Re: Analysing Dalai Lama's Address to European Parliament 04.12.08

Europeans woo the Dalai Lama without understanding what he wants? That
is the same with wooing Africa without know what they are wooing. That
is why they are in a mess today.

elle wrote:

[Nicolas Sarkozy snubbed China by giving The Dalai Lama a political
platform to malign China. Was Sarkozy a World leader defying the
Dragon or was he disgracing himself through naivety and ignorance? Was
China hyper-sensitive? Let us analyse the Dalai Lama's political (not
religious) address. My comments shown as [text]:

"When Nicolas Sarkozy, President of France entertained the Dalai Lama
despite the protests of the Chinese Government, he started a serious
diplomatic rift with China. To understand this rift I will attempt to
analyse his address to the European Parliament on December 4th 2008.]

ADDRESS TO THE PLENARY SESSION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT-By His
Holiness The Dalai Lama XIV [5]

Your Excellency, Mr. President, Honorable Members of the Parliament,
ladies and

gentlemen,

It is a great honour to speak before you today and I thank you for
your invitation.

Wherever I go, my main interest or commitment is in the promotion of
human values

such as warm heartedness � this is what I consider the key factor for
a happy life at the

individual level, family level and community level. In our modern
times, it seems that

insufficient attention is paid to these inner values. Promoting them
is therefore my

number one commitment.

My second interest or commitment is the promotion of inter-religious
harmony. We

accept the need for pluralism in politics and democracy, yet we often
seem more

hesitant about the plurality of faiths and religions. Despite their
different concepts and

philosophies, all major religious traditions bear the same messages of
love, compassion,

tolerance, contentment and self-discipline. They are also similar in
having the potential

to help human beings lead happier lives. So these two are my main
interests and

commitments.

[The Dalai Lama speaks of human values and a happy life at a community
level yet what he proposes is the source of dissension and disharmony
by challenging the authority and sovereignty of the People's Republic
of China. The Dalai Lama has already conceded that Tibet is part of
China and he was not seeking independence from China but acknowledged
as being part of China. I cannot see any evidence where the dispute is
over Buddhism in Tibet or China. China has between 278 million to
1,057 million Buddhists although they are mostly of a different sect
for the Gelug sect. [1] It has never been a conflict of religious
doctrine. So to raise the subject of "inter-religious harmony" is a
red herring. The Dalai Lama mentions in the same breadth plurality of
politics and democracy coupled with the plurality of faiths and
religions. I have not seen any conflicts regarding religion or faith,
but there are certainly differences of opinions over politics and
sovereignty. The whole address is a political and not a religious
address.]

Of course the issue of Tibet is also of particular concern to me and I
have a special

responsibility to the people of Tibet, who continue to place their
hope and trust in me

during this most difficult period in the history of Tibet. The welfare
of the Tibetan

people is my constant motivation and I consider myself to be their
free spokesperson in

exile.

[The Tibetan people compromise of more that the three major Buddhist
sects and in 1950, the total population of Tibet was 1,000, 000 and
the Dalai Lama's sect, the Gelug sect could not have been more than
800,000. He was never elected the Head of all of Tibet nor appointed
such. He has surreptitiously assumed this role without a mandate and
portrayed himself to the world that he represents Tibet. He is only
the head priest of the Gelug sect.

If he and his ruling priests were concerned about the welfare of the
Tibetan peoples why has he and the 13 other Dalai Lamas before him
kept 97% of the Tibetan population in the state of serfdom and slavery
depriving them of education, housing or medical care for 1300 years?
The serfs and slaves were finally freed in 1950. [1]

The last time I had the privilege to address the European Parliament
(EP), on October

24, 2001, I stated, �despite some development and economic progress,
Tibet continues

to face fundamental problems of survival. Serious violations of human
rights are

widespread throughout Tibet and are often the result of policies of
racial and cultural

discrimination. Yet, they are only the symptoms and consequences of a
deeper

problem. The Chinese authorities view Tibet�s distinct culture and
religion as the

source of threat of separation. Hence as a result of deliberate
policies an entire people

with its unique culture and identity are facing the threat of
extinction".

Since March this year, Tibetans from all walks of life and across the
entire Tibetan

plateau demonstrated against the oppressive and discriminatory
policies of the Chinese

authorities in Tibet. With full awareness of the imminent danger to
their lives, Tibetans

from all across Tibet known as Cholka-Sum (U-Tsang, Kham and Amdo),
young and

old, men and women, monastic and lay people, believer and non-
believers, including

students, came together to spontaneously and courageously express
their anguish,

dissatisfaction and genuine grievances at the policies of the Chinese
government. I have

been deeply saddened by the loss of life, both Tibetan and Chinese,
and immediately

-2-

appealed to the Chinese authorities for restraint. Since the Chinese
authorities have

blamed me for orchestrating the recent events in Tibet, I have made
repeated appeals

for an independent and respected international body to conduct a
thorough investigation

into the matter, including inviting them to Dharamsala, India. If the
Chinese

government has any evidence to support such serious allegations, they
must disclose it

to the world.

[Strong emotive diction is being used here like, "policies of racial
and religious discrimination the Tibetan culture and religion" when it
is obvious that some of the Dalai Lamas supporters had instigated the
riots to destabilise the country in the hope of getting international
support for their cause especially leading to the Beijing Olympics. As
ethnic Tibetan agitators killed Chinese civilians and ransacked
Chinese shops, and did the Dalai Lama expect the Chinese authorities
not to quell the demonstrations? Which nation will stand by and allow
the dissenters to run amok? Which nation would not arrest and
interrogate the trouble makers. Is it not also logical for a police
presence to prevent further anarchy? Compare it to Paris, Northern
Ireland, London, even Jerusalem or Mumbai. Here it was clearly trouble
started by ethnic Tibetan agitators, encouraged by exiled Tibetans in
Dharamsala and surreptitiously supported by CIA trained ethnic Tibatan
saboteurs.]

Sadly, the Chinese authorities have resorted to brutal methods to deal
with the situation

in Tibet, despite appeals by many world leaders, NGOs and
personalities of

international standing to avoid violence and show restraint. In the
process, a large

number of Tibetans have been killed, thousands injured and detained.
There are many

whose fate remains completely unknown. Even as I stand here before
you, in many

parts of Tibet there is a huge presence of armed police and military.
In many areas

Tibetans continue to suffer under a state of de-facto martial law.
There is an

atmosphere of angst and intimidation. Tibetans in Tibet live in a
constant state of fear

of being the next to be arrested. With no international observers,
journalists or even

tourists allowed into many parts of Tibet, I am deeply worried about
the fate of the

Tibetans. Presently, the Chinese authorities have a completely free
hand in Tibet. It is

as though Tibetans face a death sentence, a sentence aimed at wiping
out the spirit of

the Tibetan people.

[Here again, His Holiness, The Dalai Lama, is disingenuous in
distorting the reality of the situation. The Dalai Lama's supports
have agitated and stirred up anarchic behaviour among the ethnic
Tibetans to embarrass China just before the Beijing Olympics and
expects the PRC to sit back and do nothing to prevent mass slaughter
of her own citizens, Han or Tibetans? How irresponsible would that
have been? All civil unrests has to be dealt with promptly and
effectively to stop further spread of such unrests regardless of
whether the unrest is in Tibet or Guangdong, or Beijing. For once
(since the downfall of the Manchu Dynasty), China was in a position to
deploy sufficient police and troops to quell civil unrest.

It is interesting to observe that since there has been no further
agitation or anarchy in Tibet since the PLA placed strict discipline
in Tibet at the time of the Beijing Olympics, not a single ethnic non-
agitator Tibetan has been arrested or put in jail. No reports of mass
massacre or any genocide has occurred, nor has there been undue
repression of anyone in Tibet. In fact, there are reports that the
Tibetan population has increased as an unprecendented rate, and all
Tibetans now have free access to education, medical care, free to
travel to any part of China or outside China, and are enjoying true
freedom since 1959.

When the PRC made sincere attempts to open up Tibet to the world, most
of the journalists were only intent on looking for reasons to
"demonize the PRC, most were Human Rights agitators," or the
"insurgent exiled Tibetans" who entered under the guise of innocent
travellers, only to forment unrest and trouble among the ethnic
Tibetans. This abuse of freedom that caused more unrest had to be
stopped. It had to be part of the Tibetan National Security scheme.
Any other nation in the world would have take a similar action. But
this has been interpreted as "martial Law." Whatever the Dalai Lama
wishes to call it, it has stopped unrest and anarchy.]

Many honorable members of the EP are well aware of my consistent
efforts to find a

mutually acceptable solution to the Tibet problem through dialogue and
negotiations. In

this spirit, in 1988 at the European Parliament in Strasbourg I
presented a formal

proposal for negotiations that does not call for separation and
independence of Tibet.

Since then, our relations with the Chinese government have taken many
twists and

turns. After an interruption of nearly 10 years, in 2002 we re-
established direct contact

with the Chinese leadership. Extensive discussions have been held
between my envoys

and representatives of the Chinese leadership. In these discussions we
have put forth

clearly the aspirations of the Tibetan people. The essence of my
Middle Way Approach

is to secure genuine autonomy for the Tibetan people within the scope
of the

Constitution of the PRC.

During the seventh round of talks in Beijing on 1st and 2nd July this
year, the Chinese

side invited us to present our views on the form of genuine autonomy.
Accordingly, on

31st October 2008 we presented to the Chinese leadership the
Memorandum on

Genuine Autonomy for the Tibetan People. Our memorandum puts forth our
position

on genuine autonomy and how the basic needs of the Tibetan nationality
for autonomy

and self-government can be met. We have presented these suggestions
with the sole

purpose of making a sincere effort to address the real problems in
Tibet. We were

confident that given goodwill, the issues raised in our memorandum
could be

implemented.

Unfortunately, the Chinese side has rejected our memorandum in its
totality, branding

our suggestions as an attempt at �semi-independence� and �independence
in disguise�

and, for that reason, unacceptable. Moreover, the Chinese side is
accusing us of "ethnic

cleansing" because our memorandum calls for the recognition of the
right of

autonomous areas "to regulate the residence, settlement and
employment or economic

activities of persons who wish to move to Tibetan areas from other
parts of the PRC."

We have made it clear in our memorandum that our intention is not to
expel non-

Tibetans. Our concern is the induced mass movement of primarily Han,
but also some

other nationalities, into many Tibetan areas, which in turn
marginalizes the native

Tibetan population and threatens Tibet�s fragile natural environment.
Major

demographic changes that result from massive migration will lead to
the assimilation

rather than integration of the Tibetan nationality into the PRC and
gradually lead to the

extinction of the distinct culture and identity of the Tibetan people.

[A close scrutiny of this portion of the Tibetan demands is critical
in understanding why the Tibetan demands were sly and hypocritical and
made it impossible for the PRC to consider.

The Dalai Lama's "Middle Way Approach" is intended to secure genuine
autonomy (independence) for the people of Tibet. That Tibet would be
responsible for her own (1) independent legislature-formulating their
laws, (2) independent judiciary-Tibetan judiciary is the final
arbiter, and (3) independent executive-to have an administration that
is solely responsible to Tibet. This means that Tibet would be
independent of the Governance and Laws of the People's Republic of
China and yet is a part of China. It is quite contradictory in concept
and naturally unacceptable. (Was it intended to be unacceptable to
further demonize China and make China look unreasonable? Did the CIA-
Americans have anything to do with the drafting of the conditions?)

This means that Tibet will be a totally independent autonomous
sovereign state within the sovereign nation of the People's Republic
of China. It is inconceivable that ANY sovereign nation would accede
to such a demand from a state considered as a tributary state of the
parent nation. Surely the advisers to the Dalai Lama did not axpect
the PRC to agree to such outragous demands.

Furthermore, "to add insult to injury" the Dalai Lama intends to make
it legal to discriminate against the people of China with ethnic
cleansing of Tibet. This is what he requests,

"our memorandum call for the recognition of the right of the
autonomous areas (Tibetans) "to regulate the residence, settlement and
employment or economic activities of persons who wish to move to
Tibetan areas from other parts of the PRC." (clearly implying the Han
people or non-Tibetans showing racism.) We have made it clear in our
memorandum that our intention is not to expel non-Tibetans (ethnic
cleansing). Our concern is the induced mass movement of primarily Han,
but also some other nationalities, into many tibetan areas, which in
turnb marginalizes the native Tibetan population and threatens Tibet's
fragile natural environment."

Yet, no such restrictions have ever been imposed on any Tibetan, nor
any other ethnic minority in any party of China as far as I know. All
ethinic minorities in China are Chinese citizens that enjoy all the
previleges of a Citizen."]

The cases of the peoples of Manchuria, Inner Mongolia and East
Turkestan in the PRC

are clear examples of the devastating consequences of a massive
population transfer of

the dominant Han nationality upon the minority nationalities. Today,
the language,

script and culture of the Manchu people have become extinct. In Inner
Mongolia today,

only 20% are native Mongolians out of a total population of 24
millions.

Despite the assertions by some hard-line Chinese officials to the
contrary, from the

copies of our memorandum made available to you it is clear that we
have sincerely

addressed the concerns of the Chinese government about the sovereignty
and territorial

integrity of the PRC. The memorandum is self-explanatory. I would
welcome your

comments and suggestions.

[The practice of "special previleges for any minority group" should
never be condoned as it would invariably lead to more discontent and
hatred. The Dalai Lama is using the Tibetan minority as a red herring.
There are many minority peoples in China and I have yet to hear of any
minority (non-violent) group that has been targetted indiscriminately
and persecuted.The following is China's policy concerning minorities:

"Chinese Policy on Minorities [2]

General

These fifty-six are extremely diverse. Some of the minorities,
including the Hui and the Zhuang, are very similar to the Han; others
are very different, for instance, the Turkic peoples of the west such
as the Uygurs or Kazakhs, or the Iranian Tajiks. The Minority
nationalities occupy about 60 per cent of China's territory,
including, above all, the vast western areas.

Policy

Chinese policy officially opposes forced assimilation and allows
autonomy to the minority nationalities, so that they can retain their
own characteristics. Under this policy, the government has set up
numerous autonomous areas throughout China. The policy's real effect,
however, can best be described as integration.

Policy on Secession

Both policy and reality are fiercely opposed to outright secession,
which the government has suppressed brutally on several occasions.
Such occasions occurred in the years of 1959, 1987, and 1989. Most of
the minorities have succeeded in integrating reasonably well with the
Han, but independence or secessionist and wishes have remained strong
among a few, particularly the Tibetans. Ethnic dissent among some
nationalities could easily develop as an issue in the coming years.

Census Situation

In the 1953 census 41 minority nationalities were specified. In the
1964 census, there were 183 nationalities registered, among which the
government recognized only 54. Of the remaining 129 nationalities, 74
were considered to be part of the officially recognized 54, 23 were
classified as "other nationalities" and the remaining 32 were
classified as "indeterminate." The numbers of population has some
suspect due to the re-registration of significant numbers of Han
people as members of minority nationalities, an action which brought
with it personal benefits. Also some did so as it relates to the
substantial (though not total) exemption of members of minority
nationalities from the family planning policy of "one family one
child".

As far as I can observe, the same policy has been applied to all
minority ethnic groups and this includes Tibetans.]

I take this opportunity to appeal to the European Union and the
Parliament to use your

good offices, sparing no efforts, to persuade the Chinese leadership
to resolve the issue

of Tibet through earnest negotiations for the common good of the
Tibetan and Chinese

peoples.

While I firmly reject the use of violence as a means in our struggle,
we certainly have

the right to explore all other political options available to us. In
the spirit of democracy,

I called for a Special Meeting of Tibetans in exile to discuss the
state of Tibetan people

and the state of the issue of Tibet and the future course of our
movement. The meeting

took place from November 17-22, 2008 in Dharamsala, India. The failure
of the

Chinese leadership to respond positively to our initiatives has
reaffirmed the suspicion

held by many Tibetans that the Chinese government has no interest
whatsoever in any

kind of mutually acceptable solution. Many Tibetans continue to
believe that the

Chinese leadership is bent on the forceful and complete assimilation
and absorption of

Tibet into China. They therefore call for the complete independence of
Tibet. Others

advocate the right to self-determination and a referendum in Tibet.
Despite these

different views, the delegates to the Special Meeting unanimously
resolved to empower

me to decide the best approach, in accordance with the prevailing
situation and the

changes taking place in Tibet, China and the wider world. I will study
the suggestions

made by about 600 leaders and delegates from Tibetan communities
around the world,

including views we are able to gather from a cross section of Tibetans
in Tibet.

[Again the use of emotive words to stir up resentment and prejudice in
the Dalai Lama's quest to break away as an independent state of the
PRC. The sinister finger-prints of the CIA to create instability in a
part of China as a very low cost to America is evident. This is what
is stoking the fires of resentment.

"in the United States, its operations in the Tibetan region of China
are virtually unknown. [3]

According to a Jan. 25 report in the Chicago Tribune, "Little about
the CIA's skullduggery in the Himalayas is a real secret anymore
except maybe to the U.S. taxpayers who bankrolled it."

The Tribune report is titled "The CIA's secret war in Tibet." It is
the first major report on this contra operation in a corporate-owned
newspaper in the United States, although this news has been reported
many times in the pages of Workers World newspaper. " [3]

Further evidence from state department papers:
FOREIGN RELATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES
1964-1968
Volume XXX
China
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Washington, DC

SUBJECT
Review of Tibetan Operations

1. Summary--The CIA Tibetan Activity consists of political action,
propaganda, and paramilitary activity. The purpose of the program at
this stage is to keep the political concept of an autonomous Tibet
alive within Tibet and among foreign nations, principally India, and
to build a capability for resistance against possible political
developments inside Communist China.

2. Problem--To explain Agency expenditures in support of the Tibetan
program.
3. Background and Objectives--At a 13 December 1963 meeting "The
Special Group approved the continuation of CIA controlled Tibetan
Operations [1 line of source text not declassified]." Previous
operations had gone to support isolated Tibetan resistance groups
within Tibet and to the creation of a paramilitary force on the Nepal/
Tibet border of approximately 2,000 men, 800 of whom were armed by
[less than 1 line of source text not declassified] airdrop in January
1961. In 1963, as a result of the [2 lines of source text not
declassified] and as a result of the cited Special Group meeting, the
Agency began a more broadly based political program with the exiled
Tibetans. This included bringing 133 Tibetans to the United States for
training in political, propaganda and paramilitary techniques;
continuing the support subsidy to the Dalai Lama's entourage at
Dharmsala, India; continuing support to the Nepal based Tibetan
guerrillas; the reassignment of a part of the unarmed guerrillas to
India for further training; and the [6 lines of source text not
declassified]. Operational plans call for the establishment of
approximately 20 singleton resident agents in Tibet [less than 1 line
of source text not declassified] two road watch teams in Tibet to
report possible Chinese Communist build-ups, and six border watch
communications teams [1 line of source text not declassified].
[4]

[The above has been highlighted and linked in order to show that the
Tibetan movement has the backing and the financing of Wahsington and
that is why it is so insidious and complicated.]

I am a staunch believer in democracy. Consequently, I have
consistently encouraged

Tibetans in exile to follow the democratic process. Today, the Tibetan
refugee

community may be among the few refugee communities that have
established all three

pillars of democracy: legislature, judiciary and executive. In 2001,
we took another

great stride in the process of democratization by having the chairman
of the Kashag

(cabinet) of the Tibetan Administration in exile elected by popular
vote.

I have always maintained that ultimately the Tibetan people must be
able to decide the

future of Tibet. As Pundit Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India,
stated in the Indian

Parliament on December 7, 1950: �The last voice in regard to Tibet
should be the voice

of the people of Tibet and nobody else.�

The issue of Tibet has dimensions and implications that go well beyond
the fate of six

million Tibetans. Tibet is situated between India and China. For
centuries Tibet acted

as a peaceful buffer zone separating the two most populated countries
on earth.

However, in 1962, only a few years after the so-called �peaceful
liberation of Tibet� the

world witnessed the first ever war between the two Asian giants. This
clearly shows the

importance of a just and peaceful resolution of the Tibet question in
ensuring lasting

and genuine trust and friendship between the two most powerful nations
of Asia. The

Tibetan issue is also related to Tibet�s fragile environment, which
scientists have

concluded, has an impact on much of Asia involving billions of people.
The Tibetan

plateau is the source of many of Asia�s greatest rivers. Tibet�s
glaciers are the earth�s

largest ice mass outside the Poles. Some environmentalists today refer
to Tibet as the

Third Pole. And, if the present warming trend continues the Indus
River might dry up

within the next 15-20 years. Furthermore, Tibet�s cultural heritage is
based on

Buddhism�s principle of compassion and non-violence. Thus, it concerns
not just the

six million Tibetans, but also the over 13 million people across the
Himalayas,

Mongolia and in the Republics of Kalmykia and Buryat in Russia who
share this

culture, which has the potential to contribute to a peaceful and
harmonious world.

My maxim has always been to hope for the best and to prepare for the
worst. With this

in mind, I have counseled the Tibetans in exile to make more rigorous
efforts in

educating the younger generation of Tibetans, in strengthening our
cultural and

religious institutions in exile with the aim of preserving our rich
cultural heritage, and

in expanding and strengthening the democratic institutions and civil
society among the

Tibetan refugee community. One of the main objectives of our exile
community is to

preserve our cultural heritage where there is the freedom to do so and
to be the free

voice of our captive people inside Tibet. The tasks and challenges we
face are daunting.

As a refugee community, our resources are naturally limited. We
Tibetans also need to

face the reality that our exile may last for a longer time. I would
therefore be grateful to

the European Union for assistance in our educational and cultural
endeavors.

I have no doubt that the principled and consistent engagement of the
EP with China

will impact the process of change that is already taking place in
China. The global trend

is towards more openness, freedom, democracy and respect for human
rights. Sooner or

later, China will have to follow the world trend. In this context, I
wish to commend the

EP for awarding the prestigious Sakharov Prize to the Chinese human
rights defender

Hu Jia. It is an important signal as we watch China rapidly moving
forward. With its

newfound status, China is poised to play an important leading role on
the world stage.

In order to fulfill this role, I believe it is vital for China to have
openness, transparency,

rule of law and freedom of information and thought. There is no doubt
that the attitudes

and policies of members of the international community towards China
will impact the

course of the change taking place in China as much as domestic events
and

developments.

In contrast to the continued extremely rigid attitude of the Chinese
government towards

Tibet, fortunately among the Chinese people � especially among the
informed and

educated Chinese circles � there is a growing understanding and
sympathy for the

plight of the Tibetan people. Although my faith in the Chinese
leadership with regard to

Tibet is becoming thinner and thinner, my faith in the Chinese people
remains

unshaken. I have therefore been advising the Tibetan people to make
concerted efforts

to reach out to the Chinese people. Chinese intellectuals openly
criticized the harsh

crackdown of Tibetan demonstrations by the Chinese government in March
this year

and called for restraint and dialogue in addressing the problems in
Tibet. Chinese

lawyers offered publicly to represent arrested Tibetan demonstrators
at trials. Today,

there is growing understanding, sympathy, support and solidarity among
our Chinese

brothers and sisters for the difficult situation of the Tibetans and
their legitimate

aspirations. This is most encouraging. I take this opportunity to
thank the brave Chinese

brothers and sisters for their solidarity.

I also thank the European Parliament for the consistent display of
concern and support

for the just and non-violent Tibetan struggle. Your sympathy, support
and solidarity

have always been a great source of inspiration and encouragement to
the Tibetan

people, both in and outside of Tibet. I would like to express special
thanks to the

members of the Tibet Inter-Group of the EP, who have made the tragedy
of the Tibetan

people not only a focus of their political work but also a cause of
their hearts. The many

resolutions of the EP on the issue of Tibet have helped greatly to
highlight the plight of

the Tibetan people and to raise the awareness of the issue of Tibet
amongst the public

and in governments here in Europe, and all around the world

The consistency of the European Parliament�s support for Tibet has not
gone unnoticed

in China. I regret where this has caused some tensions in EU-China
relations. However,

I wish to share with you my sincere hope and belief that the future of
Tibet and China

will move beyond mistrust to a relationship based on mutual respect,
trust and

recognition of common interest � irrespective of the current very grim
situation inside

Tibet and the deadlock in the dialogue process between my envoys and
the Chinese

leadership. I have no doubt that your continued expressions of concern
and support for

Tibet will, in the long run, have a positive impact and help create
the necessary political

environment for a peaceful resolution of the issue of Tibet. Your
continued support is,

therefore, critical.

I thank you for the honor to share my thoughts with you.

Brussels, 4 December 2008

[It is apparent that the Dalai Lama is insincere as a Buddhist and
does not understand the philosophy of Democracy if he considers Tibet
as part of China . It is quite clear that he is speaking entirely as a
politician and is the lackey of the CIA will never achieve his
intransigent aims of total Independence of China after accepting that
Tibet is a part of China. China has always treated Tibet as a
tributary state of China since time immorial. This analysis is an
attempt to give the Dalai Lama's Address to the European Parliament
some perspective and not meant to discredit the Dalai Lama.]

References:

[1] http://knol.google.com/k/mbp-lee/a-modern-perspective-of-buddhism/1l23x9udotn1a/7#

[2] http://www.paulnoll.com/China/Minorities/China-min-policy.html

[3] http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/55/776.html

[4] http://www.state.gov/www/about_state/history/vol_xxx/337_343.html

[5] http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=23342&t=1&c=2

http://knol.google.com/k/mbp-lee/analysing-dalai-lamas-address-to/1l23x9udotn1a/12#
.