| An article titled
"What is the real intention of the United States" published Monday
refutes a US report on Tibet negotiations.Following is a summary of the
article written by Hua Zi:
In accordance with the "Foreign Relations Authorization Act, 2003",
US president George W. Bush submitted a report on Tibet Negotiations Consistent
with Section 613 of the Act to the Congress on May 8,2003.
The report on the one hand reiterates that the United States recognizes
Tibet to be part of the People's Republic of China, whereas it claims
that it supports Dalai Lama's "Middle Way Approach" of seeking
"genuine self-rule", and urges the Chinese government to respect
the unique religious, linguistic, and cultural heritage of its Tibetan
people and to respect their human rights and civil liberties.
According to the report, the "important objective" of the United
States is to encourage the Chinese government and the Dalai Lama to hold
substantive dialogue, to lead to a negotiated settlement of "questions
related to Tibet".
The report also lists efforts taken by the US President, Secretary of
State and other US government officials to encourage the Chinese government
to enter into a "dialogue" with the Dalai Lama.
As is well-known, the "Foreign Relations Authorization Act, 2003"
carries quite a number of anti-China clauses. The Chinese government immediately
expressed strong opposition to the legislation right after it was raised
in the US Congress.
In September, 2002, President Bush made an announcement when signing
the legislation, noting that the clauses related to China in it were inappropriate,
that the one-China policy of the United States had not changed, and that
its signing did not mean that he had accepted them or incorporated them
into the country's foreign policy.
Commenting on the announcement made by President Bush, Chinese Foreign
Ministry spokeswoman Zhang Qiyue said at a press conference on Oct.4,
2002: "We hope the US side, being true to its word, will not implement
those clauses so as to avoid any negative impact on China-US relations."
It is a regret that the US government submitted the presidential report
on Tibet eight months later. Such a move by the US government, which went
back on its word, has already had a negative impact on China-US relations,
no matter what the content of the report is.
This writer has been following the "Tibet issue" in China-US
relations for years, and has noted that it was the first time that a US
President ever submitted such a report, which showed the degree of Bush
administration's concern on the "Tibet issue".
Strictly speaking, there would have been no "Tibet issue" in
the world, just as there have been no "Washington issue" or
"New York issue".
The "Tibet issue" essentially arose from the fact that for
nearly a century western imperialist forces had fostered and supported
Tibetan separatists attempting to separate Tibet from China.
At present, the "Tibet issue" would not exist, if the United
States and other western countries don't support the Dalai clique,if the
Dalai clique gives up its intention of seeking "Tibet independence"
or independence in disguised forms, and stops activities of splitting
the country. The United States should not shun the essence of the issue.
So far, all previous US governments have never recognized Tibet as an
independent state, but recognized that the Tibet Autonomous Region is
part of the People's Republic of China, and also held that this is the
view of the international community.
People will naturally ask: Why has the United State showed so much interest
in China's internal affairs and concerned itself so much over the "Tibet
issue"?
According to the report, the United States is concerned about the "Tibet
issue", taking it as an "important objective" of the US
government to "encourage substantive dialogue between the Chinese
govenrment and the Dalai Lama," just because "for China to work
with the Dalai Lama or his representatives to resolve problems facing
Tibet is in the interest of both the Chinese Government andthe Tibetan
People", and also because "the Dalai Lama can be a constructive
partner as China deals with the difficult challenges of regional and national
stability. He represents the views of the vast majority of Tibetans".
If the Chinese government doesn't hold "substantive dialogue"
with the Dalai Lama "without preconditions" and doesn't reach
resolution of differences at an early date, it will lead to "greater
tensions inside China and will be a stumbling block to fuller political
and economic engagement with the United States and other nations."
This is really an American way of thinking. Does what the report say
conform to the facts? This writer reviewed what the US government had
done on the "Tibet issue", and analyzed whether the US concern
on the "Tibet issue" is beneficial or detrimental to the Tibetans,
to the stability of China, and to China's political and economic exchanges
with the United States and other countries.
The United States has never denied China's sovereignty over Tibet, nor
recognized Tibet as an independent state. The State Department said in
a statement in 1995 that historically, the United States recognized China's
sovereignty over Tibet. At least beginning in 1966, the US policy has
clearly recognized the Tibet Autonomous Region to be part of the People's
Republic of China (The Tibet Autonomous Region was established in September
1965). This long-standing policy is in consistence with the view of the
international community, including China and its neighboring countries.
None of the countries in the world ever recognizes Tibet as a sovereign
state. Because the United States does not recognize Tibet as an independent
state, it has not established diplomatic relations with the self-claimed
"Tibetan government-in-exile".
On July 27, 1998, at a joint press confernce in Beijing with Chinese
President Jiang Zemin, US president Bill Clinton said that he agrees that
Tibet is part of China, an autonomous region of China.
The report submitted by President Bush also says: "the United States
recognizes the Tibet Autonomous Region to be part of the People's Republic
of China. This long-standing policy is consistent with the view of the
international community."
The report on the one hand recognizes Tibet to be part of China and doesn't
recognize Tibet as an independent state, while on the other hand, it holds
that the Dalai Lama represents the views of the vast majority of Tibetans,
"His moral authority helps to unite the Tibetan community inside
and outside of China".
In other words, the US government holds that the Government of the People's
Republic of China cannot represent the views and interests of the vast
majority of Tibetans, who are citizens of the People's Republic of China.
Such a concept, putting China's vast Tibetan citizens in opposition to
the government elected by themselves, is illogical if not ill-natured,
and will by no means be beneficial to the Tibetan people and China's stability.
On April 17, 1997, US Ambassador to China James Sasser said during his
visit to Lhasa that ever since the Sun Yat-sen era, theUS government has
recognized Tibet as an inseparable part of China.
The Chinese central government has adopted explicit and consistent policies
towards the Dalai Lama. That is, only when the Dalai Lama abandon his
claim for the "independence of Tibet", haltany separatist activities,
openly states he recognizes Tibet as an unalienable part of China, Taiwan
as one of China's provinces and the government of the People's Republic
of China as the country's sole legitimate representative, would China
have contacts and negotiations with him.
Nevertheless, those policies, which the United States itself recognizes
publicly and the international community adheres to universally, are not
required from Dalai Lama by the US government. On the contrary, the US
government has repeatedly prompted the Chinese government to have substantial
dialogues with the Dalai Lama unconditionally and resolve the so-called
"questions related to Tibet's relationship with the Chinese authorities".
Let the "Tibet's relationship to Chinese authorities" and "resolution
of such questions through negotiation with the Dalai Lama" rest for
the time being, such act and tones of connivance and provocation from
the US government have betrayed their hidden motives to abet the Dalai
Lama to dispute with the central government of China. Does this help resolve
the so-called "Tibet issue" at an early date?
Since Tibet is an unalienable part of the Chinese territories, the Tibet
Autonomous Region exercises regional autonomy under the leadership of
central government. It is widely known to the international public that
the Chinese government adheres to its clear and definite stances and policies
on affairs concerning Tibet. Any country in the world (including the United
States itself) would not allow foreign forces to finger and gesture on
how to deal with its internal affairs. It is the basic norm of the international
law.
On the so-called "Tibet issue", the United States not only
failed to abide by such a basic norm, but grossly intervene in China's
internal Tibet affairs. More than a dozen such interveningmeasures listed
in the US "Tibet Policy Act of 2002" include "steps taken
by the President", "steps taken by the Secretary of State"
and "steps taken by other Department of State officials". The
U.S. act even claimed "the lack of (China's) resolution of these
problems will be stumbling block to fuller political and economic engagement
with the United States and other nations." Aren't these threats too
overbearing?
For over half a century, what had the US "concerns" for "Tibet
issue" brought to the political situation in Tibet? What consequences
they had incurred to the Tibetan people? We'd better take a look at the
past.
In the end of 1942, the American Office of Strategic Services (OSS, the
forerunner to the Central Intelligence Agency) assigned Captain Ilia Tosltoy
and First Lieutenant Brooke Dolan to Lhasa. They were the first officially
sanctioned American mission to Tibet.
In the end of 1946, then President Harry Truman ordered to sendto Tibet
several diesel generators which were used subsequently byTibetan separatists
in 1949 as power for its radios carrying out propaganda for the "independence
of Tibet" and also as equipment to contact and communicate with the
United States.
In March 1953, the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) marched towards
Qamdo as a prologue to the liberation of Tibet. The United States then
agitated the Dalai Lama and local Tibetan authorities to expand its arms
in a bid to resist the liberation. For a time, the so-called "theory
on Communist threat" and "theoryon China's aggression and expansion"
flooded all American newspapers and journals, big and small. On May 23,
1951, Tibet waspeacefully liberated with the signing of the Agreement
of the Central People's Government and the Local Government of Tibet on
the Measures for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet.
In July 1951, Thubten Norbu, Dalai Lama's eldest brother and his private
envoy arrived in New York and served as an intermediary for the secret
contacts between the United States andthe Dalai Lama with the aid of the
US Central Intelligence Office (CIA). While another of Dalai Lama's older
brothers, Gyalo Thondup,signed an agreement with the CIA to conduct intelligence
collecting and carry out guerrilla warfare in Tibet.
Meanwhile, with the involvement of the CIA, American diplomats in India
had worked out a "outside flight plan" in an attempt to bring
Dalai Lama to India. But the plan failed to implement immediately because
of the opposition from Tibetan patriotic strength. However, close contacts
between separatists of Tibet's upper strata and the CIA and separatists'
schemes asking for CIA'sfinancing, support and supply continued all along.
Initial CIA missions in Tibet appeared in early 1957 when the first groups
of six Khampas residing in India were picked to receive secret service
training by agents from the United States. The United States also established
training camps in Colorado for those picked agents who were later parachuted
back into Tibet and other Tibetans-inhabited areas in China to join the
rebel forces against the Chinese central government.
When the Tibetan rebellion occurred in 1959, Dalai Lama was helped to
flee to India with CIA's support. Planes of the CIA intruded hundreds
of miles into China's airspace to escort those fleeing Tibetans, spy the
movement of the People's Liberation Army(PLA) and drop food, maps, radios
and money for those rebels. A trained-in-US Khampa agent escorted Dalai
Lama all along during his flight.
Around 1960, under the plotting of the CIA, the base of the Tibetan rebelling
forces were transferred to Mustang, Nepal. In the end of 1960, some 200
Tibetan rebels arrived at Mustang and founded a guerrilla base there.
Since then, they had kept crossingborder, stole into Tibet and assaulted
PLA men and other government staffs. It was until the eve of late President
Nixon's first official trip to China in 1972 that the CIA stopped financing
Tibetan rebels, suspended their weapons supply to those guerrillas and
closed their guerrilla bases within the boundaries of India and Nepal.
During this historical process, the United States' "concerns"
over the "Tibet issue" only resulted in the aggravation of the
rebellions in Tibet and other Tibetans-inhabited areas. Such "concerns"
connived the flight of Dalai Lama and landed the Tibetanpeople in an abyss
of misery and led to many years of unrest alongthe border areas in China's
Tibet.
In the late 1950s and early 1960s, the United States' instigated some
small countries to put forward motions on the so-called "Tibet questions"
in the United Nations. They adopted meansthat were so inferior that they
themselves would probably never want to mention again.
However, the history of the United States' "concern" about
"Tibet questions" did not end there. The so-called "Tibet
questions" then became a card serving its "human rights diplomacy."
On June 18, 1987, the US House of Representatives approved an amendment
regarding so-called "China's violation of human rights in Tibet."
The amendment, after further revision, was passed by the US House of Representatives
and US Senate and was affixed to the US Foreign Relations Authorization
Act Fiscal Year 1988-1989.
Parliaments of other Western countries followed suit and passed bills
that interfered in China's Tibetan affairs, accused the Chinese government
for "violating human rights in Tibet," and supported the Dalai
Lama.
On Sept. 21, 1987, the human rights sub-committee of the US House of
Representatives gave the floor to the Dalai Lama, who putforward a "five-point
proposal" regarding the so-called "status ofTibet."
The Foreign Affairs Committee of the House held a hearing on Oct. 14,
1987 on human rights in Tibet, during which several congressmen backed
the Dalai Lama and tried to put pressure on China. After that the Dalai
Lama stepped up separatist activities and frequently went all out selling
his ideas in Western countries.
Was the US "concern" on the questions related to Tibet really
conducive to China's domestic stability during 1987-1989? The fact was
that on Sept. 27, 1987, six days after the Dalai Lama spoke at the human
rights sub-committee of the US House of Representatives, Lhasa, the capital
of the Tibet Autonomous Region,witnessed the first riot aimed at realizing
the so-called "Tibetan independence" since 1959. Some slogans
and posters appearing on the streets at that time said that the US Congress
had begun to pay attention to Tibetan affairs.
There were dozens of riots in Lhasa in the following two years,which
caused tremendous losses of lives and properties to people in Tibet and
seriously undermined their normal work, study and life. The riots were
resolutely opposed by people of various ethnic groups in Tibet. The People's
Government of the Tibet Autonomous Region has irrefutable evidence that
the riots in Lhasawere directly plotted and instigated by Tibetan splittist
forces overseas.
The US Government and congress continued to support the Dalai Lama in
various ways after 1989. And the tones of the Dalai Lama's splittist activities
changed from time to time. On Aug. 19, 1991, the Dalai Lama announced
abandoning the so-called "Strasbourg Proposal" made in June
1988, and firmly asked for "complete independence of Tibet,"
which he predicted the same year would be realized within five to 10 years.
After 1993, the Dalai Lama put forward the so-called "middle road
approach," and asked for a "high degree of autonomy " in
Tibet like the "One country, two systems" designed for Hong
Kong, following a statement of the US vice president, who advocated realizing
"Tibet independence" in two steps.
Up to now, we've not seen any public statements by the Dalai Lama indicating
he would accept the principles for negotiations proposed by the Central
Government. The United States, taking no notice of the Dalai Lama's duplicity,
has kept pressing the Chinese Government to conduct negotiations with
the Dalai Lama "without preconditions."
Such "concern" cannot but set people thinking as the recent
report by the US Government went so far as to say that the issue would
possibly become a "stumbling block to fuller political and economic
engagement" with the United States.
To sum up, all instability in Tibet over the past half century and more
was because of the disturbances and sabotage by the Tibetan splittist
forces, backed by US and other Western anti-China forces.
For the United States, which calls itself a pioneer of "democratic
politics," it seems difficult to make clear who represents the interests
of the people in Tibet. The Chinese people would not allow it if the Chinese
Government, elected by the National People's Congress (NPC), and the deputies
to the NPC,elected by people of various ethnic groups in China, do not
represent the people's interests. It's the same case with the People's
Government of the Tibet Autonomous Region.
Therefore, it is the Chinese Government and the Tibet Autonomous Regional
government, rather than the US government and the Dalai Lama who left
his motherland and religious followers more than four decades ago, that
best know how to safeguard the fundamental interests of people of all
ethnic groups in Tibet, including protecting the Tibetan language, religions
and cultural heritage.
The Tibetan local government reported a population of one million in
1953 when new China conducted its first census. The population of Tibetans
in China amounted to nearly 4.6 million, ofwhom 2.41 million lived in
the Tibet Autonomous Region in 2000, according to the fifth national census.
It is estimated that thereare 120,000 to 130,000 Tibetans living overseas.
Either viewed historically or realistically, the US Government report's
claim that the Dalai Lama "represents the views of the vast majority
of Tibetans and his moral authority helps to unite the Tibetan community
inside and outside of China," is a lie.
The Dalai Lama used to be the chief executive of the local Tibetan government,
which was an integration of political power and religious authority, and
Tibet under his rule was under the dark feudal serf system.
The Dalai Lama betrayed his country and threw himself under the shield
of foreign anti-China force just because he was opposed to any change
of the barbaric system. In exile, he has made no contribution to the development
of Tibet nor to the happiness and benefit of the Tibetan Buddhism followers
over the past 40-odd years.
On the contrary, the so-called Tibetan "government-in-exile"
led by the Dalai Lama has been involved in political activities aiming
to split the country for years. The Dalai Lama, in violation of the religious
rite and historical convention of Tibetan Buddhism, appointed Panchen
living Buddha on his own. How could he be the representative of the Tibetan
people? How could he"unite the Tibetan community inside and outside
of China"?
It is a historical choice made by all Tibetan people to follow the socialist
road and the system of regional national autonomy under the leadership
of the Communist Party of China, and they will never turn away from this
choice.
The US government,by distorting the facts, has tried its best to puff
the Dalai Lama. It has patently profaned the will of several million Tibetan
people in China. By putting pressures or even threat on the Chinese government,
it is interfering in China's internal affairs, which hurts the progress
of Tibet, the stability of Chinese society, and the improvement and development
of Sino-US relations. Such interference can but meet with firm opposition
from the Chinese government and create further distrustin the United States
by all Chinese people including Tibetans.
Why is the US government concerned about the Tibet issue, since it is
not for protecting Tibetan people's language, religion,cultural heritage,
human rights and freedom, or for safeguarding China's stability? This
writer believes that the Tibet issue or the Dalai Lama serves as a card
for the US anti-China force in its attempts to contain China. |