Policy Brief

June25,
1, 2018
Sep
2019

Dr. Monika Cha nsor ia is a
Tok yo -based Senior Fellow
at T he Japa n I nst it ute
of I nter nat iona l A f f a irs.
P r e v i o u s l y, s h e h a s h e l dappointments at the Sandia

North China, Boxer Rebellion, Japan,
Nepal, and Foreign Explorers:
Ek a i K awa g uch i’s Not es on 20 t hCentury Tibet*

National Laboratories (U.S.),

Dr. Monika Chansoria

Hokkaido University (Sapporo,
Japan), and Fondation Maisondes S c ienc es de l ’ Hom me( Pa r is). Dr. Cha nsor ia has
authored five books including
her latest work, China, Japan,
and Senkaku Islands: Conf lictin the East China Sea Amid an
American Shadow (Routledge© 2018).

Disclaimer :The views expressed in thispublication are those of the authorand do not necessarily reflect thepolicy or position of The Japan
Institute of International Affairs or
any other organization with which
the author is affiliated.

Following his arrival and getting adjusted in Lhasa in March 1901,
Japanese Buddhist explorer, Ekai Kawaguchi began familiarizing
himself with the life and times of 20th centur y Tibet. Kawaguchi
embarked upon his destination, Tibet, in June 1897 when he left
Japan. Arriving in Lhasa nearly four years thereafter, in 1901,
Kawaguchi was prepared for the challenges in store, though unawareof the scale of their manifestation. There was a sense of relief though,that he had been able to overcome perhaps the most arduous part of
his journey, which was reaching this wearisome and forbidden land
whilst being in disguise all through.
Being a stranger who got success in entering Tibet and reaching
Lhasa, when it was exceedingly difficult for even a local Tibetan tocome into the capital, the locals found it hard to believe Kawaguchi
when he told them that he came via the Jangthang (literally meaning
pastoral ‘northern plain’) route. The locals argued that there were
soldiers placed on guard all along that road, to which Kawaguchi
replied that he ventured through the pathless wilds.1
North China and the Boxer Rebellion
Coincidently, this was also the period when the Boxer Uprising
was taking place in China. Also referred to as the Boxer Rebellion( 拳亂 ), or the Yihetuan Movement ( 義和團運動 ), it was primarily
an anti-imperialist and anti-foreign uprising which took place in
China between 1899 and 1901, nearing the Qing dynasty’s last*1

 his is the third paper in a continuing series tracing the travels and journey
Tof Japan’s first successful explorer inside Tibet in 1900, Ekai Kawaguchi. The
narrative, citations, and arguments of this paper are primarily excerpted andbased on Kawaguchi’s personal memoir published in 1909, titled Three Yearsin Tibet , [Theosophist Office, Vasanta Press, Adyar (Madras) British India.]
Chapter LII, Japan in Lhasa , p. 342.

1

Sep
2019
June25,
1, 2018

Policy Brief

period. Initiated by the Militia United in
Righteousness (Yihetuan) who were known
commonly as Boxers, for many of their members
were practitioners of Chinese mar tial ar ts,
the determinants of the rebellion were many,
including, severe drought, deep inroads offoreign spheres of influence, and several
months of mounting violence in Shandong andNorth China. Resultantly, the Boxer warriors
converged on Peking (Beijing) in June 1900
raising the slogan ‘support the Qing government
and exterminate the foreigners.’2

Emperor was defeated and was in Sin-an.
Another set of people alluded that a famine
prevailed in China leaving people famished.
Indeed, every sort of rumor was aboard in the
Tibetan capital.6
Por trayal of the earlier relations between
China and Tibet requires erudition and in-depth
research and investigation to write with precise
competence. And thus, Kawaguchi decided
to confine himself only to the existing state ofthose relations as he witnessed himself. Calling
Tibet nominally as a protectorate of China,
bound to pay a tribute to the Suzerain State, thedays gone by saw Tibet forwarding this tributeto China. But subsequently the payment wascommuted against expenses which China had
to allow Tibet, on account of the Grand Prayer
which was performed ever y year at Lhasa forthe prosperity of the Chinese Emperor.7

On April 7, 1901, Kawaguchi attended a
special ser vice of prayer for the safety of theChinese Emperor in “connection with theBoxer war.” The ser vice was held at ever ytemple in Tibet including at the Sera monastery
where Kawaguchi initially stayed. He narrates
of a discreet meeting for seven days, during
which, special priests offered secret prayers.3
Upon enquiry Kawaguchi was told that Peking
was invaded by foreign troops and that the
Chinese seemed to have been beaten. Although,Kawaguchi wanted to hear in greater detail,he was denied any further information beyond
this within the monasteries. 4 Subsequently,
while moving around Lhasa, he got ‘more
definite information about the Boxer trouble.’
Some merchants who had just returned from
China, and few who came from Nepal and India,
brought news about the developments, but
Kawaguchi described all these as ‘laughable
and unreliable.’5 According to few, rumors werethat the Emperor of China had bequeathed histhrone to the Crown Prince and absconded,
while some others told Kawaguchi that the
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Kawaguchi notes that the loss of Chineseprestige in Tibet was truly extraordinary since
the Sino-Japanese War. Prior to that, China
used to treat Tibet in a high-handed way, while
the latter, overawed by the display of force of
the Suzerain, submitted to it tamely.8 Post the
Sino-Japanese War, much of that changed, andinstead of a subser vient attitude, Tibet began
viewing China with a deep sense of contempt
and ridicule. To a certain extent, the Tibetans
arrived at the conclusion that their masters
were no longer able to protect and help them,and therefore did not deserve to be feared andrespected anymore. This sudden and apparent
downfall of its prestige inside Tibet left China
completely mortified.9

For more details see, Klein Thoralfe, “The Boxer War—The Boxer Uprising,” Violence de masse et Résistance - Réseau
de recherche , SciencesPo, Paris, July 23, 2008.
Chapter XLVII, Tibet and North China , p. 297.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid., p. 299.
Chapter LXXIII, China, Nepal and Tibet , p. 519.
Ibid.
Ibid.

2

Sep
2019
June25,
1, 2018

Policy Brief

declared my Tibetan friend.”13 Whatever could
have been the motive, the Tibetans were known
to being utterly indif ferent to most of thedecrees coming in from China.

During his stay at Lhasa, Kawaguchi got
to know of a yellow paper that contained theChinese Emper or’s decr ee issued at thetermination of the Boxer Rebellion. The yellow
paper decree was hung up in the square of thecity and was addressed to all the 18 provincesof China as well as its protectorates. 10 In
order to promote aims of mutual benefit, theMiddle Kingdom had been opened up to allow
foreigners with the freedom of travelling to any
place they wished. The decree concluded that
this policy of welcome and hospitality needed tobe adopted in all provinces and protectorates.
After seeing and hearing this, Kawaguchi
thought that the decree may have been issued
as a result of conclusion of peace between thePowers and China after the former entered
Peking. What was interesting and significant
to note was that the decree failed to produce
any par ticular impression on Tibet, and the
Tibetans.11

Japan in Lhasa
In the meanwhile, Kawaguchi became quite
popular owing to his medical practice andtreatment, and got acquainted with Cham-ba
Choe-sang, the Ex-Minister of Finance in the
Tibetan Government, who was a learned scholar
and an experienced diplomat. He felt sorry that
Kawaguchi was not receiving adequate time
for studying Buddhism and scriptures having
to attend to many patients daily. He warned
Kawaguchi to be on the guard suspecting thathe might be poisoned since he was envied fortaking away the work of many local doctors.
And, therefore, the Ex-Minister of fered him
a dwelling at his residence which was moreprivate as compar ed to the monaster y. 14
Accordingly, Kawaguchi left his quarters at theSera monastery and moved into the two-storied
residence of the Ex-Minister where he found an
excellent tutor. That was none other than the
Ex-Minister’s natural half-brother, Ti Rinpoche(then present ruler of Tibet) by title, whose
father was a Chinaman. Ti Rinpoche was 67
years of age, and was named the highest priest
in all of Tibet holding the title of Ti Rinpoche of
Ganden.15

Kawaguchi asked a highly placed
Government official as to what would be Tibet’s
response towards the order set for th in thedecree, and whether the Tibetan Government, inthe face of that injunction, could refuse to allow
Englishmen to enter their country. The official‘scornfully’ replied that his Government was
not obliged to obey an order which the Chinese
Emperor issued at his own pleasure. And
besides, he continued, it was highly doubtful
whether the Emperor could have issued adecree of that nature, which he knew was utterly
opposed to the interests and traditional policy of
Tibet.12 It was probably clandestinely issued byfew ‘wicked men’ near the Emperor as “a resultof bribes received from foreigners... It did notdeserve to be trusted, much less to be obeyed,
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

In the temple of Ganden, there is a priestly
seat on which the Grand Lama had the rightto be seated by birth, while Ti Rinpoche had
to receive training of 30 years after receiving
the degree of Doctorate in Buddhism, before
he was given the above privilege.16 Following

Ibid., p. 520.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid., p. 521.
Chapter LI, My Tibetan Friends and Benefactors , p. 333.
Chapter LII, Japan in Lhasa , p. 336.
Ibid.

3

Sep
2019
June25,
1, 2018

Policy Brief

this prolonged and rigorous training of three
decades, he was declared a perfectly learned
and vir tuous priest and was elected as thehighest priest in Tibet and given the privilege
to sit on the priestly seat. Any person or priest
who attained moral and intellectual perfection
after a study and training of some 50-60 years
could be seated on this seat, except for thesons of butchers, blacksmiths, hunters, andmen belonging to the lowest castes.17 In Tibet,
the distinction of castes was given much
importance.18

the price in Japan.21 Though the musk deer was
found almost everywhere in Tibet, its principal
habitation was in remote districts such as Kongbo, Tsari, and Lo. Tibetan musk was sent in far
larger quantities to China as compared to India,
despite the fact that transportation to India waseasier. Almost all goods from Tibet to China
travelled through Ta-chien-lu, and were moreor less sent to Yunnan. Japan used to obtain
the prized ‘Yunnan-musk’ from China. It was
Kawaguchi who discovered that the ‘Yunnanmusk’ came originally from Tibet.22

The ‘Middle path for the circumambulationof the holy temple of the Buddha’ or the Parkor,
was the name of one of the principal and busiest
street in Lhasa. It was also infamous for it
was the place where criminals were exposed
to public disgrace. Walking along the Parkor,
Kawaguchi witnessed many shops that lined upsides of the street and were not very different
from those in most other countries. Many
portable shops or stalls could be seen in thestreet, in which daily essentials like articles offood, clothing and furniture were sold. Most ofthese things were made in Tibet, though somewere imported from Calcutta and Bombay in
British India, while few others from China. 19
Kawaguchi also noticed some Japanese bamboo
blinds with pictures of women, and imitationcorals made in Japan being sold at the Parkor.
Besides, he discovered kutani porcelain in thehigher elite circles, but rarely spotted themin local stores or shops in Lhasa. Japanesescroll pictures too were found, often hanging
in the houses of rich and influential families.20
Another noticeable item sold cheaply in the
districts was musk, costing about one-tenth of

Nepal and the Gurkhas

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

The Tibetan Government appeared desirous
of maintaining friendly relations with Nepal.
On an occasion, the Ruler of Nepal dispatched
his messenger to Tibet to procure a set of
Tibetan sutras. Upon hearing this, the Dalai
Lama ordered a set to be sent to Nepal as apresent from himself – which was subsequently
kept in the Royal Librar y of Nepal. 23 Tibetan
Buddhists staying in Nepal enjoyed protection
from the Government, and Nepal’s ruler often
made monetar y grants or timber donations tobuild Buddhist temples in his dominion. These
gestures drew a favorable image for Nepal in the
Tibetan people.24
Although the Tibetans did not harbor any
sense of malice towards its neighbors beyond
the mountains, they remained apprehensiveof the Gurkhas on account of their valor, skill
and discipline. Kawaguchi writes in detailabout the Nepalese troops serving in the armyof British Indian Gover nment. The famous
Gurkhas (Nepalese soldiers and troops) were

Ibid.
Ibid., p. 337.
Ibid., p. 339.
Ibid.
Chapter LXIV, Tibetan Trade and Industry , p. 449.
Ibid., p. 450.
Chapter LXXIII, China, Nepal and Tibet , p. 524.
Ibid., pp. 524-525.

4

Sep
2019
June25,
1, 2018

Policy Brief

vigorous enough to even rival regular British
troops in discipline and ef fectiveness. The
Gurkhas since that time, and till date, remain
unmatched in mountain war fare, be it theircapacity to enduring hardships and in runningup and down hill while bearing heavy knapsacks– rendering them far superior to the British
soldiers. Describing them being ‘ideal soldiers’,
Kawaguchi noticed that the Gurkhas resembled
Japanese soldiers immensely in stature andgeneral appearance, as also in temperament.25

ruler of Nepal as ‘too intelligent a statesman’
who perceived that it would be England thatwould stand to gain with a lion’s share of victoryin case of any future trouble between Tibet
and Nepal. 29 The r uler of Nepal seemingly
confined himself to making arrangements with
Tibet by means of which the Nepalese could
enter and settle in Tibet to carry on profitableeconomic and trade-related undertakings andestablish their influence. This would also result
in countering any potential advances of Russian
influence in T ibet. 30 Nepal’s own inter nal
political mess kept it deeply absorbed and it
could not spare either energy or money forpursuing any consistent policy towards Tibet.31
Although the militar y ser vice of Nepal was
sufficiently creditable, its diplomacy left much to
be desired.32

Kawaguchi specifically recalled the
population bulge stating that he had never seen
so many children anywhere as he did while
he was in the Himalayan dominion, Nepal. He
also listed a few beneficial effects of the steadyadvance of population that were visible, namely,1) almost ever y nook and corner of available
land was brought under tillage 2) woods weretended with extreme care, and 3) remote forests
added to the stock of lumber, a major portion ofwhich was annually exported to lower India.26
Additionally, Nepal was pursuing trade andopening up wild lands in Sikkim and Darjeeling.
Fur ther, perhaps it saw Tibet – a ter ritor yabout twelve-fold that of Nepal, far more thinly
populated, as a region to expand.27

Tr a d i t i o n a l P o l i c y o f P r o h i b i t i n g
Foreigners inside Tibet
Kawaguchi acknowledged that the numberof unsuccessful explorers to Tibet was quite
large and that he had heard of around 25 such
expeditions. His own estimate, however, stood ataround 40-50 such missions taking all explorers
into account. Recalling many articles and writeups about Tibet in Japanese magazines andnewspapers, Kawaguchi termed them as ‘highly
misleading and often fictitious’ – based onincorrect information and inaccuracy found in
most works on Tibet.33 Kawaguchi highlighted
this facet by citing the most conspicuous
instance of this kind, and furnished the caseof a Hungarian explorer, A. Csoma de Koros,
who compiled a Tibetan-English dictionar y,

The attempts by Russia to infiltrate into
Tibet had alarmed Nepal especially after inputs
reached that Tibet had concluded a secret treaty
with Russia and that large quantities of arms
and ammunition had reached Lhasa from S.
Petersburg. The scenario of Russia establishinga base in Tibet exposed Nepal to the dangerof absorption.28 Kawaguchi described the then
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33

Ibid., p. 522.
Ibid., p. 521.
Ibid.
Ibid., pp. 522-523.
Ibid., p. 523.
Ibid., p. 524.
Ibid., p. 525.
Ibid.
Chapter LVIII, Foreign Explorers and the Policy of Seclusion , p. 403.

5

Sep
2019
June25,
1, 2018

Policy Brief

having learned the language from a Lama in
Ladakh. This was a district on the south-westernboundary of Tibet, next to British India, where
Csoma is said to have resided for more than
three years.34 The author wanted to study the
Tibetan language on its native soil and for thatreason attempted to enter Tibet. He found it
impossible to carry out his plan from Ladakh,
as the Tibetan frontier guards there forbade
the entr y of a stranger into their countr y. Itthen occurred to Csoma that he might succeed
in his project if he star ted from Darjeeling.
Unfor tunately, he caught jungle-fever while
travelling in the neighborhood of Darjeeling anddied there, never having set his foot on Tibetansoil. His tomb till date stands at a place near
Darjeeling, probably at the point where he fell
ill. Despite the above being the factual narrative,
according to Kawaguchi, “… writers on Tibet,
both Japanese and Western, mostly represent
Csoma as someone having spent many years in
Lhasa,” which was not the case at all.35

accompanied her. The Ex-Minister went on totell how the lady was stopped by the natives ofthe place from proceeding further. It was very
fortunate that the chieftain of the local tribe wasa merciful man, or else, she could have beenmurdered.37 A report on the matter was soon
for warded to Lhasa by the magistrate of the
district, and the Ex-Minister was ordered by
his Government to hasten to the spot, and deal
with the foreigner in a suitable manner. In otherwords, his commission was to cause the lady atonce to quit Tibetan soil.38
Ar riving at Nakchukha, he found that
although the lady spoke Tibetan, it was ina dialect dif fering from that at Lhasa. She
claimed to come to Tibet in order to acquaintherself with the sacred teachings of Tibetan
Buddhism. With that objective, she wanted tomake a pilgrimage to Lhasa and then to returnhome by way of Darjeeling. She then showed apassport obtained from the Emperor of China.
The Ex-Minister told her he was under strict
orders from the Grand Lama’s Government toforbid the entrance of any foreigner within his
dominions. The Grand Lama’s Government
could not extend its protection to a foreigner
attempting a journey through the wild districtsof Tibet.39 Taylor demanded an explanation as
to why a person, possessing a passport obtained
from the Emperor of China, could not travel
through Tibet, which was a protectorate under
the Emperor. The Minister admitted to thesuzerainty of the Chinese Emperor, but said
that, at the same time, they were not obliged
to obey the Emperor’s will on ever y matter– especially on issues of seclusion for which
they were determined to oppose even theEmperor, should he try by force to set aside thisOne evening in November 1901, during acasual conversation with the Ex-Minister, thesubject of a British missionar y attempting tovisit Lhasa came up. “I wonder why British
people are so desirous to come to our country…
I cannot at all understand their motive”
obser ved the Ex-Minister. The incident wasthat of a British woman arriving around eight
years ago at a place called Nakchukha on theboundar y between Tibet and China. It wasnone other than Annie R. Taylor, a missionary,
who attempted to travel from northern China
to Darjeeling via Lhasa. 36 Kawaguchi had
already heard of this stor y during his stay at
Darjeeling prior to arriving in Tibet, where heaccidentally met with one of the guides who had

34
35
36
37
38
39

Ibid., p. 404.
Ibid., pp. 403-404.
Ibid., p. 397.
Ibid., p. 398.
Ibid., pp. 397-398.
Ibid.

6

Sep
2019
June25,
1, 2018

Policy Brief

traditional Tibetan policy.40

Hasting’s viceroyalty and subsequent return toEngland, trade began to register a steep decline,
and ultimately ceased altogether. All channelsof communications had since become almost
closed between the two countries. Meanwhile,
the movement and activities of Christian
missionaries and other foreign propagandists
put the Grand Lama’s Gover nment on its
guard.43

Besides, the first valid stor y of a foreignerar riving in Tibet can be dated back to the
14 th centur y when in the year 1328 a priest
of Pordenone, named Friar Odoric, entered
Tibet as a propagandist of the Roman Catholic
Church. Instead of imparting anything novel tothe natives of Tibet, it was Odoric who profitedby what he saw in Tibet and made notes ofmany unique rituals practiced by T ibetan
priests. Upon arriving back in his homeland,
it is learnt that he burnt most of those notes
fearing that their publication might compromise
the interests of his own religion. Despite
that, a fragment of his travel accounts were
preser ved.41 Many centuries later, in the 17th
century, two brothers (probably French) named
Grueber and D’Orville, entered Tibet in 1661.
It remained doubtful if they proceeded as far as
Lhasa, though Kawaguchi attributes that theywent from Peking to Lhasa, and from there on,
through Nepal to India.

In the year 1871, a Russian Colonel named
Prejevalsky entered Tibet across its easternborder through Kham, and reached a placeabout 500 miles from Lhasa from where he wasforced to return by the Tibetan Government.
Apparently, Prejevalsky at first, passed throughthe Chinese region of Tibet, but was stopped
as soon as he set foot in the Dalai Lama’s
dominion. He next tried to enter Tibet from thenorth, and this time reached a place about 170
miles from Lhasa on the boundary line between
the Chinese and Tibetan territories, only to be
obliged to withdraw yet again. Later during that
decade, in 1879, an Englishman named Captain
Hill entered Tibet from the direction of Tachien-lu, but had to withdraw from Ba-lithang on
the boundary between the Chinese and Tibetan
dominions. Kawaguchi stated that this was
the same place from where Japanese priests,
Messrs. Nomi and Teramoto were driven back.44
Another instance is that of Swedish geographer
and illustrator Sven Anders Hedin, who tried toenter Tibet repeatedly from the north, whilst
Kawaguchi was staying at Lhasa, but, finallygave it up. Hedin later succeeded in entering
Tibet from Kashmir in 1906.

During the period when Warren Hastings
was the Viceroy of British India, he conceived
the idea of establishing a r egular tradeconnection between India and Tibet, and forthe said purpose, dispatched a commissioner,
named George Bogle, to Tibet in the year 1774.
Bogle accompanied by his wife failed to reach
Lhasa, and remained at Shigatze. Kawaguchi
refers to Bogle’s account of his journey as being
extant in print. Few years later, in 1781, Hastings
once again dispatched a commissioner, Captain
Turner, who stayed in Tibet for two years, notnecessarily in Lhasa. Kawaguchi notes that the
only English explorer to have reached Lhasa in
1811 from India was Thomas Manning.42 Aroundthis time, trade between British India and Tibet
had actively grown, but with the termination of
40
41
42
43
44

The last and perhaps most critical explorationthat Kawaguchi mentioned was the one
undertaken in 1881 and 1882 by Sarat Chandra
Das, Kawaguchi’s own mentor and teacher at

Ibid., p. 399.
Ibid., p. 400.
Ibid., p. 401.
Ibid.
Ibid., pp. 401-402.

7

Sep
2019
June25,
1, 2018

Policy Brief

Darjeeling. At first, Das proceeded as far as
Shigatze in 1881 where he remained for twomonths and returned to India. The results of
his exploration were repor ted to the British
Government, following which he undertook asecond trip to Tibet in the following year, having
secured a Tibetan passport as earlier. This time
Das first reached Shigatze and thereafter Lhasa.
Kawaguchi narrates what he heard about Das
from a Tibetan – that he conducted his mission
with extreme caution, seldom venturing out inthe daytime, and when obliged to do so, taking
care to avoid attracting the attention of natives.45
Das stayed in Lhasa for around three weeks andalso travelled to other parts of Tibet and finally
returned to Darjeeling in less than a year. 46
When Sarat Chandra Das’ tasks and assignment
became known to the Tibetan Government, it
caused extraordinary disturbance, resulting instrengthening the Tibetan resolve to strictly
enforce the policy of exclusion against all
foreigners, more than ever.47

immediately. To that extent, it was the discovery
of Sarat Chandra Das’ mission which becamea reference point for the strict enforcement ofTibet’s exclusion policy. Kawaguchi described
this phase as one where, it appeared that
Tibet had been converted into a nation full ofdetectives and constables.49
Coinciding with these developments, were
the supposed designs and interests of other
big powers, namely England and Russia, inTibet. The Tibetan natives attributed England’s
desire to take possession of gold mines whichwere plentifully found in Tibet. Kawaguchi
went beyond this ‘super ficial explanation’and argued that in his opinion, the interest of
England towards Tibet arose from the desire
to prevent Russia from bringing Tibet under its
sway.50 England wanted to prevent Russia fromusing this ‘highland’ as a base of operations incarr ying out its ambitious projects on India. 51
Any potential advance of Russian influence inTibet, or that of Russia securing a base up there,
would have made England very insecure about
the safety of its colonial empire in India.52

Policy of Seclusion
Being fair to the Tibetans, they originallywere people who were highly welcoming
and warm to strangers. The suspicion of theGrand Lama’s Government got heightened asa result of an insidious piece of advice which,
the Government of China gave to Tibet. It wasto the effect that if Tibet allowed free entry of
foreigners into its territory, they would destroy
its Buddhism, and replace it with Christianity.48
The simple-minded Tibetan became dreadfully
alarmed at this warning, however even then,
did not put the policy of exclusion into full force
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53

Recalling what the T ibetan Ministerof Treasur y once said to him, Kawaguchi
described, “It would indeed be a great
humiliation to Tibet, if it were, ever, reduced
to being a tributary of another country… moredisastrous and unbearable would be its nationalreligion being superseded by a strange faith.”53
The Minister was firm while stating further, that
Tibet must oppose, at all costs, any plans madeby foreigners against it. In this backdrop, it
became absolutely necessary for Tibet to forbid

Ibid.
Ibid., pp. 402-403.
Ibid.
Ibid., p. 405.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid., p. 406.
Ibid.
Ibid.

8

Sep
2019
June25,
1, 2018

Policy Briefthe entr y of all foreigners and keep them guessing
about the real condition and situation of the country.54
Thus, the policy of seclusion, which primarily
originated from religious motives, had since acquired
greater form and shape owing to political and security
considerations.

54

Ibid.

9