Tibet

I have blogged here and elsewhere that the world needs to move beyond condemning China and try to find a real solution in Tibet. Clearly, China is not going to change it's stance on Tibet (will we on Kashmir?) so it's in the best interest of everyone to find a practical solution. If autonomy is what The Dalai Lama wants then India should help in setting up talks (3-way) between India, China and the Dalai Lama.

An Op-Ed in the NYT by Patrick French talks along similar lines, starting with the following:

NEARLY a decade ago, while staying with a nomad family in the remote
grasslands of northeastern Tibet, I asked Namdrub, a man who fought in
the anti-Communist resistance in the 1950s, what he thought about the
exiled Tibetans who campaigned for his freedom. “It may make them feel
good, but for us, it makes life worse,” he replied. “It makes the
Chinese create more controls over us. Tibet is too important to the
Communists for them even to discuss independence.”

The Dalai Lama likes to declare himself as an admirer of Gandhi - however the contrast is stark. Where Gandhi believed in passive resistance, the Dalai Lama has gone and tried to get support of Hollywood and others in the US - this is simply not gone down well in China. To take another example: Burma's Aung San Sui Kyi has been in house arrest for ever - she has believed in passive resistance and stuck to her ideals choosing to remain in Burma even when her husband passed away (the Junta told her that she was welcome to leave to attend his funeral but she would not be able to return).