Obama Should Meet Who/Hu First?

 

When the announcement was made that President Obama would not meet the Dalai Lama on the latter’s trip to the USA last month, the disappointment in the Tibetan world was palpable. I felt a little better after seeing this AFP headline “West Appeasing China on Tibet, says PM-in-exile”[Wednesday, September 16, 2009 17:43]. The report also did not disappoint:

DHARAMSHALA, India — Tibetan prime minister-in-exile Samdhong Rinpoche on Tuesday accused the United States and other Western nations of appeasing China in regard to the mountain territory. The charge came after aides to The Dalai Lama said the Tibetan Buddhist spiritual leader would not meet President Barack Obama on a planned visit to Washington next month.” “A lot of nations are adopting a policy of appeasement,” Rinpoche told a group of journalists late Tuesday… “Even the US government is doing some kind of appeasement,” Rinpoche said. “Today, economic interests are much greater than other interests,” Rinpoche went on to say.

The novelty of a tough, or at least not submissive, statement coming from Dharamshala was a pleasant surprise for many. This comment appeared on Phayul.com: “Finally, after 50 years in exile, a statement from the TGIE that has a little backbone, calculation and heart! Speaking our true feelings…” and “Well done Rinpoche.” and “…I hope Dharamsala will start a new era of being forthright in it’s diplomatic communication.”

Then I saw this UNI report dated 15 September (a day earlier than the AFP report). “Obama should first meet Hu Jintao then Dalai Lama: Rinpoche”. Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh, Sep 15: Tibetan Prime Minister in exile Samdhong Rinpoche today said US President Barack Obama should first meet Chinese President Hu Jintao and then the Dalai Lama as cordial relations between the US and China is very important… President Obama should not irritate Chinese leadership. China’s most irritation is with His Holiness wherever he goes. So, this I think is common sense. Obama should have good relations with the Chinese leadership,’’ Prof Rinpoche told a team of visiting media persons here.

It struck me that if Rinpoche was so concerned about not irritating the Chinese leadership, and this concern was just “common sense”, wouldn’t it make even more common sense for Obama not meet The Dalai Lama at all, which should make the Chinese feel calm and serene?

To perhaps demonstrate that he, Samdhong Rinpoche was doing his personal best not to irritate China he remarked towards the end of the interview that “Tibet will always remain an internal issue of Peoples Republic of China.’’

What on earth was going on in Dharamshala in mid-September? Did Rinpoche give different interviews to different journalists, or did he somehow manage to make absolutely contradictory statements at the same press conference without any of the journalists present noticing? Schizophrenia is sometimes defined as the capacity of a person to hold conflicting points of view at the same time, but I think in this case we may have something more symptomatic of a moral than a psychological failing.

Quite a few Tibetans (especially some dharma centre lamas) affect a fashionable pseudo-sophistication to demonstrate how they are above old-fashioned nation-state politics. It also probably helps to ingratiate themselves with their New Age sponsors and followers. It goes something like this. Freedom for Tibetans is all well and good but there are greater global concerns such as world peace, the environment, and even providing “spiritual guidance” to the Chinese people. Samdhong Rinpoche, in an interview in The New York Times, said that the last concern was more important than Tibetan independence, or “political separation from China” as he put it.

Rinpoche’s New Age leftist outlook is fairly discernible in his interviews and talks. Still, I was somewhat taken aback by Rinpoche’s attack on the American military-industrial complex (I am not kidding) in his opening statement at the panel discussion on Kalon Tripa Elections in Dharamshala on June 21 this year, that I mentioned in two of my previous postings. It didn’t seem to raise any eyebrows among the audience, but I suppose his followers accept this in the sense that Rinpoche being a “rinpoche” has a vision of the ultimate big picture, which us “grey” (kyau) folks don’t. Hence one didn’t question such utterances, no matter how weird. Even a statement as damaging to the survival of the Tibetan people, as Rinpoche’s declaration that the new Chinese railroad would benefit the Tibetan people and their economic welfare, should not be questioned.

In the interview with UNI, Rinpoche made this claim (which I think is absolutely untrue) that even for the Dalai Lama the Tibetan issue was not a primary concern. Rinpoche said that during any meeting with any president or world leader “…the Dalai Lama would first focus on human values, second on religious harmony and then Tibetan Issue which is his third priority with whomsoever he meets in the world be it President Obama, a small child or a beggar in street.”

I suppose for someone who considers the destruction of Tibetan civilization, the murder and oppression of its people and the ecocidal exploitation of its land a third priority in his scheme of things, it  probably explains why Rinpoche has regularly objected to Tibetan activists demonstrating against China. It also explains why Rinpoche was seen on European TV, in 2006, as one of the leaders of a major demonstration against the Swiss company SYNGENTA in India, a major agri-business company that Indian environmentalists oppose.

Comments

  1. gyalpot | November 4th, 2009 | 1:05 pm

    It is disappointing to realize that although Rimpoche was elected as prime minister of our exiled government, yet he chooses to not to follow the “Middle Path” policies with regard to the issue of Tibet. Not criticizing China is one thing, but stating “the issue of Tibet is China’s internal affair”, is like giving a scorpion a ride across a river. Many of us do not necessarily subscribe to the “Middle Path” agenda but realize the importance of an urgent resolution in the interest of our suffering country men inside Tibet. As far as HHDL is concerned, Rimpoche as an elected politician working for the Tibetan cause should not be distracted by HH’s statements regarding prioritization of issues in a global context. It is evident from Rimpoche’s contradictory interviews that he is on the one hand trying to be a “Gelong” and the next a “politician” which clearly underscores the issues that the Tibetan public have with a “Gelong” as a political leader.

  2. Dawa | November 4th, 2009 | 3:35 pm

    “Rinpoche was so concerned about not irritating the Chinese leadership, and this concern was just “common sense”, wouldn’t it make even more common sense for Obama not meet The Dalai Lama at all, which should make the Chinese feel calm and serene?” You got it here. This is almost exact thing I felt when Rinpoche flip flopped big time that week. My exact sentiment was “Then why not just give up the land and its population to the Chinese on a big freaking plate.” And he can ask Dharamsala’s famous gold smith Serso kelsang la to make a beautifully engraved heavy gold plate for the freaking occasion.

  3. tibetebeb | November 5th, 2009 | 2:48 am

    Our leadership at Dharamsala is diluting our cause now. Rinpoche’s smartness with choice of words is such that he could actually make people believe sun rises from the west. Rinpoche, please do not dilute our cause.

  4. Dana | November 5th, 2009 | 9:41 am

    I find it little uncomfortable the constant use of beggar in the street versus someone else. It sounds as though it shows your prejudice against the beggar in the street.

  5. Dana | November 5th, 2009 | 10:17 am

    I mean it to SR. not JN!

  6. tsering | November 5th, 2009 | 7:35 pm

    JN we Tibetan in Tibet never hope ousitde Tibet, no matter , Obma met His Holiness or not…most important thing to strugle for freedom for Tibet…JN…pepar war never win victory…please take action…come home …I welcome you…if you really fight for Freedom for Tibet.

  7. Tenzin Patriotic | November 5th, 2009 | 8:56 pm

    Some of our Tibetan foolish youth follow JN’s path. I don’t mean that JN is not scholar or whatever, he is saying he have lots of plan to get our mother of land but if he really have those plans then why he don’t join our government in exile to perform his skill or plan, why is he isolated in country side???? It shows that he don’t have any plan rather than attacking our leader with words only.

  8. Dorjee | November 6th, 2009 | 12:16 am

    Mila, Gyalpot (I m sure one single person writing under different names). JN la, you now have invitation from Tibet. What you will do now? They need you there, not on paper or net.

    In US it is difficult to survive without work. My friend do not have time for surfing the net. What I mean here is; some of the people (regular commenters) are handsomely paid for doing their (Gyami’s) job.

  9. Tenpa Dhargyal Gapshi | November 6th, 2009 | 1:45 am

    what kind of idiotic statement is that? Come to Tibet. Why? So he can join the others in jail? So they can effectively shut him up behind bars or put a bullet in his head? Is this same strategy that starts with accepting Tibet as part of China, because you know, it does rank up there. Why do you guys think that is a reasonable argument or even a point? Why does he or for that matter anybody has to prove anything to anybody. If you have a valid point or an argument to make, please make it and then we can talk about the issues. Quit making idiotic statement that has nothing to do with the topic.

  10. Kalsang Phuntsok | November 6th, 2009 | 10:11 am

    The problem with having a religious, passive and always philosophising nut as a leader is he can easily forget the immediate goals he has been elected to work towards in the first place and starts imagining grander visions and objectives like curing the entire planet or the Universe,while doing nothing towards either. The immediate goal is now part of a greater goal, World Peace/End of Suffering or whatever.
    Give me a freakin break.

    Why don’t we give up the whole struggle and call it Lay-gyumdre. Then Samdhong can retire and go to his hermitage and give a shot at nirvana. That’s probably what he wants now that his exit is near.

  11. Dawa | November 6th, 2009 | 10:28 am

    I agree with Tenpa Dhargyal Gyapshi completely. If going back to TIbet is the solution why don’t you ask the exile government leaders to do the same. Anyway why am I even talking about it. What JN writes encourages me that is a glimmer of hope. Our TGIE had given up on Rangzen. As far as TGIE is concerned we are Chinese now. Can’t you get it that we got sold out? By our own leaders?

  12. Golok Ambum | November 6th, 2009 | 10:32 am

    Dorjee (alias Jamie),

    I can assure you that Mila and Gyalpot, unlike you, are two different commentators…

    Golok Ambum
    Webmaster

  13. Dawa | November 6th, 2009 | 10:36 am

    The reason leaders should be in prime of life, healthy mentally as well as phyisically is that their judgment may not affect the running of a country with 6 million people. If our leaders who are in charge of making decisions that affect 6 million people gets too old in office there is the danger that nostalgia and urgent desire to see one’s homeland may induce them to make unwise decisions that could have unpleasant consequences for the 6 million people of Tibet in the long run. There I said it. Interpret it any way you like.

  14. Dawa | November 6th, 2009 | 10:37 am

    …that their judgment may not adverseley affect the running of a country…

  15. arihant | November 6th, 2009 | 10:46 am

    The following is the comment I wrote to post for your article on phayul. Somehow phayul censored it and barred it from posting.

    Here is the comment;
    This is one of the crappiest articles Jamyang la has put up on phayul so far. It’s like putting on a cheap chupa and tying that up with a shoe lace. It’s so out of shape.
    You don’t see people write everything in brackets ( ) when they quote sources if it were to be considered professionally done.
    Don’t just unload lousy articles here simply because Tibetans would think that you are one of a few who “can” write “professional” articles. Tidy things up before you publish them.

    Then the Schizophrenia question? It requires a lot of “moral” courage for Jamyang la to imply it to Samdong’s mental condition. Anyway, schizophrenia is not a psychological rather it’s a psychotic condition.
    To boil it down from the multi-layer criticisms of Samdong is the ideological battle between Rangzen vs the Middle Way Path. Many Tibetans I know think that you are either on Rangzen’s side or that of the Middle Way Path.
    But Chinese government thinks it differently. If you are with one of these two, actually you are on both sides. No matter how you name it, China sees the Middle Way Path a disguised name for Rangzen.
    We all (rangzen believers and the Middle Way Path wanderers and people like me in between) prayer to see the rise of the Sun of Ultimate Truth which I think it clearly implies some sort of Rangzen.
    Anyway again, I want to see a road map from our Rangzen believers that shines a clear light to the path that leads us to rangzen.
    Or is Rangzen a Tibetan version of new age shenanigan that gets in the way of practical proposals of TGIE?
    I think Samdong has given up his own ideologies or at least put them aside to serve as a faithful follower of the His Holiness the Dalai Lama. His Holiness on different occasions said the Tibet issue is his third priority. Samdong is just reiterating His Holiness’s commitments.
    Let’s start the debate.

    Here is what I wrote to phayul after I noticed it barred my comment from publishing.

    Hi folks at phayul media,
    I am not happy the way you guys filter comments. My comment on Jamyang la’s recent article hasn’t been published. My comment is not in any way abusive, misleading, axaggeration, insane, and any of that sorts of comments that usually barred from postings.
    Is this the exile journalistic ethic? Is freedom of expression a convenient word, a feel-good self back-patting tool to utter by exile Tibetans but in reality it’s alright to constrain opinions that don’t go well with one’s personal political agenda? Is this the democracy we in exile are constantly praising for?

    I hope there would be an answer for blocking my comment soon.

    Arihant

  16. Pasang | November 6th, 2009 | 11:25 am

    Sometimes I wish middle-path samdong side had better decent people than people like arihant, who can only say things like crap and crapiest. If yo want to get donw to that level of discusiion then I can also say kyakpa so arihant.

    the issue is not if rangzen side has a road. I am sure that they have. But they should not discuss it public with people who have sold out like arihant . Only people beleiving in Rangzen should discuss the strategy. But I can also ask what road map does middle path have? Nothing except surrender.

    In this article JN is just asking if it ok for Samdong to say the Chinese railroad is good. Or if Tibet is internal affair of China. Or religious guidance for Chinese is more important than Tibetan independnce. Or Obama should see Hu first so that Chinese not be irritated. If you really support Samdong then you should answer these clearly and refute JN, not just say crap.

  17. Kalsang Phuntsok | November 6th, 2009 | 11:40 am

    To Arihant: You wronte…

    “Anyway again, I want to see a road map from our Rangzen believers that shines a clear light to the path that leads us to rangzen.”

    What is the road map of middle-pathers? One that leads to nowhere?
    Rangzen believers don’t have a road map because we intend to carve one as we move along. Our goal is to reach the mountaintop. We can clearly see our goal, and more importantly our enemies can too. Middle-pathers don’t have a roadmap either, but there is a lot of hope that the mountaintop will somehow come down to meet them somewhere in the middle.

  18. Midas | November 6th, 2009 | 11:50 am

    Okay let’s not feed the troll. Jamyang la doesn’t have an appeasement policy in his agenda unlike erm you-know-who, so you trolls can lay off with your bs requests/threats. If you can’t be original, at least shut up, we all know we’ve heard that one enough.

    That said, thank you for keeping us in the loop JN la. I for one wouldn’t have thought about TGIE’s dubious double standards on the matter at hand and well, the Tibetan issue on the whole. This ridiculous farce pulled by SR which well went unnoticed rings a serious alarm and calls for some major amendments in our policies, no matter how insignificant the exile government’s position seems at this point with the right-wing orgs and ICT coming into play, like you’ve pointed out. Although I’d wish His Holiness to put more emphasis on the Tibet issue, I do understand where He’s coming from and His responsibilities as the World Leader. But Samdhong Rinpoche?! Really??? If the TGIE and SR did the same, I really don’t understand why we need them in the first place, I thought we elected them to look after us, not go around being the lone saviour of humanity. It’s definitely about time something gets done, and as much as I’m glad that more Tibetans are getting educated and acquainted with these matters (the kind of hope you wrote about in the last one), I think there’s a lot of work still left to be done. Most Tibetan youth, including yours truly, are willing but lazy and the new age pseudo-intellectuals on the other hand, would rather not delve into the ugly side of being a Tibetan, the politics that is. Come to think of it, whether we go for Rangzen or autonomy (pressure from ‘sensible’ and utterly religious parents I suppose), a lot of us have very little to no knowledge of the factual stuff regarding Tibet, history and all and if it wasn’t for the likes of you JN, a lot of us wouldn’t know what little we do know now. I don’t mean to sound like the broken records played at Gangkyi all the time (in fact right after reading this piece I watched a video on Phayul which was supposed to be a Kalon tripa panel discussion though all I heard was complaints about the Tibetan youth and I couldn’t help but cringe thinking about the sorry state of affairs and the quasi-intellectual good for nothings we have governing us), but we seriously need to get everyone involved. Except for a handful of Tibetans working for the TSGs, the remaining lot of us only have these momentary bouts of patriotism and then go back to the same old grind. I think we need a forum where we can not only discuss these things but actually take part in, on a daily basis and your blog is doing exactly that, but it’d be nice if we could do that out in the real world too. I know we have enough organizations but if only.. okay I’m not sure what I’m saying but I hope you got the drift. Before I digress, I was hoping we could perhaps start a petition to Dharamsala, perhaps write an open letter asking for a review of the policies. The multi-party democracy sounds rather appealing and even if that sounds like a rather distant aim, maybe we could mobilize the youth to get a voice in our affairs. And for that of course, it’s important to educate them first and I would very much like it if you could start something at the grassroots level, kind of like what SFT does with its campaigns so instead of just reading and agreeing with your views, we could actually participate in the politics and the upcoming elections no matter how futile it seems right now. I think we can learn from the likes of Obama, how he used technology to revolutionalize politics.. we could perhaps see some real Change, here I’m really hoping I’m not asking for too much. Anyways thank you again for the constant reality checks, JN la no matter how messed up they leave us after reading them. Let us bring on the much needed change, if Americans can, why can’t we? Sigh a girl can dream right…. Bhod Rangzen!

  19. gyalpot | November 6th, 2009 | 4:52 pm

    I would like to thank the editor for clearing up the fact that I am not an imposter as post # 8 claimed me to be.

    As for his comment; “What I mean here is; some of the people (regular commenters) are handsomely paid for doing their (Gyami’s) job.” Clearly is childish and immature and definitely lacking in proof. Today we live in society where the burden of proof falls on the accuser and if he fails to provide that, he may be setting himself up for a libel suit. It is time to put away hearsay, and conjecture and stick to putting forward ideas and discussion however, radical and opposing it may be. Everyone may not subscribe to your ideas and feelings but this is no way of behaving on this forum. Unless you yourself, are “…doing their (Gyami’s) job.”

  20. Tsering Choedon Lejotsang | November 7th, 2009 | 3:57 am

    The mentality of our monk leaders can be interpreted as chronic symptoms of a chronic disease that has plagued Tibetan political scene ever since 13th century, when Sakya
    Sect of Buddhism ruled Tibet.

    In the 13th Century, Sakyas came to power with the backing of Kublai Khan of Yuan (Mongol) Dynasty.
    Then in the 17th Century, Gelugs came to power with the backing of Gushir Khan, another Mongol chieftain.
    From mid 17th Century onwards, to maintain their rule over Tibet and to safeguard their position as the spiritual “guardians” over Mongols, Gelugs headed by Dalai Lama entered into a “special” relation with Manchus, whereby Dalai Lamas help Manchu to pacify Mongols and in return Manchus allowed the Dalai Lama to continue to rule Tibet.

    Although the Kadgyus never formally ruled Tibet (and in that sense did not bring in foreign power into Tibet for their political gains), some lamas from their sect actively sought to receive fancy titles from Ming Dynasty.

    The common denominator in all these cases is the act of using foreign power to gain more power to oneself/one’s sect. Such acts can be categorized into:
    1. The act of seeking out/ and or accepting help from foreign power to politically “unify” Tibet under a “charismatic” leader. Sakyas and Gelugs fall under this category
    2. Or the act of seeking out fancy titles from foreign power to make oneself look “more holy” and “more important” in the eyes of the follower. Kagyuds fall under this group.

    The tools that all have used to come to power or be seen as “holy” is to barter their “soft power” to complement the military/and or economic power of local/regional powers of the time (Mongols, Ming, Manchu).

    In return these powers provided political/military “protection” to the Gelugs, Sakyas, or whoever is ruling Tibet on behalf of the foreign power at the time.

    For the head of the sect ruling Tibet, safeguarding the interest of its own sect has always been of more important then the overall good of Tibet. This has been the rule rather than the exception.
    Their chief interest was to make sure that their sect stayed in power, even at the expense of jeopardizing Tibet’s sovereignty.

    His Holiness might have at one time hoped that just as the Mongols and Manchus, Mao’s China could become the new “protector” of the Dharma and allow Gelugs to continue ruling Tibet.
    But in 1959 it became clear that the communists did not need the “soft power” that the Tibetans traditionally offered the Mongols, Muchu rulers. Unlike previous powers with which the Tibetan lamas bartered their “soft power” for political power, Mao’s China had a ready “soft power” in the form of communist ideology.

    Thus, with the advent of red China, the Dalai Lama’s government was “orphaned” for the first time in 300+ years. Ever since then, the ruling sect has been searching for a “protector”.

    To some degree, I have a feeling that this search for a “protector” could be what is prompting His Holiness and Samdong lama to make statements such as “world peace is more important than Tibetan matters”, “universal brotherhood”, etc.
    The things that they say change from time to time. It is as if they are trying to test “how effective will this script be to fetch a new protector”. Or “how effective will this be to extend the influence of “Buddhism” among XXX, or YYY”.
    Looking at the scripts that they churn out from time to time, it is as if they are trying to stay in sync with the latest thought fashion among their current target audience or prospective audience.

    Now that it has become clear that no government will act as the “protector” in Mongol/Manchu/Ming sense (the West was the main recruitment base for this role for a long time), our rulers are finding ways to increase their power base in the sense that Kagyud and other lamas did with Ming China. Be in the good grace of everyone who will throw a penny at you, doesn’t matter if you are throwing away something worth a million times more than the penny.

    I doubt if the ruling sect ever really thought in terms of Tibet as a “nation state”.
    I won’t blame the rulers of the bygone times, for the very idea of a nation state did not exist then.
    Most modern states at one time were either a theocracy or a kingdom, etc. But most have now evolved into nation states where the government is there for all people within the nation state and not just for the sake of a sect or a group.

    I am sure His Holiness and Samdong lama and all monks working in the government at heart sincerely wish to work for the greater good of Tibet.
    But given their up-bringing, educational background, and company that they keep, they can’t escape from “sect first/Buddhism first” mentality.

    Thus, when we vote, the least that we can do is to make sure that we do not vote for a monk.
    I also agree with many of the comments written on this blog about His Holiness retiring from politics completely.

    The idea of modern nation state involves a few key elements such as providing modern education to all its citizens so that they can participate equally in economic activities. In order to ensure a safe environment within which to carry out such economic activities, the government has to have laws and rules.
    Government also has the responsibility of protecting its citizens from threats of external invasion. .
    External threats can come in many different ways. Outright military invasion, or implying that a nation (Tibet) is a part of another nation (China) by bestowing fancy titles on to the ruler of the former by the ruler of the latter, etc.

    It is too bad that our past rulers either actively brought in foreign power into Tibet or unknowingly been manipulated by foreign powers.

    What we are living through now is the consequences of 8 centuries of short sighted domestic power struggle and selfishness.
    We must not allow history to repeat.

    TCL

  21. Mila Rangzen | November 7th, 2009 | 4:39 am

    Dorjee/Jamie,
    I do not know what you are up to. But here is my identity. Born in Nepal. Lived most of my life in Kollegal,India.
    Schooling..CST Kollegal, CST Dalhousie, DAV Chandigarh, MCC Chenaii.
    Work..taught for 2 years in Sera Je High School,Byllakuppe. Taught 2 more years in Tibetan Transit School, Dhasa. Was a teacher/headmaster/vice principal/co-director in 4 different Tibetan schools in Kathmandu for 4 years.
    Landed up in Ari in 2001 with only $200 in my wallet and no relatives and friends here. New environment. No job. No apartment. It was hard.

    Became a professional warrior. Not that hard now. Was a nursing student at CUNY.
    Now a journalism student at Laguardia College,NY.
    Currently an independent social worker serving NY Himalayan peoples in general and Tibetans in particular.
    You can get computers here cheaper than in India. 8 hour work per day Monday thru Friday is just fine. 16 more hours to sleep or just chill. Enormous time that we Tibetans usually spend gossiping about neighbors, cigarettes, wine, kasauti, gambling, disco and conquest is channelized on this blog and elsewhere concerning our cause so I can learn something from healthy open discussions from these few intellectuals in the Tibetan world and throw my 2 cent opinion too!
    Yes I am a new age pseudo intellectual! But that’s the way to grow. No one becomes ripe intellectual over night unless it’s Samdong Lama who is reputed to have mastered English language in just 14 days! Good for him! Nothing personal. But don’t tell me “He is so great..you know..he sacrificed his satyagraha in order to practice HH’s middle way”. SR became prime minister in 2001. He wrote a booklet on satyagarha in 1985 pledging to carry it out in Tibet. 16 years is a good long time to do what he said he intended to do. If he couldn’t do it because it’s a hard calling I don’t blame him but please don’t pop up sacrifices excuses! Enough is enough!
    My very name can suggest two things if you have some common sense. In May 2008 when I went to apply for a visa to Tibet just to see my remote phayul Jepa/Jeshung/Jethongmon, in a frenzy Chinese embassy in Kathmandu tore my passport to shreds simply because my last name is independence. They hate it. My first name comes from Milarepa, a straightforward saint who never entertained mundane concerns all his life let alone actively entering politics and power. Not a single excuse did he create! There was simply no need! Someone who finds Milarepa’s life inspiring cannot be a shugden if that is what you are implying here. This is history. I don’t work for china. I don’t get paid by them. I don’t have a house. Apartment sharing..NY Tibetan style! Pigsty! No car. I don’t know how to drive even! There is no need. Subway is fine. My needs are few and simple. Somehow I can continue to manage it myself.
    Constant perpetration of evil even by a fellow Tibetan on me and my family is not tolerated by me, regardless of whether it’s coming from a high office or thug in the street. So watch what you are accusing me of. I have the greatest respect for HH, a symbol of pure intention and emotion! HH’s photo with me hangs on the wall of my office. No one continues to care more about Tibet and Tibetans than HH. There is no dispute on that. However, politically I look at him as another great human being. I try to examine his decisions and actions on Tibet whenever I can because to me he is a sort of symbol of human perfection. Giving up the goal of independence in speech and writing(as if china is giving us “meaningful autonomy”) is the greatest blunder.
    Your running skills might improve a little if you try to run after horses but not much progress when you walk with donkeys.
    What’s your identity now? Let’s exchange.
    Don’t tell me I cannot constructively criticize the decisions and actions or lack of actions on the part of our leaders/govt because I am nobody. Don’t make the mistake of speaker Penpa Tsering who said unfortunately on two different occasions that those Tibetans who do not turn out to vote during PM election can not have the right to criticize the policies of our leaders/govt.
    It’s like Nancy Pelosy going on TV “look last year 100 million Americans out of 300 million did not participate in the presidential election. Therefore, you 100 million Americans can not have the right to question the policies of Obama administration!
    She would have ended up in prison(!) had she said that. For denying a permanent right of the people.
    Voting participation is important but don’t cross the line!

  22. tsering | November 7th, 2009 | 10:39 am

    I often to read many young Tibetan writers and Poets in Tibet. Because they are real brave and strong people even though under the Chinese government still can write many inspiration of work. Here I introduce one great Tibetan poet who used both Chinese and Tibetan Language. He is a most effective poet in Tibet. most of his poems reflected his love for Tibet. some poems were deleted by Chinese web-holder. He wrote a poem as title “ My Tibetan” this poem dedicated to Tenzin Tsundue as well as Rangzen Fighters in Exile…his poem begin… Quote of Tenzins Poem “My Tibetanness”…

    “I am Tibetan.
    But I am not from Tibet.
    Never been there.
    Yet I dream
    of dying there. “

    If it is so true
    Come home
    I welcome You….

    I cannot translated all his poem because it was deleted by Chinese web-holder, but I remembered end of his poem…

    Now we are in Tibet
    Are we refugee?

    This is question , this is also a hope , this is a calling for those Rangzan fighter…JN and other Rangzen Fighters if you really want to fight for our country, then come home! no need to wait for Mangtso and next His Holiness ! come home ! if you really want our country -Tibet !

    His blog: http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4821685d0100es42.html

  23. Tenpa Dhargyal Gapshi | November 7th, 2009 | 12:29 pm

    Very well written, tsering choedon la. I have noticed that tendency in our history and nobody seems to be concerned that we have repeatedly invited foreign powers in domestic disputes for personal gains, so much so that it has become an addiction, kind of a like a suckerfish on the shark. Don’t tell me that people at that time didn’t understand the meaning of the word “AMBAN”. It boggles my mind that such nation selling tactics were tolerated even when China was relatively weak and there wasn’t any need. I do think our leadership is based on sect first and nation second and that is not just the gelugs, the others will do the same if they get the power. Just get rid of it altogether and create political parties and we will progress.

    Mila, that was a great post. There is no need to take any crap, especially when it concerns your country. Penpa Tsering should be tarred and feathered and tied to the gangkey office cafeteria so that we can give him a swift kick to the rear at lunchtime, everyday for being so stupid.

    Tsering, so now you are hiding behind a poet from Tibet (if he exist). Actually, it is much better than your usual hiding place, which is the red robes of kundun. Concerning the poet, can’t tell what his overall political leanings is nor what he meant exactly by that or whether it is a view shared by all Tibetans in Tibet or it is his frustration over the quagmire produced by inept leadership or his judgment is being marred by his reverence for H.H, well, I can’t exactly say. But I do not share his view nor think that is a great idea, at the moment, even though I disagree with utmost respect, unlike some people. By the way, where were you when Tsundue was trying to make his way into Tibet? Did you miss that?
    Actually, I think the onus is with the middle-pathers, headed by samdong rinpoche, to close down the tibetan govt, pack everything, do a last ‘thank you India’ show and head for Tibet. Wasn’t it him and the TGIE’s stance that
    Tibet is an internal issue of China and that Tibet would definately benenfit in collaraboration with our oppressors? It would make sense that YOU AND MIDDLE PATHERS SHOULD return to Tibet where I presume you would ‘negotiate’ the hell out of our country. What better way to show China and uncle Hu that we are serious about ‘autonomy’ and we don’t have rangzen as a hidden agenda. Rangzen proponents refuse to return with the oppressors still in Tibet, we will aid, shout, educate, protest, create grassroots organizations and do everything possible to keep Tibet issue alive. And refuse to listen to silly old prime minister who advises us not to protest, not to create a scene for Hu, not to say ‘China out of Tibet’, not to listen to our conscience, not to question our govt. and not to think at all. See, two can play at this kindergarden logic game and that is why I keep saying this kind of idiotic statement needs to stop. It makes me think you are not educated and a little dense up there.

  24. Arihant | November 7th, 2009 | 8:50 pm

    Tsewi Passang la,
    You just initiated the Rangzen Road Map with kaykpa zho. Good start indeed. It must be some sorts of traditional Rangzen Tibetan ceremony.
    Anyway, I am sure Rangzen believers have some realistic trantric guide (that can’t be shared with common people) to the holy mountaintop of Rangzen other than reciting Rangzen mantras and flying flags.
    You asked me the road map of Middle Way Path Policy.
    ‘Memorandum on Genuine Autonomy for the Tibetan People’ is clearly the one you can read and see where Tibet will be boxed in the context of PRC.
    If you can come to terms with larger reality of the current situation, the genuine autonomy proposed by HH the Dalai Lama and backed by TGIE is not in any way an act of surrendering.
    Mr. Samdong is in the air suspending between the private office of the His Holiness the Dalai Lama and TGIE.
    Policy direction regarding Tibet-China issue is ‘unmistakingly’ coming directly from the His private office. That doesn’t mean that TGIE led by Samdong has no authority to draft their own policy toward China.
    It is almost unimaginable how general Tibetans would react if TGIE were to write a Sino-Tibet policy that is starkly different from that of His Holiness’s Middle Way Path Policy.
    Let’s create a hypothetical situation with two scenarios where Rangzen believers will actually start get nervous about or confused of what they are standing for. Let’s say Samdong ignored the HH the Dalai Lama’s Middle Way Path Policy and put the Rangzen agenda on the kashag table.
    Scenario #1
    Samdong made a call to JN(one of the main Rangzen Voices) who has moved to somewhere in the middle of America, let’s say Tennessee. Samdong asked “What is the plan now for the Rangzen JN la?” I hope even at this hypothetical situation, JN wouldn’t hang up the phone. Even so I hope there would be Rangzen believers who have sustainable plan in hand and courage to get to the so-called mountaintop at any means (I don’t mean hunger strike. We have had enough of it). What difference course of action are you going to take to make it sound like “rangzen”?

    Scenario #2. How would general exile Tibetans react to Samdong’s Rangzen policy?

    I just want to wake some of you Tibetans up to the reality on the ground in exile politics particularly and in the world at large.

    He is a monk in the air, in suspension between his faith and his ideology, between his obligation to be answerable to both the His Holiness the Dalai Lama and TGIE Charters. He clearly knows this. He said so in the conference at TIPA regarding the next Kalon Tripa. JN knows this. He is just using Samdong as a whipping boy so that actually message would be hit where it targeted. This is just a piece of orientation for some of you guys who need frequent orientation to the time and people.

    Expecting next kalon tripa would bring some sorts of fresh new policy toward China is wishy washy immature thought. Ever since the existence of TGIE, it has been the policy of the His Holiness the Dalai Lama that guides the policy toward China. It has always been so because Tibetans don’t question His Holiness the Dalai Lama. It’s His consistent faith in Middle Way Path Policy toward China and exile Tibetans’ persistent permanent green light to His approach.
    Question regarding internal affair?
    If you think Middle Way Path is the way to go, you will be accepting that Tibet will be an internal affair of China. If you say you believe in Middle Way Path Policy but don’t think Tibet would be an internal affair of China, then China’s accusation that Middle Path is disguised name for Rangzen is true for you.

    Obama should meet who first? Hu or the Dalai Lama?
    Do Rangzen believers just want Obama to irritate China? Isn’t that too childish?
    Poor Rangzen walas don’t have a guiding map. You guys are just wandering with FREE TIBET mantras. From time to time you guys do some trial and error tactics for rangzen. I hope you would scrape off the hunger strike episode that always ended in nothing but people who participated were terribly malnourished. Regaining a nation with slogans and screaming on the streets is pretty lame.
    Whatever, it seems that what I write doesn’t necessarily reflect what I would like to see happening but rather factual pieces of information that I am trying bundle here so that you can see things from different perspectives.

  25. Arihant | November 7th, 2009 | 9:05 pm

    Kalsang Phuntsok la,
    I hope you are in full mountain gear at the base camp of the hope-built Mt Rewa Chenpo. Your shoe laces are tied and you are on your way. If you can afford, buy a guide book. It makes your climbing experience much easier. I hope mountaintop is not standing too high into the cloud and that you won’t lose your way. Anyway, you can carve a new path and reach to the top.

    Please JN la, keep your mouth opening…. this is the only window people like Midas can see Tibet issue through clearly.
    Lastly, passang kyagkama(སྐྱག་ཁ་མ་), please save your kyapa as a ration for your long journey to the mountaintop. I can also send my dry kyagpa so that you can munch on it to suck in the remaining Vitamins and minerals in them. I hope you restrain yourself from using kyagpa here in this forum.
    My Gold Medal goes to JN for his insightfulness and openness.

  26. TY Senge | November 8th, 2009 | 10:02 am

    JN and same folk,

    If you guys have eyes to see the negative side of Excile , HH Dalia Lama and S Rinpoche.
    why you can’t see more henious, alarming, and cruel policy of communist china toward Tibetan.
    Why you don’t cry for the chinese recent systermatic murder of 4 Tibetans who alleged for the peaceful protest of 2008.
    What has made you blind for those events.
    It seeem you guys are pampared by chinese to destabalise the faith of tibetan masses by educating in wrong direction.

    Do you know the chinese is not afraid of few intelectual in excile but the unchange able faith of tibetan massees with HH Dalia Lama and
    his non violence approach which is the hidden binding force of Tibetan every where.
    So you guys are aiming to ruin it by citing various evident to make it shaky and lose where external force could easily misuse it for their self serving purpose.
    ( as indepedent country neapal is fall in)
    JN started bothering negatively and intensively over tibet issue since he visit to india July.
    It seem his expactant of rosy pavement entry into Excile GOVT, was was left in vain. who care if his ideology tarnished with kind of chornic illness.

    No person is more dedicated Than S rinpoche in Tibet and in EXcile! WE love S Rinpoche. S Rinpoche we want to serve you a long white scarf to say we need you!

  27. Dawa | November 8th, 2009 | 10:05 am

    That was great TCL. Thank you.

  28. Thompa | November 8th, 2009 | 6:49 pm

    Hi JN la, its bit old news, but good thing that you bring it up because I have some thing to discuss about, not for particular context but in general the whole drama of CCP getting irritated over HHDL’s meeting other nation leader. My question is does CCCP realy give dame about it or they are just playing with us? I think they are just deciving us as same as we do to our four years old kid who like to wrestle tussle with you. your kid tend to throw punch at same spot when you pretend it realy hurt. Shed me a light if I am wrong and I maybe very wrong with my very limited knowledge on big political game. But my common sence says that every time when HHDL met with some western leader, cccp tend to protest and that particular leader show some resentment to CCCP’s stand and give some word of comfort to us which creat empty hope in our head that buys a time for CCCp free of charg. Remember Kachari, every march-tenth, some Indian Natha with funny hats giving speech to us. I think CCCP wants HHDL to meet diffrent world leader many times as much as possiable. because its a clever politic to buy a time and to numb our pain of not having our own land.

  29. Christophe | November 8th, 2009 | 7:38 pm

    Arihant,

    The “Memorandum on Genuine Autonomy for the Tibetan People” is not a road map. It doesn’t propose any steps or stages for the completion of a “genuine autonomy”, but aims only at an “agreement to start serious discussions on the points raised in this memorandum.” It is merely a document that is supposed to precede an eventual course of action yet to be agreed upon. A proper road map, such as the one proposed for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, lists dates for the achievement of goal-driven phases and stipulates binding obligations for involved parties. The TGIE is undoubtedly not yet in position for that…

    The kind of “road map” you are looking for — that is for public consumption — is actually much better expressed in the Rangzen Charter than in this Memorandum, under a “What must be done” section. Let’s consider for a second concrete steps towards genuine autonomy or independence. As far as I know, the TGIE never came out with official instructions to its citizen. The only directives they managed to impose (not propose), often through indirect channels, were DON’Ts: “Don’t demonstrate against Hu Jintao”, “Don’t irritate China”, “Don’t wear Free Tibet t-shirts”, “Don’t sing ‘Long sho'”, etc. On the contrary, the Rangzen Charter insists only on DOs: “Do actively confront Chinese tyranny”, “Do acknowledge the deeds and sacrifices of patriots”, “Do secularise Tibetan politics”, etc. One side insists on a passive (or rather lethargic) and on a surrendering attitude while the other insists on an active and empowering involvement. Doesn’t it ring the bell? To be fair, only recently did the TGIE come up with one single DO: “Do befriend with Chinese”…

    Additionally to the fact that Middle Way Approach’s supporters have nothing concrete to propose and that whatever they suggest is negative and prohibiting, they have been proven wrong by twenty-one years of fiasco. In comparison, arguments of Rangzen supporters such as “Beijing is playing with time” or “Chinese communist regime cannot be trusted” have been proven correct and acknowledged by world experts. Personally, I’m convinced that if Chinese tyranny had been actively confronted in Tibet after the late 1980’s demonstrations — one word would have suffice from the Dalai Lama —, there wouldn’t have been such large migration of Chinese settlers nor such large scale destruction of what was then left of the Tibet’s culture and patrimony — the two main dangers faced today by Tibetans according to the Dalai Lama.

    The Middle Way Approach is clearly a dead end, a terrible quagmire in which Tibetans are now bogged down. And when someone is stuck in the mud or in quicksand, you won’t suggest him to move; you’ll insist on keeping quiet and waiting for a rescue team. By opposition, Rangzen is a long open road ahead, a driving force that would positively motivate and unite Tibetans in Tibet and in exile like never before. It would create every condition to seriously frighten Beijing and destabilize its grip over the country and, consequently, to attract a number of foreign governments willing to curb China’s growing influence and pretension.

    It is true that we can hardly imagine a new government foreign policy not in tune with the Dalai Lama’s approach, but who said that the Dalai Lama couldn’t change his mind? Isn’t it only on non-violence that he will not compromise? Let’s not forget he has always insisted that, at the end, Tibetans will decide for their future. In fact, on 18th March 2008, the Dalai Lama even declared that he was open to the idea of independence for Tibet “if that’s what his people want”, and that “the will of the Tibetan people is most important. If the present approach doesn’t get us results, I will be open to review my stand”.

    Now, it’s time for a change.

  30. Kalsang Phuntsok | November 9th, 2009 | 10:29 am

    Well Said Christophe;

    Arihant, what will you do if HHDL changes his position? Will you go with him or still hold on to your middle-path guidebook? I can imagine you sitting on a rock scratching your head at the foot of the mountain, with a flag in your hand.

    Yeh…speaking of flags, does middle-pathers have one or is it the same as one used by PRC? Because if you do reach your middle of the mountain goal that’s the flag you will be waving, and perhaps with a Chinese passport in your back pocket. Speaking of that…do you already have one?? just asking…

  31. Jamyang Norbu | November 9th, 2009 | 2:09 pm

    Thomba la,
    You may have a point. The anger and irritation shown by the Chinese is a political ploy that they use to keep their opponents off balance. HH and members of the Tibetan government should read EAST & WEST by Chris Patten. When he was negotiating the Hong Kong handover he came across a lot of this Chinese theatre, but he saw through it. The lesson is don’t get excited when the Chinese say nice things about you or get upset when the insult you or get irritated with you. Just stick to your game plan. the problem with us is that we don’t have one. Or rather, we do but it is just to please the Chinese at any cost.

  32. Mila Rangzen | November 9th, 2009 | 11:27 pm

    Jamyang Norbu la,
    The total democratization of our system cannot be achieved by simply having a kalon tripa who believes in rangzen or by merely changing the members of our parliament. How true!
    Tell us then how the introduction of multi-party system can be achieved. Do you expect HH to introduce it? or Kashag? TYC? Who can bring about this change? People? How?
    Replacing the old uneducated small minded chithues with new young educated large hearted chithues gives me a glimmer of hope for change.Other than that we are doomed for another 100 years.

  33. Dave | November 10th, 2009 | 3:25 pm

    On the topic of Obama meeting Hu, I hope at least that Obama won’t make any public statement recognizing Chinese sovereignty in Tibet. The article at this link suggests that the Chinese might ask him to: http://www.vermonttibet.org/?p=203

    It seems unlikely he would comply, but it woudn’t hurt for people to contact the White House and express opposition.

  34. Jamyang Norbu | November 11th, 2009 | 12:02 pm

    Mila Rangzen la,
    I think this is the second time you have raised the question of how we could actually go about introducing a multi-party system. Sorry for not getting back to you earlier. I want to assure you that it absolutely can be done, and must be done to save the TGIE and ensure the continuation of the institution of the Dalai Lama. I promise you and other rangzen advocates and activists a clear preliminary road map – no later than mid-December.
    JN

  35. Mila Rangzen | November 11th, 2009 | 7:27 pm

    Jamyang Norbu la,
    That’s great! Thanks! It will indeed be like the much awaited cool water fountain on a parched brain!
    Also tell us if you know how to reach other Tibetan political intellectuals/activists in their original names(Tashi Tsering, Tenzin Sonam, Tsering Shakya,Kelsang Phuntsok, Lhasang tsering, Bhuchung tsering, Pema Bum, Hortsang Jigme etc) in a public discussion blog/website like this where we can learn something from their views on Tibet issues and causes.
    Thanks again.
    MR

  36. Kalsang Phuntsok | November 12th, 2009 | 9:57 am

    Jamyang la,

    I am delighted to know that you are working on a roadmap towards party-system. You can bet on my support.

    However, I am a little concerned about this effort being labeled by the opponents (of which we can be sure there are many) among other things as ‘a campaign led by Rangzen advocates’. Of course, the opponents will accuse us of going against HHDL’s wishes, which is as we all know considered worse than a crime in our society.

    The point I am trying to make is that the campaign for ‘Rangzen’ and for ‘establishing party-system democracy in exile’ should be treated separately. We must assure people of every ideology and background that they will have a stage to voice their opinion in a party-system.Just a thought.

    I am sure you have thought about it and have a proper strategy to deal with this problem. Would love to hear about it.

    Thank you.

  37. Christophe | November 12th, 2009 | 4:56 pm

    Kalsang Phuntsok,

    I don’t agree with you. There’s an urgent need of a Rangzen Party. This political party should come up with a candidate for prime minister in 2011 elections and this candidate should have a clear program: independence.

    As for ensuring that “people of every ideology and background will have a stage to voice their opinion”, don’t worry too much. A Rangzen Party will definitely start a trend and inspire others, in particular opponents of Jamyang Norbu…

    In regard to your concern that such party might be labelled as “anti-Dalai Lama”, it’s a matter of how you present things during your campaign. Before anything else, people should be convinced that the Dalai Lama is open to the idea of independence if that’s what the people want (see my previous comment #29 and the related link to IBN Live).

    Get some of the Dalai Lama’s speeches where he insists that it’s only on non-violence that he won’t compromise. Many times His Holiness declared that if Beijing does not respond favourably “everything will be on the table” for reconsideration. In fact, as early as 1991, he declared that he will consider himself “free of any obligation to the proposal” he made in the 1988 Strasbourg address. Why would he mind if dedicated souls decide to take things into their own hands and propose a new strategy?

    What is definitely needed is a well-planned campaign throughout India and Nepal settlements, with lectures, movies, etc., as well as conferences for each and every local Tibetan community living in the West. Jamyang Norbu as been doing such tour this year in India, the USA and Switzerland, lecturing on the origins of Tibetan nationalism and on independence, and from what I heard it had a significant impact on people’s thoughts!

  38. Jeff Bowe | November 12th, 2009 | 5:25 pm

    Tsering Choedon Lejotsang

    enjoyed your post (number 20)

  39. jigdel | November 12th, 2009 | 5:33 pm

    As per your question to JN la, may I give you the link to blogs run by some of the scholars you have mentioned?

    Buchung K Tsering, former Tibetan Review columnist has a following website:

    http://tibetreport.wordpress.com/

    He also runs a blog in Tibetan. If you read the blog, somewhere I hope you will find the link.

    Tenzin Sonam, a Tibetan writer and film maker currently based in Dharamsala, has a website providing his writing samples; documentaries and films he has made with his wife Ritu Sarin, a Journalist for Indian Express:

    http://www.whitecranefilms.com/

    3- Tsering Sakya, a Tibetan Historian and currently a professor at University of British Columbia runs a very popular blog:

    http://www.highpeakspureearth.com/

  40. Kalsang Phuntsok | November 12th, 2009 | 7:47 pm

    Christophe,

    of all the people posting comments on this blog post you were one of the persons i was least expecting to have a disagreement with regarding this subject. And i don’ think we have to diaagree here because you are talking about Kalon tripa election whereas i am talking about introducing party system. However, i do appreciate your honest response.
    Having said that i would like to make the following points:

    First of all we do not yet have a party system yet. In order to adopt party system we will have to at least amend our constitution if not completely overhaul it. Secondly, i raised the concern about mislabelling of our effort because there had been many such instances in the history of TGIE. JN la has personal experience of such campaigns. Until and unless HHDL explicitly announces his endorsement i for one will not be convinced this will go smoothly, if at all.
         

  41. Christophe | November 13th, 2009 | 9:16 pm

    Kalsang Phuntsok,

    I’m sincerely sorry if my comment upsetted you.

    My main worry is that time is running out and that an “official” procedure (if such thing exists) to change Tibet’s political system might just not be very appropriate in the present context. Things will need to be forced a little.

    I believe a large and growing number of Tibetans are going through a major crisis; they see no progress in negotiations and they realise that His Holiness is getting old. They observe China’s growing influence, they see how international relations are being reshaped in favour of Beijing, and they are gradually loosing hope. As such, I’m convinced that in exile, where the freedom of change is available, Tibetans are more than ever disposed towards a radical break — and that a 2011 Rangzen candidate proposing to declare independence and to amend the constitution would stand as much chances to be elected than other candidates, if not more.

    Of course this doesn’t address your concern of bad labelling. I’m well aware of Jamyang Norbu’s experiments with non-conformism and with subsequent mob violence and vilification campaigns. Having myself served five years in the Amnye Machen Institute, I know what it feels to be on the “wrong side”. But I insist, in the case of Rangzen, I strongly believe it all depends on how you promote your case, or more precisely on how you succeed to take advantage of His Holiness “ambiguous” declarations in favour of independence and change. Bringing out and distributing a pamphlet with such quotations, for instance, wouldn’t be a bad idea to start with.

    But maybe this is not the place to discuss such issues. Let’s rather keep our comments related to JN original posts and wait for his road map.

  42. Mila Rangzen | November 13th, 2009 | 9:51 pm

    Jigdel,
    Thanks a lot. I hope those well educated/intelligent folks sometimes visit this blog in their original names so we can meet them offline. By the way, how does this sound “Tibetan People’s Rangzen Party’? A loud and clear message is this that there is no space for non-rangzenwallas to enter the ranks of a party whose goal is rangzen. Nothing wrong in mixing “party system” and “rangzen”
    MR

  43. Jeff Bowe | November 15th, 2009 | 8:50 am

    Jigdel, you recommend Tsering Shakya’s blog.

    May I offer you a suggestion also? Please read his writing with care, particularly on the subject of the nature and objectives of resistance and protest inside Tibet.

    Take for example the following, an interview he gave in the New Left Review:

    Was the issue of Tibetan nationalism the overriding one, or were some of the protests focused on economic or social issues?

    People talked about many things, but if you look at the slogans and banners the protesters were carrying, there was no explicit demand for independence…”

    See: http://www.newleftreview.org/?view=2720

    Is that so? What selective-sight glasses was Tsering Shakya wearing during 2008? What about the numerous detailed reports from TCHRD and others, the majority of which reported clearly that the demand of such demonstrations was for Tibet’s independence? Why would Mr. Shakya choose to make such a misrepresentation of the facts, against the Tibetan people?

  44. Dawa | November 17th, 2009 | 12:33 pm

    Jeff, Obviously to hold on to his nice chair.

  45. Kalsang Phuntsok | November 17th, 2009 | 7:17 pm

    I caught the Obama’s Beijing speech this morning. I have to say i wasn’t expecting him to bring up the Tibet issue as directly as he did in front of Hu. It left me with mixed feelings. on the one hand i was glad that he brought up the subject, on the other it made me realise what a daunting task we Rangzen believers have ahead of us. He made the Tibet issue look like the issue of DL’s status.

    Would love to learn what JN la thought of the speech.

  46. Jeff Bowe | November 17th, 2009 | 7:59 pm

    Dawa

    Point noted. With the additional thought that perhaps such misrepresentation was requested from Dharamsala?

  47. Jeff Bowe | November 17th, 2009 | 8:02 pm

    Kalsang

    Please visit:

    http://tibettruth.wordpress.com/2009/11/06/2516/

    For an outline of the US position on Tibet, which, in real political terms, it has long recognized as a part of China.

  48. Dawa | November 18th, 2009 | 10:57 am

    I won’t be surprised by that either, Jeff. The way it’s been acting we can say that our government is more concerned about how the Chinese feel than how we feel.

  49. Jeff Bowe | November 18th, 2009 | 5:15 pm

    Dawa, sadly the myopic and insane determination of the TGIE to abandon Tibet’s rightful nationhood and right to self-determination, in exchange for Chinese rule, leads many to share the dis-heartening conclusion you reach.

  50. atsong | November 18th, 2009 | 5:27 pm

    Tsering Choedon Lejotsang
    I agree with you one hundred per cent. I wish you would write articles.

  51. atsong | November 18th, 2009 | 5:38 pm

    Mila Rangzen Comment 21
    The Chinese Embassy – passport tear – sounds pretty melodramatic. Very Interesting.

  52. Arihant | November 19th, 2009 | 11:41 am

    For comment# 29 & 30;

    Major Kalsang Phuntsok la and Major Christophe la,
    Look back. Passang, one of your fellow rangzen soldiers got chocked with some strange foods. Do try Heimlich maneuver or some back slapping to see if s/he can be revived.
    Thag Jey chey for pointing out the Israeli-Palestinian Road map for Peace. I am going to paste here a part of it to give a sense of what their road map for peace looks alike:
    “The road map comprises three goal-driven phases with the ultimate goal of ending the conflict as early as 2005. However, as a performance-based plan, progress will require and depend upon the good faith efforts of the parties, and their compliance with each of the obligations quartet put the plan together, with amendments following consultations with Israelis and Palestinians:
    • Phase I (as early as May 2003): End to Palestinian violence; Palestinian political reform; Israeli withdrawal and freeze on settlement expansion; Palestinian elections.
    • Phase II (as early as June-Dec 2003): International Conference to support Palestinian economic recovery and launch a process, leading to establishment of an independent Palestinian state with provisional borders; revival of multilateral engagement on issues including regional water resources, environment, economic development, refugees, and arms control issues; Arab states restore pre-intifada links to Israel (trade offices, etc.).
    • Phase III (as early as 2004-2005): second international conference; permanent status agreement and end of conflict; agreement on final borders, clarification of the highly controversial question of the fate of Jerusalem, refugees and settlements; Arab state to agree to peace deals with Israel.”

  53. Arihant | November 19th, 2009 | 11:52 am

    For comment# 29 & 30;
    Now regarding to ‘The Memorandum on Genuine Autonomy for the Tibetan People’, I think this is the main document of the Middle Path Policy. If CCP can’t agree on the points raised in the memorandum, I don’t have a crystal ball to tell you what Middle Path Wanderers should do.
    My feeling is that before TGIE shifts its gear to Rangzen Policy if ever, TGIE gets a final word from CCP that China can’t agree on the points in memorandum and has no interest in discussing Tibet issue based on the memorandum. Because if China doesn’t want to deal with Tibet issue, then there is no point in conceding any more chips in the hands of China.
    Whatever the case may be, I don’t have much hope in the tactics of either Tibetan Rangzen dreamers or Tibetan Middle Path Wanderers.
    I think we are losing the present movement while talking about Rangzen and UmaiLa. There is always a rise and fall of empire, its power and influence. History is the witness. What we need I think is to have two strategies in place.
    One would be the long-term strategy of how we can outlive the rise and fall of China. This gear is in the survival mode. It may take decades, half-century or centuries. It should target how we protect our land (specifically research on how Chinese migration in Tibet influences Tibetan identity in Tibet. How best to deal with these specific issues) and promote our identity and nationalism in current context.
    Another mode, a gear that is a couple of steps above survival mode is to think how we can thrive in the situation we are in. It will emphasize how we can compete with the rest of the world in the field of science and technology. This mode will upgrade many of our cultural and traditional practices to make them relevant to today’s world, its people and its everyday lives.

  54. Arihant | November 19th, 2009 | 12:06 pm

    Regarding the Rangzen Charter;
    I read the Rangzen Charter. It tries to elicit some emotions, nationalism in some forms but not in any way a guiding map for Rangzen.
    A couple of days ago, I downloaded all the podcast from the Tibet Connection Radio. I came across one of interviews with JN la. I will paraphrase here what he said. The Tibet Connection (last Nov) asked if JN had a road map for a Rangzen. He said “I said don’t ask for a roadmap. It’s impossible to do something like this…”
    I hope JN can explain here why it’s impossible to draft a roadmap for Rangzen. Actually let me ask him a direct question. Why is it impossible?
    It’s funny though just referring JN as ‘him’ not as ‘you’ here. I hope your Commander-in-chief of Rangzen can directly engage in our discussion here.
    On this, Major Kalsang Phuntsok la(Nidal Malik Hasan) says “Rangzen believers don’t have a road map because we intend to carve one as we move along.”
    Okay. No roadmap! That’s fine.
    Do Rangzen dreamers have a different strategy other than screaming on the streets of foreign countries?
    Obviously there is no new strategy in place. JN says one thing he agrees with HH’s policy is nonviolence method. So what is the difference? Is it idea of rangzen vs autonomy?
    Maybe it’s TGIE’s guidelines of not to protest against CCP on certain occasions vs rangzen walas noncompliance with it and protested against China anyway.
    So what’s the action and what is the result that differentiates Rangzen strategy from the Middle Way Path Policy?
    Oh wait… Then at the end of the above interview with the Tibet Connection, JN la says we will roll down the tanks from gompa la mountain into Lhasa and his beautiful female students will be waiting for us with chung. He would kiss them before accepting their chung. It would remind you of some sorts of nostalgic of the past, erotically indulging with young females. Sorry that’s way off the point here.
    What I think is the most important is the method as to how you get what you want. It’s not what you want that is the most important. For that I am not impressed with rhetoric of ‘what I want’ slogans from Rangzen dreamers.

  55. Arihant | November 19th, 2009 | 12:20 pm

    So Major Kalsang la,
    You and your Rangzen brigade want to have a multiparty system in exile as is practiced in free democratic countries around the world. Will Independence Party contest with the Interdependence Party, the Green Party of Tibet, Communist Party of Tibet, Tibetan National Party, Orthodox Religious Right Wing Party of Tibet, Tibetan Youth Congregate Party of Tibet, Bollywood Song and Dance Shechag Party of Tibet, etc? I mean there are so many organizations hanging in Dharamsala that adding more Parties just confuses people.
    Or would you want to limit party politics to Independence and Interdependence Party? Have you consider the consequences of the “party politics”.
    Ideally, I am very much for a party based democracy rather than chesum and cholug parliament if it is to practice in a free country with enforceable check and balance. But given the fact that we are in exile and that Tibetans in general aren’t politically and intellectually savvy or interested in ideology and principle of a government makes it hard to conceive a sound party based democracy in our society.
    A sound, open and free democracy requires its people to be sound in principle, open to other’s opinion and free to express one’s own idea. I think Tibetans in exile generally lack all these. I will give you some recent developments on the blogs. There are people who want to have multi-party system so that more people from their own region can be elected into parliament. Not true? Make a quick survey through people who promote it and where they are from? Can’t be true? Go through Tibetan organizations like TYC and make a rough survey of who were elected by whom? In the same way, go through those organizations in Dhasa and its outlets. I know these are touchy topics that nobody “dares” to point out and nobody is ready to acknowledge these unpronouced, sometimes unconscious biases. (This is type of bias is not unique to Tibet but it’s endemic in our society.)
    About the freedom of expression; Major kalsang la, what made you think that I possess Chinese passport in my pocket? Will you put this label to everyone whose ideas aren’t in line with yours?
    When you have a part-based politics, will you use this label indicating Chinese agent for everyone who doesn’t agree with you rather than attacking with reason?
    Media freedom is crucial element of a multiparty democracy. Will Phayul, the Xinhua News Agency of exile Tibetans serve as a free media for the voices in exile or for one party, one ideology and or government?
    For that, inserting a multiparty system in exile charter is a disaster in the making and is an attempt to make certain ideology and certain interest inroad into the exile policy.

  56. White Crane | November 19th, 2009 | 11:04 pm

    Are you from 50 cent party.

  57. Tenpa Dhargyal Gapshi | November 20th, 2009 | 2:49 am

    Arihant, what is your position exactly since you seem to have a problem with every position? Your idea about survival mode and getting educated is nothing new and isn’t really related to the main struggle as it can be easily corporated into both positions (it already is) and nobody disputes these things are important. The multi-party system (I favor the two party system) has to start somewhere and it doesn’t have to wait until everybody is educated and politically savvy. US didn’t start off as an immensely educated country to be ready for democracy (I am talking about the real democracy) and multi-party system but it is doing fine now. India certainly wasn’t but it is still chugging along. The point is there is no need to wait. The party system must be allowed to develop on its own terms, make its mistakes, and become stronger for it. Corruption and regionalistic politics will be there just as it is in any system of govt in the west. I certainly don’t think it can do worse than giving up Rangzen. That honor is reserved for the one party system.

  58. Kalsang Phuntsok | November 20th, 2009 | 9:47 am

    Thank you Tenpa Dhargyal Gapshi.

    Arihant, I don’t get offended being called something which I am obviously not. It only shows how childish you are.

    If you don’t have a Chinese passport, that’s good.

  59. Christophe | November 20th, 2009 | 5:16 pm

    Interesting comments from dissidents, including Woeser, regarding Obama’s visit:
    Obama’s China visit leaves dissidents disappointed

  60. Mila Rangzen | November 21st, 2009 | 12:48 am

    arihaunt,
    you are missing the bigger picture (democratic fairness)here. instead you are so much into who is from which region bla.. bla…mentality.
    no wonder tibetans as a people are often ruined by people who love to feed them the drug of mistrust and suspicion along the regional lines.

    what’s democratic is made to sound so regional and is blown completely out of proportion by expressing some pseudo concerns and worse still, by instilling unfounded fears in the gullible.

    bi-party system in exile.
    bi-party system in a free tibet.
    that’s fairness..democratic fairness.

    one loaf for one person.
    one loaf for hundred persons.
    that’s not fair.(lower house)

    one loaf for one person.
    hundred loaves for hundred persons.
    this is democratic fairness.(lower house)

    for example..
    1 mp seat for hunsur settlement with 3000 people.

    6 mp seats for byllakuppe settlement with a population of 18,000 people.

    no regional story.

    in exile…
    15% amdo
    35% kham
    50% utsang
    (mixed parentage…90%)

    in tibet…
    15% utsang
    35% amdo
    50% kham
    (mixed parentage..1%)

    list of people i believe who support the early construction of bi-party system(in both the parties there will be people from all the 3 regions)

    jamyang norbu……kham
    lhasang tsering….kham
    karma chophel……kham
    tenzin tsundue…..kham
    tashi tsering……kham
    pema bum………..amdo
    golog ambum……..amdo
    kp godrukpa……..kham
    phurbu dorjee……kham
    bhuchung………..utsang
    tsewang…………utsang

    if you have it in you people will vote for you as chithue or kalontripa as in the case of samdong lama.

    rest assured!

  61. Tenpa Dhargyal Gapshi | November 21st, 2009 | 3:30 am

    tenpa dhargyal gapshi —–Ustang

  62. Tsering Choedon Lejotsang | November 21st, 2009 | 7:59 am

    Another bi-party (or multi-party), secular system supporter = TCL 🙂

  63. Kalsang Phuntsok | November 21st, 2009 | 9:39 am

    Kalsang Phuntsok – Kham
    supports party-system TGIE

  64. Christophe | November 21st, 2009 | 11:15 am

    I would have wish to add my name as supporter of bi- or multi-party secular system, from U-Tsang (I’m a makpa from Lhobrak), but I can’t. Although I’m entitled to Tibetan citizenship as defined in Article 8.3 of the Tibetan Constitution, Green Books are no longer renewed to Injis since 2005…

  65. Dawa | November 25th, 2009 | 10:54 am

    Me, rootless hatless Tibetan, for two or more party system.

  66. Dawa | November 25th, 2009 | 10:55 am

    JN is of mixed parentage.

  67. Jeff Bowe | November 26th, 2009 | 10:46 am

    Wishing a happy Thanksgiving
    to all supporters of, and activists for, Tibet’s rightful independence.

    http://tibettruth.wordpress.com/2009/11/26/happy-thanksgiving/

  68. samdup | November 30th, 2009 | 2:00 am

    hahahahahahahahahaha….u people are following jn’s space path n voted for urself. that is gud otherwise tibetan common people knew jn’s path earlier and u won’t get a single vote lo.

  69. Arihant | November 30th, 2009 | 7:21 pm

    *** message removed ***

    Arihant, this is not the place for comments on the tibettruth website.

    Golok Ambum
    Webmaster

  70. Arihant | November 30th, 2009 | 7:41 pm

    Tsewi Gapshi la,
    I think you are specifically asking me which side I am on; Rangzen or Middle Path Policy. Though it makes people wonder what this guy stands for, I don’t take position on big issues as these aren’t really completely black and white. I know it wouldn’t be an ideal approach not being on either side of issues if you want to be a politician or build your own persona.
    Regarding my interest in emphasizing education; I think one of the best tools of nonviolence struggle is the manpower of smart and intelligent and serious Tibetans who can compete with their counterparts. I was thinking that if exile community could have produced one successful venture capitalist, a fraction of its earning could support and run TGIE that TGIE would not need to beg for donations from other countries. It would lift the spirit of individual and spirit of collective conscious to a new height. This is one aspect of the grand scheme of the new education system I am imaging would turn our exile situation into an upbeat, self-sufficient, competent and world-class.
    Your interest in creating a multiparty system in exile charter is in no way will speed up the materialization of Rangzen dream. In fact partisan politics would prevent any major changes or approaches timely manner as you can see what is happening in the Capitol Hill.
    Let say Rangzen Party won this years’ election. And MWP wins the next election. And Arihant Party wins election after that. Each of these parties has different policy to deal with China. Would these changes in policy be desirable or effective for solving Tibetan issue? You can’t assume that Rangzen Party will win every election.
    In general, I am skeptic about “virtues” of West democratic system. I am especially disillusioned by the partisan politics in America. I am not in the vanguard of Samdong lamaic idealism either. Again that leaves me where I belong and what I believe? Hahaha.

  71. Arihant | November 30th, 2009 | 7:50 pm

    Tsewi Mila Rangzen la, the messenger of Rangzen party brigade,
    I saw you on a couple of websites commenting and promoting multiparty system. First of all, learn to spell my name ok if you want to be the Secretary of TGIE for Rangzen Administration (assuming your part wins the election). Image your task and how you play your diplomacy among other world leaders. Prepare for it when it comes to you.
    I am not promoting regionalism. I see it as a serious problem among Tibetans. To handle this problem, you need to first recognize it. By denying it won’t make it perfect.
    I don’t know where you got those percentages of Tibetans from Three Regions. Wait and see if those percentages get well pronounced with party elections in exile communities. Did you notice anything from the recent mayoral election here in NYC? Did you observe the pre-election surveys?

  72. Mila Rangzen | December 1st, 2009 | 9:46 pm

    arihant,
    Did someone mention regionalism here?
    It makes me get into hysterical laughter again.

    Tibetans have often heard this advice(not to be regionalistic/sectarian from people from various walks of life. It’s a good advice but one without practical support.
    even HH/govt has not done anything on this other than a mere mouth advice.
    although his life above regional politics is a indeed a good practical example for others to follow through. no dispute on that. but no practical means on the ground that average tibetans can relate to and get encouragement in concrete terms that would reduce regionalism/sectarianism from the minds and hearts of all tibetans. common sense tells us that usually sense of oneness gets stronger when you belong to both by blood.
    just the other day..a white guy implied that the black boy in the group is a racist. blackboy’s immediate reaction was “my brother’s wife is white. what are you talking about?”. racism won’t disappear completely simply because of inter-racial marriage but it does reduce the garbage greatly.

    soviet union did not just sit back and said to their citizens “produce more children. it’s good. our land is huge. we have a dearth of people.” but added “look, if you produce more children, your family will have more benefits of all kinds from your govt”. that worked wonders.
    education plus inter-regional and inter-sectarian marriage can reduce a lot of this garbage. i see no encouragement from govt or any one on this. but that is not to say it should be forced upon people. no! never! people decide their lifepartners whatever it is..black, white, yellow, brown etc
    what possible solutions have you?

    no practical support.Hence, not much help.
    Our parliamentary system in itself is factionalistic based on the so called province and sect. Nothing new. what we have seen in the recent chithue session is the tip of iceberg–your choka/my choka insinuation, sarcasm, i dare you, insults, threats etc

    The following solutions if and when applied will greatly minimize such destructive tendencies.
    1. separation of religion from politics
    2. bi-party system
    3. population/locality based voting system
    4. one person one vote

    Will those who accuse others of factionalism support the above view point? !
    will those who fear that provincialism and sectarianism will bring down tibetans as a people support a secular bi-party system that is inclusive of all in both the parties and less divisive along those red lines other than some ideological differences?

    Action speaks louder than words!

    P.S. In these dark times do not expect any one to nonregionalistic and nonsectarian. But create benefits(and consequences) where he sees good reasons to be honest and fair to all tibetans!

    encouragement!
    support!
    Accountability!

    don’t stone wall
    mingle with all
    you hear beautiful stuff
    you hear ugly stuff too!
    but hearing both
    you get large-hearted
    through your overall experience with them
    including bedtime stories!

    democratic fairness and justice must happen!

  73. jigdel | December 4th, 2009 | 11:23 pm

    Hi Jeff,

    I was just respondin’ to Mila Rangzen’s request to JN la to see if my answers serve the purpose. Since I am not too investigative these days, I have no problem mentionining or recommendating Tsering Sakya’s blogs since it at least intends to unleash the brutalities of Chinese invasion in Tibet through information gathering n analyzing irrespective of his political ideology although I might have my own preferences.

  74. Tenpa Dhargyal Gapshi | December 5th, 2009 | 2:38 am

    Arihant,
    three points. I think you are the only one here who doesn’t seem to know where you stand. I know they say you are the last person to know about the infidelity of your partner but I don’t think that includes your own biases.

    Secondly, as I mentioned before, and I am sure it should be pretty clear by now, that a good modern education is a pre-requisite for surviving in a modern world and nobody is really against that. That is a given and does not need to said. It is like all of us here are lost in the amazon jungle and we are trying to figure out how to get out of there and then you chime in and say that we need food and water. And air.

    Thirdly, with regards to multi-party system, you misunderstand me. I am pushing for multi-party system not because I think a rangzen proponent will win the election and set the course of future engagements with China (which would be nice btw). I am advocating for multi-party system simply because it is truly democratic, gives people a fair shake wherever they fall on the politcal landscape, and most of all reduce the influence of religion and regionalism in our community. Of course, I expect rangzen party to get a fair say in the goverance of our country’s future instead of being labelled as anti-tibet and anti-dalai lama. I think that is a reasonable dream and a moreover a duty. I am just tired of being ‘unique’ or uniquely enjoying ‘tibetan’ democracy and getting uniquely screwed in the process. For heaven’s sake, some people can vote twice!! Need I say anymore than that about our democracy?

    I met this young lady who was really confused and actually quite distaught about being struck between her conscience and the overwhemingly magnificence of the middle-path one world philosophy and the daunting task of choosing a path contrary to H.H. She was having repeated arguments with family members and people she loved. I did manage to reassure her and support her and got her to check this website. That got me thinking that the situation we are struck in, especially rangzen proponents, who really and truly have to wage a war within to come out and say that I disagree with the path H.H is espousing, is actually quite cruel and emotionally draining. I wonder how many young people are out there confused and conflicted as they have to wage a similar battle. That is what I wanted to say to the middle-path proponents before they accuse us of having the audacity of asking for what is rightfully ours; we have fought a painful battle within and we do not willingly go against the wishes of H.H. We do it because our conscience behoves us, logic implores us, and widsom compels us. Personally, going against the middle-path has been one of the most painful moment of my life as I am quite religious. It doesn’t have to be that way. That is why I seek the separation of relgion and politics and multi-party system. It has nothing to do being westernized or trying to jump on the most popular bandwagon.

  75. Mila Rangzen | December 6th, 2009 | 8:15 am

    arihant,
    to be a part of china or not to be part of china/to surrender sovereignity or not to surrender it is a truth as absolute as either your sister is pregnant or she is not. no inbetween.
    it’s not that hard unless you want to play with words and keep slicing hair that gets us nowhere. you need not want to be a politician to take a stand. look at me, an average tibetan with no desire for political power for self.
    a clear cut stand is always better than two heads!

    how about contacting that tibetan guy in toronto who is said to be almost a billionaire running a chain of malls or grocery stores in canadian cities? there are filthy rich lamas and one of them is said to have 10,000 employees in ari but they have monasteries and their own sect to worry about first. so not much hope to finance our govt. by the way who are the richest lay guys in tibetan world? can you list top 20? thanks. tashi tsering in kathmandu, pomdatsang in tibet, tsampa sakhang in new york!

    partisan politics is ugly but regional/sectarian politics can be even worse. it’s more communal and would grip the individual beings of every tibetans and therefore far more dangerous. like the gadhi violence on us in dhasa, manali and elsewhere in india. common folks are pretty much innocent. but it’s the few at the top be it in sect or choka that occasionally spreads poison usually by inviting the innocents to some secret night meetings. the number of those ugly guys from the controversial sixties are dwindling. what a relief! it’s getting better for us as one people. let there be no sarjor/nyingjor division. we are one in the same boat now. juchen and ala jigme are preparing their final flights to some heavenly fields! phayul chikpa ki he! hee!
    secular bi-party democracy is the answer!
    but i have heard ngari rinpoche gives rs5000 to every amdo students(but not to students from kham/utsang) that is done with their schooling at sogar school in dhasa for newcomers from tibet. is this true? i hope not. i hope this is just a rumor. because to me he is a top public asset that would consider the needs of all tibetans equally no matter where they are from and even if it’s his own personal savings.
    but i do appreciate those average individuals helping their phayul/choka chikpa in kind and cash who are less privileged than themselves. they are not harming tibetans from other choka/phayul. they are simply helping themselves and that’s good, reducing burdens on our govt by contributing greatly to our nation by helping a part of it. if i won a $370 million mega lottery, people from my phayul are lucky! there will be workshops and loans to teach them how to fish and help them become multi-millionaires and build ten 20,000 population town in my phayul jeshong valleys! education, hospitals and parks!
    go help your tribe that’s lagging behind!

    with secular bi-party system even rangzen voice has the possibility to put action where its considerable mouth is. i will be the first one to jump(unconditionally) in any battlefield/mission. that’s the part where my character fits well. an ordinary faceless soldier doing its job dutifully. me thinks so.

    under the present one party choesi-sungdel regime at dhasa we have no hope of formulating goals and policies. decisions and actions.

    the two most negative traits of us are
    1.putting down other tibetans simply because they do not belong to our village/camp/phayul/sect/choka/etc.
    2.making attempts to deny others of a benefit that you did not get. eg us embassy scenes/stories(at 2 cases caused by tibetans in the last one year), belgium immigration issues with tibetans. thousands are losing sleep.
    asking for a benefit that others got is absolutely fine. but trying to deny others of a benefit simply because you did not get it is sheer stupidity and pathetic jealousy.
    let’s try to free ourselves from such small-mindedness.

    well until then, enjoy the bhardo of your own choosing!

  76. Jeff Bowe | December 6th, 2009 | 8:52 am

    Jigdel

    Mr. Shakya’s distortion of the facts is very disturbing indeed and betrays the courageous struggle being waged inside Tibet.

  77. Kalsang Phuntsok | December 8th, 2009 | 2:55 pm

    Arihant, you wrote,
    “I don’t take position on big issues as these aren’t really completely black and white.”

    Let me simplify it for you. Do you believe in the inalienable right of Tibetan People to an Independent Tibet? Yes or No.

    If your answer is ‘yes’ then what do you think our logical stand and course of action should be?

    No roadmap doesn’t mean you can’t answer the above questions. You don’t have to dilly-dally on the subject unless you are trying to run for the next Kalon Tripa and trying to secure as much vote as possible from both sides.

    This reminds of a story from third-grade school text-book about a crow wearing a peacock feather and pretending to be peacock in front of a flock of crows and gets kicked out from the flock. Then he goes to Peacock flock and gets kicked out from there too. Don’t be that crow.

  78. Arihant | December 20th, 2009 | 3:25 pm

    Tsewi Tenpa Dargyal Gapshi la,
    I will try to answer the points you raised in your comment # 74 here. Nowhere else to go today with snows piling up on the sidewalks and drifting all over by freezing wind. So I will curl up around this computer and make some ‘lone’noises in this blog.
    First one:
    I think while I was roaming around in the Rangzen Grassland here, I wasn’t wearing the “official” rangzen label on my neck. Duh hahah. You got the idea. That’s why I seem alone and lost in here. Even some of my comments were robbed by an Amban from Golok in the Rangzen Grassland which makes me think twice before I write anything here.
    I understand both Rangzen and Umelam. Of course I would want to see a Bod Rangzen but if the struggle for this drags us on for years with no end in sight, I wouldn’t mind getting even more compromised position of Umelam and return back to Tibet tomorrow or next year.
    As I said before whatever the truth might be, the history is interpreted by powers with force not weak with sympathy. What I am trying to say here is that shouting Free Tibet on the streets of foreign countries to beg sympathy from leaders or mass wouldn’t get us closer to Rangzen realization. It is more so in the reality of the rise of China.
    Somebody made a comment recently here somewhere suggested turning our struggle like that of the mass movement against apartheid in South Africa. We are talking here about a mass movement against a repressive regime. Our struggle doesn’t have many of the elements that the movement against apartheid had. These elements I am talking about aren’t related to how severely people were and are (Black S. Africans then and Tibetans now) subjected to repression or how cruel the colonists of these repressive regimes were. A successful mass movement requires a favorable climate or the mood and a share of fraternity (one of the most important ones is religion). I’ll stop here on this topic because many of good mannered gentlemen (and chamkushuglas ) here might think this lone Tibetan is experiencing some of delusions here.

    Second Point:
    I think first and foremost priority of TGIE should be education for the exile children. You know it has now almost two generations being in exile that has received a free education. But look at the quality of education in exile community. As you said I know nobody is against offering education but I don’t see a satisfying result of current education system in exile maybe because it hasn’t being the top priority in TGIE policy. Here have to acknowledge that it was a great success to be able offer basic education to exile Tibetans in the earlier life of exile. Now we need to move the gear up and reward or finance those smart dudes coming out of high schools who can’t major in some highly competitive and highly specialized courses not because of their academic performance but because of the lack of finance.
    Of course we can’t shift the whole burden of children’s education on TGIE. Look at Korean parents for example of how hard they work and how much money they invest in their children’s education here in the States and how Chinese parents in China are investing their hard earned money in their children’s education. Look at the history of success in Asian countries. I think there is a strong correlation (I have to acknowledge that I am not claiming some kind of scientific findings) between parents’ full investment and involvement in children’s education and success stories of countries of these people.
    I know the difficulty of earning a living in exile by farming on a square of land and selling sweaters to try to make end meets. It’s disheartening to think of those Tibetans who have to live a hard live with no faults of their own. (I can go on extra miles talking “cheap” about Tibetans in the West but that’s a whole new story). But we can focus on things that can yield result. If we TGIE and Tibetan parents would invest and engage fully with Tibetan children of their education, within a generation, we can be transformed into a dynamic and intelligent flock of Tibetans that in themselves can transform our ultimate struggle. This in fact is the air, the food and ultimately the tool to regain the shelter that has been stolen.
    We had the illusion of regaining Tibet in the following months when we first got in exile. I have no illusion of regaining Rangzen in the next year or following years. I am not suggesting therefore to give up on it but instead I am saying we need to lay out a long term strategy for our children and for our collective dream. This is above all, the most important thing that we can do that shouldn’t be ignored or sidelined.

    Third Point:
    I might have incorrectly phrased my words in a way that implied your intention of creating multi-party system was to make rangzen inroad into TGIE policy. That was my mistake. དགོངས་དག་ལོ།
    I have the similar idea of what KP said about trying to get a slot in chitue lhankhang for Rangzen advocates. It’s always safe to change things from within. Even parasite knows this trick. Hahaha. From there, you can try to influence school curriculums to fit more Rangzen themed materials. That would at least make future Tibetans understand what Bod Rangzen means. At the same time you guys can march to the Nepal border and being kicked out from there if there aren’t any other strategies.
    I would want to suggest Rangzen walas to read Obeyma’s (Miss. Pelosi’s flat lip pronunciation) speech on the concept of peace and a just war, especially his comment on Gandhi and King of their take on nonviolence movement(response in this case). That should give you a global perspective of what a peace, a just war and a nonviolence means. Understanding of these concepts in global context should rattle some of dove feathers that blanket innocent and peaceful and passive Tibetan leaders from Dhasa and their critics from Rangzen Grassland here.

  79. Arihant | December 20th, 2009 | 3:41 pm

    Tsewi Mila Rangzen la,
    I hope you’ve finished laughing now and ready to answer me where you got those percentages of Tibetans from Three Regions.
    Separation of religion from politics is important in many ways especially so in creating rule of law in governance. Again it is not enough lashing out at Samdong or some Lamas in chitues for the problems of getting religious influences into politics. You need to rewrite the whole charter (constitution) of TGIE to change it into a secular democratic political system. Please get some firm grasp on the existing system first before you throw out new ideas here.
    Can you see a secular democratic society (country) with heavily religious texts (Buddhism to be specific.) being taught in schools? Can we make a special case for it? Should we permit the Dalai Lama Institution the power and prestige of today in Tibetan affairs to the successive Dalai Lama (15th, 16th….so on)? If not, can we get rid of all religious teachings out of school education and stripe the power of the Institution of the Dalai Lama to create a truly secular democratic society? Or can we make exceptions for these because of “our unique culture”?
    To sum it up, how soon and how far do we want to go changing things in the name of “democratic” and “secular”?
    I must emphasize that TGIE should not be confused as a free country. I think what is most important while in exile is what holds Tibetan people together and how Tibetans can make best use of a coordinated movement to regain whatever is achievable at the moment.
    By the way, I saw your exclusive Rangzen club with some portfolios on Phayul. What is the official beer of this elite club? I know Lhasa Beer is definitely not the beer for Rangzen walas. Golok Ambum just threw the Lhasa beer out of the table. Maybe King Fisher or Corona? Can I bring my Budweiser, the homeless beer to the club for a chat? Or Muchachos, one Corona and a shot of Tequila babe… Ahahah.

  80. Arihant | December 20th, 2009 | 4:00 pm

    Tsewi Kalsang Phuntsok la,
    You would have no problem finding Rangzen supporters (lip service) in exile community. If you don’t have a road map for regaining Rangzen, then you could write something like Charter 08 which has no road map to get where they want to reach. But Charter o8 serves its purpose by telling Chinese that there can be a more free and open and better society than what they are in now. In our case, we don’t necessarily need to explain Tibetans the advantage of a Rangzen country because many if not all would buy into the idea of a better life in a free Tibet. What we need is a clear map and a leadership to guide us to get where our happiness (I have to use this ambiguous) is.
    So Major General Kalsang la, could you improvise your dilapidated slingshot in some ways or is it out of fashion in the 21st century of our ‘enlightened’ Buddhist Tibetans( who perform extensive puja over a life of an earth worm at least in the Hollywood movie that JN had to see and was forced to crawl under the table of the Saturday Night Live hahaha )? By the way, I wrote a comment on you and White Crane but Golok Ambum robbed them. I will not rewrite it again.
    I agree about the “right of Tibetan people” part but I don’t know how to get it. So I don’t know the responsibility part of it. That’s one thing.
    If I could win an office in TGIE, any Tibetan can win the katriship. I am not a colorful peacock. I am a black sheep or in our saying a white crow (ཕོ་རོག་དཀར་པོ). I am interested in politics because it’s directly related to my life as a Tibetan but I don’t want to be a politician because I don’t have the personal mood or mannerism or interpersonal skill to harness my ideas to that of others. I am best suited for working in a NGO in humanitarian work. Again I acutely understand that NGOs are the target of many of big mouth Rangzen walas.

  81. Kalsang Phuntsok | December 21st, 2009 | 9:42 am

    Hi Arihant,
    You wrote: “I agree about the “right of Tibetan people” part but I don’t know how to get it. So I don’t know the responsibility part of it.”

    You are right. Rangzen advocates have no roadmap. It seems you need a step-by-step guide not only to Rangzen but even on what to do in your daily life to achieve that goal. May be you also need a reminder everyday that you are a Tibetan.

    Let me ask you this what will you do if your hand gets burned while cooking. Do you go to your neighbour to ask what to do or do you go to the sink and pour cold water on your hand first. Unless you are a child, you know what you will do.

    Why do I get this feeling that even if there was a clear roadmap to Rangzen, you will still find a silly excuse to be on the sideline and make pointless criticism. And like George W. Bush think you nailed it.

    I am not gonna waste any more time responding to your comments. So, have a good life.

  82. Mila Rangzen | December 22nd, 2009 | 11:09 am

    arihant,
    i haven’t come across any one who is so worried about choka percentage as you are! so to this end i pray..may your tribe increase! what matters most to me is some one who is well qualified than minority/majority story. samdong lama-a minority is the katri which shows like minded individuals like you are in the minority of minority! good news! lest our system won’t go beyond it and people get stuck in the mud of narrow mentality.
    religious texts can be taught in monasteries and caves for those seeking freedom from the world. no problem with that. the Dalai Lama institution can remain in a spiritual realm and advise people should there be any internal racism or civil war. now is the time to experiment any political changes while HH is alive and there is no fear of a bloody coup or civil war in exile. and we have all the necessary freedom at this period in our exile history. in this we can go to the end of the seas. we are not talking about a murder trial. that will be handled by the law of the host country. goal, and efforts that go along with it will determine what we can achieve. not this “whatever can be achieved”. for we are in the land of politics where enemy calls all the shots! and we shy away from creating any concrete leverage in our favor. to be part of a system which continues to wipe us out as a people and nation cannot be -in any one’s right mind- a goal of any kind. quit changing the goal post if you want to beat Chelsea!

    i do believe in something like this strong.

    Chief justice commissioner—-lobsang sangay
    Justice commissioner———–phurbu dorji
    Justice commissioner———–topgyal

    15th parliament-in-exile

    Speaker————-karma chophel
    Deputy speaker—tashi phuntsok

    Religion separated from politics (good bye to monks and lamas on their way to buddhahood)

    It’s now Rangzen party vs umeylam party(like it or not, that’s how it is)

    Members of the 15th Tibetan parliament-in-exile

    50 election constituencies in exile(lower house 50 mp seats) all independence supporters.
    6 senator seats(upper house 2 seats each from 3 chokas)

    Executive: 14th kashag

    Kalon tripa—jamyang norbu(commander-in-chief)
    Deputy prime minister—tenpa tsering

    Kalon lhasang tsering—-defense minister(also army general)
    Kalon tenzin tsundue—-foreign minister
    Kalon tendor————–sports minister
    Kalon kp godrukpa——press and diplomacy minister
    Kalon tashi tsering——culture minister
    Kalon pema bum——–education minister
    Kalon tsering————-health minister
    Kalon lhadon————-home minister
    Kalon Tseten norbu—–finance minister
    Kalon lobsang wangyal—entertainment minister

  83. Mila Rangzen | December 22nd, 2009 | 6:59 pm

    let’s rewrite the exile charter and replace its “truth prevails” with clear cut political term..independence and secular bi-party democracy. and this can be done by the mps but JN seems to have a different idea. his article on this is actually due by mid december but let’s give him some more since he seems be to writing 4 articles at a time.

  84. Arihant | December 22nd, 2009 | 8:37 pm

    Tsewi Kalsang Phuntsok la,
    I’m so sorry if my attempts to express my thoughts and curiosities here somehow consumed your time. Often time, when I go on relatively extensive discussion on any topics with Tibetans, usual reactions are either I am not Tibetan enough (implying Chinese agent), I am wasting their time, or in Mila Rangzen’s thought, I am too regionalist and any numbers of other things. We officially have closed our discussion on the Roadmap here today.
    I had turned away from arguing with Chinese agents on phayul figured out that was really a waste of my time. Instead I tried to raise some issues and discuss them with Tibetans on phayul forum and eventually moved here. And that this also seems not turning the way I was meaning it to be.
    And final verdict on Mila Rangzen’s ཇབ་བེ་ཉོབ་བེ will also officially end here with this closing argument.
    We talked about cholka politics until he exhausted all his reasons for his position. Finally he produced these percentages of people from Cholkha Sum as such;
    1. in exile…
    15% amdo
    35% kham
    50% utsang
    (mixed parentage…90%)
    in tibet…
    15% utsang
    35% amdo
    50% kham
    (mixed parentage..1%)
    I knew right away these numbers were cooked in Mila’s Rangzen kitchen. First I ignored it.
    Then when I talked about the cholka issues in the exile community, he had the gut to label “gullible” to general Tibetans and said talking the way I talked could misinform and mislead these “gullible Tibetans”.
    Furthermore, he dared to present the forged statistics here again. He went into “hysteric laughter” when I was talking with Mr. Gapshi la about regionalism in exile. So I questioned the authenticity of the percentages. He ignored it.
    When I asked this time (probably the third since this topic started in phayul forum) again about the source of his information, instead of answering me the question, he started branding me as the first person he has ever met “who is so worried about choka percentage as you are! so to this end i pray..may your tribe increase!”
    But he doesn’t have the gut to acknowledge that he cooked those percentages for reasons I don’t know.
    No offense here but since we are not making any decisions here, our discussions should be open, frank and honest.

    Biparty and biparty democratic system?? Don’t you get tired of Biparty political dramas in the Capitol Hill? Didn’t it come to a point when even one senator could have hijacked the whole Senate Bill on Healthcare reform? How democratic indeed!!! Come on everybody applaud for it.

  85. Kalsang Phuntsok | December 23rd, 2009 | 9:26 am

    Arihant,

    I may have been quite harsh in my comments towards you. And as an apology for that I believe you deserve one more response from me.

    Your question about roadmap is a legitimate question. But let me tell you what else we don’t have. We don’t have a policy which surrenders to our very enemy our most basic right of independence and self-determination. We don’t have a policy which always tries to appease the criminals and tells the victims to shut up. A pro-Rangzen government will tell the world what its people want not what it thinks its people want.

    I don’t love my enemies neither do I empathize with who says they do. If I got a chance, I will try my best to kill my enemy(and if a few ass kisser gets killed in the process I will think of it as collateral damage). When they have not shown any mercy on us why should we. Settlement and compromise occurs between parties who had misunderstandings not between a bully and a victim. If there is to be any solution, the first thing that needs to occur is an apology from the bully quickly followed by returning of what he has robbed from his victims.

    And then we can talk.

  86. Arihant | December 23rd, 2009 | 8:08 pm

    Tsewi Kalsang Phuntsok la,
    I can acutely feel the feelings that you share.
    I admire those Tibetans who have unwavering commitment and strong conviction for ones own country even in the direst situation. I have to acknowledge that I can easily be discouraged and distracted. Anyway,I’ll write something relevant to your comment.
    There are sporadic debates on Obama’s use of the phrase “just war” in his acceptance speech of Nobel Prize. Whether his continuing war on Iraq and in Afghanistan is justifiable is a big question. But in our case, a war against a daily oppressor can very well satisfy the general requirements of a “just war”.
    Since it’s a theory, we might want to read upon the just war theory to comprehend what I am talking about here. I know that our enlightened beings would raise their eye brows when we touch the topic of war.
    My general sense is that our enlightened exile beings shun upon anything that involves violence, and consider it almost as a “low class”. Maybe it’s really a sign of their enlightenment.

    Speaking of violence, I said in the previous comments to read Mr. Obeyma’s acceptance speech of Nobel Prize to compare that of our concept of nonviolence and its virtue to get a global prospect of it. I will quote a fatty port of his speech here.
    “Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones.” As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. King’s life work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there’s nothing weak — nothing passive — nothing naïve — in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King.

    But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda’s leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism — it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.”
    And the rest can be read from the following link;
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/11/world/europe/11prexy.text.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=obama%27s%20acceptance%20speech%20&st=cse

  87. Choni Tsultrim Gyatso | December 25th, 2009 | 1:17 am

    Dear brothers and siters
    I felt exactly disappointment same as you guys felt of be heard announcement President Obama would not meet the Dalai Lama on his last trip in Washington. I think Obama avoided to meet HH not only up set Tibetan people but supporters and Millions of people around the world who cares about world peace and harmony.
    I think Obama embarrass himself in front of million of people. He knows that but still acted like third world country leader who simply so afraid of up set Chinese leader.
    Obama forgot what country he represents Nepal or United States. That is why he actd like child.
    One of the reasons is that Obama wants to borrow money from China to bill out America Auto industries and his health care bill. He dreams and dreamt but it did happen. Disappoint to Obama.
    Obama also forgot China accusing On US not show any sign of environmentalism. Mr.O also forgot China sold US poisoned pet food, contaminated drywall and lead-laced toy result many innecent kids and pets died. People so scare to buy any food mark with made by China.
    All these shows that it is so clear that Obama is so log headed man with selfish concentration and his lack of experience has shown right front of everyone.
    Again Obama embarrassed by international Olympic committee in Copenhagen as well as by Chinese premier.
    Obama once again embarrassed him try to persuade Olympic committee to bring 2016 summer game to Chicago.
    There are so many times that obama danced so much but it never look good.

    Obama should first meet Hu Jintao then Dalai Lama: Prime Minister in exile Samdhong Rinpoche said. I am not surprised about that comment because I don’t see there would be another expression to make Obama wake up and realize that he was doing some thing wrong to avoiding meet Tibetan leader. We all know that there is nothing can be done to stop him, so Samdhoung Lama said “President Obama should not irritate Chinese leadership. China’s most irritation is with His Holiness wherever he goes. So, this I think is common sense. Obama should have good relations with the Chinese leadership”. I think everything said is so true.

    “Freedom for Tibetans, global concerns such as world peace, the environment, and even providing “spiritual guidance’s important but I think Samdhung Lama exaggerated little in stead of bring Tibet’s issue first put all these secondary thing push to in front of our main goal. I don’t think HH’s last concern or less concern is Tibet and people in Tibet.

    Rinpoche’s declaration of Chinese railroad would benefit the Tibetan people and their economic welfare. I am kind of agree what Samdhung Lama said about. We know rail road mainly bulit because Chinese wanted take away all the nature resource from Tibet and transporting Chinese people to Tibet to change Tibet from white to black. But at same time Tibetans also can use it and I think it must brought some kind of benefit for the people in Tibet in short and longer term in the future if we can go back to Tibet soon. We are going to need railroad in 21 century and we can’t use yak to transport in modern age.

    Another thing HH might be said Tibetan issue was not a primary concern but human values and religious harmony and then Tibet issue.

    I think this is a way of saying or pick issue on one particular subject. I also think that there are so many thousands of people around the world support Tibetans issue in Because Tibetan cares about human value and harmony among the different faith. We as Buddhist should care all these not to be selfish but having said that we should absolutely focus on what we needs to achieve not loose our belt for other thing third party reason and definitely there is no doubt about that our first priority is our country and people.

  88. lobsang | January 20th, 2010 | 6:27 am

    Hi Jamyang la.

    As a tibetan, I do have the courage to sacrifice for the our cause and we all see that china is becoming more and more powerful and human rights in Tibet are becoming worse and worse but the Tibetan’s in Tibet are still looking towards India and waiting for us to do something as we are in a free country but still Tibetan’s in Tibet are sacrifing more than what we do in a free nation’s.
    I jus wanna say……… Think about.. Even if you are born in India or anywhere.. but your origin is Tibetan..

  89. Jamyang | February 11th, 2010 | 2:50 am

    That schritzophrenia comment was so not right. I hope its connotation is limited to just a poor analogy or a metaphor. JN la, you have diagnosed this fatal ailmennt of rinpoche’s just after digesting two articles? It really shows your analytical abilities. I guess you loathed psychology when younger.

    I hugely follow your thoughts but when you make comments like this, it really shows a desparate and somewhat shameful attempt to attract readers and unduce reactions.

    Anyways, i think you have drawn a graph just by using two points and neglected all the other points which contributes to the situation. Thats all i have to say.

  90. Arihant | February 21st, 2010 | 9:39 am

    For tsewi Jamnor la,

    Here is the link where you can hear from the “hot” mouth of HH the Dalai Lama that Tibetan issue is not his first priority:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cDddFNyv5I&feature=player_embedded Carefully listen from 1:00

    So tsewi Choni la, you probably don’t need to doubt that Mr. Samdhong misinterpreted His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s priorities.

    That being said,I still believe in deep down my heart that Tibet is the main concern or priority for His Holiness but somehow the way it’s packaged to present to the world is such that misleads people, especially rangzen walas and Tibetans with narrow opinions.

  91. Tenpa Dhargyal Gapshi | February 21st, 2010 | 3:19 pm

    Dearest Arihant la,
    I believe it when Kundun says Tibet is not his first priority. As a buddhist monk and a reincarnation of Chenrazi, his main priority is the future of mankind and leading them on the path of enlightenment. As such, the problem of Tibet, as sad and disgusting as it might be, wouldn’t appear particularly important, considering the bigger picture. I don’t find that surprising nor unexpected. That is not to say that he doesn’t care about Tibet which he does immensely and doesn’t need to be validated. It is just that vision is much broader and involves the whole samsara. So, yes, I do believe it.

  92. Arihant | February 26th, 2010 | 12:37 pm

    Tsewi TD Gapshi la,
    Me neither. But I am trying to understand the Jigsaw puzzle of exile politics. I wanted to point out another interesting topic of Jamnor la’s article related with the recent interview with Larry King.
    I am going to quote from Jamnor la’s above article of what Mr. Samdong said in an interview. Here is what he has in the article. (The opening quotation mark is missing in the article.)
    Tibetan Prime Minister in exile Samdhong Rinpoche today said US President Barack Obama should first meet Chinese President Hu Jintao and then the Dalai Lama as cordial relations between the US and China is very important… President Obama should not irritate Chinese leadership. China’s most irritation is with His Holiness wherever he goes. So, this I think is common sense. Obama should have good relations with the Chinese leadership,’’
    Here is what HH the Dalai Lama said in the recent interview with Larry King.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF9F5E4gRpo
    Are there any differences in the comments made by HH the Dalai Lama and Samdong regarding who should meet who first?
    I am not trying to protect or support Mr. Samdong but am trying to understand whether Kashag is independent from Kugay?
    The ultimate question here is who is running the show? If we have a clear idea of it, it will make a whole world difference when we think of who should be elected for the katriship. Am I making any senses here?

  93. Kalsang Phuntsok | February 27th, 2010 | 1:03 am

    Arihant, I have posted my comment to your above post under article “Unleashing the R Word”. Check post 205.

  94. Tibetan Mastiff | February 27th, 2010 | 11:23 pm

    A Tibeatn Nomad Boy telling tales of A bird during a Student event:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_TjuV2xTXk

  95. Arihant | March 6th, 2010 | 9:48 am

    Tsewi Kalsang Puntsok la,
    I see the exact same problem. Every major decision in exile govt is sealed by a forged sense of collective conscience. But Tibetan Youth Congress is an independent organization so is the National Democratic Party of Tibet and many others. Even so they are like Mr. Samdong doing the same thing that “We either don’t acknowledge the problem or can’t dare to look at the leader’s decisions through a critical lens because of fear of inflaming religious sentiments.”
    Pretty much anything that goes against the His Holiness the Dalai Lama can’t simply exist in Tibetan community especially in Tibetan diaspora. I just don’t want to talk about these things because raising these sorts of questions always gets me alienated from the group.
    The sources of many of the issues we face now are so intertwined with our history that I can’t even think of a quick solution to these.
    There need to be some political reforms in exile govt. The right way to do that is through a democratic process such as participating in chitue election or katriship and change laws through legal means. If you run for the katriship and if my green book is up to date, you may get my vote.
    In the end, I’ve gained (or validated my impression) of some prospective on the exile politics. I thank you for sincerely expressing your views. Let move on from this topic. Hopefully, I meet you on some other topics in the future.

  96. Arihant | March 21st, 2010 | 7:13 am

    Dearest Unanimous Resolution la,

    You have spoken gallons of gasoline that I can drive ever fast away from you forever.
    Here is an article from Phayul this morning:

    Dharamsala, March 20: The Tibetan Parliament-in-exile Saturday passed a unanimous resolution reaffirming full trust and confidence in His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s leadership in resolving the issue of Tibet.

    The resolution abides by the Parliament’s earlier resolution passed way back in 1997 that gave the Tibetan leader full authority in dealing with the future course of action for resolving the issue of Tibet.

    The unanimous resolution, which was passed after two days of extensive deliberation on the Statement of His Holiness the Dalai Lama to the the parliament, was met with a standing ovation from Tibetan lawmakers.

    In the statement, the Dalai Lama directed the parliament to undertake thorough discussion with the administration to clarify all confusions and doubts in the exile Tibetan community that the “Memorandum on Genuine Autonomy for the Tibetan People” and the “Note on the Memorandum’ submitted to the Chinese government do not reflect his views or that the two documents had not been tabled in the parliament for approval.

    A section of the parliamentary members had also earlier during the session, which concluded successfully here today, questioned the validity of the two documents.

    In the statement, the Dalai Lama has said that in arranging the two documents he had acted sincerely on the unconditional responsibility entrusted to him by the unanimous resolutions passed by the Tibetan parliament in the past.

    The Tibetan parliament in 1997 passed a unanimous resolution accepting Dalai Lama’s approach to resolve the Tibet issue. It was passed after vast majority of Tibetan people expressed views that whatever His Holiness the Dalai Lama decides, considering the international situation, will be acceptable to them.

    The resolution passed here today said that the parliament was fully convinced that the two documents submitted to the Chinese government were in accordance with the wishes of His Holiness the Dalai Lama and that there was no need for parliament’s approval for them as per the earlier unanimous resolution.

    In the resolution, the Parliament also extended heartfelt apologies to the 74-year old exiled Tibetan leader for any pain and hurt caused by the recent controversy and misconstruction on the matter.

    The resolution further said that the members of the parliament in future would strive sincerely to improve the standards and the proceedings of the parliament and that it would work for the public good by avoiding partisan feelings.

    While briefing the press after the conclusion of the proceedings the Parliament Speaker Mr Penpa Tsering expressed full satisfaction for the smooth and successful conclusion of the Ninth session of the 14th Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile.

    Do we need these chitues?

  97. PhurbuDorjee | March 22nd, 2010 | 4:28 am

    Tibet

Post a comment