Have we no sanctity? It seems that the wrong ways of the past are being used to justify the wrong ways of the current. Things like human rights, compassion and the common good are becoming more or less just words instead of real things; Simple concepts or ideals represented by strings of letters, regarded as either unrealistic, improbable or a fiction so poisonous that it contaminates and possesses anyone who recognizes it as truth. While the conflict and tension between China and the United States of America has been a longstanding issue, recently the stand for tibet and human rights in China has become more political than it is sensible, and, for lack of a better word, humane.
When China first entered tibet in 1950, many Tibetans, including His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama, fled to nearby areas like Nepal and India. Those who didn't, however, were met with extreme disposition. Among the reactions, many Tibetans (especially the monks), opted for peaceful protests, where they gathered, chanting and holding up signs in support of a free Tibet. Other monks even set themselves on fire as a symbolic gesture. As is the current case, the former were detained and frequently beaten. Many accounts exist of experiences in Chinese prisons, and Tibetans are among the most shocking; if not for the treatment of the Tibetans, than for their treatment in comparison/contrast to/of their action(s).
In March 2008, there was a significant amount of unrest in Tibet when mass riots formed and monks revolted. While there is no denying the fact that a substantial amount of damage was done, the amount of victims/casualties remains disputed, with Students for a Free Tibet claiming a great number more Tibetans were killed than China reported. The tension between the Tibetan and Chinese sides got so intense that all riots started taking place all over the world, especially in the United States. In one particular case at Duke University, a Chinese girl trying to qualm both sides wound up being rejected and insulted by both. She began to receive death threats against her and her family, and her personal information was leaked by her own country, forcing her parents to go into hiding. Thus, leading up to the olympics in Beijing, there was much activity both within Tibet and outside of it. At this time, China put more troops in Tibet to suppress any opposition at all. During the olympics, the rest of the world was offered a quick glimpse at Tibet, though instead of appeasing the curiosity and concern about the Tibetan people, it showed what force China is willing to use in order to prevent any negativity being portrayed. After the olympics, China proceeded to once again clench their fist on Tibet, sending in more troops and enforcing an even stronger crackdown. Such amount of power in quantities like this can't be good for anyone, as the people of the world would soon come to find out. In January 2009, a young man who had taken part in a peaceful protest full of banners, fliers, and slogan-shouting passed away. His death was anything but the result of natural causes. During the protest, he and his fellow protesters were detained by Chinese authorities, and it was the beatings he received from them that killed him. This is a crucial event because it makes void any attempt by China to deny its inhumane treatment of its people, particularly Tibetans.
On February 9, 2009, the United Nations gathered to review the human rights records of countries around the world. China was among one of the most to look forward to, as it had avoided such events and criticism for a long while, using its political strength to pressure others and, ultimately, to avoid pressure themselves. In addition to China submitting an incomplete and distorted report on their human rights records, China managed to make a mockery of the review, gaining praise from countries such as Cuba, and dismissing or denying any claim about Tibet and other hot topics, claiming it was not open for discussion, let alone anyone else's business. When the UN had reached a conclusion on ways for China to improve the treatment of its people, China just shrugged them off. Soon after, China called out Australia and the United States for their human rights records, claiming they should be improved. Where does this come from? How is it that it has become possible for human rights to be made into a card in the game of political power? If China is going to deny the UN's suggestions for improvement, and ignore or not discuss the more important issues, than they are going against the greater good. If we are interested in living amongst each other in peace and functionality; if we are interested in paving a future for the youth of today, tomorrow, and the next day; if we are to aim for order and fairness, then we must come together and listen to each other. To do otherwise is, in itself, to show selfish and/or malicious intent. Furthermore, to turn around after backing away and place the same accusations on others is to commit the epitome of hypocrisy on a massive scale. The way in which China handles its power and global influence is only tactful in the way that it is unstable and ignorant.
The same actions and reactions apply when it comes to culture and ethnic integrity. Later on in February, the Tibetan people decided that instead of celebrating Losar, the Tibetan new year, they would instead spend their time in mourning. What's interesting is that rather than be satisfied, as would be expected if one were to follow the pattern of China's objectives, China became upset. It wanted the Tibetans to celebrate to convey a positive image of Tibet's current conditions. Instead, the days of Losar were full of prayers, candle-light vigils, and messages for the Chinese to, among other things, listen to Tibetans. The fact that China enforced celebration, though, is interesting, as it follows the trend of China demolishing the culture and ethnic integrity of the Tibetan people before rebuilding or reinforcing it for exploitation and/or to improve the public image at a time of their own convenience. Another instance can be found in Paris, where ancient Chinese artifacts, the bronze heads of a rat and a rabbit, were being sold. The artifacts were looted from the imperial garden in the late 1800's. They are a significant part of Chinese cultural history, and, as such, were severely sought after by China, who made numerous attempts to stop the sale and assure the return of the artifacts. When you decimate a land along with its culture, how can you be one to demand the rightful sustainment of your own?
What was shocking for many was Hillary Clinton's visit to China. This is a former first lady and governor, just named the Secretary of State, whom has done numerous speeches on human rights, even at China's discomfort. In addition to being in favor of awarding the Dalai Lama the congressional gold medal, she consistently stuck up for Tibet, encouraging Sino-Tibetan discussions and urging Bush to skip the opening ceremony of the olympics in Beijing. However, upon arriving in China, she discussed how she would be putting economic issues ahead of that of human rights. While on the one hand, this is understandable, considering complications with China would be inopportune while attempting to rebuild the economy of the United States, it's still a surprise to see her put such a passion and important subject aside in the name of politics.
It seems that whenever China comes under more pressure in regards to Tibet and human rights, it closes off Tibet either partially or entirely. When this occurs, not even journalists are allowed into the region, and thus we are unable to know anything about the then current status of it, which, in addition to the fact that it was the one to close it off in the first place, makes it hard to believe China's reports and evaluations of the conditions. Getting past all of that, what even gives anyone the right to disallow others from areas of land in the first place? The belief that one has any ultimate ownership over land is preposterous to begin with, and to deny access to a certain area of land such as Tibet is to impose on the rights of everyone you exclude. This is slightly reminiscent of the way in which China bans people from returning, or even coming in the first place. Accounts of bans are ubiquitous, though as of recent, a good many of them are the result of mentioning Tibet, the Dalai Lama, and/or anything in between.
In regards to politics, human rights don't necessarily have a place, but rather are at the basis of human existence, without which politics wouldn't even be possible. Therefore, it's intriguing to witness the world issues of today, primarily in relevance to China. It seems, though, that today, in the modern day and age, we are further growing, if not maturing as a world of nothing but politics, forgetting our human nature and that of others. We hold such high regard for ourselves, considering humans to be superior, but, and especially with the current global standpoint, one can only wonder how advanced we actually are, what advancement really means, and whether or not we're really just diving so far down into politics that we're simply digressing into a sort of "political primate".
