THE MAP BELOW SHOWS DHARAMSALA, WHERE H.H. DALAI LAMA AND THE TIBETAN GOVERNMENT IN EXILE RESIDE TODAY AND HAVE DONE SINCE THE CHINESE OCCUPATION OF TIBET IN 1959.






Tibetan Bulletin
September-October 1996

Cao Chang-Ching* argues that a detailed look at the history of Tibetan-Chinese relations throws up irrefutable proof of the independent historical development of Tibet.

THE Chinese government on both sides of the Taiwan Straits hold opposing political views on most issues, often resorting to tit for tat policies and verbal attacks. On the Tibet issue, however, the two sides cling to the same viewpoint: both claim Chinese sovereignty over Tibet, emphasizing that Tibet has been a part of China since ancient times.

Over the past several decades, these official viewpoints have been instilled in the Chinese people by means of large scale propaganda campaigns waged by the Beijing and Taiwan governments. As a result of this brainwashing, the majority of the Chinese people have lost the ability to discover the truth. However, through a brief review of Chinese history, we can clearly see that Tibet was never a part of China until it was invaded and occupied by China in the 1950s.

In the Tang Dynasty, China and Tibet signed a peace treaty, clearly stating their borders and positions. During Song Dynasty, China and Tibet had almost no contact. China's claim to Tibet is based primarily on the assertion that Tibet was once ruled by the Yuan Dynasty (1271-1368). During the Yuan Dynasty, Mongolia occupied most of Asia, includ-ing China, Tibet, Vietnam, and Korea. The Mongolians established a capital on Chinese territory to rule over the conquered lands of their empire. Firstly, if such a military occupation qualifies as historical basis for ownership, it should he made by the Mongolians, not the Chinese. Furthermore, if the fact that Tibet was once ruled by China in this fashion forms a legal basis for their claim on Tibet, why have the Chinese never made the same claim on Vietnam, Korea and other parts of Asia which were annexed and ruled over by the Mongols at the same time? Clearly, it is illogical to only claim Tibetan territory.

Since China's Ming Dynasty had minimal relations with Tibet, the Qing Dynasty(1644-1911) is the only other historical ground for the Chinese to dem-onstrate their claim to Tibet. However, unbiased history books do not substan-tiate this claim.

It is true that the Qing Empire had relations with Tibet. Upon the request of the Dalai Lama, the Qing military entered Tibet four times to help settle internal rebellions and to defeat external invasions. However, it is clearly groundless for the Chinese to claim ownership of Tibet because the Qing Army helped to maintain stability in the region. This is as absurd as the United States claiming rule over Kuwait just because the U.S. army helped defeat the Iraqi invad-ers.

Later, an "Imperial Resident in Tibet" was sent by the Qing Emperor as a special envoy to aid Tibet with administrative works. Due to their admiration for the Dalai Lama's spiritual power, the Qing Emperors intended to help strengthen Tibet. However, all regulations and statutes clearly state that the Dalai Lama and the Resident in Tibet had equal positions and seniority, and that important matters should "be solved after the consultation made by and between the Dalai Lama and the Resident." The Dalai Lama and the Qing Emperor had reciprocal seniority during that time period. If Tibet was one of the Empire's provinces, the right of the Emperor's envoy would have been greater than that of the Dalai Lama.

Several historical examples clearly demonstrate the equality of the Dalai Lama and the Qing emperor. In 1632, the Qing Emperor, Shunzhi, invited the Fifth Dalai Lama for a friendly visit to China. Upon the Dalai Lama's arrival, the Em-peror himself went as far as 20 kilometers out of the capital to meet him. The Emperor would never have met a leader of his subordinate territory with such an honourable, grand rite. Historical records show that there had never been an em-peror to do so, not even to meet a king of a foreign country. Furthermore, in the book, A Biography of Dalai Lama, written by Ya Hanzhang, a Chinese expert on Tibet, and published by the official Chinese publishing house, there are prints of two mural paintings depicting Emperor Shunzhi and the Fifth Dalai Lama, and Empress Dowager Ci Xi and the Thirteenth Dalai Lama sitting side by side on the throne. This friendly relationship lasted almost 260 years through the whole period of the Qing Dynasty.

After the deaths of Emperor Guangxu and Empress Dowager Ci Xi, the Qing army took over Lhasa by force and soon occupied all of Tibet. But they were driven out by Tibetans in less than three years. In 1913, the Thirteenth Dalai Lama clearly announced: "Tibet is an independent country."

During the period of the Republic of China (1911-1949), President Chang Kai-shek twice sent his special envoys to Lhasa to persuade the Tibetans to become subjects of the Republic. But the Tibetan leaders never consented. In 1990 a total of 478 correspondences between China and the Tibetan government were published in Beijing, clearly demonstrating that Tibet was an independent country during the time of the Republic of China.


H.H. Dalai Lama with Chinese Officials in Lhasa

The rest of Tibetan-Chinese history is simple. In 1951 the Chinese Army took over Tibet by forcing a delegation from the Tibetan government to sign the so-called "Seventeen-Article Agreement" The Tibetan government signed this treaty under duress. Later in 1959 the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan government denounced the agreement.

If Tibet had always been a part of China, why did the Chinese insist on the signing on this agreement? Why haven't the similar agreement been signed with Xinjiang Uygur Autono-mous Region and the Three Provinces in the Northeast, the then "Manchukuo"? The "Seventeen-Article Agreement" has been used to prove China's rule over Tibet since its signing. Yet this clearly demonstrates that before the Agreement, China did not have a valid claim to Tibet.

Although I was a journalist in China, I did not know the above mentioned historical facts until I came to the United States. Like my fellow Chinese, I had always thought that Tibet was a part of China. All of my knowledge concerning the Tibetan situation has been based on the official Chinese history texts, newspapers, books, and movies. It was only after coming to the USA and reading unbiased history books that I began to understand the truth about Tibet.

The Chinese should pay due heed to the reality of the situation in Tibet today. Since the Chinese occupation of Tibet, the human rights of the Tibetan people have been wantonly trampled upon. Furthermore, the Tibetan people are systematically discriminated against and persecuted by the Chinese colonialists.

*Cao Chang-Ching is a visiting fellow at Columbia University and a reporter for the biggest Chinese language news-paper in North America. In the 1980's he was a reporter for Shenzhen Eco-nomic Times, and one day he dared suggest that Deng Xiaoping was too old to hang on to power and that he should retire. Instead, Cao says, he was retired.

From Office of HH Dalai Lama, Dharamsala, India