It was good to read Jamyang Norbu la's article on the Upcoming Kalon Tripa Election and I look forward to reading his commentary on the other candidates as well. I appreciate his defense of Kalon Tripa candidates' honesty and experience against criticism made by a panelist on VOA Kunleng TV.
I am also of the view that all the candidates are dedicated and patriotic Tibetans who want to serve the cause. Now let me address some of the issues raised by him about me.
I found Jamyang la's analysis to be way off mark. The statement "I want to be Obama of China", was a JOKE and not meant to be taken seriously. In October 2008, at the time of the conference, there was an excitement about the real possibility that Obama from a marginalized group might be elected as the President of America. In contrast, it was impossible to imagine a Tibetan becoming the President of PRC. Four other attendees (Dr. Warren Smith, Dr. Sonam Topgyal, Tashi Rabgey, and another American) recalled this joking remark and said they had a good laugh. As Jamyang la was not at the conference, I don't blame him for the out-of-context interpretation. However, he should have fact-checked with other attendees instead of relying on a panelist without sense of humor. (1)
Jamyang la's interpretation of my views on the Chinese constitution is alarmist to say the least because it makes me sound as though I am a believer of the Chinese constitution. On the contrary, I have strongly criticized the Chinese constitution and particularly the Regional National Autonomy Law. (Please see the article published by Harvard South Asian journal
The criticism of the Chinese constitution was acknowledged and quoted by Human Rights Watch report on China and Tibet (2005) and also in an article by Tenzing Sonam
(Producer and director of Sun Behind the Clouds). Jamyang la bases his comments on his recollection of our conversation during his time in Boston, perhaps my paper, published in the Harvard Asia Quarterly
in the Summer of 1999, could refresh his memory.
He also claims that I dismiss the debate about 'Umey Lam' and 'Rangzen' which is untrue. My objection is against extreme rhetoric on both sides by Rangzen and Umey Lam supporters, which I find unhealthy and divisive. I do believe that any action has to be based on unity, planning and discipline, three cardinal principles of non-violent movement. For detail on this issue, please go to: http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=23208
1. The panel consisted of Elliot Sperling from Indiana University, Allen Carlson from Cornell University and myself, and the moderator was Mark Mohr, Director of the Asia Program of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.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.