Tibet protests
Mar 20th, 2008, 11:32 AM
#21
NPR's Day to Day just had an excellent piece by a journalist (James Miles, Beijing bureau chief for the Economist magazine), who was actually in Lhasa during the protests. Recommend listening to the podcast: http://www.npr.org/templates/rundown...n.php?prgId=17 He thinks the Beijing government will now have to reassess their Tibetan policy.
Mar 20th, 2008, 11:51 AM
#23
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with Rkkwan. At the very LEAST, the Chinese government should immediately allow foreign journalists and diplomats to visit Tibet and other affected areas to make their own, independent observations. This would immediately put a stop to any exaggeration (if there is any) by NGOs. Unless, of course, the Chinese government is hiding something.........
Mar 20th, 2008, 08:41 PM
#24
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 17,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No way are the Han Chinese going to let anybody else into those areas.
It's a repeat of the terribly sad situation in Myanmar.
The Chinese are using the Tibetans in the Eastern part, the "Champas", who generally follow a different sect of Mahayana Tantric Buddism, the Nyingmapas (red hats), against the dominant Gelugspa sect (yellow hats) in the rest of Tibet. If you see a Tibetan who is an official under the Chinese, it will most likely be an Easterner. Very sad, turning Tibetan against Tibetan.
It's the same situation as Iraq for the US. There's too much mineral and other wealth in Tibet, too many areas that are unexplored with great mining potential - the Chinese are not going to give it up now.
It may be that boycotting the Olympics is the only way to make the Chinese understand that others don't agree with their imperialist view of Tibet.
It's a repeat of the terribly sad situation in Myanmar.
The Chinese are using the Tibetans in the Eastern part, the "Champas", who generally follow a different sect of Mahayana Tantric Buddism, the Nyingmapas (red hats), against the dominant Gelugspa sect (yellow hats) in the rest of Tibet. If you see a Tibetan who is an official under the Chinese, it will most likely be an Easterner. Very sad, turning Tibetan against Tibetan.
It's the same situation as Iraq for the US. There's too much mineral and other wealth in Tibet, too many areas that are unexplored with great mining potential - the Chinese are not going to give it up now.
It may be that boycotting the Olympics is the only way to make the Chinese understand that others don't agree with their imperialist view of Tibet.
Mar 23rd, 2008, 06:15 PM
#25
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 14,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This has really been devastating. We have studied buddhism for years and the Dalai Lama is a remarkable leader and teacher. He is so devoted to nonviolence that he must be truly suffering.
It's my understanding that the geographical location of Tibet plays a huge part in China's desire to control the region, as it could have huge strategic repercussions in the future.
It's my understanding that the geographical location of Tibet plays a huge part in China's desire to control the region, as it could have huge strategic repercussions in the future.
Mar 28th, 2008, 08:04 AM
#27
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The PM of Australia and US President have both just now stated during a Press conference their renewed recognition of the Human Rights abuses by the Chinese in Tibet and urged the Chinese government to engage in discussion with His Holiness the Dalai Lama.
Mar 29th, 2008, 02:23 AM
#28
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bella - yeh, yeh, yeh.
Neither leader can slam China because of the impact on each country's economy. You see, they think that the people of their respective countries care more about the dollar in their pocket than they do about what might be happening to people just like them in a far off country.
And that's probably a fair assessment.
Each leader has to take a position that they feel will be accepted by the non-thinking majority - because, they want to get re-elected, or in the case of Dubya, they want to be loved and to go into history as a "good thing."
We can't blame them for it. It's just one of those occasions in history when individuals have to stand up, act and be counted.
Of course, it doesn't usually work - think Iraq - but we must keep trying.
Neither leader can slam China because of the impact on each country's economy. You see, they think that the people of their respective countries care more about the dollar in their pocket than they do about what might be happening to people just like them in a far off country.
And that's probably a fair assessment.
Each leader has to take a position that they feel will be accepted by the non-thinking majority - because, they want to get re-elected, or in the case of Dubya, they want to be loved and to go into history as a "good thing."
We can't blame them for it. It's just one of those occasions in history when individuals have to stand up, act and be counted.
Of course, it doesn't usually work - think Iraq - but we must keep trying.
Apr 1st, 2008, 01:54 PM
#30
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you really think that by boycotting China or the Olympics will change anything. I think it would just make the situation worse. As China grows economically rich and people begin to make more money then they will be able to have access to more technologies capable of showing them what is really going on. For example Satellite TV, foreign travel, interaction with foreigners, ect... One way for china to grow economically and become more open to western views is by having the Olympics. The Olympics is helping open up china to the west and will create a dialogue not only between outsiders on Chinese politics but also within China.
I know from my own travels that you can never fully understand your own country without seeing how the outside world views it. The best thing for Tibet and China is a dialogue within china be opened. Most Chinese people are just uninformed and therefore take the side of their government due to the pride in their country.
Secondly, although violence is against the traditional Dalai Lama teaching and other Tibetan view, one could not help but question whether there is some higher up Tibetan leadership involved in these protest. Up until this Tibet has been a lost issue among the press and the world and I would bet that these leaders, if not the Dalai Lama himself thought of the run up to the Olympic games as a last chance effort to gain attention to Tibet.
And lastly, punishing the athletes who have worked so hard for the politics of one government would be a shame. The Olympics are supposed to be for everybody whether we agree with their government policies or not. That is why we let dictator ships like North Korea and terrorism supports like Iran participate. The Olympics should unite, not divide.
Just my $.02
I know from my own travels that you can never fully understand your own country without seeing how the outside world views it. The best thing for Tibet and China is a dialogue within china be opened. Most Chinese people are just uninformed and therefore take the side of their government due to the pride in their country.
Secondly, although violence is against the traditional Dalai Lama teaching and other Tibetan view, one could not help but question whether there is some higher up Tibetan leadership involved in these protest. Up until this Tibet has been a lost issue among the press and the world and I would bet that these leaders, if not the Dalai Lama himself thought of the run up to the Olympic games as a last chance effort to gain attention to Tibet.
And lastly, punishing the athletes who have worked so hard for the politics of one government would be a shame. The Olympics are supposed to be for everybody whether we agree with their government policies or not. That is why we let dictator ships like North Korea and terrorism supports like Iran participate. The Olympics should unite, not divide.
Just my $.02
Apr 1st, 2008, 04:26 PM
#31
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boycotting the Olympics would indeed change nothing in terms of the way China is run or by whom. But that isn't any reason for not boycotting the games. Some actions are inherently wrong, and supporting the Beijing Olympics is one of them. It doesn't matter if no one notices that you aren't there and everything goes ahead. You know. And those of us who care about such things will admire you, too.
The argument that doing business with China will open up the country and eventually end the one-party system is one that businessmen have trotted out to justify their investment in one of the world's most rotten regimes throughout the second half of the 20th century. But things have turned out very differently.
Foreign channels do not appear on satellite television and nor are they going to outside top class hotels and expat/reliably rich Chinese residential compounds, and even then with touchy stories blacked out; the Internet is heavily censored to all those with no English or understanding of proxy servers; most overseas travel is on tours and by people who have an interest in maintaining the status quo.
What is happening is that Western investment is funding the view that a one-party state can and is delivering the goods, and therefore need not be changed. It's funding the growth of a (still insignificant in percentage terms) middle class that supports the government because it has allowed it to become rich. Democracy? Don't make them laugh. That would put unwashed peasants in the majority and not be in the interests of these Lexus drivers at all.
The Olympics has nothing whatsoever to do with opening up China to the West. The total number of fresh contacts will be infinitesimal compared to the total number of existing interactions, and these will be the most tightly monitored and artificial encounteres since foreigners were first allowed back in. The Chinese government has made these games the very opposite of 'dialogue'. No 'dialogue' will take place at all. This is a broadcast of propaganda to the outside world, about the triumph of Chinese socialism, the exaltation of the masses, and the eradication of the memory (until those memories are useful again, at least) of past wrongs (real and imaginary) done to China by foreigners. It's about the eradication of 4 June 1989 and the promotion into global acceptability of one of the most bloody-handed regimes of modern times. To participate is to sign-up for these repulsive propositions.
There will not be any dialogue within China about Tibet, and the Olympics will have no impact whatsoever on the Tibet situation. There's no interest in argument or discussion; no interest even in facts. Even were China suddenly to become a multi-party democracy tomorrow Tibet would still be held by the throat. The rest of the observations on this topic read like something out of China Daily.
The Olympics may be 'supposed to be for everybody' but the mendacious and supple Jacques Rogge and the Beijing government between them have made sure they are anything but that. No sympathy is due to the athletes who should have made it clear to the Olympic committee as soon as China became a candidate that they would not participate. The recent violence is just a pin-prick compared to the massacres since the current regime took power, and its ongoing repression and politically motivated imprisonment of the innocent.
What next? An Olympics in North Korea? How about Darfur?
The shame will be if there's a boycott through last-minute political opportunism as leaders shrug off the pressures brought to bear by greedy businessmen fearful of losing contracts in response to a groundswell of public opinion to which they pay attention far too late in the day. The boycott should have been led by the athletes in the first place, ensuring that the Olympics went somewhere that would treat them as games and not politics, leaving the whole Olympic ideal permanently stained with blood.
The argument that doing business with China will open up the country and eventually end the one-party system is one that businessmen have trotted out to justify their investment in one of the world's most rotten regimes throughout the second half of the 20th century. But things have turned out very differently.
Foreign channels do not appear on satellite television and nor are they going to outside top class hotels and expat/reliably rich Chinese residential compounds, and even then with touchy stories blacked out; the Internet is heavily censored to all those with no English or understanding of proxy servers; most overseas travel is on tours and by people who have an interest in maintaining the status quo.
What is happening is that Western investment is funding the view that a one-party state can and is delivering the goods, and therefore need not be changed. It's funding the growth of a (still insignificant in percentage terms) middle class that supports the government because it has allowed it to become rich. Democracy? Don't make them laugh. That would put unwashed peasants in the majority and not be in the interests of these Lexus drivers at all.
The Olympics has nothing whatsoever to do with opening up China to the West. The total number of fresh contacts will be infinitesimal compared to the total number of existing interactions, and these will be the most tightly monitored and artificial encounteres since foreigners were first allowed back in. The Chinese government has made these games the very opposite of 'dialogue'. No 'dialogue' will take place at all. This is a broadcast of propaganda to the outside world, about the triumph of Chinese socialism, the exaltation of the masses, and the eradication of the memory (until those memories are useful again, at least) of past wrongs (real and imaginary) done to China by foreigners. It's about the eradication of 4 June 1989 and the promotion into global acceptability of one of the most bloody-handed regimes of modern times. To participate is to sign-up for these repulsive propositions.
There will not be any dialogue within China about Tibet, and the Olympics will have no impact whatsoever on the Tibet situation. There's no interest in argument or discussion; no interest even in facts. Even were China suddenly to become a multi-party democracy tomorrow Tibet would still be held by the throat. The rest of the observations on this topic read like something out of China Daily.
The Olympics may be 'supposed to be for everybody' but the mendacious and supple Jacques Rogge and the Beijing government between them have made sure they are anything but that. No sympathy is due to the athletes who should have made it clear to the Olympic committee as soon as China became a candidate that they would not participate. The recent violence is just a pin-prick compared to the massacres since the current regime took power, and its ongoing repression and politically motivated imprisonment of the innocent.
What next? An Olympics in North Korea? How about Darfur?
The shame will be if there's a boycott through last-minute political opportunism as leaders shrug off the pressures brought to bear by greedy businessmen fearful of losing contracts in response to a groundswell of public opinion to which they pay attention far too late in the day. The boycott should have been led by the athletes in the first place, ensuring that the Olympics went somewhere that would treat them as games and not politics, leaving the whole Olympic ideal permanently stained with blood.
Apr 23rd, 2008, 10:56 AM
#32
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right Now in the IS, Congressional hearing have just started on the Tibet situation. It is heavily attended.
Sec of State John Negroponte is making his statement. Richard Gere will then speak to introduce the special envoy of HH The Dalai Lama, and other Tibetan scholars will also make statements.
It took decades of suffering but at least we are now getting an official forum for this horrific situation has has been going on for so long and has led inevitably to the current state of affairs.
Anyone who is interested can watch on CSpan2 this afternoon.
Peace
Sec of State John Negroponte is making his statement. Richard Gere will then speak to introduce the special envoy of HH The Dalai Lama, and other Tibetan scholars will also make statements.
It took decades of suffering but at least we are now getting an official forum for this horrific situation has has been going on for so long and has led inevitably to the current state of affairs.
Anyone who is interested can watch on CSpan2 this afternoon.
Peace
Feb 1st, 2009, 07:55 AM
#33
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wrote Dialogues Tibetan Dialogues Han, a travelogue from Tibet, after having chatted with hundreds of Tibetans in Tibet, before the protests/riots in 2008.
Worth reading as it's the Tibetans talking.
http://www.amazon.com/Dialogues-Tibe.../dp/9889799936
Worth reading as it's the Tibetans talking.
http://www.amazon.com/Dialogues-Tibe.../dp/9889799936
Feb 1st, 2009, 11:45 AM
#35
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 23,361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting editorial from today's New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/01/we...ef=todayspaper
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/01/we...ef=todayspaper
