Talk:Foreign relations of Tibet

message: : do not feed the troll Ran. He is a pro communist china vandal and nationalist.  Me 04:27, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ran, what is your problem? Why are you reverting all my edits? Explain yourself. Stop trolling me. Me 17:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Why do you have the han's picture on the article on Tibet? Put some Tibetan picture. Me 17:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ran, the Troll of Tibet Related Articles

message: This article needs some cleaning up. Certain parts read like opinion or story telling and not up to the standard of factual history
:"In early 1943 Tolstoy continued into China arriving at Lanzhou in June, 1943. The Tibetans were a neutral nation during the war, while China was not. This tends to show that Tibet was autonomous at that time."
Is this Tolstoy opinion, an entry of his journal or the contributor’s own opinion? 
::Neither. This was added by a Wikipedia editor, possibly even me, although I've not looked in the history. It is a true statement as the British and Chinese were unable to negotiate passage for even non-military materials during the war due to objections by the Tibetans, see page 5, Orphans of the Cold War, but is hard to source, as any negative thing is. Basically Tibet did nothing during the war. I have, however, removed the passage. The article's silence on the Tibetan "war effort" should speak loudly enough. Fred Talk 22:07, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "...Tibetan passports, and, again, a US officer in Hong Kong, thus defeating the efforts of the US State Department and the British Foreign Office to deny use of the Tibetan passports, a small victory for the supposedly unsophisticated Tibetans"
Who claim the Tibetans are unsophisticated? (WannabeAmatureHistorian 20:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you asking for a source? Fred Talk 22:07, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Article need cleaning up

message: Article appears to contain statements that appear to support the position of China having legitimite sovereignty over the area claimed by the Nation-State of Tibet.  I will place the appropriate flag on this article.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 06:50, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Tibet is not recognized as an independent state by any other. This article documents relations with other states, even treaties, but none of them resulted in formal recognition. Legitimacy of Chinese sovereignty might be another matter in light of international recognition of a right to self-determination. The degree to which there is recognition of such a right and how that right might be applied to Tibet might be a section of this or some other article on Tibet. Fred Talk 22:17, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Bias/Unbalanced

message: Harrer was not in Tibet 1938 (Nazi German SS expedition to Tibet). I asked for reference, but I know this totally wrong. References to Harrer should be deleted from this paragraph.--Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 20:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harrer 

message: "Outline of Journey and Observation Made by Ilia Tolstoy, Captain, AUS and Brooke Dolan. First Lt., AC," September 1943, is in possession of the CIA. It was assigned the document number IOLR L/P&S/12/4229. It may or may not remain classified. The photographs were published in A Portrait of Lost Tibet,  As the work of employees of the United States government made in the performance of their duties the text would be in the pubic domain if it could be accessed. Fred Talk 22:31, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Tolstoy and Dolan's report

message: This passage from the lede is quite misleading:
The main problem is the statement that Tibet was fracturing in the 20th century. In fact, Tibet was becoming more politically centralized than it had been at any time in recent memory. The connection between Tibet and Beijing was fracturing. An additional problem is the over-emphasis on British agency, at the expense of the Tibetan government, the central Chinese government, and the local Chinese warlords in so-called "inner Tibet". The sentence reads in a confusing way, too, because it seems to imply that the British cared who ruled "inner Tibet" and that they had wanted it to be ruled by a republican government, which didn't even exist before 1912.—Greg Pandatshang (talk) 19:10, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: My thought is that references are appropriate to the British-Russian rivalry over central Asia, The Great Game and to the impact of western imperialism on China during the 19th and 20th century. However the civil war and the Japanese invasion are certainly the central factors which weakened China. Fred Talk 19:33, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's undeniable that British involvement and their invasion in 1904 had an effect on the situation. The problem is the phrase "what the British had wanted". The situation that prevailed at this time was the result of the competing wants of various players, primarily the Dalai Lama's government, the warlords, and, after the mid-1920s, Chiang Kai-shek.—Greg Pandatshang (talk) 19:38, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That passage is referenced to Page 74, Goldstein, Volume 1. It would be helpful to look at that passage, whatever it is. I'm looking... but have boxed that book up. Fred Talk 20:03, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That page is talking about British goals at the Simla talks. It describes why the British did not support the idea of a fully independent Tibet, but instead wanted what "came to be known as the Simla Position: symbolic subordination to China, with extensive autonomy, under the watchful eye of Great Britain". It then goes on to explain why the Tibetan government was willing to accept this compromise at the time in 1914.—Greg Pandatshang (talk) 20:14, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I'm looking at the page on Amazon, a search for "british" brings it up. The British had a trade monopoly and exclusive access and liked it that way. Fred Talk 20:20, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  early 20th century in the introduction 

message: Tibetan foreign relations did not cease immediately after the 17-point agreement was accepted in 1951. As Melvyn Goldstein describes in A History of Modern Tibet, Volume 2 (pg. 412), the old Tibetan government's Foreign Affairs Bureau continued to exist until 1952 or later, when it was merged into the new Tibet Foreign Affairs Department (西藏外事处). Even at that point, Tibet still had an unusual international profile, since a) most province-level entities don't have foreign affairs departments, and b) the new Foreign Affairs Department was jointly run by the Chinese government and by the old Tibetan government. I'm not sure at what point the Tibet Foreign Affairs Department ceased functioning; it may have lasted until 1959, or it may have been eliminated during the 1956-1959 period when PCTAR was becoming more powerful.—Greg Pandatshang (talk) 19:20, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There is also the matter of foreign relations conducted by the Dalai Lama and later the Tibetan Government in exile such as the appeal to the United Nations and the resolution passed there by the General Assembly in 1959. Whatever article they go into, they are certainly significant events which occurred. If not here, where? Fred Talk 19:38, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If the 13th Dalai Lama's government in Tibet could do foreign relations because they had "de facto" control over Tibet, the idea that #14 could conduct foreign relations on behalf of Tibet on the basis of some retroactive "de jure" claim after he relinquished control and left Tibet is... incredible. Essentially, that is a contrarian political argument that the Dalai Lama is the "real" representative of Tibet, despite not being elected &c., and not an argument with a legal basis. The 14th Dalai Lama, even more than his predecessor when he had some power, is not received as a head of state by any recognized government. The 1959 resolution just called for respecting the "fundamental human rights of the Tibetan people", which does not change the political status of Tibet. Quigley (talk) 04:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

text: According to Goldstein (A History of Modern Tibet, Volume 1, pg. 325), there were representatives from China, the British Empire, Nepal, Ladakh, and Bhutan. The Chinese envoy was treated with "a special honor", which enabled him to claim that he had presided over the ceremony.—Greg Pandatshang (talk) 03:38, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  After 1951 

message: To suggest Hale, Christopher. 2003. Himmler's Crusade: The true story of the 1938 Nazi expedition into Tibet. Transworld Publishers. London.  as further reading is a joke, I think? Himmler never made a crusade to Tibet. This sensationalist book is not helpful as further reading and does not fulfil the standards for this section. I replaced the book by proper scientific research. 213.182.68.42 (talk) 23:22, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed Hale and replaced it by Engelhardt

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Foreign relations of Tibet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121030061528/http://www.ltwa.net/library/index.php?option=com_multicategories&view=article&id=170&catid=30%3Anews&Itemid=12 to http://www.ltwa.net/library/index.php?option=com_multicategories&view=article&id=170&catid=30%3Anews&Itemid=12
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:27, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Foreign relations of Tibet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060713233328/http://www.tibet.com/Status/hughrichardson.html to http://www.tibet.com/Status/hughrichardson.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:41, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified