China Unveils Strategy for Stability in Tibet-NY Times 01/24/10

[Rob_Hugo@PortNW]

This NY Times article reports that the Chinese government at the highest levels has laid out a new strategy to bring rapid economic development to Tibet in the hopes it will bring stability to the region. According to the article, the emphasis on economic development shows that the Chinese leadership still view the solution to the Tibet "problem," as a rising standard of living for Tibetans rather than allowing Tibetans to practice their cultural and religious traditions. Despite a rising standard of living in Tibet, the article points out that ethnic nationalism remains strong in Tibet, and many Tibetans resent the introduction of larger numbers of Han Chinese into the region.

[Anonymous]

Another article in the NY Times on January 3, 2010, related to China involves the rehabilitation of the legacy Chiang Kai-shek within China. According to the article, a recent example of a change is the film, "Jianguo Daye" (The Founding of the Republic), "a movie sponsored by the Chinese government, in which Chiang is portrayed as an honorable man who betrayed the CCP due to human mistakes incited by bad advisers." This change, as cited in the column, can be traced to Chiang's crackdowns on pro-independence activity in Taiwan.

[Anonymous]

An article in the February 3, 2010, New York TImes reports that China has strongly warned President Obama from meeting with the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, stating that it would damage US-China relations. While Obama was pragmatic by not meeting with the Dalai Lama before visiting Beijing last year, his plans to now meet with the Dalai Lama remained unchanged according to his spokespeople. A meeting of Obama and the Dalai Lama comes at a time when China and the United States are dealing with other serious issues including Internet censorship and US arms sales to Taiwan. As the article states China considers both the status of Tibet and Taiwan as "core interests."

[Anonymous]

In Clay Dube's lecture on February 2nd, he showed a map of China in 1924 which highlighted the fragmentation of China during this period, and how this fragmentation made China "vulnerable" to foreign powers and internal dissension. This fear of vulnerability and internal dissension really drives the point why the Chinese government has adopted such a hard-line stance towards Tibet.

[Anonymous]

President Obama did meet with the Dalai Lama this week, and China protested. The Dalai Lama does not call for an independent Tibet (although many of his supporters do), so it is not as if the president was meeting with a revolutionary or a government in exile. I thought a very sad photo was the Dalai Lama leaving the White House by the "back door" where the trash bags were lining the walkway. I felt this to be very insulting to such a humble guest to our country.

[Anonymous]

It sounds like Tibet and Taiwan are the same issue: more autonomy with a future eye toward complete independence from Beijing. Is this an oversimplification? Is this a new status for the future disintegration of China, that regions would not call for outright independence and they would have loose autonomy? Is the Dalai Lama a Head of State? Head of a religion? Both? A lot of questions. It does seem that the Dalai Lama's visit with Obama was "downplayed" by the White House and the circumstance of his arrival, visit, and departure do not rise to that of a man of his stature in the world.
Thoughts?

[Anonymous]

Sounds like Beijing has a plan to settle large numbers of Chinese in Tibet to "Chinese-ify" (I know, it is a stretch) Tibet as rapidly as possible. It does not sound like they will be very welcome by Tibetans. A divided Ireland, Cyprus, and Catalan come to mind.

[Anonymous]

Thank you for some of the clarifying remarks. I did not know much of the information posted-such as the Chinese importing their people into Tibet. Interesting, especially knowing all the racial issues they had last summer when they did the same in another region in mainland China. I never really thought about relating Tibet to Taiwan or Ireland, etc. That brings up a variety of other issues.

[Anonymous]

I believe that to Beijing Tibet and Taiwan are the same issue - they are both considered provinces of China. But even though we "officially" accept the "one China" policy, we treat Taiwan as an independent nation. Not so with Tibet. As of now we would militarily protect Taiwan, but maybe as time goes on, the People's Republic will work to have such close economic ties and friendship with Taiwan that we will see them as one, and move away from our determination to see a 'free Taiwan." China does always believe that time is on their side.

[Author]

Posts