Your recent article about the many missed opportunities for the CTA to engage on the global forum about issues directly related to Tibet made me wonder why. Earlier I recall reading that His Holiness has expressed a personal desire to engage directly with the Chinese people on an individual basis in an effort to get them to understand, perhaps even appreciate, the Tibetan perspective. We have also seen the Sikyong renouncing democracy for Tibet, even though this contradicts the sentiments that he expressed in his doctoral dissertation.
There seems to be a deliberate pattern here of trying to please China, of not expressing any public sentiment or taking any public position that they won't like. One supposes that this is a legitimate strategy, and that if it achieves positive results, His Holiness and the Sikyong will be vindicated. But so far it has achieved nothing, and one can only wonder for how long will they follow this strategy? If it goes on for too long a time, it will begin to appear that the His Holiness, the Sikyong and the CTA simply have no backbone, and that they are willing to remain supine while China walks all over them.
This would not reflect well on either the Sikyong or the CTA.
Indeed, I suggest that now is as good a time as any to dump this as a strategy. Beijing has squashed this recent initiative for HH to travel to Tibet, so what is there to lose? Taking a firm stand now will be very credible in the eyes of the world. After all, Beijing has unilaterally damaged its own credibility with its reversal on Hong Kong. It would be entirely appropriate for Tibet to now demand of China a series of confidence-building measures, so that, at some future time when Tibet is sitting at the table across from China it can say to them: “Okay, we feel like we can trust you now. What shall we talk about?’