After The Dalai Lama, What?
By B. Raman
Even while
pretending to avoid the discourtesy to His
Holiness the Dalai Lama of discussing what
could happen after him while he was still
alive, the Chinese authorities have
indirectly dwelt on this subject at a press
conference held on February 2, 2010, to
brief the Beijing-based media on the outcome
of the ninth round of the dialogue with
Mr.Lodi Gyari and Mr.Kelsang Gyaltsen, the
special emissaries of His Holiness , from
January 26 to 31. It is understood that the
dialogue consisted of one day of formal
talks in Beijing and a visit to
minority-inhabited areas for a briefing on
China’s policy towards its ethnic
minorities.
2. The Chinese
Communist Party was represented in the
talks with the representatives of His
Holiness by Mr.Du Qinglin, Vice-Chairman of
the National Committee of the Chinese
People’s Political Consultative Conference,
and Mr. Zhu Weiqun, Executive Vice-Minister
of the United Front Work Department of the
CPC Central Committee. The media briefing
was held by Mr.Zhu.
3. Mr.Zhu made it
clear that it was not a Sino-Tibetan
dialogue, but a meeting with two “private
representatives” of the Dalai Lama on the
future of His Holiness and his associates
and not on the future of Tibet and the
Tibetan people. He dismissed the Dalai
Lama's claim of being the "legal
representative" of Tibetans. He said: “The
Chinese Government and the Government of
Tibet Autonomous Region under its leadership
are the only representatives of Tibetans.”
4. He said that
during the talks, the Dalai Lama's “private
representatives” refused to "revise a single
word" in the Memorandum for All Tibetans to
Enjoy Genuine Autonomy which they had
presented at the previous round, nor did
they make any concession. They insisted that
the Dalai Lama is "a legal representative of
broad Tibetans" and would like to talk with
the Central Government about the "Tibet
issue" and "the welfare of 6 million
Tibetans," he said.
5. Mr.Zhu added:
"The so-called 'Tibet government-in-exile'
composed of those who defected to India and
gathered there absolutely violates China's
laws. The private representatives have no
legal status to discuss with us the affairs
about Tibet Autonomous Region. They are only
the Dalai Lama's private representatives, so
they can only talk about the prospect of the
Dalai Lama, at most, the prospects of a
small party around him."
6. Mr.Zhu also
warned of serious damage to Sino-US
relations if US leaders were to meet with
the Dalai Lama, saying the move would "harm
others but bring no profit to itself
either." The US side would violate
international rules by making such a
decision. Such a move would be both
irrational and harmful, he said. "If a
country decides to do so, we will take
necessary measures to help them realize
this."
7. He said the
talks with the representatives of the Dalai
Lama "had some upside" as they let both
sides know exactly their differences and how
wide the differences were. He added: "It
helps the Dalai Lama realize the position he
has been in. The Central Government wanted
to give the Dalai Lama a chance to correct
his mistakes by holding talks with his
envoys. The talks were not without result,
as the Central Government arranged trips for
the envoys to visit central Hunan Province
to better understand the country and the
regional ethnic autonomy policy.”
8. According to
Mr.Zhu, when the previous round ended in
November, 2008, after the Chinese rejected
the Memo presented by the representatives of
the Dalai Lama, Mr.Lodi Gyari left saying
they would not want any new round of talks,
but this time after the latest round failed,
Mr.Lodi Gyari said the talks will continue
in the future.
9. Mr.Zhu
objected to some of the past remarks of His
Holiness describing himself as “a son of
India” and projecting Arunachal Pradesh,
which the Chinese describe as southern
Tibet, as belonging to India, and asked:
"Can these act and words of the Dalai Lama
improve relations with the Central
government?" Mr. Zhu said it was imperative
that the Dalai Lama should "match word to
deed." What he sought to convey was that if
His Holiness really felt that Tibet was part
of China, he should not support India’s
claim to Arunachal Pradesh.
10. He added that
the Central Government wanted the Dalai Lama
to abandon his alleged attempts to split the
country, cease separatist activities, openly
admit that Tibet was an inalienable part of
China and Taiwan was an inalienable part of
China and the Government of the People's
Republic of China was the only legal
government representing China.
11. The most
interesting part of the briefing was about
what could happen in Tibet after His
Holiness. Mr.Zhu was asked by one of the
journalists if he felt that the Tibetan
issue would become more difficult to handle
after the death of the Dalai Lama. He
replied: “Chinese people, including
Tibetans, will decide the future of Tibet.
It is not polite in China to talk about the
possibility of a 75-year-old man passing
away. We hope he can live a long life. The
Central Government hoped the Dalai Lama
could settle his affairs concerning his own
prospects while still alive and would not
pass away abroad. Since the armed rebellion
in 1959, what did the Dalai Lama get except
that he was pushed further and further away
from the journey home? His followers should
ponder what they should do when the Dalai
Lama departed this life.”
12. Asked to
comment on whether there would be an upsurge
of violence and terrorist activities after
the death of the Dalai Lama, Mr. Zhu said he
believed most Tibetans living abroad loved
peace and would like to contact their family
and friends in Tibet and be engaged in
Tibet's development. It could not be ruled
out that a few people would turn to
violence, but history had showed that
violence and terrorist activities would
inevitably end in failure.
(The writer is Additional
Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt.
of India, New Delhi, and, presently,
Director, Institute For Topical Studies,
Chennai. He is also associated with the
Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-Mail:
seventyone2@gmail.com)