I am gratified that my blog posts have generated so much discussion on the issue of Jigme Ngabo’s dismissal from RFA. Even the few inaccuracies in my writing have inexplicably (but providentially) become catalysts for democratic debate, engendering historically unprecedented participation from the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA). First we had the clarification from CTA Press & Media dept, and now we get another from the Representative of His Holiness the Dalai Lama in New York, Lobsang Nyandak la. The following is my reply to his statement issued on November 30, 2012.
Dear Dhonchoe Lobsang Nyandak la,
I was very pleased to read the extraordinarily well-written clarification issued in your name regarding my article, “CTA Joins Free RFA Debate”. Thank you firstly for officially confirming an important but hitherto-undisclosed fact: that the Honourable Sikyong Lobsang Sangay and Ms. Libby Liu were both at the same event in London on October 23, 2012, just two weeks before Jigme Ngapo la was fired. I’m sure that the Tibetan people will further appreciate a full recounting of any interactions between the Sikyong and Ms. Liu in London before, during, and after this event.
Incidentally, the symposium you mentioned, “Ethics for a More Prosperous World”, was the one I said took place at Legatum Institute which had the honour of hosting His Holiness the Dalai Lama (http://www.li.com/news-events/news/2012/11/28/ethics-for-a-more-prosperous-world). I am still curious how Ms. Liu ended up being invited. The access that the current CTA administration is giving her to His Holiness is unprecedented by any CTA administration for any past president of RFA or VOA. It would be entirely appropriate for the CTA to explain why Ms. Liu is being offered this unprecedented access to His Holiness, and whether anything was asked in return, because it is in the interest of all Tibetans to ensure that His Holiness’s good name is not dragged into a questionable political arrangement. In short, as Tibetans we all have an obligation to protect His Holiness from such things.
Also incidentally, given the scrutiny that the United States Congress is giving this issue, may I respectfully suggest that, when you speak for the CTA administration (which of course you have the right and duty to do) you leave His Holiness’s good name out of it. When you went out of your way to invoke your status as not just the CTA representative but also the representative of His Holiness the Dalai Lama (knowing full well that His Holiness has graciously lent his name only to allow the CTA to function more easily), one could imply that you were claiming to speak on His behalf on this issue. That would be a very unfortunate and wrong implication.
Lastly, I wanted to thank you for your transparency in confirming that you had, very coincidentally, planned to be in Washington DC on the very day after Jigme la’s fired. I’m sure Jigme la’s firing was as much a surprise to you as to everyone else. And I’m sure that the RFA staff who attended your talk for their benefit at ICT appreciated the good fortune of all this coincidental timing. In closing I would like to point out that you did not deny you said that although the exile administration was not behind the dismissal “that it did not take an unfavorable view of what had happened” as I noted. What did you mean by that? That the CTA wanted Jigme la out and somehow it happened, just like that? The Tibetan public and I hopefully await a clarification.