Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

No place for Tibet in Rudd's 'New Sinology'?

By Simon Bradshaw - posted Tuesday, 11 May 2010


The reference to territorial integrity is almost certainly a disguised reference to Tibet, which Beijing continues to regard as fundamentally an issue of sovereignty. While the Dalai Lama and Tibetan people have long since ceded the demand for independence and sought a solution within the framework of the PRC, it has served Beijing’s interests well to paint the Tibetans as separatists. Very reasonable statements of concern by foreign governments over such things as media freedom, religious oppression and arbitrary arrest are consistently, and to the exasperation of Tibetans and Tibet supporters, slammed as support for “splitting the motherland”.

Today even a casual observer has no problem recognising the dilemmas and challenges inherent in our relationship with China. Innumerable column inches have been spent debating how to balance our very real concerns over Tibet, East Turkestan, civil and political rights, media freedom and rule of law with the undeniable need to maintain a working, co-operative relationship with the dominant power in our region.

On the one hand, given Beijing’s steadfast refusal to address constructively the situation in Tibet and the over-the-top rebuke that even relatively low-level meetings between the Dalai Lama and foreign officials tend to invoke, we can easily rationalise the government’s decision to keep quiet.

Advertisement

Yes, this is a tragedy for Tibet. More broadly, this is a tragedy for the wider cause of non-violence, of justice and of truth over power. But as Brian Rudman, a columnist for the New Zealand Herald stated last November while chiming into the discussion over whether Prime Minister John Key should meet the Dalai Lama: “Cheeking a non-ally like China over an issue as esoteric as Tibet seems suicidal.”

Whether China has in fact exacted any real toll on those countries that have a pushed a little harder on Tibet is debatable. But far more important is the misapprehension of Tibet as an esoteric issue.

Tibet is as large as Western Europe. Wedged between India and China it is an area of immense geopolitical significance, for centuries a buffer between the two rising giants of Asia. It also lies at the centre of a nuclear-weapons triangle formed by China, India and Pakistan.

The Tibetan Plateau is the source of almost all Asia’s great rivers. The Mekong, Yangtze, Yellow, Brahmaputra, Ganges, Salween, Indus and Irriwaddy Rivers: the lifeblood of China, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and South-East Asia all begin their life in Tibet. This vast island of ice in the sky is also the main engine of the Asian monsoon, drawing moist air in from the oceans to bring rain and sustenance to hundreds of millions.

In short, what happens in Tibet, and whether we see Tibet further subsumed into China’s military-industrial complex, has implications far beyond Tibet and China’s borders. Decades of unregulated colonisation have seen not only the decimation of Tibet’s traditional rural economy but also drastic environmental disturbances that threaten the livelihoods of millions downstream. Tibet’s nomads, who for centuries maintained the fragile grasslands of the high plateau, are today being forcibly removed and resettled. China’s catastrophic policy failures in Tibet, which have fanned ethnic tensions and led to the widest rich-poor divide of anywhere in the PRC, remain a constant threat to social stability.

It is, clearly, in China’s own interest to face the facts and take a fresh look at its problems in Tibet. By proxy it is strongly in our own interests too. A China destabilised by internal unrest would damage our Australian economy. The impact on those downstream of another half century of disastrous environmental mismanagement of the Tibetan Plateau does not bear contemplating.

Advertisement

With the events of 2008 still fresh in the mind of China’s leaders, no other issue prompts quite the same knee-jerk defiance as Tibet. And through sheer force and diplomatic dexterity, both in multilateral forums and in its bilateral relations, China has shown a unique ability to evade criticism when it wishes.

To bring Tibet into Australia’s “New Sinology” may mean creating several more bumps in the near future. To continue ignoring the “yak in the room” will create a far greater tragedy down the line.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

1 post so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Dr Simon Bradshaw is the Campaign Coordinator for the Australia Tibet Council. He has previously worked on environment and development projects in Australia, India and on his home island of Guernsey. In 2007 he completed a four-year research project on the traditional relationship between the land and people of Tibet. Simon now campaigns fulltime for the human rights and democratic freedoms of the Tibetan people.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Simon Bradshaw

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 1 comment
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy