This is part of a paper presented at the University of KwaZulu Natal, South Africa
By Mr. Renato Palmi
Durban, South Africa – In the present-day contest for hegemony over the “Roof of the World” – Tibet – there are four contending forces of disparate power: the self-proclaimed rule of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), The Tibetans living thereunder, the Tibet community-in-exile and the various Western and Asian supporters which collectively make up the international Tibet Support Group (TSG) movement. The challenge for all involves more than merely political domination. It forms a matrix of contested history, international law, ideology, symbolism and of recent economic domination.
This kaleidoscope of networks, institutions and individuals that make up the TSG movement is often prone to each component moving into conflict with one another, in the process of trying to “portray events in highly emotional and often disingenuous terms, intended to shape international perceptions and win sympathy for their cause” (Goldstein, 1997: x).
In contrast to academic criticism of civil society organisations claiming to represent “the people” or “communities”, the Tibet government-in-exile (TGiE) actively supports and encourages such representation on their behalf, even though it may distance itself from some of the actions undertaken by TSGs on behalf of the Tibetans under Chinese occupation and or in exile.
The Tibet movement which comprises of 350 Tibet Support Groups and some 650 “Students for a Free Tibet” Chapters has become the “army of truth” (Tibet Bulletin, 2004: 10). The Tibet movement has gained international moral support with its blended call for religious and political freedom and the upholding of human rights in general. However, one should question whether or not the momentum for a freedom movement of this kind that advocates non-violence could be sustained purely on the grounds of moral obligation and ethical conduct in the modern world of economic domination. Does the survival of “the little people from the Roof of the World” (McKay, 1996) really mean anything to the global players in their pursuit of economic gain?
Has the growth of the civil society organisations promoting the Tibetan cause actually succeeded in tangible results, bringing the Tibetans closer to their goal of freedom or does this growth represent a more superficial desire by Westerners to be involved in the Tibetan movement?
The accessibility of the Dalai Lama to Western audiences has implanted a moral calling for some Western Buddhist to become involved with the Free Tibet cause. A few Westerns see “social activism on behalf of the Tibetans as being intimately linked with [their] Buddhist practices” (Powers, 2000: 11). Unfortunately this has not happened in South Africa. A possible reason for this is that most South Africans who are attracted to following Tibetan Buddhism and flock in their hundreds to see the Dalai Lama are white middle-class citizens with no historical interest in or experience of activism or protest politics. Many of these individuals choose not to link the Tibetan political struggle and even the Dalai Lama’s call for “action” with their adopted religion.
Increased globalisation and the Chinese economic development inside Tibet is an “…important means through which the Chinese government maintains its grip on power” (Crawford, 2001: 211). The Tibetan movement has had to find other ways to respond to China’s economic dominance of Tibet. Today the movement has founded itself “pitted against banks, governments and transnational corporations” (Fisher and Ponniah, 2003: 2). The policy is to view China as the New Empire – the military and now economic coloniser of Tibet.
In order to counter market intrusion in Tibet that empowers the Chinese and marginalises the Tibetans, new modes of strategic mobilisation has been implemented. One of the first major successes of this new strategy happened on July 7, 2000 when the Tibet movement forced the World Bank to retract its proposed loan of $40 million to China for the relocation of some 85 000 Chinese into fertile lands in Western Tibet. Another success on the transnational corporate battleground and linked to a South African company was the campaign against Sino-Gold – an Australian goldmining company which linked with South Africa’s GoldFields in a joint venture to own and operate a mine inside Tibet. In 2003 an international campaign was launched to prevent the proposed operation from being implemented. South Africa’s GoldFields incurred negative publicity and were publicly questioned about the morality to have a stake in mineral extraction inside Tibet. The campaign was a success and SinoGold decided for the time being to halt their venture in Tibet.
On the political front the Tibetans are still marginalised not only by governments but also seemingly by civil society itself. The Tibetans were maginalised at the 2004 World Social Forum through being denied access to participation in the World Parliamentary Forum. The new anti-capitalist and social movement that dominated the WSF do not universally accept the Tibetans’ usage of non-violence to gain support. According to Lehulere, one of the criticism[s] of the WSF is that “its charter restricts constituent organisations to non-violent forms of struggle” (2004:18).
Their symbolic presence at international civil society conferences, along with the media attention and moral support from the public the Tibetans and their struggle gain at such conferences merely signify that the West is still fascinated, attracted and intrigued by all that represents Tibet in their own minds, However, sadly, such appeal has failed to muster or harness any universal substantial or effective support for the Tibetan cause by the international community, institutions and various role-players that make up the entity of Civil Society.
Since becoming globalised, the TSG movement can argue that it has achieved the goal of bringing the Tibet question into the international arena. The objective of inducing China to properly address the Tibetan issue with tangible demonstrable actions such as releasing the Panchen Lama, accepting that the Dalai Lama is not calling for total independence and etc has failed. The Tibetans themselves need to look beyond the West and ask why there has been little support for them by Third World Countries and in particular Africa. The TGiE needs to realise the importance of Africa in either assisting, collaborating and supporting their cause or they will find that China’s long term goal of courting Africa will pay dividends in China’s favour in regard to the future of Tibet within the international community. Is it realistic to ask that the United Nations would ever host on the African continent a conference on the rights of the Tibetan people as it did in June 2004 when the UN hosted the “United Nations African Meeting in Support of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People”?
Sadly, though when the world is awash in violence and millions of dollars is spent on peace missions, and negotiations that invariably breakdown the one exemplar of a peaceful freedom movement is not justifiably rewarded by the international community. Will the Tibetan’s cause ever be taken seriously before they as a people and their ethnicity becomes a footnote in the history books? It is for this reason that the Dalai Lama, the TGiE and the international Tibet movement needs to re-examine its alliances, strategies, communication and policy to address the changing climate within Civil Society and the international community.
References:
Crawford, Gordon 2001. Foreign AID and Political Reform: A Comparative Analysis of Democracy Assistance and Political Conditionally. New York: Palgrave
Fisher, William and Ponniah, Thomas 2003. Another World Is Possible. New York: Zed Books Limited
Goldstein, Malvyn, 1997. The Snowlion and the Dragon – China, Tibet and the Dalai Lama. USA: University of California Press
Lehulere, Oupa. 2004 ‘MUBAI RESISTANCE 2004 towards a new international.’ KHANYA: A Journal for Activists No5, 16 – 19
McKay, A. C. 1996. Mythos Tibet. Bonn: The International Institute of Asian Studies
Power, John, 2000. ‘ The Free Tibet Movement: A Selective Narrative.’ Journal of Buddhist Ethics. 7, 1- 20
Tibet Bulletin. 2004. ‘The Worldwide Tibet Support Movement: An Overview.’ 8(4), 10 –11
Mr. Renato Palmi is founder member of the Tibet Society SA
