Tibetan Identity and Chinese Repression

Ann Applebaum has a great piece in Slate on the uprising in Tibet. While emphasizing the important role cell phones have played in distributing information about the protests, she moves on to a serious discussion of China’s repressive policies towards Tibet and how the current communist party leadership of Hu Jintao has aggravated Sino-Tibetan relations by prioritizing the repression of Tibet. Of note:

And like all its predecessors, the Chinese imperial class cares deeply about the pacification of the imperial periphery, more so than one might think.

For proof that this is so, look no further than the biography of Hu Jintao, the current Chinese president—and also the former Communist Party boss of Tibet. In 1988 and 1989, at the time of the last major riots, Hu was responsible both for the brutal repression of dissident Tibetan monks and dissidents and for what the Dalai Lama has subsequently called China’s policy of “cultural genocide“: the importation of thousands of ethnic Han Chinese into Tibet’s cities in order to dilute and eventually outbreed the ethnic Tibetan population.

Clearly, the repression of Tibet matters enormously to the members of China’s ruling clique, or they would not have promoted Hu, its mastermind, so far. The pacification of Tibet must also be considered a major political and propaganda success, or it would not have been copied by the Chinese-backed Burmese regime last year and repeated by the Chinese themselves in Tibet last week. Tibet is to China what Algeria once was to France, what India once was to imperial Britain, what Poland was to czarist Russia: the most unreliable, the most intransigent, and at the same time the most symbolically significant province of the empire.

Keep that in mind, over the next few days and months, as China tries once again to belittle Tibet, to explain away a nationalist uprising as a bit of vandalism. The last week’s riots began as a religious protest: Tibet’s monks were demonstrating against laws that, among other things, require them to renounce the dalai lama. The monks’ marches then escalated into generalized, unplanned, anti-Chinese violence, culminating in attacks on Han Chinese shops and businesses, among them—as you can see on the cell-phone videos—the Lhasa branch of the Bank of China.

However the official version evolves, in other words, make no mistake about it: This was not merely vandalism, it could not have been solely organized by outsiders, it was not only about the Olympics, and it was not the work of a tiny minority. It was a significant political event, proof that the Tibetans still identify themselves as Tibetan, not Chinese.

2 thoughts on “Tibetan Identity and Chinese Repression

  1. But dude, seriously– there are lots of Latinos in California and the Southwest who say that the USA is sitting on “Occupied Aztlan.” Hawaiians say the same thing. And they actually have a case.

    Now, I don’t see any defense for Beijing’s oppressive laws in Tibet, especially demanding the renunciation of the Dalai Lama. That’s just arrogant, and the Chinese government should be called out for that.

    But I just feel like there’s a lot of hypocrisy going around when it comes to the “Free Tibet” aspect of it. The USA is also sitting on occupied land, period.

    IMHO, the best thing for China would be for the nations of the world to participate in the Beijing Olympics as planned, since this would require China to behave like a civilized country and ensure that China engages with the world as one. Any lame-ass boycotts like this would be self-defeating, and give China the perfect excuse to repress even further, on the pretext of other countries “interfering in China’s matters.”

    Just engage in the Olympics and demand increasing transparency from the Chinese government.

    Like

  2. You think things are/were bad in the US, therefore we can’t say anything about things that are bad in Tibet? Give me a break.

    Moreover, there are images and videos and reports coming out of Tibet TODAY about violent repression taking place at the hands of the Chinese military and police. We have a moral obligation to speak out, now.

    You’re not making an apples to apples comparison, as there is no similar outrage taking place today in the US vis a vis Mexico. You have a problem with how this country was founded – fine, you’re welcome to your opinions. But having an existential critique with the US has no bearing on the universal respect for human rights.

    More importantly, if that is your critique of the US, I’d expect that you are capable of leveling a similar critical eye on China and Tibet. Multi-task, it’s not that hard to care about more than one thing. To wit, I write about American domestic politics and the Tibetan independence movement, two things that have effectively no overlap.

    Like

Leave a comment