Welcome to the internet's top destination for the civil discussion of politics. This is a forum for discussion and debate of the issues, and not for personal remarks aimed at other discussants.
This forum has no political affiliation and welcomes your perspective on the issues. Membership is free. If you would like to join the discussions and debates please REGISTER HERE.
All new members should review the forum rules. The "Today's Posts" button automatically adjusts itself to fit your screen on its first use for Firefox and on its second use, for Internet Explorer. Have a pleasant day. (This is a spam free board.)
I think that China will bring trouble on itself with this kind of attitude. In many respects, the Dalai Lama is a moderate. He is not even calling for Tibetan independance. So for China to get so upset just for someone talking to the Dalai Lama appears... childish.
Let's put the childish thing aside.
What kind of trouble? Two famous car brands sold to India? I want to know what Jeremy Clarkson will comment on this on next series of TopGear which is my favorite show. Joking. Anyway, I think this is a signal China want deliver. If he gets widely accepted in the world, will that do any better to China?
About Dalai Lama himself, I can only say I don't know much about him, since it's hard to tell which info about him is true. And I certainly don't have any evidence that Dalai Lama was the man behind this riot so I didn't mention him in previous post.
But I have to point out that your understanding about Dalai Lama doesn't make any sense, he acts as a moderate and not calling for Tibetan independence doesn't prove that he don't want independence, because he had to do these, a much powerful Taiwan with US on the back yet not dare calling independence, how could he? If he do that he will get much fewer support, so the only thing he can do is be nice, obviously. And since he is the former header of the region who didn't accept Chinese rule, it is totally sensible to assume that he wants independent in his heart, just not crazy enough to say it out. The only way to prove that he doesn't want independent is declare it directly by himself, he can ask something else. If he do that, negotiation is waiting for him, but only he don't.
And if I remember correctly, British "contributed" a lot to this whole Tibet issue decades ago, I watched that from NHK several years ago. Do your have any comment about this?
Is that confirmed that the rioters were monks and landowners, or is that just prejudice?
Thanks for the question.
In such a situation, the only people that can tell the truth are those rioters themselves, so it is my best guess based on what data I could find. It's certainly not prejudice because I care little about there before. I believe this guess is sensible and here is why:
My source includes pictures I could find on internet, lots of them with monk rioters, not difficult to find one for yourself so I don't put link here. And that "A Year In Tibet" documentary series made by BBC which maybe more trustworthy to the rest of the world clearly shows the tension between [monks and wealth Tibetans] and [ethnic Han Chinese] (this [] means a group).
And it also shows other Tibetan people although with several kinds of mutter to government but it's no more than what most people in the world do, and they do remember the benefits they received before, they used to be slaves. The most important thing is, no evidence shown that those mutters from ordinary Tibetans were not aimed at Han Chinese, which was the target of the riot. In fact Han Chinese bring investments there and provide them jobs.
Other source are Chinese which I think have not much use put here.
I am very interested in this, why you are that sure Germans have no idea? is there something I should know?
What I know is for the next month or so after their premier met Dalai Lama, BBC is talking about this and its aftermath continuously on radio which I could listen online, not only because strong protest from China GOV, but also the economical effects which eventually led to sign France the 20b$ railway contract, cancelled many project from Germany and halted others, usually you don't get this kind of revenge.
That is why winter6126 is so angry and if you can read Chinese and have a glance of Chinese forums then you'll have the idea, after all most Chinese couldn't use english well especially in debate scenario. But there are also many young people just releasing their overflowed energy, though.
Thats very interesting, even if it is a bit disturbing.
As an Austrian, I know German news coverage pretty well as we get German TV here as well as that some major German papers are widely sold as well.
I can remember the news that the Chinese government protested the Dalai Lama visit in Germany, here. Thats pretty much about it. Now that you say this all, there might have been even a short mentioning of some economic actions from the Chinese side, but I would not have remembered otherwise that information.
I think the major point here is that I did not expect that not only the Chinese government is outrageous but also the Chinese about this. After all, Germany is not exactly a huge country or very near to China either.
So, to be honest I am surprised by this intensity of reaction among the Chinese people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oneday
Yes, thanks, this is a good reminder.
Things about these seems never appeared in my history book, or I forgot all of them? and Chinese seems never put too much attention on Europe, may be because it's a bit low profile? I don't know.
You see, and thats because I am surprised about the amount of attention you seem to give Germany now.
I hope however you hear about Europe more in history classes than we get to hear about China. Its a shame, but I can't remember to have heard much at all about Chinese history. Not before the 19th century or so at least. I think all you get to know is that it has a loooong history and I can remember a comparision of cities from the the medieval age, where non European cities were next to non European ones. I can only remember that they looked tiny to the Chinese city that was hosted in this book, only Constantinople could play in a similar league (even though still considerably smaller)
I have read a bit about your history, but still know next to nothing, at least no details.
Quote:
We care about US and Japan more But this part of history was also been selectively taught, as well as our own history. I learn those only after I have the access to internet and boost my English to practical level (years of painstaking process), then I don't have to care about internet blockade or censorship, because they were mostly applied to Chinese sources.
If you want to talk about European history, you can open a thread. Just in case you are interested about something in special or in general.
This is absolutely true, any Chinese can confirm that, today chinese culture and religions were in fact better preserved outside mainland.
The reason China could do it, I have only the official explanation which I also think is reasonable:
From 1840 China lost its power and became a pray for predators, until 1949, in around 110 years, there were countless wars, civil wars, foreign wars, land wars, sea wars... everything end up with disasters on people, people were in extreme poverty, in a born at will era population was still roughly stable. And generations of people tried everything they could, countless revolts, those revolts were mainly in the form of people get organized under religions, but all failed and followed by massacres. Until Japan invade China and killed around 10% of population (35m), people finally realized that believe in religion was a hopeless struggle, and this is just an perfect opportunity for CCP to took over this blank with its military success as prompt.[/quote]
Interesting explanation. Thats a possibility, but in Europe it worked worked out quite differently. Its not like we lacked bloody incidents and crimes against humanity.
Quote:
The wars in EU after medieval were probably not so lasting and brutal enough(if you exclude Russians and Jews in WWII) for Europeans to lost faith on religion, or they already had other things to separate religions apart from wars? Just guess, please correct me.
If you would know... you know WWI and WWII, do you? They are today at least in Europe and in the west in general considered to be the model of the total and hell like war. Before them however there was another war famous for being the worst kind of war that ever happened. It was the "30 years' war" (between 1618 and 1648), which was not only a religious war, it was a religious war of Christians against Christians and to top it was a German civil war as well. Principally the main opponents were Austria allied with southern German states against the Swedish empire allied with the northern German states. (But most other European powers were involved in one way or another as well, especially France as arch enemy of Austria) It ravaged the German states, great starvations were the consequences. If you look at the statistics of the population development of Europe over the centuries, you can see that war clearly on it as big minus. 1 out of 3 Germans and Czechs died during this war. (in some German states even 2 people out of 3)
...but back to my point. It did not harm the religiousity much in Europe. The atheism and decline in religiosity in Europe is a phenomena of the late 20th century. It might have to do with the philosophy of enlightment, scientific progress and wealth. But I can't tell you why in the US we see a renaissance of religion while in Europe happens the opposite...
__________________
"Every country gets the cuisine it deserves"
I agree, but the tourist evidence is very patchy. For what it's worth, there are also photographs circulating of what appear to be Tibetans with what appear to be bullet wounds. Who knows if they're genuine or not?
They might be. If the photos are the same as those I have seen, they were taken in other parts of China (e.g. Ngawa (a.k.a. Aba) County in Sichuan Province) at a later date after the Lhasa riot was quelled. I saw them first on “The Epoch Times”, one of the most anti-CCP newspapers that you can find in the world. It was run by members of the Falungong group, which was labeled as a cult and banned in China. However, the fact remains that no evidence supports the claim of Tibetan’s being shot to death on the March 14th Lhasa riot as of now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikado
But do you trust the Chinese media? Here's another James Miles report, referring to Saturday 15 March:
A photo of what apear to be troops with rifles, plus reports of gunshots. Granted the arrival of the troops appears to coincide with the end of the worst of the riots, and there may not have been firearms used earlier on.
I agree that there doesn't seem much independent evidence to support claims of "100+" deaths or anything like that. I'd agree also that if there are rioters attacking people then it's not beyond all reasonableness that some of those rioters get killed by security forces.
I read news from the Chinese media with the same caution as I read them from the western media nowadays. Considering all the evidences that were available to date, that specific claim seems credible to me, and I stated why in my original post. Thanks for the link to the other James Miles report, although it does not contradict to CCP’s claim that no live weapons were used against the crowd in Lhasa on March 14th. They have in fact acknowledged, for example, firing at the rioters that stormed a police station and attempted to take away guns from the police.
I, too, think the use of forces is necessary when civilians’ lives were in danger. CCP has been criticized by many Chinese netizens for its lack of decisive movement to contain the riot in its early stage. However, you have to know that after the Tiananmen Square, and with the upcoming Olympics, the Chinese government has to be extremely cautious in taking actions. You also need to understand that most leaders of the local government were at Beijing attending the national people’s congress session at that time. The local police probably had the order of restraint when the protest was still relatively peaceful, but when the riots got out of control in a very short period of time, they could not act on their own without the authorization.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikado
I think that calming the situation is indeed important, but to resolutely report anything about Tibetan deaths creates an information vacuum, which is easily filled by rumours. If the Chinese government have nothing to be ashamed of then they are not serving their own best interests by maintinaing the secrecy.
Rumors would always be there, whether or not Xinhua reported the Tibetan deaths. I, for one, do not buy the story that the riots were spontaneous acts. Lhasa is a very clean city in general, with very few litters on its streets. Yet thousands of rocks were used in the riots, and they were granites from outside of the city. It just looks like a premeditated event to me. I tend to think that Dalai Lama was not behind this, but it wouldn’t surprise me at all if other, more radical elements of the Tibetan exile groups, such as the Tibetan Youth Congress (TYC), were spreading rumors to enrage the crowd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikado
Perhaps the situation is similar to Northern Ireland or to Kosovo. When there's two communities that are intermingled, yet who are unable to live together so a separation is required, a line has to be drawn somewhere to make that separation. Some from each community will find themselves on the wrong side of that line.
Is the secession inevitable? Is independence the only option? I don’t think so, and apparently neither does Dalai Lama, at least not in public. I suspect that Tibetans were also divided on this issue. After all, millions of Tibetans live in China, and only a very small portion (<1%) participated in the latest protests. Regardless, one thing for sure is that it is not practical at current time. Dalai Lama knows this perfectly well, and I think that’s the main reason he stopped seeking independence in recent years, but instead asked for true autonomy. I do think peaceful coexistence is possible among different ethnic groups. Many other minority ethnic groups have coexisted with Han Chinese peacefully for centuries, such as the Hui (Muslims) who somewhat maintained their own religion and culture, as well as the Manchurians who assimilated themselves into the Chinese culture when they (the Manchurians) were in power. Tibetans are a little different, because they have very strong religious beliefs. I think the CCP became aware of this in the early 1980s, and started correcting the errors that it has made during the Cultural Revolution. I am just curious but have you read the books I recommended? I have a feeling that you don’t really know the history and the present very well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikado
that begs the question of whether these other regions that perhaps don't want to be part of China really ought to be part of China. Just like there's a question as to whether Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales ought to be part of the UK.
You can draw analogies, but in the end, each case will be different. The three major separation forces in China are: Tibetan Independence, East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM), and Taiwan Independence. I think if you want to seriously discuss on these issues, you need to start learning more on Chinese histories.
__________________
What we've got here is... failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach. --CHL
For that your English skills are still far superior to mine
I try to make myself understood, otherwise it will get lost in translation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slartibartfas
Its hard to speculate about a vague phrase, but principally you have only biased news here, from both sides, it would be the best to give both versions the equal time. I know this does not happen enough, but Tibet is nothing special, its happening in domestic news coverage as well, that you see bias.
The media in the west are as good as you want them to be. If you look for credible information, you have good chances to find it. Same can not be said about the Chinese media sphere, as far as I see it. There is only one version in the Chinese media: the own.
Agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slartibartfas
Of course if this is all true, the question remains why China fell back into this completely authoritarian information censorship. Why were all foreigners thrown out of the region also against their will? Thats foreign correspondents, they know the risks, if China wants to say it was for safety reasons.
One reason is that they don’t want to internationalize the Tibet problem, the other is that they don’t want anything bad leak out. Whatever happened after the foreign correspondents moved out could be anyone’s guess, but as far as they are concerned, it would be at best speculations without solid proof which cannot be used against them. I am not suggesting that there would necessarily be bad things happening either. Although when you were going to confront some of these people who engaged in the atrocious acts earlier, things might get out of control. They were taking the preventive measure here. Here is an interesting article by an Indian on the possible damage control by China: Tibet:* Chinese Damage Control Exercise
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slartibartfas
Not that I can remember. What I can remember and what certainly is also correct is that the basic reason for these riots is the Chinese policies towards the Tibetans which looks pretty much like their planned marginalisation and "hanification" of Tibet.
What I read though just recently is, that the Dalai Lhama looses grip over some parts of the young Tibetans. (In his exile, and therefore very likely in Tibet as well). I read a report where some said that the peaceful way officially supported by the Dalai Lhama is not the best and should think about alternatives (guerilla, attacks...).
China seems to do currently its best to undermine the Dalai Lhama and ultimatively destroy him politically. What they don't consider as it seems is that what comes after the success of this task, will not be nicer for China, rather the contrary.
You would be mistaken if you believe the reason for China’s accusation of Dalai Lama is to destroy him politically. CCP knows well that Dalai Lama is the key to solve the Tibet problem, and it is to China’s best interest to bring Dalai Lama home before he dies, because the new Dalai Lama won’t have the leadership to unite the Tibetans, even if he decides to work with China. That is why they reached out to him as early as in the early 1980s, and again when Panchen Lama died, but unfortunately Dalai Lama declined because he believed that time was on his side. The dialogue is still open as of today, but hardly goes anywhere.
If somehow they can sell the idea that there is a tie between Dalai Lama and the more radical groups, such as the TYC, it serves two purposes. On the one hand, Dalai’s image of non-violence would be severely undermined, and lose his international support; on the other hand, the radical groups would also proceed more cautiously, because each violent act they committed would be one more blow to their leader.
There is another possibility, but I hope it was not the case. Beijing can simply wait out until Dalai Lama passed away. It is true that the Tibetan independence movement would turn towards the violent side, but it will also put them closer to become a terrorist group, and cost them the international support.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slartibartfas
Can't comment on it as I dont know anything about it, but on google or youtube you can also find 100% proof that the CIA is controlled by aliens as well. Principially I would not deem it impossible though, considering the constellation back then and the fact that what China did, did not look all too legitimated either.
It was not my wish to accuse you of something you did not do. I mentioned it to show that I am not speaking from a level of moral superiority. You know, my home country was just 90 years ago a highly multiethnic conglomerat, where no ethnicity was in the position to be the majority, but the German speakers and the Hungarians effectively ruled the country. If you study the history of my country I think you will find everything from completely voluntary assimilation to ethnic cleansing and systematic mass murder and nearly everything in between. There is indeed an impressive number of possibilities to marginalize minority cultures.
No official will say that of course, but I will be enlightened to hear your perspective on this issue later on.
Once again, it's late, and I am tired. Too much work during the day, and my baby son was sick and cranky early. Hence I can only post at such a late time. Sorry to dissappoint you yet again, but I promise I will give you my perspective one day.
__________________
What we've got here is... failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach. --CHL
Those 6 Youtube videos about the CIA in Tibet indeed give some good feedback about Big Bro's interest in Tibet from the 50s till the day Pres. Nixon wanted to play ping pong with Mao.
"La raison d’état" in all its glory.
Listen to the words of that CIA official at the end of video #6: "The Agency failed miserably". So face it people: Tibet is part of China now.
I just hope the Chinese Govt and the opposition are not going to kill more people in the name of ethnicity or unity or for whatever reason they come up with.
Thats very interesting, even if it is a bit disturbing.
I think the major point here is that I did not expect that not only the Chinese government is outrageous but also the Chinese about this. After all, Germany is not exactly a huge country or very near to China either.
So, to be honest I am surprised by this intensity of reaction among the Chinese people.
So am I but let's not make a big deal about it. Most of educated Mainland Chinese don't make a big fuss about it. About economics, the deal for the trains was, as far as I can see, because of the technological knowhow. One can say a lot of bad things about the Frenchies but their TGV technology is ace...
They might be. If the photos are the same as those I have seen, they were taken in other parts of China (e.g. Ngawa (a.k.a. Aba) County in Sichuan Province) at a later date after the Lhasa riot was quelled. I saw them first on “The Epoch Times”, one of the most anti-CCP newspapers that you can find in the world. It was run by members of the Falungong group, which was labeled as a cult and banned in China. However, the fact remains that no evidence supports the claim of Tibetan’s being shot to death on the March 14th Lhasa riot as of now.
I can't see anything that shows these are genuinely March 2008 Tibetans, or not.
Quote:
Is the secession inevitable? Is independence the only option?
No, and I clearly worded my reply badly. I was responding to a point you made about the way populations are mingled together, and the way that Tibetans live outside the TAR as well as within. My point was just that if secession were the best option then it would be necessary to draw a dividing line between the Tibetan state and China, just as it has been necessary to draw dividing lines in innumerable similar cases. In other words, the mingled-ness of the populations does not prevent a line being drawn, and secession being possible.
Quote:
I suspect that Tibetans were also divided on this issue. After all, millions of Tibetans live in China, and only a very small portion (<1%) participated in the latest protests.
I suspect that too. But since the Chinese government won't allow a debate, it's impossible to know for sure.
Quote:
Regardless, one thing for sure is that it is not practical at current time.
Purely because the Chinese government will not entertain any discussion of independence (including increased autonomy). Other than that, I can't think of anything that would make secession not practical (lack of support in Tibet might make it a non-issue, but that's another issue).
Quote:
I do think peaceful coexistence is possible among different ethnic groups.
I agree, and I think that peaceful coexistence would be a good outcome for Tibet. However there seems to be a problem in Tibet at the moment - between the Tibetans and the Hui, and between the Tibetans and the Han. I also read stories that the police in Tibet are not even-handed towards Tibetans, and that sometimes Tibetans are beaten arbitrarily. I wondered if you have any view on those claims.
Quote:
I am just curious but have you read the books I recommended? I have a feeling that you don’t really know the history and the present very well.
I have had a very quick look through The Snow Lion and the Dragon - that's all I have had time for. I would say I don't know much detail about Tibet past or present (but possibly more than you think I do )
Quote:
You can draw analogies, but in the end, each case will be different. The three major separation forces in China are: Tibetan Independence, East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM), and Taiwan Independence. I think if you want to seriously discuss on these issues, you need to start learning more on Chinese histories.
Sure, each is different, but each is comparable too.
East Turkestan I know very little about. I know more about Taiwanese history though, and we could discuss that in another thread if you've time and inclination.
__________________
No Fear No Hate No Pain No Broken Hearts
So am I but let's not make a big deal about it. Most of educated Mainland Chinese don't make a big fuss about it. About economics, the deal for the trains was, as far as I can see, because of the technological knowhow. One can say a lot of bad things about the Frenchies but their TGV technology is ace...
Sure, TGV rules. Its not just that its working, its a very mature technology. Like the VW Käfer. It runs and runs and runs and runs...
The ICE is not bad either however, I think they have learned from the disaster in Eschede. The ICE 3 might be even more efficient. When it comes to comfort the TGV loses however clearly. For the passangers the ICE is simply another category in style and comfort. The TGV is rather spartanic in comparision.
Having that said, I do not find it weird when a country decides for the TGV, many arguments are in favor of him.
__________________
"Every country gets the cuisine it deserves"
Joking. Anyway, I think this is a signal China want deliver. If he gets widely accepted in the world, will that do any better to China?
I learn those only after I have the access to internet and boost my English to practical level (years of painstaking process), then I don't have to care about internet blockade or censorship, because they were mostly applied to Chinese sources.
Linear Mode
