China was part of Mongolia UNTIL the Ming took over and kept all of the Mongolian’s past territories in China.

1. Disagree. Historical records have never shown an instance where Tibet was recognised by the world as being independent.

2. Irrelevant. Penang has a Chinese majority, cause for secession? So many other countries have diverse cultural content, not a valid reason for secession.

3. One govt at a particular time in China’s history doesn’t warrant secession of a historical part of China.

4. Agreed, but only after a referendum confirms that secession is the true will of the majority of Tibetans.

Invasion and subjugation is a natural (albeit painful) method of nation formation in the past. Southern China was not part of early China, yet it is now. Vietnam won its independence, so kudos to them for their strong leadership then. Can’t say the same for Tibet atm.

It is, however, unfair Tibetans *today* has to remain tightly within the grips of authoritarian China only because their ancestors were invaded. Because, if that is the matrix for invasion and subjugation, Vietnam ought to be part of China as well.

The Dalai Lama is not exactly an innocent person. The Chinese gahmen trusted him to rule Tibet and bring prosperity/developement into Tibet. He was invited to attend various national conference/congress, he toured the country witnessing the progress of China with top Chinese leaders. It was a trust that was betrayed.

Also, one of the problems in Tibet now is a racial one. Too many Han Chinese are migrating to Tibet due to business and economic opportunities. The Tibetans don’t like this. So they make noise lah. And the gwailos also make noise together-gether.

Far too many people are simply swayed by the Western media and are protesting for the sake of protesting.
“Free Tibet!”
Why free Tibet? “Because China is evil”.
Hasn’t China brought development and does its best to help Tibet? “Huh? Errr… free Tibet anyway!!”

Logically the better option should first be that the referendum is held while Tibet is still part of China. AND the purpose of me bringing up Chinese history becomes clear when linked to this regard. Because I’ve felt that Tibet has been part of China since circa 1200s.

My primary beef is that the Western world is peddling misleading images of an overwhelming majority of Tibetans wanting to separate from China. There have been research on this which shows that a lot of poorer Tibetans actually prefer to be part of China, if just for economic reasons. So let’s settle the issue with a fair referendum. Not with a unilateral Western-influenced secession attempt which disregards the Tibetan people’s majority will.

I don’t see why you keep blaming the West whenever the issue of Tibet comes up. There are certainly Western interest groups pushing for Tibetan independence; I don’t think that has any bearing on whether the Tibetans should have the right to decide for themselves what to do, which is precisely what independence implies.

If Tibet is free, that means Tibet has the right to choose whether to remain independent or be part of China. That’s all there is to it. I support a referendum because it makes more sense than first cutting Tibet off when they might decide they still want to be part of China, but honestly, if China will free Tibet, more power to them and everyone involved. A free Tibet is one free to choose for itself. You seem to assume that if Tibet is independent, it means that the Tibetans will have no choice in the matter of their political allegiance, which is the height of ludicrousness. Only when Tibet is free can they really decide whether they should be politically sovereign or part of China.

My post was a reply to his. Earthinc believed that Tibet at some point in time was an independent entity. He then viewed the 1949 takeover by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) as unfairly annexing Tibet. He thus believes that China (under the CCP)’s rule of Tibet is illegitimate.

It is because of this reason I brought up history into my debate with him.

The trouble is that you seem to have missed this point. My post serves to support my stance in the argument of whether Tibet can legitimately be claimed by China: I say yes, pro-Tibetans like the earthinc says no, while you seem to say that it doesn’t matter.

It is only in the final paragraph that what you think this discussion was about converges with what I wrote. I advocated a referendum because I do want to see the will of the majority prevail in Tibet. But I want it to be on the Tibetan people’s own terms. And not influenced and dictated by Western superpowers which have their own dubious agendas to fulfill.

So on this grounding, I do not think including western interference in this matter to be a red herring. I think it is something that is definitely worth evaluating.

Because like I’ve said, what makes you so sure that pro-Tibetan independence movements in Tibet and around the world are supported by the majority of ordinary Tibetans? They might very well be supported by just small groups of ex-Tibetan political elites, backed considerably by Western powers. In fact, for all their claimed advocacy of democracy, I don’t think I’ve yet to read in the papers any Western countries at least suggesting that China hold a referendum for the Tibetans to decide for themselves what they want. No, instead those powers have done exactly what they accuse the CCP govt of doing, and are just blindly demanding China to ‘release’ Tibet irregardless of the will of the Tibetan majority. Forgive me then if I find their sanctimonious criticisms hard to swallow.

The majority of your post focuses on what are fundamentally irrelevant issues if you really believe in self-determination. The West’s hypocrisy and Chinese history have nothing to do with whether Tibet should have the right to decide to stay or leave the Chinese polity; they are purely red herrings distracting from the fundamental issue of self-determination. You said yourself that you support Tibet remaining within China because of those two reasons, which is at odds with your claim to support self-determination.

All this talk about everybody entitled to freedom of choice is nice and dandy, but it doesn’t reflect the realpolitiks of things.

First off, when did I say the Tibetans have to be ‘forced’ to stay within China? What I did say was all this noise coming from Tibet atm (and more from the outside) could very well just be reflecting the will of the minority. I advocated a referendum to settle the issue. On this point, my position does not differ either from you or from earthinc.

It would be incredibly naive to discount the very real interventions from other powers in world affairs. If you think that the will of the people would always prevail, I would have to ask you to reconsider. Superpowers choose sides in every conflict in history irregardless of the true will of the majority of people involved in them, and prop up the side which serves as their allies. The sudden and huge amount of Western interest in Tibet only after 1949 makes me highly suspicious of their intentions. Like I’ve said, there were hardly any interest in Tibet’s affairs prior to the PRC’s assumption of power in China.