By Renato Palmi
South Africa
October 2005
As China emerges ever more rapidly as a dominant economic force in the international arena, the global space for Tibetans and their supporters to act against the occupation of Tibet by the People’s Republic of China is shrinking rapidly. The platform for anti-China activism is further compromised by the leadership of the Tibetan exiled community in Dharamsala attempting to gag Tibet supporters’ opposition to China’s human rights violations in Tibet for fear of alienating the Chinese authorities.
The Tibet government-in-exile finds itself facing a “make or break” stage in its negotiations with the PRC, reflecting that China is directing the process of the dialogue, and overriding the standing of the TGiE as an equal partner and stakeholder in the conflict.
It is difficult to imagine Nelson Mandela ever requesting anti-apartheid activists to desist from protest on the grounds that such action could have offended the erstwhile white South African regime. The government of China shows no respect for the Dalai Lama, as it continues to berate, belittle the character and statesmanship of His Holiness. In the contemporary context, then how do prevailing Sino-African relations affect the struggle for a free Tibet?
While policy-makers in Dharamsala engage in circular attempts to find a way forward for Tibet, ever respectful towards Chinese sensitivities, the PRC is claiming increasing power and influence through trade agreements and historical ties with governments in Africa. The PRC relies on Africa to assist them in silencing any debate on Tibet, both in their own countries and internationally. Analysis of numerous speeches made by Chinese officials over the course of 2005 on the growth in relationships between the PRC and African countries indicates that Africa is, whether or not unwittingly, helping to shape the future of Tibet.
Tibetans will never see the same energy, passion and determination in terms of support for their freedom movement by South Africans that is given to the Palestinians or to the anti-Bush and anti-Blair movements. Why is it that South Africans do not protest in their thousands in front of the Chinese embassy and consulates, as they do in front of American diplomatic edifices? Will South Africans ever refer to Chinese government officials as “consulate[s] of genocide” as some have named the US and British diplomats? Will South Africa’s State President ever make a claim for the right of the Tibetans to their own nationhood and development, as he has for the Palestinians?
Inexplicably, the Tibetan movement in South Africa is not able to mobilise debate on the plight of Tibetans on an emotional level or that matches the degree of activity and support as is raised for the cause of the Palestinians or against Western governments. One reason might be that the Tibet government-in-exile feels unable to engage with South Africans on a political platform: instead, it foregrounds the more benign Buddhist tradition and Tibetan cultural and healing arts as a means of inspiring South Africans with their ancient traditions of non-violence and interconnectedness.
Tragically, such anaemic approaches cannot advance the Tibetan people’s struggle for self-determination or their release from the invasive and oppressive Chinese regime. Indeed, such policies undermine any forward movement, and as Tibetans, both in Tibet and in the diaspora, become more isolated and misunderstood, with their non-violent stance being ignored. Judiciously cautious as this stance might seem, the sinister undertow that threatens its impetus and efficacy is the tenuous nature of the Tibetan presence in South Africa. It would appear that Tibetans and their spiritual and temporal leader, the Dalai Lama, are tolerated in South Africa only as long as they do not raise the ire of China. Certainly, any political or rights-based protest in favour of Tibetan freedom could catalyse economic retaliation by the PRC against South Africa – or at least provoke grave threats from China in this vein.
It is safe to generalise that the South African populace has no knowledge of nor interest in the political future of Tibet, and that as long as those white South Africans who follow Tibetan Buddhist practice can get to see the Dalai Lama on occasion, be in the presence of Tibetan monks on tour and enjoy Tibetan cultural arts performances, they are satisfied. This short-sighted attitude results in a vacuum of Tibetan support in a country which is still developing its hard-won democracy. Black South Africans, having been denied their own rights for decades, are unaware of the fact that Tibetans are on the brink of extinction. While the South African government is aware of this, no quarter is given to the issue of Tibet and China’s human rights record.
On the 17th May 2005, China’s Jin Yongjan addressed a South African think-tank, saying: “Without firm support from African countries, China could not have defeated anti-China draft resolutions tabled by some Western countries [and pro-Tibet lobbyists] at the UN Commission on Human Rights.” Here, at least, is open admission that hypocrisy escapes criticism when trade and political alliances are at stake.
For those who know the truth and care about the future of Tibet, it is insufferable to observe how quickly the South African State and civil society are in their condemnation of British and American colonial imperialism, while turning a blind eye to China’s colonial and Machiavellian aspirations in Africa. There is scant mention in the South African media that China is protecting and supporting corrupt governmental forces in the Sudan, simply because the PRC has invested heavily in Sudan’s oil industry; nor is there any tangible activism against China’s annihilation of South Africa’s clothing and textile industry.
Tibetans will soon witness the march into their country by South African companies assisting and collaborating with the Chinese government to further marginalise the indigenous people. This scenario was alluded to by China’s ambassador to South Africa, Mr. Liu Guijin, when in February, 2005 he stated” “The Chinese government welcomes and encourages investment and participation in the development of the Western [i.e. Tibet] region.” For China, Africa is a continent ripe for exploitation and economic colonisation, and a very useful ally in muffling the Tibetan freedom movement.
So, as the 7th October arrives – and with it the 55th year of the PRC’s illegal occupation of the sovereign nation of Tibet – the Tibetans enjoy only toothless support from the West, with much palm-pressing at cultural fora and inter-faith gatherings, but no speeches of outrage or diplomatic mobilisation in the arenas of secular power. The impoverished, voiceless and supplicating Tibetans will have to face the reality that the entire continent of Africa is in the grip of the Red Dragon, ready to be exploited, manipulated and wielded as a powerful tool against the people of Tibet and their rights to self-determination. Soon, the PRC’s economic, cultural, spiritual and environmental programme of genocide in Tibet will be complete, and the retrospective shame of the global community will be too little, too late.
