Dead-End in Delhi – April 1988
The abrupt end of the hunger-strike in Delhi by Tibetan does not bode well for the future of such activities. This was the third time tht they had organised a ‘hunger strike uto death’. None of the three managed to carry out the threat : the first two petered out afte vague assurances of support form some Indian politician, and the latest one was called off at the behest of the Dalai Lama without achieving even a token response to the hunger striker’s demands.
The hunger strikes of 1974 and 1977 received a fair amount of press, probably because it was thought Tibetans might really do or die as they had been proclaiming in print and in heated speeches. The ensuing retractions were seen as examples of Tibetan gullibility in taking politician’s words seriously. The press probably would have totally ignored the recent strike but for the events in Lhasa of the past few months. If defenceless people in a captive land can willingly sacrifice their lives, it is not unreasonable to expect at least some of their compatriots in the free world, loudly claiming to be fighting for the same cause, to follow suit. Thus, under the circumstances, there was ample coverage of the fast-in-progress despite complaints by the organisers to the countrary. Of course the world would not come to a standstill simply because of a statement of intent ; otherwise, there would be no need for actual action to achieve anything. A mere threat would have the possibility of achieving something only if it comes from someone who has previously demonstrated that he means what he says.
Had the undertaking been continued, eventually one or more of the strikers would have died. The event would undoubtedly have been reported across the world as irrefutable evidence of Tibetans in and outside. Tibet being equally determined to pursue the common objective. Even those Tibetans who had so far been passive witnesses would have been spurred on to action. The United Nations would have been under genuine pressure to do something about the whole thing. And the Chinese would not have gotten a wink of sleep until they came at least halfway to meeting the Dalai Lama’s peace proposal.
The discontinuation of the strike doubtless saved some lives. But what happens now? How will the Tibetan struggle for freedom be carried out in exile? What else is there left to do apart from shouting in the streets for a couple of hours once a year? After this anti-climax, even if another hunger strike is announced in future, will there be the same amount of press and public interestt?
Paradoxically, it seems that in order to carry out such undertakings, the existence of a well-established organization is almost a handicap. Observers have remarked on the fact that the Lhasa rioters did not appear to have any leaders. It was perhaps just as well. Imagine underground leadrs in Lhasa planning a riot but waiting for written permission from Dharamsala before giving their followers the green signal ! It is not possible to verify at this moment the rumour of the Dalai Lama having been requested to make the hunger strikers discontinue their efforts. Whatever the truth may be in this instant, it is clear, however, that this can be done whenever the Chinese feel some political activities of the exiles is proving embarrassing to them. They can ask the Indian government to put an end to it who would feel obliged to ‘advise’ the Tibetan authorities appropriately. And the latter, not being renowned for being able to make independent decisions, would report to the time-honoured practice of passing the buck to the Dalai Lama. End of the problem.
The abrupt end of the hunger-strike in Delhi by Tibetan does not bode well for the future of such activities. This was the third time tht they had organised a ‘hunger strike uto death’. None of the three managed to carry out the threat : the first two petered out afte vague assurances of support form some Indian politician, and the latest one was called off at the behest of the Dalai Lama without achieving even a token response to the hunger striker’s demands.
The hunger strikes of 1974 and 1977 received a fair amount of press, probably because it was thought Tibetans might really do or die as they had been proclaiming in print and in heated speeches. The ensuing retractions were seen as examples of Tibetan gullibility in taking politician’s words seriously. The press probably would have totally ignored the recent strike but for the events in Lhasa of the past few months. If defenceless people in a captive land can willingly sacrifice their lives, it is not unreasonable to expect at least some of their compatriots in the free world, loudly claiming to be fighting for the same cause, to follow suit. Thus, under the circumstances, there was ample coverage of the fast-in-progress despite complaints by the organisers to the countrary. Of course the world would not come to a standstill simply because of a statement of intent ; otherwise, there would be no need for actual action to achieve anything. A mere threat would have the possibility of achieving something only if it comes from someone who has previously demonstrated that he means what he says.
Had the undertaking been continued, eventually one or more of the strikers would have died. The event would undoubtedly have been reported across the world as irrefutable evidence of Tibetans in and outside. Tibet being equally determined to pursue the common objective. Even those Tibetans who had so far been passive witnesses would have been spurred on to action. The United Nations would have been under genuine pressure to do something about the whole thing. And the Chinese would not have gotten a wink of sleep until they came at least halfway to meeting the Dalai Lama’s peace proposal.
The discontinuation of the strike doubtless saved some lives. But what happens now? How will the Tibetan struggle for freedom be carried out in exile? What else is there left to do apart from shouting in the streets for a couple of hours once a year? After this anti-climax, even if another hunger strike is announced in future, will there be the same amount of press and public interestt?
Paradoxically, it seems that in order to carry out such undertakings, the existence of a well-established organization is almost a handicap. Observers have remarked on the fact that the Lhasa rioters did not appear to have any leaders. It was perhaps just as well. Imagine underground leadrs in Lhasa planning a riot but waiting for written permission from Dharamsala before giving their followers the green signal ! It is not possible to verify at this moment the rumour of the Dalai Lama having been requested to make the hunger strikers discontinue their efforts. Whatever the truth may be in this instant, it is clear, however, that this can be done whenever the Chinese feel some political activities of the exiles is proving embarrassing to them. They can ask the Indian government to put an end to it who would feel obliged to ‘advise’ the Tibetan authorities appropriately. And the latter, not being renowned for being able to make independent decisions, would report to the time-honoured practice of passing the buck to the Dalai Lama. End of the problem.
posted by editorla at
8:58 PM
<< Home