Why China must recall history before replacing Tibet with ‘Xizang’

One can argue that the Chinese are history lovers; they have a recorded history for several millennia (which is not the case of India, where history was usually transmitted in the guru-shishya parampara form); however, since the advent of the Communist Dynasty in 1949, the Mandarins in Beijing seem to have lost this sense of history. There is a simple reason for this: the Communist ideology has to prevail over history.

The Middle Kingdom’s relation with Tibet is an example of the Chinese amnesia about the recent past.

From immemorial times (to use Chinese terminology), the Tibetans have turned to India for their religion, culture, trade, and civilisation in general; Tibetan Buddhism is still today synonymous with the Nalanda tradition. Similarly, Tibetan script has evolved from the Brahmi script, which can’t be included in the Chinese knowledge system.

More from Opinion

Why Trump’s tariffs on India are a colossal mistake Apache induction and Aatmanirbhar Bharat: Striking the right balance in defence modernisation

One could multiply such examples; even politically, Tibet was an independent nation till it was invaded by Mao’s Army in 1950-51.

The fact that Tibet, India, and China sat on an equal footing for six months at the conference table in Simla in 1913–14 is the best proof that the Nationalist regime could not deny Lhasa the right to negotiate a treaty (even if, at the end, it was not ratified by China for unrelated reasons).

Official Erroneous Interpretation

On the first day of her arrival in the Chinese embassy in Delhi, a Chinese official tweeted a threatening message, attacking the Indian media, which did not follow, according to her, the line of the Communist Party: “Recently, we noticed some comments on Xizang-related affairs in some Indian media. Xizang has been part of China since ancient times. Xizang-related affairs are purely China’s internal affairs that brook no foreign interference,” she wrote.

Impact Shorts

View All

Why Trump’s tariffs on India are a colossal mistake

Putin-Trump talks: Can a fragile trust lead to a Ukraine ceasefire?

What is this ‘Xizang’?

It is the name given by Beijing to Tibet. As any colonial power has done in the past, the names of places (and persons) are changed. For Beijing, the name ‘Tibet’ needed to be erased and replaced by a Chinese one.

Then the official tried to make us believe that Communist China has great expertise about the return on earth of the spirit of advanced masters: “Reincarnation of Living Buddhas comes with a set range of rituals and conventions, which has been in existence for several hundred years. The Chinese government pursues policies of freedom of religious belief, including respecting and protecting the reincarnation of Living Buddhas, an institution of succession in Tibetan Buddhism. For the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama, the Panchen Erdeni, and other grand Living Buddhas, a complete set of methods and procedures have been established over the centuries, and the religious rituals and historical conventions as well as the Chinese laws need to be complied with in this process.”

‘Living Buddhas’ is again a Communist invention; reincarnated lamas are generally known as tulkus or Rinpoches (an honorific title meaning ‘precious’) or yantsi, a term literally meaning ‘being born again’ or ‘repeat of existence’; a master takes birth again in the cycle of existence, purportedly to continue his spiritual work started in his previous life.

The Chinese official concluded that “reincarnation of Living Buddhas including the Dalai Lama, must comply with Chinese laws and regulations and follow religious rituals and historical conventions. It is hoped that the media respect China’s core interests and do not provide any platforms for anti-China separatist activities.”

In Tibet, the system of reincarnation was not rigidly codified; it was left to each monastery, college, or school of Tibetan Buddhism to discover their own masters, then enthrone and groom them.

The Panchen Lama is also mentioned in a renamed form, ‘Panchen Erdeni’ by the official. The Panchen Lama is considered the second most important spiritual leader in the Yellow (Geluk) School of Tibetan Buddhism.

The case of the Panchen Lama is interesting as it shows how far Beijing is ready to go to control the ‘reincarnation’ system.

Following the death of the 10th Panchen Lama in 1989, in 1995, the 14th Dalai Lama recognised a young boy, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, as the true incarnation of the 10th incarnation. Three days later, Beijing abducted Gedhun and his family. A few months later, after setting up its own search committee, Beijing selected Gyaltsen Norbu as the ‘real’ Panchen Lama. For the purpose, they used a lottery system known as the Golden Urn, which was extremely rarely used in Tibet…because it is easier to manipulate.

Since 1995, the whereabouts of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima and his family are unknown. Is he still alive? Who knows?

The message of the official of the embassy, however, indicates that China is preparing to select its own 15th Dalai Lama, even against the will of the present one. For this, the Communist leadership will send Gyaltsen Norbu to Lhamo Latso, the holy Lake of Vision; Norbu will have a vision of a boy born in Tibet, and Xinhua will announce the good news.

How the Chinese Communist 15th Dalai Lama will be accepted by the Tibetans and the world is another story.

Just look at the 14th Dalai Lama; he was recently in New York, where 17,000 people gathered in a stadium to offer long-life prayers. Following a knee replacement surgery in June, it was his first major public appearance.

People gathered in the sports arena to fervently pray for the long life of the 89-year-old Buddhist leader, who told them, “I have done my best to benefit others and the Tibetan people.”

Two days later, he had a stopover in Switzerland. In Zurich, he went on the stage at the Hallenstadiony, where he sat on a throne before large Thangka paintings. The stadium was booked to full its capacity of 15,000.

Thinley Chökyi, Representative of the Office of Tibet, Geneva, said in her opening remarks: “May you yet be able to return to Tibet, take your seat on the Lion Throne in the Potala Palace, and offer teachings from there once more.” Watching the videos, the fervour of the Tibetans offering long-life prayers was truly moving.

Around the same time, Gyaltsen Norbu, the Chinese selected Panchen Lama, was travelling in Nagchu City (prefecture) ‘in China’s Xizang Autonomous Region’ (note, ‘China’s Xizang’ in case one forgets where Tibet is).

Before returning to Lhasa, Norbu visited several Tibetan Buddhist monasteries: “he participated in religious services and performed head-touching rituals for monks and believers.”

Xinhua asserted that “he also attended a series of Buddhist and social activities in various localities, including a horse racing festival and a symposium of representatives of the religious circle.”

The point is that everywhere the crowds were minimal, like it has been when he visited some areas of Central Tibet and border areas during the past years, never more than 50 people.

It so happens that during this time, I was working on the role of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Air Force in Tibet; what is striking is that ever since the invasion (called ‘liberation’ by China) of the Roof of the World, the Tibetans have never felt part of the Middle Kingdom, quite on the contrary.

When they started rebelling against the Communist rule, which wanted to impose ‘reforms’ on them (a few years later the Red Guards introduced similar reforms in the Mainland), they had to be ‘pacified’; at that time, many Tibetans were trying to take refuge in the northern districts.

In August 1958, the Central Military Commission ordered the PLA to systematically attack the fleeing Tibetans from the air. By then, the pilots had a very simple way of identifying ‘rebel bandits’: after spotting hundreds of white sheep, “we neared the sheep herds; we’d discover yaks alongside them, as well as scattered tents, and then we could basically conclude that they were rebel bandits,” said a Chinese record quoted by Jianglin Li, a Chinese author based in the United States.

Jianglin quoted an Air Force 25th Division pilot who took part in the bombing: “One time, a buildup of thousands of rebel bandits [read the Tibetans] was surrounded by our troops on the top of Maqin [Amnye Machen] Mountain. At first the army launched a powerful attack on the mountain from four directions, but because the enemy occupied a commanding position and the mountain slopes were precipitous, the attack was not successful, and our troops suffered substantial casualties. The Rebellion Pacification Command Post ordered an immediate deployment of bomber planes to bomb the rebel bandits on Maqin Mountain.”

The Tibetan rebel ‘bandits’ tried to fire on the aircraft with guns, but they experienced “the iron fist of the People’s Air Force. … In one stroke, we annihilated this band of stubbornly resisting rebel bandits.” The PLA Air Force unit is said to have dropped nine 100-kilo bombs on Amnye Machen Mountain, and all of them hit their target.”

Jianglin and some other authors give a number of examples.

One can only suggest that all Chinese officials should read their own reports and history on how Tibet, which was clearly not theirs, was first ‘liberated’ and then brutally ‘pacified’.

The writer is Distinguished Fellow, Centre of Excellence for Himalayan Studies, Shiv Nadar Institution of Eminence (Delhi). Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the writer. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.