Examination of Witnesses (Questions 120-133)
HIS HOLINESS
THE DALAI
LAMA
22 MAY 2008
Q120 Sandra Osborne: I understand
that you threatened to resign as the leader of the Tibetan Government
in exile if the violence from the protesters did not stop. Why
did you do that, and what would have been the result if you had
resigned?
The Dalai Lama: I cannot stop
individual views or individual action. I myself am totally committed
to the promotion of democracy—freedom of expression. Some
among the Tibetan community in India are very critical of our
approach. Some are also quite critical of me for being too lenient
or soft. Some Tibetans, mainly inside Tibet, also seem very critical
of Buddhism. I do not want to do so, and I do not have the right
to stop these expressions. I cannot say "Shut up!" I
do not want to do that. Therefore, my best weapon is to warn that
if violence becomes out of control my only choice is to resign.
Q121 Mr. Hamilton: Your Holiness,
as China becomes more powerful as an economic force within the
world, and therefore more politically powerful, do you think that
it will become more difficult to reach a peaceful negotiated solution
for genuine autonomy for Tibet and the Tibetan people?
The Dalai Lama: In a way, yes.
Also, on top of that the Government are deliberately promoting
nationalism and Han chauvinism, unlike in previous times. During
the 1950s, Chairman Mao spoke against Han chauvinism and local
nationalism—against both. It was quite well balanced. In
recent decades, they are against only local nationalism; the word
"Han chauvinism" is no longer there. So when there was
some sort of crisis regarding China's relationship with Japan
or France recently there was too much emotion. It is difficult.
At the same time, the last 60 years' history
of the People's Republic of China can be looked at from another
angle. I usually describe Mao's era, Deng Xiaoping's era, Jiang
Zemin's era, and now today Hu Jintao's era. There is change. In
Mao's era, the emphasis moved more to ideology. In Deng Xiaoping's
era, the emphasis was more on economy. In Jiang Zemin's era, according
to the new reality the Communist party is no longer a party for
working-class people. Now a wealthy community is also there. They
are also influential. Therefore, the party should represent all
sections of the community under his idea of "Three Represents".
Then Hu Jintao emphasises harmony. This shows the leadership acting
according to a new reality. So in some way it is quite realistic.
So, economically, China now has diplomacy and
interaction with the outside world and that is very necessary
and important. Chinese leaders really want to be good members
of the whole world. The Chinese have an ambition to become a superpower.
They already have a big population, a big army and military power.
Now, economic power is also there. Fourth is moral authority in
order to become a respected superpower. Moral authority—respect
from the rest of the world—is very important in order to
have a more effective role.
Therefore, from that angle, there is always
the opportunity or chance for the leadership to take a realistic
approach. First of all, it is important, as was initially stated,
to seek truth from fact—that is very important. Fact must
be real fact. Sometimes I doubt whether the leadership really
seeks truth from real fact. One example is that recently—a
few months ago—in the autonomous region of Tibet, the party
secretary expressed that the Tibetan people are so loyal to China's
Communist party that they consider it to be a Buddha. Suppose
that is fact. Policy based on that kind of a fact is very difficult.
Q122 Mr. Eric Illsley: Your Holiness,
on your website you mention the issue of cultural genocide, and
you refer to the fact that two thirds of Tibetan people now speak
Chinese, and that unintentionally—or perhaps intentionally—China
is now taking over much of that Tibetan culture. That policy has
gone on for many years. How long is it likely to be before that
two thirds becomes a total encroachment on Tibetan culture?
The Dalai Lama: One example is
that, at present, the population of the capital Lhasa is 300,000,
according to recent information. Two thirds are Han Chinese. Therefore,
in Lhasa, Tibetans have already become a minority. So, in their
daily life, Chinese language is more important and useful than
the Tibetan language. Because of the whole atmosphere, their way
of thinking and way of life is changing—even the food style
is changing. That is one example.
On the overall population in the autonomous
region of Tibet, I do not know—we need more research and
investigation. It may be half a million, but I do not know how
many Chinese there are. Last year, I heard some information, but
I do not know whether it was reliable or not. That information
was leaked from a military source in Lhasa. According to it, after
the Olympics, 1 million Chinese are going to settle in the autonomous
region of Tibet. So far, the Chinese population in the Tibetan
community has been manageable—it is okay. Sometimes I jokingly
say that our Chinese brothers and sisters can provide us with
good food, and we Tibetans can provide them with spiritual food.
That is good. There are many Buddhists among the Chinese. Those
Chinese who respect the Tibetan culture and Buddhism are okay,
and they are welcome if the number is okay, but it is better for
those who really feel that Tibetans are dirty and smell bad to
go.
All that will depend on the policy. The national
trend is that if there is a good opportunity, more and more Chinese,
voluntarily or not, will come to Tibet to work and make money.
Such national trends are not that dangerous, but on top of that,
officials deliberately, to control the Tibetan community, say
that Tibetans in Tibet should be an insignificant minority. Inner
Mongolia has the same autonomous region status as Tibet. The local
population is around 4 million, but there are more than 20 million
Chinese. Therefore, discounting whether it is intentional or unintentional,
some kind of cultural genocide is taking place.
One method that is intentional is the restriction
on study in Tibet, particularly of the religious word, and in
monasteries and nunneries on political education. That is very
serious. They intensified political study in the monasteries and
nunneries. Those are intentional means. Unintentional means refers
simply to the fact that the population is overwhelmed by Han Chinese.
It must depend on the policy.
Q123 Sir John Stanley: Your Holiness,
about 18 months ago, some members of the Committee were allowed
by the Chinese authorities to do what they have always denied
you—to visit Tibet. I should be grateful if you could tell
us whether you think there is any possibility that the Chinese
authorities will in future lift their ban on your going to Tibet?
The Dalai Lama: I think possibly,
certainly. Since direct contact was renewed in 2002, there have
been six round-table talks, but the Chinese Government never announced
them. After a meeting, some foreign journalist asked about it
and the Foreign Ministry spokesman spoke of some trusted or close
friend of the Dalai Lama being in China casually, so a casual
meeting was held—that kind of response.
However, the Chinese Government officially announced
the recent meeting, and in reality the initiative came from the
Chinese side through private channels, so we responded immediately.
Not only did the Government announce it publicly, but President
Hu Jintao acknowledged it publicly. That acknowledgment was also
in the Chinese Xinhua news for the Chinese domestic readership.
Then the President also expressed his seriousness about the talks. The
time and date of those seventh formal round-table talks is now
fixed for the second week of next month. These are new developments,
unlike previous events. Therefore, the ban may be lifted one day.
Q124 Sir John Stanley: Your Holiness,
you just referred to the recent meeting between your representatives
and officials of the Chinese Government, and you believe that
there are some grounds for optimism that that might produce a
change of policy towards the people of Tibet. However, there is
also the possibility—I wonder whether you consider this
to have any substance—that the current talks that have been
initiated by the Chinese Government are simply a public relations
exercise to try to quieten the issue on the world scene until
the Olympic games are over. Do you believe that that is the case?
The Dalai Lama: Yes, it is possible.
There are two possibilities. One is simply to show the outside
world that there is a meeting, but then show no more serious interest
after the Olympics. Hopefully, the large-scale crisis in all different
sorts of areas, mainly outside the autonomous region of Tibet,
will raise big questions.
Then there is the possibility of looking more
carefully at the situation. I think I already mentioned the possibility
of looking at a deeper level at what has caused this, while the
Government are pouring in billions of Chinese dollars. There is
certainly a lot of construction and development. In spite of that,
much resentment comes from the Tibetan side. Why? This is a big
question. It brings an entire review of the policy of the past
50 or 60 years regarding minorities. There is a real possibility
that reality and a realistic approach will be accepted. Then I
think the problem could be solved, particularly given President
Hu Jintao's emphasis on building a harmonious society. We fully
support and agree with that, but harmony must come from trust—trust
very much based on equality and mutual respect. So, for various
reasons, I think that there is a possibility to accept the reality,
and accordingly, a more realistic approach may start.
Here I think that the international community
also has an important role to play in reminding our Chinese brothers
and sisters. After all, a solution must be found between the Chinese
and the Tibetans—no one else. The support of the Chinese
people is essential. Some writers and intellectuals have already
written very objective assessments and articles. That is a really
hopeful sign. Unfortunately, however, after this crisis, many
ordinary Chinese people have got the impression that Tibetans
are anti-Han Chinese. It is not the case.
We have always respected our Han brothers and
sisters. I am Buddhist. Whenever I give Buddhist teachings to
Chinese Buddhists, I always make a salutation to them, because
Buddhism reached Tibet in about the seventh century, but it reached
China about three centuries earlier. From that viewpoint, our
Chinese Buddhist brothers are the senior students of Buddha, and
we are the junior students. So we have a moral obligation to respect
them. I always make salutations at the beginning of teaching.
It is also a little joke or teasing for them, because as far as
knowledge is concerned, the junior student may be a little better.
The urgent thing is to eliminate this baseless
impression among our Chinese brothers and sisters. So I suggested
when I was in America, and also just this morning when I met some
Tibetans, and in Germany when I met some Chinese people, that
the time had come to create Sino-Tibetan friendship groups. That
is very important. The Government have denounced me. They consider
me almost to be a demon or wolf. Okay, no problem! Still I am
a human being. But if millions of Chinese really feel that the
Dalai Lama is something like a demon, I feel a little sad.
Q125 Mr. Hamilton: My colleague,
Sir John Stanley, mentioned our recent visit to Tibet, to Lhasa,
during which we went to Tsedang and the Sera monastery. While
we were there, it became evident that some of the guides showing
us around were great admirers of yourself, but were too frightened
to say anything, which was a source of great sadness. I am sure
that you have reflected on that already. My question refers to
your commitment to non-violence, which we all know about, and
your middle way of autonomy, but not independence, for Tibet.
Do you think that the violence that we saw in March in Lhasa shows
that some Tibetans do not agree with your middle way and non-violent
approach?
The Dalai Lama: Yes. Some Tibetans
outside and inside Tibet really are critical of our approach.
The longer it takes before we get any concrete results, the more
frustration increases. So, there is now some direct criticism
towards me. That is understandable. Initially, I had plenty of
reasons to argue with them, but now they say that there is no
improvement and no concrete response from the Chinese Government,
so my reasons become weaker. So, I think the Dalai Lama's popularity
among Tibetans may be now reduced. Okay, no problem. I am already
in a position of semi-retirement. Since 2001, we have an elected
political leadership. Now, if these complicated politics carry
on by themselves, I can retire completely. My lifelong commitment
is the promotion of human value, with no national boundary, and
the promotion of religious harmony, also with no national boundary.
I am fully committed to those two things until my death. So, when
I completely retire from the political or national struggle, that
will give me more time and energy to dedicate to these two fields.
Q126 Mr. Moss: Your Holiness, it
would seem that, despite what I might call your new claims for
autonomy for Tibet, the Chinese authorities still believe that
your real agenda is independence. They cite in evidence the fact
that you have said in the past that you want to expel the Han
Chinese and the military from Tibet, and the fact that, at one
time, your claims for territorial integrity embraced about a quarter
of the land mass of China. Do you now believe that Tibet is an
inalienable part of China?
The Dalai Lama: I think the world knows
that we are not seeking independence. Sometimes, I jokingly tell
people that both sides have some mantra or recitation. I say,
"We are not seeking independence, we are not seeking independence."
That is my recitation. I think I have said it a thousand times.
The Chinese say, "Tibet is part of China, Tibet is part of
China." That is their recitation. So, just mere recitations
are not very effective. So, we have to work. I am a Buddhist monk.
In all my contact, what I really feel, I express. I have no interest
in, and do not practise, saying something and keeping in mind
something different. Right from the beginning, when the middle
way approach started, some of my own colleagues said, "Oh,
this is too honest. Better to demand something higher and then,
through talks, to come down." I opposed that. No, that is
not good; that is hypocrisy. It is better to say what we really
want; to tell them clearly what we want—no more, no less.
Make that clear—that is my approach. However, if I am a
type of demon, then maybe it is possible to say something and
have two faces, or three or four faces. People should investigate.
They should check, that is all.
So the Chinese accuse us of wanting a greater
Tibet, but we on our side have never said that. All Tibetan ethnic
groups in different areas have the same culture, are the same
Tibetans, have the same Buddhist faith, and speak basically the
same language, although of course there are different dialects.
So the threat to their culture, their religious faith faces all
those areas. That is why there is now this crisis. Expressed clearly,
Tibetans are concerned about their own culture and rights. The
Chinese constitution also recognises those different Tibetan ethnic
groups, in different areas. So the constitution arranges autonomous
regions, autonomous prefectures, autonomous districts and autonomous
counties. The constitution accepted the right of self-rule, recognising
different ethnic groups with their own different cultures.
I always describe myself not as a ruler of Tibet,
just as the free spokesman for 6 million Tibetan people. Since
they trust me, and all are facing a similar problem, we have to
speak on behalf of those people. The Chinese say that we have
the idea of a greater Tibet and after serious discussion the detailed
proposals will come. We are simply showing them our real concern
for the preservation of Tibetan culture and Tibetan Buddhism.
Actually, as I mentioned earlier, among the
Chinese there are many Buddhists. Therefore, the preservation
of Tibetan Buddhism is important for the interest of the People's
Republic of China as a whole. After all, we are not seeking separation.
Tibetans' rich cultural heritage and Buddhist tradition enrich
the culture and religious tradition of the People's Republic of
China.
Recently I met a Chinese group in America. One
Chinese reporter asked me this question about seeking independence
and I asked her, "Where do we state that? When did we state
it?" No answer. How can we expel all the Chinese? Even before
1950 there were a few Chinese in Tibet, and we always considered
them good traders, and good brothers.
Q127 Mr. Moss: Can I follow up by
asking what, in your model of autonomy, is the separation of responsibilities
for governance? What responsibilities do you see the Chinese retaining
within the autonomous region?
The Dalai Lama: Defence and foreign
affairs should be handled by central Government. Culture, education,
the environment and the economy, essentially, the Tibetans can
handle better, because they have fuller knowledge. In those fields,
Tibetans should have the authority.
Q128 Chairman: Can I take up something
that you just said about preserving Tibetan culture? Tibet has
changed a great deal in the past 50 years. There has been a lot
of investment in roads and different kinds of buildings. There
has also been the migration to which you referred. One of the
Chinese Government's arguments is that the old Tibet was feudal,
and that a return to the past would bring back the old social
structures. What is your response?
The Dalai Lama: As early as 1952,
soon after I took responsibility, I started a reform committee,
which already carried a programme of reform. Then, of course,
in 1954, I went to mainland China. It was a very happy moment.
Then, in 1956, I went to India. Soon after, the crisis started,
in early 1956. After 1959—after our Administration went
into political asylum in India—we started at once to work
for democratisation. Since 2001, as I mentioned earlier, we already
have elected political leadership.
Also, in 1963, we made a draft constitution
for the future of Tibet. One clause mentioned that the Dalai Lama's
power could be abolished by a two-thirds majority of the people's
deputies. As far as the future is concerned, in 1992 I made a
clear official public statement that when the day came to return
to Tibet with a certain degree of freedom, I would hand over all
my legitimate authority. The Tibetan establishment outside Tibet,
including the elected political leadership, has no right to ask
for certain privileges. All functions should be carried by Tibetans
who are already working there. Not a single Tibetan dreams of
the restoration of the old system.
Q129 Chairman: Thank you. We are
very short of time. Can I ask you quickly about the Olympics?
You have said that you are against a boycott of the Olympics.
You have also said that you did not call for the British Prime
Minister not to attend the Olympic games. Are there any circumstances
in which your attitude to the Olympic games and to attendance
would change?
The Dalai Lama: No change. Tibetan
issues and the Olympics are two separate things. I fully supported
the Olympics from the beginning, because they provide a connection
with 1.3 billion of humanity, particularly our Han Chinese brothers
and sisters, who are proud of the Olympics. We must respect their
wishes and their feelings. The Chinese people still got the impression
that the Dalai Lama and the Tibetans were against the Olympics,
so there was much irritation and emotion, but there has been no
change.
Q130 Mr. Horam: May I return to your
meeting tomorrow with our Prime Minister, Gordon Brown—
The Dalai Lama: Okay. Another
opportunity to seek your advice.
Mr. Horam: Exactly, and we would be very
glad to give it. You must conduct the meeting exactly as you wish,
but we would be happy to give you advice.
When you came here and Tony Blair was Prime
Minister, he received you at No. 10 Downing Street, and when you
went to America last year, President Bush received you in the
White House. Do you think that Gordon Brown should receive you
at No. 10 Downing Street in your political capacity?
The Dalai Lama: For me there is
no difference. As long as there is a meeting and we can talk,
that is important. The venue does not matter. My first meeting
with President Clinton, and perhaps also the second, was a drop-in.
While I met Vice-President Al Gore, the President dropped in.
That does not matter. I do not care. When I meet a person, I do
not care about their status or background. It does not matter
whether they are a President, Prime Minister or beggar. There
is no difference. I always meet people on the level of human beings.
You are parliamentarians and politicians—
Mr. Horam: We are human beings too.
The Dalai Lama: My firm belief
is that whatever the issue, it is of first importance to think
and talk on the level of human beings. We must understand other
people's interests, rights and points of view.
Q131 Mr. Horam: None the less, the
fact is that such things matter in the international political
context, as we all know. Small things matter. They may not matter
to you, but they matter to the Chinese and the British. May I
ask you, your Holiness, whether you think that the British Government
is doing enough to help you in your human rights struggle?
The Dalai Lama: Not enough. Even
the Indian Government is not doing enough. But how much can they
do? That is another big question. There are limits, even for the
European Union and the United States. In every field there is
a Buddhist concept of interdependency. There is no absolute identity.
Everything is interdependent, so there is support, but in spite
of genuine concern there is a limit on action, and it depends
on many other factors. That is a fact.
Q132 Mr. Horam: You made an important
point in your previous remarks when you said that a country's
moral authority was important, and that as China grew in economic
and political power, it should remember that moral authority is
a very important part of international power. Do you think that
the Chinese authorities understand that point?
The Dalai Lama: Not now. Perhaps
after five or 10 years, the new generation will be more educated.
Q133 Mr. Horam: But not now. You
do not think that they understand it now?
The Dalai Lama: That is difficult
to say. The best thing is to wait and see.
Chairman: Thank you, your Holiness. We
have found this a very valuable session. We are very grateful
to you and your colleagues for coming before us today.
May I ask the members of the public to remain
in their seats so that his Holiness can leave with his colleagues
and then we will clear the room afterwards. May I thank you all
for your interest and for coming today.
The Dalai Lama: Thank you very
much.
|
