Torture Relay - Why Tibet Matters
The Buddha Smiled
It's been almost fifty years since the 1959 invasion of Tibet by China, an act of aggression which merely formalized the sustained political, military and social pressure that an increasingly strident Communist government had been applying for several years to the isolated country. The political and religious elite fled soon thereafter, crossing into India where they were granted political asylum, setting the precedent for a stream of over one million Tibetan refugees over the years. However, after capturing the attention of the world for a few brief years, the Tibetan struggle for independence soon fell by the wayside, as more and more governments sought to form stronger ties with a China that was growing at a sustained pace never recorded before in world economic history. Who cared about the concerns of a small minority, whose only claim to fame was that their temporal leader was also one of the most influential figures in Buddhism, itself a religion easily relegated by the more rigid of thought to a less than serious status as the manna of a hippie fringe seeking enlightenment?
And so it may have been - for over thirty years, the world turned a blind eye as the population of ethnic Tibetans remained stagnant at just over 5 million, while the number of ethnic Han Chinese in the territory has increased several fold. The world ignored Tianenmen Square, and also the brutal suppression of protests in Lhasa in 1989. The world ignored the Chinese crackdown on Falun Dafa, as it ignores the continued arrest, torture and detention of Chinese human rights activists; the recent imprisonment of Hu Jia is only one of many such acts. In fact, not only did the world ignore these excesses, it was often complicit in them: multinational companies, including Google and Yahoo, were too eager to bend over backwards and provide sensitive information to Chinese authorities regarding political dissidents in their attempts to avoid being kicked out of an increasingly attractive market. Economics, or so it appeared, had won the battle for the world's willingness to engage with China. The manner in which Chinese support for a regime supporting genocide against its own people in Darfur has stymied international intervention over the past two years seemed to indicate that the Red Dragon had won, and nobody would quite be willing to take a stand against what is most likely going to be the hegemon of this century.
So why bother? And does it matter whether or not the world takes up the Tibetan cause?
The answer is that it does matter. In fact, it is of crucial importance that the world engages with China (and when I say China I refer to both its government and its people) if we are to influence the the world we will live in tomorrow. Globalisation is often touted as a recent phenomenon, something that really only became a reality in the latter part of the twentieth century. This is, however, only partially true - the only thing that is recent about globalisation is its democratisation, and the flexibiltiy with which both human and financial capital can now be deployed around the world. Technological advances have made it much easier for individuals to move and travel, while access to information is increasing exponentially (provided you're not sitting behind a Chinese government firewall in Shanxi or Guangzhou).
What is a much older phenomenon is what I could call the authoritarian part of globalisation, where the fates of millions were decided by decision makers in places often thousands of miles away. Jewish populations in Lithuania and Italy were condemned to gas chambers by policies agreed in Berlin; millions of Indians died of famine during World War II thanks to Winston Churchill's economic policies, while Palestinians today live in refugee camps or in ghettos in the West Bank and Ramallah thanks to the Balfour Declaration made in London. Iraq is burning today thanks to decisions made in Washington DC, and even as we speak, it is difficult to guess where Iran will be in the next few years. The impact and influence at any given time that the world's current hegemonic power has over the rest of the globe is immense and often immeasurable; just watch the fascination with which media organisations cover US Presidential elections around the world; elections in which only a few hundred million will vote to choose a leader with the greatest global impact worldwide.
This is why Tibet matters. IR theorists have been debating whether or not America's role as the world's sole superpower, a position of preeminence that it has enjoyed since the collapse of the Soviet Union, is coming to an end or not. What is not being debated is China's inexorable rise as a military and economic power; as time goes by, the extent and strength of the influence it will exert in global discussions will only increase.
So the question we must ask ourselves is what sort of global power do we want to be active in the world over the next one hundred years? Do we want the worlds that we and our children will live in to be shadowed by the presence of a large, largely democratic state that values human rights, encourages dialogue and freedom of speech, and values the individual's right to life, liberty and property? Or will we be happy to have the greatest influence of global discourse on trade, defence and economy to be an authoritarian state, where torture in prisons continues to be an endemic issue, where arrests are sudden, unprovoked and where shrill government spokespersons are the only sources of information, where free speech does not exist, and where critical thinking is not tolerated?
So the issue of Tibet is now much more than how China chooses to engage with demonstrators in the territory. While the protests surrounding the Torture Relay are as much about the brutal crackdown on clergy and laity alike in Tibet and China's western provinces, the issues has magnified into something much less tangible, but with far greater repercussions on all of our lives. How China deals with Tibet has become part of a broader discussion of the shape and form of the world that we want to live in. Tibet is no longer an issue between two Asian countries. And if you think that Tibet is someone else's problem, you only need to look at the streets of London yesterday, where a large Chinese security detail, part of the government machinery that uses brutal methods against its population and the Tibetans, jogged with impunity through the streets, while protestors wearing "Free Tibet" t-shirts were ordered to leave the area. Democracy is a very fragile institution, and it does not take much to descend into authoritarianism (and if you disagree with that, I'd only point you towards Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib). The question is, at what point does it become important to speak out?
So, dear reader, if you live in a country where you will not be jailed for raising your voice, for wearing your beliefs on your t-shirt, where it is legal to stand in the street and chant, "Tibet will be free", and if you are in a city through which the Torture Relay is scheduled to pass, then as a citizen of the world, as a friend to those millions who cannot wave a simple cloth without fear of detention, torture and summary execution, in solidarity with the people of a country where it is illegal to have a photograph of the Dalai Lama, go and protest. Do so nonviolently, because violence only begets violence. Go and stand in peace, in harmony and in solidarity. Go and protest the rally, not just for your Tibetan brethren, but for the millions of Chinese citizens who are currently locked up in prison for having the courage to express their views in public, for challenging their regime through peaceful protest and dialogue. Go and protest to send a message to your government and that of China's, and other authoritarian regimes like it, that the voice of millions cannot be discounted. Do not despair - it was after all the student protests of the 1980's that finally forced an economic embargo onto the apartheid regime in South Africa, which crumbled in the following decade.
Do not be silent, because that is another name for complicity. Protest, for the millions in bondage around the world. Protest, but not just for the millions in bondage around the world.
Do it for yourself, and do it for your children.
Torture Relay - Why Tibet Matters
RSS:
- Subscribe to RSS 2.0 feeds for:
- » Comments on this article
- » Politics
- » Politics: China
- » Politics: India
- » Politics: World
- » Desicritics.org articles by The Buddha Smiled
- » All Opinion articles
- » All Desicritics.org articles













Anamika
April 8, 2008
04:54 AM
Thank you. Bod gya lo!
tony c
April 8, 2008
10:03 AM
Though I agree with your statement about the positive world power we need...I submit that the U.S. is not the best example. Citizens get kicked off planes for wearing "inappropriate" t-shirts, the media force-feeds its own versions of news, countless Iraq civilians are dead because of a war that was forced by lies and ignorance. This sort of sounds like a terroist country.
Chandra
April 8, 2008
11:22 AM
A small factual error - Tibet was annexed in 1949-51 and not 1959. The Dalai lama fled in 1959.
I think the bigger issue is not whether the Tibetans get Independence or treated well. To be honest i am not sure we do a great job in the NE and Kashmir. As far as i am concerned, the bigger concern is the weak approach of the current Govt. The extreme lengths they are going to protect the torch is incredible- NSG commandos and choppers etc. This is total madness. Every right thinking citizen should land there to protest, not against the Tibetans but against our own 'weak' Govt. I want to see which NSG commando or whoever it is has the guts to shoot at Indian citizens in broad daylight.
Morris
April 8, 2008
02:19 PM
Excellent.
I agree but I am afraid the world is gradually moving in the direction of might is right. Or perhaps it was always that way.
The Buddha Smiled
URL
April 9, 2008
07:23 AM
Thanks all for the comments;
1) Anamika - Bod Gyalo right back at ya!
2) Tony C - I totally agree that the USA in its current manifestation is not the benevolent hegemon that the world would like or needs; at the same time, despite the problems inherent in the current regime, there is still some democratic process alive and well in the country, which is far greater than what is available in China today.
3) Chandra - thanks for the correction; I was indeed referring to the exodus of 1959, whereas China had a strong military presence for several years before that.
I also totally agree with your statement that what is particularly shameful for Indians is the stance of the current government towards the protests. While Kashmir and the Northeast remain festering wounds (and frankly, the more I think about it, the more I think that if people are that desperate to leave, then we should let them) I do not think that kowtowing to Beijing will curry us any favours (now how's that for mixing cultural metaphors?) I also find it reprehensible that Pranab Mukherjee, after his completely disastrous handling of the Taslima Nasreen incident, chose to "remind" His Holiness that he was a guest in the country, and should not engage in political activity. Especially when it is well documented that the Chinese government has a longstanding tradition of arming and training groups seeking separation from India. Finally, the diktat issued by the HRD Ministry to all Tibetan schools in the country, directing them not to protest, is particularly inflammatory. When last I checked, India was a democracy, that guaranteed freedom of speech to all, and it was never our way to prohibit protests.
God forbid if the NSG dares shoot at any India-based protesters - it would be the biggest disgrace of all.
4) Morris - the world has always followed the way of might, except for a small minority that has time and again managed to use the power of its moral persuasion to bring the rest around. It is easy to be despondent, and much more difficult to retain hope against all odds. And yet time and again we have seen how even the smallest act can bring about change. It took several decades for the apartheid regime to collapse in South Africa, and over 200 years for the British to leave India; but both happened. So perhaps there is hope yet for Tibet...
PH
URL
April 9, 2008
01:01 PM
Buddha Smiled,
Wonderful post.
Anamika
April 9, 2008
01:48 PM
Buddha Smiled, Chandra: I think the current government is behaving shamefully especially given the Tibetan history of since 1960s.
As members of the SFF, Tibetan soldiers have fought -with no recognition of their bravery - in India's wars dating back to 1971. With great reluctance - and ironically to prove their gratitude as guests - they went in to the Golden Temple BEFORE the army did, in their socks btw out of respect.
And even in Kargil, they ensured that Pak could not send in reinforcements by cutting off the road links on the other side. They have acted in J&K, and in other situations, always in India's interests even when these have little to do with them.
In all these actions, they have neither been acknowledged nor rewarded. They do not leave their dead or wounded behind, and should any of them be captured - on a mission for India btw, not Tibet - they are disclaimed.
No refugee group in the world has proven their gratitude and support for the host country like the Tibetans. I am sickened and ashamed of the GOI for behaving as it is, and just to appease a brutal, hostile, nation that is a threat in short and long terms.
Man Singh
URL
April 9, 2008
04:27 PM
Anamika #7
Good one.
Please keep it up.
Morris
April 9, 2008
05:23 PM
The Buddha Smiled
I agree with you. When I said might is right, I was just pointing out the reality. I am not suggesting that we do not try to do something about that. As far as Tibet is concerned our options are very limited.
Geographically large region such as Tibet should not be considered a piece of real estate particularly when it is inhabited by people culturally so different from those living in the country demanding its ownership. China has a lesser claim on Tibet than on Taiwan. It should never be a question of legal ownership. As far as possible it should be determined by the people living on the land. May be UN should study whole issue and set some guidelines. I realize that it is not likely to happen.
Anamika
April 9, 2008
08:25 PM
Man Singh, when you can discuss ALL issues rationally THEN we shall exchange. Until then you are talking through your hat, and I don't have one.
perihelionflux
URL
April 10, 2008
12:22 AM
Buddha smiled: i agree completely.
here in Australia the 'torture' is to pass through Canberra on 24 April. i intend to participate though the 'event' is on a thursday. i have heard of emails going around in the Chinese community here urging Chinese people to provide safety and support for the 'torture'..i believe only the guilty or the deluded can be so defensive.
what is even more sickening than the Chinese government's crimes, is the attitudes of the expat Chinese community around the world who do not speak out against the Chinese government and get very defensive, aggressive and touchy when you so much as hint at China's shameful activities. i have found the Indian community amenable to and even eager to readily criticize Indian govt. at least in this respect, i find Indians to be open minded.
btw, i share house with a Chinese family and i don't discuss China with them. few days ago their kid asked me if i thought that the Indian govt. would help Tibet against China. i said i don't know as i'm not working with the indian govt. the kid then said to me that i do not discuss these things with them as they were chinese. then i said that Tibet's occupation by China is very wrong. the kid then said nothing and went away. so much for discussing China..
and yes, the whole Olympics thing has descended to the level of a farce and people around the world have rightly used the torch charade to show China that it stands isolated from the rest of 'free' world.
Add your comment
(Or ping: http://desicritics.org/tb/7540)