Jun 21

Dalai Lama tries speaking to the Chinese

Written by Buxi on Saturday, June 21st, 2008 at 7:49 am
Filed under:Analysis, Environment, General | Tags:,
Add comments

If there’s one thing we’ve consistently criticized here, it’s that the Dalai Lama (and “clique”) has largely failed to reach out to the Chinese people directly. For every interview he provides to the Chinese-language press, it seems he’s done fifty for foreign language press. And even when he makes an attempt to speak to the Chinese (as with an open letter released earlier this year), his ignorance and lack of familiarity shows through.

But he is at least making an active effort to change this. He has met with individual Chinese in the United States and Germany in recent months. And in his just completed trip through Australia, he met with the Chinese-language press, and also hosted an open Q&A session targeted at overseas Chinese. (Unfortunately the session was organized with a dissident group with links to the FLG… but that’s not the point here.)

Here’s what he had to say in Australia, courtesy of the International Campaign for Tibet (原文):

Dalai Lama: … Problems related to Tibet must absolutely be resolved between the Han and Tibetan races, no one else can deal with this type of problem. And precisely because of that, the Chinese, the Han in inland China, you must understand the real situation, this is very important.

So, what is the real situation in his opinion? Read on for more.

Dalai Lama: I’m very happy, very fortunate to have this opportunity to be in contact with the Chinese media. Speaking as a Buddhist disciple, we all know that that history of Buddhist teachings in China predates Tibetan history, so the students of Buddhism in China are really our elders. And I’ve also occasionally run into some believers from the mainland, and many desperately hope that I can return to spread teachings; some even shed tears as they made this request.

Unfortunately, the media is limited in China, so there’s no way to share the real situation with everybody. This is why it’s even more important that overseas Chinese learn the truth. So, I am very enthusiastic about meeting with Chinese, and I’m very happy about this opportunity.

First, let me make clear one thing. I absolutely am not against the Chinese (huaren), I’m not against the Han (hanren), I absolutely don’t have that in mind. I’m not against China, I’m not anti-Chinese. Second, I completely support the Olympics. Third, I even made the call: please do not interfere with the Olympic torch relay.

Because of recent events, some people have come to the conclusion that I’m anti-Chinese, and I’m absolutely not. After the events of 3/14, no matter where I go, protesters are following me. Chinese protesters, Han protesters. They believe, and perhaps in their hearts they truly believe, that I’m anti-Chinese, I’m against the Olympics. But my response has been a very positive, very benevolent. Even so, they say that I am lying, they want me to stop my lies. Ok, that’s fine, whatever.

Well, that’s quite an expression of love from the Dalai Lama. But as we’ve said, we’re dealing with him as a politician… so enough platitudes, on to the real stuff.

Xinhua (?) reporter: First, let me say I deeply respect you. During the Olympic Torch relay, everyone saw the turmoil, the grabbing of the torch. The Dalai Lama believes this has nothing to do with him, but the Chinese government believes it is related to you. Others have said the Tibetan Youth Congress is using the Olympics as an opportunity to internationalize and expand the Tibet problem. So, in this kind of situation, do you believe the Tibetan Youth Congress has responsibility for this? Thank you.

Dalai Lama: Since March 10th, I’ve made three different appeals. The first to the Chinese world-wide, the second to the people in Tibetan areas, and third to the Chinese world-wide with an emphasis on Buddhists within China. I said to them, from the very beginning I’ve completely supported the Olympics. Why? The primary reason is because, in a country of this size, the opportunity to host the Olympics is something they feel very fortunate about, are proud of. I respect their thinking, and I am determined to support the Olympics. This is what I’ve said in the beginning.

Is that really the case? Even on the Tibet Central Government Authority website, it describes an interview from the Dalai Lama on Jan 23rd. When asked if Tibet groups should protest the Olympics, he said “that they could remind the international community, including the Chinese people about the repression and urgency of the situation in Tibet“.

Is he insulting our intelligence? Is that really proof of his “determination” to support the Olympics? Perhaps a lawyer could defend his words when interpreted strictly: he’s not against the Olympics being held in Beijing… but to the rest of us, his words are clear confirmation that he supported politicizing the Torch and the Olympics, and that he advocated protest from activist groups.

UPDATE: One of our readers, chorasmian, also brought this article from April to our attention; it quotes Lodi Gyari, the Dalai Lama’s personal envoy to the United States (and one of the negotiators in Shenzhen), as saying: the IOC “should tell China, ‘Look. That stretch of relay through Tibet needs to be cancelled.’

Dalai Lama’s answer continued from above
Later on, in London, in Paris there were attempts on the torch. Before the torch made it to San Francisco, I already privately wrote letters to Tibetans in the area, saying, please don’t interfere with the torch relay. I appealed to them. But based on what I saw on BBC, the people grabbing at the torch in London, unless they’ve had plastic surgery, aren’t Tibetans, they’re foreigners.

Again, I have to ask. Is he insulting our intelligence? He might be right about London, but surely he’s also seen the footage from Paris. Unless they’ve had plastic surgery, those attacking Jin Jing were Tibetans, not foreigners.

Dalai Lama’s answer continued from above
We completely believe in democracy, so we don’t have the right to tell them to shut their mouth. I can’t say this, I really have no way to tell them to shut their mouth, because we are determined to believe in freedom of thought, freedom of speech, and this can’t be controlled. All I can do is explain what’s good and what’s bad; you don’t have to listen to me, that’s your freedom, your decision. But because I have this moral responsibility, so I have to make it clear to you, I have to explain it to you.

Xinhua reporter: Do you really have no influence over the protesters? Do you really have no influence over the Tibetan Youth Congress?

Dalai Lama: Let me give you an example. Recently, some Tibetan Youth Congress are trying to peacefully march to the China-India border. In response to this, I called the leadership, and I discussed with them; if you walk over like this, it’s not good for anyone, because there might be some violent actions at the border, so I recommend that you don’t do this. Besides, the Indian government really dislikes this, and of course China dislikes it, so basically everyone’s agreed: please don’t do this. They listened at first, but then they still marched. What else can I do? I have no way of making them shut up.

Xinhua reporter: Do you really have no way of controlling them?

Dalai Lama: I have no way of controlling them. On this planet, the only one that can control a billion people are the Chinese government; we don’t have that ability.

Did you like that little dig at the Chinese government at the end? It seems like a perfectly reasonable explanation, over all. He’s powerless, these protests are all spontaneous and completely out of his control. And then you read this in a statement issued on May 21st by his Central Tibetan Administration:

In order to express our solidarity with the great natural disaster that befell on China, Tibetans across the world should shun staging demonstrations in front of the Chinese embassies in the respective host countries they live in at least for until about the end of May, this year.

Not so surprisingly, the almost regular protests in front of Chinese embassies disappeared for about 2 weeks. The almost constant waves of Tibetans protesting in Nepal, for example, dissipated over night… only to return at the end of May. These are not the words of a spiritual leader giving moral advice, these are the words of a political leader giving orders to his followers. If he treated the Olympics as seriously as he treated the Shugden issue, I doubt many of his followers would be ignoring his advice so easily.

Let’s continue with his interview session in Australia:

New Era reporter: And what kind of autonomy are you looking for?

Dalai Lama: What kind of autonomy am I looking for? Foreign policy and defense as responsibilities of the central government. But Tibetans have the right to manage education, culture, and religion, etc. Of course, all of this must be based on the Chinese constitution, as well as rights described for minorities within the government’s white paper. I believe details must be discussed.

New Era reporter: You’re putting in a lot of effort to speak with China, do you believe there’s hope?

Dalai Lama: I believe there is hope, and am making an effort at progress in this direction. If you look at the past 60 years, the last four generations of Chinese leadership has given us different changes. During the Mao Zedong era, the most important emphasis was on ideology. During the Deng Xiaoping era, the emphasis was on economics, and this has led to dramatic changes. Gradually, there became wealthy people in China, and from that point on the Communist Party didn’t belong exclusively to the worker class. In the Jiang Zemin era, the “Three Represents” was proposed, which basically said the Communist Party no longer only represented the working class, but also had to represent the relatively wealthy. Now, during the Hu Jintao era, the growing wealth gap, as well as the growing gap in living standards between coastal and inland areas, implies that more attention must be spent taking care of the weaker groups in society. This is why now, the emphasis is on harmony (和谐) and unity. So, we can see that throughout history, the Chinese leadership has made tremendous changes in policy as the situation changed. This is the primary reason I maintain hope and optimism.

And after 3/10, a number of scholars and professors within China have expressed a voice different from the government through their writings. This also gives me hope.

I think the Dalai Lama shows an insightful understanding here of the Chinese government, so that’s certainly a welcome thing. He’s said in the past he thought dissident voices in China might force political changes, but I don’t recall him speaking favorably or optimistically of the Chinese government itself.

… followed is a leading question from a Chinese dissident based in Japan, about inviting the Dalai Lama to speak to Chinese in Japan …

Dalai Lama: Last year, in Vancouver Canada, I saw that local Tibetans and Chinese had established a friendship association. I thought this was an excellent example, and we should all learn from them. After March 10th when I went to the United States, I also said to local Tibetans, we must take the first step and maintain friendly relationships with Han in the area, using Canada as an example. And during every Tibetan celebration, we should invite these comrades from the Party and non-Party friends, and have them join us and learn from each other. During Chinese holidays, we should also join them, and establish a friendly relationship like that between brothers. This way, when problems erupt, we won’t be filled with suspicion.

From my side, I’m ready to meet with local Chinese any time and anywhere. Because I have consistently maintained thought: and that’s great unity between Han and Tibetan. Great unity doesn’t come from calling out slogans, but actual contact between people.

Well, I certainly welcome the spirit of what he’s saying; regardless of what happens to the Dalai Lama, greater Han/Tibetan unity should always be embraced. However, he will find though that the local Chinese remain very skeptical of his mixed answers.

EDIT: Removed the Chinese response, and added it as a comment below.

All in all, it’s a mixed bag. On the negative side, the Dalai Lama continues to evade his involvement in the Olympic protests and his influence over Tibetan protests in exile, while painting himself as a committed friend of all Han and Chinese. On the positive side, he’s trying to reach out to the Chinese people, and also shows signs of having a better understanding of the government in Beijing.

That’s not the end of the story. The Kalon Tripa (head of the Central Tibetan Administration) issued a press release during the Dalai Lama’s visit to Australia, and it gives us a clue into where their new negotiating position lies.

First, on the good side, for the first time I personally have ever seen it, they claim their form of autonomy is limited to exactly what the Chinese constitution promises minorities. The press release includes a very detailed analysis of the Chinese constitution and its provisions for minority autonomy.

If these provisions of constitution and autonomy law are implemented in true spirit it will ensure the welfare of Tibetan people and the protection of Tibet’s unique culture, religion, tradition and language. It will further enable Tibetans to perform their universal responsibility.

In my mind, this is progress. I’ve said before that if the lamas protesting in Tibetan areas had been holding up copies of our Chinese constitution, demanding the rights legally promised them, it would have changed the entire complexion of the conflict. I’m not naive enough to believe Beijing would agree overnight, but at least many Chinese would sympathize.

However, on the negative side, it makes an ideological claim about Tibetans that I personally don’t understand and could not possibly support:

All Tibetans lived together on the Tibetan plateau since time immemorial, sharing the same religion, culture, language, customs, geographical location and livelihood, and if the PRC truly accepts Tibetan nationality as one of the 55 minority nationalities of China as they already claim, one cannot divide them into different parts or designate them into inner or outer region and smaller or greater. It is essential to implement self-rule provided under the provisions of national regional autonomy to all Tibetans.

Though Chinese side has unleashed massive propaganda to project that His Holiness the Dalai Lama is demanding a “greater Tibet” and “high degree autonomy”, but in reality Tibetans are one single nationality and it cannot be divided into greater or smaller parts.

Even if Tibetans are a dominant and isolated majority in central Tibet, that has never been the case in eastern Tibet. The Dalai Lama is certainly aware of this, having been born into a Chinese-speaking Tibetan family in Qinghai province. Throughout Qinghai/Sichuan/Yunnan, Tibetans have been living alongside non-Tibetans for literally centuries. The idea that “all” Tibetans must now be tied to the same political entity makes no sense, and instead only suggests independence is their real, long-term goal.

I’m still optimistic about the upcoming meetings between the Dalai Lama’s representatives and Beijing. I hope that with more time and compromise, the negative aspects will be thrown away, and we will find enough in common on the positive side for a permanent solution.

There are currently no comments highlighted.

67 Responses to “Dalai Lama tries speaking to the Chinese”

  1. Buxi Says:

    Boy, that’s a long entry.  I wonder if I should’ve split it into two for easier reading?

    Here’s a blog entry (originally above) from one skeptical, and apparently average Chinese emigrant to Australia who actually attended the Dalai Lama’s session in Australia (原贴):

    The Dalai Lama and China can never have a true dialogue, because in contrast to his announced “joint interests”, the Dalai Lama has fundamentally set the interests of Tibetans and Han against each other. The Dalai Lama has been unrestrained in looking to expand the interests of Tibetans as a whole, and correspondingly expand his personal political advantages. But the ultimate result of this process, both strategically and economically, and emotionally, is completely unacceptable for all Chinese (Han and other minorities). For example, limiting the number of Han in Tibetan areas, limiting the central government’s ability to base troops, and other than politics/foreign affairs, all other power held only by ethnic Tibetans. The Dalai Lama blames the Chinese government for implementing racial segregation, but his proposal is true racial segregation…

    The Dalai Lama’s proposal is to really implement barriers, and put all rights solidly in the hands of Tibetans. This is completely opposite from the Chinese government’s hopes for racial integration, regional security, and national unity. If the Tibetan areas are independent, it will definitely hurt the living room available to all other races. Although the Dalai Lama says he’s in favor of “autonomy and not independence”, but the actual nature of his proposal is clearly separation and independence. His Mandarin is poor and needs a translator, but his English is fluent, why? Because he’s looking for the assistance of foreign forces, because he’s gathering the support of anti-Chinese groups, and English is therefore a critical survival tool.

  2. Leo Says:

    It is always very funny to compare the Dalai statements on one issue on different occasions. My impression is that he is really good at talking about and out of everything, be it history, woman, homosexual, war, non-violence, etc, etc.

  3. flotsam Says:

    Well, you certainly tried hard to knock a few holes in his arguments but didn’t score many [if any], even after all the selective target picking. The impression I get from your writing is that no matter the DL says, it means something else to you, usually something negative. I’m no fan of the DL, or the PRC govt, but if the situation in Tibet is to be resolved, rather than just holding down a lid on it, then all parties need to a little more open and honest. This at least looks like a step in the right direction on the part of the DL. Until a problem is acknowledged it simply isn’t possible to resolve it.

  4. Buxi Says:


    Certainly, everyone’s welcome to their own impressions of what I wrote.  But I will say that I wasn’t trying to “knock holes” in his arguments… mostly because he didn’t really present many arguments in Australia, it was more or less a typical PR appearance, a chance for him to express his feelings and little else. 

    Do you realize how many Chinese still refer to him as Da-Liar Lama?  Many.  Many, many, many.  These PR appearances won’t increase his personal standing amongst most Chinese as long as he continues to lie about his involvement in and influence over Tibetan protests.

    But I too came away an optimistic conclusion from what the Central Tibetan Administration actually proposed.  Like I said, an emphasis on what the Chinese constitution promises is absolutely a step in the right direction. 

  5. Karma Says:

    I say wait for the next reincarnation.  Unlike you Buxi, I have no hope for this DL.

  6. homer Says:

    Do you realize how many Chinese still refer to him as Da-Liar Lama? Many. Many, many, many.

    gosh.. you should realy try to get some news from Tibet. by yourself. it will be funny to see you trying this one. and then try to tell those news inside of China. i see you failing and be blamed as a liar longnouse. LIAR and that by MANY CHINESE, MANY, MANY..

  7. EugeneZ Says:

    Thanks for the compilation of the Dalai Lama’s recent activities and comments.  This blog has become a very good source of information about the latest on the Tibetan issues, especially these days this topic is of low visibility in the western media. 

    Regarding the Dalai Lama’s role in protests, I remember that two days after the riots, at the time I was fixated on the TV news related to the rioting, DL gave a  press conference. He speficially said that he got a call from protesters in Tibet who pleaded that he not ask them to stop the protest/riot, and he said that he granted arrpoval for the request because he did not want them to stop.  To me, he was using the press conference to deliver a very clear message to the protesters in Tibet to continue whatever they were doing – protesting, rioting, burninging, exploding, and killing of innocent civilians.  And surely enough, the riots continued in many Tibetan areas in Gansu/SIchuan for several more weeks.

    This is just one example, I am sure there are many more.  For people like @FORP to doubt if there is any evidence of DL’s involvement in fanning protests is a show of ignorance, or perhaps intellectual laziness.


  8. JL Says:

    Thanks again Buxi for a thoughtful post. Regarding the ‘greater Tibet’ issue, I have some trouble understanding what the problem is, given that the Tibetan areas outside the TAR, are already “Tibetan Autonomous Prefectures 州” within the current political system -and have been since the beginning of the PRC. Surely it is only logical that if any more autonomy were granted to the TAR, the same (or similar) might also apply to the TAPs -given that the tangible autonomy enjoyed by the TAPs is roughly the same as that enjoyed by the TAR. @EugeneZ, regarding intellectual laziness, yes it’s a serious problem, and for this reason I am particularly full of admiration for people such as Yu Maochun (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/JF11Ad01.html ) who have been intellectually rigourous enough to not only to think critically about the DL, but also about the Chinese leadership. I recognise that Wen is extremely popular in China right now, but nothing is gained by not questioning the motivations and actions of all politicians involved in a particular issue.

  9. AC Says:


    Having had the chance to witness Soviet Union’s collapse and what Russia went through after that, Mr. Yu still thinks Zhao Ziyang is a visionary. OMG, that’s not independent thinking, that’s stubbornness! If you want to know what China would have been like if Zhao Ziyang got his way, just look at India.

  10. Nimrod Says:

    Buxi, this “call to jihad” video from Jan. 8, 2008 is a very important one. (Maybe this should be in the main post.) How anyone can still believe the March protests were “spontaneous” is beyond me. I also have great trouble believing the Dalai Lama knows nothing about this being organized by basically all the organizations (incl. TYC) in Dharamsala.


    Let me just quote something from it:

    Now it is time for Tibetans everywhere to rise up. In the spirit of the 1959 Tibetan National Uprising (Edit: and what spirit was that?) we must rise up and resist and bring about an even greater Uprising. An Uprising that will shake the Chinese government to its core.

    Those who can walk shall join the March to Tibet. Those with money shall support the movement. In short, whatever resources you have — skills, experience, wealth, courage — this is the time to bring it to the table and make a real impact on our struggle.

  11. Buxi Says:


    Now it is time for Tibetans everywhere to rise up. In the spirit of the 1959 Tibetan National Uprising (Edit: and what spirit was that?) we must rise up and resist and bring about an even greater Uprising. An Uprising that will shake the Chinese government to its core.

    Great video.  I’ve seen it mentioned in the Chinese press, but never really watched it in full.  Maybe you can do a blog post with the transcript…?  I don’t know if I’ve seen it elsewhere.  I’ve heard (through postings on Woeser’s blog) that while some Tibetans rioters were rampaging through Lhasa, they were screaming that they were reincarnations of those killed in the uprising in 1959.


    Ironically, I just read an essay by a hard-core leftist in China, calling for a new proletariat revolution (seriously) against the revisionists who had corrupted the Communist Party.  He also blamed the leadership (not in so many words) of trying to trick the people with tears.

    Whatever.  Wen Jiabao isn’t being criticized for crying, he’s being criticized for being in power.  If he never shed a tear in Wenchuan, “enemies” of the Chinese government would’ve likely blamed him for being so cruel.

    I personally think the Chinese propaganda arms over-played the “evidence” they had by claiming that they had proof Dalai clique was clearly behind the riots.  I believe the Dalai Lama and exile groups he influences were direct political inspirations for the riots, and I believe their political propaganda after the riots helped fan irrational international anti-China rhetoric, and I believe individual monks returning from exile probably helped spread the message… but I personally don’t believe there was a vast conspiracy directly orchestrated from India.  The way Chinese propaganda made it sound, there were battle plans and instruction manuals from India… but I don’t think that’s the case.

  12. Nimrod Says:

    Buxi wrote

    but I personally don’t believe there was a vast conspiracy directly orchestrated from India.  The way Chinese propaganda made it sound, there were battle plans and instruction manuals from

    It’s hard to say, really. In the aftermath, we hear Dharamsala claim they had communication with people in Tibet to figure out where the riots were and who were allegedly killed. While I think most such claims are preposterous logically speaking, I can’t rule out that some people had some direct communication with people rioting.

    Speaking of battle plans and instruction manuals, where did all the snow-lion flags come from, for example? Even if they made them locally, it still needed prior planning. And let’s not forget one of the motifs (there were a few) that recurred in all the organized riots: taking down the PRC flag and replacing it with the snow-lion flag. This happened in China as well as at overseas embassies. And coordinated slogans.

    …Think about the effort the Chinese in the US put into going to protest in SF on short notice — the Chinese in the Bay Area had the benefit of several existing organizations and the best minds and communications technology. From what I can see, the riots in Tibet, Gansu, Sichuan areas took at least that much planning effort.

  13. abc Says:

    I wonder why the Tibetan people still unquestioningly revere the Dalai Lama. After 50 years he has done nothing for them except cause trouble and perpetuate his superstitious nonsense. Everyone else in the world is wanting to learn to speak Chinese but the Tibetans resist. So backward, I just can’t understand this mentality.

  14. FOARP Says:

    @ABC- Try taking what you have just written and turning it on its head – what reasons might make the idea of Tibetan independence more attractive than continued rule from Beijing?

  15. Leo Says:


    For those who really believe, he is the “one” who has the control over “reincarnation”/”good or bad next life”. Tibetan Plateau is not a very friendly place and people put a lot of weight on this belief. For average Tibetan, he is the one who gives the West an unbelieveable positive image of the Tibetans. It is due to him that the rich big-nose think them as peaceful, wise, spiritual, almost saint-like, and donate them money, and favor them over the Han Chinese, which, of course, makes them feel very proud, lucky, and empowered.

    A lot of Tibetan nationalists have an almost unshakeable faith in the US world dominance. Melvey Goldstein told such a anecdote: when he visited a monastary in Tibet, a senior monk grabbed him aside and asked him when the US troops would march in. Goldstein told him honestly that it was almost impossible as China was not a small country people could easily deal with. The monk immediately called him a liar. 2003 when the US marched into Bagdad, Tibetan exiles also marched to White House to demand an invasion of China.

    Before 3.14 I read a petition by a Tibetan that a lot of young returnees from Dharamsala can only speak English, not Chinese, and that Beijing government should provide them more English-friendly jobs. I was really amused by the idea.

  16. Otto Kerner Says:

    Personally, I think that the Olympics should be politicized every time, regardless of what country they are in. Or rather, the Olympics are always politicized to begin with — the only question is whether any message other than the status quo will be heard. This doesn’t mean that the games should be disrupted or cancelled; I think everybody should leave the athletes alone and let them compete. But all of the ridiculous parades and assorted frou-frah surrounding the events are fair game.

  17. yo Says:

    Nimrod, Buxi,
    I would also like to add 2 things:

    1.  IMO, the Dali Lama’s crew, if you will, are not homogeneous as you think.  I believe there are differences between the “plans” that the DL wants to carry out vs say TYC, or whatever group.  For me, it’s really tough to say how much influence DL has over other groups in a planning and strategic sense.  Even though Buxi said that DL is just being a politician for supporting the Olympics and urging people not to attack the torch(“shaking my hand while peeing on my leg”), I believe that this type of talk is quite demoralizing/disillusioning to camps within Dharmsala who favor a more radical approach, and I think it important to note the political ramifications within his “own camp”.

    2.  IMO, I strongly question the premise that Chinese efforts of being “big brother” were so effective that Tibet can be “sealed off” from say the exiles groups(I didn’t see it made here but the premise is used elsewhere).  People have cell phones, internet, people from Dharmsala, for whatever reason can go back into China.  Nimrod, yes, I feel there was planning, and logistics wise, it’s not that hard, even with counter measures in place.  However, the extent of the planning is quite unknown. 

  18. JL Says:


    I wasn’t really saying that I either agree or disagree with any specific critique of Wen Jiabao; to be honest I don’t know enough about his career to make one.  I was just saying that I think it’s important to adopt a critical attitude towards all politicians in a particular scenario. You’ve spent a lot of space criticizing the DL . Fair enough. But what about thinking about who the Chinese leaders are in Tibet? Who is the chairman of the province? What’s his record like? What successes has he had and what mistakes has he made (and there isn’t a political leader who doesn’t make them)? And, yes, what about the policy of the central government, what are their successes and mistakes? And yes, I know that sophisticated Chinese people do criticize their government, but how about an examination of their government’s Tibet policy. Maybe there have been loads, in which case, perhaps you could link to one, as I for one would be interested to read it.

    Perhaps this is why a lot of Tibetan people find it difficult to relate to Chinese patriotism. The man they revere is always being castigated, whereas seldom is there the same level of critical analysis directed towards the Chinese leadership ‘s Tibet policy.

    Thanks, again.

  19. FOARP Says:

    @Yo – The existance of any collusion has not been shown – all this stuff about ‘where did the flags etc. come from?’ is rather silly. Is it that hard to sew a flag? Given the way that many visitors to Tibet report being hassled for pictures of the DL it’s not surprising that people should have got hold of pictures. Basically, these riots appear to have spasmodic and showed no sign of co-ordination. Why is it so hard to accept that these riots could have happened in the same way that most such riots do – heavy-handed policing followed by a backlash.

  20. Leo Says:


    Because in the areas where the most riots happened, such as Qinghai or Western Sichuan, you often could not spot a single soldier, policman, or Han Chinese over a hundred kilometers. There was not much policing. And Qinghai and Western Sichuan were often accredited by the exile Tibetans as very liberal.

  21. Nimrod Says:

    FOARP, yo,

    Let me sketch a possible scenario — see if it’s reasonable.

    The government-in-exile has long ago realized that they wanted to do something using the Olympics. This includes organizing protests everywhere, arranging for the DL to go globe-trotting at the right time, pressuring the heads of state to make gestures, as well as contacting monks in certain monasteries inside China to get a reaction on this particular March 10, the so-called “uprising day” anniversary and drive out the Han in the so-called Greater Tibet. The DL may not have drawn up the plan personally, but he knew perfectly well this would be going on, because he is in this plan.

    Why do I say these were premeditated? Because you can see elements of all this in that January jihad video that I posted. The politicking in Dharamsala may have been: DL says, TYC you go make some trouble, then I’ll use my peace-man image to get talks and concessions.

    Now, while what happened inside China was obviously planned, I do think the details were subcontracted to the cells already there, so Dharamsala may have been slightly surprised at how things unfolded … that’s plausible. Nevertheless, the monks that protested on March 10 knew exactly what they were doing — get a reaction. Many on the streets rioting on March 14 may not, but they were led by ringleaders who also knew what they were doing — taking the agitated crowds from Han shop to Han shop, methodically burning them and destroying their contents, but leaving aside the Tibetan shops and houses that were marked ahead of time.

  22. opersai Says:

    “I also have great trouble believing the Dalai Lama knows nothing about this being organized by basically all the organizations (incl. TYC) in Dharamsala.”

    This had happened before. Dalai Lama had a history of denying obvious evidence. I watched the Swiss TV filmed documentary on Dalai Lama’s crackdown on Dorje Shugden. In the video, you can see clearly the hypocrisy of Dalai Lama as the contradictions appeared. In the video, while the major paper of the exile community publish advertisement such as below to call on harm the practioners of Dorje Shugden, wanted posters with all details of the practioners, other Tibetans openly cast the practioners out of community with isolation and threat, Dalai Lama denies his acknowledgment of all of this completely. All this happened under this noise.

    Advertisement from the video:
    “Anyone who’s against Dalai Lama must be oppose without any hesitation with man, money and possessions. That is to say, by all means, including violence.”


  23. opersai Says:

    Also @Nimrod:

    What you said remind me. I had read an article from ESWN of a Phoenix TV reporter blogging on her person blog of some material she could not publish on TV because the interviewed didn’t want to appear on TV. There I remember reading about locals tell there were strange marks on the Han shops prior the riot, and see a few photos of those strange marks – since most of them were burned alone with the shops.

    I can’t find that article anymore unfortunately, let’s see if I’d have better luck later.

  24. yo Says:

    FOARP, Nimrod,

    FOARP, you are echoing my point that it’s very doable to coordinate these things because the effectiveness of the “big brother” facade in China is exaggerated.  You probably got confused with Nimrod’s post because he was the one who mentioned the flag, which I would say is quite easy to bring in as well.

    I agree with Nimrod and IMO, the evidence speaks for itself  that there are signs of coordination.   however, I would say the extent of coordination is not yet known.  Are we talking about sleeper cells, are we talking about some people calling each other up to plan the uprisings within China, was it like a flash mob(like the T-mobile sidekick commercial if you will).

    “Why is it so hard to accept …” 
    I could do what you do to others and ask you the opposite.  But I’m not going to.  I looked at the facts, and came to my views.  You probably did the same to reach your opinions.  My agreeing or disagreeing with you has absolutely no consequence to you, and vice verse.

  25. yo Says:


    You must be talking about this article:

  26. snow Says:


    Thanks for the video source. It was virtually a war declaration! How could the world media be so blind to see it in this light. How could anyone deny the connection between the DL/ his followers overseas and the 3.14 Lahsa riots after seeing this video! an interview conducted by a Hong Kong based TV station to a lama in Tibet on Sat. also confirmed that VOA in Tibetan language had also heavily broadcast calling for uprising shortly before the riots happened.  

    I believe that there has been an intentional oversight in regard to what really happened before and during the riots in the world media’s reporting. Condemning CCP for its heavy-handed crackdown is always a “politically correct” line for them to follow no matter what really happened.

  27. S.K. Cheung Says:

    To Nimrod:
    “Nevertheless, the monks that protested on March 10 knew exactly what they were doing — get a reaction” – but of course that’s the plan.  Who plans to protest with a goal of drawing no reaction…and hence no attention?

  28. Buxi Says:

    S.K. Cheung,

    Who plans to protest with a goal of drawing no reaction…and hence no attention?

    Well, there you go. We agree with you. But some Tibetans in exile would insist argue that everything that happened in March was entirely spontaneous, an unplanned outpouring of resentment by people that had “had enough”.

    The truth is somewhere in between. A planned campaign by people who wanted a reaction, which then escalated due to underlying discontent.

  29. yo Says:

    Well said Buxi. I feel that the truth will probably lie somewhere in between. I think people should look at the entire situation and refrain from cherry picking facts to draw an absolutist conclusions: Yes, this entire thing was orchestrated, no, it was entirely spontaneous etc etc.

  30. S.K. Cheung Says:

    To Buxi:
    “A planned campaign by people who wanted a reaction, which then escalated due to underlying discontent.” – I think this is entirely plausible, as you and Yo suggest. For starters, you couldn’t start a protest in Canada and not draw any attention. I can’t imagine anyone doing so in China with the thought that it would simply be ignored. I didn’t realize that some T.I.E.’s claim everything to be a spontaneous outburst…that seems implausible. So the discussion boils down to how “planned” this campaign was, and which “people” were privy to said planning. This plan could be as small as a couple of monks who decided they would go make a scene, up to and including the TGIE pulling all the strings. The urge in these parts seems to be to link it to the DL, someway, somehow. But clearly there’s no “proof”, otherwise this discussion would have ceased being on the level of conjecture long ago. That it remains so, however, begs the question: why keep speculating about it? For those who buy it, it feeds the frenzy; for those who don’t (admittedly a minority around here), it changes nothing.

  31. Buxi Says:

    The urge in these parts seems to be to link it to the DL, someway, somehow.

    You’re misreading the urge in these parts. No one is talking about it, you’re the one that’s trying to misdirect the conversation.

    I don’t think many Chinese are really concerned whether the Dalai Lama was really “involved” in the planning for these protests; we believe he is, but it’s an irrelevant point… as I said, I think of him as being the Tibetan al-Sadr, his involvement behind the scenes would only be natural, and I honestly don’t believe he wanted to see violence. I’m more concerned with the propaganda the TGIE pumped out in following weeks, and his involvement in supporting protests world-wide against the Olympics while claiming with an innocent face that he’s nothing but a poor monk and a friend of the Chinese people and the Beijing Games. This leaves many of us the clear impression that he’s a politician with very little credibility.

    JL asked above whether we should be asking the same questions of Wen Jiabao, Hu Jintao, and the government in Tibet. I’d say the government in the Tibet Autonomous Region also has very little credibility with me personally; I believe they’ve proven to be relatively incompetent. I would say, however, that Wen Jiabao and Hu Jintao have a great deal of personal credibility with me. They’ve been wrong, and they might have exaggerated at times, but they’ve never lied to my face. Most importantly, I believe them when they tell me they have China’s best interests at heart. I don’t believe it coming from the Dalai Lama.

  32. The Trapped! Says:

    Hi Buxi,
    You have been going well, doing well until you said you are discussing with some pre-determined belief. Real analytics and researchers let logic and reason goes first and then draw conclusion, then come to a belief. But for you, you yourself decide something from beginning, and then try everything to make it look like reasonable, make it look like some analytical result. So, I would say you are no different from other stubborn bloggers. As a local to the “illegal to mention the name” place, I would say you guys’ guesses are far from the bottom line. So, unless you have nothing to do, like me today, then there is no point wasting your precious time. And if you guys really want something worth-talking, then you should contact some locals, but that may put their safety in danger as we are talking about “someone” whose name is almost illegal to mention, never mention possessing “his” photo, in those areas.

  33. Buxi Says:

    @The Trapped,

    I do admit I”m here with a pre-determined *position*, as are probably you, as are any human being except the most detached observer at some higher level of consciousness. I try to be logical and humane, but without a doubt, my greatest concern is what’s best for China (including Tibet), and what’s best for Chinese (including Tibetan) interests. Beyond that, I’m wide open.

    As far as Tibet goes… I think you have the more or less standard propaganda view of what’s going in Tibet. Clearly it’s a tense period right now, but it doesn’t keep Tibetans and other Chinese from discussing and trying to understand how to move on from here. I think this forum in Chinese gives you a better idea of what people are actually talking about.


  34. yo Says:

    As for myself, I don’t try to link it to the Dalai Lama. As I said before, I doubt the influence he has in a strategic or planning sense over all camps in Dharmsala. See #18

  35. S.K. Cheung Says:

    To Buxi:
    “You’re misreading the urge in these parts. No one is talking about it, you’re the one that’s trying to misdirect the conversation.” – you and Yo may not share these urges, but check out #8/11/13/22/23/27 just in this thread alone.

  36. Buxi Says:

    S.K. Cheung,

    I don’t think Nimrod’s well argued position is substantially different from mine. He’s arguing convincingly why someone would believe the Dalai Lama is linked to the protests, if not necessarily the violence. The Dalai Lama *is* the TGIE, hard to believe anything but.

    If there’s a difference, it’s that in response to those trying to suggest the Dalai Lama has no direct involvement at all, I personally don’t think there’s a need to debate that point. Even if he wasn’t directly involved in orchestrating the protests, his public actions are more than enough to implicate him in the movement.

  37. S.K. Cheung Says:

    If you’re trying to “implicate (the DL) in the movement” dating back decades, that goes without saying. If you’re trying to implicate him in the violence, you’ve got no proof, as you seem to concede, so there’s no disagreement there. If you’re trying to implicate him in the events that have come after 3/14, that’s where we diverge. If I’m understanding you correctly, you’re not saying he’s “directly” involved; so it becomes an issue of degrees of indirect involvement. How indirect an involvement could he have had to still be guilty by association, I suppose, is the question.

  38. Buxi Says:

    The Western press is gleeful today that the IOC has reportedly “criticized” the Chinese government after a speech by TAR party secretary Zhang Qingli during the torch run last week. Zhang decided to make a statement about the Dalai Lama, which is obviously a political statement.

    Frankly, I think this has to be the final nail in Zhang Qingli’s political coffin. The guy’s credentials are horrible. He’s a former worker who has no university background, and effectively took night classes at the Party school. He’s primarily worked in minority areas, but seems unlikely he has much formal training or development.

  39. Lindel Says:

    When will you be performing a detailed analysis of Hu Jin Tao’s press conference with western reporters where he directly answers a similar set of questions regarding the same events?

  40. Buxi Says:


    When will you be performing a detailed analysis of Hu Jin Tao’s press conference with western reporters where he directly answers a similar set of questions regarding the same events?

    You’re asking a rhetorical question, and it’s a fair one.

    Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao are careful about the kind of questions they answer directly, but when they do answer, they are careful not to lie. You might disagree with their interpretation of events, but in my opinion, they will do what they say. I can’t believe that about the Dalai Lama.

    Here is a link to Wen Jiabao’s press conference on 3/18, a week after the riots in Lhasa. Reporters from CNN and the Financial Times all asked pointed questions about Tibet and the Dalai Lama. Feel free to digest his comments in full, and let me know if you think a detailed analysis is necessary.

  41. Lindel Says:

    No it is not a rhetorical question at all. What day and time will you conduct the said analysis and when will it be published and be made available so that an impartial and objective comparison can be made of the Dalai Lama’s communication with Chinese compared to Hu Jin Tao’s communication with Tibetans?

    You have gone through and parsed statements made by the Dalai Lama to the press and in response to chinese reporters and have passed judgements on his statements in terms of veracity and responsiveness to a chinese audience.

    The question again is when will you be performing an identical line by line analysis of Hu Jin Tao’s statements and responses to questions regarding the same issues and passing judgement?

    If you are actually attempting to be objective and impartial then the analysis should be performed by a counterpart of yours which would be an ethnic Tibetan. You are judging the Dalai Lama’s communications to Chinese people so if you are actually to be an equally impartial and objective judge of Hu Jin Tao you should be analyzing the statements made by Hu Jin Tao to the Tibetan people and how he has responded to Tibetan people’s questions.

    Again it is a simple direct question. When will you be conducting such an analysis?

    An appropriate response to the question is to state the time the analysis will occur. It is not a question to stimulate debate, but requires a simple direct answer that would be a statement of fact.

    When will you be conducting an analysis of Hu Jin Tao’s statements to and questions from the Tibetan people demonstrating that Hu Jin Tao is honestly attempting to reach out to the Tibetan people?

  42. Buxi Says:

    Again it is a simple direct question. When will you be conducting such an analysis?

    An appropriate response to the question is to state the time the analysis will occur. It is not a question to stimulate debate, but requires a simple direct answer that would be a statement of fact.

    Ah, if it’s such a simple direct question, the simple direct answer is: no such analysis is planned, future depends on how events unfold.

    If you’re not looking to stimulate debate and uninterested in my answer, then I certainly won’t bother trying to engage you with an explanation of why no such analysis is planned.

  43. Lindel Says:

    Yes it is necessary. COB today. thanks

  44. Lindel Says:

    The explanation of why no analysis is planned is an issue that can only be addressed within your own conscience and the conscience of Hu Jin Tao. The world is waiting to learn where Hu’s conscience will lead us because the ramifications of Hu’s explanation has the potential to affect the lives of many people in many places around the world and possibly across many generations into the future. Your conscience is an issue that is your burden and your burden to carry alone but I do have compassion for your situation from knowing that your burden is much heavier to carry than you realize at this moment. I wish you well with your struggle.

  45. Buxi Says:


    I guess you changed your mind about wanting just a simple answer? My conscience is clear. I think you’re a little confused as to the substance of what’s going on here, so let me try to set the table for you.

    Basic background: this is a blog by Chinese concerned about Chinese interests on issues involving China.

    Therefore, completely frankly, I’m not in a position to lecture about Tibetan interests or Hu Jintao to the Tibetans in exile. I don’t really know what their true concerns are, I don’t know what they’re taught in school, I don’t know what they know of modern China and Hu Jintao. For the Tibetans in exile’s own sake, I hope someone in their community is doing what I’m doing: breaking down Hu Jintao’s statements and actions and trying to better understand them.

    Frankly, I doubt Hu Jintao himself is trying to convince the Tibetans in exile of much. Hu Jintao is the President of China, and as such serves me, and the other 1.3 billion Chinese citizens out there… he does not serve those passionately convinced they are not Chinese citizens, and those hoping to destroy the Chinese nation.

    I didn’t vote for Hu Jintao (nor did any Tibetan vote for the Dalai Lama), but he’s still our man at the negotiating table… and I expect he will uphold my interests. The Dalai Lama is the man on the other side of the negotiating table, and I (as well as many other Chinese) are very suspicious whether he’s credible, and whether we can count on him to respect our basic interests as well. That’s what this analysis is intending to explore, and that’s why this analysis belongs on this blog..

    If someone wanted to write an entry questioning Hu Jintao from a Tibetan perspective, we’d be happy to link to it and discuss it, but it’s not something I’m going to write. If someone wanted to write an entry questioning Hu Jintao’s actions from a Chinese perspective (similar to this entry about the government selling out China), I think that would make complete sense.

  46. S.K. Cheung Says:

    “The Dalai Lama is the man on the other side of the negotiating table, and I (as well as many other Chinese) are very suspicious whether he’s credible, and whether we can count on him to respect our basic interests as well.” – he’s probably not credible to you, but that matters not one iota. He’s negotiating with you, not for you. Presumably, the people negotiating for you should have credibility with you, and will ensure that your basic interests are preserved; his job is to further the interests of his people. Hence, as I’ve said before, so long as he’s the one to represent Tibetan interests, all this prospective navel-gazing is pointless.
    I do agree though, that it’s your prerogative to represent your perspective, but you have no obligation to provide similar service to all perspectives.

  47. Buxi Says:


    he’s probably not credible to you, but that matters not one iota. He’s negotiating with you, not for you. Presumably, the people negotiating for you should have credibility with you, and will ensure that your basic interests are preserved; his job is to further the interests of his people.

    That’s a good point.

    Except I think the Chinese government is a tougher negotiator than the Chinese people. The Chinese government probably has a higher “bottom line” than what we, the people, have. After all, I personally don’t care if the Communist Party retains control in Tibet… but the Party probably does. I think the Dalai Lama seems to agree, which is why he’s trying to reach out to the Chinese people, in hopes that he can change our opinion.

    And if he’s going to go that route… well, let’s hope he respects our intelligence more.

  48. The Trapped! Says:

    Hi Buxi,
    When Japanese came to China, their propaganda was to build an Asian own power that would not have to bend to the western power. When US went to Vietnam and Korea, their propaganda was to resist the encroachment of the Communism that might finally cause danger to individual rights, and so on. When US went to Afghanistan and Iraq their propaganda was to build a democratic society, although US initial claim was Saddam possessing Weapons of Mass Destruction WMD. When Germans committed Holocaust, they said that Jews stabbed the Germany from back.
    Well, China is very good students, thanks to Confucius who taught us to be loyal to teacher and emperor. She learned the tricks of all above-mentioned strategy and used them over this little Himalayan region. You may look at me in blank. Well, safe-guarding that part of territory from western power, resisting capitalist idea which is the deadly weapon that makes poors poorer and riches richer; liberating them from serfdom; now they are standing with our enemy–the western, lets prosecute them. Of course you can understand all these, unless you do not want to. However, I also do not want to look at the issue this way because that makes me only sadder, though they exactly match. All our purpose is living a happy life. For China, taking this region away is like amputating one’s limbs. So, I came to understand that trying that is just causing more trouble without any positive result. But, being bellied by big-brother is not acceptable either. And those imported liberation and benefits are not so incentive. You guys can easily understand why Iraqis do not like US-exported democracy, but you guys never try to apply the same logic. You may say this is domestic and internal issue. Well, country to country and region to region, even two neighbour households won’t like each other’s force-fed noodle. So, please guys, don’t to too stubborn, instead try to find a middle-path. For us, Tibetans, saying and discussing such thing may make us political dissident. But you have all the advantages to solve these problems. Blaming on DL or CPC only can not solve any problem. Everybody can blame, but only few can show how to deal with that. You listen from US and I look from the spot itself, I won’t blame you for not understanding everything.
    Here in Chengdu, we are looked at by police and general public like how the Arabs are looked at during post-Sept 11. Last night, Wuhouci, the Tibetan cluster area of Chengdu, was surrounded by PAP, special force and of course normal police. All the apartments were searched one by one. People with Tibetan-face were asked to show ID card and Resident Card. This witch-hunting exercise is giving doubt even to party member Tibetans. I saw one Tibetan who claimed to be Baiyun County Civil Affair Bureau’s director was quarreling with police over double-searching his vehicle. Well, all the vehicles entering this area are thoroughly searched. Such prejudice and discrimination is saying that racial prosecution is very near. Young intellectuals, you say you are looking in the interest of China (including Tibet) and Chinese (including Tibetans), then please do something, do something before Gaza Strip gives birth to our land.

  49. The Trapped! Says:

    And to everybody (especially to abc),
    Making a religious person to denounce his religious leader is like making him spit on his father’s face. Everybody religious person on this earth know this. So, forcing them to denounce their religious leader will only result in mass rebellion. That’s straightforward logic. Nobody is forcing you to be religious, but if you want to talk about religious people, you should at least have a basic understanding of how faith works. Ignorance brings arrogance, and arrogance brings destruction to both sides. So, take a deep breath and try to revise your idea and yourself before making further stupid mistakes. Actually, I doubt same mistakes are also being made by people from as high level as Politburo.

  50. Leo Says:

    @The Trapped!

    Buddhists are Buddhists, not Dalai-Lamaists. Those DL-ists who claim to be Buddha’s followers while spreading rumors and racial hatred should reexamine their belief principles. DL is only the head of Gelugpa. There are other sects and Bön which don’t deem him as religious leader. Outside Tibet, there are Han and Mongolian Chinese Gelug followers, who don’t make any fuss about DL issue. It is independence-leaning Tibetan nationalists who are noisy all the time. Many of them are not at all Gelugpa followers. DL issue is fundamentally a political issue, not religious.

    Between 1950-1959, the Central Government did nothing to touch Tibetan theocracy and serfdom. It was DL and his loyalists who rebelled and declared independence. After 1959 it would be ridiculous if the Central Government took over the role of god king and slave-owner and went on as if nothing happened.

    It is Tibetan extreme nationalists like you who make a Gaza Strip out of nowhere then blame it on Han Chinese.

  51. Buxi Says:


    I don’t agree that we should call “The Trapped” an extreme nationalist. He hasn’t made any extreme, or nationalistic comments at all. He is complaining about what he is seeing around him, but he has the right to complain as much as any other Chinese citizen. We should give him the basic respect we give all Chinese.

    @The Trapped!,

    I firmly believe you that the situation for Tibetans in Tibet and southwestern China is a very tense, very uncomfortable one right now. I think this is a shame, a horrible situation that I hope will end soon. I am also strongly against forcing religious Tibetans to denounce the Dalai Lama. I believe there instead should be more legal education; if China is going to be a legal society, that has to be the basis.

    And for the sake of the Tibetans in China (and no one else), I hope a compromise solution can be worked out with the Dalai Lama that allows him to return. I’ve talked before about what this compromise solution would look like. I hope it’ll be a solution that preserves Tibetan religion, language, and culture. But I also hope it is a solution that makes impossible the political ideology that the Dalai Lama has pushed publicly and privately for years.

    You draw a comparison to Japanese imperialism in China and American imperialism in Iraq. Let me point out what I see as the difference.

    – The Japanese empire never saw other Asians as their true equals; other Asians were forever second-class citizens. For most Chinese (not all Chinese, but MOST), Tibetans should be our equals. You are not second-class citizens; in fact, the Han are the second-class citizens in much of China. I would fully support a Tibetan president of China, if he or she is most qualified for the job.

    – The United States certainly doesn’t see Iraq as their true equals. Can Iraqis move to the United States? Can Iraqis become American citizens, with the same rights as anyone else? The debate in the United States on Iraq doesn’t care whether Iraqis will die, and doesn’t care about the livelihood of Iraqi people; the focus is almost entirely on the number of Americans that might die.

    In China and Tibet, regardless of the history, we all have an option right now. We can all choose to be citizens of one China, and work together to make our country better together. And that means I fight and argue for your equal rights as a Chinese citizen, and you respect and preserve my equal rights as a Chinese citizen. I hope enough Tibetans stand up to do that, and I hope the Dalai Lama decides to make a historic commitment in that direction. If it happens, we will both win.

    But unfortunately, because the Dalai Lama *is* both a religious and political leader, if he does not decide to make that commitment… many Tibetans will follow his example. Then we will all lose, we will all suffer.

  52. Leo Says:


    I am against The Trapped!’s opinion because he uses the Japan-China, US-Iraq, as well as the following Gaza Strip nonesense, to suggest Tibet is not a part of China and Tibetans are not Chinese citizens. So I don’t see any ground to consider him an amicable compatriot just with a slight ethnic grudge. And his “denounce your religioius leader will result mass rebellion” polemics are equal to “if you don’t follow my al-Sadr, I will kill you” logic.

    In this blog these guys will pretend to be innocent Tibetans who are wrongly forced to denounce DL. But in those blogs like Woeser’s, you know, it is often these guys who actively denounce Tibetans and lamas who want to distance themselves from DL as race traitors and apostates.

  53. Buxi Says:


    I understand your point completely, and I’m also watchful whether he is really “an amicable compatriot”. But let’s give him a chance to say what he wants to say. I don’t want to make assumptions or put labels on him; let his own words be his label.

    You ask a good question though.

    “The Trapped!”, what is your opinion of Tibetans who believe in one China, who believe zangzu and hanzu should be united in supporting zhonghua minzu?

  54. The Trapped! Says:

    Hi Buxi,
    Thanks for extending your welcoming gesture. Now, I am already feeling better that not everybody is so stubborn. I feel that there is still room for discussion and idea-sharing. As a matter of fact, I agree most of your points. When I mentioned Japan-China war and US-Iraq, I wasn’t trying to compare them politically. I was just trying to point out what small ones’ response will be when he is over-weighted by bigger ones. So, here Leo is so wrong about my idea. But I am not to blame him because I also suspected that some people would take it that way when I posted it in the first place. That’s why I said “even two neighbour households won’t like each other’s force-fed noodle.” If I am always bossy to my neighbour Han family and then give them some help, they would never appreciate that. That’s my point. I am not talking a country’s sovereignty.
    I am just about a common person relationship with other person, the nature of human being. For your very last question, I think I have already replied that. However, I can repeat it. Looking at the whole situation–the military strategy, the economic strategy, China will do anything, I really mean anything, if someone try to cut Tibet away from China. I know how Tibet is important to China. As the Chinese writer Wang Lixong said “Tibet is fragile side rib of 21 century’s China”, I think anyone who is thinking of splitting Tibet from China is really not thinking of the unimaginable bloody consequences. If I am not wrong, the DL is also very clear about this and that’s why he proposed middle-path approach. This approach, if you have ever read about, is exactly what you said, “a solution that preserves Tibetan religion, language, and culture” while remaining under the People’s Republic of China. The Party knows that’s the DL’s proposal. That’s why the Party always keeps away any speech of him, even a single sentence, away from mass Chinese public because otherwise people will also have the same idea as you have and then start to sympathize him. That’s what the Party fear about. Sometimes this is about real issue, sometimes this is just about saving face. My answer, therefore, is an equal and united China will be beneficial for everyone, whether we Tibetans like it or not. For me, I can’t say I have Chinese nationalist feeling now, but once an equal, liberal and united China comes to alive, I will definitely be Chinese nationalist. Even these days, I hate when western look down on China and Chinese culture and custom. Whether Leo believes or not, I had to argue some westerners who come to China, and then laugh at Chinese when Chinese people do something that’s uncommon in west. I had to tell them that it’s wrong for western to think that everything that’s not corresponding to western culture is wrong is very stupid.
    And for Leo, I don’t think we can have any compromise if we discuss. So, if you want to denounce and label me whatever you wish, be my guest. I can’t waste my time. Try to learn something from people more open-minded and then join forum. We should not undermine the value of forum with tit for tat kind of thing and spitting on each other’s face kind of behaviour. People with pen don’t usually do this.

  55. Leo Says:

    @The Trapped!

    I did not denounce you and label you. I denounce your words and action and label them accordingly. The Japan-China/US-Iraq rhetoric is always persistent in the Tibetan pro-independence camp. If you want to avoid confusion, drop them!

    Regarding your “The Party knows that’s the DL’s proposal. That’s why the Party always keeps away any speech of him, even a single sentence, away from mass Chinese public because otherwise people will also have the same idea as you have and then start to sympathize him. “, I want to remind you the most Chinese come to this forum did read or watch the most, if not every, statements and interviews by the DL. I even have access to a lot of periodicals pulished by the GIE as next to me is a Tibeten studies department set up by DL guys.

  56. Buxi Says:

    @The Trapped,

    I really, really appreciate your comments.

    Please keep in mind that whenever people have differences while discussing online…its very easy to escalate into an argument. And when it comes to the issue of Tibet, it can be very sensitive and emotional. Every single one of us: you, me, and Leo have had debates on this issue with hundreds of other people… some of whom were completely unreasonable. We all have this shadow of bad interaction in our minds.

    But please believe me that no one here wants to anger you for no reason, and I really hope this discussion can continue in a cooperative spirit… it will be good for everyone. I think we all should remember about watching our 民族情结.

    If you did not join us, I would have to search out comments like yours from other forums in China to prove the “other point of view”.. (I only know of bbs.tibetcul… are there any other forums commonly used by Tibetans?) But since you are here, we can show the Western world that we don’t have to hate each other, that even if we disagree, we also have the wisdom to hopefully find agreement.

    I will repost your thread at the very top of this blog, so that it can get more attention.

  57. Buxi Says:

    Actually, The Trapped… your English is already very good.

    Instead of just copying your comment here to the top… would you be interested in writing a full blog post for us, as the point of view of someone who is Tibetan and Chinese? What are your fears for the future? What do you like, what do you hate? What do you want for China? What do you believe is the likely future of both China and Tibet? I would really enjoy seeing that.

    If you’d like help refining what you write in English, we’d be happy to help, but the choice is up to you.

  58. Willi Says:

    @ The Trapped

    Who did give you that name, The Trapped?
    When i read your posts here i think you are trapped, do you like to be free?
    You should know there is no one higher than the other, thats only illusion.
    What will happen if you are in the desert and have the illusion of water only?
    Yes, you have nothing to drink.
    The Dalai Lama, can not support life!
    You say the Dalai Lama is a special, a higher one, and someone says he is a liar, who is right?

  59. The Trapped! Says:

    For the moment, I want to answer Will’s question and then think about whether I should post a full blog or not. It’s bad time for us, Tibetans like me, to talk too much. When I say this, please don’t take it in offense! I just mean what I said, don’t have any implied meaning. If I don’t care about our common future, then I won’t give a shit about all these things, wasting time, wasting energy! Here in China, it’s really difficult to have a fruitful face-to-face discussion between hanzu and zangzu because they go extreme side and then if not careful, hands come faster than mouths. So, I am very happy to share my idea with you and your idea take in. As a human nature and as Buxi said, we all are human beings, so when someone said something very extreme, then you are likely to response with extreme. I really do not want to offend any hanzu because she is the only other half of one heart–the heart that solves Tibet-related problem– that brings warmth to our common future, common home. So, please forgive me if I said something bad out of emotion.
    Well, I picked The Trapped as my name by myself. Here, this has less relation to freedom and so on, but more to confusion. I feel I and my kind of Tibetans are kind of trapped in between two gulfs, the zangzu extremist and hanzu extremist, before reaching a handful fair minded hanzu and zangzu. That is also why I keep commenting on this blogpage because it’s worth taking serious and spending some time on. So, there is no bad motivation behind this name.
    And about whether the Dalai Lama is higher one or liar, that’s depend in which context you are talking. So, I don’t want to talk about him because person like you will easily say that I am trying to cover him. Truth will emerge sooner or later. But one thing I can say with confidence is that, almost no Tibetan will happy if you say something bad about him. But still you can simply say Tibetans are shit-headed stupid bunch of barbarians who can easily be cheated and manipulated if you feel like. I don’t give a shit about that because a government which is responsible for the fate of around a quarter of the world population is pilling every worst vocabularies in dictionary against him and say that Tibetans are cheated. So what more difference will it make if a person like you and me say good or bad about him or about Tibetans?

  60. Buxi Says:


    Many people, especially Chinese, are wondering what the non-extremist zangzu are thinking right now. Unfortunately, there are too few non-extremist zangzu voices out there. I believe it’s not because all Tibetans are extremists… it’s only because the extremists are loud. Of course the government is partly responsible, for not giving non-extremist zangzu enough chance to speak.

    Well, you have a chance here to speak, if you have something to say. My only rule for this blog: write an entry with the point of view of loving China. Loving China doesn’t mean you can only defend it; if something in China is wrong, then loving China would mean giving ideas on how to change China. So if you write… tell all of us, both hanzu and zangzu, how we can all do a better job of loving China.

    If you’re not ready for a real entry for now because you haven’t decided… well, there is no hurry. Keep thinking about it, the offer is open.

  61. The Trapped! Says:

    And to Leo,
    “The Japan-China/US-Iraq rhetoric is always persistent in the Tibetan pro-independence camp.”
    Hey, it’s ‘rhetoric’ not only in ‘Tibetan pro-independence camp’, but pro-big-brother camp as well. It’s too rhetoric on http://www.anti-cnn.com, CD, PD and Xinhua since March incident. So, if you have time, pay visit to those sites, then read through news archives and comments on them and also forums attached them. Then you will see these terms are as much popular in ‘Tibetan pro-independence camp’ that much popular among pro-big-brother camp, if not more.
    “I want to remind you the most Chinese come to this forum did read or watch the most, if not every, statements and interviews by the DL. I even have access to a lot of periodicals pulished by the GIE as next to me is a Tibeten studies department set up by DL guys.”
    Does this mean vast majority people of China have same privilege that you have under some foreign country’s umbrella? Don’t you feel bad to say this, seeing that you are also one of those big-brother’s face-saving volunteers? How can you show off what you can do over there which we can not do back here to us? Try to look at things from all dimensions, things that’s ok you may not be possible to others.

  62. FOARP Says:

    @Buxi – If you define all Tibetans who want independence as ‘extremists’ and think that the main thing is to get both sides to ‘love China’ more you are going to find things difficult.

  63. Buxi Says:


    Trapped! (the person claiming to be a Tibetan from Chengdu) is the one who introduced the term “Tibetan extremist” (along with Han extremist). Why don’t you ask him what he meant by that term?

    And yes, the only question I’m looking to answer is how to better “love China” (the China of 56 brother/sister nationalities). Difficult or not, that’s the only solution I’m interested in. I would be interested in hearing Trapped!’s proposal for making that happen.

  64. FOARP Says:

    @Buxi – Some things are best loved from a distance . .

  65. outlet Says:

    Good post. I be taught something more difficult on different blogs everyday. It can all the time be stimulating to learn content from different writers and observe a bit of something from their store. I抎 want to use some with the content on my blog whether or not you don抰 mind. Natually I抣l give you a link in your net blog. Thanks for sharing.


  1. Embraced » Blog Archive » Dalai Lama tries speaking to the Chinese
  2. An Anachronist’s Life » Blog Archive » Buxi: Dalai Lama tries speaking to the Chinese

Leave a Reply