ZERO FUNDING FOR NATURAL FREEDOM IN TIBET – NATURAL MECHANISM FOR REGIME CHANGE IN BEIJING. THE SWORD OF DAMOCLES HANGING OVER THE NECK OF BEIJING.
ZERO FUNDING FOR TIBET – NATURAL MECHANISM FOR REGIME CHANGE IN BEIJING
President Trump’s 2018 Budget provides no funding in support of Natural Freedom in Tibet.
I am presenting view shared by Ms. Olivia Enos in which she appeals to President Trump not to forget Tibet. In her view, it appears that Natural Order is always determined by choices and actions performed by Man.
As student of Natural Science, I examine Natural Factors, Natural Conditions, Natural Mechanisms, and Natural Events that impact, or reset Natural Balance, Natural Order, and Natural Equilibrium that underlies human experience called Natural Freedom. For example, Natural Event called K-T Extinction Event totally wiped out ruling clan of Dinosaurs from face of planet Earth to introduce new clan of rulers called Anatomically Modern Man.
In Natural History of Man, powerful, mighty Empires have risen and fallen altering political boundaries imposed by Man over Natural Boundaries that define terrestrial life. Man brings about Regime Change using physical force using tools invented by Man. However, to expect Regime Change through Natural Event such as Bolide Collision cannot be dismissed as figment of human imagination.
In fact, Saint John describes, Book of REVELATION, Chapter 18, a mechanism for Regime Change in Evil Empire code-named Babylon. He visualizes heavenly strike such as Bolide Collision that destroys Evil Empire Babylon. Man may interpret sudden, unexpected Downfall of Babylon as Natural Disaster, Natural Calamity, Catastrophe, Cataclysm, Doom, or Apocalypse.
I am not concerned about President Trump’s Budget Plan with Zero Funding for Natural Freedom in Tibet. In my Natural Expectation, Evil Red Empire will experience Natural Downfall triggered by Natural Event called Bolide Collision. I seek Tibet Equilibrium to restore Balance of Power in South Asia that grants Natural Freedom to Tibetans. The Sword of Damocles is hanging over the neck of Beijing.
Zero Funding in President Trump’s 2018 Budget in support of Natural Freedom in Tibet. Natural Mechanism may restore Tibet Equilibrium.
Olivia Enos ,
Contributor
I write on international human rights and national security.
I am a researcher in the Asian Studies Center at The Heritage Foundation where I write on international human rights issues including human trafficking, transnational crime, religious freedom, and democratic freedoms, among other social issues in Asia. I also work on human rights challenges facing the Middle East including ISIS genocide and U.S. refugee policy. My work has been featured in The National Interest, RealClearWorld, Providence: A Journal of Christianity and Foreign Policy, and Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, among other publications. I received my BA from Patrick Henry College and am completing my MA in Asian Studies at Georgetown University. I live with my husband Zach on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C.
The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.
President Trump’s 2018 Budget provides Zero Funding in support of Natural Freedom in Tibet. Natural Mechanism for Regime Change in Beijing.
UNSPECIFIED, CHINA – APRIL 23: Tibetan Buddhist monks use the iPhone in the courtyard of the Kumbum Monastery on April 23, 2017 in Xining, Qinghai Province. Kumbum was founded in 1583 in a narrow valley close to the village of Lusar in the Tibetan cultural region of Amdo. (Photo by Wang He/Getty Images)
President Trump’s proposed 2018 budget would zero out funding critical to advancing freedom in Tibet. Proposed budget cuts would eliminate all USAID programming for Tibet and funding for the Ngawang Choephel Fellows program, which finances educational and cultural exchanges for Tibetan refugees. What might happen with efforts to protect Tibetan refugees in South Asia is unclear.
The State Department said that many “tough choices” were made during budget negotiations. Economic development programs in Tibet will take the most significant hit. In addition to the cuts outlined above, there is a question as to how much funding—if any—will be allocated for the Tibet Fund. Nor does the budget proposal outline how cuts to the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) will impact programs toward Tibet.
Defunding efforts to empower Tibetans sends the signal that the U.S. no longer cares about advancing liberty in places like Tibet and Xinjiang where China today uses human rights abuse to maintain control over these territories.
Just last year, the Chinese government began demolishing one of the world’s largest Tibetan Buddhist academies, the Larung Gar, reducing the population of monks and nuns from 12,000 to less than 5,000 after its partial destruction in 2016. Additionally, at least 150 Tibetans have self-immolated since February 2009.
At a recent event at The Heritage Foundation, Dr. Lobsang Sangay, president of the Central Tibetan Administration, reaffirmed Tibet’s commitment to the “Middle Way” approach. This policy approach seeks freedom for Tibetans within the framework of the Chinese constitution.
“The Middle Way approach” explained Sangay, “is in the middle of seeking separation or independence from China but at the same time ending the present repressive policies of the Chinese government.”
It is a peaceful initiative, one that embraces dialogue with the Chinese government. The last two U.S. administrations affirmed that policy, but it remains to be seen whether it will be supported by the Trump administration which has said little to nothing on Tibet.
U.S policy toward Tibet has historically been led by Congress and is enshrined in the 2002 law, the Tibetan Policy Act, which initiated or affirmed the programs the Trump administration plans to cut. If budget cuts are solidified, members of Congress should take steps to reaffirm U.S. support for Tibet.
One of the other ways Sangay suggests the U.S. can support Tibet is by meeting with the Dalai Lama. Sangay highlighted that on his first international trip, President Trump visited Saudi Arabia, Israel and the Vatican traveling to “all three major sacred places of three major traditions.” Sangay continued, “If he can meet with all leaders of major traditions, I think it’s just logical that he meet with the most prominent Buddhist leader”.
Advancing freedom in Asia – and around the world, for that matter – is in the interest of the U.S. China is not the only country to use human rights violations or the threat of abuse to keep the population in check and maintain their grip on power. These authoritarian tendencies are encouraged when actors like the U.S. refrain from supporting freedom where they can. The U.S. should not grant de facto impunity to China by abandoning the Tibetan people in their time of need. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in a recent speech to the State Department said that human rights would factor into the Trump administration’s foreign policy paradigm. To make good on that promise, the Trump administration should consider ways to promote human rights and norms in China. The effort can begin with protecting rights and freedom in Tibet.
President Trump’s 2018 Budget provides Zero Funding in support of Natural Freedom in Tibet. Natural Mechanism for Regime Change in Beijing may restore Tibet Equilibrium. The Sword of Damocles hanging over the neck of Beijing.Zero Funding in support of Natural Freedom in Tibet. Natural Mechanism for Regime Change in Beijing. The Sword of Damocles hanging over the neck of Beijing.Zero Funding in support of Natural Freedom in Tibet. Natural Mechanism for Regime Change in Beijing. The Sword of Damocles hanging over the neck of Beijing.Zero Funding in support of Natural Freedom in Tibet. Natural Mechanism for Regime Change in Beijing. The Sword of Damocles hangs over the neck of Beijing.
NO CHINA, NO RUSSIA – U.S. MUST CHOOSE TIBET EQUILIBRIUM
NO RUSSIA, NO CHINA – U.S. MUST CHOOSE TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. RUSSIAN EMPIRE IN 1913.
United States must define Foreign Policy before choosing allies. “AMERICA FIRST” Foreign Policy demands choosing “TIBET EQUILIBRIUM.”
NO RUSSIA, NO CHINA – U.S. MUST CHOOSE TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. QING CHINA EMPIRE CIRCA. 1820.
Both Russia and China are major military powers of world competing for Superpower status. To achieve ‘Balance of Power’ to restore ‘Power Equilibrium’, America must choose Tibet because of its strategic location.
NO RUSSIA, NO CHINA – U.S. MUST CHOOSE TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. BRITISH EMPIRE 1921.
Tibet is second largest nation of the region and Tibet’s Independence from military occupation is the only real solution to contain and engage military powers like Russia and China.
NO RUSSIA, NO CHINA – U.S. MUST CHOOSE TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. A SATELLITE’S EYE VIEW OF TIBETAN PLATEAU.
Major Retd Rudranarasimham, DOOM DOOMA DOOMSAYER
CHINA OR RUSSIA? U.S. MAY HAVE TO CHOOSE AN ALLY
NEWSWEEK
Newsweek Europe
NO RUSSIA, NO CHINA – U.S. MUST CHOOSE TIBET EQUILIBRIUM.
This article originally appeared on The Conversation.
Forty-five years ago, last February, U.S. President Richard Nixon returned from a visit to China that shocked the world and unsettled leaders in Moscow, who were awaiting a visit from Nixon a few months later.
Soviet leaders wondered if they were finally witnessing the birth of a U.S.-China alliance that they had feared ever since the breakdown of the Sino-Soviet alliance in the early 1960s.
As Washington and the media convulse over every new outrage emanating from Moscow, while President Trump repeatedly asks, “Wouldn’t it be nice if we actually got along with Russia?” U.S. policymakers are faced with the same choice between Russia and China, though this time the stakes might be even higher.
The history of persistent tensions between Russia and China suggests two choices: Accommodate and reconcile with Russia to balance against the greater power—China. Or, align with China to defend a rules-based international order from its most powerful antagonist—Russia.
It should be clear by now that we can no longer oppose Russia and China at the same time. Though that route might seem tempting and natural, given the historical aspirations of U.S. foreign policy to protect territorial sovereignty, promote human rights and provide a framework for free trade, we are no longer equal to the task.
At a minimum, that would require decisive U.S. action in Syria, firm military support for the government in Kiev, a drastic military buildup of NATO forces across Eastern Europe and a more confrontational posture in the South and East China seas. Doing that would further stretch a U.S. military that is already facing a personnel shortage. It would also represent a burden that the American people apparently no longer wish to carry.
Lost in the discussion of whether Trump’s “America First” bravado reflects militarism or isolationism are the ways in which our options have been shaped by the administration that preceded him.
Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, second from right, and China President Xi Jinping watch the Victory Day parade at Red Square in Moscow, Russia, May 9, 2015. Reuters
We have only begun to reckon with the foreign policy legacy of Barack Obama, but he has clearly done more to shape the current global predicament than Trump has. When the Russian, Iranian and Turkish foreign ministers met in Moscow in the final weeks of the Obama administration to solve the Syrian crisis by themselves without inviting the U.S., they were making a startling declaration: The nation that had once declared itself to be “indispensable” was now very clearly dispensable. It would have been unthinkable at any point since Pearl Harbor for American interests to be discounted so brazenly in solving the most pressing international crisis.
It is hard to separate the factors that brought us to this point. Is this simply an inevitable product of relative, or even absolute, American decline? Is it a product of a president who sought to “lead from behind” and whose fundamental foreign policy principle was that sins of commission are always worse than sins of omission? Or did Obama conclude he was dealing with a country, already exhausted by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, that was no longer willing to shoulder the burden of defending the free world? Either way, Trump has inherited a country that is no longer willing and able to play the leadership role it once did in world affairs.
So where do we go from here? If we cannot oppose both Russia and China, then we need to compromise with at least one of them.
MAKE FRIENDS WITH RUSSIA?
Arguing for a Russian alignment is the notion that China already does more damage to American interests around the globe than Russia does. China damages U.S. economic interests through unfair trade practices, our standing in Asia by undermining our alliances, and our ability to promote democracy, particularly in Africa, by offering aid and investment without good governance conditions. As China grows more powerful and assertive, its efforts to drive the U.S. out of East Asia, coupled with increasing challenges to American interests around the globe, will amount to a full-spectrum challenge to the current U.S. position in the world.
In contrast, Russia’s challenges to American interests are relative pinpricks. Russia does not have the ability to turn either Eastern Europe or the Middle East into its own sphere of influence. It is even losing the competition for economic influence in Central Asia, its own post-Soviet backyard, to China.
Putin might not be an evil dictator bent on doing as much damage to the West as possible, but rather a spurned pragmatist with a realistic view of Russia’s position in the world who had initially hoped to cooperate with Western leaders, but has been embittered by poor treatment by them. Putin’s Russia, therefore, would represent not a mortal threat to the international world order, but rather a missed opportunity, one that can still perhaps be salvaged.
OR CHOOSE CHINA INSTEAD?
Alternatively, we could align with China against Russia.
This approach makes sense if you believe Putin began as a pragmatist, but that was only a temporary tack, given his KGB background and nationalist authoritarian inclinations. But now that he has seen how weak his opponents are and how much havoc he can wreak, he has set his sights higher. Fifteen years ago he might not have imagined he could break NATO or the EU, but now that seems within reach, and nothing will deter him from this chance to realize the fondest dreams of his Soviet predecessors. What could we possibly offer him to match such dreams? He would revel in the chaos that would follow.
Chaos, however, is precisely the opposite of what the leaders in Beijing desire. China’s resurgence is built on a world of peace and trade, a world ultimately sustained by American military strength. For China to seek to challenge such an order, it would have to imagine that it could not only fill the role the U.S. currently fills, but manage the transition in such a way as to avoid a chaotic interlude. Chinese leaders are far too clear-headed for such a gambit, and in any case they see no need to rush such a transition before conditions for it have matured.
President Xi Jinping is anyway preoccupied with ensuring the indefinite continuation of Communist Party rule. What could jeopardize that more than a world in chaos and economic disaster?
IS THE CHOICE EVEN OURS?
With Russia against China? With China against Russia?
There is no question such a choice is unpalatable. Not only would either alternative involve morally difficult concessions, but having to make the choice at all implies that the United States is no longer capable of defending the world order it has long sponsored. This is a difficult reality to accept.
And broaching the possibility of such a choice leads to more difficult questions.
Could Russia even be persuaded to align with the U.S. against China or China against Russia? What would we have to offer either side? What would this mean for our allies, especially in Europe and East Asia? The latter question might not be as insoluble as it may seem, because our allies have long since begun anticipating just such a scenario. But if we are no longer able and willing to perform the role we once did, we need to reckon with the consequences.
Jeremy Friedman is Assistant Professor, Business, Government, and the International Economy, Harvard Business School.
NO RUSSIA, NO CHINA – U.S. MUST CHOOSE TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. RUSSIAN EMPIRE 1914. NO RUSSIA, NO CHINA – U.S. MUST CHOOSE TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. THE CHINESE EMPIRE 1910. NO RUSSIA, NO CHINA – U.S. MUST CHOOSE TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. NO RUSSIA, NO CHINA – U.S. MUST CHOOSE TIBET EQUILIBRIUM.
NIXON-KISSINGER VIETNAM TREASON – THE CIA’S CANCELLED WAR
NIXON-KISSINGER VIETNAM TREASON – THE CIA’S CANCELLED WAR.
‘TIBET: THE CIA’S CANCELLED WAR’ fails to describe Nixon-Kissinger Vietnam Treason during 1971-72 when Americans were fighting a bloody War in Vietnam against Communists supported by the Soviet Union and Red China. As I was part of this CIA Mission in Tibet, I knew that Tibet and India were willing to help the US by fighting against Communists inside Tibet rather than directly engaging Communists in Vietnam. Tibet and India want to choose their Battlefield in full support of the US Policy to engage and contain the spread of Communism. The Central Intelligence Agency or CIA has no vested powers to wage or fight wars. “The Cancelled War” is simply an act of Treason. The 37th President of the United States chose to provide support and comfort to the Enemy during War waged on behalf of the United States.
In 1971-72, CIA Mission in Tibet never ended. The Mission continued without direct participation of American nationals. I can appreciate CIA’s unwillingness to divulge the truth about its Mission which is always sanctioned by the executive powers vested in the US President. In my analysis, this War will be fought to restore Balance of Power in Southern Asia.
NIXON-KISSINGER VIETNAM TREASON – CIA’S CANCELLED WAR
Lhamo Tsering Collection
Resistance fighters on the Tibetan border during the early years of the CIA’s Tibet program
For much of the past century, US relations with Tibet have been characterized by kowtowing to the Chinese and hollow good wishes for the Dalai Lama. As early as 1908, William Rockhill, a US diplomat, advised the Thirteenth Dalai Lama that “close and friendly relations with China are absolutely necessary, for Tibet is and must remain a portion of the Ta Ts’ing [Manchu] Empire for its own good.” Not much has changed with the Fourteenth Dalai Lama one hundred years later. After a meeting in 2011 with President Obama in the White House Map Room—the Oval Office being too official—the Dalai Lama has ushered out the back door, past the garbage cans. All this, of course, is intended to avoid condemnation from Beijing, which regards even the mildest criticism of its Tibet policy as “interference.”
However, there was one dramatic departure from the minimalist approach. For nearly two decades after the 1950 Chinese takeover of Tibet, the CIA ran a covert operation designed to train Tibetan insurgents and gather intelligence about the Chinese, as part of its efforts to contain the spread of communism around the world. Though little known today, the program produced at least one spectacular intelligence coup and provided a source of support for the Dalai Lama. On the eve of Richard Nixon’s historic 1972 meeting with Mao, the program was abruptly canceled, thus returning the US to its traditional arms-length policy toward Tibet. But this did not end the long legacy of mistrust that continues to color Chinese-American relations. Not only was the Chinese government aware of the CIA program; in 1992, it published a white paper on the subject. The paper included information drawn from reliable Western sources about the agency’s activities, but laid the primary blame for the insurgency on the “Dalai Lama clique,” a phrase Beijing still uses today.
The insurgency began after the People’s Liberation Army invaded Tibet following its defeat of the Nationalists, and after Beijing forced the Dalai Lama’s government to recognize Chinese administration over the region. In 1955, a group of local Tibetan leaders secretly plotted an armed uprising, and rebellion broke out a year later, with the rebels besieging local government institutions and killing hundreds of government staff as well as Han Chinese people. In May 1957, a rebel organization and a rebel fighting force were founded and began killing communist officials, disrupting communication lines, and attacking institutions and Chinese army troops stationed in the region.
By that point, the rebellion had gained American backing. In the early 1950s, the CIA began to explore ways to aid the Tibetans as part of its growing campaign to contain Communist China. By the second half of the decade, “Project Circus” had been formally launched, Tibetan resistance fighters were being flown abroad for training, and weapons and ammunition were being airdropped at strategic locations inside Tibet. In 1959, the agency opened a secret facility to train Tibetan recruits at Camp Hale near Leadville, Colorado, partly because the location, more than 10,000 feet above sea level, might approximate the terrain of the Himalayas. According to one account, some 170 “Kamba guerrillas” passed through the Colorado program.
While the CIA effort never produced a mass uprising against the Chinese occupiers, it did provide one of the greatest intelligence successes of the Cold War, in the form of a vast trove of Chinese army documents captured by Tibetan fighters and turned over to the CIA in 1961. These revealed the loss of morale among Chinese soldiers, who had learned of the vast famine that was wracking China during The Great Leap Forward. Over the next decade, however, there was growing disagreement in Washington over the CIA’s activities in Tibet, and in 1971, as Henry Kissinger prepared for Nixon’s meeting with Mao, the program was wound down.
“Although Tibet may not have been on the table in the Beijing talks, the era of official US support for the Tibetan cause was over,” recalled John Kenneth Knaus, a forty-year CIA veteran, in his 1999 book Orphans of the Cold War: America and the Tibetan Struggle for Survival. “There was no role for Tibet in Kissinger’s new equation.” By 1975, President Gerald Ford could say to a skeptical Deng Xiaoping, China’s future leader, “Let me assure you, Mr. Vice-Premier, that we oppose and do not support any [United States] governmental action as far as Tibet is concerned.”
Many friends of Tibet and admirers of the Dalai Lama, who has always advocated nonviolence, believe he knew nothing about the CIA program. But Gyalo Thondup, one of the Dalai Lama’s brothers, was closely involved in the operations, and Knaus, who took part in the operation, writes that “Gyalo Thondup kept his brother the Dalai Lama informed of the general terms of the CIA support.” According to Knaus, starting in the late 1950s, the Agency paid the Dalai Lama $15,000 a month. Those payments came to an end in 1974.
In 1999, I asked the Dalai Lama if the CIA operation had been harmful to Tibet. “Yes, that is true,” he replied. The intervention was harmful, he suggested because it was primarily aimed at serving American interests rather than helping the Tibetans in any lasting way. “Once the American policy toward China changed, they stopped their help,” he told me. “Otherwise our struggle could have gone on. Many Tibetans had great expectations of CIA [air] drops, but then the Chinese army came and destroyed them. The Americans had a different agenda from the Tibetans.”
This was exactly right, and the different goals of the Agency and the Tibetans are explored fully by the Tibetan-speaking anthropologist Carole McGranahan in her Arrested Histories: Tibet, the CIA, and Memories of a Forgotten War (2010). Although sometimes clouded by anthropological jargon, her account fascinatingly explores how differently from their American counterparts the Tibetan veterans remember the CIA operation. A striking example is the matter of the Chinese army documents, whose capture in a Tibetan ambush of a high-ranking Chinese officer is depicted in grisly detail in a huge painting in the CIA’s museum in Washington. In addition to revealing low Chinese morale, the documents disclosed the extent of Chinese violence in Tibet. “This information was the only documentary proof the Tibetan government [in exile] had of the Chinese atrocities and was therefore invaluable,” McGranahan notes. Yet the documents and their capture rarely came up during her long interview sessions with the veterans. “Why is it that this achievement, so valued by the US and Tibetan governments, is not remotely as memorable for [the] soldiers?”
One reason is that the Tibetan fighters were told nothing about the value of the documents, which they couldn’t read. One veteran explains to her:
Our soldiers attacked Chinese trucks and seized some documents of the Chinese government. After that, the Americans increased our pay scale. Nobody knew what the contents of those documents were. At that time, questions weren’t asked. If you asked many questions, then others would be suspicious of you.
The leader of the ambush tells her that “as a reward, the CIA gave me an Omega chronograph,” but he, too, had little knowledge of the documents’ importance. As McGranahan shows in extensive detail, the veterans were preoccupied above all by their devotion to the Dalai Lama, whom they wanted to resume his position as supreme leader of an independent Tibet.
After the CIA mission was ended, Tibet became increasingly marginal to Washington’s China policy, as Knaus has now made clear in a second book, Beyond Shangri-la: America and Tibet’s Move into the Twenty-First Century. The reality is that American presidents now face a world power in Beijing. In language that sums up the cats-cradle of American justifications for ignoring Tibet, ex-Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia Marshall Green recalls to Knaus, “there was nothing we could do to help the Tibetans except by improving our relations with the Chinese Communists so that we might be in a position to exert pressure on them to moderate their policies towards the Tibetans.” Green “admitted that this was ‘perhaps a rationalization.'”
President Obama will soon meet the new Chinese leader, Xi Jinping. His advisers will have reminded him of the encounter between his predecessor, Bill Clinton, and then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin on June 27, 1998. In that meeting, Clinton assured Jiang that, “I agree that Tibet is a part of China, an autonomous region of China. And I can understand why the acknowledgment of that would be a precondition of dialog with the Dalai Lama.” Banking on his well-known charm, Mr. Clinton added, “I have spent time with the Dalai Lama. I believe him to be an honest man, and I believe if he had a conversation with President Jiang, they would like each other very much.” Jiang, it is reported, threw back his head and laughed. Clinton’s suggestion was omitted from the official Chinese transcript.
CHINA MINUS TIBET EQUALS TO POWER EQUILIBRIUM. PRESIDENT TRUMP WITH CHINESE PRESIDENT XI JINPING.
To deal with problems of Red China’s Economic, Political, Military, Maritime, and Nuclear Expansionism, I have to address the problem of Red China’s Territorial Expansionism. Red China gained 965, 000 square miles of Tibetan Territory through military occupation. In terms of size, Tibet is the second largest nation in Southern Asia, almost as large as Republic of India( over 1, 269, 221 square miles).
Evicting Tibet’s military occupier is the first step that will restore Balance of Power in Asia and I name this process as ‘TIBET EQUILIBRIUM’ for Tibetan Territory is the Key for Political, Economic, Military Imbalance that is undermining International Relations.
CHINA MINUS TIBET EQUALS POWER EQUILIBRIUM. PRESIDENT TRUMP WITH CHINESE PRESIDENT XI JINPING.CHINA MINUS TIBET EQUALS TO POWER EQUILIBRIUM. PRESIDENT TRUMP MEETS CHINESE PRESIDENT XI JINPING.
BY ISHAAN THAROOR
China Minus Tibet Equals to Power Equilibrium.
Chinese President Xi Jinping arrived in Palm Beach, Fla., on Thursday for an unorthodox meeting at President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. The presidents and their wives are scheduled to spend about 24 hours together, including a Thursday night dinner and a working lunch the following day. The first meaningful discussions between arguably the two most powerful people on the planet are, of course, hugely significant. Trump spent a large chunk of his election campaign attacking China’s supposedly unfair trade and fiscal practices, which he promised would be challenged by a more protectionist and nationalist Trump presidency. Xi, meanwhile, is meeting the erratic U.S. president at a time when his own political future at home is not as secure as some might think.
China Minus Tibet Equals to Power Equilibrium.
Trump has already signaled this may be a tough encounter. But, as my colleague Simon Denyer wrote last week, it’s quite likely Xi has come bearing gifts — “a package of pledges designed to give the U.S. president some ‘tweetable’ promises to present as victories.” Whether this translates into long-term wins for either leader is less clear. Either way, here are the main storylines to watch: The question of trade “We can’t continue to allow China to rape our country,” declared Trump on the campaign trail last year. He was talking about the United States’ considerable trade deficit with China and Beijing’s history of currency manipulation. Part of Trump’s pledge to revive blue-collar American jobs explicitly involved punishing China on the world stage. This was a major departure from previous U.S. administrations, both Republican and Democratic, which embraced the dogma of open markets and sought to make China a reliable partner within — not an opponent to — an American-led international order. Earlier this year, as the world readied for Trump’s inauguration, Xi cast himself as a custodian of that order, defending globalization, open borders and free trade — all things Trump campaigned against — at the World Economic Forum. Xi’s rhetoric received mixed reviews, but it underscored the strange new paradigm shaping global relations. Ahead of Xi’s visit this week, China’s state media attempted to make the case for normal bilateral ties. “U.S. job losses are not China’s fault,” read a Xinhua commentary on Wednesday. The next day, another piece argued that China’s trade surplus “does not necessarily mean China benefits while the United States loses.” Xinhua went on: “About 40 percent of the trade surplus is actually generated by U.S. companies in China.” Ironically, as economic experts note, Trump’s protectionist agenda is more in line with China’s own practices, including its boosting of mammoth Chinese state-run companies. “Mr. Trump seems to want to move the U.S. toward China’s approach, rather than move China toward the U.S. approach of open trade and globalization,” said Eswar Prasad, a professor of trade at Cornell University, to my colleague Ana Swanson. “He seems to want the U.S. to be more like China than China to be more like the U.S. And I’m not sure that’s the best path for the U.S. to go down.”
A magazine featuring President Trump on display with Chinese military magazines at a newsstand in Beijing on April 4. (Mark Schiefelbein/Associated Press) The question of security There will be a Kim Jong Un-shaped elephant in the room in Mar-a-Lago. Amid a flurry of North Korean missile tests, the Trump administration is keen on getting China — Pyongyang’s only real friend — to bring the pariah state to heel. Trump and other senior administration officials have signaled their impatience with North Korea and threatened unilateral action in the past week. “The clock is very, very quickly running out,” a senior White House official told reporters. “All options are on the table for us.” This may all be bluster intended to pressure Beijing, which has cast itself as the honest broker between the North Koreans and the United States — much to American chagrin. Washington’s longstanding frustration with what it perceives as China’s unwillingness (or inability) to rein in North Korea will also run up against other geopolitical disagreements, including differences over China’s expansionist role in the South China Sea and the status of Taiwan. On all these fronts, it’s likely the Xi-Trump meeting will yield polite sound bites — and few real changes to the tense status quo. The question of strategy In the short term, Trump may emerge from Mar-a-Lago having burnished his credentials as a budding statesman — a pleasant photo-op here, a nice headline there. Xi, who will return home as the Communist Party is preparing for a cabinet reshuffle, has to walk a difficult line and “lose face” in the eyes of the global media and the Chinese public. But in the long term, Western observers see an alarming drift in the course of U.S.-China relations.
China Minus Tibet Equals to Power Equilibrium.
“The problem lies in Mr. Trump’s transactional view of the world. He prefers deals to something as necessarily ill-defined as global leadership,” wrote Financial Times columnist Philip Stephens. “Hence the decision to repudiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade agreement that would have checked Beijing’s advancing economic influence in the western Pacific and handed Washington important strategic leverage.” “As recently as four years ago, Xi and other Chinese leaders fretted, publicly and explicitly, that their people were being seduced by the moral glamour of American democracy — by the open hearted confidence of the ‘shining city on a hill’ and by the ability of a nation founded on slavery to elect its first African-American President,” wrote the New Yorker’s Evan Osnos. “Xi worried that the American example of competence, generosity, and contempt for authoritarianism would, someday, drive his own people to challenge the rule of the Communist Party. Xi has less reason to worry about that today.”
UNITED STATES – CHINA RELATIONS DEMAND TIBET EQUILIBRIUM
US – CHINA RELATIONS DEMAND TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. PRESIDENT TRUMP MUST ACCEPT THE ROLE OF BALANCER.
In 1971, United States during Doomed Presidency of Nixon-Kissinger initiated a Policy that disregards the Doctrine of Balance of Power which formulates a system of international relations in which nations shift alliances to maintain an Equilibrium of Power and prevent dominance by any single state. For Balance of Power is the goal of Foreign Policy, nation can enter alliances to maintain stable power relations. Balance of Power describes the posture and policy of a nation or group of nations protecting itself against another nation or group of nations by matching its power against the power of the other side. States can pursue a policy of Balance of Power in two ways; 1. By increasing their own power, as when engaging in an armaments race or in the competitive acquisition of territory; or, 2. By adding to their power that of other states, as when embarking upon a policy of alliances. The role of “BALANCER” or “Holder of the Balance” is guided by one and only one consideration – the maintenance of “BALANCE” itself.
US – CHINA RELATIONS DEMAND TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. CHINA’S MILITARY BUDGET IS EXPANDING TAKING FULL ADVANTAGE OF US – CHINA TRADE DEFICIT.
In my analysis, with emergence of Red China as a major economic and military power of the world, Balance of Power is by necessary has become the focus of United States foreign relations. The geographical location and size of Tibet’s territory give it a predominant role in formulating US relations with all other nations of that region in Asia. For example, the size of China’s immediate neighbors is as follows:
1.Tibet – 965,000 square miles
2. Japan – 142, 811 square miles
3. North Korea – 46, 540 square miles
4. South Korea – 38, 321 square miles
5. Philippines – 115, 830 square miles
6. Taiwan – 13, 885 square miles
7. Malaysia – 128, 430 square miles
8. Indonesia – 741, 096 square miles
9. Brunei – 2, 228 square miles
United States has no choice other than that of upholding the principle of Balance of Power to defend vital, national security interests. US must perform the role of “BALANCER” or Holder of the Balance by restoring Tibet Equilibrium. Tibetan territory cannot remain under Red China’s military occupation.
TIBET SUPPORTERS CONVERGE ON CAPITOL HILL TO LOBBY CONGRESS
March 31, 2017 7:22 PM
VOA News
FILE – The U.S. Capitol building is seen on Capitol Hill in Washington, Jan. 28, 2014.
More than 130 people from 23 states converged on Capitol Hill to lobby for Tibet the week before Chinese President Xi Jinping is scheduled to meet with President Donald Trump at his Mar-a-Lago retreat in Florida on April 6.
Although the leaders’ meeting is expected to focus on trade and the need for China to do more to rein in the nuclear and missile programs of its neighbor and ally North Korea, Tibet remains a contentious issue between the two nations.
“Congress has shown a strong interest in Tibet since the 1980s, passing dozens of laws and resolutions related to Tibet, speaking out about conditions in Tibet, and welcoming visits by the Dalai Lama,” according to a 2014 report by the Congressional Research Service. “Such actions have long been a source of friction in the U.S.-China relationship. China charges that they amount to support for challenges to Chinese rule in Tibet.”
US – CHINA RELATIONS DEMAND TIBET EQUILIBRIUM.
FILE – Chinese President Xi Jinping shakes hands with U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson before their meeting at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China, March 19, 2017.
Bhuchung Tsering of the International Campaign for Tibet in Washington, which organized Tibet Lobby Day, said, “Looking at the meeting of President Xi of China and President Trump, we want to send a message to President Trump, through Congress and to Trump directly, that there is traditional bipartisan support for dialog with China on Tibet,” he said, adding “Secretary [of State Rex] Tillerson says he is committed to promoting dialogue on Tibet and receiving the Dalai Lama.”
Tibet Lobby Day was held simultaneously in Washington, Brussels and Canberra, Australia, March 27-29.
“U.S. policy has not changed,” Anna Richey-Allen, a spokeswoman for the State Department’s East Asia and Pacific Bureau, said Friday, adding that the U.S. recognizes the Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR) and Tibetan autonomous prefectures to be a part of the People’s Republic of China.
“We remain deeply concerned about human rights abuses and restrictions, including those imposed on religious freedom, in the TAR and elsewhere in China,” she said. “We remain committed to supporting meaningful autonomy for Tibetans and the preservation of their unique religious, cultural and linguistic traditions.
“The United States encourages the People’s Republic of China to engage with the Dalai Lama and his representative without preconditions.”
Ngawang Norbu of Boston, Massachusetts, was one of the Tibetan-Americans and Tibet supporters who spoke with more than 250 members of Congress and their staffs during Tibet Lobby Day.
US – China Relations Demand Tibet Equilibrium. Tibet Lobby Day in Washington, March 2017.
Ngawang Norbu, a Tibetan-American and Tibet supporter shown in this photo taken from video, attended Tibet Lobby Day on Capitol Hill in Washington, March 2017.
The activists asked them to continue funding Tibet programs and to promote efforts to gain access to Tibetan areas for U.S. officials, citizens and journalists. They also want the Trump administration to implement the Tibetan Policy Act of 2002 (TPA), which has the stated purpose of supporting “the aspirations of the Tibetan people to safeguard their distinct identity.”
“The important thing today is that there’s a new administration in America and, along with that, the exile Tibetan administration in India has declared 2017 to be a year of action for Tibet, and so that’s why I’m here,” Norbu told VOA on Wednesday. “It’s our responsibility and obligation to lobby for Tibet, and whether our requests are responded to or not is, of course, up to the leadership here, but in our mind we think our objectives and efforts will bear fruit.”
Bhuchung expects to see the reintroduction of the proposed Reciprocal Access to Tibet Act by Representative Jim McGovern, a Democrat from Massachusetts; Representative Randy Hultgren, a Republican from Illinois; Senator Marco Rubio, a Florida Republican; and Senator Tammy Baldwin, a Wisconsin Democrat.
US – China Relations Demand Tibet Equilibrium.Tibet Lobby Day in Washington, March 2017.
Marah Litchford of North Carolina, shown in this photo taken from video, participated in Tibet Lobby Day in Washington, March 2017.
North Carolinian Marah Litchford, who has expressed concern about religious freedom in Tibet, participated in the Washington movement. “They listen,” she said. “You just have to talk loudly.”
Nike Ching and Steven Herman contributed to this report, which originated with reporting by Dondhon Namling of the VOA Tibetan service.
TIBET CONSCIOUSNESS – TIBET PROBLEM ON THE BACK BURNER
TIBET CONSCIOUSNESS – TIBET PROBLEM ON THE BACK BURNER. TIBET PROBLEM WILL NOT GO AWAY AND TIBET CAN NEVER BE FORGOTTEN. THERE IS NO BALANCE OF POWER IN SOUTHEAST ASIA WITH RED CHINA’S MILITARY DOMINATION THREATENING PEACE AND STABILITY OF WORLD.
The Problem of Balance of Power in Southeast Asia became apparent with founding of People’s Republic of China on October 01, 1949. Red China’s Communist Party Chairman Mao Zedong wasted no time to declare his ambitious ‘Expansionist’ Policy. United States along with India gave due importance to this Tibet Problem and initiated action to respond to Red China’s Military and Economic Expansionism.
TIBET ON THE BACK BURNER
TIBET CONSCIOUSNESS – TIBET PROBLEM ON THE BACK BURNER. NIXON-KISSINGER GET CREDIT FOR PLACING TIBET ON THE BACK BURNER. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. THE TIME FOR ACTION IS NOW.
US 37th President, Richard M Nixon placed Tibet Problem on the Back Burner in pursuit of his sinful desire to befriend Mao Zedong and Zhou En-Lai totally ignoring their Crimes against Humanity. Tibet’s time in History has arrived. Tibet Problem can no longer remain on the Back Burner. The time for action is NOW.
TIBET CONSCIOUSNESS – TIBET PROBLEM ON THE BACK BURNER. IN 1971, INDIA REFUSED TO KEEP PROBLEM OF BANGLADESH ON THE BACK BURNER. INDIA TOOK UNILATERAL, DECISIVE ACTION TO RESOLVE HUMANITARIAN CRISIS IN BANGLADESH.
During 1971, Nixon-Kissinger placed the problem of Genocide in East Pakistan on the Back Burner. India refused to go along with Nixon-Kissinger and insisted that the humanitarian crisis in East Pakistan deserves a very high priority. India acted alone, and decisively resolved Bangladesh Crisis.
TIBET CONSCIOUSNESS – TIBET PROBLEM ON THE BACK BURNER. ON NOVEMBER 03, 1971, INDIAN PRIME MINISTER MRS. INDIRA GANDHI MET WITH US PRESIDENT RICHARD NIXON IN THE WHITE HOUSE. INDIA REFUSED TO KEEP BANGLADESH HUMANITARIAN CRISIS ON THE BACK BURNER AND TOOK SWIFT, DECISIVE ACTION TO INITIATE LIBERATION OF BANGLADESH USING MILITARY ACTION.
Nixon-Kissinger did not ‘NORMALIZE’ US-CHINA relations. Without Power Equilibrium in Southeast Asia, US cannot hope for normal relations with Red China.
The Spirits of Special Frontier ForceThe Spirits of Special Frontier Force, Ann Arbor, MI. At Special Frontier Force, I host ‘The Living Tibetan Spirits’…
TIBET CONSCIOUSNESS – TIBET PROBLEM ON THE BACK BURNER. INDIA AND UNITED STATES CANNOT AFFORD TO IGNORE RED CHINA’S MILITARY DOMINATION OF TIBET.
NIXON-KISSINGER – TIBET – ON THE BACK BURNER
TIBET CONSCIOUSNESS – TIBET PROBLEM ON THE BACK BURNER. IN 1971, NIXON-KISSINGER IGNORED HUMANITARIAN CRISIS IN EAST PAKISTAN LEAVING IT ON THE BACK BURNER.
NIXON-KISSINGER – TIBET – ON THE BACK BURNER. Archer Kent Blood, the US Consul General at Dacca, East Pakistan sent this “Blood Telegram” to question the US Foreign Policy that utterly failed to denounce the atrocities, the massacre of innocent, unarmed civilians, mostly Hindu minority community living in East Pakistan during 1971 by the military rulers of Pakistan. He sent this telegram as his moral duty to uphold the humanitarian principles.
TIBET CONSCIOUSNESS – TIBET PROBLEM ON THE BACK BURNER. DURING 1971-72, NIXON-KISSINGER PLACED TIBET PROBLEM ON THE BACK BURNER. THE PROBLEM IS TOO IMPORTANT AND THEY DID NOT BURY IT. THEY LEFT IT SIMMERING.
NIXON-KIISINGER – TIBET – ON THE BACK BURNER. Richard Milhous Nixon, 37th President of the United States(1969-1974), and Dr Alfred Henry Kissinger, the National Security Adviser(1969-1975) deserve to be known as Whole Villains for not responding to the problem of genocide in East Pakistan( now known as Bangladesh) during 1971. Their actions are evil, unprincipled, and make mockery of the US Constitution.
The word ‘Villain’ describes a wicked or unprincipled character in a novel, play, etc., who opposes the protagonist or hero. Villain is someone or something regarded as the cause of a problem, difficulty, injustice, or great crime. It speaks about the evil nature of a person, very bad, disagreeable, or objectionable and such a person is often characterized as a ‘scoundrel’.
I am pleased to share Ashok Malik’s review of the book “The Blood Telegram – India’s Secret War in East Pakistan” authored by Gary J. Bass. The book reveals Archer Kent Blood, the chief US diplomat in Dacca as the hero or protagonist who had suffered on account of the actions of President Nixon and Dr. Kissinger, the National Security Adviser during 1971 . The real character and nature of President Nixon and Kissinger as ‘Villains’ can be easily discerned by reading this historical story titled “The Blood Telegram.” The book talks of the courage and uprightness of Archer Blood who was a first-hand witness to the genocide in East Pakistan, oppression of Bengali speaking Pakistanis, the mass murder and elimination of Hindu minorities and the humanitarian crisis that spilled into a massive refugee problem in India. Mr. Blood meticulously reported the massacres, the bloodshed in East Pakistan and had urged the US administration to take action to stop the military dictator of West Pakistan. Mr. Blood suffered greatly for his efforts and devotion to work. He was ignored, singled out and victimized by Dr. Kissinger. Mr. Blood’s career in the US State Department was utterly ruined and destroyed. This book is the story of what Mr. Blood did and how he suffered for being true to his conscience and his calling. It must be noted that the men and women who make up the State Department or work for the Central Intelligence Agency(CIA) are often conscientious, well-meaning folks, schooled in the simplicity and goodness of small-town, middle class life in the heart of America. They are moral people, keen to use their country’s power to make the world a better place. Such conscientious people who belonged to the Central Intelligence Agency(CIA) had rendered their service at a military organization in India known as Special Frontier Force or Establishment No. 22. Both the US President Richard M. Nixon, and Dr. Henry Kissinger, the National Security Adviser must be recognized as “WholeVillains” for their actions were motivated by an unprincipled desire to befriend Communist China without any concern for its involvement in killing its own people during the “Great Leap Forward” program of 1957-58, and during the infamous “Cultural Revolution” of 1966-69. The story reveals how Nixon and Kissinger were blinded by hate for India and Indians. They had visualized Pakistan as an essential ally and gateway to Communist China and had totally ignored the problem of human suffering in the Land that took a very painful birth as Bangladesh after India’s victory in a military battle during November-December 1971.
NIXON-KISSINGER – TIBET – ON THE BACK BURNER. Gary J. Bass, Professor of Politics & International Affairs at Princeton University is the author of the book titled “The Blood Telegram.” He described the heroic role of Archer Kent Blood, the US Consul General in Dacca(Dhaka), East Pakistan during 1971.
NIXON-KISSINGER – TIBET – ON THE BACK BURNER. Archer Kent Blood(March 20, 1923 to September 03, 2004) was the US Consul General, the Chief US Diplomat in Dacca, East Pakistan during 1971.
NIXON-KISSINGER – TIBET – ON THE BACK BURNER. Massacre in East Pakistan during 1971 is fully revealed in this book. This Genocide must not be forgotten and the Villains must be exposed.
NIXON-KISSINGER – TIBET – ON THE BACK BURNER. The role of General Yahya Khan, the military ruler of Pakistan, and US President Nixon in the brutal killings of unarmed civilians in East Pakistan during 1971 is now fully revealed. This is their photo image dated October 24, 1970. In this relationship, the US has totally disregarded the value of Democracy and showed no concern for Human Dignity and ignored its traditional role of defending Human Rights.
NIXON-KISSINGER – TIBET – ON THE BACK BURNER. Mockery of the US Constitution. Dr. Henry Kissinger is the Arch Villain in this story and he is seen in this photo meeting the leader of another country while responsibility of conducting diplomacy belonged to the US State Department. Kissinger flew to China from Pakistan and had used Pakistan as a gateway to Communist China. Both of these Villains are responsible for the millions of people who died in East Pakistan during 1971. Kissinger had misused and abused his position as the National Security Adviser. In clear violation of the US Constitution, he had usurped power of the Secretary of State to conduct secretive, diplomatic negotiations with foreign leaders.
During 1971, I had served in a military organization called Establishment No. 22, or Special Frontier Force which in reality represents a military alliance/pact between India, Tibet, and the United States to contain the military threat posed by Communist China’s illegal occupation of Tibet. It must be noted that Nixon had served as Vice President for two terms 1953-1956, and 1957-1960, during the presidency of Dwight David Eisenhower. President Eisenhower and his Secretary of State John Foster Dulles continued President Truman’s policy of containing Communism. In Southeast Asia, Eisenhower supported and had employed the Central Intelligence Agency(CIA) to organize the Tibetan Resistance Movement since 1957-58. Later, President John F. Kennedy took the initiative to formulate the military alliance with India and Tibet that created the Special Frontier Force during 1962. The Central Intelligence Agency(CIA) has represented the US as our military partner and took the initial responsibility to impart the necessary military training to all personnel. Its Mission is that of fighting a war to evict China from the Land of Tibet and the men are not used for spying, or gathering intelligence as undercover agents. The CIA has used the services of this Organization to monitor the nuclear activities of Communist China as China was conducting underground nuclear tests inside Tibet. During 1971-72, in a complete reversal of its foreign policy, the United States allowed the National Security Adviser to change the course of the country and to make decisions on foreign relations without giving any role to the duly appointed Secretary of State. Kissinger used the infrastructure of US State Department to orchestrate a policy that has ignored the vital US national interests and its commitment to Democracy and Freedom. Kissinger had chosen to support Pakistan’s military dictator and had used him to gain access to the Communist Leaders in Peking that paved the way for President Nixon’s visit to China during February 1972. This book reveals as to how Nixon was baffled and annoyed by American sympathies for India and he communicated this opinion to Pakistan’s military dictator General Yahya Khan and observed that Americans could be suffering from a “physiological disorder.” Nixon and Kissinger encouraged other countries to illegally ship their US supplied weapons to Pakistan violating US laws that prohibit such transfer of military equipment. Kissinger had urged China’s Foreign Minister Chou En-Lai to open a second front and attack India to stop India from giving assistance to the people of East Pakistan. As India initiated the Liberation of Bangladesh, Nixon sent the US Seventh Fleet into Bay of Bengal without any concern about India’s logistical support to the US Army that was fighting a bloody war in Vietnam, a war in which Communist China had played a big role to ensure defeat of the US Army.
NIXON-KISSINGER – TIBET – ON THE BACK BURNER. During April 1969, Chairman Mao Tsetung had selected his Defence Minister Lin Biao as his successor and Lin became the Vice Chairman of the Communist Party. Both of them must be held accountable for the atrocities, the crimes against humanity perpetrated in the name of “Cultural Revolution” during 1966-69.
NIXON-KISSINGER – TIBET – ON THE BACK BURNER.Lin Biao Defence Minister and Communist Party Vice Chairman, the successor of Chairman Mao Tsetung was apparently assassinated by Prime Minister Chou En-lai and Chairman Mao Tsetung on September 13, 1971 as he tried to escape from the country. After his killing, most of the People’s Liberation Army’s Generals of high command were purged. It totally amazes me to know that the US National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger had requested Prime Minister Chou En-Lai to launch a military attack on India during that time to prevent India from taking military action to resolve the humanitarian crisis in East Pakistan.
During 1971, the US National Security Adviser, Dr Henry Kissinger had kept his visit to Peking as a big secret. However, at Special Frontier Force, Establishment No. 22, we were fully aware of his activities. The Central Intelligence Agency(CIA) officials who were serving at Establishment No.22 as military instructors were abruptly asked to return to the United States. Communist China had insisted that it would agree to meet Henry Kissinger and receive him in Peking only after the United States removes all its personnel from India who at that time were employed in the Special Frontier Force/Establishment No. 22. After their departure, India and Tibet had agreed to jointly launch a military action in Chittagong Hill Tracts to initiate the Liberation of Bangladesh and to stop the genocide in East Pakistan.
NIXON-KISSINGER – TIBET – ON THE BACK BURNER. On November 04, 1971, India’s Prime Minister Indira Gandhi made a final attempt to get support from President Richard Nixon to resolve the humanitarian crisis in East Pakistan. By that time, US had already decided to remove all its CIA personnel who were employed as military instructors at Special Frontier Force/Establishment No. 22. However, we began our military operation to initiate Liberation of Bangladesh without any assistance from the US personnel deputed by the CIA.
NIXON-KISSINGER – TIBET – ON THE BACK BURNER. India’s Prime Minister Indira Gandhi could not obtain any support from US President Richard Nixon during her visit to Washington D.C. on November 04, 1971. However, it did not deter Special Frontier Force/Establishment No. 22 from initiating our military action to dislodge Pakistan’s Army from East Pakistan. We began our military action on November 03, 1971, a day before this meeting.
INDIA’S SECRET WAR IN EAST PAKISTAN:
NIXON-KISSINGER – TIBET – ON THE BACK BURNER. These two leaders, the US President, the military dictator of Pakistan must be held accountable for the genocide in East Pakistan during 1971.
NIXON-KISSINGER – TIBET – ON THE BACK BURNER. Mockery of the US Constitution. The US National Security Adviser, Dr. Kissinger had misused and abused his official position to meet foreign Heads of State to formulate US foreign relations without participation of the US Secretary of State. I call this Villainous act as “Original Sin”. Both Chairman Mao Tsetung, and Prime Minister Chou En-Lai were leaders of the “Cultural Revolution” during 1966-69 and are guilty of crimes against humanity.
NIXON-KISSINGER – TIBET – ON THE BACK BURNER. “THE CRUEL BIRTH OF BANGLADESH” by Archer Kent Blood, the US Consul General in Dacca during 1971 describes the Villainy, the detestable acts of Pakistan’s military generals, and US President, and National Security Adviser.
India launched a Secret War in East Pakistan to respond to the huge humanitarian crisis which could not be resolved. United States pretended its ignorance of this whole problem. This military operation was given the code name Operation Eagle. On November 03, 1971, while India’s Prime Minister was visiting Washington D.C. in a final bid to enlist the support of President Nixon, Special Frontier Force without the US personnel moved into Chittagong Hill Tracts. President Richard Nixon had failed to endorse our military action, but we executed this military action using military equipment, field gear and rations provided by the United States. The infantry weapons and all other tools that we had used were the same as those used by the US Army in its Vietnam War. We prevailed in the battlefield and forced Pakistan’s Army to withdraw from their entrenched positions. The official war of India with Pakistan was declared by India’s Prime Minister on December 03, 1971.
Rudranarasimham Rebbapragada Ann Arbor, MI 48104-4162, USA
SERVICE INFORMATION:
R. Rudra Narasimham, B.Sc., M.B.B.S., Personal Numbers:MS-8466/MR-03277K. Rank:Lieutenant/Captain/Major. Branch:Army Medical Corps/Short Service Regular Commission(1969-1972); Direct Permanent Commission(1973-1984). Designation:Medical Officer. Unit:Establishment No.22(1971-1974)/South Column,Operation Eagle(1971-1972). Organization: Special Frontier Force. Reference: National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 79. The Tilt: The U.S. and the South Asian Crisis of 1971.
TIBET CONSCIOUSNESS – TIBET PROBLEM – ON THE BACK BURNER. NIXON-KISSINGER GET CREDIT FOR PLACING TIBET ON THE BACK BURNER. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. THE TIME FOR ACTION IS NOW.
TIBET CONSCIOUSNESS – TIBET PROBLEM ON THE BACK BURNER. IN 1971, INDIA REFUSED TO KEEP PROBLEM OF BANGLADESH ON THE BACK BURNER. INDIA TOOK UNILATERAL, DECISIVE ACTION TO RESOLVE HUMANITARIAN CRISIS IN BANGLADESH.
THE LEGACY OF TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM
TIBET – INDIA – US – RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. TIBET IS STILL IMPORTANT FOR INDIA’S SECURITY. US WANTS POWER BALANCE IN SOUTHEAST ASIA.TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. US PRESIDENT HARRY TRUMAN WITH INDIAN PRIME MINISTER JAWAHARLAL NEHRU AT THE NATIONAL AIRPORT IN WASHINGTON DC, ON OCTOBER 11, 1949.
People’s Republic of China came into her existence on October 01, 1949. Red China openly declared to world her ‘Expansionist’ Policy and it immediately raised security concerns in Tibet, India, and the United States. Tibet – India – US relations began with Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s visit to Washington DC on October 11, 1949 to meet US President Harry Truman. Red China posed a direct threat to power balance in Southeast Asia. I would characterize Tibet – India – US relations as ‘The Quest for Tibet Equilibrium’. Tibet – India – United States remain united and have this common purpose for their historical relationship. The issue is not that of Middle Way or of meaningful autonomy for Tibetans. The issue is not that of Tibet’s Independence. It doesn’t matter if Tibet is part of China or not. Tibet, India, and the US view Communist China as “AGGRESSOR” nation in Tibet which endangered Power Balance in Southeast Asia. The issue is that of restoring Balance and Equilibrium in Tibet. Special Frontier Force is prepared to restore Balance and Equilibrium in Tibet by application of physical force to counteract Red China’s Force of Oppression in Tibet.
The Spirits of Special Frontier ForceThe Spirits of Special Frontier Force, Ann Arbor, MI. At Special Frontier Force, I host ‘The Living Tibetan Spirits’…
TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. TIBETAN RESISTANCE MOVEMENT REPRESENTS THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. LHASANG TSERING. Photo. Nolan Peterson. The Daily Signal.
Lhasang Tsering, 68, a Chushi-Gangdruk veteran who served in Nepal’s Mustang region in the 1970s. (Photo: Nolan Peterson/The Daily Signal)
DHARAMSHALA, India—When Sonam Dorjee was a Buddhist monk at the Debung Monastery in the Tibetan capital of Lhasa, he would not kill an insect. After all, that annoying fly buzzing in your ear could be the reincarnation of a beloved family member.
But when Chinese soldiers opened fire on the Tibetan refugees with whom Dorjee was fleeing across the Himalayas in 1959, the then-25-year-old monk picked up a rifle and fought back. “It was a journey to become a different man,” Dorjee, now 81 years old, said during an interview at his home in the misty mountain village of McLeod Ganj, just outside Dharamshala.
“I had to develop a totally different mentality,” he said. “I lost my country and saw the Chinese kill many people in front of me. If you meet such a situation, it helps you to convert your mind. I had to do something for my country. There was no other choice.”
After Chinese soldiers began to shell Lhasa in 1959, Dorjee fled across the Himalayas with a group of monks and other refugees who were escorted by Chushi-Gangdruk guerilla fighters. When Chinese soldiers attacked Dorjee’s group, the fighting spirit of the Tibetan guerillas inspired the young monk. “If not for the Chushi-Gangdruk,” he said, “His Holiness and no other Tibetans would have escaped Tibet.”
“They saved Tibet,” he added. “I saw what they did, and I was thinking that I could take a weapon and I could fight for my country too.”
TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. SONAM DORJEE, ESTABLISHMENT NO. 22, SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE. Photo. Nolan Peterson. The Daily Signal.
Sonam Dorjee, 81, a veteran of India’s Establishment 22 and a former bodyguard of the Dalai Lama. (Photo: Nolan Peterson/The Daily Signal)
Six years later, a 31-year-old Dorjee decided to abandon his monk’s robes for good when he joined Establishment 22—a secret all-Tibetan unit in the Indian army created after China attacked India in the 1962 Sino-Indian war. For the former monk, becoming a soldier meant abandoning some of his most elemental philosophies and beliefs—including the prohibition on killing.
“It was very difficult to give up being a monk,” he said. “It was a totally different life. As a monk, we do puja and we pray. As a soldier we trained to kill people.”
The CIA initially provided training and equipment for Establishment 22, and Dorjee remembers the CIA instructors fondly. He said their support gave the Tibetan resistance movement a morale boost. “America trained us, and gave us food and weapons,” he said. “I have a deep appreciation and a great respect for America.”
Dorjee served in Establishment 22 for 10 years before he was selected for the Dalai Lama’s bodyguard, a post he held for 11 years. Establishment 22 never faced Chinese soldiers in combat, but saw action in operations against Pakistan, including the 1971 Indo-Pakistani war.
Establishment 22 is still active and draws recruits from Tibetan refugees in India and Nepal. A dispute over pensions has tempered Dharamshala’s support for the unit, but even today, the possibility of one day fighting the Chinese lures Tibetan recruits.
“When I joined the army, I wanted to kill Chinese,” Dorjee said. “All I wanted was to kill just one Chinese soldier. I was very angry.” “It didn’t work out like that,” he continued. “I regretted not killing any Chinese. Now I don’t hate China, but I don’t regret the fighting. I tried my best. I have no anger left.”
STUCK IN THE MIDDLE
The predominant narrative of the Tibetan resistance has been the Dalai Lama’s push for nonviolence and the “middle way”—a policy dating back to the 1970s that does not call for full Tibetan independence but a status of “genuine autonomy,” in which Tibetans control internal matters and are able to preserve their culture and religion but relegate international affairs and defense to Beijing.
Yet, the Dalai Lama is only one part of the Tibetan resistance story. From the 1950s through the mid-1970s a CIA-backed Tibetan freedom fighter army called the Chushi-Gangdruk waged a bloody guerilla war against China from inside Tibet and bases in Nepal. And after the 1962 Sino-Indian war, thousands of Tibetan men signed up for Establishment 22 (which the CIA trained and supported with arms and supplies) for a chance to fight China.
The combined combat history of the Chushi-Gangdruk and Establishment 22 challenges the Tibetan nonviolent resistance narrative. And the legacy of Tibet’s freedom fighters continues to inspire generations of Tibetan refugees to retain their hope for freedom and to resist Chinese oppression off the battlefield. While most Tibetan refugees still support the Dalai Lama’s middle way approach, recent signs of wavering in China’s economy have sparked a debate within the refugee community about how Tibetans should react if China’s Communist Party collapses.
“The Chushi-Gangdruk legacy has inspired younger generations,” said Tenzin Nyinjey, researcher at the Tibetan Center for Human Rights in Dharamshala—home of the Tibetan government in exile.
“The hope for freedom hasn’t faded at all,” he added. “We’re going to see something really explosive within our lifetime.”
The debate orbits around whether the Tibetan government in exile should continue pushing for autonomy, as the Dalai Lama has advocated, or push for full-fledged independence, which Tibet’s freedom fighters fought for during the Cold War. And with the Dalai Lama’s 80th birthday this year, there is also quiet debate within the refugee community about how long support for the middle way will last after his death.
“We know armed resistance is impossible, the CCP [Chinese Communist Party] has to collapse or the system has to change,” Nyinjey said. “This is not the Cold War, no one is going to arm or train Tibetans to fight. But Tibetans are quite ready to declare independence if the Communist system collapses. We have the institutions of political democracy already built here in India.” “Independence usually doesn’t require picking up a gun,” he added. “But when the time comes, young Tibetans will do what it takes.”
Many Tibetan refugees, however, still prefer the middle way approach over full independence. They base their support for the policy on a combination of pragmatism and their faith in the Dalai Lama.
“With Gorbachev, the USSR ended in an instant,” said Norbu Dorjee, 61, a business owner in Leh, the capital of India’s Himalayan Ladakh region. “China’s problems are good for us. We hope that China will become democratic, that the Communist party will collapse and we can go home.”
“But,” Dorjee added, “we are still only asking for internal autonomy, not total independence. We have to maintain faith in the path His Holiness has chosen for us.”
“I believe the middle way will last,” said Thupten Gyantso, 41, a Tibetan refugee living in Pokhara, Nepal. “The reality is that China is too powerful for us to win independence. And even if we become independent, we will still rely on China for many things.”
Opponents of the middle way claim the 40-year-old policy has achieved little for Tibetan refugees and that human rights inside Tibet have worsened in the intervening decades. “So long as Tibet insists on only achieving autonomy, it will not be an international issue,” said Lhasang Tsering, 68, a Chushi-Gangdruk veteran who served in Nepal’s Mustang region in the 1970s. He now lives in Dharamshala and owns a bookshop called “Bookworm.”
“Unless the Dalai Lama makes freedom the ultimate goal, for peace and justice, other countries won’t help us,” Tsering said. “It might be too late for Tibet by the time China collapses.” Some point to the recent Tibetan government in exile’s elections for prime minister as a bellwether for a renewed independence movement. The candidate who has arguably created the most media attention within the Tibetan refugee community is LukarJam—who has stirred controversy by openly challenging the Dalai Lama’s middle way policy and arguing for independence.
“It’s fashionable to talk about the middle way, but it kills the passion to act,” Jam said, according to the Associated Press. “I have separated the spiritual and political Dalai Lama and criticize only his political policies.” “His popularity shows skepticism about the middle way,” Nyinjey said, referring to Jam. “There’s a movement happening that shows a fracturing of Tibetan opinion, and proponents of the middle way are being forced to defend their policies.”
TIPPING POINT?
Paralleling the middle way debate is a mounting resistance movement inside Tibet against Chinese rule—evidenced by protests in 2008 and a wave of self-immolations in Tibet that began in 2009. And with Beijing hosting the 2022 Winter Olympics, some speculate that there could be a repeat of the protests that swept across Tibet in advance of the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics.
During the 2008 protests, Tibetans sacked Chinese-owned businesses and attacked Han Chinese on the streets, underscoring simmering ethnic tensions inside China’s Tibet Autonomous Region.
“In 2008 this major uprising happened across Tibet,” said Sherab Woeser, visiting fellow at The Tibet Policy Institute, a think tank in Dharamshala. “No one expected it, and it was young people who led it. They want to have Tibetan textbooks in school and to be able to wave their flag and honor the Dalai Lama. Young people are expressing themselves in Tibet saying they want to be free.”
After the 2008 protests, Chinese authorities cracked down in the Tibet Autonomous Region. Surveillance increased, as did reports of arbitrary arrest and torture. Pictures of the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan flag were outlawed, new travel restrictions were put in place and the borders with India and Nepal were sealed, practically stemming the flow of refugees out of Tibet.
Since 2009, 142 Tibetans have self-immolated inside China as a reaction to China’s crackdown. While the Tibetan self-immolators comprise all ages and spectrums of society, the average age of the self-immolators is 24, reflecting what some claim is increasing resistance against Chinese rule among Tibetan youth.
“The self-immolations are just a continuance of the Chushi-Gangdruk resistance,” Nyinjey said. “Nothing has changed. The occupation and the oppression have always been there. The same causes of the resistance are still there, but the form of resistance has changed.”
“Tibetans have seen so much death, pain and oppression, and that shows in the way they protest,” Woeser said. Some also speculate that a renewed Tibetan independence movement could spark a chain reaction of secessionist movements in China’s Inner Mongolia and Xinjiang autonomous regions.
“Tibet can be the Tunisia, the trigger, for the breakup of China,” Nyinjey claimed, referencing the self-immolation of a street vendor in Tunisia in December 2010 that was a catalyst for the Arab Spring. LEGACY
Despite the overwhelming odds against them, Tibet’s guerilla fighters fought fiercely, suffering heavy casualties as they faced Chinese artillery, tanks and bombers from horseback, armed with swords and World War I rifles.
“They had no knowledge of how to fight, they were just very patriotic and wanted to fight for their country,” said Tenpa Dhargyal, 37, general secretary of the Welfare Society of Central Dokham Chushi-Gangdruk, a New Delhi-based organization dedicated to caring for Chushi-Gangdruk veterans and their families.
Dhargyal’s grandfather was a Chushi-Gangdruk fighter who died fighting the Chinese. “Their courage came from their anger,” he said.
The Chushi-Gangdruk played a key role in establishing Tibet’s government in exile. In 1959, the Chushi-Gangdruk’s control over territory in southern Tibet created a protected corridor through which the Dalai Lama escaped to India. And after the Dalai Lama was safely in exile, the Chushi-Gangdruk subsequently protected the tens of thousands of refugees who fled across the Himalayas into India and Nepal.
TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. TENPA DHARGYAL, GENERAL SECRETARY, THE WELFARE SOCIETY OF CENTRAL DOKHAM CHUSHI-GANGDRUK. Photo. Nolan Peterson. The Daily Signal.
“We don’t want to live under Chinese rule. We want our country back.” —Tenpa Dhargyal, 37, general secretary of the Welfare Society of Central Dokham Chushi-Gangdruk. (Photo: Nolan Peterson/The Daily Signal)
In 1957, two years prior to the Dalai Lama’s escape, the CIA began paramilitary training for handpicked Chushi-Gangdruk fighters. The training took place at secret bases in Saipan; Camp Hale, Colorado; and Camp Peary, Virginia (at a facility known as the “farm”).
After their instruction, the Tibetan operatives parachuted into Chinese-occupied Tibet from CIA aircraft ranging from World War II era B-17s (which were painted all black) to C-130s. To create plausible deniability should an aircraft go down, the CIA initially used East European pilots recruited for covert missions over Soviet Ukraine. Air America (an aviation front for the CIA) later handled the Tibetan missions.
The Chushi-Gangdruk eventually set up camps in the remote Mustang region of Nepal, from which they launched cross-border raids into China.
The CIA supported the Chushi-Gangdruk with airdropped weapons, ammunition and supplies until 1972, when President Richard Nixon normalized relations with China and U.S. support for the Tibetan resistance was cut off. The Chushi-Gangdruk continued to operate from Nepal for several more years without U.S. backing, but achieved little.
“The U.S. treated it as a tactical move to harass the Communist block from behind, it was not a strategic decision to support Tibetan independence,” Tsering, the Chushi-Gangdruk veteran said.
“But it’s easy to point the finger at others for our failure,” he added. “We failed to capitalize on the CIA’s support to internationalize our cause and unite world opinion to support us.”
In 1974, after bowing to Chinese pressure, the Nepalese military rooted the Chushi-Gangdruk out of their mountain hideouts in Mustang, killing many (including their commander, General Gyato Wangdu, who had been trained by the CIA at Camp Hale, Colorado) in high-altitude gunfights. The Dalai Lama sent a taped message imploring the Mustang resistance to lay down their arms, spurring several fighters to commit suicide.
For some Tibetans, the history of China’s invasion of Tibet and the legacy of lives lost in the ensuing Tibetan resistance fuels a lingering distaste for submitting to Chinese rule—which they see the middle way as promoting.
“Even though they asked us to be friends with China, we don’t want it,” Dhargyal said. “We can’t make friends with them because they killed our grandparents. We don’t want to live under Chinese rule. We want our country back.” KARMA Chungdak Bonjutsang began to cry when he described how Chinese soldiers killed his mother in 1959.
Bonjutsang, now 61 years old, covered his eyes with his hands. His chest heaved a few times with deep breaths. He tried to fight through it and talk, but he choked up. After a silent moment, he wiped his eyes clear, looked up to the ceiling for an instant, and then continued.
Bonjutsang was only 6 years old when his mother, father, uncle and older brother crossed the Himalayas to escape Communist rule in Tibet. They were in a group of about 400, he said. Women, children and the elderly were kept in front, while the men and the Tibetan Chushi-Gangdruk guerilla fighters stayed at the rear to repel Chinese attacks. Their group was a part of the 80,000 Tibetans who flooded into India and Nepal in 1959 after the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) shelled protesters in the Tibetan capital of Lhasa.
TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. CHUNGDAK BONJUTSANG TIBETAN EXILE. Photo. Nolan Peterson. The Daily Signal.
Chungdak Bonjutsang, 61, fled Tibet with his family in 1959. (Photo: Nolan Peterson/The Daily Signal)
Bonjutsang remembers the sounds of bullets ricocheting off the hard stones of the mountain when the Chinese attack came. Exposed on a high-altitude pass with nowhere to hide, the only options were to run or fight back. Bonjutsang’s father tied the scared 6-year-old boy to one of the horses used to carry supplies so that he wouldn’t be lost in the confusion of the gunfight. And then his father and uncle joined the Chushi-Gangdruk guerillas in fighting back the Chinese soldiers.
During the attack, Bonjutsang’s mother was shot in the side. She died quickly. And with the Chinese in pursuit, there was no time to bury her. “We just left her on the ice, and then we ran away,” Bonjutsang said during an interview at the Sonamling Tibetan refugee colony in India’s Himalayan Ladakh region.
“I was very young then,” he said. “But as I grew older, the pain got worse. I can’t stop thinking about her lying dead on the ice. I see her at night when I go to sleep.” Fifty-six years later, Bonjutsang’s pain and his anger over his mother’s murder have not faded. “China is still the enemy,” he said. He has never returned to Tibet, and admits that he may never be able to. Yet, his hope that Tibet will regain its independence has not faded—and that hope is sustained by his unshakeable faith in the Dalai Lama.
“We have great hope that we will be able to return the Dalai Lama to Tibet before he passes,” Bonjutsang said. “As long as His Holiness is alive we believe freedom is possible.” A smile crept across Bonjutsang’s face. He added: “And, of course, we also hope His Holiness outlives the Communist Party in China.”
Nolan Peterson, a former special operations pilot and a combat veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, is The Daily Signal’s foreign correspondent based in Ukraine.
TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. THE QUEST BEGAN ON OCTOBER 11, 1949 WITH INDIAN PRIME MINISTER’S VISIT TO WASHINGTON DC. INDIA REPRESENTED TIBET’S INTERESTS AND PROVIDED STIMULUS FOR INDIA – US RELATIONS.
TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. NEHRU – TRUMAN MEETING ON OCTOBER 11, 1949. TIBET EQUILIBRIUM WAS THE CHIEF CONCERN AND PURPOSE FOR THIS RELATIONSHIP.TIBET – INNDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. NEHRU – TRUMAN MEETING ON OCTOBER 11, 1949. INDIA REACHED OUT TO THE US ON BEHALF OF TIBET.TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. THIS LEGACY BEGAN ON OCTOBER 11, 1949 WITH HISTORICAL MEETING OF NEHRU AND TRUMAN.
TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. THIS LEGACY BEGAN WITH NEHRU AND TRUMAN AND IT WITHSTOOD THE TEST OF TIME.TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. TIBET, INDIA, AND THE US RECOGNIZE CHINA AS AGGRESSOR NATION AND DESIRE TO RESTORE BALANCE IN TIBET.
TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. TIBET, INDIA, AND THE US SHARE A COMMON CONCERN ABOUT RED CHINA.
TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. INDIA’S FIRST PRIME MINISTER NEHRU AND LATER ALL OTHER PRIME MINISTERS INCLUDING HIS DAUGHTER INDIRA GANDHI VIEW CHINA AS AGGRESSOR NATION.TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. IN OCTOBER 1949 WHEN COMMUNIST CHINA DECLARED HER EXPANSIONIST POLICY, IT SET OFF ALARM BELLS IN TIBET, INDIA, AND THE US.TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. TIBET, INDIA, AND THE US BEGAN THIS QUEST IN OCTOBER 1949 SOON AFTER COMMUNIST PARTY CHAIRMAN MAO ZEDONG ANNOUNCED FOUNDING OF PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA. THIS LEGACY OF DALAI LAMA, NEHRU, AND TRUMAN STILL SURVIVES.
TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. US PRESIDENT HARRY S TRUMAN.TIBET – INDIA – US – RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. TIBET IS STILL IMPORTANT FOR INDIA’S SECURITY. US WANTS POWER BALANCE IN SOUTHEAST ASIA.TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM.TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. TIBET, INDIA, AND THE US VIEW CHINA AS AGGRESSOR NATION THAT UPSET POWER BALANCE IN TIBET.TIBET – INDIA – US RELATIONS – THE QUEST FOR TIBET EQUILIBRIUM. THE EMERGENCE OF RED CHINA IN OCTOBER 1949 AND HER EXPANSIONIST POLICY HAS UPSET POWER BALANCE IN SOUTHEAST ASIA.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – DOCTOR’S ORDER – COMPASSION – DR BARRY KERZIN, DALAI LAMA’S PERSONAL PHYSICIAN.
His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s personal physician, Dr. Barry Kerzin who lives in India is prescribing use of Compassion in practice of Medicine. Compassion is an instinct that is evoked when a person witnesses pain and suffering in the lives of other living entities. Compassion provides Motivation or Drive to perform actions that will help to relieve pain experienced by a victim and provide uplift to such victim to overcome feelings of sorrow and misery. Compassion acts like a physical force for it helps the performer of Compassionate action. While acting under the influence of Compassion, the performer acts without experiencing personal hardship or tiredness. Compassion provides additional energy with which performer of Compassionate actions overcomes physical barriers that may limit physical capacity in ordinary circumstances.
In Tibet, I witness action of two opposing forces; 1. Physical Force used by Red China to oppress Tibetans, and 2. Resistance Force used by Tibetans to counteract Oppression. To have Balance and Equilibrium in Tibet, we need both interacting forces to be of same power. I witness pain, suffering, and misery in the lives of Tibetan people as their power of Resistance is not equal to Force of Oppression applied by Red China. This tragic situation in Tibet evokes instinct of Compassion directing me to take action to find Balance and Equilibrium in Tibet. I am seeking Force of Compassion to physically uplift Red Army from Tibet. When this brutalizing force is evicted from Tibet, there will be Peace, Harmony, and Tranquility in Tibet as Balance and Equilibrium will be restored.
The Spirits of Special Frontier ForceThe Spirits of Special Frontier Force, Ann Arbor, MI. At Special Frontier Force, I host ‘The Living Tibetan Spirits’…
PBS NEWSHOUR Dalai Lama’s American doctor wants more compassion in medicine
October 27, 2015 at 6:35 PM EDT
Dalai Lama’s doctor wants more compassion in medicine. Before he was a personal physician to the Dalai Lama, Dr. Barry Kerzin never imagined that a professional trip to Tibet would lead him down a decades-long path studying Buddhism and meditation. Special correspondent Fred de Sam Lazaro talks to Kerzin in India about his feeling that compassion and empathy are essential to medical training. 2015-10-27
JUDY WOODRUFF: But, first, the Dalai Lama was supposed to arrive in the U.S. yesterday. He didn’t, because doctors at the Mayo Clinic advised him to rest. But advice flows both ways in the relationship between the Buddhist leader and his personal physician.
Special correspondent Fred de Sam Lazaro reports on how the Dalai Lama inspired a California native to move halfway across the world and bring compassion back into a medical care system dominated by technology.
The report is part of Fred’s ongoing series Agents for Change.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Sixty-eight-year-old California native Barry Kerzin began his career as a professor of family medicine at the University of Washington. He never dreamed it would lead to a pro bono house calls thousands of miles away in Tibetan.
DR. BARRY KERZIN, Buddhist Scholar: I keep pinching myself, Fred. I don’t know. (LAUGHTER)
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: He first arrived here after hearing that the Dalai Lama had wanted a Western physician to train traditional Tibetan doctors in modern research methods.
DR. BARRY KERZIN, Buddhist Scholar: We did a research study. And we used that pedagogically to train the local Tibetan medicine doctors how to do the research. And then I got more involved with Buddhism. I had already been very interested. I got more involved with meditation and study. And I ended up extending my stay. And that’s happened again and again and here I am 27 years.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: He came to India from a life punctuated by pain and loss, at 11, a near fatal brain abscess that required extensive surgery and left a permanent lump on his skull. His mother died young, and a few years later so did his wife, only in her mid-30s, both from cancer. Buddhism became a sanctuary under the tutelage of the Dalai Lama, who told him to stay connected to the world.
DR. BARRY KERZIN: He always encouraged me to keep my credentials and to continue practicing medicine. Don’t just do the wisdom. Also do the love and the compassion. In fact, do them 50/50. Those were his words.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Scholarship in Buddhism led to his ordination as a monk, while meditation has been a path to inner peace and happiness. And that’s translated into empathy, he said.
DR. BARRY KERZIN: It’s slowly moved me along to be more compassionate, to be less selfish. I don’t get angry very much anymore. I used to be highly competitive. I’m still somewhat competitive, but it’s more now personal, not at the expense of somebody else. I think it’s a combination of meditation and also, as His Holiness calls, emotional hygiene.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Kerzin, who now serves as a personal physician to the Dalai Lama, has taken the spiritual leader’s gospel of emotional hygiene and compassion to medical practitioners around the world. DALAI LAMA (through interpreter): He is my messenger. Go to Japan, go to Mongolia.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: And full circle to America.
DR. BARRY KERZIN: It’s lovely to be at Stanford.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: A few years ago, a prestigious lecture at a top U.S. medical school wouldn’t have been given by a man who left American medicine and many stunned colleagues for a very different world, where he doesn’t own a house, car or refrigerator.
DR. BARRY KERZIN: I think initially they thought I went off the deep end. What are you doing living in India? Come on. You know, how can you stay healthy? Why don’t you come back? And you could have a very good life. You could have a very good academic life in medicine. You could have a very comfortable economic life. It’s ridiculous what you’re doing. So let’s meditate, OK?
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: But on this day, they were listening, even meditating, with him. Kerzin says meditation helps one focus on the now, the present. You tune out the past and all your regrets, tune out planning and worry about the future. It’s taken years, he says, but gotten results, scientifically measured results.
DR. BARRY KERZIN: This is in Madison, the University of Wisconsin, and they’re researching my brain.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Kerzin has been part of a series of studies into the impact of meditation on the brain.
DR. BARRY KERZIN: What they found were changes in the prefrontal cortex. This area is called the executive function area, the PFC, and it helps with things like planning, reasoning, imagination, empathy, to feel as — like another person is feeling. So these areas were enhanced, both anatomically and functionally, in long-term meditators.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Kerzin’s host at Stanford said there’s an epidemic of dissatisfaction among American doctors today, which likely makes them more receptive to a message like Kerzin’s.
DR. ABRAHAM VERGHESE, Stanford School of Medicine: Fifty percent of them, they say in some studies, are unhappy. And that tells you this is not an individual problem. This is a systemic problem.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Dr. Abraham Verghese, well-known author and professor at Stanford, says technology, for all its benefits, leaves doctors little time for the compassion that drew most of them to medicine.
DR. ABRAHAM VERGHESE: There was a chilling paper from the “Journal of Emergency Medicine” titled “4,000 Clicks,” suggesting that an emergency medicine physician does 4,000 clicks a day and spends the great majority of their time on the computer, very little percentage of the time actually with patients, and similar studies that are coming out suggesting the same about residents and medical students and physicians in other specialties.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Kerzin says he wants to make compassion as integral to medical education as physiology or biochemistry, more partnerships between scientists and Buddhist scholars, a reconciliation of very different perspectives on life that he said he’s made internally.
DR. BARRY KERZIN: I used to say I wear two hats. So, sometimes, this is the medical hat, this is the Buddhist hat. But I don’t say that any more.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Today, he says he wears one scientist monk hat.
For the PBS NewsHour, this is Fred de Sam Lazaro in Dharmsala, India.
Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour…Become a member of your local PBS Station.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – DOCTOR’S ORDER COMPASSION. THE FORCE OF OPPRESSION IS GREATER THAN THE FORCE OF RESISTANCE. COMPASSION IS TREATMENT TO BRING BALANCE AND EQUILIBRIUM IN TIBET.TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – DOCTOR’S ORDER – COMPASSION. DR BARRY KERZIN RECOMMENDS TEACHING COMPASSION AS A SUBJECT IN MEDICAL EDUCATION.TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – DOCTOR’S ORDER – COMPASSION. DR. BARRY KERZIN, DALAI LAMA’S PERSONAL PHYSICIAN RECOMMENDS TEACHING COMPASSION TO DOCTORS.TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – DOCTOR’S ORDER – COMPASSION. DR. BARRY KERZIN, DALALI LAMA’S PERSONAL PHYSICIAN. TIBET NEEDS UPLIFTING POWER OF COMPASSION TO COUNTERACT FORCE OF OPPRESSION USED BY RED CHINA.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – DOCTOR’S ORDER – COMPASSION. DR. BARRY KERZIN, PERSONAL PHYSICIAN OF DALAI LAMA. MY PRESCRIPTION FOR TIBET. COUNTERACT OPPRESSION WITH UPLIFTING PHYSICAL FORCE OF COMPASSION.TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – DOCTOR’S ORDER – COMPASSION. DR. BARRY KERZIN, DALAI LAMA’S PERSONAL PHYSICIAN. TIBET IS SUFFERING ON ACCOUNT OF LACK OF BALANCE CAUSED BY RED CHINA’S MILITARY OPPRESSION. MY PRESCRIPTION IS USE OF UPLIFTING PHYSICAL FORCE CALLED COMPASSION.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS A DAILY ROUTINETIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE
Tibet’s awareness of military occupation generates a natural response called ‘RESISTANCE’. However, the strategy of Resistance demands recognition of external realities. Tibet’s Enemy is using overwhelming physical force to suppress any sign of Resistance. Tibet needs to use the tactic called Patience and Perseverance while Enemy wears herself out pursuing a course of self-destruction. I ask Tibet to practice Resistance as a Daily Routine. Red China’s Policy of Subjugation, and Tibet’s response of Resistance when practiced with Patience and Perseverance will maintain balance and equilibrium in the lives of Tibetans who may not have ability to confront Occupation using physical force. Tibet need to stay calm and unperturbed for Beijing is Doomed.
The Spirits of Special Frontier ForceThe Spirits of Special Frontier Force, Ann Arbor, MI. At Special Frontier Force, I host ‘The Living Tibetan Spirits’…
The Dalai Lama’s Daily Routine and Information Diet
“To understand the Dalai Lama … perhaps it’s most useful to see him as a doctor of the soul.”
By Maria Popova
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE
I think a great deal about the difference between routine and ritual as a special case of our more general and generally trying quest for balance — ripped asunder by the contrary longings for control and whimsy, we routinize daily life in order to make its inherent chaos more manageable, then ritualize it in order to imbue its mundanity with magic, which by definition violates the predictable laws of the universe. I suspect that our voracious appetite for the daily routines of cultural icons is fueled by a deep yearning to glean some insight on and practical help with this impossible balancing act, from people who seem to have mastered it well enough to lead happy, productive, creatively fruitful, and altogether remarkable lives. Perhaps the most unexpected yet brilliant master of this elusive modern equilibrium is the Dalai Lama.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE.The Dalai Lama by Manuel Bauer
In the altogether magnificent The Open Road: The Global Journey of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama(public library), writer Pico Iyer — who has known the beloved spiritual leader since adolescence and, by the time he began writing this book, had visited him in his exile home for nearly thirty years — describes how the Dalai Lama begins each day:
[By] nine a.m. … the Dalai Lama himself had already been up for more than five hours, awakening, as he always does, at three-thirty a.m., to spend his first four hours of the day meditating on the roots of compassion and what he can do for his people, the “Chinese brothers and sisters” who are holding his people hostage, and the rest of us, while also preparing himself for his death.
Compressed into this humble and humbling morning routine is the entire Buddhist belief that life is a “joyful participation in a world of sorrows.” This daily rite of body and spirit is the building block of the Dalai Lama’s quiet and steadfast mission to, as Iyer elegantly puts it, “explore the world closely, so as to make out its laws, and then to see what can and cannot be done within those laws.” He writes:
To understand the Dalai Lama … especially if (as in my case) you come from some other tradition, perhaps it’s most useful to see him as a doctor of the soul.
As someone deeply invested in the crucial difference between information and wisdom, I was particularly fascinated by the Dalai Lama’s information diet — that is, what daily facts he chooses to fuse with ancient wisdom in his dedication to unraveling the nature of reality and making use of it in fortifying the soul. Iyer writes:
As a longtime student of real life, ruler of his people before the age of five, he listens every morning to the Voice of America, to the BBC East Asian broadcast, to the BBC World Service — even while meditating — and devours Time and Newsweek and many other news sources (I think of how the Buddha is often depicted with one hand touching the earth, in what Buddhists call the “witnessing the earth” gesture).
And yet the Dalai Lama approaches his information diet like he does his meditation — as a deliberate practice. In that sense, “meaning diet” is far more accurate a term, for he is remarkably deliberate about which aspects of the Information Age to fold into his meaning-making mission and which to sidestep. He chooses, for instance, to avoid one of the most perilous byproducts of our era, which Susan Sontag presaged in 1977 in her famous admonition against “aesthetic consumerism.” Iyer writes:
In the Age of the Image, when screens are so much our rulers, anyone who wishes to grab our attention — and to hold it — does so by converting himself into a “human-interest story,” translating his life into a kind of fable…. Those who long to be entrusted with real consequences in our lives acquire that power increasingly by presenting themselves as fairy tales.
The Dalai Lama, by nature and training, is in the odd position of trying to do the opposite: he comes to us to tell us that he is real, as real as his country, bleeding and oppressed, and that he lives in a world far more complex than a two-year-old’s cries of “Good Tibetans, bad Chinese” (the Dalai Lama would more likely say, “Potentially good Tibetans, potentially good Chinese”).
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE.The Dalai Lama by Manuel Bauer
At the heart of this message is a larger testament to the most essential characteristic of reality — something Alan Watts, who began popularizing Eastern philosophy in the West when the Dalai Lama was still a teenager, captured memorably when he wrote: “Life and Reality are not things you can have for yourself unless you accord them to all others.”
Indeed, contacting this interconnectedness of all beings and all lives is the very impetus for the Dalai Lama’s morning routine and his information diet — a beautiful assurance that beneath our obsession with routine and ritual lies a deeper, more expansive longing for meaning, for orienting ourselves in this vibrating universe of interconnectedness that we call reality.
Iyer articulates this elegantly:
Imagine, for a moment, that you are a body (not difficult to do, since in part that is what you are). You have eyes, ears, legs, hands, and, if you are lucky, all of them are in good working order. You never, if you are sane, think of your finger as an independent entity (though you may occasionally say, “My toe seems to have a mind of its own”). You are never, in your right mind, moved to hit your own foot, let alone sever it; the only loser in such an exercise would be yourself. […] This is all simplistic to the point of self-evidence. But when the Buddhist speaks of “interdependence” (the central Buddhist concept of shunyata, often rendered as “emptiness,” the Dalai Lama has translated as “empty of independent identity”), all he is really saying is that we are all a part of a single body, and to think of “I” and “you,” of the right hand’s interests being different from the left’s, makes no sense at all. It’s crazy to impede your neighbor, because he is as intrinsic to your welfare as your thumb is. It’s almost absurd to say you wish to get ahead of your colleague — it’s like your right toe saying it longs to be ahead of the left. […] Perhaps it’s not surprising, then, that the Fourteenth Dalai Lama is famous for his laughter, the sudden eruption of almost helpless giggles or a high-pitched shaking of the body. Seen from the vantage point of one who meditates several hours a day, traveling to the place where everything is connected, much of our fascination with surface or with division seems truly hilarious… Talking about friends and enemies is a little like holding on to this hair on your arm and claiming it as a friend, because you see it daily, and calling the hair on your back an enemy, because you never see it at all. Talking of how you are a Buddhist and therefore opposed to the Judeo-Christian teaching is like solemnly asserting that your right nostril is the source of everything good, and your left nostril a place of evil. The doctrine of “universal responsibility” is not only universal but obvious: it’s like saying that every part of us longs for our legs, our eyes, our lungs to be healthy. If one part suffers, we all do.
Suddenly, the Dalai Lama’s morning routine and his information diet are revealed in a whole new light of meaning — they are a form of self-empowerment in the journey toward shedding self-centeredness. (Lest we forget, as another great Buddhist teacher has put it, “you first need to have an ego in order to be aware that it doesn’t exist.”)
Iyer writes:
Buddhists do not (or need not) seek solutions from outside themselves, but merely awakening within; the minute we come to see that our destinies or well-being are all mutually dependent, they say, the rest naturally follows (meditation sometimes seems the way we come to this perception, reasoning the way we consolidate it). If you believe this, human life offers you many more belly laughs daily, as the Dalai Lama exemplifies.
And there, with a good-humored smirk, Iyer reminds us that his perspective isn’t perched on a holier-than-thou branch in the tree of life but grounded in his reality as a Westerner and a writer, and thus a creature of ego trying to learn the very lesson he is channeling:
Why despair, indeed, when you can change the world at any moment by choosing to see that the person who gave your last book a bad review is as intrinsic to your well-being as your thumb is?
The Open Road is an illuminating read in its totality, propelled by Iyer’s deeply pleasurable prose. Complement it with Iyer on what Leonard Cohen knows about the art of stillness and his superb On Being conversation with Krista Tippett, in which he recounts the experience of shadowing the Dalai Lama in order to capture his inner light:
On Being is one of these nine favorite podcasts for a fuller life — do your soul a favor and subscribe.
donating = loving
Bringing you (ad-free) Brain Pickings takes hundreds of hours each month. If you find any joy and stimulation here, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
You can also become a one-time patron with a single donation in any amount:
Newsletter
Brain Pickings has a free weekly interestingness digest. It comes out on Sundays and offers the week’s best articles. Here’s an example. Like? Sign up.
Brain Pickings participates in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn commissions by linking to Amazon. In more human terms, this means that whenever you buy a book on Amazon from a link on here, I get a small percentage of its price. That helps support Brain Pickings by offsetting a fraction of what it takes to maintain the site, and is very much appreciated
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE. THE DALAI LAMA’S DAILY ROUTINE AND INFORMATION DIET. BRAIN PICKINGS.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINETIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE.TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE.TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE. A DAY IN DALAI LAMA’S LIFE. FORCED TO LIVE IN EXILE FOR RESISTING RED CHINA’S OCCUPATION OF TIBET.TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE.
TIBET EQUILIBRIUM – RESISTANCE IS DAILY ROUTINE. PICO IYER’S NEW BOOK.
