ANTI-MUSLIM RUMOURS SPREAD IN CENTRAL MYANMAR

B.RAMAN

Anti-Muslim rumours projecting Muslims negatively have spread to Rangoon from Meikhtila which has been placed under a State of Emergency following three days of Buddhist-Muslim clashes last week.

2.While no fresh fatalities have been reported from Meikhtila, there have been reports of fresh attacks on mosques and Muslim-owned properties in the villages and townships around Meikhtila.

3. There have been reports of fear among the Muslima of Rangoon, many of them of Indian origin, following circulation of rumours regarding possible attacks on Muslims and their properties there. The Myanmar Government has placed security forces in Rangoon in a state of alert. There have been no violent incidents so far.

4. Muslims suspect that the attacks on Muslims and the rumours are being instigated by anti-reform elements in the Army to discredit President Thein Sein and Aung San Suu Kyi.

5.The privately-owned Irrawaddy Journal has reported as follows:  “ Fear gripped Rangoon’s Muslim communities on Sunday night after reports and rumors began to emerge that groups of rioters were planning to attack their neighborhoods. Muslim residents reacted by closing shops and holding nighttime patrols, but eventually there were few incidents in Burma’s biggest city.

“Over the weekend the violence directed at Islamic communities spread southward through Mandalay Division from Meikhtila Township, where 8,000 Muslims were displaced and dozens of people were killed after violence erupted last Wednesday.

 “Some Islamic leaders and Burmese activists now allege that the rapidly spreading communal violence—which appears to pit Buddhists against Muslims—is in fact being incited by outside interests.

“On Sunday night, reports and rumors that groups of anti-Muslim rioters were on their way to Muslim neighborhoods in central Rangoon first began to appear. Around midnight an unidentified group allegedly tried to set fire to buildings in Ma U Gone, a Muslim quarter in Tamwe Township, according to local resident Tha Aye.

“It was near midnight, around seven or eight people came in a van and tried to set buildings on fire. When people tried to catch them they ran away,” said Tha Aye, who is also chairman of the Union National Development Party, an Islamic political organization.

“They threw [Molotov cocktails] at a mosque but it was in vain,” he said, adding that the attackers revisited the area more than one hour later, but they were chased away by residents who carried knives and sticks.

‘News of the incident quickly reached other Islamic communities who formed vigilante groups to patrol the streets, according to Aye Lwin, a Muslim representative from Burma’s Interfaith Friendship Organization.

‘At around 3 am Monday morning Muslim crowds could be heard chanting ‘God is Great’ as they marched through central Rangoon’s Pabedan Township.

‘Residents of Mingalar Taung Nyunt Township, a predominantly Muslim market area, were also on alert after they received repeated anonymous phone calls on Sunday night, saying that the area would be the target of mobs.

‘Businesses in the area remained closed during a visit by a reporter on Monday. “We want the government to help stop these rumors and reassure the community’s safety,” local community leader Khin Hlaing said.

‘Some Muslim leaders believed that the violence directed at their communities was being orchestrated by outsiders. “In my opinion, a group of people is trying to instigate public unrest by targeting Muslim people,” Aye Lwin said.

‘”Tha Aye alleged that elements in the ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party were involved in the supposed organization of the anti-Muslim riots, adding that they wanted to hinder President Thein Sein’s political and socio-economic reform agenda.”

6.Our security agencies should step up online monitoring to prevent dissemination of morphed images of the violence by extremist elements as happened last year after the violent incidents in the Rakhine State.( 26-3-13)

(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. Twitter @SORBONNE75 )

 

BUDDHIST-MUSLIM CLASHES IN MEIKHTILA

 

B.RAMAN

Between 20 and 26 persons are reported to have been killed in three days of violent clashes between Buddhists and Burman Muslims (not Rohingyas) in the central Myanmar cantonment town of Meikhtila since March 20,2013. Official figures have, however, given the death toll as five only till the evening of March 22.

2. The town has a population of about 100,000 of whom one-third are estimated to be Muslims. The violence reportedly broke out following a quarrel between the Muslim owner of a jewellery shop and some of his Buddhist customers.

3.Five mosques, including the main mosque of the town, are reported to have been burnt down by Buddhist mobs. Armed Buddhist monks prevented journalists from taking photographs of the damages caused to the mosques.

4.Finding the local police unable to bring the violence under control, the Government imposed a State of Emergency in Meikhtilla and neighbouring townships and villages on March 22 to enable the deployment of the Army.

5. A reporter of the privately-owned Irrawaddy Journal has reported as follows: “Photo evidence of widespread carnage is also emerging, with news media websites and social media sites such as Facebook posting pictures that show numerous charred bodies and whole neighborhoods on fire. Some local residents told The Irrawaddy that militant Buddhist monks and laymen went on a rampage through the city in Mandalay Division on Friday morning, destroying mosques and what they believed were Muslim-owned properties. “It’s as if they are destroying the town. The situation is now out of control,” said a Pauk Chaung quarter resident, who wanted to remain anonymous for fear of his safety.”

6.He said Muslim residents were seeking shelter at sites in Meikhtila where police could offer them some form of protection. “They [police] are standing guard over 800 Muslim people taking refuge at a football ground. Now I’ve heard that the ministers for internal affairs and religious affairs and the chief minister for Mandalay Division are here,” the Buddhist man said. However, police had little control over events, according to the resident. “Now we have nearly 30 truckloads of riot police here, but they can’t control the mob,” he said. “Instead they are trying to put out the fires.”

 7.The Irrawaddy Journal reporter added: “Thousands of Muslims, who are believed to make up as much as a third of the city’s population, have reportedly fled since Wednesday out of fear that they might be killed. On Friday evening, The Irrawaddy’s reporter in Meikhtila observed police evacuating about 1,500 residents, mostly women and children, out of the city’s Chan Aye quarter to a makeshift refugee camp on the town’s outskirts. More than 2,000 Muslim refugees were gathered at the  site.”

8. Meikhtila is a garrison city (Cantonment) with a heavy military presence, located halfway between Mandalay and Naypyidaw.

9.The Journal has quoted Kay OO May, a representative of a local NGO, as saying that  12 Muslims and eight Buddhists are dead. “I myself witnessed two dead bodies,” she said. “Five mosques, including the biggest one, were destroyed. The Muslim quarter of Chan Aye was the most hard-hit.”

10. Members of the  88 Generation Students organization have criticized President Thein Sein for his allegedly inadequate response to the violence. Islamic Organizations have  sent a letter to the  President  urging him to urgently provide Muslim people in the country with lawful protection.

 11.The Irrawaddy Journal has commented as follows:’ “The clashes in Meikhtila are the latest flare-up in ongoing Buddhist and Muslim inter-communal violence in Burma. Since June 2012 there have been recurrent waves of violence between Buddhist Arakanese and Muslim Rohingya in western Burma’s Arakan State, which have killed 180 people and displaced 110,000 villagers, mostly Rohingyas. In recent months there have been several reports of inter-communal clashes in other parts of Burma, but no one was reportedly killed in  these incidents.”

( 23-3-13)

 

( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. Twitter @SORBONNE75 )

THE CASE OF SANJAY DUTT

B.RAMAN

I have been in receipt of many tweets and E-Mails criticizing me for advocating that the case of Sanjay Dutt, who has been convicted under the Arms Act for having been found in illegal possession of two fire-arms and sentenced to five years of imprisonment, should be treated differently and any petition from him for a lenient view of his guilt should be considered sympathetically.

2.In my first tweet after his conviction by a bench of the Supreme Court, I had said that, as in the US, there is a need for a provision in our laws under which a court can allow a convicted criminal in certain cases to do compulsory community service in lieu of imprisonment to cover cases like that of Sanjay.

3.Subsequently, I had tweeted my agreement with the view of retired Justice Katju, Chairman of the Press Council of India, that Sanjay’s case deserves pardon in view of the good service to the community that he and his parents had done in the past. However, I had differed from Justice Katju in respect of the community service. I am of the view that Sanjay could be considered for pardon  not for his good service of the past, but for the community service that he promises to do in future in lieu of the imprisonment. His performance has to be closely monitored by someone designated by the Governor to ensure that he carries out his solemn commitment. If he violates his commitment, his pardon should be cancelled.

4.My views have been strongly criticized on the following grounds .Firstly, he has committed a heinous offence by accepting a gift of arms from a person allegedly connected with Mumbai’s mafia. Secondly, if any special consideration is shown to him by virtue of his celebrity status, it would be a violation of the sacred principle of equality before law. Thirdly, there are many others who are languishing in jail despite their good service to the community. When the law has not shown them any special consideration, why should it show a special consideration only to Sanjay.

5. Sanjay is a confirmed convict under the Arms Act against whom a minimum sentence of five years as provided in the Arms Act has been awarded by the Supreme Court. Taking into consideration the 18 months that Sanjay had already spent in jail during the trial, the court has ordered that he should spend another  three and a half years.

6.I  argue for a lenient view in his case on the following grounds

·      Even though Sanjay has been found guilty of illegal possession of arms, no evidence has been forthcoming to show that he was aware that these arms were part of a consignment that had been smuggled in from Pakistan for use in the Mumbai serial blasts of March 1993. If he was aware of this fact, as a law-abiding citizen, he should have immediately alerted the police and his failure to do so would have amounted to complicity in an act of terrorism. Since there is no evidence to show that he was aware of this fact, he cannot be accused of complicity in an act of terrorism.

·      No other evidence has been forthcoming to show that he was part of the conspiracy relating to the Mumbai blasts. He has not been found guilty of an act of terrorism.

·      Despite the absence of any evidence to show his involvement, he was treated as a suspect under the TADA along with the members of the conspiracy. As a result, he was not tried separately under the Arms Act, but along with the conspirators and perpetrators of the Mumbai blasts. The trial went on for 20 years. Had he been tried separately under the Arms Act and not with others, his case might have concluded a long time ago and by now he might have completed his sentence

·      His case being clubbed along with the cases against others has resulted in his having to wait for 20 years for the final judgment and he has to go to jail now after this long delay, spending another three and a half years in custody. This is unfair to him and is contrary to the principles of natural justice.

7.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances relating to the conviction of Sanjay I had suggested that he should be treated differently and a sympathetic view should be taken if he petitions for pardon. It will not be a violation of the principle of equality before law. My views have nothing to do with his celebrity status or his family and social connections.

8. If there are others with similar facts and circumstances, their cases have to be examined in the light of those facts and circumstances without any prejudice. In my view, Sanjay had to suffer unfairly because of his case being clubbed along with the cases of the conspirators and perpetrators of the blasts in the absence of credible evidence to warrant it.

9. I will be happy to stand corrected if I have failed to consider any other relevant fact relating to him. (23-3-13)

( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt of India, New Delhi, and , presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. Twitter: @SORBONNE75 )

 

CBI AGAIN UNDER FOCUS

B.RAMAN

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Government of Dr.Manmohan Singh have come under criticism for the perceived ham-handedness of the CBI in the investigation of a complaint regarding irregularities in the import of some foreign cars involving suspected evasion in the payment of duty.

2.In connection with the preliminary enquiry into the complaint, which precedes the registration of a First Information Report  (FIR), the CBI allegedly raided the houses of Shri M.K.Stalin and Shri M.K.Alagiri, senior DMK leaders and sons of Shri M.Karunanidhi on the morning of March 21,2113, while looking for the suspected cars.

3.Since the raids came a day after Shri Karunanidhi announced the withdrawal of the DMK from the ruling coalition in protest against the Government’s policy on the violation of the human and political rights of the Sri Lankan Tamils by the Sri Lankan Government, there have been allegations that the raids were politically motivated to teach the DMK a lesson for its action.

4.Dr.Manmohan Singh and some senior Ministers from the Congress (I) have dissociated themselves from any responsibility for the controversial raid and found fault with the CBI action. There has been professional as well as political ham-handedness in the entire affair.

5. The CBI has the duty and the responsibility to take cognizance of reports of illegalities and investigate them if such investigation falls within its charter, irrespective of the political and other background of the persons against whom complaints have been made.

6.The timing of the investigation  is in the hands of the CBI. Action has to be immediate where heinous offences such as murder or terrorism are involved or where there are reasons to apprehend tampering with the evidence by the wrong-doers if the investigation is delayed.

7.The investigation in connection with irregularities in the import of foreign cars did not come under any of these categories. It was not a heinous offence. Nor were there grounds to apprehend attempts to tamper with evidence.

8.The CBI could have chosen its timing keeping in view the possibility of misrepresentations and misprojections to attribute political motives to the raids in order to discredit the CBI as well as the Government. If it had delayed the raids by a few days till the heat of the controversy over the withdrawal of the DMK from the ruling coalition has died down, heavens would not have fallen. This is where sound professional   judgment  comes in. While one could not fault the CBI for the raids, one could fault its judgment in rushing with them.

9. There is so far no evidence to believe that the raids were undertaken at the instance of anyone in the Government or the Congress. It would seem that the Prime Minister and some senior Ministers were taken unawares by the raid. There were panic reactions due to a fear that the raids may further complicate the relations of the Congress with the DMK  at a time when the  Congress had not given up hopes of finding a face-saver that might enable the DMK to at least support the Government from outside.

10. In the resulting panic, the Prime Ministers and the senior Ministers handled the sequel to the raids with lack of political finesse---not only criticizing the CBI, but also giving the impression of asking the CBI to discontinue the raids. They forgot they had no powers to do so.

11.As a result of the mishandling  by the Government, the CBI has been put in an embarrassing position. It will be suspected if it went ahead with the investigation and even more suspected if it did not.

12. Building up the credibility of the CBI as an independent organization known for its professionalism depends not only on its officers, but also on the political leadership which should refrain from actions or inactions that could impact on the prestige of the CBI.

13.In the final analysis, we will get the CBI we deserve. There is no point in blaming it all the time----right or wrong .(22-3-13)

 

( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute for Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. Twitter: @SORBONNE75)

 

XI JINPING ON SINO-INDIAN RELATIONS

B.RAMAN

In his first visit abroad as the President of China since assuming office on March 14,2013, Mr.Xi Jinping is scheduled to visit Russia, Tanzania, South Africa and the Republic of Congo from March 22-30 and attend the fifth BRICS( Brazil,Russia,India,China and South Africa) summit on March 26-27 in Durban, South Africa. In the margins of the summit, he is scheduled to have bilateral talks with Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh.

2. The PLA Daily of March 21 has carried a report disseminated by the official Xinhua news agency the previous day on an interaction which Xi had before his visit with representatives of the Chinese media as well as media representatives of the BRICS countries based in Beijing.

3.In addition to Xi’s views on the importance of BRICs as an economic co-operation organization, the Xinhua report as published by the PLA Daily highlights the views expressed by Xi on Sino-Indian relations.

4. To quote from the Xinhua report as published by the PLA Daily:

　　“On Sino-Indian ties, Xi said, to jointly follow a path of peaceful development and development through cooperation not only meets the common interests of China and India, the two largest developing countries in the world, but also does a great service to Asia and the world at large.

　　“Speaking highly of the important headway in bilateral ties in recent years thanks to concerted efforts of the two sides, Xi urged both countries that are pursuing development at a faster pace to seize the opportunities and take solid steps to bolster cooperation and exchanges in all fields, accommodate each other's core concerns and properly handle their problems and differences.

　　“On the boundary problem, Xi said it is a complex issue left from history, and solving the issue won't be easy. But he said he believes "as long as we keep up our friendly consultations, we can eventually arrive at a fair, reasonable and mutually acceptable settlement."

　　"Pending the final settlement of the boundary question, the two sides should work together to maintain peace and tranquility in border areas and prevent the boundary question from affecting the overall development of bilateral relations," the President added.”

5. Two significant points in his observations need to be underlined. Firstly, he talks of China’s “core concerns” vis-à-vis India and not core interests. Xi and other Chinese leaders talk of “core interests and major concerns” when they talk of China’s relations with the US, Japan and the ASEAN countries. When they talk of core interests and major concerns, they have in mind Taiwan and sovereignty issues relating to the islands in the South and East China Seas.

6. While Xi has not spelt out what are the core concerns of China vis-à-vis India, one could assess that these probably relate to the activities of the Government-in-exile of His Holiness the Dalai Lama from Indian territory, China’s sovereignty claims relating to Arunachal Pradesh and India’s strategic relations with Vietnam and Japan.

7. Of late, the Chinese have been accusing the Dalai Lama’s set-up of orchestrating the self-immolations in the Tibetan areas of China. It is likely that the reported revival of the activities of the Tibetan Youth League (TYC) and other pro-independence elements in the Tibetan diaspora in the West could be interpreted by Beijing as adding to its concerns.

8.Even though the Chinese have not openly taken up these issues, the likely impact of the Chinese concerns on this subject on our bilateral relations with China has to be continuously monitored and assessed.

9. As I had pointed out in the past, the Chinese attitude on the border dispute with India has been less confrontational than their territorial sovereignty-related disputes with Japan and the ASEAN countries, particularly Vietnam. In the case of India, they have accepted over the years “mutual accommodation” as one of the principles that should be followed in any border settlement. While they are prepared for mutual accommodation in a border settlement with India, they never talk of mutual accommodation in their disputes with Japan and the ASEAN countries. It is this Chinese acceptance of mutual accommodation with India that should explain the absence of rhetoric when they talk of the border  dispute with India as contrasted with the rhetoric in their statements on the South and East China Seas.

10.China’s nuanced policy in matters relating to sovereignty disputes with India is evident from Xi’s recognition of the border issue as a complex problem on which the two countries should keep negotiating while maintaining peace and tranquility across the border and without allowing the dispute to affect the over-all development of the bilateral relations.

11. This is a formulation  with`  which India need have no quarrel. Neither India nor China has been transparent on the progress in the border talks. As a result, one does not know where the two countries are stuck up. The conventional belief is that the lack of progress is due to India’s opposition to China’s demand for the transfer of Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh to China.

12. In the absence of details regarding the present stage of the talks, there has been no contribution by the non-governmental community of analysts to the search for options to find a compromise solution. There is a need for the two Governments to be more forthcoming on the border talks so that the search for a compromise solution could be intensified. Ultimately, public and political opinion in India has to accept a border settlement .Keeping them in the picture will facilitate this. Since India too has accepted the principle of mutual accommodation, a compromise has to be found which will not seriously affect the national interests of the two countries. Why not the two Governments appoint a small core group of non-Governmental experts from the two countries to come up with alternate ideas that could be mutually acceptable?

13. On the question of China’s core concerns regarding India’s strategic relations with Vietnam and Japan, there is no reason for India to be defensive or apologetic about them. India’s relations with Vietnam and Japan do not pose a threat to China whereas the increasing presence of the Chinese Army in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK) and Gilgit-Baltistan and of the Chinese Navy in Gwadar in Balochistan do pose a threat to India’s security. The Chinese have been indifferent to India’s core concerns on this. There is  no reason for India to be sensitive to Chinese concerns regarding its relations with Vietnam and Japan. (21-3-13)

 

( The writer is Additional Secretary ( retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre  for China Studies. Twitter: @SORBONNE75)

IS THERE A NEO-LTTE EMERGING ?

B.RAMAN

Is there a neo-LTTE emerging nearly four years after the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) was wiped out in May, 2009, by the Sri Lankan Security Forces? That is a question that needs the attention of the intelligence agencies in the wake of the growing support for the Sri Lankan Tamils’ political and human rights in the Sri Lankan Tamil diaspora abroad and among large sections of the international community.

2.India had reasons to be gratified with the total elimination of the LTTE, which had become a Frankenstein’s Monster, by the Sri Lankan security forces. Indian intelligence and security agencies  had played an active, but low profile role in helping in the counter-LTTE operations of the Sri Lankan security forces through means such as exchange of intelligence, monitoring the movement of LTTE's commercial ships used for smuggling arms and ammunition, strengthening the anti-aircraft defence of the Sri Lankan forces, training etc.

3.While one has to concede that the uprooting of the LTTE was largely due to the excellent counter-insurgency operations of the Sri Lankan Security Forces, the unadmitted contribution of India was not insignificant.

4. While the Governments of India and Sri Lanka were on the same wave length before the elimination of the LTTE in May 2009, nagging differences cropped up post-May 2009, due to various reasons. Firstly, the Government of President Mahinda Rajapaksa sought to impose a dictated peace on the Sri Lankan Tamil population in total breach of the various promises regarding political accommodation with the Tamils which the Rajapaksa Govdernment and its predecessors had made over a period of years. India’s counter-insurgency help to Sri Lanka was in the expectation that the Sri Lankan Government would implement these commitments.

5. Secondly, after the operations against the LTTE were over, evidence, at least some of it credible, started emerging regarding alleged disproportionate use of force by the Sri Lankan Security Forces not only against the LTTE, but also against the civilian Tamil population living in areas controlled by the LTTE. Instead of addressing these complaints and taking corrective action where required, the Rajapaksa Government started dragging its feet in the matter. Backed by countries like China and Pakistan, it became increasingly indifferent to nudgings not only from the US and the EU countries, but even India to attend to these complaints before they became a major international issue.

6. Thirdly, one found that the admiration of the world for the successful counter-insurgency operations of the Sri Lankan Government gave way to pressures from various quarters for attending to these complaints.

7. Fourthly, the successful counter-insurgency operations destroyed the LTTE’s support base in Sri Lankan territory, but not among the Sri Lankan Tamil diaspora abroad. This diaspora had played a very important role in keeping the LTTE sustained through funds and clandestine supply of arms and ammunition. After lying low for a while after May 2009, the Sri Lankan Tamil political activists in the diaspora became active once again in giving fresh oxygen to the objective of an independent Tamil Eelam. The unaddressed complaints of serious violations of the human rights of the Sri Lankan Tamils were exploited by these elements to give a fresh lease of life to the movement with the help of Western human rights organisations which exercised pressure on their Governments to act against the Rajapaksa Government.

8. Fifthly, a new generation of Tamil activists mushroomed in Tamil Nadu, who acted in tandem with the activists in the Sri Lankan Tamil diaspora, for reviving the Tamil Eelam objective. Growing number of members of GenNext in the Tamil Community in Tamil Nadu, which had become disillusioned with the opportunistic politics of the traditional Dravidian parties, found themselves attracted to the ranks of neo-Dravidian parties which sought to develop a political base in Tamil Nadu by taking up the cause of the Sri Lankan Tamils and by projecting Prabakaran once again as a Tamil icon.

9. Sixthly, unnerved by the support of GenNext for the neo-Dravidian parties, the traditional Dravidian parties found themselves obliged to indulge in competitive political extremism by taking up the cause of the Sri Lankan Tamils once again.

10. As a result of all these factors, the Government of India and the mainstream Indian political parties find themselves confronted with a welter of extremist forces, which have been exploiting  legitimate complaints and demands regarding the human rights of the Tamils, for creating a volatile situation across the Tamil belt in India and Sri Lanka.

11. The situation calls for deft handling by the Ministries of External Affairs and Home acting together. It has the germinating seeds of new political violence. In the past, whenever the Sri Lankan Tamil issue assumed importance in our policy-making, the political leadership in New Delhi had the benefit of sound advice and inputs from the Congress in Tamil Nadu which had its feet and ears close to the ground in Tamil Nadu as well as the Eastern and Northern Provinces of  Sri Lanka.

12. Today, the Congress is practically non-existent in Tamil Nadu.it has no leader of stature who attracts the GenNext. New Delhi’s handling of the post-May 2009  situation has been drifting from one faux pas to another, from one bungling to another. Only India can and should play the leadership role in dealing with the complex situation. Instead of dong so, the Manmohan Singh Government has surrendered all political initiative internationally to the US and the EU countries and locally to parties such as the DMK, motivated by political opportunism.

13.If the Government of India does not play a more proactive role in this matter, a neo-LTTE is waiting to take over the ground situation. ( 20-3-13)

( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. Twitter: @SORBONNE75 )

TIBETAN INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT SPREADS

 

B.RAMAN

The Tibetan independence (Rangzen) movement, started on November 23, 2001, by Thubten Jigme Norbu, former Abbot of the Kumbum monastery and Professor Emeritus at the Indiana University in the US,  has been slowly spreading.

2. The movement, which was launched by a group of Tibetans who constituted themselves into what was called the Rangzen Alliance, describes its objectives as follows: “The Rangzen Alliance is a movement of committed Tibetans and friends, world-over, who have joined together to provide a common platform of action for the realization of three goals:

a.     The restoration of Tibetan independence.

b.     The return of His Holiness the Dalai Lama to Tibet as the sovereign head-of-state of an independent nation.

c.     The establishment of a fully democratic system of government in exile Tibetan society and in free Tibet – based on the rule of law and the primacy of individual freedom.”

3.     The Rangzen movement enjoys the support of the Tibetan Youth League (TYC) and many members of the Tibetan diaspora spread across the world. While the movement has reservations about the middle road policy advocated by His Holiness the Dalai Lama envisaging autonomy for all the Tibetan areas of China in the Tibetan Autonomous Region, Gansu, Qinghai, Sichuan and Yunnan, it has been strongly backing the leadership of His Holiness.

4.     The movement, which had lost some momentum after the brutal suppression of the Tibetans by the People’s Liberation Army after the anti-Chinese riots of March 2008, is again showing signs of gathering strength as resentment builds up among the Tibetans of China and the diaspora over the Chinese indifference to the continuing self-immolation of Tibetan monks and others in the Tibetan areas since March 2009. 108 Tibetans have so far committed self-immolation, the majority of them in the Sichuan province.

 5.The total Chinese indifference to the self-immolations and their attempts to arrest and persecute relatives and friends of those committing self-immolation on charges of complicity have added to the resentment and injected fresh oxygen into the Rangzen movement. On February 13, 2013, the  TYC organised a two-day Rangzen Conference , which was attended by around 35 independence activists.

6.The  Rangzen Conference also marked 100 years of His Holiness the 13th Dalai Lama’s Proclamation of Tibetan Independence. Speaking at the Conference, Dhondup Lhadar, vice-president of TYC, stressed that every Tibetan had the responsibility to “preserve the legacy of the 13th Dalai Lama and uphold the truth of an independent and sovereign Tibet.”

7.“More than a hundred Tibetans have given the ultimate non-violent sacrifice of setting themselves on fire protesting China’s occupation,” Lhadar said. “It is our sacred duty to repeat history a 100 years later and realise the return of our most beloved leader His Holiness the Dalai Lama.”

8.The same day, activists of the Tibetan diaspora in New York and Paris announced the formation of a   Tibetan National Congress (TNC)  to disseminate the views of independence-minded Tibetans in the Tibetan community and in Tibet’s  democratic government in exile.

9.A  spokesman of the TNC Jigme Ugen told Radio Free Asia in an interview as follows:“Naturally there will be different viewpoints about what is the best course to take, but I believe that Tibetan democracy is ready at this point for those viewpoints to be respectfully and openly debated through constructive political participation.”

 10.“We expect more members to come out from other organizations and from the broader Tibetan society who really believe not just in Rangzen [independence] but in democracy. TNC will help form a common platform.” 

11.The supporters of the TNC plan to hold a global conference in September next to work out their programme of action.The total silence of Xi Jinping, the General Secretary of the Communist Party of China, who took over as the President of China on March 14,2013, on the Tibetan issue has added to the determination of the independence activists to strengthen their movement even if its goals are at variance with the Middle Road policy of His Holiness.

12.His Holiness has not yet expressed his views on the emergence of the TNC, but he may not discourage any movement that uses non-violent means for asserting the rights of the Tibetans---whether the rights are for autonomy or independence. The Chinese calculations that somehow the Tibetan struggle will peter out as they forge ahead with their programme for economic development have been belied so far. The fact that the new generation of Tibetans is even more determined than the older generation to assert Tibetan rights indicates that the Chinese may not be able to suppress the Tibetans. ( 19-3-13)

( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. Twitter: @SORBONNE75 )