India must revisit Tibet policy to stop Beijing bullying

My article  India must revisit Tibet policy to stop Beijing bullying appeared in The Daily Guardian

Here is the link...

Xi Jinping visited Central and Southern Tibet after a gap of ten years. His objective was to ‘implement the party’s strategy for governing Tibet in the new era and write a new chapter in long-term stability and high-quality development of the snow-covered plateau’.

The last few weeks have been eventful as far as Tibet is concerned.

From June 21 to 23, Xi Jinping, General Secretary of the Communist Party of China (CPC) visited Central and Southern Tibet after a gap of ten years. When the Chinese president landed in Nyingchi City (previously called Prefecture), near the Indian border of Arunachal Pradesh, it immediately rang bells in the security establishment in India.

The China Daily reported about his stage-managed arrival: “He [Xi] was warmly welcomed by local people and officials of various ethnic groups.” Xi inspected the ecological preservation in the basin of the Yarlung Tsangpo River and its tributary, the Nyang River.

For India, this was an important part of the visit because first, the Chinese President was accompanied by Gen Zhang Youxia, Vice-Chairman of the Central Military Commission (chaired by Xi), and second, due to the proximity of ‘Bayi’ (which means ‘8-1 or August 1’, a term reserved to the People’s Liberation Army which was founded on August 1). Bayi is the Headquarter of the forces facing India in Arunachal Pradesh. Though no details have filtered, Xi was probably briefed about the situation on the border (a meeting with the PLA top brass of the Western Theater Command and the Tibet Military District was later organized in Lhasa).

The visit has to be seen in the context of the CPC’s 100th anniversary and the 70 anniversary of the so-called Liberation of Tibet (read ‘invasion’). The People’s Daily resumed the objectives of the visit: “to implement the party’s strategy for governing Tibet in the new era and write a new chapter in long-term stability and high-quality development of the snow-covered plateau.” This refers to the 7th Work Forum held in August 2020 which defined the development policies for Tibet for the five next years, particularly the sinicization of Tibetan Buddhism.

The Chinese President’s tour was hardly over, that another development took place in Delhi: on July 28 morning, US Secretary of State Blinken ‘briefly’ met the Dalai Lama’s representative Ngodup Dongchung during the former’s maiden trip to the Indian Capital.

Later photos of a meeting with members of the Indian ‘civil society’, attended by Geshe Dorjee Damdul, Director of Tibet House, the Dalai Lama’s cultural centre in Delhi were released. Confusion was created between the two meetings, because Dongchung was called ‘a’ representative of the Dalai Lama, while he is the ‘The’ Representative in Delhi. The US embassy should have certainly given the full name of the Representative, to avoid such ambiguity.

A couple of days earlier Wendy Sherman, the US Deputy Secretary of State had met State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi in China.

A State Department communiqué said: “The Deputy Secretary and State Councilor Wang had a frank and open discussion about a range of issues… [She] raised our concerns about human rights, including Beijing’s anti-democratic crackdown in Hong Kong; the ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity in Xinjiang; abuses in Tibet; and the curtailing of media access and freedom of the press.”

All this is fine and welcome, but one question remains: has India a Tibet Policy?

It is India that has long and tense border with Tibet from Demchok in Ladakh to Kibithu in Arunachal Pradesh; is it not high time for Delhi to have its own ‘Tibet’ Policy and start immediately engaging Dharamsala?

At first, Indian officials should meet the newly elected Sikyiong Penpa Tsering; it has not helped India to keep the relations with Dharamsala at a low key (or non-existent). Both India and the Tibetans need to seriously discuss several issues, whether of common interests or problems facing the Tibetan refugees in India.

The election of a new Sikyong Penpa Tsering as the head of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) is an ideal time to sit together.

Contentious issues, if any, should also be brought to the table (for example, why, nearly three months after the result of the elections, half the recently elected members of the Assembly of Tibetan People’s Deputies have still not yet taken the oath? Is there a Chinese angle behind this?). This should be frankly discussed (and not necessarily made public).

Several areas of Indian interests need to be discussed.

First, the recruitment of Tibetans in the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Militia; it has been reported in the Indian media that China wanted to match India by raising a Special Force composed of Tibetans. It is doubtful if this can succeed as Beijing’s trust in the Tibetans remains extremely low, even 70 years after the so-called Liberation of Tibet (read ‘invasion), but Delhi should ascertain Dharamsala’s views; and the CTA should eventually issue a statement stating its views.

Exchanges should also take place about some aspects of the Tibet-Indian border, whether in the Eastern Sector (Arunachal Pradesh), Central Sector (Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh) or the eastern part of the Western Sector (Demchok area); what is Dharamsala’s historical take on these issues?

This is particularly important at a time when it has been reported that the Chinese have erected tents on the Indian side of the Charding Nala near Demchok in Ladakh. The Tibetans are certainly aware of their traditional border with India and can hopefully openly state their position.

Another area of interest (not to say worry) for India, is the demographic change on the Indian frontiers. Since 2017, the mushrooming of ‘model’ villages in Tibet, at the proximity of the Indian border, is disturbing; hundreds of ‘xiaogang’ (‘moderately well-off’) villages have come up in the last four years with a mixed population of Tibetans and Hans.

Further, the authorities in Tibet have started to entice the local Tibetan population to side with the Communist Party. A new formula can be found in every speech of the local satraps, the inhabitants of China’s borders (with India) should be “the protectors of the sacred homeland and the builders of happy homes.” Officially, this development is linked with ‘poverty alleviation’ and the ‘defence of the borders’.

There are other areas of common interests, for example how to communicate with the Tibetans inside Tibet? Once the Ladakh episode is over, Delhi should facilitate cultural contacts between Tibetans in India with those in Tibet and why not invite the latter for religious or cultural happenings in India.

Environmental issues are also of concern for India, particularly the mega hydropower plants to be developed by China on the Yarlung Tsangpo/Brahmaputra; what are Dharamsala’s views on this?

From India’s side, assurance should be given that Delhi will stand by the Dalai Lama’s choice for his succession.

Finally, a mechanism should be set-up for regular exchanges between Delhi and Dharamsala; centuries of close kinship between the Roof of the World and the Indic civilization cannot be erased just for political expediencies , or due to Beijing’s bullying tactics.

Can Dharamsala stop PLA's Tibetan gambit?

In the recent weeks, news of the recruitment of Tibetan soldiers in the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has been reported in the Indian media.
We had often written about this on this blog as elsewhere.

See Tibetan Faces in the PLA

or Tibetans in the PLA Paramilitary 

or  The Colonizers’ Dilemma

My article Can Dharamsala stop PLA's Tibetan gambit? appeared in Rediff.com

The first priority for the new Tibetan administration in Dharamsala should be to look at Tibetan recruitment in the PLA, suggests Claude Arpi

Here is the link...

Last month, The Hindustan Times went a step further; it asserted that a special unit composed of Tibetans was being raised by PLA: “China’s military has stepped up efforts to recruit more Tibetans amid the dragging border standoff with India on the Line of Actual Control (LAC), holding special recruitment drives across Tibet Autonomous Region [TAR] since the beginning of the year.”
Quoting intelligence sources, it further noted: “PLA officials have criss-crossed the TAR to hold recruitment drives and to pick up Tibetan recruits who were already at PLA camps,” adding, citing intelligence reports and communications intercepts from three separate intelligence agencies: “There are also reports the PLA intends to create a Special Tibetan Army Unit. If this were to go ahead, this would be the first PLA formation comprising soldiers from a specific ethnicity.”

A New Sikyong
All this comes at a time when Penpa Tsering, the newly-elected president of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) — known as Sikyong — is going to take over his job.
In an interview with The Week, the Tibetan leader stated that he planned “to approach the Chinese government to facilitate a visit of the Dalai Lama to China;” he also hopes “to bring Beijing to the negotiating table with the representative of the Dalai Lama for the resolution of the Sino-Tibetan conflict.”
When asked about his priorities, Tsering said: “A key priority is the resolution of the Sino-Tibetan conflict. Keeping in mind the international situation and the political dynamics, we will have to study the issue more closely and come out with the right strategy. We also have to make good use of all the opportunities that come our way.”

China Today
It would extremely doubtful if the Chinese are in a mood to negotiate anything today with Dharamsala which should study the recent 11 rounds of talks between the Indian Army and the Chinese PLA in Ladakh; it will immediately be realized that even with muscles, tanks, artillery and 50,000 jawans, it is not easy (not to say nearly impossible) to make the Chinese bend.
Further, just look at the situation in Hong Kong, where the National People’s Congress in Beijing passed a new law ensuring that only ‘patriots’ can govern the former British colony; addressing the Chinese legislative body, Premier Li Keqiang showed that Beijing is serious about it, Li warned the world not to interfere.
According to the BBC: “Critics say Beijing is crushing dissent and removing the ‘one country, two systems’ agreement it made with the UK. Under the agreement, Hong Kong, a former British colony, was allowed to continue with its own legal system and have rights including free speech and freedom of the press.” It is all over now.
Lord Chris Patten, former governor of Hong Kong, observed that Beijing has “taken the biggest step so far to obliterate Hong Kong's freedoms and aspirations for greater democracy under the rule of law.”

Could it be different for Tibet?
Nearby, in the Taiwan Strait, the situation has also greatly deteriorated during last few weeks. According to Reuters, in March, in a day only, twenty Chinese military aircraft “entered Taiwan’s air defence identification zone, in the largest incursion yet reported by the island’s defence ministry and marking a dramatic escalation of tension across the Taiwan Strait.”
The island’s defence ministry announced “the air force deployed missiles to ‘monitor’ the incursion into the southwestern part of its air defence identification zone. ….[Taiwans’] planes warned the Chinese aircraft, including by radio.”
The situation in South China Sea is becoming tenser by the day, on April 23, Xi Jinping, China’s Supreme Leader, launched three new warships in just one day from the Hainan Island. China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has acquired a new cruiser, an amphibious assault ship and A ballistic missile submarine. All using the latest technologies.
Popular Mechanics, a magazine reporting on science and technology, commented: “The commission [of the three ships] reflected the breakneck pace of China’s naval shipbuilding program, which has transformed the country’s navy from a meager coastal defense force into the second most powerful navy in the world in just 30 years.”
No need to mention the treatment of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang and the propaganda orchestrated by Beijing for defending the indefensible.
In these circumstances, Dharamsala has little chance to succeed, especially after nine rounds of talks between Beijing and the Dalai Lama’s representatives over nine years came to nil in 2010.
At the same time, the state of affairs in East Ladakh is far from improving, on the contrary. China is massing new weapons, radars, equipments and reinforcing the Xinjiang Military District (XMD).
PLA divisions are also being reorganized, enlarged and modernized, introducing at a fast pace the concept of Combined Armed Brigades.
Moreover, lands belonging to Tibetans living on the border are said to have been expropriated by the PLA to build new garrisons.
Xi’s China is certainly in no mood to ‘negotiate’ with Dharamsala, especially when the 100th anniversary of the Communist Party of China and the 70th of the so-called Liberation of Tibet are on the horizon.
Penpa Tsering will also have to be briefed about the intensive ‘historical’ education of the masses taking place in China and on the plateau.
Today all over China, the mood is Red. 

Everything Red
On May 5, China Daily mentioned the Zhaojin Beiliang Red Army Primary School in Shaanxi province: “In 2018, the school was designated a demonstration school for Red education, which refers to Chinese revolutionary history, the spirit of role models and stories of the Communist Party. All 160 pupils are immersed in Red songs, Red tales and Red films.”
In Lhasa, the local leaders recently gathered in the ‘Two Roads’ Museum consecrated to the pioneers who invaded Tibet in 1951 and built the two roads (between Sichuan to Lhasa and Qinghai to Lhasa) between 1951 and 1954, which was indeed a remarkable engineering feat.
Today, Red slogans are flying all over; for example, Red Tourism should use “Red Resources, Good Red Stories, carry out Red Education, inherit the Red Genes, cultivate core socialist values and keep the Spirit of Old Tibet, while remaining true to the Original Aspiration.”
Does it not sound like the Cultural Revolution?
In these circumstances, ‘negotiations’ with Dharamsala, seem far away.
The priority should perhaps be to reconnect with the Tibetans inside Tibet, especially on the border areas.
In an article similar to the one in The Hindustan Times, IANS also spoke of the PLA recruiting “exclusive military formations manned by ethnic Tibetans.”
Citing intelligence officials, the news agency said: “most of the recruits are mixed Tibetans -- mostly children of Tibetan mothers and Han Chinese fathers or otherwise. Most of them are children of ex-PLA Han Chinese soldiers who got married to Tibetans.”
The intelligence officials told the agency: “It is a fairly long process because the security vetting process after the initial selection on the basis of a tough physical and IQ test is very extensive," an intelligence official monitoring the process, told the news agency.
In is undoubtedly a risky business for the PLA who 70 years after the ‘Liberation of Tibet’, still does not trust Tibetans enough to give them the command of a unit (or to become TAR Party Secretary).
Only a couple of Tibetan officers made it to the rank of major general (namely, Maj Gen Thinley, responsible of the recruitment of Tibetans and Maj Gen Ngawang Dorjee).
It needs however to be noted that hardly any Tibetans served in operational postings on the Indian borders, and no Tibetan has ever commanded the Tibet Military District (TMD), a lieutenant general post (nor for that matter, a Uyghur, the XMD).

Settling Han Veterans in Tibet
Another serious development is taking place, which Dharamsala should take notice of. According to Xinhua News Agency, after retiring from the PLA, a number of Han soldiers who have served in TMD or XMD, “took the initiative to sign up and chose the highest county in the Tso Nyi County of Nagchu City to make their contributions [to the motherland]. Over the past few years, after retiring, 17 retired non-commissioned officers “used their true qualities as soldiers and have moved to areas with an altitude of more than 5,000 meters, dedicating their youthful glory to write a new chapter in their life.”
The Chinese agency cited several examples: “Most of them are post-90s party members’ (meaning in their thirties), have moved to settle in these remote districts “to help [the Tibetans?] to get rid of poverty in high-altitude areas and take care of everyone.”
The propaganda said that they wrote a youthful song about hard work and national unity in which the party and the people are one: “We just changed place (of residence) to realize our dream.”
Xinhua continues: “in 2017, Tibet recruited civil servants from PLA veterans across the country, and 17 people eventually came to work in Tso Nyi County. Fifteen of them are members of the Communist Party or reserve party members, 14 are ‘post-90s’ [born] and 11 are college veterans.”
Tso Nyi (‘the Two Lakes’) County is located “in the depths of the Northern Tibetan Plateau. It covers an area of nearly 120,000 square kilometers, has a population of only 14,000 people, and has an average elevation of more than 5,000 meters. There are 10 months of long winter, with a minimum temperature of minus 40°C.”
It is obvious that China plans to change the demography of these areas like never before. It is true for this remote desolate place of Northern Tibet, but also for India’s borders, whether north of Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Uttarakhand or Himachal.
The first priority for the new Administration in Dharamsala (and the newly-elected Assembly) should be to look into the issues of recruitment in the PLA and resettlement of Han ‘veterans’ on the plateau. It may be less glamourous than to run to Washington to meet the State Department officials, but it is the need of the hour.
Reconnecting with their countrymen in occupied Tibet is indeed the first task of the new Sikyiong and Assembly.

Tibetan Democracy: random thoughts

Democracy: something one may not see in Tibet soon

Some thoughts about the recent Tibetan elections

Elections for the post of Sikyong (Prime Minister of the CTA) as well for Assembly of Tibetan People’s Deputies were recently held.
As someone who has been following ‘Tibetan affairs’ for the last 45 years, I wish put down in writing some my thoughts on the recent election of the Sikyong, which has attracted a lot of ink in the media (and keyboarding on the Net).
Let us start by a small telling observation: the social networks have played a role like never before in the election process. This can have negative or positive features, but, overall, it should be seen as a sign of growing awareness and active involvement of the Tibetan society in their leader’s election. As Tibet-in-exile is a free society, this should be encouraged, with self-restraint, of course.
Looking back, since 1959, His Holiness the Dalai Lama (HHDL) can claim, in my opinion, three great achievements in the political field:

• HHDL reunited the different parts of Tibet (let us not forget that in October 1950, when the Communist troops entered ‘Tibet’, they crossed the Upper Yangtze (Drichu). It means that, territories east of the Drichu were not de facto under the control of Lhasa). Today, the map of Tibet with the 3 provinces of U-Tsang, Kham and Amdo is accepted by all Tibetans; it was not the case in the 1950s. It is a historic achievement.
• HHDL reunited the different schools of Buddhism. Historically, Tibet has witnessed a lot of conflicts between the different religious schools. HHDL has given a voice to all the schools (including the Bon faith). This is an important progress.
• In March 2011, HHDL offered full democracy to the People of Tibet. This is an earth-shaking change for the Tibetan nation.

The recent elections are the result of this gift from HHDL.

Democracy as a system
Democracy cannot be said to be a perfect system, but it has good features as well as not so good ones. It is however far superior to the one-party system prevalent in Modern China.
Beijing is often pointing to the failures of the Western democracies, but its own system is today on the brink of collapsing; as a result, more and more repressions have to be applied to keep it going.
Democracy is sometimes chaotic (we can see this every day in India), but it ultimately brings a sort of stability in the society and the possibility for what Communist China calls ‘the masses’, to express themselves and change their leaders when they are unhappy or deceived. In other words, the voice of the ‘common men and women’ can be heard.
The system of rule by reincarnations was a poor system of governance:

• It left a gap of 20 odd years between two reincarnations/political leaders
• It was subject to manipulation by external forces (eg: the cases of the 10th and 11th Panchen Lama)
• In the interregnum, Tibet has often had mediocre regents, unable to give a lead to the nation (during the interregnum of the 14th Dalai Lama, the power struggle between 2 regents was so bad that it nearly lead Tibet to a civil war).
• Just take the 19th century, the Manchus fully used the fact that the 9th, 10th, 11th and 12th Dalai Lamas passed away too early to rule, to ‘return’ to Tibet.

A modern nation can't afford such an antiquated system.
Therefore ‘democracy’, though imperfect, is the best system until the human society reaches the level of a Gnostic or Spiritual Society, where the ‘wisest’ will automatically come to the fore to organize the public life. It may take some time.

Present Sikyong Elections

• Tibet had the good luck to have a remarkable man elected as the first Kalon Tripa. It was Tibet’s good karma.
• It is important to keep in mind that this does not mean that the ‘best man’ is automatically and always taking the right decision for his people (remember the Greek Gods who often led their people to their doom).
• On the other hand, even if an elected leader is not perfect, it does not mean that the system is not good and in this particular case, that Tibet should not continue with this system of governance.
• Usually, in other societies (for example in India), anti-incumbency plays an important role to bring fresh blood into the system.
• Things are different in the Tibetan society where there is an immense respect for the established hierarchy. In fact, many believe that the Dalai Lama had to ‘force democracy’ down reluctant Tibetan throats; everybody was quite happy to depend on their wise leader to guide and tell them what to do with their lives; ultimately, it does not empower the ‘people’.
• It is true that even in exile, a deep veneration for the leader/lamas has remained ingrained in the Tibetan psyche. It should not stop people to have an independent thinking of their own.
• At the beginning of the campaign of this election, it is interesting to note that there was no anti-incumbency vote; this partially explains Lobsang Sangay’s high score in the first round.
• During the campaign for the second round, it is regrettable that the debate did not reach the expected level; however, on the positive side, it has been one of the few opportunities for the Tibetan society to debate the functioning of its administration and point a finger at what was considered wrong or unacceptable.
• At the same time, the election process should not be an excuse for ‘regionalism’ to return as a plague for the Tibetan nation. Regionalism apparently played an important role in the recent election. There is nothing wrong in regional representation, but regional favoritism should be avoided at all cost by the new leadership. It has not always been the case. I believe HHDL said this to the 2 candidates in no uncertain terms.
• To an outsider, the CTA seems to be a very opaque organization. Instead of openly debating serious (and sometimes negative) issues facing the society in general, these problems are often kept under wraps (I remember the case of a Tibetan who had raped a girl in a Tibetan settlement; the first ‘official’ reaction was to hush up the incident, because “it is not good for the cause”. But a rape is a rape, whether committed by a French, a Chinese or a Tibetan and it should be denounced with full vigour). One could give many other such cases.
• It is true that some of the arguments/points mentioned during the campaign should have come out earlier during the term of the Sikyong (particularly the issues raised by Kasur Dicki Chhoyang). However, apart from the debate at the Assembly, there are very few opportunities for the ‘common man’ to express himself or know what is happening behind the opaque curtains of Gangkyi.
• In this context, it is interesting to note that the incumbent Sikyong did not fare well in Gangkyi area. There is obviously a trust issue which needs to be looked at and ironed out.
• In the future the press should take a more active role and openly speak of the thorny political issues facing the society. For example, the problem of ‘health services’ recently brought up by HHDL should have been raised long ago by a vibrant media.
• Old Tibet had ‘street songs’ making fun or criticizing the leaders/lamas, what is replacing this today?
• Personally, I feel that it is wrong for the gods or the ‘protectors’ to interfere in the ‘common man’s elections. Without judging the former’s competence and knowledge of geopolitics (or just in politics), the time has come for ‘common men’ to think for themselves; keeping in mind that in some cases they may take the wrong decisions, the ‘masses’ should be empowered (even if that means having different perspectives than HHDL). It is what China will never be able to do; the present regime can built beautiful modern airports, safe highways or comfortable five-star hotels, but people are not allowed to think on their own.
• More important than to take the right or wrong decisions, it is essential to learn from past errors and avoid the same mistakes in the future.
• The Buddha taught his disciples: 'As the wise test gold by burning, cutting and rubbing it on a piece of touchstone, so are you to accept my words only after examining them and not merely out of regard for me."
• Democracy likewise should be burnt, cut, rubbed and tested again and again and ultimately perfected. External interference cannot help much the empowerment of the Tibetan society.

It may be possible to avoid the ‘boxing’ encounters during the campaign; it is happening in most democracies: just look at the present US Presidential Elections campaign. It is part of the ‘imperfection’ of the system, simply because our societies (and the human composing them) are imperfect.
One has to make with it, and just get the best of it.

How to make the Tibetan Administration more transparent?

• The Tibetans should have a vibrant, independent and fearless press (including investigative journalism). For this, the Tibetan mindset has to change; criticism should be taken as an occasion to ‘change’. The society does need to wait to receive ‘critics’ from HHDL or other religious leaders; the Tibetan should become more ‘positively’ critical.
• Take the example of the recently released ‘Panama Papers’, it is ‘positive’ criticism, which will hopefully help the world to be more just.
• Implement an RTI Act for the CTA. It would go a long way to better understand the opaque functioning of the CTA. Once again, cases such as the one mentioned by HHDL for the health facilities in the Tibetan settlements could have been raised much earlier and taken care of.
• Women should play a more important role in the Sikyong elections (why not have 50% female Kalons?). In a modern society, women are often able to give a lead that a man is unable to provide.

Tasks in front of the new Sikyong

• Hopefully the new Sikyong will be able to fit the description given by Kasur Dicki Chhoyang at the time of her resignation. The Kasur also raised the issue of regionalism vs unity of Tibet; this should be taken seriously.
• The new Sikyiong’s choice for the next Kalons should be dictated only by what is the best for the Tibetans in exile and the Tibetans inside Tibet and not by personal acquaintances or personal preferences.
• The new Kalons should be role models for the Tibetans inside Tibet (and the Chinese government).
• The new Sikyong should establish a close connection and understanding with the Government of India at all levels, in all domains.
• He should be in touch with what is happening in Tibet and China and provide an alternative to the Chinese schemes or at least comment on it (for example when the Chinese provide a database of the ‘Living Buddhas’ or when the Chinese invade Tibet bringing tens of millions of tourists on the plateau).
• Why not have a Department headed by a Kalon for ‘Inside Tibet’ Affairs?
• And if the Chinese do something good, why not say it!
• Since several years, the Chinese have always been a few steps in advance on Dharamsala in terms of information/propaganda. It is sad.
• The new Sikyong should take more responsibilities; since HHDL has delegated his political power, the new elected leader should act as a leader on his own (always keeping the general good in mind).
• Human resources should not vanish under the US/European sky, but remain in India and work for the general good of the Tibetan community.
• The CTA needs to have a think-tank which ‘thinks’ of solutions for the future of the Tibetan nation
• The CTA also needs a good professional spokesperson who will be able to articulate the policies of the CTA (after these policies are decided); particularly the policies vis-à-vis China. He should also be able to tackle difficult questions on the life of the society in exile.

These are some of my thoughts.
Tibetan democracy is clearly going through a period of apprenticeship; overall it is doing fairly well.
The most important task is to empower the ‘common man/woman’.

Tibet is learning the tricks of democracy

Penpa Tsering, Lobsang Sangay, The Dalai Lama

My article Tibet is learning the tricks of democracy appeared in The Daily Mail.

Here is the link...

The ballots have spoken. Lobsang Sangay, the incumbent Tibetan prime minister, has been re-elected as ‘Sikyong’ (Political Leader) to lead the Tibetan refugees during the next five years.
In the old days, the State Oracle would speak to the ‘Spiritual Leader’, that is, the Dalai Lama, and give him directions on how to conduct state affairs.
Now times have changed, and though some might miss the past democracy is more fitting for a modern state - so the Dalai Lama decided in March 2011.
Incumbent Tibetan PM Lobsang Sangay, pictured with the Dalai Lama, has a lot riding on him

Democracy
The uncontested leader of Tibet thought that the time had come for Tibet to become an ordinary democracy led by a leader chosen by the people, instead of a divine incarnation ruling by virtue of his birthright. It was a great move from the Dalai Lama - and it annoyed Beijing immensely.
The current Chinese leadership does not believe in democracy. Though the Communist Party rules on behalf of the ‘people’, the masses’ participation is absolutely unwarranted.
The official results will only be declared by the exiled Tibetan Election Commission on April 27, but private websites give Lobsang Sangay 33,234 votes, while his opponent Penpa Tsering gets only 24,752 in his favour — out of some 90,000 registered voters.
The beauty of democracy is often the anti-incumbency factor against politicians in power. But things are different in Tibet, where there is immense respect for the established hierarchy. In fact, many believe that the Dalai Lama had to ‘force democracy’ down reluctant throats.
During the recent campaign, Tibetans realised the not-so-nice aspects of the process. This probably explains the reaction of Professor Samdhong Rinpoche, the first directly elected prime minister. He told a Delhi newspaper that he boycotted the election process because the campaign had moved away from the ideals.
“The exiled government was based on the principles of Swaraj of Mahatma Gandhi. It didn’t involve competition or opposition,” he observed.
Well, democracy is democracy, with its good and bad intact. The Dalai Lama laughed when he asked the two candidates during an audience: ‘How is the boxing match’?
At the end of the campaign, out of the blue, Dicki Chhoyang, the Canada-based minister of information and international relations, resigned and declared her intention to vote for Tsering.
In her statement, she enumerated ‘some personal character traits’ which she considered important for the Sikyong. Her list was interesting: Motivation and dedication to the collective interest, the ability to think holistically and with long-term vision, to be honest, a team player, to value substance over appearance, etc.

Qualities
Was the incumbent prime minister lacking these qualities? Now that the people have spoken, one can only hope that the entire community will unite around the new Sikyong.
True, everything is not perfect in the exiled Tibetan society, but where does a perfect society exist? A few days after the final vote, the Dalai Lama spoke of the deplorable health conditions in some Tibetan settlements in India, and asked the new administration to provide better care and services to them.
“Feel-good appearances will not help. That will be empty glory,” he added.

Future
Another area the Sikyong will have to take a serious look at is the happenings in Tibet.
Dissensions have recently appeared in the Chinese leadership. The South China Morning Post reported that Zhu Weiqun, the interlocutor of the Dalai Lama’s Special Envoys and a hardliner on Tibet affairs, has been accused of taking huge bribes “to grant approvals for people to become Living Buddhas”.
The Hong Kong daily quotes an overseas Chinese website, Bowen Press, which believes that Zhu is under investigation for allegedly granting the status of ‘Living Buddha’ (reincarnated lamas) in exchange for cash.
If proved true, this is a big development. Zhu, after all, had advocated that the Communist Party was the sole authority to decide the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama and pledged to strictly follow policies.
In many fields, the Chinese leadership is steps ahead of Dharamsala. Take the flooding of the plateau with mainland tourists, which has irreversibly changed the ‘Roof of the World’. More than 50 million annual visitors have been the pretext for expanding border infrastructure - hurriedly constructed railways, roads and airports… all leading to India.
The new leader will have to be able to take up these issues with New Delhi and Beijing. The fact that the Dalai Lama has ‘imposed’ a democratic system is important for India. It corresponds to India’s value system. It should definitively be encouraged by Delhi, and with the Dalai Lama getting older, it is crucial to have a solid interlocutor, someone who can speak on behalf of the Tibetan community and have influence in Tibet.
Will Lobsang Sangay fit the bill? Only the future will tell.

Election in Exile

Penpa Tsering and Lobsang Sangay debating

My article Election in Exile appeared in The Asian Age/Deccan Chronicle.

Here is the link...

A Tibetan friend pointed out a small error, Dicki Chhoyang is not born in Canada; she is born in India and moved to Canada at the age of 4.
I should have written 'the Canada-based minister'.
Errare...

It is crucial for the next Sikyong to establish a good working relation with the present government in New Delhi. The incumbent seems to have failed in this regard.

Tibetans refugees will elect their new Prime Minister on March 20.
He is known as “Sikyong” or “Political Leader” in opposition to the “Spiritual Leader”, the Dalai Lama, who in March 2011 decided that the time had come for Tibet to become a true democracy and have an elected leader instead of someone ruling by virtue of his birth-right, as the incarnation of Avalokitesvara, the Bodhisattva-patron of Tibet.
It was a great move from the Dalai Lama; it annoyed Beijing immensely. The current Chinese leadership does not believe in “elections” and democratic norms. Though the Communist Party rules on behalf of the masses, the masses’ participation is not required.
On December 4, 2015, the Election Commission of the Central Tibetan Administration declared the results of the preliminary round for the Sikyong election.
Two candidates with the largest number of votes, Lobsang Sangay, the incumbent Prime Minster, a Fulbright scholar who graduated from Harvard Law School, and Penpa Tsering, the present Parliament-in-exile Speaker, were shortlisted by the Election Commission. They had respectively gathered 30,508 and 10,732 votes.
The second round, on March 20, seemed played in advance. It may not be so. But let us first look at the Tibetan society.
In most places, there is often an anti-incumbency factor against politicians in power. Candidates are extremely good at making tall promises which, later, they are unable to fulfil. This is the beauty of democracy: Voters can register their dissatisfaction with an elected leader by sending him back to the starting blocks, i.e. “normal” life.
Things are different in the Tibetan society where there is immense respect for the established hierarchy. In fact, many believe that the Dalai Lama had to “force democracy” down reluctant Tibetan throats; everybody was quite happy to depend on their wise leader to guide and tell them what to do with their lives, but the Tibetan leader had a greater vision.
Years ago, I interviewed a senior Indian military intelligence officer who was sent to Tibet in 1949 to prepare a report on the threats coming from China, when I asked him what struck him the most during his several weeks mission in Tibet, he said: The sense of hierarchy! As an Indian officer educated by the British, he was deeply shocked to see “common men” prostrating in front of passing lamas or officials, without even knowing their identity; these ordinary folks did not even dare to look up.
Things have changed in exile, but this deep veneration for the leader/lamas has remained ingrained in the Tibetan psyche. Everyone still addresses a “leader” as “kusho-la, kusho-la” (Sir-ji, Sir-ji), with the outmost reverence.
In this election, it is interesting to note that there is no anti-incumbency vote and that partially explains Mr Sangay’s high score during the first round.
But the dye has not been cast.
Less than a month before the final round, out of the blue, Dicki Chhoyang, one of the senior ministers in the Kashag (Cabinet), resigned.
In her statement, the Canada-born minister of information and international relations said that she would like to “participate in the discussions leading up to the March 20, 2016 general election”, and could not do so as a minister.
She admitted that the time was pressing: “H.H. the Dalai Lama is 80 years old… We are blessed by his presence during this critical historical juncture, but great challenges are yet to come. We must be ready to face them. There is no time to be lost.”
Though not saying openly that she would vote for Penpa Tsering (she said so a few days later), her statement contained “some personal character traits” which I considers important for the (Sikyong) to have.
Her list makes interesting reading: motivation and dedication to the collective interest, the ability to think holistically and with a long-term vision, to be honest, a team player, value substance over appearance, respectful of others, humble, etc.
A perspicacious observer could ask, does she mean that the incumbent Prime Minister does not have these qualities?
It is up to the people to decide.
She added one issue that has historically plagued the Tibetan society —regionalism. “The current electoral campaign season has strong regional overtones. This is destructive. We must teach our children to think of themselves as Tibetan first.”
She further had a point when she concluded: “We have a moral duty to prioritise issues touching the 98 per cent of Tibetans living in Tibet.”
What are India’s interests in this election?
More than one lakh Tibetans are refugees in India; they are a vibrant and mostly peaceful community, rarely in the news for the wrong reasons.
The fact that the Dalai Lama has “imposed” a democratic system is important for India. It simply corresponds to India’s values and should definitively be encouraged.
With the Dalai Lama getting older, it is crucial for Delhi to have a solid interlocutor, someone who can speak on behalf of the Tibetan community.
Historically, in Tibet, religious leaders, especially in the interregnum between two Dalai Lamas, have triggered instability (verging on a civil war in 1947 when the two regents violently opposed each other). It is one of the reasons why the Dalai Lama has opted for democracy, a far-more stable system.
It is crucial for the next Sikyong to establish a good working relation with the present government in Delhi. The incumbent seems to have failed in this regard.
The Chinese leadership is always steps ahead of Dharamsala. Not only has Beijing worked for more than a decade on the issue of “reincarnation’, it is flooding the plateau with mainland tourists, changing the demography and landscape of the “Roof of the World”.
More than 50 million yearly visitors have been the pretext of expanding the border infrastructure — hurriedly construct railways, roads and airports… all leading to India.
The new, elected leader will to have to be able to take up these issues with Delhi. For all these reasons, the new man in the Sikyong’s seat in Dharamsala is vital to Delhi.