| Timing the Olympic Dragon |
|
|
| General Opinion | |||
| Written by Gabriel Lafitte | |||
| Monday, 07 April 2008 10:15 | |||
Despite all efforts of Chinese state media to deny the reality of state violence, to portray Tibetans as vicious criminals, imagery of what erupts reaches our tv screens. This alone makes this Tibetan revolt so different from the revolts of 20 and 50 years ago. No longer can anyone believe these revolts, thousands of kilometres apart, are just the work of a malign handful, orchestrated secretly from the far side of the Himalayas. What is in the minds of those Hezuo horsemen? China’s propaganda won’t tell us, nor the lame language of world leaders who want only business as usual with China. The world’s leaders look on in embarrassed silence, muttering strained clichés about restraint and how disturbing it all is. None want to be disturbed, or to understand how utterly sick of Chinese haughtiness the Tibetans are. The BBC footage of Tibetans standing in their stirrups, astride the sturdy Tibetan horses China used to rely on for its army, does not tell us the minds of these nomads. We do know that nomads charging into town is one of China’s deepest nightmares, a race memory that explains why the Great Wall was built to defend (unsuccessfully) against the nomadic hordes sweeping across the plains, coming out of nowhere. For Tibetan nomads, freedom is more meaningful than the modern freedom to choose between competing brands in the shopping mall. In the year 1900 a loyal subject of the Tsar, Captain Kozloff, led an expedition across the deserts of northern Tibet, into the lush pastures of Golog, a Tibetan prefecture almost the size of Hungary or Portugal, not far from today’s horseback revolt against China. A Golog said to him: “You cannot compare us Golog with other people. You obey the laws of strangers, the laws of the Dalai Lama, of China, and of any of your petty chiefs. You are afraid of everyone: to escape punishment you obey everyone. And the result is that you are afraid of everything. And not only you, your fathers and grandfathers were the same. We Golog, on the other hand, have from time immemorial obeyed none but our own laws, none but our own convictions. A Golog is born with the knowledge of his freedom, and with his mother’s milk imbibes some acquaintance with his laws. This is why we have ever been free as now, and are the slaves of none – neither the (Mongolian ruler) Bogdokhan nor of the Dalai Lama.”
The ability of gowa headmen to resolve conflicts was not due to their status as monastics, although the nomads of Golog, despite their quarrelsomeness, were known as devout Buddhists. A gowa respected by the nomads won their support not by authority, since these people had little respect for any authority outside the clan. The skillful gowa was respected for his clear-headed equanimity, persuasive rhetoric, his use of logic, reason, fairness and compassion in winning over stubborn and hot-headed antagonists. These are the skills of rigne, a part of classic Buddhist education in ways of leading others towards a more spacious and accommodating outlook, on the path to awakening. “Some of the Tibetan tribes - notably some of the smaller ones - traditionally have no chief; all matters of policy are decided by a council of elders somewhat analogous to the encampment council. The members of this tribal council have no special title but are also known simply as the rgan-po (the aged ones). Nor is participation determined by any formal election; by common consent the leading mean men of each encampment attend. There are also tribes who have no chiefs but are ruled by the lamaseries to which they belong. In such a case, the lamasery, through its leaders acts as ruler for certain tribes” In these words, a Christian missionary, Robert Ekvall, described the nomads, in 1939. But today the monasteries of Golog are today rigidly excluded from playing a constructive role in conflict resolution, and are not permitted to infringe on the prerogative of the state to administer justice. Now the Chinese authorities have broken their promise of long-term land lease allocations to Golog nomads. In much of Golog leases have been revoked, or restricted by new regulations that ban grazing for several consecutive years, deeply undermining nomadic livelihoods. The herds must be sold, livelihoods ruined. This is done in the name of grassland and watershed protection, as if nomads cannot be trusted to care for their pastures and meadows. During the 1980s and 1990s, customary community based management of the grasslands returned, but in the 21st century nomads are once more being expelled, this time in the name of conservation. The fiercely independent Gologpa are now the first victims of a policy that is being rapidly implemented right across the Tibetan grasslands, of displacing nomads from their grasslands, as if the only way of regrowing degraded pastures is by banning grazing and even the graziers. What should be a measure of last resort, excluding the nomads, has become China’s foremost policy instrument for governance of the rangelands. Elsewhere , this might be recognised as blaming the victims.
These nomads are shaping 21st century China, and have even made the 2008 Beijing Olympics questionable. We need to understand them, silenced for too long, now that they have burst onto everyone’s tv news screen, galloping into town to cut down China’s colonial flag. With one slash of the nomadic knife, they cut through China’s claims of Tibetans contented to live under market socialism with Chinese characteristics. They whirl their lassoos, unerringly corralling wayward colts, or fat cadres doing a runner. They cut through the Dalai Lama’s talk of compromise and a carefully calibrated minimal demand for autonomy and minimal Chinese loss of face. The nomads refuse to die quietly or live uselessly in new towns on the edge of their rangelands. They demand freedom, and are prepared to take the consequences. After fifty years of enforced silence, Tibetans inside Tibet now speak for Tibet. The nomads seized the initiative from a China caught unawares, lulled by its own propaganda about the Tibetan masses loving the Party. They also seized the initiative from the Dalai Lama, whose patient diplomacy over decades had steadily narrowed the gap, reducing what Tibet seeks from full independence down to cultural autonomy. Now the gulf is wide again: freedom or subjugation.
Despite the complete absence of free media or open debate, this “conspiracy” managed to stage simultaneous uprisings in all areas nominally designated by China as counties, prefectures and regions of Tibetan governance, erupting in all five of China’s 30 provinces where Tibetans are at home. These official fictions – the 150 “Tibetan Autonomous Counties”- extend far beyond the designated Tibet “Autonomous” Region, which both in area and Tibetan population is only half of Tibet: from a Beijing centric perspective, the outer half.
If crisis is to become opportunity rather than danger marched blindly towards tragedy, we all need to open our eyes. We need to stand in the stirrups with the horsemen, to see through their eyes. They are the people who have been silenced for five decades, spoken for both by the Communist Party of China, and by the Dalai Lama. We need to experience, with them, the hollowness of China’s claim that, in Sichuan, Gansu, Qinghai and Yunnan provinces, as well as in the Tibet “Autonomous” Region they are governed by Tibetans for the Tibetans. We need to understand their experience of governance as endless extortionate taxation by Chinese and Tibetan cadres who grow fat on corruption and deliver nothing. Township officials have a genius for inventing new taxes, but give nothing back. We need to understand the nomads’ decades of passive resistance, withdrawing to the vast rangelands where cadres seldom dare venture, where modern health care, education and employment opportunities are beyond reach. We need to understand how in recent years they reached the tipping point, as a newly zealous Chinese state extended its reach into the remotest pastures, tearing up long term land leases issued to the nomads only a few years earlier. What sparked this revolt on the grasslands is a story the world knows very little about: the forcible removal of nomads from their pastures, herding them onto urban reservations, all in the name of “ecological migration.”
The uncompromising Tibetan demand for freedom is outcome of the denial of all debate inside Tibet for 50 years. Tibetans have been unable to form NGOs, or set up their own civil society outside the agencies of official power. The wisest and most revered of Tibetan leaders, the lamas, are excluded from the public sphere. They may be glimpsed on tv, but may not speak. Tibetans have been unfree, under constant suspicion of “splittism”, their leaders given no role in public life. Educated Tibetans have been required to slavishly translate Party propaganda into Tibetan, to write textbooks for rote parroting in schools and monasteries that are a Chinese inversion of Tibetan history and identity. In exile, Tibetans have debated endlessly whether their goal should be independence, autonomy, a middle way or something else. But inside Tibet all development of debate has been arrested, stifled by the Party’s insistence that only the Party, with its token Tibetan cadres, speaks for the will of all Tibetans.
If this is a crisis for both Hu Jintao and the Dalai Lama, we can rethink what we know. This might be a clue as to the wider picture. All along, China’s leaders have pretended to themselves that the Tibetan question is only the problem of the personal status of the Dalai Lama. The loyalty of the Tibetan masses to the Chinese motherland was, by definition, settled once and for all by the “peaceful liberation” of Tibet from Tibetan rule, over five decades ago. The Tibetan people have found their voice, and what they want is clear. The six million Tibetans counted in China’s census have spoken, as a people, as a nation. Now no-one can doubt that what all Tibetans want is freedom. They do not want to become Chinese, as the necessary precondition for access to modern health care, education and economic development. What Tibetans want is not merely cultural autonomy under Chinese rule. The Tibetans, in all Tibetan areas, want freedom, the collective right to self-determination which for almost a century has supposedly been the right of all colonized peoples. Unless the answer is to ruthlessly suppress all Tibetans into enforced silence once more, we are in new territory. The lava flow may cool, but new terrain is under our feet.
So this is a crisis too for the Dalai Lama, for his global diplomacy, and for the worldwide network of supporters of the Tibetan path of nonviolent resistance. Tibetan diplomacy, now subverted by nomads crying freedom, steadily sought in recent years to coax China’s suspicious Party bosses to open their minds, and resolve this decades old legacy of China’s revolutionary era. The Tibetans, based in the Indian Himalayas, supported by a global diaspora, chanted the mantra of nonviolent resistance, to try to persuade China’s leaders to relax and open their eyes. Tibetans given asylum in Europe, Canada, the US and Australia, free countries frequently visited by Chinese leaders, were urged by the government in exile to refrain from demonstrating, or shouting slogans. With great reluctance, they generally complied. All that has been swept aside by the charge of the Tibetan light horsemen. Their charge challenged not only the legitimacy of China’s occupation of a land the size of western Europe, but also the authority of the Dalai Lama. The horsemen want freedom, independence, a return to Tibet run by Tibetans, restoration of the open unfenced land where wild animals used to mingle with the nomads’ herds before China’s guns made them fear the human presence.
For more than a decade I have worked in Dharamsala as a consultant with the Dalai Lama’s Planning Commission and the Environment & Development Desk of the Tibetan government-in-exile, helping young Tibetan professionals monitor and analyse the actual situation inside Tibet, and prepare alternative plans for sustainable, productive Tibetan livelihoods. The job of my Tibetan colleagues begins with the words of the Dalai Lama who, frequently but cryptically, speaks of a future Tibet which is modern, developed but also equitable, sustainable and a haven of biodiversity and peace. The task of the new generation of Tibetan ecologists, economists and geographers is to test the feasibility of the Dalai Lama’s vision, to explicate his brief remarks. So, over the years, my colleagues and I have had much opportunity to think carefully about what the Dalai Lama says and means.
Over Tibet, China has spy satellites. On the new railway to Lhasa, guarded by Israeli surveillance technology, China rushes in more and more armor and troops. China has the best Russian and home grown technologies of control and destruction, yet they have been unable to stop the nomad horsemen, whirling their lassos, macerating the red flag of the dictatorship of the Chinese proletariat. The Party intensifies its rhetoric of the Dalai Lama as an evil saboteur, against whom all Tibetans must compulsorily wage “people’s war”. Meanwhile, the Dalai Lama is on our tv news nightly, relaxed, confident and joking, inviting China – or anyone - to investigate him up close for any evidence he is the author of the riots and horseback stampedes. The Dalai Lama knows the situation is critical but not serious, because that is the nature of existence. Buddhists knew this long before Karl Kraus coined his witticism in Vienna a century ago. Because the situation is critical, the Dalai Lama can be ever more open and jovial; it is the only way forward.
Getting the fearful, timid, suspicious, unadventurous minds of the Politburo to the same table in Beijing as the Dalai Lama will need all the friendly advice they can get from world leaders they know and trust. That is why now, of all times, the Dalai Lama wants so much to go to Beijing, despite being labeled “a wolf in monk’s clothes,” necessitating a “life-and-death struggle.” The Economist, one of the few media to have a reporter on the spot as the protests erupted in Lhasa, says: “China persists in seeing the Dalai Lama as the embodiment of its ‘Tibet problem’. In fact, he offers the only plausible solution to it.” His Holiness Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai Lama, the victorious precious one, meaningful to behold, does indeed know something we barely glimpse: this is the moment of opportunity for everyone, if only we recognize it and are not blinded by habit.
About the AuthorThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it is a development policy consultant to the Environment & Development Desk of the Tibetan government in exile based in India. In 1999 he was asked by Tibetans to assess a World Bank project in Tibetan areas of Qinghai province, that proposed alleviating poverty by sending tens of thousands of nonTibetans settles to displace Tibetan nomads. While at the World Bank site he was detained and interrogated by China’s state security force for a week, then deported. He recently returned to China to present a plan to a state-sponsored conference on poverty, for improving Tibetan livelihoods by interbreeding Australian carpet wool sheep. Gabriel contributed to two reports just published, which explain the roots of Tibetan discontent: here and here. Images: Creative Commons License ePluribus Media Contributors: avahome, roxy, jenn718
|
|||
| Last Updated on Friday, 16 May 2008 12:38 |
Copyright ePluribus Media 2005-2008. All rights reserved. Powered by Joomla!