The Dalai Lama and His Government: Catch-22 Tibet

Sikyong Lobsang Sangay launched a CTA-sponsored book that glorifies Tibetan suicide by self-immolation.

The opinion piece below was sent to dorjeshugden.com for publication. We accept submissions from the public, please send in your articles to [email protected].

 


 

By: Shashi Kei

It has been 60 years since the Dalai Lama fled Tibet to set up an exile government in Dharamsala, North India. As a third generation of Tibetan refugees drift with uncertain futures in exile, most of them today have not seen, let alone lived in, their homeland. And yet a deep ultranationalism accompanied by animosity towards China persists due to very effective indoctrination that has been championed by the Dalai Lama’s exile Tibetan leadership, the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA).

Faced with a powerful nemesis and finding itself with no military or economic might, the CTA has instead co-opted two very powerful weapons in its assault against China – the Dalai Lama and the Buddhist religion. In the name of the Dalai Lama, the CTA commandeered Buddhism as a political tool and with that, created pockets of anti-China agitators in every place in the world where the Tibetan Buddhist faith is being practiced.

According to the CTA’s narrative, the proper practice of the Buddha’s teachings compels unquestioning compliance with all of the Dalai Lama’s thoughts, which by extension, translates into the CTA’s policies and its political aspirations. The Dalai Lama is presented as a Buddha and hence all Buddhist adherents owe him a duty of obedience. In doing this, the CTA places the Dalai Lama at risk of being compared to the infamous Pope Boniface VIII, the megalomaniacal pontiff who decreed that salvation was not possible unless the people subjected themselves to him completely. Similarly, one is not a proper Buddhist unless one supports the Dalai Lama ergo, the CTA. This is notwithstanding the fact that the Dalai Lama is not even the absolute spiritual head of his own lineage, the Gelug school, let alone of Buddhism overall.

The CTA has subtly encouraged Tibetan self-immolation as a means to create sympathy for its political agenda. Over 150 Tibetans have perished unnecessarily over the years. When will the CTA finally speak up strongly to discourage the Tibetans from self-harm?

Being in exile accorded the Dalai Lama more power than any of his predecessors or any other Tibetan Buddhist figure, as the world became intoxicated with the Shangrila myth. It is upon this privilege and power that the CTA draws its legitimacy. In the decades since the Dalai Lama escaped Tibet, the Tibetan leader has commanded immense vogue and created a significant global space within which the CTA has increasingly worked its mischief, often undermining the Dalai Lama’s efforts.

 

The Sabotage

A number of incidences bear testimony to this. For instance, in July 2017 amid a tense standoff between India and China, the President of the CTA Lobsang Sangay decided it was an opportune time to assert Tibetan independence, and to raise the Tibetan flag at Pangong Tso (Pangong Lake), which lies between India and China. Sangay’s taunt of China was all the more provocative given it was done within eyeshot of Tibet. That injudicious act infuriated China, a result at odds with India’s seeking of a peaceful solution to its border woes. To redress the injury, the Indian Foreign Secretary subsequently instructed all Indian government officials to refrain from participating in Tibetan events organized to mark the 60th anniversary of the Dalai Lama’s exile in India. In essence, the CTA significantly diminished almost 60 years of goodwill the Dalai Lama had built with the CTA’s generous host.

More recently, the Dalai Lama’s efforts to close the gap between Dharamsala and Beijing with accord on spiritual matters has been brazenly thwarted by his own Tibetan government-in-exile. In April 2018, the Dalai Lama acknowledged that the China-enthroned Panchen Lama Gyaincain Norbu is in fact the “official Panchen Lama”, a statement that effectively endorses China’s legitimacy in recognizing and enthroning high lamas. This represents a complete reversal of the Tibetan leadership’s past stance, which asserted that Gyancain Norbu is merely a political stooge and a false incarnation of the popular 10th Panchen Lama. Given the importance of the Panchen Lama, deemed to be the highest-ranking Tibetan lama in China, the Dalai Lama’s acceptance of the Chinese Panchen Lama was clearly designed to thaw relations with Beijing and draw parties back to the negotiation table. The head of the CTA, Lobsang Sangay was with the Dalai Lama when his proclamation on Gyancain Norbu was made and so there cannot have been a miscommunication.

His Holiness the 11th Panchen Lama, Gyaincain Norbu.

Nevertheless, just two days later, the CTA saw it fit to publish on its official website an article critical of the Chinese Panchen Lama and demanded the release of their authorized Panchen Lama candidate, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima whom they claim had been kidnapped by China in 1995. To ensure that their point was not lost, another two stories were published on the CTA website in May 2018, both critical of the Chinese Panchen Lama. In essence, these stories demolished whatever foundations of friendship the Dalai Lama was constructing with Beijing.

 

Co-opting Buddhism

Not content with undermining the Dalai Lama’s diplomacy on the domestic front, the CTA has gone international with its attempts. In his recent speeches made during world tours, Lobsang Sangay has framed the Sino-Tibetan conflict as the struggle between Communism and Buddhism, masquerading the fact that it is more accurately a quarrel over who has dominion over the Tibetan nation – a communist regime or a feudal theocracy to whom the Tibetan people were regarded as mere chattel prior to 1959.

The CTA’s misuse of Buddhism is subtle but delivers devastating effect. An example is the Tibetan leadership’s 1996 ban on the worship of a popular Tibetan Buddhist deity, Dorje Shugden. The 2004 Human Rights Watch Report on Tibet dedicates an entire section to Dorje Shugden, articulating how the CTA’s diktat on the Shugden practice created deep divisions amongst Tibetans in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) and worldwide. Banning the worship of Dorje Shugden was a calculated and deft strategy. Dorje Shugden, an ancient deity worshipped by many Tibetan Buddhist schools, was carefully chosen from amongst the thousands of deities in the Tibetan Buddhist pantheon due to the popularity of his practice.

The International Shugden Community, whose members comprise of Shugden practitioners from all over the world, have suffered discrimination

The CTA conceived the idea of Dorje Shugden being an instrument of the Chinese, constructed with the aim of destabilizing the reign of the Dalai Lama. In this way, Tibetans were pitted against one another. Dorje Shugden practitioners on the one hand were summarily painted as anti-Tibet, anti-Dalai Lama and pro-Chinese traitors while non-Dorje Shugden practitioners were pro-Tibet and pro-Dalai Lama. The result of all this was unrest within the TAR, precisely what the Chinese government fears most due to the tendency for unrest to escalate into uprisings in China’s frontier regions. It was a clever ruse on the part of the CTA, turning Tibetan Buddhists worldwide into de facto Tibet activists, intent on suppressing Dorje Shugden practitioners with the TAR and across the globe, all for the sake of the so-called ‘Tibet cause’.

 

A Noxious Assault on Freedom

Whilst effective, this strategy exacts a very high attrition on communities dragged into supporting the CTA’s agenda, namely discord and disharmony in erstwhile peaceful societies not involved in Sino-Tibetan aggressions. Still, it is a cost the CTA seems prepared to inflict as we see in its recent interference in Taiwanese spiritual affairs. Since 1949 Taiwan and China have had fraught relations. As tensions renewed between the two nations under Taiwan’s new President, Tsai Ing-wen, the CTA waded in to introduce further enmity and mistrust between the small island nation and the juggernaut China.

In August 2018, CTA representative Dawa Tsering proudly launched a new anti-Shugden book in Taiwan, titled “Tibetan Dharma Protectors, Deities and Demons”

In August 2018, the CTA via its agency Snowland Publications in Taiwan published Tibetan Dharma Protectors, Deities and Demons. The book was written in Chinese with a foreword by Dawa Tsering, the CTA’s representative in Taiwan. At first glance, the publication of an educational book on Tibetan Buddhism seems benign enough. However, on closer inspection, it bears all the hallmarks of good propaganda material created with one intention – to use the Dorje Shugden issue to divide the community and blame China.

With chapter titles like “How did Tulku Drakpa Gyaltsen [who arose as the said divinity Dorje Shugden] become an evil spirit”; and “The Poison of Dolgyal [a derogatory name for the deity]” and “The Consequences of Propitiating Shugden” there is no doubt what the objective of the book is. Not a single page acknowledges the fact that the highest lamas of the Gelug and the Sakya, including the 14th Dalai Lama, had worshipped the deity.

Dawa Tsering said in an interview with Radio Free Asia that Dorje Shugden “violates Buddhism” while sidestepping the fact that the very idea of a book that disparages a religion and seeks to create disharmony in a foreign state violates the simplest concept of freedom and decency. This is the CTA once again undermining the Dalai Lama’s work to portray the Tibetans as harmless and soulful citizens of a heavenly Himalayan nation.

Not only is it suspicious that an official of the supposedly democratic CTA is again conflating religion and politics, but now the CTA is stirring trouble in another country whose religious affairs are of no concern to any foreign government, let alone an exiled and stateless administration whose primary preoccupation should be the welfare of its refugee populace and the fulfilment of the Dalai Lama’s wish to return to Tibet.

Prior to the new Taiwanese publication, Lobsang Sangay had launched yet another anti-Shugden book in 2016, written with the purpose of segregating and creating further divisions within the Tibetan community.

The CTA’s latest anti-Shugden book purports to expose Taiwanese Buddhist groups that it claims have been infiltrated by the Chinese government. The basis of this allegation is purely on account of the groups’ worship of Dorje Shugden, the deity that the CTA had pre-emptively outlawed despite claiming to be a democracy. According to the book’s line of thought, the evil government of China has corrupted Buddhism in Taiwan and therefore, even if a Buddhist practitioner has no interest in Sino-Tibetan politics, he should still oppose China as a means of defending the integrity of his faith. That makes him a supporter of the Dalai Lama and CTA by default.

The CTA’s act has far-reaching consequences:

  • To begin with, it trespasses on Taiwan’s spiritual affairs, rightly an internal issue that the CTA should have no say over.
  • It specifically targets certain Taiwanese Buddhist groups. Thus, the CTA is implying that all good Taiwanese Buddhists should disregard Taiwan’s laws that provide for freedom of religion, and instead obey the CTA’s decrees.
  • It attempts to criminalize Taiwanese citizens who choose not to abide by the CTA’s diktats regarding Dorje Shugden.
  • It conflates spirituality with politics, implying that a Taiwanese citizen’s personal choice of worship is somehow a reflection of their private political beliefs.
  • It brings to Taiwan the same unrest it created within the TAR and in other Tibetan Buddhist communities worldwide.
  • It is an external administration passing judgement on Taiwanese citizens, thereby disregarding the sovereignty that Taiwan claims for itself and its people. How is that any different from, say, Germany passing a decree about Greek citizens? Or from China making decisions on Taiwan’s behalf, to put it into a context a Taiwanese citizen can relate to?

The CTA’s own treatment of Shugden Buddhists is nothing short of draconian. For instance, it publishes on its official website a series of notices and parliamentary resolutions that criminalizes Shugden worship and compels the Tibetan populace to apply pressure on Shugden Buddhists to give up their faith. Now the CTA wants the people of Taiwan to similarly turn on their own countrymen and splinter the Taiwanese Buddhist community. The deeply divided Tibetan community worldwide and the unrest in the TAR such as that reported by the Human Rights Watch in 2004 bear witness to the damage suffered by those who have listened to the CTA.

The official website of the Central Tibetan Administration carries material that undemocratically accuses Dorje Shugden practitioners worldwide to be “Chinese spies” and “criminals in history”. Click to enlarge.

What the CTA aims to do – constrain the people’s choice of belief while planting dissension and bringing strife upon Taiwan’s Buddhist community – contravenes the most fundamental international laws that prohibit a State from interfering with the internal affairs of another State thereby compromising its sovereignty. This is notwithstanding the fact that the CTA is not legally a State by the definition of established International Law, although it behaves and demands to be accorded the privileges and status of one. In fact, for 60 years, the CTA has acted outside the ambit of every global regulatory body and the reach of international law, a convenience they have exploited fully. Next, and given prevailing tensions between Taiwan and China, the CTA’s book that accuses Shugden Buddhists of being Chinese agents serves to induce further sentiments detrimental to the development of peaceful reunification between Taiwan and China. Stirring anti-China sentiments can only damage cross-strait ties at a time when they are already frail.

 

A Simple Business Decision

It may perplex some to see how a government that claims to base its policies on Buddhist values such as ahimsa (non-violence or non-injury) engage in such treachery to serve its political agenda. This is especially so when the Dalai Lama became famous off the back of touting messages of peace all over the world, even being awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts. But there is a simple explanation – the CTA is after all an exile government and as such, its reason for existing holds only as long as the 150,000 or so Tibetans who followed the Dalai Lama into exile continue to be refugees.

The CTA’s locus standi ends the moment the Dalai Lama’s spiritual and political plans are accomplished, symbolized by his return to China-controlled Tibet. The success of the Dalai Lama’s work comes at the demise of the CTA, which will simply have no role in the TAR. It is highly unlikely China will consider, let alone allow, for a separate administration to operate autonomously with its own set of rules, especially one that has spent six decades actively seizing every opportunity to destabilize the region.

The CTA will have to dissolve its core and supporting structures including the countless Office of Tibet premises around the world that have drawn, according to conservative estimates, an annual average of USD50 million into the CTA’s coffers for the past 60 years. This money is supposed to be applied towards improving the standard of living of the Tibetan refugees but, given the string of global propaganda campaigns that keep resentment towards China at a peak, critics cannot help but wonder if the donations and grants have been used to bankroll the CTA’s schemes instead.

Should the Dalai Lama manage to draw the Chinese government into a settlement, this gravy train would come to an abrupt halt and career politicians like Lobsang Sangay would lose all prestige accorded him. He will instead have to return to his position as an assistant lecturer, given the lack of demand in the otherwise lucrative lecture circuit for a failed President who has no achievements to call his own. Which politician-businessman would seek such an end? There are such incongruities between what the CTA portrays and its actions that lend credence to China’s labelling of the CTA as a “separatist government”. The Dalai Lama has called for a cessation of CTA hostilities towards China saying that it is foolish to regard China as the enemy and that the past is past. Clearly, the CTA disagrees. It cannot afford not to.

 

中国染指“凶天”渗透分化海外藏人

Source: https://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/gangtai/hx1-08202018101135.html. Click to enlarge.

 

Please support this website by making a donation.
Your contribution goes towards supporting
our work to spread Dorje Shugden across the world.

Related Topics: , , , ,

Share this article
83 total comments on this postSubmit yours
  1. Separating Buddhist community into camps is a crime! This is in fact one of the 5 heinous crimes as Buddhist i.e. creating schism among Sangha.

    This is obviously politically motivated by CTA to cover up it’s own incompetence. Using Dorje Shugden practitioners as scapegoats to justify its inability to champion the cause of #Tibetans while continue to ask donations from international sympathisers.

    What is worse, CTA has now extended its propaganda to other countries as evident in this publication of anti-Shugden book in Taiwan.

    This shouldn’t be taken lightly. CTA already caused disharmony among Tibetans in-exile and now even to Buddhists all around the world and even invading the harmony of non-Tibetan Buddhists in their own country!

    We must stop the evil plan of CTA. We must not stay quiet.

    Let’s voice out loud our side of the truth. Fight them with logic and historical facts. Fight them with reality against their fabricated lies.

    This is our mission as Dorje Shugden practitioners. It’s our responsibility.

  2. 每一个人都有权利选择自己的信仰和修行自由,为何要制造那么多谎言,自导自演无谓的烦恼给众生,那个种行为就是你们的神圣的信仰了吗?

    你们口口声声也说自己是修行者,那么就要真的实践佛法,身体力行,行为一致。

    照成伤害、隔离、威胁并不是修行者的行为。愿你们一起吉祥,回头是岸。

  3. 达瓦才仁 说: 雄登是世间鬼神,据我所知他是文殊菩薩的化身,只知道凡是修持 多杰雄登者,无論是出家或在家人都遭受迫害,不平等待遇·这些国際新聞都曾經報導过,人民眼睛都是雪亮的·不好被一些有心人誤導了!

  4. 达瓦才仁你这样说就是修多杰雄登是鬼神又惨害西藏宗教,是爪牙打手。

    看来我不觉得像你们说的这样。根据网上的说法,修多杰雄登法门,会伤害达赖喇嘛尊者。看来不是的。
    像是多杰雄登修持者受到伤比较多。一直受到威胁,毒骂和毒打。在网上有很多照片可以证明。你有什么证明多杰雄登法伤害赖喇嘛尊者,大家一起想想到第谁在伤害谁。

  5. Spending public donation for publishing books as propaganda tool and spread lies is one of the most shameful things a “government” like CTA can do.

    See how difficult the life of some Tibetans in Indian refugee camps…those money should be used to make their life better. Too bad Tibetan leaders did not, and not planning to do so in future as well. 😥😆

  6. A powerful article, a must-read! Makes people wonder, why are they so biased against China when all the other countries are doing exactly what China is doing but behind the facade of ‘democracy’? 👎

    Opinion: In Search Of Historical Parallels For China’s Rise
    October 15, 20182:55 PM ET
    Alexis Dudden teaches history at the University of Connecticut and is the author of Japan’s Colonization of Korea and Troubled Apologies Among Japan, Korea, and the United States. Jeffrey Wasserstrom (@jwassers) teaches history at University of California, Irvine, and is the author of Eight Juxtapositions: China through Imperfect Analogies from Mark Twain to Manchukuo and coauthor of China in the 21st Century: What Everyone Needs to Know.
    History can be helpful in making sense of what the Chinese Communist Party is doing within and beyond the borders of the People’s Republic of China. But when it comes to understanding today’s China, history is an imperfect guide. Neat parallels with the past aren’t possible. Certain aspects of China today are completely without historical precedent. And even when certain parallels do become possible, history isn’t helpful in quite the way that either Chinese President Xi Jinping or others promoting comparisons to the past may assume.
    Some have warned that as China threatens to displace the U.S. as a world power, war is inevitable — the so-called Thucydides Trap. While it may be tempting now to view the U.S. as Sparta to China’s Athens, this analogy does not stand up to scrutiny. There are more than just two major states locked in competition. Moves by Russia, the European Union, Japan and other powers will affect what does or does not happen next. The existence of international organizations and nuclear weapons alone makes it problematic to summon ancient Greek wars as templates for contemporary geopolitical tensions.
    Xi’s own ideas about the past are particularly significant, and similarly flawed. In promoting his outward-facing Belt and Road Initiative — an ambitious global infrastructure project — and his more domestically focused “Chinese dream” vision of national rejuvenation, he advances the idea that China should be seen as both rebooting and rejecting the past.
    In terms of rebooting, he presents the Belt and Road Initiative as putting a glorious new high-tech spin on the ancient Silk Road. In terms of rejecting, he presents China as breaking completely from the way two previous rising powers — the U.S. and Japan — behaved during the so-called “century of humiliation,” the period between 1839 and 1949 when they were part of an imperialist ganging-up on China.
    But there are no perfect historical analogies for the Belt and Road Initiative. It is not the modern version of the ancient Silk Road. That “road” was actually a set of roads, and they evolved organically, not via a top-down edict. In addition, Silk Roads also were defined by flows in different directions, with China being transformed by things moving into the country as much as by things heading out from it.
    Similarly, there are no perfect analogies to Beijing’s aggressive actions in the South China Sea or its creation of a vast network of indoctrination camps for Uighurs in Muslim-majority Xinjiang.
    As historians of China and Japan, what intrigues us, though, is that some of the most revealing imperfect analogies that come to mind lie precisely where Xi claims no precedents should be sought: in the actions and rhetoric of America and Japan between the first Opium War and the second world war — the period encompassing China’s century of humiliation.
    As America and Japan leapfrogged up the world’s geopolitical hierarchy, they each, as China does now, generated awe, anxiety and an admixture of the two. Much like China today, these two countries were associated with rapid economic development (facilitated by limits on the rights of laborers), technological advances (such as impressive new train lines) and territorial expansion (including, in each case, asserting control over islands in the Pacific Ocean).
    Leaders in Washington and Tokyo then, like those in Beijing now, often claimed to be breaking with the playbooks of previous empires. They asserted that their actions were motivated not by a naked desire for greater power but by a wish to improve the lot of people already under their control in borderlands or those being brought under their control farther away. When they used force, they claimed, they did so only to ensure stability and order.
    Beijing’s recent actions in Xinjiang and Tibet have echoes in Tokyo’s actions in Manchuria in the 1930s and Washington’s in the Philippines at the turn of the 19th century. Tokyo sent soldiers and settlers to Manchuria and exerted direct and indirect influence over the territory. Japanese official publications treated Manchuria’s people much in the same way as China’s Xinhua News Agency now treats those of Xinjiang and Tibet — as inhabitants of a backward and dangerous frontier that needed guidance from a government in a more advanced capital. In the Philippines, American proponents of expansion similarly celebrated the influx of new people and the importing of “modern” ideas, institutions and influences.
    History does suggest that Beijing’s leaders might consider doing things to make their actions less similar to the negative models of Japanese and U.S. expansion that loom large in China’s textbooks. They could grant greater agency to Uighurs and Tibetans in the path of their assimilationist development moves — allowing various languages to be taught in schools, for example — and reverse the trend in Xinjiang of disappearing people into camps, which conjures up other troubling historical analogies as well.
    In the South China Sea, Beijing is doing things that anyone steeped in the American and Japanese pasts will find familiar. But there are new twists.
    In the 1850s, the Japanese government built six Odaiba island fortresses in Tokyo Bay as a defensive strategy, primarily against the Americans. During an 1879 tour of China and Japan, former U.S. president Ulysses S. Grant boasted about his nation’s completion of the transcontinental railroad, which is notable in this context because it was a grand, “belt”-like project that, among other things, facilitated his successors’ annexations of Hawaii and the Philippines, as well as other islands.
    Beijing’s recent pressure on international airlines to shade Taiwan the same color as the mainland on their maps is a new turn. It does, though, recall schoolchildren’s maps in Japan being modified to include Taiwan in 1895, when Tokyo annexed the island into its growing empire. The same thing occurred again in 1910, when Japan subsumed Korea.
    One important difference between China’s expansionist moves and those of the United States and Japan is how they resonated at home. Until Japan took its dark turn in the late 1930s that resulted in the cataclysmic events of 1945, Japanese critics of Tokyo’s territorial ambitions could express their views in public.
    Mark Twain, a writer Xi admires, found it distasteful when the U.S. took control of the Philippines — when, as he put it, the “eagle put its talons” into new places with rapacious greed.
    Some Chinese citizens doubtlessly feel similarly about their government’s actions in the South China Sea, as well as its repressive moves in Xinjiang and Tibet. Unlike Twain or domestic critics of Japanese expansionism, though, it would be dangerous for China’s people to voice their concerns openly. That may be one of the most troubling comparisons from the past and present.
    https://www.npr.org/2018/10/15/657019981/opinion-in-search-of-historical-parallels-for-chinas-rise

    ty

  7. If CTA really serious about serving the interests of fellow Tibetans and delivering what CTA promised them, why do they see fit to waste resource on publishing propaganda material to use the Dorje Shugden issue to divide the community and blame China?

    Time for those who support CTA because they are drawn to HHDL to cease blindly perpetuating harm indirectly or directly.

  8. “The bottom line is its not about whether anyone trusts or likes China but whether China can help these countries advance their own respective national interests. And the answer is yes. Correspondingly the question is whether any country can afford not to access China’s vast consumer market moving into the future. Not doing business is bad for local economies and no one will elect or re-elect a government that presides over a failing economy.”~NY Times

    How China Has Defied Expectations, in Canada and Around the Globe
    By Ian Austen
    Nov. 23, 2018
    In Saskatchewan, farming is done on a grand scale. So when I visited the Canadian Western Agribition in Regina this week for an upcoming story, I wasn’t surprised to find that the annual gathering of Western farmers is almost overwhelmingly large, luring 127,000 visitors last year to a city of 215,000.
    Like all agricultural exhibitions, the Agribition has a wide array of activities for city dwellers like me, including a rodeo, horse shows and cattle judging. But what started as a regional exhibition 48 years ago has grown into a global event. Cattle ranchers, many from distant parts of North America, parade their livestock to buyers from around the world looking to improve their herds.
    When I asked breeders where their customers come from these days, many of them said China.
    Canada, like the rest of the world, has not escaped the effects of China’s move from isolated backwater to a global economic and political force. For the past several months, more than a dozen New York Times reporters, editors, photographers and designers have been examining China’s dramatic rise in a project called China Rules, which launched this week.
    Phil Pan, our Hong Kong-based Asia editor, has worked in China for about two decades and returned to writing to produce the must-read opening essay on how China’s rise has defied expectations.
    Political shifts in Washington and Beijing helped influence the timing of the series. “One factor was certainly a sense at the beginning of the year that America under Trump was in retreat or withdrawing from the world,” Phil said.
    Under President Xi Jinping, China saw an opportunity to step up, he said. And in recent months, he said, “We began to see this fundamental shift in the relationship between the U.S. and China from engagement to competition.”
    While President Trump has attacked China and launched a trade war against it, Canada has taken an opposing track. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has said repeatedly that his government is moving toward a full-scale free trade agreement with China, though that movement’s progress has been stately, at best.
    And Mr. Trudeau’s government continues to rebuff American security warnings about allowing equipment made from Huawei Technologies, the Chinese telecommunications company with research operations in Canada, into the coming upgrade of Canada’s wireless networks.
    I asked Phil if Canadians can, or should, trust China.
    “I think the debate in Canada and the United States probably will be much less about trust than about interests,” he said. “Is the fact that the Chinese political system is authoritarian a problem for our national interest?”
    Here, for your weekend reading pleasure, is more from our China Rules series:
    • The American Dream Is Alive. In China.
    • How China Made Its Own Internet
    • How China Took Over Your TV
    • How China Is Writing its Own (Hollywood) Script
    • The World, Built by China
    Among the stories still to come in the series is an examination of China’s authoritarian control of its citizens, as well as articles on how the country is challenging the global, liberal democratic order and why its economic rise left many Western economists red-faced.
    If after reading China Rules, you’d like to discuss the series, we have a new Facebook group: Examining China’s Reach With The New York Times.
    In Conversation
    Mark Thompson, president and chief executive officer of The New York Times Company, will join Chrystia Freeland, Canada’s minister of foreign affairs, in conversation at the University of Toronto on Tuesday, December 11. The two will discuss U.S.-Canada relations, foreign policy challenges and more. Details and ticket information are available here.
    And a final reminder that Sam Tanenhaus, a former editor of The New York Times Book Review, will moderate a panel on book reviewing on Friday, Nov. 30, also in Toronto. Use the code CANADALETTER for $5 off the ticket price.
    Trans Canada
    —The turmoil that followed the arrest of six teenagers accused of sexual assault during hazing rituals at an elite private school in Toronto is prompting some Canadians to question the value of all-boys schools.
    —Canada is pushing the United States to end steel and aluminum tariffs before the ceremonial signing of the replacement deal for Nafta. But Washington is considering another, similarly unappealing measure to replace the duties.
    —An art historian from Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario is among the curators of an exhibit that uses imaging technology to peel back the layers of Bruegel’s complex masterpieces.
    —In Opinion, Amanda Siebert wrote that the legalization of recreational marijuana in Canada will allow medical research to blossom.
    —While the United States dithers, Canada has approved new regulations that will allow for the sale of cars with headlights that automatically adjust their beams, letting drivers see farther down the road without blinding oncoming traffic.
    A native of Windsor, Ontario, Ian Austen was educated in Toronto, lives in Ottawa and has reported about Canada for The New York Times for the past 15 years. Follow him on Twitter at @ianrausten.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/23/world/canada/china-defied-expectations-canada.html

  9. Everyone is expecting a communist China to fail. But in fact China is getting stronger and bigger and more powerful. China proves communism can work to the chagrin of ‘democratic’ countries such as the US who is jealous and threatened of their own status quo. China will continue to grow according to the New York Times.

    The Land That Failed to Fail
    The West was sure the Chinese approach would not work. It just had to wait. It’s still waiting.
    By PHILIP P. PAN
    Photographs by BRYAN DENTON
    NOV. 18, 2018
    In the uncertain years after Mao’s death, long before China became an industrial juggernaut, before the Communist Party went on a winning streak that would reshape the world, a group of economics students gathered at a mountain retreat outside Shanghai. There, in the bamboo forests of Moganshan, the young scholars grappled with a pressing question: How could China catch up with the West?
    It was the autumn of 1984, and on the other side of the world, Ronald Reagan was promising “morning again in America.” China, meanwhile, was just recovering from decades of political and economic turmoil. There had been progress in the countryside, but more than three-quarters of the population still lived in extreme poverty. The state decided where everyone worked, what every factory made and how much everything cost.
    The students and researchers attending the Academic Symposium of Middle-Aged and Young Economists wanted to unleash market forces but worried about crashing the economy — and alarming the party bureaucrats and ideologues who controlled it.
    Late one night, they reached a consensus: Factories should meet state quotas but sell anything extra they made at any price they chose. It was a clever, quietly radical proposal to undercut the planned economy — and it intrigued a young party official in the room who had no background in economics. “As they were discussing the problem, I didn’t say anything at all,” recalled Xu Jing’an, now 76 and retired. “I was thinking, how do we make this work?”
    The Chinese economy has grown so fast for so long now that it is easy to forget how unlikely its metamorphosis into a global powerhouse was, how much of its ascent was improvised and born of desperation. The proposal that Mr. Xu took from the mountain retreat, soon adopted as government policy, was a pivotal early step in this astounding transformation.
    China now leads the world in the number of homeowners, internet users, college graduates and, by some counts, billionaires. Extreme poverty has fallen to less than 1 percent. An isolated, impoverished backwater has evolved into the most significant rival to the United States since the fall of the Soviet Union.
    An epochal contest is underway. With President Xi Jinping pushing a more assertive agenda overseas and tightening controls at home, the Trump administration has launched a trade war and is gearing up for what could be a new Cold War. Meanwhile, in Beijing the question these days is less how to catch up with the West than how to pull ahead — and how to do so in a new era of American hostility.
    The pattern is familiar to historians, a rising power challenging an established one, with a familiar complication: For decades, the United States encouraged and aided China’s rise, working with its leaders and its people to build the most important economic partnership in the world, one that has lifted both nations.
    During this time, eight American presidents assumed, or hoped, that China would eventually bend to what were considered the established rules of modernization: Prosperity would fuel popular demands for political freedom and bring China into the fold of democratic nations. Or the Chinese economy would falter under the weight of authoritarian rule and bureaucratic rot.
    But neither happened. Instead, China’s Communist leaders have defied expectations again and again. They embraced capitalism even as they continued to call themselves Marxists. They used repression to maintain power but without stifling entrepreneurship or innovation. Surrounded by foes and rivals, they avoided war, with one brief exception, even as they fanned nationalist sentiment at home. And they presided over 40 years of uninterrupted growth, often with unorthodox policies the textbooks said would fail.
    In late September, the People’s Republic of China marked a milestone, surpassing the Soviet Union in longevity. Days later, it celebrated a record 69 years of Communist rule. And China may be just hitting its stride — a new superpower with an economy on track to become not just the world’s largest but, quite soon, the largest by a wide margin.
    The world thought it could change China, and in many ways it has. But China’s success has been so spectacular that it has just as often changed the world — and the American understanding of how the world works.
    There is no simple explanation for how China’s leaders pulled this off. There was foresight and luck, skill and violent resolve, but perhaps most important was the fear — a sense of crisis among Mao’s successors that they never shook, and that intensified after the Tiananmen Square massacre and the collapse of the Soviet Union.
    Even as they put the disasters of Mao’s rule behind them, China’s Communists studied and obsessed over the fate of their old ideological allies in Moscow, determined to learn from their mistakes. They drew two lessons: The party needed to embrace “reform” to survive — but “reform” must never include democratization.
    China has veered between these competing impulses ever since, between opening up and clamping down, between experimenting with change and resisting it, always pulling back before going too far in either direction for fear of running aground.
    Many people said that the party would fail, that this tension between openness and repression would be too much for a nation as big as China to sustain. But it may be precisely why China soared.
    Whether it can continue to do so with the United States trying to stop it is another question entirely.
    Apparatchiks Into Capitalists
    None of the participants at the Moganshan conference could have predicted how China would take off, much less the roles they would play in the boom ahead. They had come of age in an era of tumult, almost entirely isolated from the rest of the world, with little to prepare them for the challenge they faced. To succeed, the party had to both reinvent its ideology and reprogram its best and brightest to carry it out.
    Mr. Xu, for example, had graduated with a degree in journalism on the eve of Mao’s violent Cultural Revolution, during which millions of people were purged, persecuted and killed. He spent those years at a “cadre school” doing manual labor and teaching Marxism in an army unit. After Mao’s death, he was assigned to a state research institute tasked with fixing the economy. His first job was figuring out how to give factories more power to make decisions, a subject he knew almost nothing about. Yet he went on to a distinguished career as an economic policymaker, helping launch China’s first stock market in Shenzhen.
    Among the other young participants in Moganshan were Zhou Xiaochuan, who would later lead China’s central bank for 15 years; Lou Jiwei, who ran China’s sovereign wealth fund and recently stepped down as finance minister; and an agricultural policy specialist named Wang Qishan, who rose higher than any of them.
    Mr. Wang headed China’s first investment bank and helped steer the nation through the Asian financial crisis. As Beijing’s mayor, he hosted the 2008 Olympics. Then he oversaw the party’s recent high-stakes crackdown on corruption. Now he is China’s vice president, second in authority only to Xi Jinping, the party’s leader.
    The careers of these men from Moganshan highlight an important aspect of China’s success: It turned its apparatchiks into capitalists.
    Bureaucrats who were once obstacles to growth became engines of growth. Officials devoted to class warfare and price controls began chasing investment and promoting private enterprise. Every day now, the leader of a Chinese district, city or province makes a pitch like the one Yan Chaojun made at a business forum in September.
    “Sanya,” Mr. Yan said, referring to the southern resort town he leads, “must be a good butler, nanny, driver and cleaning person for businesses, and welcome investment from foreign companies.”
    It was a remarkable act of reinvention, one that eluded the Soviets. In both China and the Soviet Union, vast Stalinist bureaucracies had smothered economic growth, with officials who wielded unchecked power resisting change that threatened their privileges.
    Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the Soviet Union, tried to break the hold of these bureaucrats on the economy by opening up the political system. Decades later, Chinese officials still take classes on why that was a mistake. The party even produced a documentary series on the subject in 2006, distributing it on classified DVDs for officials at all levels to watch.
    Afraid to open up politically but unwilling to stand still, the party found another way. It moved gradually and followed the pattern of the compromise at Moganshan, which left the planned economy intact while allowing a market economy to flourish and outgrow it.
    Party leaders called this go-slow, experimental approach “crossing the river by feeling the stones” — allowing farmers to grow and sell their own crops, for example, while retaining state ownership of the land; lifting investment restrictions in “special economic zones,” while leaving them in place in the rest of the country; or introducing privatization by selling only minority stakes in state firms at first.
    “There was resistance,” Mr. Xu said. “Satisfying the reformers and the opposition was an art.”
    American economists were skeptical. Market forces needed to be introduced quickly, they argued; otherwise, the bureaucracy would mobilize to block necessary changes. After a visit to China in 1988, the Nobel laureate Milton Friedman called the party’s strategy “an open invitation to corruption and inefficiency.”
    But China had a strange advantage in battling bureaucratic resistance. The nation’s long economic boom followed one of the darkest chapters of its history, the Cultural Revolution, which decimated the party apparatus and left it in shambles. In effect, autocratic excess set the stage for Mao’s eventual successor, Deng Xiaoping, to lead the party in a radically more open direction.
    That included sending generations of young party officials to the United States and elsewhere to study how modern economies worked. Sometimes they enrolled in universities, sometimes they found jobs, and sometimes they went on brief “study tours.” When they returned, the party promoted their careers and arranged for others to learn from them.
    At the same time, the party invested in education, expanding access to schools and universities, and all but eliminating illiteracy. Many critics focus on the weaknesses of the Chinese system — the emphasis on tests and memorization, the political constraints, the discrimination against rural students. But mainland China now produces more graduates in science and engineering every year than the United States, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan combined.
    In cities like Shanghai, Chinese schoolchildren outperform peers around the world. For many parents, though, even that is not enough. Because of new wealth, a traditional emphasis on education as a path to social mobility and the state’s hypercompetitive college entrance exam, most students also enroll in after-school tutoring programs — a market worth $125 billion, according to one study, or as much as half the government’s annual military budget.
    Another explanation for the party’s transformation lies in bureaucratic mechanics. Analysts sometimes say that China embraced economic reform while resisting political reform. But in reality, the party made changes after Mao’s death that fell short of free elections or independent courts yet were nevertheless significant.
    The party introduced term limits and mandatory retirement ages, for example, making it easier to flush out incompetent officials. And it revamped the internal report cards it used to evaluate local leaders for promotions and bonuses, focusing them almost exclusively on concrete economic targets.
    These seemingly minor adjustments had an outsize impact, injecting a dose of accountability — and competition — into the political system, said Yuen Yuen Ang, a political scientist at the University of Michigan. “China created a unique hybrid,” she said, “an autocracy with democratic characteristics.”
    As the economy flourished, officials with a single-minded focus on growth often ignored widespread pollution, violations of labor standards, and tainted food and medical supplies. They were rewarded with soaring tax revenues and opportunities to enrich their friends, their relatives and themselves. A wave of officials abandoned the state and went into business. Over time, the party elite amassed great wealth, which cemented its support for the privatization of much of the economy it once controlled.
    The private sector now produces more than 60 percent of the nation’s economic output, employs over 80 percent of workers in cities and towns, and generates 90 percent of new jobs, a senior official said in a speech last year. As often as not, the bureaucrats stay out of the way.
    “I basically don’t see them even once a year,” said James Ni, chairman and founder of Mlily, a mattress manufacturer in eastern China. “I’m creating jobs, generating tax revenue. Why should they bother me?”
    In recent years, President Xi has sought to assert the party’s authority inside private firms. He has also bolstered state-owned enterprises with subsidies while preserving barriers to foreign competition. And he has endorsed demands that American companies surrender technology in exchange for market access.
    In doing so, he is betting that the Chinese state has changed so much that it should play a leading role in the economy — that it can build and run “national champions” capable of outcompeting the United States for control of the high-tech industries of the future. But he has also provoked a backlash in Washington.
    ‘Opening Up’
    In December, the Communist Party will celebrate the 40th anniversary of the “reform and opening up” policies that transformed China. The triumphant propaganda has already begun, with Mr. Xi putting himself front and center, as if taking a victory lap for the nation.
    He is the party’s most powerful leader since Deng and the son of a senior official who served Deng, but even as he wraps himself in Deng’s legacy, Mr. Xi has set himself apart in an important way: Deng encouraged the party to seek help and expertise overseas, but Mr. Xi preaches self-reliance and warns of the threats posed by “hostile foreign forces.”
    In other words, he appears to have less use for the “opening up” part of Deng’s slogan.
    Of the many risks that the party took in its pursuit of growth, perhaps the biggest was letting in foreign investment, trade and ideas. It was an exceptional gamble by a country once as isolated as North Korea is today, and it paid off in an exceptional way: China tapped into a wave of globalization sweeping the world and emerged as the world’s factory. China’s embrace of the internet, within limits, helped make it a leader in technology. And foreign advice helped China reshape its banks, build a legal system and create modern corporations.
    The party prefers a different narrative these days, presenting the economic boom as “grown out of the soil of China” and primarily the result of its leadership. But this obscures one of the great ironies of China’s rise — that Beijing’s former enemies helped make it possible.
    The United States and Japan, both routinely vilified by party propagandists, became major trading partners and were important sources of aid, investment and expertise. The real game changers, though, were people like Tony Lin, a factory manager who made his first trip to the mainland in 1988.
    Mr. Lin was born and raised in Taiwan, the self-governing island where those who lost the Chinese civil war fled after the Communist Revolution. As a schoolboy, he was taught that mainland China was the enemy.
    But in the late 1980s, the sneaker factory he managed in central Taiwan was having trouble finding workers, and its biggest customer, Nike, suggested moving some production to China. Mr. Lin set aside his fears and made the trip. What he found surprised him: a large and willing work force, and officials so eager for capital and know-how that they offered the use of a state factory free and a five-year break on taxes.
    Mr. Lin spent the next decade shuttling to and from southern China, spending months at a time there and returning home only for short breaks to see his wife and children. He built and ran five sneaker factories, including Nike’s largest Chinese supplier.
    “China’s policies were tremendous,” he recalled. “They were like a sponge absorbing water, money, technology, everything.”
    Mr. Lin was part of a torrent of investment from ethnic Chinese enclaves in Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore and beyond that washed over China — and gave it a leg up on other developing countries. Without this diaspora, some economists argue, the mainland’s transformation might have stalled at the level of a country like Indonesia or Mexico.
    The timing worked out for China, which opened up just as Taiwan was outgrowing its place in the global manufacturing chain. China benefited from Taiwan’s money, but also its managerial experience, technology and relationships with customers around the world. In effect, Taiwan jump-started capitalism in China and plugged it into the global economy.
    Before long, the government in Taiwan began to worry about relying so much on its onetime enemy and tried to shift investment elsewhere. But the mainland was too cheap, too close and, with a common language and heritage, too familiar. Mr. Lin tried opening factories in Thailand, Vietnam and Indonesia but always came back to China.
    Now Taiwan finds itself increasingly dependent on a much more powerful China, which is pushing ever harder for unification, and the island’s future is uncertain.
    There are echoes of Taiwan’s predicament around the world, where many are having second thoughts about how they rushed to embrace Beijing with trade and investment.
    The remorse may be strongest in the United States, which brought China into the World Trade Organization, became China’s largest customer and now accuses it of large-scale theft of technology — what one official called “the greatest transfer of wealth in history.”
    Many in Washington predicted that trade would bring political change. It did, but not in China. “Opening up” ended up strengthening the party’s hold on power rather than weakening it. The shock of China’s rise as an export colossus, however, was felt in factory towns around the world.
    In the United States, economists say at least two million jobs disappeared as a result, many in districts that ended up voting for President Trump.
    Selective Repression
    Over lunch at a luxurious private club on the 50th floor of an apartment tower in central Beijing, one of China’s most successful real estate tycoons explained why he had left his job at a government research center after the crackdown on the student-led democracy movement in Tiananmen Square.
    “It was very easy,” said Feng Lun, the chairman of Vantone Holdings, which manages a multibillion-dollar portfolio of properties around the world. “One day, I woke up and everyone had run away. So I ran, too.”
    Until the soldiers opened fire, he said, he had planned to spend his entire career in the civil service. Instead, as the party was pushing out those who had sympathized with the students, he joined the exodus of officials who started over as entrepreneurs in the 1990s.
    “At the time, if you held a meeting and told us to go into business, we wouldn’t have gone,” he recalled. “So this incident, it unintentionally planted seeds in the market economy.”
    Such has been the seesaw pattern of the party’s success.
    The pro-democracy movement in 1989 was the closest the party ever came to political liberalization after Mao’s death, and the crackdown that followed was the furthest it went in the other direction, toward repression and control. After the massacre, the economy stalled and retrenchment seemed certain. Yet three years later, Deng used a tour of southern China to wrestle the party back to “reform and opening up” once more.
    Many who had left the government, like Mr. Feng, suddenly found themselves leading the nation’s transformation from the outside, as its first generation of private entrepreneurs.
    Now Mr. Xi is steering the party toward repression again, tightening its grip on society, concentrating power in his own hands and setting himself up to rule for life by abolishing the presidential term limit. Will the party loosen up again, as it did a few years after Tiananmen, or is this a more permanent shift? If it is, what will it mean for the Chinese economic miracle?
    The fear is that Mr. Xi is attempting to rewrite the recipe behind China’s rise, replacing selective repression with something more severe.
    The party has always been vigilant about crushing potential threats — a fledgling opposition party, a popular spiritual movement, even a dissident writer awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. But with some big exceptions, it has also generally retreated from people’s personal lives and given them enough freedom to keep the economy growing.
    The internet is an example of how it has benefited by striking a balance. The party let the nation go online with barely an inkling of what that might mean, then reaped the economic benefits while controlling the spread of information that could hurt it.
    In 2011, it confronted a crisis. After a high-speed train crash in eastern China, more than 30 million messages criticizing the party’s handling of the fatal accident flooded social media — faster than censors could screen them.
    Panicked officials considered shutting down the most popular service, Weibo, the Chinese equivalent of Twitter, but the authorities were afraid of how the public would respond. In the end, they let Weibo stay open but invested much more in tightening controls and ordered companies to do the same.
    The compromise worked. Now, many companies assign hundreds of employees to censorship duties — and China has become a giant on the global internet landscape.
    “The cost of censorship is quite limited compared to the great value created by the internet,” said Chen Tong, an industry pioneer. “We still get the information we need for economic progress.”
    A ‘New Era’
    China is not the only country that has squared the demands of authoritarian rule with the needs of free markets. But it has done so for longer, at greater scale and with more convincing results than any other.
    The question now is whether it can sustain this model with the United States as an adversary rather than a partner.
    The trade war has only just begun. And it is not just a trade war. American warships and planes are challenging Chinese claims to disputed waters with increasing frequency even as China keeps ratcheting up military spending. And Washington is maneuvering to counter Beijing’s growing influence around the world, warning that a Chinese spending spree on global infrastructure comes with strings attached.
    The two nations may yet reach some accommodation. But both left and right in America have portrayed China as the champion of an alternative global order, one that embraces autocratic values and undermines fair competition. It is a rare consensus for the United States, which is deeply divided about so much else, including how it has wielded power abroad in recent decades — and how it should do so now.
    Mr. Xi, on the other hand, has shown no sign of abandoning what he calls “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.” Some in his corner have been itching to take on the United States since the 2008 financial crisis and see the Trump administration’s policies as proof of what they have always suspected — that America is determined to keep China down.
    At the same time, there is also widespread anxiety over the new acrimony, because the United States has long inspired admiration and envy in China, and because of a gnawing sense that the party’s formula for success may be faltering.
    Prosperity has brought rising expectations in China; the public wants more than just economic growth. It wants cleaner air, safer food and medicine, better health care and schools, less corruption and greater equality. The party is struggling to deliver, and tweaks to the report cards it uses to measure the performance of officials hardly seem enough.
    “The basic problem is, who is growth for?” said Mr. Xu, the retired official who wrote the Moganshan report. “We haven’t solved this problem.”
    Growth has begun to slow, which may be better for the economy in the long term but could shake public confidence. The party is investing ever more in censorship to control discussion of the challenges the nation faces: widening inequality, dangerous debt levels, an aging population.
    Mr. Xi himself has acknowledged that the party must adapt, declaring that the nation is entering a “new era” requiring new methods. But his prescription has largely been a throwback to repression, including vast internment camps targeting Muslim ethnic minorities. “Opening up” has been replaced by an outward push, with huge loans that critics describe as predatory and other efforts to gain influence — or interfere — in the politics of other countries. At home, experimentation is out while political orthodoxy and discipline are in.
    In effect, Mr. Xi seems to believe that China has been so successful that the party can return to a more conventional authoritarian posture — and that to survive and surpass the United States it must.
    Certainly, the momentum is still with the party. Over the past four decades, economic growth in China has been 10 times faster than in the United States, and it is still more than twice as fast. The party appears to enjoy broad public support, and many around the world are convinced that Mr. Trump’s America is in retreat while China’s moment is just beginning.
    Then again, China has a way of defying expectations.
    Philip P. Pan is The Times’s Asia Editor and author of “Out of Mao’s Shadow: The Struggle for the Soul of a New China.” He has lived in and reported on China for nearly two decades.
    Jonathan Ansfield and Keith Bradsher contributed reporting from Beijing. Claire Fu, Zoe Mou and Iris Zhao contributed research from Beijing, and Carolyn Zhang from Shanghai.
    Design: Matt Ruby, Rumsey Taylor, Quoctrung Bui Editing: Tess Felder, Eric Nagourney, David Schmidt Photo Editing: Craig Allen, Meghan Petersen, Mikko Takkunen Illustrations: Sergio Peçanh

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/25/world/asia/china-rules.html

  10. India and China now pushing ahead with resolution of their border disputes. It looks like India is finally ready to officially drop the Tibet card.

    Excerpt:

    “India and China will have “early harvest” talks on their vexed border dispute as many agreements have been reached by both sides since their top leaders met in Wuhan, Beijing said on Monday”.

    Sino-Indian ‘early harvest’ spells scorched earth for Tibetan dreams.

    Too bad for Tibetans in India. Too bad for Tibetan leadership. Their karma coming back soon for all the harms they have done.

    India, China for ‘early harvest’ talks on border
    November 27, 2018
    BEIJING: India and China will have “early harvest” talks on their vexed border dispute as many agreements have been reached by both sides since their top leaders met in Wuhan, Beijing said on Monday.
    Days after India and China pledged to intensify their efforts to resolve a decades-long boundary feud in their border talks, the Chinese Foreign Ministry said that New Delhi and Beijing have agreed to authorise the Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on border affairs to start “early harvest consultations.”
    The Ministry’s spokesperson Geng Shuang said India’s National Security Advisor and Chinese State Councillor had a constructive and forward-looking meeting at the 21st round of border talks last week.
    Asked what he meant by “early harvest,” Geng did not elaborate.
    “After the Wuhan summit between Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping, the bilateral relations have made very positive progress and made new developments.
    Indo-Asian News Service
    http://gulftoday.ae/portal/f8b61f20-9429-48df-b61d-06df2e236b51.aspx

  11. Dear Lobsang Sangye and Tibetan Govt in exile in Dharamsala,

    How come after 60 years you are still not at the G20 meetings? How come you cannot get your country back? How come the world economies and power are shifting towards the East which is China? How come you cannot get Tibetan autonomy, or freedom or any leeway with China? How come your negotiations with China is a failure and you produced nothing?

    You run around begging for FREE MONEY from Europe, Australia, Japan, Canada, Taiwan and US for 60 years now but no one in your refugee community has made it big or successful? Where did all the money go? In your pockets? How come all your Tibetans from India/Nepal are going back to Tibet or leaving to the west. How come your schools in India are empty? How come Dharamsala is emptying out?

    How come you are getting weaker and more world governments are ignoring you? How come more are paying attention to China? Less governments are willing to pay attention to you and the Tibet cause? Where is all your rangzen groups? How come they are not effective? Maybe they are disillusioned with your corruption, lies and underhanded tactics and human rights abuses using religion to divide your own people?

    What happened to you? Why are you and your community your Tibetan ‘parliament’ such losers and failures? How come you cannot achieve anything?

    Are you going to continue to beg for more FREE MONEY to fund your trips, houses, children’s education, vacations, five star hotels, nice brocade chubas, expensive accessories, and properties. You know the ordinary Tibetan in India has gotten nothing in financial help of the hundreds of millions in aid for that last 60 years you Tibetan exiled government pocketed. Is that why your Tibetan people in India and Nepal are all leaving to back to Tibet and the west? You failed?

    Your policies and work are not effective.

    Too bad.

    China rises at the G20
    The global balance of power is shifting from West to East
    Tensions loom over Argentina, which plays host to the 2018 summit of the G20 which started on November 30. The G20 is an international forum of the EU and the heads of state of 19 major economies, which discusses global economic challenges. And the challenges are mounting.
    Globalization is in reverse, as the US threatens to escalate its trade war with China and other trading partners; and xenophobia is rife in many Western countries. These challenges are a threat to global prosperity, but what will shape much of the long-term evolution of the global economy is the rise of China and other emerging economies.
    Much of the focus at the G20 has been on Donald Trump and his series of sidebar meetings with other leaders, especially Xi Jinping. Trump has said that it is “highly unlikely” that he would postpone the planned increase in tariff levels from 10% to 25% on $200 billion of Chinese goods in January 2019.
    Of course, this may be bluster and a frequent refrain from apologists for Trump is: “Take note of what the president does, not what he says.” But we may be on the cusp of a full-blown trade war, which will not be confined to the US and China and which will reverse and reconfigure globalization. Entering foreign markets will be more costly and global supply chains will be disrupted.
    Globalization is not inevitable
    The notion that globalization is a natural phenomenon, akin to the change in the seasons or the weather or gravity, is a frequent refrain. During his tenure as prime minister of the United Kingdom, Tony Blair opined: “I hear people say we have to stop and debate globalization. You might as well debate whether autumn should follow summer.” A pithy turn of phrase, but patently not true.
    The configuration and extent of globalization are shaped by public policy and technological change. When this changes, it can, in turn, accelerate, slow, or reverse globalization. In periods of severe economic crisis, it has been common for countries to become inward looking — blaming “others” for economic problems and resorting to protectionism and controls on immigration.
    In the interwar period, for example, the response to the Great Depression was a trade war and competitive devaluations as the Gold Standard unraveled. Similarly, since the 2008-09 financial crisis and the Great Recession that followed, there has been a worldwide rise in protectionist measures and Trump’s interventions may lead to a new phase of “delocalization.”
    An evolving global economic order
    Major economic crises often reflect endemic flaws within the structure of the global economy and lead to major changes in global economic leadership. The crises and lessons of the interwar period led to the establishment of the Bretton Woods system, which managed the world economy during the post-war golden age of capitalism until the early 1970s. It was the system that created new international institutions (the IMF, World Bank, and GATT, which was the forerunner of the WTO) and this was underpinned by the dominance of the US economy.
    But the relative strength of the US (and the dollar) declined and the system unraveled in the late 1960s and early 1970s. This collapse, and a series of oil crises, led to another major economic crisis which temporarily stalled globalization and led to shifting reliance on the power of unfettered market forces.
    Liberal market capitalism may have been unleashed, but is still not ubiquitous in the world economy. The picture of a fully globalized world and the dominance of free markets is a partial distortion of a complex picture. The extent to which countries have embraced the global market agenda is highly variable.
    Although many developed countries have deregulated financial markets, capital controls and managed currencies are still highly prevalent in developing countries. In terms of trade, tariffs have been reduced since World War II but they have not been eradicated.
    Meanwhile, the use of non-tariff barriers has increased, with roughly 80% of all traded goods affected by these restrictive rules and regulations — and these are prevalent in developed countries. The ongoing chaos of Brexit illustrates that “free trade” is not a natural state but is negotiated, complex, and dependent on a litany of regulations and agreements.
    Deregulation, the hollowing out of the welfare state, and intensified global competition have led to rising income and wealth inequality in many Western countries. And many of those who have not benefited from globalization have also borne the brunt of the austerity policies that followed the financial crisis and the Great Recession. The resulting backlash against globalization helps explain the election of Trump and the vote for Brexit.
    The rise of China
    The G20 will focus on current instability but there are long-term structural shifts which are leading to a rebalancing of the global economy. The balance of power is shifting from West to East and we are in the early stages of transition to China as the dominant world economy.
    China is already the largest economy in the world (measured in purchasing power parity) and PwC (using World Bank data) estimates that by 2050, the Chinese economy will be 72% larger than the US. Further, by 2050, six of the largest eight economies will be countries that are still emerging markets.
    China is home to many of the world’s largest companies, including major tech companies like Alibaba and Tencent. It is investing rapidly in research and innovation and although the dollar remains the dominant world currency, the IMF has added the renminbi to its basket of global reserve currencies. It will only become more important as Trump’s policy of American isolationism continues.
    This year’s G20 summit will focus on maintaining some semblance of international cooperation and preventing a global trade war. The short-term noise will probably come from Trump. But China can play a long-term game as its position in the global economy is on the rise. In the face of the gales of the long-term shifts in the global economy, Trump can blow hard now — but as far as the future is concerned, he will be blowing in the wind.
    Michael Kitson is University Senior Lecturer in International Macroeconomics, Cambridge Judge Business School. This article previously appeared in Reuters.
    https://www.dhakatribune.com/opinion/op-ed/2018/12/01/china-rises-at-the-g20

  12. TIBETANS SHOULD NOT HAVE MONKS AS LEADERS, THAT IS A BIG MISTAKE

    Note what Namdol Lhagyari said is progressive and unlike the usual Tibetan rhetoric:

    “The problem I see right now is how reliant we are on one individual,” Namdol Lhagyari, 32, the youngest member of Tibet’s exile parliament, said. “I understand that every freedom movement requires one role model, one leader, who would push everyone in the right direction, bring everyone to one goal. But he has reached an age where we will have to prepare ourselves for a post-Dalai Lama.”

    Source: https://themediaproject.org/news/2018/12/3/as-the-dalai-lama-ages-tibetan-exiles-turn-to-secular-unity-over-sacred

    👎

    These are important points to remember:

    1. Tibetan lamas and monks SHOULD not enter politics. They should not hold positions of power, leadership and political roles. It will demean the Dharma. They are not trained, nor qualified nor have the credentials to be in government. They also do much damage to religion as people start to respect them less. The lines between respecting them as spiritual beings (sangha) and speaking against them when they are in government and make wrong decisions become blurred.

    2. Monks and nuns should not get involved with the running of the country but should stick to education. Giving good education to the public about ethics, morality and in some cases Buddhism. No one wants to see a political monk or nun. Because it contradicts the very reason they renounced the worldly life in order to enter a life of contemplation, learning, meditation and gaining enlightenment.

    3. Look at other countries where Buddhism is strong where sangha is sangha and never get involved with government or being public officials. In Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Burma, Sri Lanka etc where there are tens of thousands of sangha, you don’t see them in the government at all. Local or national governments both do not have sangha. Even in Christian countries you don’t see priests in government. That is Tibet’s big mistake to place monks/high lamas in so many government positions and as public officials. Very dangerous for the country as it has proven with Tibet and Tibetans.

    4. Monks, nuns and high lamas should do dharma practice, produce books, videos, give teachings, guide the public, do funerals, blessings, be a nurturer, study dharma, build real temples, keep existing temples spiritual, animal shelters, environmentalists, be mediators, help with orphanages, shelters, the poor, half way houses, poor houses, and basically all sorts of charities that benefit the mind and body of sentient beings that is NOT GOVERNMENT BASED. If sangha gives good education, they can produce kind and good leaders to run the country.

    Tibetans should never never never allow Sangha (monks, nuns and spiritual personages) to be involved with government, politics and rule of law because it ends up in disaster. That is how Tibet lost it’s country and will never get it back. There are too many monks in the Tibetan Parliament and as leaders remember Samdhong Rinpoche as the prime minister of exiles. That was very bad. The King of Tibet currently is a monk. How does that look? Very political.
    Tibet made that huge mistake and Tibet will never recover from it.

    Forum: http://www.dorjeshugden.com/forum/index.php?topic=6226.0

  13. Differences between Dalai Lama and CTA president put Tibetan politics in a tailspin
    By Rajeev Sharma, November 27, 2018 SouthasianMonitor.com

    Tibetan politics is in a tailspin as there are signs of serious differences between the 14th Dalai Lama, unquestionably the supreme and undisputed leader of the Tibetans, and Lobsang Sangay, president of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA).

    The immediate provocation is the unceremonious cancellation of the 13th Religious Conference of the Schools of Tibetan Buddhism and Bon Tradition, which was scheduled between November 29 and December 1 year in Dharamshala. Insiders have revealed that the conference was cancelled by Lobsang without consulting the Dalai Lama.

    Even more intriguing is the timing of the move. Knowledgeable sources in the Tibetan establishment in India disclosed that Lobsang made the move while the Dalai Lama was travelling back from Japan, knowing that he wouldn’t be able to do anything to stop it.

    Tibetan politics is turning out to be a cloak-and-dagger mystery. According to sources, Lobsang waited until the Dalai Lama was on his way to the airport before ordering the Department of Religion and Culture to cancel the event. Interestingly, the cancellation of the conference is available by way of an announcement in English on the CTA website.

    The CTA’s Department of Religion and Culture announced that owing to the sudden demise of the supreme head of the Nyingma tradition, Kathok Getse Rinpoche, who passed away this week in Nepal and in respecting the sentiments of the followers of Nyingma tradition, the 13th Religious Conference of the Schools of Tibetan Buddhism and Bon Tradition was being indefinitely postponed.

    The department cited that many lamas and representatives of the Nyingma tradition were unable to participate because of Rinpoche’s passing away.

    On November 22, the CTA organised a prayer service to mourn the demise of Rinpoche, the 7th supreme head of the Nyingma school of Tibetan Buddhism. Rinpoche passed away following an accident on November 19 in Pharping, Nepal. He was 64.

    Sources say the Dalai Lama is furious with Lobsang Sangay for trying to take credit for his negotiations with China about returning to Tibet.

    Sangay claimed that the Dalai Lama has failed for 60 years in negotiations with China, but he has the power and ability to succeed. This is also an indication of how weak the Dalai Lama’s current position is. Sangay knows that the Dalai Lama has been negotiating with China about returning and he’s trying to position himself to take credit for it. Had this happened a few years ago the Dalai Lama would have had him removed, but since his cancer has become terminal, Sangay has been consolidating his position among the exiled community. He controls the press department of the Tibetan government-in-exile and has done so since he ousted Dicki Chhoyang.

    For the record, the head of the department, which cancelled the conference, was appointed by Sangay.

    By the time the Dalai Lama returned to India the event was cancelled and announcements were issued to the media while he was still in the flight, which would have prevented a confirmation with the Tibetan leader and nothing could have been done to stop it. The reason given for the cancellation was the death of a senior monk.

    Sources said that the real reason for the CTA president to keep the Dalai Lama in the dark was because the latter would decide again whether to back the Karmapa as his successor. The Karmapa issue has been a major reason of discord between the Dalai Lama and the CTA president. Sources spoke about a telephonic conversation between the Dalai Lama and Sangay in this regard on November 22 when the former was in Japan.

    During this conversation, furious arguments broke out between the two. The Dalai Lama is said to have “shouted” at Sangay, saying that the Karmapa wouldn’t be chosen and that he wouldn’t be dictated terms by anyone. In this conversation, the Dalai Lama used some expletives in Tibetan language which he did not expect Sangay to understand as the CTA president doesn’t know the language. However, a Lobsang aide is said to have translated what the Dalai Lama said.

    This marks the most significant power play ever between the different factions within the Tibetan exile leadership. In other words, it’s now an all-out battle between the Dalai Lama and Lobsang Sangay over the future of the exile community, which may worsen in the days to come.

    (The writer is a columnist and strategic analyst who tweets @Kishkindha)

    Source: http://southasianmonitor.com/2018/11/27/differences-between-dalai-lama-and-cta-president-put-tibetan-politics-in-a-tailspin/

    ===================================

    This interesting article has much food for thought:

    1. Dalai Lama is angry and shouting expletives as Lobsang Sangay. Everyone knows the Dalai Lama is in full control. He claims he’s retired from politics but this is just to say what the west wants to hear so he can continue getting funding. It looks good to the west that he voluntarily gave up power and this makes him look progressive. But the Dalai Lama controls everything from behind and if you don’t agree with his decisions, he will be furious. Every Tibetan knows this well.

    2. Interesting the article mentions Dalai Lama’s cancer is terminal. Everyone knew this but the Dalai Lama tries to cover this point up. Why? Who knows? What is the problem if people knows he has cancer. Tibetan govt tries to play it down.

    3. Dalai Lama is angry as his successor will only be on his terms and no one else may dictate to him the terms as Lobsang Sangay tried to do so since it is not a democracy in practice. As all Tibetans know, the Dalai Lama is the Lama-King and he has full power and no one may contradict him. The face he shows the west (soft, friendly, diplomatic, easy-going, democratic) is all just for the west. The face Dalai Lama shows his Tibetan people (fierce, King, angersome, in charge and must be obeyed) is how it really is. Tibetans know the Dalai Lama controls everything and fully manages all politics. People are not happy with this but dare not speak up as there is no democracy.

    Writer Rajeev Sharma is telling the situation like it really is. Finally the truth is coming out. Tibetan government in exile is a regime in every sense of the world that depends on all the hundreds of millions of free dollars it has been taking from the west, Japan, Australia and so on. It exists on free money. It is not a good government and has failed all negotiations with China due to the Tibetan leaders’ arrogance. Why arrogance? They think the world will force China to do what Tibetans leaders want and that they are so important on everyone’s agenda. Tibetans are on no one’s top agenda and China is an economic and military super power. China will not and will never kowtow to the Tibetan demands. It is the Tibetans who must beg China to be friends and get some concessions if at all possible. No country has ever dared stand up to USA, but China has and China is growing in power yearly. Everyone is scrambling to be China’s friend and saying goodbye to the Tibetan cause. Tibetan cause is the thing of the past and no economic benefits to support Tibetan cause.

    These days every country votes in leaders that can better their country’s economy due to world recession. So every country has to do business and trade and aid with China to improve their economy. If you side with the Dalai Lama and Tibetan govt in exile in India, what do you get? Nothing! So leaders of every nation realize this now and will continue to make friends with China and say goodbye to the Dalai Lama. Dalai Lama on a personal level may be rich, famous and sells a lot of books, but that won’t get Tibet back. That won’t win the support of leaders of the free world and other nations.

  14. “What does Empress Cixi and the 14th Dalai Lama have in common?”

    His Holiness the Dalai Lama has a ‘method’ in his very powerful rule.

    The Dalai Lama will always say it is not up to him and it’s up to his people. He gave up his power to the people. But it is not really up to his people. His people and his parliament must seek his approval for all decisions or carry out his will. If you ask his people do they want a 15th Dalai Lama after him, they have to say yes as the current one (14th) is watching them and you have to be politically correct to say yes. Who dares to say no? You don’t want to displease him. Who dares to say we want genuine democratically elected leaders. Remember, none of the Dalai Lamas were ever democratically elected (the penny drops). All the Dalai Lamas sit in power on the throne till the end of their lives.

    Also how the next Dalai Lama will be found, the current Dalai Lama will definitely set the mechanics during his lifetime and then sit back and say, it’s the people who wanted it this way. It’s the people who wanted another Dalai Lama. Of course they have to say that. If they say they don’t want another Dalai Lama after this one, it is tantamount to treason. It will offend the current Dalai Lama and make him upset. In order for a stateless leader like himself to continue to get millions in aid for free as he has been for 60 years, he must appear democratic. How will he get money to support his vast expenditure of his lama court, if no free donations in the millions are given? So behind the scenes, Dalai Lama pulls all the strings but in front, he acts like he is doesn’t know anything and not involved and his elected leaders are running the show. Nothing can be further from the truth. Just like the last empress Cixi of China. She always enthrones little emperors handpicked by her from her royal family and extended families and controlled their power and ruled China from behind them as their regent during their adolescence. As a woman she could not be the emperor or ruler of all China, so she was clever and put young kids she chose from her royal families on the throne to be their regent and controlled them from behind the gauze curtain. She was suppose to hand power back to them when they reach the age of maturity to rule China, but she never did. She would place the young emperors on the throne during audiences and sit behind a curtain and dictate orders to the ministers in the name of the emperor as their regent. So in this way, she was acting in the name of the emperor (regent), but actually she was in full control. When time came to hand power over to the emperor, she would have them poisoned. Then place another new very young emperor on the throne. She did this for decades.

    She was literally the power behind the throne. She could not be dethroned in this way yet she held all power. Like this, she ruled China till her death which was near impossible for any woman to do so. The last emperor Puyi she placed on the throne before the kingdom fell to civil war. (This spawned the movie by director Bernardo Bertolucci “The Last Emperor” and the emperor was played by John Lone.) When time came for the maturing emperors to take actual power from Dowager Cixi during her regencies, she would have them poisoned and install another young emperor and continue to be the regent. In this way, she stayed in power. She didn’t get a chance to poison Puyi because she passed away (rode the dragon to heaven) during his adolescence.

    The other only female ‘emperor’ in Chinese history is We Xetian (Empress Wu). Another very incredibly intelligent woman who beat the men around her at their own game and ruled China as a woman.

    The Dalai Lama started the Dorje Shugden ban. It came from him and only he can start it. But now he says, it is not him. Because it would make him look bad if he admits the ban came from him which it did. He claims everyone in the monasteries took a vote and they voted Dorje Shugden out. Ignorant western audiences wouldn’t know any better. They had no choice but to vote Dorje Shugden out or the abbots of the monasteries would be dishonorably discharged by the Dalai Lama himself. He places them in power and he can remove them. All Abbots of the great Gelug Monasteries are chosen by the Dalai Lama himself. He can remove them from power anytime, therefore the abbots are frightened of the Dalai Lama. Dalai Lama says he just advised to not practice Shugden, but his people, the abbots in charge, the monasteries took it to another step and outlawed Dorje Shugden and it’s the will of the people. So his ban on Shugden appears democratic. It was up to them. But it is not. He rules behind a ‘gauze’ curtain that he handed his power over to his personal ‘Puyi’ (Lobsang Sangay).

    The Dalai Lama cannot show the world he is in full charge, because he would be seen as a dictator and therefore lose all free aid money which he and his government subsist on. Dalai Lama is behind the gauze and holds all power and Lobsang Sangay ‘Puyi’ is on the throne. Strangely similar to Empress Cixi. If Lobsang Sangay does things that does not please the Dalai Lama, you can bet your bottom dollar, he will be dethroned. Again, no Dalai Lama was ever democratically voted into a lifetime of power.

    Photos-Empress Cixi of China.

    CiXi

    56

  15. ‘Karmapa’ Ogyen Trinley no longer recognised by Indian govt as 17th Karmapa. Indian government is not happy he did not show respect to India for all the years he took refuge in India. He simply renounced his Indian protectorate papers and took a Dominican republic passport. He could have had the courtesy to let Indian government know beforehand and thank them.

    Read more at:
    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/67279793.cms?&utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

    ‘Dorje no longer recognised by Indian govt as 17th Karmapa’
    Indrani Bagchi | TNN | Dec 28, 2018, 04:00 IST
    HIGHLIGHTS
    Given its apparent disenchantment with the Karmapa, the government is no longer seeing his decision to acquire a Dominican passport as a problem and is willing to give him a visa.
    This could mean that India will no accord much importance to the status of his identity certificate, the document commonly issued to Tibetan refugees, which also facilitates travel abroad.
    NEW DELHI: The already strained ties between Karmapa Ugyen Trinley Dorje and the Indian government seems to have further deteriorated with the government making it clear that it does not recognise him as the legitimate Buddhist religious leader of the influential karma kagyu sect.
    The sharp put down, articulated by well-placed sources, makes the status and future of the Karmapa uncertain in India and seems to indicate that India’s impatience with his long absence from India has turned into a colder indifference to the leader’s claim to his “traditional” seat of the Rumtek monastery.
    Given its apparent disenchantment with the Karmapa, the government is no longer seeing his decision to acquire a Dominican passport as a problem and is willing to give him a visa. This could mean that India will not accord much importance to the status of his identity certificate, the document commonly issued to Tibetan refugees, which also facilitates travel abroad.
    There are legal and political aspects to the development. Since there are competing claims to the Rumtek monastery that are sub judice, India cannot pronounce on the Karmapa’s claim. However, politically, keeping the Karmapa in its zone of influence and supporting his presence here makes India a “guardian” of a religious leader seen to rank next to the Dalai Lama in importance.
    The government’s stand is at odds with the Dalai Lama, who has recognised Dorje as the legitimate Karmapa. In recent years, the Indian government had also shed its suspicions about Karmapa’s escape from China along with his older sister and a few followers. But for more than a year after Karmapa went to the US, he has avoided returning and has in fact complained that he finds restrictions on his travel irksome.
    The rival claimant to the post, Thaye Dorje, who had been placed as a Karmapa claimant by Shamar Rimpoche, recently renounced monkhood and got married, diluting his claim since the title calls for celibacy.
    The two claimants had riven the Karma Kagyu sect, though according to reports, an attempt was made to bridge the divide with Ugyed Trinley Dorje and Trinley Thaye Dorje meeting at a place on the France-Switzerland border in October.
    Ugyen Trinley Dorje’s situation became tenuous after he took a passport from the commonwealth of Dominica in the Caribbean. Sources said Dorje’s acquiring of a foreign passport automatically makes the Tibetan identity certificate (IC) invalid. This means, he would need a visa to enter India.
    The Indian government, according to sources, have conveyed to the Karmapa willingness to issue him a visa. “But he has not approached any Indian mission for a visa,” they said.
    Indian security agencies have been suspicious of him for years, branding him a Chinese spy, particularly as China so readily recognised him. In 2016, the Modi government however, eased travel restrictions for him and he was allowed to travel overseas.
    This throws into confusion not only the future of the Karma Kagyu sect of which Dorje is believed to be the head, but would have implications for India-China and India-Tibet relations in the longer term.
    https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/67279793.cms?&utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

    Dorje no longer recognised by Indian govt as 17th Karmapa

  16. As the so-called spiritual head of Tibetan Buddhists, the Dalai Lama strictly abstains from drinking alcohol in accordance to traditional monastic codes. However, it has recently been reported that the religious leader owns his own vineyard in Switzerland! Apparently, various celebrities, including the likes of Roger Moore, Sepp Blatter and Zinedine Zidane have all made trips to the vineyard. What will people say when they find out that a Buddhist monk, who promotes abstinence from alcohol, owns a vineyard that produces wine for sale? This is certainly not going to sit well with his image of a religious leader and member of the Buddhist monastic order.

    http://video.dorjeshugden.com/comment-videos/comment-1546557813.mp4


  17. Dear Tibetan government-in-exile (Dharamsala),

    Sharmapa Rinpoche is the highest authority in the Karma Kagyu after Karmapa. By age-old tradition, Sharmapa is the one that confirms the real incarnation of Karmapa. He recognized Thaye Dorje as the genuine Karmapa. But Dalai Lama endorsed Orgyen Trinley as the real Karmapa. Dalai Lama is a great lama but there has never been a tradition of him recognizing a Karmapa.

    Both ‘Karmapas’ have big followings in and out of Tibet. So which one should we follow? We have to follow the genuine Karmapa. If we follow the fake one, we will get fake teachings, fake lineage and no results. We can even take rebirth in the lower realms.

    Only the Tibetan leaders can tell us which is the real Karmapa. You have told us which one is the real Panchen Lama. We follow the Panchen of your choosing. Since then we have condemned China and condemned the fake Panchen Lama. Now it is the same situation with Karmapa. We have denounced the fake Karmapa and ask him to step down. He is destroying the Karma Kagyu Lineage.

    This issue has torn the Karma Kagyu sect in half. There are many who are so confused and some gave up Tibetan Buddhism altogether because of this. We must solve the confusion. This does not look good for the Tibetan government in exile because the confusion was started by Tibetan government. I support Dalai Lama and Tibetan government. But so many of us need to know the real Karmapa already. Don’t remain silent. Which one is the real Karmapa.

    Tibetan government in exile, you have created two Gelugs (Pro-Dorje Shugden and against), you have created two Panchen Rinpoches, two Karmapas, two Dromo Geshe Rinpoches, two Kundeling Rinpoches and so on. When are you going to solve all the confusion. You are destroying Tibetan Buddhism.

  18. Who knew that the Tibetan government have so skeletons hanging in their closet? It is quite clear that the Tibetan government are not a kind and compassionate government by looking at their actions and how they have been ruling Tibetans in exile for 60 years.

    It is quite obvious that the Tibetan government is not caring towards their own people. They do not care about their people at all. Tibetans are just a tool for them to use to get more benefits for themselves. It is very clear when we look at what happens when Tibetans start to self-immolate to fight against China’s occupation of Tibet.

    Instead of educating their own people from killing themselves, the Tibetan government launched a book to glorify the act of self-immolation. They are telling their own people that it is good to kill themselves for the country because it generates more attention to their problem and they can get even more donations. What an evil government we have here.

  19. I’ve been operating an online hate group on FB against the NKT. I use to be a part of that organization. I loved my guru Geshe Kelsang, but I didn’t like some of the underlings who ran the organization. I was there for over a decade and it was time for me to be given a position of a teacher and have the respect I felt I deserved. I didn’t get what I wanted and I felt angry and slighted. It reminded me of my abandonment issues I’ve had throughout my life. I’ve never belonged anywhere and people usually left me and I just couldn’t stand it. I got my personal emotional issues mixed up with my spiritual direction. I projected my personal issues onto my teacher and the organization and I have done that so many times in my life ruining good situations.

    I left NKT and told whoever would listen to me who I was abused in NKT. I started a FB page to encourage other ‘victims’ to speak out against NKT. Being the vast organization that NKT is, it was not difficult to find other people who had left for one reason or another and had things to say against NKT. Our little group even got close to some of the events coordinators of the Dalai Lama and we were given a chance to take pictures with Dalai Lama which we promptly did. The photo with the Dalai Lama we thought gave us some validation towards our stance against NKT-but it backfired. It gave us a high to have a photo with the Dalai Lama but after a while we realized we can never be close to the Dalai Lama. We can never get the care and amount of teachings we use to get from Geshe Kelsang Gyatso. Being close to the Dalai Lama is like celebrity worship not so much as having a personal guru who is there for us.

    I regret opening my FB page as it vented out my rage and it was the platform for many other people who had blame and anger issues to collect vast amounts of negative karma. We were never able to have any cases or legal suits against NKT with all of our bantering because there was nothing substantial or genuine in the so called abuses we claimed we received while in NKT. NKT continues to grow while the rest of us who left are nowhere in life. Nowhere in our spiritual practice and just living empty lives. For me I’ve gotten tired of the page I’ve started and FB and it’s a horrendous effort to go there to post things or read any comments. Barely anyone visits the page anyways these days. How much can people vent out their anger at someone or something which is not to blame in the first place?

    I don’t have the courage to apologize to my teacher or rejoin NKT because I am a coward. I’ve always been a coward looking for the easy way out. But I am thinking about it. I realize my mistakes. I realized my mistakes which comes from me.

  20. This book that is being published by the Tibetan leadership glorifies self-immolation. They are actually telling their Tibetans to go light themselves on fire and go die for their country. What kind of government do that? A government is supposed to protect their own people and not exploit them for personal gain.

    The self-immolation cases have brought a tremendous amount of international attention to the Tibet-China situation and they put China in a very bad position. This is exactly what the Tibetan leadership wants. When the world see how desperate the Tibetans are to use such an extreme method to raise awareness of China’s occupation of Tibet.

    Sympathy funds will start pouring in and this is exactly what the Tibetan leadership wants. All they care for is the donation that they will get. They are shameless to exploit their own citizen’s life to get donations. It is amazing that the Tibetans are still loyal and blind to all the exploitation that they are suffering from the Tibetan government.

  21. Why is the Tibetan leadership does not stop their own people from killing themselves? In fact, they are enjoying the fact that their own people are burning themselves to death and getting international attention which comes with a lot of sympathy money. The Tibetan leadership is a sick group of people that only care for themselves.

    There are over 160 Tibetans that killed themselves to fight for the freedom of their country. Until now, the Tibetan leadership has not released any statement or public announcement to advise or stop their own people from doing the act. It does not help with the situation at all because China will certainly not return Tibet back to them just because some Tibetans killed themselves and protested against their rule in Tibet.

    Then, the Tibetan leadership go a step ahead and glorifies the act of self-immolation and labeled the self-immolators as a national hero. They are directly encouraging Tibetans to die for their country in such a horrible way which is totally ineffective and pointless. Tibetan leadership knows it very well but yet they allowed it because it generates more donation and put China in a bad light.

  22. Lobsang Sangay is not only the worst leader for the Tibetans, but he is also the worst leader in the whole wide world! Tell me, which leader in this world is always flying here and there to beg for free money? I think Lobsang Sangay is the only one. He doesn’t put his heart in making sure the Tibetans in exile are able to go back to Tibet, instead, he always creates conflict and splits the Tibetan community into many fractions.

    The reason the CTA has failed in the Tibet cause is that they don’t really want to free Tibet. They want to enjoy the free money so they don’t have to work hard. They take things for granted and they are greedy, they want more and more.

    Lobsang Sangay knows the CTA will collapse very soon, that is why he doesn’t want to leave the CTA yet. He wants to use the opportunity as the president of the CTA to make more money. He has already planned his future very well. He has a US passport and he has a house in the US. He plans so well for himself but he doesn’t have a plan for the Tibetans.

  23. Karmapa Thaye Dorje Ignores the Dalai Lama

    (1) Decades ago, the Shamarpa asked the Dalai Lama to endorse Thaye Dorje as the Karmapa. Shamarpa proved to the Dalai Lama that Thaye Dorje was the Karmapa. The Dalai Lama still refused as it will make the Dalai Lama look bad for endorsing Ogyen Trinley. ~ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJJXYAz3Bz0

    It is known that Tai Situ Rinpoche recognized Ogyen Trinley by stealth. Tai Situ Rinpoche used the Dalai Lama’s fame to promote his Ogyen Trinley candidate in order to secure the Karmapa wealth of many generations.

    (2) Even though the Dalai Lama endorsed Ogyen Trinley as Karmapa, Thaye Dorje could not be restrained and continues to grow immensely in popularity all over the world. Even without the Dalai Lama’s endorsement, the Karmapa Thaye Dorje is growing in importance. Tai Situ Rinpoche thought that without the Dalai Lama’s endorsement, the Karmapa Thaye Dorje would fall and become nothing. He was wrong.

    (3) Shamarpa Rinpoche had asked the Dalai Lama to at least ordain Thaye Dorje as a monk when he was very young and the Dalai Lama refused. This refusal hurt Shamarpa and the Karmapa Thaye Dorje very much. The Dalai Lama sidelined Shamarpa Rinpoche and Thaye Dorje. It was a grievous insult and detrimental interference. In the Karma Kagyu tradition it is the Shamarpa who is the first and foremost to recognize the Karmapas and only in his absence do other regents recognize the Karmapas. Not only did the Dalai Lama interfere in Karma Kagyu affairs but the Dalai Lama took sides. That caused so much fighting and disharmony within the Karma Kagyu school of Buddhism. Tai Situ Rinpoche was wrong not to consult with Shamarpa Rinpoche in all of this.

    (4) The Dalai Lama had no business interfering in Karma Kagyu traditions by recognizing a Karmapa. In the history of the Karma Kagyu school, there has not been one Karmapa recognized by a Dalai Lama nor did they ever need the Dalai Lama’s endorsement. This interference by the Dalai Lama has caused the Karma Kagyu school to take two sides and broke them up and created much disharmony. The disharmony, fighting and mud-slinging as to which one is the real Karmapa has continued to this day in 2019.

    (5) Shamarpa Rinpoche passed away in 2014 and it is up to the Karmapa to recognize his incarnation without the endorsement or interference of the Dalai Lama.

    (6) Now the Karmapa Thaye Dorje recognizes his son born in 2018 as Shamarpa Rinpoche’s incarnation and he does not ask the Dalai Lama to endorse this incarnation. He does not need it. The Dalai Lama has done enough damage. This will shift the dynamics of the Karma Kagyu school again in favor of the Shamarpa Rinpoche’s side. Unfortunately, it will make Ogyen Trinley look strange and left out in the cold. Within the Kagyu school, the Shamarpa is the next highest incarnation after the Karmapa. The Karmapas always recognized Shamarpas and vice versa. It shows that the Karmapa Thaye Dorje has the full authority to recognize the next highest incarnation within their school on his own. This Shamarpa will be spiritually trained by the Karmapa Thaye Dorje himself without the influence of the aged Dalai Lama and his government-in-exile which most Karma Kagyus consider a regime.

    (7) During the Kagyu Monlam prayers in Bodhgaya on January 2019, Thaye Dorje was there leading the Monlam (New Year’s prayers) and so was the Dalai Lama in Bodhgaya, giving teachings in another location nearby. The Dalai Lama, while in Bodhgaya, wanted to meet Thaye Dorje but Thaye Dorje refused. Thaye Dorje avoided the Dalai Lama. It was an insult to the Dalai Lama that he had to accept for all the damage he had done in their Karmapa affair and Karma Kagyu school.

    The Dalai Lama had sidelined Shamarpa and Thaye Dorje when asked to endorse Thaye Dorje decades ago. Now that the Karmapa Ogyen Trinley has run away to the USA, the Dalai Lama wants to be friendly with Thaye Dorje so that he can get on the Karma Kagyu school’s good side. Without the Dalai Lama’s permission, the two Karmapas met in France and decided to mend the rift. This will make the Dalai Lama look bad. Even the Dalai Lama did not think in such a big way or a middle way to help mend the rift. Too bad and too late for the Dalai Lama to make friends with the Karma Kagyu school of Buddhism.

    So much damage has been done. But the Karmapa Thaye Dorje is on the way to mending all this.

    Karma Tsogyal

    thayedorjeson1

  24. Contemplate this:

    Indian journalists sound desperate when they talk about terrorist attacks on India. As this article correctly states, there is little that India can do to address terrorism as they seem to operate from Pakistan. To deal with the terrorists, Indians will have to literally attack Pakistan which it cannot do.

    Well, there is something India can do which is to stop Dharamsala’s terrorist activities against China being executed from Indian soil. The Tibetans have been attacking China for decades, yet they say they wish to return to Tibet. How do you return to a place you constantly criticize? The Dalai Lama is literally begging China to allow him to visit the Five Peaks of Manjushri pilgrimage site in China and also his birthplace in Amdo, Tibet. But if the Dalai Lama keeps criticizing China, why would they sit at the bargaining table with him? India allows for all of this to happen on Indian soil, so that would irritate China.

    Yet India wants concessions from China on the terrorist issue. Meanwhile, Beijing equates Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) leader Hafiz Saeed to India supporting the Dalai Lama against China for five decades now. Furthermore, India wants China to speak up against Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) Masood Azhar. But India does not speak up against Dalai Lama. Whether the world thinks the Dalai Lama is the good guy or not, he is a thorn in China’s side so anyone that supports him is not supporting China. Similar to the situation, LeT’s Hafiz Saeed and JeM’s Masood Azhar are a thorn in India’s side but they do not bother China and her allies, so why should China do anything about them? If India does something on the Dalai Lama, then it would be fair to ask China to do something about their support of Lashkar-e-Taiba leader Hafiz Saeed and Jaish-e-Mohammed’s Masood Azhar. Simple equation.

    These reports are really bare-faced hypocrisy. It implies one nation is helpless against terrorists because the terrorists camp out in another country. But that did not stop the US from heavily bombing Iraq on the basis that it was harboring terrorists. The US did not hesitate to overthrow the government and murder its leader Saddam Hussein.

    It is also very hypocritical that the same journalists who are outraged at China’s annexation of Tibet are quiet about Israel’s annexation of Palestine.

    It is interesting to note that most terrorist attacks are aimed at the US and her allies. Everyone conveniently forgets that the US has been throwing their weight around for decades and can even determine which leader they want in other countries.
    Back to India – if China can convince North Korea to have détente with the US, China can similarly help India with the JeM. India simply has to give up the Tibet card. The article is also a one-sided opinion piece because India faces as many terrorist threats from Bangladesh, with just as many terrorist camps, but because Bangladesh is not China, their involvement is not mentioned.

    India is a great country. China and India as friends will be able to influence the globe literally economically and, eventually, militarily. But India has to play fair. By supporting the Dalai Lama, India will get nothing and furthermore, it will be a stumbling block to China’s 1.4 billion people becoming friends with India’s 1.3 billion people.

    The Dalai Lama has to be compassionate and stop speaking against China because he has to consider the difficulty he places India in as his host. Each time he criticizes and allows his refugees to protest against China and ask for western support, it makes China look bad. So if the Dalai Lama wants China and India to become closer and benefit each other economically then he has to be silent on this already.

    The Diplomat’s Prarthana Basu sums it up very well by saying in the article below that “Now with another terrorist attack infuriating India’s populace, the mystery behind this Chinese silence remains unsolved. While most attribute China’s apparent silence as a favor to Pakistan, as both continue to maintain their “all-weather friendship,” others argue that China holds India responsible for granting political asylum to the Tibetan leader Dalai Lama, whom Beijing equates to Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) leader Hafiz Saeed.”


  25. Soon the CTA will run out of Tibetans in exile to cheat, to brainwash and to control. It will just a matter of time until they will have to cease to exist because there will be no Tibetans to be governed in India. The Tibetans are the worst government that I have ever come across. Not only they had failed their people, they even dare to manipulate their own people into sacrificing their precious life for the government’s benefit.

    Now that China had opened their arms to welcome Tibetans to go back to Tibet, I sincerely hope that Tibetans will go back to Tibet which is much more advanced and developed now. They have a much brighter future there than being controlled by the Tibetan government in India. China is doing so much to help the Tibetans to get back on track via self-help courses and social aids.

    Why would anyone want to stay in India and eventually forced to burn themselves to death just to raise awareness for a lost cause? Tibet is lost forever to China and the Tibetan government has totally no hope in getting it back since they wait for 60 years and still no real effort from them to get back Tibet. Tibetans should wake up and see the reality and leave CTA before they are being used and discarded by the government for their own benefit.

  26. Tibetans in exile are too sheltered and they do not know anything outside of Tibet prior to 1959. His Holiness the Dalai Lama is their god-king and they will follow him no matter what he said. This kind of mindset existed several hundreds of years already since the 5th Dalai Lama’s time. Anyone who goes against the Dalai Lama will not have a good ending. Hence, no one dares to oppose His Holiness or the government.

    When they came to India in 1959, they bring the exact same mentality with them. Those who refuse to see the world outside of Tibet will be stuck with that kind of attitude while those who are willing to step out of their comfort zone will be able to see a whole new world. That is why, those Tibetans who went overseas, will be more successful and will be able to see the true colors of their government.

    Just look at the Tibetans who self-immolate to fight for the freedom of their country. There is no way for them to get back their country now and all they manage to achieve by burning themselves to death is more sympathy and money for CTA. There is also the main reason why CTA encourages their people to self-immolate. Tibetans who are exposed and can think logically will never do such harmful act to themselves because it is a waste of precious human lives. That is why Tibetans need to leave their government and join India or go back to Tibet.

  27. No one in the CTA is capable, even the person who has the best qualification i.e. Lobsang Sangay is useless. Lobsang Sangay may have a qualification from the Havard University but he does not have the quality of a leader. His paper qualification does not make him a good leader automatically.

    The motivation of Lobsang Sangay to be the president of the CTA is to make money. He has got himself some properties in the US and a passport. He does not have to work hard but still getting his paycheck every month. All he needs to do is to pretend he is a political victim and how much the Tibetans have suffered. Lobsang Sangay is a good actor, but definitely not a good leader.

    The CTA will never be in the G20 meeting. They have not proven themselves to be a successful leader. For the past 60 years, they have been fighting for the freedom of Tibet but there is no result, there is no progress. If they want to be invited to the G20 meeting unless they have proven themselves to be more capable than China.

  28. Unlike 5 years ago, Tibetan leader Lobsang Sangay is not invited to Prime Minister Modi’s swearing-in ceremony this time. It is clear that PM Modi of India snubs the Tibetan leadership once again in favour of deeper ties with China. The Tibetan leadership finds itself increasingly isolated as nobody wants to offend China by lending any support to the ungrateful Tibetans.

    PM Modi snubs Tibetan leadership for swearing-in ceremony
    By Tenzin Dharpo
    May. 30, 2019
    DHARAMSHALA, May 30: The Indian Prime Minister who is fresh off of a massive win in the Indian Lok Sabha elections has done a U-turn by not inviting exile Tibetan government’s President to the swearing in ceremony due to be held later today, in a bid to not anger Beijing.
    The President of the exile Tibetan government, known officially as the Central Tibetan Administration, Dr. Lobsang Sangay’s absence today at the Rashtrapati Bhavan in New Delhi marks a stark contrast to 2014 when the elected Tibetan leader was seated in the former rows at the ceremony when PM Modi was sworn into office the first time around.
    The invitation to Dr. Sangay in May 2014 drew strong objection from the Chinese government who lodged an official protest censuring New Delhi’s disregard for the so-called ‘One-China policy’. Many said at the time that the invite was posturing at most, of Modi’s intent to India’s neighbor and biggest rivals both in Asia and global arenas.
    The New Delhi-Beijing relations post the Doklam stand off and Wuhan summit has meant that India has given a cold shoulder to the exile Tibetan set up, thereby taking a step back in using the much-touted ‘Tibet card’. The shift in policy has markedly been seen on the ground with New Delhi issuing an advisory to senior leaders to avoid His Holiness the Dalai Lama or pushing the CTA to shift the “thank you India” ceremony from New Delhi to Dharamshala last year.
    The head of the Tibetan polity who extended pleasantries to PM Modi on his win, however may have anticipated the snub. Days after Modi’s historic election win, Sangay flew to the United States and is scheduled to return on June 5 to India next week.
    http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=41474&article=PM+Modi+snubs+Tibetan+leadership+for+swearing-in+ceremony

  29. Some people say the Dalai Lama is doing something we cannot comprehend. By imposing the ban on Dorje Shugden practice, he is actually promoting it. It is not doubt that many people are hurt and many people are affected negatively by the ban. But it is also because the ban, many people know about Dorje Shugden. Which Dharma protector in this world is as famous as Dorje Shugden?

    In this modern world, people are more interested in negative news than positive news. Perhaps this is the best way to promote Dorje Shugden? When Yamantaka practice was first introduced in Tibet by Ra Lotsawa, there were a lot of misunderstanding and many lives were sacrificed as well. In the end, Yamantaka became of of the very powerful tantric practice Vajrayana Buddhism.

    But of course, at the secular level, it is not right to discriminate and to segregate Dorje Shugden practitioners. Tibetan leadership should treat all Tibetans the same regardless of their belief. CTA claims it is a democratic government, Tibetans should be given the freedom of religion. CTA is being very unfair to the Tibetans and this is very disappointing.

    • If we look at the example of the Yamantaka practice, how lives had to be sacrificed before the practice was accepted and recognised, it kind of gives us hope in the Dorje Shugden controversy. People who are suffering from the ban can make the suffering positive by relating the ban to Yamantaka practice.

      However, I do agree with you that the CTA is not being fair to all its people. As a democratic government, according to the constitution, every has the right to the freedom of religion. No government should discriminate its own people based on their belief. Perhaps CTA has to revisit the meaning of a democracy.

      How different is the CTA compared to China? If the CTA thinks China is suppressing Tibetans, not allowing them to learn their own language and practice Buddhism, isn’t CTA doing similar things to Dorje Shugden followers? How dare CTA condemn China when CTA also do the same thing to the Tibetans.

  30. The CTA is a big hypocrite and they always have a double standard to everything. They complain about being suppressed and not given religious freedom. They complain about being treated unfairly.

    But look at how CTA is suppressing Dorje Shugden practitioners, they are also taking away religious freedom from these people. Why is that they can do this to their own people? Why is that when other people do this to them, they complain about it?

    If CTA feels so much victimised by the Chinese government, they should stop what they are doing to Dorje Shugden practitioners. It is time for them to do the right things, and things that are beneficial to Tibetans. No one should be treated unfairly.

  31. CTA tells people they are a democratic government but they are not. Whoever is against them, they will make their lives difficult. Dorje Shugden ban is a very good example. They segregate Dorje Shugden followers and take away their basic right as a member of the Tibetan in exile community.

    At the same time, they condemn China for not giving religious freedom to the Tibetans. If the Dalai Lama has genuinely changed his stance on the Tibet issue and CTA really cooperate with the Chine government, Tibetans will be allowed to follow the Dalai Lama. Dalai Lama will be allowed to go back to Tibet.

    Unfortunately, the CTA loves free money more than anything else. They will not follow what the Dalai Lama wants and they don’t put the future of Tibetans as their priority. This is the fact, we just have to accept it.

Submit your comment

Please enter your name

Please enter a valid email address

Please enter your message

Show More
Show More
+

(Allowed file types: jpg, jpeg, gif, png, maximum file size: 10MB each)

You can now upload MP4 videos to the comments section. "Choose File" -> click "Upload" then wait while your video is processed. Then copy the link and paste it into the message box. Your video will appear after you submit your comment.
Maximum size is 64MB

Contemplate This

.…Instead of turning away people who practise Dorje Shugden, we should be kind to them. Give them logic and wisdom without fear, then in time they give up the ‘wrong’ practice. Actually Shugden practitioners are not doing anything wrong. But hypothetically, if they are, wouldn’t it be more Buddhistic to be accepting? So those who have views against Dorje Shugden should contemplate this. Those practicing Dorje Shugden should forbear with extreme patience, fortitude and keep your commitments. The time will come as predicted that Dorje Shugden’s practice and it’s terrific quick benefits will be embraced by the world and it will be a practice of many beings.

Dorje Shugden and Dalai Lama – Spreading Dharma Together | Terms of Use | Disclaimer

© DorjeShugden.com 2019 | All Rights Reserved
Total views:8,857,359