Thirty odd years for nothing?

Born in Angoulême, France, Claude Arpi's real quest began 36 years ago with a journey to the Himalayas. Since then he has been an enthusiastic student of the history of Tibet, China and the subcontinent. He is the author of numerous English and French books including. His book, ‘Tibet: the lost Frontier’ (Lancers Publishers) was released recently.

Sometime in November 1978, Gyalo Thondup, the Dalai Lama’s elder brother arrived without warning in Kanpur where his brother was giving a religious teaching. The Dalai Lama remembered: “To my surprise, he announced that he had heard through some old and trusted friends of his in Hong Kong that Xinhua [New Agency] wanted to make contact with him.” Thondup wanted the permission to go ahead. The Dalai Lama was thoughtful. As he wrote later: “The developments of the past two years all looked very promising [after Mao’s demise]; however, as the ancient Indian saying goes, when you have once been bitten by a snake, you become cautious even of rope.”

Nevertheless Thondup got the green light. During the following five or six weeks, he met several times with Li Ju-sheng, who, although certainly not a journalist, was designated as ‘Xinhua Director No. 2’ in the then British colony.

At the beginning, Gyalo Thondup did not know that Li was a close associate of Deng Xiao-ping (who had closely watched his intelligence work in Indonesia in the 1960’s). After a few meetings, Li recommended to his boss to invite Thondup to Beijing to discuss the situation in Tibet.

China: What after the Games?

The meeting between the new supreme leader of the People’s Republic of China and the Dalai Lama’s brother took place in Beijing in February 1979 (around the time the Indian Foreign Minister Vajpayee was visiting China). Immediately, Deng told Thondup that he would like to invite the refugees in India to return to Tibet: “It is better to see once than to hear a hundred times”.

It is during this encounter with Gyalo Thondup that Deng Xiaoping said: “The door is opened for negotiations as long as we don’t speak about independence. Everything else is negotiable.”

Hence, 20 years after they had fled their native land in the most dramatic conditions, three fact-finding delegations were sent by the Dalai Lama in 1979 and 1980 to visit Tibet.

Let us not forget the Dalai Lama’s situation who, followed by 85,000 of his countrymen, had taken refuge in India. As he reached the Indian border near Tawang in March 1959, he was given asylum by the Nehru government with the condition that he would not indulge ‘in politics’ on the Indian soil. From then on, his hands were tightly bound.

Tibet keeps alive true spirit of the Games

On March 10 1973, in an annual Statement, the Tibetan leader clearly outlined his main concern, the happiness of 6 million Tibetans: “If the Tibetans in Tibet are truly happy under Chinese rule then there is no reason for us here in exile to argue otherwise.” This would remain the guiding principle of his policy during the following decades.

After having written a long personnel letter to Deng Xiaoping in 1981, in-depth discussions were held in 1982 and 1984 in Beijing between the Dalai Lama’s representatives and Chinese officials. Unfortunately with no tangible progress! The Chinese only wanted to discuss the status of the Dalai Lama and his future role, in case he came back to the ‘motherland’. This was not acceptable to the Dalai Lama who wanted to ‘negotiate’ the fate of his countrymen, not his own future. For Beijing, the status of Tibet has been fixed once and for all in 1951, when a Seventeen Point Agreement for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet was signed (under duress, say the Tibetans).

Earlier this month, when the Dalai Lama’s Envoys met Du Qinglin, the vice-chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, the latter said that the Dalai Lama “should respect history, face reality and conform to the times, as well as fundamentally change his political propositions.”

It is not really clear what is meant by ‘change his political propositions’, but ‘face reality’ probably signifies that regarding Tibet’s status even a small degree of autonomy (guaranteed in the Chinese Constitution but never implemented) is not negotiable. According to Xinhua, Du made clear: “Concerning the fundamental issue of safeguarding national unification and territorial integrity, not the slightest wavering or departure would be allowed, noting that no ‘Tibet independence’, ‘half independence’ or ‘covert independence’ would be tolerated.” In other words, no discussion on ‘a meaningful or genuine’ autonomy!

Claude Arpi Columns

Strangely, the same words were used by the Chinese when the Dalai Lama presented his Strasbourg Proposal in June 1988. To the consternation of many, the Tibetan leader decided to surrender the independence of his country and resign himself to obtaining a genuine autonomy.

On that day of June 1988, in front of the European Parliament in Strasbourg, he made a huge compromise by renouncing ‘independence’, a dream cherished by millions of his countrymen, and accepted to settle for ‘autonomy’ within the People’s Republic of China.

Confronted with ‘vast seas’ of Chinese migrants who “threaten the very existence of the Tibetans as a distinct people”, the Tibetan leader had crossed the Rubicon and formalized his ‘Middle-Path’ approach.

India to mark entry on moon on Friday

For the past 20 years, the Tibetans, especially the younger generation, are torn between their aspiration for freedom and their love for their leader.

A few weeks before the visit of his Tibetan Envoys to China, addressing a large audience at the annual Foundation Day of the Tibetan Children Village in Dharamsala, the Dalai Lama surprised many when he declared that he had ‘given up’ on China: “It's difficult to talk to those who don't believe in truth [the Chinese]. I have clearly mentioned that I still have faith in the Chinese people, but my faith in the Chinese government is thinning.” He added that despite sincerely pursuing the mutually beneficial Middle-Way policy in dealing with China, there was no positive response from Beijing.

Like thirty years ago, the Tibetan leader asserted: “The issue at hand is the welfare of the Tibetan people and is not about my personal status and affairs.”

Probably sensing the tensions within the Tibetan community between the pros and cons ‘Middle Path’ and considering the ‘serious situation inside Tibet’, the Dalai Lama called for a ‘Special Meeting’ with old and present Cabinet Ministers, current and former members of the Tibetan Parliament in Exile, government officials, Tibetan NGOs, and intellectuals to deliberate between November 17 to 22 in Dharamsala on Tibet’s future and its relation with China.

There is of course the danger of Tibetans tearing themselves apart; many want ‘independence’ while others feel that to go against the Middle Path is to go against the Dalai Lama. At the same time, the Tibetan leader has asked his people to come out with their own solution to the cul-de-sac.

For Beijing also the situation is not that simple. Paradoxically, the Chinese leadership needs to hold the ‘talks’ to show the world that they are serious about sorting out the issue. The dissident Wang Lixiong analyzed: “Beijing sees the talks as an end in themselves. They do not need any resolution, and do not want any resolution, just the process is enough. From the start, their objective was to prolong the process as long as possible.”

A catch 22 situation for everybody!

The views expressed in the article are of the author’s and not of Sify.com.

SEARCH