Originally posted by
[email protected] 9 2006, 08:49 PM
There is no generally accepted legal basis for China's claim of sovereignty.
The opposite is true: neither the UN nor most governments have ever disputed China's claim to sovereignty over Tibet. Few, if any, have ever recognized Tibet as independent. Even Washington accepts that Tibet is part of China, whatever complaints they may make otherwise.
This isn't a hugely important point; it's just that the first claim in this article is false. Almost all the others are false or misleading as well. Few people lie more than the exiled serfowning theocrats behind the "Free Tibet" campaign.
For why their overall picture is false and their campaign reactionary, I recommend this article (http://www.seeingred.com/Copy/3.1_freetibet.html) by yours truly.
A couple other falsehoods from the article posted here:
By the 17-Point Agreement of 1951 China undertook not to interfere with Tibet's existing system of government and society, but never kept these promises in eastern Tibet and in 1959 reneged on the treaty altogether.
That "existing system of government and society" was brutally exploitive feudalism; most of Tibet's population were serfs. So the crime was making those promises, not breaking them.
Fortunately, eastern Tibet was never covered by the 17-point agreement, since it was never ruled by the Dalai Lama. And after the nobility and religious hierarchy of central Tibet organized an uprising against PRC rule, their serfs were encouraged to divide their land too.
Some 1.2 million Tibetans are estimated to have been killed by the Chinese since 1950.
Estimated only by the Dalai Lama's government-in-exile. They offer no evidence to support this claim.
I did some looking around, once, to try to determine if this number is accurate. I looked on various human-rights and anti-genocide websites - they do not mention this number. Neither does the Tibet Information Network, as far as I can tell. Or Tibetan exile and historian Tsering Shakya, in his book The Dragon in the Land of Snows. Maybe they're all a little embarassed at this exaggerated accusation.
According to Encarta Encyclopedia: "Experts believe that before Chinese Communists began controlling Tibet in the 1950s, the region’s population was declining due to illness, poor pre- and postnatal care, and a sizeable proportion of men becoming celibate monks. It is estimated, however, that the population has nearly doubled since that time, as a result of better health care, increased availability of food, and relative political stability."
China's population-control policies are applied more loosely for Tibetans and other non-Han Chinese nationalities. Encarta Encyclopedia again: "However, women who belong to one of China's national minorities may not face the same level of pressure. In general, government policies allow non-Han peoples more cultural independence and permit them to have larger families." This is one reason that the non-Han Chinese nationalities are a growing part of China's population, today approaching 10%. Not exactly genocide.
Oh, and the ICJ was a CIA-financed Cold War propaganda group. Their report has been shown to be a tissue of lies and unsupported allegations.
Secondary school children are taught all classes in Chinese. Although English is a requirement for most university courses, Tibetan school children cannot learn English unless they forfeit study of their own language. Many children are sent away to China for education, usually for a period of seven years.
Profoundly hypocritical. Before 1959, most Tibetan children didn't go to school at all. The Dalai Lama's schools in exile are run entirely in English.
And this picture of Chinese policy on Tibetan language and culture is distorted. For a more accurate look: Off the Human Rights Watch webpage. (http://www.hrw.org/pubweb/sperlingcont.html)
I could go on. But all these lies by the exiled serfowners are actually kinda beside the point.
Because the larger problem is their masters in Washington, London, etc.
Each year, Free Tibet Campaign holds an awareness and fundraising day to commemorate the anniversary of the invasion and show Tibet, China, Britain and the world that Tibet has not been forgotten.
What are you demanding of Britain? And, by extension, of the other countries where people are campaigning to "Free Tibet"?
The campaign typically demands economic sanctions against China. Economic warfare is a type of intervenion against China - a Third World country which had a powerful revolution. That revolution threw off the domination of Washington, Tokyo, and other centers of finance capital which exploit the whole world - including Chinese working people today.
Some of the progressive gains of that revolution still remain intact. Washington is trying to reverse that, constantly pressing for "freer markets" and a "rule of law" that would make even better conditions for foreign capital to exploit Chinese labor and natural resources.
To demand these bloodsuckers intervene to bring "freedom" to Tibet or anywhere else - the only kind of freedom they'll bring is the freedom to starve.
And economic sanctions aren't automatically the end of it, either. Time and time again, economic warfare leads to shooting warfare.
When the Bush administration took office, it was largely focused on China as a "strategic competitor", aka potential adversary. 9/11 has postponed that and shifted priorities...but not eliminated the potential for conflict.
And anytime any ruling class gears up for war, it always hollers about the atrocities committed by its adversaries. Why do that work for them?
Revolutionaries focus our fire on our own bosses first and most of all. Their puppet regimes and allies, secondarily.
And while it's important to be politically clear on other anti-working-class regimes and not fall into thinking "the enemy of my enemy" is automatically our friend.......we don't campaign against our oppressor's adversaries, either.
What would that accomplish? Public opinion here won't directly affect what China does in Tibet, y'know. It only affects what governments here do....strengthening their hands for hostile moves against China.