Tibet: heating up

[NoWayJose]

I'm interested in Dirt's perspective. I know he'll get the usual jeers from the usual gang, but I'd still be interested to hear what he has to say.

[madkevin]

Trolling by proxy?

[Dirt]

I hate religiously political mysticism.

[Lum]

Somewhat related, the Economist posted a series of articles on the new Chinese colonialism:

http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10795714

(See right sidebar for other stories)

It looks like the Tibetan protests are related - not trying to gain independence or impose Lamaism or whatever, but rioting and burning Han Chinese-owned businesses. The Chinese have been colonizing Tibet for a while now, looks like it's not too popular.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7296837.stm

[NoWayJose]

I'm talking about prognoses, etc. Although they say this is the most violent it's been "in over two decades," I honest don't recall shootings and destruction like this. So I'm curious what people might think the outcome will be, and also the reaction by the western world.

madkevin, you're excused this time. :)

[Dirt]

Tibet and China have been fighting each other off and on for centuries. I don't expect that to change in our lifetimes.

[NoWayJose]

Somewhat related, the Economist posted a series of articles on the new Chinese colonialism:

http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10795714

(See right sidebar for other stories)

It looks like the Tibetan protests are related - not trying to gain independence or impose Lamaism or whatever, but rioting and burning Han Chinese-owned businesses. The Chinese have been colonizing Tibet for a while now, looks like it's not too popular.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7296837.stm
Yeah, I'm just curious about international pressure, especially in light of the upcoming Beijing Olympics. There's already been mounting pressure from the participating nations on the Chinese to make human rights reforms, it seems like some amount of this was timed by the Tibetans to force Beijing's hand. I can't imagine there would be another Tiananmen-style event now, but then I couldn't really imagine it then, either.

[Mr_PeaCH]

OK, how out of it am I...

I came in to this thread expecting a discussion on global warming.

[madkevin]

madkevin, you're excused this time. :)

Excused from what?

[Dirt]

The Commies pass out some kool-aid:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080314/ts_nm/china_tibet_dc

[Johan O]

BBC World just showed how their outgoing broadcasts from Hong Kong would get blackouted the second the mentioned Tibet. Amazingly unsubtle.

[BlueJackalope]

Yeah, I'm just curious about international pressure, especially in light of the upcoming Beijing Olympics. There's already been mounting pressure from the participating nations on the Chinese to make human rights reforms, it seems like some amount of this was timed by the Tibetans to force Beijing's hand. I can't imagine there would be another Tiananmen-style event now, but then I couldn't really imagine it then, either.

According to this take, the Tibetens took their que from China's promise to shape up.

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/03/14/maybe-china-shouldn-t-be-hosting-the-olympics.aspx

But what if Beijing had never implied it would clean up its act in order to host the Olympics? There would probably be no Tibetan uprising right now. There would be little international pressure for press freedom and civil liberties. And there would be less pressure to clean up the situation in Darfur. At what point will China regret having campaigned so hard for the 2008 Games?

EDIT: Silly Tibetians

[BostonBum0]

“We saw two dead at Ramoche temple, two in the garden, two at the Ganden printing house, and those Tibetans who went to take food to prisoners in Drapchi prison saw 26 Tibetans shot after they were brought in on a black vehicle,” one Tibetan witness said. “There could be about 80 dead, or more, but there is too much commotion here to give an exact number.”

boingboing (http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/14/tibet-more-deaths-in.html)

At a demonstration outside the United Nations in New York, Psurbu Tsering of the Tibetan Association of New York and New Jersey said its members received phone calls from Tibet claiming 70 people had been killed and 1,000 arrested. The reports could not be verified.
Ap Article (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h5Z6bJwtN_roGSIUQiQnfbf2NkhgD8VDEFLOB)

I think this could get ugly pretty fast...

Does anyone know how often stories are wrong from Tibet? Considering China likes to censor news, what is the likelihood that this story is dumbed down?

[Dirt]

Or propaganda'd up.

[Sarkus]

China may be up to something fairly big that will come out after the Olympics are over. They don't want to mess that event up, but after that the gloves may be off.

I'm not talking about them invading anyone or what not, but there have been rumblings in the military press that they might be about to announce a home built carrier program, for example. Plus, I was watching the NHK (Japanese network) english news program the other day and they had a report saying the Chinese may have informally proposed to the US that the two countries "share" the Pacific ocean, with the US in the eastern Pacific and China in the western pacific. I'd provide a link for this latter story, but I haven't been able to find any web version of it, even on NHK's website.

[Lum]

China has about 50 years of shipbuilding to catch up before they can challenge the US Navy in open water. They've been concentrating more on holding the Taiwan Straits since that's one of the most likely flashpoints.

[Jonathan Crane]

China has about 50 years of shipbuilding to catch up before they can challenge the US Navy in open water. They've been concentrating more on holding the Taiwan Straits since that's one of the most likely flashpoints.

Don't the Chinese have some sort of scary submarines that keep popping up unannounced at US Naval excercises? I would think that might count for something.

[Sarkus]

China doesn't need to catch up to the US in shipbuilding to fundamentally change the strategic situation. All they need is a decent sized modern navy, heavy on the subs, and a few carriers for force projection. Combine that with a very large modern air force and China can easily impose its will on the western Pacific and Indian ocean.

[Linoleum]

Much easier said that done, China is extremely vulnerable to naval interdiction.

Diesel subs are cast-iron bitches in their home waters, but you can't project with them.

China has no hope of preventing the US from maintaining air superiority for a long time.

[Dirt]

Don't the Chinese have some sort of scary submarines that keep popping up unannounced at US Naval excercises? I would think that might count for something.

Yeah. Making a carrier would be a national pride thing. Not a defense of China thing. The submarines are far more effective for defending their country. Power projection isn't something the Chinese necessarily want.

[Grifman]

China doesn't need to catch up to the US in shipbuilding to fundamentally change the strategic situation. All they need is a decent sized modern navy, heavy on the subs, and a few carriers for force projection. Combine that with a very large modern air force and China can easily impose its will on the western Pacific and Indian ocean.

Extreme Western Pacific, meaning within aircraft range of the Chinese coast, yes. Beyond that, not so much. And the Indian Ocean, please, how is China going to support forces that far away? You need more than carriers, you need an entire logistical chain, which the US could easily interdict. And cutting off Chinese oil imports at the Strait of Malacca would be child's play.

[Grifman]

Tibet and China have been fighting each other off and on for centuries. I don't expect that to change in our lifetimes.

The Chinese are better imperialists though :)

[Sarkus]

Yeah. Making a carrier would be a national pride thing. Not a defense of China thing. The submarines are far more effective for defending their country. Power projection isn't something the Chinese necessarily want.

I don't know. All kinds of signs point to Chinese interest in having carriers, and that means power projection capability. Some chinese officials have all but admitted that they plan to have them.

This may not be the forum to debate the issue, but there are factual reports that support a Chinese interest in carriers.

[Rimbo]

China may be up to something fairly big that will come out after the Olympics are over. They don't want to mess that event up, but after that the gloves may be off.

I'm not talking about them invading anyone or what not, but there have been rumblings in the military press that they might be about to announce a home built carrier program, for example. Plus, I was watching the NHK (Japanese network) english news program the other day and they had a report saying the Chinese may have informally proposed to the US that the two countries "share" the Pacific ocean, with the US in the eastern Pacific and China in the western pacific. I'd provide a link for this latter story, but I haven't been able to find any web version of it, even on NHK's website.

Sounds to me a lot like when Mexico City hosted in 1968. Dissidents want to use the Olympics as a chance to try and gain international attention; establishment is going to respond with a good old-fashioned, "Get that shit outta here, we have the biggest guns. Here, let us show you them."

[Aeon221]

How can anyone seriously think that China would ruin its economy by starting shit with the West? Or invading Taiwan? Or massacring people in Tibet? Hell, Taiwan is practically begging to rejoin China at this point (based on KMT successes) and much of the current mess in Tibet probably has more to do with the economic disenfranchisement of minorities -- and, to be honest, pretty much all of western China -- than anything else. State subsidies to improve their standard of living would gloss over the real issues without anyone getting shot.

And China building a blue water navy? Sure, fine, let em. In this day and age, it's just a big fat boondoggle anyway.

Sounds to me a lot like when Mexico City hosted in 1968. Dissidents want to use the Olympics as a chance to try and gain international attention; establishment is going to respond with a good old-fashioned, "Get that shit outta here, we have the biggest guns. Here, let us show you them."

MY GUNZ, LET ME SHOW YOU DEM!!!

[Rimbo]

we totally need a lolcat for that

[Sarkus]

How can anyone seriously think that China would ruin its economy by starting shit with the West? Or invading Taiwan? Or massacring people in Tibet?

I'm not saying that. China merely wants to be treated with a level of importance that reflects it's significance. So, it will flex its muscles a little bit by investing in the things that usually are viewed as being evidence of a major power.

[Aeon221]

I'm not saying that. China merely wants to be treated with a level of importance that reflects it's significance. So, it will flex its muscles a little bit by investing in the things that usually are viewed as being evidence of a major power.

In a more perfect world, they'd just buy a television channel and do nothing but show lolcats on it. You'd have to have shittons of money to do that.

[Dirt]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23644788/

I'm embarrassed to call myself Chinese.

[MikeSofaer]

How can anyone seriously think that China would ruin its economy by ... massacring people in Tibet?

Umm, aren't they doing exactly that?

[Lum]

Even if there was a Tienanmen-scale massacre of protesters in Tibet (which there probably hasn't been - reports from the scene indicate less a popular uprising and more a scene reminiscent of the Los Angeles riots: ethnically motivated economic destruction) it's extremely doubtful China's economy would suffer more than a blip. The West's economy is too dependent on China to enforce an embargo that would sting.

The only way China could be damaged is in its international prestige; which it does value, but it values internal stability far, far more.

[Dirt]

This is going to kill the Kuomingtang's chance at the Presidency. The DPP is sure to use this to fear monger the people into voting for them.

[Aeon221]

Umm, aren't they doing exactly that?

Ten people?

edit: mmm, apparently I've been reading out of date articles. The numbers are still low, but not _that_ low. Sadly.

[Dirt]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080318/india_nm/india325465

If only FDR hadn't died in office......

I don't believe that the Dalai Lama orchestrated this revolt. However, the peaceful thinking of the Dalai Lama is a recent advent. In older times, Lamas were encouraged to destroy everyone that were not Tibetan Buddhists (probably by the nobles of Tibet with encouragement from the head of the 4 major schools of Tibetan Buddhism). Whether Jewish, Christians, Muslims, Chinese, etc. I think it's telling that it was Tibetan monks that started these protests. It makes me wonder if they are really concerned for the culture of Tibet or if they are concerned for the power they will continue losing as the years pass on.

[Rimbo]

FREE TIBET!*















*(with purchase of equal or greater value)

[Dirt]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23686441/

At what point will it be okay for China to "crack down" on the Tibetans? How many Han Chinese will the Communists let die?

[Kalle]

What, it's not like there's plenty of Chinese people to go around. I'm sure it's viewed as a sacrifice they can make on behlaf of the people to keep to Olympic athletes happy.

[Dirt]

What, it's not like there's plenty of Chinese people to go around.

That's exactly what I'm afraid the Communist government will think.

I hear a lot of talk about violence against the Tibetans. But I hear little about the violence against the average Han Chinese citizen that the Tibetans are committing.

[Sarkus]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23686441/

At what point will it be okay for China to "crack down" on the Tibetans? How many Han Chinese will the Communists let die?

Why are you so concerned about the Han Chinese? You seem to accept the PRC version of everything on this issue. Plenty of legitimate sources believe the PRC has been massively colonizing Tibet with chinese immigrants since the takeover, which is an obvious attempt to marginalize the tibetan population.

[Dirt]

Why are you so concerned about the Han Chinese? You seem to accept the PRC version of everything on this issue. Plenty of legitimate sources believe the PRC has been massively colonizing Tibet with chinese immigrants since the takeover, which is an obvious attempt to marginalize the tibetan population.

No doubt. Immigration over the border into Russia from China has been a problem for a decade. Quite a few Russian border cities have almost as many Chinese people living in them as Russians.

But that's just immigration. The Chinese have been really successful in sinicizing the people around them. The Bai, the Tai, the Khitans, the Manchurians (though they largely sinicized themselves and quite a few other non-Han as well). The first Tang Emperor probably wasn't Chinese, but he forced the sinicization of his people once he became Emperor.

Heck, recent DNA evidence has proved conclusively that the Northern Han Chinese and the Southern Han Chinese are of different DNA stock. It's conclusive evidence of a long held belief that the Northerners overtook and sinicized the Southerners.

[Rimbo]

I wonder if part of the problem is that the PRC is trying to cover up what they've done. If nothing else, letting the news get out might be one way to discourage future protesters from trying to use the Olympics as a forum (see also: Mexico City Olympic games).

Also, you'll note that both barbed comments and bullets from the PRC are being fired at the Dalai Lama and monks. This is also about an atheist state working to reduce the power, influence and numbers of one of those fanatacism-fostering intolerance-promoting science-subverting religions. Something certainly must have been lost in translation from Nietzsche to Marx to Mao such that we're now at shooting Tibetan monks, but that's just how these things go, and it's naive to assume there'd be any other outcome.

[Dirt]

The Dalai Lama led the uprising against China in 1959, the Dalai Lama also continues to be the political leader of the exiled Tibetans who helped in making the uprising of 1959 happen. That's why the Dalai Lama is unwelcome and the recepient of China's vitriol. It's not because of his religion. If it was religion alone, then there would be no Panchen Lama in Tibet.

[Gav]

The Dalai Lama led the uprising against China in 1959, the Dalai Lama also continues to be the political leader of the exiled Tibetans who helped in making the uprising of 1959 happen. That's why the Dalai Lama is unwelcome and the recepient of China's vitriol. It's not because of his religion. If it was religion alone, then there would be no Panchen Lama in Tibet.
There is no Panchen Lama in Tibet. He doesn't live in Tibet, and Tibetans are not exactly enamored of him. (for more info, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/sep/08/china.worlddispatch.)

[Dirt]

It's interesting, but not surprising, that the 2 places that most resist China's control are also the 2 places that would otherwise have theocracies and have religions that are quite different than anything in China. Xinjiang is Muslim and while Tibetans are Buddhists, their Buddhism is deeply rooted in the original Tibetan Bon religion.

To put it frankly: China and Tibet have been fighting each other for almost 1500 years. The Uyghur and China have been fighting for even longer. At the moment, China is the winner.

[idrisz]

I still don't get what Tibetans are protesting about. Dalai Lama said they don't want independence from China, but only want autonomy for Tibetan. so do they want something like Reservation for American Indians??

Have China force the Tibetans to learn chinese or impose laws on their religion thus leading them to believe that their cultures are been eliminated.

[Dirt]

I still don't get what Tibetans are protesting about. Dalai Lama said they don't want independence from China, but only want autonomy for Tibetan. so do they want something like Reservation for American Indians??

The young Tibetans are rejecting the Dalai Lama's call for greater Tibetan autonomy under Chinese rule. They want independence.

Have China force the Tibetans to learn chinese or impose laws on their religion thus leading them to believe that their cultures are been eliminated.

Yes. There certainly is a drive towards the sinicization of Tibetans. Learning Mandarin is not forced on threat of death, but the Tibetan languange is being discouraged. So is Shanghainese and every other dialect in China. But it's not illegal to know and practice your native dialect. Apparently, there's a small revival of the Manchurian language by the North-Easterners of China.

Religion is fiercely regulated, but the Tibetans are allowed to practice privately.

[idrisz]

Yes. It's not done on threat of death, but the Tibetan languange is being discouraged. But so is Shanghainese and every other dialect in China. Religion is fiercely regulated, but the Tibetans are allowed to practice privately.

Yet we don't see people in shanghai asking for culture autonomy...

I feel it's a good thing that it's mandatory to learn mandarin in school, because all of those regional dialects are extremely confusing. Can you imagine walking around in LA, and no one can understand English.

Regarding religion been extremely regulated, I know some of friend's family still goes to temple in china every months.

[Dirt]

Yet we don't see people in shanghai asking for culture autonomy...

Well, the region we now call Shanghai has been a part of China (at various stages) for thousands of years. Tibet was (arguably) never fully under the control of China. The Yuan Dynasty conquerored them. The Ming Dynasty ignored them. The Qing Dynasty controlled them but gave them full autonomy.

I feel it's a good thing that it's mandatory to learn mandarin in school, because all of those regional dialects are extremely confusing. Can you imagine walking around in LA, and no one can understand English.

You can already walk around in L.A. in places where people have trouble understanding English. It's to their own advantage to learn English, but they shouldn't have to give up their native language.

Regarding religion been extremely regulated, I know some of friend's family still goes to temple in china every months.

Yeah, but going to temples with the head Lamas chosen by Han Chinese for the Tibetans would be like Catholics going to church to worship with a Pope chosen by Russians.

[idrisz]

Well, the region we now call Shanghai has been a part of China (at various stages) for thousands of years. Tibet was (arguably) never fully under the control of China. The Yuan Dynasty conquerored them. The Ming Dynasty ignored them. The Qing Dynasty controlled them but gave them full autonomy.

You can already walk around in L.A. in places where people have trouble understanding English. It's to their own advantage to learn English, but they shouldn't have to give up their native language.

Yeah, but going to temples with the head Lamas chosen by Han Chinese for the Tibetans would be like Catholics going to church to worship with a Pope chosen by Russians.

sorry was actually been sarcastic in the first 2 comments regarding shanghai and LA, I was gonna say something regarding spanish in LA but I feel it would be kind of racist(shaighan baozi, yum....).

If I remember correctly, Dalai Lama have been chosen by Qing dynasty for a long time now. so technically they have been praying to someone that was chosen by Chinese for a long time now.

[Dirt]

Yes. But the Qing Dynasty was not ruled by the Han Chinese who after over 2 and a half centuries of foreign occupation, rules China again. There are so many ways to look at it. China's history, it's dynastic cycles, it's culture and ethnic identity is so complicated, this isn't not going to be resolved in our lifetimes.

[idrisz]

Wasn't Tibet a slave society 60 years ago? so how did a slave owner like Dalai Lama end up with Nobel Peace Prize?

I guess tibetan wishes to be slaves again?

[Dirt]

There is no Panchen Lama in Tibet. He doesn't live in Tibet, and Tibetans are not exactly enamored of him. (for more info, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/sep/08/china.worlddispatch.)

This is the 10th Panchen Lama's daughter:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/bridging-the-gap/2005/11/11/1131578237462.html

The Tibetan people love her. It's pretty obvious that Hu Jingtao is courting her to publically proclaim the China chosen 11th Panchen Lama as the reincarnation of her father. I'm sure her Han Chinese mother will sometimes nudge her to accept the China chosen 11th Panchen Lama. However, she has publically demured on that assertation; in talking about her first meeting with the China chosen 11th Panchen Lama, she has said that she didn't feel anything yet. She is one savvy little girl.

I'm not one to indulge in conspiracy theories regarding the Communist Chinese. But I can't help to wonder if the Communist government forced the 10th Panchen Lama to have a child expressly for the purpose that I gave above. Especially considering the importance of the Panchen Lama in choosing a new Dalai Lama. To us now, in this time, it's controversial and maybe even wrong for the Han Chinese to choose the Dalai Lama. But a 100 years from now. 200 years. 500 years. Nobody will care how the person they know and love as their spiritual leader... well, they won't care how his predecessor was chosen or even who chose him. They will only feel their own love and respect for the person they see before them. And by then, the Han Chinese hand in it will be a an accepted part of tradition. Having been a conquered people so many times in the past, the Chinese have learned to be patient, to take the long view in all things.

[Johan O]

I was under the the impression that the Lamaist dogma stated that the present Dalai Lama would be the last incarnation, but judging from that article that's not the case.

Edit: I looked around a bit in books and online, the only thing, I've found is a reference to the Dalai Lama himself suggesting that perhaps it was time for the tradition to end.

[Dirt]

The Dalai Lama is as much a politician as he is a spiritual leader. I always take what he says with a grain of salt.

[Dirt]

http://discussions.pbs.org/viewtopic.pbs?t=68073

Wow. M.A.Jones is good.