Monday, March 31, 2008

T!BET (my blog is so blocked)

Clearly, the Communist Party’s mishandling of the current unrest in Tibet has become a hot topic in today’s news even as the violent protests cease in most parts of the region and its periphery. During my recent visit home, I was surrounded by this mounting criticism of China followed by sharp attacks on my judgment for voluntarily associating myself with this authoritarian regime. The truth is, Tibet is a complicated issue and is quite difficult to discuss among those who are unqualified to fully assess the situation, including myself (but here we go anyway).

Unfortunately, most Americans are buying into this Cold War propaganda that our own media projects to strengthen a mainstream conception that a red empire is on the rise threatening our way of life and the moral standards that we live by. In a polarizing nation that gossips about radical pastors, cheating governors, and juicing baseball stars strained by an inevitable recession, failed war, and a lame duck president, criticism of China hits a nationalistic chord that transcends all divisions as it reminds us that behind all the bullshit, we are all proud Americans. Does China deserve criticism? Yes. But it would be wrong to say that our media is completely fair in its reporting. .

First of all, the accounts of how the protests began are unclear. A peaceful sit down by monks on the anniversary of the Dalai Lama’s exit from China had turned for the worst as police interference instigated a violent back lash from those people on the streets. This brawl escalated quickly and within a day, unleashed tension from years of “cultural genocide” rocked the region before the government could quell this incited sense of rebellion that had the potential to spread across the whole nation.

The facts are nearly impossible to confirm but it seems by piecing together the information we have been able to obtain, Tibetans literally went on a killing spree – burning down buildings, vandalizing shops and murdering Han Chinese (the majority ethnic group that Tibetans fear will overpopulate their land thus fostering assimilation and the annihilation of a two thousand year old culture). The truth seems evident – these were not peaceful protests – they were extremely violent. This, in my opinion, is lost in many of the news accounts on CNN, BBC, and elsewhere.

However, the Communist Party propaganda machines are very keen on stressing this fact, going as far as calling offenders terrorists and describing Tibet’s spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, as a conspiring “splitist” devoted to challenging the territorial integrity of China. And because Tibet has now become a military state with a ban on foreign journalism, we don’t know the casualties of Tibetans or Han Chinese – the numbers are unconfirmed and will undoubtedly alter from the official account. But whether these actual events begin to look like a Kent State massacre (violence from the oppressors) or more likely the LA riots (violence from the oppressed), the real problem is the oppression itself – a problem that the Communist government is refusing to recognize. Without a free and open platform to analyze and assess the underlying tensions and historical injustices that fueled such an outburst, the government will not be able to resolve this crisis any time soon. Instead, the government has targeted Tibetans and specifically the Dalai Lama as the only culprits, breeding racism that will ultimately turn Tibet into China’s own Chechnya.

Chinese media will constantly refer to Tibet’s growing prosperity and the economic benefits that the Han Chinese bring, but then fail to discuss the erosion of cultural freedoms that has resulted in six million Tibetans struggling with identity and with autonomy over their land. This dialogue of struggle for our basic human rights is nonexistent in China, while it touches the core of every American. We pride ourselves by protecting the individual and his rights while Chinese pride themselves in the wellness of their nation – sustainable only through squashing social unrest and restricting all channels that could be used to challenge the Party.

So as China’s state-owned media publishes and broadcasts images of Tibetans burning and looting Chinese shops in Tibet and attacking ethnic Han Chinese, the international media continues to report on the persecution of the Tibetan and criticism seen in videos of peaceful protests at Chinese embassies around the world, disruptions during the lighting of the Olympic torch in Athens, and world leaders voicing words of concern. The only international support that CCTV could report on came from the Communist Parties of Russia, India, and Brazil, as well as Samoa, Fiji, Mauritania, Fatah, Eqypt , and Iraq – talk about support(chuckle, chuckle).

China is a developing nation with many problems strongly imbedded in the framework of its society, making it harder for civil rights to prevail and for Tibetans to overcome these hardships. But in a globalised world that has never been so integrated before, blankets infested with smallpox, lynch mobs, and concentration camps are no longer tolerated by a well-informed international community – in today’s world China has to deal with their dirty laundry on a global stage, the first rising power to do so, and they must perform this balancing act between internal development and external acceptance very carefully.

Like I said – complex. China has suppressed the unrest this time, development will continue, but its relations with the rest of the world have been tarnished. To save face, Hu Jintao may invite the Dalai Lama to Beijing to perform a series of diplomatic exchanges. Little will be achieved, the DaLai Lama will eventually die, and the new DaLai Lama will be under strict control of the Party. Tibet will stay as part of China and will have to wait with the rest of the country to see major political reform and their basic rights realized.

But for now, both sides will continue to do what they think is the right think to do – and being the optimist that I am (at least today) it will progress... they shall overcome.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

What fascinated me about Beijing when I went there in 2003 was walking around the shops and even the young sales people would ask me why the US was invading Iraq. Definitely a politically-minded city there.

Anonymous said...

The below sounds like a publicity piece by the Chinese government.

"The facts are nearly impossible to confirm but it seems by piecing together the information we have been able to obtain, Tibetans literally went on a killing spree – burning down buildings, vandalizing shops and murdering Han Chinese (the majority ethnic group that Tibetans fear will overpopulate their land thus fostering assimilation and the annihilation of a two thousand year old culture). The truth seems evident – these were not peaceful protests – they were extremely violent. This, in my opinion, is lost in many of the news accounts on CNN, BBC, and elsewhere."

First, when a government is afraid of the truth - banning all journalists - then you have to suspect the worst. The Chinese government has no history of self restraint or training their troops in the art of self restraint - they killed a couple hundred relatively peaceful demonstrators in Tiananmen Square. Do you think the Han troops or police would have any trouble pulling the trigger on those ungrateful Tibetans. The reports are that the number of Tibetans killed is way over 100 - reports, for example, from Tibetans who have escaped to Chengdu. There is a saying, "If they won't let you know the truth, then the truth must be pretty bad." Since the Chinese government did not let the world know the truth - only the negatives concerning the Tibetans - it must be assumed that the truth was pretty bad.

By using the term "killing spree" you have made the Tibetans worse than other oppressed people. Normally, when demonstrations of oppressed peoples go bad (often after some violent provocation by the police), they attack the shops of the exploiters (think blacks in America, immigrants in Paris). There likely was no intent to kill. But things get pretty rough. Police are shooting the rioters. Shop owners get into fights with rioters. Did a dozen plus Han police and shop owners get kill, probably since that is the figure the government gave - and they wouldn't make the number smaller than it really was. But while the Tibetans were killing the Han, the Han police, troops, and shop owners were also killing the Tibetans at probably a greater than 10 to 1 ratio - if history is followed...in conflicts between oppressed and oppressor. Were the Han on a killing spree or is this pejorative term only good for the lowly Tibetans.

Language is important. When you use "killing spree" and "murder" to describe the Tibetan, but not the Han, you have defined yourself as a prejudiced reporter. Watch the loaded words, watch the balance.