humblehobbes
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2009
- Messages
- 449
- Reaction score
- 0
India must take a free Tibet stand
By By Nitish Sengupta
Oct 22 2009
The recent report about China wanting to build a dam to divert water from the Brahmaputra is the latest in a series of anti-India steps that China has taken in the last two-three years. And one that should give India reason for serious introspection. Beijings somewhat childish behaviour over Arunachal Pradesh lately should serve as an appropriate reminder of our own blunders on Tibet and related boundary issue six decades ago.
We also need to take a relook at Chinas so-called claim of sovereignty over Tibet. On closer scrutiny, these appear to be nothing more than imperialist claims, like Britains over Hong Kong and Gibraltar, which cease to have validity in a post-colonial world. The plain fact is that China, as an imperial power, laid claim over Tibet as a colony. The argument about Tibet ethnically being a part of China is incorrect and lacks historical support.
The origin of Chinas claim over Tibet goes back to a dynastic marriage over 1,500 years ago, when the Tibetan king Songsten Gampo married princess Wen Cheng of the Tang dynasty. The marriage in itself did not mean that Tibet was incorporated into China at that time, but China, from this point of time, claimed that Tibet was a part of greater China. The Tibetans, and in particular the government-in-exile headed by the Dalai Lama based in Dharamsala, has never accepted this untenable claim by the Chinese government. According to them, Tibet has always enjoyed de facto independence. After Songsten Gampo, the Tibetans and the Chinese fought many times and the Tibetans defeated the Chinese on at least two occasions.
After the rise of the Dalai Lama, the relationship between the two countries was politico-religious, resembling the relationship between the Pope and the Holy Roman Emperor in Europe. Chinese emperors acted as Tibets protectors. In 1911, when the nationalists overthrew the Quing dynasty, the 13th Dalai Lama expelled all Manchu and Chinese officials from Tibet and announced Tibets independence (1913). From 1913 to 1951, Tibet was completely independent.
The Simla Agreement of 1914 was the result of a conference attended by representatives of Tibetan, Chinese and British-Indian governments. There is no evidence that the Tibetans acknowledged the Chinese claim over them. The Chinese and the Tibetan delegates, along with the Indian delegates, signed the draft treaty separately. But, thereafter, although both British-India and Tibet formally endorsed this treaty, the Chinese government in Beijing did not do it on account of the fact that the Chinese imperial government got progressively weakened and was eventually overthrown by San Yat Sen in 1911. It is not correct to say that the government in Beijing refused to endorse the treaty as they had objections to its provisions. The Tibetans have always maintained that Tibet enjoyed de facto independence till 1950. It was after the Communist takeover of China under Mao Zedong that Radio Peking started announcing that Tibet was a part of China and that the Chinese government was determined to restore Tibet to a unified China. Soon after that the Peoples Liberation Army of China invaded Tibet. The Dalai Lama appealed to America, Britain, India and Nepal for help and guidance. The British advised the Dalai Lama to negotiate with the Chinese and reach an arrangement suitable to both. However, the Indian government bent over backwards in acknowledging Tibet as a part of China and advised the Dalai Lama to accept this status.
Delhi went out of its way in withdrawing the Indian Army contingents stationed in Lhasa and Gyantse, under the 1914 treaty. The government of Tibet had no choice then but to sign the infamous 17-point agreement, and agreeing to Tibet being incorporated into the communist regime. The very first point of the agreement was: The Tibetan people shall return to the big family of the motherland the Peoples Republic of China.
Tibetans now became one amongst the 55 ethnic minorities of China. Further, China distributed Tibetan territories among different Chinese provinces like Sichuan, Yunan and Gensu, leaving only the so-called Tibetan Autonomous Region as Tibet. Today, the Han settlers outnumber ethnic Tibetans in Tibet proper. China has militarised Tibet and located military bases along the Indo-Tibetan border in a clear policy to intimidate India.
It is forgotten by Indians of the present generation that Indians did not need a passport or visa to visit any part of Tibet for business or tourism until the early 50s. It was only after Chinas occupation that they insisted that Indians carry valid travel documents for entering Tibet. It should also be pointed out that traditionally the border between British-India and Tibet was notional rather than political or geographical. And when, for the first time, the Chinese attempted to physically mark the border, this started a process of unending border disputes.
Meanwhile, the flight of the Dalai Lama in 1959 complicated matters. The Dalai Lama is respected widely in the border areas and Tawang is no exception. Chinese claims over Arunachal Pradesh are only on the strength of the attachment of the people living there to the Dalai Lama and his Tibet. The moment the Dalai Lama is no longer in Lhasa that attachment will disappear.
For India, the time has come to engage in real politics. New Delhi should consider retracing steps and reviving the case for Tibets complete autonomy and for the withdrawal of the Chinese military forces from Tibet. Once India takes this stand, there will be support for it in the UN as well. After all, during the days of Hindi-Chini bhai bhai, China did not oppose Indias case for Jammu and Kashmir, but the moment China became friendly with Pakistan and border problems erupted between China and India, China dumped Indias case without any hesitation and supported Pakistans claim over Kashmir. It was a clear volte-face. So there are good international precedents for India to re-open the Tibetan question.
Nitish Sengupta, an academic and author, is a
former Member of Parliament and a former secretary to the Government of India.
India must take a ?free Tibet? stand
By By Nitish Sengupta
Oct 22 2009
The recent report about China wanting to build a dam to divert water from the Brahmaputra is the latest in a series of anti-India steps that China has taken in the last two-three years. And one that should give India reason for serious introspection. Beijings somewhat childish behaviour over Arunachal Pradesh lately should serve as an appropriate reminder of our own blunders on Tibet and related boundary issue six decades ago.
We also need to take a relook at Chinas so-called claim of sovereignty over Tibet. On closer scrutiny, these appear to be nothing more than imperialist claims, like Britains over Hong Kong and Gibraltar, which cease to have validity in a post-colonial world. The plain fact is that China, as an imperial power, laid claim over Tibet as a colony. The argument about Tibet ethnically being a part of China is incorrect and lacks historical support.
The origin of Chinas claim over Tibet goes back to a dynastic marriage over 1,500 years ago, when the Tibetan king Songsten Gampo married princess Wen Cheng of the Tang dynasty. The marriage in itself did not mean that Tibet was incorporated into China at that time, but China, from this point of time, claimed that Tibet was a part of greater China. The Tibetans, and in particular the government-in-exile headed by the Dalai Lama based in Dharamsala, has never accepted this untenable claim by the Chinese government. According to them, Tibet has always enjoyed de facto independence. After Songsten Gampo, the Tibetans and the Chinese fought many times and the Tibetans defeated the Chinese on at least two occasions.
After the rise of the Dalai Lama, the relationship between the two countries was politico-religious, resembling the relationship between the Pope and the Holy Roman Emperor in Europe. Chinese emperors acted as Tibets protectors. In 1911, when the nationalists overthrew the Quing dynasty, the 13th Dalai Lama expelled all Manchu and Chinese officials from Tibet and announced Tibets independence (1913). From 1913 to 1951, Tibet was completely independent.
The Simla Agreement of 1914 was the result of a conference attended by representatives of Tibetan, Chinese and British-Indian governments. There is no evidence that the Tibetans acknowledged the Chinese claim over them. The Chinese and the Tibetan delegates, along with the Indian delegates, signed the draft treaty separately. But, thereafter, although both British-India and Tibet formally endorsed this treaty, the Chinese government in Beijing did not do it on account of the fact that the Chinese imperial government got progressively weakened and was eventually overthrown by San Yat Sen in 1911. It is not correct to say that the government in Beijing refused to endorse the treaty as they had objections to its provisions. The Tibetans have always maintained that Tibet enjoyed de facto independence till 1950. It was after the Communist takeover of China under Mao Zedong that Radio Peking started announcing that Tibet was a part of China and that the Chinese government was determined to restore Tibet to a unified China. Soon after that the Peoples Liberation Army of China invaded Tibet. The Dalai Lama appealed to America, Britain, India and Nepal for help and guidance. The British advised the Dalai Lama to negotiate with the Chinese and reach an arrangement suitable to both. However, the Indian government bent over backwards in acknowledging Tibet as a part of China and advised the Dalai Lama to accept this status.
Delhi went out of its way in withdrawing the Indian Army contingents stationed in Lhasa and Gyantse, under the 1914 treaty. The government of Tibet had no choice then but to sign the infamous 17-point agreement, and agreeing to Tibet being incorporated into the communist regime. The very first point of the agreement was: The Tibetan people shall return to the big family of the motherland the Peoples Republic of China.
Tibetans now became one amongst the 55 ethnic minorities of China. Further, China distributed Tibetan territories among different Chinese provinces like Sichuan, Yunan and Gensu, leaving only the so-called Tibetan Autonomous Region as Tibet. Today, the Han settlers outnumber ethnic Tibetans in Tibet proper. China has militarised Tibet and located military bases along the Indo-Tibetan border in a clear policy to intimidate India.
It is forgotten by Indians of the present generation that Indians did not need a passport or visa to visit any part of Tibet for business or tourism until the early 50s. It was only after Chinas occupation that they insisted that Indians carry valid travel documents for entering Tibet. It should also be pointed out that traditionally the border between British-India and Tibet was notional rather than political or geographical. And when, for the first time, the Chinese attempted to physically mark the border, this started a process of unending border disputes.
Meanwhile, the flight of the Dalai Lama in 1959 complicated matters. The Dalai Lama is respected widely in the border areas and Tawang is no exception. Chinese claims over Arunachal Pradesh are only on the strength of the attachment of the people living there to the Dalai Lama and his Tibet. The moment the Dalai Lama is no longer in Lhasa that attachment will disappear.
For India, the time has come to engage in real politics. New Delhi should consider retracing steps and reviving the case for Tibets complete autonomy and for the withdrawal of the Chinese military forces from Tibet. Once India takes this stand, there will be support for it in the UN as well. After all, during the days of Hindi-Chini bhai bhai, China did not oppose Indias case for Jammu and Kashmir, but the moment China became friendly with Pakistan and border problems erupted between China and India, China dumped Indias case without any hesitation and supported Pakistans claim over Kashmir. It was a clear volte-face. So there are good international precedents for India to re-open the Tibetan question.
Nitish Sengupta, an academic and author, is a
former Member of Parliament and a former secretary to the Government of India.
India must take a ?free Tibet? stand
