Whenever I see the Dalai Lama either in person or in picture, I feel that here is a man who presides over a receding culture of thousands of years and realises that it has a problematic future. Tibet is the home of this culture, a country which is under China that knows only one culture, that of communism which obliterates everything else.
The new home of Tibetan culture is straddling Dharamshala, a hilly territory in India. However the Dalai Lama may try, the Tibetan culture he represents in the wilderness is wilting because the uprooted plant from Tibet is not flourishing in a new environment.
The Tibetans, the Buddhists, are resisting Beijing's might, even after 50 years of suppre-ssion through satyagraha, familiar to India which adopted the same method to oust the British masters. But China is different. It has unleashed terror to suppress the out-of-step Tibetans. And some of them have adopted the way to burn themselves alive to attract attention to their plight.
Already an uncomfortable international society feels horrified over the self-immolations of 99 people, including 15 women. But China has only increased its repression and detained hundreds of potential self-immolators. A few have been taken to law courts and sentenced to imprisonment so that the world is bamboozled by a semblance of order. The Dalai Lama is against self-immolation. But he resides in India which accords him respect but not unrestricted freedom because of China's ever-needling protests.
It was in 1959 that the Dalai Lama along with hundreds of Tibetans escaped the tyranny of China and took refuge in India. The locals do not like the burgeoning Tibetan habitation. But they know that the Buddhists are akin to the Hindus in religious faith and traditions. There-fore, the Tibetan culture conquers tension because the renunciation which the Dalai Lama preaches is what a Hindu ultimately aspires for.
The Dalai Lama often talks about the future and realises that the Tibetans have to return home eventually. As a compromise, he has offered China a status for Tibet within the country. But Beijing has rejected the proposition recently after long talks. China's communism represents a regimented society which has no place for an autonomous culture that is religious in content.
There was a time when the Tibetans rose in revolt. The Khampas among them took to arms. But the Chinese forces crushed them mercilessly with superior arms and numbers. The atrocities committed were untold. Yet the Tibetans never gave up. Even today, the Chinese Army, posted extensively, feels insecure and harassed at the hands of Khampas and other Tibetans.
Beijing blames New Delhi which bends over backwards to assure China that it is not India's doing. After giving refuge to the Dalai Lama and his monk followers, India has sealed the border. It has washed its hands off Tibet which the British left under its tutelage when they quit India in August 1947.
To be on the right side of China, India transferred Tibet's suzerainty to Beijing. Whether New Delhi regrets it or not, suzerainty is not sovereignty. Suzerainty is handing over political control, not extinguishing all rights as New Delhi has done. It is overlordship which is many pegs lower than sovereignty. Yet India, overawed by China, has not even questioned it about the plight of Tibetans. Nor is it blunt in queries when China is using Tibet to “control” the river Bramhaputra rising from Tibet.
The Tibetan plateau and its environs constitute roughly one-quarter of the Chinese landmass, in addition to being the source of fresh water for much of China, India and Bangladesh. Tibet is the land-bound hinge on which the tense geopolitical relationship between China and India rests. Tibet is also unique because the struggle of its people against Chinese domination centres on a charismatic global personality, the Dalai Lama. But what about Tibet after him?
In fact, New Delhi has drawn a Lakshman rekha around the Dalai Lama who has to inform it before leaving the Indian shores. Many a time he has been told that he should not have made certain remarks he had made. The reference to China regarding Tibet is a taboo. And he has been asked to confine himself to the field of culture and religion.
What does the future hold for the Tibetan culture or, for that matter, the Tibetans themselves? This question is never answered by India which feels relieved to see them confined to Dharamshala and the places around it. However, the Dalai Lama has expressed his agony over the future of “his people”. He has no solution, nor has he much hope. If prayers could help, he has prostrated before the Almighty many a time to suggest him a way out.
The world sees the injustice, but does not speak out lest the mighty power that China has become should be annoyed. And the thousand-year-old culture gasps for breath. It knows it will live, not at any particular place but in the hearts of Tibetans who are dwindling in numbers.
The author is a veteran journalist renowned not only in this country but also in our neighbouring states of Pakistan and Bangladesh where his columns are widely read. His website iswww.kuldipnayar.com