Today I would like to discuss the visits that my colleague, Kelsang Gyaltsen and I made to China and Tibet in September 2002 and May-June 2003. However, I do not intend to address the policy aspect of our dialogue with China.
His Holiness the Dalai Lama has very clearly enunciated the details of his Middle Way approach. This is not only the approach that he has personally adopted, but one which the Tibet leadership, including the democratically elected Parliament-in-Exile, has supported formally after intense deliberations.
The responsibility given to Kelsang Gyaltsen and me has been to reach out to the Chinese leadership and to help prepare the groundwork for negotiations under the framework of the Middle Way approach. Given the profound respect that we have for His Holiness, it can be assumed that when instructed to carry out certain responsibilities we would do so even if we did not fully subscribe to the idea behind them. But in this situation it is critical to note that we both feel fully committed to the plan that we have been asked to implement ? and it is our belief that the Middle Way approach offers the Tibetan people the best opportunity to prosper economically and culturally at this time.
For years the efforts of the Tibetan leadership have focused on beginning a dialogue that would lead to negotiations. Thus, our visits to China and Tibet were the result of many years of well planned and thoroughly discussed efforts in which His Holiness played a lead role. Some people may have suspected that we were able to make these visits because the Chinese summoned us as part of some sort of public relations exercise. But this is definitely not the case. The successes we have begun to enjoy are the result of many years of deliberation steps taken on our part, strengthened by the tremendous support we are privileged to enjoy from the international community.
Even before reaching out to the Chinese leadership, we knew we had to intensify our outreach to the international community. The Chinese call this ‘internationalisation’ of the issue of Tibet because they would like us have minimal leverage. But we strongly believe that if we are to succeed in our dealings with the Chinese leadership, we must capitalise on our strengths ? and our appeal to the international community, at least on the moral level, is definitely one of our strengths. Thus, we would not be in our current position if we had not been able to garner the support we have achieved from governments, non-governmental organisations and individuals from around the world.
Support for our efforts has grown gradually over the years, particularly in the United States, and it definitely reached new levels under President Bill Clinton’s administration. During the 1990s, we were able to establish direct, but totally confidential, relations with the Chinese authorities and we actually had three rounds of secret meetings. These efforts culminated in President Bill Clinton’s summit with President Jiang Zemin in Beijing in 1998. Unfortunately, right after this the Chinese leadership totally shut us of any dialogue for reasons we still do not know. It took us years and a tremendous amount of effort to re-establish these channels.
We believe that our two recent visits to China and Tibet once again represent an important step forward and if we stay on course there is possibility for real progress towards negotiations. We are therefore working very hard to see that this process is not derailed.
Over the course of our ancient relations with China, and particularly our more recent experiences with the present-day People’s Republic of China, we have made mistakes. We must learn from these mistakes and proceed with great wisdom and caution. After all, this is about the future of a nation and its people. Therefore, even though each step we take may not be great leap forward, we want each little step to be in the right direction.
As for the current mood in Beijing, I can personally attest to the great changes that have taken place over the last 20 years. I was a part of the high-level delegations that His Holiness sent to China in 1982 and 1984. Back then, the Chinese leadership was very arrogant and chauvinistic and the same time quite insecure. This time it was much more confident and the mood was much more relaxed. Of course, by our second visit the 15th Party Congress was over, the National People’s Congress had elected a new government, and the Party had elected new leaders. We were therefore dealing with people who were relatively secure in their positions. We also found that the leaders were much more willing to listen to our views, unlike in the early 1980s when we were not even given the opportunity to express them. Then they would lecture us and read out prepared statements and get up and say it was time to have dinner. On our recent trips we were able to make our position very clear to the Chinese Government.
Of course the Chinese leadership has not changed its principle position on Tibet. For example, they are still imposing certain preconditions. They are saying that His Holiness must accept that Tibet is an inseparable part of the People’s Republic of China and they continue to raise the issue of Taiwan. The issue of Taiwan makes them visibly tense and they forcefully reiterated that His Holiness must accept Taiwan as a province of China. We, however, refused to be dragged into a discussion on this. His Holiness believes that a special relationship exists between the Tibetan and Taiwanese people and that it would not be proper or moral to make judgements or statements concerning Taiwan’s future.
Before our first trip we had detailed communication with the Chinese leadership expressing what we see as important substantive issues. But during our visits we deliberately did not raise these issues because we believe that they must be resolved in formal negotiations. The Chinese knew that we were not taking up such issues by choice. So, during our second trip when there was an opportunity to discuss certain key issues, we chose not to pursue it. We did not want to be cornered into making hasty statements or decisions that could interfere with the agenda for formal negotiations.
It is important to note here that our visits do not represent the start of actual negotiations. We have been given the specific task by His Holiness and the Kalon Tripa to build a bridge for direct relations and to lay the foundation for real negotiations. Are our visits a part of the negotiation process? Of course, they are a critical part of the process. But a distinction must be drawn between preparatory dialogue and negotiations. When the actual time comes, a formal negotiating team will be appointed by His Holiness in consultation with the Kalon Tripa and an agenda will be pursued with a final product as the goal.
One question that has been raised is whether our talks have focused on the return of His Holiness. Ultimately direct participation by His Holiness in this process is critical, but this has not been the only issue on our agenda. His Holiness has long stressed that the issue is not about him and that we should not focused on him during our talks. Nevertheless, on a practical level he is totally inseparable from the issue. So we did not discuss His Holiness in the context of developing confidence-building measures. For example we suggested to the Chinese Government that it would build confidence if they were to lift restrictions on possessing photographs of His Holiness, even though this was not our agenda and we made it clear that the issue of His Holiness’s image was an issue for which we had no instructions. Nevertheless like other issues involving His Holiness even this one is deeply symbolic and carries much meaning for the Tibetan people.
We have tried to visit Tibetan areas on each of our trips. We have done this not for fact-finding purposes, but to send a message to the Tibetan people. The second time we went was at the peak of the SARS virus. So initially it was not possible for us to visit a Tibetan area. But at the last moment we were informed that the Chinese province of Yunnan was SARS free. In the northern part of this province, in what was part of the traditional Tibetan province of Kham, there is an autonomous prefecture which we Tibetans call Gyalthang. We immediately got in touch with our Chinese counterparts and they agreed to our visit to Gyalthang. We hope to visit more areas in Tibet on our future visits.
We make important distinctions between the meetings that we have in Beijing and those that we have in the Tibetan areas. For example, when we went to Lhasa on our first visit, we met with almost all the senior Tibetan leaders, but we did not engage in any serious discussions with them. Our issue is not about differences between Tibetans from inside and outside Tibet and we want to ensure that no artificial divisions are made between us. We did share with them the purpose and goals of our trip, but we did so because it concerns their future too. For example when we were speaking to senior Tibetan cadres and party members in Yunnan, we told them how we were going to raise our concerns about allowing the image of His Holiness to be displayed. In the presence of the Chinese officials, we said, “As Party members you may be loyal to your Party, but we have no doubts that you are also proud of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. As a Tibetan you must be proud of this fellow Tibetan who has today become one of the world’s greatest leaders. But today you cannot have his image. That’s not fair. We believe that you can be a good Tibetan at the same time that you can be a good Party member. But right now every one of you is suspected of disloyalty.” When we made this statement and looked around the room, we could see that some of the Tibetans felt really excited. Others looked cautious.
The point is that we are trying to engage the Tibetans inside Tibet and make them understand that our goal is to empower them. They are subjected to considerable Chinese propaganda that suggests that our goal is to have the Tibetan Government-in-Exile take over once His Holiness returns. This is ludicrous as His Holiness has stated time and time again that he has no intention of imposing the political hierarchy in exile on Tibetans inside Tibet. Nevertheless, we have to be constantly vigilant in reassuring the Tibetans that our role is to support them, not to overtake them.
Another goal of ours on these trips was to visit important Buddhist shrines. In China there is a growing awareness about Buddhism, particularly Tibetan Buddhism. We believe that in Buddhism there is a commonality between the Tibetan and Chinese people. We also believe that the Buddhist Association in China could provide an important platform for our future relations. Furthermore, His holiness has made it clear that under his plan we will co-exist with the Chinese people. We must therefore do all we can to build bridges and understand where they are coming from.
As for our current status, we have communicated to the Chinese our desire to return for more talks. We do not know exactly when this will happen, but we hope it will be soon. We do not know that the Chinese were not happy with His Holiness’ last visit to the United States. Of course, this did not surprise us. Not only did His Holiness come to the United States to meet President George W. Bush, he also personally asked the President to continue to press the Chinese leaders to begin negotiations with us. Still, we do not believe this should be an impediment to future progress.
This process of working towards negotiations involves a tremendous amount of work and time, so we should not think that the issue can be resolved after a few visits. Furthermore, we are dealing with the Chinese leadership who could change its policy for no apparent reason and shut us out, as they have done in the past.
However, on the whole I am optimistic that progress will continue to be made. Not only do we have such great support from the international community, we Tibetans are also speaking in unified voice. In the past Kelsang Gyaltsen and I reported directly to His Holiness, now we also report to the Kalon Tripa, Professor Samdhong Rinpoche, who is elected by the people. He has always given us his full support and has given us much encouragement and guidance.
I thank you for your continued interest, support and efforts on behalf of the Tibetan people.