On Mar 28, 10:34 am, Crazyyak <crazy...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> quoted, in part:
> But China also needs to earn the respect
> and esteem of the global community through the establishment of an
> open and harmonious society based on the principles of transparency,
> freedom, and the rule of law. For example, to this day victims of the
> Tiananmen Square tragedy that adversely affected the lives of so many
> Chinese citizens have received neither just redress nor any official
> response. Similarly, when thousands of ordinary Chinese in rural areas
> suffer injustice at the hands of exploitative and corrupt local
> officials, their legitimate complaints are either ignored or met with
> aggression. I express these concerns both as a fellow human being and
> as someone who is prepared to consider himself a member of the large
> family that is the People's Republic of China. In this respect, I
> appreciate and sup****t President Hu Jintao's policy of creating a
> "harmonious society", but this can only arise on the basis of mutual
> trust and an atmosphere of freedom, including freedom of speech and
> the rule of law. I strongly believe that if these values are embraced,
> many im****tant problems relating to minority nationalities can be
> resolved, such as the issue of Tibet, as well as Eastern Turkistan,
> and Inner Mongolia, where the native people now constitute only 20% of
> a total population of 24 million.
Ah, ha! The wily Dalai Lama reveals his true colors!
> It is unfortunate that despite my sincere efforts
> not to separate Tibet from China, the leaders of the PRC continue to
> accuse me of being a "separatist".
Asking the People's Republic of China to become a country where the
people have legal redress against government officials, and where the
Press is free is to ask for what the Chinese Communist Party has
absolutely no intention of granting.
When the hare asks the fox to live together in harmony, the fox can
honestly complain that the hare wants to run away from it and hide,
because the hare is expressing unwillingness to accept what the fox
considers its due from the continued proximity of the fox and the
hare... the fox having a dinner of the hare.
Tibet will enjoy a free press and the rule of law either with the
downfall of the regime in Beijing, brought about by force, or through
being as separate from China as India or Russia is separate from
China. Since these are facts which everyone knows perfectly well, for
the Chinese to claim that insistence on freedom for Tibet is
essentially treason to the Chinese nation, where the existing Chinese
regime is viewed as the legitimate ruler of that nation, is not
entirely disingenuous.
Could there not be a face-saving solution, where Tibet is autonomous,
but technically part of China, like Hong Kong? Too many people in
Tibet who remember the Cultural Revolution could tell their stories.
There is no reason to grant such a favor in this case, unlike Hong
Kong, where creating a mass exodus of refugees would be to pick a
fight with Britain.
What does China want with Tibet? Without both Tibet and Uighuristan
(Sinkiang province), China would be like Japan, a country that must
im****t almost all its metals and almost all its oil. The oil comes
from Sinkiang; the metals come from Tibet. Without Tibet, it would be
very much impaired in its ability to build up militarily, and its gain
of foreign exchange from ex****ts of manufactured goods would be much
reduced as well.
We are familiar with the recent quarrel of the Chinese government with
the movement known as Falun Gong. Also, the Roman Catholic Church does
not operate normally in China; instead, the Government runs a church
for Chinese Catholics. It fears independent organizations operating in
China, as it sees every group of individuals that is not run by the
government as a springboard for rebellion. And that is obviously
because it intends to make such exactions of the people as to incline
them to rebellion.
But keeping more than a thousand million people alive in China means
they will have to work hard, and they will not be as wealthy as people
in other places. Modernizing China to improve matters requires even
harder work. So, yes, it can be argued this is not all due to
gratuitous evil on the part of Communism. When the colonies in Africa
were given their independence under democratic governments, the
democracy did not last long. So it can be asked if it is not the case
that a country of poor people needs a firm hand.
The Chinese leaders feel that they are riding a tiger. To make a
concession to Tibet would encourage a concession to the Uighurs. And
what about the Han people themselves? Would they not expect better of
their government?
To them, the Dalai Lama asking them to allow openness and the rule of
law - for ordinary Chinese people, not foreign investors - is the same
as asking them to step down from the tiger so it can eat them up. They
will not do it.
So to Beijing, it makes no difference. If the Dalai Lama were instead
to ask President Bush to crush the PLA, bomb Chinese cities, and
occupy China like it does Iraq, the authorities in Beijing might have
the satisfaction of saying, "Look! We were right about him!" which is
harder for them to do at the moment, but the fact that he does not ask
for this means nothing to them. Because a life in freedom and dignity
for the Tibetan people is, to them, pretty much the same thing - a
threat to their continued power.
John Savard
|
