News and Views on Tibet

Tibet’s history of independence sets crucial premise for Middle Way Approach: CTA Prez

Share on facebook
Share on google
Share on twitter
Sikyong Penpa Tsering with the students and faculty of Dalai Lama Institute for Higher Education in Bangalore (Photo/

By Choekyi Lhamo

DHARAMSHALA, May 30: The President of the Tibetan government-in-exile, known officially as the Central Tibetan Administration, Penpa Tsering on his visit to the Dalai Lama Institute for Higher Education in Bangalore on Sunday said that there is a pressing need to assert historical evidence of independent Tibet, which will in turn set crucial premise for the Middle Way Approach, which is the official CTA policy.

“While our counterparts are engaged in a desperate attempt to gain legitimacy over Tibet from the international community, it is highly imperative that Tibetans, especially the youth know the historical facts about Tibet and then take control of the narrative.

The Kashag remains firmly with the Middle Way Approach as its fundamental political stand and now we need to explore the ways and tactics to achieve the objective of the said approach,” he told the students and faculty of the college, noting that Tibetan history would only strengthen the idea of Umaylam approach.

The CTA President also noted the importance of coming together as a society despite disagreements, “Difference in opinions is inevitable. Let us not fight amongst ourselves. A Rangzen or Umaylam advocate needs to redirect one’s focus and face China. Only then we’ll be able to use our small community’s strength against a mighty power like China.”

The Sikyong also detailed his cabinet’s objectives for the coming future, stressing on initiatives like E-governance and V-TAG (Voluntary Tibet Advocacy Groups) projects. “Statistics are very important, especially for an exile community like ours,” he remarked on the upcoming population census which will be starting in a few months.

“Another pressing problem that needs to be addressed, which I was only made aware once I assumed this office, is the lack of land for Tibetans, especially for those who came from Tibet . . . As of today, there are reported 1,999 families [for those who fled Tibet] that are in need of immediate housing. The estimated budget for such a huge project would require at least 15 or 16 millions USD, after excluding expenses that the families can afford,” he said.

5 Responses

  1. For the last twenty years, the CTA leaders tried to suppress Rangzen advocates. They treated them as an obstacle to the success of the Middle Way proposal. Their attack dogs had a field day disparaging Rangzen advocates and ostracised them. It was an attempt to suppress Tibetan nationalism and replace it to embrace China in order to suck up to the CCP. Even patriotic songs were banned in order to placate the enemy. One particular anti-Rangzen leader demonised the patriotic Rangzen advocates as worse than Shugden worshippers! Rangzen advocates were made pariahs in the exile community. Parents pulled their children out of TYC owing to the community’s disdain for Rangzen advocates. As a result, RTYC’s across the world lost members and diminished their standing. The anti-Rangzen leader insinuated his anti-Rangzen crusaders to attack, divide and discredit them in order to fulfil the wishes of the CCP. Even though, Tibetans are living in free societies, the CCP was able to suppress Tibetan independent advocates through their proxies living in exile!!!
    Now, they are singing a different tune! This is an admission that the Middle Way policy has spectacularly failed! For the last forty years, this was trumpeted as a magic wand that is going to bring mutual benefit (གཉིས་སྨན་དབུ་མའི་ལམ་) for both Tibet and China! The climb down from Independence to autonomy was air brushed as a means of protecting the fast disappearing Tibetan religion and culture in occupied Tibet. However, it is evident beyond a shadow of doubt that this policy has had no impact whatsoever in preventing the CCP from bulldozing Tibet’s ancient culture, religion and identity!
    The comments are a diversionary tactic to escape recrimination from the public. The fact of the matter is, the appeasement policy has only helped the CCP to legitimise its illegal occupation of Tibet. It also emboldened the CCP to stick to their guns as the desperate Tibetans caved in like a pack of cards. The anti-Rangzen brigade did everything to discredit Tibet’s rightful claim of custodianship of our country and proved themselves apologists of the illegal Chinese occupation of Tibet. The recent drunken drivel in Washington is another example of successive CTA’s wayward policy of surrendering Tibet’s sovereignty to curry favour from the incorrigible CCP criminal syndicate.
    No wonder, the issue of Tibet has all but disappeared from international headlines and out of the concern of world leaders. Tibet has been left out in the itinerary of UN commissioner Michelle Bachelet’s visit to East Turkistan says it all! As it were, it is time to ditch the present policy of appeasement and reiterate Tibet’s irrefutable sovereignty over all the areas inhabited by Tibetans for centuries. As the Dalai Lama mentioned in his Strasburg proposal of 1988 in which he stated, “OUR HISTORY, DATING BACK MORE THAN TWO THOUSAND YEARS, HAS BEEN OF INDEPENDENCE. At no time, since the founding of our nation in 127 BC have we Tibetans conceded our sovereignty to a foreign power”. WE MUST STICK TO OUR HISTORY AND NOT SQUANDER AWAY OUR CUSTODIANSHIP OF OUR COUNTRY ANYMORE! Future generations will be deprived of their country and we will be held responsible for the dispossession they will face in future like the Rohingya Muslims of Burma. The CCP will collapse like all regimes which keep people suppressed like the erstwhile Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. Reiterating our historical custodianship will not only enhance our unity but will rejuvenate the sagging morale that has crept into the present dispensation. This is the only way to reunite the people, give hope to the Tibetans inside Tibet and also reinvigorate our international profile by standing with the democracies instead of grovelling to the CCP.

  2. The Middle Way Approach is very genuine, sincere, selfless and maintain core interest of the both parties (Tibet/China). This is the unthinkable thought of the pioneer and very bold step taken by His Holiness. However, it was failed from its very inception when His Holiness expressed his Middle Way Approach idea on the Strasburg conference. The idea was resisted by TYC along with some NGO’s and the China’s Communist government refuted it by saying an attempt of seeking independence. TYC, National Democratic Party and SFT etc. are still not convinced by the selfless thought of His Holiness because they do not trust on Communist China. In 1996 the Tibetan Parliament in exile promoted it through passing a resolution to make it exile government policy with an intention to start negotiation with Red China. But Red China rejects Tibetan government in exile to represent Tibet and proclaimed CTA an illegal organization. Hence, it sends very clear message that the Middle Way Approach will not get any progress with Red Chinese authority.
    As a matter of fact, The present Communist Party government is an illegal government established through using all sorts of force and it has forced the legitimate government of Tibet to move into exile and prior to that it closed down China’s legitimate democratic government in 1949. Therefore, the illegal government will never contact and pursue to legal approach with historically legitimate government of Tibet. We must keep our legal status and reverse government policy. We shouldn’t be cared about United Nation’s rule and regulations because UN itself is not a reliable organization because illegal Communist government is one of its veto power holding members. Our struggle must continue with our understanding of Tibet’s history instead of scholars who interpret different way which includes Red China’s propagandas.

  3. “The Kashag remains firmly with the Middle Way Approach as its fundamental political stand and now we need to explore the ways and tactics to achieve the objective of the said approach.” It has been decades that the middle way approach has been adopted. Does the sikyong’s remarks about having to now explore the ways and tactics imply that we have failed in the tactics for all those decades?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *