councilor.org
| Source | Macdonald Stainsby |
| Date | 99/07/27/22:22 |
| TODAY'S TIBET by Macdonald Stainsby The most screenplayed and least explained of the national liberation movements currently spoken of in the mainstream press is undoubtedly that of Tibet. We are treated to emotion evoking images of terror and sorrow in such Hollywood offerings as "Seven Years In Tibet" and "Kundun". Short of content and discussion, these movies provide any decent person with ample righteousness in condemning "atrocities" carried out by a heartless, power hungry and expansionist Chinese Communist Party. There are countless groups from all sorts of first world (i.e.- Imperialist) countries pressing for a "Free Tibet!" using the charming and seemingly humble Dalai Lama as their spokesman of reference. The Dalai himself has been awarded the Nobel peace prize, adding fuel to a cause that, it would seem, only racists and Chinese bureaucrats and Nationalists would dare oppose. Yet there are several things that do not add up, and many secrets not spoken about all this that cry for clarification. It does not seem that such information is forthcoming from those who wished to be viewed as the bearers of expertise on this "untouchable" issue. So let's "touch" the issues. Some questions either omitted or refuted through gross distortion are begged, such as: 1. What was Tibet like during the period before People's Liberation Army intervention? 2. Who is the Dalai Lama now and historically? What is the Chinese argument to maintain jurisdiction? 3. Has Tibet ever been sovereign? Why do Bill Clinton and other decidedly anti-liberation leaders and governments wish to embrace "Tibetan Freedom"? 4. Aside from the one-sided stories of murder and mayhem, what new policies have been implemented in Tibet since the occupation? 5. For a poor, third world region what does "freedom" amount to in practical terms, outside of the (newly raised) slogans of "American style democracy"? These questions, usually afforded dismissal when not merely accorded ommission by the mainstream press, require real, objective answers for all those seeking the best interests of Tibet and her inhabitants. Unlike the "Shangri-la" image of Tibet before 1959 usually portrayed by movies and Richard Gere types, Tibet was a lot more complicated and unpleasant than what is spoken today. The reality seems almost a matter of common sense. What region, dirt poor and neglected has ever been the site of merely "religious and spiritual harmony"? The Tibet of old was, in fact, a theocracy. Religious rites were law, and public input was never sought. In the charter of law, women had no rights, being only those who produced further Tibetans. Tibet may have benn very much a land of spiritual wealth, but as is often the case, this was dependant entirely on your material wealth. A country with only land that was barely productive for cultivation of sparse crops and little else, the wealth was almost non-existent. In order to achieve some form of economy without damaging economic, religious and political privelige, Tibet had only around 100 families who owned nearly all the land in what was a de-facto serf-feudal economy. As was done in establishing relations with the "Post-Communist" Russian Federation, any so-called independant Tibet would be required to return "stolen" (i.e. Nationalized) property to it's pre-'59 owners. Some estimates have gone as high as 20 percent of the population being outright slaves, bought and sold. These numbers are inconsistent with two facts: There were not enough people in Tibet with resources to provide subsistence to slaves for such a large figure, and the feudal slavery that was the lot of ninety percent of Tibet was far more cost effective for the nobility than the cloak of religion. Five percent is the number that most objective non-partisan researchers agree on. Monks had to be male, and inherit the social status of the previous generation in what was an inaccesible inner-ring of power. Slaves and serfs who ventured to break free of their social position were subjected to torture, such as live-skinning and tortuous burns to keep them in place and serve as an unspoken warning to others who might dare the same revolt. The image fostered of Tibetans studying prayers and meditations is far more mis-leading than it is outright false. As already mentioned, Tibet was spiritual for those with the material to back it up. However, this picture is propagandistic because Tibetans has an overall literacy rate estimated at less than 5 percent. "Estimates" need to be gathered because the leadership of Tibet would never attempt such a humane census. Only two schools, both run by the monasteries, existed before 1959. Both of these educated the next crop of priveliged monks. Lacking the access to education and innundated with a reactionary brand of Buddhism, Tibetans who were very poor even developed a legend that if you kill a rich foreigner, you will inherit his "luck". Infant mortality was higher than anywhere else in mainland China. As with most, if not all feudalisms, any wealth deemed important to the hierarchy of Tibet was just taken. In other words, when the livestock (almost only yaks and sheep) was limited for meat, a serf would watch helplessly as the monks carted them off for their own consumption. As neccessary, this was done by murderous force. As far as the Dalai Lama, do not be deceived by his "respectable" credentials. Nobel Peace Prize winners have included such men as covert operation king Henry Kissinger, supposedly for bringing peace in VietNam, which only he and his cohorts had prevented through bombimg campaigns for the previous 20 years. This "prize" was the Wests' answer to the Stalin Peace Prize, awarded to Paul Robeson, among others. In fact, the Dalai Lama has been on the CIA payroll and contact list since before the 1959 intervention. The Dalai's role was less than peaceful, much less than moral. In 1951, the Tibetan authorities signed an agreement with the Communist Party of China that was in the mold of all the other Sino-Tibetan charters; Tibet was an autonomous region of China with her own local authorities, answerable to the central government in Beijing. This did not signify a new motherland for Tibet, rather, it showed a new administration for the old motherland. The new government, being a socialist governing body, laid out a plan for the slow transformation of Tibets' property relations , to be completed by 1964. This was too much for a priveliged elite dependant on those relations, so when the CIA approached the Dalai and his patrons in the late `50's, he was very accomadating. In 1959 there were undoubtedly many Tibetans who wanted an end to their centuries old domination. A state was now demanded by the theocracy, and even the poorest peasants who wanted to live without China joined up---at first. When the PLA arrived to put down the "revolt" of the aristocrats, the slogan of the national revolution of a decade previous, "land to the tiller" was raised. This left the Dalai Lama with mostly only Monks and slave owners (As well as quite a bit of American sponsored weaponry) to fight with, the peasants either opting out of the fight or joining the Communists. With this, the foreign sponsored "uprising" was quickly crushed, and the land reform sped up by five years, freeing many de-facto slaves in the process. The Dalai Lamas' escape was so well orchestrated against tremendous odds, it has been said to have become a legend insise the CIA. The Dalai Lama, in a total about face from his previous attempts to work with the new government, started talking about "Tibetan Independance" and the like. At this point, the Dalai Lama and company got heavily involved in the CIA, receiving hundreds of millions of dollars of aid and weaponry throughout the sixties and seventies to start a terrorist-style "contra war", much of the type which terrorised the young Nicaraguan revolution into submission throughout the Eighties. In an article just released on Oct 7 in the NY Times, the Dalai Lama stated in his defense that the money all went to "the cause", and not him. Okay, so he's an agent of the CIA, but not a corrupt one. This is hardly relevant. The real "crime" that the PLA commited was to eliminate religious theocratic rule and economic power, something our friend the Dalai Lama has not forgiven them for to this day. The Chinese maintain that Tibet has not been independant for 700+ years, which is almost accurate. In fact, Tibet has not been independant for 1300 years, since before being ruled by the Mongols. The first Chinese revolution of the twentieth century, taking place in 1911, left much of China in disarray. According to the Dalai Lama's exiles, Tibet was "free" from 1912 to 1951. Possibly he has a de-facto argument, but then so would any province in China not directly under Chiang Kai-shek's thumb during this period. No country ever extended diplomatic recognition to Tibet. Prior to the defeat of Britain in attempting to maintain India as a colony, Britain tried to push Tibet (briefly) as a "lost" part of India. An unsuccessful attempt at drawing up British passports for Tibetans was completely abandoned when it became futile to try and hold on to India. With the destruction of the greater portion of the British empire, so the death of "greater India" in Tibet. No other attempts of splitting or recognizing Tibet as seperate from China would occur until the rise to prominence of the Dalai Lama as part of the Cold War. All this encompasses Tibet's 1300 years of legal (or at least recognised) incorporation into the Mongol or Chinese empires, far longer than Northern Ireland in Britain, Quebec or First Nations in Canada or Texas, Hawaii, California not to forget Puerto Rico in the United States. All of this is not to discount that Tibet has very clearly constituted a seperate nation. There are many dozen distinct nations in China alone. From Hawaii and Mexico to India, to Peru all of these indigenous nations are just the tip of the iceberg internationally. Many, many groups that most North Americans have never heard of constitute legitimate nations. Most have never been independant states. On this note, Texas has been (briefly) an independant, sovereign state. There is also a "Republic Of Texas" movement that has been involved in exchanges of gunfire with cops. No one is duty bound to support a sovereigntist movement by mere virtue of its existence. Quite often, the bed-fellows that one could end up with are clearly worse than the current state of affairs. With all the media hype around this issue of "Free Tibet", it is clear that the rulers of the western world support the return of the Dalai Lama to his former throne. In contrast to their callous silence on the Kurdistani, Native American and East Timorese genocides, to name but only three of a current age, why are they so concerned about Tibet? The current Chinese government is an enigma to western policy makers. On the one hand it claims to be "communist", on the other it allows massive inflights of foreign capital to over-exploit her workforce. China maintains nuclear capabilities, yet she has sold off guaranteed jobs, education and "the Iron Rice Bowl". In the final analysis however, what people define China as is just a label. Western speculators have been wasting no time in recognising the "good and bad" aspects of modern China, to their view. At the final analysis to Washington, The Chinese can not be forgiven for their independance. While massively preffered by the West than the old Mao years, China still sets her own interest rates, foreign policy and laws- all while running a state that has a large portion still nationalised. This is the real "crime" that China commits today, as Noriega's Panama, Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Qaddafi's Libya have made quite clear. Bill Clinton and the Pentagon will support the Dalai Lama as long as possible. The economic reasons are not as clear in Tibet as they are in Iraq. Tibet has few resources worth much, and not enough to be noticable to any Imperialist economy, or even the Chinese, who as mentioned spend more money on than they receive from Tibet. Ripping out a chunk of China would weaken her internally and militarily, however. The "Roof of the World" is very difficult to access clandestinely from either India or Nepal. But a China without the Tibet region is very accessible with tanks, aircraft, etc..., and the Dalai Lama is not likely to be very resistant to using Tibet for American Foreign policy, as he has been doing precisely that since 1959. China, since 1949, has been under not one countries' dictates and the "Government in Exile" is already as such, dependant on Western Europe and the United States. Since the 1959 riots, hundreds of schools have been built to supplement the previously existing 2. For the fist time in Tibetan history now, literacy is more common than uncommon. The life expectancy was 35, now it is 69 years of age. Poor peasants, serf slaves and outright slaves have all been distributed land for each and all (In 1960 some tens of thousands of newly emancipated slaves were invited to a bonfire where all the old property deeds were burned. The Communists hosted the event, but they were not the prime participants). Womens rights at least entered the 20th century, which is bad enough. The most important feature of the 59 "chasing out" is the achievement for Tibetans of what most constitutions cherish, the legal seperation of church and state. No one in North America would get very far calling for a fundamentalist Catholic state, although there are many like Pat Robertson and John Hagee who try hard to establish one. The Chinese experiment called "The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution" of the sixties and seventies is very divisive, even on the left alone. Some refer to it as "power politics and Cult Of The Personality gone mad" and others call it the "Greatest advance of democracy in history". Regardless of your personal take on all that, what happened in Tibet at the time was the worst of Chinese occupation, to be sure. Outside Chinese smashed cultural relics, destroyed Temples and denounced much of what was historically linked with Tibet. Today, it is a different story. Billions of Yuan have been poured into restoring and rebuilding the temples of Tibet. Religious schools for monks have been opened up, but slaves and privelige have not been restored. The Dalai Lama, and all movements associated with him and his "facts" can not be seen as areliable source on Tibet today, for he has not been to Tibet in nearly Forty years. His motives behind his "facts" are clear by virtue of their inconsistency. In the early Sixties, he claimed that Tibet had apopulation of 2 million. Then, overnight, he was claiming twelve million. Then it was 3, then 6.... The number of residents is not the only number that has fluctuated according to whatever is selling at the time. To start cries of "genocide" the Dalai Lama stated "3 million deaths in Tibet". When it finally became apparent that Tibet had less than 1.5 million people in '59, the cry became "1.3 million deaths". We need ask: Did each Tibetan woman of child bearing age give birth to over 20 kids? Unlikely, but that is the only way to account for this death toll, when today's ethnic Tibetan population is 2.2 million. The argument often used with me is that the Dalai Lama is not the "Free Tibet" movement. When this becomes true, the "facts" the movement promotes will not be exactly those of the "Government In Exile". At this point, a more honest but not fanatical and propagandistic look into abuses of Tibetans can occur. But for now, heart tugging, apolitical movies, some written by SS mombers, will be more important than the truth of Tibetan history. Probably into the foreseeable future. The Tibet of today is open up for tourism. In fact the Chinese government is encouraging such, putting out several periodicals explaing their (biased, to be sure) version of events. In Tibet, you will see monks, lots of Chinese government personnel, and uncomfortable residents, to be sure. You will not see people carted off for speaking to you, and ethnicTibetans are the over-whelming majority. This reality will negate the claims that Tibet is being assimilated to change the make up of society. It would be right in front of your eyes. As important as what you see, will be what you don't. No slaves being whipped in public, no women being sold on a market. No one being forced to sell land "to Him". Tibet is a very economically backward region, with all the trappings of the third world very close to reality every day. That reality gets closer every time the Dalai Lama gets more press in his attempts to return to the throne. Chinas' "reform and opening up drive" are reaching the rural areas last. Thus, Tibet may have a precarious future under the current CPC, but not so its' present. As already mentioned, Tibet is actually a loss-leader economically as more money is coming from the central government into Tibet than from Tibet outwards. Schools, electricity plants and the like come from the CPC-public treasury. Never in history have any imperialist countries ever executed such a relationship. If the Dalai Lama has his way, Tibet would be merely tourist based, and killing rich foreigners for luck would probably become legend again. What little resources Tibet has would be sold to the highest bidder and mercilously exploited. Former Serf families would lose their land to the magic of the "market". To preserve (culturally) Tibet, the only answers are: Pressure China to allow more autonomy for the Tibetan region, while simultaneously convincing the Dalai Lama to accept the CPC offer as spiritual but not political head of Tibet (however it must be noted that we must first determine if Tibetans do, in fact, want this. There is currently no realistic way of finding out; we only hear "yes" or "No" ). Try to get Tibet to bypass the "reforms" as much as possible, to continue the development of the Tibetan Autonomous Region on a healthy scale. Make it obvious what the "Government In Exile" is really being motivated by, and who sponsors them to seperate. This may not be as emotionally comforting as picking a "righteous side", but it has a real chance of helping Tibet, Tibetans and their culture far more than spreading the lies of an American backed, deposed Monarch. |
Copyright (c) 1998, Joongpil Cho