Beijing Is DOOMED
DOOMSAYER OF DOOM DOOMA HINTS AT MAO ZEDONG’S DOWNFALL
I say, “Mao Zedong Lives” for his Occupation of Tibet survives apart from his Single-Party governance of China that he has put in place shaping lives of millions of people.
I am Witness to his Failure in 1971 when he failed to attack India to abort Liberation of Bangladesh War. He was too busy plotting the murder of his Defence Secretary and purging top-ranking officials of People’s Liberation Army. I am Witness to his Success in Vietnam War when he outmaneuvered Nixon-Kissinger who deserve equal credit for their Vietnam Treason.
Mao Zedong Lives. Red China is still in Tibet. At this moment, Mao Zedong’s Communist Party appears to be invincible. However, I visualize Mao Zedong as Queen of Babylon whose Downfall is Revealed in The New Testament Book ‘REVELATION, Chapter 18, Verses 1-24. Mao Zedong’s Evil Red Empire awaits the Fate of Babylon revealed by Prophet John. Mao Zedong’s Babylon is Doomed. No One on Earth can avert this Calamity, Disaster, and Catastrophe that humbles Mao Zedong.
Ann Arbor, MI 48104-4162 USA
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE
THE NATIONAL INTEREST BLOG:
China’s Biggest History “What-If”: If Mao Zedong Died in 1949
September 23, 2016
For thirty-seven years, Mao Zedong occupied a singular position atop the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), governing organization of the world’s largest country. For over a dozen years, Mao had led the CCP through wilderness (literally), fighting off factional opponents, the armies of Chiang Kai Shek, and the invading forces of the Empire of Japan. In the next decades, Mao would put a deep imprint on the politics and history of China, rarely for the good.
Modern scholarship on the history of the CCP has demonstrated that Mao rarely, if ever, had complete control over the Party machinery. He struggled through his entire tenure against competitors, both bureaucratic and ideological. Many of the decisions Mao made had strong support from the rest of the CCP, and emerged more from consensus that from authoritarian diktat. Nevertheless, the CCP and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) bore the special imprint of Mao’s ideological conviction and genius for infighting.
What if Mao had died in 1949, shortly after the declaration of the existence of the People’s Republic of China? How might China’s domestic and foreign policy have fared in the absence of the Great Helmsman?
Ideology and Factionalism:
For better or worse, Mao Zedong supplied a strong ideological foundation for the existence of the CCP, and for its provision of single-party control over the PRC. This melded a modified form of Marxist economic doctrine with Soviet state Leninism, leavened by a strong dose of anti-colonial thought. This ideological foundation, and the cult of personality that the CCP established around Mao, helped provide unity for the party and the state throughout the PRC’s early years, allowing it to weather such crises as the Korean War, the ongoing challenge of the survival of Chiang Kai Shek’s regime on Taiwan, and the Sino-Soviet Split. It also helped drive crises, including the Great Leap Forward, the aforementioned split with the USSR and the Cultural Revolution.
But Mao Zedong was far from the only important figure in the CCP in 1949. The struggle against Chiang and the Japanese had given many prominent commanders and administrators the chance to prove their worth. Other major political players in 1949 included Peng Dehuai, senior PLA commander; Liu Shaoqi, a key theorist and administrator; Zhou Enlai, Mao’s long-time right-hand man; Lin Biao, another senior commander and close confidant of Mao; Zhu De, founder of the PLA; Gao Gang, Bo Yibo, and Chen Yun, chief economic administrators; Deng Xiaoping, protégé of Liu Shaoqi, and Yang Shangkun, military and political leader during the Revolution.
Mao’s prominence among this group played an important role in stifling infighting; he could command sufficient legitimacy inside and outside the party that the other major players remained in check. It is unlikely that any other figure in the PRC could have provided the same degree of prestige and ideological heft. This would have made it difficult, at least in the early going, to pursue a “cult of personality” state-building strategy.
In Mao’s absence, the factions that formed around these prominent figures (and others) might have descended into open combat with one another. As is often the case with revolutionary insurgencies, the Chinese Communist Party was riven with factionalism even as it took power in Beijing in 1949. Different components of the People’s Liberation Army had fought entirely different wars, in different areas, with different tactics and organizational structures.
Powerbrokers within the CCP commanded the allegiance of portions of the PLA, which provided them with security from factional conflict. Without Mao to keep them in check, the PLA itself might have become embroiled in political infighting. Moreover, the USSR (which had substantial influence in the 1950s) might have decided to support one faction or another, leading to even more fighting.
Mao Zedong was the primary driver behind the Great Leap Forward, a project designed to spur industrialization but that instead resulted in massive famine. Mao wasn’t alone; much of the rest of the CCP supported, or at least acquiesced, in the project. However, Mao’s idiosyncratic views on expertise, and his faith in the power of the peasantry, made the Great Leap much worse than it otherwise might have been. In the end, millions died in a campaign that Liu Shaoqi himself declared resulted from “70% human error.” The Great Leap also resulted in the purging of Peng Dehuai (critic of Mao), and the sidelining of Mao from the day-to-day domestic decision-making process. Under the guidance of Liu Shaoqi or similar figure, China would likely not have embarked on such a risky, dangerous course towards modernization, and millions might have lived.
The sidelining of Mao after the Great Leap Forward helped set the stage for the next great upheaval. The Cultural Revolution did not spring fully formed from the mind of Mao Zedong, but he did drive most of its main elements, and the ideological brew it created benefitted Mao at the expense of his competitors. Mao fueled the sense of ideological resentment among a younger generation of Chinese students in order to break the back of the parts of the CCP that opposed him and that, in the early 1960s, had worked hard to sideline him. The impact was dreadful in nearly every way imaginable; millions died, Chinese state capacity atrophied, science and innovation slowed, and the PRC withdrew from the international community. While some of the underlying tensions in China would have existed even without Mao, he played a key role in activating those tensions, and creating a political disaster of epic proportions. Without Mao, China might not have lost an entire decade of economic, social, and technical progress.
The PRC stood in precarious position in the wake of its declaration. The Republic of China, led by Chiang Kai Shek, remained in existence on Formosa, with the United States acting as apparent security guarantor. The Soviet Union offered ideological, military, and economic support, but at the price of full alignment. For a decade, the PRC took this deal. The Soviets supplied support for Chinese military operations in Korea, and helped lay the foundation for the PRC’s military-industrial complex. The Soviets also helped jumpstart China’s nuclear weapons program.
In 1956, Nikita Khrushchev’s turn against Stalin’s cult of personality cut hard into Mao’s own ideological foundation. Tensions increased as China and the USSR pursued divergent approaches to confrontation with the West; Mao preferred taking risks, while Khrushchev wanted to play it safe. Mao had managed to maintain control over the greater part of the foreign policy apparatus of the PRC, giving him ample space to carry out a feud with the USSR. While other voices within China also resented the Soviets, Mao’s ideological convictions, along with his special role at the top of the CCP, helped poison Sino-Soviet relations and bring about a dramatic split between the two countries.
Ten years later, Mao would override many of the rest of the senior leadership (Lin Biao, longtime confidant, died under suspicious circumstances) to seek an opening with the United States. This decision, which permanently detached China from the increasingly moribund USSR and paved the way for opening the PRC’s economy and society, remains Mao’s most meaningful positive contribution to China’s success. Without Mao, the PRC might have pursued Lin Biao’s preferred policy of re-engaging with the Soviet Union.
China would have struggled to emerge from civil war and its agrarian roots regardless of who guided the ship of state. The establishment of the cult of personality around Mao undoubtedly helped prevent some nasty conflicts between the leaders of the CCP, and assured a degree of unity against foreign foes. But it also gave Mao Zedong, a man with a special talent for human misery, the ability to guide the destinies of hundreds of millions of people for several decades.
ROBERT FARLEY, a frequent contributor to TNI, is author of The Battleship Book. He serves as a Senior Lecturer at the Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce at the University of Kentucky. His work includes military doctrine, national security, and maritime affairs. He blogs at Lawyers, Guns and Money and Information Dissemination and The Diplomat.
Image: The portrait of Mao Zedong at the Tiananmen Gate. Wikimedia
TROUBLE IN TIBET – HAVE HOPE – COMPASSION WILL STRIKE EVIL RED EMPIRE
Lady Gaga’s meeting the Dalai Lama at the U.S. Conference of Mayors in Indianapolis set off a “firestorm” in China. She spoke to the Dalai Lama about role of Hope and Compassion in changing World Affairs. “Hope is essential to keep the World going.” I ask my readers to keep their ‘Hope’ alive for Compassion will strike Evil Red Empire. Beijing is Doomed.
Ann Arbor, MI 48104-4162 USA
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE
Lady Gaga’s Chinese Fans are Not Happy She Met the Dalai Lama
Posted: Jun 28, 2016 1:15 PM
Singer Lady Gaga has set off a bit of a firestorm in China after she posted a picture on Instagram of herself and the Dalai Lama. Lady Gaga, whose birth name is Stefani Germanotta, spoke with the Dalai Lama on the topics of hope and kindness at the U.S. Conference of Mayors in Indianapolis.
“Hope is essential to keep the world going.” – His Holiness the Dalai Lama #withcompassion #usmc2016 #kindyouth
A photo posted by Lady Gaga (@ladygaga) on Jun 26, 2016 at 7:30am PDT
Over in China, however, people were not so thrilled. The singer has reportedly been banned from the country, but government officials are being relatively mum on this. If her music is actually banned, she’d hardly be the first musician to be prohibited from entering China.
Following Lady Gaga’s meeting, the Communist party’s mysterious propaganda department issued “an important instruction” banning her entire repertoire from mainland China, Hong Kong’s pro-democracy newspaper Apple Daily reported on Monday.
Chinese websites and media organisations were ordered to stop uploading or distributing her songs in a sign of Beijing’s irritation, the newspaper said.
The propaganda department also issued orders for party-controlled news outlets such as state broadcaster CCTV and newspapers the People’s Daily and the Global Times to condemn the meeting.
Additionally, Lady Gaga’s angered Chinese fans spammed her Instagram account and posted on the Chinese social network Weibo commenting that they would no longer listen to her music as they were furious at her. Others said that Lady Gaga’s meeting with the Dalai Lama “hurts a lot” and that they were disappointed with the singer.
The Dalai Lama has been exiled from China since 1959. Lady Gaga has never performed on the Chinese mainland, but has done concerts in both Hong Kong and Macau.
Townhall.com is the leading source for conservative news and political commentary and analysis.
Copyright © Townhall.com. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you
TROUBLE IN TIBET – HOPE FROM DOOMSAYER OF DOOM DOOMA
K. N. Raghavan author of book on Tibet titled ‘Vanishing Shangri La: Tibet and Dalai Lama in 20th Century) expressed deep concern for future of Tibet after Dalai Lama.
In my analysis, Red China’s actions are ‘EVIL’ and consequence of ‘EVIL’ is described by the meaning of the term ‘EVIL’; it means calamity, disaster, catastrophe, apocalypse, etc., Beijing is Doomed and Red China’s fate is sealed. As Doomsayer of Doom Dooma, I share prophesy of Prophet Isaiah (Book of Isaiah, Chapter 47:10&11) to declare Red China’s unexpected, unavoidable, inevitable, sudden downfall and there is no nation that can save Red China from her predicament.
Ann Arbor, MI 48104-4162 USA
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE
THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS
The Glory of Tibet and the Tragedy of Tibetans;A Scholarly Book Puts Them In Perspective
By T J S George
Published: 17th April 2016 04:00 AM
India has always been in a lose-lose situation vis-à-vis Tibet. And China always in a win-win situation. Which means that, in realpolitik terms, the Tibetan refugees of today will remain refugees for ever and Tibetan Buddhism will never again have a home of its own. The plight of the displaced Tibetans has attracted world attention because of the international respect the present Dalai Lama has won with his humanity and championship of peace. But after him?
India has always been handicapped by a cultural inability to understand the intricacies of Tibetan politics and mores. On the other hand, China’s perception of Tibet as part of its geography and history has remained constant during the era of the emperors, the interregnum of Chiang Kaishek’s nationalism, and the triumphalist communism of Mao Zedong.
In 1956, when the Dalai Lama visited Bombay, Delhi directed governor M C Chagla to serve the guest strict vegetarian fare. Chagla arranged a grand thali-style dinner at the state banquet. The next morning, the ADC conveyed a message to the governor that the Dalai Lama would like to have kidney and sausages for breakfast. “So much for Delhi’s knowledge about the culinary habits and tastes of important visitors,” noted Chagla in his autobiography Roses in December.
Delhi’s knowledge of diplomatic delicacies was no better. In October 1950, as Tibet’s attempt to strike a deal with the new Communist rulers of China came to nothing, China invaded Tibet and paused at Chamdo. India had two options. It chose the first, apparently at the behest of the then foreign policy boss Girija Shankar Bajpai, and sent a strongly worded protest note to Peking. The Chinese replied by calling India a “running dog of Anglo-American imperialism”. Thereupon India adopted its second option, proposed by K M Panikkar, ambassador to China.
The position now was that India should make a gesture of friendship towards the new Communist country by not opposing the occupation of Tibet. (The official Indian note mentioned that India recognised the sovereignty of China over Tibet. It turned out that the word intended was suzerainty, but sovereignty crept into the message wrongly because of oversight at the Cypher Bureau in Delhi. The External Affairs Ministry tried to correct the mistake with another message to China, but was dissuaded from doing so on the ground that such a major correction would cause serious misunderstandings besides damaging India’s reputation.)
Facing imminent conquest, Tibet appealed to all the big nations of the world and to the UN for help. Nobody showed any interest. And nobody was to blame but Tibet itself. K N Raghavan, author of the latest book on Tibet (Vanishing Shangri La: History of Tibet and Dalai Lama in 20th century) says, “Tibet’s inaccessibility, solitude and its unfriendly response to even the friendliest of overtures all combined to ensure that it would not receive any support from other nations during its hour of need.”
Raghavan is not in unfamiliar territory. Author of the definitive Dividing Lines: Contours of India China Conflict, he has an extraordinary eye for detail and a gift to put complex issues in simple terms. He shows how the Dalai Lama began his rule with “a period of honeymoon” with China. He even visited China as an honoured guest in 1954, was ardently cultivated by Mao, and appointed a Vice-President of the Steering Committee of the People’s Republic of China. But relations soured in a few years. When rumours spread of Chinese plans to arrest the Dalai Lama, Tibetans rose in anger against the Chinese. Amid chaos in Lhasa, the Dalai Lama and party managed to leave the capital in disguise and, sick and tired, entered India on March 31, 1959. Raghavan argues convincingly that China had allowed the escape in order to avoid the adverse world reactions his capture would have invited. With the Dalai Lama out of the scene,
China “brought the entire might of the PLA to crush the incipient rebellion” by the Tibetans.
With a comprehensive and scholarly analysis of China’s policies in Tibet after the Dalai Lama left, the soft power Tibetan exiles have been exerting on western intelligentsia and the Middle Way Approach conceived by the Dalai Lama, Raghavan provides an exhaustive overview of Tibet in its transformatory age—an account that is both inspirational and sad. The resilience shown by the Tibetans wins our admiration but their homelessness leaves us feeling sorry for them.
The Dalai Lama, Nobel Prize and all, carried the helpless diaspora on his brave shoulders. But after him.
Copyright © 2016, The New Indian Express. All rights reserved.
THE FUTURE OF RED CHINA WITHOUT DALAI LAMA
What will be the future of Red China without Dalai Lama??? I am not asking about the future of Tibet or Tibetan Buddhism with or without Dalai Lama. As ‘Doomsayer of Doom Dooma’, I am predicting a future event, a sudden disaster, catastrophe, apocalypse, cataclysmic event that will bring downfall of Red China and there will be no person or nation to save her.
Ann Arbor, MI 48104-4162 USA
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE
WHAT’S THE FUTURE OF THE DALAI LAMA? NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE POSES THE RIGHT QUESTIONS
JULIA DUIN, December 13, 2015
The Dalai Lama was the topic of a New York Times magazine profile recently, and unlike the laudatory sort of write-ups one usually sees about this 80-year-old religious icon, this one calls his leadership into question.
Not only his leadership, but his legacy is questioned this time around
We’ve written about how he decided four years ago to give up his political role as head of the world’s exiled Tibetan community. The Buddhist leader will be dying sooner or later, the article says, and maybe sooner. So what will happen then to Tibetan Buddhism and the cause of free Tibet?
So you get paragraphs like this:
The economic potency of China has made the Dalai Lama a political liability for an increasing number of world leaders, who now shy away from him for fear of inviting China’s wrath. Even Pope Francis, the boldest pontiff in decades, reportedly declined a meeting in Rome last December. When the Dalai Lama dies, it is not at all clear what will happen to the six million Tibetans in China. The Chinese Communist Party, though officially atheistic, will take charge of finding an incarnation of the present Dalai Lama. Indoctrinated and controlled by the Communist Party, the next leader of the Tibetan community could help Beijing cement its hegemony over Tibet. And then there is the 150,000-strong community of Tibetan exiles, which, increasingly politically fractious, is held together mainly by the Dalai Lama. The Tibetan poet and activist Tenzin Tsundue, who has disagreed with the Dalai Lama’s tactics, told me that his absence will create a vacuum for Tibetans. The Dalai Lama’s younger brother, Tenzin Choegyal, was more emphatic: ‘‘We are finished once His Holiness is gone.’’
I had forgotten the dust-up about the pope not meeting with the Buddhist leader, but a year has passed since then and they have yet to meet.
The article continues on, recounting how 140 Buddhist monks and nuns have publicly set themselves on fire to protest the suppression of Tibet by China. And what does the Dalai Lama do in response?
As if in response to these multiple crises in his homeland, the Dalai Lama has embarked on some improbable intellectual journeys. In 2011, he renounced his role as the temporal leader of the Tibetan people and declared that he would focus on his spiritual and cultural commitments. Today, the man who in old photos of Tibet can be seen enacting religious rites wearing a conical yellow hat — in front of thangkas, or scrolls, swarming with scowling monsters and copulating deities — speaks of going ‘‘beyond religion’’ and embracing ‘‘secular ethics’’: principles of selflessness and compassion rooted in the fundamental Buddhist notion of interconnectedness.
Increasingly, the Dalai Lama addresses himself to a nondenominational audience and seems perversely determined to undermine the authority of his own tradition. He has intimated that the next Dalai Lama could be female. He has asserted that certain Buddhist scriptures disproved by science should be abandoned. He has suggested — frequently, during the months that I saw him — that the institution of the Dalai Lama has outlived its purpose. Having embarked in the age of the selfie on a project of self-abnegation, he is now flirting with ever-more-radical ideas. One morning at his Dharamsala residence in May this year, he told me that he may one day travel to China, but not as the Dalai Lama.
As much as this leader would like to shuck off his political obligations, the world won’t let him, the article notes. There is simply no one to take his place.
Still, as a political negotiator, the article states, he has failed. But who wouldn’t? Was the Dalai Lama supposed to be a modern-day Gandhi, bringing China to its knees somehow? Rather, it’s China that is setting the conditions. The Dalai Lama very much wants to return to Tibet before he dies. By the time you’ve finished this piece, you’ll be convinced that will never happen.
One thing the writer — who is an Indian intellectual and author who’s had access to the Buddhist spiritual leader for years — brings out is the ordinariness of the man. He lists a number of things the Dalai Lama will do to confound people and keep them from putting him on a pedestal.
I have covered two of the DL’s appearances in the Washington, DC area. The one included an esoteric discourse on Buddhism that defied translation. But the other had quite a bit of barnyard humor, which was tough to square with a world-famous monk. I never knew if the latter was part of an earthiness that comes with being from that part of the world, or something else. The author of this piece likewise captures the oddity of the Dalai Lama, who will sometimes make weird jokes or pronouncements in public settings that make little or no sense or seem odd at best.
Couple that with examples throughout the piece about how the Dalai Lama and his cause are losing traction throughout the West, and one concludes that by waiting out the Dalai Lama, the Chinese may win this battle.
The piece has way more to say about politics than religion, although it does have flashes of insight like the following:
The ‘‘world picture,’’ as he saw it, was bleak. People all over the world were killing in the name of their religions. Even Buddhists in Burma were tormenting Rohingya Muslims. This was why he had turned away from organized religion, engaged with quantum physics and started to emphasize the secular values of compassion. It was no longer feasible, he said, to construct an ethical existence on the basis of traditional religion in multicultural societies.
When asked if he means to reincarnate once he dies, the Dalai Lama answers that he does not. Our GetReligioncolleague Ira Rifkin covered this pronouncement earlier this year. The institution of the Dalai Lama, the author of the magazine article points out, has reached the end of its usefulness.
So what will happen with Tibet? In one sense, the article leaves you hanging. In another sense, it’s clear that the Dalai Lama has already checked out.
There are a few journalistic burps in this piece, one being that the Buddha was born in Nepal, not India as the article says. And as one commentator pointed out, Tibetan Buddhism believes its leaders must reincarnate until everyone is ready for full enlightenment. So how can this Dalai Lama say he will not reincarnate?
Otherwise, it raises the right questions about a man who, along with Pope Francis, is one of the world’s top spiritual leaders.
Shutterstock photos by Nadezda Murmakova and Phaendin.
© 2014 GetReligion.org unless otherwise noted.
All rights reserved.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – FUTURE OF RED CHINA’S EVIL POWER
Red China wants to sustain her military occupation of Tibet by controlling and manipulating Tibetan cultural practices that play a role in selection of next Dalai Lama. In my analysis, future of Red China’s Evil Power is already decided by prophecy shared by Prophet Isaiah in The Old Testament Book, ISAIAH, Chapter 47, verses 10 and 11:
“You have trusted in your wickedness
and have said, ‘No one sees me.’
Your wisdom and knowledge mislead you
when you say to yourself,
‘I am, and there is none beside me.’
Disaster will come upon you,
and you will not know how to conjure it away.
A calamity will fall upon you
that you cannot ward off with a ransom;
a catastrophe you cannot foresee
will suddenly come upon you.”
At Special Frontier Force, I am known as ‘Doomsayer of Doom Dooma’ for I predict that Beijing is Doomed. There is no one to save Red China when this catastrophe suddenly comes upon her.
Ann Arbor, MI 48104-4162 USA
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE
BROWN POLITICAL REVIEW
RULE BY REINCARNATION : CHINA AND THE NEXT DALAI LAMA
BY MILI MITRA, NOVEMBER 1, 2015
In the last decade, China has become a juggernaut in international politics. It is undoubtedly the dominant force in Asia and faces scant challenge from other regional powers. However, Beijing still faces internal opposition from dissidents, especially in Xinjiang Province and Tibet. The autonomous region of Tibet in particular is known for its robust and lasting resistance to Chinese rule. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has attempted to control the region since 1951. Now, China’s most recent efforts have taken an unexpected form: They are relying on the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama. Beijing seems to subscribe to the belief that a more cooperative Dalai Lama would help undercut Tibetan opposition and gain hegemony over the region. Needless to say, this plan is as unrealistic as it is absurd.
Beijing’s historical relationship with Tibet is conflicted and troubled. Tibet was incorporated into CCP-led China in 1951. CCP leader Mao Zedong wished to unite China after a turbulent century of weak Qing emperors, feuding warlords and the Japanese invasion. In October 1950, the Chinese army crossed into Tibet and defeated its Tibetan counterparts. Tenzin Gyatso, the current Dalai Lama, sent representatives to Beijing to negotiate, leading to the signing of the 17-Point Agreement for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet. The pact made Tibet a part of China but gave it a measure of autonomy. There was some oversight from the national government, but the Tibetan government had more power than any other provincial government.
The Tibetan aristocracy and government were funded in part by China. The CCP also funded the development of infrastructure and organized land reforms. It seemed to be a mutually beneficial treaty, but many of these advantages failed to materialize for Tibet due to Chinese duplicity. Despite these promises, the CCP remained uncomfortable with Tibet’s partial autonomy and unique cultural heritage. Chinese leaders feared that Tibetan spirituality — and indeed, loyalty to the Dalai Lama — would undermine their own power. They endeavored to dilute the local culture, a process now known as the “Sinicization of Tibet.” Rituals and traditions are integral to Tibetan society, but the Chinese government worked to suppress local festivals and religious customs.
To counter the dominance of Tibetan Buddhists in the region, Beijing also sent thousands of Han Chinese, the largest ethnic group in the country, to intermarry with Tibetans. As one would expect, these decisions only exacerbated cultural tensions. Overall, the CCP’s overbearing attempts to control Tibet won them few supporters and antagonized the majority of the local population. Ultimately, the Tibetan people tired of these oppressive tactics and launched the 1959 Tibetan Uprising. The rebellion failed, resulting in at least 10,000 deaths and the exile of the Dalai Lama to northern India.
Ever since, China’s rule in Tibet has been fraught with instability and local opposition. The Chinese government has tried a variety of tactics to win Tibetan support but has finally come to the conclusion that it needs the support of the Dalai Lama. And since it can’t win the approval of the current Dalai Lama, it wants to collaborate with his next incarnation. This plan may sound far-fetched, but China’s schemes are based on a shrewd — if misguided — premise. Beijing has long realized that the Dalai Lama holds an unparalleled sway over the Tibetan people, even in exile. His influence as a spiritual and political leader cannot be overstated. The current Dalai Lama would never agree to cooperate with Beijing; he has long demanded Tibetan independence and is a figurehead for dissidents in the region. Even in exile, the Dalai Lama is an omnipresent figure in the Tibetan cultural and political consciousness. But as he ages, the Chinese government believes his successor might be more compliant.
Since China can’t win the approval of this Dalai Lama, they want to collaborate with his next incarnation.
In fact, China is reluctant to leave this to chance. The boy selected to be the next Dalai Lama will be reared in Tibetan Buddhist traditions and will likely feel the same way as the present Dalai Lama. To ensure that the next spiritual leader will align with its goals, Beijing wishes to oversee the selection process; in other words, it wants to select a Dalai Lama more sympathetic to its goals. In a morbid twist, it sees the Dalai Lama’s passing as an opportunity to instate a puppet leader, a figurehead who would be raised in Beijing and taught to adhere to the party line.
The process to identify the next Dalai Lama is complex and intriguing. A group of senior monks, called High Lamas of the Gelugpa tradition, and the Tibetan government are responsible for identifying their next spiritual leader. The search begins with the High Lamas interpreting their dreams or visions. If the previous Dalai Lama was cremated, as is generally the case, the smoke from his cremation might indicate the direction in which they should look. They then use these signals to find boys born around the time of death of the previous leader. The boys are then asked to identify objects that belonged to the former Dalai Lama. If several boys are found who satisfy the conditions, as is typically the case, they consult the servants of the former Dalai Lama. In the rare case when there are still multiple boys that pass all these tests, they place the names in an urn and hold a public draw.
The Dalai Lama — along with the majority of Tibetans — believes that Beijing’s involvement in the selection process would undermine the sanctity of the religion and lead to further conflict. This is substantiated by a similar case in 1995: the selection of the Panchen Lama. The Panchen Lama is the second highest ranking in Tibetan Buddhism and is “found” in much the same way as the Dalai Lama. The committee of high monks had selected a candidate, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, and the Dalai Lama endorsed their decision. However, the Chinese government insisted on holding a draw after which Gyaincain Norbu was chosen as the 11th Panchen Lama. Gedhun Choekyi Nyima was immediately taken away by Chinese officials and has been missing ever since. Tibetans were horrified by the Chinese ploy and have refused to accept Gyaincain Norbu as the Panchen Lama. There are still calls from the international community to free Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, but China has disregarded these requests. As a result of Chinese intervention, Tibet’s “true” Panchen Lama has not been seen in over 20 years.
Perhaps with an eye on the past, the current Dalai Lama once again chose to defy the Chinese government. He has announced that he will consider whether he will reincarnate and continue the tradition in 2024. As he told the BBC, he would rather have no Dalai Lama than a “stupid” one. He went on to explain that it might be better to dissolve the influential position rather than to wait for a future Dalai Lama who could “disgrace” himself. His comments imply that he is aware of the prospect of Chinese intervention in selecting his successor and is reluctant to leave his legacy in such hands. He also acknowledged that his role might become less relevant in time. In response, Beijing has hit out at his statements, claiming his attitude was “frivolous.” Not one to shy away from a war of words, the Dalai Lama pointed out, “Chinese officials [seem] more concerned with the future Dalai Lama than me.” The Chinese government’s fixation with the next Dalai Lama is certainly questionable, but it is wrong to assume that the Dalai Lama has not given the matter much thought. He is a shrewd political player and knows how to bring out the worst in the Communist Party. There are several possible motivations behind the Dalai Lama weighing whether or not to reincarnate. Some see it as a means of ensuring the position’s prestige and spiritual authority is not tainted by dirty politics. Others, including Jia Xiudong of the China Institute of International Studies in Beijing, believe he is “playing a political game.” They see his announcement as a way to put pressure on China and ensure that it respects Tibetan traditions and autonomy.
Nonetheless, the Chinese government has emerged from this episode looking ridiculous — a common outcome in their dealings with the Dalai Lama. Regardless of whether the Dalai Lama decides to reincarnate or not, it will be interesting to see how the Free Tibet movement — and indeed, Tibet-China relations — progresses without the Dalai Lama leading the international conversation. Despite his apparent humility, he has shaped Tibetan identity over the last half-century and has become virtually synonymous with the Free Tibet movement. His passing would leave a power vacuum in Tibetan politics for at least a decade, simultaneously making the region more vulnerable to Chinese influence and more volatile to shocks and triggers.
If Beijing wants to maintain regional peace, it should tread very carefully in its positions with the current and future Dalai Lama. A senior Obama Administration official predicted that this process of transition would be reminiscent of the Avignon Papacy, a period of conflict between different Catholic authorities that almost destabilized all of Europe in the fourteenth century. If Beijing intervenes and selects its own candidate, it will likely cause widespread dissent and conflict in Tibet. The Tibetan people are wary of Chinese involvement and will distrust any decision in which Beijing has the upper hand. The Communist Party might believe that they would reduce hostility by choosing a cooperative Dalai Lama, but their intrusion could quite well incite outright rebellion. Either way, the selection of the next Dalai Lama, if it takes place at all, will undoubtedly be a dramatic turning point in Tibetan history. All we can do is wait and watch as the spectacle unfolds.
Photo: Christopher Michel
MILI MITRA Mili Mitra ’18 is an International Relations concentrator and a senior staff writer for BPR.
Copyright 2015 Brown Political Review
THE EVIL RED EMPIRE – CONSUMERISM AND ECONOMIC EXPANSIONISM
Consumerism is a theory that claims continual increase in consumption of material goods is sound economically. Red China buried her dreams of Proletarian Revolution to embrace this theory of ‘CONSUMERISM’ as a means to accomplish her goal of Economic Expansionism. People all over the world have recognized dangers posed by practice of Consumerism. What we clearly need is Consumer Protection, not only laws to safeguard interests of the buying public, but also to protect rights of workers, communities, environment, and ecological systems that sustain delicate natural equilibrium. The lives, health, and well-being of both workers and consumers is compromised by hazardous products and planet Earth is facing a major challenge to the very existence of Life. Red China’s Economic Expansionism is not sustainable and her economic collapse is simply inevitable. Red China’s Economic Meltdown is indeed a Blessing to all of us.
Ann Arbor, MI 48104-4162 USA
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE
THE US NEWS & WORLD REPORT
IS CHINA COOKING THE BOOKS ON ECONOMIC EXPANSION?
Analysts aren’t terribly confident in the Chinese government’s economic growth data.
China’s government expects its economy to grow 6.5 percent each year between 2016 and 2020.
By ANDREW SOERGEL Nov. 2, 2015 | 1:10 p.m. EST
One of China’s most senior government officials over the weekend said his country’s economy should expect to see “at least 6.5 percent” gross domestic product growth each year between 2016 and 2020, despite a growing pool of evidence suggesting China is in the midst of a historic economic slowdown.
But whether Chinese GDP numbers actually paint a clear economic picture is another question entirely.
“We propose to achieve the goal of creating a ‘moderately prosperous society’ by 2020, which requires annual economic growth of at least 6.5 percent over the next five years,” Chinese Premier Li Keqiang said Sunday during a speech in Seoul, according to The Associated Press.
He said the economy is operating within a “reasonable range” and that the government has “the confidence and ability” to hit its growth target of “about 7 percent” this year.
Rumors had floated around in the days and weeks leading up to Sunday’s announcement that the government would eventually lower its expansion goals for the next several years following a slew of recently underwhelming economic indicators suggesting Asia’s financial giant was beginning to cool. Exports and imports have plummeted in recent months, and the Chinese government announced in October that GDP expanded by only 6.9 percent in the third quarter – which represents the worst three-month period for the Chinese economy since the world was just emerging from the global financial crisis in 2009.
But even that 6.9 percent growth – the worst China had posted in more than half a decade – sounded too good to be true.
“We don’t have total confidence in the numbers, and we are surprised by the acceleration in services output given the collapse in the equity market,” a team of Bloomberg economists wrote in a research note at the time.
China’s stock market has recently strengthened, thanks in no small part to extraordinary governmental intervention. The heavy-handed Chinese government has thrown out safety net after safety net in an attempt to prevent a hard economic landing. Only a few weeks ago, China slashed its interest rates for the sixth time in less than a year.
“We continue to expect China to pull out all the stops to kick-start its economy in the coming weeks and months,” Burt White, chief investment officer at LPL Financial, wrote in a research note last week. “The [People’s Bank of China] interest rate cuts, along with selected fiscal and legislative actions in China, should further help to calm fears of a hard landing.”
Are China and Russia Trying to Undermine the U.S. Dollar?But some analysts have speculated that the Chinese government’s intervention could extend to the country’s economic news releases as well. A recent Wall Street Journal survey of 64 select economists found that 96 percent of respondents think China’s GDP estimates don’t “accurately reflect the state of the Chinese economy.”
They likely “overstate GDP by about 2 to 3 percentage points,” said one respondent.
“A government wielding such a heavy hand in markets is surely influencing/manipulating official statistics.” said another.
Ironically, China’s own premier has previously said he’s far from confident in the country’s GDP estimates, calling them “man-made” and unreliable, according to a leaked document from 2007 obtained by WikiLeaks. He said government data releases, especially the GDP numbers, should be used “for reference only.”
“Quite frankly, we don’t believe them at all. It’s not only that they come in suspiciously close to the target, which is pre-set. They’re produced remarkably quickly and rarely revised,” Danny Gabay, director at Fathom Financial Consulting, said last month in a radio interview with the BBC.
Gabay said he recalculated economic growth “based on Premier Li’s advice, which is that the GDP data are untrustworthy and we should use alternative measures to gauge the level of activity in China like electricity use, credit growth and other domestic indicators.” He said the actual growth number is “closer to 3 percent. Not 7.3 percent.”
But even if the 6.5 percent growth target between now and 2020 seems a little optimistic, it’s a clear recognition from the Chinese government that economic expansion now is not what it once was. China enjoyed double-digit annual growth between 2003 and 2007, and 2014’s 7.4 percent jump was still significantly higher than the global average, even though it was China’s worst year in more than two and a half decades.
For comparison’s sake, the U.S. economy hasn’t grown by 7.4 percent or more in a single year since 1951. And double-digit annual growth hasn’t been seen in America since 1943.
Part of the problem is that once an economy gets to a certain size, it’s just harder to keep up the momentum, which is likely at least partially responsible for China’s gradual slowdown. It would be unreasonable to expect the Chinese economy to plug along at a double-digit pace, just as it would be unreasonable to expect the U.S. economy to suddenly grow by 10 or 12 percent for a prolonged period of time.
But China’s government is able to influence market activity in a way America’s is not, which could artificially prolong China’s still respectable levels of economic growth beyond what would happen naturally. Most expect to continue to see relatively positive GDP numbers out of China for some time, even if such releases could be filled with a little bit of hot air.
“As an economy closely linked to international markets, China cannot stay immune to the lackluster performance of the global economy,” Chinese President Xi Jinping told Reuters in an interview last month. “We do have concerns about the Chinese economy, and we are working hard to address them.”
Andrew Soergel is an Economy Reporter at U.S. News.
World Report LP.
TIBET CONSCIOUSNESS – RED CHINA HAS NO REDEEMER
The proud Han Chinese people may choose to ‘love’ or ‘hate’ United States of America. The issue is not that of bilateral US – China relations. Red China would be paid back with the very weapons she used on others. Just as she destroyed Tibet, she would be destroyed. Red China is exhausting herself for nothing. She dominated Tibet but she is wearing herself out. Red China is moving toward her own logical end of self-destruction.
The Evil Red Empire is destined to be uprooted, torn down, and destroyed for Red China has not repented and her evil actions are not forgiven.
Chinese people may love or hate America. But, Red China has no choice. Red China has no Redeemer. No one can save Red China for she pursued a hazardous course of action to the brink of catastrophe. Beijing is Doomed.
Ann Arbor, MI 48104-4162, USA
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE. ESTABLISHMENT 22
|The Spirits of Special Frontier ForceThe Spirits of Special Frontier Force, Ann Arbor, MI. At Special Frontier Force, I host ‘The Living Tibetan Spirits’…|
|View on www.Facebook.com|
THE NEW YORK TIMES
Contributing Op-Ed Writer
A Land China Loves and Hates
OCT. 13, 2015
Credit Erik S. Lesser/European Pressphoto Agency
HONG KONG On the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, a major Chinese television network broadcast a documentary that investigated how Chinese people viewed not only those pivotal events but America itself. One man, referring to the slaughter of thousands of Americans, declared, What a beautiful job! Another said, They should give America more of the same. And a student standing in Tiananmen Square said he approved of the attacks because the United States was a bully and a hegemon. Later in the film, the young man in Tiananmen Square went on to describe his plans for the future. He said that he loved America and that he was about to go there to study. If I don’t have to come back, then I won’t, he said.
The Chinese view of America has not changed since this aired four years ago.
On Sept. 3, President Xi Jinping orchestrated an extravagant military parade in Beijing. An acquaintance from my schooldays was so excited by the spectacle, the disciplined troop formations, the advanced equipment that he wrote in a post on WeChat that he could hardly sleep that night. He added that his friends should guard against America because American imperialism still wants to destroy us.
Only a few months earlier, this same man had taken his daughter on a trip to Boston, where he reported enthusiastically on social media about visiting Harvard University and eating a huge lobster. He also pledged to send his daughter to America. We should help our next generation live in a place without pollution, without recycled cooking oil and poisoned milk powder, he wrote.
The young man in Tiananmen Square and my former schoolmate are hardly alone in holding contrasting, schizophrenic views of America. For many Chinese people, the depth of their admiration for the American system and way of life is matched only by their animosity toward the country.
According to a Pew Research Center survey released earlier this year, only 44 percent of Chinese people have a favorable view of America the 33rd lowest approval rating out of 40 countries surveyed, and far lower than the 84 percent reported for South Korea and the 68 percent for Japan.
The Chinese hostility to America is first and foremost the result of government propaganda. Because of censorship, many people lack a basic understanding of life outside China. And although in the past few decades the Chinese government has been careful to avoid a real clash with America, Beijing’s domestic propaganda has never ceased presenting it as the enemy. Stir in 60 years of uninterrupted anti-American schooling, and it is hardly surprising that one result is an irrational hostility toward the United States.
Another Chinese documentary, Silent Contest, from 2013, highlighted one of the major reasons for castigating America as the eternal enemy. In the film, it was said that America’s key strategic objective is to dominate and break up China. You hear a lot of this kind of talk from Chinese officials. Like most despotic governments, the Chinese leadership likes to play the part of defender of the people a role that necessitates the existence of a powerful external enemy. A strong and hostile America is an important source of the legitimacy for Communist Party rule.
But in our globalized age, where there are myriad, multilayered interactions between countries, it is impossible for our government to fully stop people from seeking to research, study and understand the United States.
American films, TV shows and products, and many other aspects of American culture remain influential in everyday Chinese life. On the Internet, Chinese netizens loudly praise America’s system of government and spontaneously rally to America’s defense in global affairs. Some people like to compare America and Russia in recent years Beijing has been cozying up to Moscow and analyze the behavior of the two countries toward China, wondering aloud if we have chosen the right friend.
Many of the same people who are suspicious of America’s intentions are the ones who harbor the most fervent hopes of going to live there. In everyday conversation these people might be ashamed of China’s human rights record and our political situation, or they may talk about how they want to buy an apartment in New York to find a secure place for their money, but when a foreign government or organization (from no matter what country) criticizes the Chinese system, they become defensive. In the case of the United States, they will often fire off a list of America’s failings, such as racism and gun violence.
A mixed view of extremes about America is not uncommon around the world, but what makes it so striking here is that many Chinese government officials and elites seem to hold these contrasting views.
Like the young man in the documentary in Tiananmen Square, the children of many high officials go to America to study, to settle down, to invest in property. For years, the children and grandchildren of the Communist Party elite have been attending America’s top universities. Perhaps most famously, President Xi Jinping’s daughter enrolled at Harvard in 2010.
Many Chinese people can’t help but notice that the elites have no problem taking advantage of what America has to offer, but when they are preaching to the public, they seem to have another view.
Government leaders can’t be relied on to deliver better bilateral relationships, especially not the Chinese government. But its encouraging that, in the shadow of censorship, some ordinary Chinese people are opening their eyes and looking more realistically at our country and its place in the world. American leaders should realize that the best hope for improved Chinese-American relations resides with these Chinese people.
Nevertheless, as long as the Chinese government pretends to be the defender of the people against the United States and persists in its negative propaganda, Chinese-American relations will have a long way to go.
Murong Xuecun is a writer whose latest novel to be published in English is Dancing Through Red Dust. This article was translated by The New York Times from the Chinese.
A version of this op-ed appears in print on October 14, 2015, in The International New York Times.
Copyright 2015 The New York Times Company.