From: <KONDARED@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Ref: India/Tibet (China) Border Issues
Supersedes: <93022.170152KONDARED@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Organization: Purdue University
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 02:13:12 GMT

In article <1993Jan20.191007.16712@leland.Stanford.EDU>,
must@leland.Stanford.EDU (Mustafa Syed) says: (in reply to the following line)
>
>>the communist invasion. Today China is OCCUPYING Tibet and
>
>        Sir, could you please furnish evidence to support your
>        statement. Communist took power in China in 1949. UN was
>        formed in 1945. So since TIBET was a sovereign state before
>        1949...as claimed by you....when did it become a member of UN?
>
>        The fact is that Historically, Tibet was NEVER an independent
>        state. It was an autonomous region UNDER Chinese rule.
>        If you have references to prove otherwise, please provide them.
>        Even Dalai Lama accepts this fact so I am really interested in
>        references to prove your above assertion.
>
     Mr. Syed,  historically many countries were never sovereign states
     before the concept of a nation state took root. And the concept of nation
     states took root in different regions (viz. europe, S.America,W.Europe,
     The Balkans) at different times. In many areas the concept of a nation
     State are still evolving (viz. the Balkans). Tibet might never have been
     a sovereign state, but its acceptance of Chinese rule was based on
     China's  acceptance of Tibet's autonomy, and non interferance in its
     social and cultural life. But in the 1950s *Communist* China started
     brutally interfering with Tibets' social and cultural affairs. The PLA
     cruelties were enough to drive Tibet's leader and a significant %
     of it's population to flee to India. India is (you will agree) not quite
     the land of milk and honey and so many Tibetans fleeing to India should
     be a clear indicator to even someone who does not want to beleive that,
     gross human rights abuses did take place in Tibet. And since Tibetan
     acceptance of Chinese rule was based on absolute autonomy (so absolute
     that for many hundreds of years when the rulers in China were weak Tibet
     was virtually sovereign) rhe late 50's was the right time for the concept
     of a nation state to take root on the roof of the world.

     Your (implied) opinion "if a nation has never been sovereign then
     it should never harbor nationalistic aspirations and has no right to
     sovereignity" is not in line with the spirit of the times. If we
     accept your "learned and informed opinion"  then Bosnia has no right
     to independance, and what is happening to the bosnians is nothing to
     make such a fuss about. But fortunately even the "western infidels"
     do not share your opinion and there is talk about no-fly zones and
     war trials of the Serbian leaders. And i believe a greater % of Tibet's
     population fled to India than the % of bosnians fleeing  Bosnia now.


>>denying human rights of millions of poeple there. There are
>>500,000 soldiers of PLA and Tibet entry is forbidden to everyone
>>(including Chinese) while Dalai Lama meditates in Dharamashala
>>India. Those are the facts in this case...hope it helps to
>>clarify things.
>>
>        Well since the above are not FACTS in this case, it leaves
>        the netters with no clarfication at all.
>
>        Mustafa Syed.
>
  Well, i cant think of truer facts. What are all those hundreds of thousands
  Tebetan refugees doing in India?

      Cheers,
      sashi

________________________________________________________________________
|                                                                       |
|BITNET: kondared@purccvm       INTERNET: kondared@mace.cc.purdue.edu   |
|                                         kondared@parsec.ecn.purdue.edu|
|...................................................................... |
|    "..... and now we can all get some sleep"  - Le Marquis De Sade    |
|_______________________________________________________________________|
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian