By Tsewang Namgyal
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
– Sun Tzu
INTRODUCTION
The Tibetan Government in Exile (“TGIE”) has done many things right to create a conducive environment to reach a just agreement with the Chinese government. Their consistent stand on non violence, focus on Tibetans educational development, support for Tibetans professional growth, lobby the international community to use their leverage to encourage China to be adhere to international law, dialogue with the Chinese people and democratization of our exile society to name a few. Our negotiators, Mr. Lodi Gyari, Mr. Kelsang Gyaltsen and their team, also need to be specifically commended much for their efforts.
Blaming China and praising our goodwill to achieve a breakthrough in the current stalemate will not be much different from a fly trying to enter a closed window. Relying on hope is no strategy at all. I note our leadership is considering alternative paths. As we know, a Special Meeting was called in November 2008 in Dharamsala as a result of the failure of our efforts to make any real progress with the Chinese government. At the meeting many recommendations were made. For basis of this opinion piece I would like to highlight one as a reflection of the sentiments of many (if not the majority) Tibetan people. I note considering the lack of free press we do not have full understanding of the actual wishes of the Tibetans in Tibet but this is the best we have.
“Based on the suggestions received to this Special General Meeting from in and outside Tibet and after frank and candid discussions held by the delegates in regard to the future policy of Tibet, it came to unanimous decision to straightly follow the guidance of His Holiness the Dalai Lama based on the prevailing situation from time to time. Majority decision to continue the policy of Middle-Way-Approach. Besides that, looking at the Chinese Government’s behavior in the past, views to stop sending envoys and to pursue complete independence or self-determination if no result comes out in the near future were also strongly expressed.”
Reflecting on the outcome of the meeting and our negotiation efforts, I have focused my thoughts and analysis on developing a comprehensive strategy and negotiation tactics to achieve our goal.
Since I am not privy to the actual internal discussions and do not have a full grasp of the situation there may be many flaws on my thoughts. However I believe as a Tibetan, someone who has lived/traveled extensively in both Tibet/China and the refugee settlements in India, worked in the financial sector, served in the military and volunteered/held leadership in human rights/development activities this has given me some depth in understanding of our current situation. The reason for sharing my thoughts in a public forum is to invite others to critique me so that we can provide the best analysis for our leaders’ consideration.
STRATEGY
China is currently one of the most populous (number one), politically powerful (one of the five United Nations Security Council’s permanent members), military strong (number three) and economically large (number two based on purchasing power parity) country in the world.
Based on the reality of this situation, the only way we Tibetans can succeed is through Judo Strategy. This proven strategy involves using your competitor’s strength to one’s advantage. In addition, one would need to leverage on one’s relatively smaller size by staying on the offensive and not react tit for tat. I believe through combining this strategy as part of our negotiation tactics would be critical for a breakthrough.
For the long term sustainability of any agreement it is critical we align our interest with that of the Chinese people.
As a Judo strategist, our focus should be on the Chinese government’s weak spots. This point we can imagine is the point where we can get the best grip to throw our opponent down. To continue with this analogy to strengthen our grip we need to consistently empower ourselves intellectually and economically.
A Sumo Strategy (head to head) with the Chinese government is near fruitless. I say this not from a moral standpoint but based on the differences in our strength and resources. Violence is suicidal and would give the best pretext for extreme nationalist Chinese forces to massacre Tibetans.
One of my Chinese friends mentioned that the Chinese government may even be willing to allow Tibetans to kill few thousand PLA soldiers in order to justify their final “retribution.” He further indicated with the Chinese governments current plans to modernize their military (reduce head count and focus on technology) any violence would only fit their overall military strategy.
Efforts to marginalize China economically/politically is impossible due to the country’s large size, leverage in the world of economics and political strength. If we make efforts in this area this would burn out our limited resources as China can easily outspend and outmaneuver us. It would be prudent that we do not get caught in any bait if we are drawn into a useless battle where winning is impossible nor the fight is worth it. To quote Sun Tzu, “He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot will be victorious.” Only proper allocation of our resources and choosing the battlefield where we have a competitive edge we will the “war.”
I invite readers to share if this strategy makes sense and if so consider appropriate tactical actions. For more details on Judo strategy and Sun Tzu there is much information one can get from the internet.
One Case
After March 2008 sections of the Chinese government skillfully played the ethnic card in the China market. They portrayed the Tibetans demonstrations as a fight between Han Chinese and Tibetans (instead of political, religious and economic rights). With the lack of freedom of press this helped raise China’s nationalism to a boiling point. Overwhelming majority of the Chinese people explicitly or implicitly supported the governments’ violent crackdown on the Tibetans. Only a few brave Chinese people tried to clarify the situation as they knew from their Tiannaman Square incident on the honesty of the Chinese government.
In the international market the Chinese government turned the table around. Instead of defending their Tibet policies they blamed the exile community for instigating the demonstrations. One of my Chinese friends mentioned that he felt we Tibetans bit the bait. He felt we were more defensive about China’s accusation. Instead he felt we should have stayed on the offensive when the media was focused on Tibet by challenging China to answer specific issues like the status of the Panchen Lama, government supported settlement projects, economic marginalization of Tibetans and lack of religious/political freedoms.
One response that was strategic and timely by our leadership is by challenging China to an independent investigation on the cause of the demonstrations. China of course instead of responding to the challenge continued to stay on the offensive by follow up accusations such as accusing the Tibetan Youth Congress of being a terrorist organization.
Hindsight is 20/20. There is a saying if someone fools you once he is a fool. If he fools you twice you are a fool. During these relative quiet times on the medias interest in Tibet it is critical for us individually and organizationally to think of different scenarios so that when world media is again focused on Tibet we are ready to be on the offensive.
One Suggestion
The Chinese government’s weakest spot is corruption. Just as they played the race card to have the Chinese people blindly support them against Tibetans we can focus on corruption. With a common enemy (corruption) this has the ability to allow us to form a united front with the Chinese people and even some sections of the government officials. I believe this will be even more powerful than say a common cause- democracy.
Corruption in China is rife. One of the key factors for the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 is corruption. Today speaking with my Chinese friends overwhelming majority of them speak with much anger about this issue whether it is the economics, political and environmental issues.
China on the face looks very rich but in reality it is an autocratic where a few hold most of the power and wealth. I believe in reality it is corruption that is the cause of much of the suffering for both Tibetans and Chinese people. It is one of the key factors that prevent Tibet and China from real growth and development.
Exposing corruption will build the anger against it and call for transparency. This will I believe eventually put upward pressure on the Chinese government to bring more clarity on many issues including Tibet’s historical past and our present conditions. With more clarity I believe there will be natural support for the Tibetan peoples’ aspiration not much different from White peoples support for civil rights and anger with colonialism. I believe at the end, history has shown that humans cannot be separated from their conscience.
NEGOTIATIONS
Current Situation
Statement by Mr. Kelsang Gyaltsen to The European Parliament on March 31, 2009.
“A major difference between the two sides has been the conflicting perspectives on the current situation inside Tibet. So in order to have a common understanding of the real situation, we proposed in 2007 that we be given an opportunity to send study groups to look at the actual reality on the ground, in the spirit of “seeking truth from facts”. … Moreover, right at the beginning of our contact on April 18, 2002, we had written to President Jiang Zemin explaining, among other things, that our mission was to bring about a face-to-face meeting between His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the Chinese leadership. .. His Holiness the Dalai Lama reiterated publicly in 2006 his wish to visit China on a pilgrimage.
…
To our deep disappointment, none of our suggestions and proposals were entertained or accepted by the Chinese side. Nor has the Chinese side reciprocated any of our confidence-building initiatives or presented their own suggestions or proposals for a way forward. Since the start of this dialogue in 2002, the Chinese side has been adopting a position of no recognition, no reciprocity, no commitment and no concession and no compromise. Although they continue to profess even to these days that the door to dialogue is open, however, so far they have been pursuing a strategy of avoiding any progress, decision and commitment. This lack of political will on the part of the Chinese leadership was clearly demonstrated at the last round of discussions that took place in November last year.
…
In July last year during the seventh round the Chinese side explicitly invited suggestions from His Holiness the Dalai Lama for the stability and development of Tibet and emphasized the fact that they would like to hear our views on the degree or form of autonomy we are seeking. Accordingly, on October 31, 2008, we presented our Memorandum on Genuine Autonomy for the Tibetan People to the Chinese leadership.
…
Unfortunately, the Chinese side rejected categorically our memorandum in its entirety. At one point of our discussion the Chinese Executive Vice-Minister Zhu Weiqun stated: “Even the title of your memorandum is unacceptable. How many times do we need to say that the Dalai Lama has no right to speak about the situation in Tibet or in the name of the Tibetan people?” When we asked him why in the first place he had invited us to present our views on autonomy, his answer was: “This was a test to see how far you have come understand the position and the policy of the Central Government. And you have failed the examination miserably”.
Analysis
To consummate any transaction whether it is to purchase furniture, buy a house or form a partnership both sides needs (i) ability and (ii) willingness.
The statement from Kelsang la reflects the Chinese government’s lack of willingness to reach an agreement with the Tibetans. China has the ability as indicated by their political/military/economic might.
Human psychology tells us that without willingness trying to force a sale is near impossible and in fact counterproductive.
How to create willingness?
In order to create willingness we must abide by the general proven sales tactics. Things we should not do are appear desperate, give too much information, make presentations when there is no interest, put forward our lowest offer, advertise our willingness to compromise (gives no incentive for other side to talk as they will wait for a lower offer) and have no control over the process.
Things we should do are sell value (not compromise), listen more than talk, tailor our message, listen between the lines (not words), get information (before giving), focus on our goals (not what you do not want),do not get emotional and a have single qualified media savvy spoke person (otherwise we will played against each other).
While we wait, TGIE should focus their efforts in empowering Tibetans in Tibet and exile intellectually and economically. In addition, they should continue to represent the voice of the Tibetans in Tibet, bring to the world’s attention China’s uncivilized actions, lobby international support (but not try to force China to talk) and prepare hard for an eventual negotiation.
Political organizations/support group should continue to focus on attacking China’s brand image. There is no enjoyment in ones success if one is constantly reminded of the injustice one has inflicted.
Foreign governments and non-governmental organizations should constantly express their displeasure to China’s treatment of Tibetans and provide support to TGIE/international support groups.
The Chinese community should take a leadership role in urging the Chinese government to resolve the Tibet issue. His Holiness and our leadership are doing a fantastic job in reaching out to the Chinese people explaining our situation. We need to clearly explain to the Chinese people that resolving Tibet issue is in China’s own self interest and not only appeal to the Chinese peoples’ goodness.
We must note here that China as a communist ideological driven country does not exist. The proof of this is that most of the businesses in China are owned by the sons and daughters of Chinese leaders. This is not good or bad thing but a reality. If we think of China as a unified ideological driven regime we are fighting with an opponent that does not exist.
I understand from Chinese friends who have some familiarity with the inside working indicate that China is not much dissimilar from the United States where there is much power struggle within the government. Those that are idealist like Mr. Zhao Ziyang are out of the picture and it is only the “pragmatist” who has the power. These individuals will not take a risk that threatens their power or family members. In this current political environment unless the Chinese people reflect their interest in resolving the Tibet issue no politician will be willing to take any personal risks.
Ultimately through such a multi pronged approach and with patience this has the best chance to create willingness in the Chinese leadership.
Condition/Willingness test
To test China’s willingness we should have a condition in place for any future dialogue. The test should be one that is reasonable, easy to understand and would be conducive to reach a final agreement. One such condition could be an independent investigation into whether China’s own political, economic, educational and religious policies/rights as reflected in their Constitution is given to the Tibetans.
As a background, the Constitution of the PRC was adopted by the 5th National People’s Congress on December 4, 1982. One of the key architects of the constitution was Mr. Deng Xiaoping. Deng and China’s leadership worked hard on the write up of the constitution so that the disastrous policies under the Mao era where millions of Chinese people unnecessarily died were not repeated.
The Constitution guarantees religious freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and demonstration. In addition, the amendment on March 14, 2004 guarantees human rights. Like all countries, China has done many things right and made many mistakes in its implementation so it should be in her benefit to get an independent evaluation. For more background on the Constitution I would recommend readers to analyze the Memorandum on Genuine Autonomy and Chapter 25 of A Tibetan Revolutionary, The Political Life and Times of Bapa Phüntso Wangye.
Our leadership views the comments by Mr. Deng Xiaoping that “anything was negotiable except independence” as the starting point of our current negotiations. The Chinese until recently have not downplayed the words but recently have strongly disowned these words. Now challenging China to evaluate whether there are even giving the Tibetans rights enshrined in the Constitution would be something that they should not be able to refuse. Besides this is the Constitution that was largely inspired by Deng himself so we should use China’s paramount leader against them.
Preparation, Positions/Interests and Term Sheet
In negotiations, the critical component is preparation. Preparation should involve understanding the issues to discuss, identify the items that we feel are very important to us, consider how much one will horse trade with those that are not critical, identify those issues where our opponents feel that are important to us but are not really and put yourself in your opponents shoes to think how they would be preparing. As we wait China to indicate their willingness this should buy us valuable time to prepare.
Besides the fundamental issue about Tibet’s future independence or a genuine autonomous region under PRC, it would be prudent to think of quantifiable items of interest to generate goodwill, trust and groundwork.
In negotiations one is often advised to differentiate between positions versus interest. So far in our negotiations with the Chinese has been on our position that all three provinces of Tibet should be under a single administration. The assumption here is that this has the best chance of protecting Tibet’s culture. I note this position maybe politically correct and justified.
China’s position in turn has been that this is not possible. The fear they claim is that this would be only a step away from a call for Tibet’s independence and lead to the eventual break up of China. Personally, I believe if China really treats Tibetans with proper respect Tibetans will be more inclined to be part of China not much dissimilar for many East European countries interest in being part of the European Union.
In the future if China indicates its’ willingness and both sides continue to stick to these positions it may be politically correct for one’s constituencies but has the potential for no breakthrough.
Instead I believe the initial negotiations should be focused on our interests. The reality is Tibetans and Chinese people have different priorities in their interests. To help further clarify this concept I would like to share a common story often used in negotiation classes.
Two chefs fought for one orange to prepare their respective dishes. Both side’s position was they wanted the orange to complete their dish. Like “civilized” people, both compromised and split it in two. One chef squeezed the orange juice for his sauce but was not enough. The other took the peel from his half and grinded it to make cake but it was not enough. If both sides talked about their interest for the orange rather than their position they could have reached a more beneficial agreement by one side taking the peel and other the meat of the orange.
There are many areas of interest that the Tibetan and Chinese side can discuss prior to bringing up the mentioned positions. The primary I believe are: (i) Education (such as set up of schools/colleges and training programs to assist Tibetans to adapt to the modern economy); (ii) Economics (such as percentage of proceeds local authorities keep on tax revenues generated, ability of local leaders to develop economic policies that fits with local needs, give more power to local Tibetan leaders in making decisions on government funding, quotas for Tibetans in key management positions and set up of a social investment fund); (iii) Cultural Issues (freedom for monastic institutions to study/practice freely, tax breaks for Tibetan handicraft projects and respect for His Holiness the Dalai Lama in the media); (iv) Political Issues (rural level elections and more real political power to Tibetans); and (v) Environment (such as set up of Natural parks, environmental policies related to protection of land/water/ air and work to increase environmental awareness in the region).
This interest could form what in business is called a Term Sheet. Once the key terms are finalized we can then have it legally documented and executed for a fixed period of time. A strict timeline should then be provided where after a set period an empowered Tibetan population in all three provinces should be allowed to participate in a referendum, not dissimilar to the one Quebec. Details on the referendum could include (i) whether three provinces of Tibet should be united and (ii) whether Tibet should be independent or not.
I understand there are many suggestions here that may not be appetizing. However, I believe reflecting on our own Strengths, Weaknesses, Threats and Opportunities along with the current market situation this is the best that I can think of.
Finally, I believe once both sides indicate both their ability and willingness the whole issue can be wrapped up within a year. If not, it would take countless generations and we will all be still on the same page for the detriment of both the Tibetan and Chinese people.
CONCLUSION
As a Buddhist, sometimes it is little embarrassing to recommend modern negotiation tactics that on the face appear contradictory to our Buddhist values. Sometimes I wonder it must be very difficult for our leaders to function in the political economic world which is more of a chess game than one driven by a goal to be of service to others. As someone who was raised with Buddhist values it is not difficult to empathize with our leaders in particular those who have taken monastic vows. However, I believe we need to constantly remind ourselves that understanding the game and playing by the existing rule (if one cannot change it) falls within the principles of Buddhism. Those who are arm chair critics I believe should in particular think twice before judging if anyone of our leadership uses efforts that may not appear to meet Buddhist principles.
Firstly our larger motivation is justified as it is for the ultimate benefit of others. Secondly, I believe this falls within the conventional/relative truth. According to Nagarjuna in Mūlamadhyamakakārika, “The Buddha’s teaching of the Dharma is based on two truths: a truth of worldly convention and an ultimate truth. Those who do not understand the distinction drawn between these two truths do not understand the Buddha’s profound truth. Without a foundation in the conventional truth the significance of the ultimate cannot be taught. Without understanding the significance of the ultimate, liberation is not achieved.” I understand from our teachers that the conventional truth although does not express the true nature of reality it is critical that we understand it.
In one of the teachings by His Holiness he advises to view conventional truth as a cunning and deceptive neighbor. He argues that since one has to interact with the person and knows it’s’ deception one should constantly be on one’s guard. From here we can see that as long as we are not fooled by our neighbor’s deception, we will be safe.
Finally, I believe there is no guarantee that adopting these negotiation concepts will work for us. However, I believe focusing on results and adopting proven techniques has a greater probability of success. This is in the best interest of Tibet, China and the world at large.
—-
The author is an MBA graduate (Beta Gamma Sigma Honor Society member) from the Thunderbird School of Global Management and works in the Investment Banking field in New York City. Tsewang is one of the Founding Board of Directors of Students for a Free Tibet, first Tibetan to officially enlist in the United States Military and served as the Executive Director of the Tibetan Community Center Project (NY) from 2007-2008 . He can be reached at densang123@yahoo.com
