The Canadian House of Commons recently passed a unanimous bill supporting Tibet’s right to self-determination. The US Congress also approved a similar bill, known as the Resolve Tibet Act, awaiting President Joe Biden’s signature. This legislation from the US Congress also addresses China’s misinformation campaigns targeting Tibet. The issue of Tibet has long been sidelined in international affairs. When China first invaded and labelled it as ‘liberating Tibet’, global attention was diverted by the more pressing Korean War. Since then, China has gained power over the past sixty years and has used it to suppress criticism at home and abroad.
In light of these recent developments, it is crucial to revisit the debate on Tibet’s national sovereignty, a topic China has long evaded.
Tibet was historically never part of China
Throughout its extensive history, Tibet has indeed encountered various levels of foreign influence from entities like the Mongols, the Gorkhas of Nepal, the Manchu emperors of China, and the British in India. Historically, Tibet wielded influence over its neighbours, including China. Few nations today have escaped foreign influence or dominance entirely. The extent and duration of foreign interference in Tibet’s affairs have been relatively limited. Additionally, relations with the Mongols, Chinese, and Manchu rulers, where they held political significance, remained largely personal and never implied a fusion or integration of the Chinese and Tibetan states.
In ancient times, Tibetan culture notably displayed stronger cultural ties with India, the birthplace of Buddhism. Tibet stands at a unique crossroads of Buddhism and Shaivism, profoundly shaping its culture and politics in subsequent centuries. In contrast, China has been rooted in a Confucian civilisation where Buddhism, transmitted via Tibet much like in Mongolia, evolved differently from Tibetan Buddhism. Tibetan emperors did engage in marital ties with China, as they did with Nepal. However, Nepal never asserted a claim of ‘ownership’ over Tibet, unlike China.
Tibet as a Nation
Throughout much of its history, Tibet existed as an independent nation. Until 1950, Tibet functioned autonomously with defined territory and governance over its population, managing its own foreign relations. Historical parallels can be drawn, such as Poland’s removal from world maps by the German and Russian empires, yet regaining independence and territory post-World War II due to the strong national identity of the Polish people. Similarly, Tibet possesses a distinct identity among nations, notably differing culturally from mainland China. This distinction is evident in the Tibetan language, which markedly differs from Chinese, including its unique script.
Similarly, Tibetan food practices are distinctly unique. A notable difference between Tibetan and China’s governance lies in Tibet’s long-standing theocratic system contrasted with China’s bureaucratic control under the Mandarins. Scholars like Benedict Anderson, known for his concept of ‘Imagined Community,’ find relevance here, as do others such as Anthony Smith with ‘Ethno-Symbolism.’ These frameworks aptly illustrate Tibet’s identification with distinct symbols, values, myths, and memories, separate from those of China. In Tibet’s perception, China has been viewed as a hostile power, consistently posing threats whenever possible.
Why China Opposes the Middle Way and Refuses to Resolve the Tibet Dispute
Tibetans aspire to live peacefully and seek autonomy to uphold their beliefs, yet China denies them even this basic right. In 1950, China invaded Tibet and coerced the signing of the 17-Point Agreement, which promised internal autonomy and freedom for Tibetans. However, the 1959 Tibetan uprising revealed that China failed to honour its commitments under this agreement.
It’s crucial to understand that Communist China’s concept of nationhood diverges significantly from that of imperial China. It seeks to homogenise all ethnic groups within its borders under a singular Han-dominated national identity, requiring them to forsake their original cultures and identities. This parallels the former Soviet Union’s attempt to create the “New Soviet Man” detached from ethnic and cultural ties—a strategy that ultimately led to the dissolution of the USSR into 15 independent states.
While China has suppressed dissent and sought assimilation, it has not achieved complete success, akin to the USSR’s historical experience. China has attempted to address the Tibet issue by leveraging its global influence and economic power. The Western world was content with China as long as it did not pose a geopolitical challenge. Now, however, major countries worldwide are increasingly becoming mindful of China’s actions concerning minority nations.
The recent motions in Canada and the US Congress signify a crucial shift in international attitudes – a corrective step by the global community that had previously overlooked Tibet.
The writer is an author and columnist and has written several books. His X handle is @ArunAnandLive. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18’s views.
Comments
0 comment