« Q-PAC Confirms Tighter Race In PA | Main | McCain Campaign On Obama's 100 Years Of McCain's War » No Beijing Boycott Call For Obama08 Apr 2008 08:26 am Yet... "I have been deeply disturbed by the recent events in Tibet, and have communicated my concerns in public and to President Bush. As I have said repeatedly, the Chinese government must take immediate steps to respect the dignity, security, human rights and religious freedom of the Tibetan people, to provide foreign press and diplomats with access to the region, and to finally work with the Dalai Lama toward meaningful autonomy for Tibet. If they do not, there should be consequences." Comments (17)
It would add a lot more credibility to OBammBamm's foreign policy credentials if there was a smidge of recognition that the Dailai Lama was a bit player in a larger CIA plot to destabilize China and foment secession of Tibet. What in the hell does that have to do with calling for Tibetan independence? Did you just want to show everyone that you are aware of the history of the conflict between China and Tibet? Are you actually suggesting that Tibet has no claim to independence from Chinese rule? 
If what you are suggesting is OBammBamm should seek "independence" from Chinese rule, then, say so. The OBammBamm statement was very careful to not say that.
The history of conflict between the United States of American and China over the Tibet issue is what is at issue. Oh, of course! That's why protesters in London and Paris (obviously American spies!) are putting out the Olympic torch. That's why Germany's Merkel is threatening to pull out of the Olympics altogether. That's why Greek protesters were arrested in Olympia. Obviously the issue with these people is the conflict between the US and China and not, amazingly, whether or not Tibet should have the freedom of self-rule.
If you have information otherwise that suggest they played an active role in the CIA scheme to destabilize China and to assist Tibetan efforts to secede, please let all of us know. I have said nothing about Tibetan demands for autonomy. The history of American cold war confrontation with China over the Koreas, Taiwan, Vietnam, Tibet, Cambodia, the Philippines, etc. is a major factor and issue as to what the United States can do in the region.
Mmmmmmmmmmmkay.
It is easy to get caught up between two great propaganda machines: that of the Dailai Lama and Beijing. It is understandably distressing to see what appear to be an outbreak of political instability in Tibetan areas of China (which goes well beyond the province of Tibet). These outbreaks should be viewed in a similar light to the rather massive and prolonged riots in France, Britain, and, even the United States (Los Angeles, Newark, D.C., Detroit, etc.). Without prejudicing the discussion as to who is in the "right", the United States is in a morally weak position to say much about the Tibetan issue to China because of previous American efforts to explicitly instigate secessionist forces in Tibet. How pissed off would Americans be if it transpired that China financed, armed, and trained a group of people in the United States to secede? That is why I felt that OBammBamm would have done himself a lot of good by simply expressing concern, disappointment, dismay (diplomatic code words) without the last few words, "or there will be consequences". You can bet your last dollar that China will respond to "consequences" with "consequences" for American interests. "An eye for an eye, and the whole world goes blind", as Gandhi once said.
Back under Carter, we boycotted the Games in the USSR, and they boycotted the games in the US. Did anything positive result from either of these? All I remember is a general downer, but I was pretty young. Olympics we could have boycotted in Nazi Germany, but didn't, were clearly a good thing: Jesse Owens showed their racial theories up in a way that a boycott never could. This year there is no issue analogous to the race issue from back then. Still, the Olympics promote engagement across a broad spectrum, not just diplomats. China is intensely aware that it's on display without the attempts to humiiate them. (One of the better analogies: China is very like the US--so huge it matters in the world just by sheer size, full of people who haven't travelled outside the country, are patriotic, but really don't grasp how the world views them, or could view them differently than they see themselves.) All of which is to say: I think going to the Olympics is always better, even if people opt to ware Tibet buttons. Boycotts seem to engender lots of ill will all around that does not translate into any positive steps. But I would be open to an argument about past foreign policy changes successfully wrought by boycotting the Olympics--maybe they exist and are just boring or hard to summarize.
Agree with Obama's every word. This year is not just the Olympics, but the year after the Han Race colonists achieved their demographic majority in Tibet. If it was whites doing this, the Left would be all over it. I do believe though that "symbolic" Olympic acts of denunciation or boycotting come from weakness and further the war activist groups wage against the mostly accepted Olympic Ideal from ancient times and in the modern era that hostile states and performers put aside their differences and through peaceful sports competition, come to understand others better. It was weakness that led Black September to kill the Israeli athletes. It was weakness and pathetic leadership of Jimmy Carter that led to him believing the only power he had left dealing with the Commies was boycotting the Olympics. Bitch of it is, to have the Summer Games, you have to be a significant power, unlike dinky little places tucked away that are so insignificant they offend no one that can do the Winter Games. As significant powers - obviously there are 100 activist groups that would love to use the Games as their PR for protest of their pet cause that the economic, political, diplomatic, cultural clout of the significant nation offends so... So any nation can expect the same sort of hissy fits. All the "free trade brings democracy" crap appears to be incorrect with China. Instead you have a Nationalist awakening, with most Chinese intoxicated on cleaning America's clock and stealing away much of it's industry and America humbled into begging money from a China that now graduates 6X the scientists and engineers America does. They are imperialist - moving Han Settlers into not only Tibet, but the vast Turkic areas, Inner Mongolia, encouraging more Chinese to set up overseas and serve China in US, Canadian, EU, Burmese residency. Taiwan awaits peaceful or forceful Borg-like assimilation. Right now, according to "unofficial" boasts, China has more Han in Eastern Siberia than there are Russians or indigenous peoples, and there is more North-South trade between Siberia and China than there is East-West trade between Siberia and the rest of Russia. China is also pushing border claims with Vietnam and the Philippines over possession of Islands and oil, fish and other oceanic resources within the sphere of the claim. China also has a major stake in controlling it's vexing puppet Tribute State, N Korea. Which has cost China much face in the region for losing control of the parameters N Korea was to stay in to serve China's interests, and prompted stronger bonds with Japan, USA, Vietnam, Russia and others that use the NORK threat and its nukes as reason to band together in a manner that can just as easily be used to contain China.... Tibet is not in the US's vital interests. Stability in East Asia is. At most, the US should use the Olympic venue not boycott or belittle the Chinese People - but to politely remind China that it's rise to Great Power and it's likely replacing the US as the greatest economic power in a few decades comes with responsibilities and that temperence in China's behavior will be met with temperence in US behavior.
Not to belabor the point, I don't think there is any dispute that Iraq is not a part of the United States. Can someone tell me how many Iraqi people have been harmed by the American occupation of Iraq? Start adding up those killed, injured, displaced (refugees), and those harmed by ethnic / religious conflict after the US invasion. It is long established in international law that the occupying power have the legal obligation to provide food, shelter, and security for the territories it occupies.
"politely remind China that it's rise to Great Power and it's likely replacing the US as the greatest economic power in a few decades comes with responsibilities and that temperence (sic) in China's behavior will be met with temperence (sic) in US behavior."
Moderation is another.
D, not to belabor the point, but nobody is claiming Iraq is part of the United States. Unlike China, which is claiming that Tibet is part of China. I also have a problem with your argument that, because the United States did (assuming, for the sake of discussion, it did in the case of Tibet) do something wrong in the past, it can then never take a moral position on the entire issue again. Does that mean that we should just accept any immoral action anywhere? I mean, if in the past the United States committed genocide against at least some Native American tribes, does that mean we should simpy ignore any genocide that happens today? Since every country has, in the past, done things that were wrong, that would seem to be an argument against anybody every taking any principled stand on anything. If that really is your position, you might want to state it clearly. If not, perhaps you should clarify. A lot.
Wow, d: does the CIA owe you money or something?
Good point. I did not say that once guilty, forever without credibility. I did point to the very recent events (by Chinese standards) of American clashes with China throughout the region. I can also point to the current sharp differences and potentially hostile (to China) military alliances and deployments of US forces as another major parameter in relationships between the USA and China. For example: the military alliance with Japan, China's enemy who have never atoned (in the fashion the Germans did both in scale and scope) for World War II. US troops stationed on the periphery of China, in Japan, S. Korea, Guam, Central Asia, etc. Arms sales in the region, including to Taiwan, military relationships with India, China's rival. Ditto for US presence in Mongolia, bases in Central Asia, de facto bases in the Philippines, etc. Note these are current, not historical issues. If the Chinese were even modestly active in doing the same around America's backyard (Central America, Latin America, Cuba), the US would go ballistic. Having said that, the US and China need to have a open, civil discussion about what both countries can agree are common standards of civility, decency, and human dignity (as opposed to human rights) that ought to be universally applied.
"Calling the dalai lama a great propaganda machine is as off the mark as calling MLK jr. or Gandhi or mandela a great propaganda machine." See how good the propaganda machine is? This is just about as good as it gets.... Swift Boat Veterans, Willie Horton.... Karl Rove would be proud of how good they are.
Obama knows that a U.S. boycott of the Olympic Games would seriously hurt Chicago's chances of winning the 2016 Games.
TH, Naw... that is too long in coming and too mild a counter-stroke. All they have to do is to boycott a few treasury bill auction and watch interest rates on long term debt spike by about 2%... Now, that is a weapon of mass destruction.... Fortunately, everyone is sensible enough to not use tools like that.
|
Subscribe to this blog by Email Twitter || On Facebook || QIK Live Channel  Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
|
Copyright © 2008 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
| 
It would add a lot more credibility to OBammBamm's foreign policy credentials if there was a smidge of recognition that the Dailai Lama was a bit player in a larger CIA plot to destabilize China and foment secession of Tibet.
See:
http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/concia.html
The CIA's Secret War in Tibet
Kenneth Conboy and James Morrison
April 2002
320 pages, 24 photographs, 9 maps, 6-1/8 x 9-1/4
Modern War Studies
Cloth ISBN 978-0-7006-1159-1, $34.95
Book Cover ImageDefiance against Chinese oppression has been a defining characteristic of Tibetan life for more than four decades, symbolized most visibly by the much revered Dalai Lama. But the story of Tibetan resistance weaves a far richer tapestry than anyone might have imagined.
Kenneth Conboy and James Morrison reveal how America's Central Intelligence Agency encouraged Tibet's revolt against China--and eventually came to control its fledgling resistance movement. They provide the first comprehensive, as well as most compelling account of this little known agency enterprise.
The CIA's Secret War in Tibet takes readers from training camps in the Colorado Rockies to the scene of clandestine operations in the Himalayas, chronicling the agency's help in securing the Dalai Lama's safe passage to India and subsequent initiation of one of the most remote covert campaigns of the Cold War. Conboy and Morrison provide previously unreported details about secret missions undertaken in extraordinarily harsh conditions. Their book greatly expands on previous memoirs by CIA officials by putting virtually every major agency participant on record with details of clandestine operations. It also calls as witnesses the people who managed and fought in the program--including Tibetan and Nepalese agents, Indian intelligence officers, and even mission aircrews.
Posted by D | April 8, 2008 8:39 AM