Another Tibetan Monk Sets Himself on Fire in China

 Tenzin Choeden

Another Tibetan monk, the 19-year-old Lobsang Gyatso, from Kirti Monastery has set himself on fire in Ngaba Town, in south-western China, say Free Tibet and the International Campaign for Tibet (ICT). He is the second teenager to set himself on fire in Ngaba in the last three days, following Tenzin Choeden, who died last Saturday. (See also here and here).

In the last year, at least 21 young Tibetans have died the same way.

Here is the link to an online petition calling for a U.N.-led fact-finding mission to observe the situation in Tibet. (Via Tibet News)

Burning for Freedom in Tibet

“No people should be forced to live in such desperate circumstances that they feel they must resort to desperate means like suicide,” writes the Christian Science Monitor commenting the tragic type of protest that has become popular in two different parts of the world in the past two years. The kind of protest in question is setting fire to oneself, and the two different parts of the world that the CSM is referring to are Tibet and some countries of the Arab world. Perhaps the major difference (among many others) between the two cases is that, generally speaking, as far as I know, what is happening in Tibet doesn’t seem to deserve being noticed, or at least it is not getting the coverage it deserves. With very few exceptions like this or this:

Another Tibetan in southwest China self-immolated Saturday in the latest in a series of apparent protests against Chinese rule, activist groups said.
The self-immolation in the town of Aba in Sichuan province was followed by clashes between security forces and local Tibetans, said the London-based group Free Tibet.t protests against Chinese rule, activist groups said.
At least 16 Buddhist monks, nuns and other Tibetans are now believed to have set themselves on fire in the past year — including four in the past week — mostly in traditionally Tibetan areas of Sichuan province. Most have chanted for Tibetan freedom and the return of their spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, who fled to India amid an abortive uprising against Chinese rule in 1959.

Yes, we are talking of Buddhist monks setting fire to themselves—of course in response to Beijing’s iron-fisted grip over Tibetan affairs—and this notwithstanding the fact that any form of suicide is widely seen as contrary to the teachings of their religion!

“You [the Chinese leadership] will never address the genuine grievances of Tibetans and restore stability in Tibet through violence and killing, the only way to resolve the Tibet issue and bring about lasting peace is by respecting the rights of the Tibetan people and through dialogue,” said Lobsang Sangay, the prime minister of Tibet’s government in exile in Dharamsala in India, who denounced the shooting by police on hundreds of Tibetan protesters in western Sichuan this week. Of course he is right, but at the same time it’s pretty easy to predict that, even though the Tibetans’ struggle for freedom will continue, whether the whole world is watching or not,

As the communist government in Beijing struggles with issues of reform and modernization, it has retained and even intensified its hard-line policies against the Tibetan people. Given China's growing importance as an economic power and a general sense of fatigue in the rest of the word for meaningful action in defense of human rights, the people in Tibet can expect little concrete support in their quest for political freedom and religious liberty.

Candlelight vigil in Dharmsala, India, after news reports of self-immolation by two Tibetan monks at the Kirti Monastery in Sichuan province's Aba prefectuture, Monday, Sept. 26, 2011. Pic:AP

Death Was a Small Price to Pay

The Dalai Lama fleeing from Tibet
with his entourage on horse in 1959

Tibet is, in the West, a story of a weak nation taken over and occupied by a more powerful one. But “this is the American theme, the theme of 1776, when we threw off our own band of occupiers,” says Stephan Talty, the author of Escape from the Land of Snow (see my previous post). That’s why any American, he continues, can understand Tibet in a phrase. And perhaps this is also why—unlike their Commander-in-Chief, if I may say so—many Americans do care about Tibet. But patriotism and civic virtue seem to be less fundamental than one might think at first sight…

Stephan Talty on his own book at The Huffington Post:

When I went to Lhasa in 2009 to research my book on the Dalai Lama's escape to freedom, I expected to be meet patriots almost exclusively. But I was wrong. The story of modern Tibet is in many ways the story not of nationalism but of Buddhism.
[…]
What struck me in interviewing survivors of the uprising was its religious undercurrent: If His Holiness had been a secular leader only, most likely Tibetans wouldn't have raised a finger to protect him. Many of them distrusted the aristocrats and bureaucrats who ran the government -- they were seen (correctly) as corrupt allies of the Chinese. It was what the Dalai Lama meant to them as people of faith that caused ordinary Tibetans to risk their lives.

Teenagers who had never been particularly patriotic ran to the Norbulingka, His Holiness's summer palace, to act as human barriers. Older men opened their shirts as they stood in front of the palace gates, daring the Chinese soldiers to gun them down. Monks in the colleges grabbed rifles, dooming themselves to a reincarnation as a lesser being for violating the Buddhist maxim against violence.

None of these people had taken up arms in 1950 when the Chinese invaded their borders. Nationalism didn't rouse a majority of them to fight. The notion of Tibet was too diffuse. Many Tibetans in 1950 didn't even speak the same language; each region had its own dialect that made it impossible to communicate with someone from another province. The only thing that united the far-flung populations was their love of tsampa, the roasted barley that is a staple across the country. And the figure of the Dalai Lama.

I spoke to monks who now live in tiny rooms in the hills of Dharamsala, India, and many told me the same thing: In fighting the Chinese in Lhasa, they believed they were protecting His Holiness as he fled toward freedom. They believed if he was captured, the dharma would be irreparably harmed. Death was a small price to pay if they stop that from happening.

Escape from the Land of Snow (Updated)

The strangest fact about the Dalai Lama’s strange life, writes Jeffrey Paines in his Washington Post review of four books on the subject, is that it remains largely untold. “Most books promoted as biographies of him hardly qualify as such and are indeed no more revealing than Testu Saiwai’s recent manga, or cartoon, biography. That’s why, according to the reviewer, of the recent attempts to provide insight into the Dalai Lama, the most effective one is Stephan Talty’s Escape from the Land of Snows.

After all “Talty has actually written three books in one: a biography of the young Dalai Lama up to his 24th year (1959), a history of recent Tibet and a hair-raising tale of daring and escape. The last of these makes Talty’s story come alive—and made the Dalai Lama the man he is today.“

Not that the other books aren’t worth reading, but, you know, time is a tyrant and you can’t read everything you’d like to read. However, the other books are The Essence of Happiness (and the best-selling The Art of Happiness from which it is excerpted), and My Spiritual Journey—unfortunately the Dalai Lama did not write, or apparently read, any of the first, nor of the second, while the third has a misleading title, for it is no autobiography...

-----

UPDATE January 30, 12:30 pm

The author of Escape from the Land of Snow on his own book at The Huffington Post.

Please Help Free Liu Xiaob

Not that, to be honest, I am overly confident that this Call to Action will be crowned by success (and this for at least two quite obvious reasons I won’t mention here), but I can’t help doing my own little part to help support Tibetan and Chinese political prisoners in China, including Chinese literary critic, writer, professor, and human rights activist Liu Xiaobo, who has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize “for his long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China,” and is currently serving an 11-year prison sentence for “inciting subversion of state power.” That’s why I accept the call to action launched by the International Campaign for Tibet:

Liu Xiaobo, Chinese literary critic, writer, professor, activist and supporter of the Tibetan people, has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize "for his long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China." Currently serving an 11-year prison sentence for "inciting subversion of state power," Liu Xiaobo is the first Chinese person to be awarded a Nobel Prize of any kind while residing in China.

Thousands of prisoners - Tibetan as well as Chinese - continue to be held behind bars, serving long sentences for speaking out and voicing their opinions. They include Dhondup Wangchen, a Tibetan film-maker; Migmar Dhondup, a Tibetan tour guide and writer ; Runggye Adak, a Tibetan nomad; and Tenzin Delek Rinpoche, a Tibetan religious and community leader.
The Nobel Peace Prize ceremony, which the Chinese government is not allowing Liu or his family to attend, will be held on December 10, which is International Human Rights Day.

Please add your voice before December 10, 2010 by sending a message to President Obama to urge him to stand up to press China for the release of all political prisoners detained for exercising their right to free expression, and to implement the political and human rights reforms that multitudes of Chinese and Tibetan advocates risk their lives to promote.
Take action and send your message now!

'The Sun Behind the Clouds'

“The Sun Behind the Clouds: Tibet’s Struggle for Freedom,” the documentary film by Ritu Sarin and Tenzing Sonam (check out the trailer below), has been greeted by some critics as “a potent update” on Tibetans‘ 50-year struggle for justice and recognition, and “an essential viewing” for anyone who cares about the fate of Tibet and the legacy of the Dalai Lama, while others (this one, for instance) have pointed out that the filmmakers lurch awkwardly between reverence for the Dalai Lama and hints that he has become, politically, irrelevant or an obstacle. As a matter of fact, as noted by another reviewer, the film incorporates several approaches, and perhaps not all are really worth your time…

For all its worthiness politically, “The Sun Behind the Clouds’’ is a lackluster film. That changes whenever the Dalai Lama is on screen. We see him at his residence in the northern Indian city of Dharamsala, as well as making public appearances in the United States and Western Europe. To watch his meet-and-greet with Prince Charles is truly to see worlds colliding — those worlds being humanity at its most impressive and Madame Tussauds at its most animated (relatively speaking). The Dalai Lama also gives interviews to the filmmakers. He’s the most prominent of several talking-head subjects, nearly all of them Tibetan activists.

The closest thing to debate in the movie is over the Dalai Lama’s “middle way’’ policy, which seeks Tibetan autonomy under Chinese rule rather than outright independence. Several activists criticize the Dalai Lama for what they see as self-defeating moderation. It’s hard to imagine what alternative the Dalai Lama has. “The only thing we know is that empires rise and fall,’’ says Lhadon Tethong, former executive director of Students for a Free Tibet. That’s certainly true. But as another Tibetan activist notes, the situation of his people recalls that of Native Americans and Native Australians in the 19th century. More Chinese than Tibetans now live in Lhasa. Cultures fall, too, especially when they’re shoved.

Be it as it may, I stand with the Dalai Lama and always will. The only thing I know is that, to quote one of my favorite authors ever, “The strongest of all warriors are these two—Time and Patience” (Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoi). Long life to His Holiness!

Chinese 'security' forces in Tibet

“There will be a time when truth will prevail. Therefore, it is important that everyone be patient and not give up,” said the Dalai Lama in a speech delivered yesterday in India on the 51st anniversary of his flight from Lhasa.

Meanwhile, we learn from a New York Times report that

[f]or a second straight year, the Chinese government has increased security across parts of the vast Tibetan plateau to dissuade any Tibetans from holding protests this week to mark the anniversaries of ethnic uprisings. Witnesses who have spent time recently in Lhasa, the Tibetan capital, and other Tibetan areas of western China say there are more police and paramilitary forces on the streets, some of them bearing automatic weapons.

Read the rest.

Help free Dhondup Wangchen

Dhondup Wangchen is a Tibetan film-maker who was arrested in March 2008. He had just completed filming an extensive series of interviews with ordinary Tibetans, giving a voice to Tibetans under China’s rule. The interviews were smuggled out of Tibet at great risk and have been made into a remarkable 25-minute documentary, Leaving Fear Behind, which was secretly shown to a small group of foreign reporters on the eve of the Beijing Olympics last year, and eventually was seen screened in more than 30 countries.

As a prisoner of the Chinese government, Wangchen endured torture to extract a confession, contracted hepatitis B (being denied adequate treatment), and had the lawyer he chose replaced with a government-appointed one—violating his right to choose his own counsel and denying him access to independent legal assistance.

His arrest and sentence of 6 years prove that the Chinese government will not allow Tibetans any expression that opposes Chinese rule.

Please, tell the Chinese government to free Dhondup Wangchen and to uphold the right to freedom of expression and the right to a fair trial in future cases: Sign Petition & spread the word!

To be free or not to be free, that is the question (for Tibetans)

To be free or not to be free, that is the question for Tibetans. Well, no, actually: perhaps the real question, for them, is “How to enjoy the freedom of being not free?” At least, that’s what I think one has to look at the whole Tibetan thing after reading this. Or, better still, just don’t free Tibet (great post!). To free or not to free, that’s the real question! Sometimes you have to laugh not to cry...

How Tibet was sold out for a fistful of pounds and a few dollars more

Last week, Christopher Booker, columnist at the Sunday Times, reported on “the strange eagerness” of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office “to appease the murderous regime in Tehran.” But now we have learned that David Milliband’s appeasement of Tehran has a strong precedent,

Another example of the FCO's willingness to kowtow to nasty regimes has been flagged up in another newspaper, where a columnist researching ahead of a recent visit to China came across a remarkable statement from the Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, slipped out on the FCO website on October 29 2008, just before representatives of the Dalai Lama were due to hold talks in Beijing on the future of Tibet.
Buried in the statement was Britain's recognition for the first time that, like "all other members of the EU… we regard Tibet as part of the People's Republic of China".

It’s just what Barack Obama said last November, soon after his meeting with China’s president Hu Jintao. Unfortunately, the “recognition” has become a very popular motto in the language of international relations, since in a diplomatic note to Beijing issued one month ago by the Danish government it was made clear that Denmark—ruled by a center-right coalition—would oppose Tibetan independence and carefully considered China’s reaction before inviting the Dalai Lama again.

So, apparently it all started from David Miliband, the would be leader of the Labour party (and possibly Prime Minister of the UK), and above all the Foreign Secretary of a country which for over a hundred years has studiously not conceded that Tibet is part of China. He even apologized that Britain had not done so earlier… As Robert Barnett, the director of the Modern Tibetan Studies Program at Columbia University, wrote in November 25, 2008 New York Times,

The British concession to China last month was buried within a public statement calling on Beijing to grant autonomy in Tibet, leading some to accuse the British government of hypocrisy. It is more worrying if it was a miscalculation. The statement was released two days before the Dalai Lama's envoys began the eighth round of talks with Beijing on their longstanding request for greater autonomy, apparently because the British believed - or had been told - that their giveaway to Beijing would relax the atmosphere and so encourage China to make concessions to the Dalai Lama.
The result was the opposite. On Nov. 10, China issued a damning attack on the exile leader, saying his autonomy plan amounted to ethnic cleansing, disguised independence and the reintroduction of serfdom and theocracy. The only thing that China will henceforth discuss with the exiles is the Dalai Lama's personal status, meaning roughly which luxury residence he can retire to in Beijing.

Barnett also reported that

The official press in China has gleefully attributed European concessions on Tibet to the financial crisis. "Of course these European countries are at this time not collectively changing their tune because their conscience has gotten the better of them," announced The International Herald Leader, a government-owned paper in Beijing, on Nov. 7. It added that the financial crisis "has made it impossible for them not to consider the 'cost problem' in continuing to 'aid Tibetan independence' and anger China. After all, compared to the Dalai, to as quickly as possible pull China onto Europe's rescue boat is even more important and urgent."

Would the International Herald Leader have ever imagined that about one year later even the President of the United States would sell out Tibet by rewriting history to get support in the financial crisis?

But, as the old saying goes, “Never say die!” In fact His Holiness the Dalai Lama today said he was optimistic about China giving autonomy to Tibet, and this, paradoxically, just because of a matter of money... Asked about the chances of China giving autonomy to Tibet, he said, “Since Jiang Zemin came to power, there has been a big change in China; now money is very important. Therefore, I am optimistic.” But then again, as another old saying goes, “Money comes and goes...”

Denmark: a farewell to Tibet

Do you remember what Barack Obama said soon after his meeting with China’s president Hu Jintao some three weeks ago? “We did note that while we recognize that Tibet is part of the People’s Republic of China, the United States supports the early resumption of dialogue between the Dalai Lama’s representatives and Beijing.” Well, now the “recognition” is running the risk of becoming a very popular motto in the language of international relations. And this is of course no surprise, because the U.S. is still the leading country in almost everything—except perhaps the fight for human rights, since the time that Barack Obama took office as President of the United States of America…

What I’m trying to say is that in a diplomatic note to Beijing issued by the Danish government it is said that Denmark—ruled by a center-right coalition—will oppose Tibetan independence and carefully consider China’s reaction before inviting the Dalai Lama again:

Denmark is fully aware of the importance and sensitivity of Tibet-related issues and attaches great importance to the view of the Chinese government on these issues. […]
Denmark takes very seriously the Chinese opposition to meetings between members of the Danish Government and the Dalai Lama, and has duly noted Chinese views that such meetings are against the core interest of China, and will handle such issues prudently.
In this regard, Denmark reaffirms its One-China Policy and its unchanged position that Tibet is an integral part of China. Denmark recognises China’s sovereignty over Tibet and accordingly opposes the independence of Tibet.

What shall I say about that? What about this (along with Soeren Espersen, spokesman of the far-right Danish People’s Party)? The Danish government “is going on bended knee before China.” Or this: “The government has given in to Chinese pressure” to “preserve the interests of its companies,” as political analyst Hans Engell told the TV2 News television channel. In both cases it’s a sad scenario, isn’t it?

Tibet: a dialogue about what?

Speaking at the 5th World Parliamentarians Convention on Tibet, held in Rome yesterday, the Dalai Lama expressed his appreciation for the support given to him by Barack Obama, who on Tuesday discussed Tibet with China’s president, “making clear his respect for the Dalai Lama as a cultural and religious leader, and his intention to meet with the Dalai Lama at an appropriate time.” “We did note that while we recognize that Tibet is part of the People’s Republic of China, the United States supports the early resumption of dialogue between the Dalai Lama’s representatives and Beijing,” Obama said soon after his meeting with Hu Jintao.

Yet, notwithstanding the appointment of a special Tibet coordinator by the White House, with one of his characteristic laugh, His Holiness also noted the “limitations” to the support he could expect from the US. In fact, if the US recognizes that Tibet is nothing but a part of China, “What bargaining chips remain for the Dalai Lama to use with the Chi-Comms?” as rightly pointed out by Ralph Alter on American Thinker. As a matter of fact, Obama’s statement shocked the entire Tibetan community, said Tenzin Cheoying, the president of a voluntary, Students for Free Tibet.

As Dhondup Dorjee, vice president of the Tibetan Youth Congress, puts it,

“Whatever he (Obama) stated today, of course, Tibetans in general we welcome his appeal to the Chinese leadership in urging early resumption of dialogue, but a dialogue without any result, dialogue with lots of pre-conditions from the Chinese government and with no intentions to come to a solution, will reach us no where. So, we expect the President to take up the Tibet issue at a higher level, not at the mere usual common stand to encourage dialogue. And, what was the fate of the dialogue we have seen in the 80’s and even in the recent dialogue what happened.”

Very well said, if I may add. But then again, what has become more and more clear in the course of the last months is that times have changed, and much water has flowed under the bridge since the day that George W Bush met the Tibetan spiritual leader in public in a ceremony on Capitol Hill, a couple of years ago. Everything became clear when, last October, for the first time since 1991, a US President decided to postpone a meeting with the Dalai Lama until after this November summit between Obama and his Chinese counterpart, in order to maintain good relations with the Chinese government. Congressman Frank Wolf described the presidential snub as an embarrassment: “Economics should not trump human rights. You can do them both together and do them respectfully,” he said.

What we can say today is that President Obama “effectively forfeited the issue of Tibetan sovereignty in favor of Hu Jintao’s expansionist government,” as Ralph Alter puts it, and that

Obama’s October cancellation of a tentative meeting with the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader, suggested that B.O. was looking for negotiating room in anticipation of his scheduled visit to Beijing. Despite Chinese forces torching Tibetan shops and attacking its citizens, it appears the U.S. President simply folded his hand, effectively tossing the Dalai Lama and his people into the crowded undercarriage beneath the Obama bus.

But most Americans, according to Alter, “are disgusted with B.O.’s determination to promote his ½ America principle.” Perhaps he’s right. As far as I am concerned, as a European by birth but an “American by philosophy,” I cannot but ask myself (once again): “Is this the America that the Founding Fathers would have wanted?”

No time for the Dalai Lama

Who remembers how, on the last January 17th, the Dalai Lama greeted the outgoing President of the U.S., George W Bush? He chose these words: “I love President George W Bush.” Leaving the audience stunned—he was delivering the Madhavrao Scindia Memorial Lecture in New Delhi—the Tibetan spiritual leader recalled how he and the then US President instantly struck a chord in their first meeting. Of course he was well aware that in his most recent visit to Washington, in 2007, George W Bush was the first American president to meet him in public in a ceremony on Capitol Hill.

But times have changed, and much water has flowed under the bridge since then. In fact, now His Holiness the Dalai Lama of Tibet, who is in Washington these days after a long tour through North America, for the first time since 1991 won’t be welcomed by the U.S. President. Why? Because the White House has preferred not to have Barack Obama meet him now in order not to damage relations between China and the U.S. ahead of Obama’s visit to China in November.

Well, this is precisely what is called “realpolitik” in international affairs. And yet, in my humble opinion, at this stage two questions, at least, arise spontaneously: “Is this the America that the Founding Fathers would have wanted?” And “Is this the America that Obama wants?” Or, more pragmatically, along with Frank Wolf, a Republican member of Congress involved in the fight for human rights, we might ask ourselves, “What would a Buddhist monk or Buddhist nun in Drapchi prison think when he heard that President Obama, the president of the United States, is not going to meet with the Dalai Lama?” In China, Wolf added, “It’s against the law to even have a picture of the Dalai Lama. I can almost hear the words of the Chinese guards saying to them that nobody cares about you in the United States.” Of course, this is an exaggeration, but..

Dalai Lama's statement on the 50th anniversary of Uprising Day

Here are some excerpts from the Statement of His Holiness the Dalai Lama on the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Tibetan National Uprising Day:

Today is the fiftieth anniversary of the Tibetan people's peaceful uprising against Communist China's repression in Tibet. Since last March, widespread peaceful protests have erupted across the whole of Tibet. Most of the participants were youths born and brought up after 1959, who have not seen or experienced a free Tibet. However, the fact that they were driven by a firm conviction to serve the cause of Tibet that has continued from generation to generation is indeed a matter of pride. It will serve as a source of inspiration for those in the international community who take keen interest in the issue of Tibet. We pay tribute and offer our prayers for all those who died, were tortured and suffered tremendous hardships including during the crisis last year, for the cause of Tibet since our struggle began.
[…]
Our aspiration that all Tibetans be brought under a single autonomous administration is in keeping with the very objective of the principle of national regional autonomy. It also fulfils the fundamental requirements of the Tibetan and Chinese peoples. The Chinese constitution and other related laws and regulations do not pose any obstacle to this and many leaders of the Chinese Central Government have accepted this genuine aspiration. When signing the 17-Point Agreement, Premier Zhou Enlai acknowledged it as a reasonable demand. In 1956, when establishing the Preparatory Committee for the “Tibet Autonomous Region”, Vice-Premier Chen Yi pointing at a map said, if Lhasa could be made the capital of the Tibet Autonomous Region, which included the Tibetan areas within the other provinces, it would contribute to the development of Tibet and friendship between the Tibetan and Chinese nationalities, a view shared by the Panchen Rinpoche and many Tibetan cadres and scholars.If Chinese leaders had any objections to our proposals, they could have provided reasons for them and suggested alternatives for our consideration, but they did not. I am disappointed that the Chinese authorities have not responded appropriately to our sincere efforts to implement the principle of meaningful national regional autonomy for all Tibetans, as set forth in the constitution of the People's Republic of China.

Quite apart from the current process of Sino-Tibetan dialogue having achieved no concrete results, there has been a brutal crackdown on the Tibetan protests that have shaken the whole of Tibet since March last year. Therefore, in order to solicit public opinion as to what future course of action we should take, the Special Meeting of Tibetan exiles was convened in November 2008. Efforts were made to collect suggestions, as far as possible, from the Tibetans in Tibet as well. The outcome of this whole process was that a majority of Tibetans strongly supported the continuation of the Middle-Way policy. Therefore, we are now pursuing this policy with greater confidence and will continue our efforts towards achieving a meaningful national regional autonomy for all Tibetans.

From time immemorial, the Tibetan and Chinese peoples have been neighbours. In future too, we will have to live together. Therefore, it is most important for us to co-exist in friendship with each other.

Since the occupation of Tibet, the Communist China has been publishing distorted propaganda about Tibet and its people. Consequently, there are, among the Chinese populace, very few people who have a true understanding about Tibet. It is, in fact, very difficult for them to find the truth. There are also ultra-leftist Chinese leaders who have, since last March, been undertaking a huge propaganda effort with the intention of setting the Tibetan and Chinese peoples apart and creating animosity between them. Sadly, as a result, a negative impression of Tibetans has arisen in the minds of some of our Chinese brothers and sisters. Therefore, as I have repeatedly appealed before, I would like once again to urge our Chinese brothers and sisters not to be swayed by such propaganda, but, instead, to try to discover the facts about Tibet impartially, so as to prevent divisions among us. Tibetans should also continue to work for friendship with the Chinese people.

March 10, 2009: Display the Tibetan flag

Next March 10 will mark a double anniversary for Tibet: 50 years since Tibetans rose up to protest China’s illegal invasion of their homeland, and one year since unprecedented protests broke out across the Land of Snow showing China and the world that Tibetans are determined to be free. The images in March 2008 of Tibetans in Tibet bravely displaying Tibetan flags is an image that none, among those who love freedom and justice, will ever forget.

That’s why the Students For Tibet web site is inviting people to display a Tibetan flag on March 10, 2009. And that’s also why I am linking here to their site.

There are many places where a Tibetan flag can be raised or displayed. Here are just a few of the suggested places that could fly a flag:

> Schools
> Shops
> Libraries
> Pubs/bars
> Sports grounds
> Village/Public Halls
> Offices
> Local landmarks
> Your home
> On cars

Moreover, in taking that a step further, as the “Dalai Lama blog” suggests, it would be great that all bloggers and webmasters displayed an image of the Tibetan flag on their blogs and web sites during the entire month of March. And that’s what I’ll be doing next week.

Rome and Venice honor the Dalai Lama

One day after being made a citizen of Rome, His Holiness the Dalai Lama was yesterday in Venice, where he was made an honorary citizen by Mayor Massimo Cacciari.

It was a Tibetan lama who persuaded the Grand Khan to suspend the executions of 100,000 people who were thrown into the river each year; the lama was a friend of Marco Polo, […] but the past is the past and today the communist Chinese authorities have an extremely restrictive and short-sighted view,

said the Tibetan spiritual leader, accusing China of ”deliberately seeking to eliminate Tibetan people, culture and religion.” “In such a difficult period,” he added, “receiving your sympathy and feeling it passed from heart to heart encourages me and makes me happy.”

On Monday, during the citizenship ceremony in Rome, His Holiness said that “this honor of becoming a citizen of Rome is a further encouragement for me to support non-violent action. I will remain committed to non-violence to my dying day.” “I believe that the Tibetan people,” he added, “knowing that I am here in Rome to receive this honorary citizenship, will feel less alone and know that they have not been abandoned.” In welcoming the Dalai Lama to city hall, Rome Mayor Gianni Alemanno said: ”Your presence here is our moral revolt against injustice, violence and oppression. A moral revolt in favor of the identity of a people and the right of each and every one of us to express their won spirituality and culture.”

'I love President George W Bush'

Terrorists are “very brilliant and educated,” the Dalai Lama said yesterday delivering the Madhavrao Scindia Memorial Lecture in New Delhi, “but a strong ill feeling is bred in them. Their minds are closed.” That’s why, he added, “it is difficult to deal with terrorism through non-violence.” 

Those words, uttered in a moment of the highest international tension because of the events in Gaza, may sound very meaningful to them who have ears to hear.

On the same occasion, the Dalai Lama had also kind words for the outgoing President of the U.S., George W Bush: “I love President George W Bush,” he said leaving the audience stunned and recalling how he and the US President instantly struck a chord in their first meeting. “I told him ‘I love you but some of your policies I oppose’,” he added.

What shall I say? I wonder if the Tibetan spiritual leader could have ever spoken more highly of one of the most hated world leaders in history. My answer is, “probably not.” And I think I know why, as well as President-elect Barack Obama, who said last Friday on CNN that George W. Bush is a good guy. “If you look at my statements throughout the campaign, I always thought he was a good guy, I mean, I think personally he is a good man who loves his family and loves his country. And I think he made the best decisions that he could at times under some very difficult circumstances.”

Well, if these are the premises, I think history will be fair to George W. Bush.

How to be intellectually (dis)honest about Tibet

David Gosset, director of the Academia Sinica Europaea at China Europe International Business School, Shanghai, in today’s Asia Times:

The expression “cultural genocide”—which has been used by the Dalai Lama himself—is supposed to describe the present conditions in the Tibet Autonomous Region is absurd and carries some baseless accusations which can not be conducive to harmony.

This is probably one of the worst ways to deal with the Tibetan issue, either in logical and in “ethical” sense. Why a struggle for freedom should first and foremost be “conducive to harmony?” In fact, politically speaking, that is apart from religion and philosophy, harmony could be regarded as the outcome of freedom, not as an end in itself—and in his piece David Gosset insists that “as the head of the Tibetan ‘government-in-exile’ in Dharamsala, India, the Dalai Lama is a political figure with a political agenda,” and that “pretending that the Dalai Lama is purely a spiritual leader is deceptive and illusory.”

Tibet is currently changing rapidly but this change does not equate with “cultural genocide”. In fact, the region is going through a process of socio-economic modernization which benefits the majority of the population.

Which “majority of the population” are we talking about? The majority of people of the Han ethnic group—the main ethnic group in China—which has been settled in Tibet making Tibetans themselves a minority in their own land?

This process is far from perfect but does allow the Tibetans within the PRC to reinterpret their tradition and to preserve the best of their culture.

Have Chinese ever asked Tibetans whether and how they want to reinterpret their tradition, and so on?

Dealing firmly with China

The Dalai Lama is in Europe. On Monday, during his visit to Prague—where he met his long-time friend Vaclav Havel, the former Czech President, as well as Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek—, he called on the world to stand firm when dealing with China. “I’m always telling my friends that a good, a close relationship with a huge country like China is very essential, and not only for the economy,” he said. “But in the meantime, there are principles, like freedom of expression, human rights, democracy... for which you have to stand firm. Genuine friendship leaves a space to be firm, and at the end the other does appreciate (that),” he added.

His Holiness will address the European Parliament in Brussels on December 4 and will have a meeting with French President Sarkozy on December 6 in Gdansk, Poland.

Well, what would be an appropriate outcome of this European tour? What about if “the European Union designate as soon as possible a high profile European Emissary to help resolve the issue of Tibet and put an end to tensions between China and Europe around Tibetan issues?” That is what the International Campaign for Tibet (ICT) asks the European Union to do.

It would be a miracle if that were to happen, but, well, who knows?

Sex spells trouble, my friends ...

Sexual pressure, sexual desire, actually I think is short period satisfaction and often, that leads to more complication.
[…]
Naturally as a human being ... some kind of desire for sex comes, but then you use human intelligence to make comprehension that those couples always full of trouble. And in some cases there is suicide, murder cases.

Don’t worry, my dear secularist readers, it was not the Pope who said this. It was Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai Lama.