Hi guest, Register | Login | Contact Us
Welcome to Phayul.com - Our News Your Views
Tue 28, Mar 2017 11:45 AM (IST)
Search:     powered by Google
2016 ELECTION RESULT
 MENU
Home
News
Photo News
Opinions
Statements &
Press Releases

Book Reviews
Movie Reviews
Interviews
Travels
Health
Obituaries
News Discussions
News Archives
Download photos from Tibet
 Latest Stories
Tibetan lawmakers debate on electoral reform, women empowerment
Budget session concludes, electoral reform discussion deferred to next session
Australian Cricket team call on the Dalai Lama
Senior Abbot says forced eviction at Larung Gar nearly over
India should take responsibility to ensure genuine autonomy for Tibet: Former Indian diplomat
Tibetans protest during Chinese premier Li Keqiang’s Australia visit
Lukar's car vandalized, says his family feel 'threatened by anti-social elements'
Yarchen Gar made inaccessible for tourists, foreigners
Dalai Lama’s upcoming trip to border state sparks political debate
Tibetan exiles observe World Water Day
 Latest Photo News
Tibetans participate in a candlelight vigil following news of the self immolation protest by a 24 yr old Tibetan named Pema Gyaltsen in Nyarong, Kham, on March 18, 2017. McLeod Ganj, March 19, 2017 Phayul Photo:Kunsang Gashon
His Holiness the Dalai Lama gazes at devotees as he visits the Mahabodhi temple near the Kalachakra venue, a day after the conclusion of 34th Kalachakra. Jan. 15, 2016 Phayul Photo: Kunsang Gashon
Three weeks after Indian PM announced Demonetization of 500 and 1000 notes residents including Tibetans queue outside State Bank of India and on-site ATMs to withdraw daily limit of 2000 Rs per account, Dharamshala, Nov. 28, 2016, Phayul Photo
more photos »
Advertisement
LEGITIMACY OF RANGZEN
By Email[Monday, November 17, 2008 16:01]
by Tashi Phuntsok

After almost 30 years of adoption of Middle Way Policy by our exile administration, the saddest thing that it achieved as a result is the “Delegitimization of the struggle for Rangzen” and its advocates being perceived as “Violent Radicals”.

The Rangzen advocates are constantly sidelined in our society and often seen as delinquents opposing the wishes of the His Holiness the Dalai Lama.

The argument is that these Rangzeners are emotional, naïve, somewhat violent, impractical fools and as a result of it they are “Unrealistic”, where as on the contrary the Middle way approach as a Reconciliatory, legitimate, peaceful and humane, lawful, practical and therefore “Realistic approach”.

My argument on the other side is that the very seed of this seemingly practical and realistic approach of Middle way policy was based on somewhat unrealistic basis; therefore it has got its own share of dark virtues and flaws.
As we all know that the basis of the current policy was laid down in Strasbourg proposal of 1988, where one of its chief demand was making “Tibet a self-governing democratic political entity with its own Constitution. And that Government should be comprised of a popularly elected Chief executive, a Bi-cameral legislative branch and an independent Judiciary system”.

By above mentioned term ‘Democracy’, I am sure our exile government didn’t mean Socialist understanding of the term.
Thus the basic legal understanding of the approach is that whatever are conditions or demands as per the Middle way policy, shall be in consistent with the Constitution of PRC and its National Regional Autonomy Law.

So, to put it in simple terms, the demand of democracy from an authoritarian regime that makes no such provision for their own people is something absurd and somewhat unrealistic in understanding.

Therefore in strict legal sense, there is an apparent inconsistency, contradiction and repugnancy between what the exile Govt. seeks to achieve through its current policy and the existing laws of the PRC, besides its authoritarian and communist structure of the state.

In the larger context, my main concern for our current policy is over its basic precondition or assumption “Past is past, lets focus on the Future”. By doing so I’m fearful of its implication of loosing our strong Historical and Legal case of Independence, which I think should be the cornerstone of our national struggle.

It is a fact that legally Tibet was a De-facto independent state and historically a free and independent nation.

Thus today due to our Lone focus on the future per se, we are coming out of our strongest zone and stepping into the uncharted territory of grim realities full of uncertainties.

Therefore I feel that the complete neglect of our past in any of our current or future policies will always have a detrimental effect on us.

Historically struggles are always based upon High Ideals rather than some practicalities because the very nature of practicalities and realities are itself constantly changing, therefore what appears realistic and practical today may not remain so the very next moment.

According to a newspaper report last year, His Holiness was now thinking of reconsidering his “democracy” demand in the middle way policy because it may not seem practical in the light of current state system of the PRC.

Therefore what was thought practical and realistic back in 1988 is now appears to be unrealistic.

Today many people feel that Umey Lam is the pragmatic way and therefore once we achieve it, then we shall go for Rangzen.

I totally disagree over it and I feel such view is a naïve one, apart from ignorance of the International system and law.

My contention is that once we achieve genuine autonomy, then what we are indeed accepting is China’s rule over Tibet and territorial integrity of the PRC de jure (in law).

The “territorial integrity” is not just any other political term, but it’s one of the core general principles of the International law which every states must observe.
So by accepting this, we are indeed legitimizing China’s rule over Tibet which the Chinese themselves could never able to achieve even after five decades of its illegal occupation of Tibet.

Once International community recognizes china’s legitimate rights over Tibet, then we are left with no other legal basis to claim Rangzen in the International law.

Thus my argument is that if there is ever a correct and appropriate time to claim and fight for Rangzen, surely it is now, not after genuine autonomy.

The writer is doing his M.Phil in International Law from JNU, Delhi. he can be contacted at taphun@hotmail.com )


The views expressed in this piece are that of the author and the publication of the piece on this website does not necessarily reflect their endorsement by the website.
Print Send Bookmark and Share
  Readers' Comments »
Rangzen beckons (Tsongi)
Your Comments

 More..
China's Urbancide in Tibet
An Open Letter from Tibetan Students/Researchers in Exile
THE MYSTERY OF THE MARCH 10 PHOTOGRAPHER - By J. Norbu
Leveraging mindfulness and compassion to unlock our potential
Remembering my Teacher: Elliot Sperling (1951-2017)
Story of the Potala: World’s Highest Palace in Tibet
Trump and Tibetans
Tibetan Shyness: My story
Anguished Fear
Working to revitalize the largest Tibetan settlement in India
Advertisement
Advertisement
Photo Galleries
Advertisement
Phayul.com does not endorse the advertisements placed on the site. It does not have any control over the google ads. Please send the URL of the ads if found objectionable to editor@phayul.com
Copyright © 2004-2017 Phayul.com   feedback | advertise | contact us
Powered by Lateng Online
Advertisement