Tibet

From: Nagindas Khajuria 

Publication: Asian Voice 

Sent: Tuesday, 20 May, 2008

Subject: The Rape of Tibet

The invasion of Tibet by China in 1950. Was it really "the Rape of Tibet?". I am referring to the article by Mr Gandhi to you (AV, 17 May, P4) on the plight of Tibetans. I do not think so at all.

World Bank economists, Shaohua Chen and Martin Ravallion, estimated that roughly 1.1 billion people were living in extreme poverty in 2001, down from 1.5 billion in 1981. United Nations has long used a complicated statistical standard-income of $1 per day per person, measured at purchasing power parity to define extreme poverty.

China and East Asia accounted for 800 million of those in extreme poverty in 1981. This group, mainly China, managed to reduce this figure to 260 million by 2001. Surely Tibetans would have benefited along with all other Chinese in this area as well as in all it progress and prosperity in every direction: e.g. average GDP growth rate of 6-8% every year for 50 years.

By comparison, India and South Asia accounted for 470 million in extreme poverty in 1981. This group, mainly India, managed to reduce this figure to a still a very high 415 million in extreme poverty by 2001.

Which ideology is better? Capitalism or Communism? In the former, man exploits man, In the latter, it is the other way round: man exploits man. Recent history has proved that none of the two systems are superior to the other. Let us not forget that Russia until recently was the second most powerful country in the world. Now China has proved with their "system of communism" that in many ways they are the most successful country in the world, BUT only to a certain level. In the Human Development Index (HDI) prepared by the U N Development Programme on a scale of 0-1, measured by three key components-longevity, knowledge and income, each measured by several parameters, China still comes 81st and India 126th in descending order among 177 countries. Recent events are beginning to prove that the entire world financial system, as the backbone of capitalism, could be fundamentally flawed.

China's and India's population growth will hamper their progress for generations to come and there is no way they can catch up with the West unless they work together with the West and ensure that the West also progresses and continues to buy their goods and services. In a sense the world is flat now and either everyone grows or every one falls behind. After all, China would not have been given a permanent seat at the Security Council of the UN, if that were not the case.

While it may be true that some Tibetans who want autonomy or independence may be suppressed, the Chinese culture, values and beliefs are as strong, if not stronger, that the Tibetans or the Indians. That is why they have outpaced both the Tibetans as well as the Indians. That is why they are not likely to ethnically cleanse the Tibetans nor invade neighbouring countries because they are wiser than that and also because in any case, the other countries all all protected by the Himalayan mountain range thick impenetrable border. Again, China has a separate Minister in charge of Ethnic Affairs. Which other country has such a minister? 

Some of the factors that has enabled China to succeed so well and so fast are:

The Chinese culture: "the key factor is actually a country's cultural endowments, particularly the degree to which it has internalised the values of hard work, thrift, honesty, patience and tenacity, as well as the degree to which is is open to change, new technology and equality for women" according to economist David Landes, in his book The Wealth and Poverty of Nations". In U N Gender Empowerment Index, the Chinese rank 0.5 in the range of 0-1 while India does not even feature in this Index.

The Chinese values and beliefs: the Chinese believe in the fusion of three great religions: Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism. They account for over 700 million people worldwide. They have believed in this for the past two and half thousand years. In that sense, they are no inferior to the Buddhists of Tibet. Confucianism, rather than a religion, is a set of moral and social values designed to bring the ways of the citizen and governments into harmony with each other.

The five Confucian virtues are benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom and trustworthiness. Instead of God, it has five hierarchical relationships as the prerequisites in a well educated society: ruler to the ruled, son to father, younger brother to elder brother, wife to husband and the only relationship which is equal--friend to friend. The Government may be atheist, but the people are not.

Tao literally translates as the "Way". It implies the Way of Nature whose underlying principle and source of all being is the bond that unites man and nature. Its message is to take no action that runs against nature.

The Chinese economic policy: under the vision of Deng Ziaoping, vice chairman of the CCP, the Chinese Communist Party, from 1976 and again in 1992, China followed an "open door policy" for foreign investment and collaboration as opposed to Tibet that had historically closed its doors to outsiders all along until the Chinese came along and conquered them. The latter opened up the country to the whole wide world and has definitely improved the lives of the Hans, who represent 92% of the Chinese population, as well as all ethnic minorities who represent the remaining 8% including the Tibetans.

One should not forget that the massive Tibetan plateau at an average height of 4500 metres above the sea level, is guarded on all sides by towering mountain ranges: the Himalayas separate Tibet from India, Nepal and Bhutan to the south, the Karakoram from Pakistan to the west and the Kunlun from Xinjiang to the north. The plateau is the birthplace not only of the Indus, Brahmaputra and Sutlej rivers, but also the Yangzi, Mekong Yellow and Salween rivers in the east. Mr Gandhi's article fails to mention the Chinese rivers.

Finally, let us not follow the war mongering language or the divide and rule policy of splitting communities and countries which have shown that working together they could achieve far more than working as two independent countries entangled into an imaginary battle of ideology. The Tibetans are better off within China rather than without China. India also better make best use of the huge market potential of Chinese middle class so close to it by healthy cooperation and competition rather than taking a confrontational attitude without due reflection on its long term objectives, values and beliefs.

Nagin Khajuria