I had to do a double take when I saw a bottle of "Free Tibet Golden Ginger Ale" at an ice cream parlor my first day home after spending six months in China. In my time away, I had forgotten about how Americans like to openly mix the controversial and the commercial.
Maybe it was culture shock, but this struck me as bizarre and unfair. There are lots of territorial conflicts and oppressed people in the world, so why bother slapping the Tibetan flag on bottles of soda as a globally conscious marketing gimmick?
Back in March, when Tibet became a particularly hot topic because of the riots in Lhasa and other ethnically Tibetan parts of China, I realized I knew embarrassingly little about the situation. I started asking both American classmates and Chinese teachers and friends to explain the history. At the extremes, these were the two story lines I heard:
Chinese story: "Tibet has always been and will always be a part of China. When the Chinese army liberated the Tibetan province from the inhumane feudal system headed by the Dalai Lama in 1950, many people who were previously enslaved went free and Tibetans were, on the whole, grateful for communist rule. The United States, however, wanted to weaken China and oppose communism, so it supported the uprising in 1959 and then the Dalai Lama's government in exile.
"Tibetans have benefited from being part of China, as Beijing has invested immense amounts of money to improve the region's infrastructure and grow the tourism industry. The Dalai Lama still wants to split Tibet away from the rest of China and is therefore a dangerous and despised enemy of the Chinese people.
"It's also important to remember that this is an internal Chinese problem and foreigners have no right to interfere or even discuss it in their newspapers."
American story: "Tibet was a peaceful, self-governing Buddhist nation independent from China until the Chinese army 'liberated' it against its will in 1950. The Dalai Lama and his government in exile are the rightful rulers of Tibet, which is still occupied by China. The Tibetans have been oppressed for many years, denied religious freedom and political self-determination.
"The Chinese occupation of Tibet has not brought any prosperity to Tibetan people, as all industries are owned and managed by government officials and non-Tibetan Chinese who have moved to the region. China rewrote history in a way that legitimates its expansionary territorial claims and then used state-controlled media to brainwash the Chinese people into believing its story."
Needless to say, I was a bit confused. The stories line up only on the basic premise that Tibet exists, and there are some problems there. But before cursing the Chinese government as a bunch of totalitarian liars, let's assume that reality (foggy, censored and subjective as it may be) lies somewhere between these two narratives.
I have never been to Tibet and am certainly not an expert on the issue, but my conversations with Chinese people over the next few months convinced me that the following points should become part of the American dialogue about the region.
First, it's significant that the United States may have been involved in funding and training Tibetans who participated in the 1959 uprising. This information should be a permanent part of the thirty-second CliffsNotes on modern Tibetan history. For better or worse, the Dalai Lama might not have become a household name if the United States had decided to fund guerrilla fighters in Xinjiang instead of Tibet.
Second, a free Tibet is not possible because China would not hesitate to use violence against Tibetans in order to preserve its sovereignty in the region. Unchallenged territorial sovereignty is a political necessity for any country, particularly for China with its one-party political system, complicated ethnic situation and, of course, Taiwan.
If Americans are familiar with Chinese history and politics and still feel idealistic enough to become Tibet advocates, they should know that a free Tibet is out of the question and focus on issues of autonomy, rights and religion. The conversation with China is over as soon as some one says "independent Tibet."
Finally, we can't expect China to take seriously Americans' "meddling in their internal affairs" when we do distasteful things like use the Tibet issue to sell gourmet soda. This plays on the romanticized Tibet of the American imagination, trivializing the situation, eroding our ability to evaluate the conflict from an unemotional place and undermining the legitimacy of our opinions. No wonder China thinks Americans are just looking for another reason to be critical.
Tibet will continue to make headlines as the Beijing Olympics fade further into memory, and while I don't expect any campus groups to start selling "Don't Free Tibet" t-shirts any time in the near future, it wouldn't hurt to add a touch of realism to our understanding of Tibetan history and any attempts at activism.
Rachel Forman '09 prefers the crisp, clean taste of Chinese-Sovereignty-Is-Inevitable Cola
