— HN Das Way back in late 1961, when we were in the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration, Mussoorie, my friend and batchmate Prince Wangchuk Namgyal, uncle of the present King of Bhutan, took me out on a drive one cold afternoon in his powerful Japanese Pojero vehicle. We travelled on winding roads drenched by rain and skirted the hills enveloped in a deep cover of snow. It was really cold. I shivered while Wangchuk enjoyed. About 40 kilometres out of Mussoorie and beyond the Kemptee Falls the vehicle stopped in front of a cluster of bungalows. The Dalai Lama stayed here while Dharamsala was being made ready for him. We entered one of the bungalows. A young lady came out and ushered us into a warm drawing room choicefully decorated with ethnic Tibetan furnishings and a large painting of the fourteenth Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, on the mantle. I was told that the lady and her parents belonged to the highest rung of Tibetan aristocracy and had fled that country in the wake ofthe Dalai Lama’s flight to India for asylum in March, 1959. Her maid served Tibetan tea with plenty of butter mixed in the liquor. The taste was so pungent that I had to ask for tea with milk and sugar. I do not remember the details but the discussion revolved around Tibet andthe Dalai Lama. That was my first introduction to the country and its ruler.
Born on July 6, 1935 in a small village called Tagtser in the Dhome province of Tibet Tenzin Gyatso was brought to Lhasa in October, 1939 and enthroned as the 14th Dalai Lama (meaning “Ocean of Wisdom’ in Mongolian language) on February 22, 1940. He assumed full responsibility of his office on November 17, 1950 at the age of 16. I learnt aboutthe Dalai Lama and Tibet only from books and articles as I could never visit the country personally.
The Chinese had a special relationship with Tibet, which was “nominally subject to the suzerainty of China” but was “for all practical purposes an independent theocracy.” After the Communists came to power in China in 1949 their cadres started penetrating into Tibet. In 1951 a 17-point agreement was signed between China and Tibet under which suzerainty of China was accepted but it was clearly stated that Tibet would continue to enjoy full autonomy. The control of external affairs and defence would be under China but “there would be no interference by the Chinese Government with the Tibetan religion and customs and her internaladministration.” The Dalai Lama , however, maintained that “Tibet is a separate country different from China — racially, culturally, linguistically, geographically and historically.” (The Asian Wall Street Journal, November 8, 1979).
The Chinese did not honour this agreement. They started interfering in Tibet’s internal affairs. What the Dalai Lama stated in his press statement of June 20, 1959 is significant: “although they had solemnly undertaken to maintain my status and power asthe Dalai Lama , they did not lose any opportunity to undermine my authority and sow dissensions among my people.” He also accused the Chinese of letting loose “a reign of terror which finds few parallels in the history of Tibet.” According to him the Chinese have used “forced labour and compulsory exactions, a systematic prosecution of the people, plunder and confiscation of property belonging to individuals and monasteries and execution of certain leading men in Tibet.” In fact, the Chinese wanted the Hans of that country to completely absorb the Tibetans through marriage and forced procreation. Asthe Dalai Lama said “the ultimate Chinese aim with regard to Tibet, as far as I can make out, seems to attempt the extermination of religion and culture and even the absorption of the Tibetan race.”
The Tibetans protested against the Chinese design through uprisings in the end of 1955 and again in 1957 in some of the provinces. These revolts were mercilessly put down. More than 65,000 people were killed and others sent away to the Chinese heartland. About 15,000 came to India as refugees. More people came to Sikkim, Nepal and Bhutan. The rebels organised themselves under the banner of the National Voluntary Defence Army of Tibet. The leaders of the upsurge claim that their movement is “backed by the masses of the people and they refute the allegation of the Chinese authorities that the rising was the handiwork of a few reactionaries.” According to the leaders “the widespread revolt is a national upsurge of people who are fighting for their existence and their identity.” The then Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru clarified in the Indian Parliament on April 27, 1959 that “even according to the accounts received through Chinese sources the revolt in Tibet was of considerable magnitude and the basis of it must have been a strong feeling of nationalisation which affects not only upper class people but others also. (“Truth About Tibet”).
Earlier the Dalai Lama had come to India once before in 1956. He had described the atrocities committed on his people. He did not want to return to Lhasa. But the then Prime Minister Nehru persuaded him to go back. Nehru had obtained the assurance of the then Chinese Prime Minister Chou En Lai aboutthe Dalai Lama ’s safety and advised the latter on that basis. Chou En Lai had visited India in December, 1956. But the Chinese did not honour the trust that Nehru reposed on them.
After the Dalai Lama’s return to Lhasa the situation in Tibet became worse with the Chinese forcing Tibetan Lamas from many monasteries to work as labourers on road projects in China and killing others after destroying the monasteries. Then they started inviting high Tibetan personages to parties given by the Chinese military commanders. These dignitaries never returned home. They were either killed or imprisoned. The climax came whenthe Dalai Lama himself was invited to attend a cultural programme on March 10, 1959. He was asked to come unaccompanied by any of his ministers or his body guard. This raised an alarm in the minds of the Tibetans.
A large number of people, estimated to be 10,000 who gathered in front of the Norbulinga palace blocked the gates and stayed on throughout the night of March 10,1959 inspite ofthe Dalai Lama ’s personal assurance to them that he would not go to the function. Next day a meeting of all government officials was held in the palace at the end of which a proclamation was issued in the name of the Cabinet that Tibet was independent. Earlier a gathering of 5000 women had urgedthe Dalai Lama to proclaim independence. On March 12, 1959 almost the entire population of Lhasa turned out and held huge public meeting at Shol below the Potala palace. This meeting was in continuous session till March 17, 1959. The Chinese started firing warning shots probably to forcethe Dalai Lama to surrender. The firing of shell and machine guns became incessant. On March 17, 1959 at 10.30 pm the Dalai Lama and the members of his entourage left the palace one by one. They were fortunate that the Chinese did not discover their flight almost for two days. Whenthe Dalai Lama and his party of 80 people arrived the Indian border post of Chutangmu on the evening of March 31, 1959, they were properly received by the Assistant Political Officer of Tawang. This could be done because the Government of India had expected some such development and had warned the border check posts accordingly. (The Prime Minister’s statement in the Lok Sabha, April 3 1959).
At this point it may be pertinent to mention that India had a special relationship with Tibet. During British times the Viceroy at Calcutta Lord Curzon sent an armed expedition to Tibet in 1903 under Colonel Younghusband which occupied Lhasa and obtained certain concessions including opening of three trade marks and the establishment of a British Trade Agent’s office at Gyamtse. A telegraph line was also laid. In 1910 the then Dalai Lama took refuge in India in the aftermath of a Chinese invasion of his country. In June, 1912 he returned to China and claimed that “the old vassel-suzerain relationship....had come to an end with the extinction of the Manchu dynasty” during the Chinese Revolution of 1911. After the famous tripartite conference at Simla between India, China and Tibet a convention, was initailled on April 27, 1914, by which China recognised “the complete autonomy of “Outer Tibet” skirting the Indian frontier and including Lhasa, Shigatse and Chamdo”. It also fixed the frontier between India and China for a distance of 850 miles. This frontier came to be called as the McMohan Line after Sir Henry McMohan, who as the foreign secretary to theGovernment of India had signed the agreement. Independent India inherited the British legacy. (Advanced History of India).
Actually India’s relationship with Tibet is much deeper than that. As described by the Dalai Lama himself “India and Tibet have religious, cultural and trade links extending over a thousand years and for Tibetans it has always been the land of enlightenment, having given birth to Lord Buddha.” (statement issued at Tezpur on April 18 1959).
After the Dalai Lama took political asylum in India in April, 1959 many questions had been raised. But the then Indian Prime Minister Nehru, in his statement in the Rajya Sabha on May 4, 1959, clarified the position as follows: “We have received the Dalai Lama and party and, subsequently, some thousands of refugees. We have given them asylum. As a sovereign country we have every right to do so, and nobody else can be a judge of that except ourselves... It would have been utterly wrong for us to do otherwise.” That settled matters and during the past half a century the Dalai Lama has been India’s “honoured guest”. He can visit any part of the country as he wished. Arunachal cannot be an exception. In fact, he has already visited Arunachal six times and out of these he has been to Tawang five times. The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu is reported to have said in October, 2009 that “China’s position on so called Arunachal Pradesh is consistent and clear. We firmly oppose the Dalai Lama’s visit to the region. China is greatly concerned over the news. We believe this further exposes the Dalai Lama’s nature of anti-China separatism, as is known to all.” That is uncalled for because India’s boundary with Tibet had been finally settled by the Simla convention of 1914. The McMohan Line drawn and agreed to in 1914 must be respected by both the countries. Rather than claiming Arunachal Pradesh China should return to India the large area it has been occupying since long and particularly since the war of 1962.
Almost 1,00,000 refugees have come to India in the wake of the Dalai Lama’s flight in 1959. Ever since 1963 China has been inviting them to come back to Tibet. But, as the Dalai Lama has averred “there has been no response from our side on this issue because this is not the real issue. The real issues are the feelings and welfare of the six million Tibetans still left in Tibet. Why should an alien rule be forced on them? Why should not they have the choice of holding their own beliefs, traditions, culture and identity? “(The Asian Wall Street Journal, August 25, 1977).” It is these issues that China should address in consultation with the Tibetans.
In awarding the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989 to the Dalai Lama the presentation speech of Egil Aarbik, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, stated as follows: “We affirm our unstinting support for his work for peace, and for the unarmed masses on the march in many lands for liberty, peace and human dignity.” As the leader of the Mahayana Buddhism the Dalai Lama has always supported movements for peace and non-violence. My visit to the Taletasang monastery near Thimphu from where Guru Padmasambhava had spread his Buddhism to Bhutan, Sikkim and Tibet and my earlier visit to Tawang monastery made me familiar with the message of peace which the Dalai Lama is preaching. There is absolutely no doubt that he is committed to the promotion of human values, religious harmony and understanding and also of the Tibetan issues. On November 8, 2009 the Dalai Lama is going to Arunachal Pradesh “to hold religious discourses and bless the people in Tawang and Bomdilla.” He will also inaugurate the multi-speciality hospital in Tawang which has been built with money donated by his followers in 2003. Whey should any one object to such a visit?
(The writer was Chief Secretary, Assam, during 1990-95.) ASSAM TRIBUNE
Born on July 6, 1935 in a small village called Tagtser in the Dhome province of Tibet Tenzin Gyatso was brought to Lhasa in October, 1939 and enthroned as the 14th Dalai Lama (meaning “Ocean of Wisdom’ in Mongolian language) on February 22, 1940. He assumed full responsibility of his office on November 17, 1950 at the age of 16. I learnt aboutthe Dalai Lama and Tibet only from books and articles as I could never visit the country personally.
The Chinese had a special relationship with Tibet, which was “nominally subject to the suzerainty of China” but was “for all practical purposes an independent theocracy.” After the Communists came to power in China in 1949 their cadres started penetrating into Tibet. In 1951 a 17-point agreement was signed between China and Tibet under which suzerainty of China was accepted but it was clearly stated that Tibet would continue to enjoy full autonomy. The control of external affairs and defence would be under China but “there would be no interference by the Chinese Government with the Tibetan religion and customs and her internaladministration.” The Dalai Lama , however, maintained that “Tibet is a separate country different from China — racially, culturally, linguistically, geographically and historically.” (The Asian Wall Street Journal, November 8, 1979).
The Chinese did not honour this agreement. They started interfering in Tibet’s internal affairs. What the Dalai Lama stated in his press statement of June 20, 1959 is significant: “although they had solemnly undertaken to maintain my status and power asthe Dalai Lama , they did not lose any opportunity to undermine my authority and sow dissensions among my people.” He also accused the Chinese of letting loose “a reign of terror which finds few parallels in the history of Tibet.” According to him the Chinese have used “forced labour and compulsory exactions, a systematic prosecution of the people, plunder and confiscation of property belonging to individuals and monasteries and execution of certain leading men in Tibet.” In fact, the Chinese wanted the Hans of that country to completely absorb the Tibetans through marriage and forced procreation. Asthe Dalai Lama said “the ultimate Chinese aim with regard to Tibet, as far as I can make out, seems to attempt the extermination of religion and culture and even the absorption of the Tibetan race.”
The Tibetans protested against the Chinese design through uprisings in the end of 1955 and again in 1957 in some of the provinces. These revolts were mercilessly put down. More than 65,000 people were killed and others sent away to the Chinese heartland. About 15,000 came to India as refugees. More people came to Sikkim, Nepal and Bhutan. The rebels organised themselves under the banner of the National Voluntary Defence Army of Tibet. The leaders of the upsurge claim that their movement is “backed by the masses of the people and they refute the allegation of the Chinese authorities that the rising was the handiwork of a few reactionaries.” According to the leaders “the widespread revolt is a national upsurge of people who are fighting for their existence and their identity.” The then Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru clarified in the Indian Parliament on April 27, 1959 that “even according to the accounts received through Chinese sources the revolt in Tibet was of considerable magnitude and the basis of it must have been a strong feeling of nationalisation which affects not only upper class people but others also. (“Truth About Tibet”).
Earlier the Dalai Lama had come to India once before in 1956. He had described the atrocities committed on his people. He did not want to return to Lhasa. But the then Prime Minister Nehru persuaded him to go back. Nehru had obtained the assurance of the then Chinese Prime Minister Chou En Lai aboutthe Dalai Lama ’s safety and advised the latter on that basis. Chou En Lai had visited India in December, 1956. But the Chinese did not honour the trust that Nehru reposed on them.
After the Dalai Lama’s return to Lhasa the situation in Tibet became worse with the Chinese forcing Tibetan Lamas from many monasteries to work as labourers on road projects in China and killing others after destroying the monasteries. Then they started inviting high Tibetan personages to parties given by the Chinese military commanders. These dignitaries never returned home. They were either killed or imprisoned. The climax came whenthe Dalai Lama himself was invited to attend a cultural programme on March 10, 1959. He was asked to come unaccompanied by any of his ministers or his body guard. This raised an alarm in the minds of the Tibetans.
A large number of people, estimated to be 10,000 who gathered in front of the Norbulinga palace blocked the gates and stayed on throughout the night of March 10,1959 inspite ofthe Dalai Lama ’s personal assurance to them that he would not go to the function. Next day a meeting of all government officials was held in the palace at the end of which a proclamation was issued in the name of the Cabinet that Tibet was independent. Earlier a gathering of 5000 women had urgedthe Dalai Lama to proclaim independence. On March 12, 1959 almost the entire population of Lhasa turned out and held huge public meeting at Shol below the Potala palace. This meeting was in continuous session till March 17, 1959. The Chinese started firing warning shots probably to forcethe Dalai Lama to surrender. The firing of shell and machine guns became incessant. On March 17, 1959 at 10.30 pm the Dalai Lama and the members of his entourage left the palace one by one. They were fortunate that the Chinese did not discover their flight almost for two days. Whenthe Dalai Lama and his party of 80 people arrived the Indian border post of Chutangmu on the evening of March 31, 1959, they were properly received by the Assistant Political Officer of Tawang. This could be done because the Government of India had expected some such development and had warned the border check posts accordingly. (The Prime Minister’s statement in the Lok Sabha, April 3 1959).
At this point it may be pertinent to mention that India had a special relationship with Tibet. During British times the Viceroy at Calcutta Lord Curzon sent an armed expedition to Tibet in 1903 under Colonel Younghusband which occupied Lhasa and obtained certain concessions including opening of three trade marks and the establishment of a British Trade Agent’s office at Gyamtse. A telegraph line was also laid. In 1910 the then Dalai Lama took refuge in India in the aftermath of a Chinese invasion of his country. In June, 1912 he returned to China and claimed that “the old vassel-suzerain relationship....had come to an end with the extinction of the Manchu dynasty” during the Chinese Revolution of 1911. After the famous tripartite conference at Simla between India, China and Tibet a convention, was initailled on April 27, 1914, by which China recognised “the complete autonomy of “Outer Tibet” skirting the Indian frontier and including Lhasa, Shigatse and Chamdo”. It also fixed the frontier between India and China for a distance of 850 miles. This frontier came to be called as the McMohan Line after Sir Henry McMohan, who as the foreign secretary to theGovernment of India had signed the agreement. Independent India inherited the British legacy. (Advanced History of India).
Actually India’s relationship with Tibet is much deeper than that. As described by the Dalai Lama himself “India and Tibet have religious, cultural and trade links extending over a thousand years and for Tibetans it has always been the land of enlightenment, having given birth to Lord Buddha.” (statement issued at Tezpur on April 18 1959).
After the Dalai Lama took political asylum in India in April, 1959 many questions had been raised. But the then Indian Prime Minister Nehru, in his statement in the Rajya Sabha on May 4, 1959, clarified the position as follows: “We have received the Dalai Lama and party and, subsequently, some thousands of refugees. We have given them asylum. As a sovereign country we have every right to do so, and nobody else can be a judge of that except ourselves... It would have been utterly wrong for us to do otherwise.” That settled matters and during the past half a century the Dalai Lama has been India’s “honoured guest”. He can visit any part of the country as he wished. Arunachal cannot be an exception. In fact, he has already visited Arunachal six times and out of these he has been to Tawang five times. The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu is reported to have said in October, 2009 that “China’s position on so called Arunachal Pradesh is consistent and clear. We firmly oppose the Dalai Lama’s visit to the region. China is greatly concerned over the news. We believe this further exposes the Dalai Lama’s nature of anti-China separatism, as is known to all.” That is uncalled for because India’s boundary with Tibet had been finally settled by the Simla convention of 1914. The McMohan Line drawn and agreed to in 1914 must be respected by both the countries. Rather than claiming Arunachal Pradesh China should return to India the large area it has been occupying since long and particularly since the war of 1962.
Almost 1,00,000 refugees have come to India in the wake of the Dalai Lama’s flight in 1959. Ever since 1963 China has been inviting them to come back to Tibet. But, as the Dalai Lama has averred “there has been no response from our side on this issue because this is not the real issue. The real issues are the feelings and welfare of the six million Tibetans still left in Tibet. Why should an alien rule be forced on them? Why should not they have the choice of holding their own beliefs, traditions, culture and identity? “(The Asian Wall Street Journal, August 25, 1977).” It is these issues that China should address in consultation with the Tibetans.
In awarding the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989 to the Dalai Lama the presentation speech of Egil Aarbik, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, stated as follows: “We affirm our unstinting support for his work for peace, and for the unarmed masses on the march in many lands for liberty, peace and human dignity.” As the leader of the Mahayana Buddhism the Dalai Lama has always supported movements for peace and non-violence. My visit to the Taletasang monastery near Thimphu from where Guru Padmasambhava had spread his Buddhism to Bhutan, Sikkim and Tibet and my earlier visit to Tawang monastery made me familiar with the message of peace which the Dalai Lama is preaching. There is absolutely no doubt that he is committed to the promotion of human values, religious harmony and understanding and also of the Tibetan issues. On November 8, 2009 the Dalai Lama is going to Arunachal Pradesh “to hold religious discourses and bless the people in Tawang and Bomdilla.” He will also inaugurate the multi-speciality hospital in Tawang which has been built with money donated by his followers in 2003. Whey should any one object to such a visit?
(The writer was Chief Secretary, Assam, during 1990-95.) ASSAM TRIBUNE
No comments:
Post a Comment