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

By Shashi Kei

In October 2017 the Tibetan government-in-exile, known as the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), launched its latest initiative, the ‘Five Fifty Forum’ (5/50). From their headquarters in Dharamsala, North India, the CTA declared this was its strategy towards “resolving the issue of Tibet and Tibet’s political future” in five years or, in an unspoken ultimatum to Beijing, spending the next 50 years fighting what it regards as China’s occupation of Tibet.

The forum was intended as a show of stamina and resolution by the Tibetan leadership. However, whispers have abounded for some time now that things are not going well at all for the Dalai Lama’s administration. Indeed, to paraphrase a news article by Jayadeva Ranade published in the Sunday Guardian Live on 28^th July 2018, this 5/50 is nothing but a futile pantomime, an empty charade.

During the launch of 5/50, Sikyong Lobsang Sangay declared that the program aims to reinvigorate the Tibet movement for the next 50 years. But the Ranade article maps a worrying trend for the Tibet narrative, which brings into question its ability to survive with any significance even in the short term, let alone over another half a century.

The CTA’s Politics of Division

It did not escape Ranade’s notice that the feud between Penpa Tsering and Lobsang Sangay finally snapped what was an already chronically splintered community. Historically, the Tibetan people are already divided by region (Ü-Tsang, Amdo and Kham) and by religious tradition. This partitioning was a significant factor in the Tibetans losing their country to begin with. Indeed, few people are even aware that Tibet was never one united country, but rather an agglomeration of often-warring factions that in the end was carved up by a handful of aristocratic families and brutal feudal lords.

Into this volatile mix, the Tibetan leadership continually introduced highly discordant policies. Some of their attempts to dissolve all Tibetan Buddhist lineages into a single one under the Dalai Lama include:

1. The Gungthang Tsultrim murder;
2. Inducing a three-way split in the Karma Kagyu lineage over their highest spiritual leader, the Karmapa;
3. Illegally imposing the Dorje Shugden ban thereby splitting the Gelug tradition;
4. Politicizing Tibetan Buddhism, demonizing the religious rituals of those they perceive as challengers, and banning reincarnations;
5. Refusing to incorporate representatives of the Jonang tradition into the Tibetan parliament;
6. Confusing the objective of the ‘Tibetan cause’ by pitting independence (rangzen) activists against those standing for meaningful autonomy (umaylam), thereby creating a conflict which culminated in street brawls;
7. And not least, the continual infighting at the highest levels of the Tibetan leadership.

All these policies have damaged Tibetan unity tremendously and under such conditions, the Tibetan struggle has never really been a unified one.

The rivalry between Ex Speaker of Parliament Penpa Tsering and Sikyong Lobsang Sangay is expected to intensify over time.

Fending for Themselves

This jockeying for power and the Dalai Lama’s favor has dominated the minds of the Tibetan leadership. The ensuing neglect of the people’s welfare has thrust the task of preserving Tibetan Buddhism’s integrity into the hands of senior monks of individual Buddhists sects who, unable to gain an appropriate measure of support from their own leaders, have been engaging the Chinese government directly, as Ranade notes. In doing so, these monks risk being labelled traitorous Chinese sympathizers and anti-Dalai Lama operatives who allow their religion to be politicized.

Still, saving their lineage has been worth the risk. Because not only has the politicization of Tibetan Buddhism also been a policy tool of Dharamsala, but aligning oneself with Dharamsala also lacks the sorely-needed status and funding that China can provide to rebuild and protect the lineages. And while China has always been willing to separate religion from politics, it is in fact Dharamsala who has refused to give up their dangerous fusion of church and state. Thus, China today is merely engaging the Tibetan leadership in the game they set out to play, only now the CTA is losing in their own game and crying foul.

The Tibetan leadership’s inability to retain the loyalty of religious leaders in their community has extended to even the 17^th Karmapa Ogyen Trinley Dorje whom the Dalai Lama has endorsed as the official head of the Karma Kagyu tradition, the largest sub-sect of the Kagyu school. To some, Ogyen Trinley also represents a potentially suitable candidate to take over the spiritual leadership of Tibetan Buddhism outside China, in the absence of the Dalai Lama. For all intents and purposes, Ogyen Trinley had much to gain by remaining in India as part of the Tibetan establishment. Hence, his fleeing Dharamsala’s sphere of influence has not gone unnoticed.

The 17th Karmapa Ogyen Trinley Dorje has thus far refused to return to India, citing reasons that allude to his being controlled by Dharamsala.

Ogyen Trinley’s escape from India might appear to be the result of his reluctance to be used as a political tool in Sino-Indian engagements, but as Ranade’s article points out, it was in fact to escape being used as a pawn by the CTA to the detriment of his own lineage. Karmapa Ogyen Trinley has even expressed interest in returning to China, having fled the country in December 1999. His is a statement which echoes the sentiments of other senior monks of various Tibetan Buddhist lineages, who are reported to be building bridges with Beijing – it is better to be a Tibetan under the Chinese than the CTA.

Against the backdrop of a China whose rising might corresponds with her determination to deny the fulfilment of the so-called ‘Tibetan cause’ and her interest (even if simply strategic) in Buddhism, it is only logical for these monks to conclude that their respective traditions have no future under the stewardship of the Tibetan exile leadership. To ensure the survival of their traditions, they have to make their peace with China, something the CTA has failed to grasp and therefore has continued to vilify anyone who even dares to suggest it.

For those who rely on sense rather than sentiment, it is clear that they will need to build bridges with Beijing as a means of securing the continuation of their religious traditions. Authentic lamas and tulkus (lama incarnates) are drawn to conditions that empower them to spread the Dharma and if those conditions are manifest in China, then it is there they will go in this life and in future rebirths. And many indeed have, either moving back to China or taking rebirth there. After all, labels such as country codes and border lines are worldly constructs, and the talk of politicians is beyond the interest of true practitioners of Buddhism who seek to escape the pull of ‘samsara’ (cyclical existence), rather than trading one aspect of it for another.

Hence, collectively, these senior lamas’ actions make a strong statement about the prevailing lack of faith in the Tibetan leadership’s abilities and intentions and, whether wittingly or not, bear significant social and political consequences. Not only has the CTA failed to keep alive the hopes and confidence of the Tibetan refugees, but it also speaks of the Dalai Lama’s waning power not only on the world stage but also within his exiled community. The urgency to protect the Dharma now supersedes the Tibetan leadership’s mandate to appear loyal to the Dalai Lama and the consequence is this – because the Tibetan people identify strongly with their spiritual tradition, they tend to follow the lead of their spiritual teachers. Thus, as more of them forge relationships with China, ultimately this means accepting China. In their focus on personal agendas and neglect of the people, the Tibetan leadership have all but delivered victory to the enemy.

China’s Checkmate: The Dalai Lama’s Final Move

It should surprise no one that the Dalai Lama might be harboring similar thoughts. His government-in-exile has largely failed. China continues to grow stronger even as the Tibetan struggle, singularly embodied in the Dalai Lama’s being, weakens as his health and influence subside. It would be unrealistic for the Dalai Lama to expect that China will suddenly cave in to his administration’s demands just because he is running out of time and options. Either the Dalai Lama allows the Tibetan cause to disintegrate when he passes on or he decides to use whatever time is left to secure a future for his people. The idea of entrusting the struggle to future leaders of the Tibetans in exile, the basis of Dr Lobsang Sangay’s 5/50, may be long in form but falls sadly short in substance and realism based on the CTA’s performance thus far.

The Buddhist Academy of the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) is located in Nyetang Township, Quxu County, Lhasa, TAR. As the first high-level comprehensive academy of Tibetan Buddhism, it has attracted eminent monks and students from all five sects of Tibetan Buddhism.

If the Dalai Lama cannot reacquire Tibet and continue to claim sole proprietorship over ‘Tibetan Buddhism’ then maybe he can mortgage his original schema of autonomy to secure the future of the Tibetan people, and lodge control and legitimate authority over Tibetan Buddhism with a new guardian. At the very least, China’s transnational trajectory will by default spread the sacred Buddhist practices from the Dalai Lama’s motherland and in that way, preserve the memory of the old Tibet. And the one move which will achieve both objectives and, more importantly, the only move China seems interested in, is for the Dalai Lama to return to China. This decision may explain why the personal emissary of the Dalai Lama, Professor Samdhong Rinpoche, made a secret trip to China in November 2017.

The Dalai Lama’s return to Tibet on China’s terms would put an official end to the Sino-Tibetan conflict and progressively ease tensions in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR). This translates to a less turbulent life for Tibetans in TAR who live as suspects with each and every day that the Dalai Lama’s Tibetan struggle drags on. It would also fulfil what is, for millions of Tibetans, a lifelong wish to meet the Dalai Lama again. All these however are mere concessions as the clear winner is China.

The Final Analysis

The Dalai Lama’s return to China on China’s terms would mean that in the final analysis:

1. The Dalai Lama agrees Tibet has always been a region under China’s sovereignty and not an independent country;
2. It would affirm that it was rightful for Chinese troops to have marched into Tibet in 1959 to reclaim what they view as their territory; and
3. It would invalidate all criticisms of China as an oppressor that is trespassing in Tibet, thereby invalidating all work and campaigns by pro-Tibet organizations for the last 60 years.

But the biggest prize of all would be China’s formal installation as the sole authority to recognize the next and all future Dalai Lamas as well as high incarnate lamas. This itself is the key to controlling the Tibetan people as well as indirectly commanding the allegiance of countless millions of Tibetan Buddhist adherents around the world. This is a weapon that should not be discounted as China has seen how a monk with no country, no army, and no commercial and economic power has managed to sway sentiments against China, both inside and outside her own borders, for decades.

Is the Dalai Lama negotiating for his return to China via his emissary, Samdhong Rinpoche?

Jayadeva Ranade’s article does not spell it out but it seems to be a natural conclusion that the state of affairs in Dharamsala equates to a foreboding sense that the Tibetan cause is in its final stages. A writer with inside knowledge like Ranade should know that all the CTA and Dalai Lama can manage now is little more than posturing in the hope of gaining whatever concessions they can lay their hands on from China.

But all may not be lost for the Dalai Lama, for if it is to be believed that he is none other than Avalokiteshvara, the Buddha of Compassion, then the biggest winner will be Buddhism itself. In the absence of a commandeering and disruptive conflict, life would swiftly normalize, allowing those who embody Tibetan religious life to ride the Asian Dragon to a new renaissance of Dharma. It may have taken the Tibetan leadership 60 years to fail or we can choose to view it from another perspective; that over 60 years, the Dalai Lama and his Buddhist government managed to incentivize a rising giant, China, to embrace Buddhism so wholeheartedly, even desperately, as to turn her into the world’s biggest addict of this opiate that Mao regarded as so toxic. However you regard it, what is certain is that the ‘Tibetan cause’ is done for.

Sunday Guardian Live: Exiled Tibetans are confused about future

Source: https://www.sundayguardianlive.com/news/exiled-tibetans-confused-future. Click to enlarge.

The young 10th Zhabdrung Rinpoche

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

By: Solaray Kusco

High in the foothills of the Himalayas, from their base in Dharamsala, North India, the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA; Tibetan leadership in exile) has spent the last 60 years in a coordinated campaign to vilify and isolate China. It is becoming increasingly clear however, that their efforts have been in vain because the world today watches China’s rapid and ongoing transformation from a provincial backwater that was easy to malign for her Communist past, into a world superpower with sophisticated politics and great economic vigor.

As part of their campaign against China, the CTA has always promoted themselves and pre-1959 Tibet as some kind of idyllic Shangri-la. Thanks to canny marketing, for decades Tibet supporters were swept away by romantic notions of a land of snows filled with grand old lamas full of wisdom, and free from the shackles of capitalism, materialism and politics. While there is some element of truth to this, and many lamas were indeed great beings, pre-1959 Tibet was in fact a generally feudalistic society with deeply entrenched ideas about rank and servitude. If you were born a serf, it was because of your karma and you were bound to serve whoever was wealthier than you until your karma was exhausted. Unlike other more meritocratic societies, there was very little opportunity for upwards social mobility.

This form of ‘governance’ has been relocated into the Tibetan diaspora, where the nobility and aristocrats of pre-1959 Tibet continue to rule life in exile, and names such as ‘Aukatsang‘ and ‘Gyari’ fill the ranks of the leadership. One person still sits at the top, dictating all decisions and policies that the government, a mouthpiece for democracy, enforces on his behalf.

The Tibetans were able to do this in pre-1959 Tibet, as well as in exile, because of the global reputation of Vajrayana Buddhism and, more importantly, that of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Few in the world have achieved the universal rank and reputation of the Dalai Lama and until recently, he has enjoyed a warm welcome all over the world. Lauded as a paragon of compassion and all-knowing wisdom, the Dalai Lama and, by default, the CTA have had near-carte blanche to do as they pleased for the last 60 years. Political rivals, for example, could be disposed of as they pleased; in pre-1959 Tibet, this might have been through the use of poison or assassins but in the exiled community, it has taken on the more elegant, though no less violent, form of labelling someone a Chinese spy to upset the Tibetan people and “sic ‘em” on one another.

One other nation close to Tibet that has benefited from similar tropes is Bhutan, another Vajrayana Buddhist nation that continues to enjoy a very positive response globally. While most aspects of Bhutan are very admirable, including their carbon-negative status as well as emphasis on happiness and peace instead of materialism, there exists a side of Bhutan that not many know about.

Going back to the beginning

Modern-day Bhutan was founded by His Holiness Zhabdrung Rinpoche Ngawang Namgyal, an attained being who unified many warring fiefdoms into one kingdom. Not only was he an astute military strategist and shrewd statesman but he was also an accomplished meditator and a patron of arts, culture and Buddhism. As the secular leader of Bhutan, he sought to create a Bhutanese cultural identity that was distinctly different from the Tibetan one. He implemented a unique judicial and legal system in the country, splitting control of Bhutan between a religious leader (Je Khenpo) and a secular one (Druk Desai). It is a system of governance that persists until today, albeit in a modified form. Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyal was also militarily-minded and established many dzongs (fortress monasteries) throughout Bhutan, including the strategically-located Simtokha Dzong close to Thimphu, the capital city. This allowed him to control traffic between Paro Valley in the west and Trongsa Valley in the east.

As a religious leader, Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyal was open-minded and although his personal Drukpa Kagyu practice prevailed to become the state-sponsored faith, he allowed the Nyingmapas to continue undisturbed with their worship. He even hosted Jesuits in his court, unlike Tibet, which continued to remain closed off to foreigners and visitors for many more centuries.

This 252-year-old statue of Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyal Rinpoche was acquired by The Asiatic Society in Kolkata in 1865. (Souce: dnaindia.com)

Due to his activities and deeds, Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyal’s image can be seen painted on walls in temples and homes all over the country. It is said that every Bhutanese home in the country has a statue of this great lama who did so much to bring Bhutan together, and give them the tools to grow and prosper for many more centuries.

One might think that such an illustrious lama would come back in his next life with no impediments for the continuance of his great works. Unfortunately, Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyal’s successors did not fare as well as their predecessor.

After his passing, Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyal’s subsequent incarnations returned as multiple emanations. Some say that the recognition of a body, speech and mind emanation of the Zhabdrung line was an intentional move on the part of the secular Bhutanese leadership, who conspired to recognize more than one reincarnation so that power could not be consolidated into one individual. And in addition to the recognition of more than one reincarnation, Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyal’s reincarnations also appear to have developed a habit of dying at a young age.

A summarized list of the demise of the Zhabdrung lineage goes as follows:

Click to enlarge

Rumors abound of the Bhutanese leadership’s role in all of these deaths; sources speak of a prophecy that foretells the demise of the Bhutanese monarchy should the Zhabdrung mind emanation ever be allowed to come of age, and gain all the resources that comes with a full and proper recognition.

This would certainly be a very good reason for the Bhutanese leaders to suppress the Zhabdrung incarnations and it appears that they have been successful with at least the body incarnation lineage which died out in the mid-18^th century. The speech and mind emanations, on the other hand, continued well into the 20^th century.

The Zhabdrung lineage in the 21^st century

The 10th Zhabdrung Rinpoche

Today, the 10^th Zhabdrung mind emanation, Zhabdrung Rinpoche Jigdrel Ngawang Namgyal (Pema Namgyal), is rumored to reside in Kalimpong, away from the potential tumultuousness of a relationship with the country his previous incarnation established. That is not to say the 10^th Zhabdrung Rinpoche has not tried to establish a relationship; the fact he attempted to do so actually led to a very eventful early life for the young reincarnation.

The 10^th Zhabdrung Rinpoche was born in 2003, two months before the 9^th Zhabdrung Rinpoche passed away. Within Vajrayana Buddhism, this is not an unusual occurrence. For example, Guru Deva Rinpoche is known to have emanated in a similar way, ejecting his consciousness into his son before he passed away.

Under the guidance and recognition of the 17^th Karmapa Ogyen Trinley, the young boy was recognized as the 10^th Zhabdrung, the declaration taking place in Bodhgaya in 2004. The boy was just one year and four months old at the time. He and his supporters were subsequently invited to Bhutan to face Bhutan’s reincarnation committee, set up by the government to validate all tulku recognitions. Tulkus who are not recognized by this body may not promote themselves as reincarnations and are subject to a variety of institutionalized consequences. Supporters of such unapproved claimants also face harsh punishments.

Thus the 10^th Zhabdrung Rinpoche travelled to Bhutan accompanied by his parents as well as the oracle who had recognized him. Upon their arrival in Thimphu, the oracle was promptly thrown in jail while the boy and his parents were held in a secret location. The 10^th Zhabdrung Rinpoche was then declared to be a fake and, instead of being released, he and his parents were put under house arrest. Their current whereabouts remain unknown; the last reports about them are in 2014, when they were said to have still been under house arrest. Nothing was published about their release, and reports about the 10^th Zhabdrung Rinpoche residing in Kalimpong remain unconfirmed.

Similarities with China

It would be remiss if we failed to see how the 10^th Zhabdrung Rinpoche Jigdrel Ngawang Namgyal’s situation closely mirrors that of China and the 11^th Panchen Lama.

A relatively benign example is the fact the 10^th Zhabdrung Rinpoche is rumored to have three emanations – a body, speech and mind incarnation. The same can be said of the 11^th Panchen Lama – there is the Dalai Lama-recognized candidate and the China-backed Panchen Lama, whom the Dalai Lama has just confirmed is the “official Panchen Lama”.

Another example of the similarities is China’s “living Buddhas” list which is a record of all state-recognized tulkus throughout China and Tibet. Those who do not make it onto the list are subjected to greater levels of scrutiny and monitoring; in Bhutan, it appears that those who fail to meet the standards of the reincarnation committee face harsher consequences than mere scrutiny and monitoring.

(Left to right) The Panchen Lama candidate chosen by the Dalai Lama, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima and the Panchen Lama candidate recognised by China, Gyaincain Norbu.

Just like China, the Bhutanese leadership claim that this committee was set up to prevent abuse of the tulku system by charlatans but lamas like the 10^th Zhabdrung Rinpoche, who is recognized by his followers but not by the committee, would argue that the committee and its lists are open to abuse, and can be employed to shut out potential political rivals or threats to the system.

Similarly, in the case of the candidates for the 11^th Panchen Lama, when the Dalai Lama’s candidate was recognized and announced, the young boy disappeared just a few days later. The Tibetan leadership claim that the child has been under house arrest for the last 22 years. In the case of Bhutan, the 10^th Zhabdrung Rinpoche was placed under house arrest upon his arrival in Bhutan from India 13 years ago, and his current whereabouts also remain unknown or otherwise unconfirmed.

And just like China, whose leadership has a reputation for making swift work of political rivals, it would appear that the Bhutanese leadership are also quick to dispatch of any potential threats to their position and power, the sudden and early demise of many Zhabdrung emanations being evidence of this. As Dr. Dhurba Rizal notes in his book The Royal Semi-Authoritarian Democracy of Bhutan, the Zhabdrung incarnations have “continued to appear and have to be dealt with poisonings, pushing off rooftops, and strangulations“, leading to subsequent incarnations taking rebirth further and further East, away from Bhutan.

Double standards from the CTA

What is intended here is not an indictment of Bhutan’s practices and policies but rather an examination of the CTA’s double standards, hypocrisy and obvious political machinations for their own benefit.

Ironically, everything that the CTA has accused China of, and could accuse Bhutan of, they are guilty of themselves. For example, China has a list of officially-recognized tulkus and Bhutan has their reincarnation committee. The Tibetan government have the exact same thing in the form of the Dalai Lama. Any reincarnations who do not meet with his approval are shunned and segregated by the community.

So while the CTA has been very vocal about China’s perceived foibles and attempts at regulating religious practices, they have on the other hand been silent on Bhutan’s actions. The CTA does not hesitate to claim that China is an authoritarian regime, yet they say nothing when witnessing similar practices in Bhutan. So why is it the CTA feels entitled to comment on one situation and not on the other? The answer lies, as always, in the CTA’s self-interests.

1. It’s harder to criticize someone with a good global reputation. Bhutan has a better standing internationally while China does not. It is easier for the CTA to vilify China when everyone already dislikes China’s Communist background. It’s much harder for the CTA to vilify Bhutan when the world lauds Bhutan for approaching globalization without losing Bhutanese culture, tradition and flair. If the CTA were to criticize Bhutan for anything, it would only make them look like petty, jealous, playground rivals and the Tibetan leadership risks a public relations backlash.
2. Relations between the Bhutanese and Tibetans are only just improving, and they have to make amends. After decades of attempts at destabilizing Bhutan, including an assassination attempt on the King in the 1970s, the CTA do not want to jeopardize their already-fragile relationship with Bhutan, who may be a potential ally in a world where the CTA are rapidly losing friends. In the Himalayan region especially, the CTA have few friendly faces to turn to – Bangladesh and Pakistan have no interest in them, Nepal has turned towards China and India is on her way to doing the same. All that remains is Bhutan, the last Vajrayana holdout that the CTA can hope for.
3. They have nothing to gain. It is not necessary for the CTA to hold Bhutan to the same standards that they attempt to impose on China because they have nothing to gain in doing so. Hence, when they criticize China for getting involved in religious matters, it is not because the CTA is trying to defend any real principle or standard, for example that an atheist government should not be involved in religion. They criticize China purely because they have something to gain from doing so – it helps the Tibetans to continue looking like victims, thus making them appear to be deserving recipients of more free financial aid.

Conclusion

The ban on Dorje Shugden had many unintended consequences, one of which was the discovery and highlighting of many controversies within Vajrayana Buddhism. Because the discrimination against Dorje Shugden was at total odds with the world’s general view of Buddhism being tolerant and compassionate, this led people to investigate what else Vajrayana Buddhists have been doing which may not fit Buddhist stereotypes.

Hence everyone was able to witness the conflict within the Karma Kagyus due to the issue of the three Karmapas, caused by the CTA. They were also treated to a display of forceful conversions of Drukpa Kagyu monasteries, which the CTA stood by silently and watched. And everyone saw how the Jonangpas were discriminated within the Tibetan Parliament by being refused equal representation.

And of course, everyone has seen the ongoing decades-long persecution of Dorje Shugden practitioners. When the CTA first banned the practice 20 years ago, one of the justifications they gave for the ban was the alleged link between Shugden practitioners and the Chinese leadership. According to the CTA, Shugden practitioners are bad, bad, bad because they are connected to the Chinese leadership who act in an authoritarian manner.

Yet, right at the CTA’s doorstep is the Bhutanese leadership acting in a similarly authoritarian manner but the CTA remains silent over this. Again, this is not an indictment of the way Bhutan chooses to operate. Every sovereign nation has a right to choose their form of governance; that is, Bhutan has a choice in how they wish to operate, and so does China.

But the fact is that every nation has events in their history that they are not proud of. For Bhutan, this may be their treatment of the incarnations of the Zhabdrung lineage. For China, it may be the way in which intellectuals were treated during the Cultural Revolution. For the US, it may be their involvement with issues like Guantanamo Bay which they have not been held accountable for, or the continued racism against African-Americans. Similarly, the 2.3 million people in the American prison system (as of 2017) would also argue that their government has acted in an authoritarian manner with regards to their incarceration.

What is clear is that the CTA’s choice of who they condemn is not based on any particular consistent principle, but on where they stand to gain the most. They do not condemn the US for their war crimes because the American government gives them US$17mil every year; they do not condemn Bhutan for their treatment of the 10^th Zhabdrung Rinpoche because Bhutan may potentially be their last ally. But they DO condemn China because pitting themselves as the David against a super-powered Goliath has been a lucrative move for the last 60 years. But with China’s ascent to political and economic supremacy, how much longer can the CTA draw from this seemingly-unending well of money before it runs dry?

Addendum

News of the 10th Zhabdrung Jigdrel Ngawang Namgyal’s unwarranted house arrest even made headlines on the Buddhist Channel website. Click on the image below to read more.

Click to enlarge. (Source: http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=40,3674,0,0,1,0#.WyK4w1Uzayp)

 
Sources:

• The Royal Semi-Authoritarian Democracy of Bhutan by Dr. Dhurba Rizal (July 2015; Lexington Books)
• http://www.bhutandnc.com/bhutantoday%20-May.htm
• http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=40,3674,0,0,1,0
• http://www.vijayvaani.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?aid=2831
• http://www.ipajournal.com/2012/09/26/is-new-shabdrung-threat-to-bhutanese-royals/
• http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=42,1818,0,0,1,0#.Wt1z3dNubhM

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

By: Shashi Kei

In April this year, there was a sudden flurry of news reports and comments made by the Tibetan leadership, of the Dalai Lama wanting to fulfil his wish to return to Tibet.

Sikyong Lobsang Sangay, the President of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA; Tibetan leadership based in Dharamsala) in particular, stunned Sino-Indian observers by voicing that the time had arrived to fulfil the Dalai Lama’s dream of returning to Tibet to reunite with Tibetans and to live in the Potala, the traditional residence of the Dalai Lamas.

Vijay Kranti, a senior journalist, Tibetologist, and Chairman of the Centre for Himalayan Asia Studies & Engagement (CHASE), has made great efforts to analyze the very important and pertinent question of “Will the Dalai Lama return to China?” His astute conclusions, published in the Tibetan Review on 16^th April 2018, have serious implications for the Tibetan diaspora and India.

WILL DALAI LAMA RETURN TO CHINA?

A question which is currently confronting most of Tibet-China watchers and Tibet supporters is, “is Dalai Lama seriously planning to visit or return to Tibet or China?” Three years ago the same question had created ripples when the idea of him visiting China’s famous holy Buddhist shrine of Wutai Shan was discussed loudly both in Beijing as well as in Dharamsala. On Sunday (1st April) again, Dr. Lobsang Sangay, the elected ‘Sikyong’ (the ‘President’ of Central Tibetan Administration in Dharamsala) stunned Tibet and China observers by announcing that time had arrived to fulfill Dalai Lama’s dream of returning to Tibet to ‘reunite with Tibetans’ and to live in Potala, the traditional palace residence of Dalai Lamas in the Tibetan capital Lhasa.

Dr. Sangay was speaking in Dharamshala at the opening function of ‘Thank You India’, the year-long celebrations organized by CTA to commemorate the 60th year of Dalai Lama’s arrival in India and to express Tibetans’ gratitude toward the people and government of India. It was on 3rd April, 1959 when Dalai Lama, the exiled ruler and supreme Buddhist leader of Tibet, arrived in India at the end of a 17-day long daring and grueling escape on foot through snow and mountains to save himself from arrest or killing by the occupying Chinese army in Tibet.

Interestingly these celebrations had already become focus of world attention following New Delhi government’s instructions to its senior bureaucrats and leaders to keep off public events involving Dalai Lama’s personal presence. This sudden toughening of New Delhi’s stand forced the CTA to cancel the main mega event of Dalai Lama in capital’s spacious Thyagraja Stadium. But it is not first time that New Delhi rulers have taken a stand of this kind which appears to be aimed at pleasing Beijing in the wake of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s upcoming visit to China. In October 2007 too, the erstwhile UPA government had issued an identical diktat to its senior leaders and bureaucrats when Dalai Lama was given a civic reception at New Delhi’s India Habitat Centre for being honoured by the US Parliament with America’s highest civic honour — the Congressional Gold Medal (equivalent to Bharat Ratna of India).

According to Dr. Sangay the first dream of Dalai Lama was about seeing blood which, according to Dr. Sangay, turned true when Tibetans faced widespread killings of Tibetan protesters during uprising against the Chinese occupation of Tibet in 1959 and also in later years. The International Commission of Jurists, an affiliate body of erstwhile UNO, claimed that Chinese army killed more than 80 thousand Tibetans to crush the uprising in 1959. As per Dharamsala claims this number of unnatural deaths of Tibetans in Chinese occupied Tibet has crossed 12 lakhs (1.2 million) over past seven decades.

The second dream refers to Dalai Lama meeting ‘people in white’ which, Sangay says, again turned out to be true when Dalai Lama fled Tibet and met Indian leaders like Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru and President Dr. Rajendra Prasad who were known for wearing dazzling white Khadi.

Comment: It was 32 years ago in Bodhgaya, India that the State Oracle of Tibet, Nechung, took trance and made a startling prediction: His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the Tibetans in-exile would be back in Tibet within five years. Because of their strong belief, this prophecy was repeated over and over again by the leaders, writers and some civil servants of the Tibetan diaspora.

Because it was the State Oracle who issued the prophecy, and because it was their leaders propagating the news, Tibetans in-exile truly believed in it. However the prophecy, which foretold that they should have been back in Tibet by 1990, never came true.

Once you disagree with the Dalai Lama’s views, you will automatically be labelled as ‘anti-Dalai Lama’ and will be instantly shunned and segregated by the community.

1990 passed and the Tibetan leadership kept quiet and never gave further explanations. Meanwhile, in the hallways of monasteries, monks quietly whispered among themselves that the Tibetan leadership and Nechung are always like that, giving sweeping prophecies that never come true and keeping their people waiting, especially for the moment of their return to their hoemland.

The failure of the prophecy to manifest simply added to a multitude of factors contributing to the ongoing erosion of confidence in the Tibetan leadership and Nechung, and open declarations of a definite return to Tibet were henceforth relegated to low-key murmurs.

Therefore, the question Mr Kranti asked, “Is Dalai Lama seriously planning to visit or return to Tibet or China”, is a question which all Tibet-China watchers and Tibet supporters are currently confronted with, and is indeed a very important and pertinent question today.

EXPLOITING RELIGIOUS SENTIMENTS?

Citing these two ‘dreams’ of Dalai Lama turning out to be true, Dr. Sangay enthusiastically claimed about a third dream of Dalai Lama which gives an extraordinary political dimension to this statement, especially for coming out of the mouth of the Tibetan leader whom the Dalai Lama has transferred all his political powers through a constitutional amendment. Quoting Dr. Sangay Jyoti Malhotra of the Indian Express reported, “The Dalai Lama’s third dream, Lobsang Sangay said, was of him returning to the Potala palace filled with light and ‘reunited with Tibetan people’… This third dream will also come true by karmic design. We must all make efforts for His Holiness’ dream to return to the Potala palace come true, Sangay added.”

Referring to dreams of an individual may not hold much meaning for outsider observers and analysts. But in a deeply religious society like Tibet where no rule is above the words of Dalai Lama, Dr. Lobsang Sangay’s attempt to present Dalai Lama’s return to Chinese ruled Tibet as the religious leader’s “last unfulfilled dream” and his call to Tibetan people for making this ‘dream’ of Dalai Lama a reality, deserves a closer scrutiny by the Tibetan society, supporters of the Tibetan cause and, above all, the Indian government who have stakes in future of Tibet and its relations with China. This statement becomes extremely meaningful in the light of the fact that it is first time in past six decades that a senior(most) official of Tibetan government in exile has publicly endorsed Beijing’s agenda which is seriously focused at bringing back Dalai Lama to Chinese ruled Tibet before he is dead and the search for his next (15th) reincarnation starts.

Comment: These paragraphs clearly highlight that the Tibetan leadership have failed their people in every respect. First of all, is the Tibetan leadership a real democracy or one that runs off dreams and premonitions? No other democracy in the world has leaders who talk about the dreams of their spiritual leaders. In fact, in other democracies, the leaders make a consciousb effort to distance themselves from their personal faiths in the hopes that their political decisions are seen as objective and secular. However, in the Tibetan leadership, a so-called democracy, the leader has no qualms about quoting the Dalai Lama and citing karma.

But that is not the only failure. The more significant, but slightly less obvious failure is the fact Lobsang Sangay has never previously made it clear that he endorses Beijing’s plan to bring the Dalai Lama back to Tibet. It is not farfetched to assume that the Dalai Lama has always wanted to return to Tibet by whatever means possible so what type of leader is Lobsang Sangay to not have prioritized this before? He should have made it clear a long time ago that one of the key objectives of the Tibetan leadership is to ensure that His Holiness returns to Tibet. In a deeply religious society like that of the Tibetans, no one overrules the Dalai Lama. So to have ignored this wish of His Holiness, and failed to align it with Beijing’s plans, and to have not highlighted and pursued it means that the CTA president has not been doing his job well.

Lobsang Sangay’s loud and open proclamation about the Dalai Lama’s dream may sound good but underneath it all, it is nothing more than emotional blackmail and the creation of a preemptive scapegoat. By pointing out that it is the Dalai Lama who wants to return to Tibet, any failure to make it happen will be everyone else’s fault for failing His Holiness i.e. Lobsang Sangay is blameless because he has made it clear what the Dalai Lama’s wishes are, and it is up to everyone else to make it come true.

PUSHING CHINESE AGENDA

It is noteworthy that in two major contacts between Dharamsala and Beijing, first held during late 1970s and early 1980s and second between 2002-2010 period, Tibetan side branded these meetings as ‘Tibet-China talks’ and ‘dialogue’ but Chinese side made it known public more than once that the visits of Tibetan delegations were ‘private’ in nature and the only subject of discussion was how to pave way for return of Dalai Lama to the ‘great motherland’. If followed in letter or spirit, Dr. Sangay’s plans about Dalai Lama’s return to ‘China’s Tibet’ is simple implementation of Chinese agenda which would mean a permanent closure of the dispute between Tibet and its colonial masters in Beijing.

Knowledgeable sources in MEA as well as India’s intelligence agencies who are keenly watching Dharamsala-Beijing contacts, believe that this announcement of Dr. Sangay has further strained the relations between New Delhi and Dharamshala. These relations have been already undergoing stress caused by a series of developments related to Dharamshala’s secret hobnobbing with Chinese government in recent past. A couple of years ago MEA had a serious brush with CTA, including the private office of the Dalai Lama when it was discovered that a meeting between Dalai Lama and a Chinese leader, holding rank of a minister, was secretly organized in Dharamsala without taking into confidence the MEA or security agencies that are responsible for Dalai Lama’s personal security. Similarly, recent China visit of Prof. Samdhong Rinpoche, the former ‘Prime Minister’ of CTA also did not go down well with MEA.

Comment: Notwithstanding Lobsang Sangay’s ulterior motives for conveying the Dalai Lama’s dreams to his audience, one thing was made clear – a return to Tibet is at the forefront of the Dalai Lama’s mind. This conclusion is strengthened by the fact Samdhong Rinpoche took the risk of recently visiting China for talks. This was no low-level visit – Samdhong Rinpoche is the former Prime Minister of the Tibetan people, and one of the Dalai Lama’s two personal envoys and representatives.

Samdhong Rinpoche’s visit to China took place in spite of a serious brush he had with India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) a couple of years ago when it was “discovered that a meeting between the Dalai Lama and a Chinese leader, holding rank of a minister, was secretly organized in Dharamsala without taking into confidence the MEA or security agencies responsible for the Dalai Lama’s personal security”.

The fact Samdhong Rinpoche was willing to further upset India by visiting China means that the Dalai Lama is most serious about engaging with the Chinese about a return to Tibet, and he is very keen for this return to happen soon. This conclusion becomes especially believable when viewed in the context of Dr. Sangay’s stunning statement about the Dalai Lama’s dream of returning to Tibet which was issued not long after Professor Samdhong’s visit.

The Dalai Lama and his personal envoy Samdhong Rinpoche

By looking at the chain of events, the Dalai Lama is in fact accelerating his return to China, even rushing it. And when he says that enough times, either himself or through his top representatives, it is almost like he is “begging” to return.

The current situation is bleak for the Dalai Lama and therefore the Tibetan diaspora. The list of world leaders who do not want to meet His Holiness or cannot be seen doing so is growing ever longer and in fact many countries in the world from South Africa to Mongolia to Taiwan have officially barred him from visiting. At home in Dharamsala, India too has begun snubbing the Dalai Lama.

In February this year, a day before India’s new foreign secretary Mr Vijay Gokhale made his first standalone visit to Beijing, he sent a note to the India Cabinet secretary, requesting him to issue a “classified circular advisory advising all Ministries/Departments of the Government of India as well as State Governments not to accept any invitation or to participate in the events being organized by the ‘Dalai Lama set-up’ to commemorate the start of the 60 years of exile of the Dalai Lama in India.”

As a result of this, the “Thank You India” event in Delhi was cancelled under advisement from Delhi, the CTA were forced to relocate it to tiny Dharamsala where it was eventually held on a very small scale at the Dalai Lama’s temple complex, the Tsuglhagkhang. From a planned Delhi extravaganza, it was in effect downgraded to a provincial event held at the CTA’s usual venues for all of their events.

Given this backdrop, could His Holiness the Dalai Lama be manifesting desperation to return to China, to the extent of straining the relationship between Delhi and Dharamsala?

All this could be worthwhile if, as Mr Kranti says, it led to the “simple implementation of Chinese agenda which would mean a permanent closure of the dispute between Tibet and its colonial masters in Beijing.” If the dispute between the Tibetans and Beijing can see closure, then the current reset in relations between India and China will also move up more quickly as there will no longer be the question of the Dalai Lama in India to hamper Sino-Indian ties.

BOTH SIDES RESPONSIBLE

But it will be too naïve and unkind to Dharamsala if all the blame for such developments is heaped exclusively on CTA or Dalai Lama. It is no secret that over past six decades of Dalai Lama’s presence in India, the MEA has been perpetually as a loss and confused in evolving or adopting a well-defined policy on Tibet — not even about the status of Dalai Lama, his activities and the scope of cooperation between him and the Indian government.

India abstained from and refused to support the first two resolutions in 1959 and 1961 in the UNO which condemned China for serious abrogation of human rights in Tibet. Rather, India stopped the rest of world from raising the issue of Tibet in the UNO. But following India-China war of 1962 India voted in favour of the same resolution when it was pressed third time in 1965. Indian representative Rafiq Zakaria’s strong statement against Chinese conduct inside occupied Tibet came as a pleasant surprise to the anti-China lobbies across the world. In later years also there have been many occasions when New Delhi allowed, rather facilitated, Dalai Lama’s visits to Arunachal Pradesh despite strong threats and reactions from China.

Comment: India has been put in an increasingly difficult position as its hosting of Tibetans for almost 60 years has had mixed results which have changed over time.

In the beginning and right up to about a decade or more ago, India benefited both tangibly and intangibly by positioning itself as a huge democratic nation which supported democratic causes. Hosting the Dalai Lama and his people added greatly to this projection. Being the generous host of the Dalai Lama and his exiled people, India was welcomed by all Western and democratic nations in the world. They were after all on the same side.

A comic taken from the Internet that depicts the truth behind Tibetan ‘democracy’.

Indeed, after at first abstaining from and refusing to support resolutions in the United Nations which condemned China for human rights violations as Mr Kranti details above, India then began using the Tibetan issue more outwardly. It became more apparent that India were using the Dalai Lama’s presence in their country as a political card; that is, the Dalai Lama is there to remind China that India as a sovereign nation will make her own decisions and host whomever she likes, and there is nothing China can do about it.

In more recent years, the Dalai Lama has taken on more of an agent provocateur role, allowing India to use him in a more hawkish manner, for example, when they facilitated the “Dalai Lama’s visits to Arunachal Pradesh despite strong threats and reactions from China”. With the Dalai Lama willing to be party to such a hostile and antagonistic approach in Sino-Indian relations, as a result there was no chance that the Tibetan issue could have been resolved because the Dalai Lama showed his willingness to fulfil the “splittist” role that the Chinese leadership view him in.

INDIRA GANDHI’S INITIATIVE

In the aftermath of 1962 war the Indian government went to the extent of raising an exclusive ‘Special Frontier Force’ (SFF) in the Indian Army which worked directly under the Cabinet Secretariat and has been popularly known as ‘Establishment-22’. In the Bangladesh liberation war during 1970-71 period a sizeable contingent of Tibetan ‘22’ guerrilla soldiers was secretly assigned the job of liberating the Tripura-Chittagong sector. Interestingly, the field operations of this secret contingent were personally supervised by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi herself.

On the day when Prime Minister Narendra Modi took oath in Rashrapati Bhawan in the presence of all heads of state from South Asia except China, the presence of Tibetan Sikyong Dr. Sangay in the VVIP enclosure gave indication that a brand new and different Tibet policy was in the offing. But later developments, especially the latest instructions of the NDA government to ignore ‘Thank You India’ have only confused the observers, and Dalai Lama too.

This sudden announcement by Dr. Sangay calling for Dalai Lama’s return to Chinese controlled Tibet has surprised many observers and institutions who have been keenly watching the Tibet-China-India triangle over past few decades. The uncommon attention that these remarks of the Sekyong has received, has prompted some other seniors in Dharamsala to suggest that it is nothing more than an off the cuff retort to New Delhi’s latest humiliating decision. Responding to my pointed question about Dalai Lama’s personal position on this issue, two prominent Tibetans who sit on two extreme ends of the ongoing political debate among the community disagreed with Dr. Sangay’s agenda.

Comment: China has over the last two decades become an economic superpower, standing practically shoulder to shoulder with the United States in terms of material production and consumption. Its economic and bilateral relations with many countries has upped and expanded.

Mr Vijay Kranti

This has destabilized Europe and America from their axis/hegemony. A new world order has emerged where relations with China can no longer be ignored or put on the backburner by labelling the country an insignificant market. In fact, China has become THE market for any business or country serious about expansion.

Within India, as Mr Kranti astutely observes, this adjustment process is currently underway. But for the Tibetans, the most significant part of Mr Kranti’s observations is that it paints the Indian approach towards the Tibetan question as erratic and inconsistent. One moment, Indian leaders are welcoming Dr Sangay as an equal and in the next moment, he is persona non grata, discarded in favor of a bilateral relationship with China.

For the Tibetan leadership, this must surely impose a feeling of instability and unreliability. Mr Kranti’s analysis simply highlights the precariousness and lack of control over their situation and future.

FAITH IN DALAI LAMA’S WISDOM

Tenzin Tsundue (43) is the most visible and vocal signature of Tibetan ‘Rangzen’ movement, which stands for complete independence for Tibet as opposed to Dalai Lama’s ‘Middle Path’ for ‘genuine autonomy’. He says, “HH (Dalai Lama) is still the boss, not Sikyong. Lobsang Sangay’s showing the face in the media, on stage, being the head of CTA is still nominal and has little meaning. HH calls the shots.” Emphasizing his faith Dalai Lama’s wisdom he says, “please don’t underestimate HH’s political wisdom.”

Prof. Samdhong Rinpoche (81) a senior monk statesman out rightly rejected the idea of any plans to send back Dalai Lama to China or Tibet. Both of them remind that during his countless world tours the Dalai Lama has been always presenting India in a very positive light in his public speeches and one to one discussions with heads of state. Both of them regret that India could have used the international goodwill of Dalai Lama in enhancing its own interests in the world politics. The Dalai Lama has recently nominated Prof. Rinpoche and Dr. Sangay as his personal envoys to take ahead Dharamsala-Beijing ‘dialogue’.

 

DELHI OR DHARAMSALA — NEITHER CAN AFFORD IT

Whatever be the reality behind the prevailing confusion but one thing is clear. Neither Dalai Lama nor India can afford his slipping into Chinese lap at this delicate moment of Tibetan history. A dramatic decision like this will leave Dalai Lama, Tibet and Tibetan people completely at the mercy of Chinese whose previous record on their promises to Tibet is only too well known. By returning either permanently or even as a ‘pilgrim guest’ of a country (China) whose atrocities made him flee to exile, Dalai Lama will lose his legal and moral qualification as a ‘refugee’.

Comment: Herein lies one of the most significant statements in Mr Kranti’s analysis – it records a Tibetan stating very clearly that the Dalai Lama is in control, and that Lobsang Sangay is just a figurehead.

This statement is extremely significant because first of all, it is being made by a prominent activist who is known to have insider knowledge into the workings of the Tibetan leadership. It is also significant because it is being made by someone who does not have any known links to China and therefore cannot be accused of such i.e. his assessment of Lobsang Sangay’s role and the Dalai Lama’s ongoing control is unbiased and he cannot be accused of trying to undermine Lobsang Sangay to further China’s interests.

Tenzin Tsundue’s statement echoes those which have been made all along by many other parties who were more easily dismissed than Tsundue himself. That is, Lobsang Sangay is not truly in power, the Tibetan leadership have not moved on towards a democracy, and the Dalai Lama is still the one in control. In essence, Tsundue’s comment debunks everything the Dalai Lama has been promoting to his Western audiences about the Tibetan leadership and their movement towards democracy.

Tenzin Tsundue, a passionate and strong advocate of Tibetan independence (rangzen).

This means that whatever Lobsang Sangay says is controlled, approved and perhaps even dictated by the Dalai Lama. If Lobsang Sangay says the Dalai Lama had dreams, it is because the Dalai Lama told him to do so; if Lobsang Sangay says the Dalai Lama is willing to negotiate with China to return to Tibet, it is because he was told to do so. Lobsang Sangay, for all of his posturing and travels, is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the real leader in charge of the Tibetan leadership.

Therefore, where is the democracy or segregation of power if the Dalai Lama alone is still the one in power? The situation is pretty much akin to the time of the last Empress of China. It was still the Empress who ruled behind the suspended curtain, pulling the strings of the puppet on the throne.

All of this may answer why the Dalai Lama appears to be in such a hurry to return to Tibet. Clearly if Lobsang Sangay has no real power or control now, then after the Dalai Lama’s passing, Lobsang Sangay will not be capable of leading the Tibetans or of making progress in the CTA’s political goals. Having projected into the future and seen this inevitability, the Dalai Lama may now be trying to push for some kind of resolution with the Chinese because once he is no longer around, he knows Lobsang Sangay will not be able to accomplish much.

So desperate is the Dalai Lama to negotiate with the Chinese that he not only nominates personal envoys “to take ahead Dharamsala-Beijing ‘dialogue’” but the Dalai Lama is also willing to “lose his legal and moral qualification as a ‘refugee’” if he returns to China. The question is, why is the wise Dalai Lama doing so? Why not before but now?

DALAI LAMA’S LOSS

Tibetan people may be happy to see their ‘Yeshi Norbu’ (meaning Precious-Gem and a common name for Dalai Lama) with their own eyes in their current life time. But this privilege will come at the cost of losing the momentum and courage of standing up against the tyranny for their colonial masters once they see their leader patching up with China. More than 150 Tibetans have committed self immolation inside Tibet against Chinese rule in recent years. The international Tibet support movement which has taken roots across the world over past six decades will die instantly and it cannot be revived in future if China ever goes back on its promises to Dalai Lama. His visit or return will permanently seal the fate of Tibet as an integral part of China and Beijing will get the license of nominating the future Dalai Lamas too.

By segregating the political and religious titles of the institution of Dalai Lama and handing over all his political powers to the elected representatives of Tibetans, the Dalai Lama had already given an endless shelf life to the Tibetan struggle and the institution of Dalai Lama itself. Sadly, his return to China will kill this achievement in its infancy.

Comment: Mr Kranti is clear about what will happen if the Dalai Lama goes back to Tibet – it will mean the end of any campaign to gain independence or meaningful autonomy for the Tibetans, because the Dalai Lama will have given up any political capital he currently possesses. Everything the Tibetans have fought for over the “past six decades will die instantly”, with no hope of a future revival.

The fact Mr Kranti pins the Tibetan future solely on the Dalai Lama, and leaves no room for consideration regarding Lobsang Sangay’s capabilities reflects the commonly-held belief that Lobsang Sangay has not shown much political wisdom or maturity, and the Dalai Lama is still in charge. This is clearly exemplified by Lobsang Sangay’s statements about fulfilling the prophecy that His Holiness will return to Tibet. Despite his insistence that he is the leader of a democratic administration, it is clear Lobsang Sangay is not on equal standing with other democratic leaders because he talks about dreams, thereby demonstrating his failure to grow out of pre-1959 Tibet’s habit of referring to mystical prophecies. After all, what kind of politically mature leader bases their decisions on dreams?

INDIA STANDS TO LOSE

For India also, too big things are at stake to sit idle and allow the influential lobbies of Dharamsala to hand over a living Dalai Lama on a platter to China. With the return of Dalai Lama to Tibet or China all chances, whatever remote, of rehabilitating Tibet as a buffer between India and a quarrelsome China would be lost forever. But worst fall out of this Dharamsala-Beijing marriage will be the sudden transformation of the Himalayan states of India from India’s ‘first defence post’ to the Chinese front post of aggression because the local Buddhist populations have deeper religious bonds and relations with the Tibetan Buddhist system and monasteries inside Tibet than with the Indian plains.

 

INDIAN HARAKIRI?

Dr. Sangay’s statement has only further confirmed fears among many observers that an influential section among the Tibetan exile leadership is desperate about cobbling up a deal with China on whatever terms. The very first negotiation point in this deal, as already declared by Dr. Sangay, is bound to be the return of Dalai Lama. Leaving Dalai Lama to the mercy of such lobbies will be a national hara-kiri on the part of Indian government. Rather, it would be much wiser for New Delhi to become pro-active on this front. By taking reasonable interest in the Dharamsala-Beijing dialogue New Delhi will not only strengthen Dalai Lama’s hands, but it will also give India enough elbow room to ensure its own interests in any prospective deal remain safe.

For New Delhi to start with, one not-so difficult move can be to publicly acknowledge Dalai Lama’s personal and institutional contributions to the Indian cultural and philosophic though process and to bestow upon him the ‘Bharat Ratna.’ After all, if India can honour friendly foreigners like Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan, Nelson Mandela and Mother Teressa with this Bharat-Ratna, then Dalai Lama’s name sound equally, if not more befitting. On the diplomatic front too, such a step will not only enhance the shelf life of Tibetan issue and value of Dalai Lama for India, it will be a very Gandhian and befitting response to China’s aggressive postures against India.

Comment: Mr Kranti hits the nail on the head with his final paragraphs. However, it seems foolhardy and risky to Sino-Tibetan relations to bestow upon the Dalai Lama any awards when his ongoing presence in India endangers the country’s welfare in a way that Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan, Nelson Mandela and Mother Teresa never did. Unlike these great laureates and personalities who contributed to India, the CTA’s comments and actions consistently serve to antagonize China, with no concern or attention paid towards how it will affect India.

Left to right: Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan, Nelson Mandela and Mother Teresa

Regardless of whatever awards India wishes to bestow upon the Dalai Lama, ultimately, India must protect her interests and wrest back control of the Tibetan administration. As guests of India, and as foreigners who refuse to become Indian citizens or integrate into Indian society after 60 years, the Tibetans and their pseudo-leader Lobsang Sangay should not be allowed to make comments which will dictate, influence or affect the course of Indian foreign policy. If Lobsang Sangay and the Dalai Lama wish to give up their influence in favor of a return to China, that is their decision but it should not come at the cost of Indian interests. India, after all, has the welfare of 1.3 billion citizens to safeguard and the activities of 100,000 Tibetans should not be allowed to adversely impact this.

Conclusion

The rise of China as a world superpower turned the tables on India as the host of Tibetans living in exile, and scuppered the Tibetans’ opportunities to continue hiding behind India as they provoked China.

While in the past, it was beneficial to criticize China regarding the Tibetan issue or to allow the Tibetan leadership in India to do so as this would be very positively received by Western nations who controlled a large amount of trade with India, this is not the case anymore.

Indeed, it has been rather hypocritical for India to side with the West with regards to the Tibetan issue, and to support the West’s opposition to China’s growth, all the while disregarding the fact it was the West who pillaged dozens of nations in the history of the world, India included.

Today, if Tibetans, after almost 60 years of living in India, do anything to jeopardize the future economic development prospects of India by continuing to antagonize the new superpower China, Indians will feel insulted because Tibetans are ungrateful for all that India has provided them. This point needs to be etched into the minds of all Tibetans because President Xi Jinping has said in no uncertain terms that no one will desecrate China again and take a single cent of Chinese money.

It is time that the CTA takes serious stock of their situation, and thoroughly explores the options still open to them. Six decades of living off India and the rest of the world have made them complacent and with China racing fast to the finish line, making friends and money along the way, pretty soon the Tibetans will just be a speck on the horizon, serving as just another inconsequential issue to be relegated to the history books.

Tibetan Review: Will Dalai Lama Return to China

Click to enlarge. (Source: http://www.tibetanreview.net/will-dalai-lama-return-to-china/)

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

By Shashi Kei

On 17^th May 2017, the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA; Tibetan leadership based in Dharamsala, North India), the exile government of the 14^th Dalai Lama, released a video with the title ‘Ten Facts About the Missing Panchen Lama’. It was on the occasion of the “22^nd anniversary of the enforced disappearance of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima”, the boy that the Dalai Lama had declared to be the reincarnation of the 10^th Panchen Lama.

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

Or watch on server | download video (right click & save file)

The Department of Information and International Relations (meaning the CTA’s propaganda department) had enlisted the help of a member of the Indian Parliament, Dr Abishek Singhvi to declare the alleged 1995 abduction of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima by the Chinese government as, amongst other things, a “major invasion of the fundamental, spiritual and religious rights of the Tibetan people”. The said video also ascribed a number of adjectives to the Chinese government – harsh, cruel, dictatorial, unrepentant, and unrelenting; it accused the Chinese government of having applied “brute force” in appointing a puppet 11^th Panchen Lama who, Dr Abishek declared, will be met with repulsion and rejection.

The elasticity of truth

The 2017 video was then the latest in an ongoing series of CTA-sponsored agitprop with two specific and conjoined purposes — (i) to continue to conjure up whatever controversies were possible such as the Panchen Lama issue in order to undermine the credibility and reputation of China; and (ii) to keep existing fault lines such as the Panchen Lama controversy created in 1995, from repairing.

In its confrontation with China, smear campaigns and the promotion of highly inflammatory issues that could incite social unrest within China were the Dalai Lama and Central Tibetan Administration’s (CTA) weapons of choice, which they wielded with incredible skill. The Dalai Lama, an astute politician who has wielded unfettered power for far longer than any government or dictator in history, knew well what the Chinese feared most, which is expressed in an old Mao dictum – “a single spark can start a prairie fire”. Therefore, creating sparks became an art form of the Tibetan government in exile.

Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, the Dalai Lama’s candidate for the 11th Panchen Lama, who disappeared shortly after he was recognized. A few months later, the Chinese government recognized their own candidate and since 1995, the Dalai Lama has persisted in his claim that the Chinese candidate is a fake and merely a puppet of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Then suddenly in April 2018, the Dalai Lama changed his mind and endorsed the Chinese Panchen Lama.

But there are other aspects to the Dalai Lama’s range of armaments in the Tibetan people’s conflict with China — an uncanny ability to find and use knowing and unknowing proxies such as Dr Abishek to broaden the frontage of attack on China, and knowing when to take up and when to let down such allies which were often used as mere collateral.

And so, one year later, on 25^th April 2018, the Dalai Lama made a complete mockery out of not only Dr Abishek Singhvi, the Indian Member of Parliament, but also the International Campaign for Tibet (ICT) chaired by Richard Gere, the United Nations, a list of US-based lobbyists and politicians, and even the CTA itself; indeed, everyone who since 1995 had been led by the Dalai Lama to believe that Gyaincain Norbu, whom the Chinese government had recognized and enthroned as the 11^th Panchen Lama, to be a fake and merely a political puppet.

Or watch on server | download video (right click & save file)

In speaking to members of the media on his arrival at Gaggal Airport in Dharamsala, the Dalai Lama said that in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, it is not unusual for enlightened beings to have as many as five reincarnations, citing the example of a famous Tibetan Buddhist personage. Taken in context, what the Dalai Lama meant was that both the Chinese-enthroned 11^th Panchen Lama (Gyaincain Norbu) and his 1995 candidate, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima are equally rightful heirs to the throne of the Panchen Lama and, in fact, the Dalai Lama acknowledges the Chinese Panchen Lama to be the official 11^th Panchen Lama. In essence, what the Dalai Lama said is tantamount to an endorsement of the Chinese-enthroned 11^th Panchen Lama Bainqen Erdini Qoigyijabu (Panchen Gyaincain Norbu) and a recognition of his legitimacy as the highest-ranking Tibetan Buddhist lama in Tibet, in the Dalai Lama’s absence.

His Holiness the 11th Panchen Lama with his teacher, Kachen Jamyang Gyatso and the Panchen Lama’s parents. Kachen Jamyang Gyatso has tutored the Panchen Lama since he was a young child, and the two share a very close relationship.

The mystery is how a ‘fake’ could have morphed into an authentic 11^th Panchen Lama, worthy of the Dalai Lama’s approval and commendation. Clearly, the candidate the Chinese government chose and enthroned has not changed and neither has the Chinese government, the Dalai Lama or the enmity between them. But those who are more familiar with Tibetan Buddhist history would know that this is not the only time the Dalai Lama has made a sudden about-turn on issues which logically cannot alter in its substance in such a casual way. The Dorje Shugden controversy is another whereby the Dalai Lama had personally worshipped this Tibetan Buddhist deity for close to 40 years, even composing one of the most popular praises to him, before suddenly declaring the same deity, Dorje Shugden, to be a malignant force to be shunned.

Effectively, the Dalai Lama was admitting that he had erred on the Panchen Lama issue, a controversy that he had fanned for over 20 years. In 1995, the Dalai Lama had insisted that he could not accept Gyaincain Norbu as having any possibility of being the right Panchen Lama. This was because the Dalai Lama had “conducted all the necessary religious procedures with great care” before naming his own candidate as the reincarnation of the 10^th Panchen Lama and that the Dalai Lama’s recognition could not be wrong and “cannot be changed”. His recent remarks however concede that the Chinese government has chosen the correct reincarnation of the 10^th Panchen Lama and the methods the Chinese government employ in the recognition process of high tulkus is in fact proper. The Chinese government definitely consulted very high lamas who are in Tibet to use their ancient methods, to recognize the 11^th Panchen Lama.

Ironically, the Dalai Lama has himself said on a number of occasions that the tulkus of high lamas guide their own reincarnations and there is no way for any man or force to manipulate or hijack the reincarnation of a highly realized being. That is to say, if the 10^th Panchen Lama wanted to take rebirth in a situation whereby he is recognized by the Chinese leadership, then that is exactly what he did. The Dalai Lama also cited the historical example of Khyentse Wangpo of the Sakya tradition as proof that high lamas can take up to five reincarnations – Body incarnation, Speech incarnation, Mind incarnation, Activity incarnation and Qualities incarnation. In fact, the 10^th Panchen Lama himself was one of two qualified incarnations, the other being Panchen Otrul Rinpoche who continues to turn the wheel of Dharma in Europe, America and the Far East. This is no secret and the Dalai Lama is fully aware of all this.

So, it cannot be new information that suddenly changed the Dalai Lama’s mind about the Chinese Panchen Lama. But that narrative would not have suited the Dalai Lama’s intended agenda at the time nor would it have been useful to the Tibetan cause for the past 20 years. But it suits the Dalai Lama’s scheme now. And so, we see in this situation a very powerful weapon the Dalai Lama exerts — the ability to bend facts and reality without being questioned. And as the Dalai Lama demonstrates on this occasion, in a mere two minutes, he has created a seismic shift in the Tibetan people’s engagement with China, one that will seal their fate forever.

Whether intended or not, the Dalai Lama has also effectively given his seal of approval to China’s claim as to its capability and sovereign right to be involved in spiritual matters. He has cleared the way of old obstacles for China to get a firm handle on Tibetan Buddhism as an instrument of control, the same power the Dalai Lama has himself wielded for over 60 years with unprecedented deftness.

Sign at the entrance of the Dalai Lama’s temple in Dharamsala, India.

In the very same interview at Gaggal Airport on 25^th April 2018, the Dalai Lama also reported that Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, whom the Dalai Lama had claimed was kidnapped and has been held prisoner by the Chinese government since 1995, was in fact doing well and is receiving a good education. Since 1995, the Dalai Lama and his supporters have roused the world’s ire against China for allegedly abducting and illegally detaining Gedhun Choekyi Nyima as the world’s youngest political prisoner, and this case has been regularly cited as being a prime example of China’s abuse of human rights. But now, the Dalai Lama’s statement seems to indicate that, far from being abused and denied his human rights, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima has been treated well and even provided with a good education.

This statement is incongruous with the portrayal of the Chinese government by the Tibetan leadership over the decades, i.e. that of an oppressive and brutal regime that ruthlessly disposes of its enemies and those it sees as a threat. However, this incongruity does expose a characteristic of the same Tibetan leadership, that which treats facts and realities as putty to be shaped and moulded to fit shifting agendas.

The characteristic flip-flop of the Dalai Lama

Whilst the latest statement by the Dalai Lama on the Panchen Lama issue seems off-the-cuff, it should be disturbing that the Dalai Lama can be so flippant over something of this magnitude. The reincarnation of such a key figure in the Gelug lineage goes to the heart of Tibetan Buddhism and should never be taken lightly. And yet, this glibness offers a tremendously valuable opportunity to examine the character of the Dalai Lama and Tibetan leadership by exploring possible reasons for the Dalai Lama’s very sudden change of tune regarding a highly-charged issue.

1. The Dalai Lama was genuinely mistaken

The power and prestige of the Dalai Lama comes from his image (be it real or carefully manicured) as a simple Buddhist monk who is the embodiment of all that is good in the world, and who also happens to be a Buddha, and therefore can do no wrong due to his spiritual invincibility. On this premise alone, millions heralded the Dalai Lama’s views and became blind propagators of his ideologies and agendas. The Dalai Lama’s narrative and, by extension that of the CTA, were embraced by fans all over the world and upheld as dogma.

The Dalai Lama’s change of tune now regarding the ‘Chinese Panchen Lama’ sits very uncomfortably with the presumption of his spiritual invincibility but this is not immediately obvious to those who have been trained to merely follow instead of think and rationalize for themselves. If one were to apply logical thought to the issue, then either the Dalai Lama was wrong in 1995 to have proclaimed the Chinese Panchen Lama to be counterfeit, or he is wrong now to declare the Chinese Panchen Lama to be authentic and worthy to be regarded as the “official Panchen Lama” (in the Dalai Lama’s own words).

The Dalai Lama cannot be right on both contradictory counts but is it a question of his spiritual competence or a question of his integrity? From the perspective of spiritual examination, the Dalai Lama is said to be none other than the Buddha of Compassion, the great and all-knowing Avalokiteshvara or Chenresig. The Panchen Lama in turn is the Buddha Amitabha. Both are Buddhas and if this is true, how can one Buddha (Dalai Lama) be mistaken in recognizing another Buddha (Amitabha) when both are supposed to be of the same awakened essence? To suggest so would be to assail the very foundations of Buddhism. In short, it can only be a question of human integrity and not a question of spiritual efficacy.

Either the entire corpus of Buddhism is formulated on false assumptions or the Dalai Lama is a mere human being and subject to faults, mistakes and vices. Either way, it should be clear now that it would be a grievous error to blindly follow a leader on the presumption of soundness and trustworthiness in everything he does and proclaims. And if there is a case to be made for the human fallibility of the Dalai Lama, then one should also call into question the Dalai Lama’s endorsement of Ogyen Trinley Dorje as the 17^th Karmapa; he was one of three claimants but the Dalai Lama proclaimed him to be the only correct and rightful throne holder of the Karma Kagyu lineage. It would also mean that the Dalai Lama very likely erred when he declared the Dharma Protector Dorje Shugden to be a demonic force after he himself worshipped the deity for close to 40 years.

History will judge how the Dalai Lama, the supposed personification of compassion, could have allowed so many innocent and unknowing people to attack and denounce the Panchen Lama, the living Amitabha Buddha; the Karmapa, the living Bodhisattva Chenresig Simhanada; and Dorje Shugden, an enlightened being with a lineage that is over 300 years old, at a karmic cost that would be frightening if it could be calculated.

Kachen Jamyang Gyatso is no ordinary teacher. Renown for his scholarship and deep practice, Kachen Jamyang Gyatso’s reputation extends even beyond the borders of Tibet – he is well-known to be an erudite master and seasoned tantric practitioner, so there is little surprise that the Chinese leadership would have selected such a lama to educate His Holiness the 11th Panchen Lama. In this image, the humble teacher greets the humble disciple. You can see from Kachen Jamyang Gyatso’s face that he is very happy to meet his student.

2. Political expediency overrides spiritual truth

It is common knowledge that the Dalai Lama and the CTA have increasingly been given the cold shoulder by world leaders as the Tibetan issue becomes a dangerous liability and burden. India is the latest to keep the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan exile government at arm’s length, after almost 60 years of unprecedented support for the Tibetan cause. It was only with the blessings of the Indian government that the Tibetan leadership was able to form and function as a government without a country and without any accountability whatsoever. No other ‘government’ in the world enjoys such a privilege and with India’s permission, the Dalai Lama and the CTA have been emboldened to traverse the world and spread enmity against China.

In the meantime, countless NGOs and charitable organizations have sprouted globally, all collecting funds in the name of the Tibetan struggle. On top of this is funding from the United States of America which came as aid for the Democratic David in his struggle with a Communist Goliath. Little is known of how much or how little of these funds actually reach the poor Tibetan refugees but clearly, the CTA very quickly realized that it is very lucrative to be a thorn in China’s side, and that being in exile offers financial rewards they could not have received as a legitimate government. All they really had to do was remind the world of China’s oppression and Tibet’s ‘victimization’ by a vicious Chinese monster.

But now, with India changing its stance on China and preferring to formulate a new friendship with her mighty neighbor, the Dalai Lama and CTA may soon find themselves without their main sponsor. Left with little choice, the Dalai Lama now feels the need to appease China instead of irking her as he and the CTA have done for the past 60 years, all the while blaming the failure of the Tibetan people to return home on China’s refusal to come to the negotiating table.

Large turnout at the 11th Panchen Lama’s Kalachakra initiation in 2016, marking the revival of Tibetan Buddhism in Tibet.

The Dalai Lama’s endorsement of the Chinese Panchen Lama comes only days before an all-important closed door meeting between India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi and China’s President Xi Jinping. It is expected that the Tibetan issue is on the agenda along with other border issues affecting Sino-Indian relationships.

In this context, the Dalai Lama’s change of tune is consistent with his other dramatic shifts including open declarations that “Tibet can remain in China”; that Tibet needs more development, which itself is a clear acknowledgment that the Chinese government have created benefits for the Tibetan people; and expressing his wish to return to Tibet as an individual as opposed to being a key person in the Tibetan people’s political struggle against China. In proclaiming that highly realized beings like the 10^th Panchen Lama could have taken more than one reincarnation, the Dalai Lama provides an avenue that legitimizes the Chinese Panchen Lama and, in effect, signals an end to Tibetan aggression towards China and perhaps the beginning of a new era of engagement. In this way, the Dalai Lama shows himself to be an astute politician to give away as a bargain, something that would soon be lost to him anyway.

In any case, this new approach of appeasing China seems to be the Dalai Lama’s chosen method at this time to solve the Sino-Tibetan conflict and to pave the way for himself and the Tibetan people to finally return to their homeland. This is the wish the Dalai Lama has harbored for 60 years and which has become more pronounced recently.

However, the Dalai Lama’s conciliatory overtures alone will not work, if it does not translate into official CTA policy. This will not be an easy sell as the likes of Sikyong Lobsang Sangay and Dhardon Sharling will have to face recalcitrant Rangzen warriors and those intoxicated with fumes of hatred for China, fed to them over decades, ironically, by the Tibetan leadership themselves.

No one can predict how well the Tibetan people will take to what is clearly the Dalai Lama’s new strategy. But it is clear that those who refuse to toe the Dalai Lama’s new line with regards to the Chinese Panchen Lama and all that the Panchen Lama stands for, are in fact working against the Dalai Lama and the weakening Tibetan cause. It remains to be seen whether the Tibetan cause will be finally lost because of the external enemies of the Tibetan people or the internal enemies who have sought to derail the Tibetan struggle through a myriad of distractions such as the Dorje Shugden conflict.

Significance of the Dalai Lama’s new proclamation

The Panchen Lama issue is one that has significant spiritual bearing. The Dalai Lama and Panchen Lama are regarded as the Sun and the Moon in the Tibetan Buddhist cosmos. In the absence of the Dalai Lama, the Panchen Lama becomes the highest authority in Tibet, as both a political and spiritual leader. In addition, the Dalai Lamas and Panchen Lamas have interchangeable roles as teachers and students, and are instrumental in finding and recognizing each other’s reincarnations. The office of the Panchen Lama is therefore a highly significant role that the CTA would be highly vested in keeping within their control. It is in fact the gateway to controlling the reincarnation of the 15^th Dalai Lama and all future Dalai Lamas and Panchen Lamas.

The Central Tibetan Administration (Tibetan exile leadership based in Dharamsala) has been agitating conflict between China and India and Sino-Indian friendship spells doom for the CTA’s game plan.

If the Dalai Lama’s endorsement of the Chinese Panchen Lama is a politically motivated move, then we see clearly that the politician in the Dalai Lama triumphs over his role as a spiritual guardian – the integrity of the so-called Tibetan cause, and the future of the Tibetan nation can be offered up as a sacrifice on the political altar of the Chinese government, so long as the Dalai Lama’s personal wishes are met. If there is any credence in this view, then there should equally be credence in the suggestion that both the Karmapa controversy and Dorje Shugden issue are politically charged contagions introduced into the Tibetan community by the Tibetan leadership, to divide and conquer.

For over 20 years, the Karmapa and Dorje Shugden controversies created intractable schisms within Tibetan communities worldwide. Add into this mix, the Rangzen (total independence) versus Umaylam (meaningful autonomy) debate and pre-existing regional rivalries, and very quickly one sees why the Tibetan freedom movement never really gained traction. These divisive issues were all creations of the Dalai Lama. And now that the Dalai Lama has done a volte-face on the topic of the Chinese Panchen Lama, is it possible that he might one day do the same for the Dorje Shugden ban, as well as his endorsement of the Karmapa Ogyen Trinley? It remains a highly plausible scenario given recent events.

To be very sure, the Tibetan leadership has taken every opportunity in the last six decades to insult China and accuse her of all manner of crimes against humanity. It is left to the imagination what might have happened if the Dalai Lama had used his CTA to bolster the unity of the Tibetan people and instituted conciliatory moves towards China as a matter of policy instead of a desperate and nervous reaction.

Checkmate on the Tibetan struggle

Whether the Tibetan people realize it or not, the Dalai Lama’s endorsement of the Chinese Panchen Lama is the tolling of the bells signaling the death of the integrity of the Tibetan leadership and with that, the Tibetan fight for freedom. The Dalai Lama cannot claim to be a victim of China’s vicious oppression, forced to seek asylum and at the same time openly express his willingness to return to Tibet and come under the sovereignty of this so-called oppressor.

Neither can the Dalai Lama claim that China is committing cultural genocide on the Tibetan people but Tibet should remain in China anyway because of the benefits and development it receives under the Chinese government.

The Golden Urn is traditionally used for confirming the identity of reincarnated lamas, mandated by the Qianlong Emperor in 1792 in the wake of the Nepali invasion of Tibet.

Neither can the Dalai Lama or any Tibetan now argue that China has no right to recognize the next and 15^th Dalai Lama when he has openly affirmed the authority of the Panchen Lama who is empowered by tradition and now consent, to do precisely that on behalf of China. Now, not only is China in possession of the Golden Urn, traditionally used in the confirmation of high incarnate lamas, but China also has the 11^th Panchen Lama. And as we have already seen, it is the Panchen Lamas who recognize and enthrone the reincarnations of the Dalai Lamas.

Neither can the Dalai Lama say that the Chinese Panchen Lama is a rightful incarnation of the holy 10^th Panchen Lama and is an emanation of Buddha Amitabha, but that the same Buddha is also a demon worshipper, because the 11^th Panchen Lama is known to be a practitioner of Dorje Shugden.

Finally, neither can the Dalai Lama deny that all his statements are inconsistent with one another and are taken to new heights of absurdity when framed within the ongoing policies and activities of the CTA. The Dalai Lama’s latest stance on the Chinese Panchen lama signals his decision to ‘work with China’ and to cease heaping vitriol upon her via issues such as commenting on China’s human rights record and also the Dorje Shugden controversy which the CTA have falsely claimed to be a ploy by the Chinese government to undermine the Dalai Lama’s reign and destabilize the Tibetan community. This about-turn by the Dalai Lama may be disturbing to those who have held on to his every word as sacred, but it may be the only avenue left for the Tibetans to achieve their fast fading hopes of returning home.

[The Tribune] Panchen Lama alive, having
normal education: Dalai Lama

Click to enlarge. (Source: http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/himachal/panchen-lama-alive-having-normal-education-dalai-lama/579684.html)

[The Tibet Post] Panchen Lama alive and receiving normal education: Spiritual leader of Tibet

Click to enlarge. (Source: http://www.thetibetpost.com/news/international/6141-panchen-lama-alive-and-receiving-normal-education-spiritual-leader-of-tibet)

[Phayul] “Panchen Lama still alive according to reliable information”, says Dalai Lama

Click to enlarge. (Source: http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=40387)

[Himachal Abhi Abhi] बड़ा खुलासा : Dalai Lama बोले जिंदा है 11 वें Panchen Lama, सामान्य जीवन जी रहे हैं

Click to enlarge. (Source: http://himachalabhiabhi.com/dalai-lama-said-according-to-reliable-source-panchen-lama-alive-and-receiving-normal-education.html)

Panchen Lama Qoigyijabu Part 1

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

Or watch on server | download video (right click & save file)

Panchen Lama Qoigyijabu Part 2

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

Or watch on server | download video (right click & save file)

Panchen Lama Qoigyijabu Part 3

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

Or watch on server | download video (right click & save file)

Panchen Lama Qoigyijabu’s 20th Enthronement Anniversary

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

Or watch on server | download video (right click & save file)

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

By: Toby Lee

China has recently launched a new service, making it easier than ever for whistle-blowers to report activities which may endanger state security. The new platform allows law-abiding citizens to alert authorities to the activities of corrupt bureaucrats, spies and other individuals engaged in actions that go against the criminal laws of the country. To this end, it has also been reported that the Beijing City National Security Bureau is offering $1,500 to $73,000 for information on spies, the official Beijing Daily said last April.

The new reporting system is a simple online platform in English and Chinese, for anyone to lodge anonymous reports of people infringing upon China’s various legal codes such as the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China; State Security Law of the People’s Republic of China; and the Counterespionage Law of the People’s Republic of China.

The legal codes include laws governing the use of religion in activities which endanger state security. Specific behaviours which can be reported include:

• 1.16 Making use of religion to engage in activities endangering state security.

• 1.18 Committing conducts endangering state security by fomenting disputes among ethnic groups or inciting ethnic separatism.

• 1.19 Any person outside the territory who, in violation of relevant regulations and without paying heed to dissuasion, wilfully meets with any person within the territory who has conducted activities endangering state security or being strongly suspected of doing so.

The implications are immense. With the new platform, it has become easier than ever to report and investigate people who are prone to creating religious problems and schism. It means that Tibetans who live outside of Tibet, and who use the Dorje Shugden issue to create schism inside Tibet, will also get their relatives and friends under investigation if they are found sharing chat messages, songs, or photos designed to create religious schism and instability in Tibet.

During one of the recent riots in Lhasa, a tourist took this photo of  goods being burned. China wants to avoid this type of social disharmony that costs millions for the citizens to recover from. 

This newly-launched system is not to be misunderstood. China is acting like any other responsible leadership which wants harmony, and has to consider the interests and wellbeing of everyone in this large and vibrant nation. With 1.4 billion people from 56 ethnic groups, all of whom have different interests to consider, the Chinese government needs to find efficient ways to govern and ensure the law is followed. It cannot tolerate anyone who is out to make trouble which will affect the livelihood of potentially millions of people. For example, there have been reports that the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA; Tibetan leadership in Dharamsala, North India) have been using the Dorje Shugden issue to split the Tibetan community inside Tibet, and pit them against one another. The Chinese leadership certainly cannot tolerate these types of external interferences who are looking for means to divide their population or are looking for methods of demonizing the Chinese.

Knowing this, the Tibetan leadership and its supporters will naturally accuse China of being a police state, a dictatorship, etc. It suits their agenda to paint the Chinese leadership in a bad light, and to paint themselves as the victims so that they appear deserving of even more financial and moral support than the millions of dollars they have already received.

However, we have to remember that China is a sovereign nation with its own laws and regulations and which has thus far become the fastest developing country and now largest economy in the world, amidst a backdrop of political stability and a relatively low crime rate. The nation’s bright future lies in the hands of both its leadership and the people. On the one hand, Chinese citizens including those in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) have an obligation to follow the nation’s laws. On the other hand, the Chinese leadership have an obligation to ensure that their people follow the laws, for the greater good of the country. And it is precisely what they are doing with the new reporting platform that they have just launched.

Is the new system really so shocking in light of how other ‘democratic’ nations behave? The United States’ has its Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative (NSI) that encourages anonymous reporting of suspected terrorist activity, run under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Justice in partnership with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and local law enforcement partners. The U.S. government also champions national awareness campaigns that educate its citizens on the signs of terrorism and terrorism-related crime, as well as the importance of reporting suspicious activity to law enforcement bodies.

And as of 12 July 2017, it is the ‘democratic’ United States that has the second highest incarceration rate in the world. At 693 prisoners for every 100,000 of the national population, the U.S. incarceration rate comes just behind Seychelles and just ahead of El Salvador. The U.S. is also home to the largest total number of prisoners with about 2.3 million people currently incarcerated and this is just the tip of the iceberg. Due to prison overcrowding, many criminals in America who are supposed to be incarcerated are allowed probation and monitored. If you include these individuals, the U.S. justice system actually controls almost 7 million people!

Is this the picture of a healthy democracy when such a large percentage of the population are incarcerated or subjected to some form of monitoring?

Every nation has their own approach to governing their people and while its application may differ, each leadership is just as serious about ensuring stability for the wider community. This applies to China as equally as it does the United States. The writing is on the wall – China has their sights set on a future that benefits 1.4 billion citizens and they will do whatever it takes to get there. This vision of the future will, by the way, also benefit the Tibetans in TAR so if the Tibetan leadership in exile really care about ethnic Tibetans, it will behoove them to stop interfering with events in TAR. And if the Tibetan leadership in exile will not desist from disseminating information that encourages the TAR community to divide and fight, then the Chinese leadership have just shown that they are serious about making them stop with the introduction of this new reporting system.

Phayul: China launches website for citizens
to report spies, corrupt bureaucrats

Click to enlarge. (Source: http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=40359)

By: Tyr Beswick

Since they entered the country over 60 years ago, the Tibetans have had free reign to carry out their activities, whether religious, social or political. Led by the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA; the Tibetan leadership based in Dharamsala, North India), they have taken full advantage of this kindness granted to them by the Indian government. However, instead of using this platform to benefit India, the CTA has exploited India as a platform to carry out their political agendas. Thus, the last 60 years have seen Tibetans using India as a base from which they can repeatedly provoke China on the issue of a Free Tibet.

The CTA has always shown a total absence of care for their host country’s political relations with other nation states although it is India who has been kindest to them. In 1959, when no other nation came to their aid, and no one else was open to hosting 95,000 exiled Tibetans, it was India who opened up her borders. However, the CTA has not shown India the gratitude she deserves.

Hence given the CTA’s behavior, it is unsurprising to learn that they have damaged their host country’s relationship with China on many occasions. But now India is pushing back against this Tibetan exploitation, and using the CTA and the Tibetans in-exile as a tool to improve ties with China instead. Most recently:

1. Vijay Gokhale, India’s Foreign Secretary met with both the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Prime Minister, Lobsang Sangay to tell them to move the “Thank You India” events out of Delhi, as India gears up to appease China. The instruction was a surprising one, as the events were supposed to be a way for the Tibetans to show their gratitude to India. But it does not seem like the Indians were interested, preferring instead to find ways of reaching out to China. Perhaps this show of Tibetan gratitude was too little, too late. Regardless, the CTA went ahead with their event anyway but had to hold it on a much smaller scale at their local temple in Dharamsala.
2. Gokhale went so far as to inform government officials not to attend any Tibetan events, even issuing a memo to this effect. The memo was leaked, an act which some think was intentional. This hints at two possibilities. First, it was a ploy to unofficially let China know that India is changing its stance towards the Tibetans, so India can get into China’s good books. Second, it was India’s way of letting ordinary Tibetans know she is serious about reaching out to China.
3. Some have also speculated that the upper echelons of power in Delhi were displeased by the CTA’s insensitivity towards the current state of bilateral relations between India and China. Having lived in India for the past 60 years, the CTA is fully aware of the necessity of maintaining the delicate balance of Sino-Indian ties. Yet, they went ahead with their “Thank You India’ celebrations without coordinating with the relevant Indian ministries and without any due consideration of how it could impact India’s foreign policy.

So just why is India changing its stance after 60 years of supporting the Tibetans in every manner possible? A brief look at recent global events makes the reasons behind India’s turnabout very clear — this is not the first time that the CTA have pulled a stunt like this with potentially huge negative repercussions for India.

1. It has been said that Samdhong Rinpoche’s secret visit to China last year contributed to India’s renewed sense of urgency in improving their relationship with China. Although no details have emerged about Samdhong Rinpoche’s visit, it is widely assumed he visited China to strike a deal about the Dalai Lama returning to Tibet. In the past, China has made it clear that any deal of this nature will only be approved if the CTA acknowledges that Tibet has always been a part of China. India sees this acknowledgement as problematic because it would call into question the legality of the McMahon Line. This is the border that Tibet and British India agreed upon during the 1914 Simla Conference; if the CTA admits Tibet was never independent, the Simla agreement becomes null and void, thus throwing into question the India-China border and opening up all kinds of territorial disputes. These are border territories that India is not willing to accede so building positive bilateral relations with China now, is a method for India to reduce the risk of potential territorial disputes in the future.
2. Staving off potential border disputes with China is just one of many incentives for India to improve relations with their giant neighbor. At home, the Indian leadership are finding that the CTA themselves are creating incentives for India to rescind her support of the Tibetans. In the last 60 years, the CTA have done very little to assist India with her many domestic and foreign challenges. Oftentimes, the CTA has even added to them, especially in stirring up trouble between China and India during sensitive times. We saw this most recently during the 2017 Doklam standoff, when Bhutan and China were locked in a territorial dispute over the Doklam area. India, claiming to act on Bhutan’s behalf, sought to intervene since Doklam is in their northeastern border and any instability there could spill over into Indian territory. As a result, China became upset at India’s presumed interference and the two nations nearly came to blows.
3. Despite the tense situation, the CTA President Lobsang Sangay decided to take a trip up to North India anyway. There, he unfurled the Tibetan flag at Pangong Lake, which is on India’s border with China’s Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR). China saw this as a deliberate act of provocation since the flag symbolizes Tibetan independence and, by extension, the CTA’s dangerous ‘separatist’ activities to destabilize the TAR. And of course, they blamed India for allowing Lobsang Sangay to travel there, thus worsening India’s relationship with China.

With the relationship between India and China already so bad, any leader worth their salt would have been respectful and stayed away. Yet Lobsang Sangay deliberately sought to make matters worse, an indication that the Tibetans are definitely not innocent. Their need for one-upmanship over China has always overridden Indian welfare, and their actions reflect their ingratitude for India’s past kindnesses and disdain for her brighter future. It is this disdain that has caused India to react skillfully, outmaneuvering the Tibetans as they advance their aim of creating closer ties with China. The CTA thought it was safe, thought they could continue using India without apprise. However, the Indian government can only be taken advantage of so many times before this powerful, sophisticated democracy tires of their manipulation and games. The Tibetan leadership should realize one thing – while India may talk about a “sensitive time” with China, the same can be said of their relationship with the CTA, who should tread very, very carefully lest they lose Indian support altogether.

Is Trump Politics Inspiring Modi to Change His China Policy?

Click to enlarge. (Source: https://www.dailyo.in/politics/tibet-india-china-doklam-xi-jinping-dalai-lama-narendra-modi/story/1/23232.html)

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

By: Tyr Beswick

March 2018 will probably be a month that the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) cannot wait to forget. It was a terrible month for the CTA, who are the Tibetan leadership based in Dharamsala, North India, as they received bad news after bad news.

It began with the leak of Indian Foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale’s memo directing all Indian ministers and government officials to avoid any events related to the CTA’s much-hyped “Thank You India” campaign. This was swiftly followed by an instruction from the Indian government to relocate the “Thank You India” opening event from New Delhi’s Thyagaraja Stadium to their temple in Dharamsala, a much smaller venue that the Tibetans ordinarily use for all of their other events. They were also forced to move their annual public rally after they were banned from commemorating the March 10^th Tibetan Uprising Day in Delhi. This was particularly disheartening as March 10^th is one of the most significant events in the annual Tibetan calendar, as it marks the 1959 uprising in Lhasa by the Tibetans resisting the Chinese incursions.

Things did not improve with the cancellation of yet another important gathering. Lawmakers and parliamentarians from all over the democratic world were due to congregate in Delhi to discuss strategies to support the so-called Tibetan cause. Billed as a high-profile event, the meeting was going to be held in India for the first time in 24 years. However, the Indian leadership once again demonstrated that they are more interested in good relations with China, and Delhi moved swiftly to cancel the upcoming conference which had not been held since Canada hosted the last meeting in 2012.

All of this negative news that the Tibetans have received in the last month alone have come from just one source, and it just happens to be their biggest and most powerful sponsor — India. It is the CTA’s worst nightmare come true and it is apparent to everyone that Dharamsala’s hastily and badly-organized “Thank You India” campaign was nothing more than a half-hearted public relations stunt to try and stave off the inevitable conclusion of waning Indian support. There is nothing more telling than the image of Tibetans finally waving the Indian flag for the first time in 60 years. It is sad that after six decades of living on Indian soil, it was waning Indian support that finally forced the Tibetans to pick up the Indian flag in a grand show of gratitude. There is no doubt that the “Thank You India” campaign has fallen flat on its face, and the fact the CTA ever thought that a public relations stunt could woo India back into supporting them is a reflection of their immature politics.

Unfortunately, India’s politics far exceeds theirs and are more sophisticated than what the CTA assumes; it is going to take a whole lot more than some poorly-attended parade marches and lackluster flag-waving to bring them back into India’s good graces. During the downsized “Thank You India” event, the Dalai Lama himself said that Tibetans do not wish to inconvenience India but what the Tibetan leadership have failed to realize is that this understanding is not going to be enough, nor will it ever be enough, to win back India’s support, certainly not against the billion-dollar economic opportunities and geopolitical realities with China. All of this news, when put together, certainly does not augur a pleasant future for the Tibetans who are fast running out of options and friends.

The fact is that every time the Tibetan leadership meddles in Indian affairs, they inconvenience India. And so for the Tibetan leadership to respect and not inconvenience India, they must stop first protesting against China and creating diplomatic issues for the Indian leadership. Second, they have to stop all political activities in India and either become Indian citizens, go back to China or migrate somewhere else. And if they are really serious about not inconveniencing India, ultimately they must stop criticizing China and start making friends with them, and settle on something after 60 years. Stop telling Indian politicians what they should do for India in relations to Tibet because at the end of the day, the Indians do not need advice from a leadership without a country. India, with its vast resources, strong culture and seasoned politicians, will be fine without the Tibetans and without Tibetan advice, and that is the reality the CTA are now being forced to face. It is high time for everyone, Tibetans and Indians included, to move on and leave the CTA far, far behind.

Tibetans Understand and Respect
India’s Inconvenience

Click to enlarge. (Source: http://www.tibetanjournal.com/tibetans-understand-respect-indias-inconvenience/)

Union Minister Mahesh Sharma

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

By: Ame Nielsen

In early March, the world learned that India was serious about repairing her relationship with China. The Tibetans themselves only learned of this when they were unceremoniously informed, by way of a leaked memo, that no Indian officials would be allowed to attend events hosted by the Tibetan leadership, which included the grand opening event of the ‘Thank You India‘ campaign which was originally to be hosted in New Delhi.

So when this opening event finally took place on March 31^st, having been forcibly relocated to Dharamsala where the Tibetan leadership is based, not even live updates could save the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) from the embarrassment of being forced to host their event in low key Dharamsala instead of glamorous New Delhi.

The ‘Thank You India’ event has been shifted to Dharamsala instead of New Delhi

The Indian leadership did face a little criticism for their sudden about-face regarding their stance on Tibetan refugees. Seeking to allay these criticisms, they finally allowed for one of their minor ministers, Union Minister Mahesh Sharma, to grace the celebrations in Dharamsala.

In his speech as the guest of honor, Mr Sharma referred to India’s support for the Dalai Lama’s return to his country. This is a neutral statement that can be interpreted in many ways but, given the nature of the event, the current political climate, and the state of bilateral relations between India and China, Mr Sharma’s message is very clear — the Indian government supports the Dalai Lama leaving India and along with him, the rest of the Tibetans.

Since India decided that they would strike out in search of a better relationship with China, bilateral relations between the two nations have gone from strength to strength. There was even a marked improvement around the time India showed signs of rescinding their support for the Tibetans. And so far, the CTA has not come up with a single, clear strategy about how to win back Indian support. Their lack of ideas and creativity, and unwillingness to show tangible gratitude towards India could not come at a worse time for the Tibetans who already have nothing to show for 60 years of petitions, protests and self-immolations. Now it seems the Indian elephant has begun to dance with the Chinese dragon and, in the process, is showing that India is more than willing to leave the Tibetans far, far behind.

Tibetans’ ‘Thank You India’ event Highlights:
India supports Dalai Lama’s struggle to
return to Tibet, says Mahesh Sharma

Click to enlarge. (Source: http://indianexpress.com/article/india/dalai-lama-tibet-thank-you-india-event-live-updates-cta-china-bjp-5118008/)

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

By: Steve Lee

It has always been assumed by most that India has been playing the so-called ‘Tibet card’ against China, by using the presence of Tibetan refugees in their country to provoke the Chinese leadership. Recently however, a new perspective has been presented by none other than Phunchok Stobdan, a former Indian ambassador who previously authored critical pieces of the Tibetan leadership, formally known as the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA, headquartered in Dharamsala, North India).

Stobdan’s conclusions bear remembering and repeating, because his are not those of the average man or woman on the street. Highly educated, Stobdan is an accomplished academician, a career diplomat and a former Indian ambassador to Kyrgyzstan. It is this distinguished gentleman’s analysis that there was never a ‘Tibet card’ to begin with, since Tibet relinquished its independence in 1951. He argues that it left India with little room for political maneuvering, since India herself accepted Tibet as an inherent part of China just a few years later in 1954. That is from a historical basis — in more modern times, Stobdan argues there is no ‘Tibet card’ because the Dalai Lama himself does not want independence. Hence using the Tibetans to provoke the Chinese leadership is a foolhardy exercise that should be relegated to its origins in the Cold War era. The ‘Tibet card’, if it even exists, will not accomplish anything but greater suspicion and mutual distrust between China and India, and only lead to the continued deterioration of the Sino-Indian relationship.

He even highlights examples in recent history to demonstrate his point, including the deterioration of bilateral relations after the Doklam standoff, the Dalai Lama’s Tawang visit and the unfurling of the Tibetan flag at Pangong Lake. Stobdan’s points are not without merit since everyone witnessed the subsequent improvement of relations after Foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale’s directive for all Indian officials to avoid events related to the CTA’s “Thank You India” campaign.

In Stobdan’s view, the ‘Tibet card’ was in fact played at the “behest of Western powers”, undoubtedly implying that it is time for India to prioritize the welfare of her 1.2 billion citizens and keep it in her own hands, instead of subjecting herself to external influences.

For Stobdan, the approach for India is very simple – India and Indians first. Will the Tibetan leadership ever be able to recover from the recent downturn in domestic and international support for their so-called Tibetan cause? If politicians like Stobdan have anything to say about it, the answer will be most definitely and categorically ‘no’.

The Modi Government Must Realise the Folly of India Playing the ‘Tibet Card’

Click to enlarge. (Source: https://thewire.in/diplomacy/modi-government-folly-of-india-playing-the-tibet-card)

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

By: Ashok Rao

For the past few decades, Nepal has graciously accepted Tibetan refugees into their country, allowing thousands of them to pass through to India for almost 50 years, and giving thousands of Tibetans a home in Nepal for nearly 60. To this day for example, the atmosphere in tourist sites like Boudhanath Stupa is predominantly Tibetan and not Nepali. It is Tibetan stores that abound in the popular tourist areas where millions of dollars are traded every year.

Despite so much kindness being extended to them, ungrateful Tibetans still make trouble for Nepal by protesting against China, resulting in a deterioration in China-Nepal relations each time they do so. However, what the Tibetans are forgetting, to their own detriment, is that Nepal is a country that is serious about its international relations and they are not afraid to show it.

Instead of being grateful for Nepal’s generosity, the Tibetans often create trouble for Nepal by holding riots and protests, jeopardizing Nepal’s relationship with China.

So it made perfect sense when in 2005, the Nepali authorities closed down two offices related to His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the Tibetans — the Office of the Dalai Lama’s Representative and the Tibetan Refugee Welfare Office — which were being used as halfway houses for Tibetans crossing over to India.

Nepal has also taken the unusual step of banning Tibetan activists from protesting within its borders, to ensure cordial relations between Nepal and China, who considers Tibetans in-exile to be dangerous separatists intent on destabilizing the Tibet Autonomous Region. The Nepali government’s decision matches their adherence and agreement to the One China policy, which asserts that Tibet is an inherent part of China.

Adak, a Tibetan activist, was taken into custody by Nepali policemen after he posted a picture of himself with a Tibetan flag on Facebook.

More recently, Nepal showed just how serious they are about this policy when they took Adak, a Tibetan activist, into custody after he posted a picture of himself holding a Tibetan flag in front of Kathmandu’s Boudhanath Stupa.

The truth is, Tibetans living in Nepal have enjoyed a whole host of kindnesses and freedoms — they have been granted Nepali citizenship, own swathes of land, run million-dollar businesses, own large homes and properties, have the freedom to travel in and out of Nepal as they wish, and have religious freedom. Yet, they just do not seem to care about the country that has given them so much; instead of holding the Nepali flag, Tibetans continue to fly the Tibetan flag, a symbol of Tibetan independence, in order to provoke the Chinese leadership and harm their host country Nepal’s relationship with China. By right, having been in Nepal for nearly 60 years already, Tibetans should not only salute, respect and hold up the Nepali flag, but it is time that they pay tribute to the country which gave them freedom. Tibetans not holding up the Nepali flag is a clear indication of the lack of respect and appreciation that they have for their host country. The same may be said for Tibetans wherever else they are flying their flag. It is well known in the world that all refugees from countries that have been lost, that are struggling, that are in a crisis – when the people migrate, they take on the flag of their new country and display it with pride. So why are the Tibetans exceptions?

A few Tibetans protesting in Nepal, carrying the Tibetan flag has achieved nothing in 60 years. The only thing they have done is break Nepali law because they carry these flags and hold their protests without a permit. In countries where these protests are held, the protestors need to carry a permit but again, Tibetans have somehow given themselves the exception to the rule by not applying for permits and breaking the law. It is also very well known that the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), who are the Tibetan leadership based in Dharamsala, encourages their people to protest and as a reward, they receive incentives such as speedier visa application processes to migrate to Western countries. So hundreds of Tibetans have protested not because they believe in what they are doing, but because they have been bribed by the CTA. There are other times when Tibetans have not joined the protests and they have been fined for their absence. This is a fact that Tibetans themselves speak about.

It is also widely known that Tibetans in India and Nepal, except for a small minority, have lost hope for gaining independence for Tibet due to the abject failures of their Tibetan leadership in Dharamsala. According to the CTA’s own census, there are approximately 95,000 Tibetans in India and Nepal combined. So why is it that when there are protests, only 50 to 100 people show up? This dismal number proves what has been said about the loss of hope and interest amongst the Tibetans themselves.

So why are Tibetans so ungrateful? If they really want to continue living peacefully in Nepal and enjoying all the benefits that they receive, they had better respect and follow the law as any citizen of any country should. It is the law in Nepal that Tibet protests are banned. It is the law in Nepal that Tibet belongs to China, under the One China Policy. Right or wrong, that is the law in Nepal.

So the Nepali government are well within their authority to detain Adak for breaking the law by flying the Tibetan flag as a symbol of protest. Clearly, overzealous activism for the so-called Tibetan cause will no longer be tolerated as Nepal continues to grow increasingly closer to China for the sake of its people. It is time for the Tibetans to wake up and realize the futility of fighting against China, especially within Nepal’s sovereign borders.

Tibetan Activist Detained for Nine Days in Nepal After Tibetan Flag Facebook Photo

Click to enlarge. (Source: http://www.thetibetpost.com/en/news/exile/6092-tibetan-activist-detained-for-nine-days-in-nepal-after-tibetan-flag-facebook-photo)