“The Dalai Lama has lost all hope
of continuing to negotiate with the present Chinese government; the
Dalai Lama hopes for nothing from China; The Dalai Lama no longer
hopes for an autonomous Tibet; the Dalai Lama reveals his weariness
towards Beijing; the Dalai Lama declares a personal sense of abandon
concerning discussions with China: the Dalai Lama is ready to examine
a more radical strategy on Tibet” – a real avalanche of titles
from press agencies or newspapers. As if someone was feverishly
ringing the alarm – it is certainly high time for it to happen, but
apart from this sudden and noisy outburst, who takes the time to
really listen to the words? Who really believes the text? It is
first of all important to know that to “lose hope” or to “drop
arms” are phrases not contained in the Dalai Lama’s vocabulary.
It is
true that when speaking at the 48th
anniversary of the foundation of the Children’s Village in
Dharamsala, the Dalai Lama admitted to having gone as far as possible
(too far?) in his determination to extend a hand to the Chinese
authorities in order to find a solution through dialogue (“the
middle way”) to the Tibetan-China dispute, acceptable to both
parties. In this perspective, he has been, and is, better supported
by international opinion today, better informed of historical facts
and the situation on the spot; by VIPs and celebrities (he is
sometimes criticised for this); by some politicians (generally from
the opposition in their own government, or retired, because there are
rarely politicians in office who dare to speak out for fear of
ruffling Chinese feathers.)
The Dalai Lama is also
supported by a great many of his own people, even if more and more in
exile speak out against his choice. Tibetans in Tibet continue to see
in him both the person who personifies the Tibetan singularity, and a
guarantee of their survival; they testified to this last Spring, much
to the displeasure of the Chinese authorities who believed that this
devotion was declining. The angry reaction of these authorities, and
their brutal repression, left no doubt of this. In making the
Tibetan leader their scapegoat, the Public Enemy no. 1 of China, they
sowed the wind that reaped the whirlwind.
His hand unfailingly
held out with propositions, continually refused (that of Strasbourg
goes back to 1988), the Dalai Lama simply takes note today of a
situation that he has done everything to avoid – for years, he has
repeated to his people that the ultimate decision remains with them
and that it is for Tibetans to assume responsibility for their
future, for themselves and for their country. In the meantime, he is
the best ambassador possible on the international scene. Maybe some
have not listened to him attentively, or do not want to hear his
words. Now the years are passing by, for him as well as the rest of
the world (and China does not hide the fact that they are waiting for
him to disappear in the (vain) hope that he will take with him the
people’s cause) it is vital for this challenge to be faced, and
taken up.
Pursuing discussions
without a tomorrow with Chinese representatives without any real
power is no more than a stop-gap with limits, and fools no-one –
except those who let themselves fall into the trap, exasperating
Tibetans. Because of that, and in the present-day context, the
independent movement is gaining ground because of the “autonomy”
without substance, and the Masters of Beijing refuse any discussion
because “it already exists”, because “it is written into the
Constitution”. As for self-determination, this is a right
considered as inalienable in international norms for any people, even
those colonised and under the Chinese boot. By asking the Tibetan
people for their opinion, the Dalai Lama is merely respecting his own
commitment to adapting Tibetan society to democracy, and submitting
to this requirement.
After having recalled in
his speech that to ignore what happened in March and April all over
Tibet – the so-called autonomous region and Tibetan enclaves in
neighbouring Chinese provinces, that is to say all of the historical
Tibet – is leading nowhere, the Dalai Lama clearly repeated what he
has been saying for years: - “The question of Tibet is that of the
Tibetan people, and it is not only about me. That is why the
question of Tibet should be examined and decided by the people.
Then, we shall be in a truly democratic system, not like the
Communist government where one speaks of democracy and practices
autocracy. It is not our way of behaving.”
Later in his speech, the
Tibetan leader said: - “If Tibetan religion and culture, based on
compassion, are eradicated, and if society is only concerned with
money, this will not help the Chinese in the future and they will
lose out.”
Mentioning the fact that
the Chinese accused the Dalai Lama of being the instigator of the
troubles last Spring, he said: - “Frankly speaking, I can say that
I am always sincere. It is difficult to speak to people who do not
believe the truth. I have clearly said to the world press that I
still have faith in the Chinese people, but my confidence in the
Chinese government has declined, and it is becoming more and more
difficult.”
“Give up?” “Refuse
to negotiate” – the Dalai Lama? To say or write this, is not to
know or understand him; above all, it is to misinterpret his meaning
and without realising it, fall into the trap of those, in Beijing or
elsewhere, hasten to claim that “the Dalai Lama refuses
negotiation”. This is exactly the contrary of what he has said,
and his acts underline his words; he has given the Tibetans the task
to freely express themselves and, at the meeting arranged for
November, to seek together ways to surmount the impasse and find a
solution. There is no
“miracle solution”,
but by not wanting to hear what the Dalai Lama says, Chinese
officials are losing the only asset they have to get them out of this
wasp nest.
Make no mistake;
whatever the present Masters of the Forbidden city do, the history of
man teaches us that it is impossible to suppress people colonised by
arms and there will come a time when those people will arise.
The events of last March
were unforeseen, but not unpredictable; the Tibetan snow lion remains
stretched across the throat of the Chinese dragon. And in the last
resort, the liberty of Tibet is perhaps simply a metaphor for ours,
that which is never acquired, and which we must defend, arms linked,
day after day.
Claude B. Levenson, November 2008