After the Dalai Lama

For the past three months, Tibetans in exile have gone through a political and historical tsunami, the most serious since March 1959 when a young Dalai Lama decided to cross the highest Himalayan peaks to take refuge in India. At that time, he abandoned his homeland along with some 85,000 of his countrymen; this was the beginning of long and traumatic years as refugees.
Today when the Tibetans are considered to be one of the most successful exiled communities, the Dalai Lama has decided to change the three-century old governance system of the Land of Snows and quit politics to consecrate his energy on other pursuits.
On March 10 in a public statement, the Tibetan leader explained the background for his decision: "As early as the 1960s, I have repeatedly stressed that Tibetans need a leader, elected freely by the Tibetan people, to whom I can devolve power. Now, we have clearly reached the time to put this into effect.”
In June 1991, the Tibetan Parliament in exile (also known as the Assembly of Tibetan People's Deputies) had adopted a ‘Charter’, a sort of Constitution providing a separation of power between the judiciary, legislature and executive powers of the Central Tibetan Administration (or Government in exile). The Charter assigned specific functions to the Dalai Lama as the Head of the State.
Penpa Tsering, the Assembly’s Speaker explained that on March 14 the Dalai Lama addressed the Deputies: “The message of His Holiness was very firm, very determined. It was very difficult for most of the members to digest the decision of His Holiness”. For a long time, the Deputies had had inklings of the Dalai Lama’s intention to retire, but “nobody could image that it would be so encompassing and so sudden”, noted Tsering.
After the Dalai Lama had officially rejected an appeal of the 14th Assembly to reconsider his decision, it became clear that there was no choice but to amend the Charter and adapt the provisions to the new situation.
It was a difficult task, though the Dalai Lama said: "It is to benefit Tibetans in the long run. It is not because I feel disheartened. Tibetans have placed such faith and trust in me."

A five member 'Constitutional Amendment Drafting Committee' was formed, with representatives from the Kashag (Cabinet) and the Assembly to suggest a legal solution to the tricky situation.
In an interview in 2006, the Dalai Lama had told me: "I have three commitments in life: promotion of human values, promotion of religious harmony and promotion of awareness of the Tibetan cause."
He had further elaborated: "Out of three commitments, number one and two are mostly on volunteer basis. Till my death I committed myself to these causes. Regarding the third one (Tibet), in a way it not a voluntary commitment, it is due to past history and to the Dalai Lama institution.”
Now he has decided to withdrawal from this historic commitment.
While making a proposal, the Drafting Committee kept in mind both aspects of the issue: the past historical role of the Dalai Lamas and their special place for the Tibetan Nation as well as his request to be relieved of his political responsibilities.
The Committee finally presented the outcome of its deliberations to a National General Meeting held at Dharamsala from May 21 to 24. This enlarged consultative sesssion was attended by 418 ‘senior’ Tibetans such as ‘former ‘prime ministers’, members of the Cabinet, former ministers, present and former members of Parliament, representatives from the Tibetan settlements and eminent members of the civil society.
Everyone was overwhelmed by the momentous occasion, sensing that the Tibetan nation was at an important turning point of its history. Could Tibet smoothly walk from theocracy to democracy?
A large majority of the delegates favoured a constitutional system with the Dalai Lama as an honorific Head of State, (many spoke of the British system, though the example of the Queen was not a happy one). He refused.
Though the 'draft' provided the historical background of the previous dual role of the Dalai Lamas; it was decided that in the changed situation, the Dalai Lama should remain ‘Protector and the Symbol of the Tibetan Nation’: “[as] human manifestation of Avaloketeshvara, is the guardian and protector of the Tibetan nation. He is the guide illuminating the path, the supreme leader, the symbol of the Tibetan identity and unity, and the voice of the whole Tibetan people.” In one way, he could fulfill his historical role, without dealing with day-to-day issues.
While many nations, particularly in the Arab world try hard to overthrow by force their unelected leaders through ‘flower revolutions’, here is the example of a leader wanting to quit all his responsibilities and the masses begging him to remain at the helm in one way or another.
The ‘retirement’ has some serious implications.
First, there is undoubtedly a larger political dimension to the Dalai Lama’s retirement; it put the political leadership in Beijing in an awkward position. Beijing has no clue about a democratic process, having only known the dictatorship of a one-party rule since 1949.
Second, it solves the issue of a successor for the Dalai Lama; now constitutionally the political successor will be the elected Kalon Tripa.
The Deputies wanted the Dalai Lama to continue to provide guidance in various forms “in matters of importance to the Tibetan people, including the community and its institutions in exile”. The Dalai Lama did not agree, he knows perfectly well that his ‘advice’ is always considered as an ‘order’ by the Tibetans.
Dr Lobsang Sangay, the elected Prime Minister explained to us: “We were left to amend the Charter with a Preamble and 3 provisions [Article 1] which have been accepted with some dilution or explanations: The Dalai Lama, our most revered leader, will continue to represent the Tibetan people, he has accepted to ‘share his opinions’ with the Cabinet and the Assembly and now the Cabinet will appoint representatives and envoys, who will be allowed to use his name.”
The Dalai Lama will however continue to meet with world leaders and other important individuals and bodies; in international fora, he could continue o speak on behalf of the Tibetan people.
Another issue is the negotiations with Beijing. When we asked Dr. Sangay if he believes that the Chinese who have always said that they will only speak to the Dalai Lama’s Representatives, will now accept to meet Envoys nominated by him, he said: “They should talk both with His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Administration. We are for dialogue, for genuine autonomy. The [Chinese] are sometimes too much obsessed with technicalities.”
The Chinese have repeatedly stated that they would only discuss with the Dalai Lama “his own future and that of some of his supporters.”
The Dalai Lama has always countered this argument saying that he is not bothered by his status, but is only interested in the welfare of the 6 million Tibetans in Tibet.
It is perhaps because the situation has not moved forward for the past 30 years and that the future seems rather bleak that the Dalai Lama has decided to withdraw at this point in time.
After one week of suspense and several back and forths between the ‘Palace’ and the Assembly, the Dalai Lama has finally accepted the changes proposed by the Assembly and the amendments have now been ratified.
What an example for the world, a leader giving up his historically bestowed powers on his own, without a bloody revolution or even a flower revolution!

The Kalon Tripa interview

My interview with the new Tibetan Prime Minister (Kalon Tripa) Dr. Lobsang Sangay is posted on Rediff.com. Click here to read.

On March 10, the Dalai Lama dropped a bombshell: he had decided to stop all political activities. In one way, it solved the problem of 'succession' as all the executive powers were now to be concentrated in the elected prime minister.
A few days after the announcement, the ballot box spoke out: Dr Lobsang Sangay, born in India 43 years ago and educated first in India and then at Harvard Law School, was elected as the new Kalon Tripa (prime minster).
Many in the Tibetan community saw Sangay as a Tibetan Obama.
'Change' was the buzz word in Dharamsala, home of the Dalai Lama in Himachal Pradesh. Even the Tibetan charter (constitution) had to be amended to reflect the change: Article 1 of the charter now terms the Dalai Lama as the "human manifestation of Avaloketeshvara, the guardian and protector of the Tibetan nation," but with no political power.
Claude Arpi travelled to Dharamsala to record the newly elected prime minister's views on the election campaign, his objectives, his government's relation with China and the changes he would like to bring about in Tibetan society. Dr Lobsang Sangay candidly answered all the questions put forth to him.

Can you say a few words about yourself; your 'Indian' life and your 'American' life?

Both my parents fled Tibet in 1959 along with His Holiness the Dalai Lama. My father was a monk during the guerilla resistance; he fought some battles, then he came to India.
All his family members were left behind in Lithang in Kham province. From my mother's side, all the family members managed to come to India, with the exception of one, who went back to Tibet to fight the Chinese army; he never returned.
I grew up in a very small Tibetan refugee settlement between Darjeeling and Sonada in West Bengal. From there, I went to the Central Tibetan Schools of Sonada and Darjeeling. Then, I attended school at St Stephen's in Darjeeling and later went to University of Delhi where I obtained degrees in arts and law.
In 1995, I left for the United States as a Fulbright scholar (it was originally for two years, but later I got other scholarships). I pursued MA at Harvard Law School and completed my PhD in 2004.
While I was in Delhi, I was elected as a Tibetan student leader, and later joined the Tibetan Youth Congress as a member of the National Central Committee (CENTREX).
When did you decide to start campaigning for the post of Kalon Tripa?
At first, I did not have plans to run for the post of Kalon Tripa. Till the fall of 2009, I did not attend any special course. I remained in Harvard Law School, with the East Asian legal studies programme, mostly working on China-related programmes.
In early 2009, the Tibetan community started talking about the election of the Kalon Tripa, even a website was created. By fall 2009, I started to take courses in leadership, communication, election campaign and so on.
By spring 2010, it became serious; some national organisations began nominating me. I thought, "OK, why not give it a try". On Radio Free Asia, they had this weekly programme on democracy and the rule of law. I was often asked questions like, 'how to improve our legislative system?'
My answer was, "Candidates should go to the people, candidates should debate amongst themselves; they should share their policies and platforms, they need to be well-informed".
I said this all along. When this platform for the Kalon Tripa elections was offered to me, I thought I should do what I always preached: "Go to the people and debate about policies".
This was really appreciated by the people. Sometimes thousands turned out in monasteries, in schools, refugee settlements, everywhere. It was a first. I never asked for votes, I just said, these are my ideas, "If you don't like them, sorry to have wasted your time".

Continue to read

The Symbol and the Protector of the Nation

(I have updated an earlier post on the new Kalon Tripa)

Ballots have spoken: Dr Lobsang Sangay, born in India 43 years ago and educated at Harvard Law School will be Kalon Tripa (Prime Minister of Tibet’s government-in-exile) for the next 5 years.
Already a couple of weeks before the results were officially announced by the Chief Election Commissioner, rumors were circulating that Sangay had gathered 27,000 votes in his tally, against 18,000 for Tenzin Namgyal Tethong, his nearest rival and 3,000 for the experienced Tashi Wangdi..
The fact that the rumors were accurate shows that the Tibetan ‘democracy’ remains still young and shaky. Some solid home work needs to be done by the Tibetan institutions in exile, if they want to project the image of a vibrant democracy.
After the results, Sangay asserted: "It is sobering to realize that nearly 50,000 people in over 30 countries voted in the recent Kalon Tripa and Chitue elections”; for an outside observer, it is rather surprising that only 58% of the voters participated in such crucial election. If one compares with the recent Legislative Assembly elections in Tamil Nadu and other Indian states where 80% of the registered voters went to the polls, the Kalon Tripa election saw a relatively low participation, especially considering that some 1,20,000 Tibetans are illegible to vote.

Beijing must have also known the results: already on March 22 (two days after the elections were held), an editorial of The People’s Daily complained: “In 1992, Lobsang Sangay rose to fame and became the youngest leading member of Tibetan Youth Congress (TYC), a terrorist organization in nature.”
The Tibetan youth organization was thus described: “The crimes made the organization look like a kin member of Al-Qaida, Chechnyan armed terrorists and ‘East Turkistan’ separatists.”
Even more far-fetched, the Communist mouthpiece’s affirmed: “The organization also made preliminary plans to prepare personnel, funding and arms to steal into China through the China-Nepal border.”
The paranoid Chinese State, which locks up behind bars whoever does not have the same views as the Communist Party (the latest on the list are Nobel Laureate Lui Xiaobo and artist Ai Weiwei), likes also to malign its opponents abroad.
For Beijing, Sangay’s crime is to have been, like thousands of other young Tibetans, a member of the Youth Congress several years ago. Just because the youth organization does not adhere to the Dalai Lama’s Middle Path and believes in a more radical, although non-violent approach, the TYC has been labeled ‘terrorists’.
The main difficulty for Sangay comes from that fact that on March 10, the Dalai Lama dropped a bombshell: he had decided to retire.
In an interview in 2006, the Dalai Lama had already told us:
"I have three commitments: promotion of human values, promotion of religious harmony and promotion of awareness of the Tibetan cause."
He had further elaborated: "Out of three commitments, number one and two are mostly on volunteer basis. Till my death I committed myself to these causes. Regarding the third one (Tibet), in a way it not a voluntary commitment, it is due to past history and to the Dalai Lama institution. I am bound to this commitment and this responsibility, because I am the Dalai Lama who played a role in the past history of Tibet”.
The Dalai Lama had acknowledged his historical role as the Protector and Symbol of the Tibetan Nation, but had already said that he wished to ‘retire’. In his 2011 Tibetan Uprising Day’ Statement, the Tibetan leader explained again the background of his decision: "As early as the 1960s, I have repeatedly stressed that Tibetans need a leader, elected freely by the Tibetan people, to whom I can devolve power. Now, we have clearly reached the time to put this into effect.”
In June 1991, the Tibetan Parliament in exile (also known as the Assembly of Tibetan People's Deputies) had adopted a ‘Charter’, a sort of Constitution guaranteeing all Tibetans equality before the law without discrimination on the basis of sex, religion, race, language and social origin. While providing a separation of power between the judiciary, legislature and executive powers in the Central Tibetan Administration (or Government in exile), the Charter assigns specific functions to the Dalai Lama as the Head of the State.
With the recent announcement, the Assembly has no choice but to amend the Charter as the Tibetan leader’s functions will have to be allotted to other bodies or individuals. It is a difficult task, though the Dalai Lama said: "It is to benefit Tibetans in the long run. It is not because I feel disheartened. Tibetans have placed such faith and trust in me."

The new context
The elections were held in a specific context, just 10 days after the Dalai Lama’s announcement, not giving time for the electors to ‘digest’ the enormity of the news; most voters still believed that the Kalon Tripa was to function under the leadership of the Dalai Lama. Today, Sangay, the new Tibetan leader faces a different job description. Had the Dalai Lama’s decision been communicated earlier; it would have put the stakes of the elections in a different perspective.
Now, it will not be an easy task for Sangay to ‘replace’ the Dalai Lama. Many Tibetans in Dharamsala (mainly the older generation) are doubtful. Youth who elected the good-looking and articulate Sangay believe that he can breathe a new life into exile politics. Only the future will be able to see if they are right.
A serious legal hurdle remains, the amendment of the Charter.
A five member 'Constitutional Amendment Drafting Committee' was asked to suggest a legal solution to the tricky situation.

The Proposal
The Drafting Committee has chosen the Middle Path, keeping in mind both aspects of the issue: the past historical role of the Dalai Lamas and his personal status vis-a-vis the Tibet Nation as well as his request to be relieved of all day-to-day responsibilities.
Having completed its job, the Committee will present the outcome of its deliberations to a National General Meeting scheduled to be held at Dharamsala from May 21 to 23. This enlarged consultative group comprises of a few hundred ‘senior’ Tibetans such as ‘former ‘prime ministers’, members of the Cabinet, former ministers, present and former members of Parliament, officials above joint secretary rank, representatives from the local assemblies of Tibetan settlements and eminent members of the civil society.
The 'draft' which will later need to be ratified by the Assembly, gives the legal background and the dual role of the Dalai Lama: “The Charter provided that the successive Dalai Lamas shall exercise their responsibilities as head of the Tibetan nation and as chief executive of the Tibetan administration.”
However, “in deference to His Holiness the Dalai Lama's irrevocable decision to relinquish his administrative and political roles and in the face of His Holiness' rejection of pleas to reconsider that decision”, the Assembly should adopt the necessary amendments to separate the Dalai Lama’s two roles and take care of his recent request, while safeguarding the continuity of the Central Tibetan Administration as the legitimate governing body of the Tibetans in exile.
The proposal is as follows: “His Holiness the Dalai Lama fully vests the Central Tibetan Administration and in particular its democratic leadership organs with the powers and responsibilities formerly held jointly by His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the Central Tibetan Administration to represent and serve the whole people of Tibet.”
However, a Preamble is added to the Charter in the same way as the US Constitution is amended, by adding amendments rather than by incorporating the amendments into the body of the Constitution as in India.
In a way, it is a legal Middle Path solution which should satisfy all the parties involved, except Beijing perhaps.
In Article 1, the Dalai Lama is termed as the ‘Protector and the Symbol of the Tibetan Nation’: “[as] human manifestation of Avaloketeshvara, is the guardian and protector of the Tibetan nation. He is the guide illuminating the path, the supreme leader, the symbol of the Tibetan identity and unity, and the voice of the whole Tibetan people. His authority is derived from centuries old history and heritage and, above all, from the will of the people in whom sovereignty is vested and therefore comprises the following inherent rights and responsibilities.”
Though freed from day-to-day official functions, the Dalai Lama would continue: “To provide advice and encouragement with respect to the protection and promotion of the physical, spiritual, ethical and cultural well being of the Tibetan people, to remain engaged in the efforts to reach a satisfactory solution to the question of Tibet and to accomplish the cherished goals of the Tibetan people.”
Apart from being the Protector, the Dalai Lama will also be a mentor and an advisor. This formulation takes care of one of the major legal hurdles. In any system of governance, a head of the State is required (he/she can be an elected leader in the case of a Republic, a King/Queen in a monarchy or a religious leader in a theocracy), but there can’t be a constitutional vacuum.
The elected Prime Minister (such as Lobsang Sangay now), is only the executive head of the Administration, not the Head of the State.
The Dalai Lama could continue to provide guidance in various forms “in matters of importance to the Tibetan people, including the community and its institutions in exile”, either on his own or at the request of the Administration.
The Dalai Lama could also be requested to continue to meet with world leaders and other important individuals and bodies to speak on behalf of the Tibetan people.
This clever formulation takes care of several serious issues.
For example the Government in exile in Dharamsala is known as the ‘Central Tibetan Administration of HH the Dalai Lama’, his embassies in Delhi and abroad are ‘The Office of the Representatives of HH the Dalai Lama’, the officials conducting the talks with Beijing are the ‘Envoys of HH the Dalai Lama’, etc., the proposal of the Drafting Committee should solve these issues, as the above institutions should be able to retain their respective names.
Vis-à-vis the Government of India who has a Liaison Office (Ministry of External Affairs) in Dharamsala, this should answer their queries, if any.
It solves also the problem of ‘succession’ as all the executive powers will be concentrated on the elected Prime Minister. Where then is the question of a successor taking over the Dalai Lama’s responsibilities?
Regarding the relations with Beijing, it is more difficult. But it is perhaps because the situation has not moved for the past 30 years and that the future seems rather bleak that the Dalai Lama has decided to withdraw at this point in time.
The Chinese have repeatedly said: “The Central Government will never discuss the future of Tibet with the Dalai Lama. What we can discuss with him is his [own] future and that of some of his supporters.”
The Dalai Lama has always stated that he was not bothered by his status, but was only interested in the welfare of the 6 million Tibetans in Tibet.
The present radical changes will not alter the respective positions of Beijing and Dharamsala. Unless something drastic happens within China, for example a movement à la Tunisian, nothing much can be expected on the negotiation front.
In any case, Sangay won’t have an easy job; he will need the support of all his countrymen. It is probably why in his first message after the election, he appealed to the Tibetans: “The time has come for all Tibetans to take on greater responsibility. While I will do my utmost to fulfill the responsibility you have placed in me, the success of the next Kashag will depend on the engagement of all Tibetans. Together, I am confident we will march together towards a better future.”
Let us hope that the Tibetans will remain united in these difficult times.

A New Prime Minister for Tibet

The Election Commission of the Central Tibetan Administration announced today the results of the Kalon Tripa's elections.
Dr Lobsang Sangay polled 27,051 votes (55 % of the total votes) while Tenzin Namgyal Tethong and Tashi Wangdi  got 18,405 and 3,173 votes respectively.  
Dr Lobsang Sangay will be Kalon Tripa for the next five years.

On March 10, a bombshell made the headlines worldwide, “the Dalai Lama retires”. But retires from what?
In his Tibetan Uprising Day’ Statement, the Tibetan leader explained the background: "As early as the 1960s, I have repeatedly stressed that Tibetans need a leader, elected freely by the Tibetan people, to whom I can devolve power. Now, we have clearly reached the time to put this into effect.”
In June 1991, the Tibetan Parliament in exile (also known as the Assembly of Tibetan People's Deputies) had adopted a ‘Charter’, a sort of Constitution guaranteeing all Tibetans equality before the law without discrimination on the basis of sex, religion, race, language and social origin. While providing a separation of power between the judiciary, legislature and executive powers in the Central Tibetan Administration (or Government in exile), the Charter assigns specific functions to the Dalai Lama as the Head of the State.
With the recent announcement, the Assembly had no choice but to amend the Charter as the Tibetan leader’s functions will have to be allotted to other bodies or individuals.
It is a difficult task, though the Dalai Lama said: "It is to benefit Tibetans in the long run. It is not because I feel disheartened. Tibetans have placed such faith and trust in me."
A five member 'Constitutional Amendment Drafting Committee' was formed, with representatives from the Kashag (Cabinet) and the Assembly to suggest a legal solution to the tricky situation.
Let us try to understand the issue.
In an interview in 2006, the Dalai Lama had told us:
"I have three commitments: promotion of human values, promotion of religious harmony and promotion of awareness of the Tibetan cause."
He had further elaborated: "Out of three commitments, number one and two are mostly on volunteer basis. Till my death I committed myself to these causes. Regarding the third one (Tibet), in a way it not a voluntary commitment, it is due to past history and to the Dalai Lama institution. I am bound to this commitment and this responsibility, because I am the Dalai Lama who played a role in the past history of Tibet”.
The Dalai Lama had acknowledged his historical role as the Protector and Symbl of the Tibetan Nation.
The Drafting Committee has chosen the Middle Path, keeping in mind both aspects of the issue: the past historical role of the Dalai Lamas and his 'divine' status vis-a-vis the Tibet Nation as well as his request to be relieved of all day-to-day responsibilities.
Having completed its job, the Committee will present the outcome of its deliberations to a National General Meeting scheduled to be held at Dharamsala from May 21 to 23. This enlarged consultative group comprises of a few hundred ‘senior’ Tibetans such as ‘former ‘prime ministers’, members of the Cabinet, former ministers, present and former members of Parliament, officials above joint secretary rank, representatives from the local assemblies of Tibetan settlements and eminent members of the civil society.
The 'draft' which will later need to be ratified by the Assembly, gives the legal background and the dual role of the Dalai Lama: “The Charter provided that the successive Dalai Lamas shall exercise their responsibilities as head of the Tibetan nation and as chief executive of the Tibetan administration.”
However, “in deference to His Holiness the Dalai Lama's irrevocable decision to relinquish his administrative and political roles and in the face of His Holiness' rejection of pleas to reconsider that decision”, the Assembly should adopt some amendments to separate the Dalai Lama’s two roles and take care of his recent request, while safeguarding the continuity of the Central Tibetan Administration as the legitimate governing body of the Tibetans in exile.
The proposal is as follows: “His Holiness the Dalai Lama fully vests the Central Tibetan Administration and in particular its democratic leadership organs with the powers and responsibilities formerly held jointly by His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the Central Tibetan Administration to represent and serve the whole people of Tibet.”
However, a Preamble is added to the Charter in the same way as the US Constitution is amended, by adding amendments rather than by incorporating the amendments into the body of the Constitution as in India.
In a way, it is a legal Middle Path solution which should satisfy all the parties involved, except Beijing perhaps.
In Article 1, the Dalai Lama is termed as the ‘Protector and the Symbol of the Tibetan Nation’: “[as] human manifestation of Avaloketeshvara, is the guardian and protector of the Tibetan nation. He is the guide illuminating the path, the supreme leader, the symbol of the Tibetan identity and unity, and the voice of the whole Tibetan people. His authority is derived from centuries old history and heritage and, above all, from the will of the people in whom sovereignty is vested and therefore comprises the following inherent rights and responsibilities.”
Though freed from day-to-day official functions, the Dalai Lama would continue: “To provide advice and encouragement with respect to the protection and promotion of the physical, spiritual, ethical and cultural well being of the Tibetan people, to remain engaged in the efforts to reach a satisfactory solution to the question of Tibet and to accomplish the cherished goals of the Tibetan people.”
Apart from being the Protector, the Dalai Lama will also be a mentor and an advisor. This formulation takes care of one of the major legal hurdles. In any system of governance, a head of the State is required (he/she can be an elected leader in the case of a Republic, a King/Queen in a monarchy or a religious leader in a theocracy), but there can’t be a constitutional vacuum.
The elected Prime Minister (such as the new Prime Minister whose name will be announced on April 27), is only the head of the Executive body.
The Dalai Lama could continue to provide guidance in various forms “in matters of importance to the Tibetan people, including the community and its institutions in exile”, either on his own or at the request of the Administration.
The Dalai Lama could also be requested to continue to meet with world leaders and other important individuals and bodies to speak on behalf of the Tibetan people.
This clever formulation takes care of several serious issues.
For example the Government in exile in Dharamsala is known as the ‘Central Tibetan Administration of HH the Dalai Lama’, his embassies in Delhi and abroad are ‘The Office of the Representatives of HH the Dalai Lama’, the officials conducting the talks with Beijing are the ‘Envoys of HH the Dalai Lama’, etc., the proposal of the Drafting Committee should solve these issues, as the above institutions should be able to retain their respective names.
Vis-à-vis the Government of India who has a Liaison Office (Ministry of External Affairs) in Dharamsala, this should answer their queries, if any.
It also solves the problem of ‘succession’ as all the executive powers will be concentrated on the elected Prime Minister. Where then is the question of a successor taking over the Dalai Lama’s responsibilities?
Regarding the relations with Beijing, it is more difficult. It is perhaps because the situation has not moved for the past 30 years and that the future seems rather bleak that the Dalai Lama has decided to withdraw at this point in time.
The Chinese have repeatedly said: “The Central Government will never discuss the future of Tibet with the Dalai Lama. What we can discuss with him is his [own] future and that of some of his supporters.”
The Dalai Lama has always stated that he was not bothered by his status, but was only interested in the welfare of the 6 million Tibetans in Tibet.
The present radical changes will not alter the respective positions of Beijing and Dharamsala, unless something drastic happens within China, for example a movement à la Tunisian, nothing can be expected on the negotiation front.
Tibetan ‘democracy’ remains however very young and shaky: recently the results of the elections for the new Prime Minister were leaked one week before they were to be officially announced. Some solid home work still needs to be done by these institutions if they want to truly represent the aspirations of the Tibetan people.