On Wednesday last week, the 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet, currently living in exile in India, issued a statement affirming the continuation of the institution of the Dalai Lama and the practice of reincarnation. Tibetan Buddhists across the globe welcomed the declaration. It arrived as the Chinese government is intensifying efforts not only to impose total control over Tibetan Buddhism, but also to erase Tibetan identity, culture and history.
The statement holds particular symbolic significance for Tibetans. Although the Dalai Lama formally stepped down from political leadership in 2011, he remains the architect of modern Tibetan nationalism in exile. For Tibetans, he is more than a spiritual figure; he is a symbol of continuity, unity and moral resistance. His statement last week reaffirms this role and signals that the Tibetan struggle, spiritual and political, is far from over.
Several key points in the statement underscore its profound implications:
First, it serves as a bold political declaration. The Dalai Lama’s statement on reincarnation is far more than a religious message. It is a bold political act reaffirming his enduring relevance amid mounting Chinese pressure. For years, Beijing has rejected his authority to decide his own reincarnation, asserting that the Chinese state holds ultimate control over the process.
That means that reincarnation is not merely a spiritual issue, but lies at the intersection of geopolitics, sovereignty and legitimacy. The Dalai Lama’s declaration reasserts the political agency of Tibetans and challenges China’s attempt to rewrite Tibetan history and identity.
Second, it signals an assertion of religious sovereignty. The Dalai Lama made it unequivocally clear that only the Gaden Phodrang Trust, his traditional office, has the sole authority to oversee his reincarnation. That directly refutes China’s claim to control the process and challenges its promotion of the historically contested “Golden Urn” method. It is a forceful rejection of religious colonization.
Third, the statement embodies pan-Buddhist solidarity. The decision to continue the reincarnation institution was made in response to requests from Buddhists across the Himalayan region, Mongolia, Buddhist republics of the Russian Federation and even China, the Dalai Lama said. That frames the issue as a regional spiritual concern, not merely a Tibetan or ethnic one. It expands the constituency involved in the reincarnation debate and bolsters cross-border Buddhist solidarity.
Fourth, the Dalai Lama emphasized that followers inside Tibet and Chinese Buddhists have also called for the continuation of the institution. That has two important implications: It signals that Chinese interference contradicts the wishes of the very people it claims to represent. It also implies that if Beijing attempts to install its own Dalai Lama, as it did with the Panchen Lama, it would face a deep legitimacy crisis, as Tibetan and Chinese Buddhist communities are unlikely to accept a state-appointed figure.
Fifth, the statement issued by the Dalai Lama regarding his reincarnation has also been endorsed by the heads of other major sects of Tibetan Buddhism, including the Sakya, Kagyu and Nyingma traditions. The collective endorsement signals a rare moment of unity among the different schools of Tibetan Buddhism, reinforcing a shared stance on a matter of deep religious and political significance. It underscores a pan-sectarian consensus that resists external interference and bolsters the collective legitimacy of the Tibetan religious community.
Last, the statement underscores the resistance to cultural erasure. The Dalai Lama’s reaffirmation of reincarnation is also an act of spiritual and cultural resistance. It defies China’s long-standing project of dismantling Tibetan religious institutions and identities. It signals that Tibetans are not surrendering spiritually, culturally or politically. In this context, reincarnation becomes a gesture of survival, a declaration that Tibetan identity would endure beyond the life of the current Dalai Lama.
Another important development is the crucial support from India. In March, the Tibetan Advocacy Alliance, a coalition of Tibetan non-governmental organizations based in India, launched a campaign calling for Indian recognition of the Dalai Lama’s exclusive authority over his reincarnation. Forty-six members of the Indian parliament signed on in support.
Following the Dalai Lama’s statement, Indian Minister of Parliamentary Affairs Kiren Rijiju voiced support for the Dalai Lama, as did Pema Khandu, chief minister of Arunachal Pradesh, a state China claims as part of “South Tibet.” Their support carries significant symbolic and geopolitical weight, especially given China’s border disputes with India and its attempts to delegitimize the Dalai Lama’s authority in the region.
Last week’s statement reasserts the Dalai Lama’s dual role as spiritual leader and political symbol of the Tibetan nation. For Tibetans, the continuation of the Dalai Lama is not simply a matter of religious tradition; it is about the survival of their identity, the rejection of external domination and the assertion of a future that remains unwritten, but not surrendered. In the face of appropriation and despair, the affirmation of reincarnation is a powerful expression of hope, sovereignty and refusal.
Dolma Tsering is a postdoctoral researcher in National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University’s Department of Humanities and Social Sciences.
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
The stocks of rare earth companies soared on Monday following news that the Trump administration had taken a 10 percent stake in Oklahoma mining and magnet company USA Rare Earth Inc. Such is the visible benefit enjoyed by the growing number of firms that count Uncle Sam as a shareholder. Yet recent events surrounding perhaps what is the most well-known state-picked champion, Intel Corp, exposed a major unseen cost of the federal government’s unprecedented intervention in private business: the distortion of capital markets that have underpinned US growth and innovation since its founding. Prior to Intel’s Jan. 22 call with analysts
RSS