Tag - stream

Beijing advances a perplexing new argument in Dalai Lama succession fight

1 month ago

With the Dalai Lama’s 90th birthday less than a year away, China is struggling to control the narrative regarding his succession.

The facts are quite clear: Tibetan Buddhists have their own centuries-old methods for identifying reincarnate lamas, and international standards on human rights state that freedom of religious belief includes the right to “train, appoint, elect or designate by succession appropriate leaders.”

The current Dalai Lama laid out his reasoning on this topic back in 2011, issuing a statement that reviewed the history of reincarnate lama lineages, raised several possibilities for how his successor could be found, and closed with a plan for how this question would be resolved:

When I am about ninety I will consult the high Lamas of the Tibetan Buddhist traditions, the Tibetan public, and other concerned people who follow Tibetan Buddhism, and re-evaluate whether the institution of the Dalai Lama should continue or not. On that basis we will take a decision. If it is decided that the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama should continue and there is a need for the Fifteenth Dalai Lama to be recognized, responsibility for doing so will primarily rest on the concerned officers of the Dalai Lama’s Gaden Phodrang Trust… I shall leave clear written instructions about this. Bear in mind that, apart from the reincarnation recognized through such legitimate methods, no recognition or acceptance should be given to a candidate chosen for political ends by anyone, including those in the People’s Republic of China.

This reasoning has been embraced by many around the world; in the United States, the Tibetan Policy and Support Act tasked the State Department with establishing international diplomatic coalitions to “oppose any effort by the Government of the People’s Republic of China to identify or install Tibetan Buddhist religious leaders in a manner inconsistent with the established religious practice and system of Tibetan Buddhism” and “ensure that the identification and installation of Tibetan Buddhist religious leaders, including a future 15th Dalai Lama, is determined solely within the Tibetan Buddhist faith community, in accordance with the universally recognized right to religious freedom.”

China’s abduction of the Panchen Lama at the age of six and his two decades of enforced disappearance since then undoubtedly set the stage for this dispute. By kidnapping a child, Beijing clearly showed the world what religious freedom with Chinese characteristics entails.

A new spin on an old classic

If Tibetans, the United States, and others favor respecting Tibetan Buddhist tradition and compliance with human rights standards, how does Beijing justify its claim to authority over the Dalai Lama’s reincarnation? China, after all, maintains a rhetorical opposition to imperialism, always portraying itself as a victim of foreign domination and never a perpetrator; problems in Tibet are always caused by “outside foreign forces,” and are never a consequence of China’s brutal occupation of the Tibetan nation.

Typically, Beijing justifies this interference with misleading interpretations of history that often center on an artifact known as the Golden Urn. Earlier this year, for example, a Chinese state media broadcast referred to the use of the Golden Urn as “the most pivotal step” in recognizing a reincarnate lama, a claim that does not stand up to scrutiny.

I was interested to see that Lhajam Gyal (Ch: Laxianjia), a deputy director of the Institute of Religion at the China Tibetology Research Center (CTRC), recently offered an alternate justification. At an All-China Journalists Association meeting he spoke on this issue, saying:

“Although the Dalai Lama is currently outside China, his reincarnation is still part of the [Tibetan Buddhist] Gelug tradition and under the jurisdiction of the Chinese government, as most temples are located within China.”

The CTRC is a government-founded institute that frequently serves as a mouthpiece to defend Chinese rule in Tibet, and so it’s interesting to see a senior staffer there provide a different reason for Beijing’s interference in Tibetan Buddhism. The idea that the Dalai Lama’s reincarnation is under the jurisdiction of the Chinese government because of the location of Tibetan Buddhist temples (hereafter Lhajam’s Rule) strikes me as quite flimsy, however, and it immediately fills me with more questions.

Would Lhajam Gyal, the CTRC, and the CCP agree that according to Lhajam’s Rule jurisdiction over reincarnation passed out of Beijing’s hands during the Cultural Revolution, when almost all Tibetan Buddhist sites in the PRC were shuttered? Tibetan Buddhist communities are indigenous to Nepal, India, Bhutan, Mongolia, and parts of Russia; perhaps the CTRC could tally up their temples and see which nation gained jurisdiction over reincarnation during this period. It would also be helpful if they studied the reopening of Tibetan Buddhist temples in the PRC following Mao’s death in order to establish when jurisdiction over reincarnation returned to Beijing.

I also wonder if Lhajam’s Rule was in effect during the time of Tibet’s undisputed independence following the collapse of the Qing dynasty. Four of the six major Gelug monasteries lay within the territory of the Ganden Phodrang state, far from the control of the Republic of China. The standard CCP line is that China was still in charge of the reincarnation of the 14th Dalai Lama, which took place during this time, but Lhajam’s Rule would appear to disagree.

Relying on the location of temples also seems to leave Lhajam’s Rule with easily-exploitable loopholes. Many Tibetans now live far from the Land of Snows; could they go on a temple-building spree and give jurisdiction over reincarnation to another country? India seems like a natural choice, with a number of historic Tibetan monasteries in places like Ladakh and new Tibetan refugee colonies established all over the country. Would the CTRC be willing to certify that the Indian government has the exclusive power to confirm reincarnations after constructing the requisite number of temples?

Finally, I must ask why Lhajam’s Rule is applied solely to Tibetan Buddhism and not to other faiths. Beijing has repeatedly claimed the authority to select Catholic bishops for churches in China over the Pope’s objections, but Italy has a far greater number of Catholic churches; shouldn’t Beijing agree that the Italians have a natural authority on this matter and condemn their own interference?

A thankless task

Lhajam’s Rule is silly, but it isn’t much sillier than the spectacle of a self-professed atheist state claiming the power to recognize reincarnations. In the end, China’s arguments about the Golden Urn and the location of temples are both attempts to put a rhetorical fig leaf over the naked reality: China has occupied Tibet, and has decided that it therefore owns Tibetan Buddhism, a faith that was historically practiced in a half dozen countries and has now spread around the world.

Lhajam Gyal apparently has a reputation for being a talented writer, but his job at CTRC is coming up with justifications for China’s repression of Tibetan Buddhism even if they’re half-baked. It’s enough to make you feel a degree of second-hand embarrassment for him – if you can overcome the distastefulness of someone offering these arguments in support of the policies of a government that kidnapped one of his fellow Tibetans at the age of six.

All things considered, I do have a certain amount of appreciation for Lhajam’s Rule. Beijing’s false claims about the Golden Urn have been repeated ad nauseum, and it’s nice to have someone make the effort to come up with something new – particularly when it’s such a peculiar argument. If the CTRC isn’t capable of telling the truth about Tibetan Buddhism then I hope they will keep inventing new claims; perhaps the next one will be a winner.

The human and environmental impacts of hydroelectric projects in Tibet presented at the water village in France

1 month ago

Vincent Metten

The water-village in Melle, France.

From July 16 to 21, the small village of Melle in the Deux-Sèvres region of France hosted a water village aimed at challenging mega-basin projects and the current agricultural model.

Protests against “mega-basins”

‘Mega-basins’ are huge open-air water reservoirs, over 70% of which are financed by public funds, and most of which pump water from underground aquifers.

A mega-basin in France.

According to the NGO Les Soulèvements de la Terre, a mega-basin refers to structures of over 50,000 cubic meters and/or more than one hectare in size. Mega-basins are different from hill reservoirs, which are filled by runoff and are more modest in size. These are ponds or puddles, used by less water-hungry farmers. But hill reservoirs can also be contested, particularly in the Alps, where they are used to produce artificial snow.

There is no official record of the exact number of mega-basins in France. So there’s a lot of mystery surrounding their number!

According to the independent investigative media Reporterre, the most reliable figure concerns the former Poitou-Charentes region, comprising the departments of Deux-Sèvres, (where the water village was installed) Charente-Maritime, Charente and Vienne. Nearly eighty-seven mega-basins are planned, all of which are the subject of legal challenges. Thirty-four have been cancelled thanks to the mobilization of associations.

According to Reporter’s estimates, based on information from Bassines non merci, nearly 300 mega-basins are planned throughout France. The real figure could be higher. An interactive map shows their location and characteristics.

This water issued from these mega-basins then benefits just 5% of French farms, and is used to boost the productivity of water-hungry crops (such as maize) that are ill-suited to climate change.

More than 120 environmental, farmers’, trade union and collective organizations mobilized to call for a nationwide halt to the construction and operation of the basins, and for an immediate moratorium.

Protests against mega-basins on 19 July and 20 July.

Protests against mega-basins on 19 July and 20 July.

This mobilization, which was followed by two major demonstrations on July 19 and 20, is the third of its kind, once again firmly supervised and repressed by the security forces. The previous two were held in 2022 and 2023 in the same region. The March 2023 demonstration against the Sainte Soline mega-farming project remains infamous for the scale and virulence of the police repression that befell the demonstrators (see the Reporterre report, Sainte-Soline, Autopsie d’un Carnage).

An international dimension of the water village

The village was attended by several thousand people, including some forty guests from abroad (India, Brazil, Colombia, New Caledonia…). Swedish activist Greta Thunberg was also present, albeit discreetly. The village thus had an international dimension, which was reflected in the many debates, meetings and screenings organized throughout the event.

Some of the guests from foreign countries reading a statement of support.

ICT was invited to take part in two events at the Water Village. Firstly, I was able to speak about the mining situation in Tibet as part of the discussion on “Investigating water, extraction and the energy transition”. It brought together a fine line-up of speakers from the academic world and NGOs such as:

Célia IZOARD: journalist and philosopher, author of La Ruée minière au XXIe siècle : enquête sur les métaux à l’ère de la transition (The mining rush in the XXe century: an investigation into metals in the age of transition),
Claire DEBUCQUOIS; Fédération nationale de la Recherche Scientifique (FNRS research fellow),
Juan Pablo GUTIERREZ: ONIC delegate and member of the Yukpa people affected by an open-cast coal mining mega-project, Colombia,
and numerous collectives in struggle: No Cav against marble quarries in Tuscany, Italy, Ende Gelände against kohl mining activities in Germany, the collective in struggle against the lithium mine in Allier in France, Stop Micro 38 in France…

All these testimonies converge to demonstrate that the current capitalist system, driven by greed for natural resources, is the main driving force behind the proliferation of these destructive mining and industrial projects across the planet. In all the examples cited, the quest for profit, particularly for the large multinationals, take precedence over human rights.

Large dams: how to put an end to these weapons of domination?

ICT also spoke on a panel entitled “Large dams: how to put an end to these weapons of domination”. In addition to ICT, the panel included three speakers: a representative of the association SOS Loire vivante and Paula Davoglio Goes of the Movement of People Affected by Dams in Brazil. The presentations demonstrated that the problems associated with dams are very similar from one country to the next. These projects are generally imposed from the top down without any involvement or consultation with local populations, and often inflict serious impact on the life and culture of the populations concerned, as well as on the environment.

ICT’s participation in the panel on dams.

In Brazil, for example, which has some of the largest dams in the world (second only to the Three Gorges), some dams have burst, such as the Brumadinho dam in January 2019, resulting in the death and disappearance of 270 people. The Vale mining group had not informed the authorities of any anomaly suggesting that the disaster could have been avoided.

In 2015, for the COP21 in Paris, ICT published a report on water “Tibet’s water and global Climate Change” which addressed the issue of dams. Today, ICT’s research continues to study hydropower projects in Tibet, either completed or underway (there are said to be around 200). Evidence shows that one of Beijing’s objectives is to turn Tibet into an energy exporter, initially supplying central and eastern China as part of the West-to-East Energy Transmission Project, and then neighboring countries in Southeast Asia.

Risks of hydroelectric projects

As highlighted by an ICT news report in April this year, dams entail serious inherent risks for the local environment and its inhabitants. Three risks stand out:

Hydroelectric dams are sensitive to and increase the risk of earthquakes, landslides and flash floods, particularly in seismically active regions such as the Himalayas.
Dams are not environmentally friendly. They increase the human footprint in fragile and biodiversity-rich ecosystems, and interrupt essential aquatic life, soil and nutrient flows downstream. As well, the reservoirs created by land flooding also produce methane pollution, a potent greenhouse gas.
Dams also lead to the eviction of inhabitants from their traditional homes. Residents are often forced to leave, or forced to do so without consultation, and those displaced receive inadequate compensation or have no access to a fair procedure to seek redress for the damage they have suffered.

Dams in Tibet can certainly be seen as tools of domination both over the local population and the environment, but also more broadly over relations with neighboring countries. For example, along the Yarlung Tsangpo, which becomes the Brahmaputra, dams and other large infrastructure projects are used to lay claim to disputed territories on the border with India. They literally consolidate their territorial claims. India is wary of this situation and is also stepping up infrastructure development in the north of the country.

A threat to cultural heritage

To illustrate the impact of dams on cultural heritage, the water village screened the excellent documentary “La bataille du Côa, une leçon portugaise” (The Battle of the Côa, a Portuguese lesson) in the presence of director Jean-Luc Bouvret, about the resistance against a dam project in Sao that threatened to cover Paleolithic engravings over 20,000 years old. This mobilization, led by the schoolchildren, eventually paid off, and the state had to back down and halt construction of the dam.

The film echoes to a certain extend the Kamtok dam on the Drichu River, a tributary of the Yangtze, in Sichuan province east of Tibet, which threatens to bury several villages as well as several monasteries including the historic monasteries of Wonto and Yena, which survived the Cultural Revolution and house important mural paintings dating for some of them from the 14th century.

Wontö Rabten Lhunpo Tse Monastery

14th century murals in Wontö Monastery offering a glimpse into the rich artistic traditions of Tibet.

Several hundred residents demonstrated in Dege County to implore the Chinese authorities to reconsider their decision. On February 22, armed police arrested numerous Tibetan monks from Wonto and Yena monasteries as well as local residents, many of whom were beaten and injured. Video footage shows Chinese officials in black uniforms forcibly restraining the monks, who can be heard shouting to stop the dam’s construction. The Chinese authorities’ response was very heavy-handed, with numerous arrests. Several local representatives remain imprisoned to this day, facing heavy prison sentences for their peaceful mobilization (see ICT report).

Alternatives to hydroelectric dams

Although there is a global consensus on the need to accelerate investment in renewable energy to reduce the effects of climate change, hydroelectric dams carry inherent, serious and disproportionate risks for the local environment and residents and in many cases contribute to climate change. It is important to assess each hydroelectric dam project on a case-by-case basis, whether in France on the Loire, in the USA, in Brazil or in Tibet, and to remain cautious about the range of risks and costs involved. There are other paths to renewable energy development, and all sustainable paths are based on the rule of law, transparency, inclusion and accountability.

As with the mega-basins in France, we call for a moratorium on all dams under construction or planned in Tibet.

A note of hope: the Indian tribes of the Klamath Basin

To end on a hopeful note, I’d like to highlight the victorious battle won by the indigenous Indian tribes of the Klamath Basin, a river in the western United States in California, against four hydroelectric dams that threatened their survival and that of the salmon are to be dismantled. They won their case and the state was forced to dismantle these infrastructures, an unprecedented undertaking to restore a river. This is the epilogue to a war that has been going on for over twenty years between ranchers, landowners, tourism professionals and the “salmon people”, the indigenous tribes whose fate has steadily declined along with that of the river. And, for once, the Indians have won.

My take on the Congressional delegation and US support for Tibet

2 months ago

Bhuchung K. Tsering

1 Comment

In the weeks leading to Congress passing the Promoting a Resolution to the Tibet-China Dispute Act (S.138) in June and the bill’s signature into law by President Biden on July 12, 2024, there was an unusually strong media interest in Tibet, particularly in India. This was further heightened by the visit of a high-level congressional delegation to Dharamsala in June to meet His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan leadership. The media directly linked the delegation’s visit to the passage of the legislation, and diverse analyses appeared on the timing and motivation of the American as well as the Indian government.

The congressional delegation meeting with His Holiness the Dalai Lama in Dharamsala on June 19, 2024, Sikyong Penpa Tsering and Secretary Tenzin Taklha are sitting beside the Dalai Lama. (Photo: Tenzin Choejor, OHHDL)

First, what is this new legislation on Tibet? Here, as in the parable of some blind men describing an elephant from their individual perspectives, the legislation is being described by people in different ways, including by President Joe Biden, who issued a statement after signing it into law saying, “The Act does not change longstanding bipartisan United States policy to recognize the Tibet Autonomous Region and other Tibetan areas of China as part of the People’s Republic of China,” a standard narrative of the Administration (see below for congressional refutation of this). The International Campaign for Tibet (ICT) has outlined the actual content and the full text can also be read online.

To me, politically, the Resolve Tibet Act, as the Bill has popularly come to be called, is fundamentally the outcome of a realization by the US Congress that a new initiative to encourage the resolution of the Tibetan issue was needed in the absence of any movement in the past several years. The Bill asserts that “China is failing to meet the expectations of the United States to engage in meaningful dialogue with the Dalai Lama or his representatives or to reach a negotiated resolution that includes the aspirations of the Tibetan people.” The Bill therefore states, “…the dispute between Tibet and the People’s Republic of China must be resolved in accordance with international law, including the United Nations Charter, by peaceful means, through dialogue without preconditions.”

On how such a settlement could be encouraged, the Bill’s premise is that China currently lacks legitimacy in its occupation of Tibet and the only way to attain any form of legitimacy is to resolve the “dispute” through negotiations without preconditions with envoys of H.H. the Dalai Lama. The emphasis on not having any preconditions is because Congress believes the obstacle to a negotiated solution is because the Chinese authorities are “including a demand that he [the Dalai Lama] say that Tibet has been part of China since ancient times, which the Dalai Lama has refused to do because it is inaccurate.”

This leads us to another aspect of the Bill, namely the historical status of Tibet. Point 3 of the Bill’s Statement of Policy says, “the People’s Republic of China should cease its propagation of disinformation about the history of Tibet, the Tibetan people, and Tibetan institutions, including that of the Dalai Lama” and Point 5 of its Findings assert that “The United States Government has never taken the position that Tibet was a part of China since ancient times.”

The Chinese government clearly understood this message from the Bill about Tibet’s historical status. Soon after it becoming law, in addition to the usual reaction issued by the Chinese Foreign Ministry that it “interferes in China’s domestic affairs,” additional responses were also released in the name of the National People’s Congress and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, both at the national level as well as by the units in the Tibet Autonomous Region. Further, statements were also issued in the name of “experts”. All of these make an effort to assert China’s historical claim over Tibet.

President Biden’s July 12 statement does not challenge the policy position outlined in the Bill about historical independence of Tibet. Rather, the statement appears to be more to placate the Chinese Government. An evidence of this can be seen from the US Embassy in China posting the White House statement both in Chinese and English and, lest the Chinese side miss getting the message, even terming it, “Important statement from President Biden on his signing of the “Promoting a Resolution to the Tibet-China Dispute Act.” “

拜登总统就签署“推进解决藏中争议法案”的重要声明。https://t.co/0phOA4jlFw https://t.co/UYZQF9919p pic.twitter.com/dwySRDrpPj

— Ambassador Nicholas Burns (@USAmbChina) July 15, 2024

In fact, this Bill’s proponents in the Congress specifically wanted to challenge such statements from the Administration as they undermine US position. In a joint op-ed on October 14, 2022, the two House leads, Michael McCaul and Jim McGovern, laid out their reasons for introducing this Bill, “So why do American diplomats continue to say, “Tibet is part of China?” This kind of rhetoric undermines both the US position and the Tibetans’ freedoms. The CCP then uses it to support the lie that “Tibet has been a part of China since ancient times,” and the State Department perpetuates this propaganda by failing to rebut it. Young foreign service officers enter with the impression that, rather than an unresolved conflict, Tibet is an internal matter of China, which is exactly what PRC wants them to think.

“US policy on Tibet has lost its way. That is why we are introducing the Promoting a Resolution to the Tibet-China Conflict Act. The bill would make it US policy that the Tibetan people have a right to determine how they are governed, and ensure that US policymakers accurately treat this issue as an unresolved conflict between Tibet and the PRC, not as an internal affair of China.”

In the light of the Resolve Tibet Act, the Administration now and in the future will have to be categorically clear on the historical independent status of Tibet or else they will be violating the law of the land.

Congressional delegation to Dharamsala

The congressional delegation to Dharamsala in June led by Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Michael McCaul certainly was connected to the legislation, but not in the way the media projected it. Rather than being a short notice political act to serve a narrow purpose, it was a project, the planning for which started in April 2022.

Sikyong Penpa Tsering, head of the Central Tibetan Administration, and ICT Board Chair Richard Gere were in town in April 2022 for a planned series of meetings, including a strategy session convened by then Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Sikyong Penpa Tsering had brought with him communications from His Holiness the Dalai Lama to the leaders. Among the issues the Sikyong raised were a legislation to update the Tibetan Policy Act, and a visit by a congressional delegation to Dharamsala. Speaker Pelosi and her colleagues, including Rep. Jim McGovern, not only embraced both the proposals, but also began discussions on how to execute them.

As in the past, they also agreed on the importance of bipartisan participation in the initiatives. Among relative new friends of Tibet who the Sikyong and Richard met in April 2022 was Representative Michael McCaul, who was then the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. While subsequent meetings indicated McCaul’s own strong personal interest in His Holiness the Dalai Lama and Tibet, one of his staffers then was someone who had worked on our issue for another member of Congress with strong support for Tibet.

Representative Michael McCaul reading the communication from H.H. the Dalai Lama presented to him by Sikyong Penpa Tsering during their meeting in Washington, DC on April 28, 2022. ICT Chair Richard Gere is alongside him.

In a social media posting soon after the meeting with Representative McCaul, Sikyong Penpa Tsering said, “We discussed the critical situation inside Tibet and our collaboration and initiatives moving forward to advance the Tibet cause.”

Had the honour of meeting @RepMcCaul, alongside Richard Gere, Chairman of ICT @SaveTibetOrg. We discussed the critical situation inside Tibet and our collaboration and initiatives moving forward to advance the Tibet cause. pic.twitter.com/QGnOsFHcHL

— Sikyong Penpa Tsering (@SikyongPTsering) April 28, 2022

Representative McCaul not only expressed his readiness on joining the initiative on the legislation, but also expressed his keen interest in visiting Dharamsala. As he tweeted then, he referred to His Holiness as “one of the most inspiring spiritual leaders of our time” and also committed his support saying, “I will continue to stand with Tibetans and all those who suffer under the CCP’s oppression.”

Pleasure meeting with @SikyongPTsering and @SaveTibetOrg Chair Gere to receive a message from the Dalai Lama, one of the most inspiring spiritual leaders of our time. I will continue to stand with Tibetans and all those who suffer under the CCP’s oppression. pic.twitter.com/iZEKGv3enN

— Michael McCaul (@RepMcCaul) April 28, 2022

Thus, the execution of the two plans began simultaneously.

Two and a half months after the meetings, “H.R.8365 Promoting a Resolution to the Tibet-China Conflict Act” was introduced in the House of Representatives on July 13, 2022, with Congressmen Jim McGovern and Michael McCaul as the lead.

Parallelly, discussions were going on between the Office of Tibet and ICT on the one side and congressional offices about the proposed congressional delegation to Dharamsala. Speaker Pelosi was trying to find the convenient time for such a bipartisan delegation.

In the meanwhile, the mid-term elections in November 2022 saw the Republicans taking over the House and McCaul became chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

The first order of business on Tibet in the new Congress was to reintroduce the Resolve Tibet Act. Although senators Jeff Merkley (D-OR) and Todd Young (R-IN) had introduced it in the Senate in December 2022, there was no time to complete the passage before the new Congress began in January 2023.

Thus, at the end of January 2023, we saw the legislation being reintroduced in both the Senate and the House. In 2024 the House passed it in February and the Senate passed it in May with some amendments. This necessitated the House having to vote once more to pass the Senate version, which it did on June 12. One month later, on July 12, 2024 President Biden signed it into law.

Screenshot of the final vote tally in the House of Representatives on the Resolve Tibet Act on June 12, 2024.

Chairman McCaul wanted to do a HFAC delegation that finally began to take shape early this year culminating in their visiting Dharamsala in June. Its members were: Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), Chairman, House Foreign Affairs Committee; Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Speaker Emerita; Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-IA), House Veterans Affairs Committee; Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), Ranking Member, House Foreign Affairs Committee; Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY), House Ways and Means Committee; Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA), Ranking Member, House Committee on Rules; and Rep. Ami Bera (D-CA), House Foreign Affairs Committee. The Tibetan community held a public reception for the delegation during which the members spoke about their support for the Dalai Lama and Tibetan people.

The congressional delegation with Tibetan legislative and executive leaders outside the Tibetan parliament house in Dharamsala on June 18, 2024. (Photo: Tenzin Phende, CTA)

It so happened that the timing of the delegation’s visit was soon after the passage of the Resolve Tibet Act by both the House and the Senate. Just as it took more than two years for this bill to be passed and become a law, the congressional delegation was also being worked on for more than two years.

In a statement before the visit, Chairman McCaul said, “This visit should highlight the bipartisan support in the US Congress for Tibet to have a say in their own future.” In the same statement, HFAC Ranking Member Gregory Meeks expanded on the objectives saying, “I’m also honored to have a chance to meet with His Holiness the Dalai Lama and to hear his views on how the American People can help advance the Tibetan people’s struggle for autonomy.”

In general congressional delegations, both by members and by staffers, to Tibet and to the Tibetan community in the Indian subcontinent have played crucial role in the formulation of US programmatic and policy support. Chairman McCaul is the second HFAC chair to lead a delegation to Dharamsala. Way back in August 1997, chair of what was then called House International Relations Committee, Congressman Benjamin A. Gilman (R-NY), led a bipartisan delegation to Dharamsala with Congressmen Gary Ackerman (D-NY) and Eni Faleomavaega (D-AS).

The Dalai Lama 89th birthday: A Celebration of Teaching

2 months ago

Franz Matzner

From July 1st through the 6th, I had the privilege of participating in the second International Tibet Youth Forum and attending His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s 89th birthday in Dharamshala.

I witnessed firsthand dignitaries, monastics, and citizens gather to recognize the Dalai Lama’s decades of dedication to compassion, preservation of the Tibetan people’s ancient civilization, and democratic freedom.

As we know, the celebration echoed around the world, befitting the Dalai Lama’s global leadership and universal message of kindness.

Despite his absence as he is in the United States, recovering from knee surgery, the crowd joined hands in spirited acknowledgment of the Dalai Lama’s service, not just to the Tibetan people’s struggle to peaceably end the People’s Republic of China’s occupation, but also to the principles of the oneness of humanity, regardless of nationality, origin, or belief.

Woven together with His Holiness’ contributions as an emissary of justice, much emphasis was placed on the necessity to find a concrete path toward a stable, mutually beneficial agreement between Tibetan leadership and Chinese authorities.

Particularly noteworthy to me was the Tibetan community’s rallying around the recently passed Resolve Tibet Act by the U.S Congress, which expresses the Tibetan people’s aspiration of self-determination. The law also takes direct aim at the PRC’s slanderous attacks on His Holiness and constant disinformation campaigns that attempt to substitute lies for historical fact in service to its agenda of domination.

Proud to have contributed my part on behalf of the International Campaign for Tibet in partnership with the Office of Tibet and many other Tibet supporters from around the world to advance the bill, it was incredibly moving to experience the significance the law is to the Tibetan people—pragmatically and as a beacon of hope to those within Tibet trapped by the fear of constant surveillance, arrest, and torture.

Befittingly, however, His Holiness’ birthday was filled with energetic joy. In defiance of Beijing’s agenda to erase Tibet’s ancient civilization, performers ranging from older representatives to the very young gifted the crowd with traditional, dance and music.

Dancers swirled in complex, synchronized movement, voices raised in Tibet’s distinctively pitched signing, and musicians artfully manipulated traditional percussion and string instruments

As mentioned above, I also had the privilege of participating in the youth forum that preceded the birthday celebration. Hosted by the Central Tibetan Administration, the forum brought together young Tibetans from 13 countries for discussion and advocacy trainings.

Speakers included, the Venerable Geshe Lhadkor, Director of Tibetan Works and Archives, Dr. Tenzin Dorjee, Strategist and Senior Researcher, Tibet Action Institute, Bhutilla Karpoche, Member of Provincial Parliament, Canada, Namgyal Gangshontsang, Mayor of Oetwil am See, Switzerland, and many others.

Once again, we were gifted by several performances conveying the distinctive nature of Tibetan artistry.

The gorgeously embroidered costume and elaborate masks were especially indicative of the vibrancy and depth of Tibet’s customs These displays provided another boost of dedication to transferring the beauty from this to generations to come.

The panels themselves offered introduction to a range of core advocacy methods, including leadership training, non-violent activism, interacting with elected officials, campaign design, movement building, and more.

It was easy to tell from the young students’ active engagement, repeated show of dedication to building their own advocacy skills, and interest in organizing their communities, the fire that continues to ignite the younger generation’s passion for change.

When asked about his participation as a speaker, Namgyal Gangshontsang, whom I met at the forum, replied “It was an honor to be part of the International Tibet Youth Forum 2024 with so many motivated conference participants.” adding “the speeches, discussions… [and] training sessions were fabulous and extremely motivating at the same time…in my view, it was a complete success.”

I could not agree more. It was incredibly satisfying to help illustrate strategies to interact with policy makers and to conduct advocacy training to provide tools to advance the Tibetan cause in the participants respective political systems.

I firmly believe strengthening the next generation’s efforts to effect change is crucial. There can be no better advocates than younger Tibetans to fulfill the end of China’s oppression. Afterall, the future belongs to them.

A journey from the Langtang mountains to the Netherlands

2 months ago

Guest

A research attempt into China’s visa practice, transnational repression and the limits to overcome the fears in Tibetan diaspora

By: Simon van Dongen

I am a Dutchman who is fascinated by Tibet, because of its nature and culture. A country with a two-thousand-year-old history, situated on a plateau with an average elevation of 4500 meters above sea-level. Today, Tibet is a highly restricted area. I have never been there, and I will probably never go there. Instead of travelling to Tibet I went to Nepal. Over there I met people from the Nepalese Himalayas who share Tibetan heritage. They are called Sherpa. Calm and warm people. There, in Langtang National Park, I had my first encounter with Tibetan culture.

It was a long journey. Although it looked nearby on the map, it took 7 hours to reach Langtang National Park from the capital Kathmandu. This narrow mountain dirt road was a horrifying experience. Eventually, I arrived at Dhunche, which is close to the Tibetan border and the starting point for a major trekking route. The road I took is portrayed on the map below.

Walking up the Langtang valley was like walking in a different world for me. Coming from a country below sea level, I was now walking between the highest mountains on earth. As shown on the map, I walked from a place near Dhunche towards Kyanjing. On the third day hiking, near Langtang village, I helped planting potatoes at a local farm. A picture I made that day is shown here. This intercultural interaction felt very special, partly because it all happened at an altitude of around 3500m.

Just before my travels, I finished my Human Geography thesis at Utrecht University: The flip side of the Chinese expansion of Tibet. Also, I read the biography of the former Tibetan political prisoner Palden Gyatso. Because of these documents, it became obvious to me that China has a full grasp on Tibetans within Tibet. After everything I had learned about Tibet, I realised that on the other side of this mountain in Langtang Valley, the Tibetan culture is eradicated.

A major part of my knowledge about Tibet I retrieved from two interviews during my thesis research. I interviewed Tsering Jampa and Wangpo Tethong, respectively the former and the current executive director of the “International Campaign of Tibet (ICT) Europe”. They predominantly spoke about repression within Tibet, but also mentioned Chinese transnational repression of Tibetans in the Netherlands. How and why does China repress people in my country? My curiosity around this question kept on triggering me after my trip to Nepal. This made me want to take action and return to the ICT to apply as a volunteer.

Tibetan anxieties form obstacles too high

Wangpo Tethong is a 61-year-old ICT director who came to the Netherlands two years ago. He gave me a warm welcome at the ICT office in Amsterdam. We realised that we wanted to add to the recent research: Chinese Transnational Repression of Tibetan Diaspora Communities of ‘The Tibetan Centre for Human Rights and Democracy’ (TCHRD). Although this research provides proof of transnational repression on Tibetans, I think it gets too little attention. After a discussion with Wangpo, I decided to try to create context around this subject in the Netherlands specifically.

The story of journalist Marie Vlaaskamp in De Volkskrant added to my concern about transnational repression. Chinese police in the Netherlands used intimidation to silence her critical view on China. Within this newspaper article she exposed these acts. I realised the Chinese intimidation not only impacts Tibetans and Uyghurs in the Netherlands but also journalists. While this scared me, I still felt the urge to research transnational repression.

Wangpo Tethong introduced me to Dawa Tsering, former president of the Tibetan community in the Netherlands. He fled from the Chinese occupation in Tibet when he was a child. We had a long discussion about potential research. The three of us came up with a plan for a small case-study on Tibetans in the Netherlands. By analysing what happens when Dutch Tibetans apply for a visa to travel to Tibet, we were hoping to provide proof of transnational repression of Tibetans in the Netherlands.

Dawa Tsering spoke about Chinese intimidation he experienced while applying for a Visa for Tibet. He was also invited to Brussels, where he spoke to the audience in the European parliament. I quote from Dawa Tsering’s speech on Novembre 30th 2023:

“I feel like I am being watched constantly and every step of me is being tracked. It is a scary thought to think about how much they actually know about me and my family and what they could do to us.”

I was optimistic about conducting research to uncover more of these Chinese intimidation stories. However, Dawa Tsering warned us about difficulties we would face when trying to interview Tibetan people. He explained that most Tibetans in the Netherlands will not speak up about the Visa application.

“While now, most of us are being denied a visa, it is not clear why some people do get visas and others do not. This unclarity intensifies the worries amongst Tibetans to come under the attention of the Chinese government. It might mean that they will not ever be able to return to Tibet and see their family again.”

According to this quote from Dawa Tsering, Tibetan people are scared to attract attention of the Chinese government. This is especially the case when people still want to visit their family in Tibet. Because of this, Wangpo proposed to search for Dutch Tibetans who do not have aspiration to travel to Tibet, nor have family over there. Although we searched for these participants, we did not find anyone as people were unwilling to speak for different reasons. Some Tibetan people were interested to apply for a visa and talk about the process at first. Later, they turned down the request to speak with us. This process was food for thought for me. How is it possible that virtually no one wants to talk about this?

New visa types leave doubts unanswered

To illustrate the problem, it is important to know the context about visa applications for Tibet. To gather information about documents required to travel to Tibet, I read the ICT-report “Access Denied”, I searched on the web and talked to travel agencies and a tourist who went to Tibet. Additionally, I used some of the knowledge I gathered during my thesis to provide context

If someone in Europe wants to travel to Tibet as a tourist, they only need a Tibet-permit if they stay shorter then 15 days. This is a trial policy announced by the Chinese government for visitors from six European countries, including the Netherlands. This policy was introduced on the first of December 2023 and will last a year. In order to stay longer then 15 days, tourists also need to apply for a visa at a Chinese consulate. The permit is provided by the tourists’ travel agency. If you have patience, you can deal with the restrictions and have a deep pocket, you can travel to Tibet as a Tourist.

It appeared like China has adopted a liberal tourist policy. However, travels through Tibet are regulated by China. On top of that, a fake reality is portrayed to these tourists. Tourists are only allowed to go to specific locations where they often see actors imitating Tibetan culture. These aspects make me strongly doubt the liberalism in Chinese tourist policy.

From what I have learnt, European citizens with Tibetan heritage experience way more difficulties in applying for a visa to travel to Tibet than people without. This is because they are limited to apply for the family-visit-visa. This type of visa comes with two extra conditions, namely an interview at the Chinese consulate and Chinese surveillance.

The two mentioned visa are shown here. (Left: tourist visa; Right: family-visit visa)

In the next part some stories of Tibetans applying for a visa to travel to Tibet will be given.

The ICT office in Brussels conducted a survey online in 2019. Tibetans were asked to anonymously tell their stories about their visa application for Tibet. Most of the respondents were Belgian Tibetans. One of these people explained the following about their visa application:

“My interview was around 25 minutes. The interview was all about my past and present life. I applied in Brussels Chinese visa application Center. They have asked about His Holiness the Dalai lama and his political perspective.”

So, the Chinese officials are gathering personal information, which I think they can use against you. Additionally, if an applicant says one critical thing about China, the visa will most probably not be given. Another Belgian respondent provided the following statement to the ICT:

“They asked me my birthplace and I answered them “Tibet”. Immediately they changed the visa form in English to Chinese. Then I had to give them all the information of my family members and I need to have introduction of to whom I want to visit and need two invitation letters… (…) Finally they denied to give me visa”^[1]

Even after sharing the required invitation letters from family in Tibet and sharing personal details of family members, this person is still denied access to Tibet.

Of course, I would like to speak to people like from the last quote. Unfortunately, visa application volunteers were not available. A few weeks ago, Vincent Metten, EU Policy Director at ICT, told me the situation in Belgium is comparable:

“… you said Tibetans were not willing to speak and so on. (…) I think that’s also something we face in Belgium because there is a lot of prudency, people don’t want to have an impact on their chances to visit their families and friends in the future.”

ICT Europe’s EU Policy Director Vincent Metten, who conducted the online survey, says ‘there is a lot of prudency” among Tibetans in Belgium to speak up about their visa application. Some awareness about the situation was created in 2019, but because of the pudency not much information has come out since then.

Some Tibetans who want to return to Tibet restrain from speaking up against China because they fear that their visa application will be denied. During the application process China can surveil Tibetans abroad and keep them quiet. Eventually most Tibetans abroad are not granted a visa. China presents itself as liberal with their 14-day free visa period, but to me this is just a sham.

Intimidation is effective

While trying to uncover what Chinese actions caused intimidation of Tibetans, I realised that the intimidation is the reason that it is not uncovered. It is painful to admit, but intimidation as a means of transnational repression by China is effective. Tibetan voices all over the world are silenced because of it. Although stories about Chinese transnational repression are exposed by the TCHRD and the ICT, the subject does not get the attention it deserves.

Personally, it feels very unfair that Tibetans cannot access their homeland freely. I was lucky to experience the mountain culture and nature near the Tibetan border. With that in mind, I try to imagine how painful it is for the Tibetan diaspora to see this all be locked away by China. The Chinese border does the same thing as the visa constrains do; it breaks up Tibetan families. Nevertheless, during my time as an ICT volunteer I experienced the strong sense of community in the Tibetan diaspora. To me, this is pure inspiration and a sign of resilience.

Footnote:

[1] Some spelling adjustments were made to make it more readable

* The author is an ICT volunteer. He tells the story how he tried to find evidence of Chinese interference and intimidation of the Tibetan community in the Netherlands

The Dalai Lama and power of collective supplication

2 months ago

Bhuchung K. Tsering

As I write this, His Holiness the Dalai Lama is in the United States for treatment for a knee problem he has been having for many years. In fact, available public information shows that as early as in 2003, His Holiness alluded to having issues with his knees. During a public talk in Boston in September that year, while expressing his skepticism about those who claim special powers, His Holiness jokingly said, “If someone truly has healing power, I’d like to call about my knees.”

In recent years, it was apparent that the knee problem had worsened, and it was disconcerting for us to see His Holiness experience discomfort while walking. Therefore, like all his devotees, disciples, well-wishers, and admirers, I welcome his coming to the United States for treatment and offer my fervent prayers for its success.

A partial panoramic view of the massive crowd along the street outside the hotel in New York city welcomes H.H. the Dalai Lama on June 23, 2024 (Photo: Tencho Gyatso/ICT)

His Holiness arrived in New York after flying from New Delhi to Zurich and then to an airport in New Jersey. It was heartwarming to see several thousand devotees, including Tibetans, members of the Himalayan community, Mongolians, Vietnamese, and others gathering to welcome him at his landing venues and hotels. In the United States, in addition to the very long queue on the road from the airport in New Jersey, several blocks in New York on the street leading to the hotel were engulfed by well-wishers. The voluntary coming together of people reminds me of the perspective of H.H. the Dalai Lama shared by Rajmohan Gandhi, grandson of Mahatma Gandhi, in 2007. While participating in a panel discussion at Emory University in Atlanta in October 2007, Rajmohan Gandhi said this of the Dalai Lama, “This man without a home is loved in millions of homes. This man without a country is honored in country after country. This is no ordinary man, yet that universal pinnacle of happiness, returning home, has been denied to him. People of all kinds are at home with this homeless man.” Indeed.

When the announcement about His Holiness’ imminent treatment of his knee was made even before there was any circular from Dharamsala, devotees began to recite the mantra of the Medicine Buddha (ཏདྱཐཱ། ཨོཾ་བྷཻཥཛྱེ་བྷཻཥཛྱེ། མཧཱ་བྷཻཥཛྱེ་བྷཻཥཛྱེ། རཱཛཱ་སམུངྒ་ཏེ་སྭཱཧཱ། Tad-ya-ta: Om Be-kan-dze Be-kan-dze Ma-ha Be-kan-dze Ra-dza Sa-mung-ga-te So-ha). Invoking the Medicine Buddha is believed to be beneficial in the efficacy of medical treatments. Simultaneously, Tibetans residing in different parts of the world organized collective recitation of the mantra.

The community in the Dhoeguling Tibetan settlement in Mundgod, south India holding a collective prayer session for H.H. the Dalai Lama on June 19, 20204 (Photo credit: www.tibet.net)

Such collective prayer sessions are common in communities that follow Tibetan Buddhism. But they do not seem to be unique to us. A cursory look at the different religious traditions show that all of them embrace the special qualities of praying together. These are considered powerful moments that can spread positivity.

Supplication to Live Long

In Tibetan Buddhism one such collective prayer sessions is Tenshug (“firmly abide”), the ritual ceremony of supplicating to a lama to continue living on this earth for the sake of sentient beings. This is based on the belief that certain individuals, the Dalai Lamas being examples, with special realization have the power to decide the course of their lifespan and their rebirth. Therefore, supplicating to them is considered a spiritual way to ensure that their presence continues. As the lamas age, more such supplications are made at regular intervals by the disciples. For example, since January 2023, at least 10 Tenshugs have been offered to His Holiness by groups representing religious traditions, the Tibetan leadership, the Ladakhi community, school students and regional Tibetan communities. Later this year, the Monpa community of Arunachal Pradesh, Taiwanese Buddhists and a community representing Tibetan women are among those scheduled to make their Tenshug offerings.

I returned from a short trip to Dharamsala earlier this month where I was attending a Tenshug that the former officials of the Central Tibetan Administration (གཞུང་ཞབས་ཟུར་པ།) were offering to H.H. the Dalai Lama. We were joined by the former security personnel (སྐུ་སྲུང་ཟུར་པ།) and present & former members of the Tibetan Medical & Astro Institute (སྨན་བརྩིས་ཁང་།) in a joint supplication.

The actual ceremony, which was based on the Dolkar Tsejin Yeshin Khorlo (སྒྲོལ་དཀར་ཚེ་སྦྱིན་ཡིད་བཞིན་འཁོར་ལོའི་སྒོ་ནས་བརྟན་བཞུགས། wish-fulfilling wheel of Life-giving White Tara) ritual, took place in the morning of June 11, 2024. This date was chosen because it fell on the 5th day of the 5th Tibetan month, the actual day when H.H. the Dalai Lama was born in 1935. The ceremony included prayer sessions, symbolic auspicious offerings by Prof. Samdhong Rinpoche who was serving as the Vajra Master of the ceremony, and a brief remark by His Holiness in which he repeated his conviction of living well beyond 100 years.

Samdhong Rinpoché offering a “long-life arrow” as part of the auspicious offerings during the Tenshug on June 11, 2024. (Photo: Tenzin Choejor/OHHDL)

There were other positive initiatives taken before this ceremony. The three supplicating organizations undertook Saving and Releasing the Lives of Animal (Tsethar and Sok-lu) by purchasing over one hundred sheep in Ladakh and entrusting them to the care of a family so that the sheep do not ever have to go to the slaughterhouse.

In any case, notwithstanding the comparatively short session of the ceremony its importance equally lay in the positivity engendered by the coming together of people from different parts of the world sharing the same devotion to His Holiness and with the same prayer for his continued well-being. May our collective prayer continue to see fruition so that all of us, Tibetans and non-Tibetans, can continue to benefit from His Holiness’ presence.

President Xi’s European Tour: Strategic moves and key outcomes

May 15, 2024

Vincent Metten

The Chinese President has just concluded a visit to Europe, his first since 2019. He visited three countries: France, Serbia, and Hungary. Why did China choose these three countries? And what results and lessons can be drawn from the Chinese President’s trip?

Chinese President Xi Jinping’s motorcade passes an overpass on which a Tibetan flag and a “Free Tibet” banner was hung by activists of the Students for a Free Tibet.

Visit to France

The Chinese President’s visit to France follows President Macron’s visit to China in April 2023. It was part of the 60th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries when General de Gaulle was in power. Besides being one of the major European countries and a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, one reason Beijing chose to kick off this visit of Europe in Paris can be partly explained by France’s position on Europe’s “strategic autonomy” from the USA, which it seeks to promote on the international stage. This approach aims to reduce Europe’s dependence on its American ally, particularly in matters of security and protection. Beijing views this position favorably as it aligns with the vision of a more multipolar world, less dominated by the United States.

Three Main Issues on the Political Agenda

Many subjects were on the agenda in France, but three main issues dominated the discussions: economic relations between France, the European Union, and China, characterized by a large trade deficit and Chinese state aid to its companies, which distorts free competition; international crises, particularly China’s stance on Moscow and its implications for the war in Ukraine. China has never condemned the war (referring to it as a “crisis”) and supports Russia, notably through the delivery of dual-use equipment. More than direct supply of weapons – a red line that China seems careful not to cross so far – it is the supply of machine tools and components for the production of these weapons that is the focus of attention. Thanks to commercial transactions by its companies, Beijing has enabled Moscow to revive its arms industry and gain an advantage in the conflict. China is unlikely to change its position on this issue.

Finally, the last major issue concerns environmental questions and climate change, in which France has played an important role in the past. In 2025, France will host the next United Nations Ocean Conference in Nice.

Human Rights marginalized

It’s highly probable that human rights were also discussed between the two Presidents, but in any case, in the public communication surrounding the visit on the French side, no mention was made of this subject, which is to be regretted. Prior to the Chinese President’s arrival and during his visit, the media, political representatives, NGOs, and members of the Uyghur and Tibetan communities widely highlighted the deplorable human rights situation in the country. A few days before the Chinese leader’s visit, the French President Macron met the President of the Central Tibetan Administration in Exile, Mr. Penpa Tsering, at an event at the Élysée Palace, to present the Legion of Honor to former Senator André Gattolin, known for his support to Tibetan. A meeting of this nature set a political precedent!

For their part, Tibetan supporters undertook protest rallies and even hung pro-Tibet banners from the Arc de Triomphe or from a bridge under which Xi Jinping’s convoy passed on its way from Orly airport to the capital. A major Tibetan demonstration was held on Place de la République on May 5, with several thousand participants. The Uyghurs also held a demonstration at Place de la Madeleine, despite intimidation and counter-demonstrations by pro-Beijing groups. On the political front, an open letter to the French President signed by 14 members of the French Senate’s Tibet Information Group highlighted Tibet’s geostrategic importance in Asia and urged the French President to put human rights and Tibet at the heart of his discussions with his Chinese counterpart. Also worthy of mention is the open letter published in Le Monde by Raphaël Glucksmann, Member of the European Parliament and head of the Socialist Party and Place Publique list in the European elections. In this open letter, he denounced the French President’s “obsequiousness” towards the Chinese leader and his lack of strategic vision.

Lack of European Unity

The French President invited the President of the European Commission to join a meeting with the Chinese President, which she accepted. A similar offer was made to German Chancellor Scholz, who apparently declined, having visited China a few days earlier. This lack of Frehc-German unity in the face of China is certainly not in the European camp’s favor, as it is yet another illustration of the lack of unity in the face of Beijing. China is well aware of this and is playing the “divide and conquer” card in its relations with European states.

Visits to Serbia and Hungary

This logic explains the subsequent visit to Belgrade, the capital of Serbia (which is not a member of the European Union), and then to Budapest in Hungary. In Serbia, Xi Jinping was warmly greeted at the airport by Serbian President Vucic (in France, it was Prime Minister Gabriel Attal who did the honors). The same was true in Hungary, where the Hungarian President met Xi at the plane. Red carpet, Chinese flags, glowing remarks from both sides: the aim was to demonstrate the excellent relations that unite Serbia, Hungary, and China.

One of the purposes for Xi’s visit to Serbia was to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the NATO bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade – an opportunity to criticize NATO in a European country that is not an alliance member, and implicitly reprimand NATO’s growing involvement in the Asia-Pacific region. China and Serbia proclaimed an “ironclad friendship” and a “shared future.” Serbia’s Vucic became the first European leader to commit to joining China in building a “community with a shared future.”

China has also successfully established military cooperation with this ally and has provided some military equipment to Belgrade (such as missiles and drones). Serbia’s military is relying on Chinese arms suppliers as tensions have increased with its smaller neighbor Kosovo, which declared independence in 2008 but the government in Belgrade does not recognize it, even though the U.S., U.K., and many other countries do. China and Kosovo do not have formal diplomatic relations as China does not recognize Kosovo as a sovereign state. On the contrary, China is supporting Belgrade’s position on Kosovo, and in exchange, Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic said that Serbia had “a clear and simple position regarding Chinese territorial integrity: Taiwan is China.” It is difficult to be more explicit than that.

Hungary and China signed some 18 cooperation agreements in sectors such as railways, IT, and nuclear energy. Hungary is emerging as an increasingly important production hub in Europe for Chinese automotive suppliers, including electric vehicle (EV) makers. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that “The two sides are ready to take the announcement of the establishment of an all-weather comprehensive strategic partnership for the new era as a new starting point to take bilateral relations and practical cooperation to a higher level.”

Conclusion

Xi’s visit to Serbia and Hungary has served several purposes: it has shown to its domestic audience that China has close friends in Europe, it tries to decrease the pressure on trade, security, and human rights coming from Europe, and these visits are chipping away at a world order he sees as dominated by the United States.

Serbia and Hungary don’t care about democracy or human rights. For them, foreign policy is strictly pragmatic and focused on economic interests. They are strategic gateways for Beijing toward Europe.

On the other side, China has not been successful over the past years in deepening its relations with other central and eastern European countries (with maybe the exception of Slovakia). Although China never recognized Russia’s behavior in Crimea or in Eastern Ukraine, China did not blame Russia for its military actions and is even supportive of Moscow in providing some dual-use equipment, which is feeding the war. This position is not appreciated by most of the eastern and central European countries, who have been under the domination of a communist country during the Cold War and are very supportive of Kiev against Russia’s aggression.

Amala and a future of more democracy

May 8, 2024

Ashwin Verghese

For Western audiences, part of the allure of Tibetan culture is that it often seems like an antidote to the doom loops of the modern world. That’s even the case when it comes to one of the West’s most exalted values: democracy.

In 2011, at the start of a decade that saw cult-of-personality leaders ascend to power in some of the world’s largest democracies, the Dalai Lama, one of the most popular figures on Earth and the public face of Tibetan society, voluntarily relinquished his political power. For the first time, Tibetans, spurred on by His Holiness, elected a president, known as the sikyong, who took over much of the temporal authority of the Dalai Lama (His Holiness remained the spiritual head of Tibetan Buddhism).

Impressively, Tibetans voted for sikyong in over 30 countries around the globe. Sadly, this did not include Tibet itself, where the occupying Chinese government suffocates democracy of any sort. But in exile, Tibetans, under the Dalai Lama’s leadership, have established not just an elected presidency but also a parliament (the Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile) and a judiciary (the Tibetan Supreme Justice Commission). These institutions should look familiar to Americans with our tripartite system of checks and balances.

Problems with democracy

Yet if Tibetans are repeating America’s experiments in democracy, they also seem to be running headlong into some of the same problems—namely partisanship and paralysis. In a thought-provoking blog post from earlier this year, my senior colleague Bhuchung K. Tsering asks, “Is Tibetan democracy in exile failing?” While chronicling the Dalai Lama’s heroic efforts to set up a democratic infrastructure and hailing Tibetan democracy at the grassroots level, Bhuchung la also lays out several of the recent controversies in the Tibetan system of government, including the further postponement of a parliamentary session late last year due to the lack of a quorum.

Democracy, Bhuchung writes, “is a double-edged sword”:

When those participating in it exercise their franchise responsibly, there is progress. But when some participants do not do so, they can lead to the stagnation or, worse, the retrogression of the society. The irony will be that people who fall in either of these categories will stick by their position, asserting that they are exercising their democratic rights.

Aptly, Bhuchung compares the dysfunction in the Tibetan parliament to the chaos in the US Congress last year when House Republicans ousted Speaker Kevin McCarthy and failed to agree on his replacement for several weeks. Indeed, it should come as no surprise that Bhuchung’s question about democracy failing applies just as easily to the United States.

But given these failures, I can’t help but wonder about a bigger question: Is democracy really the best option for society?

Worth saving?

In the United States, we hear that our democracy may not survive the next election. Yet if you survey the country, it can be hard to see why it’s worth fighting for in the first place. Across a range of issues, from abortion to gun control to Gaza, the will of the majority is thwarted by contemptuous elected officials alongside unelected jurists and bureaucrats. Policy in the US more often represents the desires of the wealthy than the wishes of the public.

Other pillars of democracy are hollow in today’s America. Protestors exercising their right to free speech are assaulted by militarized police. The mainstream press, supposedly a check on abuses of power, largely echoes the views of the powerful. And as I’ve written before, ordinary Americans lack the economic equality needed for meaningful participation in self-government.

These are all ongoing problems. But let’s not forget that America, the global bastion of freedom, is responsible for genocide, slavery and colonialization. Throughout history, democracies across the world have been guilty of the same. If this is what democracy produces, is it even redeemable?

Undemocratic alternative

Don’t get me wrong: I am very worried about the future of politics in the United States. And I certainly prefer living in America to living in a place like China that lacks even a fig leaf of popular rule. Yet seeing the disasters wrought by our governments, I can’t help but think there has to be a better option out there.

Working at the International Campaign for Tibet for the past six years has brought me closer to one potentially superior alternative: rule by the Dalai Lama. It’s easy to understand why having a leader for life would be horrifying, but what if that leader were His Holiness? I would certainly prefer him to any president the United States has ever had. One of the problems with democracy is that it tends to see the worst people in society—the greediest, most self-obsessed, most morally compromised—running for office or finding puppets to run on their behalf. But under the leadership of the Dalai Lama, you would have one of the world’s best people in power.

Yet the very qualities that make the Dalai Lama such a uniquely qualified leader seem to have informed his decision to give up his authority. In 2011, after he announced his decision to step down from politics, His Holiness acknowledged that he had “received repeated and earnest requests both from within Tibet and outside, to continue to provide political leadership.” But, he added, his decision was based on a wish “to benefit Tibetans in the long run.” “I trust that gradually people will come to understand my intention,” he said, “will support my decision and accordingly let it take effect.”

As an outsider in the Tibetan world, I’ve often wondered if most Tibetans truly want democracy or if they would gladly return to a theocratic system. I’ve asked some Tibetans informally, and, to my slight surprise, they’ve said they think democracy is preferable. One Tibetan friend told me that democracy, for all its flaws, is better than every other form of government.

Amala and democracy

The topic of democracy came up recently when ICT hosted a screening of the documentary “Amala,” followed by a Q&A with the film’s titular subject, Jetsun Pema. The younger sister of the Dalai Lama, she earned the moniker “Amala,” or “mother,” because she served for over four decades as president of the Tibetan Children’s Villages school system in South Asia.

When asked by an audience member about the importance of Tibetan democracy, Amala gave a detailed answer in which she acknowledged some of democracy’s shortcomings. “Democracy is for the people, by the people and with the people,” she said. “That’s something which the leaders tend to forget when they get to the top.”

Nevertheless, Amala said democracy is “very precious.” She spoke about the subject for several minutes; what I found remarkable was how much more deeply she seemed to grasp the meaning of democracy than the average politician does.

Inspiration from Amala

Amala made several observations that all of us who care about good governance would benefit from hearing:

Democracy and education: Unsurprisingly for a longtime educator, Amala emphasized the role of education in democracy. “Democracy is something you learn right from school,” she said. “People have to be really well-educated to know what democracy means,” she added. Amala’s comments brought to mind John Dewey, the 20th century American public intellectual who was a fierce advocate for democracy. According to Fordham University’s Nicholas Tampio, Dewey believed that “modern societies can use schools to impart democratic habits in young people from an early age.”
Democracy outside the ballot box: Amala also drew from her experience at the Tibetan Children’s Villages schools to show that democracy is more than just a formal procedure for electing politicians. “Even in the institutions like TCV,” she said, “we always followed a democratic way of selecting our principals, selecting our heads of the schools and even selecting the president of the Tibetan Children’s Village.” This process puts to shame the notion that democracy simply means giving people the freedom to elect one of two woeful candidates once every four years. Democracy is also about more than just politics. A healthier democracy would exist in a greater range of spheres of life, including democracy in the workplace, democracy at the local level, democracy in the development and use of technology and more.
Freedom and responsibility: Democracy is “freedom for everybody,” Amala said. “But it must be freedom with responsibility. You can’t just take democracy to do as you please. Democracy is something which has to be honored.” Amala’s words are an important message for audiences in the West, where the indulgence of individual freedom has run amok. It’s not an exaggeration to say that people focusing on their rights and ignoring their responsibilities is a big reason why democracy is in crisis today.

The need for more democracy

My favorite writer, Pankaj Mishra, once contrasted the notion of democracy as electoralism (simply electing politicians into office and letting them decide everything from there) or a tyranny of the majority (allowing the largest group in society to trample the needs of all others) with the vision of democracy as “a process of consensus-building, a process of transparent discussion, debate and decision-making.”

“I think what is really true,” Mishra said, “is that we haven’t really had much democracy, and what we need is more democracy.”

For that, Amala’s words are a good starting-off point. All in all, she expressed a vision of democracy that is fuller and deeper than what most of us experience, reminding us that as we look ahead to an uncertain political future, the path forward should not be to turn back on democracy but rather to lean further into it.

Watch Amala’s answer on Tibetan democracy:

Note: After six years at ICT, this will be my final blog post as an employee. Thank you to all of you who have read and commented over the years. I look forward to staying involved in the Tibetan movement. Bod Gyalo! (Victory for Tibet!)

Our Unwavering Mission to Uphold Peace and Human Rights

April 25, 2024

Guest

By Tenzin Passang. Tenzin Passang is a junior at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities and an intern at the International Campaign for Tibet.

“Our prime purpose in this life is to help others. And if you can’t help them, at least don’t hurt them.”
– His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama

Author Tenzin Passang outside of Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi’s office on Capitol Hill.

This quote of His Holiness manifested in true form when more than 200 Tibetan Americans and non-Tibetans convened in Washington DC for the annual Tibet Lobby Day. Their purpose: to speak for those who can’t. Tibet Lobby Day organized by the International Campaign for Tibet, empowers advocates with the opportunity to meet their legislators and address the plight our fellow Tibetans face in Tibet. This year our focus was on the Resolve Tibet Act, which recently passed the House of Representatives and now awaits Senate approval. The bill, if passed, will make it official US policy that the dispute between Tibet and China remains unresolved and must be resolved in accordance with international law.

It was overwhelming to see many people from all over the nation come to DC for our event. We received a very diverse group of participants including high school and college students, professionals, retired folk and partners of our organization. It was especially inspiring to see so many young Tibetans, and their absence from their school served as their recognition for a greater cause. Their presence meant a lot to me and not because they increased the number of participants, nor because we increased our outreach to more states, but because it served as a testament that the next generation who will eventually lead the movement to free Tibet was up to the task. I perceived a deeply rooted sense of patriotism and selflessness in them reflected by their commitment to advocate for people who they have never met, yet with whom they shared an intrinsic connection of identity, culture, and compassion.

Congressional meetings are often one-sided conversation; you best be prepared to present your issues articulately and persuasively. These meetings require you to understand the bills and relevant current affairs. I accompanied two Vermonters to their Congressional meetings, Tsering Yangkyi Cummings, a community leader, and her 14-year-old daughter, Tenzin Yega Cummings. Tsering and the rest of the group were well prepared, and we had organized in a way so that everyone on the team could contribute to the meeting. However, the person who made the most impactful contribution was Tenzin Yega. Yes, a 14-year-old advocate. Without her the meetings would not have been as productive as we would have liked. She displayed confidence and intellectual prowess by leading our conversations and by answering questions in a well-informed and articulate manner. I could see that the Congressional staffers were amazed, and I was as well.

Author Tenzin Passang with ICT staffers Sarah Kane and Tsejin Khando preparing materials for Tibet Lobby Day participants.

Her conversations were driven by her passion and a willingness to make a difference. Her calm and composed demeanor set the tone for our meetings, and she was quick to speak up when others had run out of things to say. During the free time between meetings, she would flip through info packets and prepare herself by practicing with her mother.

All in all, Tibet Lobby Day was a grand success. The event itself is an exercise of our right to petition our government, keeping the Tibetan spirit vibrant within the halls of Congress. The growth in participation since our inaugural year is exponential, with some non-Tibetan allies matching, if not surpassing, my own zeal—a fact that fills me with immense joy. Through our relentless advocacy we aim to marshal more support not just in Congress but the American population in general.

I am eager to participate next year as well and to find more energy and inspiration. Bod Gyalo! (Victory for Tibet!)

Is Tibetan democracy in exile failing?

January 2, 2024

Bhuchung K. Tsering

2 Comments

On Dec. 21, just four days before its rescheduled session was to begin, the Tibetan Parliament-in Exile announced that it was being postponed again to March, this time due to lack of a quorum.

The initial postponement was made on Sept. 28, 2023, when the Tibetan parliamentary secretariat issued a terse notice saying, “The remaining business of the 6th session of the 17th Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile has been postponed due to the absence of the requisite quorum needed for the session to constitute.” This brought an uncertain close to the latest development in Tibetan diaspora politics that left some observers wondering whether Tibetan democracy in exile was failing?

On Nov. 16, 2023, the parliament made an announcement that it “will reconvene with the remaining business of the general session from 25th to 29th December 2023.” And thereby hangs a tale.

I had then wanted to write about this development looking at the overall state of Tibetan democracy, as the parliament is merely a part of it. As I began to draft something, another development took place in Washington, DC, in the US House of Representatives, on Oct. 3, 2023, leading to the dismissal of then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy and the inability of the House Republicans to come up with a viable new candidate, which paralyzed the House session. It was only on Oct. 25 that Republicans were able to somehow come up with a choice of a speaker in Representative Mike Johnson. Even now there is only temporary peace in the House, so to say.

The development in Washington, DC made me look at what happened in Dharamsala in relation to the fate of democratic institutions in the world in general. It would not be inaccurate to maintain that democracy can become as strong or as weak as its participants want or permit it to be, whether in one of the oldest democracies like the US, the largest democracy in India or the borderless democracy of the Tibetans in exile.

Exiles have democracy while those in Tibet suffer authoritarianism

Let us put Tibetan democracy in perspective first. In stark contrast to the Tibetans in Tibet who live under an authoritarian regime and are denied their fundamental human rights, leave aside political franchise, the small population of Tibetans in Diaspora has been undergoing a unique experiment in democratic governance at the insistence of H.H. the Dalai Lama. This has been taking place both in the temporary headquarters of Dharamsala in India, as well as in all Tibetan communities in the Indian subcontinent and abroad, adapted to meet the needs of the local situation. Since 2000, the Tibetan leadership at the central level has been shaped by the direct will of the voting populace and been represented by the elected political leader (now known as Sikyong) and the parliamentarians. In short, despite the limitations posed by their situation, Tibetans in exile are better off than our brethren in Tibet.

Ven. Gedun Kesang, a 100-year old Tibetan monk residing in Minnesota voting for the Tibetan elections on January 3, 2021. One ballot box is for the Sikyong (President of CTA) elections and the other marked Chithue is for the parliament elections. (Photo: TAFM video)

However, democracy is a double-edged sword. When those participating in it exercise their franchise responsibly, there is progress. But when some participants do not do so, they can lead to the stagnation or, worse, the retrogression of the society. The irony will be that people who fall in either of these categories will stick by their position, asserting that they are exercising their democratic rights.

Secondly, democracy does not operate in a vacuum but has to function within the framework of a given society. It is again up to the participants whether or not they take into consideration the prevailing factors in undertaking their actions. Their decisions have consequences.

Dalai Lama’s intervention resolves a problem

This was most recently apparent since the beginning of the current parliament in 2021. The parliamentarians’ term began in an unusual manner on account of disagreement on the nature of taking their oaths of office. This was because some of them declined to take their oath before the then-speaker pro tempore on account of another development during the previous parliament, which is beyond the scope of this blog post. This led to a four-month impasse and a political vacuum, including the newly elected Sikyong not having any ministerial colleagues in the absence of a parliament to confirm them. In any case, this latest development has added fuel to the ongoing discussions about the perceived degeneration of the Tibetan society in diaspora, leading people to wonder about the future of the precious democracy that we were provided by the Dalai Lama. Even the US government had somehow felt it necessary to intervene, indicating the sense of concern even beyond the Tibetan community. In an unprecedented development, even the US State Department made a public call to the Tibetan parliament to resolve its issues. In a letter in August 2021, the State Department said, “Disputes over parliamentary procedures which are not resolved in a timely manner and in accordance with the rule of law risk undermining the confidence placed by the Tibetan diaspora and the international community in the CTA and TPiE. We urge the elected members to move past their differences and turn to the pressing matters that need their attention.”

Ultimately, unable to reach a solution themselves, the newly elected parliamentarians supplicated to His Holiness the Dalai Lama, and his intervention led to the parliament members taking their oath of office in October 2021 and being able to begin their work.

Speaker Pro Tempore Dawa Tsering addressing the Parliament after the members resolved their issue of the mode of taking their oath in October 2021. (Photo: https://tibetanparliament.org)

While the developments relating to the Tibetan parliament are certainly concerning and are negatively impacting the democratic process, at the same time they need to be looked at from the broader perspective.

Evolution of democratic governance in exile

Acknowledging the drawbacks of the administrative system in Tibet, the Dalai Lama implemented a series of initiatives to empower the Tibetan people soon after coming into exile. In 1960, His Holiness introduced the concept of representative democracy by asking Tibetans to elect their deputies to a “Commission” (now formally known as the Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile) that would have a say in the governance of the Tibetans in exile and also be a preparation for a future democratic Tibet. He then followed it up a few years later with the promulgation of a draft constitution for future Tibet, thus introducing the concept of rule of law of this nature. Much to the consternation of the Tibetan public he mandated that this constitution retain an impeachment clause to be applied to the Dalai Lama, if the need arises. This was a very important message that the Dalai Lama was sending, namely that the institution should be more important than individuals and that no one should be considered above the law.

His Holiness also laid out the infrastructural basis in the form of the Central Tibetan Administration and the various organs under it to implement democratic governance.

Initially, the parliamentarians were virtually embedded in the different offices of the CTA to be part of the direct governance.

In subsequent years, the Dalai Lama took further steps in empowering the Tibetan people; from enfranchising the people to elect the ministers (who were until then appointed by him); to the drafting of a Charter, specifically to govern the Tibetan Diaspora, which included provision for the establishment of the three pillars of democracy, legislative, executive, and the judiciary. The authority of the Tibetan parliament was clarified to separate it from the executive and expanded to highlight its legislative functions becoming the highest policymaking body in the Tibetan administration. In the case of the judiciary, given that the Tibetan Diaspora operates under host countries, the process was adapted to the prevailing situation. Thus the judiciary that was introduced to the Tibetan community is the Tibetan Justice Commission that works under the alternative dispute resolution system as permitted under arbitration laws of any country.

The Dalai Lama’s devolution of his political authority

The Tibetan people were able to embrace these changes, some unwillingly though, as they had remained assured of the Dalai Lama’s role as the “head of state and government.” But a significant change took place in 2011 when the present Dalai Lama not only gave up all his political authority in favor of an elected Tibetan leadership, but also virtually removed the institution of the Dalai Lamas from all future political roles.

When His Holiness had initially broached the idea of his devolution of authority, there were concerns among a section of the Tibetan people about whether we were ready to shoulder the needed responsibility ourselves. His Holiness had then said it was better that the people tread on this path of self-reliance while he was still active as he could then provide guidance if things went astray.

In his announcement of this devolution of authority on March 19, 2011, His Holiness outlined the role of the Dalai Lama institution and the support and reverence he himself was receiving from the people. He continued, “If such a Dalai Lama with an unanimous mandate to lead spiritual affairs abdicates the political authority, it will help sustain our exile administration and make it more progressive and robust.” His Holiness also expressed his optimism: “So, the many political changes that I have made are based on sound reasons and of immediate and ultimate benefit for all of us. In fact, these changes will make our administration more stable and excel its development. So, there is no reason to get disheartened.”

Democratic institutions at the grassroots level

Tibetan democracy should not be seen in the context of the institutions in place in Dharamsala alone. Even while working to resettle the Tibetan refugees in the different settlements in the Indian subcontinent, His Holiness had the foresight to introduce grassroots democracy. I have not done a survey of the situation in all the settlements, but in the first settlement that began in Karnataka, Lugsung Samdubling in Bylakuppe, this empowerment began at the “camp” level, comparable to a village. The Lugsung Samdubling settlement had six such camps composed of 100 houses. Householders (Pachens as they were called) in every 10 houses elected their Chupon (leader of 10) to represent them while the camp as a whole elected two Gyapons (leader of 100) as camp leaders to look after the overall camp affairs. Such camp leaders were also known as Chimi (public person). Given that agriculture was the primary means of earning a livelihood the settlement also had a co-operative society (established to support their economic life) whose affairs were run by a board of directors elected by residents of each of the camps. In the early days when the cooperative society ran all-purpose stores in each of the camps, even the storekeepers were elected by the respective camp residents.

It was the camp leaders, assisted by the Chupons, who looked after the welfare of the residents. They would oversee water supply, undertake spiritual, cultural and social activities for the camp as a whole, be the coordinator between the co-operative society and the residents on agricultural work (including arranging for ploughing schedule and selling of crops). They would also be the mediators for any disputes between residents or even within a family. Since the local post office did not deliver mail to individual houses but deposited all mail with the camp leaders, they also had to serve as delivery persons of the mail. The camp leaders met with the Chupons to discuss issues, and for major matters they would convene a householders’ assembly for decisions.

Growing up in the Lugsung Samdubling settlement, I would see the camp residents eagerly taking part in elections for their Chupons, Gyapons and Board of Directors to the co-operative society. As quite many of the people were illiterate then, symbols like those in the eight auspicious symbols were assigned to candidates, and these would be pasted on the ballot boxes so that people could decide whom to cast their votes for.

Almost all the settlements would have elected camp leaders or other similar positions. This grassroots system of democracy in the settlements continues to this day with a new generation of younger residents taking over the mantle of the camp leaders and other locally elected positions.

Also, at the settlement level, there are co-operative societies that have been set up to assist the settlers in their socio-economic life. Their board of directors are elected by the people in the settlement who also technically own shares in the societies. Following democratization, these societies, which used to be administered by Dharamsala, are now overseen by a Federation of Tibetan Cooperatives (FTCI). FTCI lists 10 such societies under it in different Tibetan communities in India.

Signboard of a store for the Kunpheling Tibetan settlement in Sikkim, northeast India, run by its cooperative society (Photo: www.nyamdel.com)

Since the promulgation of the Charter of Tibetans-in-Exile, there is provision for Local Tibetan Assemblies, to be composed of deputies elected by the people in the area to be the watchdog of the work of the settlement office in the region. The Tibetan Parliament website currently lists 40 such local assemblies in the Indian subcontinent as well as in Switzerland.

11th Local Tibetan Assembly of the Tibetan settlement in Leh, Ladakh after their swearing in on Oct. 30, 2023. (Photo: www.tibet.net)

Is the Parliament impeding Tibetan democracy?

The parliament is seen as the symbol of Tibetan democracy, as is the case with other democracies. Therefore, when parliamentarians, individually or collectively, become embroiled in controversies, there is an immediate negative impact in the public’s eye. This is the situation that Tibetans are in currently. Our parliamentarians who swear by democracy somehow end up being seen as causing impediments to the governance system. The disappointment is more so with the younger parliamentarians upon whom much faith was placed that they would be different from their “green-brained” (a derogative term for older people who are perceived as not using their brains) older colleagues. If not their action, the rhetoric of some of them does give that impression that they, too, subscribe to the herd mentality. Observing the proceedings of the parliament one cannot but avoid reaching the conclusion that consideration of personalities dominates discussions on substance.

The situation is further complicated by the surge in social media usage in the Tibetan community. To be fair, the rise of social media has had a positive impact in the community in many ways. It is common knowledge how social media, particularly messaging apps (unlike in the West students in India did not have individual access to computers and so had to depend on their mobile phones for their classes), were the lifeline for teachers to impart education to Tibetan children in India during the coronavirus pandemic when physical presence in classes was not possible.

Similarly, a major factor for the widespread craze for the Gorshey (circle dance) on Lhakar (White Wednesday) in the Tibetan community is because of social media that became the vehicle for Tibetans all over the world to impact each other. It did not matter whether they were residing in the remote settlement of Choephelling in Miao in Arunachal Pradesh, Bylakuppe in Karnataka, Gangtok in Sikkim (all in India), Pokhara in Nepal, Toronto in Canada or in Bhutan or any other places where Tibetans reside. This has also resulted in younger Tibetans taking pride in projecting their Tibetanness, whether in wearing Tibetan garments or speaking the language.

Tibetans in the remote settlement of Choephelling in Arunachal Pradesh in India, close to the Tibetan border, at one of the Gorshey performances. (Screengrab from a YouTuber: Evergreen ChungChung)

However, there have been negative impacts with the advent of social media, as individual content creators do not need to take into consideration accountability. Thus, issues are amplified and distorted and every development is followed by a blame game with polemical utterances through factional taking of sides.

We should, however, remind ourselves of the initial two-pronged objectives His Holiness the Dalai Lama had after coming into exile: to look after the socio-economic welfare of the Tibetan community and to resolve the Tibetan political problem. Thus, it is a no-brainer to realize that all of us should utilize our democracy to work to solve the Tibetan problem rather than lead to the community’s weakening. This power of democracy that the Tibetans have attained in the post-1959 period has enabled united efforts under His Holiness the Dalai Lama, which have been a source of hope for the Tibetans in Tibet and of concern for the Chinese leadership. Not only do the Chinese officials have concerns, but ironically there is an expectation from the Chinese leadership side that the CTA is capable of much more than what it is doing. As a case in point, way back in 1993, during a secret meeting to discuss their public relations strategy on Tibet, one of the Chinese government officials said, “According to analysis, since the beginning of 80s, the splittist activities of the Dalai Clique [the demeaning Chinese term to refer to the Tibetans in exile under the leadership of His Holiness the Dalai Lama] have entered a new cycle. It is still in the process of developing and has (not) yet reached its peak stage.” Thus, the Chinese government is certainly cognizant of the potential of the Central Tibetan Administration. There is the opportunity for all of us to prove to the Chinese authorities that they were right, at least on their expectations about the Tibetan leadership in exile.

In one sense, it is good that problems, like the recent one with the Tibetan parliament, are taking place now while corrective measures can be taken and when we have the presence of His Holiness the Dalai Lama to provide guidance, if all other efforts fail. But we need to think deeply.

The Tibetan people need to change their mindset on their understanding of democracy. Currently, whether it is the parliament or the public, it appears that we are only copying the worst of democratic practices of East and West. Unlike those countries, we Tibetans do not have the luxury of focusing on side issues and neglecting the more fundamental aspect. To the Tibetans in exile, democracy is not the end, but the means to get to the political end, and our recognizing that can pave the way for a smoother running of the Tibetan governance system.