A statement issued on 20 July 2004 by a Tibetan cultural group celebrates the cancellation of famed Chinese athlete Zhang Jian’s endeavour to swim across the holy Namtso Lake (Chin. Namco). A strongly worded open letter, addressed by the same group to the Chinese authorities on 22 June 2004, [See: TIN News Update on 28 June 2004 ‘Petition To Prevent Swimming Across Holy Lake‘] had condemned Zhang’s attempt which had originally been scheduled for 31 July. The new statement underlines the alleged popular support received by the original petition, as well as the emergence of an environmental consciousness in the People’s Republic of China (PRC). But it also acknowledges the political framework of the PRC.
The statement specifies that the open letter was dispatched to the State Ethnic Affairs Commission, the State Bureau Of Religious Affairs, the State Sport General Administration, the Tibet Autonomous Region People’s Government, Beijing Sport University and Zhang Jian himself. Subsequently, on 19 July, the Reception Office [Chin: xinfang] of the State Council (Chinese Cabinet) notified the group by telephone that their letter had been reviewed, Zhang Jian’s plan “prevented”, and that detailed information would be available from the Swimming Administrative Centre of the State Sports General Administration. Jing Zhi, the director of the Centre which the group then contacted, is quoted in the statement as saying: “We have already notified Zhang Jian to cancel his plan as we must safeguard the unity of all nationalities and respect the feeling of our Tibetan compatriots”. Jing reportedly also expressed his hope that the group “would publicise this issue well.”
Whereas the tough wording of the petition of 22 June expressed its authors’ strong opposition to Zhang’s plan and their determination to prevent it, the group’s statement of 20 July praises the authorities’ action in “resolving this incident promptly and correctly” and, at times, falls into plainly pro-active political correctness:
“We think that through the handling of this issue, our government can show to the world the correct stand and attitude on issues such as environmental protection, nationality and religion, thus rejecting the bias and incorrect views held by some western countries about our government regarding these issues.”
However, the statement falls short of political sycophancy by also mentioning “the attention and support of over ten thousand individuals from various regions, nationalities and walks of life” (hence not only Tibetans) received via the Internet. The ensuing “in-depth rational discussions” are described as having “strengthened the understanding of the issue, and have led to a common realisation at a high level [Chin: zai geng gao de ceng mian shang qu de gong shi.].” According to the group, this response demonstrates that the matter has “gone beyond the scope of nationality and religious issues”, and is part of “the global environmental protection trend and has reached the level of natural and human heritage and holy natural site protection.”
The statement also makes repeated references to ‘green’ tendencies, currently popular among the Chinese public: “[we hope] from now on more and more people will learn how to live in harmony with nature”. In this context, as so often in the Chinese public perception, Tibetan culture and nature are implicitly assumed to be closely connected. “The incident has concluded in accordance with the wishes of our friends who respect and cherish nature and Tibetan culture”. The growing environmental concern among the ‘masses’ has recently been formally endorsed by the authorities, for example, in their declared intention to make the Beijing 2008 Olympics, the PRC’s favourite prestige project for the next few years, the first ‘green Olympics’, thus acknowledging what is perceived to be a global and ‘modern’ movement.
Although the statement is enthusiastically ‘green’, and explicitly mentions broad social support, it does not suggest a ‘people’s power’-style approach. Rather, and as in the open letter of 22 June, it aligns itself with the leitmotifs of the dominant political discourse in China that emphasises the duty of responsible and law-abiding citizens to engage in existing structures and actively contribute to the realisation of the national and development goals set by the Party:
“We (…) and our friends of all nationalities have always maintained the respect for the lawful channels while reflecting the issues and support for the unity and stability of the country.”
(…)
“From now on, more and more people will realise that the first and foremost foundation stone for constructing a prosperous and happy family of multi nationalities and multi cultures is the mutual respect for one another’s culture, tradition, religion and way of life.”
“From now on, more and more people will learn that a society based on law and calm and reasonable expression is the best way to resolve contradictions.”
“We sincerely hope that this is a beginning, a beginning that will lead to our common and prosperous tomorrow!”
The overall tone of the statement is that this “truly long awaited and exciting news” may presage a better future: “We hope this is a new beginning…”
