3rd WPCT, 23-24 April, 1997, Washington, D.C.
Moderator: Hon. Mario Carazo
Discussants: Dr. Drew Li, Dr. Orville Schell
Hon. Mario Carazo: What can be obtained? What are the opportunities that come from a revised leadership in China?
Dr. Drew Liu: A one-sentence answer to the question, Where is China? Is China is at the crossroads. It is at crossroads where it faces great uncertainty about the future; great threat of dictatorship to Chinese people and to its neighbours' potential for Democracy. There are four areas to note:
- Political System: Outgrown by the circumstances of the new era, the old Maoist control systems are no longer effective. The question is, should China go towards a Constitutional Democracy or should it be an imperialistic state trying to redeem itself of the repeated violation of its territory, specially in the 19th century? At the grassroots the following actions are recommended: Adopting prisoners of conscience; and writing letters. Organizing Tibetan Losar (New Year) celebrations to make the culture visible and commemorating the anniversary of the Tibetan National Uprising will help in increasing media coverage.
- Economic: Today the marketplace assumes increasing strength in China. But it is a half baked marketplace. State ownership may be undermined but a non-state sector is not a private sector.
- Social: Traditionally the middle gentry has served as a buffer between the state and the people. Today, the middle class wants to integrate with the rest of the world and participate.
- Culture: There is today a cultural vacuum in China. Communist ideology is rejected. Nationalism is on the rise. In short, China is facing an identity crisis.
So, there are great opportunities and great challenges, too.
Dr. Orville Schell: Why does China want to hold onto Tibet? China spends a lot of money in Tibet. Today, Tibet is a net drain for China. It derives more negative publicity from Tibet in the long term than any other issue, including the Tiananmen Square massacre and the Cultural Revolution.
There are two questions — What is happening in China? And might we expect anything?
In the short run, the scenario is gloomy. The obvious fact of life today in China is that Maoism is dead, but Communism is not. Therefore, it has a body but no soul, except for the market. Therefore, the government in China needs to find reasons for its legitimacy. The Chinese people themselves have pretty much given up on Communism.
Now there is nationalism. Not simply projected to the outside world (in the west we see China's rigid, unyielding, military stance), it also has meaning within the country. Unification of the Motherland was a common theme with every ruler. Mao, too, promised unification. He occupied Xianjiang, Mongolia and Tibet.
In this climate, nationalism is whipped up. No leader can allow any autonomy to the areas as it will be seen as the breaking up of the motherland.
The Communist Party is seeking to restore itself through nationalism. Thus, there is great pressure on the Chinese leaders to hold on to Tibet and other areas.
Another factor is the marketplace, which has rushed in to the philosophical vacuum. People in China do not know what is Chinese anymore. Thus, the people do not have an idea of what the state is anymore and we do not know what we are dealing with. So, the outlook is bleak.
Playing with nationalism is very dangerous and the solution is very difficult. The leadership does not even have the power to give half a loaf (concessions).
His Holiness the Dalai Lama has already backed up enough. There may not be enough room to back up anymore. Also, we have seen that once you make concessions, they (Chinese) stop dialogue altogether. They lay down rigid rules. Not that if you were doing the same, it would not be effective.
Hence, it is not a great time to expect anything on Tibet from Beijing.
Question and Answer Session
Question by Mr. Thupten Samphel: Tibet today enjoys a certain visibility. Is there an amicable way to resolve the situation?
Dr. Drew Liu: Intellectual Chinese would like an amicable solution through negotiations. The average Chinese will definitely support His Holiness the Dalai Lama's proposal for a solution less than independence. To the average Chinese, Greater Tibet means eating into Chinese territory.
The Chinese government is not afraid of international pressure on Tibet. Our analysis is that they think the Dalai Lama's actions will not have much of an impact on Tibet, however well he fares overseas. That is why they are so particular about reincarnation. They think that the self-interest of the people will surface. An economically developed and integrated Tibet will be pro China. This view in my opinion is unrealistic.
Question from Hon. Ela Gandhi: Do you think that the Tibet support groups have perhaps made the movement into an anti-communist movement and this is a threat to granting independence? His Holiness said that it is not an anti-communist movement. Will a change in focus make a difference?
Dr. Schell: Anti-Communist movement can only be salutary. When you try to be reasonable, there is no end to it. Therefore, it is a slippery slope. It is good if the opponent comes with noble intentions, but China does not. Therefore, we need to be wary of such concessions. The US too has learned from it.
Dr. Liu: Tibetan issue is not a separate issue. Unless the Chinese identity is found, the Tibetan issue cannot be resolved. China needs to resolve with its own past: Power makes might? And, is concession and dialogue the way to go?
China's soul is still haunted by what the British and the Japanese did to it. Till it is resolved, the Tibetan issue will be avoided. Therefore, Tibetans also have to work to find China's soul.
Dr. Schell: Because of their nationalism, Chinese in their 40s and 50s want to keep China together. Thus it is not just the older generation of Chinese that want a unified motherland. Also, there isn't much reflection or information on Tibet in China.
Question from Hon. Henri Wujec: We have seen that nationalism hasn't succeeded, for example in Romania. Nationalism needs nationalists. They also need an enemy. I think it is a better way to go step by step.
Dr. Schell: There was an unnoticed message in 1989. They took care of the "Polish disease" — workers rising up. The message was, 'don't allow political reform'. Therefore there is not much hope. When political movement becomes threatening, they cut it off.
Question from Hon. B.B. Tiwari: His Holiness stands for genuine self rule. He has tried genuine negotiations. What will be the prospect of negotiations after Deng's death.
Dr. Liu: There is still opportunity. There may be an emergence of interest groups. Democratization in China is not morally driven. China had a unitarian political controlling system. Now, after Deng's death, there is no paramount power. Power now is spread around and lies in different institutions, which is heretofore unknown in Chinese Communist history. Now we see different factions using institutional mechanisms to check and balance each other. If combined with putting liberals in power, then irrational nationalism may be balanced.
Question from Hon. Bob Brown: Is there a scope to sell a solution in economic terms?
Dr. Schell: If the US can get a handle on China policy, and engage, a positive package can be offered. For example, the Chancellor of University of California at Berkeley, who is an influential Chinese, can be used to do some negotiations.
The session adjourned for tea and coffee.
