h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Canada tibet Committee---Thanks to your support during the year, CTC has moved Tibet forward on Ottawa's foreign policy agenda. The Prime Minister's Office has said that Tibet will be raised with the Chinese government during Mr. Martin's first official visit to China later in the month. We're greatly encouraged by that news, but we're waiting to see whether it proves to be more than a token gesture.

------

There has been considerable media coverage of the Prime Minister's trip to China, much of which has featured concerns over human rights and the Tibet issue.

JTG

Well worth reading:


Here's a link to the latest report on China and Tibet by Human Rights Watch.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/01/13/china9809.htm

Cheers,

Chaiwallah

BTW. Just in case anyone out there reads this thread apart from JtG and me, you might be interested to know that we who support Tibet do occasionally get into action. The response from the officials in the Dublin Chinese Embassy was interesting, to say the least.

Here's a report from Ireland for the last few days.

Ireland and the International Day of
Action for Tenzin Delek Rinpoche:

Tuesday 11th January
Ireland's Prime Minister, An Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, will lead a trade
mission to Beijing and Hong Kong next week (17-21 January). We (TSG Irleand and HH the Dalai Lama's Representative, Mrs.K.Y.Takla ) therefore had face-to-face meetings with three of the most senior officialstravelling with him to brief them and urged Bertie and themselves to raise the case of TDR with the President, Premier and other Chinese Government officials they meet.

Wednesday 12th January
HH the Dalai Lama’s European Representative, Mrs Kesang Takla of Office of Tibet, London, addressed the Historical
Society of Trinity College Dublin, to a capacity student audience.
We encouraged them to join in the Day of Action on Friday and to
establish an active Students for a Free Tibet chapter.

Thursday 13th January
Amnesty International’s annual lecture, given by Harvard Human Rights Professor, Michael Ignatieff, was a public meeting in Trinity College Dublin. Amnesty graciously agreed to give TSG-Ireland’s leaflets on the TDR case to all the members of a packed auditorium..

Simultaneously, the TCD Philosophical Society was holding a debate on
China’s future as an economic super-power, chaired by the Chinese Ambassador, with lead speaker Professor Lin Yueh from the LSE. A student audience of about 60 received TDR leaflets, and the Tibetan issue was raised in the course of the debate in terms of both human rights and the environment.

Friday 14th January
TSG-Ireland members had been asked to telephone the Chinese Embassy (as many times as they can throughout the day) to ask for TDR's death
sentence to be commuted and for him to be released.


Maybe as a result, on Friday, the Chinese Embassy phone-line was jammed with calls, and their answering service unable to receive any more messsages.

Frustrated by this, Chaiwallah made a personal visit to the Chinese Embassy on Friday afternoon, and had a very intensive discussion with the ambassador's personal assistant and interpreter for about an hour. The ambassador's PA was fully aware of the TDR case, and went so far as to agree that the development of genuine "rule of law" was essential for the future of China.

Interestingly, when the subject of the Tibet-China Dialogues was raised, he re-iterated China's insistence that HH the Dalai Lama must acknowledge Taiwan's status as an inalienable part of the PRC. When it was suggested that the status of Taiwan was not HH the Dalai Lama's responsibility, he responded, with a note of anger, that HH the Dalai Lama's actions in congratulating the "so-called President of Taiwan"(his words) on his election, showed that Taiwan is part of HH the Dalai Lama's responsibility. When asked what China would gain by waging a war against an "independent" Taiwan, which would decimate its population and destroy its vibrant economy, he quickly answered, "sovereignty."

As he had taken an active part in the EU-China Human Rights Dialogue during Ireland's Presidency of the EU last year, it was interesting that he considered the EU "ill-informed" on the realities of human rights in China. He also said that dialogue could not be fruitful if both sides could not trust each other, and that we, the EU and other countries, "should learn to trust the Chinese Government!!!"

As the ambassador had boasted in Trinity of China's rapidly increasing internet use, the topic of internet policing was raised and met with the response that the Chinese authorities are only interested in censoring the "evil aspects" of the internet.

On the topic of the environment, ( deforestation, pollution, desertification etc.) he agreed that China was facing major problems, "but we are learning from the mistakes of others."

Cheers,

C \|/

Just want to say to JTG and Chaiwallah that I *do* read these threads with interest and want to thank you both for the regular updates!

Delighted to know that somebody does.

C \|/

BEIJING, China (AP) -- Zhao Ziyang, who was ousted as China's Communist Party leader after sympathizing with the 1989 Tiananmen Square pro-democracy protests and became a symbol of the era's shattered hopes, died Monday after 15 years under house arrest. He was 85.

Unmentionable, I know you are a stout heart. I live in hope that one or two others read this once in a while.

I received an email from Joe at Tibetan Photo Project recently to say that he had been getting a large number of hits from the version of the Tibetan Photo Project Entry, then being Subbed. Evidently, more people read what we've written than we tend to think.

Thanks for the news, Chai. I'll update the HRW link in the library. I must say I admire you for doing what you do. It's very easy to click online petitions (hint to anyone who may be reading); but it takes courage to stand up for what's right in the way that you do.

Yep, still keeping abreast

Aha! Recumbentman, you lurker, you. I thought I sensed you out there somewhere.

Is that from our library, Mudhooks?

The following is the text of a letter I wrote to the Irish Times on Sunday. It was published in full yesterday.

***************************************************************

The prognostications in Saturday’s (Irish Times ) supplement (entitled "Ireland 2025") were, if anything, too complacent regarding our future on a number of fronts. Most civilisations consume themselves into extinction, often abetted by climate change. The likelihood is that “western” civilisation will do so soon. Tragically, “western” now being global, the entire world will suffer.

The key lies with China, where even now our Taoiseach (premier Bertie Ahern) is negotiating Ireland’s slice of the Chinese economic cake. China is in the grip of the largest, and dirtiest industrial revolution since the 19th century. Consuming raw materials at a staggering rate, it is also destroying its environment at an equally alarming speed. With only 7% of the world’s arable land to feed over 20% of the world’s population, China cannot afford to be wasteful. Yet China is losing its arable land at the rate of about one million hectares per annum, to urban and industrial sprawl, and to desertification.

Water supplies are already a problem for much of the country, yet over 80% of all industrial and domestic waste is dumped, untreated into local lakes and rivers. China contains 14 of the world’s 20 most polluted cities. 75% of all China’s industrial energy is derived from coal burning. Not surprisingly, the two commonest causes of death in China are respiratory and gastric diseases resulting from pollution. From this poison chalice, new strains of bird flu are the least we can expect. Nor can we reasonably expect China’s rapidly expanding affluent middle-class to say no to consumerism just as they’re acquiring the taste for it. ( The same can be said for India, not far behind China in all these statistics.) In the last twenty years China’s rich-poor, urban- rural income divide has trebled, while an estimate 400 million landless peasants are moving into the cities in pursuit of a better income.

Meanwhile, gas-guzzling America is running a massive fiscal and trade deficit with China, while more and more western manufacturing is being outsourced to China’s ultra-cheap labour market. If China stalls for any reason, resource shortage, famine, disease, or the increasing but largely unreported worker and rural protests, the whole economic house of cards will collapse, taking us with it. If the toxic industrial engine keeps running unchecked, a global catastrophe is assured.
*******************************************************************

Excellent! Have you thought about sending this in to WTN? This is just the sort of thing they need more of, I'd say.

JTG

Hi JtG,

Recumbentman tells me you'd got the Tibetan Photo Project onto the Front Page. Congratulations. He sent me the link and I had another read. Excellent work.

Cheers,

C \|/

Thanks, Chai. lbclaire did a first-rate job with the Subbing, incorporating several long and cumbersome footnotes that grew out of the Peer Review process very nicely. It's good to see that links to things like the Drepung sponsorship page were left in. It seems that someone is smiling on our humble efforts.

Hi again people!

I just would like to say ... right now, I am still at the stage of just reading and thinking about Tibet because I'd like to find out more. There are several issues at stake here. There's the aspect of the importance of a certain culture and its cultural knowledge and traditions. There's the aspect of the authority of a 'country' over the peoples that live in it. Most countries in the world are shared by different 'peoples' but there's no real 'equality' of those peoples. In many countries you will find a single ethnic group dominating other ethnic groups. You have a single group that will decide what the political and economic priorities and policies should be for all the other groups. And suppose you have a country with one large group and a few very small ones ... then the will of the 'majority' might reflect nothing of the views of the very small minorities ... what kind of rights should the small groups have over their own affairs? One might even ask ... what gives any group of people the right to call itself a specific 'group' ... a culture, a people ... which criteria are to be used to say that an individual person is a member of a specific group? Who gets to decide what the 'interests' or the 'rights' of a specific group should be?

For instance I live in South Africa. In this country there are multiple ethnic groups. Which of these groups deserve recognition as 'cultures' or 'peoples'? Which of these groups deserve 'language rights' or 'cultural rights' or a certain degree of political autonomy? Which of these groups can even be adequately defined as 'groups'? Consider the 'Afrikaners', the group into which I myself would have been officially classified a few years ago. I am a very atypical Afrikaner. I don't share the religion or most of the cultural 'habits' that are considered to define 'Afrikaners'. The only way that I am an 'Afrikaner' is because my genetic heritage is Afrikaans. My skin is white and I speak Afrikaans but my lifestyle, my beliefs, my personal 'culture' distinguishes me from other Afrikaners. Am I still an 'Afrikaner'? Most of the time, I still think I am one.

Then there are people who in the past would have been excluded from being Afrikaners, even though Afrikaans was their language. The so-called 'Coloureds' to a large extent speak Afrikaans and share many cultural elements with the white Afrikaners. Some of them are also Christians like the majority of white Afrikaners but some of them are Muslims. Should they be grouped with white Afrikaners, or separately? Should a division be made on the basis of religion, rather than skin colour? Some people say that no divisions should be made ... but in practice, divisions *are* made ... certain people of their own accord identify themselves with other people and so form 'groups', even if the criteria for group membership seems to be politically incorrect. Many white people *do* feel themselves to belong to groups such as the Afrikaners, as traditionally conceived as excluding non-white Afrikaans speakers. Many non-white Afrikaans speakers feel themselves as belonging to a different group, the 'Coloureds'.

Consider the issue of languages. Right now in the world there are a few 'Big Languages' and thousands of 'Small Languages'. Global Communication favours the Big Languages. It is clear to see that all over the world smaller languages are dwindling and disappearing. Is this a problem? Many people may see this as no problem at all. Some people think that the only way for humans to achieve peace is for all humans to become a single 'people' with no distinctions of language, religion or culture between them. Personally, I think such a thing can never happen. People will never be all alike in all aspects. And even if that were practically possible to achieve ... would it be a good thing? If we are all alike ... why do we need to be many people? It would be as if the World was inhabited by just a single person!

In my own case I think that Language is extremely important. Every language of the world has its own unique history, going right back to the dawn of human language itself. Every language is like a little 'world' of its own. Every language is a key to a certain heritage, a legacy of knowledge. Every bit of knowledge embodied in the writings or oral tales of a specific language, is a small piece of the puzzle of Humanity. This gives every language and its entire heritage a great importance.

Along with language come traditions, culturally-transmitted knowledge and habits. It is my belief that all of this enriches humanity. If the traditions, the knowledge embodied in a particular 'culture' is lost, Humanity itself becomes poorer.

People do not need to perpetuate unchanging cultures forever. Cultures do change, cultures must change. Certain cultural practices and knowledge *do* become obsolete. In any culture whatsoever, certain practices and beliefs can be criticised. But it easily happens that certain bits of knowledge or 'ways' that could still be of supreme value, gets lost. I say that we may change, but should never forget what we used to be, where we came from. We can remember the knowledge, the traditions, and maybe after some time we could once again recognise the value of something we previously rejected. For a time the value of something may not appear clearly, but later it might become very valuable and useful.

In Tibet, the most important issue to me is that the culture and traditions should not be completely destroyed. I do also think that the Tibetans are a clearly-enough defined 'group' to allow them a degree of autonomy over 'themselves'. This becomes the more and more difficult as more and more Chinese people go into Tibet. But as for 'traditional' Tibet, I think the religion, the culture, the traditions, are all extremely valuable to the whole of Humanity. Tibetans may change in response to new situations but that change could happen while still preserving the past. This is part of a much larger issue, as thousands of 'traditional peoples' all over the world find their lifestyles so seriously impacted and disrupted by 'modern peoples' that for all purposes their cultures, their ways of life, are completely destroyed. The old values are rejected, but no new values take their place, and these peoples become the 'waste' of the modern world ... small groups isolated in scattered, poor and decrepit communities, having been beguiled and betrayed by 'modernity', in the process having lost their own past and then finding that they don't have a place in the 'future' either.

Thanks for that. You raise some interesting points.

I live in Canada, as you know, which is also a country of wide diversity. Here, too, there are serious questions of relationship between the dominant cultures: French or English speaking Europeans; indigenous peoples, with their own varied languages and traditions; and a large and diverse immigrant community, with its own needs and expectations. In many ways our own treatment of minorities within the broader culture has been shameful. In many ways it still is, as China is quick to point out. Nevertheless, in this country diversity is seen as a strength, not as a weakness. As much as we denigrate the needs of minorities in the pursuit of our own wealth and security, we still recognise the basic rights of the poor and the disenfranchised to cling to what they have and aspire for what they have lost. That may seem like hypocrisy, and I suppose it is. But it is more a case of people struggling to reconcile the needs, as we perceive them, of daily existence with humanitarian ideals, which, as a part of the international community, we support as the basic rights of all human beings.

That's the crux of the Tibet issue in my opinion. There is an accepted standard of human rights, which include the right to self determination, the freedom to practice religion, and so on. The question of Tibet's ancient history in relation to a China that the Chinese themselves have swept into oblivion is mute. My own motivation for speaking out on behalf of Tibetans is that they are the victims of a cruel and systematic process which robs them of the points of cultural identity you have described and results in the suffering of innocent individuals in ways that cannot be tolerated by civilised people anywhere. To me it is intolerable that young nuns, for example, are imprisoned and tortured for expressing ideals that we take for granted. That they continue to express those ideals at such cost after more than half a century of oppression nearly breaks my heart.

It's true that there are a great many problems in the world, many of which cause at least as much suffering as China's occupation of Tibet. Nevertheless, caring about Tibet does not deplete the capacity to care about other things. Quite the opposite in fact. As I've grown more aware of Tibet, the need to preserve Tibetan culture and the question of basic human rights, I have found myself tuned into all sorts of ideas that might not otherwise have arisen. I've also met some wonderful people.

Marauding PC (sorry, couldn't resist that abbreviation) has put the moral question in clear and human terms. It has in the past been normal for one culture to destroy any other that it met, either violently or by absorption, if it had sufficient clout.

The idea that different cultures could coexist is really quite new. It seems (to me) to depend on a concept of international law, a thing not everybody feels happy with.

Chinese authorities have announced that Tenzin Delek Rinpoche's death sentence has been commuted to life in prison. Many thanks to all who took some part protesting Rinpoche's death sentence.

************

From Students for a Free Tibet:

We are extremely relieved and happy to let you know that today Tenzin Delek Rinpoche's death sentence was canceled. He will not be executed.

The Chinese authorities have said they commuted his sentence to life imprisonment because he has not violated any laws while in prison. We know that they have made this decision because of international pressure and international pressure only, and we are thankful to the hundreds of thousands of people worldwide who spoke out against Tenzin Delek's impending execution. We hope you will take a moment to celebrate this achievement! Together we have helped save the life of a remarkable Tibetan leader.

At the same time, we remain outraged at the detention and treatment of this innocent man and his supporters. In particular, Tenzin Delek's student Tashi Phuntsog was recently released from prison in such terrible condition that he is unable to walk or speak clearly. Two years ago today, Lobsang Dhondup was executed, after an unfair trial. We pledge to continue to take action until Tenzin Delek Rinpoche and all Tibetan political prisoners are free.

There was a time, not so long ago, when the Chinese authorities did whatever they pleased in Tibet. They did not care what the world thought of them and were somewhat untouchable. Now, as they seek to gain international credibility, especially in the time leading up to the 2008 Beijing Olympics, we can influence them more and more and force them to change their ways in Tibet. In fact, we already are.

Change happens because, together, we make it happen. Thank you for helping save Tenzin Delek Rinpoche's life, and please take action below to keep up the pressure to FREE TENZIN!

I've tacked a press report on the Tibetan Photo Project's Meadows Museum in Shreveport, Louisiana, onto the Entry: F1964034.