Yesterday, a 43-year-old Harvard graduate and legal academic became the first non-monastic, directly elected prime minister of Tibet’s exiled government.
The swearing in of Tibetan Prime Minister Lobsang Sangay in Dharamsala, India, the seat of the Tibetan government-in-exile, not only ended more than 350 years of political leadership by the lineage of the Dalai Lamas over the Tibetan polity, it also capped a half-century of the secular maturation of Tibet’s democratically elected government-in-exile.
Most of what the world knows about Tibet has come through the 14th Dalai Lama, who fled Tibet in 1959. During more than 50 years in exile, the Dalai Lama has been recognized around the world for his tireless devotion to peace and non--violence and in 1989 he received the Nobel Peace Prize.
The past half-century has also created the opportunity to modernize Tibet’s government. In 1961, the Dalai Lama presented a draft constitution to Tibetans, which began a two-year dialogue that culminated in its establishment.
In 1990, Tibetans furthered their nascent democratic institutions and practices by establishing an electoral process to directly elect members of the Tibetan parliament-in-exile, as well as to choose members of the executive branch’s Cabinet. In 2001 came the first direct election of the Tibetan government’s prime minister, or kalon tripa.
With the second five-year term of former kalon tripa Samdhong Rinpoche ending this year, Tibetans worldwide went to the polls last year to elect their next kalon tripa. After two rounds of voting, in October last year and again in March, Sangay, born in exile to parents who fled China’s crackdown in Tibet in 1959, was declared the winner, receiving an absolute majority of votes over two other secular candidates.
While the peaceful electoral process and maturation of a democracy in exile might seem newsworthy enough, two additional compelling events occurred during this time.
First, during both rounds of voting, Chinese officials intervened and disrupted the voting process for about 9,000 eligible Tibetan voters living in exile in Nepal. Nepalese police arrested and detained Tibetans and seized ballot boxes, denying those Tibetans the right to vote and thereby to determine their own political future.
Second, in mid-March the Dalai Lama stepped down from the government, voluntarily devolving all political authority and ending 350 years of direct governance and leadership by successive Dalai Lamas. His reason?
“Tibetans need a leader, elected freely by the Tibetan people,” the Dalai Lama said.
Today, the day after Sangay’s historic swearing-in ceremony, it is an understatement to say that he and his people face enormous domestic challenges. These challenges include preserving Tibetan religion, culture and language; healthcare and education; and addressing unemployment across the Tibetan diaspora.
However, it is the very persistence of Tibetan freedom in exile, despite repeated Chinese attempts to crush Tibetans’ traditions and aspirations, at home and in exile, that will carry Sangay and all Tibetans forward.
As the Dalai Lama relinquishes all political authority over the Tibetan polity, at home and abroad, all eyes now turn to Prime Minister Sangay and to the Tibetan people, whose unswerving faith in their non-violent efforts to establish and enhance their constitutional freedoms provide a renewed message of peace and hope for the world.
John Isom is executive director of the US-based Tibet Justice Center. Fiona McConnell is a junior research fellow of geography at Trinity College Cambridge, England.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS