What is the future of “The Living Tibetan Spirits”? I claim that I am the host of the spirits of some young Tibetan soldiers who gave their precious lives while participating in the military action in the Chittagong Hill Tracts during the Liberation War of Bangladesh in 1971.
In the traditions of Tibetan Buddhism, these young men have no opportunity to seek Reincarnation. For they are not Christians, they may not get the benefit of Resurrection. In the Hindu belief, the soul is Reborn after the death of the individual. But, Tibetan Buddhism does not embrace the concept of Soul or Spirit. In my analysis, the entities named as Body, Mind, and Soul do not have an independent existence of their own. The singularity that we recognize as man exists in the physical world because of the unity of body, mind, and soul during all stages of his existence.
I validate the concepts of Rebirth, Reincarnation, and Resurrection as the mechanism called death or the dying process always precedes the mechanism called Birth and the living process. In other words, Death always precedes Life. Without the intervention of a natural mechanism called Death, the living condition called Life cannot come into its existence. As per the Fundamental Laws of Conservation, matter including the living matter is neither created nor destroyed. Certain values are always conserved in the operation of all natural phenomena including the events called Birth and Death.
Man is a mortal being who must eventually die. When Lazarus died and was laid in a tomb for four days, Jesus performed a miracle and Lazarus came back to life from death. The Book of John, Chapter 11, narrates this event. In verses 41 and 42, Jesus said,”Father, I thank You that You have heard Me. And I know that You always hear Me, but I said this for the benefit of the people who are standing here, that they may believe that You sent Me.” The risen Lazarus had eventually died.
As Dalai Lama turns 85, his lineage’s future is as uncertain as Tibet’s
What is the future of the Living Tibetan Spirits?
Exiled Tibetan artists perform a special song to mark the 85th birthday of their spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, whose portrait is seen behind at an official function in Dharmsala, India, on July 6, 2020. (AP Photo/Ashwini Bhatia)July 6, 2020
Ira Rifkin
(Religion News Service) — The Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhism, who turns 85 Monday (July 6), is not only arguably the world’s best-known Buddhist figure. Through the force of his personality he has made his nation’s struggle for autonomy from China a global cause, and his influence has prompted many in the West to adopt if not Buddhism as a religion then many of its practices and principles, such as meditation and spiritual visualization.
Yet as fans of the Dalai Lama celebrate a landmark birthday, the future of his 600-year-old lineage and its ramifications for his occupied homeland are uncertain.
Though His Holiness, as followers refer to the Dalai Lama, is said by Tibetan officials to be in good health after hospitalization in 2019 for a reported chest infection, the looming question for Tibetan Buddhists and the Tibetan national cause is, what will happen when the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize winner inevitably — in blunt Western terms — dies?
“Of course we Tibetans think about this a good deal,” said Ngodup Tsering, head of the North America branch of the Office of Tibet, an arm of Tibet’s official government in exile. “It is foremost for us.”
The title Dalai Lama, which translates roughly as “ocean of wisdom,” is rooted in the traditional and intricate Tibetan Buddhist concept of reincarnation. Certain highly evolved spiritual adepts, such as the Dalai Lama, are believed to be able to control their reincarnations.
What is the future of the Living Tibetan Spirits?
Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama greets devotees as he arrives to give a religious talk at the Tsuglakhang temple in Dharmsala, India, on Nov. 4, 2019. (AP Photo/Ashwini Bhatia)
For Tibet, this holds profound political implications. The Himalayan nation has been under Chinese military occupation since 1950. Since then the government in Beijing has taken methodical steps to erase Tibet’s distinct culture, flooding the region with ethnic Han Chinese brought from outside Tibet while limiting religious activity and all signs of reverence for the Dalai Lama.
Until 2011, when he voluntarily transferred that role to a democratically elected leadership, the Dalai Lama was also Tibet’s political chief. His abdication, said Tsering, who is based in Washington, D.C., “allows a new generation of younger Tibetans to take the mantle of leadership.”
However, the question of his religious leadership remains.
The current Dalai Lama — the 14th in a line of tulkus, or human reincarnations of, it’s believed, the very first Dalai Lama, born in 1391— fled Tibet for India in 1959 after a failed uprising. He has lived in exile ever since.
China’s leadership, its avowed atheism notwithstanding, insists that the Dalai Lama must reincarnate so that the position can continue. Tibetans maintain Beijing’s interest is only motivated by its intent to seize the next Dalai Lama while he is still a young boy to control him and crush the political movement for Tibetan autonomy.
This is the course it took with the Panchen Lama, Tibetan Buddhism’s second ranking official. Three days after the current Panchen Lama was recognized in 1995, he and his family were kidnapped by the Chinese and he has not been heard from since.
Beijing has installed a proxy in his place, though he has been rejected by an overwhelming majority of Tibetans as a Chinese political tool.
The Dalai Lama has said for several years that he might not reincarnate, hoping to avoid leaving his own successor with a similar fate, or to prevent the Chinese from presenting their own version of the Dalai Lama. “There is no guarantee that some stupid Dalai Lama won’t come next,” he said in 2014. Other times he has said that if he does reincarnate, it’s likely to occur in the global Tibetan refugee diaspora rather than in Tibet itself.
In late 2019, the various factions that comprise the Central Tibetan Administration, which directs the Tibetan exile government, voted to urge the Dalai Lama to reincarnate.
“The Tibetan people and the administration want him to come back,” Tsering said. “So many around the world are encouraged by him. It would be demoralizing if there was no Dalai Lama and a great political loss. The position is so central to the Tibetan tradition, to the Tibetan mind.”
“I’m sure (Tibetans) will keep the name for sure,” said Robert A.F. Thurman, a Columbia University professor emeritus who directs Tibet House, a Tibetan cultural center in New York, and is one of the Dalai Lama’s closest Western associates. “One way or another, there will be a Dalai Lama.”
What is the future of the Living Tibetan Spirits?
The Dalai Lama, child in center, during his first trip to Lhasa in 1939. The Dalai Lama was roughly 4 years old at the time. Photo courtesy of Ira Rifkin
Among the possibilities, according to Tibetan beliefs, is that the Dalai Lama will reincarnate himself before he dies, said Thurman.
“It’s called maday tulku. The idea is that the Dalai Lama is reborn as a child while he still exists as an adult. The child is then raised for 20 years clandestinely so he can enter the picture with the charisma of his adult self.”
Melvin McLeod, editor-in-chief of Lion’s Roar, a leading English-language international Buddhist magazine based in Halifax, Canada, explained the complexity of Tibetan reincarnation thinking as follows:
“Buddhism in general holds to a basic assumption that we experience a series of rebirths to progress up the spiritual ladder. Tibetan Buddhism in particular has a very highly developed understanding of what happens after death and prior to rebirth. … It allows for certain individuals who because of their high level of spiritual development attained over years of deep meditative practices can guide their reincarnation.”
The Dalai Lama himself appears to be in no rush, despite his age, to resolve the issue. His official website maintains that when he is about 90, and in consultation with Tibetan Buddhist leaders and ordinary followers, he will decide whether and how he will reincarnate. He indicated he will leave written instructions as to how his reincarnated self can be found to minimize the possibility of Chinese deception.
Last year, the Dalai Lama also said he had dreamed that he will live to 110, a statement that Tibetans take very seriously because of their belief in his advanced spiritual powers.
Tsering said “the Dalai Lama will do what he thinks is best for all humanity, not just Tibetans, because as a Buddhist he is concerned with the betterment of all humanity.”
And for now, those close to him say there is little urgency. At 85 — 86 according to Tibetan tradition, which adds a year for time spent in the womb — “he’s in excellent shape,” said Thurman. “The Mayo Clinic watches over him with Western medical diagnostics and he has Tibetan physicians who watch him with traditional Tibetan methods.”
The global Tibetan Buddhist diaspora will celebrate the Dalai Lama’s birthday with a host of events, which because of the pandemic are restricted to online. To mark the milestone, the Dalai Lama has released an audio album titled “Inner World,” in which he recites teachings and mantras (words or sounds that serve as meditation aids) accompanied by music.
And how will the Dalai Lama himself celebrate his day?
“As a Buddhist, as a lama (monk), as a renunciate, the Dalai Lama doesn’t attend birthday events or make a big deal over his birthday. It’s just not important to him,” said Tsering. “He asks people to mark a birthday only with doing something good for others.”
THE SPIRITS OF SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE: WE ARE OPENLY SHARING THIS PHOTO ILLEGALLY OBTAINED BY A CHINESE SPY. THE PHOTO WAS TAKEN AT CHAKRATA ON 03 JUNE, 1972 WHILE HIS HOLINESS THE 14th DALAI LAMA WAS PRESENTED A GUARD OF HONOR BY MAJOR GENERAL SUJAN SINGH UBAN, AVSM, INSPECTOR GENERAL, SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE. MY INDIAN ARMY CAREER BEGAN AT THIS LOCATION AND I WILL CONTINUE TO FIGHT FOR FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY IN THE OCCUPIED LAND OF TIBET.
The Unknown Soldier of America pays his tribute to the US Representative John Lewis.
“Do not get lost in a sea of despair. Be hopeful, be optimistic. Our struggle is not the struggle of a day, a week, a month, or a year, it is the struggle of a lifetime. Never, ever be afraid to make some noise and get in good trouble, necessary trouble.”
I am indeed sorry to hear about the loss of the US Representative John Lewis. I used to read about the Civil Rights Movement in America while I was a college student in India. During the Civil Rights Era, I used to think that I will never ever set my foot on the American soil. But, fate and destiny have their own power. I wanted to serve in the Indian Army and my very first posting placed my services in the hands of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The government gave me the choice to withdraw myself and return to the Indian Army Service. At that time, just like the Civil Rights, the Political Rights of Tibetans is a issue that bothered me. I had no choice other than that of accepting the CIA as my Master.
I want to pay my tribute to Congressman John Lewis using his own words. His struggle for Civil Rights continues to inspire me to carry on my struggle for the Political Rights of Tibetans.
“Do not get lost in a sea of despair. Be hopeful, be optimistic. Our struggle is not the struggle of a day, a week, a month, or a year, it is the struggle of a lifetime. Never, ever be afraid to make some noise and get in good trouble, necessary trouble.”
The Great Problem of Tibet must not be left on the Back Burner. In the words of Representative Lewis, I ask,
John Lewis, Towering Figure of Civil Rights Era, Dies at 80
Katharine Q. Seelye
The Unknown Soldier of America pays his tribute to the US Representative John Lewis. Mr. Lewis in June 1967. He had been “involved in a holy crusade,” he later said, and getting arrested had been “a badge of honor.”The Unknown Soldier of America pays his tribute to the US Representative John Lewis. Mr. Lewis, foreground, being beaten by a state trooper during the voting rights march in Selma, Ala., on March 7, 1965. The Unknown Soldier of America pays his tribute to the US Representative John Lewis. Mr. Lewis, third from left, marching with the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., right, from Selma to Montgomery, Ala., on March 21, 1961. The Unknown Soldier of America pays his tribute to the US Representative John Lewis. Mr. Lewis and a fellow Freedom Rider, James Zwerg, after they were attacked by segregationists in Montgomery, Ala., in May 1961.The Unknown Soldier of America pays his tribute to the US Representative John Lewis. Mr. Lewis spearheaded a sit-in by Democratic House members on the steps of the Capitol in June 2016 in support of gun-control legislation.The Unknown Soldier of America pays his tribute to the US Representative John Lewis. Mr. Lewis, right, and a fellow student demonstrator, James Bevel, stood inside the door of a Nashville restaurant in 1960 during a sit-in to protest the establishment’s refusal to serve Black people.The Unknown Soldier of America pays his tribute to the US Representative John Lewis. Mr. Lewis with other members of Congress staging a sit-in on the floor of the House of Representatives in June 2016, demanding that the Republican-led body vote on gun control legislation after the Orlando nightclub massacre.The Unknown Soldier of America pays his tribute to the US Representative John Lewis.Mr. Lewis in 2017. “Our struggle is not the struggle of a day, a week, a month, or a year,” he said, “it is the struggle of a lifetime.”
Representative John Lewis, a son of sharecroppers and an apostle of nonviolence who was bloodied at Selma and across the Jim Crow South in the historic struggle for racial equality, and who then carried a mantle of moral authority into Congress, died on Friday. He was 80.
His death was confirmed in a statement by Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House of Representatives.
Mr. Lewis, of Georgia, announced on Dec. 29 that he had Stage 4 pancreatic cancer and vowed to fight it with the same passion with which he had battled racial injustice. “I have been in some kind of fight — for freedom, equality, basic human rights — for nearly my entire life,” he said.
On the front lines of the bloody campaign to end Jim Crow laws, with blows to his body and a fractured skull to prove it, Mr. Lewis was a valiant stalwart of the civil rights movement and the last surviving speaker at the historic March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in 1963.
More than a half-century later, after the killing in May of George Floyd, a Black man in police custody in Minneapolis, Mr. Lewis welcomed the resulting global demonstrations against police killings of Black people and, more broadly, against systemic racism in many corners of society. He saw those protests as a continuation of his life’s work, though his illness had left him to watch from the sidelines.
“It was very moving, very moving to see hundreds of thousands of people from all over America and around the world take to the streets — to speak up, to speak out, to get into what I call ‘good trouble,’” Mr. Lewis told “CBS This Morning” in June.
“This feels and looks so different,” he said of the Black Lives Matter movement, which drove the anti-racism demonstrations. “It is so much more massive and all inclusive.” He added, “There will be no turning back.”
He died on the same day as did another stalwart of the civil rights movement, the Rev. C.T. Vivian, a close associate of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Mr. Lewis’s personal history paralleled that of the civil rights movement. He was among the original 13 Freedom Riders, the Black and white activists who challenged segregated interstate travel in the South in 1961. He was a founder and early leader of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, which coordinated lunch-counter sit-ins. He helped organize the March on Washington, where Dr. King was the main speaker, on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.
Mr. Lewis led demonstrations against racially segregated restrooms, hotels, restaurants, public parks and swimming pools, and he rose up against other indignities of second-class citizenship. At nearly every turn he was beaten, spat upon or burned with cigarettes. He was tormented by white mobs and absorbed body blows from law enforcement.
On March 7, 1965, he led one of the most famous marches in American history. In the vanguard of 600 people demanding the voting rights they had been denied, Mr. Lewis marched partway across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Ala., into a waiting phalanx of state troopers in riot gear.
Ordered to disperse, the protesters silently stood their ground. The troopers responded with tear gas and bullwhips and rubber tubing wrapped in barbed wire. In the melee, known as Bloody Sunday, a trooper cracked Mr. Lewis’s skull with a billy club, knocking him to the ground, then hit him again when he tried to get up.
Televised images of the beatings of Mr. Lewis and scores of others outraged the nation and galvanized support for the Voting Rights Act, which President Lyndon B. Johnson presented to a joint session of Congress eight days later and signed into law on Aug. 6. A milestone in the struggle for civil rights, the law struck down the literacy tests that Black people had been compelled to take before they could register to vote and replaced segregationist voting registrars with federal registrars to ensure that Black people were no longer denied the ballot.
Once registered, millions of African-Americans began transforming politics across the South. They gave Jimmy Carter, a son of Georgia, his margin of victory in the 1976 presidential election. (A popular poster proclaimed, “Hands that once picked cotton now can pick a President.”) And their voting power opened the door for Black people, including Mr. Lewis, to run for public office. Elected in 1986, he became the second African-American to be sent to Congress from Georgia since Reconstruction, representing a district that encompassed much of Atlanta.
‘Conscience of the Congress’
While Mr. Lewis represented Atlanta, his natural constituency was disadvantaged people everywhere. Known less for sponsoring major legislation than for his relentless pursuit of justice, his colleagues called him “the conscience of the Congress.”
When the House voted in December 2019 to impeach President Trump, Mr. Lewis’s words rose above the rest. “When you see something that is not right, not just, not fair, you have a moral obligation to say something,” he said on the House floor. “To do something. Our children and their children will ask us, ‘What did you do? What did you say?’ For some, this vote may be hard. But we have a mission and a mandate to be on the right side of history.”
His words resonated as well after he saw the video of a Minneapolis police officer kneeling on Mr. Floyd’s neck for more than eight minutes as Mr. Floyd gasped for air.
“It was so painful, it made me cry,” Mr. Lewis told “CBS This Morning.” “People now understand what the struggle was all about,” he said. “It’s another step down a very, very long road toward freedom, justice for all humankind.”
As a younger man, his words could be more militant. History remembers the March on Washington for Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech, but Mr. Lewis startled and energized the crowd with his own passion.
“By the force of our demands, our determination and our numbers,” he told the cheering throng that August day, “we shall splinter the segregated South into a thousand pieces and put them together in the image of God and democracy. We must say: ‘Wake up, America. Wake up!’ For we cannot stop, and we will not and cannot be patient.”
His original text was more blunt. “We will march through the South, through the heart of Dixie, the way Sherman did,” he had written. President John F. Kennedy’s civil rights bill was “too little, too late,” he had written, demanding, “Which side is the federal government on?”
But Dr. King and other elders — Mr. Lewis was just 23 — worried that those first-draft passages would offend the Kennedy administration, which they felt they could not alienate in their drive for federal action on civil rights. They told him to tone down the speech.
Still, the crowd, estimated at more than 200,000, roared with approval at his every utterance.
An earnest man who lacked the silver tongue of other civil rights orators, Mr. Lewis could be pugnacious, tenacious and single-minded, and he led with a force that commanded attention.
He gained a reputation for having an almost mystical faith in his own survivability. One civil rights activist who knew him well told The New York Times in 1976: “Some leaders, even the toughest, would occasionally finesse a situation where they knew they were going to get beaten or jailed. John never did that. He always went full force into the fray.”
Mr. Lewis was arrested 40 times from 1960 to 1966. He was beaten senseless repeatedly by Southern policemen and freelance hoodlums. During the Freedom Rides in 1961, he was left unconscious in a pool of his own blood outside the Greyhound Bus Terminal in Montgomery, Ala., after he and others were attacked by hundreds of white people. He spent countless days and nights in county jails and 31 days in Mississippi’s notoriously brutal Parchman Penitentiary.
Once he was in Congress, Mr. Lewis voted with the most liberal Democrats, though he also showed an independent streak. In his quest to build what Dr. King called “the beloved community” — a world without poverty, racism or war (Mr. Lewis adopted the phrase) — he routinely voted against military spending. He opposed the Persian Gulf war of 1991 and the North American Free Trade Agreement, which was signed in 1992. He refused to take part in the 1995 “Million Man March” in Washington, saying that statements made by the organizer, Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, were “divisive and bigoted.”
In 2001, Mr. Lewis skipped the inauguration of George W. Bush, saying he thought that Mr. Bush, who had become president after the Supreme Court halted a vote recount in Florida, had not been truly elected.
In 2017 he boycotted Mr. Trump’s inauguration, questioning the legitimacy of his presidency because of evidence that Russia had meddled in the 2016 election on Mr. Trump’s behalf.
That earned him a derisive Twitter post from the president: “Congressman John Lewis should spend more time on fixing and helping his district, which is in horrible shape and falling apart (not to mention crime infested) rather than falsely complaining about the election results. All talk, talk, talk — no action or results. Sad!”
Mr. Trump’s attack marked a sharp detour from the respect that had been accorded Mr. Lewis by previous presidents, including, most recently, Barack Obama. Mr. Obama awarded Mr. Lewis the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor, in 2011.
In bestowing the honor in a White House ceremony, Mr. Obama said: “Generations from now, when parents teach their children what is meant by courage, the story of John Lewis will come to mind — an American who knew that change could not wait for some other person or some other time; whose life is a lesson in the fierce urgency of now.”
To His Family, ‘Preacher’
John Robert Lewis grew up with all the humiliations imposed by segregated rural Alabama. He was born on Feb. 21, 1940, to Eddie and Willie Mae (Carter) Lewis near the town of Troy on a sharecropping farm owned by a white man. After his parents bought their own farm — 110 acres for $300 — John, the third of 10 children, shared in the farm work, leaving school at harvest time to pick cotton, peanuts and corn. Their house had no plumbing or electricity. In the outhouse, they used the pages of an old Sears catalog as toilet paper.
John was responsible for taking care of the chickens. He fed them and read to them from the Bible. He baptized them when they were born and staged elaborate funerals when they died.
“I was truly intent on saving the little birds’ souls,” he wrote in his memoir, “Walking With the Wind” (1998). “I could imagine that they were my congregation. And me, I was a preacher.”
His family called him “Preacher,” and becoming one seemed to be his destiny. He drew inspiration by listening to a young minister named Martin Luther King on the radio and reading about the 1955-56 Montgomery bus boycott. He finally wrote a letter to Dr. King, who sent him a round-trip bus ticket to visit him in Montgomery, in 1958.
By then, Mr. Lewis had begun his studies at American Baptist Theological Seminary (now American Baptist College) in Nashville, where he worked as a dishwasher and janitor to pay for his education.
In Nashville, Mr. Lewis met many of the civil rights activists who would stage the lunch counter sit-ins, Freedom Rides and voter registration campaigns. They included the Rev. James M. Lawson Jr., who was one of the nation’s most prominent scholars of civil disobedience and who led workshops on Gandhi and nonviolence. He mentored a generation of civil rights organizers, including Mr. Lewis.
Mr. Lewis’s first arrest came in February 1960, when he and other students demanded service at whites-only lunch counters in Nashville. It was the first prolonged battle of the movement that evolved into the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.
David Halberstam, then a reporter for The Nashville Tennessean, later described the scene: “The protests had been conducted with exceptional dignity, and gradually one image had come to prevail — that of elegant, courteous young Black people, holding to their Gandhian principles, seeking the most elemental of rights, while being assaulted by young white hoodlums who beat them up and on occasion extinguished cigarettes on their bodies.”
In three months, after repeated well-publicized sit-ins, the city’s political and business communities gave in to the pressure, and Nashville became the first major Southern city to begin desegregating public facilities.
But Mr. Lewis lost his family’s good will. When his parents learned that he had been arrested in Nashville, he wrote, they were ashamed. They had taught him as a child to accept the world as he found it. When he asked them about signs saying “Colored Only,” they told him, “That’s the way it is, don’t get in trouble.”
But as an adult, he said, after he met Dr. King and Rosa Parks, whose refusal to give up her bus seat to a white man was a flash point for the civil rights movement, he was inspired to “get into trouble, good trouble, necessary trouble.”
Getting into “good trouble” became his motto for life. A documentary film, “John Lewis: Good Trouble,” was released this month.
Despite the disgrace he had brought on his family, he felt that he had been “involved in a holy crusade” and that getting arrested had been “a badge of honor,” he said in an oral history interview in 1979 with Washington University.
In 1961, when he graduated from the seminary, he joined a Freedom Ride organized by the Congress of Racial Equality, known as CORE. He and others were beaten bloody when they tried to enter a whites-only waiting room at the bus station in Rock Hill, S.C. Later, he was jailed in Birmingham, Ala., and beaten again in Montgomery, where several others were badly injured and one was paralyzed for life.
“If there was anything I learned on that long, bloody bus trip of 1961,” he wrote in his memoir, “it was this — that we were in for a long, bloody fight here in the American South. And I intended to stay in the middle of it.”
At the same time, a schism in the movement was opening between those who wanted to express their rage and fight back and those who believed in pressing on with nonviolence. Mr. Lewis chose nonviolence.
Overridden by ‘Black Power’
But by the time of the urban race riots of the 1960s, particularly in the Watts section of Los Angeles in 1965, many Black people had rejected nonviolence in favor of direct confrontation. Mr. Lewis was ousted as chairman of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee in 1966 and replaced by the fiery Stokely Carmichael, who popularized the phrase “Black power.”
Mr. Lewis spent a few years out of the limelight. He headed the Voter Education Project, registering voters, and finished his bachelor’s degree in religion and philosophy at Fisk University in Nashville in 1967.
During this period he met Lillian Miles, a librarian, teacher and former Peace Corps volunteer. She was outgoing and political and could quote Dr. King’s speeches verbatim. They were married in 1968, and she became one of his closest political advisers.
She died in 2012. Mr. Lewis’s survivors include several siblings and his son, John-Miles Lewis.
Mr. Lewis made his first attempt at running for office in 1977, an unsuccessful bid for Congress. He won a seat on the Atlanta City Council in 1981, and in 1986 he ran again for the House. It was a bitter race that pitted against each other two civil rights figures, Mr. Lewis and Julian Bond, a friend and former close associate of his in the movement. The charismatic Mr. Bond, more articulate and polished than Mr. Lewis, was the perceived favorite.
“I want you to think about sending a workhorse to Washington, and not a show horse,” Mr. Lewis said during a debate. “I want you to think about sending a tugboat and not a showboat.”
Mr. Lewis won in an upset, with 52 percent of the vote. His support came from Atlanta’s white precincts and from working-class and poor Black voters who felt more comfortable with him than with Mr. Bond, though Mr. Bond won the majority of Black voters.
Not surprisingly, Mr. Lewis’s long congressional career was marked by protests. He was arrested in Washington several times, including outside the South African Embassy for demonstrating against apartheid and at Sudan’s Embassy while protesting genocide in Darfur.
He supported Mr. Obama’s health care bill in 2010, a divisive measure that drew to the Capitol angry protesters, including many from the right-wing Tea Party. Some demonstrators shouted obscenities and racial slurs at Mr. Lewis and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus.
“They were shouting, sort of harassing,” Mr. Lewis told reporters at the time. “But it’s OK. I’ve faced this before.”
In 2016, after a massacre at an Orlando, Fla., nightclub left 49 people dead, he led a sit-in on the House floor to protest federal inaction on gun control. The demonstration drew the support of 170 lawmakers, but Republicans dismissed it as a publicity stunt and squelched any legislative action.
Through it all, the events of Bloody Sunday were never far from his mind, and every year Mr. Lewis traveled to Selma to commemorate its anniversary. Over time, he watched attitudes change. At the ceremony in 1998, Joseph T. Smitherman, who had been Selma’s segregationist mayor in 1965 and was still mayor — though a repentant one — gave Mr. Lewis a key to the city.
“Back then, I called him an outside rabble-rouser,” Mr. Smitherman said of Mr. Lewis. “Today, I call him one of the most courageous people I ever met.”
Mr. Lewis was a popular speaker at college commencements and always offered the same advice — that the graduates get into “good trouble,” as he had done against his parents’ wishes.
He put it this way on Twitter in 2018:
“Do not get lost in a sea of despair. Be hopeful, be optimistic. Our struggle is not the struggle of a day, a week, a month, or a year, it is the struggle of a lifetime. Never, ever be afraid to make some noise and get in good trouble, necessary trouble.”
Roy Reed, who covered the civil rights movement for The New York Times and who died in 2017, contributed reporting from an earlier version of this obituary. Sheryl Gay Stolberg also contributed reporting.
The Unknown Soldier of America pays his tribute to the US Representative John Lewis.
The Unknown Soldier of America thanks the US President for giving direct financial support to Tibet. Honourable Sikyong Dr Lobsang Sangay, Finance Kalon Karma Yeshi and Chief Resilience Officer/SARD Director Kaydor Aukatsang lead the press briefing on the USAID’s direct funding of almost USD 1 million to CTA.
Dharamshala: The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) awarded a sum of $997,124 to SARD to “strengthen the financial and cultural resilience of the Tibetan people and contribute towards a sustained resilience of the Tibetan people’s economic and cultural identity.” This award represents a historic milestone as it is the first time any funding agency affiliated with the United States government has awarded development assistance directly to the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA). The Cooperative Agreement was signed on SARD/CTA’s behalf by Kaydor Aukatsang, Chief Resilience Officer/SARD Director, and the award was made on June 23, 2020.
“The awarding of direct funding to the CTA fulfils a long desired aspiration and represents the culmination of many years of effort since my first term. I want to thank the USAID and hope this award paves the way for a more substantial funding relationship between the USAID and the CTA,” said Sikyong Dr. Lobsang Sangay.
The award from USAID will support the Tibetan Resilience Project (TRP) where funds will initially go towards Tibetan language revitalization and capacity building of Gangjong Development Finance (GDF). The language program will be implemented by the Department of Education and the GDF component will be managed by SARD. The program will be implemented over a two-year period. Key activities under language revitalization includes production of Tibetan animation and audio books; publication of children’s literature for students in classes VI to XII; development of a language learning portal; and an annual summer language and cultural immersion program targeting Tibetan youth in the ages 18-30 and primarily residing outside South Asia. Key activities under GDF include development of a strategic business plan; purchase and customization of an appropriate MIS; technical assistance for implementation of action plan developed by Dalberg; and training.
“The awarding of direct funding is a momentous occasion for the CTA. I want to thank USAID for their generous support and extend my congratulations to the SARD leadership and team for their hard and excellent work,” said Mr. Karma Yeshi, Finance Kalon.
The formal process for the direct funding to the CTA began with a pre-award assessment of SARD in February 2019 where a team of senior staff from the USAID office in New Delhi visited Dharamsala and reviewed various aspects of SARD and its operation. The report was positive. This was followed up by the visit of a senior technical team from USAID in December 2019 to co-create the proposal which was submitted in March. In between, there were many rounds of email exchanges and phone calls between SARD and USAID.
“The direct funding sends a strong message of confidence in SARD and CTA’s ability to handle development assistance from foreign governments. The direct relationship with government funding agencies will have multiple benefits including saving funds and further strengthening SARD’s capacity. With the receipt of this award, SARD has taken a significant step forward in truly becoming the development agency to support the CTA and the Tibetan community,” said Kaydor Aukatsang, Chief Resilience Officer/SARD Director.
-Filed by SARD
The Unknown Soldier of America thanks the US President for giving direct financial support to Tibet. SIkyong Dr Lobsang Sangay and Finance Kalon Mr Karma Yeshi at the press conference on 3 October 2016.
Dharamshala — The Tibetan government in exile announced in a press conference today that the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has awarded a grant of $23 million USD in order to strengthen self-reliance and resilience of Tibetan communities in South Asia.
The grant is effective from October 1, 2016 and will be awarded over a period of five years.
The overall goal of the program is to strengthen the self-reliance and resilience of Tibetans and Tibetan communities in South Asia by equipping them to thrive economically, become effective leaders; and maintaining the vitality of Tibetan communities and institutions while sustaining their unique identity and culture.
According to a press release from the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), key program areas consist of leadership development, including institutional capacity building; establishing of a banking-like institution; and an integrated settlement development through community participatory process.
The programs will maximize local participation and ownership of the development process and a crosscutting gender component will incorporate women’s perspective and participation in the design and implementation of all sustainable livelihoods strategies.
CTA will partner with the Tibet Fund and other organizations and make maximum efforts to achieve the core program goals.
US sends message to China, starts direct funding to exiled Tibet govt in India
The United States has for the first time directly provided funds to the Tibetan Government-in-Exile based in India, a move likely to rile up China.
The US Agency for International Development or the USAID has committed to providing nearly $ 1 million to the Social and Resources Development Fund (SARD Fund)—a non-profit organisation set up by the Tibetan Government-in-Exile (TGiE), formally known as Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) and based at Dharamshala in Himachal Pradesh.
This is the first time any US government agency has provided funds directly to the TGiE, signalling a subtle move by President Donald Trump’s administration towards acknowledging a political entity spearheading the campaign against China’s occupation of and continued rule over Tibet.
The US move came amid the military stand-off between India and China in eastern Ladakh
“This funding signifies the US government’s support to the Central Tibetan Administration and the Tibetan community,” Kaydor Aukatsang, the Director of the SARD Fund of the CTA, told the DH on Monday.
The Dalai Lama set up the CTA on April 29, 1959, just a few weeks after he escaped from Tibet and arrived in India. The CTA calls itself the “continuation of the government of independent Tibet”.
Beijing accuses the Dalai Lama and the CTA of running a separatist campaign against China. Though New Delhi publicly maintains that the Dalai Lama was an honored guest of India, it never formally acknowledged the CTA as the exiled government of the erstwhile independent Tibet. China has always objected to India’s tacit support to the CTA and often demanded its closure.
The CTA set up the SARD Fund in 1997 to help mobilize resources and support development efforts of Tibetans living in South Asia. The Ministry of Home Affairs of the Government of India allowed it “to receive any amount of donations and foreign contribution for relief and development purposes”.
The direct funding by the USAID was an acknowledgement of “the capacity of the SARD as an international development agency to receive and manage such assistance”, said Aukatsang. The SARD earlier received financial support from the foreign governments through intermediary non-profit organizations. The USAID fund of $997,124 to the SARD fund of the CTA is intended to support “strengthening the financial and cultural resilience of the Tibetan people and contribute towards a sustained resilience of the Tibetan people’s economic and cultural identity.”
The US has been slamming China over the past few weeks for its military aggression, not only along its disputed boundary with India in eastern Ladakh but also in the South China Sea, the East China Sea and the Taiwan Strait. The US Navy deployed its two aircraft carrier strike groups – USS Nimitz and USS Ronald Reagan – in the South China Sea, in response to maritime muscle-flexing by the communist country.
President Donald Trump’s administration also imposed visa restrictions on some officials of the Chinese Government and the Communist Party of China (CPC) as they were allegedly involved “in the formulation or execution of policies” denying access for foreigners” to Tibet. The move was in accordance with the US Reciprocal Access to Tibet Act of 2018. The law allowed the Trump Administration to bar Chinese Government and the CPC officials from entering America if it is found that they had a role in denying permission to the US citizens, journalists and diplomats to Tibet.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently accused the Chinese government of human rights abuses in Tibet and said that the US remained committed to “meaningful autonomy” for the Tibetans.
The US also imposed visa-restrictions and economic sanctions on the Chinese government and the CPC officials for atrocities on the Uighurs and violation of human rights in Xinjiang Autonomous Region of China. The Trump Administration also initiated similar measures for the Chinese government’s officials “responsible for, or complicit in, undermining Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy”. The move came after China imposed a new National Security Law in Hong Kong, which critics say would undermine the “one country, two systems” notion that the communist country had promised for the territory for 50 years while taking it back from the United Kingdom in 1997.
China too retaliated to the US move to impose visa restrictions on its officials.
The Unknown Soldier of America thanks the US President for giving direct financial support to Tibet.
July 12, 2020. The Celebration of the virtues of Simple Living.
A day to take a moment
‘A field of water betrays the spirit that is in the air. It is continually receiving new life and motion from above. It is intermediate between land and sky.’ So Henry David Thoreau immortalized Walden Pond, but he could have been describing this calming image of Ežezers Lake in Latvia. Today, the birthday of that famous American advocate for pursuing a simple life is also National Simplicity Day, an annual reminder to unplug, slow down, step back, and consider your life. Thoreau’s most famous work (that you probably haven’t read since high school), ‘Walden,’ is his account of the two years, two months, and two days he spent away from society in a cabin near the shore of Walden Pond in Concord, Massachusetts. Through this work he encourages us to take a step back and look for ways to simplify our lives. ‘Our life is frittered away by detail,’ Thoreau observed. ‘Simplify, simplify.’
This advice is as sound today as it was 165 years ago when it first appeared in print. Some things you can do to mark the day are unplug from your devices (even this one—eventually); declutter your house; take a walk in the woods; and maybe even reread ‘Walden.’
July 12, 2020. The Celebration of the virtues of Simple Living.
In the Indian tradition, the purpose of life involves the discovery of the true or real ‘Self’. This discovery process demands the use of ‘simplicity’ as a tool to explore one’s own mind by removing its insatiable desires and cravings.
July 12, 2020. The Celebration of the virtues of Simple Living. SPIRITUALISM – THE DISCOVERY OF BHAVANAJAGAT.org : What is the “Connection” between man and Sun? Does man have the physical and intellectual ability or capacity to harness Solar Energy to maintain his living functions?
The Red Alert. Red China Stepping on Too Many Toes.
step on (someone’s) toes
To insult, offend, or upset someone, especially by getting involved in something that is their responsibility.
To offend someone by doing something that they should be responsible for or that they have the authority to do.
Red China is marching ahead stepping on too many toes without care or concern for the pain and damage she is inflicting on people all over the world. I am sure that people will unite and stand firm to oppose the Red Dragon’s relentless reckless march.
The Red Alert. Red China Stepping On Too Many Toes.
The inexorable rise of China has been the most significant event in global geopolitics over the past three decades. From less than 3%, it now contributes 15% of the annual global output of goods and services. It is not only the second largest country economically, but also, there is a wide chasm separating it from Japan in the third place. Not surprisingly, it aspires for a role and influence in world affairs commensurate with its economic clout.
Nothing unusual about it; historically, every rising power has wanted a say in how the world affairs are run. Until recently, China followed the dictum of Deng Xiaoping to ‘hide your strengths and bide your time’.
With Xi Jinping taking over in 2013, this policy was abandoned and China began to assert itself in global affairs. However, it wants to play by its own rules, disregarding global institutional order, international norms and the interests of the other countries, in particular its neighbors. It also suffers from a perceived feeling of historical injustice. The two, together with the dictatorial governance structure of China, form a recipe for disaster.
The threat posed by China is nothing new. It has disregarded global norms for a long time. Since Xi Jinping took over as the head of the Communist Party of China (CPC), such threats have taken on ominous proportions. Lack of any significant opposition seems to have further emboldened China. In fact, during the current tragic COVID-19 crisis, it has started flexing its muscles even more. And the list of indiscretions and transgressions is now a rather long one.
China has always claimed Taiwan to be its own territory and has firmly rejected the two nation theory. In recent times, it has threatened Taiwan militarily and its aircraft have repeatedly violated Taiwan’s airspace.
China has passed the Hong Kong Security Law which ensures that for all practical purposes, Hong Kong is as integral a part of China as any other of its territory. It hardly felt constrained by the ‘One Nation Two Systems’ pact it had signed with the United Kingdom, as part of the handing over of Hong Kong in 1997. The agreement is lodged with the United Nations but is practically defunct now.
China has been threatening to take control of the South China Sea for the last few years. It has ignored the judgement of the International Criminal Court (ICC) which ruled that there was ‘no legal basis for China to claim historic rights’ over the area. Countries in this region, such as Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, are all mortally in fear of what China may do next to hurt their interest. The area is critical since one third of global shipping passes through it.
There is no better demonstration of China’s insidious ways than the way its relations with Australia have panned out. China has used its muscle and money power to influence politics in Australia. There have been instances of buying off politicians to influence their political thinking and even voting in the Parliament. Australia has been subjected to extensive cyberattacks by China. China has officially issued ‘threats of economic coercion’ when Australia proposed an inquiry into the origins of COVID-19.
Australia, much smaller in size, is heavily dependent on China to keep its economic engine going. Hats off to the country for taking a principled stand on the matter and look China in the eye.
The animosity with Japan is an old one and only getting worse, especially with China claiming sovereignty over the Senkaku islands.
The worst and the most gruesome, of course, has been the attack on Indian soldiers and the attempt to annex Indian territory. China may have thought India would easily cave in; that was foolish and it has been in for a surprise it had not bargained for. India is now digging in for a long struggle and the cost to China may be more than it ever imagined.
China has not learnt to work amicably with other countries. It regularly engages in a disinformation campaign, twisting truth to suit its own viewpoints. There is brutal opposition to anything they consider inimical to their interests. Wolf Warrior is a term coined to describe the aggressive nature of Chinese diplomacy or its social media policy towards other nations. The number of countries it has ‘warned’ for anti-Chinese activities over the past six months is large.
Will China continue in its own merry ways, disregarding the rights of other nations and the global institutional order? Or, will the world have the courage and the sagacity to stop China’s nefarious ways?
Over the past few months, China has overplayed its hands. It has behaved less like the great power it can be and more as a local bully. Initially, when a bully exercises its power, people give in, not wanting to pick up a fight. That emboldens the bully to ultimately overreach himself and burn out on his own.
Or, its repeated misdemeanors unite everyone and the bully is effectively crushed.
I firmly believe that China has shot itself in the foot on both counts. Simultaneously picking up fights with so many countries, at a time when it has itself been weakened by the COVID-19 pandemic and its own economic woes, is not very sensible. These weaknesses are likely to hurt China and ensure it is the loser in the fight.
Second, China’s intransigent behavior is likely to lead to a united alliance that will confront China on many fronts – economic, political and military.
Until recently, many countries were keen to maintain cordial relations with China, mainly due to its enormous economic strength, its high growth rate and the potential for business. Most of them are bound to have a rethink.
Majority of European countries, Australia, Canada, Japan and now, of course, India have been hurt by China’s acts of aggression and must dread its likely future behavior if left unchecked. Smaller, less powerful neighbors who have been in awe of China, now realize that left to itself, China is going to gobble them up, slowly but surely.
What the world must now do is to form an alliance against China and fight it at every stage, irrespective of the possible costs, financial or otherwise. China has left the rest of the world with no alternative. Such confrontation should have happened much earlier but now there is no time to lose. We either get together to fight China as one or be prepared to pay the price individually.
The global front against China must be led by the US, being the largest economy and possessing by far the largest military resources.
That ability has been undermined in the past few years by Mr Trump, who exudes no confidence with his lack of appreciation of issues involved and thinking required for such leadership. Most world leaders are unlikely to trust the US as long as Mr Trump remains the President. It is imperative that Mr Trump is defeated in the next US presidential elections in November later this year. Never ever has a US presidential election been so critical to global affairs.
India, on its part, must change its strategy and be prepared to take on China wherever and whenever required. We were oscillating between aligning with the US and riding on two boats simultaneously. The shocking action in the last few days has forced our hand and left India with no choice. The time for any strategic ambiguity is over. We must actively promote and in fact, be in the forefront of the anti-China alliance. The need for such an alliance has never been more imperative and the chances of success never better.
This promises to be a long struggle, in fact, a permanent one and we must be prepared to play it, keeping only our interests in mind, without worrying about how China perceives any action we take.
We need not be too apprehensive of the fact that China is much stronger than us. China’s aggressive behavior on multiple fronts could possibly stem from its weaknesses rather than its strengths. Its economy is weakening, growth is declining and the financial system unsound. Weaknesses of a dictatorial system of governance are not immediately apparent; but when they manifest, the system implodes. No one believes China is nearing implosion but the weaknesses could be leading to dissensions and significant opposition to Xi and the CPC members. An internal struggle for power, a weakening economy and simultaneous battles on many fronts does leave China vulnerable. We must keep that in mind, without ever lowering our guard.
(Sunil Mahajan, a financial consultant and teacher, has over three decades experience in the corporate sector, consultancy and academics.)
The Red Alert. Red China Stepping On Too Many Toes.
China Grabbed Tibet Seventy Years Ago, the Unknown Soldier of America Cannot Let it Go
On September 22, 1971, I arrived in Chakrata, India for my very first assignment after the grant of Short Service Regular Commission in the Indian Army Medical Corps during September 1969.
THE SPIRITS OF SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE: WE ARE OPENLY SHARING THIS PHOTO ILLEGALLY OBTAINED BY A CHINESE SPY. THE PHOTO WAS TAKEN AT CHAKRATA ON 03 JUNE, 1972 WHILE HIS HOLINESS THE 14th DALAI LAMA WAS PRESENTED A GUARD OF HONOR BY MAJOR GENERAL SUJAN SINGH UBAN, AVSM, INSPECTOR GENERAL, SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE. MY INDIAN ARMY CAREER BEGAN AT THIS LOCATION AND I WILL CONTINUE TO FIGHT FOR FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY IN THE OCCUPIED LAND OF TIBET.
At Chakrata, I was introduced to the concept of being a ‘Soldier For Life’ while I embraced my role as ‘The Unknown Soldier of America.
China grabbed Tibet seventy years ago. The Unknown Soldier of America cannot ‘Let it Go’ as the act of aggression in Tibet is not yet resolved.
China Grabbed Tibet 70 Years Ago, New Sanctions Show US Hasn’t Forgotten That
By James Patterson 07/08/20 AT 7:02 AM
The United States on Tuesday restricted visas to an unspecified number of Chinese officials determined to be involved in “excluding foreigners from Tibet,” the once-independent country that communist China annexed in 1950.
In return, China said it will “impose visa restrictions on U.S. personnel who behave badly on Tibet-related issues.” Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian also urged the U.S. to “immediately stop interfering in China’s internal affairs through Tibet-related issues.”
As tensions rise over China and the U.S. on various fronts, including because of Beijing’s expansionist claims over the lands of its neighboring countries, the State Department’s action revives memories of the Chinese Communist Party’s brazen land grab, the suppression of a peace-loving people and the destruction of their culture.
According to a 2009 publication by the National Academy of Science (NAS), humans lived on the Tibetan Plateau as far back as 21,000 years ago. About 16,000 years later, those humans were replaced by Neolithic immigrants from northern China setting a precedent that continues today but for many different reasons.
Tibet, home to Mount Everest, has fluctuated between eras of independence and times of servitude under the rule of powerful Chinese and Mongolian dynasties. In 1950, China deployed thousands of troops to Tibet. The outcome was the establishment of the Tibetan Autonomous Region along with other neighboring Chinese provinces.
After his exile, most of Tibet’s monasteries were destroyed during China’s Cultural Revolution. Thousands of Tibetans are believed to have been killed during these periods of repression and martial law.
More recent developments with Tibet include:
The 1980s “Open Door” reforms, spurred by international pressure and aimed at boosting outside investment, loosened Beijing’s grip on Tibet.
The Olympics Games in 2008 were hosted by Beijing and once again international attention was focused on Tibet. Clashes between anti-Chinese protesters and authorities resulted in some fatalities. This led to pro-Tibet demonstrations as the Olympic torch made its way from London to Beijing.
The Reciprocal Access to Tibet Act of 2018 was signed into law by U.S. President Donald Trump. The bill denies Chinese government officials’ access to the United States if they are responsible for creating or implementing restrictions on American government officials, journalists, independent observers, and tourists seeking access to Tibet.
Beijing denies any human rights abuses but continues with actions that seemingly promote it. Last week, the National Security Law for Hong Kong went into effect resulting in several arrests. It has angered many U.S. and European lawmakers.
President Trump finds himself in a precarious situation over how to treat China. On one hand, he must be critical of China’s alleged human rights abuses. With the presidential election rapidly approaching, he also needs to deflect criticism over the COVID-19 pandemic. China presents an easy target on which to shift the blame.
On the other hand, like Australia and other countries in the Pacific region, he needs China as a major trade partner, particularly with agricultural products that are produced by American farmers, a large segment of Trump’s rural political base.
Henrietta Treyz, director of economic policy with the Veda Partners consulting firm and a former congressional staffer, commented on the dilemma Trump is facing. “He wants to look tough on China but doesn’t want to be tough,” she said.
Tibet appears to be a piece in the unfinished political jigsaw puzzle between China and the rest of the world including the U.S and India. But unlike 5,000 years ago and even in 1959, Tibet now has ample help to counter Chinese oppression.
China Grabbed Tibet Seventy Years Ago, The Unknown Soldier of America Cannot Let It Go.
Definition of let it go
1: to forget or not care about something. Let it go is also a general phrase meaning to “stop thinking or being upset over something,” The Unknown Soldier of America signed a Declaration that would not sanction the option called “LET IT GO.”
China Grabbed Tibet Seventy Years Ago, The Unknown Soldier of America cannot Let It Go.
China’s Occupation of Tibet vs Pakistan’s Occupation of Kashmir.
In my analysis, the discussion about India-Tibet-US Relations will always be shaped by Pakistan’s illegal invasion and occupation of Kashmir.
“Nehru’s ill-thought faux pas set a dangerous precedent in history which affects the relationship between India and Tibet as well as other foreign policy decisions.” – ANJALI KANOJIA, RYAN BAIDYA.
As a lifetime member of the military organization called Special Frontier Force-Establishment No. 22-Vikas Regiment, I do not find any merit in the above view shared by Anjali Kanojia and Ryan Baidya. Even prior to India’s independence, Tibet had the golden opportunity to prepare for War to safeguard its freedom from the threat posed by the Communist takeover of the mainland China. Tibet chose to ignore the offer of assistance extended by the US president Roosevelt while the US invested billions of dollars to prevent the spread of Communism to Asia.
India’s policy was shaped by Tibet’s own policy of ‘Isolationism’. Tibet tried to appease Communist China and agreed to accept the offer of full autonomy rather than full independence. Even now, the Tibetan demand for meaningful autonomy and not freedom is very similar to the Seventeen-Point Plan or Agreement for Peaceful Liberation of Tibet signed on May 23, 1951. Nehru’s decision to sign the ‘Panchsheel’ Agreement of 1954 is consistent with the Tibetan Policy.
China’s Occupation of Tibet vs Pakistan’s Occupation of Kashmir.
I always discuss India-Tibet-US relations in the context of Kashmir. Nehru had the primary responsibility of safeguarding the Republic of India. I cannot discuss the problem of China’s invasion of Tibet without mentioning the problem of Pakistan’s invasion of Kashmir with the connivance of the United States and the United Kingdom. Prime Minister Nehru was confronted with the problem of Pakistan’s illegal invasion of Kashmir in 1947 (The First Kashmir War of 1947-48) prior to the problem of Tibet’s invasion by the People’s Liberation Army of Communist China in 1949-50. Kashmir is the core or the central issue that will guide the policy of India in formulating external relations with other nations like the Soviet Union/Russia, the United States, Tibet, and China. India was unwilling to openly condemn Chinese invasion of Tibet for the United States and the United Kingdom are unwilling to openly condemn Pakistan’s illegal invasion of Kashmir.
China’s Occupation of Tibet vs Pakistan’s Occupation of Kashmir.
India in a sense can be considered as a mother, which gave birth to the beautiful culture of Tibet where the same stream of consciousness flows between the two entities
By Anjali Kanojia and Ryan Baidya -June 28, 2020
Tibet holds extreme importance to Indians as it denotes resilience and survival
Tibet has flourished for centuries; it has been a living hub of ancient culture and spirituality, minding its own business, so to speak. Tibet has made vast contributions to the world in terms of spiritual wealth and philosophy. As parts of the Indian subcontinent were being invaded and the Hindu civilization was obliterated by the barbaric attackers, many seekers, gurus and spiritual masters took refuge in the safety and solitude of Tibet, allowing Hindu and Buddhist thought and literature to survive and flourish. Thus, Tibet holds extreme importance to Indians as it denotes resilience and survival.
India & Tibet – Mutual Roots
One usually thinks of the recent history of Buddhism arriving from India to Tibet. However, the harmonious relationship between India and Tibet runs farther and deeper and predates the time of the Gautama Buddha. Tibetan scholar Bu-ston[1], wrote that the Tibetan race comes from the descendants of the Military General – Rupati – a general from the Kaurava army from the times of the Mahabharata. Tibetan chronicles documents that show Rupati went to Tibet after the Kauravas were defeated by the Pandava army after the epic battle of Mahabharata ended and Rupati was followed by a large number of his consignment into Tibet.
“Tibetans have lost most of their Central Asian possessions to the Chinese and the great Tibetan Empire all but vanished by the 9th century due to Chinese and Mongol invasions.”
India in a sense can be considered as a mother, which gave birth to the beautiful culture of Tibet where the same stream of consciousness flows between the two entities. The roots of Tibet are Indian, and this continued with the advent of Buddhism in Tibet and noble Buddhist thought and philosophy influenced the people and the way of life for the region of Tibet. Two Tibetan kings – Songtsen Gampo and Trisong-Detsen played a vital role in history by introducing Buddhism to their Praja (citizens) in the 7th and 8th centuries. This influence is still practiced and observed in the rituals, art, literature, poetry, and day-to-day lives of the beautiful Tibetan people.
Political Background
This historic border between India and Tibet was called the Indo-Tibetan border and China (Sino) had no mention in defining that border. Tibetan history shows that Tibetan powerful rulers in the 7th century invaded parts of China, and the annexed Chinese territory was even paying taxes or tribute according to a treaty (Treaty of 821 A.D.[2]) between the Tibetan king Tsenpo and the Chinese Emperor Hwang citing “neighborly contentment,” and “establishing a great era when Tibetans shall be happy in Tibet and Chinese shall be happy in China, and this shall never be changed.” The Chinese forces violated the 821 A.D. bilateral treaty by continuously invading Tibet over the centuries.
Tibetans have lost most of their Central Asian possessions to the Chinese and the great Tibetan Empire all but vanished by the 9th century due to Chinese and Mongol invasions[3].
The British signed the Lhasa Convention with the Government of Tibet after their expedition and this denotes Tibet’s sovereignty[4]. It should be noted that China is nowhere in the picture and all official business was conducted with the government of Tibet.
Twentieth Century
Mongolia and Tibet had a formal, bilateral treaty in 1913 where the two nations maintained recognition[5], and Mongolia had kept an Ambassador in the Tibetan capital – Lhasa. In 1913-1914, the representatives of British India, Tibet, and China met in Shimla and settled the political status of Tibet and defined Tibet’s relations with China[6]. British- ruled India and Tibet signed an Indo-Tibet border treaty establishing the McMahon Line[7], which mainly defined the eastern Himalayan international borderline at the Shimla Convention. However, the Shimla Convention failed to meet the goals it set out to accomplish.
Nehru’s ill-thought faux pas set a dangerous precedent in history which affects the relationship between India and Tibet as well as other foreign policy decisions.
Neighboring Nepal, in 1949 applied for the United Nations membership and formally stated that the Tibetan nation had independent, diplomatic relations with the United Kingdom, India, Burma, the United States of America, and Tibet. This clearly shows Tibet as an independent entity.
Chinese Invasion
The Chinese again invaded Tibet in 1949. India’s foreign office responded to the violation (of 821-treaty) on October 26, 1950, as: “In the context of world events, invasion by Chinese troops of Tibet cannot but be regarded as deplorable and in the considered judgment of the Government of India, not in the interest of China or peace.”
India’s response clearly shows that India did not recognize Tibet as part of China. If India did recognize Tibet as part of China, it would not refer to the violation of the 821 A.D. as an “invasion.”
When India became independent of the British in 1947, the Government of India sent the following note recognizing the Tibetan government: “The Government of India would be glad to have an assurance that it is the intention of the Tibetan government to continue relations on the existing basis until new arrangements are reached that either party may wish to take up. This is the procedure adopted by all other countries with which India has inherited treaty relations from His Majesty’s Government.”
Mao Zedong acknowledged independent Tibet
After the fall of the Manchus in 1911, China offered both Nepal and Tibet to join China, and both the nations refused. China clearly recognized each of these nations as being sovereign entities up to this moment of time. During World War II, Tibet continuously maintained neutrality and did not allow passage of any troops through its territory. Even Mao Zedong acknowledged the independent status of Tibet in the year 1938 when traveling through the Tibet-China border regions and said that “This is our only foreign debt, and someday we must pay — the Tibetans for the provisions we received from them.”
Soon after the failure of the Shimla Convention where China refused to sign the treaty, Mao Zedong declared a liberation plan for Tibet and began claiming that Tibet has always been a part of China. The then Indian Prime Minister – Jawaharlal Nehru for the first time recognized China’s claim over Tibet and signed the Panchsheel Treaty in 1954 acknowledging the same[8].
Nehru’s ill-thought faux pas set a dangerous precedent in history which affects the relationship between India and Tibet as well as other foreign policy decisions.
On June 23, 2003, while visiting China, in a joint declaration signed by then Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, for the first-time recognized Tibet as a part of China. However, soon after the declaration, China repeatedly violated this declaration and Panchsheel accord by substance and spirit. China’s aggression has continued even today with increased vigor and voracity.
India had enough and India has begun to ‘Right’ the ‘Wrong’. In 2014, when Mr. Narendra D. Modi got elected by an unprecedented mandate by the citizens of India, Mr. Modi invited the head of the exiled government of Tibet to his swearing-in ceremony.
“Given the recent issues between India and China over land grabbing, India needs to firm up its policies towards all its neighboring nations, especially Tibet.”
Righting the Wrongs
More than 1.2 million Tibetans have died as a result of China’s occupation of Tibet. The culture and people have been systemically destroyed and redirected resources that put Tibetans in a terrible position for survival. China indiscriminately diverted water from the multinational rivers which originate in Tibet thereby putting the lives and well-being of billions of people at risk.
India not just from a moral and ethical perspective but from a cultural perspective needs to maintain a protective status towards nations such as Tibet and Nepal and it is in everyone’s mutual interest that their sovereignty remains intact and protected from the neighboring Communist dreams and agendas.
Given the recent issues between India and China over land grabbing, India needs to firm up its policies towards all its neighboring nations, especially Tibet. Nations often declare treaties to be moot, and it is time for India to declare that it will no longer recognize the Panchsheel Treaty of 1954 to be valid. India has no choice but to rescind its reluctant recognition of Tibet as a part of China, and formally re-recognize Tibet as a sovereign nation.
Note: 1. The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of PGurus.
After Seventy Years, the United States is giving support to India in the Ladakh Sector of Kashmir.
In my analysis, the United States is awakening to the global threats posed by China’s military expansionism and at the same time the American infatuation with Pakistan is weakening as Pakistan drifts into Extremism. As a result, after seventy years, the United States is giving the support to India in the Ladakh Sector of Kashmir to contain China’s military adventurism. Seventy Years ago, in 1950, China easily occupied the Aksai Chin area of Ladakh Sector taking full advantage of the ambiguous US policy.
After Seventy Years, the United States is giving the support to India in the Ladakh Sector of Kashmir.After Seventy Years, the United States is giving the support to India in the Ladakh Sector of Kashmir.After Seventy Years, the United States is giving the support to India in the Ladakh Sector of Kashmir.
From Tibet to Galwan: 70 Years of Sino-India Twisted Ties
(MENAFN – Kashmir Observer) Behind the fresh LAC faceoff is the seven-decade-old fraught history dominated by dragon’s menacing advances and territorial ambitions.
By Swati Joshi
A video of a family throwing their television from their balcony as a sign of protest against China is making rounds on social media. Considering everyone is not so enthusiastic in giving up their well-earned Chinese products, the family has not set an example but it is an act that just tends to become a source of entertainment for many.
The old clichéd ‘Hindi Chini bhai bhai’ slogan apart, the relationship between the two is not very healthy and the continuous face-offs between them have made it sourer.
To understand the relationship between India and China, one has to go back to the time in the late 1940s when both emerging Third World Countries- the newly independent India and the rising communist China were planning to make their presence in the world.
The entire Sino-India border including the western Line of Actual Control (LAC), some disputed section in the middle and the McMahon Line in the east is 4,056 km which traverses through the union territory of Ladakh and four states- Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, and Arunachal Pradesh.
First Dispute: Tibet
The first territorial issue faced by India after independence with China involved Tibet.
Tibet lies on the Tibetan plateau on the northern side of the Himalayas between India and China.
However, the two sides did not decide on the demarcation of the Indian-Tibetan border.
In the same year, the two countries signed the Panchsheel Treaty – five principles of peaceful co-existence under the leadership of Prime Minister of India Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru and Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai, during the latter’s visit to Delhi.
The five principles of coexistence mentioned in the Treaty included respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty, non-aggression, non-interference in internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence.
In 1955, Beijing decided to set up a Preparatory Committee for setting up Tibetan Autonomous Region, that marked the end of traditional Tibetan society and the transfer of power to the China Communist Party (CCP) from the theocratic government under the Dalai Lama. This move by China created unrest in Tibet.
After Seventy Years, the United States is giving the support to India in the Ladakh Sector of Kashmir.
Dalai Lama and others
In 1956, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) annihilated monasteries in Eastern Tibet where local insurgents had taken refuge. This action by China worsened the condition in Tibet and the Dalai Lama pressured Beijing to resolve the condition otherwise he would stay in exile in India.
After negotiations, the Dalai Lama came back to Tibet.
After the Tibetan Uprising in 1959, India had given asylum to the Dalai Lama which did not go well with the Chinese. China considered this move by India as a threat to its rule over Tibet. Even Mao Zedong, the former chairman of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) stated that the uprising in Lhasa was caused by India.
Frontier Tensions
Amidst the Tibet issue between China and India, other border issues also came into light. The western and eastern non-demarcated borders received troops from both sides.
After Seventy Years, the United States is giving the support to India in the Ladakh Sector of Kashmir.
Nehru meets Mao in Beijing, 1954
In 1960 Zhou Enlai suggested that if India gave up its claim over Aksai Chin, China in return would drop its claim on Arunachal Pradesh but Nehru didn’t agree with it saying China had no rule over these areas. India started following ‘Forward Policy’ and sent troops and patrols to the disputed areas.
The Sino-India war which went for a month in both eastern and western fronts resulted in the loss of life and property. It is estimated that 3000 Indian soldiers were killed and approximately 1000 were injured.
After Seventy Years, the United States is giving the support to India in the Ladakh Sector of Kashmir.
1962 Sino-Indian War
Between 1962 and 1969 the relation between India and China was cold. Beijing’s political and military support to Islamabad further worsened the condition.
The relations between India and China further crumbled in June 1967 when two Indian diplomats were expelled from Beijing on alleged charges of ‘espionage activities’.
On October 1 that year, China again fired heavily on Indian troops in Cho La which ended on the same day.
New Era
The relationship between India and China was officially re-established in 1979 when Atal Bihari Vajpayee, the then foreign minister of India, visited China.
During his visit, Vajpayee brought the contentious border issues with the Chinese leader who in turn told him not to bring the issue for discussion. Following this many political leaders visited China which started a new era of India-China relations.
According to a research paper by journalist Manoj Joshi, ‘Since the early 1980s, both sides have held multiple rounds of talks to draw up a mutually acceptable LAC and resolve their border dispute. However, even though they have inched towards the goals, they have failed to follow-through.’
Renewed Face-offs
India and China had many face-offs but the one at Doklam in 2017 lasted for more than two months.
Doklam lies at the trijunction between India, Bhutan, and China and is surrounded by the Chumbi valley of Tibet, Bhutan’s Ha Valley, and Sikkim.
The Doklam region is claimed by both Bhutan and China and even after efforts from both the countries, the dispute has not been resolved.
The dispute worsened in 2017 when China started constructing a road in the area. Indian troops supported Bhutan and objected to the construction activities by Beijing resulting in a standoff.
After Seventy Years, the United States is giving the support to India in the Ladakh Sector of Kashmir.
PM Modi and President Jinping
Doklam being located close to the Siliguri corridor that connects mainland India with its north-eastern region, is important for India for security reasons.
In recent years, China has been increasing its troops in the Chumbi valley. Since both Indian and Bhutanese troops are at the higher ground around the valley, they are at a much advantageous position, unlike China.
If the Chinese had captured Doklam they would be at a commanding position of Chumbi valley and Siliguri corridor.
Fresh Faceoff
The current dispute between India and China along the LAC is one of the worst rows between the two countries post-1962.
At least 20 Indian soldiers were killed on June 15 in the Galwan valley which became the first casualties in 45 years along the border. Indian troops were accused of crossing the border twice ‘provoking and attacking the Chinese personnel’.
There are reports of Chinese casualties but there is no confirmation from the officials.
After Seventy Years, the United States is giving the support to India in the Ladakh Sector of Kashmir.
LAC Standoff renewed Sino-India tensions
The first confrontation between the Chinese and Indian troops happened around the Pangong lake. The Sirijap range overlooking the lake has many cliffs which are numbered one to eight. India claims the LAC up to Finger 8. Chinese troops come from behind Finger 8 cliffs and can be seen by the Indian side only when the Chinese troops are at Finger 6.
To increase its visibility over the Chinese troops, the Indian side decided to build an observation point at Finger 8 that would help Indian soldiers to intercept Chinese soldiers, as soon they entered the area from Finger 8.
The Chinese PLA objected the construction and put pressure on India to halt the work, due to which a standoff happened between the soldiers of two sides on May 5-6 but it was controlled as both the armies stuck to protocols to resolve the issue.
The second dispute took place over a bridge build by India in the Despang Plains across the Galwan rivulet. PLA was beefed up at patrolling points 14, 15 and 17. The bridge is supposed to give the soldiers access to Daulat Beg Oldie, the last military post south of Karakoram Pass.
The bridge is now functional amid the ongoing tension between the two countries.
After Seventy Years, the United States is giving the support to India in the Ladakh Sector of Kashmir. Unbranded Valley, Ladakh.After Seventy Years, the United States is giving the support to India in the Ladakh Sector of Kashmir
Special Frontier Force – The Doctrine of Tibetan Resistance: The tools of Tibetan Resistance are 1. Patience, 2. Persistence, and 3. Perseverance. Man opposes the reign of force by standing firm or by working against the force without yielding. To oppose and to withstand a force, man needs the virtues of Temperance, Tolerance, and Tranquility to remain calm, unperturbed to maintain “Inner Peace” while reacting to an external force. The virtue of Perseverance triumphs for it preserves the “Inner Peace” while the external reality is described by Violence or War.
The Principles of War-The Strategy of Perseverance:
Perseverance – to ensure the commitment necessary to attain the national strategic end state. As a lifetime soldier of the military organization called the Special Frontier Force also known as Establishment No. 22 and Vikas Regiment, I learned about the military strategy described as Perseverance. India and the world do not need satellite image evidence to know the fact of China’s military occupation of Tibet. Since 1950, India pursued the option of Strategic Perseverance to contain the national security threats posed by China’s illegal conquest of Tibet . India’s security interests will not be fully served by taking military action against the PLA who intruded into Indian territory across the McMahon Line. India’s security demands the total eviction of the military occupier of Tibet. To accomplish the above mentioned objective, India and Tibet are patiently waiting for the right time to launch their offensive operation which may include a global coalition of forces who may launch simultaneous attacks on other fronts apart from the Himalayan Frontier. We need the commitment of other nations. I am hopeful that the military mission will be accomplished as I describe it as “The Battle of Right Against Might” using the phrase coined by Gandhi as his battle plan to oppose the mighty British Empire.
China is on LAC to tell India who the ‘big brother’ is, not to gain territory
“Depending on the diplomatic and military response from India, PLA’s means will be calibrated to achieve China’s military aim.”
By Lieutenant General H S Panag PVSM, AVSM (Retired)
Lt Gen H S Panag PVSM, AVSM (R) served in the Indian Army for 40 years. He was GOC in C Northern Command and Central Command. Post-retirement, he was Member of Armed Forces Tribunal. Views are personal.
The situation along the Line of Actual Control is tactical, but the intent of both sides is strategic, as it should be. The ultimate political aim of any conflict between nations is lasting peace on own terms. However, the issue is relative, as lasting peace in competitive conflict among nations remains a utopia. Military is only the means to achieve this end and always the last resort.
China has precipitated the situation along the LAC in Eastern Ladakh by preemptively securing/threatening previously un-occupied, but patrolled, tactical areas with strategic importance in the Galwan River Valley, Hot Spring-Gogra-Kongka La area and north of Pangong Tso. Having seized the initiative, China has put the onus on India to respond, on which will depend Beijing’s future course of political and military action. China has come prepared for escalation to achieve its strategic aim.
India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity are at stake. Militarily, India has contained the Chinese intrusions and poised its forces to deal with the developing situation. Its future course of action, particularly with respect to use of military means, will also depend on the political aim it has defined for itself.
The unfortunate events on the intervening night of 15 and 16 June have forced the adversaries to take fresh stock of the situation. China, the initiator and aggressor of the conflict, has realized that if the ‘fist and club fight’ was so violent and barbarous, what it would be like in an armed conflict/war with India’s Army of today. The stage is set for a military disengagement to tactically separate the rival forces and pave way for the diplomatic negotiations to settle larger strategic issues. If diplomacy fails, military means for either side would be the last resort to achieve political aims.
Tactical military situation
In the Galwan Valley, post the 15-16 June incident, there seems to be no presence left of China’s People’s Liberation Army or the PLA, as is distinct from the heights to the north and south. One does not know the exact details of what was agreed to after the first round of Corps Commander-level talks on 6 June, or what has since been modified during the second round on 22 June. At what distance from the LAC are the troops of both the countries going to remain deployed is not known. In mountains or high-altitude areas, the battle is for the control of the heights. Valley is used for logistics and movement of vehicles, but has to be defended to avoid being cut off. Thus, what has happened in the Valley so far is a sideshow. If the PLA is not holding the heights to the north and south, then we should be holding them. Without control of the heights, the Valley cannot be defended.
In the Hot Springs-Gogra-Kongka La area, the situation remains unchanged. We cannot patrol up to Kongka La, and the area between Kongka La and Gogra Post seems to be under the control of the PLA.
The situation North of Pangong Tso is in the open domain due to satellite images available on OSINT platforms. The area between Finger 4 and Finger 8 (5.6 km as the crow flies and 8 km when measured along the banks of Pangong Tso) is still firmly under PLA’s control. Military infrastructure and defences have been constructed on ridges going north, along Fingers 4, 5 and 6, up to 5 km. Thus, approximately 40 sq km of our area where we patrolled effectively prior to April is now under PLA control.
Elsewhere, all along the LAC, India and China have mobilised and carried out precautionary deployment to cater to any escalation.
It is beyond my comprehension as to why we are still in denial about the situation. If the assessment of OSINT is wrong, then there is a simple solution to counter claims of PLA incursions—take the press to these spots in helicopters and show them the reality.
Chinese actions are strategic in intent and tactical in execution, and aim to create an embarrassing situation for India, daring it to respond. Depending on the diplomatic and military response from India, PLA’s military means will be calibrated to achieve China’s military aim.
Political aim of China
China is very sensitive to any threat to Aksai Chin, which it gradually occupied in 1950s, and other areas to its west and south that it captured in the 1962 war with India to gain strategic depth. India’s fast-developing border infrastructure in eastern Ladakh does exactly that, howsoever remote the possibility may seem to be at this juncture. Gaining additional territory is not China’s aim per se.
China perceives that by threatening to recapture Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK) and Gilgit-Baltistan, India is posing a threat to its prestigious economic project — the China-Pakistan-Economic-Corridor or the CPEC. Indirectly, China desires a similar relationship between India and Pakistan as was prevailing with itself since 1990s. That is, relative peace on border and focus on economic relations.
India’s asylum to Dalai Lama in 1959 and the perceived training of Tibetan ‘rebels’ in conjunction with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was a major factor that led to the 1962 war. The presence of the Dalai Lama in India, the Tibetan government in exile and 10,000 to 15,000 Tibetan soldiers trained as special forces is considered by China to be the most serious potential threat to its sovereignty. India is seen as the principal instigator of the Tibetan struggle for freedom.
China also perceives that India is colluding with the US and its allies to undermine its strategic interests in the international arena, in general, and South China Sea and Indo-Pacific, in particular.
The political aim or idealistic strategic wish list of China would be on the following lines:
To maintain the ‘status quo’ with respect to border infrastructure along the LAC on its own terms — to forestall any threat, howsoever remote, to Aksai Chin and NH 219.
To prevent any threat developing to the CPEC by brokering a peace deal between India and Pakistan.
Coax India to join Belt and Road Initiative, in general, and CPEC, in particular.
Coax India to refrain from colluding with the US and its allies to undermine China’s strategic interests, particularly in the Indo-Pacific and South China Sea.
In a nutshell, China wants India to play the role of a cooperative junior partner and not that of a competitor, both regionally and globally. To what extent it can achieve the aims highlighted above will depend on its diplomatic skills and how it uses its military to enforce its will. If its broad political aim is achieved, then it will restore status quo ante April 2020, and agree to demarcate the LAC, subject to final boundary settlement.
India’s political aim
The broad contours of India’s political aims should be as follows:
Retain its sovereignty and territorial integrity and strategic independence as an equal competitor to China,both regionally and globally.
Restore status quo ante April 2020 with respect to the LAC and ensure its demarcation.
Retain freedom to develop border infrastructure as it deems fit.
Retain its claim over PoK, Gilgit-Baltistan under occupation of Pakistan, and Aksai Chin and other areas seized by China since 1950.
Continue to highlight the illegality of the CPEC, since it passes through territory that rightfully belongs to India.
Ideally, a military setback for China in a limited conflict enables India to achieve its political aim in its entirety. However, the differential in comprehensive national power, particularly in economic and military domains, is in favor of China. We have the military capability to calibrate our response to stalemate China, but a setback will set us behind by decades.
The challenge before the Narendra Modi government is to skillfully manage its diplomacy and military means to achieve its political aims.
India’s management of the current crisis
India is facing a strategic dilemma. I have no quarrel with the narrative— ‘nothing has happened on the LAC, no territory has been lost’—except that the government shouldn’t itself start believing this narrative as it also serves the Chinese narrative.
A seasoned political leader once told me that politicians have one major weakness—they repeat a lie so many times to shape public perception that after a point in time they themselves start believing in that lie.
One presumes that the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) and the National Security Council (NSC) have formally met and a national security strategy in consultation with the Chief of Defence Staff has been formulated to handle the situation. But, doubts assail me when I hear—“armed forces have been given full freedom of action”. Armed forces are given a formal political directive based on the decision made in the CCS and NSC to achieve the political aims and not a rhetoric one liner.
Special Frontier Force – China’s Military Threat: China’s Military Power, China’s Military Strategy, and China’s Military Tactics cannot overcome the Power of Perseverance, the Perseverance of Tibetan Resistance.
The Unfinished Korea-Vietnam War. The Cold War Mentality is Alive.
The Cold War in Asia can be traced to the threat posed by the spread of Communism from Europe to Asia during the concluding years of World War II. To contain the threat of the Communist Expansionism, the US fought wars in Korea and Vietnam. The Cold War Mentality is alive as Korea, and Vietnam are not the real adversary. It is not surprising to note that the US would place a few clamps on the Propaganda Machinery of Communist Party of China.
The Unfinished Korea-Vietnam War. The Cold War Mentality is Alive.
China vows to respond after US targets more state media outlets
By Hadas Gold and Eric Cheung, CNN
Updated 7:58 AM ET, Tue June 23, 2020
London (CNN Business)China has vowed to make a “necessary and legitimate” response after the US government designated four more Chinese state media outlets as “foreign diplomatic missions.”On Monday, the Trump administration announced that it would treat China Central Television (CCTV), China News Service, the People’s Daily and the Global Times as arms of the Chinese government, arguing that they are under the control of the Chinese Communist Party.The designation means the outlets must now submit to the rules that cover diplomatic missions, such as providing detailed information about their employees— whether Chinese or not — and notifying the US government about any real estate transactions.Five Chinese outlets —Xinhua, CCTV subsidiary China Global Television Network, China Radio International, China Daily and People’s Daily parent Hai Tian Development USA — were given the same label in February. At a regular briefing on Tuesday, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs criticized the United States for its “political suppression of Chinese media” and argued it would undermine their reporting.
“It also further exposed the hypocrisy of the so-called freedom of press and speech boasted by the US,” Zhao Lijian, a spokesman for the ministry said at a press conference. “We strongly urge the US to abandon the Cold War mentality, ideological prejudice, and immediately stop and correct this practice that does harm to both sides.”The US move and China’s threatened response is the latest sign of growing tension between China and the United States over the coronavirus pandemic, trade, and Hong Kong, with media outlets in both countries getting caught in the middle. Chinese state TV breached UK media rules over Hong Kong protests.
Since the US move on Chinese media in February, China has expelled journalists from The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post. The US government also announced last month that Chinese journalists working for non-American outlets would be limited to 90-day working visas.
The Unfinished Korea-Vietnam War. The Cold War Mentality is Alive.
Whole Dude - Whole Spirituality 
