The following is a chapter of
Who will identify the next incarnation of the Dalai Lama?
Political Significance of the 11th Panchen Lama
Tibetans are betrayed by their hopefulness, the Chinese by their suspiciousness.
- Tibetan Saying
The political significance of the current 11th Panchen Lama – assigned by the Chinese government – has all to do with the Chinese territorial claim on the Tibet Autonomous Region. The Dalai Lama, living in exile in India, is outside of Chinese control, but his next incarnation may very well be assigned by the Chinese government, and consequently confirmed by the Panchen Lama.
In this context it is crucial to understand the claim of both, the Chinese government and the Central Tibetan Administration.
What is the historical basis of the Chinese claim to Tibet?
According to Beijing Review – Chinese Communist Magazine:
From ancient times, the Mongolians had been one of China’s nationalities. In the 13th century, their power expanded rapidly. Genghis Khan united the tribes under a centralized Khanate in 1206. The outcome was a unified country [China] and the formation of the Yuan Dynasty in 1271.
In the process, the Mongol Khanates peacefully incorporated Tibet in 1247 after defeating the Western Xia [1227] and the Jin [1234].
With a unified China, the Yuan Dynasty contributed greatly to the political, economic and cultural development of the nation’s various nationalities — in strict contrast to the feuding that had gone on since the late years of the Tang Dynasty (618-907). To argue that the Mongolians’ campaign to unify China was fundamentally the imposition of rule by a foreign power is wrong because it misses the basic point of Chinese history that China is a multi-national country. Whether it was the Mongolians, the Manchus (who founded the Qing Dynasty [1644-1912], or any other peoples, it has always been a case of one Chinese nationality replacing another.
It is completely out of the question to claim that the Mongolians or the Manchus were outsiders who conquered China.
The Dalai Lama’s view is as follows:
During the 5th Dalai Lama’s time [1617-1682], I think it was quite evident the we were a separate sovereign nation with no problems. The 6th Dalai Lama [1683-1706] was spiritually pre-eminent, but politically, he was weak and disinterested. He could not follow the 5th Dalai Lama’s path. This was a great failure. So, then the Chinese influence increased. During this time, the Tibetans showed quite a deal of respect to the Chinese. But even during these times, the Tibetans never regarded Tibet as a part of China. All the documents were very clear that China, Mongolia and Tibet were all separate countries.
Because the Chinese emperor was powerful and influential, the small nations accepted the Chinese power or influence. You cannot use the previous invasion as evidence that Tibet belongs to China. In the Tibetan mind, regardless of who was in power, whether it was the Manchus, the Mongols or the Chinese, the east of Tibet was simply referred to as China. In the Tibetan mind, India and China were
treated the same; two separate countries.
Source: http://stason.org/TULARC/travel/tibet/B5-What-is-the-historical-basis-of-the-Chinese-claim-to-Tib.html
The Importance of the 11th Panchen Lama
The importance of the Panchen Lama, as well as that of the current Dalai Lama, for the Chinese government seems to dwindle over time. First, the Dalai Lama is now 75 years old, and his health is less than perfect. Even the Dalai Lama himself is well aware that time is on Beijing’s side. “The Chinese are simply waiting for him to die,” says Nicholas Bequelin, a China researcher for the New York-based rights organization Human Rights Watch. When the Dalai Lama is gone, Bequelin says, supporters of Tibetan autonomy will have lost what is by far their most potent symbol of resistance to Chinese rule. Whoever takes over will have a much-diminished presence.
Beijing has become more sophisticated in dealing with Tibetan religion, allowing some interaction among less exalted lamas on both sides of the political divide. More importantly, the accelerating erosion of Tibetans’ traditional nomadic lifestyle, along with a burgeoning influx of ethnic Chinese workers, businessmen and tourists, makes it likely that Tibet will lose much of its unique cultural identity within a generation. Bequelin points to the example of China’s Muslim-majority province of Xinjiang, where Beijing has spent billions encouraging tourism — notably by building a train line through the region’s vast desert to the remote city of Kashgar, connecting it with the rest of China — and improving the infrastructure to extract its considerable oil reserves. Along with the strict repression of even the slightest signs of dissent, the policy has been highly successful in neutralizing opposition to Chinese rule.
In Tibet’s case, similar tactics are being used. A $5 billion train line connecting Beijing and Lhasa opened last July, doubling tourism arrivals in the region. A forced relocation program that will resettle tens of thousands of nomadic herders, along with increasing urban migration among young Tibetans, will ensure any remaining resistance dwindles with time. “It’s never a pretty sight when indigenous peoples run into the power of the state,” says Bequelin, “but China is unique in the Tibetans lack of ability to resist, so the process of assimilation is much faster.”
Source: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1686573,00.html
[
[
