This is the way we need to go. There are no easy solutions, no wiggle room. Just pack it up and say, "Sorry, folks, we bombed your country and now we have no solutions. But you can do it without us. We're just making more trouble than it's worth." This is from The Raw Story:
Kucinich to force Congress to vote on withdrawing from Afghanistan after news Obama will extend war to 2014
[....] Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) blasted President Barack Obama Wednesday over reports that he is planning to de-emphasize the July 2011 deadline for the withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan.
"When the new 112th Congress convenes in January, I will immediately enter a privileged resolution that will force Congress to vote on setting a withdrawal date," Kucinich said. "The withdrawal of our troops must be driven by Congress, not the corrupt president of Afghanistan."
[...] "Expanding the timeline constitutes a de facto expansion of the war without Congressional approval," said Kucinich.
The new policy is to be unveiled at a NATO conference in Lisbon next week, where the United States and other NATO countries are set to discuss their commitment to Afghanistan. The United States hopes to introduce a plan to begin the withdrawal of military forces from Afghanistan by 2014, senior officials told McClatchy.
[...] "The Obama Administration must withdraw our troops now," said Kucinich. "Our presence there is counterproductive, it keeps our troops in harms way and it opens to the door for the expansion of the massive corruption of the Karzai regime."
[...] "The War in Afghanistan is longer than any other war America has ever fought," said Kucinich. "The war has cost U.S. taxpayers more than a trillion dollars. The death toll is rising. More than 1300 Americans have died, thousands more wounded and countless Afghan civilians have died. The civilian death toll is rising, and there are fewer than 100 Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.
"To top it all off," he added, "we recently learned that Karzai has openly admitted to accepting bags of cash from Iran."
We, the People were lied to about 9/11 and the reasons to bomb people in Afghanistan, then Iraq. There has never been any reason to go to war with these countries since the "attack" of 9/11 was perpetrated by Saudis and a couple of misfits, none from those two countries. Yet we have destroyed them. Why? Oil and now, we are learning about precious minerals in Afghanistan, plus pipelines, et al, et nauseum.
If we are to have any credibility in the future of this planet, we must take the lead in holding accountable every single leader who led us down this road to disaaster. I think that begins with the former president-select, George W. Bush.
Indeed, the rule of law is the "strongbox that keeps all our other values safe." We can write laws that say we have certain freedoms and rights, and we can build courts and elect lawmakers, but if there is no rule of law, then we lose our rights bit by bit until they are no longer recognizable. While the goppies will cry "partisan witch hunt," even the Bush State Dept. recognizes that no democratic society can tolerate abuses when people are tortured or kidnapped under rendition in violation of our rule of law or tolerate the failure to prosecute in compliance with our Constitution.
Signing the petition drafted by budhydharma and Docudharma is not in defiance of our President-Elect Obama, but rather a sign of support for the difficult times that he and Holder will face when performing their clear constitutional duties. As President, Obama will have the constitutional duty to faithfully execute our laws.
The constitutional oath of office will require President Obama to faithfully execute the office of President and preserve, protect and defend our Constitution. Our constitution also requires that our presidents "shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed." The principle of the rule of law is partially based on this Faithfully Execute clause which requires our President to comply with laws, our Constitution and treaties because our Constitution established a government of laws, not of men and women. The Geneva Convention is one of the laws which must be faithfully executed.
I grew up in an era of Communist threat, nuclear threat, the RED threat, but it was always something and still is. This brief report should get wide distribution. I hope you agree that this story HAS to reach as many citizens as possible.
Last week’s FBI raids likely signal that the Obama regime has begun a major campaign to criminalize and crush the Left. Think COINTELPRO, 21st century-style. President Obama, the constitutional rights lawyer who claims the right to kill at will, seeks to strangle the activist opposition to his wars and pro-Wall Street policies. “For targets not marked for oblivion, there awaits a grand jury with boundless powers to ensnare anyone.”
It doesn't matter the race or religion, it's about power and slavery, It's older than the Bible, it's why working people dream of heaven or fortune and blame their fellow working slave for why life sucks.
I can't even comprehend the motivation behind such an unceremonious exit as that given to His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Can you imagine the uproar if this were the Pope being hauled out by the elbow?
US Downplays Obama's Meeting with Dalai Lama as Part of Chess Game with the Chinese
Martin Barillas
February 22nd 2010
The unceremonious departure of the Dalai Lama from the White House on February 19 gained almost as much currency as the actual meeting between the Tibetan Buddhist leader and President Barack Obama. While leaving the Executive Mansion, the Dalai Lama was captured on film exiting through a door usually used by household staff where the West Wing meets the main presidential residence. The saffron-robed monk, a recipient of the Nobel Prize and revered icon for Buddhists and lovers of liberty was seen walking around trash bags in his sandals in chilly Washington DC.
The photo promptly went all over the world, sparking criticism and bewilderment. For its part, the White House released only one photo of the actual meeting between the two leaders, showing them in conversation.
China, which has occupied the mountainous nation of Tibet since the 1950s, duly registered its diplomatic pique over the visit. The American ambassador in Beijing was summoned for a consultation with the Chinese foreign ministry in protest. A Chinese spokesman averred that the Tibetan spiritual leader’s visit with Obama had “seriously harmed” Sino-American relations. The Chinese registered its “solemn representation” to the U.S. diplomat that international relations had been damaged because of Obama’s refusal to heed Chinese warnings. “We believe the actions of the U.S. side have seriously interfered in Chinese internal affairs, seriously hurt the feelings of the Chinese people, [really?] and seriously undermined China-U.S. relations,” said the Chinese spokesman.
[...] The White House went forward with the meeting even while calculating it that meant angering the Chinese. “I don’t think this has come as a surprise, no,” said U.S. Ambassador Jon Hunstman. “The president had expressed his concerns for human rights in Tibet and his admiration for the Dalai Lama as an international religious figure. I can’t say what would appease the Chinese on this meeting, but of course we had told the Chinese months in advance and in fact when President Obama was here in November he did mention he intended to meet with the Dalai Lama when he had his meeting with President Hu Jintao.”
In an open letter, Arjia Rinpoche—Director of the Tibetan Mongolian Buddhist Cultural Center and one of the most respected Tibetan Buddhist leaders in exile—wrote “The visit of His Holiness the Dalai Lama and President Barack Obama has far more far reaching significance than many commentators are giving credit. The President, despite Chinese objections, is showing the Dalai Lama greater respect than any president before him and is also a meeting of two very special people.” In 2009, Obama met with President Hu of China and was criticized for not meeting with the Dalai Lama first. However, Rinpoche notes the criticisms, at least two U.S. diplomatic envoys went to the exiled leader’s headquarters in India to discuss preparations for the eventual visit. http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=11986
The right wing smear machine is desperately trying to rewrite history and create propaganda to advance the notion that we were "safe" under BushCo. because W was so tough on terrorists. These are lies and dangerous assertions which could radically impact on our democracy.
To that end, we must prosecute BushCo. for its lying us into the willful destruction of Afghanistan and Iraq. If we don't our children will grow up believing that might makes right and power is the only thing than matters. Tell CBS to support free speech and critical thought. Our democracy depends upon an informed populace which holds elected officials responsible for criminal deeds. Please take a moment to sign this petition and pass it on. The principles of the U.S. Constitution are not "attack advertisement" CBS attempts to silence IndictBushNow movement! The petition reads: I am writing to express outrage at CBS Outdoor's recent decision to silence those who want to stop torture and who demand accountability from elected government officials by denying IndictBushNow.org the ability to purchase ad space on buses in Washington, D.C.
The proposed ad stated these simple words: "TORTURE is not just wrong ... it is ILLEGAL. Because NO ONE is above the law," followed by the organization's website address. The CBS Outdoor legal team abruptly classified this as "attack advertising" in its sudden refusal to place the ads after weeks of planning.
Opposition to the illegal practice of torture or equal application of the law to all is not an "attack" on anyone. In fact, these are fundamental values enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and law--values that are cherished by people across the United States.
Clearly, CBS Outdoor does not feel the same way.
For our part, we will not allow political influence to cover up crimes or trample the Constitution, human rights and our civil liberties. We insist that CBS Outdoor rescind its decision and allow these bus ads to go forward immediately. http://www.impeachbush.org/site/PageServer?pagename=homepage
Along these lines it's important to recognize that the increasing vitriol being spewed at Barack Obama serves to deflect attention from BushCo.'s failure to protect AND defend America on 9/11/2001. Here is an interview from the Joe Scarborough show featuring Lawrence O'Donnell attempting to get the facts straight: The original video was removed without my knowledge. I got this from youtube.
Lawrence O'Donnell Rages On Bush Speechwriter Marc Thiessen: 'Your Administration Invited The First Attack' (VIDEO) The original video was removed without my knowledge. I got this from You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqfpvvDCU9w
Fireworks erupted on the set of "Morning Joe" Friday, after MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell took umbrage with former Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen's claim that President Obama was inviting a domestic terrorist attack.
Things started off rocky after Thiessen -- in the process of justifying the coercive counter-terrorism techniques used under the Bush administration and condemning Obama for "eliminating" the CIA's interrogation program -- insisted that his former boss was required to essentially start from scratch.
"You gotta think back to the period after 9/11," he said. "We didn't even know who hit us.[my bold]We didn't know that Khalid Sheik Mohammad was the mastermind of 9/11 or the operational commander of al Qaeda. And then we started rounding up these terrorists..."
O'Donnell responded quickly, barking out his bewilderment with Thiessen's assertion that there had been no pre-9/11 warning that an attack was coming.
"Isn't it true that the president you worked for invited the first attack by having no idea what was going on with al Qaeda? You just admitted that when you were hit on 9/11, you just said, 'We didn't know who hit us'. You were told who was going to hit you before 9/11. And your administration invited the first attack, for which you should live in shame."
Those charges were some of the milder in the heated exchange. Later in the segment, O'Donnell told Thiessen that he was hopelessly ill-equipped to talk about terrorism or torture.[...]
OMG--I really wish this wasn't so because it gonna send us waaaaay back down the rabbit hole!SDS is even implicated!!! Promoted to Headline (H3) on 12/22/09: Obama worked for the CIA For OpEdNews: Josh Mitteldorf - Writer from an article at Online Journal
Wayne Madsen Reports has obtained additional details on Business International Corporation (BIC), the CIA front company where President Obama spent a year working after graduating from Columbia University in 1983.
BIC used journalists as non-official cover (NOC) agents around the world. The firm published weekly and fortnightly newsletters for business executives, including Business International, Business Europe, Business Latin America, and Business Asia.
On February 24, 2009, WMR reported: "For one year, Obama worked as a researcher in BIC's financial services division where he wrote for two BIC publications,Financing Foreign Operations and Business International Money Report, a weekly newsletter.
"An informed source has told WMR that Obama's tuition debt at Columbia was paid off by BIC. In addition, WMR has learned that when Obama lived in Indonesia with his mother and his adoptive father Lolo Soetoro, the 20-year-old Obama, who was known as "Barry Soetoro,' traveled to Pakistan in 1981 and was hosted by the family of Muhammadmian Soomro, a Pakistani Sindhi who became acting president of Pakistan after the resignation of General Pervez Musharraf on August 18, 2008."[...] http://www.opednews.com/articles/Obama-worked-for-the-CIA-by-Josh-Mitteldorf-091222-13.html
Here's a bit more on BIC from Wikpedia:
Founded in 1953 by Eldridge Haynes and his son, Elliott Haynes, BIC initially focused on American companies and started out with a weekly newsletter (called Business International) and a group of key corporate clients. Offices were established overseas, including major regional operations based out of Vienna (East Europe and the USSR) and Hong Kong (Asia-Pacific), and single-country offices (e.g., Rome, Tokyo).
BI eventually became the premier information source on global business with research, advisory functions, conferences and government roundtables in addition to its publications. It was headquartered in New York City, with major offices in Geneva, London, Vienna, Hong Kong and Tokyo, and a network of correspondents across the globe.
In his book The Strawberry Statement, former student protester James Kunen reports a description of Business International by an unnamed Students for a Democratic Society conference attendee in 1968. The attendee, referred to by Kunen as 'the kid', claimed the company offered to finance SDS demonstrations in Chicago. Business International is described as 'the left wing of the ruling class' and as desiring a Gene McCarthy presidency.[1]
This is the time of year we all think about giving, even just a little something, to those who provide services, be it mail carriers, hair dressers, doormen, etc. It's hard to think we need to even ask for help, 8 years later, for those who ran to the "pile" and seem to be forgotten in the rage of health care reform.
Please forward this message and put pressure on President Obama and Speaker Pelosi: Pass HR 847. Thank you.
Fealgood Foundation Christmas Message to President Obama
As I wrote after BHO's speech, let the demos begin. Here's the first big one I'm aware of:
EMERGENCY ANTI-ESCALATION RALLY
Saturday, Dec. 12, 2009 11am-4pm • Washington DC
Lafayette Square | White House
Metro: Farragut West or Farragut North
Speakers: Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Rep. Cynthia McKinney, Sen. Mike Gravel, Kathy Kelly, Chris Hedges, David Swanson, Rev. Graylan Hagler, Gael Murphy, Brian Becker, Debra Sweet, Mathis Chiroux, Coy McKinney, Elaine Brower, Lynne Williams, Hon. Betty Hall, Marian Douglas, Dr. Michael Knox, Ralph Lopez, Cpt. Ron Fisher. Plus: Statements from Rabbi Michael Lerner, Col. Ann Wright, Kevin Zeese, Dr. Stephen Zunes, Granny D (turning 100), and others.
Anti-War, 1969
Live Music: Jordan Page, Head-Roc, Emma's Revolution, Precise Science.
Under Obama-Pelosi-Reid, the US has already sent about 35,000 more troops into the Afghanistan graveyard of empires. Now, Obama has announced another round of re-enforcements—an Afghan surge of 30,000 additional GIs, thereby betraying his supporters on the left and ignoring the majority of Americans, 55% of whom disapprove of his handling of the war. Instead, Obama is taking the advice from the war party—from Petraeus, McChrystal, and Mullen. It's high time Obama, Pelosi, and Reid heard a clear message from a resurgent antiwar movement demanding no escalation and an immediate pullout of all US forces from Afghanistan and Iraq, including an immediate halt to Predator drone attacks and CIA operations in the region. Come to the rally and let our united voices be heard! http://www.enduswars.org
The anti-war community is growing again, momentum is building again. There will soon be too many demos to go to, for our troops in Afghnistan, Iraq, places unacknowledged and most of all for the people of those traumatized countries.
Here are two views about Prez Obama's upcoming announcement of more boots on the ground, again.
From US Labor Against the War, I present in it's entirity their announcement. It isn't posted on their web page yet but I felt it important that a broad audience read this:
***
November 29, 2009
To: All USLAW affiliates, members and supporters
From: USLAW Co-Convenors
RE: Imminent Afghan Escalation
On the very eve of the USLAW National Labor Assembly in Chicago, President Barack Obama is expected to announce his decision about the deployment of tens of thousands of additional troops to Afghanistan. Media reports predict he will make an announcement on Tuesday evening, December 1, that he intends to send as many as 34,000 additional U.S. troops and will seek thousands more from NATO allies.
Antiwar organizations around the country are organizing to protest this military escalation in Afghanistan. We encourage USLAW affiliates, members and supporters to join them to convince the administration that this escalation puts our country on the wrong course. It is the path LBJ took in Vietnam and it cost him "The Great Society." We can do better.
While the Assembly will consider USLAW's overall stance, it has been USLAW policy since the Leadership Council meeting December, 2008, that we
• Oppose any escalation of the conflict in Afghanistan and military action in Pakistan and promote non-military solutions that rely primarily on diplomacy, economic development, and pursuit of terrorists as a criminal rather than military matter.
On November 15, we reiterated this position in an Action Alert in which we said:
The wisdom of that stand has been born out by the steady deterioration in the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The government is viewed by Afghans as corrupt and ineffective. The elections there made a travesty of the very notion of democracy. Karzai, surrounded by warlords and drug lords, is thoroughly discredited. His own brother is a druglord and a thug.
Committing thousands more troops will only stiffen Afghan resistance to foreign military occupation.
During the last few weeks, across the country, tens of thousands of people who share these concerns have written and called the White House to express opposition to any escalation of the conflict in Afghanistan. They believe, as we do, that the corrupt regime in Kabul does not deserve any more blood or money.
What Afghanistan needs now is not more foreign forces but rather more international diplomacy, regional negotiations that include the Taliban, real development assistance, more schools and clinics, electrification, clean water, and sanitation.
It costs $1 million for every troop the U.S. sends to Afghanistan. The billions of dollars we are squandering there are not making us any safer, but they are draining resources that could be used here to meet the urgent needs we have here at home - for health care, education, infrastructure, and more.
Rather than listen to the generals and Congressional hawks, we must convince the Obama administration to listen to the people - a majority of whom want an end to war and occupation in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Now is not a time for silence!
Join, Support & Build USLAW - Labor's Antiwar Voice!
Excellent commentary on WHY we must prosecute the criminals of BushCo. McClatchy Washington Bureau Commentary: Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue Joseph L. Galloway last updated: November 18, 2008 With two months still to go before his inauguration as the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama and his transition team are already getting off on the wrong foot, signaling that they have no intention of investigating anyone in the Bush administration for possible war crimes. What we're talking about here is the torture of detained terrorist suspects in American custody in a grotesque violation of both our treaty obligations under the Geneva Conventions and our historic principles as a democratic nation. By their own machinations and attempts to redefine and pervert both treaties and our own laws, President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Attorneys General John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales, Cheney's chief of staff David Addington and any number of lesser suspects sought to shield themselves from, or put themselves above, justice. They did so knowing full well that what they were doing — clearing the way for interrogators at Guantanamo and in the Central Intelligence Agency’s secret dungeons around the world to do anything it took, short of murder, to extract information from terror suspects. The "harsh interrogation methods" included water-boarding, stripping and humiliating prisoners, subjecting them to extremes of temperature, putting them into stressful physical positions for hours, the use of psychotropic drugs and doubtless other equally uncivilized practices. Water boarding has always been treated as a criminal act in this country. Military officers were court-martialed at the turn of the last century for water boarding Filipino guerrillas. More recently, an East Texas sheriff was sentenced to 10 years in federal prison for water boarding a suspect and extracting a confession from him. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue, and its no way to begin an administration that was elected on promises of change. What it says is that if you're one of the elite and powerful, your violations of the law will be overlooked, no matter how much damage you did to our country’s standing in the world. What signal does it send to Mr. Bush's gang of unindicted co-conspirators, who've unwrapped a Pandora’s boxful of other offenses — from perverting the administration of justice, to illegally eavesdropping on the phone conversations and e-mails of ordinary Americans, to salting the stream of intelligence with bogus material, to inviting their cronies to loot the Treasury with no-bid military contracts, to lying under oath to congressional oversight committees, to applying political litmus tests to the hiring of civil service employees to the wholesale destruction of White House e-mails and records? Etcetera. Etcetera. This nation was founded on the principle of equal justice under the law. No one — no one — ought to be able to skate or hold a get-out-of-jail-free card by virtue of having been the most powerful felon in the land, or of working for him. This signal on torture investigations says that Sen. Obama wants to start his administration as a uniter, not a divider, trying to untangle the unholy mess that the Decider and Co. are leaving behind them in the economy, in our military, in virtually every walk of our national life. It speaks to his desire to reach across the aisle to the defeated Republicans and try to bring them back into the fold as Americans. That's all well and good, but not if it comes at the cost of lifting the blindfold off Justice’s eyes and letting her pick and choose who'll pay for criminal acts and who won't. That's no way to begin, and no way to continue. Out in West Texas, crusty old ranchers plagued by coyotes killing their calves and baby sheep shoot the offending beasts and hang their carcasses on the nearest barbed wire fence as an object lesson to the rest of the pack. Unless the newly empowered Democrats in the White House and on Capitol Hill hang a few coyotes on some fences in Washington, D.C., they're making a huge mistake that will come back to haunt them, and all the rest of us, too. Unless the truth, the whole truth, is unearthed, justice is done and the Republican closet is emptied of festering transgressions, the next pack will do it again, secure in the knowledge that their positions will protect them from the penalties that more ordinary citizens must pay for the same crimes. The people of this nation have spoken loudly. They voted to throw the rascals out. They voted for a different way of governing, a different way of law making. They voted for equal rights under the law. If their desires aren't satisfied — if the new broom sweeps no cleaner than the old one — the next time around they may move things up a notch and throw all the bastards out — and they'd be fully justified in doing so. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/339/v-print/story/56115.html
Chinese Prime Minister Hu Jintao has come to the USA and all conscious humans hold their breath in fearful anticipation of the mighty giant. The Tibetan experience is a very painful lesson that the rest of us/US must learn. Their desire for independence (rangzen) clashes with the harsh realities faced by the Dalai Lama's desire to seek autonomy as a compromise, or middle way, to ensure the survival of their culture.
The unedited essays below provide more information for people who should think about this struggle and the ramifications for us/US and the world.
May all beings be free from dangerand oppression.
Long live His Holiness, the Dalai Lama!
Long live the people of Tibet, wherever they are!
Rangzen Beckons Again
Phayul, 3/11/08
By Samdup Tenzin
His Holiness the Dalai Lama's admission last week that he is losing hopes for a negotiated settlement with the People's Republic of China underlines the fact that even a learned religious practitioner's patience, no matter how profound, has its limits. Ongoing Sino-Tibetan bilateral talks have made little progress and until now they have been nothing more than a tale of unrealistic expectations on our part and dilly-dallying on behalf of our counterpart. For twenty long years since the Strasbourg Proposal of 1987, His Holiness has endeavoured with utmost sincerity to reach out to the Chinese leadership to effect a speedy and mutually beneficial resolution of the Tibet issue. However, the PRC, rather than responding in kind, has over the years launched an unmitigated smear campaign against him; one of the most vitriolic renditions of which was brandished in the aftermath of the recent crackdown in Tibet by Zhang Qingli, leader of the Communist Party of Tibet who labeled His Holiness "a wolf in monk's robes" and "a devil with a human face but the heart of a beast". There is nothing in the world which hurts a Tibetan's sentiments more than unwarranted mudslinging of this nature directed at our Gyalwa Yeshi Norbu. For me personally, these stinging and heart-wrenching slurs were mentally excruciating and physically overpowering. When I say this, I am quite certain that I speak for many amongst us who at the time had similar revelations.
His Holiness' confession of his diminishing hope comes at a time when our freedom movement desperately needs a redefinition of objectives and clarity of purpose after a sustained period of ambiguity and indecision. By saying so, I do not intend to imply that the goal of "genuine autonomy" is in anyway incoherent or undesirable under the current circumstances. In fact most of us would gleefully accept such an outcome and merrily follow His Holiness to Lhasa if China acceded to it. The Middle Way Approach as espoused by His Holiness is without a flicker of doubt an ingenious conflict resolution tactic emanating from the very core of our Buddhist tradition, one which seeks to harmonise seemingly divergent perspectives and mutually exclusive interests for the welfare of everyone involved. In this respect, our renunciation of independence in favour of "genuine autonomy" is perfectly consistent with such an approach. However, it is worth reiterating here that it always takes two to tango. Even as we make benign gestures and appeasing quirks to facilitate the talks, the Chinese government has stood its ground and consistently sought to toughen its stance on Tibet by increasing religious repression and intensifying patriotic re-education. While we pick up the debris of our shattered expectations in the aftermath of every round of talks, our adversaries smugly revel at their triumph in keeping our mouths shut and spirits fractured.
As a Tibetan, I, like many of us, am proud of our Buddhist culture which instructs us "what we cannot attain, we should learn not to yearn for" and "a desire renounced or extinguished is equivalent to a desire accomplished". But sometimes I wonder if we are stretching these metaphysical ideas of contentment too far, and most importantly to our detriment as a nation. Self-abnegation is unquestionably an unparalleled virtue and an admirable philosophy when used as a lodestar for our individual conducts in our private lives. But adhering to such a modus vivendi as a nation already devoid of even a semblance of recognition and as a people lacking the most fundamental of rights is, in my view, tantamount to digging our own graves especially considering the Chinese government's lack of enthusiasm to engage with us constructively.
By renouncing the demand for independence, we, as a nation, have made the mother of all sacrifices. For many of us it was one of the hardest decisions of our lives, which we took nevertheless with a hope that the Chinese leadership with reciprocate in good faith. Such an act of decency on the part of the PRC has been felt wanting and if the Chinese government's recent crackdown on Tibetans inside Tibet is any indication, then the prospect of any significant change in its demeanour in the foreseeable future is slender at best. Beijing is obviously playing for time and we, by relinquishing what we desire the most and falling into the trap of empty negotiations devoid of any concrete results, are making life very easy for the Chinese. The position we have put ourselves into is very similar to that of a helpless lamb waiting for the butcher to deal the fatal blow. We have literally tied our hands and are expecting the Chinese to show pity and set us free; this is not likely to happen. Given the hopelessness of the situation, one could not help but doubt the viability of the Middle Way Approach, no matter how sacrosanct and groundbreaking. In an ideal world this principle would have, no doubt, worked wonders, but perhaps the real world we live in is not ready for it yet.
Under the current circumstances, only waiting in anticipation for Beijing's yearly summons would be an exercise in futility. I believe our resources and time would be better spent devising a comprehensive new strategy that would sustain us for years and if necessary decades to come. A pragmatic first step towards such a strategy would be the acknowledgement of the fact that in the murky world of international politics, there is no room for altruism; the sooner we accept this grim reality the better it would be for us. Secondly, we should bear in mind that the realisation of freedom will require unrelenting hard work and persistent slogging. The goodwill of the international community is, of course, crucial but that will only be catalysed by our own efforts. It is, therefore, childish to expect the UN or the West to act on our behalf; the onus should lie squarely on us, the ordinary Tibetans. It is worth mentioning here that strong nations are build on the bedrocks of unflinching determination and consistent toil on the part of ordinary citizenry. Very few colonial powers of the past have willingly ceded an occupied territory without being forced by the will of the people to do so. Expecting the PRC to readily abandon Tibet is politically naive; the spectre of Beijing engaging in such an unprecedented act of compassion without being subjected to protracted and sustained pressure from us is practically unimaginable. Nation-building is impossible with a softy-softy approach which leaves little to our discretion. What is needed is a fundamental policy transformation.
It is always a sound engineering practice to dig up old foundations and to lay them anew when they are found to be too weak and unsustainable for a structure to be built on top of it. For more than two decades, we nurtured a vision of Tibet with the Middle Way Approach as its cornerstone. But that foundational base is now showing signs of decay and deterioration, and needs to be replaced, if possible, promptly by one which is comparatively stronger and impregnable. I, for one, quite cherish the good old days of the 1960s and the 1970s when the spirit of Rangzen throbbed unremittingly within every Tibetan's chest, and believe that any strategic transformation in the near future should seriously consider this policy alternative. I personally see the switch of objective from "Genuine Autonomy" to Rangzen as not only prudent but also justified in view of the current stalemate. Beijing has been reluctant to entertain any of our demands for self-rule under its constitutional framework. It has instead preferred to restrict the negotiations solely to the matter of His Holiness' return to China, that too subject to a myriad of unreasonable conditionalities to be met by him. Given the lack of consensus regarding the agenda for discussion between the two sides, reconciliation seems practically impossible. Independence may appear unrealistic, but so too does "Genuine Autonomy" under current circumstances.
The apparent implausibility of Rangzen notwithstanding, I would still pick it over "Genuine Autonomy", essentially for its unifying characteristics. As long as His Holiness the Dalai Lama is in flesh and blood, his influence on us will always be the single most important unifying factor. However, considering his advanced age and the deadlock in negotiations, we have to, at some point, contemplate surviving in a world without His Holiness' humbling presence. In a post-Dalai Lama scenario, the only thing that could prevent our nation from fragmenting along sectarian and provincial lines, and eventually disappearing into oblivion is a common purpose and a shared aspiration. In His Holiness' absence, only Rangzen could engender a nationalistic vigour strong enough to counteract regionalism and sectarianism in our community, and inspire in us the determination to maintain and preserve our distinct identity until the 15th Dalai Lama comes of age.
At present, going into the details of what an independent Tibet, if possible, will look like and whether or not it would be economically sustainable is premature and untimely. I am of the opinion that economics should never be a barrier in choosing our destiny. We are a group of tough mountain people capable of enduring any conceivable hardship. Luxury for our ancestors has never meant more than an adequate supply of Chura, Marr dang Yaksha and a bowl (or two) of Chang. I believe our prosperity as a nation is better gauged in terms of the Gross National Happiness (GNH) rather than any abstract economic benchmark. Besides, if East Timor and Kosovo with their virtually non-existent economic infrastructures can survive as independent states, then there is no reason to believe that we can not.
Having said that, the mere declaration of Rangzen as our common goal will not suffice. If we are to survive as a people, we have to strive to make our democratic experiment in exile a success. To this end, strengthening our existing democratic institutions by zealously participating in the elections and other democratic processes is extremely pivotal. Looking up to His Holiness to make political decisions on our behalf on every conceivable occasion while we shy away from our responsibilities is surely not the way forward. It is high time for us to realise the gravity of our situation and abandon the much cliched Gyalwa Rinpoche Khenno attitude. Undoubtedly, our culture and religion are integral to our survival but when it comes to political decision-making we have to learn to leave faith at our doors. Political judgements are best made using rational analysis and weighing in pros and cons rather than by extrapolating cultural and metaphysical ideas. I acknowledge that such a transformation in our outlook will not materialise overnight and could take years given that democracy as a conception is totally alien to our culture. But democratic ideals are essentially empowering and by embracing these liberal notions we will only be enriching our already rich Buddhist culture.
If we keep alive the spirit of Rangzen within us, we can use every window of opportunity, no matter however small, that comes our way to our advantage. We might have to wait for 20, 50 or even 100 years for such an opportunity to knock at our doors but I believe it is better than watching China bludgeon our culture to a slow painful death while we pray for a divine intervention. As I see it, Rangzen is not only the ultimate end we all desire but also a pragmatic means to that end.
The author is a student at University of Edinburgh, studying LLM in International Law
Views expressed above are solely of the author, and does not reflect views of phayul.
It has now been more than 21 years since His Holiness the Dalai Lama first proposed in Washington DC the Five-Point Peace Plan for Tibet; 20 years since the Strasbourg Proposal to the Members of European Parliament; and almost 30 years since the “direct contact” between Dharamsala and Beijing was first established. Like most Tibetans, I have been waiting all these years and hoping that something good will come out of all this. So, the other day when His Holiness the Dalai Lama expressed his lack of confidence in the Chinese leadership because of the absence of any positive response from them, I said to myself, this is what I feared.
One of the fundamental requisites for any successful dialogue is a genuine desire on the part of both parties engaged to find a solution. I, for one, believe that China, from the very onset, never intended to find a resolution. Why would they? China is already in full control of Tibet -the land and its people. This was and continues to be a sinister ploy on the part of China tobuy more time hoping that the issue of Tibet will disintegrate and disappear once His Holiness passes away.
I have always believed in leadership through the power of truth - the truth about Tibet. The truth that Tibet was an independent nation until China invaded in 1949. I have time and again heard His Holiness state that truth was on Tibet’s side and that ultimately truth will prevail. So, around 1979 when His Holiness announced that He was giving up Tibet’s independence in favor of a “Middle-Way” approach, like many other fellow Tibetans, I was overwhelmed with confusion, not knowing what to make of it. As time passed, I realized that this was a compromise to save Tibet and Tibetan culture by a sincere and a well meaning leader who had the best of intentions for the welfare and wellbeing of both the Chinese and Tibetan people.
In 2000, the Secretary General of the United Nations, Kofi Anan, emphasized the importance of truth to a gathering of students and faculty members of Hampshire College. I asked him why he was preaching ‘truth’ when one truth is that the organization that he represents passed three resolutions on Tibet, and that even after 40 years, has failed to act on any one of them. His response to me was, “I wish I could say that this world is perfect……that truth always prevails.” This was a very instructive moment for me because what he was really telling me was that in this imperfect world of ours, where policies and decisions are dictated by self and national interests, TRUTH DOES NOT PREVAIL but truth needs to be lived, nurtured and secured. If Tibetans truly believe that Tibet was an independent country and wants to be independent, we have to dream RANGZEN and then live that dream. Or else, as the Chinese say “a thousand lies make it true” and then there is a real danger that Tibet will cease to exist one day.
Whenever one makes an argument for Rangzen, the inevitable counter argument is that Rangzen is not “realistic.” In His Holiness’s Strasbourg Proposal, referring to his idea of Tibet becoming a self-governing political entity in association with the People’s Republic of China, He states, “I believe these thoughts represent the most realistic means by which to re-establish Tibet’s separate identity…..” I believe that the introduction of the word “realistic” in any discussion about a nations’ future, and especially in our ongoing struggle for self determination, is very disenfranchising and disempowering. What is unspoken but clearly communicated is that we should give up the idea of Rangzen because Rangzen is not realistic. The only way to make any crucial and complicated mission “realistic” is to believe and live the dream. Only then will the dream have a chance of becoming a reality.
Imagine if some 47 years ago, President John F. Kennedy believed that it was not “realistic” to dream of going to the moon. The first space walk on the moon never would have happened. Imagine if 61 years ago, the Indian leadership and its people believed that seeking independence from the British Empire was unrealistic because ‘the sun never sets on the British empire.’ India perhaps would not be an independent country today.
Thinking about Rangzen, my memory goes back to my early years as a child at TCV and later as a staff member, when we were all unified in our mission and belief in Rangzen. The students, parents, cooks, teachers, nurses, and office staff – we all knew that whatever each one of us was doing at that time, it was in preparation for that beautiful dream of Rangzen. We were unified and strong in our belief in RANGZEN. We did not know then how and when Tibet would regain its Rangzen. Yet, I know for sure that it gave us all a tremendous sense of pride and purpose. It was this sense of unified belief and purpose that propelled us to be recognized as one of the most successful refugee communities in the world. Today, when I visit the settlements and schools in our community, the loss of that sense of unity and direction is apparent.
November 4, 2008 was one of the most beautiful days in my life. Even though I could not vote, I celebrated the victory of President Elect Obama. His victory was historic and showed once again that it is important to dream big (without letting reality limit your dreams) and to live that dream. Nothing is impossible. Remember, this was a country where about 44 years ago people of African heritage did not even have the right to vote. Back then it was considered unrealistic and inconceivable that one day a black man would become the President. Today Barak Obama is the 44th President of the United States of America. That dream has become a reality. One of the main reasons that this dream became a reality today is because the people of African heritage believed that all human beings are created equal and they lived that dream. Of course all this did not come soon or easy, but there is a lesson that Tibetans can learn from this. Today’s dream can become a reality tomorrow. If we dream Rangzen and live that dream, no matter how hard or how long the road ahead may be, one day, one day Rangzen will become reality! RANGZEN – Yes We Can!
A special meeting will be held later this month to confirm our mission and renew our dreams. As His Holiness said, “When all is said and done it is for the Tibetan people themselves to decide about their collective future.” I thank His Holiness for this opportunity. I call upon all Tibetans to speak out and participate in this historic meeting. Let not your hopes and dreams be limited by reality, but guided by truth. I recognize that it is possible that I may not see Rangzen in my life time or, for that matter, in my children’s lifetime. But I would be proud to have left the Rangzen legacy for future generations of Tibet and will take comfort that one day, Rangzen will become reality. This past spring, Tibetans from inside Tibet have spoken. Now is our time to say loud and clear in a unified and strong voice –RANGZEN! YES WE CAN!
The author is a residence director at the University of Massachusetts and can be reached at thondup@educ.umass.edu
