What's new

Sinocentrism for the Information Age

Thank you for illustrating what the professor wrote...

You mean justified Japan WW2 crime as the right noble thing? And China, Korea and SEA are the wrong side?


But it did not, it suggested that China refuses to accept that the West has a different narrative and leave it at that, that China's goal is to actually control Western narrative, and actually global narrative as part of its concept of a 'harmonious global society'.

Western narrative:
US military, who spent more than 50% of world military spending (Not included West Europe), is not a threat.
The world should accept Western culture and moral value, like human rights, and the others must extinct.
Homosexuality is right, polygamy is wrong.
US is the good guy, Iran and Venezuela are the bad guys.
etc.

When China and others are trying to complain, you call it as trying to "control".

Western elites must be very happy to have a person like Christopher Ford around.
 
Do you have evidence? If so, please tell me, if not, don't post irrelevant info.



How many times was Vietnam occupied? I heard that China dominated the place 4 times.

Dude were where you in history class? or your education background says Beijing china? that's common history
 
Dude were where you in history class? or your education background says Beijing china? that's common history

Sorry. I wasn't there since I was too lazy to get up. Also, education background says UK, since I used to live there.
 
A westerner that is so much immerse in their prejudice that they do not even realize their chauvinism.

China bashing is a popular sport in the west. Every tom, dick and harry feel that they have the right to criticize China. And when out of these barrage of criticism, China deem some that are too much over the line and attempt to defend herself, it was brushed aside and cherry pick to label China as trying to hijack the narrative.

We are not the one that is trying to shove our narrative, ideology, viewpoint down other people throat. We do not have overt or covert policy of regime change of other country government. We are a sovereign people, we reserve the right to accept or not accept any part of your value system.

It is not true that China cannot take criticism. It is also not true that we reject western narrative out of hand. We have study and integrate many part of China system into the global system. Known China basher or shorter are frequently invited to China to attend conference/seminar and give public speech/comment. Chinese is a people that are prompt(too prompt if you ask me) to introspection. These criticism help China to keep on our toe.

But criticism is one thing, attempt to destabilize is another.

We do not cause trouble in other country, why the west need to do that to us?
 
Even the Vietnamese do not trust Americans.

State Secrets Revealed In Vietnam

On the United States: "To tell the truth, the US is implementing a two-faced policy. One face uses Vietnam as an advanced force to block China. The other face employs every means to destroy the long-standing solidarity between the people of Vietnam and the people of China. ... The Americans really want to set up a naval base at Cam Ranh Bay, one of the three best harbors in the world. ... The Americans are pushing a strategy of 'peaceful change' [of the Vietnamese regime] and they seek to implement it through 'educational cooperation' with us."
 
You mean justified Japan WW2 crime as the right noble thing? And China, Korea and SEA are the wrong side?
I mean messing with their education system when it involves your country. More widely, internal politics when it involves your country in any fashion.

For example Japan has its own narrative on WW2 that is not the same narrative the US has. We know this, but we aren't trying to change their curriculum or place sanctions on them for their different view of the war. As for 'justifying war crimes' you will have to provide evidence that such a practice is prominent in the Japanese education system, because While there have been books printed covering up the issue, these books were widely ostracized from the public education system the last I heard, and it is standard practice to cover the occurrences of war crimes by those in charge of Japan's military.



Western narrative:

In advance, thank you for illustrating the professor's point again, is it a cultural thing i wonder?

The PLA participants, however, were quite comfortable telling non-Chinese what their various governments’ intentions are.
Just replace 'intentions' with 'narratives'


US military, who spent more than 50% of world military spending (Not included West Europe), is not a threat.
The world should accept Western culture and moral value, like human rights, and the others must extinct.
Homosexuality is right, polygamy is wrong.
US is the good guy, Iran and Venezuela are the bad guys.
etc.

Interesting view on what the Chinese think the US narrative is, its wrong and simplistic though.

When China and others are trying to complain, you call it as trying to "control".

I'd say sanctioning Norway and pulling shadow sanctions whenever a country allows the Dalai Llama a visit or a film festival shows a film sympathetic to Tibetan independence are far more than mere 'complaining'. Then there are the numerous instances at the individual level, though this is expected of China's society in any case due to the party control.
 
For China and for a lot of Asian, it is obvious that the Japanese do not fully appreciate the extent of the atrocities and hurts that they inflicted during WWII.

Chinese would like to get over the ghost of the past and move on. And in order to do that, we have to analyze why the Japanese did what they did in recent past and propose a solution.

The right wing Japanese want to deny everything and moved on as if nothing has happened. We cannot allow that lest they would do it again. The Japanese have to show that they have learned the lesson, they owed it to those who had suffered during WWII.

The right wing Japanese is gaining more and more popular support, we would like to believe that the Japanese are good-hearted people, therefore the only conclusion is that their supporter are not fully aware of what Japanese did in WWII. What else could have explain why the Japanese did what they did? What sane reason and benefit that the Japanese would gain from prodding the emotionally explosive wound of their neighbor every once in a while. Why is it so hard for the Japanese to refrain from doing that?

Our conclusion is therefore thus, the Japanese have to educate their populace especially the young on what happened. They have to muster the courage to face what they did in WWII just like the German did in order to move on. It is the right path to take, it is good for them, it is good for us.

And for the Diaoyu island issue. The Japanese when surrendered during WWII make a solemn oath to the world to unconditionally accept the term of the surrender. We expect and demand that Japan abide by that oath.

And for the recent nationalization of the Diaoyu island. Then prime minister of Japan, Mr. Noda said that he is going to nationalize or buy the island. That is in order to stop the right wing mayor of Tokyo, Mr. Ishihara from buying the island. That this would stop Mr. Ishihara from developing the island. He also promised that he would seal off the island barring development. That China should just trust him.

But any person that understand Japanese politic knows that Mr. Noda has very little control of the situation. Nationalization would mean that legally the Japanese government could easily erect structure and stationed troop on the island. And indeed some of the Japanese politician has already proposed that as a pledge in their election campaign.

From China point of view, what Mr. Noda asked is this: "We have an internal political problem, in order to protect China Japanese friendship, I have to nationalize the island. Although this would screw your national interest in the process, but Japan official position is that there is no dispute for Diaoyu island, so I cannot negotiate with you. I am sorry but there is no other way"

If you follow the trouble that concern China Japan relation, you would notice a pattern. Japan, one of the most homogenous nation on the planet, a culture that has shown unity and state power repeatedly in history, mysteriously is unable to unite her people to do what is right, and ultimately what is best for her national interest. It is like this for the Yasukuni Shrine as well as for the text book issue. The same type of excuse would be used.

The main difference is, while last time Japan only said fcuk you out of the blue, this time they not only said fcuk you they proceed to grab something as well.
 
People tends to forget that Mr. Dalai Lama is the leader of a arms revolt in China (the popular term these day is terrorist). No nation on this earth would ignore someone with that history being supported politically by another nation. China do not object if Dalai Lama is being invited as a religious leader or as a scholar.

China position on this is well known, nation knowing full well of this fact and proceed to use Dalai Lama as a political tool to challenge China would obviously invite a response from China.

Any attempt to destabilize China would not be left unanswered.
 
Most mainland Chinese certainly don't share your kind of view~ especially when they are fed daily with state propaganda.


Sovereignty of a nation was judge by:
1. Actual exercised and control of power over an area
2. Recognition by other states

Neither did the ROC ever control the south China sea effectively since its inception in 1911, nor did neighboring countries recognized such claim. The only instances the Chinese try to control it was in 1940s (ROC) and 1970s (PRC) when other power has laid controlled over them (France and Japan).


And that's the POINT!
The reality is, Vietnamese control much of the islands. If the ROC/PRC excercised their sovereignty, how could so much islands was left controlled by other states?

The conclusion is that, south china sea was never effectively under the jurisdiction of any nations until recent occupation or exercised of power by surrounding countries
FYI, the only island in Spratly that is barely habitable by human is Taiping island (Itu Aba) that is originally controlled by ROC(Taiwan). It is the only island in Spratly that has naturally occurring barely drinkable fresh water.

It is not a coincident that while historically there are many countries hence people surrounding SCS, and more than 30,000 island/reef/shoal/rock in Spratly, yet none of the island is permanently habituated by human before recently.

The truth is, extended stay in any of these island is detrimental to your live expectancy. It is only the crazy Vietnamese that would waste the lives of their young man and resource supply to station in so many islands.

Historically fisherman from surrounding countries sometimes would built hut to store water and supply in some of the island. Sometime they also erect small shrine in some of the bigger island. Fishermen also take temporary sanctuary in some island during bad weather. But nobody stay in those island.

Only when it is discovered that there might be oil and gas in the island that the trouble began.

I think China proposed that they want sovereignty of all the island but willing to share the resources among the claimant.

It would be good if a solution could be found because the situation currently with people staying in those island is actually rather stupid.
 
People tends to forget that Mr. Dalai Lama is the leader of a arms revolt in China (the popular term these day is terrorist). No nation on this earth would ignore someone with that history being supported politically by another nation. China do not object if Dalai Lama is being invited as a religious leader or as a scholar.

China position on this is well known, nation knowing full well of this fact and proceed to use Dalai Lama as a political tool to challenge China would obviously invite a response from China.

Any attempt to destabilize China would not be left unanswered.

Talking about Tibet, I just had funny conversation with friends and colleagues. Most of my friends are attorneys and very wealthy. They told me the only thing they know about Dalai Lhama is the movie. They know nothing else except that he is a religious leader. I am not gonna open a can of worms here in this thread, but what I am trying to illustrate is that those clueless upper middle class Americans are very easily influenced by others, including myself with a bit history chitchat. :woot:

Majority of Americans, even very well educated ones, are very myopic. They had no clue about other countries. Can we really trust U.S. politicians' wisdom about international relations when the electorates are ignorant about the world? How much more knowledgeable about the international affairs are those politicians than the general public?
 
For Dalai Lama and his followers, the revolt was considered as struggle for Independence.

Don't forget that in the past, Tibetan Empire existed before the Chinese (technically the Mongols) invaded them in 1270, by which after the invasion, there are intermittent self-government and re-invasion by the Chinese.

The Dalai Lama accepted Chinese rule out of non-violence principle of Buddhism and prosperity for Tibetans, but the catastrophe caused by MaoZedong's "Great leap forward" and "Cultural Revolution" was the catalyst for resistance.
The revolt in 1959 by Dalai Lama were mostly motivated by the great famine caused by Mao Zedong infamous "Great Leap Forward". Mao may let hundreds of thousand of Chinese starved and died, but Dalai Lama as leaders of Tibetans won't let that happened to the Tibetans. Even worse, this was followed by "Cultural Revolution" in 1966 which was a catastrophe to Tibetan Culture.

The act of Dalai Lama was comendable as a leaders who cares for his people. If I was Dalai Lama, I would have also revolted rather than succumb to see thousands of peoples died.
 
For Dalai Lama and his followers, the revolt was considered as struggle for Independence.

Don't forget that in the past, Tibetan Empire existed before the Chinese (technically the Mongols) invaded them in 1270, by which after the invasion, there are intermittent self-government and re-invasion by the Chinese.

The Dalai Lama accepted Chinese rule out of non-violence principle of Buddhism and prosperity for Tibetans, but the catastrophe caused by MaoZedong's "Great leap forward" and "Cultural Revolution" was the catalyst for resistance.
The revolt in 1959 by Dalai Lama were mostly motivated by the great famine caused by Mao Zedong infamous "Great Leap Forward". Mao may let hundreds of thousand of Chinese starved and died, but Dalai Lama as leaders of Tibetans won't let that happened to the Tibetans. Even worse, this was followed by "Cultural Revolution" in 1966 which was a catastrophe to Tibetan Culture.

The act of Dalai Lama was comendable as a leaders who cares for his people. If I was Dalai Lama, I would have also revolted rather than succumb to see thousands of peoples died.
First off, since "Cultural Revolution" happens years after the revolt, it is impossible for that to be the reason for the revolt.

Dalai Lama signed an agreement with the PRC government that give Tibet autonomous rule. Dalai Lama was then selected as a deputy chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, a post he officially held until 1964. Whether Tibetan Kingdom/Empire exist or not exist in history is irrelevant.

14th Dalai Lama - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Cooperation and conflicts with the PRC

The Dalai Lama's formal rule was brief. He sent a delegation to Beijing, which ratified the Seventeen Point Agreement for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet.[22][23] He worked with the Chinese government: in September 1954, together with the 10th Panchen Lama he went to the Chinese capital to meet Mao Zedong and attend the first session of the National People's Congress as a delegate, primarily discussing China's constitution.[24][25] On 27 September 1954, the Dalai Lama was selected as a deputy chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress,[26][27] a post he officially held until 1964.[28]

In 1956, on a trip to India to celebrate the Buddha's Birthday, the Dalai Lama asked the Prime Minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru, if he would allow him political asylum should he choose to stay. Nehru discouraged this as a provocation against peace, and reminded him of the Indian Government's non-interventionist stance agreed upon with its 1954 treaty with China.[14] The CIA, with the Korean War only recently over, offered the Dalai Lama assistance. In 1956, a large rebellion broke out in eastern Kham, an ethnically Tibetan region in Sichuan province. To support the rebels, the CIA launched a covert action campaign against the Communist Chinese. A secret military training camp for the Khampa guerrillas was established at Camp Hale near Leadville, Colorado, in the U.S.[29] The guerrillas attacked Communist forces in Amdo and Kham but were gradually pushed into Central Tibet.

Exile to India

At the outset of the 1959 Tibetan uprising, fearing for his life, the Dalai Lama and his retinue fled Tibet with the help of the CIA's Special Activities Division,[30] crossing into India on 30 March 1959, reaching Tezpur in Assam on 18 April.[31] Some time later he set up the Government of Tibet in Exile in Dharamshala, India,[32] which is often referred to as "Little Lhasa". After the founding of the exiled government he re-established the approximately 80,000 Tibetan refugees who followed him into exile in agricultural settlements.[8] He created a Tibetan educational system in order to teach the Tibetan children the language, history, religion, and culture. The Tibetan Institute of Performing Arts was established[8] in 1959 and the Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies[8] became the primary university for Tibetans in India. He supported the refounding of 200 monasteries and nunneries in an attempt to preserve Tibetan Buddhist teachings and the Tibetan way of life.

The USA just after the end of the Korean War with PRC, is eager to start another front in China. Dalai Lama cooperate with the CIA in 1956. Years before the Great Leap Forward. Moreover, Great Leap Forward does not affect Tibet province which is autonomous, it does however affect people of Tibetan origin in other province.

No country in this world, could have tolerate a person that covertly cooperate with an enemy state to instigate a arms revolt. The Chinese government and people are actually very lenient to Dalai Lama considered the circumstances.

The governmental system of the traditional Dalai Lama rule could only be described as anachronistic barbaric feudal theocracy.

The Dalai Lama’s Tibet: now that was hell on earth | Crikey
The Dalai Lama knows how to generate publicity for his dubious cause. This time, he is using the 50th anniversary of his failed uprising against the Chinese in Tibet, to tell the world that the years since the events of 1959 have brought “untold suffering and destruction to the land and people of Tibet.”

Naturally, the Western media swallows this statement lock, stock and barrel, even though it is simply brazen intellectual and historical dishonesty on the part of the well heeled, formerly CIA funded, Tibetan monk.

The reality of life for Tibetans when the Dalai Lama and his predecessors ruled Tibet was simply ghastly. It was truly “hell on earth”, a phrase the Dalai Lama is using to describe the impact of China’s presence in Tibet today.

In his 1996 book, The Making of Modern Tibet, Tom Grunfeld describes the feudal system that existed in Tibet in the lead up to 1959. Tibetans, he writes, were ruled by a system of feudal theocracy, and the Dalai Lama was at the pinnacle of that structure. It was a society in which land owners and nobles made life as hellish for peasants as was the case in medieval England. Nobles collected taxes, beat their “serfs”, took bribes and ensured that the serfs, who lived in hovels on their estates, starved while their banquet tables heaved with produce grown on the estate.

Serfs, and the vast majority of Tibetans were in this category, had no power. They had to gain permission to attend a monastery or to get married. There was, Grunfeld writes, little class mobility in Tibet. It was a rigid and thoroughly elite driven society in which slavery was tolerated.

Grunfeld’s bleak assessment of living conditions in Tibet up to 1959 is not a maverick one. Another scholar, Michael Parenti from the University of California, has researched and written extensively on the issue of Tibetan society prior to the Chinese intervention in 1959.

Parenti, writing in academic journal New Political Science in 2003, observes that in “the Dalai Lama’s Tibet, torture and mutilation — including eye gouging, the pulling out of tongues, hamstringing, and amputation — were favored punishments inflicted upon runaway serfs and thieves.”

Parenti cites the work of one Western observer who in 1929:

…visited an exhibition of torture equipment that had been used by the Tibetan overlords. There were handcuffs of all sizes, including small ones for children, and instruments for cutting off noses and ears, gouging out eyes, and breaking off hands.

There were instruments for slicing off kneecaps and heels, or hamstringing legs. There were hot brands, whips, and special implements for disemboweling.

Sexual abuse in monasteries was rife, and starvation among the serfs a regular occurrence, despite the plentiful conditions for agriculture that existed in Tibet.

The Tibet that the Dalai Lama presided over, until his exile in 1959, was far from the Shangri-la that dewy eyed supporters of the Free Tibet movement pretend it to be. Unless you were a member of the small elite class, or a monk, life was, in Thomas Hobbes’ memorable phrase, “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”

The Dalai Lama speaks today of “repressive and violent” campaigns by China over the past 50 years. What he has not told you, and nor has any media outlet that has quoted his gibberish today, is that he and the system he represents made life intolerable for millions of Tibetans over hundreds of years.

The history books record this.
The revolt start in Sichuan, thousand of kilometer from Lhasa. That is because while Dalai Lama could have his way in Tibet province, he has no control over what happen in other province. The communist, being considered themselves as progressive, simply could not allow the kind of barbaric rule in other province. This hurt the interest of the ruling monastic clergy class that is dissatisfied and is in turn used by the CIA to instigate a revolt.

Tibet today by any or all of the modern standard of measurement of standard of living is miles ahead of what they were during Dalai Lama rules.
 
First off, since "Cultural Revolution" happens years after the revolt, it is impossible for that to be the reason for the revolt.

Please read my post more carfully. I didn't say the revolt was caused by cultural revolution, but 'Great Leap Forward" policy of Mao. After the failure of "Great Leap forward", it was followed by "cultural revolution" further cementing efforts to resist further catastrophe caused by Chinese. Let me highlighted it for you:

For Dalai Lama and his followers, the revolt was considered as struggle for Independence.

Don't forget that in the past, Tibetan Empire existed before the Chinese (technically the Mongols) invaded them in 1270, by which after the invasion, there are intermittent self-government and re-invasion by the Chinese.

The Dalai Lama accepted Chinese rule out of non-violence principle of Buddhism and prosperity for Tibetans, but the catastrophe caused by MaoZedong's "Great leap forward" and "Cultural Revolution" was the catalyst for resistance.
The revolt in 1959 by Dalai Lama were mostly motivated by the great famine caused by Mao Zedong infamous "Great Leap Forward". Mao may let hundreds of thousand of Chinese starved and died, but Dalai Lama as leaders of Tibetans won't let that happened to the Tibetans. Even worse, this was followed by "Cultural Revolution" in 1966 which was a catastrophe to Tibetan Culture.

The act of Dalai Lama was comendable as a leaders who cares for his people. If I was Dalai Lama, I would have also revolted rather than succumb to see thousands of peoples died.

Dalai Lama signed an agreement with the PRC government that give Tibet autonomous rule. Dalai Lama was then selected as a deputy chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, a post he officially held until 1964. Whether Tibetan Kingdom/Empire exist or not exist in history is irrelevant.
Of course it is relevant, otherwise why would they want independence? Vietnam was invaded by China (and administered as one of chinese province) in the past and they manage to fight for their independence. The same could be said to Mongolia. Or did you suggested that Vietnam should be part of China and must not be independent?

The USA just after the end of the Korean War with PRC, is eager to start another front in China. Dalai Lama cooperate with the CIA in 1956. Years before the Great Leap Forward. Moreover, Great Leap Forward does not affect Tibet province which is autonomous, it does however affect people of Tibetan origin in other province.

No country in this world, could have tolerate a person that covertly cooperate with an enemy state to instigate a arms revolt. The Chinese government and people are actually very lenient to Dalai Lama considered the circumstances.

The governmental system of the traditional Dalai Lama rule could only be described as anachronistic barbaric feudal theocracy.

The revolt start in Sichuan, thousand of kilometer from Lhasa. That is because while Dalai Lama could have his way in Tibet province, he has no control over what happen in other province. The communist, being considered themselves as progressive, simply could not allow the kind of barbaric rule in other province. This hurt the interest of the ruling monastic clergy class that is dissatisfied and is in turn used by the CIA to instigate a revolt.

Tibet today by any or all of the modern standard of measurement of standard of living is miles ahead of what they were during Dalai Lama rules.

The European imperialists also use this kind of reason to conquer Africa. So you agreed that European colonization of Africa was justified to "civilize" the barbaric africa? That Africa could be better off if they were still ruled by the European in contrast to today's chaos?

The Chinese historical narrative always use double standard regarding their imperialists past. First, they justified and brag about the invasion of Tibet, XinJiang, Vietnam, Korea, and Japan (unsuccessful), while at the same time denounce any Japanese historical deed in WW2.
 
Please read my post more carfully. I didn't say the revolt was caused by cultural revolution, but 'Great Leap Forward" policy of Mao. After the failure of "Great Leap forward", it was followed by "cultural revolution" further cementing efforts to resist further catastrophe caused by Chinese. Let me highlighted it for you:
My point is, Dalai Lama and his follower has already revolt before Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution happened. His "fight for independence" as you put it has already happened before those two event occurred. And that is a fact.

BTW, Dalai Lama has publicly said that he do not seek independence for Tibet only autonomous rule.
Tibet not seeking independence from China: Dalai Lama - Indian Express


Of course it is relevant, otherwise why would they want independence? Vietnam was invaded by China (and administered as one of chinese province) in the past and they manage to fight for their independence. The same could be said to Mongolia. Or did you suggested that Vietnam should be part of China and must not be independent?
According to the current international order.

Dalai Lama as the last leader in history signed an agreement that integrate Tibet into China. What happened in the past is not relevant. This is why there is NOT a single country in the world that recognized Tibet as NOT a part of China. And that is a fact.

Following your logic, Indonesia could be break into many countries. South Vietnam could break away from Vietnam. All the sultanates in Malaysia would any time in the future declare independence and break away from Malaysia. India would break into many many countries. Any country that exist in the past could declare independence from the current country.

The world would be in a total chaos.


The European imperialists also use this kind of reason to conquer Africa. So you agreed that European colonization of Africa was justified to "civilize" the barbaric africa? That Africa could be better off if they were still ruled by the European in contrast to today's chaos?
Europe and African are thousand of miles apart. They have no historical, political and cultural link.

Tibet is just next door to China mainland. Historically, Tibet has been many times a part of China.

Tibet along with many part of China break away after the fall of the last imperial empire, the qing dynasty. China is broken into many small countries. This always happen in China after the fall of a empire/dynasty.

A new administration/government would needs to gather the break away countries and unite China again. Only the government that is able to do that would be considered the legitimate successor or in Chinese term, the one to received the mandate of heaven to rule China. This process has happened many many time in Chinese history.

The PRC(CPC) simply did what was traditional. If it is the ROC(KMT) that has won the civil war in China. They would have done the same thing to unite Tibet into China also.

The relationship between China and Tibet is not a colonist/colony relationship. We are one people. The Chinese people truly care about the Tibetan people. China sent million each year into Tibet. Whenever Tibet need Chinese help, Chinese would not think twice to deliver it. Tibet contrary to many believe is not a heaven on earth. It has a harsh and fragile environment. Chinese people have no problem at all helping our not so fortunate brother. China has many preferential policy that assist the Tibetan. And with 1.4 billion brother looking out for each other, we would build Tibet into a prosperous place just like other part of China.

The Chinese historical narrative always use double standard regarding their imperialists past. First, they justified and brag about the invasion of Tibet, XinJiang, Vietnam, Korea, and Japan (unsuccessful), while at the same time denounce any Japanese historical deed in WW2.
China imperialist is just like any other imperialist. That is in the past. I do not understand what you mean by historical narrative. Is that historical, official or from internet?

Before the end of WWII, countries could just invade and annex any country. This leads to two world war that caused immense suffering of everybody. The world gather together and founded the United Nation to prevent that from happening again.

China considered it is of utmost importance that the post WWII order is maintained. We do not wish the world to revert to the past. This is of vital interest to every countries in the world, especially the small and weak country.

This is the reason why, China would insist that Japan abide by the term of her surrender in WWII. And stop the practice of denying and revising historical fact about the atrocities that they had committed.
 
Talking about Tibet, I just had funny conversation with friends and colleagues. Most of my friends are attorneys and very wealthy. They told me the only thing they know about Dalai Lhama is the movie. They know nothing else except that he is a religious leader. I am not gonna open a can of worms here in this thread, but what I am trying to illustrate is that those clueless upper middle class Americans are very easily influenced by others, including myself with a bit history chitchat. :woot:

Majority of Americans, even very well educated ones, are very myopic. They had no clue about other countries. Can we really trust U.S. politicians' wisdom about international relations when the electorates are ignorant about the world? How much more knowledgeable about the international affairs are those politicians than the general public?
You are right that many people are unable to see that Dalai Lama beside being a religious and spiritual leader, is also a politician.

In the political arena, his history shown that he has consistently act exactly like any other politician would have.

The only thing is, unlikely the Pakistani, he has made a seriously wrong bet. Had he stay in China, he would be the unassailable top level religious and political leader today, with not only Tibetan but Mongolian under his wings, for life too, just imagine the kind of money and power that he would have. But I do not blame him for the misjudgement, I guess it can only be attribute to karma. I think now he realizes that also, way too late though.
 
Back
Top Bottom