Why I Didn't Cover About Tibet

so you covered

Posted by: mac on April 6, 2008 1:45 AM

Jianshuo,

Just one quick comment: You wrote: "I want to give facts, instead of oppinions - especially oppions based on no-so-solid facts." This is a great commitment. Unfortunately, journalism nowadays is gradually shifting from reporting of facts to expression of opinions. By stating opinions rather than facts you're less exposed to legal action, though you're of course still not entirely safe.

In a thread on another topic in this forum, there currently seems to be a small argument on whether ungrounded opinions and less-than-rock-solid facts should be allowed to be posted. This is worth debating. For sure, correct facts are more valuable than opinions, but we can't expect all posters to be omnisicient. I personally believe that opinions are also a positive contribution to this blog, and sometimes opinions prompt you to look for facts in a certain area. And pls let's not forget: This blog is kept alive through discussions, and once a discussion starts, you can't shut out opinions anymore.

Posted by: DB on April 6, 2008 1:49 AM

@DB, sure, we cannot be over-precious on facts - even the language we are using are not precious, so we have to tolerate the limit of information. Just for this matter, I really have no idea of what is going on - pretty confused now, not because I don't have information, just because I have too many versions of conflicting information.

It is just like only people with one watch can tell you with confidence about the exact time. For those who have two or more watches, they can only tell you approximate time - no two watch in this world reports exactly the same time.

Posted by: Jian Shuo Wang (external link) on April 6, 2008 2:16 AM

Pretty unusual comments coming from you JS, not knowing the "truth" never stopped you from sharing your opinions before.
I understand your unwillingness to rely on the "news" from either sides. I had mentioned this before in the debate on Myanmar. The truth is likely to be somewhere between. Each side has it's own agenda. But the fact remains that Tibet has always been a part of China barring a short period of colonization by the British, a fact the west is unwilling to accept. It is also a fact that it was a rather backward place bounded by slavery up until the introduction of the communist ideal. Now I am not saying that the system was perfect, but it nevertheless made a huge qualitative difference in the lives of the Tibetians.
The fact that the Dalai Lama was supported by the CIA is no longer in dispute, so the position of the pieces on the chessboard is very clear.
Yes, there should be freedom. But at a pace dictated by China alone and definately not some foreign politicians influenced by the news networks threatening to boycott the Olympics.
Randolph Hearst types are still all over the place. FYI check out Murdoch.
I am not a big fan of the "party" but I am quite flabbergasted by their constant need to pacify everyone just to save face for the Olympics.
We are always talking about China standing up. Why are we always apologising for standing up ?? First Myanmar, then Congo, now Tibet,...whats next ?? As far as I am concerned, the invitations have already been sent out and tables set. It's ok is you choose not to turn up. But insulting the host is simply bad manners and comparing the Beijing Olympics with the Berlin Olympics is absolutely ridiculous.

Posted by: wonton on April 6, 2008 3:29 AM

Nobody ever seems to talk about Mongolia when talking about a united China. I believe people in China don't care about Mongolia because the CCP doesn't call it an "inalienable part of China". But since the CCP calls Taiwan and Tibet "inalienable", everybody gets all patriotic and calls those places inalienable and forgets the fact that Mongolia was once part of China too, but was given independence. So my belief is that Chinese people's desire for a united China has very little to do with history, but more to do with national pride guided by the CCP. (Ok I'll just say the ugly word – propaganda. Nothing to be ashamed about. Every nation uses it.)

BTW, I lumped Taiwan and Tibet together above but I understand that their situations are totally different. One of them has been self-governed with remarkable success for half a century. The other, well, hasn't.

Posted by: DKwan (external link) on April 6, 2008 9:08 AM

There is precedent for conquered groups within the U.S. splitting from the country, in that Native American reservations are given political autonomy.

States are also (in theory) given broad autonomy under the 9th Amendment.

Posted by: digchinese (external link) on April 6, 2008 10:35 AM

Wang Jianshuo,

Even before the US Civil War, there were some secessionist movements here in the US: Massachusetts in 1803, Florida in 1810, the New England cluster of states in 1814, South Carolina in 1832. In response to the South Carolina attempt, President Andrew Jackson proposed a "doctrine" (not an actual law but a working principle usually set forth by the executive branch of government) that no state can secede from the union "because each secession destroys the unity of a nation." This was reinforced by President Abraham Lincoln's doctrine declaring that no state may leave the union without the approval of the other states. To my (limited) knowledge these generally accepted "working doctrines" are the basis for maintaining the US union; there is not an explicit law in the US Constitution prohibiting secession. The spirit of the agreement to remain united is related to the family as a model for the state (a very Chinese concept): that loyalty, fidelity, cooperation, mutual protection are fundamental to human civilization and that disolving relationships that promote these advantages should not be done hastily or for selfish reasons.

I hope someone wiser and more knowledgable than I will respond to your important and interesting request for information.

--罗彬

Posted by: Luo Bin on April 6, 2008 10:49 AM

One of the Tibetan complaints that I have heard is that so many Han Chinese now live in Tibet that they have "taken over" . If there are large numbers of Han living in Tibet, any vote to secede is likely to fail. Anyone know the population statistics and how they might have changed from, say the 19th and 20th centuries?

Almost all the Tibetans living in the U.S. come from India, have never been to Tibet, and many of them are the ones who want Tibet to secede. It is likely that many Tibetans in Tibet, like disadvantaged minority groups in many countries, just want better treatment not a whole new country.

Posted by: Zjemi on April 6, 2008 11:06 AM

Good post.

Re: Hypothetical independence for California.

Being from Canada, it's natural to compare it to Quebec separation:

"The 1995 Quebec referendum was the second referendum (the first was in 1980) to ask voters in the Canadian province of Quebec whether Quebec should secede from Canada and become an independent state, through the question "Do you agree that Québec should become sovereign after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership within the scope of the bill respecting the future of Québec and of the agreement signed on June 12, 1995?".

The referendum took place in Quebec on October 30, 1995, and the motion to decide whether Quebec should secede from Canada was defeated by an extremely small margin: 50.58% "No" to 49.42% "Yes"." ---wikipedia

Personally, as I'm from another province in Canada, I'd be sad to see Quebec separate.
But I'd be even more sad if they were forced to remain a part of Canada if the majority voted for independence.

Similarly, in 1949 my province (Newfoundland) voted 51% to 49% in favor of joining Canada.

How can I not give Quebecers that same right to choose their own destiny?

Posted by: Rick Martin (external link) on April 6, 2008 2:06 PM

Dear Jian Shuo Wang,

I'm an American who used to be one of the "Free Tibet" supporters, but I left the movement due to my anger about the hypocrisy among so many people in the pro-Tibetan movement. They criticize China for the situation in Tibet, while they ignore the far worse crimes of e.g. the British and Americans in North America-- where almost the entire indigenous native American population was wiped out by the British settlers, and where the US Southwestern states were stolen in a bloody war against Mexico in 1848 (and where Latinos are again becoming the majority), where places such as Hawaii and Puerto Rico were seized without the consent of the natives. Since California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and other neighboring states will soon have a Latino majority, and since the USA took them in the Mexican-American War, should we let them secede as a new country now as a result? Or the Hawaiians? Same with e.g. the British and Australians in Australia, where the indigenous aborigines were brutally slaughtered, or in New Zealand, which was taken from the indigenous Maoris. And yet, my pro-Tibetan friends hypocritically ignore this history in a bid to attack China.

Don't yield an inch on the Tibet issue. Try to be nonviolent, and address issues in the region by for example, encouraging entrepreneurs from other places in China to move in and start businesses in Tibet, which will employ Tibetans and better integrate the Tibetan economy with the rest of China. Also, increase educational opportunities and provide Mandarin language instruction for Tibetans to better join the rest of the economy. Much of the unrest in Tibet has been fomented by troublemakers from outside of Tibet (including a Canadian-American group that is more anti-Chinese than pro-Tibetan), but to the extent that there is frustration there, best to solve it by better joining the Tibet economy with the rest of China to share in the prosperity. Same with Xinjiang-- integrate the Uighurs better into the overall Chinese economy to share in the prosperity, encourage Chinese from all over to go to Xinjiang, and provide more Mandarin-language instruction to increase job prospects there.

Posted by: Horace on April 6, 2008 9:21 PM

One more thing to mention here, and this is very important, so please keep it in mind: For a large number (perhaps the majority) of the people in the "Free Tibet" movement, their pro-Tibetan stance has nothing to do with human rights, but instead has everything to do with Great Power Geopolitics and Realpolitik-- where the aim is to weaken and ultimately break up China, so that China cannot be a strong power. I encountered this attitude in many of the pro-Tibet meetings I attended, and it made me so angry that it became one of the factors pushing me to leave the movement myself.

Again: A major motivator for the pro-Tibet movement now is not "human rights," but instead is a desire by many Americans, Canadians, Britons and Australians to break up China into a weak power by pushing Tibet and Xinjiang to leave, leading to a state of civil war, so that China can then be invaded and occupied by US, Canadian and British troops and (as a result) US multinational companies. They want to turn you into Iraq.

The reality is, there are many powerful people in the USA, Canada and Britain especially, who intensely hate China and want to make you into a weak country. These people are the so-called "neoconservatives" or "neocons" as they're called for short. They are essentially Anglo-American imperialists, just like the British and French in the 19th century who fought the Opium Wars against China, and burned down the Chinese Imperial Gardens in 1860. The neocons remain bitter about the fact that China defeated the British and Americans in 1950 at the Yalu River, with the Anglo-American powers never being able to avenge that loss, and so the neocons continue to hate China as a result. The neocons are major leaders in the "Free Tibet" movement, an example being Anne Applebaum of the Washington Post: www.slate.com/id/2186753/
Her views have nothing to do with helping Tibetans, and everything to do with hurting China.

It is the neocons who are responsible for the American-British-Australian disaster of the Iraq War, and I and most other Americans hate the neoconservatives because of it. As you can see from Anne Applebaum's article above, the neocons support secession of Tibet and Xinjiang because they see it as a way to weaken China, and thus turn China into a defenseless nation that can be invaded and occupied by the USA and US allies. That's what so much of this pro-Tibet propaganda in the US, Canada and Britain is about-- not helping Tibetans, but weakening China instead. The neocons don't care about human rights at all-- after all, they supported the bloody invasions and occupations of both Iraq and Afghanistan, that have killed millions of people. Rather, the neocons care about power for the USA, Canada and Britain, and since they see China as a potential rival, they want to attack you because of it.

My advice to you in China to fight against the neocons who hate you and want to weaken you:

1. You must, ***absolutely must*** ensure a long-term, large and stable Han majority in Tibet and Xinjiang, as well as the rest of China. Inner Mongolia now has about 80% or so Han population, which has stopped unrest there. The same must be true for Tibet and Xinjiang. So long as these geographical regions are associated with a majority of one ethnic group (Tibetans, or Uighurs in Xinjiang), they will always be a security threat for your country. That's because the neocons in the USA, will constantly instigate "freedom movements" for Tibet and Xinjiang like this, encourage protests and riots in those provinces, and write propaganda articles in the US, British and Canadian press, claiming "atrocities" by the Chinese and encouraging these regions' secession. The neocons will constantly be encouraging trouble and unrest in these regions until there's a strong Han majority there, mingling and working together with the Uighurs and Tibetans, and with these regions economically benefiting along with the rest of China.

The danger is that, if there were a Tibetan majority in Tibet and/or a Uighur majority in Xinjiang, then these regions ***would*** attempt to secede, whenever China had a period of temporary weakness or economic crisis-- such a recession, high inflation, poor harvests or anything else causing turmoil. This would lead to a civil war in China, because the neocons in the USA, Canada and the UK would be fomenting "revolution" in Tibet and Xinjiang, providing weapons, spreading propaganda and doing other things to push a civil war to weaken China. Make no mistake-- you have enemies in the USA, Canada and Britain especially, i.e. the neoconservatives, who would just love to see China violently break up in a civil war, ***even though this would be horrible for Tibetans and Uighurs*** as well as Han Chinese! Once again, the neocons don't care about human rights-- they care only about power, and weakening China.

On the other hand, if there is a Han majority throughout China including in Tibet and Xinjiang, then these regions would be more stable and calm during any period of economic crisis, recession, or turmoil throughout China. There wouldn't be violence, and no danger of the neocons fomenting a civil war there. It's even better if the Han Chinese intermarry and mingle with the Tibetans and Uighurs, and especially if Tibet and Xinjiang are better integrated with the rest of China, sharing in the country's economic growth.

2. Thus, you should strongly encourage Han immigration into both Xinjiang and Tibet through those rail lines among other means, while also encouraging Tibetans and Uighurs to leave Xinjiang and Tibet and prosper throughout China, not just in Tibet and Xinjiang. Encourage intermarriage among the different groups and some degree of assimilation, spread education in the Mandarin Chinese language (which is essential for economic success anyway) while allowing for Tibetan and Uighur cultural celebrations throughout China, not just in Tibet and Xinjiang. Maybe make an exception to the One Child Policy for Han Chinese who move there-- thus, for Han in Tibet and Xinjiang, allow them to have their desired family size, since these regions need development anyway.

Also, of course, encourage Han entrepreneurs to set up businesses and employ Tibetans and Uighurs in Tibet and Xinjiang. Simultaneously provide microcredit and loans to help Tibetans and Uighurs start their own businesses.

The overall objective here, is to make Tibetans and Uighurs feel more like respected citizens of China, as more Chinese than Tibetan/Uighur (even as they maintain some degree of their prior cultural heritage), to provide them with educational and economic opportunities throughout China. In other words, the best way to address any tensions among the Tibetan and Uighur peoples is *absolutely not to encourage ethnic separateness*, but to instead encourage intermarriage and opportunities in education and business. This is why a country like Brazil, for example, is able to stay unified despite dozens of ethnic groups-- they intermarry, and people are focused on improving themselves in education and business, rather than ethnic grievances.

As an added benefit, when Tibet and Xinjiang are secure, then China won't have to worry so much about meddling and hateful outsiders such as the neocons, stirring up trouble within China. You can therefore proceed more confidently toward various reforms-- such as better intellectual property protections, a freer press, more open intellectual discussions (in areas like the sciences, which will help to increase the number of Nobel Laureates among the Chinese and the quality of Chinese universities!). You'll then attract more business from the outside, while also attracting more intelligent people from other countries to work in China, especially if environmental reforms go with these other benefits. As for Tibetans and Uighurs, my sense is that once Tibet and Xinjiang are secure, then Uighur and Tibetan culture will actually flourish ***much better***, since there won't be any political/geographical threat to China's integrity, and cultural celebrations can happen throughout China. Plus, you won't have to worry about further unrest and bad press for China as a result!

3. In terms of China's "geostrategic orientation," I would encourage you to diversify, to be less US-centric in your education and business relations but to cultivate closer ties with other powers, such as Russia, India and especially the European Union.

Just as one example, I would strongly encourage Chinese schools to promote mastery of a greater variety of foreign languages-- such as Spanish, Russian, Hindi, Japanese and ***especially German***-- rather than just English. I was talking to a Chinese colleague recently who told me that all Chinese students must take English courses, while other languages are optional. This makes no sense to me, even as an English-speaking American! It would be much better to diversify the languages that your students master, so that you can better do business with a broader section of the world-- not just English-speaking countries, but *especially* the German regions, Japanese, Russian, French, Spanish, Portuguese and Hindi.

For those of us who work in engineering and the sciences, we essentially have to learn German anyway, since the Germans are the leaders of the European Union and still are pretty much the best scientists and technical people in the world, as has been the case for about two centuries now. So German is now a big scientific and business language again. As an added bonus, I have been in Germany on several occasions for work, and I can tell you that the Germans are probably the most pro-Chinese people in the Western World. The Germans, after all, were among the few Europeans who did not try to attack China during the Opium Wars period, or force an "Unequal Treaty" onto China, and so the Germans have long had more respect for China, India, Korea, Vietnam and Japan than the British, French and Americans, who either attacked these Asian countries or in some cases set up colonies there (as the British did in much of India).

Thus, the Germans are much more comfortable with the 21st century as one led by countries such as China and India, than are the USA, Britain, Canada and Australia. Since Germany, again, leads the European Union-- a bigger economic bloc than the USA-- German is already becoming very important all throughout Europe and even North America and South America. So, I'd strongly suggest that Chinese schools and universities drop the mandatory English requirement, and instead encourage Chinese students to master a variety of languages. In fact, it might be beneficial to focus more on German in particular-- write some scientific papers and technical journals in German, give talks in German, do business in German, get professional training in the language and so forth. Obviously English will still be very important, but this way, your students will diversify and be strong in a broader array of languages. I'd also strongly suggest Arabic, Hindi, Spanish, Portuguese, French, Japanese, Korean and Russian as "encouraged electives" for Chinese students to study.

I want nothing more than to see China succeed-- and for Tibetans and Uighurs to succeed as China succeeds-- since this, once and for all, will shut down the dangerous neocon movement. I hope that these suggestions will help you to do that.

Posted by: Horace on April 6, 2008 10:30 PM

Wow - conspiracy theory at it's best - and lengthiest.

Posted by: AussiePB on April 6, 2008 11:42 PM

Ensuring a Han majority will not solve the unrest. It will only cause futher resentment by the local population. In fact, it may be the interference by "officials" seen as representing solely the interest of the party, that cause the unrest the first place. The party's disdain for anything remotely religious is clear. Making atheists our of everyone will not help.
The displacement felt by the Tibetians may not be that different from the alienation felt by the indigenous peoples of America and Australia. Any development must be through serious and honest consultation with the natives of the land. Simply bringing along commerce is not enough. Some kind of dialogue has to be established with the leaders of the community. If they are the monks, so be it. More respect should be accorded to them than the silly cadaver on the square.
I am all for autonomy, not for seccession. Those advocating for an independant Tibet don't know what they are asking for. This is not what caused the unrest the first place.

Posted by: wonton on April 7, 2008 11:40 AM

@wonton - I've purposely not been stating my opinion on this subject - it's not for me to say.

However - congratulations on your post!! It is the most sensible one I've read on this topic yet.

Posted by: AussiePB on April 7, 2008 12:47 PM

As a Hong Kong girl living in Australia, i would really like to see peace between China and Tibet. i just wish i could help.

This issue is similar to the Australians and the Australian Aboriginals. At university i do a unit call Health and Society and i learn alot about how the Aust. Aboriginals are seriously disadvantaged physically, socially and emotionally compared to the non- aboriginals. This is why I ( and many other Australians) have applauded our Prime Minister Kevin Rodd for saying sorry to the Aboriginal people (stolen generation) after so many years of marginalization.

I believe the bottom line is that the Tibetians feel oppressed and disrepected. I agree with Horace, if China could economically and socially improve Tibet, then one day, they wouldn't mind being a part of China. The Tibetians, like everyone else just want to be accepted, be prosperous and to be cared for.

I know this because Hong Kong used to be under the rule of the United Kingdom. The UK develped Hong Kong pretty well and nobody was complaining much.

Hope this issue would end soon and hope the Olympic games could unite not just China and Tibet, but the world.

Posted by: Ally on April 7, 2008 1:13 PM

I appreciate the viewpoint by the gentleman (? Horace, I mean) for disclosing the inside of this "free tibet" movement. Here in the Bay Area, there is lots of controversy over the Olympic Torch Relay arriving at San Francisco the coming Wednesday. Local media has publisized the so-called "free tibet torch" (some 3000 tibetans) scheduled to get here Tuesday. I hope both pros and cons will have a chance to read your comment. What the protests did in London and will probably do in SF is a shame on/crime by the anti-China Tibetan communities. Boycotting the Olympics has never been effective.

Posted by: angela on April 7, 2008 1:16 PM

@AussiePB: me sensible ??? it's probabily my flu medication talking...;)

Posted by: wonton on April 7, 2008 2:12 PM

@DKwan : Basically the Mongolians broke away during the tail end of the Qing dynasty, when China was in a mess, by first getting the help of the Russian Tsar. Unfortunately it's did'nt work out too well and he got buried in a swamp along with his familyand some bullets.
It was retaken by the chinese for a short while before they again got help from the north but this time Stalin. Well, they stayed a vassal of the soviets from 1925 up to it's collapse in 1996. The russians got it's buffer between China by screwing both the Mongolians and China.
Yes, it was a part of China, a part we were unable to hold on to. Life is like that, you don't ask for your child back after it is given away for adoption. You say good luck and have a great life.
With regards to Tibet and Taiwan, we have NEVER given way. Grouping them together with Mongolia shows that you don't even understand the situation.
What is the big deal with the P word ?? why is it ONLY a problem when communist establishments use it ?? Do check out your own country's history with the P-word before checking out ours.

Posted by: wonton on April 7, 2008 7:54 PM

What is so terrible about loving your own country and preventing it from fracturing into little pieces ??

Posted by: wonton on April 7, 2008 7:59 PM

Why western countries sided with Tibetan at this conflict in Lhasa? I don't know!

Does Dalai Lama has the magic touch? I don't know either!

When the conflict happened in Lhasa, I was in Hawaii reading the news.

Looking at the history of Hawaii, it was the US who annexed the island kingdom and overthrow the monarchy about hundred years ago.

No reports of the local Polynesian stood up to fight the US army to revive the monarchy.

Did US government gave special treatments to the islanders such as one country, two systems or waive the federal tex? No such thing!

Did US government outlaw the former ruler of the Kingdom? I saw fresh flowers placed at the statue of the former King every day!

Are the islanders are proud American? I can't see otherwise!

I was told many islanders join the US military and there is a four stars Hawaiian Army General.

President Clinton even apologized to the islanders for the overthrow of the Hawaii Kingdom.

Why Tibet and Hawaii have two different outcomes, I shall let the ruling party to answer this question!

Posted by: stephen on April 8, 2008 5:35 AM

@wonton: You're very impolite.

1. Taiwan was never given away? Before you accuse anyone of not understanding the situation, make sure you yourself understand it.

2. Read my post again – I said every nation uses propaganda.

Don't be so sensitive. And don't be so quick to insult people in a friendly discussion.

Posted by: DKwan (external link) on April 8, 2008 6:54 AM

I believe that the Summer Olympics are being ruined by all these protests and demonstrations.

Posted by: Shrek7 on April 8, 2008 11:34 AM

火炬传递时，留学生在法国的真实见闻：
　在来法国之前，我非常的喜欢这个国家，也认为这是个对中国十分友好的美丽的国度。而现在，一切都改变了。
　　
　　早上11点，火炬就要出铁塔了。留学生在草坪上拉起了“奥运会不等于政运会”的横幅。一个电视台开始在中国留学生的人群里采访我们，采访了几个，大家一致的观点是奥运会不是政治运动会，我们不在今天谈论政治，欢迎法国朋友去北京，去中国，看看友好的中国人民。记者显然不满意这样的回答，一遍遍的问我们兮葬。留学生很不快。这时有两个法国人上前说话了，说他们中国人没有名zhu的，都被洗脑了，所以只会说这样的话。
　　
　　然后到了victor那里等火炬，三个葬毒分子（法国人）去抢火炬。其他一些葬毒法国人喊“解放西藏”，留学生就在边上喊“北京，加油”。当葬毒抢火炬的时候，我亲耳听到边上的一对法国母女的对话，让我知道了法国人是怎么样从小开始就被洗脑的。那个小女孩只有5、6岁的样子，看到有人去抢火炬了，就问她的母亲“妈妈，为什么他们要这样子做？”，母亲说“因为中国人使用武力占领了他们的国家五十年了，他们借此机会表达他们想要获得解放”。我相信，母亲并没有什么恶意，因为她也是从小受到的如此的教育，她只是把她所“知道”的告诉她的女儿而已。
　　
　　火炬过后，留学生开始往下个点（radio france）进发，一路上不断的有同胞加入，只要是中国人，看到了就加入我们的队伍，我们一路发国旗，一路往前走。我们沿着塞纳河走，桥上的人看见我们，就发嘘声，喊着葬毒的口号，时不时的有举着反奥运和支持葬毒的牌子的人从我们对面走过，我们就对着他叫“北京，加油！北京，加油！”
　　在过某座塞纳河桥的时候，队伍估计已经有三百多人了。这时警察开始封路，并射发了催泪瓦斯，队伍就只能后退，找到另一条路，结果又被封掉。无奈只好先分散队伍，准备到市政厅再集合。
　　
　　在队伍过桥的时候，有三四个法国人，很嚣张的跑到我边上喊“解放兮葬”，我怒极了，朝他们喊“解放科西嘉！”。那个女的也发怒了，说“科西嘉就是法国的”，我说“兮葬就是中国的”。她来抢我手里的旗子，我反手用旗子朝她脸上戳了一下，她和她边上的男的就作势要动手，我跑进大部队，他们也只好作罢。
　　
　　到了市政厅，发现好多国旗，大的国旗，迎风飘扬，好激动啊！！！我们一个小分队马上跑进大部队，大家一起唱国歌，喊“加油，北京”，声音响彻市政厅广场。我感到我从来没有这么热血过！边上有不少白痴法国人喊什么“解放兮葬”、“北京，杀手”之类的话，马上被我们的国歌和“加油，北京”压下去。我边上一个老头不停的问我为什么来法国，滚回中国之类的话，我当他神经病，对着他喊“中国、中国”。
　　
　　市政厅大楼上的一个窗户打开着，几个法国人举着一个藏独旗子，市政厅大楼上也挂着一个牌幅，写什么巴黎永远保卫世界人泉，都是当天挂上去的。但是广场上已经绝对是中国人的主场了，多亏了我们的国旗多，嗓子也够响，呵呵。
　　
　　然后我们到终点站charlety体育场。那里我们和葬毒分子起了正面冲突。一开始我们人数占优，他们一喊口号就被我们的声音压下去。后来他们人渐渐地多起来，跟我们发生了两次小冲突。他们拿来一根很长的旗杆上插着葬毒的旗子来打我们，结果被我们顺势把旗抢过来踩在脚底。奥运车这时也开过来了，在我们面前停了好久，我们不停地唱国歌，车里的中国官员就朝我们挥手，举大拇指。场面真的很感动，到处都是被敌人包围，看到自己祖国来的人是多么亲切。
　　
　　在体育场那里，虽然所有的法国人几乎都站在葬毒那边，但是有个巴基斯坦兄弟站在我们的队伍里跟我们一起喊口号，我很感动，还跟他合了个影。六点多的时候下了冰雹，奥运火炬也装在车里过去了。我们就打算全体撤退，这时葬毒的突然冲过来打人，我们很克制的不还手，把警察叫过来，警察拦住了他们让我们走。走的时候，听到后面“解放西藏、北京杀手”的喊声不断，咬咬牙，在别人的地皮上，只能走了。
　　
　　今天看到的葬毒，99%是法国人，真正的藏人根本没几个。口号喊得最凶的是法国人，动手打人的也是法国人。我们一个哥们在路上走得好好的，被几个法国高中生用水倒进他的脖子里，指着他说“北京，杀手，解放西藏”。我真的很难过，原以为的对中国很友好的国家，为什么他们的人民要那么仇恨中国人？就为了个兮葬，要跟中国人打架。难道兮葬是你们的祖国吗？怎么弄得比死了自己爹娘还要激动。
　　
　　友好的法国人也不是没有，我今天碰到一个，在车上看到我走过去还伸出头说“北京！”我说“法国万岁！”他说“谢谢！”但是这样的人太少了，真的太少了。
　　
　　我从来没有过这样爱自己的祖国，也从来没有过这样热血。看到媒体肆意的诬蔑自己的国家，如果还能忍受的话，那就是冷血动物了。都说法国温州人多，很多人讨厌温州人。但是我要说，他们是好样的！这种时候，那么多的温州人站出来，维护自己的国家。还有很多做四个多小时的火车，花100多欧的车票，专程从外省赶来。看到那么多同胞团结在一起，没有比这个更让人高兴的了。
　　
　　回来后看了CCTV4的报道后，觉得有必要以自己的所见所闻写点什么了。中国人太善良了，法国在中国一直有很好的、很正面的宣传。可是他们又是怎么宣传我们的国家呢？在没有任何根据的情况下，居然可以用造假的手段来诬蔑一个把他们当作是自己朋友的国家。这次之所以有那么多留学生自发的走上街头，也是因为他们实在做得太过分了。我们可以忍受你的偏见，可以忍受你的选择性失明，甚至可以忍受你的不公正评论，但是，我们不能忍受你制造假的证据来欺骗民众。假的照片，假的翻译，假的视像，你们这样诬蔑一个有古老温和的国家，又怎么能够用文明来标榜自己？
---------------------END--------------------------------------------------

Posted by: Du on April 8, 2008 1:52 PM

　
对于奥运，我们也不要害怕抵制，火炬接力中所发生的一切意外都不是中国的耻辱，是某些国家的耻辱，是奥运的耻辱。

Posted by: DU on April 8, 2008 1:57 PM

Just to clarify things here, I want to repeat my main point, since I admittedly buried it above:

China must stay strong on the Tibet and Xinjiang issues and must absolutely ensure their economic, demographic, cultural and educational integration with the rest of China, because *it does not matter how just or fair you actually are in Tibet, the neocon propagandists in the West will attack you in Western media anyway and make China look bad*.

Again, my chief objective in contributing to this forum is to give you, in China, the reality about the inside of the Free Tibet movement as someone who saw that ugly reality. (The same goes for the Free Xinjiang movement-- obviously, we collaborated a lot.) There were some of us who were sincere about human rights for all Chinese-- Tibetan, Uighur and Han alike-- but the Tibet movement has been increasingly taken over by neocon neo-imperialists who hate China far more than they want to help Tibet.

These neocons' one and only aim is to provoke a massive civil war and the breaking-off of Tibet and Xinjiang from China, with hundreds of millions of deaths, a weak China and a consequent US-European occupation, with access to all of China's resources, even worse than the Opium Wars. It's about power and Western imperialism, not human rights.

When I emphasized the need for a vast Han majority (90+%) in Tibet and Xinjiang, and intensive efforts to promote Mandarin-language education, intermarriage, assimilation and harmony among the groups, again I want to emphasize, my reasons are based on the practical realities of what I've seen in the Free Tibet movement:

Until both Tibet and Xinjiang are fully secure and integrated within China, without riots and without a restless ethnic minority (predominant in the region) even considering secession, there will *never, ever* be peace in China, and China will continue to suffer from the worldwide propaganda aimed against it.

I learned myself once, years ago when I ultimately left the Free Tibet movement, that the accusations of the neocons in charge of the movement were false. I learned that China has indeed been making efforts to accommodate the Tibetans, giving them an exception on the One Child Policy, encouraging Tibetan cultural celebrations and so forth. I am not at all trying to discourage fair policy to Tibet, obviously in the interests of human rights, I am glad to see the Tibetans overall treated quite well, and I hope it continues.

I am just telling you the reality of the neocons' plans against you-- all your good efforts and fairness toward the Tibetans will do you little good among the Western public, because the neocons control the media here in the USA, Britain and much of Europe, and they will continue to launch anti-Chinese propaganda against you, portray you as oppressors, no matter how much good you do for the Tibetan people. The American, British, Australian and European publics have a short attention span-- they won't know of your fair policies in Tibet, they will know only the anti-Chinese propaganda. Obviously, you **should** work hard to defend your Tibet record (and discuss your efforts to treat the Tibetans well) to national leaders such as Nicolas Sarkozy, Angela Merkel and Donald Tusk in Europe, and use this as a way to defend yourselves and encourage them to show for the Olympics.

But the reality is that in the West, ***appearances and perceptions in the media often count far more than realities*** among the general public. And no matter what level of good you do in Tibet, the neocon propagandists will always attack you with the "evil China" theme in the media.

And as long as ***the geographical regions of Tibet and Xinjiang*** have a majority (or even a large minority) of Tibetans and Uighurs, the neocons in the USA, Britain, Australia and Europe will continue to foment riots and civil unrest, since this subsequently gives them the opportunity to humiliate China further with their propaganda, and encourage secession movements.

To give you an analogy-- the entire US Southwest, California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas, was once a part of Mexico, until the USA invaded Mexico in 1846 and violently seized the region. In the decades after the war, there was much civil unrest, guerrilla fighting and attempts to resist US annexation, and either return to some kind of Mexican rule or be independent. This changed ***only with demographics*** when "Anglos" became the majority instead of Latinos-- Spanish was banned as a public language, all education and business was in English, and finally the civil unrest subsided and the region became secure. Even the Latinos who stayed, were forbidden from using Spanish-- they were forced to use English in schools, and thus as adults, they became "Americans" rather than "Chicanos."

I'm not saying I'm happy about this-- I have many Latino friends, and I admire the Spanish language and Latino culture-- I'm just saying, it was only the demographic shift that secured California and the rest of the Southwest within the USA. Now, of course, demographics are changing again, and Latinos (and native Americans) are once again becoming the majority in Southwestern states. So now, Latino culture is again dominating the region, and predictably, there's ethnic tension. I personally don't mind, since I'm furious at so much Western hypocrisy and glad to see the Latinos flourish as a people again.

All I'm saying is-- demographics and economic integration, above all else, determine if a region is peaceful, or if it is full of tension. China will not survive as a unified nation, if the demographics of Tibet and Xinjiang are such that they remain Han minority. Because as I said, you can continue to pursue fair and just policies in Tibet and Xinjiang for the Tibetan and Uighur peoples, and it won't matter-- the neocons will still launch massive anti-Chinese propaganda against you as "oppressors" in Tibet and Xinjiang, and will continue to incite riots and civil unrest by the Tibetan and Uighur peoples.

And if the Tibetans are not assimilated within China, if they don't "consider themselves Chinese" but instead a separate people, and above all-- if they are *a demographic majority* in *the geographic regions* of Tibet and Xinjiang, then the neocons will take advantage of this and continue to foment riots and violence in Tibet and Xinjiang against you, and continue to give China a negative image in the West. And as soon as China experiences a moment of weakness-- such as an economic recession, or food shortages of things like rice-- then the neocons will push for an all-out rebellion in Tibet and Xinjiang and cause great damage to you. Make no mistake, the neocons hate you almost to a racist degree, and will stop at nothing to hurt China.

Posted by: Horace on April 8, 2008 2:21 PM

各大高校BBS热贴：

大敌当前推动中华民族空前团结
　　
　　
　　 （一）
　　
　　 “3.14”以来，一向鼓吹以“佛教不杀生”为皈依的藏独分子，借“08奥运”中国政
府深受掣肘之际，与境外反华势力遥相呼应，上窜下跳，疯狂叫嚣“西藏独立”，极尽挑
衅之能事！
　　
　　 他们屠戮妇婴，焚烧使馆，劫掠财物，从拉萨到甘南，从阿坝到成都，从境内到境外
，以赤裸裸的无耻暴力，上演了一幕幕令海内外华夏儿女忍无可忍的人间惨剧。
　　
　　为了给藏独等民族分裂势力鼓劲儿打气，以法国总统萨科奇、美国议长佩洛西、德国
总理默克尔等为首的西方反华势力代表，除了给藏独分子提供大量金钱作为“活动经费”
外，还亲自跳出来为其摇旗呐喊，加油助威。根据他（她）们的歪理邪说，西藏“受到了
不公平的待遇，应该独立”。
　　
　　 这些当年“八国联军”侵华洋寇主力的后裔，在时隔100年后，在善良的中国人本着
“以德报怨”的思想对其祖上的滔天罪行既往不咎之后，为何竟还如此敌视中国这个东方
古老的礼仪之邦呢？
　　
　　答案很简单，委内瑞拉总统查维斯一语道破天机：美国等西方反华势力是煽动西藏暴
力的幕后黑手，其直接意图是破坏即将举行的北京奥运会，根本原因是他们无法忍受中国
崛起，千方百计设置障碍阻挠中国强大。查韦斯的话也许有个人主观色彩，但却在某种程
度上反映了西方反华势力与藏独势力密不可分的关系和在其中所扮演的卑鄙角色。
　　
　　西方媒体指鹿为马、颠倒黑白的无耻谰言被揭穿后，确实很狼狈。台湾《中国时报》
报道：中华网网友发起反对CNN往上签名活动，一呼百应，群情激昂；接下来几天，在大陆
各大网站论坛的呼吁下，“CNN”逐渐成为2008年第一流行语,根据汉语语发音，这三个大
写字母被赋予了一个很精悍、“很暴力”的响亮短句：“草你娘！”令广大网友大喊过瘾
，甚为解恨！这场媒体战朝着西方野心家不愿意看到的局面快速发展。这肯定是CNN的老板
在为这家新闻机构起名时所始料不及的，也是驻华记者恶意杜撰新闻时没有想到的！
　　
　　 更令他们想不到的是：强敌相迫不仅不能阻挠中国的强大，反而使中国民众空前团结
，他们摩拳擦掌，义愤填膺；他们万众一心，同仇敌忾！
　　这无疑将进一步加快中国的崛起速度。
　　
　　 （二）
　　
　　　　中华民族是一个经过几千年发展逐步形成的“生命共同体”，汉族以及55个少数
民族是这个共同体不可分割的组成部分。俗话说“城堡最容易从内部攻破”，近代史上，
在西方势力“以华制华”的阴谋作用下，饱受内忧外患折磨的中国一盘散沙，聪明、勤劳
、智慧的中华民族沦为“东亚病夫”！
　　
　　 是毛泽东把中国多灾多难的历史掀开了新的一页。1949年10月1日，当他用湖南方言
庄严宣布“中国人民站起来了”时，西方人只是用鄙夷的眼光冷冷打量了一下中国这位面
黄肌瘦的东方对手，嘲讽道：想站起来，没那么简单！
　　
　　 1953年10月，发生在朝鲜战场上的较量，让高傲了几个世纪的西方政治家大跌眼镜：
当时的“世界霸主”美国组织并亲自指挥的15个国家的军队硬是在伤亡 40万人（其中美国
14万）后，灰溜溜在板门店“停战协定”上签了字，作为战争中弱势一方的中国,靠着无数
衣衫褴褛的勇猛战士的鲜血和生命,打出了一个受尽屈辱的东方大国的国际地位，打出了一
个饱经磨难的民族做人的尊严！
　　
　　 朝鲜战争是一个触及美国人思维和灵魂的事件：一个古老的民族通过这场在外人看来
至今都不可思议的战争中，以一种最有力的方式向全世界宣告：“西方大国在东方海岸驾
几门大炮就可以霸占几个国家的时代一去不复返了！”
　　如果说朝鲜战争使中国开始了“生存时代”，改革开放则使中国开始了“发展时代”
！经过近30年改革开放，中国通过改变自身进而改变了世界。从美国和西方人认知的角度
看，90年代初先有了“中国崩溃论”，在90年代中期很快出现了“中国威胁论”，进入21
世纪之后有了隐形的“中国威胁论”。这个变化的全过程都是因为中国的快速发展，是一
种连带效应，一种自然产生的客观性效果。
　　
　　到21世纪以后，特别是2003年至2004年以后，美国开始一波新的对华政策辩论，辩论
的核心话题就是中国崛起，美国战略界开始重新思考崛起的中国对美国以及全球的意义。
美国的保守势力是很大的，最终，决策的精英集团深刻认识到：美国的削弱就是中国的机
遇，中国的崛起将不可避免地造成美国的相对衰落！于是，我们看到了一出出由美国统治
阶层导演的精彩“活剧”：在中国被“千夫所指”的“Fa轮功”，在美国却被奉为“座上
嘉宾”；披着宗教外衣、行分裂祖国之实在中国臭名昭著的达赖喇嘛，在美国等西方法华
势力的精心导演策划下却被授予“诺贝尔和平奖”；对于中华民族万众一心、翘首期盼的
奥运会，美国等西方反华势力千方百计阻挠、破坏、设置障碍…………
　　明眼人一看即知：凡是有利于败坏中国形象、阻挠中国崛起的，以美国为首的西方势
力统统欢迎；凡是有利于增强中国综合国力，加快中国发展的，以美国为首的西方集团坚
决反对！
　　
　　古今中外，大国崛起都伴随着国际关系的剧烈调整，各种势力的重新组合是一个痛苦
的历史过程，其间必然会有阻挠和障碍，会有形形色色的挑战和破坏，必然会有流血和牺
牲。中国近30年的持续快速发展，无疑对东亚乃至世界的格局产生了根本性影响，西方大
国尤其是美国对中国的崛起越来越忧心忡忡！
　　
　　 （三）
　　
　　汉初，田横五百壮士战败后退据海岛，他们宁愿轰轰烈烈自杀，绝不屈辱苟活一天；
宋末，节节败退的南宋皇帝兵败崖山血流成河，从皇帝到大臣、从将军到士卒，他们宁愿
纵身跳海，绝不愿落入贼手！……….膘骑将军霍去病千里奔袭封狼居胥，少年祖逖挥师北
伐击楫中流，民族英雄冉闵崛起于乱世、挽大厦于将倾，无不深刻说明：虽然社会从来没
有实现过真正的公平，但华夏的民族精英即使食不果腹也从来都“位卑未敢忘忧国”。

　　
　　近代史上，有两位人物的死始终令我痛心不已：一是赴日留学生陈天华（湖南新化人
，为抗议日本政府对华政策跳海自杀）；二是“戊戌六君子”之一谭嗣同（为唤醒国人麻
痹的神经而杀身成仁）。是他们是我看到，无论政治是否清明，华夏族自古以来就有为民
请命的人，忍辱负重的人，舍身求法的人！
　　
　　这是炎黄子孙的宿命，也是华夏族数千年长盛不衰的重要原因。四大文明古国均出现
在经常泛滥的大江大河流域，并不是偶然的：经常性的洪水泛使居住在这些地区的部落在
与大自然的斗争中提高了生存能力，最终在各部落的竞争中脱颖而出。圣人深悟此道，遂
总结出“生于忧患，死于安乐”的千古名句。
　　
　　 古人云“艰难困苦，玉汝于成”，正是由于中华大地上接连不断的各种挑战考验才使
得今天的炎黄子孙敢于面对一切强敌。当一个民族再也没有了激情，当一个民族已经麻木
得没有了爱和很，那么离灭亡也就不远了。自古以来，中华民族历经磨难而始终昂首自立
于世界东方，多次东山再起、绝处逢生，就在于这是一个有强烈危机意识的民族，这是一
个敢爱敢恨，敢于拚命的民族！
　　
　　 “疆独分子炸南航飞机”、“藏独分子杀我同胞”、“陈水扁叫嚣加入世卫”、“默
克尔扬言再次会见达赖”、“佩洛西主导美国众议院通过关于西藏局势的议案” •
•••••• •统统见鬼去吧！把希望寄托在别
人身上，迟早一败涂地。
　　
　　 思路决定出路,力度决定速度。要崛起就要敢于面对挑战，就要敢于做压倒一切劲敌
的强者。从这个意义上讲，现在的挑战不是太多，而是太少：中华民族历史压力最大的时
期，也往往上发展最快的时期；身临绝境的时期，也往往是高歌猛进的时期。
　　
　　 在强者眼里：弱者和被淘汰民族的文化从来都是垃圾，国家之间的竞争就是民族意志
的竞争，没有超强的意志绝不会有国家的复兴，更不用奢谈军事上的直接对抗。
　　
　　 拥有超强意志的族群，即使一无所有，终究走向强大；意志涣散的族群，即使风光一
时，终究走向消亡。有梦想的族群死也要死在冲锋的路上，千万不要死在自己挖的坟墓里
！
　　
　　 内乱分裂，是民族生存的一个严重威胁，因为在民族之林的残酷竞争中，内乱分裂必
然导致强敌入侵与外来势力的各种不正当进入，从而最终灭亡这个民族的文明生存方式。

　　
　　 （四）
　　
　　 民族的灭亡，虽然不一定是全部个体生命的集体毁灭，却是个体赖以存在的文明根基
彻底湮灭，使灭亡后残存的个体生命丧失精神创造力与传统生活方式，沦为精神乞丐，成
为行尸走肉。
　　
　　惟其如此，民族的内乱分裂，绝不仅仅是国家民族的灾难，更是每一个体的灾难。某
个民族如果发展到以国家生存形式，就意味着这个民族的文明已经成熟。从此，国家就成
为这个民族的生命形式，成为这个民族的外壳与灵魂，国家的兴衰荣辱就成为这个民族的
生命轨迹。从本质上说，民族的分裂内乱所侵害的第一个目标就是国家形式，通过对国家
形式的破坏而消解浸蚀民族生存能力，从而对整个民族带来毁灭性灾难。
　　
　　　中国人强烈的群体精神，在于其反对分裂，维护统一的悠久与坚定，这一点在整个
人类世界都是独一无二的。这是中华民族能够以大民族大国家形式数千年岿然屹立的根本
原因之一。从现实原因讲，中国人也许在远古时代从部族团结联盟抵御严酷大自然与“非
我族类”的侵害中，就痛切体会到了族群统一的至关重要。大禹联合各部族共同治水的时
代，除了极其有限的棍棒木耒与极少数天然金属工具，人们几乎是赤手空拳，但是一旦联
合行动，竟然在几十年中疏通了纵横数千里的滔滔大河，使遍地洪水东流入海！此等“喝
令三山五岳开道”的丰功伟业，还曾有哪一个大河流域的民族拥有？尼罗河？多瑙河？密
西西比河？恒河？如此独步寰宇的伟业，没有万众一心众志成城的团结统一，连想也不用
想。某些清醒的西方人也看到了这一点，说大河流域民族的治水斗争，是统一专制的东方
帝国的起源（见汤因比的《历史研究》与魏特曼的《东方专制主义》）。
　　
　　事实是：大禹领导的联合治水，挽救了整个华夏民族。由此，大禹建立了中国民族历
史上的第一代国家形式——统一联邦制的夏。从大禹立国开始，反对分裂维护统一就成为
中国民族生存历史上的头等大事。大禹在会稽山的开国大典上，无情的杀了迟到的东方部
族首领共工，树立起国家最高政权令行禁止的绝对权威就是从夏朝开始的，至今已有约四
千一百年。
　　
　　总体来看，中华民族的统一始终占据主流，分裂内乱终归统一。一个基本规律是，强
盛的中国全部是统一时期，积贫积弱的中国全部是分裂内乱时期。世界上没有一个古老民
族象中国这样历经如此多的分裂内乱而每次都能整合自己，最终回归统一潮流！仅仅从这
个意义上讲，达赖集团的藏独分裂势力，逆潮流而动，违背包括藏族同胞在内的中华民族
的整体利益和长远利益，其狼子野心必遭失败！
　　
　　 佛祖曰：放下屠刀，立地成佛；苦海无边，回头是岸。
　　 全球14亿中华儿女说：回头吧，达赖，放下你的屠刀!
　　
　　 有必要敬告所有图谋不轨的“野心家”：无论你是“挟洋自重”，还是“认贼作父”
，古往今来，中国历史上的分裂势力没有成功过一次，中国的神圣领土没有因为分裂内乱
而永远丢失哪怕仅仅一寸！
　　
　　 当然，这只是古人的功绩。面对自己族群当今的挑战和困难，面对波谲云厄、暗藏杀
机的复杂局势，作为炎黄后裔，作为当代青年，我们又该如何做出一番无愧于先祖的事业
呢？！
　　
　　 我们应该豪情满怀地说：让暴风雨来得更猛烈一些吧！
　　不，我们应该责无旁贷地站出来，对着列祖列宗的坟墓发誓：如蒙召唤，吾愿从命！

　　 时下的中国各族青年，多数具有忧国忧民意识、强烈民族自豪感和历史责任感，他们
为祖国的百年屈辱史而郁闷，他们为民族五千年文明史而自豪，他们对敌人嫉恶如仇，对
祖国恨爱交加，恨是因为不满意仍然落后的现状，爱是因为人人肩负着复兴民族的神圣使
命。
　　年轻人是一个古老民族复兴的基因载体，他们是一个历经磨难的民族实现大国崛起的
生命基础！这次西方媒体的断章取义、无中生有的丑露表演，不仅没能争取到中国人尤其
是年轻人的“民心”，还被人洞察到了其唱衰、分裂中国，阻挠中国复兴强大的险恶居心
，以后再披着“民主”的外衣，“爱你没商量”，主动关心中国人的“人权”，恐怕就不
太容易“取信于民”，其损失可谓大矣！
　　 可以预言的是：随着中国崛起步伐的加快，越来越多的挑战还会如影相随，“奥运效
应”仅仅是个开始。应该说，这是时代青年的幸运，这是中华民族的福份，因为：历史选
择了我们，时代选择了中国！
　　
　　 要知道中华民族从来不是一个害怕挑战的民族，有挑战的崛起，才能根基永固，持久
强大！被上苍垂青还不是福分吗？要知道，不是每个民族都能有这么幸运！
　　
　　 感谢“CNN”、“BBC”、“美国之音”等西方媒体在“西藏扫乱”事件上的精彩表演
，你们以让藏独分子在全世界有正义感的人士面前“裸奔”的形式，抽了自己一记响亮的
耳光！
　　 这记耳光打疼了自己，也打醒了对西方心存幻想的青年。
　　 你以牺牲自己信用的方式催生大国崛起，14亿中国人民感谢你“CNN”！
　　
　　 2500年前，中华民族伟大的思想家、教育家孟子曾深谋远虑地昭告后人：天将降大任
于斯人也，必先苦其心志，劳其筋骨，饿其体肤，空乏其身，行拂乱其所为，所以动心忍
性，曾益其所不能。人恒过，然后能改；困于心，衡于虑，而后作；征于色，发于声，而
后喻。入则无法家拂士，出则无敌国外患者，国恒亡。然后知生于忧患，而死于安乐也。

　　
　　 1800年前，中华民族伟大的军事家、政治家曹操曾饱含深情地阐释：龙能大能小，能
升能隐；大则兴云吐雾，小则隐介藏形；升则飞腾于宇宙之间，隐则潜伏于波涛之内。方
今春深，龙乘时变化，犹如人之得志而纵横四海。龙之为物，可比世之英雄。
　　
　　 是的，对个人来讲是这样，对一个民族、一个国家而言，又何尝不是如此？!
　　
　　 方今春深，龙乘时变化，犹如人之得志而纵横四海。
　　 入则无法家拂士，出则无敌国外患者，国恒亡。
　　
　　 西藏骚乱的后续效应很明显：中华民族空前团结，大国崛起步伐加快。上苍啊，让暴
风雨来得更猛烈一些吧！
　　
　　
　　
　　 附：西藏简史
　　
　　
　　 西藏：以清正式定名得名。唐宋为吐蕃；元属宣政院；明称乌思藏，设都司等；清初
称卫藏，卫即前藏，藏即后藏；后正式定名为西藏，为西藏得名的开始；清设西藏办事大
臣；民国初西藏地方；建国后仍之，后改西藏自治区，区名至今未变。
　　
　　　　早在公元前，居住在青藏高原上的藏族先民就与生活在中国内地的汉族有着联系
。经过漫长的岁月，西藏高原上分散的众多部落逐渐统一，成为现在的藏族。
　　
　　 远在公元七世纪，西藏的政治家、军事家松赞干布就统一了西藏。并同唐朝建立起密
切的关系。特别是松赞干布和文成公主和亲，对于藏汉民族的联系，对于西藏经济文化的
发展，都有深远的影响。
　　
　　 　 十三世纪中叶，西藏地区正式归入中国版图后，此后，中国虽然经历了几代王朝
的兴替，多次更换中央政权，但西藏一直处于中央政府的管辖之下。
　　 到了元朝，西藏地方正式归入祖国的版图，结束了西藏内部长期分裂的局面，正式建
立了吐蕃王朝，定都拉萨。 松赞干布在位期间，吸取唐朝的先进生产技术和政治文化成果
，在政治、经济、文化等方面与唐朝保持了极为友好的关系，人民得到了安定的生活。

　　到了明朝，特别是清朝，西藏同祖国的关系进一步加强，西藏的政治、经济、文化也
得到了发展。1644年清朝建立后，对西藏的治理更加严密，使中央政府在西藏行使主权管
辖的施政进一步制度化、法律化。1727年，清朝设立驻藏大臣，代表中央监督西藏地方行
政。1791年，清朝政府派大军进藏，同西藏人民并肩战斗，维护了祖国的统一。接着清朝
政府还同西藏地方当局议定了西藏地方政府的组织及政治、财政、金融、军事、外交、宗
教等各方面的制度，奏请清朝中央审定批准，正式颁行，并设置驻藏大臣，代表清廷督办
西藏事务，加强了对西藏的管理。　
　　　
　　　 1949年，中华人民共和国成立。中央人民政府根据西藏的历史和现实情况，决定采
取和平解放的方针。中央人民政府顺应西藏人民的意愿，在西藏进行了民主改革，废除了
封建农奴制度，百万农奴和奴隶翻身解放，不再被作为农奴主的个人财产加以买卖、转让
、交换、抵债，不再被农奴主强迫劳动，从此获得了人身自由，成为新社会的主人。1951
年5月23日，中央人民政府和西藏地方政府签订了《关于和平解放西藏办法的协议》，经过
几年的稳定发展，1965年9月正式成立了西藏自治区。
　　
　　　英文“Tibet”一词，可能源于突厥人和蒙古人称藏族为“土伯特”，在元代经阿
拉伯人介绍到西方，也即是源于藏族的自称bod。在民族称谓上，Tibet对应于“藏族”；
但是在地域称谓上，Tibet有时对应于“西藏”，有时又泛指整个藏族地区，与“西藏”
的含义有重大差异。在法、德、俄、日等文中也是如此，这是翻译外文资料和将有关西藏
的资料译成外文时需要注意的一个问题。

---------------------continue---------------------------------------

Posted by: JF on April 8, 2008 2:38 PM

Historically Tibet has always been part of China.

Interestingly, according to the same 'neocons', Israel has more of a right to Palestine (1948) than China who allegedly 'occupied' Tibet in 1949.

I am waiting to see if Mia Farrow will throw her 'considerable' weight behind the Palestinians. Like she persuaded her Jewish friend Steven Spielberg to pull out of the Olympics preparation over China's role in Darfur, I wonder if she would also persuade him to boycott Israel in some manner. I remain always hopeful.

Posted by: mei on April 8, 2008 2:38 PM

One other thing to clarify--

When I was emphasizing that China should diversify its foreign language education (to provide a more equal emphasis on German, English, Spanish, Japanese, Hindi, Korean and so forth, rather than having mandatory English), the main reason for this is seeking *balance of power* in the West.

Obviously, there are other reasons-- such as Germany's economic strength and high-tech talent in the EU, Japanese and Korean technical prowess, Hindi's cultural cachet and the widespread use of Spanish and Portuguese. Ensuring that Chinese students have expertise in a broader variety of languages, and not just English, increases your ability to defend China directly in the media of these nations, while also increasing your ability to do business and innovate technologically with these nations, especially upon mastering other big scientific languages like German and Japanese.

But the other reason: The neocons' anti-Chinese power base is in English-speaking countries such as the UK, Canada, the USA and Australia, and so long as there is an "English-language consensus" (i.e., "English as the international language of the West"), then the neocon-dominated, anti-Chinese media will continue to be the chief information source throughout Western countries. The English language news is translated into e.g. French, German, Spanish and other languages, and since the original source of this news so frequently has an anti-Chinese bias, this same bias is passed onto other languages, and an "anti-Chinese bloc" thereby arises and solidifies in the West.

Obviously English should still be **one of the important languages** that Chinese students study-- I'm just advising that you diversify to other big languages like Spanish, Japanese, German, Russian, French and Arabic.

Try to publish your scientific and technical papers increasingly in Chinese of course (with pinyin transliteration as needed) and encourage Mandarin as an international language throughout the world. But when it comes to communications to the outside world, diversify the languages that you choose.

English should be "nothing special", just one of many Western languages used for communication. I've noticed that India for example, and Arab countries, are already doing this-- diversifying the languages of communication that they use. Many dispatches are of course in English, but increasingly, technical papers and sophisticated publications are produced in languages such as German, Spanish, Portuguese, Hindi and Arabic.

As I'll explain below, if anything it's increasingly looking like Portuguese (and Spanish to a degree) might offer a lot of advantages as a "big Western language" as opposed to English or even German, and not just because of the strength of Brazil, where Portuguese is the main language: It really seems that Brazilians and Portuguese-speakers lately have been the fairest-minded toward China in the midst of this Olympics mess.

If China does this as well, then English loses the "information privilege" that allows the neocon-dominated English-language media to dominate Western thought. In fact, because Chinese is so widely spoken, this will also help to accelerate the day when Mandarin becomes the global language. It's the old idea of achieving victory, by throwing your opponents off balance and keeping their eyes on each other, rather than unifying against you. Rather than giving English the extraordinary privilege of being "the Western language," just make it one of many which you