My Spiritual Journey

by Dalai Lama

  Tibet is still suffering from flagrant, unimaginable human rights violations

  I CONTINUE TO OFFER MY PRAYERS, and pay homage to all those courageous men and women in Tibet who endured immense ordeals and sacrificed their lives for the cause of our people. I express my solidarity with the Tibetans who are at present enduring repression and ill treatment. I salute both the Tibetans in Tibet and Tibetans abroad, those who support our cause, and all defenders of justice.

  For six decades, Tibetans throughout all of Tibet, known under the name of Chokha Sum (including the provinces of U-Tsang, Kham, and Amdo), have been forced to live in a constant state of fear, intimidation, and suspicion, subject to Chinese repression. Still, the Tibetan people have been able to maintain their religious faith, their firm sense of nationality, and their unique culture, while still keeping alive their age-old aspiration for freedom. I have great admiration for these qualities in our people and for their indomitable courage. They make me feel great pride and satisfaction.

  Many governments, nongovernmental organizations, and individuals throughout the world, faithful to the ideal of peace and justice, have steadily supported the cause of Tibet. Over the course of recent years, governments and peoples of numerous countries have made important gestures to show their solidarity clearly, and I would like to express my gratitude to them.

  The very complex problem of Tibet is linked to other questions having to do with politics, society, law, human rights, religion, culture, national identity, the economy, and the natural environment. That is why a global approach must be adopted to resolve it by taking into account the interests of all parties involved, rather than one single faction. So we have been firm in our engagement in favor of a mutually beneficial policy of the Middle Way, and we have made sincere, persistent efforts to put it into practice for several years now.

  Since 2002, my envoys have conducted six negotiation sessions with their counterparts in the People’s Republic of China to approach these important problems. These exhaustive discussions helped appease certain doubts and helped us explain our aspirations. However, when it comes down to it, there has been no concrete result. During these last few years, Tibet has experienced an increase of brutal repression. Despite these unfortunate events, my determination and my commitment to pursuing the policy of the Middle Way and conducting dialogues with the Chinese government remain unchanged.

  One major concern of the People’s Republic of China is its lack of legitimacy in Tibet. The best method that the Chinese government could use to strengthen its position would be to pursue a policy that could satisfy the Tibetan people and win its trust. If we are able to reconcile with the Chinese by coming to an agreement, then, as I have stated many times, I will try to win the support of the Tibetan people for it.

  In Tibet at present, because of numerous actions carried out without any foresight on the part of the Chinese government, the natural environment is severely damaged. Moreover, because of the policy of demographic transfer, the non-Tibetan population has increased massively, reducing native Tibetans to an insignificant minority in their own country. What’s more, the language, customs, and traditions of Tibet, which reflect the true nature and identity of our people, are in the process of disappearing. The result is that Tibetans find themselves progressively assimilated into the more numerous Chinese population.

  In Tibet, repression continues to be exercised with numerous, flagrant, unimaginable violations of human rights, denial of religious freedom, and the politicization of religion. All this stems from the Chinese government’s lack of respect for the Tibetan people. These are major obstacles that the Chinese government is deliberately setting in the way of its policy of unifying nationalities. These obstacles separate Tibetans from Chinese. That is why I call on the Chinese government to put an immediate end to this policy.

  Although the zones inhabited by the Tibetan population are labeled by the names of autonomous regions, autonomous prefectures and autonomous counties, they are autonomous in name only and in reality do not enjoy any autonomy whatsoever. On the contrary, they are governed by people who are ignorant of the regional situation and dominated by what Mao Zedong called “Han chauvinism.” In fact, the so-called autonomy has not given any tangible benefits to the nationalities concerned. These mistaken policies, which are not in keeping with reality, cause enormous damage, not only to the different nationalities, but also to the unity and stability of the Chinese nation. It is important for the Chinese government to follow the advice given by Deng Xiaoping: “look for the truth based on the facts,” in the literal sense.

  The Chinese government severely criticizes me when I raise the question of the welfare of the Tibetan people before the international community. Until we manage to find a mutually beneficial solution, I have the moral and historical responsibility to continue to speak freely in the name of all Tibetans. In any case, everyone knows that I have been in semi-retreat since the new political leadership of the Tibetan diaspora was elected by the people.

  China is developing and is becoming a powerful country thanks to major economic progress. We welcome this with a positive mind, all the more so since it is a chance for China to play an important role on a global level. The world waits with impatience to see how Chinese leadership today will apply its concepts of “harmonious society” and “peaceful growth” that it advocates. In this domain, economic development will not be enough by itself. There must be progress in respect for the law, in transparency, and in freedom of information and expression. Since China is a country of many nationalities, they should all enjoy equal rights and the freedom to protect their respective identities. That is a condition for the stability of the country.

  On March 6, 2008, President Hu Jintao declared, “The stability of Tibet concerns the stability of the country, and the security of Tibet concerns the security of the country.” He added that the Chinese government should ensure the wellbeing of Tibetans and improve its actions toward religious and ethnic groups, while maintaining social harmony and stability. President Hu Jintao’s statement is in keeping with reality, and we ask that it be applied.

  In 2008, the Chinese people proudly and impatiently awaited the opening of the Olympic Games. From the beginning, I supported the idea that China should host the Olympic Games. Since such international sporting events, the Olympics especially, bring the principles of freedom of expression, equality and friendship to the fore, China should demonstrate the quality of its welcome by granting these freedoms. In sending its athletes, I felt the international community should remind China of its duties. Several parliaments, individuals, and nongovernmental organizations throughout the world took numerous initiatives, stressing the chance this opportunity gave China to initiate a positive change. The Olympic Games undoubtedly had a great impact on the minds of everyone in the Chinese community. So the world should look for ways to act energetically in favor of positive changes in China, even after the end of the Games.

  I would like to express my pride in and approval of the sincerity, courage, and determination the Tibetan people in Tibet have shown. I actively encourage Tibetans to continue to work peacefully, respecting the law. I urge that all national minorities in the People’s Republic of China, including the Tibetan people, be able to enjoy their legitimate rights.

  I would also like to thank the government and people of India in particular for their continued and unparalleled aid to Tibetan refugees and to the cause of Tibet, and to express my gratitude for all the governments and all the peoples who continue to support our cause.

  With my prayers for the well-being of all sentient beings.28

  The problems expounded in this speech on March 10, 2008, are the same ones that the Dalai Lama had continued to denounce since the beginning of the Chinese occupation of Tibet. They have gotten dangerously worse over the years, and despite the support of international public opinion, the systematic tightening of Chinese control has not stopped.

  A wish for dialogue and negotiation
has been clearly expressed by the Dalai Lama on numerous occasions—such as in a speech during a trip to Taiwan in February 1997, when he asserted that “the Tibetans’ struggle is directed not against the Chinese or China, but in an authentic spirit of reconciliation and compromise.”

  China responded to these statements by issuing a call to fight by every means possible “the international campaign of the Dalai clique.” During a visit to the United States six months later, in October 1997, the Chinese president, Jiang Zemin, declared at Harvard: “The Dalai Lama should publicly admit that Tibet is an inalienable part of the People’s Republic of China, and he should renounce the independence of Tibet and stop all activities aimed at separating it from the motherland.”

  Two years later, in 1999, during a state visit to France, the Chinese president repeated these statements, adding that the Dalai Lama should also admit that Taiwan was “a Chinese province.” And during his yearly message on March 10 of that same year, the spiritual leader of the Tibetans declared that China had hardened its position on entering into discussions with him.

  If, in order to go forward in dialogue, the Dalai Lama has many times since 1987 expressed his willingness to renounce the independence of Tibet in favor of a status of real autonomy within contemporary China, this does not mean that he is willing to rewrite his country’s history and endorse the lie that Tibet is an ancient Chinese province.

  International public opinion—expressed at the highest level by the moral authority of the Nobel Peace Prize—has continuously urged China to accept the hand held out by the Dalai Lama, but this pressure has only provoked Chinese officials, who express their increasing exasperation by an ever more severe repression in Tibet. The Sino-Tibetan dialogue was interrupted in 1993 and did not resume until 2002, when a delegation of the Dalai Lama’s went to China and Tibet with the goal of reestablishing direct contact. Thereafter, a more profound exchange between the two parties did not happen until 2004.

  In his official speech on March 10, 2005, the Dalai Lama declared, “I would once again like to reassure the Chinese authorities: as long as I am responsible for Tibetan affairs, we will remain fully committed to the Middle Way, which does not claim independence for Tibet.” The Dalai Lama expressed his optimism for the gradual improvement of exchanges between his emissaries and their Chinese counterparts.

  In July 2005, a meeting at the Chinese embassy in Berne, Switzerland, aroused much hope when Chinese delegates assured Tibetans that the Communist Party would accord “very great importance to relations with the Dalai Lama.” Then, in February 2006 and again in July 2007, during new meetings in Beijing, both parties declared that they had reviewed the conditions necessary to resolve their differences. The Tibetan emissaries insisted on the urgency of dealing with fundamental questions, while expressing the Dalai Lama’s wish to make a pilgrimage to China.

  These negotiations were the longest and most promising ever undertaken. That is why, in his speech on March 10, 2008, while he regretted that the discussions had not yet resulted in concrete actions and that Beijing was persisting in its demographic aggression and its violation of human rights in Tibet, the Dalai Lama was pleased with President Hu Jintao’s declaration affirming that the Chinese government would ensure “the well-being of Tibetans and improve its actions toward religious and ethnic groups, while maintaining social harmony and stability.”

  But in the days that followed, Lhasa rose up in revolt.

  In China, I see that change is on the way

  SEVERAL DISTINGUISHED members of the European Parliament are well aware of my continued efforts to find a mutually agreeable solution to the Tibetan problem through dialogue and negotiation. It was in this spirit that, in 1988, at the European Parliament of Strasbourg, I presented a proposal in due form for negotiations that did not call for the separation or independence of Tibet. Since then, our relations with the Chinese government have experienced many highs and lows. After an interruption of almost ten years, in 2002 we reestablished direct contacts with the Chinese government.

  Exhaustive discussion has taken place between my emissaries and representatives of the Chinese regime. In these negotiations, we clearly presented the aspirations of the Tibetan people. The essence of my Middle Way policy is to guarantee an authentic autonomy for our people within the constitution of the People’s Republic of China.

  During the seventh cycle of meetings in Beijing, on July 1 and 2, 2008, the Chinese party invited us to present our point of view on the form that an authentic autonomy should take. Consequently, on October 31, 2008, we presented to the Chinese government the “memorandum on the true autonomy of the Tibetan people.” This text set forth our position on what an authentic autonomy would be and explained how to satisfy the basic needs of the Tibetan nation to arrive at autonomy and self-determination. We listed these suggestions with the sole aim of making a sincere effort to solve the real problems in Tibet. We were confident that, with goodwill, the questions raised in our memorandum could be resolved.

  Unfortunately, the Chinese party rejected it in its totality, declaring that our suggestions were an attempt to regain a “semi-independence” and that it was a matter of a “disguised independence,” which, for that reason, was unacceptable. What’s more, the Chinese party accused us of “ethnic cleansing” under the pretext that our memorandum called for a recognition of the right of autonomous regions “to regulate the residence, settlement and employment or economic activities of persons coming from other parts of the People’s Republic of China wanting to settle in Tibet.”

  We clearly expressed that our intention was not to expel non-Tibetans. Our concern was the increasing transfer of settlements, mainly Hans, to many Tibetan regions, which marginalizes the native Tibetan population and threatens the fragile ecosystem of Tibet. Major demographic changes, resulting from massive immigration, will lead to the assimilation rather than to the integration of Tibetan identity in the People’s Republic of China and will gradually lead to the extinction of the distinct culture and identity of the Tibetan people.

  While firmly rejecting the use of violence to lead our struggle, I affirm that we certainly have the right to explore all other possible political options. In a democratic spirit, I called for a special meeting of Tibetans in exile to debate the status of the Tibetan people and the future of our movement. The meeting took place from November 17 to 22, 2008, in Dharamsala, India. The failure of the Chinese government to respond favorably to our initiatives revived the suspicions of many Tibetans who thought that the Chinese government was not interested in any mutually acceptable solution whatsoever. Many Tibetans continue to believe that the Chinese regime is only envisaging a complete, forced assimilation and absorption of Tibet by China, so they call for the complete independence of Tibet. Others advocate the right to self-determination and ask for a referendum on Tibet. Despite these different points of view, the delegates at our special meeting unanimously resolved to give me full power to decide on the best possible approach, keeping in mind the present situation and the changes in Tibet, in China, and throughout the world.

  I have always argued that in the end it is the Tibetan people who should decide on the future of Tibet. As Pandit Nehru, who was prime minister of India, declared before the Indian Parliament on December 7, 1950: “The final word on Tibet should be given by the Tibetan people and no one else.”

  The cause of Tibet has a dimension and implication that go beyond the fate of six million Tibetans. It also concerns over thirteen million people living throughout the Himalayas, Mongolia, and the Kalmuk and Buriat Republics in Russia, as well as a growing number of our Chinese brothers and sisters who share our Buddhist culture, which is capable of contributing to the peace and harmony of the world.29

  The Dalai Lama gave this speech at the European Parliament in Brussels in December 2008, after the mass uprisings that agitated Tibet starting on March 10 of China’s Olympic year, after the demonstrations that took place during the passing of the Olympic torch th
rough the world’s capitals. Chinese repression was brutal, blind, and thorough. Rumor has it that there were so many arrests that the Chinese police ran out of handcuffs and had to tie prisoners up with cables.

  On March 14, Zhang Qingli, secretary of the Communist Party for the autonomous region of Tibet, described the situation in Lhasa as a “fight to the death” against the Tibetan separatists. At a meeting with the heads of the People’s Armed Police, he expressed his pleasure that the March demonstrations allowed them to “test their ability to respond to an emergency in case of riots.”

  The number of victims has not yet been verified, since there are still more than one thousand people missing. And information is filtered, since all communications are censored—to such an extent that even many months afterward, Tibetans in India have told us that they were not phoning their families out of fear of endangering them.

  We now know that thousands of Tibetans—monks, nuns, laypeople, old people, and even children—were arrested. Over 200 were condemned, and at least 150 died, sometimes under torture and beatings. Some spoke of a “second Cultural Revolution” given the methods used by the Chinese regime following the closing of hundreds of monasteries throughout the country. Monastic compounds in the Lhasa valley were besieged by armored tanks for weeks, and laypeople were dissuaded from bringing in food or water. At least one monk is said to have died of hunger in Ramoche monastery. Once again people witnessed the pillaging of valuable religious objects, and meetings of “patriotic reeducation” were organized to force ordained people to deny the Dalai Lama in writing, under penalty of being accused of separatism and imprisoned.