Monday, March 24, 2008

Tibet


As many of you may know, history is in the making in Tibet. A huge movement for the secession of Tibet from China, with the Dalai Lama at its head, is currently protesting vigorously for the freedom of Tibet. China has replied to the peaceful protests with police and military force, trying to "put down" the rebellion and maintain a state of order.

Unfortunately, the unfolding events are difficult to get information on, due to China's control of its news sources. China has been blocking news reports referencing the conflicts from CNN and other non-Chinese stations from being viewed by its citizens. There has been a large amount of conflicting information coming from the area, where international news sources have not been allowed. There have been between 10 and 100 protestors killed (the Chinese government claims 10, members of the Free Tibet movement claim 100), and between 12 and 48 people were arrested at one time for blocking the entrance to a United Nations building (again, the discrepancies are from different numbers reported by the government and the protestors). Which numbers are right? Maybe neither. It's probable that both sides have either exaggerated or downplayed the numbers, but the true statistic definitely lies between the two.

What is this conflict about, you may ask? I asked the same thing when I first heard about it. Here's a simplified version of the issue, which of course is quite complex: The Tibetans want to be an independent state. The area is currently under Chinese control, and the residents say that the Chinese government has been oppressive and has violated their human rights. The government, of course, claims it is merely trying to maintain order and keep the peace. But this conflict's roots are not deep, and the movement is young. This is because Tibet was a fully independent nation up until the 1900's. China claimed Tibet as its own in 1914, saying that they were unified since they had both been under Mongol control in the past and therefore were homogenous. Tibet ignored the claim and continued to rule itself, until 1949 when China invaded. So it is not a surprise that the Tibetan people are chafing under Chinese rule, as they do not have the same interests and are a vastly different culture.

This issue is especially important now, as China is hosting the 2008 Olympics. It is necessary for the country to have a good international opinion. Also, protestors have threatened to interfere with events such as the running of the torch if China does not agree to go into talks with the Dalai Lama. This rebellion has cast a shadow over the Games, and it is in China's best interest to either come to terms with the protestors or beat them into line before the Games begin.

It is the spirit of America to support rebellion and popular opinion. Our nation was born in a bloody war, seperating from a government that it deemed oppressive and against its interests. If a group of people is fighting the same cause that we fought over 200 years ago, isn't it right to give them our support?
Support for the protestors can also be born from merely having sympathy for fellow people of the world. China is guilty of huge amounts of human rights violations, no matter whose statistics you go by. They rule with an iron fist and control countless aspects of their people's lives, all in the interest of the country. But shouldn't the real interest of a government be to protect and serve its citizens, not to improve the country's wealth and power at any cost?

If you support the people of Tibet, the least that you can do is take a few seconds and sign the following petition. Broad international pressure is required to make the Chinese government act humanely, and that pressure can be administered by a large amount of ordinary people like you and me.

If you support the Chinese government, you don't have to so anything. Because if the world just sits by and watches, China will brutally force the Tibetans back into compliance like it has so many other discontented groups of citizens in the past.

0 comments: