Enigma Variations
Every year 10 March Tibetans in exile have been able to give vent to their suppressed fury by publicly protesting against the foreign occupation of their homeland. The Chinese embassy in New Delhi has been a particularly favourite spot, outside which local Tibetans spent hours on that day, reminding themselves and those who cared to listen of their continuing plight, and hurling abuses at their barely capable targets. Some attempts have been made to enter the embassy compoind in order to make somebody personally accept their memorandum, but the police never had any problem desisting them. Nonetheless, the whole exercise had a curiously soothing after-effect on the demonstrators—perhaps much like that on Japanese factory workers who nip down to the basement every once in a while to pounce on papier mache models of their bosses so that they could resume their work, temporarily contented with life and grinning from ear to ear to prove it.
But this year the Delhi police made sure that the Tibetans were deprieved of even this outlet. The reason is far from clear. Some of the demonstrators were told that orders have been issued recently to prevent any foreigner from taking part in demonstrations in the city. The written order when see, however, left no doubt that it applied only to the Tibetans.
Another version has it that permission for holding the rally was sought too late so that the police was not confident of being able to cordon off the embassy compound in time. This too is rather difficult to swallow since the police presence at the two localities whence the demonstrations were to start was, if anything, stronger than usual. If they could arrange to gather at a place ten minutes’ walk from the embassy long before the first demonstrator arrived on the scene, why couldn’t they do so, with all those vehicles at their command, outside the embassy itself?
Granted that Section 144 of the Indian Penal Code, prohibiting gathers, was imposed on the embassy area. But this is nothing new. It is imposed every year this time precisely in anticipation of the Tibetan demonstration. And every year the demonstrators did reach the embassy area, and all that the police did was ensure that they did not actually enter the embassy compound. Did they, for some reason, think that it will be different this year? Were the Tibetans supposed to be fully armed this time? Or did the police fear that Tibetans might have hired the estimable talents of Messrs Stallone, Eastwood, Bronson & Schwarezenegger? Will we ever learn the truth?
Every year 10 March Tibetans in exile have been able to give vent to their suppressed fury by publicly protesting against the foreign occupation of their homeland. The Chinese embassy in New Delhi has been a particularly favourite spot, outside which local Tibetans spent hours on that day, reminding themselves and those who cared to listen of their continuing plight, and hurling abuses at their barely capable targets. Some attempts have been made to enter the embassy compoind in order to make somebody personally accept their memorandum, but the police never had any problem desisting them. Nonetheless, the whole exercise had a curiously soothing after-effect on the demonstrators—perhaps much like that on Japanese factory workers who nip down to the basement every once in a while to pounce on papier mache models of their bosses so that they could resume their work, temporarily contented with life and grinning from ear to ear to prove it.
But this year the Delhi police made sure that the Tibetans were deprieved of even this outlet. The reason is far from clear. Some of the demonstrators were told that orders have been issued recently to prevent any foreigner from taking part in demonstrations in the city. The written order when see, however, left no doubt that it applied only to the Tibetans.
Another version has it that permission for holding the rally was sought too late so that the police was not confident of being able to cordon off the embassy compound in time. This too is rather difficult to swallow since the police presence at the two localities whence the demonstrations were to start was, if anything, stronger than usual. If they could arrange to gather at a place ten minutes’ walk from the embassy long before the first demonstrator arrived on the scene, why couldn’t they do so, with all those vehicles at their command, outside the embassy itself?
Granted that Section 144 of the Indian Penal Code, prohibiting gathers, was imposed on the embassy area. But this is nothing new. It is imposed every year this time precisely in anticipation of the Tibetan demonstration. And every year the demonstrators did reach the embassy area, and all that the police did was ensure that they did not actually enter the embassy compound. Did they, for some reason, think that it will be different this year? Were the Tibetans supposed to be fully armed this time? Or did the police fear that Tibetans might have hired the estimable talents of Messrs Stallone, Eastwood, Bronson & Schwarezenegger? Will we ever learn the truth?
posted by editorla at
9:10 PM
<< Home