The Historical Status of Tibet: A summary
This is a synopsis of a book an the status of Tibet by a jurist, Dr.
Michael C van Walt van Praag Dr van Walt obtained law degrees m the Netherlands and the United States and has taught International Law and
Tibetan Studies. He is a former D~or of the Tibetan Affairs Co-
Ordination Office in the Netherlands. He currently practices
international law m Washington D. C and London.
The Tibetan Government in exile, headed by His Holiness the Dalai
Lama, Tibet's exiled Head of State and spiritual leader, has,
consistently held that Tibet has been under illegal Chinese occupation
since China invaded the independent state in 1949-1950. The People's
Republic of China (PRC) insists that its relation with Tibet is a
purely internal affair, because Tibet is, and has for centuries been,
an integral part of China. The question of Tibet's status is
essentially a legal question, albeit one of immediate political
relevance.
The PRC makes no claim to sovereign rights over Tibet as a result of
its military subjugation and occupation following its armed invasion
in 1949-1950. Indeed, the PRC could hardly make that claim, since it categorically rejects as illegal claims to sovereignty put forward by
other states based on conquest, occupation or the imposition of
unequal treaties. Instead, the PRC bases its claim to Tibet solely on
the theory that Tibet became an integral part of China seven hundred
years ago.
Early history
Although the history of the Tibetan state began in 127 BC with the establishment of the Yarlung Dynasty, the country as we now know it
was first unified in the AD 700 under King Songtsen Gampo and his
successors. Tibet was one of the mightiest powers of Asia for the
three centuries that followed, as a pillar inscription at the foot of
the Potala Palace in Lhasa and the Chinese Tang histories of the
period confirm. A formal peace treaty concluded between China and
Tibet in 821-823 demarcated the borders between the two countries and
ensured that, "Tibetans shall be happy in Tibet and Chinese shall be
happy in China".
Mongol Influence
As Genghis Khan's Mongol Empire expanded towards Europe in the west
and China in the east in the 13th century, Tibetan leaders of the
powerful Sakya school of Tibetan Buddhism concluded an agreement with
the Mongol rulers in order to avoid the conquest of Tibet. The Tibetan
Lama promised political loyalty and religious blessings and
instruction in exchange for patronage and protection. The religious relationship became so important that when, decades later, Kublai Khan conquered China and established the Yuan Dynasty (1279-1368), he
invited the Sakya Lama to become the Imperial Preceptor and supreme
pontiff of his empire.
The relationship that developed and continued to exist into the 20th
century between the Mongols and the Tibetans was a reflection of the
close racial, cultural and especially religious, affinity between the
two central Asian peoples. The Mongol Empire was a world empire and,
whatever the relationship between its rulers and the Tibetans, the
Mongols never integrated the administration of Tibet and China nor
appended Tibet to China in any manner.
Tibet broke political ties with the Yuan emperor in 1350, before China
had regained its independence from the Mongols. Not until the 18th
century did Tibet again come under a degree of foreign influence.
Relations with Manchu, Gurkha, and British neighbours
Tibet developed no ties with the Chinese Ming Dynasty (1386-1644). On
the other hand, the Dalai Lama, who had established his sovereign rule
over Tibet with the help of a Mongol patron in 1642, did develop close religious ties with the Manchu emperors, who conquered China and
established the Qing Dynasty (1644 - 191 1). The Dalai Lama agreed to
become the spiritual guide of the Manchu emperor, and accepted
patronage and protection in exchange. This "priest-patron"
relationship (known in Tibetan as ChoeYoen), which the Dalai Lama also maintained with some Mongol princes and Tibetan nobles, was the only
formal tie that existed between the Tibetans and the Manchus during
the Qing Dynasty. It did not, in itself, affect Tibet's independence.
On the political level, some powerful Manchu emperors succeeded in
exerting a degree of influence over Tibet. Thus, between 1720 and
1792, Emperors Kangxi, Yong Zhen and Qianglong sent imperial troops to
Tibet four times to protect the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan people from
foreign invasions by Mongols and Gurkhas or from internal unrest.
These expeditions provided the Emperor with the means for establishing influence in Tibet. He sent representatives to the Tibetan capital,
Lhasa, some of whom successfully exercised their influence, in his
name, over the Tibetan Government, particularly with respect to the
conduct of foreign relations. At the height of Manchu power, which
lasted a few decades, the situation was not unlike that which can
exist between a superpower and a satellite or protectorate, and
therefore one which, though politically significant, does not
extinguish the independent existence of the weaker state. Tibet was
never incorporated into the Manchu empire, much less into China, and
it continued to conduct its relations with neighbouring states largely
alone.
Manchu influence did not last long. It was entirely ineffective by the
time the British briefly invaded Lhasa and concluded a bilateral
treaty with Tibet, the Lhasa Convention, in 1904. Despite this loss of influence, the imperial government in Peking continued to claim some
authority over Tibet, particularly with respect to its international relations, an authority which the British imperial government termed
(4 suzerainty" in its dealings with Peking and St. Petersburg
(Leningrad). Imperial armies tried to reassert actual influence in
1910 by invading the country and occupying Lhasa. Following the 1911 revolution in China and the overthrow of the Manchu empire, troops
surrendered to the Tibetan army and were repatriated under a Sino-
Tibetan peace accord. The Dalai Lama reasserted Tibet's full
independence internally, by issuing a proclamation, and externally, in communications to foreign rulers and in a treaty with Mongolia.
Tibet in the 20th Century
Tibet's status following the expulsion of Manchu troops is not subject
to serious dispute. Whatever ties existed between the Dalai Lamas and
the Manchu emperors of the Qing Dynasty were extinguished with the
fall of that empire and dynasty. From 1911 to 1950, Tibet successfully
avoided undue foreign influence and behaved, in every respect as a
fully independent state.
Tibet maintained diplomatic relations with Nepal, Bhutan, Britain and
later with independent India. Relations with China remained strained.
The Chinese waged a border war with Tibet while formally urging Tibet
to "join" the Chinese Republic, claiming to the rest of the world that
Tibet already was one of China's "five races".
In an effort to reduce Sino-Tibetan tensions, the British convened a tripartite conference in Simla in 1913 where the three states met on
equal terms. As the British delegate reminded his Chinese counterpart,
Tibet entered the conference as "an independent nation recognizing no allegiance to China". The conference was unsuccessful in that it did
not resolve the differences between Tibet and China. It was,
nevertheless, significant in that Anglo-Tibetan friendship was
reaffirmed with the conclusion of bilateral trade and border
agreements. In a joint Declaration Great Britain and Tibet bound
themselves not to recognize Chinese suzerainty or other special rights
in Tibet unless China signed the draft Simla Convention which would
have guaranteed Tibet's greater borders, its territorial integrity and
full autonomy. China did not sign the Convention, however, leaving the
terms of the joint Declaration in full force.
Tibet conducted its international relations primarily by dealing with
the British, Chinese, Nepalese and Bhutanese diplomatic missions in
Lhasa, but also through government delegations travelling abroad. When
India became independent, the British Mission in Lhasa was replaced by
an Indian one. During World War II Tibet remained neutral, despite
strong pressure from the USA, Britain and China to allow the passage
of raw materials through Tibet.
Tibet has never maintained extensive international relations, but
those countries with whom it did maintain relations treated Tibet as
they would have any sovereign state. Its international status was in
fact no different, say, than that of Nepal. Thus, when Nepal applied
for membership to the United Nations in 1949, it cited its treaty and diplomatic relations with Tibet to demonstrate its full international personality.
The Invasion of Tibet
The turning point in Tibet's history came in 1949, when the People's Liberation Army of the PRC first crossed into Tibet. After defeating
the small Tibetan army and occupying half the country, the Chinese
government, in May 1951, imposed the so-called " 17-Point Agreement
for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet" on the Tibetan government.
Because it was signed under duress, the agreement lacked validity
under international law. The presence of 40000 troops in Tibet, the
threat of the immediate occupation of Lhasa, and the prospect of the
total obliteration of the Tibetan state, left Tibetans little choice.
As open resistance to the Chinese occupation escalated, particularly
in eastern Tibet, the Chinese repression, which included the
destruction of religious buildings and the imprisonment of monks and
other community leaders, increased dramatically. By 1959, popular
uprisings culminated in massive demonstrations in Lhasa. By the time
China crushed the uprising, 87000 Tibetans were dead in the Lhasa
region alone, and the Dalai Lama had fled to India, where he now
resides with the Tibetan Government in Exile.
In 1963 the Dalai Lama promulgated a constitution for a democratic
Tibet. It has been successfully implemented, to the extent possible,
by the government in exile.
Meanwhile, in Tibet religious persecution, consistent violations of
human rights, and the wholesale destruction of religious and historic buildings by the occupying authorities has not succeeded in destroying
the spirit of the Tibetan people to resist the destruction of their
national identity. 1.2 million Tibetans have lost their lives (more
than one sixth of the population) as a result of the Chinese
occupation. But the new generation of Tibetans are just as determined
to regain the country's independence as the older generation was.
Conclusion
In the course of Tibet's 2000-year history, the country came under a
degree of foreign influence only for short periods of time in the
thirteenth and eighteenth centuries. Few independent countries today
can claim as impressive a record. As the ambassador for Ireland at the
UN remarked during General Assembly debates on the question of Tibet,
" [for thousands of years, or for a couple of thousand years at any
rate, [Tibet] was as free and as fully in control of its own affairs
as any nation in this Assembly, and a thousand times more free to look
after its own affairs than many of the nations here. "
Numerous other countries made statements in the course of the UN
debates that reflected similar recognition of Tibet's independent
status. Thus, for example, the delegate from the Philippines declared:
" [It is clear that on the eve of the invasion in 1950, Tibet was not
under the rule of any foreign country. " The delegate from Thailand
reminded the assembly that the majority of states " refute the
convention that Tibet is part of China. " The USA joined most other UN
members in condemning the Chinese "aggression" and "invasion" of
Tibet. In 1959, 1960 and again in 1961, the UN General Assembly passed resolutions (1353-XIV, 1723-XVI and 2079-XX) condemning Chinese human
rights abuses in Tibet and calling on China to respect and implement
the human rights and fundamental freedoms of the Tibetan people,
including their right to self-determination.
From a legal standpoint, Tibet to this day has not lost its statehood.
It is an independent state under illegal occupation. Neither China's
military invasion nor the continuing occupation by the PLA has
transferred the sovereignty of Tibet to China. As pointed out earlier,
the Chinese government has not claimed to have acquired sovereignty
over Tibet by conquest. Indeed, China recognizes that the use or
threat of force (outside the exceptional circumstances provided for in
the UN Charter), the imposition of an unequal treaty or the continued
illegal occupation of a country can never grant an invader legal title
to territory. Its claims are based solely on the alleged subjection of
Tibet to a few of China's strongest foreign rulers in the thirteenth
and eighteenth centuries.
How can China - one of the most ardent opponents of imperialism and colonialism - excuse its continued presence in Tibet, against the
wishes of the Tibetan people, by citing as justification Mongol and
Manchu imperialism and its own colonial policies ?
Michael C Van Wait Van Praag
From: THE STATUS OF TIBET:
History, Rights and Prospects in International Law (Westview, 1987)
Reproduced from LUNGTA December 1989
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!search/thomaswheat1975$20kangxi$20tibet/talk.politics.tibet/divYlZy6FwE/9Wu2ts1QKA8J
On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 5:58:11 PM UTC-7, Thomas Wheat wrote:
On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 4:47:40 PM UTC-7, The Progressive Voice wrote:
Tibet is an Illegally Occupied Nation
For over 1200 years Tibet was an independent monarchical Nation. Then the Mongols conquered China and Russia in 1242 and Tibet became suzerain autonomous to the Mongol Khan Kublai. However ther mongols deemed Tibet completely independent in internal
affairs , with Mongolia responsible for National Defense, and a Vatican neutral theocratic state they ascribed to the Tibetans who under Sakya Pandita peacably converted them to Vajrayana Buddhism. The Tibetans entered into a Cho yon Priest patron
relationship with the Mongol Khan's whereby the chief Sakya Lama and Later the Gelugpa Dalai Lama acted as his chief confessor. This relationship only existed while the Mongol Yuan Dynasty was still ruling China. In 1388 the yuan dynasty fell.
During the Ming Dynasty Tibet maintained no diplomatic relations with China. It still continued diplomatic relations with Mongolia and Nepal. The Ming dynasty excerted no Suzerain control over Tibetan monastical succession or national defense. In 1644
The Manchurians established the Qing dynasty, conquerer of all modern day china. Now they are all but extinct as a tribe. Under Emperor Kangxi, the Manchurians first established their time to hold the Cho yon relationship with the Tibetans. The Cho yon
more less existed as it did under the Mongols, with the Qing Emperors. This cho yon relationship ceased when the Qing Dynasty fell in 1911.
In 1912 Tibet declared itself Defacto and Dejure Independent of Foreign Powers. To establish the prerequisite for international recognition of independent sovereign status, Tibet entered into a mutual Military Defense Treaty with Mongolia. They also
abolished the death penalty.
During World War 2 Tibet was an officially international Neutral power, with its airspace closed to all Allied flights flying across the Himalya's. Franklin Roosevelt dispatched a mission to Tibet led by Leo Tolstoy's grandson, Illya Toltstoy's. The
Tibetans politiely rebuffed FDR and Tibet's airspace was not crossed throughout the rest of that World War. This is proof of international recognition of Tibet.
China illegally invaded Tibet in 1951 prommissing to Liberate the Tibetans from hypothetically imagined large scale feudal exploitation. In reality they projected their own cutltural bias and experience with feudalistic exploitation, onto the Tibetans
who were mostly monks and nomads. Thus they were no different from the Western feudal Colonial powers, and thus have lost their mandate as a beacon socialist liberator, thereby the CCP is losing the moral high ground in the war of rhetoric.
In 1959 alone the Chinese PLA massacred 85000 Tibetans in the capital Lhasa on one day as Tibetans revolted in uprising against PLA attempts at expropiation and forced relocation on communes and slave labor camps. All told some 1.2 millions Tibetans
were genocidedly murdered over a 40 year span.
The Population of Tibetans in Tibet has scarcely changed since 1959. Meanwhile the Tibetans are now a minority in their own capital, Lhasa. They are also indirectly subject to the one child policy in direct violation of PRC's laws on the books in
regards to national minority policy. There is approximatelly 1.1 billion chinese of the Han Nationality, who are officially subject to the 1 child policy, and the remainder population is split between 24 tribes. Tibetans have been subject to CCP indirect
recognition of forced sterilization and late term abortions forced on Tibetan Women by the reppressive imperialistic Chinese Communist Party.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)