-exile). The Dalai Lama now remains silent, worried any statements would be seen as support for a particular policy.
So what sort of agendas could emerge from the conference?
The days of CIA-backed Tibetan military units ended decades ago, and even the most hard-line exiles see no hope in fighting China’s army.
Today, the clearest divide is between those favoring Tibetan autonomy and those favoring independence. But there are also endless sub-permutations, with various factions urging more protests, angrier protests, boycotts, more pressure on Western nations and, among a small group, a push for sabotage of China’s infrastructure.
With China heightening its rhetoric — last Monday, Beijing officials accused the Dalai Lama’s envoys of trickery — the exile debate has also become sharper.
“The tough line taken by China is increasing divisions among the exiles and uncertainty about what it should do,” said Robbie Barnett, an expert on modern Tibet at Columbia University.
In many ways, these debates can seem pointless. China has 1.3 billion people and the world’s largest army. The Tibetans number perhaps 6 million and are led by a devout pacifist who hasn’t been home since fleeing amid a failed uprising against Chinese rule in 1959.
But the discussions are taken deadly seriously in Dharamsala, where movement leaders hope for a time when changes in China will lead to meaningful change in Tibet.
Certainly, this is a time of turmoil in the Tibetan exile movement. Bloody anti-government riots in March in Lhasa, Tibet’s capital, were brutally put down. Shaken by reports of anti-Chinese attacks, the Dalai Lama threatened to resign unless his followers stopped their violence.
That was followed by the Beijing Olympics, which many Tibetan activists had hoped would offer the best stage in years for demonstrations. Instead, protests in Europe during the Olympic torch run faded into near-silence after China was hammered by an earthquake.
The lack of protests, in turn, helped reinforce divisions between Tibetan exiles who back the Dalai Lama’s relentless pacifism and a far angrier young generation, many born in exile, increasingly desperate for action.
Most importantly, though, there is the Dalai Lama, 73. While people close to him insist he remains in good health for his age, he has been hospitalized twice since August and his travel schedule has been curtailed.
In a movement that often sways between centuries, it can be hard to differentiate between the Tibetan struggle at large and the Dalai Lama himself.
On one side there is a modern protest movement, with Web sites and hip T-shirts and Richard Gere speeches. On the other is a leader who came to power because Buddhist mystics proclaimed him the reincarnation of the previous Dalai Lama. He is a holy man who became a master at public relations, and who remains a god to his followers.
“I have heard of this middle way, but I don’t know much about it,” said a former businessman, his hair combed into a pompadour, waiting recently in a Dharamsala refugee center.
Days earlier, he had fled Tibet, fearing the police because he’d joined the March protests. He asked that his name not be used out of concern for his family.
As for the conference, he wasn’t worrying about it: “I will do what His Holiness wants, no matter what.”
When Panama severed diplomatic relations with Taiwan and recognized China in 2017, Beijing achieved one of its most important diplomatic victories in Central America. However, nearly a decade later, Panama is demonstrating that diplomatic recognition does not necessarily eliminate Taiwan from a country’s political system. Panama and Taiwan had diplomatic relations for more than 100 years and the goodwill between the countries was displayed last week when Panama’s National Assembly established an interparliamentary exchange group with the Legislative Yuan. Forty-five of the assembly’s 71 lawmakers joined the group, representing more than 60 percent of the legislature. Its members include National Assembly President Shirley
Ten years ago, when I was an undergraduate at National Chung Hsing University (NCHU), there was a referendum on whether to remove a statue of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) from the campus. I wrote to the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper) urging faculty, staff and students to vote for its removal. Eventually, the statue was removed from the university. Today, I am filled with emotion at seeing students at Soochow University democratically remove their own statue of Chiang, a figure of authoritarian rule, after it was on display for 48 years The timing is noteworthy, with the nine-in-one local elections approaching.
Beijing has for decades insisted that Taiwan is a matter to be settled between China and the US — or, preferably, by China alone. The strategic environment around Taiwan is making that increasingly difficult. The clearest evidence this week came not from Washington or Beijing, but from Tokyo. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi on Tuesday met with US President Donald Trump before his summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Taiwan is expected to feature prominently in US-China talks, particularly as Beijing presses Washington over arms sales to Taipei. However, focusing only on what Trump might or might not concede misses the
On the surface, a radio interview with Democratic Progressive Party and Taipei mayoral candidate Puma Shen (沈伯洋) hosted by television producer Wang Wei-chung (王偉忠) on Sept. 10 came across as an old-time city resident putting questions to a candidate on the campaign trail. Beneath that, however, it was an encounter between two distinct Taiwanese experiences, two generations and two different political vocabularies. Wang grew up in a military dependents’ village. His parents came to Taiwan with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government, carrying with them the legacy of war, displacement, the loss of a homeland, and an identification with Chinese culture
RSS