By Zang Yanping (China Daily)
Updated: 2007-11-13 07:03

The Dalai Clique repeatedly claims "the Dalai Lama's stand to solve the Tibet issue through reciprocal talks has never changed", "the Dalai Lama has long made it clear he is not seeking independence for Tibet and the current problem is lack of trust on the side of the Chinese government". Does the Dalai Lama "unswervingly" stand for "reciprocal talks"? Has he truly given up seeking independence for Tibet? Let us look back at some historical facts.

To "commemorate" the armed uprising he staged on March 10, 1959, the Dalai Lama releases a statement on the anniversary every year. Here is an analysis of his statements issued from 1960 to 2007.

In 12 statements he released from 1960 to 1977, the Dalai Lama pertinaciously insisted that "historically and culturally, Tibet is a sovereign state" and repeatedly said that he "stood fast on this claim".

In view of its relationship with China, the United States diminished its support for the Dalai Clique from 1978 to 1989. For the convenience of contact with the Chinese government, the Dalai Lama deliberately avoided the word "independence" in the 30 statements released over these years.

From 1984 to 1989, taking advantage of China's opening up reform, the Dalai side scaled up their secessionist activities in Tibet and other Tibetan-inhabited areas. From 1984, the Dalai Lama once again started to incorporate "Tibetan independence" into his statements, but still, without the direct appearance of the word "independence". After thorough thinking, he put forward a "five-point scheme for Tibetan peace" (in 1987) and "seven new schemes" (in 1988) and suggested a "middle way" whose purpose was to turn proclaimed independence into one that was "in disguise" and "one-stop" independence into a step-by-step one.

From 1989 to 1993, a string of incidents happened. The Soviet Union broke up, several uprisings took place in Eastern Europe and China experienced a serious political disturbance. Some international interest groups awarded the Dalai Lama the Nobel Peace Prize. In their wrong analysis of the situation, the Dalai Lama and his clique thought it was high time for "Tibetan independence". In his March 10 statement in 1990, the Dalai Lama said "extraordinary changes are occurring in Eastern Europe: events which have set the pace for social-political change throughout the world", and proclaimed that "virtually all Tibetans long for nothing less than full independence".

From then on, however, China has been socially stable and economically prosperous and did not undergo what the Dalai Lama envisioned as drastic changes. Realizing that high-profile independence would never work, the Dalai Clique changed their strategies again from 1994 to 2007 - they toned down their voices for independence and suggested "sincere" and "concrete" dialogues with the central government. They said they were "willing to solve the issue within the framework of the Chinese Constitution" - which, in detailed wording, is a proposal for "Greater Tibet" "high-degree autonomy" or "true autonomy" - in order to "better protect the language, religion and cultural heritage of Tibet".

From my point of view, first of all, the Dalai Clique does not show true "sincerity" as they continued to organize protests against the Chinese government on a large scale and even assaulted Chinese embassies by force or organized forces to impair China's preparations for the Olympic Games.

Secondly, their "willing to solve the issue within the framework of the Chinese Constitution" is just a pretense. The Dalai Clique still state that the "five-point scheme for Tibetan peace" they put forth in 1987 and "seven new schemes" in 1988 are "fundamental political guidelines". Such a proposal of "disguised independence" will never find its place in the Chinese Constitution.

Lastly, their claim to retain the unique Tibetan culture is just rhetoric aimed at winning public opinion in the international community and in effect serves as a tool for their "disguised independence".

History clearly tells us "the Dalai Lama's stand to solve the Tibet issue through reciprocal talks" is not unchanging as he had stated. When they deem that the international situation is in their favor, they tone up their voices for independence, or even threaten to cut contacts with the central government and cease "peace talks". When they deem the situation is unfavorable to them, they do the opposite. Their schemes and strategies are ever-changing along with the international situation, but what remains unchanged are their attempts to break up China and their unceasing secessionist activities.

Xinhua News Agency

(China Daily 11/13/2007 page10)