China needs a morality lesson

Ye Xiaowen, State Council's Secretary for Religious Affairs selecting the name

My article China needs a morality lesson appeared in The Edit Page of The Mail Today.

China is today a powerful State, probably more powerful than the United States, at least if one looks at the Huawei affair and the way the Chinese state-sponsored telecom giant manages to influence governments (the British Defence Secretary recently lost his job for not realizing this).
China is indeed powerful and can dictate to the world media its views on any subject. Take the case of the young Panchen Lama recognized by the Dalai Lama, who turned 30 year-old last week; he has spent the last 24 years under arrest …somewhere in China.

Where is the Panchen?
Not one of the media persons posted in the Chinese capital dared to ask the spokesperson of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) the whereabouts of the young reincarnation during the daily briefings.
The saga of the young lama’s disappearance (or more correctly kidnapping) by the Chinese State would indeed make a great Hollywood blockbuster.
In 1989, a promising young Communist cadre called Hu Jiatao was sent to Lhasa as Party Chief. It was to be the crucial challenge for Hu; he knew that he had to show results to repay the confidence placed in him by the senior leaders in Beijing.
Hu reached Lhasa on January 12, 1989. On January 23, he went to the Tashilhunpo monastery in Shigatse; he was accompanied by the 50-year old 10th Panchen Lama, the second highest ranking Tibetan Lama after the Dalai Lama. The occasion was the consecration of a stupa containing the mortal remains of some of the previous Panchen Lamas. To everyone's surprise, during the function, the Panchen Lama denounced the Communist Party's role in Tibet: “although there had been developments in Tibet since its liberation, this development had cost more dearly than its achievements.” Four days later, he passed away in mysterious circumstances.
When a demonstration erupted on March 5 in the Tibetan capital, the People's Armed Police quickly took control of the situation; eyewitnesses later said that hundreds of Tibetans were massacred around the Central Cathedral in Lhasa on that day leading to the clampdown of martial law three days later. The tragic events in Lhasa seem to have been a rehearsal for another event: the student rebellion on Tiananmen Square three months later. But the young official would be rewarded for his actions; a few years later, he would become President of China and Secretary General of the Communist Party.
In May 1995, the ‘return’ of the Panchen Lama was announced on the world’s telescripters; the Dalai Lama had formally recognized Gedhun Choeki Nyima, a six-year old boy from Lhari district in Nagchu prefecture of Tibet as the 11th Panchen Lama. Soon, it transpired that the Tibetan leader had been in touch with the Chinese-appointed head of the Search Committee, Chatrel Rinpoche, who had twice consulted the Lhamoi Lhatso, the Lake of Vision, in which signs often indicate the way to discover a departed soul.
When Jiang Zemin and his colleagues of the Politburo, learnt that the Dalai Lama had announced the return of the Panchen Lama without consulting them, they were furious.
The Chinese President and his Premier Li Peng personally took charge of the ‘reincarnation’ issue. Gedhun Choeki and Chatrel Rinpoche were arrested.

China's Monk
In the meantime, the Chinese leadership decided that no time should be lost to announce Beijing’s own candidate. The name of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima was deleted from the list of possible candidates, while a few weeks earlier he was for Beijing one of the very strong contenders for becoming the Eleventh Panchen Lama.
On December 8 1995, a new candidate Gyaltsen Norbu, was imposed by the Party and ‘officially’ enthroned at the Tashilhunpo monastery. The ceremony had been kept secret by the Chinese until the last moment as they feared the backlash of an angry Tibetan population at this unilateral imposition of their candidate, ‘selected’ after a mock ‘Golden Urn’ ceremony organised in the Jokhang Cathedral in Lhasa on November 29 by the governor of the Tibetan Autonomous Region, also Gyaltsen Norbu (some Tibetans found the courage to joke, “Gyaltsen Norbu chose Gyaltsen Norbu”). The parents of the boy were of course good Communist Party card holders.
The question remains, why twenty-four years later, has nobody to dar asking the Chinese government “But where is the Panchen Lama Gedhun Choeki Nyima?”
Like questions on Xinjiang, it is simply not allowed.
Is it the sign of a ‘great’ State or a nervous State?


A Nervous State
It is true that the BBC publicized the issue by commissioning forensic artist Tim Widden to flesh out the look that the Panchen Lama would have today. Widden used the only known photograph of young lama; he assumed an average height and weight …and a guessed upon hairstyle.
Why didn’t someone ask the MFA spokesman if the simulation looked like the real Panchen Lama (and if he is still alive)?
The answer is simply because China, as a great power, does not have to answer queries.
But is it the hallmark of a human State …in the new era often mentioned by President Xi?
If China wants to become a respected power, it is not enough to have a powerful Navy or the latest gadgets such hypersonic planes, plasma guns or AI Apps, which can control each and every move of its citizens, China needs to become a ‘moral’ State too; it means, it should stop supporting well-known terrorists, as it did for years for Jaish-e-Mohammad’s Masood Azhar; stop ‘reeducating’ its own minorities; stop trying to enlarge its territory by grabbing lands (or seas) around and stop spying on industrial competitors or political opponents. Goondagiri does not make a power truly great.
In the case of the Panchen Lama, to imprison a young boy just because the Dalai Lama had announced his recognition before Beijing could do so, is deplorable and unacceptable.

The Return of the Princess?

The ‘Princess’, alias Rigzin Wangmo, the 10th Panchen Lama’s daughter has returned to Tibet.
Is it a move from the Communist Party to ‘promote’ the memory of her father?
In June 2013, I mentioned her earlier visit to Lhasa (see below).
Five years later, as she arrived at the Jokhang Cathedral, she encountered a huge crowd again; probably much larger than the previous time.
Rigzin Wangmo, accompanied by her mother, received a warm welcome from thousands of Tibetans assembled to have a 'darshan' of the Lama's daughter.
The Tibet Post International (TPI) quoting some sources inside Tibet, wrote: "the 10th Panchen Lama Rinpoche's wife and daughter on June 20, 2013 secretly visited the Jokhang temple in Lhasa, the heart of Tibet, a crowd of thousands of Tibetan people immediately gathered to give them a warm welcome and support."
Not so secretly, if thousands got to know about her visit.
A source in Switzerland told TPI: "Huge gathering of crows paid great attention to their pilgrim(age) to the two holy sites - Jokhang Temple and Ramoche Temple in the capital. Tens of thousands turned out en masse to pay a warm welcome and respects to Rigzin Wangmo, the daughter of His Holiness the 10th Panchen Lama."
Many were disappointed as they could not see the ‘Princess’, due to tight security arrangements hurriedly put in place by the Chinese authorities.
TPI said: “The fear of huge public gathering, a large number of military personals immediately deployed in front of Jokhang Temple and near Ramoche Temple."
Wangmo also visited the Tashilhunpo, her father’s monastery in Shigatse.
There, she was seen with her son, paying homage to the photo of the 10th Panchen Lama and meeting lamas. What is not known is: did her visit have the blessings from Beijing?
Probably.
In which case, it means that the present regime is keen to promote the 10th Panchen Lama, who has often been critical of the Communist policies. Of course a media blank will be put on the Lama's 'patriotic' writings and speeches.
Seen the photos of the 'Princess' in Lhasa, one can imagine what would happen if the Dalai Lama or Samdhong Rinpoche were allowed to visit the Jokhang Cathedral.
But Beijing is too afraid of this; it will never be permitted.

In the Jokhang

In Shigaste

 

 

Extracts of my post on June 30, 2013

More interesting in my opinion, is the visit to Lhasa, a week earlier, of Rigzin Wangmo, the only daughter of the previous (the 10th) Panchen Lama.
According to The South China Morning Post, Wangmo, “travelled to Lhasa on her first visit for several years. Thousands of Tibetans greeted her outside Jokhang Palace before being dispersed by police.”
The Communist Party's United Front Work Department had stopped her from entering the region for many years.
In 2006, Rinzin Wangmo, sometimes called Renji, ‘Princess’ gave a long interview to The Southern People Weekly (Nanfang Renwu Zhoukan).
Thought the Propaganda Department of the Chinese Communist Party immediately blacklisted media coverage of Rinzin Wangmo to “avoid disturbing religious figures”, we have an English translation of the interview.
At that time, Wangmo gave several unknown details on her life-story to the Chinese publication: “I came into the world in June 1983. I’m sure a lot of people were surprised at my dad’s marriage and wondered how the Panchen Lama could marry and have a baby. Many people raised in mainland China aren’t familiar with the conventions of Tibetan Buddhism, which belongs to the Mahayana branch. …Having said that, my dad was the first Panchen Lama to marry. Six hundred years passed from the First Panchen Lama to my dad, so for me to be the daughter of the Tenth Panchen Lama makes me feel a deep relationship with the Buddha.”

The Panchen Lama, his wife and 'Renji'

Her mother Li Jie, was the granddaughter of a Kuomintang general, Dong Qiwu.
‘Renji’ recounted the origin of the ‘70,000 characters petition’, a long missive that the Panchen Lama wrote to Zhou Enlai and the State Council; she said: “This ‘Letter of 70,000 Words’ bluntly enumerated seven key points, which attracted serious notice from top officials in the central government. Although Premiere Zhou Enlai disagreed with some of the views in the letter, he agreed that my dad had raised some valid issues. But a little more than a year later, this ‘Letter of 70,000 Words’ was labeled as reactionary.”
The Panchen Lama was to spend more than 10 years in detention, in most difficult condictions, often been beaten and humiliated by the Red Guards: “The 10 years in prison wore my dad down physically and psychologically, and after his release he craved the comforts of a secular family life.”
She said that at the age of 44, the 10th Panchen Lama was blessed with a daughter; it was her, Rinzin Wangmo.
Now comes an even more interesting part of the interview: “One hundred days after I was born, the party elders Deng Yingchao [wife of Zhou Enlai] and Xi Zhongxun came to my home. Deng gave me my childhood nickname, ‘Tuantuan’ or ‘Circle.’ She picked me up and said, ‘This baby’s face is so round, you should just call her Circle!’The deeper meaning was a wish for an unbroken circle of solidarity and harmony between the Han and Tibetan peoples. In Chinese, the word ‘circle’ carries the meaning of solidarity.”
Xi Zhongxun is President Xi Jinping’s father. One can imagine the bond between the two families.
Wangmo then recalled the tragic (and very mysterious) death of the Panchen Lama in Shigatse: “In the past, we had always just accompanied my dad to the plane when seeing him off. But that time, my dad couldn’t bear to part from us, and had people call me into the plane’s cabin time and time again. He kept telling me things, like that I should study hard so I could assist in his work in the future, and that I must obey my mom. The Living Buddhas [Rinpoche] who were with my dad at the time later recalled that he was very emotional in his regret at leaving us, and that he asked the Living Buddhas to take care of his family as they had taken care of him.”
On January 28, 1989, the Panchen Lama suddenly passed away after having dared to criticize the Party.
Rinzin Wangmo later went to the United States to study. Though the Universities of Virginia and Columbia accepted her as a graduate student, she decided to come back to China, where the Communist Youth League admitted to a Ph.D. program at Tsinghua University.
What is fascinating and timely is the description of her return to Lhasa some ten years ago. She remembered: “The year I turned 18, the government arranged for me to return to Tibet. This was the first time I went back to my native land without my mom. Although communications and transportation are not too advanced, and living conditions are quite basic, news that the daughter of the Panchen Lama had arrived quickly circulated, and every day thousands of people, young and old, sometimes entire villages, came to see me.”
She continued: “All they wanted was to receive my blessing and to present me with a pure white khatag. As I gave them khatags in return, one after another, my arms became so sore that I could barely lift them.
“At the end of my 45-day visit, tens of thousands of Tibetan people gathered in the square of the Jokhang Temple to see me off. With tears in their eyes, they said, ‘Please come back often. We’ll miss you.’ Even as my car drove off, people continued to stand there, waving at me. At that moment, I felt that the responsibility I had taken on was heavier than the soreness in my arms.”
She concluded: “I know the spirit of my dad is blessing me, and that his eyes are watching me...”
The same thing seems to have happened again last week.
Isn’t interesting? Was the hand of some of the official who blessed her when she was born, behind the event?
Everything is possible when the climate start changing.
But it is difficult to know in which direction the wind will blow next political season.
Will it be the same cold Winter Wind or a more refreshing Spring Breeze?
It will probably be decided in Beijing.

Patriotism with Tibetan Characteristics?

Meeting Sun in 2015

Reuters reported that Gyaltsen Norbu, the Chinese 11th Panchen Lama met Madam Sun Chunlan, head of the United Front Work Department (UFWD) and member of the Politburo of the Communist Party of China. Through the UFWD, the Communist Party oversees all religious activities in China.
Beijing’s Panchen Lama would have promised Sun that he will “work hard to maintain the country's and ethnic unity.”
The question is why does he need to reiterate this time and again?
Reuters says: “A youth named by China as the second-highest figure in Tibetan Buddhism, but reviled as a fake by many Tibetans, has pledged to uphold the ‘glorious tradition’ of patriotism.”
Quoting Norbu, Xinhua affirms that the Lama will "resolutely endorse comrade Xi Jinping as the core of the Communist Party, endorse socialism with Chinese characteristics and continue the glorious tradition of Panchen Lama's in history of loving the country and loving religion."
The official report asserted that Gyaltsen Norbu “will not fail to live up to the expectations of the party and contribute to promoting Tibetan Buddhism and socialism.”
Sun would have told him that she hoped he ‘deeply understands’ that the Communist Party is the only representative for the basic interests of the Tibetan people, and that he should always stand with the party."
He probably does not ‘deeply understand’ this; that is why he has to be reminded. Already in February 2015, I mentioned on this blog a meeting between Madam Sun and the Chinese Panchen Lama.
A few months later, Xi Jinping himself ‘gave an audience’ (summoned) Gyaltsen Norbu to Zhongnanhai in Beijing.
The meeting was ‘very appropriate’ reported Xinhua; it showed that the Party “has consistently given a high level of attention to Tibet.” The news agency added that it also indicated “the great importance that the Central Committee attaches to the religious work …Xi Jinping has set an example for the rest of the Party members by taking the lead in uniting the religious figures.”
Three other members of the Politburo attended the ‘audience’: Yu Zhengsheng of the Standing Committee, Sun Chunlan, the UFW head and Li Zhanshu, director of the General Office of the Party; also present was Jampa Phuntsok (the senior-most Tibetan in the Party).
I then wrote: “Why such a rare lineup?” and I answered: “apparently Gyaltsen Norbu needed to be briefed.”
The recent ‘audience’ with Sun probably means that Gyaltsen Norbu still needed to be reminded about patriotism.
Remember the Tenth Panchen Lama who turned to be one of the greatest Tibetan patriots in Modern Tibetan history.
As a young boy, like Gyaltsen Norbu, after being selected by the Communist Party, on October 1, 1949, the day the People’s Republic of China was founded, he sent a ‘patriotic’ telegram to Mao.
He was then 10 years.
Here is the telegram from the 10th Panchen Lama "to Chairman Mao [Zedong] of Central People's Government and Commander-in-Chief Chu [Zhu De] of Chinese People's Liberation Army":
The boy wrote:

With superior wisdom and courage Your Excellencies have completed the grand salvation of the country and the people. The success of your army has brought joy to the whole country. For generations in the past I have received kindness and favour from the country. During the past twenty years [note: he is 10 years old when he writes this] and more I have ceaselessly struggled for the territorial and sovereign integrity of Tibet. It is to be deeply regretted that I have had no success. I am now lingering in Chinghai [Qinghai] and waiting for an order to return to Tibet. Fortunately under the leadership of Your Excellencies, the North West has now been liberated and the Central People's Government has been established. All those who are conscientious applaud with one accord. From now on, the realization of the democratic happiness of the people and revival of the country are only questions of time and it will not be long before Tibet is liberated. I sincerely present to Your Excellencies on behalf of all the people in Tibet our highest respects and offer our heartfelt support.
Signed: Panchen “

Mao and Zhu De replied on November 23, 1949; they assured the child that Communist China will soon ‘liberate’ Tibet:

We are very glad to acknowledge the receipt of your telegram of October 1. The people of Tibet are patriotic and opposed to foreign aggression. They are dissatisfied with the policies of the reactionary government of the Kuomintang and wish to become a member of the big family of a united, strong and new China where all races co-operate on the basis of equality. The Central People's Government and the Chinese People's Liberation Army will undoubtedly satisfy this desire of the Tibetan people. It is hoped that you and all patriots in Tibet will unitedly exert all your efforts in the struggle for the liberation of Tibet and unity between the Chinese and Tibetan peoples.

On January 31, 1950, the boy Panchen Lama sent another telegram to Mao Zedong and Zhu De. He expressed his support to Central People's Government and hoped that China would ‘liberate’ Tibet at the earliest.
He mentioned that the ‘Goodwill Mission’ sent by the Lhasa government to inform India and the West about the situation in Tibet.
The young lama spoke of the “activities [carried out by the Mission] which visited countries such as America, Britain, India etc and in collaboration with the imperialists, were attempting to oppose the People's Government, to conspire of separating Tibet from motherland and selling Tibet.”
In his telegram, he emphasized:

Tibet is China's territory, it is acknowledged by the entire world, all Tibetan people consider themselves as one of the nationality of China. Today such actions of Lhasa authorities actually are destroying national territorial sovereignty and integrity, which is against the will of the Tibetan people. We on behalf of Tibetan people sincerely and cordially request to send [your] righteous army as fast as possible, liberate Tibet, clear up reactionary elements, drive out the imperialistic influence from the Tibet, consolidate national defence in Southwest and liberate the people of Tibet.

He was asking China to invade Tibet; it is at least what Xinhua says.
Unfortunately for Beijing in later years, the 10th Panchen Lama turned out to be a great ‘patriot’ and one of the staunch defenders of the Tibetan culture and religion. He died in mysterious circumstances in January 1989 after criticizing the Chinese occupation of his country.
Is Beijing nervous that their 11th Panchen Lama could also become a new 10th Panchen Lama, a great Tibetan patriot?

Don’t give India a chance to amuse themselves by our failure

Panchen Lama, Dalai Lama, Chen Yi, Zhou Enlai, Nehru, Indira Gandhi in 1956

The Tibetan factor impeded longer military operations against India in the fall of 1962. With discontent brewing on the Roof of the World, the supply lines to the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), had been greatly weakened.
This is an important to understand the ‘short’ Sino-Indian border war.
Tibet's instabilty appears clearly in the 70,000-character petition sent by the Panchen Lama to Zhou Enlai in May 1962.The Tibetan Lama who had been made Chairman of the Preparatory Committee for the Tibet Autonomous Region when the Dalai Lama left for India in 1959, dared (‘with anger’) to criticize the policies of the Party in Tibet.
The Chinese Premier requested Xi Zhongxun, Vice-Premier and father of Xi Jinping, Li Weihan, the minister of the United Front Work Department dealing with ‘Minorities’, General Zhang Jingwu, the Representative of the Central Committee in Tibet and General Zhang Guohua, the Secretary of the CPC Tibet Committee and main commander during the 1962 war, to read and study the Panchen Lama's petition.
Interestingly, when the Panchen Lama died in 1989, Xi Zhongxun wrote in The People’s Daily that the Tibet experts found “most of the comments and suggestions [of the Panchen Lama were] good; they could be implemented, but some had gone too far.”
Indeed, he had gone 'too far' for the Communist leadership; Mao called it a 'Poisonous Arrow". 
The Panchen Lama listed several problems such the ‘suppression of the Rebellion’ in 1959.
Each time, after agreeing with the official line, he criticized it:

The rebellion in Tibet was counter-revolutionary in nature, being against the Party, the motherland, the people, democracy and socialism. Its crimes were very grave. Thus, it was entirely correct, essential, necessary and appropriate for the Party to adopt the policy of suppressing the rebellion. However, when these points were implemented…

And then he mentioned the grievances of the Tibetan population.
Then he took on the ‘Democratic Reform’, the ‘Production in Agriculture and Animal Herding’, ‘Livelihood of the People’, the United Front policy for the ‘nationalities’, ‘Democratic Centralism’, the Dictatorship of the Party and finally the most important for him, the freedom of religion. Each time, he used the same pattern.
The Panchen Lama paid a heavy price for having dared to write what everyone knew. He eventually spent the years from 1964 to 1978 in solitary confinement and rehabilitation camps.
Very few analysts have pointed out that a longer war would have been very difficult to sustain in the atmosphere of 'rebellion' prevalent on the Roof of the World at that time. Though openly siding with the 'reformists' camp led by Lui Shaoqi and Deng Xiaoping, the Panchen Lama was also warning the Communist leadership of the resentment of the so-called nationalities.
During his speech at Beidaihe in August 1962, Mao, who for months had been in the wilderness, staged a comeback using the case of the Panchen Lama.
Dr Li Zhisui, Mao’s physician, recounts:

Then [Mao] turned his opprobrium against the Panchen Lama of Tibet, denouncing him as ‘an enemy of our class’. [After the 1959] crackdown, the Panchen Lama, ordinarily subservient to Beijing, was now arguing that Beijing's so-called ‘democratic reforms’ had moved too far to the left. He hoped that the ultra-leftist trend in Tibet could be corrected.

Some new historical documents regarding the 70,000 characters letter have now been translated in English, by two independent researchers, Jianglin Li and Matthew Akester.
The transcripts make fascinating reading.
In the Summary of a Meeting between Comrade Xi Zhongxun, Comrade Li Weihan and Panchen held on June 21, 1962 in The Great Hall of the People in Beijing, Nehru and India are several times cited.

I am posting here some extracts of the longish discussions.
The entire transcript is available on the bog of Jianglin Li and Matthew Akester.

Xi [Zhongxun, Xi Jinping’s father] intervenes: “I had a meeting with the Master [the Panchen Lama] once, and the Master expressed his support for the [Tibet] Work Committee’s leadership [the so-called Communist reforms]. This is very good. This can be seen in the report too. It is possible that you have a few opinions about each other, this is quite natural. We held several meetings here just for you to vent your anger and figure out ways to solve problems. This is a beginning. You should do the same after returning [to Tibet]. If you are angry, let it out. If you have disagreement, speak out. Problems should be solved through consultation and discussion.”
In 1964, the Panchen Lama’s ‘anger’ will take him for 14 years to jail.
Later, the issue of the Dalai Lama’s flight and India came again in the discussion. Xi explains:

Comrades in Tibet should be clear of the fact that through a big struggle, the reactionary Dalai clique had split off. Through suppressing rebellion and implementing reform, we have laid an initial foundation for our work in Tibet, which is the foundation for development and prosperity within the big family of motherland.

It has to be noted that according to Chinese figures 87,000 died in the first week of the ‘suppression’. For Communist China, it was the ‘base’ of the ‘Liberation’.
Xi admits:

There might be tens and thousands of shortcomings and mistakes, however, as long as we have this foundation, all shortcomings and mistakes can be corrected. Our work during the past few years should be cherished. Achievements cannot be denied, our power should be truly strengthened. Dalai is watching us in India right now. He is dreaming that all we have implemented in Tibet will fall apart, and Banchan [Panchen] will meet his downfall. If we don't want his dreams to come true, we must do our work diligently and prudently. First of all, we must strengthen our unity, and unite every person that can be united. If this work is not done well, Dalai will laugh at us, and Nehru will laugh at us too. Don’t give them a chance to amuse themselves by our failure.

This shows that Xi Jinping’s father was not really a ‘moderate’ and those who believe the Xi Jinping will follow his footsteps and ‘open up’ China were wrong.
Xi again cites Nehru:

This requires that we do our work better under the leadership of the [Tibet] Work Committee [implementing the ‘reforms’], and construct our motherland better. Nehru is laughing now, but don’t let him have the last laugh. Nehru launched an anti-communist satellite, we will launch a revolutionary satellite. We will compete with him on this point.

It is interesting to see that even so-called moderate leaders like Xi, put squarely the blame on Nehru and his government for the Dalai Lama’s flight to India. It will result in the ‘punishment’ three years later, on the slopes of the Thagla ridge and in Ladakh.

At another point came up during the three-day discussions, Xi Zhongxun mentions other implications of the Panchen Lama’s letter:

…Specific problems still need to be solved through consultation and discussion. In Tibet, the workload is very heavy, internal matters are quite difficult, foreign affairs are arduous too. Tibet is the front line of national defence, and there is struggle against enemies as well. Rebels are meddling in Nepal, they took over a county government there and sent spies and rebels to make trouble in Nepal,” and Xi adds: “This is the joint work of Nehru and Dalai. If they messed up Nepal, how can they not want to mess up Tibet? What’s their purpose? They just want to overthrow the current leadership in Tibet and restore the old order. This is not only a current struggle, it is also a long term and arduous one. We must unite ourselves closely; otherwise we won’t be able to handle this situation. Things are difficult in Tibet, but solutions and hope do exist, and our future is bright.

After the three days meeting in June, the same officials had an ‘audience’ with the Premier, Zhou Enlai, who gave a long, tortuous ideological speech. Zhou mentions the historical background:

First was Director Banchan’s [Panchen] report, which was submitted on May 18 [1962]. After that, the Tibetan and Chinese texts were double checked, and submitted again in June.  Now by July 19, four documents had been formulated, two months in between. This is a big job, and is well done. All of you at present have been kept in the mainland for ten months, the past two months being most important. Your task has been well accomplished. Based on the written report, four documents, Director Banchan’s two speeches and opinions from other comrades, [the four documents have been prepared].

Let us not forget that the Party was on the boil, with Mao preparing his come-back a few weeks later.
The Premier says:

We now have these four documents, primarily because Director Banchan submitted his report, and raised questions. The attitude of raising questions is in line with the frank, sincere and outspoken attitude shared by our nation’s senior cadres. Regardless of the content, [the report] recorded all or most of what he saw and what was in his mind. It is a good thing, and applaudable as [General Zhang] Jingwu said just now. In the past we didn’t have such a relationship with Dalai. He didn’t speak out when he had objections, playing a double game, saying one thing to us and another to Nehru; one thing in front of us and another thing to the conspirators behind our back, so we couldn’t be sure what he was up to. We communists were frank with him, but he thought the way.

Zhou Enlai refers to the visit of the Dalai Lama to India in 1956-57 and the long talks with the Indian Prime Minister (Incidentally, Nehru strongly advocated that the Dalai Lama should go back to Tibet and ‘work’ with the Chinese).
Zhou says that in March 1959, China had no clue that the Tibetans would revolt:

we had no clue when he [the Dalai Lama] started the rebellion. Even Apei [Ngabo Ngawang Jigme] was in the dark. We dispatched troops there only after the rebellion broke out. Why did Dalai play a double game? He took us as enemies instead of comrades and friends, and took Nehru as his own circle, the conspirators who plotted rebellion as his own circle, thus it was inevitable for him to play a double game. We were sincere and honest when we told him the Party’s attitude; for example, I talked with him twice in New Delhi and told him the Party’s attitude, but he wouldn’t listen, he listened to Nehru instead. So this made it hard for us to get along. This means that rebellion in Tibet was bound to happen, since he took Nehru as friend and took us as enemy. Now, the attitude adopted by Master Banchan is basically different from that of Dalai.

Zhow Enlai then explains:

When problems arise, the Party will make sure to solve them; you must know this particular characteristic of the Party by now. Do not evade problems and solve problems when they arise, this is the Party’s tradition over the past forty years. When problems are raised, they must be solved; however, this does not mean that all the problems raised are correct. Some are correct, some are not. As both situations exist, careful investigation is required. Correct ones should be accepted, as for the incorrect ones, either raise one’s opinions in a positive way, or criticize from an opposing angle.

The Panchen Lama assessment must have been very incorrect as he will have to spend from 1964 to 1978 in jail.
The next few weeks saw the ‘return’ of Mao on the stage, the purge of Xi Zhongxun and a war against India to make ‘Nehru’ pay for giving asylum to the Dalai Lama.
I have dealt with this in a separate paper.

When Tibetans fought for Rangzen

The Panchen Lama with Chinese Fan Ming and another Communist official

I am posting today a personal letter from Apa B. Pant, the Political Officer in Sikkim addressed to Subimal Dutt, India’s Foreign Secretary.
The letter is dated February 17, 1956.
It is interesting in the context of the present campaign to elect the next Political Leader of the Tibetans.
The S.I.B. report mentioned by Pant is unfortunately not available.
It is interesting to note that in the history of modern Tibet, the dissent or even the revolt, has often come from the masses, not from the aristocracy or the clergy.
The same thing will happen 3 years later in Lhasa with the uprising of the 'masses'.
The 'masses' had however supporters among the latter classes as Pant's letter shows. Alo Chonze was then the main leader of the Mimang.
"The absorption of Tibet by China would be a difficult process", says Pant in 1956. It was quite prophetic.
Pant also affirms: "The more they try to put up the Panchen Lama, as an equal of the Dalai Lama, the more the general mass of Tibetans would resist them", the present leadership in China should read this at a time the Party tries to impose their own Panchen Lama on the masses.

Here is Apa Pant's letter

I had asked the S.I.B. [Subsidiary Intelligence Bureau] to prepare a note about the Mimang Tsongdu [Peoples’ Association] from the information they have collected over the past four years. I send you herewith a copy of the report sent to me by Shri Bose, Asst. Director S.I.B. Kalimpong.

2. It is interesting to note that most of the Tibetan officials in the govt. of Tibet have been either inactive or too afraid of the Chinese to take any positives [steps] and amongst them there have been some like Ngapo [Ngabo Ngawang Jigme] Shape who sincerely in the beginning felt that the Chinese would be in a position to help the Tibetans in their progress. His collaboration with the Chinese however has not at all satisfied the general mass of Tibetans. Other Tibetan officials including such people as Tsarong, Surkhang, have sided with the Chinese in order to make their own position secure in the govt.

3. The Mimang movement has thus grown from the bottom. It is an expression of the discontent that now pervades many classes of people inside Tibet. I have been reliably told that the committee of seven have taken oaths in front of some of the sacred chapels in Lhasa to carry through the resistance movement. The committee of fifteen of which the majority of members are not very important has also sworn an oath of secrecy and allegiance to the Mimang.

4. The most important people who are perhaps directing the actions of the Mimang are Lukhangwa the ex-prime minister, Lobsang Tashi and Trijang rimpoche. Trijang rimpoche is very close to the D.L. and I personally have no doubt that he himself is well aware of both these parties the Mimang and the Thamang.

5. What this S.I.B. report says about the actions of some of the nobility from Tibet regarding their attempts to contact foreign powers is very true. Most of them however not understood that outside help for the furtherance of their cause would not be available. There are however, some people like PHU RAGPA PANDATSANG, who still persists in contacting foreign powers. I have given my views about him in a letter which I have written to [T.N.] Kaul [Joint Secretary in the MEA].

6. The absorption of Tibet by China would be a difficult process. Tibetans certainly feel that the Chinese are imposing a form of colonialism on them. They therefore look towards those nations who are professedly anti colonial and take up the cause of the down trodden.

7. The Chinese on their side I am quite sure would try to bring about their dynamic reformist and revolutionary zeal in order to change the pattern of life in Tibet. I think the Chinese will stand or fail not only by their good intentions but by their actions untarnished either by persecution, violence or totalitarian methods. If the Chinese in order to reform Tibet establish a kind of a dictatorship I fear the Tibetans would certainly resist them.

8. Though I am myself not yet convinced that the organization of the Thamang or Mimang is perfect it will certainly come about and the Chinese would find it very difficult to carry on in that country. Nearly six years have elapsed since the arrival of Chinese in Tibet and yet it has not been possible for them to have any substantial majority of the mass of the population on their side on the other hand many who hoped China would help have been disillusioned and some have even joined the Mimang.

9. The action of the Chinese to bolster up the PANCHEN LAMA has also affected of the general mass of Tibetans towards them. The more they try to put up the PANCHEN LAMA, as an equal of the Dalai Lama, the more the general mass of Tibetans would resist them.

I feel that we should keep good watch on these events that are taking place across our border. The Indo-Mongoloid living in Bhutan, Sikkim and Nepal and our other border areas are very deeply affected emotionally and otherwise by all that is happening in Tibet.
They watch the events in Tibet very carefully and also watch the reactions of India and other countries to all that is happening there. To these people the METO [METO or Middle East Treaty Organization?], SEATO (?) [The Southeast Asia Treaty Organization], the Hydrogen bomb or the Atom bomb are far away things. What is vital to them is the position of the D.L. [Dalai Lama] and the fate of their brothers and cousin across the border.

A 'rebel' Panchen Lama?

Where is Gyaltsen Norbu?

On October 25, the Fourth World Buddhist Forum (WBF) closed its doors at the Brahma Palace on the Lingshan Mountain in Jiangsu Province.
The Forum had previously been held in the mainland in 2006 and 2009, and in Hong Kong in 2012. At that time, the Chinese-selected Panchen Lama, Gyaltsen Norbu was the star attraction.
The official press in Beijing asserted that “one thousand Buddhist personages from 52 countries and regions attended the two-day forum, more than all previous years, fully reflecting the WBF’s internationalism and authority.”
This year, the WBF’s theme was “Common Aspiration, Common Action—Embracing Exchanges and Mutual Learning”. Xinhua said that it “embodied the consistent style of all previous WBFs in inheriting the past and ushering in the future.”
The participants spoke of “building a community of human destiny as the common aspiration and work hand in hand through exchanges and mutual learning to highlight the Buddhism’s force of purifying the people’s hearts and good deeds to benefit all.”
This sounds good.
But the most surprising aspect of the event was the extremely discreet presence of the Chinese Panchen Lama who just appeared in the group discussion to suggest stricter discipline measures for Buddhist monks.
Let us remember that Gyaltsen Norbu was selected by Beijing and groomed as the 11th Panchen Lama, while the candidate recognized by the Dalai Lama languishes for the past 20 years under house arrest, somewhere in China.
Why was Gyaltsen Norbu nowhere to be seen during the opening and closing ceremonies, while he had been the Chief Guest on the occasion of the previous Forum?
As I earlier mentioned on this blog, Beijing seems unable to fully ‘control’ their Panchen Lama candidate (see, Hot Summer on the Tibetan Plateau).

Is Gyaltsen Norbu not a good Communist?
In June, Xinhua announced that President Xi Jinping ‘accepted an audience’ with Gyaltsen Norbu at Zhongnanhai in Beijing on June 10. The term ‘accepting an audience’ is a euphemism to say the least, because the ‘audience’ seemed more like summon-cum-lecture.Was Gyaltsen Norbu not following the Party's diktats?
He had probably been speaking too much his mind for Beijing’s taste.
During the WBF, Norbu appeared only briefly during a round table discussion.
The Catholic news agency ucanews.com, reported that at the WBF, he called "for tighter controls over monks to ensure they follow Buddhist precepts.”
The Communist Party is uncomfortable with ‘roaming’ monks not enrolled in ‘official’ monasteries. These monks are believed to be the most subversive elements “particularly prone to breaking precepts. It would also be difficult for any other authority or the police to seize them if they do not break the law," said Norbu.

The Communist Party tightly monitors activities in the monasteries through hand-picked Monastery Committees, fierce watchdogs working for the authorities in Beijing.
Monks who follow the Buddha’s ‘wandering’ precepts are considered as extremely dangerous for the Party.
The same ucanews.com noted that “Norbu's remarks represent a return to the party line after a speech in March in which he warned that China's quotas on Tibetan monks and nuns – a rarely acknowledged open secret – meant a danger of Buddhism existing in name only," the news agency adding: “His comments were viewed by some observers as a jab at Beijing's Tibet policies. However, other analysts noted the Communist Party would have vetted his speech in advance.”
Probably not, and that is why he was summoned in Zhongnanhai in June by the President himself.
During the WBF, the Chinese protégé uttered some banalities: “Social changes have also resulted in changes in the system and orders within temples. It is important to adapt to the changes in time" or “it is important to train young talents, …as it would decide what kind of role Buddhism can play in society, …The key is to ensure the practice and doctrine learning of the young Buddhists.”
And he left…
China seems to have a serious problem with recalcitrant Tibetans, even when they are meticulously hand-picked by the Party.
It has been the case of the 10th Panchen Lama, it is now the case of Gyaltsen Norbu, and probably many more not well-known lamas.
According to the White Paper released in September, there are 358 living Buddhas (reincarnated lamas), of whom more than 60 have been selected according to the 2007 rules and regulations of the Party.
How many are fully under the control Party is a question difficult to answer.
Did you notice that Gyaltsen Norbu also missed the festivities held in Lhasa on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the founding of the Tibetan Autonomous Region? Strange?
Sixty-five years after being ‘liberated’ Tibetans are still rebel. Beijing should find out why.

Communist Reincarnation

Tenzin Delek Rinpoche

My article Communist Reincarnation appeared in The Statesman.

Here is the link...

Was it a coincidence? Tenzin Delek Rinpoche died of cardiac arrest in a county hospital in Sichuan province on 12 July. The Rinpoche, born in 1950 in Litang region of Eastern Tibet, had been awarded the death penalty in 2002 for a crime he never committed - masterminding five terrorist bombings in the province that killed one and injured a dozen others from 2000 to 2002, according to a Chinese Court.
Tenzin Delek’s sentence was commuted to a life term in January 2005, which he served till his tragic heart arrest in the Dazhu County’s Jail. The Rinpoche’s main crime was to have promoted the Tibetan language and culture in Kardze Prefecture of Sichuan; this was too subversive for China. His death comes at the time when Beijing makes renewed efforts to ‘promote’ religious institutions in Tibet. In the process, the Communist leadership has apparently acquired a sudden great knowledge of the most esoteric aspect of Tibetan Buddhism: ‘soul’ reincarnation!
In one day last week, China Tibet Online, affiliated to Xinhua, published five articles on reincarnation of lamas, more particularly on the present Dalai Lama’s reincarnation.
On one side, a senior Lama is left to die in prison, (‘China’s criminal law stipulates that prisoners serving life sentences are not allowed medical parole’, says Xinhua) and on the other, Beijing sponsors the ‘reincarnation’ process. Where is the trick?
According to the Communist regime, reincarnation is “a complete set of religious rites and historical mechanism,” and “as China adopts the policy of freedom to religious belief,” the Communist Party has decided to recognize ‘reincarnations’, but this ‘belief’ must follow the party’s rules and regulations.
That is why Beijing says that the present 14th Dalai Lama living in India has “no authoritative power on his [own] reincarnation issue.” He does not believe in the party.
For Beijing, the Dalai Lama’s recent statements about his reincarnation are “a blasphemy towards the religious rites and historical mechanism of Tibetan Buddhism, a great disrespect to the followers of the religion, and an absolute provocation towards the authority of the central government.”
Beijing seems increasingly nervous as it is unable to control the restive populations living on the Tibetan Plateau and once the Dalai Lama departs for the Heavenly Fields, the situation may degenerate further. The Communist leadership wants to prepare the stage for a ‘safe’ Chinese Dalai Lama, fully under the party’s control. The Communist Government is banking on the Golden Urn process to turn the tide in its favour.
Beijing’s tainted version of history is that sometimes “several ‘soul boys’ appeared at the same time; it indubitably aroused disputes between different sides.” To solve the problem, Emperor Qianlong would have invented the Golden Urn lottery.
Though Beijing says that the Golden Urn was regularly used to ‘test’ the right choice of candidate, interestingly, Beijing admits that the present and previous (13th) Dalai Lamas were ‘exempted’ from the test.
The Golden Urn was used by Beijing to select Gyaltsen Norbu, its own Panchen Lama candidate, while for the past 20 years, the boy selected by the Dalai Lama continues to languish under house arrest somewhere in China. How Norbu was selected is recounted by a Tibetan Lama, who participated in the ‘test’ and later managed to escape China.
The Lama, Arjia Rinpoche, the Abbot of the Kumbum monastery in today’s Qinghai Province, was part of the great tamasha to ‘select’ the 11th Panchen Lama in 1995. The process is explained in his book, Surviving the Dragon: A Tibetan Lama’s Account of 40 Years under Chinese Rule.
In 1995, Beijing, furious that the Dalai Lama had ‘unilaterally’ decided on the new incarnation of the 10th Panchen Lama, decided to use the Golden Urn.
In November 1995, an emergency meeting was called in Beijing to ‘clarify’ the Communist Party’s position: “We must not allow the Dalai’s separatist clique to interfere.” To avoid the Dalai Lama being involved in the selection process, the Golden Urn was the best method, it was decided. A few days later, some party cadres and high Lamas were called to Lhasa.
The test was to be held in the Jokhang Cathedral: “We landed at Gonggar airport in Lhasa, which was tightly guarded by People’s Liberation Army soldiers and armed policemen.  Soldiers were lined up along the entire route ‘for our protection’. At the Lhasa Hotel, I saw squads of PLA soldiers with machine guns, as well as regular police, surrounding the hotel so that no one could slip in or out,” recalls Arjia. The Communist officials told the Rinpoches:  “The Golden Urn Ceremony will take place tonight, please be prepared. If a separatist clique (followers of the Dalai Lama) attempts any disruption of the ceremony, everyone will be protected.”
The ceremony took place on 29 November, 1995 at 2 am.
Luo Gan, a Minister (later, a member of the Politburo’s Standing Committee) presided over the ceremony: “Inside the gold urn was a small case, which contained three ivory lots, an inch wide and seven or eight inches long. The names of the three candidates were written on three separate pieces of paper. The three ivory lots were placed into the Golden Urn.”
The name of the ‘selected’ candidate was Gyaltsen Norbu. An official present later told Arjia: “When we made our selection we left nothing to chance. In the silk pouches of the ivory pieces we put a bit of cotton at the bottom of one of them, so it would be a little higher than the others and the right candidate would be chosen.”
That was it.
There is no doubt that the selection of the next Dalai Lama will be done in the same manner, if Beijing is allowed to have its way. Though not mentioned in the recent articles, there is another factor that Beijing is aware of - the Panchen Lama has traditionally to affix his seal on the Dalai Lama’s reincarnation discovery. To make sure that their protégé obeys, President Xi Jinping gave him an ‘audience’ at Zhongnanhai in Beijing on June 10.
Apparently Gyaltsen Norbu, though selected by Beijing in a dubious manner, needed to be briefed: could he rebel like his predecessor and refuse to follow the diktats of the party? Everything is possible in the Middle Kingdom. During the ‘audience’, Norbu was probably told what he should do …in case a new Dalai Lama needs to be ‘recognized’ by the Communist Party.
Gyaltsen Norbu has also been promoted as China’s leading Buddhist leader.
A few weeks ago, he visited the Zongfo Temple in Jinghong (in Xishuangbanna Prefecture of Yunnan province). This monastery, located close to the Thailand border, is not a Tibetan but a Theravada centre. The visit was clearly a political move by Beijing which is keen to show that the young Lama is able to lead not only the Mahayana school, but the Hinayana too. Xinhua mentioned that while in Jinghong, Norbu participated in Theravada rituals or debates.
On July 15, the same Gyaltsen Norbu met with an eight-member delegation of Mongolian Buddhists headed by the Chairman of the Mongolian Buddhist Association at the Xihuang Buddhist Temple in Beijing. Xinhua says: “The Panchen Lama warmly welcomed the Mongolian delegation, accepted their worships and gifts, offered his gifts in return and gave them head-touching blessing, according to the religious ritual of Tibetan Buddhism.”
Obviously, Beijing wants their candidate Panchen Lama to play a more and more active political role in the Buddhist world, while those like Tenzin Gelek, who do not obey, will be left to their fate. However Gyaltsen Norbu’s popularity amongst the masses remains very low. His visits to Tibet have to be stage-managed. To manipulate an urn is easier than to win hearts. When will China learn this?

Chinese diplomacy is a culinary delight

Chinese 'sailors' on the 'Yongshu' Reef in the South China Sea

My article Chinese diplomacy is a culinary delight appeared today in the Edit Page of The Pioneer.

Here is the link...

Beijing can't afford to have many enemies. When it becomes too ‘hot' on one front, it needs to make friends on another. It is making friends the way that one slowly cooks seafood to make ‘Buddha jump over the wall’

News agency Xinhua recently admitted that the ‘rift’ over the South China Sea between Beijing and Washington has heightened tensions in the region, “but dispute over this body of water is only ‘an episode’ in China-US relations, instead of a flashpoint as portrayed or feared by many”.
The Chinese news agency further commented: “At a time when the futures and fortunes of China and the United States are more closely intertwined than they have ever been, it is imperative for them to always look for the bigger picture, and prevent such solvable tensions evolving into dangerous tinderbox.”
Behind these words, it is clear that Beijing can’t afford to have too many enemies at the same time and when it becomes too ‘hot’ on one front, Beijing needs to make friends on another.
What about the Middle Kingdom’s other foes, namely, individuals or groups opposing the party within China? Beijing is trying to deal with them in a novel way, which might also apply to ‘external unfriendly’ powers.
In your opinion, what could make Buddha jump over a wall? According to a Chinese saying, it is a special stew made of seafood and poultry: It is apparently so yummy that even Buddha would jump over a wall to taste it.
Why is it so tasty? Simply, because the ingredients have slowly simmered for a long, very long time over a low flame. President Xi Jinping recently mentioned the famous dish: “Make friends, the way that one slowly cooks seafood and poultry stew to make ‘Buddha jump over the wall’,” he advised.
He was then speaking about ‘internal friends’ during a United Front Work conference. The UFW Department is a party organ which makes the link between the Chinese Communist Party and non-party organisations, including business people like Mr Jack Ma’s Alibaba, but also Tibetans, Uyghurs or ‘compatriots’ from Taiwan.
During the conference, Mr Xi explained that the UFW aims at making more friends, adding: “However, in order to make this kind of friend, you can’t hurry it as if you are cooking fast food, but rather you should put in the kind of effort as if you are slowly cooking the famous Chinese dish.”
To demonstrate his point, the Chinese President cited the case of former Premier Zhou Enlai and his ‘friendship’ with the 10th Panchen Lama: “On April 27, 1950, when the Panchen Lama arrived in Beijing for the first time: that night he was received by Premier Zhou and invited to dinner. They discussed everything from customs, traditions, and daily life to the victory of the Chinese revolution and the future of Tibet. Premier Zhou’s openness and sincerity deeply influenced the Panchen Lama.”
Mr Xi then compared the Panchen Lama and the Dalai Lama: “In 1956, the Indian Government invited the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama to India to participate in celebrations for the 2,500th anniversary of Sakyamuni Buddha achieving nirvana. The Panchen Lama fought against separatist forces and returned home on schedule, in a sharp contrast to the Dalai Lama who delayed his return.”
This example means that ‘friends’ have to obey to the party; the Dalai Lama did not. Before returning to Tibet, the Dalai Lama attended a religious function in Kalimpong and this despite the objections of Zhou Enlai who considered Kalimpong ‘a nest of spies’. The Panchen Lama ‘obeyed’ and immediately returned to Tibet.
Mr Xi’s conclusion is interesting, prospective friends “should be treated with the same effort required to make the dish, with more contacts, more close talks, more assistance and emphasising respect, equality and sincerity”. But like the Panchen Lama, they should listen to the party.
China’s ‘external’ neighbours too should ‘listen’ to Beijing, for the purpose, they may need to be ‘cooked’ over a long time. In recent months, China has been extremely aggressive in the South China Sea, extending her territorial waters by nearly 1,000 kilometers.
Beijing pretended to be furious when Washington sent a P-8A Poseidon surveillance aircraft to monitor China’s deployments in the region; land-reclamation however relentlessly continued.
Attack being the best defence, Liang Fang, a professor at China’s National Defence University, violently accused the US ‘of launching its Asia’s repivot’ in The Global Times and “blockade China and unite with its allies Japan and the Philippines against China”, though he said that “China’s land reclamation efforts on disputed islands and reefs in the South China Sea will reduce the US’s projection power in the region.” He also added: “This makes the South China Sea a major strategic hotspot, which will decide the new world order.”
In other words, China is fighting a battle to dominate its close neighbours and stop the US from any interference in these designs.
In the meantime, sina.com published a sideshow with pictures taken on one of the reefs in the South China Sea. It shows good-looking female sailors (most probably models) posing on ocean breakwalls, while watering vegetable gardens, with pigs in a pen in the background. The title is “Gratifying results on China’s Yongshu Reef: Building vegetable greenhouses and growing fruit trees.”
It means that China had already succeeded in establishing its presence far away from its coastal areas; now, the next stage: To make friends, starts. General Fan Changlong, the powerful vice chairman of China’s Central Military Commission, visited Washington for the purpose and after a meeting with the US Defence Secretary Ashton Carter, he declared: “The two nations should take the higher ground to look into the far future by paying more attention to other, more important regional and international issues.”
As Xinhua nicely put it, the relationship between Beijing and Washington has matured; the news agency spoke of “a new type of major-country relations, which features mutual benefits and a win-win cooperation.” Obviously, as the Chinese girls/models show, Beijing’s work on the reefs is over.
While taking on the US in the South China Sea, Beijing has been ‘cooking’ Tokyo. Reuters reported that in July, Japan and China “will conclude an agreement to define procedures for communication between their naval vessels and military aircraft during unexpected encounters to reduce the risk of confrontation.” One way to make friends without renouncing any claims!
What about India? Here too, Beijing wants to gain time. While turning down Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s proposal to exchange maps of the Line of Actual Control, a move which seemed most reasonable, Beijing has started speaking of a new sauce, ie comprehensive measures. Mr Huang Xilian, an official in the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs told a group of Indian journalists in Beijing: “We have to seek some kind of comprehensive measures, not only one measure to control and manage the border to ensure peace and tranquility along the border.”
But does it make sense to be cooked into becoming China’s ‘friend’, when LAC maps can’t even be exchanged?

Will Buddha jump over the wall?

Do you know what could make Buddha jump over a wall?

According to a Chinese saying, it is a special stew made of seafood and poultry.
It is apparently so yummy that even Buddha (or at least Chinese monks) would jump over a wall to taste it.
It might not be true for Tibetan monks, as this dish originates from Fujian Province; their taste may be different. Anyway, one of the characteristics of the preparation is that all the ingredients have to slowly simmer for a long long time over a low flame.
It is said the former U.S. President Ronald Reagan, Queen Elizabeth and Prince Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia and many others tasted the delicacy, while in China.
President Xi Jinping recently mentioned the famous dish: “make friends, the way that one slowly cook seafood and poultry stew to make ‘Buddha or monks jump over the wall’.”
The story was used by Xi during the United Front Work (UFW) Conference, during which Xi explained that the United Work “aims to make more friends, especially some close friends who are able to speak their minds.”
According to the Chinese media, Xi would have added: “However, in order to make this kind of friend, you can’t hurry it as if you are cooking fast food, but rather you should put in the kind of effort as if you are slowly cooking the famous Chinese dish made of lots of seafood and poultry.”
To demonstrate his point, the Chinese President cited the case of former Premier Zhou Enlai with the 10th Panchen Lama Chökyi Gyaltsen.
Xi told the UFW Conference that when, on April 27, 1950, the Panchen Lama arrived in Beijing for the first time: “that night he was received by Premier Zhou and invited to dinner. They discussed everything from customs, traditions, and daily life to the victory of the Chinese revolution and the future of Tibet; from the accommodations and itinerary to the importance of national unity. Premier Zhou’s openness and sincerity deeply influenced the Panchen Lama.”
Let us not forget that the young Panchen Lama who had just been selected by the Communist Party as the true incarnation of the 9th Panchen Lama, (while the Lhasa candidate was rejected by Mao), was only 12 years old.
Xi continued his story: “In 1952, the Panchen Lama returned to Lhasa to meet with the Dalai Lama. He remembered the instructions of Premier Zhou, to unite with the Dalai Lama and submit to the current situation.”
By that time, the Tibetan government had had to sign on the dotted and had 'accepted' that Chökyi Gyaltsen was the true incarnation of the 9th Panchen Lama.
Then, Xi Jinping compared the Panchen Lama and the Dalai Lama: “In 1956, the Indian government invited the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama to India to participate in celebrations for the 2,500th anniversary of Sakyamuni Buddha achieving nirvana. The Panchen Lama fought against separatist forces and returned home on schedule, in a sharp contrast to the Dalai Lama who delayed his return.”
Historically, it is not fully  correct. Before returning to Tibet, the Dalai Lama had to visit Kalimpong (against Zhou Enlai’s advice) to meet devotees, at that time the Panchen Lama decided to immediately return to Tibet. It can’t be called a ‘delay’; it was just part of the Tibetan leader’s program.
Xi continued his argument: “During the ‘Cultural Revolution’, the Panchen Lama was severely denounced, and his situation was critical. After Premier Zhou learned of this, he quickly arranged for him to be protected by the military.”

Xi forgets an important detail: the 70,000 character petition (‘A Poisoned Arrow’, according to Mao) which cost the Panchen Lama 14 years in jail in the most horrendous conditions.
Where was Zhou Enlai then?
Xi knows perfectly well this episode, as his father Xi Zhongxun was ‘purged’ two months after the Panchen Lama. Read my post on the subject.
Xi nonetheless affirmed: “Premier Zhou and the 10th Panchen Lama formed a great friendship over a long period of time and numerous trials, despite their difference in age.”
Xi’s conclusions are however interesting, he argued that the structure of the United Front has undergone great changes, and the concept of social thought is becoming more diverse. He mentioned two issues which have come up for United Front Work: “One is not paying attention to ideological guidance and not being concerned with ideological activities of people outside the Party. The other is a phenomenon of being arrogant, purely bureaucratic, and rigid.”
Xi Jinping believes that non-Party people should be treated with the same effort required to make the dish with more contacts, more close talks, more assistance and emphasizing respect, equality and sincerity.
Will it make Tibetans, in particular Buddhist monks, ‘Jump over the Wall’? Only future will tell.

I am posting here some excerpts of From The Heart of the Panchen Lama (Major Speeches and a petition: 1962–1989), published by the Department of Information and International Relations, Central Tibetan Administration in Dharamsala.
The Panchen Lama made this statement in 1987 at the TAR Standing Committee Meeting of the National People’s Congress in Beijing. During his lengthy speech, the Panchen Lama refers several times to the 70,000 character petition to Zhou.
If he was listening from his from his Marxist Paradise, Zhou Enlai must have turned in his grave.

On the annexation of Tibet
In the Seventeen-Point Agreement [in May 1951], it was emphatically stated that there would be no change in the power of the Tibetan local government until the introduction of democratic reforms. The same promise was made to the Tashilhunpo monastic authorities. However, what happened later could be summed up by this dictum: ―Criticizing the old system from the perspective of a new ideology.
This kind of practice is not very ethical. A scientist must arrive at his decision according to whatever is proved right scientifically. Tibetan aristocrats had served the government for generations. They were deeply devoted to the Dalai Lama and turned to him for refuge both in this and the next life. In the same way, the masses have deep respect and devotion. This is an undeniable fact. Later on, however, the aristocrats were accused of being the leaders of the rebellions and persecuted. This, I think, was an absolutely wrong thing to do. Of course, I was criticized and punished for this. But truth is timeless. It always remains the same. Undoubtedly, there were mistakes in my petition. But I have never been wrong in speaking up. The mistakes in the content of my petition are mistakes, both today and in the past. But there should be a clear dividing line, spelling out where I went wrong and where I was right.
Talking about Lhoka, first the Khampa guerrillas were based there. But when the Dalai Lama passed through there, people happily donated butter, barley flour and other provisions without being asked for them. This was, of course, a spontaneous gesture of love by the people. Later on the people who offered these things were treated as active members of the resistance. How can you do such a thing? This is something that everyone should know. Speaking of myself, in those days whenever I passed by, people would show love and devotion to me. Now should this be construed as a politically motivated act? Amongst other things, they showed respect to me because they were religious-minded and it is a Tibetan custom. Due care and consideration must be shown to customs and traditions that are special to Tibet.
Quelling the rebellions and introducing reforms was right in principle. But there was a strong leftist tinge to the way this was done. Such things should not happen again and they must be rectified. During the last three decades of communist rule there have been many good things done and many bad things also. There were considered in the Sixth Meeting of the Eleventh National Congress of the Communist Party of China, and were publicized internationally.
Owning up to our mistakes will not damage the Party’s image; rather it will help build it.
Speaking about the former comrades in the Tibet Military Command Centre and the Chengdu Military Command Centre, some comrades told me that they should not have done what they did. This is a healthy attitude. We frequently say that great achievements were made with your sweat in the liberation and reformation of Tibet and that the people of Tibet will never forget this. This is an honest statement. However, you did make a great deal of mistakes, and these also in Tibet. These too, we will never forget. What I am saying is for the purpose of rectifying these mistakes. If we can do this, we can make progress. I am saying this with the best of intentions.
I will tell you a more personal story at this point. The Government of the Kashag spearheaded the rebellion [in March 1959]. Those of us at the labrangs (lama households) were not party to any agitation. In the beginning, we were told great things about peaceful reforms and policies of fraternal relations. However, when the reforms were undertaken, people belonging to our establishments were subjected to untold suffering. This filled people with disgust and disbelief. Most of the members of the local Tibetan government fled from Tibet. A handful, who stayed back, were praised and appointed to government jobs as shining examples of a progressive element. Our people who stayed back in solidarity with China were subjected to unthinkable suffering. Being in Lhasa, as I was at that time, I did not suffer so much. But all my family members were subjected to thamzing (public struggle sessions).
There was one woman, a wife of one of my staff, who was also arrested. One day, when she was called into the interrogation chamber, she muttered, ―This man called Panchen had caused me so much suffering that I will die from depression. This utterance led the authorities into believing that she would say something incriminating about me, a much-awaited chance for the authorities to take punitive measures against me. They immediately called the scribes to record her testimony. Then she went on, ―We made a big mistake by following this man called Panchen and not participating in the fight against the Chinese. If he had led us in rebellion against the Chinese, our condition today would be better than this. Because, initially, we would have killed as many Chinese as possible and then fled to India, which would have been easy since India is near our village. But this man told us to be progressive and patriotic. And this is what we get for following his advice. Now it is not possible for us to flee to India. Our people, both men and women, are being persecuted here. We are experiencing hell on earth.
If there was a film made on all the atrocities perpetrated in Qinghai province, it would shock the viewers. In Golok area, many people were killed and their dead bodies rolled down the hill into a big ditch. The soldiers told the family members and relatives of the dead people that they should all celebrate since the rebels had been wiped out. They were even forced to dance on the dead bodies. Soon after, the family members and relatives were also machine-gunned. They were all buried there.
Actually, rebellions did not occur in all these areas. In Kham, of course, there were rebellions in many places. In Jharoong Parpo and Mili, both in Amdo, the nomads collected their guns and handed them over to the Chinese authorities. They were praised and garlanded during a special function. After the function they were driven to their villages where they were immediately arrested and imprisoned for a long time. There were some very old people among them.
In Amdo and Kham, people were subjected to unspeakable atrocities. They were shot in groups of ten or twenty. I know that it is not good to speak about these things. But such actions have left deep wounds in the minds of people. There are some officials who always leave behind a bad legacy. What is the purpose of doing this? The guilty must, of course, be punished. But what is the use of leaving behind a bad legacy. People who persist in doing this are really stupid. But there are some who consider these people very wise and capable. Comrade Wu Jinhua has a plan to investigate the methods and mistakes made by some of the officials in putting down the Tibetan rebellion. I feel this investigation needs to be done with the utmost diligence.
Mao Zedong said clearly in his speech that he would not only kill the senior Jiang Jieshi, but also the junior ones. Although, I, the senior Panchen, managed to survive, many junior Panchens were killed and tortured in prisons.
In Qinghai, for example, there are between one to three or four thousand villages and towns, each having between three to four thousand families with four to five thousand people. From each town and village, about eight hundred to one thousand people were imprisoned. Out of this, at least three to four hundred people died in prison. This means almost half of the prison population perished. Last year, we discovered that only a handful of people had participated in the rebellion. Most of these people were completely innocent.
In my 70,000-character petition, I mentioned that about five percent of the population had been imprisoned. According to my information at that time, it was between ten to fifteen percent. But I did not have the courage to state such a high figure. I would have died under thamzing if I had stated the real figure. These are serious matters as far as Tibet is concerned. If we pay only lip service to these kinds of mistakes and do nothing to redress them there will be equally serious consequences. People may not like what I am saying. But I am saying this out of my love for the motherland.

The next Dalai Lama, handpicked by China?

My article The next Dalai Lama, handpicked by China? appeared in the Edit Page of The Pioneer.

Here is the link...

According to Beijing, it is for the Communist Party of China to ‘decide’ on the incumbent Dalai Lama’s successor. The process and the result can be farcical, as has been the case with the Panchen Lama

A topic which was not on the agenda of Indian National Security Advisor Ajit Doval and his Chinese counterpart State Councilor Yang Jiechi, the Special Representatives for the Indo-China Boundary issue, but which is at the core of the relations between the 2 countries is the future of the Dalai Lama’s institution after the demise of the Tibetan leader.
After their meeting, earlier this week, Xinhua reported: “China and India agreed to properly handle and control their disputes and jointly safeguard peace and tranquility in their border regions before the boundary issue is solved,” however, no word about the Dalai Lama.
It was different during China's 12th National People's Congress (NPC) recently held in Beijing. During a press conference, Padma Choling, the senior-most Tibetan official objected to the Dalai Lama’s earlier announcement saying that ‘his traditional religious role should cease with his death’.
Choling, who is Chairman of the Tibet Autonomous Regional (TAR) People's Congress, created a flutter when he declared: “it's not up to the Dalai Lama to decide [about his own reincarnation].”
He added that the process: “should follow strict historical conventions …and be approved by the central government.” Yes, according to Beijing, it is for the Communist Party of China to ‘decide’ who will be the next Dalai Lama.
How will the Communist Party choose the next Dalai Lama?
It is not difficult to guess, if you read a book ‘Surviving the Dragon: A Tibetan Lama's Account of 40 Years under Chinese Rule’ written by a Tibetan Lama, now in exile in the US, who was part of the great tamasha for the ‘selection’ of a new Panchen Lama in 1995.
The Lama, Arjia Rinpoche was the Abbot of the Kumbum monastery in today’s Qinghai Province before escaping from China.
Soon after the Tenth Panchen Lama passed away under mysterious circumstances while on a visit to Tibet, the Chinese government formed a ‘search team’ under Gyayak Rinpoche, the Panchen Lama’s religious teacher. Chadrel Rinpoche, abbot of the Panchen Lama’s Tashi Lhunpo Monastery and Arjia Rinpoche were to assist the old Lama. Arjia remembers: “The Chinese government trusted Chadrel Rinpoche to do their bidding.”
But soon after Gyayak’s demise, the scenario changed; Beijing discovered that Chadrel Rinpoche was secretly in contact with the Dalai Lama in India to find a ‘consensus’ candidate. In early November 1995, events accelerated and an emergency meeting was called in Beijing to ‘clarify’ the Communist Party’s position.
According to Kumbum’s former Abbot: “This was when I learned that Chadrel Rinpoche had been arrested. …[then] we were bombarded with statements like ‘We must not allow the Dalai's separatist clique to interfere in the Golden Urn Ceremony’. Though not spelled out, the message was clear: His Holiness [the Dalai Lama] would not be involved in the selection process, and the Golden Urn Ceremony would be the method of choice.”
The following day, another meeting took place to which Jamyang Shepa, abbot of Labrang-Tashi Kyil monastery, Bumi Rinpoche, a Lama from the TAR and Arjia participated. Ying Kesheng, the Party Secretary of Qinghai Province was also present.
The rinpoches had no other choice but to accept Beijing’s decision: “The meeting was swift and efficient. That same afternoon, central TV aired footage of the meeting throughout China and the rest of the world,” says Arjia Rinpoche.
Soon after, another meeting was called “for determining the reincarnation of the Panchen Lama using the Golden Urn Ceremony.”
It was to be held in the Jokhang Cathedral in Lhasa: “We landed at Gonggar airport in Lhasa, which was tightly guarded by People's Liberation Army soldiers and armed policemen. …Soldiers were lined up along the entire route ‘for our protection’.”
At the hotel, the Lamas saw ‘squads of PLA soldiers’ with machine guns surrounding the hotel ‘so that nobody could slip in or out’.
The Communist officials told the rinpoches:" If a separatist clique [i.e. followers of the Dalai Lama] attempts any disruption of the [Golden Urn] ceremony, you will be protected …and if any among you support or participate in any such attempt, we will punish you without mercy."
The message was loud and clear.
The ceremony was held on November 29, 1995, at 2 am in the morning in Jokhang: “Although the night was dark, again we could see soldiers in their heavy bulletproof vests every few steps along the deserted streets. …we saw undercover policemen standing in every corner and shadow.”
Arjia Rinpoche continues the narration of the dramatic event: “In front of the statue of Sakyamuni Buddha was a large table covered with a yellow silk cloth. Alone on the table stood a golden urn about 15 inches high, surrounded by seated high officials.”
Luo Gan, a State Counselor (who later became a member of the Politburo’s Standing Committee) and Gyaltsen Norbu (the then TAR governor) were present.
Then the Ceremony began: “Inside the gold urn was a small case, which contained three ivory lots with cloud scrolls etched at one end. The names of the three candidates were written on three separate pieces of paper and pasted to the ivory sticks. …The three ivory lots were placed into the Golden Urn.”
Bumi Rinpoche, who had been appointed Ganden Tripa (throne holder of the Yellow School) by Beijing, drew the lot. The Communist ‘puja’ was swiftly performed: Bumi handed a yellow pouch to Luo Gan for verification, the latter handed it to the Governor.
The name of the ‘selected’ candidate was Gyaltsen Norbu, like the Governor: “Gyaltsen Norbu chose Gyaltsen Norbu. The government chose itself as Panchen Lama,” a joke later circulated.
But the tamasha was not over. As you read on, you will understand how the next Dalai Lama can be selected.
After Gyaltsen Norbu’s enthronement in Tashi Lhunpo, Arjia Rinpoche returned to Beijing by plane. He and Jamyang Shepa were called in a private cabin by Li Tieying, a Central minister and Ye Xiaowen, the director of the Bureau of Religious Affairs in Beijing: “Both of them looked especially pleased with themselves. Li Tieying placed the event in the context of great moments in China's history.”
Ye Xiaowen then revealed the shocking secret: “When we made our selection we left nothing to chance. In the silk pouches of the ivory pieces we put a bit of cotton at the bottom of one of them, so it would be a little higher than the others and the right candidate would be chosen.”
That was the way ‘with Chinese characteristics’.
Twenty years later, Gedun Choekyi Nyima, selected by the Dalai Lama as the Panchen Lama is still under house arrest, somewhere in China.
There is no doubt that the selection of the next Dalai Lama will be done in the same manner, if Beijing is allowed to have its way.
A tragic farce indeed!

Is China becoming Buddhist?

Communist China is fast becoming expert in Tibetan Buddhism. Unfortunately (for them), though Beijing shows a great interest in the Tibetan Tradition, it is not enamoured with the Dalai Lama as yet.
Beijing was very pleased when, on August 20, Japanese daily Mainichi Shimbun reported that the Tibetan religious leader’s visit to Mongolia, scheduled for later this month, was canceled.
Of course, this was done under Beijing’s own pressure.
How could the Dalai Lama visit Ulan Bator the same month than the new Emperor? Xi Jinping paid a two-day state visit on August 20 and 21 to Ulan Bator.
The Chinese media reported that the cancellation was ‘believed’ to result from China's effective use of economic leverage on the neighbour, whose 80 percent of the population follow Tibetan Buddhist tradition.
Suppose that the Dalai Lama had got a better reception than Xi Jinping, it would have not looked nice for the strong man in Beijing. Isn’t it?
Mongolia, being China's largest trading partner, had no choice, but to bow to Beijing's will and cancel the visit.
More interestingly China Tibet Online asserts: “Tibetan Buddhism has been a remarkable tie and witness of the bilateral relationship between the two countries.”
Outer Mongolia and Communist China now share their passion for Buddhism.
Beijing’s new love is apparent in another article of China Tibet Online which, quoting Trinley Dorje, director of the Tibet Committee of Ethnic and Religious Affairs, affirms: “At present, China's Tibet Autonomous Region has 358 Rinpoches [reincarnated lamas] who were enthroned in accordance with the reincarnation system of Rinpoches.”
The official publication adds: “The reincarnation system of Rinpoches, or living Buddha, is a unique practice for the continuation of the Rinpoche of Tibetan Buddhism, which is respected by the Chinese government. In recent years, some 40 Rinpoches in Tibet were enthroned according to the historical custom and religious ritual. The searching, decision and enthronement of 5th Dezhu Jiangbai Gesang and the 8th Rongbu Chokyi Lozang Dondrup which were carried out in the recent five years both strictly followed the reincarnation system.”
Of course, very few have heard of these ‘rinpoches’ before, but it is another issue; the point is Xi Jinping’s regime pretends to be not atheist anymore.
We are told that Tibet’s Department of Ethnic and Religious Affairs also helped 20 Islamic clergies to get the approval from the China Islam Association (under the Communist Party). In 2013, the Tibetan government even sent 16 Tibetan Muslim for a pilgrimage in the Saudi Arabia.
Is China transformed?
In the meantime, Gyaltsen Norbu, the Panchen Lama selected by Beijing visited with fanfare Western Tibet (Ngari prefecture).
Xinhua reported: “The 11th Panchen Lama, Bainqen Qoigyijabu [Panchen Gyaltsen Norbu], has come to Nagri [Ngari] Prefecture of Tibet for the first time to hold Buddhist activities. Since he arrived on August 13, the Panchen Lama had worshiped Kangrinboqe, [Kang Rinpoche or Mount Kailash] a holy mountain about 6,656 meters above sea level in Burang [Purang] County. In the eyes of the followers of Hinduism, Buddhism and Bonism, it is the center of the world.”
It is undoubtedly true.
The details of the busy schedule of the Panchen Gyaltsen Norbu are given: “Before the worshiping ceremony started in the morning of the August 14, he visited a temple at the foot of the mountain to pray for all living creatures.”
We are told that Gyaltsen Norbu was received by some 20 monks [who] welcomed him ‘by holding prayer flags, accompanied by the sound of horns’. The report continues: “Before the worshiping ceremony [puja], he visited the Chokyi Temple at the foot of the mountain and chanted sutras to pray for all living creatures”, says Xinhua, adding that hearing the news that the Panchen Lama had arrived, 'Buddhism followers' [i.e. Tibetans] nearby got together in a zigzagging queue in hope of worshipping the Panchen Lama for blessings.
Nothing, of course, like the late 10th Panchen Lama, during his last visit to Tashilhunpo. Watch this video!
Gyaltsen Norbu had the ritual photo op in two local village house in Montser [Minsar?] in Gar County. A Tibetan, Yeshe with his family, “with all in brand new clothes, welcomed the Panchen Lama by holding hada [khata] in their hands and bringing out the chema, a wooden container used by Tibetans to pray for a bumper harvest.”
Yeshe had to give details about his daily life, "how many members are there in your family, where is the source of your income, how much do you earn one year”, etc. Gyaltsen Norbu was told the 8-member family, lived on transportation and tourism travel; they have an annual income of about 8,000 US $: “the Panchen Lama was pleased and wished Yeshe could also help other local residents prosper”.
Gyaltsen Norbu then went to “the holy lake Mapham Yutso [Mansarovar] and nearby temples, chanted sutras for all living beings, visited two local farm households, named a 13-day-old baby at the request of his parents and touched the heads of several hundreds of people to give them blessings.”
The report asserts: “It enjoys a reputation equal to the holy mountain in the eyes of local Tibetans.”
On the morning of August 16, the Panchen Lama went to the Khorchak Monastery, built in 996 CE, near Purang. the monastery belongs to the Sakya school; according to the Chinese news agency: “He successively worshiped the main shrine, Great Chanting Hall, Tara Hall, Champa Hall, Dharmapala Hall, and Seven-Buddhas Hall. Then in the main shrine, he chanted sutras with monks of the monastery and gave head-touching blessing to those followers”.
But Karl Marx was not forgotten during the visit, on the last day, Gyaltsen Norbu honoured a Communist ‘model worker’ by visiting the tomb of one Kong Fansen, a Chinese ‘model’ official who dedicated his life to the building of Tibet; Gyaltsen Norbu presented “a hada [khata], a strip of raw silk and linen for good blessing.”
All these choreographed visits would be fine, if they were not aimed at showing off to the world that Communist China is today a very tolerant  nation.
But China is so intolerant that Gedhun Choekyi Nyima born on April 25, 1989 and recognized as the 11th Panchen Lama by the Dalai Lama is still under house arrest in China; the authorities in Beijing have systematically refused to let the world know about his whereabouts.
He has not been seen in public since May 17 1995, nearly twenty years ago.
This proves that Communist China is not truly Buddhist as yet.
Here are some pictures of the Chinese Panchen Lama near Mt. Kailash and Manasarowar.