| Home |
| China |
| News |
| Finance |
| Technology&Science; |
| Travel |
| Entertainment |
| Comment |
| US |
| News |
| Finance&Technology; |
| Entertainment |
| Comment |
| World |
| News |
| Life |
| Comment |
| Video |
| News |
| Life |
|
| Search |
All Rights Reserved
Userful Links
[UPI Asia]
[Reuters]
[Washington Post]
[CNN]
[China Free Press]
[CPJ]
[RSF]
[WPFC ]
[CECC]
[China Digital Times]
[EastSouth..Blog]
[France24]
Userful Links
[UPI Asia]
[Reuters]
[Washington Post]
[CNN]
[China Free Press]
[CPJ]
[RSF]
[WPFC ]
[CECC]
[China Digital Times]
[EastSouth..Blog]
[France24]
by Wang Lixiong This essay was written in January 2007. This is not to say that he is prophetic, but that the facts speak for themselves: "Beijing sees the talks as an end in themselves. They do not need any resolution, and do not want any resolution, just the process is enough. From the start, their objective was to prolong the process as long as possible." In 2000, when I met Lodi Gyari in the United States, he asked me what I thought about the possibility of Tibet and China resuming dialogue. I expressed pessimism. I said that face-to-face talks are not so simple, first there must be an agreed agenda, what are you trying to achieve, and can this objective be achieved? If the Beijing side is in no position to make any concessions, then it is clear that the talks will be for talking's sake and reach a dead end. Because I don't see the Communist Party's intention or ability to make concessions, I don't believe that the basic prerequisites for fruitful dialogue exist. But subsequent developments proved me wrong. The dialogue resumed, and are into their fifth round. But the outcome is just as I suspected. Beijing has made no concessions, and will not make any concessions. When I predicted that the talks would not even begin, I was mistakenly believing that the intention of both sides would be to resolve the outstanding problems. The Tibet side of course has this hope. What I was not anticipating is that Beijing sees the talks as an end in themselves. They do not need any resolution, and do not want any resolution, just the process is enough. From the start, their objective was to prolong the process as long as possible. This is a clever strategy. It can delay more sanctions from the international community, and quiet the calls from other countries accusing China of refusing to even talk. Aren't we talking now? We just have not reached a consensus. And this consensus will never be reached. Round after round of talks, on the surface things look much better than before, I listen to whatever you have to say, but we don't reach any agreement on concrete action. In any case Tibet is in our possession, talking once or twice a year is no skin off our backs, we can talk endlessly. What is not endless is the Dalai Lama's lifespan and the Tibetan people's patience. I believe that this is the present state of affairs in the Tibet-China talks. The Tibetan side should have no illusions. Under these circumstances, except for time passing, these talks will accomplish nothing. The old cliche "Tibetans will eventually lose hope" may finally come true under these circumstances. But if you ask me if talking is better than not talking, I say that talking is better because there is always the possibility that sudden political change could take place in China. Although there are no overt signs of this at present, history often surpasses our expectations. At least if the Tibetan side keeps talking it will maintain the moral high ground in the eyes of the international community, and preserve for Tibet's future the possibility of a justly deserved potential. Just as hope should never all be placed on one pillar only, other options should always be explored. What Beijing should note clearly is that the strategy it is utilizing toward Tibet is exactly the one that Taiwan is using toward it. Taiwan can continue delaying any substantive resolution to their talks until its independence is a de facto reality. What Beijing does not like being done to it in its talks with Taiwan, it conversely should not do to Tibet in its talks with them. Beijing January 2007 http://canyu.org/n3999c10.aspx © Copyright 2008 by Boxun News Top of Page |
|
|