From: richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (C. Richter)
Subject: Re: Conference, Sino-Tibetan Relations: Prospects for the future
Organization: UTCS Public Access
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 21:33:08 GMT

***  To my dear debaters:  I am afraid that I cannot continue our 
***  debates as I shall be busy for the next while.  I am only sorry 
***  that Mr. Anonymous couldn't get back to me; he seemed to know 
***  a thing or two.    
 
In article 1547 phsj@marlin.jcu.edu.au (su jianfeng):
>The key is there are so many people in Western countries tell people in
>developing countries, such as China, Czechoslavakia, Former Soviet
>Union etc., about the right to self determination, but this right is not
>quaranteed in most of the Western countries.  You can not find
>the law which protest local people to have the right in most of the
>Western countries.  To tell Chinese about the right to self-
>determination is only a game of cheating.    Even majority of
>people in Western countries do not accept the idea of the right
>to self-determination.
 
Well, don't you think you are stooping a bit low here, calling me 
a cheater?  The majority of Westerners are satisfied that the devolution 
of the British, German, French, Portuguese, Belgian, Spanish, Dutch
empires was right.  Colonies belonging to each to of these empires 
were freed in the last 100 or so years.  Tibet is a colony of 
China, and as such it should be released.  The Tibetan people have 
expressed their desire to self-determination.
 
>>I know.  Most people in the dominant position are uncomfortable with 
>>any process which may lead to the giving up of powers to a minority.  
>>Canadians too are uncomfortable.
>
>Why should China learn from Canada instead of Great Britain, Australia,
>USA, Japan, Germany and Franch etc.?  
 
China can learn from whatever or whomever it wants.  That doesn't 
change the fact that Tibetans want their freedom.
 
>Would you please copy the text of the law for which you think it can
>quarantee the aborigines to have the right to get back the land and show
>the resource for the information.  The aborigines have only the right
>which is quaranteed by law and they can not gotten any quarantee from
>your words.
 
I would happy to provide the text, but I don't have a legal secretary 
at my disposal just this instant.  About the suggestion that my 
words might be construed as some sort of guarantee: don't worry, no 
aborigine of Canada is pinning his or her wellbeing on my words.  
 
>Tell me your opinions about the British government used troops to keep
>the land 'Northern Ireland'.  Why don't you teach people of UK the right
>to self-determination?  Should I call you a racist?
 
Thanks for the suggestion, but wouldn't my opinions of the British 
government, or of any other government, be a little out of place 
in talk.politics.china?  
 
>>It is already happening.  It is fait accompli in some local areas. 
>>When can the Tibetans expect their land back?
>
>Show your evidence.  Tell me what law can let the aborigines have the
>right.  Tell me where is the law recorded, including name of the book
>and page number etc.  I doubt you are sending blank cheques here.
 
Again, I would be happy to do so, but my legal secretary is out for 
lunch.  Actually, if you insist, you can 
check out the legal draft of the proposed Charlottetown accord that 
is expected out shortly.  Since it is such a hot issue right now 
there are bound to be plenty of copies floating around (and parts 
even published in the press) in the next little while.  This is not 
specifially what you asked for (you asked for existing laws) but it 
should give you a very good idea of what direction Canada is heading 
in this area.  
 
>After 50 years, there will be no voice for the self-determination.  How
>many years for Canada, USA and Australia have been spent for cooling
>down the voice?  
>
>Chinese have many to learn from people in Western countries
>including the way of cheating.
 
Good for you.  First people here get upset because they think I am 
trying to teach them something, then I am called a cheater, and now 
you say China wants to learn from me.  Such "radical confusions"!
 
 
In article 1550 EE102@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK (Gao Mr ZhiJie) writes:
>>Then why did China invade Tibet in the 1950s?  In 1991 the Chinese
>>government proudly celebrated the "Peaceful Liberation of Tibet."
>>Invitations were sent by China's embassies to prominent politicians
>>and government officials, but few accepted.  In fact one wrote to the
>>embassy in Ottawa to inquire, "If China is celebrating the Peaceful
>>Liberation of Tibet, then what, may I ask, did China liberate Tibet
>>from?"
>  * Petty, they didn't go.  So they will never know what did Chinese
>    communists liberate Tibet from.
>    Anyway, they are not interested in knowing that in the first place.
 
[Gao means 'Pity' here]  
 
> Judging by the fact that there were about 300,000 Tibetans
> in Sikkim alone. The accuracy of your figures for Tibatans in India
> is questionable. And of course, not every Tibetan is or used to be
> Chinese.                                          
 
I stand to be corrected, there are over 100,000 Tibetan 'refugees' 
in India, Nepal, and elsewhere.  A small correction for you:  
Tibetans are Tibetans, not Chinese.
 
> I appreciate
> your knowledge about the distribution of the Tibetan population
> within China is very impressive in comparison of average Westerners
> who usually don't know anything about China except some abstract
> concepts like 'human rights abuser' etc. that they learned from the
 
Thank you.  
 
> This sounds like political proclamation rather than argument in debates.
> You can't speak on the behalf of Chinese living in Tibet and I don't
> you are automatically qualified for representing the Dalai Lama and His
> associates just because you believe in every thing in the
> Holybook of His Holiness.
 
Wow!  This guy (Guo) is getting downright nasty here.  And he calls 
this an argument?  
 
> They will be capable of doing that once all Chinese ( including Tibetans
> of course )are capable enough to decide the nature of the China's gov't
> through democratic procedures.
>[ That's where, I guess, the economy comes in. (I note that this is a
>point some their netter raised.)  But it would be too much to expect you
>to agree with me. ]
>
>    Mind to tell me whether you are paid-up spokesman of His Holiness.
>    If so, I don't even bother to argue with you. ( Disqualified :-( )
 
No, I am not.    
 
>   The arguments of Canadian aborigines sounds irrelevant to me. But may
>   I note the plain fact that the aborigines were collectively
>   killed by the white settlers and they then were purposely kept
>   suppressed economically, politically and educationally until they were
>   practically close to extinction and posses absolutely no threat
>   to drive the whites out of their homeland ( or any part of it ) before
>   any thing can be called 'negotiation' started and every thing settled
>  in the whites terms.  THAT is really some thing makes me uncomfortable
>   to learn.
 
Check the thread.  I did not bring up the aboriginal issue; rather 
some of your compatriots ran out of arguments and decided to distract 
us for a while. 
 
>>What does economics have to do with it?  Or do you mean, "Once the
>>'treasure house' (Xizang) has been fully exploited for the benefit of
>  ************************
>>Chinese, and everyone in China has enough money in their pockets, then
>>let's talk."
>
>  Where did YOU learn that? You are murdering Chinese. :-(
 
Murdering Chinese?  The last thing I would want to do.
 
>>China invaded Tibet starting in 1950.  Chinese forces attacked the
>*******************************************************************
>>Potala in 1959.
>***************
>
>  Is that His Holiness version of the story? It won't automatically
>  become truth just by repeating though.
>  Hope you don't have any problem accessing other sources apart from His.
 
No, he hasn't stopped by lately to tell me his version.  
 
>>>Give the source please!!! If it is true, I really have learned somethin
>>>from you.
>
>>The book _The Forgotten Tribes of China_.
>>--
>
>   Is the author a China hater?
 
No, not at all.  Take a look for yourself.
 
>     Is Sikkim that sovereign country you called Tibet? Well it used to
>     a *country* governed by Tibetans and recognised by the world
>     community. Where it is now?
 
Hmmm.... Sikkim was a sovereign country, you are conceding that much.  
Now, somewhere, someone said Sikkim was part of Tibet.  My question to you  
is: If Sikkim was recognized by the world, then why wasn't Tibet 
recognized by the world?  Seriously, this is very interesting.  
I should want to ask, then, what is your evidence is that Sikkim was 
indeed sovereign; but I will miss your answer.
 
 
In article 1551 EE102@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK (Gao Mr ZhiJie) writes:
> You seemed to be too permissive about the realisation of Tibet
> Independence ( as your pointer was directed to Chinese rather than the
> non-democratic CCP leadership ).  IMHO though,
> since China is changing rapidly towards modernisation not only
> economically but also politically, you may stand a chance to see
> a 'democratic vote' on TI matter in your life time.
 
That would be great.  (If for you, my "pointer" is pointed to the 
CCP, fine.  Others here, however, appear to be suggesting that 
the CCP is merely a footnote in the story, that Tibet is irrevocably 
China's whether the CCP is in power or not.) 
 
> We all know that a vote means nothing without freedom and equality
> of expressing political opinions for everybody. So on your way
> to that date, be prepared to answer the questions that are bound to
> be raised by Chinese ( the majority of them are Tibetans )
> who are currently living in Xizang:
> * Would the Dalai Lama & Co want to establish a serfdom again?
>   I note that to date the Dalai Lama still fails to denounce
>   the slavery system He and His companions represented and did not
>   offer any apologies to the Chinese in Tibet for the systematical human
>   rights violations conducted by a group of high class Tibetan
>   ( privileged layer ) headed by the Dalai Lama when they were in Tibet?
>   ( If you have got any references, please let the netters know. )
 
The Tibetan Government-in-exile, in consultation with constitutional  
experts around the world, and with its own people, has made very public 
a model for a future government in Tibet.  Included are all the features
one expects of a modern democracy.  Documents describing the plans 
are available to anyone.
 
I have been accused of mouthing the Dalai Lama's version of the Tibet 
issue.  But here you repeat the tale of slavery and serfdom, a story you 
picked up, no doubt, from the PRC propaganda machine.
 
> * Would the Dalai Lama & Co still keep utilising the religion and faith
>   of some Tibetans, upon whom His Holiness can impose His will
>   in the way He likes,  in order to manipulate the public opinions?
>
>   You know very well that the doggy part of the TI business is that
>   it relies too much on His Holiness position as the paramount spiritual
>   leader of the Tibetan lamaists ( Nobody can strip Him from that
>   position as long as He lives,  not to mention democracy here ).
>
> As a Canadian living in a democratic society all you life, you won't
> have any trouble to understand that using religious people's faith
> to achieve political gains in nominally democratic processes, such as
> voting etc, is totally unacceptable. Well, I don't know whether or not
> you are also a supporter of Muslim Fundamentalists Movement.
> So I may be wrong here.
 
The blueprint for a new government in Tibet includes the Dalai Lama
only as a spiritual head.  The plan does not include temporal duties.
 
 
In article 1552 jhao@hila.hut.fi (Jixiang Hao) writes:
>I have really nothing against some of Tibet (XiZhang) people's claiming
>for the self-determination, for more freedom, etc. But I am really get sick
>of some of your guys and supporters lying about the history.
>
>Man, I sincerely ask you to give me evidence: WHEN was Tibet an Independent
>country other than a chinese territory for last several centuries and 
>recognized by other countries in the world?
>
>And where does it come a *Occupation* for a country, who exercises its own
>sovereign power on its own territory though it was really bloody and shameful?
>Is it also a *Hi-Tech* production?   ;-/
 
Check the thread, I have dealt with this question in detail.  I have 
given my definition of "invasion", I have discussed China's invasion of 
Tibet, and I have pointed out the absurdities of the oft-repeated 
claim that China has owned Tibet since the Yuan dynasty. 
 
>I am not defending for what CCP's criminal doing for our own people and culture
>(BTW, are you guys aware of how many nationalites in china when you are
>talking about chinese? ),  actully I hate those who force/forced people
>became their *slaves* both physically and spiritally,  whoever they are: CCP
>or Dalai Lama or British Empire, Nazi-Hitler or Japanese Fascism bandit.
>
>And a lying is not better than those devil either.
 
I have already referred to the book _The Forgotten Tribes of China_, 
so 'this guy' is well aware of how many different nationalities there 
are.  The Turkestans of Xinjiang also want independence, and there may 
well be others.  
 
>From my friend's point of view,  we would like to see Tibet independent right
>now. Because four classmates of mine were assigned to work in Tibet after 
>graduation from university, and I would assume that they could return home 
>happyly instead of choosing drinking for releasing the pain of forced to
>leave the relatives, and don't forget the endless tear of their girl friend or
>wife and family members.
 
Yes, Tibet is almost like punishment for Hans.  In fact, there are 
financial inducements to try to get Hans to settle there.  The incentives 
have been successful to a degree, but recently they were increased to 
attract more settlers.  As in Mongolia, the policy is to populate Tibet 
with Hans in order to consolidate China's hold on it.
 
 
Bye for now. 
 

-- 
Conrad Richter                     richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca
Richters Herbs                     71550.3411@compuserve.com
Goodwood, ON L0C 1AO Canada        Tel 416-640-6677 / Fax 416-640-6641