Provocation or honour for Dalai Lama

Pakistan OBSERVER, Tue, Oct,30, 2007.

Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema
 

An interesting debate has started in many parts of the world over the award of highest US civil award to Dalai Lama. On 17^th October President Bush presented to Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan leaders, US Congress’ highest civilian honor and also urged the Chinese leaders to welcome him in Beijing. 

The Chinese neither appreciated this award nor acceded to the American desire to receive him in China. Instead they regarded the move as deliberate and cleverly devised move to interfere in the internal affairs of China. ‘The move of the United States is a blatant interference with Chinese internal affairs which has severely hurt the feelings of the Chinese people and gravely undermined the relations between China and the United States’, remarked the spokesman of Chinese foreign ministry Mr Liu Jianchao. The Chinese foreign minister summoned the America ambassador and conveyed a strong protest to the US government. 

Prior to the actual award, China had warned the Americans that honoring a man who is considered by the Chinese as a person engaged in splitting their country would entail serious consequences for mutual relations. ‘China urges the United States to take effective measures immediately to remove the terrible impact of its erroneous act and take concrete stepts to protect China-US relations’ Liu said. 

The Americans, of course, view it differently.  They laud Dalai Lama as a figure of moral authority. Not only few days back he was warmly received by the German Chancellor Angela Merkel but some, in the western countries, view him as a powerful symbol of Tibetan resistance and appreciate his efforts in this regard. 

The questions that need to be explored include whether or not the honoring of Dalai Lama adds pressures on Beijing and whether or not the western countries genuinely believe that Dalai Lama is spreading a message of peace and tranquility or is he being used as important part of western tactical moves? Two interpretations seem to be circulating currently. There are those who feel that Dalai Lama deserve honor for spreading a message of hope for peace. In this connection the advocates of this argument refer to recognition by other important international groups. They feel that his efforts in a chaotic world need to be encouraged and promoted. 

The other interpretation is that Dalai Lama may be doing some good work but he is being used to promote a certain set of policy pursuits. Indeed this interpretation is far more popular than the earlier one. Those who are using him as a symbol of resistance movement in Tibet appear to be aiming at encouraging the resistance groups in Tibet and would like to see troubles fomented at a significant scale. In this connection the interests of some countries seem to have coincided. The award of honors and titles are meant to extend token recognition of the work done by an individual. It also aims to extend deserving encouragement. The critics argue that the American award to a controversial individual amounts to reflect certain policy objectives. The award of an honor in a given society is not an all that unusual development but when it is awarded to someone who is not only extremely controversial but has been engaged in a continuous struggle for what he believes a just cause which the other party regard as an interference in internal affair is bound to initiate a debate. For obvious reasons it could invoke strong reactions from certain quarters on one hand and the quest to probe why such a development has taken place intensifies on the other. 

The recent American award to Dalai Lama falls into this category. Ever since Dalai Lama fled from Tibet and took refuge in India and the Indian not only provided him with a base to carry on his struggle but also patronized his efforts against the Chinese. Following the death of the Cold War and the consequent radical changes in the international environment including the emergence Indo-US strategic partnership, the Tibetan resistance against China acquired new dimension. 

One well known objective of the Americans is to put pressure on the Chinese in one form or the other. In this connection their close allies have played an important part. Not only India is being built as a bulwark against the Chinese, even the British decided to join in and consequently they opted to hold joint military exercises in Ladakh which is not only part of the disputed territory between India and Pakistan but also borders on China. 

The Pakistanis, quite rightly, felt annoyed over the military exercise in Ladakh even though it was generally considered more meant for pressures on China. Implicit in such an act was not just motivation to please the Americans but also to woo India for both political as well economic reasons. Indeed it was a shock for the Pakistanis who regard the British as responsible for leaving the Kashmir dispute unresolved. 

Honors or awards are meant for constructive contributions within a given society and not rewarding someone who is leading symbol of resistance in Tibet and playing in the hands of Chinese adversaries. Any work or negative contributions invariably invites condemnation but if it has been encouraged and promoted for some ulterior motives by the powerful elements in the given society then one would find evasive explanations. 

Already there exists an undesired cleavage between Western world and China which needs to be bridged as soon as possible. Any contribution that has helped in creating or widening the gulf should not be patronized or rewarded. The award of highest civilian honor to Dalai Lama appears to be based more on negative objectives rather than a positive recognition of his work. 

By and large it seems that the recent award to Dalai Lama is more based on nefarious policy objectives rather than recognizing his constructive contributions. If one accepts the American bases for such an award then one should also serious consider many other leaders who are also deeply engaged in liberation struggle in many parts of the world. Undoubtedly they  also deserve similar awards. Most of the work of such individuals is dismissed by the west and they are invariably branded as terrorists. 

As the world is shrinking and is often referred as a global village, it is all the more essential to promote peace and harmony. To award someone highest civilian honor that is more based on negative reasons and is deemed to be in congruence with certain policy objectives is indeed reflective of twisted and distorted thinking. It is also viewed as deliberately contrived an unnecessary provocation.

The writer works for Islamabad Policy research Institute.