Talking to a Chinese-human-rights worker
about the Tibetan issue, an interesting comment emerged, basically that
the Tibetan issue would be solved from within China, not from within
Tibet, and this would happen when when China's other political problems
were finally put right. At the time I didn't agree with this or
see its significance, however I have come to admit there is an element
of truth in the idea.
Anything which would hasten the change would be of great benefit to both the Chinese and Tibetan peoples.
Until the last few years, here in the West most people knew about
the invasion of Tibet, but knew little of what conditions in
China itself were like, as that country was still maintaining a "bamboo
curtain" of isolation and secrecy, not unlike that of the former Soviet
Union. What we now know of China itself shows that the political
climate in that region is not just a local phenomenon, but a
serious concern for World stability and peace. Numerous recent
events have delineated not just the totalitarianism and
belligerence of the Chinese Communist regime, but also that regime's
ability to coerce and manipulate other governments into committing
human-rights abuses on their behalf.
Looking at the Chinese lifestyle today, there is little question that
the major cities such as Beijing and Shanghai are now Communist in only
name. In all other respects they mirror similar
cities in the West, in being centres of commerce and trade, set firmly
in the capitalist style of ideology. It is probable that the majority
of citizens now pay only lip-service to Communism, and regard the CCP
as an outdated institution which retains its power only through the
nature of its political monopoly, which allows for no alternatives.
The recent change of leadership from Jiang Zemin to Hu Jintao gave rise
to bright new hopes of change; however those hopes were not realised,
with Hu Jintao maintaining the same hardline Marxist policies as his
predecessor. This fact more than anything else underlines the
fact that he Communist leaders cannot - will not - even consider
change, and therefore constitute ideological dinosaurs whose
extinction from the political sphere is only a matter of time.
Mao Zedong's stated reason for conquering Tibet was its being
governed by a feudal system, and that he perceived his invasion as
being a liberation of the Tibetan people from mediaeval serfdom. We
know that was not an accurate assessment of the situation,
however it's interesting to compare the way in which the majority of
the 'feudally-governed' Himalayan kingdoms have adapted, changed and
modernised since those days with the CCP's total refusal to step out of
its 1940's ideological time-warp of worn-out Marxist dogma. Clearly, China is now the nation with the outdated and primitive
'feudal' government, while others have embraced change.
Despite its tenuous hold on power, the CCP still maintains its
policies of belligerence towards neighbouring Taiwan. With the
recent "secessionist" edict, the likelihood of a military invasion of
Taiwan seems higher than ever. Such an invasion, Tibet-style, might
well bring other major powers into the battle, and it would not be
exaggerating to say that such an act would have the potential to spark
a World War. That, coupled with PLA Major-General Zhu Chengzhu's recent outburst to the effect that nuclear weapons would
be employed if the West were to in any way intervene in a takeover of
Taiwan, underlines the critical risk to World peace which the CCP
In this environment, it could be argued that a change of in the
nature of Chinese political power is highly likely, if not actually
imminent. We have also seen from historical perspectives, that
the longer an outmoded government retains its power by force, the
more violent and damaging the repercussions when 'the change' finally
does come. I'm thinking here of the bloodthirsty French
Revolution, and of the bankruptcy of the Russian states
after the demise of Marxism. The longer the change is
delayed beyond its natural time, the more likely is war or famine as a
A step in this direction of change was instigated by the publication of "Nine Commentaries on Communism"
by the Chinese-expatriate run Newspaper, The Epoch Times
special edition covers the history of the Chinese Communist Revolution
from its roots until today, and exposes the weaknesses of the
Marxist ideological policies. Since its publication a
growing number of influential Chinese citizens have been
showing their wish for change by way of resigning their membership of
the Communist Party. The resignations, which started in a small
way, have recently grown to a landslide defection from the Party.
- How many denouncements will it take to see a change? An expert on
Chinese politics has estimated that, while the Party claims to have
many tens of millions of members, most of these 'members' are persons who
have signed-up under duress of one kind or another, such as the
requirement of CCP membership to hold certain jobs. The true figure for
loyal Communist Party supporters is estimated at being around around
8-10 million - That is, before the Nine Commentaries campaign
began. It's interesting to note that this figure, while large by
Western standards, represents a Party with a one percent
mandate. A government with so low a level of support would be
untenable in democratic countries, and the only reason the situation
persists in China is the lack of any real opposition. At a rough guess,
it was postulated that four million resignations might see the
start of a change in the Chinese political climate. That figure
has been reached, and all indications are that the resignations are indeed having a profound effect on Chinese politics.
It should perhaps be made clear (as this point is often misunderstood) that the Nine Commentaries are not
in themselves a political campaign - that is, they do not aim to
replace the CCP with any designated replacement party, or even with any
specific type of government. Their objective is a simple one - to
discredit and disempower the existing corrupt regime. The intention is
that, on the Communists losing power, democratic elections should
take place in much the same way as took place in the former Soviet
Union, and the Chinese people be allowed to decide on their form of
government - for the first time in fifty years. Although the aims
relate mainly to China, it is hard to imagine that a successful outcome
would leave Tibet any worse off than at present - In all likelihood,
Tibet would find itself in a vastly improved political climate.
A personal opinion of the Webmaster.
“The Chinese people should be allowed to decide on their own what form
of society they want to have. The Chinese people did not
elect the CCP.” - Erping Zhang, Mason Fellow of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard.
"It would be good for the ambassadors of democratic
countries in Beijing, Shanghai and elsewhere also to show by joining
demonstrators and by other means. It would be important to show that
the democratic nations of the world are on the side of the Chinese
people. That they feel strongly that China deserves not only a modern
economy but a modern political system." Mark Palmer, former U.S. Ambassador to Hungary.