The Happy People of Ngari?

Ngari or Western Tibet has been in the Chinese news in recent weeks.
It looks like a concerted effort from the Communist propaganda to promote the region bordering Ladakh, Himachal and Uttarakhand.
And first of all 'promote' the happiness of the people in these borders areas.

Happy Old People
On May 18, Xinhua published an article about The Happy life of a senior in Ali Prefecture of Tibet. ‘Ali’ is ‘Ngari’ (as the Chinese have difficulties to pronounce the ‘Ng’, it becomes ‘A’). 
The Chinese news agency mentions “a two-story house equipped with all kinds of household appliances where Cama Ciren [Karma Tseten], a 72-year-old Tibetan and his wife live.”
Karma stays there for the past 34 years, says the article.
Interestingly, the village is located in Tashigang in Gar County of Ngari Prefecture, near the Indian border (on the other side is Demchok in Ladakh).
The pattern of developing 'well-off border villages' seems the same as in Lhoka and Nyingchi Cities of Southern Tibet, (north of Arunachal Pradesh), whose fast-track development has been often been mentioned on this blog.
As reported earlier, Beijing wants the Tibetan populations living in the border areas to become: “the guardians of the sacred land and the builders of happy homes”.
This seems to me a worrying trend for India, when one think at the post-Dalai Lama era (though India was never worried, having more important political and cricket issues to follow or bother about).
Karma told Xinhua: “The village was actually isolated from the outside world in the 1980s and 1990s. There were only two or three households. Without a tent, we built a rock wall to shelter us from the wind. All of our clothes were scrabbled by hands.”

A few households, like in Yume in a couple of years ago (or less), mushroom into a large township.
Tashigang is the last village in Tibet; on the other side of the border is Demchok in Ladakh.
One has to remember that whenever villagers in Demchok have undertaken small development work, like laying a water pipe, the Chinese PLA/Border Forces immediately stepped onto the Indian territory, to object to ‘development in a disputed area’.
It is a blatant double standard!  Demchok has always been in Ladakh and Tashigang in Tibet.
Xinhua admits that on the Chinese side: “things have changed over the years. By 2012, the village was already a well-off village where each family lived in new house and a newly-built road connected the village with the outside world.”
To give these villages a ‘well-off’ status, China is building ‘model townships’, like it did in Tsona, Lepo, Marmang, Yume, or Metok in Southern Tibet.
The News Agency observed that Karma and his wife “are not supposed to labor for a living;” due to their old age, “they lead a comfortable life owing to the government subsidy policy.”
Karma told Xinhua: “The subsidies we receive each year exceed 20,000 yuan;” further, they enjoy full medical reimbursement.
The village has three college graduates; one of them is Karma’s daughter.
Even for the children, food, accommodation, and tuition fees are covered by the government.  “A happier life awaits us in the future,” Karma concludes.
Everybody seems to be happy in Tashigang.

A Happy Married Couple
Xinhua in another article reported The Happy life of married couple in Ngari Prefecture of Tibet.
One Luo Qiming came from the Mainland (Qinghai province) to the village in 2010; he met his wife, a Tibetan Niji Lhamo; she was then running the village's only commodities store.
The News Agency says “They fell in love at first sight and soon got married.”
At first, Luo thought of moving back to Qinghai with Lhamo, but “everything went on fine for the young couple,” the store does a good business, as it is supported by the local government.
Lhamo has got subsidized loans and has expanded her store: “their little store became a mini supermarket selling a variety of commodities. Their business thrived and all their loans were paid off.”

As Lhamo also works at the Gar County’s Agricultural Bank, she gets thousands of yuans extra: “Our income has increased a lot while our expenditure has not.”
And to make life happier, their children enjoy 15-year ‘free compulsory’ education: “Instead of paying anything for my elder daughter’s kindergarten education, we’ve received a lot of subsidies from the school.”
Compulsorily free education.

Happy Life in Purang
Let us move on the other side of the Ngari Prefecture.
An article on the China Tibet Online website speaks of Happy life on yaks' back in Ngari.
The website explains: “When one thinks of livestock carrying cargo, the first thought is often poverty, yet in Gangsha Village of Baga [?] Township, part of Pulan [Purang] County of Ngari Prefecture, people have used this way to overcome poverty and become prosperous.
Purang is at the trijunction between India (Pithoragarh district of Uttarakhand), Nepal and Tibet). Also known as Taklakot, it is the first town in Tibet territory for the pilgrims on their way to the Kailash-Manasarovar (after crossing the Lipilekh pass or flying by helicopter from Nepal).
China Tibet Online says: “Gangsha Village is an essential stop on the route to renowned holy mountain, Mt. Kangrinboqe [Kang Rinpoche for the Tibetans or Kailash]. Since Mt. Kangrinboqe has an average altitude of 4,700 meters, so many tourists couldn't make it past this point and need help carrying cargo and luggage. Starting in the 1980s and 1990s, Gangsha villagers have begun to provide yak-transport service for visitors.”
Since 2010, the villagers have organized a yak-transport service association: “Whenever a tourist ordered the service, the center would organize the appropriate yak, horse, and manpower.”
Jigme Dorje, the village headman explained: “we have clear prices for hiring guides and animals; one yak is 240 yuan (37.8 US dollars), and one guide is 260 yuan (40.9 US dollars), and our service is very popular. We have already made tens of thousands of yuan in profit this year, and the peak tourism season hasn't even started yet.”
In recent years, the ‘yak-transport service’ has greatly expanded its operation; the association has used part of its income, along with Chinese government subsidies, to open supermarkets, tea houses, and inns.
The village Party Secretary Dorje Pema: "We predict that we'd have more than three million yuan (0.47 million US dollars) in income this year in just those supermarkets, tea houses, and inns. We have also hired college grads, and we hope to take online orders in three years."
While the number of Indian pilgrims trekking via Lipulekh La under the Ministry of External’s scheme remains small, pilgrims visiting Kailash Manasarovar through Nepalgunj and Simikot is increasing exponentially. 
Nepali tour operators admit that some 20,000 pilgrims have booked trips to the sacred mountain and lake as of mid-May this year.
Last year, some 12,900 Indian pilgrims visited the holy place using the Nepalgunj-Simikot-Hilsa route in western Nepal.
This makes the tour operators and the yak owners happy.

Happiness in Ngari
In conclusion, everybody seems ‘happy’ in Ngari.
In the meantime, for the people of Ladakh, who for decades have been asking to reopen the traditional route from Ladakh to the Kailash via Demchok, it remains a far-away dream.
Beijing adamantly refuses and Delhi is not pushing to hard for it.
Recently, the Himalayan Buddhist Cultural Association (HBCA) has urged the Prime Minister to fulfill the long pending demands of Ladakhi, particularly the inclusion of Bhoti language in 8th Scheduled of Indian Constitution and opening of Kailash-Manasarovar route from Leh to Demchok and Tashigang.
HBCA President Tashi Targais observed during a press conference in Leh that the Kailash Mansarovar road is not only holy place for Buddhists but also for Hindus and Jain community and the route from Ladakh is the shortest route and its reopening would also boost the economy of Ladakh region.
China is not ready to listen.
If the people in Ngari are so happy, where is the risk for Beijing?
But China remains nervous.

Kailash: Holy no more?

A few days ago, The China Daily reported that last year, some 470,000 pilgrims visited Mount Kailash and Lake Manasarovar, located in today’s Ngari Prefecture of the Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR).
The article explains that these sites are sacred for the followers of Tibetan Buddhism, the Bon religion, Hinduism and Jainism:

For pilgrims, circling either site is a great honor and the fulfillment of a lifelong desire. Tibetan Buddhists believe that features such as mountains and lakes are living entities and are born in a certain year of the animal zodiac.

As often mentioned on this blog, the Communist regime in Beijing has now developed a great expertise in spiritual matters; for The China Daily:

If a pilgrim circles Kailash in the Year of Horse, the year the mountain is believed to have been born, it is a doubly auspicious act and equal to 12 revolutions in other years. They believe the journey will wash away the sins of one lifetime and bring prosperity.

The TAR government has however decided to implement measures to guarantee the pilgrims' safety, fulfill their religious needs while protecting the environment, says the newspaper.
The figure of 470,000 represents a rise of more than 50 percent from 2013 (some 30,000 pilgrims are said to have come from China's neighboring countries, i.e. Nepal and India).
According to Meng Fanhua, a Chinese pilgrim who recently did the parikrama:

It was so crowded. You could see pilgrims every few meters. People followed the same path, some Tibetans kowtowed, some walked.

Meng believes that his visit to the Holy Mountain is the greatest achievement of his life; it was a two-day walk around the base of Mount Kailash. The 50-year-old painter from Liaoning province said:

It was exhausting physically, but I have never felt better than after that journey. It was truly the greatest adventure of my life - and the most valuable one

Champa Tsultrim, head of the Ngari Prefecture’s Environmental Protection Bureau told China Today that the TAR government has invested 8 million yuan ($1.25 million) to establish some temporary sites for the disposal of garbage and help the travelers protect the environment: “We also increased the number of trashcans alongside Mount Kailash and Lake Manasarovar to guarantee one every 3 to 5 kilometers," he added.

Will it be enough to take care of the solid waste of half a million pilgrims?
It is extremely doubtful.

Champa explained that temporary sites are used to store the waste, which is collected every other week and then transported to Purang county, (near the Nepal-India border), some 100 km away from the mountain and 35 km from the lake.
Champa added that to ensure that the environment remains unspoiled, no industrial activity is allowed in the area.
But what about the ‘tourism industry’?
Nyima Phuntsok, head of Ngari's forestry bureau asserted that his office has established a hotline to allow local residents and visitors to report the behavior of pilgrims which pollute (such as dumping garbage or fishing in the lake).
Authorities can also be alerted in case animals are found sick or injured. Callers are accordingly rewarded, said Nyima.
Six monitoring stations on the lake, in some case manned by local residents have established.
Will it be enough?

Manasarovar Ghats?
Finally, the article notes that areas on the lake have been set aside for pilgrims “whose beliefs require them to bathe in the waters, and wardens keep a sharp eye out for anyone using detergents or soap that could damage the ecosystem.”
Will China built concrete ghats on the Sacred Lake?

The Future
One can safely predict that 1 million pilgrims (with a growing percentage of Chinese) will visit the Kailash Manasarovar every year by 2020.
It will be unmanageable.
Will the Holy Mountain remain Holy is the question which should be asked?

Tail-end: Incidentally, the time has perhaps come for Delhi to ask Beijing for the return of Minsar, the Indian territory illegally offered to China in the 1950s.

Demchok and the New Silk Road: China's double standard

A small nalla (stream) marks the border between Ladakh and Tibet

On May 23, Scoop News reported that the Chief Executive Councilor of the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council (LAHDC), Rigzin Spalbar wrote to J&K Chief Minister Mufti Mohd Sayeed requesting his support on an issue important for the people of the mountainous region.
Spalbar wanted Mufti to take up with the Central Government the opening (or reopening) of the Kailash Manasarovar route via Demchok, in Leh district of Ladakh.
Soon before President Xi Jinping’s visited India in September 2014, PTI reported a forthcoming ‘political gesture’ from Beijing; the Chinese President was to announce the opening of a new route, via Nathu la in Sikkim, for Indian pilgrims wanting to go on the Kailash Manasarovar yatra.
It is a fact that the Ministry of External Affairs’ yatra, via the Lipulekh-Purang route has always been rather treacherous.
For those who were unaware of the topography of the Himalayas, the Chinese offer to open Nathu-la seemed reasonable.
PTI then explained: “The new route, though longer, takes pilgrims from Nathu La to Shigatse… [and] from there the pilgrims could comfortably travel to Manasarovar and Kailash using well laid out highway.”
It was obviously Beijing’s rationale, but was it really in India’s interests? PTI explained: “It would be part of the big gesture of friendship not only to strike chord with Mr Modi but also the people at large, specially the Hindus and Buddhists considering its religious importance.”
But this ‘gesture of friendship’ from Beijing was obviously driven by self-interest.
In his letter to Mufti Mohd Sayeed, Spalbar mentioned the historical and spiritual importance of Mount Kailash and Manasarovar Lake as pilgrimage places for Buddhists as well as Hindu and Jain believers. He further pointed out that the Buddhist population of Ladakh had a long tradition of visiting the Kailash area, at least till China occupied Tibet in the early 1950s; the pilgrims till then always used the Demchok road.
Spalbar added that till the 17th century, the Manasarovar Lake and Mount Kailash were part of the Kingdom of Ladakh and the village of Minsar, near the Holy Mountain (read my article on Minsar) continued to pay revenues to the J&K State up to 1960.
In 1954, Ven. Kushok Bakula Rinpoche, then a Minister in J&K Government visited Manasarovar, along with Sonam Khangsar, a Judicial Clerk of the Leh District Commissioner Office, via Demchok; they collected taxes from the Minsar villagers.
The Chief Executive Councilor highlighted the fact that the Lipulekh and Nathu-la routes are difficult as it “involves trekking at high altitudes upto 19,500 feet under inhospitable conditions including extreme cold and rugged terrain that covers 23-25 days.”
Spalbar suggested using the Demchok route as the Holy Lake and Mountain are located at a mere two-day drive from Leh; further the route is relatively easy as it does not encounter any major pass en route.
The letter further states that the opening of the Leh-Demchok route to Kailash Manasarovar route has been “a persistent demand from the people of Ladakh since last many decades and has been relentlessly taken up with previous Governments at Center.”
According to the Chief Councilor, the opening up of the Demchok road could be a catalyst for the local economy as well as for the overall development of Ladakh.
It would further give a new dimension to the trade and tourism sector to the Ladakh district and the entire J&K State: “Moreover, the long lost historical and spiritual relations [between Tibet and Ladakh] will be revived,” wrote Spalbar.
A day later, The Economic Times said that the J&K State Congress “hit out at the Narendra Modi government for its alleged failure in taking up the issue of opening of Demchok route in Ladakh for pilgrimage to Kailash Mansoravar, in the ongoing talks with China.”
The Legislature Party leader from Ladakh, Rigzin Jora alleged: "Modi government has failed to take up opening of Demchok… It is unfortunate that he has not taken up with China the opening of a new route …although this was BJP's commitment in the parliamentary election.”
Jora used the same argument as Spalbar: “One can drive upto Kailash Mansarovar from Leh in two days without going through any high pass. So far the access is through Pithorgarh in Uttaranchal and ...through Nathu La pass in Sikkim.”
He added: “Both these routes are treacherous and vulnerable to vagaries of nature and climate. A large number of pilgrims have lost their lives negotiating the high passes and the difficult terrain on these two routes. Demchok provides the easiest access. A pilgrim can visit the holy site and be back in Delhi in a week's time.”
Jora asserted that during former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's second tenure, Delhi was given to understand by Beijing that China was ‘not averse’ to open the Demchok road as it was ‘not a disputed area.’
Jora’s assertions cannot be confirmed as it is not known if National Security Advisor Ajit Doval could take up or not the issue of Demchok with his Chinese counterpart, State Councilor Yang Jiechi, when they recently discussed the Indo-China Boundary issue.

Another view of the nalla

The New Silk Road
It is however rather strange that China, which is batting for a grand plan to create a modern Silk Road, with an mind-blowing investment of over US $2.5 trillion (over a period of a decade), still refuses to open the Demchok, one of the main traditional trade routes linking the subcontinent to Tibet and Xinjiang.
The Chinese Commerce Minister Gao Hucheng explained that more than 50 countries have shown interest in the initiative known as ‘One Belt, One Road’ to build a modern Silk Road Economic Belt (as well as a 21st Century Maritime Silk Road).
These projects include a network of railways, highways, oil and gas pipelines, power grids, Internet networks, maritime and other infrastructure links across Central, West and South Asia to as far as Greece, Russia and Oman.
Beijing’s open objective is to increase China's connections to Europe and Africa.
Speaking at the sidelines of a conference in Boao, Xi Jinping said the scheme would stimulate trade and investment between China and countries along the route: “We hope that the annual trade volume between China and these countries surpasses US $ 2.5 trillion in a decade or so,” affirmed the Chinese President.
At the same time, the traditional routes, Demchok and the Karakoram Pass linking Ladakh to Tibet and Xinjiang remain closed to tourism, pilgrimage and trade.
This New Silk Road appears to be a Chinese hypocrisy, for keeping India away from the benefits of the project.

In the meantime, the J&K State is trying to increase the areas coming under the inner line permit system (or Protected Area Permit) for the foreigners wanting to visit some remote areas of Ladakh.
Chief Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed stated: “The matter regarding extending the inner line permit for foreign tourists from Panamik to Varshi, including Yarma, Gumpa and Yarma Gongu monastery (in protected areas) in Nubra valley of Leh district, has been taken up with the Ministry of Home Affairs in February.”
These areas falls under the border districts of J&K which are covered by the Protected Area Regime under the Foreigners (Protected Areas) Order, 1958; it means that this order predates the time India discovered that China had built a road through the Aksai Chin.
A lot of water has flowed in the Indus since then.
The J&K administration had issued an order in January permitting domestic tourists to enter some of the so-called ‘protected areas’ under Nubra sub-division. The Indian Army was however not keen to allow foreign tourists in these protected areas without certain precautions.
It is said that the headquarters of 14 Corps based in Leh would agree to the extension of inner line permit (PAP) beyond Panamik with the precondition of establishing a police post to restrict foreign tourists beyond Varshi and along the road Sasoma-Sasrila; that would address the Army apprehensions.
While the security concerns should certainly be taken into consideration, it is also important to show to the world (and first, China) that these areas fall under India’s jurisdiction and it is up to the Central and State governments to grant permission.The same principle applies to many areas of Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim.
Regarding Demchok, the hypocrisy of China on this issue should be publicized; India can’t be roped in a Silk Road project if her interests are not taken into consideration.
And it is clearly in India's interest to open up Demchok to pilgrimage and later trade.

Minsar, an Indian principality in Tibet

Minsar and Kailash/Manasarovar area

My article Minsar, an Indian principality in Tibet appeared in NitiCentral.

Click here to read...

Prime Minster Narendra Modi was on his way to Arunachal Pradesh when Hua Chunying, China's Foreign Ministry spokeswoman again got virulent about Arunachal Pradesh. In a statement, she said: “the act of the Indian side is not conducive to properly resolving and controlling disputes between the two sides, nor in conformity with the general situation of growth of bilateral relations.”
Apart from the fact that Beijing has never thought of asking the people of Arunachal Pradesh on which side they would like to be (obviously, Beijing does not believe in democracy), her statement that Arunachal is a ‘disputed’ place is historically incorrect.
Xinhua added to the confusion by saying: “Modi visited a disputed zone in the eastern part of China-India borders to attend activities marking the founding of the so-called ‘Arunachal Pradesh’, a state that Indian authorities illegally and unilaterally declared in 1987.”
As I mentioned in an earlier article, the McMahon Line, signed by the Prime Minister of Tibet (Lochen Shatra) and India’s Foreign Secretary (Sir Henry McMahon) in March 1914 is very much legal.
Ms. Hua’s allegations do not make Arunachal a ‘disputed’ area, even if she claims: “The Chinese government has never recognized the so-called Arunachal Pradesh …it's an universally recognized fact that huge disputes exist on the eastern section of China-India borders.”
A ‘universal fact’ recognized by China only!
It is however true that the Middle Kingdom has always been under the impression that China and the Universe are the same thing!
Ms. Hua misplaced statements are certainly not conducive to properly resolving disputes between the two sides.
But does Beijing realize that? Probably not!
The time has perhaps come for Delhi to ask Beijing for the return of all the territories belonging to India presently occupied by China.

Apart from the J&K State’s areas illegally ‘offered’ by Pakistan to China in 1963, the Government should ask for the return of Minsar, an Indian principality in Tibet. The Indian rights to this small town were inherited from the Peace Treaty between Ladakh and Tibet signed in Tingmosgang in 1684. Besides the confirmation of the delimitation of the border between Western Tibet and Ladakh, the Treaty affirmed: “The king of Ladakh reserves to himself the village of Minsar in Ngari-khor-sum [Western Tibet]”. For centuries, Minsar has been a home for Ladakhi and Kashmiri traders and pilgrims visiting the holy mountain.
A report of Thrinley Shingta, the 7th Gyalwang Drukpa, head of the Drukpa school of Tibetan Buddhism, who spent three months in the area in 1748, makes interesting reading: “Administratively, it is established that the immediate village of Minsar and its surrounding areas are ancient Ladakhi territory. After Lhasa invaded West Tibet in 1684, it was agreed and formally inscribed in the Peace Treaty between Tibet and Ladakh, signed in 1684, that the King of Ladakh retained the territory of Minsar and its neighbourhood as a territorial enclave, in order to meet the religious offering expenses of the sacred sites by Lake Manasarovar and Mount Kailash.”
For centuries, the inhabitants of Minsar, although surrounded by Tibetan territories, paid their taxes to the kingdom of Ladakh. During in the 19th century, when Ladakh was incorporated into Maharaja Gulab Singh’s State, Minsar became de facto part of the Jammu & Kashmir State which regularly collected taxes from Minsar. This lasted till the early 1950s.

Minsar today

What happened then?
In 1953, wanting to sign his Panchsheel Agreement, Jawaharlal Nehru decided to abandon all Indian ‘colonial’ rights, inherited from the British. Though he knew that the small principality was under the Maharaja of the Jammu & Kashmir’s suzerainty and therefore part of the Indian territory, he felt uneasy about this Indian possession, near Mt. Kailash in Tibet. Nehru was aware that Minsar had been providing revenues to maintain the temples around the sacred mountain and the holy Manasarovar lake, however Nehru believed that India should unilaterally renounce her rights as a gesture of goodwill towards Communist China.
He instructed the diplomats negotiating the Panchsheel accord in Beijing: “Regarding the village of Minsar in Western Tibet, which has belonged to the Kashmir State, it is clear that we shall have to give it up, if this question is raised. We need not raise it. If it is raised, we should say that we recognize the strength of the Chinese contention and we are prepared to consider it and recommend it.”
Though Beijing did not have to ask anything, the Indian Prime Minister recognized ‘the strength of the Chinese contention’; Nehru added: “But the matter will have to be referred to the Kashmir Government. The point is that we should not come to a final agreement without gaining the formal assent of the Kashmir Government.” However, Delhi never referred the issue to the Kashmir government.
We should remember that treaties, conventions or agreements signed by any states, do not depend on an individual or a political party; they remain in force whoever is in power. The Chinese occupation of Tibet did not change this fact.
Further, the return of any part Indian Territory needs to be ratified by the Indian Parliament only, through an amendment of the Constitution. Therefore the so-called ‘return’ of Minsar to Tibet (and China) is still today illegal and invalid in law.

John Bray, the noted scholar and President of the International Association of Ladakh Studies wrote: "the Sino-Indian boundary dispute remains unresolved. Since the 1960s, the attention of the two governments has focused on the demarcation of the frontier and, more recently, on the prospects for mutual trade. The status of Minsar is no more than a minor footnote to these concerns, but one that has still to be cleared up."
Nehru’s perception that old treaties or conventions could be discarded or scraped greatly weakened the Indian stand in the 1950s (and later when China invaded India). Nehru’s wrong interpretation made it easy for the Chinese to tell their Indian counterparts “look here, McMahon was an imperialist, therefore the McMahon line is an imperialist fabrication, therefore it is illegal”.

Minsar, today located on the National Highway 219

The disastrous consequences of Nehru’s stand can still be seen some sixty years later. Ms. Hua’s statements have their origin in these wrong views.
But if Beijing continues to raise the ‘illegal’ occupation of the Arunachal by India, Delhi should definitely bring Minsar and the Shaksgam Valley on the negotiating table.
Further, it would be useful to have an Indian enclave near the Kailash, at a time when Indian pilgrims, in ever-increasing in number, are keen to visit the sacred mountain.

Kailash via Nathu: not a Big Thing

150,000 Chinese visitors in Sakya in 2014

A few days ago, when Sushma Swaraj, the Indian foreign minister was in China to prepare the visit of Narendra Modi to Beijing in May (and rebalance India’s foreign policy after the visit of President Obama to Delhi), PTI reported: “India and China exchanged notes on modalities for opening the second route for people undertaking the Kailash-Manasarovar Yatra in Tibet via Sikkim, expected to benefit Indian pilgrims.”
The Indian news agency added: “The route through Nathu La Pass will facilitate comfortable travel for Indian pilgrims by buses.”
The same day, Syed Akbaruddin, the spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs tweeted (he is a great tweeter): “India-China exchange notes on modalities for additional route for Kailash Manasarovar Yatra in 2015.”
Swaraj had earlier stated that the opening of the new route would be a ‘big thing’.
The MEA presently takes 700/800 yatris (in 18 batches for a 22-day journey) via Lipulekh Pass in Pittoragarh district of Uttarakhand. This route is often subject to bad weather and floods like in 2013.
Always optimistic Indian Officials had announced that the number of pilgrims could rise considerably once the new route via Nathu-la is opened.
It was what was expected after the fanfare announcements and great tweets.
Unfortunately on February 2, the Sikkim Government clarified: “because of sufficient and inadequate infrastructure on both sides, only four batches comprising 50 yatris, five supporting staff and a nodal officer would be allowed.”
The statement added that this year, the Kailash Manasarovar yatra, via Sikkim through Nathula, would commence from June and end in September.
The Chinese authorities had earlier mentioned that several thousand pilgrims would be allowed to travel on the new route.
What a climb-down!
Merely 200 pilgrims between June and September!
Let us recall that the Sikkim government was given the responsibility of putting in place all the required infrastructure, as well as transport, accommodation, medical facility, acclimatization centres for the yatris.
The Sikkim government's statement also announced the MEA would soon invite applications from candidates for the yatra.
Before the arrival of President Xi Jinping for his maiden visit to India in September 2014, PTI had said that, as a ‘political gesture’, the Chinese President was to announce during his visit, the opening of a new route for Indian pilgrims wanting to go on the Kailash/Mansarovar yatra.
At that time, I questioned: “The question which needs to be asked: is it a ‘great gesture’ from Beijing or only a self-serving one?
According to the Indian news agency, the proposal was under serious consideration for some tome: “All announcements including the quantum of investments China plans to make in India are expected to be announced during Xi's visit.”
Earlier, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had requested Xi to offer an alternative to the Lipulekh pass in Pittoragarh district of Uttarakhand for the Kailash yatra. Either Demchok in Ladakh, or Shipki-la in Himachal Pradesh was expected to be the new port.
It made sense in terms of access and 'comfort'.
During Xi's September visit, it was officially announced that Beijing had decided to open Nathu-la border point in Sikkim. PTI says: “The new route, though longer, takes pilgrims from Nathu La to Shigatse … [and] from there the pilgrims could comfortably travel to Mansarovar and Kailash using well laid out highway.”
It was obviously the Chinese argument as it will clearly take the Indian pilgrims for a long (and expensive) ride.
The news agency then added: “It would be part of the big gesture of friendship not only to strike chord with Modi but also the people at large, specially the Hindus and Buddhists considering its religious importance.”
I then asked: "But is it a gesture of friendship or a decision driven by self-interest?"
The Chinese foreign ministry had told PTI that “lodging and boarding facilities for pilgrims have been improved with new hotels and additional beds with additional investments. Pilgrims also can have access to over 2300 vehicles.  ...Indians pilgrimage to Tibet is an important content of bilateral relations. China's willingness is in accordance with the spirit of the agreement which has been signed by both parties...”
Merely two hundred pilgrims in 2015 shows that the new India-China friendship has not matured as yet.
It is difficult to believe that infrastructure is the issue.
The Chinese government announced in January that “The recently upgraded Shigatse city of Tibet wants to boost the tourism industry of Sakya county.”
The famous Sakya monastery is en route between Chumbi Valley (on the Tibetan side of the Nathu-la) and the Kailash area.
Zhang Xiuwu, vice-mayor of Shigatse and Party chief of Sakya county recently announced: “Sakya offers great opportunities for tourism right now along with Shigatse developed into a city. Sakya county has been called the second Dunhuang of China, and it is listed as one of the two Chinese historic cities in Tibet autonomous region.”
Zhang Xiuwu added: "Tourism is very useful for rural residents, and we look forward to welcoming more tourists in the future. Sakya is enriched with plentiful tourism resources, and he believes that tourism can generate big profits in a short period of time.”
Guess how many visitors Sakya received last year?
Zhang said: “Statistics show that the county mainly receives pilgrims and academic researchers, and it welcomed an average of 400,000 pilgrims annually in the past three years.”
In 2014, the county received 146,000 tourists, and tourism revenue reached US $ 2.6 million.
According to The China Daily, Ngari, where the Kailash is located, received 470,000 visitors ,during the Year of Horse (last year): an increase of more than 50 percent over the previous year.
It is said that an integrated tourist center in Sakya can provide a tour guide, tickets to attractions, banks, post office, communications facilities and a specialty shopping center.
Infrastructure is enough to receive 150,000 Chinese tourists in Sakya, 400,000 in Ngari and just 200 Indians to Kailash?
What to conclude?
That this Indian pilgrimage is not a Big Thing for Beijing!

China disturbing peaceful Tibet

Sacred Mt. Kailash

My article China disturbing peaceful Tibet appeared in NitiCentral.

Last week, a strange piece of news appeared in The Economic Times (ET), “While transgressions by Chinese soldiers in Ladakh in September and the resultant standoff were widely reported, an incursion of another kind shrouded in mystery is said to have taken place in Tibet at around the same time.”
The report speaks about a dozen monasteries, belonging to the Drukpa Kagyud lineage of Tibetan Buddhism being taken over by monks ‘with strong financial backing’; implying with the ‘backing’ from China.
It is true that for centuries there has been infighting over supremacy of the richly-endowed monasteries amongst sects and sub-sects of Tibetan Buddhism. But what is strange this time is that the 12th Gyalwang Drukpa Rinpoche, the spiritual head of the Drukpa Kagyud lineage, has linked the takeover of his monasteries in Tibet with the PLA’s transgressions in Chumar and elsewhere in Ladakh.
Why to link the two events is not clear, except perhaps to get publicity and force the Indian intelligence agencies to look into the issue?
The Gyalwang Drukpa told the ET, “We are still trying to ascertain if more monasteries have been taken over as these areas in Tibet are remote and communication is poor. …These monks are apolitical, engaged in spiritual work and it is baffling why they were targetted.”
The ET says that there were reports of “members of the Karma Kagyu lineage of Buddhism behind the takeover,” adding that there was no confirmation of this.
The Drukpa Kagyud lineage is a sub-sect of the Kagyud school of Tibetan Buddhism, one of the 4 major schools (the Dalai Lama belongs to the Geluk-pa lineage).
The Drukpas have a strong following in Ladakh and Western Tibet. According to the Rinpoche, it has some 267 monasteries in the region, some of them located in the vicinity of Mount Kailash.
What the ET does not mention is that the Drukpa Rinpoche had already written to the Karmapa Lama, the head of the Karma Kagyud, who lives near Dharamsala in Himachal Pradesh, accusing his followers to be behind the takeovers.
On September 10, Gyalwang Drukpa, “Over the last few days I have been receiving disturbing information from Tibet regarding the forced conversion of Drukpa Lineage monasteries in the Mount Kailash region. …My followers in Tibet tell me that nearly all of the historic Drukpa Lineage monasteries in Mount Kailash region are being forcibly occupied by the Karma Kagyu Lineage, using money, coercion and certain Chinese support.”
The Drukpa Rinpoche pointed out,”Historically the Drukpa Lineage and the Karma Kagyu Lineage have shared a deep and close spiritual bond. The Gyalwang Drukpas and Gyalwa Karmapas were known as ‘spiritual father and son’ because whoever was elder would give spiritual guidance to the younger one.” Apparently, it is not the case anymore as the Drukpa Lama believes that some Karma Kagyu lamas, using the Karmapa’s name, are behind the conversions.
It is not known if the Karmapa answered this letter.
This brings the issue of the rule by incarnation’ in Tibet, which has often been unsatisfactory. First, one is never sure that a new reincarnated lama is the right choice. During some troubled periods of Tibetan history, the Mongols or the Manchu dynasty could use their influence for making their own selection, through the Golden Urn system or other ways.

The Chinese Panchen Lamaoffering 'blessings'
on the shores of the Mansarovar

This is true not only for the Dalai Lamas, the Panchen Lamas or the Karmapas at the top of the hierarchy, but also for ‘local’ hierarchs who presided over a county, a province, a school of Buddhism, or a monastery. Historically, the first identified ‘reincarnation’ was the 2nd Karmapa Lama, Karma Pakshi (1203–1283), who succeeded Dusum Khyenpa (1110–1193), the first Karmapa.
Pakshi became the first formally recognised ‘tulku’, signalling the beginning of the Tibetan institution of ‘incarnated’ lamas. Later, other schools of Tibetan Buddhism too began to accept that lamas, saints or great yogis could return to the human world through an ‘emanation’, that took birth after the death of his predecessor, in order to ‘continue’ his work.
Historians believe that it went wrong when tulkus started to inherit the estate and the mundane position (and the disciples) of their previous incarnation. This led to the rise of hugely wealthy ‘transmitted’ estates. This is probably the root of the current problem around Mount Kailash and it is not a good omen for the future of the Tibetan civilisation.
Politically too, the rule by reincarnation does not suit a modern nation, mainly because it can be too easily manipulated. Take the example of the 10th Panchen Lama’s reincarnation. There are two contending candidates, one chosen by the Dalai Lama and one selected by Beijing (Gyaltsen Norbu). Ditto for the Karmapa lineage: there are today two or three candidates for the post of Karmapa (The Dalai Lama has accorded recognition to Urgyen Thinley Dorjee who lives in Himachal Pradesh).
Today, the Communist Party seems determined to fully play the ‘Panchen’ card against what it calls ‘the Dalai and his clique’. In March, 2013, the Chinese Government announced that the 11th Panchen Lama had been elected member of the Standing Committee of the CPPCC National Committee, China’s top political advisory body and whenever Gyaltsen Norbu visits Tibet, he is received with full pomp by the highest cadre of the Party who line up to receive his ‘blessings’. Isn’t it comical?
It is, however, true that historically the Tibetan society has often been divided; the split between the Thirteenth Dalai Lama and the Ninth Panchen Lama at the beginning of the 20th century is a case in point. The collaterals are still visible today with two Panchen Lamas.
In his Last Testament written in 1932, the Thirteenth Dalai Lama warned the people of Tibet against these ills of the Tibetan society; he wrote: “Now, when there is peace and happiness, when you have the power, work earnestly, and wholeheartedly for the general welfare. …Work and persevere now, that there is no regret later”.
At the end of his Testament, he warned his people of the forthcoming ‘dark days’: “In my lifetime conditions will be as they are now, peaceful and quiet. But the future holds darkness and misery. I have warned you of these things because of my experience and other important reasons. More I cannot say or advise, [if you don’t follow this advise] …all souls shall be immersed in suffering and the night shall be long and dark.” Soon after his death in 1933, the power-struggle degenerated into a tragic dispute between the last two Regents of Tibet (Reting and Taktra).
The present Dalai Lama often speaks of his Three Commitments, the second being “the promotion of religious harmony and understanding among the world’s major religious traditions.”
The Tibetan leader should perhaps tell all Tibetan Lamas that there is only one Buddha and that they should work in harmony, otherwise the Chinese are bound to use the situation to their own advantage.
As for the Chinese intrusions, it will probably continue, as the Party does not believe in Karma.