Whole Aggressor – Whole Dude

Whole Tyrant – Red China strangles Human Rights at Home and Abroad

COMMUNIST CHINA STRANGLES HUMAN RIGHTS AT HOME AND ABROAD

**Whole Tyrant – Red China strangles Human Rights at Home and Abroad**

The spread of Communism to mainland China compromised prospects of Freedom, Democracy, Peace, and Human Rights both inside China and in her occupied territories of Tibet, Inner Mongolia, and East Turkestan.

CHINA’S MANIPULATION OF UN HUMAN RIGHTS EFFORTS MUST BE STOPPED

Clipped from: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/09/12/chinas-campaign-to-smother-human-rights-efforts-at-un-needs-to-be-stopped.html

SOPHIE RICHARDSON, HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

Chinese President Xi Jinping speaks during the opening ceremony of the BRICS Business Forum at the Xiamen International Conference and Exhibition Center in Xiamen in southeastern China’s Fujian Province, Sunday, Sept. 3, 2017. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)

China’s growing appetite for global power isn’t hard to spot: military muscle-flexing in the South China Sea, the trillion-dollar New Silk Road development initiative, even its proliferation of Confucius Institutes, academic outposts to spread its version of history and politics.

What’s less easy to see is that worsening human rights violations at home are increasingly reflected in Beijing’s diplomatic agenda to undermine human rights protections abroad, including at the United Nations.

The U.N. human rights system exists to protect people whose own governments cannot or will not do that for them. The system has many shortcomings, but even so it is a vital international forum for monitoring nations’ compliance with their human rights obligations, where critical independent voices can be heard and violators at times held accountable—or at least spotlighted.

For activists who work on China human rights issues, this venue is all the more important because the country’s president, Xi Jinping, has steadily strangled domestic options for obtaining justice through the courts and engaging in peaceful dissent.

Chinese authorities have prevented mainland activists from reaching the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva and harassed them at U.N. headquarters in New York. Chinese officials in Geneva have even threatened foreign diplomats and UN. human rights experts who support scrutiny of Beijing’s record.

As a new Human Rights Watch report exposes, President Xi’s government is working hard to weaken these U.N. mechanisms. Chinese authorities have prevented mainland activists from reaching the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva and harassed them at U.N. headquarters in New York. Chinese officials in Geneva have even threatened foreign diplomats and U.N. human rights experts who support scrutiny of Beijing’s record.

Reflecting its hostility to human rights monitoring generally, China has also blocked U.N. resolutions supporting human rights defenders globally—thus undermining protections for rights groups who do not even work on China.

Beijing is also trying to manipulate U.N. mechanisms to impose its political views on others. China—along with other countries hostile to human rights—sits on the U.N. committee that grants civil society groups accreditation needed to participate in U.N. meetings. Applicants have been told that getting approval means deleting from their organizations’ materials any reference to 2010 Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo. Any references to Taiwan or Tibet must reflect Beijing’s view that those territories are part of China.

China has jailed activists who wanted to participate in U.N. activities, and even blocked a commemoration of one who died trying to do so.

In September 2013, Chinese authorities detained Cao Shunli, a Beijing-based activist, prior to boarding a flight for Geneva, where she was going to participate in China-related U.N. training sessions. While in detention Cao fell critically ill, but the authorities denied her adequate medical care. She died in March 2014.

At the next session of the U.N. Human Rights Council, nongovernmental organizations sought to hold a moment of silence in her honor, but China coolly and cruelly succeeded in getting enough other Council members—including Cuba, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela– to prevent the gesture.

U.N. officials have at times rejected Chinese efforts at intimidation and ensured that independent voices are heard. Yet on other occasions they either fail to stand firm—allowing, for example, China to dictate that experts seen as critical of China not sit on key committees—or, worse, are complicit in abuses.

In April 2017, U.N. security officers forced Dolkun Isa, an accredited activist for China’s persecuted Uyghurs, to leave the New York headquarters, where he was participating in a conference on minority rights. When challenged about this incident, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said he was “fully aware of the situation,” but failed to offer any explanation or plan of action to change things.

To be sure, China isn’t the only government that seeks to manipulate the U.N. human rights system for its own benefit. But Beijing’s global power, ambitions, and its status as a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council make it a sinister role model for other authoritarian governments.

China’s ability to block human rights initiatives is not absolute. The U.N. remains a high profile venue for countries intent on promoting human rights and for working to hold abusive governments to account. In March 2016, for example, the United States and 11 other countries issued an unprecedented joint statement condemning China’s arrest of human rights activists and attorneys.

Nonetheless, the trend is moving in the wrong direction. As Human Rights Watch’s research has shown, unless the U.N., with help from rights-respecting governments, pushes back by insisting on compliance with established human rights practices, adopting new ones to prevent future abuses, and holding China and other bad-faith players accountable, the integrity of the vulnerable U.N. human rights system—and the people around the world it helps to protect—are at grave risk.

Sophie Richardson is China director at Human Rights Watch. Follow her on Twitter at @SophieHRW.

Whole Problem – India-Tibet-US Relations complicated by Pakistan’s invasion of Kashmir

India-Tibet-US Relations Complicated by Pakistan’s Invasion of Kashmir on 22 October 1947

In my analysis, India-Tibet relations from the very beginning were impacted by Pakistan’s invasion of Kashmir in October 1947. The United States was willing to check Communist China’s expansionist policy, but, unfortunately, India could not take advantage of the US policy for the US simultaneously supports Pakistan’s occupation of Kashmir

The Kashmir issue poses a great danger severely undermining India’s ability to exercise full freedom to formulate an independent Tibet Policy. India needs the support of the United States to counter China’s military superiority and at the same time, India has to balance the US involvement in Kashmir in support of Pakistan’s aggression.

Book Review: Tibet: When the Gods Spoke by Claude Arpi

The History of Special Frontier Force-Establishment No. 22: The military occupation of Tibet by Communist China had shaped the historical, cultural, religious relationship between India, and Tibet. It commenced an entirely new era in which both India, and Tibet are driven by the same kind of security concerns. Prime Minister Chou En-Lai represents the face of that danger that forced Prime Minister to know and appreciate the nature of Tibetan Nation as represented by the 14th Dalai Lama, and the 10th Panchen Lama Rinpoche.

Claude Arpi shows that the 1954 Panchsheel Agreement’s guiding principle of non-interference in and respect for each other’s territorial integrity left China to do in Tibet whatever it willed

BOOKS Updated: Aug 17, 2019 10:10 IST

572pp, Rs1,650; United Service Institution & Vij Books

Thubten Samphel

Hindustan Times

The History of Special Frontier Force-Establishment No. 22: India desired to promote international peace and tried to avoid armed conflicts. The burden imposed by China’s military occupation of Tibet was viewed with concern, but India tried the use of diplomacy and avoid war. A ceremony to honor Prime Minister Chou En-Lai , and the 14th Dalai Lama during their visit to New Delhi.

In the run-up to signing the Panchsheel agreement: Jawaharlal Nehru with Zhou Enlai, the first Premier of the People’s Republic of China (both center) at Palam Airport on 25 June 1954. (HT Photo)

Claude Arpi’s third volume on relations between India and Tibet covers the deepening Chinese penetration of the plateau and Beijing’s administrative and military consolidation there. The freehand given to China in its consolidation in Tibet was made possible when the two Asian giants signed the Panchsheel Agreement on Tibet in 1954. This was the document with which India withdrew its effective presence in Tibet in the form of two trade agencies and military escorts, though India’s mission in Lhasa operated as before. The agreement’s guiding principle of non-interference in and respect for each other’s territorial integrity left China to do in Tibet whatever it willed. Beijing imposed land ‘reforms’ and new leadership and administrative structure that led to the 1959 uprising against Chinese rule.

Digging deep into India’s national archival treasure trove, Claude Arpi has pulled out a real gem. This gem is the assessment of the various Indian officers, and of the character and motives of those figures, both political and spiritual, within the Tibetan leadership structure. The comments by India’s Tibet hands include the urgent need for Tibet to reform its social structure, making it fair and just for all Tibetans. This Indian examination of the strength and weakness of the Tibetan leadership came for closer scrutiny when the Dalai and Panchen Lamas visited India in 1956 for the Buddha Jayanti commemorations.

These lengthy and fascinating reports were submitted to New Delhi by Apa Pant, the political officer based in Gangtok, who dealt with affairs of Tibet, Bhutan and Sikkim, PN Menon, the former Indian consul general in Lhasa, and PN Luthra, special officer of border areas in the Ministry of External Affairs.

Apa Pant was convinced that “Old Tibet cannot fight new dynamic China.” He suggested that “In Tibet, unless the high monks, thinkers, and saints start seriously the re-organizing of the whole social and economic structure which is today based on privileges and is corrupt, there is no point in calling Tibet a Buddhist land…”

Apa Pant also suggested that “The Chinese have also a doctrine of social revolution and change which they are certain will help the common man. The Tibetans shall have to have an equally powerful dynamic policy of social change.”

Apa Pant made this fearful prediction. With China creating the conditions for the settlement of Tibet by Chinese migrants, “Tibet, as we know it today, will be annihilated, the process for its complete absorption into China (has) started.”

Colonel PN Luthra was assigned to the Panchen Lama’s party in its travels throughout India. About China’s designs on Tibet, the astute colonel has this to say. China, he wrote, “was eating Tibet like an artichoke, leaf by leaf.”

As for the time he spent with the Panchen Lama, Luthra wrote, “At a certain stage of the tour, it became possible to freely and frankly discuss any matter, however delicate, with the Panchen Lama himself or some of his principal associates.” Luthra was impressed by the Panchen Lama’s ability to recognize faces. He was, Luthra wrote, careful to “recognize the humbler staff such as motor drivers and dispatch-riders.” The Panchen Lama told Luthra that he did not believe in the “superstitious practices of Tibetan society. The Dalai Lama’s consultation with his oracle to decide the date of his departure to India had caused the Panchen Lama much amusement.” Luthra wrote, “I once asked the Panchen Lama what it felt like to be the incarnation of Amitabha. He replied that he had no such consciousness nor does he possess any supernatural powers. He struck me as a man without pretensions.”

According to Luthra, despite the traditional rivalry between Lhasa and Shigatse and the court politics of the two Lamas, “There seems to exist personal friendly accord as one would imagine between two youths who have so much in common… I have seen them cutting jokes, thumping each other’s backs and exchanging warm greetings.”

In 1959 when the Tibetan people rose up against Chinese rule in Tibet, the Dalai Lama along with an estimated 87,000 Tibetans fled Tibet to India, Nepal, and Bhutan. The Panchen Lama chose to remain in Tibet. In 1962, the Panchen Lama after extensive research and tour of all Tibet submitted the 70,000-character petition to the Chinese Communist Party, laying bare the Party’s disastrous mistakes on the plateau, nearly falling short of accusing the Party of genocide. Mao Zedong called the Panchen Lama’s constructive criticism “a poisoned arrow” aimed at the Party. For this, the Panchen Lama spent 14 long years in prison. After Mao’s death in 1976, he was released. In 1989, he confided publicly to the Tibetan people that Tibet had lost more than it gained under Chinese rule. That year under mysterious circumstances, the Panchen Lama died.

The third major voice to offer his commentary on the Tibetan political scene is that of PN Menon. He spent two years as India’s consul general in Tibet. In 1956 he was assigned to the Dalai Lama’s party. According to Menon, the weakness of the Tibetan struggle was “the real lack of a sense of unity and political consciousness in the way we understand it. At times the conflicting advice seemed to make the Dalai Lama rather confused…” But according to Menon, the Tibetan leader’s basic common sense seemed to “guide him away from the pitfalls of some of the advice offered.”

Contemporary and future generation of researchers of this period of Tibet’s relations with India will remain grateful to Claude Arpi for making these documents accessible. They will appreciate his bringing alive, loud and clear, the sterling character of these India’s frontier officials and their insights into the ominous events unfolding in overwhelmed and beleaguered Tibet.

Thubten Samphel is an independent researcher and a former director of the Tibet Policy Institute

First Published: Aug 16, 2019, 18:31 IST

Whole Problem – India’s Tibet Policy is shaped by foreign aggressors in Kashmir

Special Frontier Force Defends Jammu and Kashmir. India’s Tibet Policy is always shaped by security concerns over foreign aggressors in Kashmir. The United States was willing to check Communist China’s expansionist policy, but, unfortunately, India could not take advantage of the US policy for the US simultaneously supports Pakistan’s occupation of Kashmir

Communist China apart from its illegal military occupation of Tibet during 1949-50, had illegally occupied Indian territory in the Aksai Chin region of Ladakh Province in the State of Jammu and Kashmir prior to its sudden, military attack during 1962 all along the Himalayan Frontier. India’s Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru failed to request military assistance from the United States to oppose this military occupation and land grab by Communist China due to concerns over the US support for Pakistan’s aggression in Kashmir.

The United States was willing to check Communist China’s expansionist policy, but, unfortunately, India could not take advantage of the US policy for the US simultaneously supports Pakistan’s occupation of Kashmir.

Irked by China, India signals turnaround on Dalai Lama

As Beijing keeps riling New Delhi with J&K rants, India invites 84-year-old Tibetan leader to deliver prestigious lecture instituted in memory of its second President.

India’s Tibet Policy is always shaped by security concerns over foreign aggressors in Kashmir. As Beijing keeps riling New Delhi with J&K rants, India invites 84-year-old Tibetan leader to deliver prestigious lecture instituted in memory of its second President.

The government has given its nod to an autonomous institution funded by its Ministry of Human Resource Development that is housed in the summer retreat of President of India to invite Dalai Lama to deliver a lecture next Thursday – a move, which is likely to rile China.

The Indian Institute of Advanced Studies (IIAS) housed at Rashtrapati Nivas in Shimla has invited Dalai Lama to deliver a lecture instituted in memory of eminent educationist and philosopher Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, who had served as the first Vice President and second President of India.

New Delhi’s nod to the institution to invite Dalai Lama to deliver lecture signaled a subtle shift in its approach on engaging with the exiled Tibetans and it came about 20 months after the Cabinet Secretariat in February 2018 advised senior leaders and the functionaries of the government to stay away from events attended by Dalai Lama and other leaders of the global campaign to free Tibet from “repressive rule” of China.

Dalai Lama will deliver the 24th annual Radhakrishnan Memorial Lecture at the India International Centre in New Delhi on Thursday. Vinay Sahasrabuddhe, a member of Parliament of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Director-General of the Indian Council of Cultural Relations (ICCR) will be the Guest of Honor at the event, according to an invitation circulated by the IAAS.

New Delhi’s ties with Beijing came under stress once again after China joined Pakistan to oppose India’s August 5 decision to strip Jammu and Kashmir of its special status and reorganize the state into two Union Territories.

China is concerned over the implication of the Modi government’s move on Jammu and Kashmir on its protracted boundary dispute with India. The Chinese government perceived it as New Delhi’s “unilateral” move to change the status quo in the disputed territory and to strengthen its claim – not only on areas of Kashmir under occupation of Pakistan, but also on 5180 sq km of areas ceded by Pakistan to China in 1963 as well as on Aksai Chin – a disputed territory between India and China.

Though Modi hosted Xi for the second “informal summit” at a seaside resort near Chennai on October 11 and 12, China’s opposition to India’s decisions on Jammu and Kashmir cast a shadow over the meeting.

India, in fact, raised its pitch to re-assert claim over its territories illegally occupied by China, after the communist country on October 31 described the reorganization of Jammu and Kashmir as “unlawful”.

Whole Problem – India’s Tibet Policy is shaped by foreign aggressors in Kashmir. Communist China apart from its illegal military occupation of Tibet during 1949-50, had illegally occupied Indian territory in the Aksai Chin region of Ladakh Province in the State of Jammu and Kashmir prior to its sudden, military attack during 1962 all along the Himalayan Frontier. India’s Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru failed to request military assistance from the United States to oppose this military occupation and land grab by Communist China due to concerns over the US support for Pakistan’s aggression in Kashmir.

Whole Evil – 62 Years after the 1962 War of Red China’s Aggression

The US halts Red China’s Military Adventurism

Communist China’s act of unprovoked aggression on India during October 1962 came to an abrupt halt on November 21, 1962. China declared unilateral cease-fire and withdrew from captured territory in North East Frontier Agency (NEFA), or Arunachal Pradesh of India. Indian territory that China illegally occupied in Ladakh Sector remains under Chinese control.

In the book, ‘LISTENING IN: The Secret White House Recordings of John F. Kennedy’ selected by Ted Widmer, Foreword by Caroline Kennedy, it is suggested that China halted its war of aggression when Kennedy planned to nuke China in 1962. Since that time, the United States is playing a key role in curbing Communist China’s “Adventurism” in Southern Asia.

**The US halts Red China’s Military Adventurism. Red China’s Military Adventurism of 1962.**

REMEMBERING THE 1962 INDIA – CHINA WAR : Communist China apart from its illegal military occupation of Tibet during 1949-50, had illegally occupied Indian territory in Aksai Chin Region of Ladakh Province in the State of Jammu and Kashmir prior to its sudden, military attack during 1962 all along the Himalayan Frontier. India’s Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru, on account of Pakistan’s War of Aggression in Kashmir, failed to request for military assistance from the United States to oppose this military occupation and land grab by Communist China.

**Whole Dude – Whole Fight: The McMahon Line in India’s North East Frontier Agency or Arunachal Pradesh.**

Chinese Adventurism and the Tibet Factor

BY CLAUDE ARPI

Thursday, May 04, 2017.

Clipped from: http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/edit/chinese-adventurism-and-the-tibet-factor.html

**The 1962 India – China War and the US Factor.**

Had China extended the 1962 war against India, it would have had to battle it out at various fronts simultaneously. The situation in Tibet was grim and a power tussle was on within the ruling Communist Party.

The Dalai Lama, Beijing’s bête noire, was recently awarded the Professor ML Sondhi Prize for International Politics 2016. Sondhi, a renowned academic, a Jan Sangh politician as well as a visionary diplomat, was probably the first to advocate normal relations with Israel, at a time when India was still living in a dream-world of non-alignment with the Hebrew state.

During the function, the Tibetan spiritual leader, in a veiled threat to Beijing, stated that China will have to think of Tibet in case of a conflict with India, as handling both simultaneously (India and Tibet) would not be an ‘easy’ task for Beijing. At the same time, the Dalai Lama played down the possibility of a military conflict.

He, however, added that since India has become a military power, the only option for China was ‘compromise’: “India is not a small country. It is gaining military power. So the only thing is compromise. The Chinese have to think about the situation inside Tibet when it comes to conflict with India.”

This raises an important issue: The significance of the ‘Tibet factor’ in the history of the 1962 Sino-Indian conflict; the highly unstable situation on the plateau in the months which preceded the Chinese attack in the NEFA and Ladakh played a restraining role for the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in October 1962 — particularly the 70,000-character petition of the Panchen Lama addressed to Premier Zhou Enlai and another high official, Xi Zhongxun, President Xi Jinping’s father.

At the beginning of the 1960s, resentment was at its peak in Tibet. In January 1962, during a speech at an important party forum, Mao Zedong brought up the issue of the Panchen Lama and the situation in Tibet. The young Tibetan Lama, who had been made Chairman of the Preparatory Committee for the Tibet Autonomous Region when the Dalai Lama left for India in 1959, had started to criticize the Communist Party’s policy in Tibet.

The Tibetan issue was to become a crucial factor which impeded longer military operations against India at the end of 1962. In the 70,000-character petition, (dubbed by Mao as a “poisonous arrow”), the Panchen Lama listed several problems on the plateau.

In the summer of 1962, when the PLA started to work on the details of the military operations, it soon realized that the campaign could not be sustained for a long time. It was, therefore, decided to terminate the war ‘with a unilateral Chinese halt, ceasefire, and withdrawal’. Historian Shi Bo believes that in view of “practical difficulties associated with China’s domestic situation”, the PLA, after achieving its military objectives, had to “quickly disengage and end the fighting as quickly as possible”. China’s ‘domestic situation’ is referring to the power struggle within the Party (Xi Zhongxun would be purged in July) and the situation in Tibet. With discontent brewing on the Roof of the World, the supply lines to the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) had been greatly weakened.

Tibet’s instability appears clearly in the 70,000-character petition sent by the Panchen Lama to Zhou Enlai who requested Xi Zhongxun and Li Weihan, responsible of the United Front Work Department dealing with ‘minorities’, General Zhang Jingwu, the Representative of the Central Committee in Tibet and General Zhang Guohua, the Commander of the Chinese forces during the 1962 war, to read and study the Panchen Lama’s petition.

Interestingly, when the Panchen Lama died in 1989, Xi Zhongxun wrote in The People’s Daily that the Tibet experts found “most of the comments and suggestions [of the Panchen Lama were] good; they could be implemented, but some had gone too far”. Indeed, he had gone ‘too far’ for the communist leadership.

He had criticized the handling of the 1959 ‘rebellion’ (‘uprising’ for the Tibetans). Xi Sr commented: “[It] was counter-revolutionary in nature, being against the party, the motherland, the people, democracy and socialism. Its crimes were very grave. Thus, it was entirely correct, essential, necessary and appropriate for the party to adopt the policy of suppressing the rebellion.”

In separate chapters entitled, ‘Democratic Reforms’; ‘Production in Agriculture and Animal Herding’; ‘Surviving of the People’; ‘Nationalities’ Policy’; ‘Dictatorship of the Party’; and finally, ‘Freedom of Religion’, the Panchen had mentioned the deep grievances of the Tibetan population. He paid a heavy price for having dared to write what everyone knew; he spent the years from 1964 to 1978 in solitary confinement and rehabilitation camps.

Few analysts have pointed out that a longer war would have been difficult to sustain in the atmosphere of ‘rebellion’ prevalent on the Roof of the World at that time. Though openly siding with the ‘reformists’ camp led by Lui Shaoqi and Deng Xiaoping, the Panchen Lama was also warning the communist leadership of the resentment of the so-called nationalities.

Some new historical documents regarding the 70,000 characters’ letter have recently appeared in English on a blog, War in Tibet. The transcripts make fascinating reading. In the Summary of a Meeting between Comrade Xi Zhongxun, Comrade Li Weihan and Panchen held on June 21, 1962, in The Great Hall of the People in Beijing, Jawaharlal Nehru and India are several times mentioned. At one point, Xi Zhongxun intervenes and recalls his encounters with the ‘Master’, the Panchen Lama: “We held several meetings here just for you to vent your anger and figure out ways to solve problems…. if you are angry, let it out. If you have disagreement, speak out. Problems should be solved through consultation and discussion.” But the Panchen Lama’s anger venting would take him to jail for 14 years.

About the restive situation in Tibet, Xi speaks of Nehru: “This requires that we do our work better under the leadership of the [Tibet] Work Committee [implementing the ‘reforms’], and construct our motherland better. Nehru is laughing now, but don’t let him have the last laugh.”

At another point, during the three-day discussions, Xi Zhongxun mentions other implications of the Panchen Lama’s letter: “Tibet is the front line of national Defence, and there is struggle against enemies as well.” He adds: “This is the joint work of Nehru and Dalai. If they messed up Nepal, how can they not want to mess up Tibet? What’s their purpose? They just want to overthrow the current leadership in Tibet and restore the old order. …Things are difficult in Tibet, but solutions and hope do exist, and our future is bright.”

Though the situation is relatively stable in Tibet today (it is not the case in Xinjiang), it would certainly be an important factor in case of Chinese adventurism. Indian planners should take note of this crucial strategic issue and in-depth studies should be undertaken on the situation in Tibet in the eventuality of a Sino-Indian conflict.

( Claude Arpi, the writer is an expert on India-China relations and an author)

**THE 1962 INDIA – CHINA WAR AND THE US FACTOR. PRESIDENT KENNEDY PLANNED TO NUKE CHINA IN 1962.**

Whole Aggressor – Red China, Aggressor Nation Occupying Tibet

Red China – Aggressor Nation Occupying Tibet

In my analysis, Communist China, Red China is aggressor, hegemonist, imperialist, Expansionist,Neocolonialist, and Evil One occupying Tibet using military force. I do not consider the actions of Tibet, or of India to explain as to why Tibet lost Freedom in 1950.

How Tibet Lost Its Independence and India Its Gentle Neighbor

Clipped from: http://www.asianage.com/books/230318/how-tibet-lost-its-independence-and-india-its-gentle-neighbour.html

It relates to the sequence of events and the role of KM Panikkar, the Indian Ambassador in China, during the weeks after the invasion of Tibet.

Red China – Aggressor. Indian Mission in Lhasa till 1952. In my analysis, Communist China, Red China is aggressor, hegemonist, imperialist, Expansionist,Neocolonialist, and Evil One occupying Tibet using military force. I do not consider the actions of Tibet, or of India to explain as to why Tibet lost Freedom in 1950.

Dekyi Linka, the Indian Mission in Lhasa till 1952 (thereafter the Indian Consulate-General).

Claude Arpi, holding the Field Marshal KM Cariappa Chair of Excellence from the United Service Institution of India (USI), for his research on the Indian Presence in Tibet 1947-1962 (in 4 volumes), has extensively worked in the National Archives of India and well the Nehru Library (on the Nehru Papers) on the history of Tibet, the Indian frontiers and particularly the Indian Frontier Administrative Service.

The Last Months of a Free Nation — India Tibet Relations (1947-1962) is the first volume of the series, using never-accessed-before Indian archival material. Though Tibet’s system of governance had serious lacunae, the Land of Snows was a free and independent nation till October 1950, when Mao decided to “liberate”it. But “liberate” from what, was the question on many diplomats’ and politicians’ lips in India; they realized that it would soon be a tragedy for India too; Delhi would have to live with a new neighbor, whose ideology was the opposite of Tibet’s Buddhist values; the border would not be safe anymore.

The narrative starts soon after Independence and ends with the signing, under duress, of the 17-Point Agreement in Beijing in May 1951, whose first article says: “The Tibetan people shall unite and drive out imperialist aggressive forces from Tibet; the Tibetan people shall return to the big family of the Motherland-the People’s Republic of China.” Tibet had lost its Independence …and India, a gentle neighbour.

Reproduced below are extracts from a chapter The View from the South Block.

It relates to the sequence of events and the role of KM Panikkar, the Indian Ambassador in China, during the weeks after the invasion of Tibet.

It is usually assumed that Sardar Patel, the Deputy Prime Minister wrote his “prophetic” letter to Jawaharlal Nehru, the Prime Minister, detailing the grave implications for India of Tibet’s invasion. In fact, he used a draft sent to him by Sir Girija Shankar Bajpai, the Secretary General of the Ministry of External Affairs and Commonwealth.

On November 7, 1950, just a month after the entry of the People’s Liberation Army in Tibet, Patel sent Bajpai’s note to Nehru under his own signature Bajpai, the top-most Indian diplomat, was deeply upset by the turn of events; he also shared his note with President Rajendra Prasad, C. Rajagopalachari and others. Nehru ignored Patel’s letter and the views of his colleagues.

Red China – Aggressor. In my analysis, Communist China, Red China is aggressor, hegemonist, imperialist, Expansionist,Neocolonialist, and Evil One occupying Tibet using military force. I do not consider the actions of Tibet, or of India to explain as to why Tibet lost Freedom in 1950.

November 1950
It is usually assumed that Sardar Patel, the Deputy Prime Minister of India wrote the “prophetic” letter to Jawaharlal Nehru, the Prime Minister, detailing the grave implications for India of Tibet’s invasion. In fact, he used a draft sent to him by Sir Girija Shankar Bajpai, the Secretary General of the Ministry of External Affairs and Commonwealth. On November 7, 1950, a month after the entry of the People’s Liberation Army in Tibet, Patel sent Bajpai’s note under his own signature, to Nehru, who ignored Patel’s letter.

Bajpai, deeply upset by the turn of events, had also sent his note to President Rajendra Prasad and C Rajagopalachari.

Girija Shankar Bajpai’s Note of October 31
Bajpai first noted that on July 15, 1950, the Governor of Assam had informed Delhi that, according to information received by the local Intelligence Bureau, Chinese troops, “in unknown strength, had been moving towards Tibet from three directions, namely the north, north-east and south-east.” The same day, the Indian Embassy in China reported that rumours in Beijing had been widely “prevalent during the last two days that military action against Tibet has already begun.” Though Panikkar was unable to get any confirmation, he virtually justified Beijing’s military action by writing: “in view of frustration in regard to Formosa, Tibetan move was not unlikely.” A few days later], Bajpai remarked that the Ambassador [Panikkar] had answered [Delhi] that he did not consider the time suitable for making a representation to the Chinese Foreign Office. Bajpai is more and more frustrated with Panikkar’s surrender to Chinese interests and perhaps also by the support that the ambassador gets from the Prime Minister. The Secretary General is clearly in a difficult position. Already on July 20, Panikkar’s attention had been drawn by South Block to the fact that Beijing’s argument that the “Tibetans had been stalling the talks,” was wrong. Panikkar had been informed by Delhi that the Tibetan Delegation should not be blamed for something they are not responsible for…

Panikkar brings in philosophical issues
India [Panikkar] attempted to change the Communist regime’s decision to “liberate” Tibet, by bringing a philosophical angle to the issue: “In the present dangerous world situation, a military move can only bring a world nearer [to a conflict], and any Government making such a move incurs the risk of accelerating the drift towards that catastrophe.”

Mao was not in the least bothered about such niceties.

Another Aide-Memoire
Delhi again repeats its “philosophical” position: it would be bad for Beijing to invade Tibet: “The Government of India would desire to point out that a military action at the present time against Tibet will give those countries in the world which are unfriendly to China a handle for anti-Chinese propaganda at a crucial and delicate juncture in inter-national affairs.” Delhi is convinced that “the position of China will be weakened” by a (Chinese) military solution.

The Chinese plans are clear
The objective of Mao and the Southwestern Bureau in Chengdu is to occupy Chamdo, it is therefore clear that the PLA is preparing to enter “Tibet proper”. …The objective remains the fall of Chamdo before the winter, ambassador or no ambassador, negotiation or no negotiations.

As Tibet is invaded, Sir Girija’s narrative continues:
On October 17, the Indian Ambassador receives the full details of the Chinese invasion of Tibet. South Block confirms that Tibet has been invaded, it was “brought to our notice at the request of the Tibetan Government in a message sent through our Mission in Lhasa,” says a cable from Delhi. The next day, Panikkar continues to argue against the invasion having happened; he says that out of the incidents to which Lhasa has drawn Delhi’s attention, only one appears to be new.

Bajpai more upset
Sir Girija Bajpai is further upset when Panikkar argues: “Further I should like to emphasise that the Chinese firmly hold that Tibet is purely an internal problem and that while they are prepared in deference to our wishes to settle question peacefully they are NOT prepared to postpone matters indefinitely.”

This is written by the Ambassador of India.

(On October 22], Nehru cables the Ambassador in Beijing: “I confess I am completely unable to understand urgency behind Chinese desire to ‘liberate’ when delay CANNOT possibly change situation to her disadvantage.”

Finally on October 24, the Ambassador presents an aide-memoire to the Chinese Foreign Office. Bajpai notes “The contrast between the tone and content of the instructions sent to the Ambassador, and his feeble and apologetic ‘note’ deserves notice.” This raises a question, how could the ambassador present an aide-memoire without its content being vetted by South Block? It is a mystery.

Bajpai could only conclude that “from the foregoing narrative which I have been at some pains to document, that ever since the middle of July, at least, Peking’s objective has been to settle the problem of its relations by force.” From Mao’s cables, [one can see that] the invasion (or “liberation” for the Chinese side) did not at all depend on “negotiations” or “talks” with Tibetans. The army action had been decided since months.

Though Bajpai says that he is not interested to find “scapegoats”, he finally blames his ambassador to China: “The search for scapegoats is neither pleasant nor fruitful, and I have no desire to indulge in any such pastime. …however, I feel it my duty to observe that, in handling the Tibetan issue with the Chinese Government, our Ambassador has allowed himself to be influenced more by the Chinese point of view, by Chinese claims, by Chinese maps and by regard for Chinese susceptibilities than by his instructions or by India’s interests.” This is a strong, though late indictment of Panikkar.

Patel replies to Bajpai
…When on October 31, Sardar Patel wrote back to Bajpai: “The Chinese advance into Tibet upsets all our security calculations. …I entirely agree with you that a reconsideration of our military position and disposition of our forces are inescapable.” A few days later, Bajpai would write a note for Patel who sent it to Nehru, who did not even acknowledge it… Patel passed away five weeks later.

The rest is history.

Red China – Aggressor. Invasion of Tibet in 1950. In my analysis, Communist China, Red China is aggressor, hegemonist, imperialist, Expansionist,Neocolonialist, and Evil One occupying Tibet using military force. I do not consider the actions of Tibet, or of India to explain as to why Tibet lost Freedom in 1950.

Whole Tyrant – Red China’s Imperial Emperor

Red China’s Imperialism – Era of Emperor Xi Jinping

**Whole Tyrant – Red China’s Imperial Emperor: Era of Emperor Xi Jinping.**

In my analysis Red China’s Imperialism will perish without any human intervention. Era of Emperor Xi Jinping will end by heavenly strike as mentioned in REVELATION Chapter 18.

China President’s Possible Indefinite Term Raises Concerns Among Citizens

Clipped from: http://www.ibtimes.com/china-presidents-possible-indefinite-term-raises-concerns-among-citizens-2657905

Political commentators and business people in China voiced their displeasure on the proposal for an indefinite term for President Xi Jinping, Time Magazine reported.

In a rare event that was close to an expression of public dissent, prominent people in China penned open letters urging lawmakers to reject the plan to extend the term of the president.

Li Datong, a former editor for the state-run China Youth Daily wrote in a statement on WeChat — a social media mobile application — that lifting the term limit will “sow the seeds of chaos.”

Wang Ying, a business woman who in the past advocated for government reforms, viewed the move by lawmakers as a betrayal.

“I know that you (the government) will dare to do anything,” Wang wrote on WeChat. “And one ordinary person’s voice is certainly useless. But I am a Chinese citizen, and I don’t plan on leaving. This is my motherland too!”

Xi is viewed as the most powerful leader in China since Mao — the founding father of People’s Republic of China.

Li told the Associated Press on Tuesday: “If there are no term limits on a country’s highest leader, then we are returning to an imperial regime.”

“My generation has lived through Mao. That era is over. How can we possibly go back to it?” she added.

The officials in China said they were not aware of the open letters.

Under China’s constitution the president is allowed two terms in office, but the current president sought additional terms to realize the agenda set by his office to fight corruption, eliminate poverty and transform China into a thriving country.

On Sunday, lawmakers in China said they were pursuing an amendment in the constitution in which the term limit can be indefinitely extended so Xi can stay in power.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said Monday the proposal “was made in accordance with new situation and the practice of upholding and developing socialism with Chinese characteristics in the new era.”

The statements indicating discontent on the move to extend the term limit, started making rounds shortly after lawmakers declared they were looking into the possibility.

According to the report in Time, the National People’s Congress was sure the bill to amend the constitution will pass at the next annual session early next month, which would grant Xi a second five-year term and appoint new ministers and other government officials.

“The strong leadership of the [Communist party of China] has proved to be a decisive factor for what this country has achieved both economically and politically over the past four decades,” the China Daily argued in an editorial.

The Guardian reported that the English newspaper China Daily, an international voice for the affairs in Beijing, said the move was “necessitated by the need to perfect the party and the state leadership system.”

Whole Trouble – The Decline of American Century

The Rise of Evil Red Empire – The Cold War in Asia

In my analysis, Nixon-Kissinger Vietnam Treason caused the ‘Decline of American Century’ and the ‘Rise of Evil Red Empire’. I ask my readers to remember July 15, 1971 as “Black Day to Freedom” , the Day on which US President Nixon publicly announced his decision to befriend Communist China while Americans were bleeding and dying in Vietnam to combat the spread of Communism in Asia.

Nixon-Kissinger Vietnam Treason initiated Doomed American China Fantasy in 1972. Since that time, USA as a global power is on steady decline, while Red China remains in hot pursuit of her doctrine of Expansionism, a State Policy of using Military and Economic Power to subjugate people and control natural resources in weaker nations of Asia, Africa, and Europe.

President Nixon met Communist China’s Prime Minister Chou Enlai. Did this act of friendship help the US Army in the Vietnam War? Could it stop Communist North Vietnam from launching its major invasion of South Vietnam during March 1972? Using this friendship, both President Nixon and Dr. Kissinger tried their best to stop India from Liberating Bangladesh during 1971. This Nixon and Chou Enlai friendship did not stop the Liberation of Bangladesh which India initiated with Operation Eagle 1971 in the Chittagong Hill Tracts.

**TIBET CONSCIOUSNESS – UNDYING HOPE FOR FREEDOM. US PRESIDENT NIXON’S VISIT TO COMMUNIST CHINA IS BLACK DAY TO FREEDOM.**

REMEMBERING CHINESE PRIME MINISTER ZHOU ENLAI ON JANUARY 08, 2017, HIS 41st DEATH ANNIVERSARY. I KEEP ZHOU ENLAI, MAO ZEDONG, RICHARD NIXON ALIVE IN MY THOUGHTS FOR TIBET REMAINS UNDER MILITARY OCCUPATION.

Military & Defense

China held a massive military parade showing off its might – and it could surpass the US by 2030

Alex Lockie

China’s president, Xi Jinping, presiding over the country’s massive military parade in inner Mongolia. CCTV

Chinese President Xi Jinping on Sunday presided over a massive military parade from an open-topped jeep, declaring, “The world is not peaceful, and peace needs to be defended.”

And as China’s show of force demonstrates, Beijing may have the will and the strength to replace the US as the world’s defender of peace.

“Our heroic military has the confidence and capabilities to preserve national sovereignty, security, and interests … and to contribute more to maintaining world peace,” Xi said at the parade, one day after US President Donald Trump lashed out at Beijing for its inaction regarding North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

China’s massive military modernization and increasing assertiveness have irked many of its neighbors in the region, and even as the US attempts to reassure its allies that US power still rules the day, that military edge is eroding.

China showed off new, mobile intercontinental ballistic missiles that it says can reach the US in 30 minutes, along with its J-20 stealth interceptor jets. And Xi inspected thousands of troops drawn from the 2 million-strong People’s Liberation Army’s on its 90th anniversary.

The historian Alfred McCoy estimates that by 2030, China, a nation of 1.3 billion, will surpass the US in both economic and military strength, essentially ending the American empire and Pax Americana the world has known since the close of World War II.

Soldiers marching to celebrate the 90th anniversary of the founding of China’s People’s Liberation Army. Xinhua

But China could achieve this goal patiently and without a violent struggle. China has employed a “salami-slicing” method of slowly but surely militarizing the South China Sea in incremental steps that have not prompted a strong military response from the US. However, the result is China’s de facto control over a shipping lane that sees $5 trillion in annual traffic.

“The American Century, proclaimed so triumphantly at the start of World War II, may already be tattered and fading by 2025 and, except for the finger pointing, could be over by 2030,” McCoy wrote in his new book, “In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of US Global Power.”

China unveiled its J-20 stealth fighter at an air show in November. China Daily/via REUTERS

China’s J-20 jet also most likely borrows from stealth secrets stolen from the US through a sophisticated hacking regime. Though China hasn’t mastered stealth technology in the way the US has, the jet still poses a real threat to US forces.

Meanwhile, the US is stretched thin. It has had been at war in Afghanistan for 16 years and in Iraq for 14, and it has been scrambling to curtail Iranian and Russian influence in Syria while reassuring its Baltic NATO allies that it’s committed to their protection against an aggressive Russia.

Under Xi, who pushes an ambitious foreign policy, China’s eventual supremacy over the US seems inevitable.

Inserted from <http://www.businessinsider.com/china-military-parade-superior-to-us-by-2030-2017-7>

Whole Trouble – Red China Fools All People All the Time

Trouble in Tibet – Red China Fools All People All the Time

“You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.” – Abraham Lincoln. Red China is an exception to this rule about fooling people for she tries to fool all people all the time.

TROUBLE IN TIBET - RED CHINA FOOLS ALL PEOPLE ALL THE TIME. I AM PRAYING FOR DESCENT OF SWARM OF TRILLIONS OF BEES TO STING AND TO DRIVE AWAY PEOPLE'S LIBERATION ARMY FROM OCCUPIED TIBETAN TERRITORY. — TROUBLE IN TIBET – RED CHINA FOOLS ALL PEOPLE ALL THE TIME. I AM PRAYING FOR THE DESCENT OF A SWARM OF TRILLIONS OF HONEY BEES TO STING AND TO DRIVE AWAY PEOPLE’S LIBERATION ARMY FROM OCCUPIED TIBETAN TERRITORY.

Red China claims that Dalai Lama is fooling people by suggesting that he may reincarnate as Honey Bee. In my prayer, I am seeking descent of a swarm of trillions of Honey Bees to sting People’s Liberation Army and force their retreat from Occupied Tibetan territory.

DAILY MAIL.COM

High ranking Chinese official says Dalai Lama is ‘making a fool’ of Buddhism after he suggested he may be reincarnated ‘as a bee or mischievous blond girl’

China’s ethnic and religious affairs chairman takes a swipe at Dalai Lama Claims he is failing Tibetan Buddhists with comments on reincarnation. The Dalai Lama said he may reincarnate as ‘a bee or mischievous blond girl’.

By EUAN McLELLAND for MailOnLine

Published: 10:16 EST, 28 March 2016 | Updated: 10:16 EST, 28 March 2016

A top Chinese official has blasted the Dalai Lama claiming he is ‘making a fool’ of Buddhism by suggesting he may not reincarnate when he dies.
Zhu Weiqun, chairman of the ethnic and religious affairs committee of the top advisory body to China’s parliament, said the Dalai Lama had to respect tradition.

Tibetan Buddhism believes that the soul of a senior lama is reincarnated in the body of a child on his death.

**TROUBLE IN TIBET – RED CHINA FOOLS ALL PEOPLE ALL THE TIME. PRAYING FOR THE DESCENT OF A SWARM OF TRILLIONS OF HONEY BEES TO DRIVE AWAY PEOPLE’S LIBERATION ARMY FROM TIBET.**

The Dalai Lama – who fled into exile in India after a failed uprising against Chinese rule in 1959 – is being accused of adopting a ‘useless’ approach by suggesting he may be reincarnated as an animal or ‘something entirely inappropriate’

Writing in the state-run Global Times, Mr Weiqun wrote: ‘The Dalai Lama continues to proclaim his reincarnation is a “purely religious matter” and something only he can decide, but he has no way to compel admiration from the faithful.

‘He’s been proclaiming he’ll reincarnate as a foreigner, as a bee, as a “mischievous blond girl”, or even proposing a living reincarnation or an end to reincarnation.

‘All of this, quite apart from making a fool of Tibetan Buddhism, is completely useless when it comes to extricating him from the difficulty of reincarnation,’ wrote Zhu, who was involved in the past in Beijing’s failed efforts to talk to the Dalai Lama’s representatives.’
The exiled Tibetan spiritual leader is considered a violent separatist by China.

He denies espousing violence and insists he only wants genuine autonomy for Tibet.

The comments against him come as early election results put the leader of the Tibetan government-in-exile, Lobsang Sangay, on course for a second term, part of a strategy to sustain a decades-old struggle for greater autonomy for its Chinese-ruled homeland.

**TROUBLE IN TIBET – RED CHINA FOOLS ALL PEOPLE ALL THE TIME. I AM PRAYING FOR THE DESCENT OF A SWARM OF TRILLIONS OF HONEY BEES TO FORCE PEOPLE’S LIBERATION ARMY TO WITHDRAW FROM OCCUPIED TIBET.**

Tibetan Buddhism believes that the soul of a senior lama is reincarnated in the body of a child on his death.

China says the tradition must continue and its officially atheist Communist leaders have the right to approve the Dalai Lama’s successor, as a right inherited from China’s emperors.
A senior aide to the Dalai Lama, Tenzin Taklha, said there was ‘no way’ Tibetans would accept a successor appointed by China.
‘The Chinese are following an absurd agenda and we continue to reject it,’ he said.
In 2011, the Dalai Lama called on exiled Tibetans to nominate an elected leader, or ‘Sikyong’, to lead the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA). Sangay was on track to win re-election with over 65 percent backing in the March 20 vote.
‘I hope to do much better. Both on political terms, by holding dialogue with the Chinese, and working on welfare issues in the next five years,’ he told Reuters.
China does not recognize the CTA, which is based in India’s Himalayan town of Dharamsala and represents nearly 100,000 exiled Tibetans living in 30 countries including India, Nepal, Canada and the United States.

Published by Associated Newspapers Ltd

Part of the Daily Mail, The Mail on Sunday & Metro Media Group

Trouble in Tibet. Red China Fools All People All The Time. Red China is Liar. — **Trouble in Tibet. Red China Fools All People All The Time. Red China is a Liar.**

TROUBLE IN TIBET – RED CHINA FOOLS ALL PEOPLE ALL THE TIME. I AM PRAYING FOR THE DESCENT OF A SWARM OF TRILLIONS OF HONEY BEES TO STING AND TO DRIVE AWAY PEOPLE’S LIBERATION ARMY FROM OCCUPIED TIBETAN TERRITORY.

Whole Trouble – The Military Occupation of Tibet is a symptom of Spiritual Wickedness

Trouble in Tibet – The Spiritual Wickedness of Red China

Trouble in Tibet arrived in the form of military occupation which is a manifestation of Red China’s Spiritual Wickedness. The 100 Most Spiritually Influential People of the World put together may not be able to treat Red China’s Spiritual illness.

His Holiness the Dalai Lama of Tibet tops 2016 Spiritual 100 list

Tibet post International

Tuesday, 23 February 2016 18:13 Yeshe Choesang, Tibet Post International

TROUBLE IN TIBET – RED CHINA’S MILITARY OCCUPATION OF TIBET IS A SYMPTOM OF SPIRITUAL WICKEDNESS. 100 MOST SPIRITUALLY INFLUENTIAL PEOPLE OF WORLD WHEN PUT TOGETHER MAY NOT BE ABLE TO CURE RED CHINA’S SPIRITUAL SICKNESS.

Dharamshala — The spiritual leader of Tibet His Holiness the Dalai Lama again topped the 2016 list of the 100 Most Spiritually Influential Living People, published by Watkins’ Mind Body Spirit Magazine.

Presented annually since 2011 in the spring issue of the quarterly publication, the list – also known as the Spiritual 100 – compiles the most spiritually prominent people of the past year.

“We are delighted to share with you Watkins’ 2016 list of the 100 Most Spiritually Influential Living People – spiritual teachers, activists, authors and thinkers that change the world,” the magazine said.

The Nobel Peace Prize laureate, His Holiness the Dalai Lama was recognised in front of Pope Francis and South African retired Anglican bishop Desmond Tutu who were placed second and third respectively. Others listed include German spiritual teacher and writer Eckhart Tolle (fourth), Indian American author and public speaker Deepak Chopra (fifth), Brazilian novelist and author of The Alchemist Paulo Coelho (sixth), American novelist, short story writer, poet, and activist Alice Malsenior Walker (Seventh), Australian television writer and producer Rhonda Byrne (eighth), Chilean filmmaker and director of El Topo Alejandro Jodorowsky (ninth), American talk show host Oprah Winfrey (tenth), Greek American author and co-founder and editor-in-chief of The Huffington Post Arianna Huffington (fifteenth) and British author and commentator known for her books on comparative religion Karen Armstrong (twentieth).

The Magazine also said that “there are plenty of newcomers on this year’s list including the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, psychologist and author Daniel Goleman, physicist and environmental activist Vandana Shiva and poet and philosopher Mark Nepo.”
“If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion.”

This is just one of the many often-quoted statements from His Holiness the Dalai Lama that continue to land him on top of global lists of influential and inspiring world religious leaders. For several years now, Watkins Magazine has placed the Tibetan spiritual leader at the top of their list of the 100 Most Spiritually Influential Living People. He was #1 in 2015, 2014, 2013 and 2012. In their 2016 list, published earlier this month, the Tibetan spiritual leader is once again #1.

#21. Jon Kabat-Zinn: Also not a Buddhist per se, but Kabat-Zinn did study with a number of Buddhist teachers before developing the now wide-spread Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR).

#25. Sam Harris: One of the “Four Horsemen” of New Atheism, has taken up the practice of vipassana, derived from the early Buddhist tradition, and even teaches it – stripped of aspects he considers religious.

#34. Daniel Goleman: A well-known psychologist and long time scholar of meditation who has worked closely with the Dalai Lama for over a decade. One of his breakthrough books was Emotional Intelligence (1995), and later works include Destructive Emotions: A Scientific Dialogue with the Dalai Lama (2003) and Focus: The Hidden Driver of Excellence (2015).

#36 is Gary Snyder, #38 is Pema Chödrön, #50 is Robert Thurman, #65 is Thich Nhat Hanh, #66 is Jack Kornfield, #68 is Ajahn Brahm, #78 is Tara Brach, #82 is Huston Smith (another wonderful scholar of many world religions, including Buddhism), #89 is Richard Gere, #95 is Sogyal Rinpoche, and #99 is Sharon Salzberg.

The magazine states that the list is compiled based on three factors: “1. The person has to be alive as of January 1st, 2016. 2. The person has to have made a unique and spiritual contribution on a global scale. 3. The person is frequently googled, appears in Nielsen Data, and is actively talked about throughout the Internet.”

“By taking into account the amount of times that a person is googled or how many times their Wikipedia profile is viewed, the list gains a highly democratic parameter. In a sense, being googled is a form of digital voting, and illustrates just how often someone is being sought out,” it added.
According to Mind Body Spirit, the list is not a competition but “is meant to celebrate the positive influence of contemporary spiritual teachers.”
Watkins Mind Body and Spirit magazine is sold and published by Watkins Books, England’s oldest and largest esoteric bookshop that has been trading since 1893.

Last Updated ( Tuesday, 23 February 2016 19:08 )

Whole Aggressor – Red China’s Dictatorial Regime

Tibet Consciousness – Red China’s Dictatorial Regime

On this Thursday, December 10, 2015, World Human Rights Day, I state that Red China is autocratic, domineering, and tyrannical for she exercises power suppressing the views of all others. Her actions are arbitrary, unreasoned, and unpredictable. Red China uses power or authority in accord only with her own will or desire. Red China’s Communist Party is a dictatorial regime for this one-party governance has absolute control of political, economic, and military power giving no room for any kind of dissent.

CHINA CRACKS DOWN ON AGGRIEVED PARTY CADRES IN XINJIANG AND TIBET

Critics say hardline stance against ‘separatism and religious extremism’ has provoked significant disquiet

**Tibet Consciousness – Red China’s Dictatorial Regime.** ***Red China’s Communist Party is a dictatorial regime for this one-party governance has absolute control of political, economic, and military power giving no room for any kind of dissent.***

A paramilitary policeman stands guard in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa, Tibet. Photograph: Damir Sagolj/Reuters

SIMON DENYER for the Washington Post

Tuesday 8 December 2015 04.32 EST Last modified on Tuesday 8 December 2015 04.34 EST

China has mounted an extraordinary set of attacks against Communist party members in the troubled western regions of Xinjiang and Tibet, with accusations of disloyalty, secret participation in religious activity, sympathy with the Dalai Lama and even support for terrorism.

The accusations reflect a hardening of the party’s stance in Buddhist Tibet and Muslim-majority Xinjiang, experts said, as well as President Xi Jinping’s determination to push for ideological purity within the party nationwide, quashing debate and dissent. But critics say they also reflect the fact that the party’s hardline approach towards crushing “the three evils of separatism, terrorism and religious extremism” in both regions has not only alienated many ordinary ethnic Tibetan and Uighur people but has also provoked significant disquiet in its own ranks.
Some party officials openly criticise policies handed down from above, complained Xu Hairong, secretary of Xinjiang’s Commission for Discipline Inspection, making the unusual admission in a commentary published last month.

“Some waver on clear-cut issues of opposing ethnic division and safeguarding ethnic and national unity, and even support participating in violent terrorist attacks,” Xu wrote in his agency’s official newspaper.

“This does not mean the cadres participated in attacks,” said Nicholas Bequelin, East Asia director for Amnesty International, “but rather is the equivalent of local officials saying: ‘The central authorities are sending leaders who are so ham-fisted they have driven people to the edge and understandably they have started blowing up things.’”

With Xi taking the lead in formulating policy toward Xinjiang, “everybody has to march to the same drumbeat”, Bequelin said.

An article published last Friday on China Tibet Online, a party website, said that 355 party members had been punished in Xinjiang last year for violating “political discipline”.

The article said that one had joined a social media chat group titled “Uighur Muslim” that was meant to undermine ethnic unity, while another had reposted an interview given by the prominent Uighur intellectual Ilham Tohti, who was sentenced last year to life in prison on charges of advocating separatism.

Written by Zhao Zhao, the article said that some officials blame social problems on ethnic discrimination, thereby inciting ethnic hatred. “There is also a lack of faith in Marxism. Some grassroots party members even participate in religious activities,” he wrote, adding that this would never be allowed.

A street in Urumqi, in 2009, shows the scars of riots. Photograph: Peter Parks/Getty

Critics say there is widespread economic, cultural and religious discrimination against Uighurs and Tibetans.
After 2009 riots in Xinjiang’s capital, Urumqi, left at least 192 people dead, the party acknowledged that it needed to address Uighur grievances, Bequelin said.

But later, with an increase in violent attacks by Uighurs, the party changed course, asserting at a major meeting on the region in 2014 that the priorities were stability and unity rather than economic development and combating discrimination.

The imprisonment of Tohti, a moderate economist whose work had detailed the problems Uighurs face, sent a strong signal to academics and party officials alike that the debate about discrimination had been closed, Bequelin said. The party now vehemently asserts that Uighur terrorism is directed by Islamist militants based abroad and is increasingly rooted in extremist ideas picked up on the internet.

At the same time, the Communist party has been recruiting, and the number of members in Xinjiang is reported to have risen by 21,000 to 1.45 million in 2014. And that has brought other problems.

“The Chinese Communist party believes that it is witnessing a ‘crisis of faith’ in Xinjiang and Tibet in particular,” said Julia Famularo, an international securities studies fellow at Yale University.

“It has actively endeavoured to draw ever greater numbers of ethnic minorities into the party, but it now fears that these new recruits possess only superficial loyalty to the party-state,” Famularo wrote in an email. “Beijing laments that these minority party members still make clandestine visits to mosques and monasteries, and that they still have stronger ties to their own people than to the party or to China.”

In Tibet, 15 party members were investigated last year and 20 this year for violating political discipline, China Tibet Online reported, saying that some had participated in organisations supporting “Tibetan independence”.

Last month, Tibet party boss Chen Quango said the party would go after officials who held “incorrect views” on minority issues or who “profess no religious belief but secretly believe,” including those who follow the Dalai Lama or listen to religious sermons.

China accuses the Dalai Lama, the exiled spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhists, of trying to divide the country and pry Tibet away from China. The Dalai Lama insists he only wants meaningful autonomy for the region.

This article appeared in GUARDIAN WEEKLY, which incorporates material from the Washington Post