"Overseas Chinese National" Controversy is Baseless and Irrelevant

posted Mar 1, 2011, 10:00 AM by The Tibetan Political Review
 
Dear Editors,

I feel the OCN Visa issue has been created as such an important controversy towards Dr. Lobsang Sangay by Dawa Lokyitsang in her recent article, “Lobsang Sangay’s Overseas Chinese National”, which is quite baseless and totally irrelevant.

For IC Holders, if there was a choice of going to China/Tibet as an unmitigated Tibetan or simply on an OCN document, I think it would rather be a ludicrous decision for any Tibetan to go on an OCN paper. If Dr. Lobsang had a choice to begin with, I do not think he would intentionally travel to Tibet or China on an OCN document.

Also, please do not forget that Dr. Lobsang Sangay, who still holds an IC, traveled to China because he felt it necessary and believed that what he was doing helped Tibet in some way or another. Meeting with Chinese Scholars, other academics and exchanging dialogues may not seem much to you, Dawa, but he has in venerated engagements contributed to the advancement of the Tibetan cause. Your underestimating of his outreach and unappreciative attitude towards his efforts should be called an act of treason in itself.

If your concern is of the Chinese Government’s future reaction to electing a Kalon Tripa like Dr. Lobsang who traveled to China on OCN, then, what about a future Kalon Tripa voted and elected by Chinese people? (Tibetans with birthplace as China on their respective passports all over the world) And yes, there are a few folks who have had the chance to argue with the bureaucracy that allowed Lhasa or another major city of the former Tibet as their birthplace. However, a majority of Tibetans born before 1959 or the following years up until the end of Cultural Revolution would have to have China as their birthplace. In your logic, these Tibetans should not even be allowed to vote. How would China react to that in the future, if and when, they decide to do so? And what will we say? Shouldn't we call these Tibetans as traitors as well? Why be lenient to a certain group whilst holding another group accountable?

I am sure you don’t have an answer for these questions.

Therefore, this issue is nothing but another dispute with no real depth and substance. If it is a question of value, then it should apply to every Tibetan. If not, why make it a big deal? Either that, or this is again another reflection of your desperation on how to bring down the candidacy of Dr. Lobsang Sangay.

On top of this, it seems Jamyang Norbu is still not letting go of any small opportunity if open in his attempt to prove Dr. Lobsang Sangay as a Chinese. In his blog, Jamyang Norbu writes and I quote him here:

“But to travel to China, to Beijing, on an OC visa for something as unimportant as meeting some run-of-the mill Chinese academics (not “great scholars” khelwang) clearly demonstrates that the person has no problem being regarded as Chinese.”

Alas! Time is running out. It seems Unity is just an artificial word we tend to use when we feel like it. If the recent display of vindication and antagonism for each other is all that is left then what would the future of Tibet hold?

“United we stand, divided we fall”

Thank you TPR,
Tenzin Ngawang
New York
Comments