Tibet, the Olympics, and Facing the Facts

[Chukwuma]

There are those who argue that the Beijing Olympics should remain unsullied by political realities. These Games, they argue, are about global unity, a celebration of our common humanity – it would be unseemly to disrupt the beauty of these events with political statements.

It's all nonsense, of course. Politics colours everything – it always has and always will. Hosting a hitch free Olympics would be a strong political statement for Beijing, a reminder that the Chinese Dragon is stepping into the First Rank of nations, admissible as a guest at the most fashionable parties and worthy, if not of our applause, then at least of our acceptance. If a counter-statement of any sort is to be made then why not there, at an event of this magnitude with the entire world watching. How else are the complacent going to take notice?

How else indeed? It was the disruption of Torch relay that brought the Tibetan cause to my attention. There I was reclining on my couch and following on television the Olympic Flame's progress through the streets of London when suddenly a man rushed forward through the crowd and attempted to snatch the flame from the athlete who bore it. He was quickly wrestled to the ground and whisked away to be tortured off-camera but my interest had been piqued. What really was going on in Tibet?

It turned out that my initial impressions were not entirely accurate. Based on the news stories to which I had half-listened and the articles which I had (prior to that time) half-read I had formed the impression that once again Evil China was at work, trampling on the rights of the good people of Tibet, slaughtering them in their thousands and generally continuing with their well-established tradition of bad behaviour and nastiness. The facts turned out to be rather less comfortable and I found myself (after an hour or two of web surfing) far less sympathetic to the cause of “Tibetan freedom” than when I had begun.

The facts as I have come to see them, are as follows:

(1)Tibet and China have had a close relationship for hundreds of years (dating back to the 13th century) and for a great deal of this time China has exercised varying degrees of control over Tibet.

(2)Tibet declared itself independent of China in 1912 in the aftermath of the Chinese revolution of 1911 and at a time when China was no longer able to exert any administrative or military control over the region. Tibet however failed to follow through diplomatically on this “declaration” and her independence was recognized by neither China nor any major western power (nor was the region eventually recognized by the United Nations).

(3)China reasserted control over the region in 1950 by military invasion and officially incorporated Tibet as an autonomous province of China in 1951.

(4)Although Chinese rule of Tibet has been marred by numerous human rights violations (most notably in the decade immediately following the invasion), the Chinese government has been responsible for modernising Tibet and pumps billions of dollars each year into the region.

(5)The Dalai Lama has repeatedly stated that while he urges Beijing to protect and uphold Tibetan culture he would like his fellow Tibetans to accept that they are part of China.

(6)The recent riots in Lhasa have been mostly motivated by ethnic hatred (Tibetans attacking Han Chinese), the violence and killing was begun by the Tibetan protesters and the Western media's (initial) coverage of these events was characterised by inaccuracies and inordinate bias.

(7)Ethnic or religious distinction (in this day and age) is an insufficient reason to seek political self-determination. How many of the fervid and righteous “free Tibet” protesters would advocate similar freedoms for Northern Ireland, Kurdistan, Quebec or the Basque region.

According to the facts which no one disputes, Tibet is a part of China and has benefited economically from this situation. There is no denying that the Chinese government should show a bit more sensitivity when dealing with the Tibetan people and their “government in exile” but the grievances which remain hardly warrant the demonstrations and tomfoolery that we have been forced to witness. If you must make a political statement, choose your cause more carefully (Steven Spielberg, for instance, by his non-participation is protesting against China's support of the Sudanese government.) Call me selfish, but when a man makes a grab for the Olympic Flame and rouses me from my torpor I would like to believe that it has all been in aid of a cause I can believe in.