For more than seven decades, the Chinese Communist Party has claimed to govern Tibet with benevolence and progress. I have seen the truth behind the slogans. I have listened to the silences of monks forbidden to speak of the Dalai Lama, watched the erosion of our language in classrooms, and felt the quiet grief of a people whose prayers are monitored and whose culture is treated as a threat. That is why I will only accept complete independence for Tibet.
The so-called “autonomous region” is autonomous in name only. Decisions about religion, education and cultural preservation are made in Beijing, not Lhasa. Surveillance is omnipresent. Monasteries are forced to submit to party oversight. Children are taught to revere Mao Zedong (毛澤東) before they understand the teachings of the Buddha.
Some point to infrastructure and economic development as signs of progress, but what good is a highway if it leads to the erasure of your identity? Development without dignity is a hollow promise. Tibetans want the freedom to speak our language, to practice our faith and to honor our history without fear.
The yearning for freedom is not confined to exile. It lives in the hearts of Tibetans inside Tibet, who risk imprisonment to preserve our traditions. It lives in the quiet defiance of those who walk clockwise around sacred sites, who whisper prayers for the Dalai Lama, and who name their children after exiled leaders.
I once supported the Middle Way Approach, believing that genuine autonomy within China might offer a path forward. However, Beijing has responded to moderation with repression. The people of Tibet have waited long enough. They yearn for liberation, not compromise.
Independence is the only path that honors our history, protects our future and restores the dignity that Chinese rule has tried to extinguish. Tibet belongs to Tibetans — not as a province, not as a project, but as a nation.
We will not be silenced. We will not be assimilated. We will not surrender our birthright. The people of Tibet yearn for freedom, and I will stand with them until that freedom is won.
Khedroob Thondup is a former member of the Tibetan parliament-in-exile.
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,
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
Taiwan’s long-term care system has fallen into a structural paradox. Staffing shortages have led to a situation in which almost 20 percent of the about 110,000 beds in the care system are vacant, but new patient admissions remain closed. Although the government’s “Long-term Care 3.0” program has increased subsidies and sought to integrate medical and elderly care systems, strict staff-to-patient ratios, a narrow labor pipeline and rising inflation-driven costs have left many small to medium-sized care centers struggling. With nearly 20,000 beds forced to remain empty as a consequence, the issue is not isolated management failures, but a far more
RSS