Published by: World Tibet Network News, Tuesday, June 20, 1996

Diplomacy key to Beijing's 'War' with Dalai Lama

The Straits Times - Singapore

June 7, 1996

By Sunanda K. Datta-Ray

After eight years of pussyfooting on negotiations, Beijing appears to have declared war on the Dalai Lama.

"Everyone in the region understand clearly that struggle against the Dalai group is a longterm, complex, you die I live political battle with no possibility of compromise", announced the Tibet Autonomous Region People's Congress recently.

Six million Tibetans are thus presented with possibly the most serious challenge they have had to face since the peaceful liberation" whose 45th anniversary last month was marked by an intense official campaign to strip all monasteries, temples, schools, offices and homes of pictures of the exiled spiritual leader.

What is at stake now is the survival of the 500 year old institution that is the symbol of Tibet's distinctive identity.

The position of the Panchen Lama, second highest in the hierarchy, had already been marginalised before the 10th incumbent, who had suffered imprisonment and "re-education", died in 1989.

The recent enthronement of his six-year-old successor made it clear that the office now exists only by courtesy of the central government.

The Dalai Lama had identified another boy, also aged six, who headed Beijing's own list of 28 candidates. But no sooner was he singled out by the Tibetan leader than the Chinese withdrew him. Nothing has been heard of the child since, the official explanation being that he is "under protection".

Instead, Beijing installed as the 11th Panchen Lama littie Gyainsain Norbu, whose parents are registered Communist Party members.

Apart from trying to undermine the Dalai Lama's authority, the appointment warns of an ominous precedent.

Since the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama have to recognise each other's reincarnations, Beijing may be in an even stronger position when it comes to nominating the 15th holder of the former title.

This raises several questions.

First, how will the Dalai Lama cope with this threat to his historic role?

Second, will Tibetan Buddhists extend to someone who is obviously an official nominee the reverence and loyalty in which alone is rooted the present Dalai Lama's strength?

From this arises the further question: is it in China's interest to risk even more widespread disaffection, or to damage the standing of someone who could be a valuable ally?

If Israel can make a friend of an inveterate foe like Mr Yasser Arafat, why cannot Beijing engage the Dalai Lama in a constructive partnership?

Let it not be forgotten that, far from insisting on independence, the Dalai Lama has incurred the wrath of young militants among his followers by pleading for "a self-governing, democratic, political entity iii association with the People's Republic of China'.

His moderate nine-point proposal for talks, first mooted in 1988, is still on the table. So is his offer to visit China.

Both were reiterated from Oslo only last week.

Expectedly, the Chinese criticised the visit. They accuse the Dalai Lama (if internationalising the situation. So he is. And he will continue to do so for as long as there is no hope of redress at home.

Not that the Dalai Lama does not know that the problem of Tibet will not be solved in Strasbourg or Stockholm.

An astute diplomat, he is well aware, too, that when a United States President makes a supportive gesture, it is usually to send a signal to China.

But the Tibetans are also convinced that Beijing is not quite as immune to world opinion as it would make out. They draw a direct correlation between strictures abroad and relaxations at home.

Only China can disprove that contention. The obvious way, blending justice with realism, would be to preempt world criticism and meet Tibetan aspirations by extending to them Mr Deng Xiao Ping's one-country, two-systems formula.

The alternative of contributing violence would be awful for Tibet. But it would not be comfortable for China either.

As President Jiang Zemin once said, peace in Tibet's "crucial to the success reforms, development and stability throughout the country".

It should surprise no one if he is reminded that comment when he, too, visits Oslo later this month. Or of Mr Deng's memorable promise that "except for the independence of Tibet, all other questions can be negotiated".

That is all that the Dalai Lama wants. He has said again in Oslo that he is waiting only for "positive signals" from China.

With Hong Kong, Taiwan and, now Xingjiang, to say nothing of troubled relations with the US, on its plate, China cannot afford to encourage endemic unrest in its backyard.

A positive response to the Dalai Lama's overtures, instead of the present allout campaign, would secure Tibet.

It would also assure the world that the superpower, of the future is not incapable of statesmanship. Diplomacy like charity, begins at home.

(The Writer is an editorial consultant with The Straits Times)