|
|
|
> magazine
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
> magazine |
|||||
|
|
APRIL 21, 2000 VOL. 26 NO. 15 | SEARCH ASIAWEEK
Unflinching history takes all sides to task By LEA TERHUNE Tibet, always fascinating, is now -- under Hollywood's embrace of Tibetan Buddhism -- hip. The Karmapa's dramatic flight late last year only adds to the worldwide interest. There is no dearth of books about the land, be they travelogues or spiritual treatises. Solid histories, however, fill a very small bookshelf. In part, that's because the tale is long, complex and research requires knowledge of Tibetan, not an easy language to master. Tsering Shakya's The Dragon in the Land of Snows (Columbia University Press, 606 pages, $20.05) is therefore a welcome addition to the library. It has an edge in being written by a Tibetan -- and in English. (Shakya is a research fellow at London University's School of Oriental and African Studies.) Translations and assisted memoirs aside, the most authoritative histories previously (all written in the 20th century) have come from Westerners, often from a particular perspective. For example, authors such as Charles Bell were, as British officials, participants in the political maneuvring of their time. Melvyn Goldstein contributed his excellent, A History of Modern Tibet, 1913-1951 about a decade ago. But there has been little since then. Dragon, which begins at the time of Indian independence in 1947, brings us up to date. Shakya draws on research gleaned over years of interviews and forays into the archives of reticent governments. Like many historical works, this book makes slow reading. But it is worth the slog. This is among the more detailed and provocative accounts on Tibet and is sure to make all sides uncomfortable. China, India, the U.S. and the Tibetans themselves all have reasons to squirm. Reading this book as China continues its bully tactics toward Taiwan, it is striking how little Beijing's methods have changed. Likewise, the responses of international powers. Shakya's tale of the Chinese encroachment in Tibet reveals the same single-minded pursuit of a goal without reference to context. Consider the importation of thousands of People's Liberation Army troops, too many for the thin Tibetan terrain to sustain, and the introduction of unsuitable crops which caused a famine. Han chauvinism so pervaded PLA conduct in Tibet that even Mao Zedong condemned it. Yet the communists adopted even more brutal means of crushing dissent when Tibetans raised resistance. This did not happen without the collusion of local politicians. Shakya does not spare the Tibetans. Indeed, one of the more engaging sections deals with the March 10 uprising in 1959, when, fueled by rumor that the communists were about to abduct the Dalai Lama, thousands of Tibetans took to the streets in Lhasa. Their protest was not so much against the Chinese as those Tibetan officials they regarded as turncoats. The crowd beat at least one perceived traitor to death. Shakya also highlights the prejudice of Lhasa Tibetans against the Khampas from the east. This hampered resistance efforts and helps explain Lhasa's unresponsiveness to calls for help when attacks on Kham monasteries began in the 1950s. Britain washed its hands of the matter although, as the former colonial power in India, it was in the best position to support Tibet's claim to independence. Instead, the British passed the ball to New Delhi, where it was handled with equal equivocation. Although Jawarharlal Nehru granted asylum to Tibetan refugees, he may have misled other governments about the level of dissent. As evidence, Shakya cites the Indian premier's representations that the Tibetans did not want United Nations help or a government in exile, when the reverse was true. Nehru certainly didn't want any U.S. involvement. But, apprehensive about an assertive China, the Americans expressed readiness to help an anti-communist resistance. But they, too, began to hedge when asked for a firm commitment in the event of a Chinese invasion. As the Cold War deepened, U.S. support moved into the shadows. The CIA began to train and fund a resistance unit called the Four Rivers, Six Ranges group. To piece together what happened, Shakya relies on interviews with Tibetan participants, declassified U.S. government documents being too heavily censored to be useful. The result is a comprehensive account, from the Four Rivers' origin in Tibet to its relocation to Mustang in Nepal during the 1960s and the CIA's ultimate withdrawal. Tibet's story is still unfolding, of course. Shakya, nonetheless, takes it to the close of the 20th century and elucidates many of its complexities. He separates facts from the propaganda, which he describes as a "denial of history" and therefore responsibility, of both the Chinese and the Tibetans in exile. The Dragon in the Land of Snows is a must for anyone trying to fathom the plight of modern Tibet. Lea Terhune is a journalist based in New Delhi. Write to Asiaweek at mail@web.asiaweek.com
Quick Scroll: More stories from Asiaweek, TIME and CNN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
| Back to the top |
© 2000 Asiaweek. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Read our privacy guidelines. |
|
ASIAWEEK'S
LATEST