Tibetan sovereignty and independence from China.

An argument for a Free Tibet.

This Paper will go over the independence of Tibet and if China has authority over it or should Tibet be recognized as an independent country.

Chinese view: The Chinese view is that Tibet has been an official part of China and the Han Chinese people since the Yuan Empire into the Ming, Qing, and PRC. Thus china claims they have a right of inheritance and over the Tibet state. The Chinese also claim the Tibetans signed over the country in the peaceful 17th- Point agreement in which the Han Chinese liberate the Tibetans, and the 14th Dalai Lama recognizes this. China also claims it has been respecting the culture and tradition of the Tibetan people and be the nicest to them as possible. The Chinese also view the liberation as a way to take them out of slavery and serfdom. China argues that all Tibetans now have equal rights like all Chinese people do, and enjoy true religious freedom like the Chinese people do.

Tibet View: That Tibet has always been a separate state from the Chinese state, and that the Yuan Empire was Mongolian thus the Chinese cannot claim this right to the Chinese sovereignty over Tibet. The Qing army was formally invited to settle domestic disputes in the country and thus does not hold any sovereignty, not to mention the fact the nation of Tibet sent troops over to the Qing to help them out. Also not to mention the Qing were Manchu and not Han Chinese. Prior to the 1949 invasion the nation of Tibet had been recognized under international law, had a defined territory, a government, tax system, unique currency, and unique postal systems and stamps, also a formal army. The Tibetans also say the 17-point agreement was imposed on them by the threat of arms of 40,000 PLA troops in the capital of Chamdo. Tibet also claims its formal treaties of recognition along with Mongolia in 193, and that Tibet’s independence was confirmed at the treaty of Simla. The Tibetans also make note that the old ways we’re not perfect however slavery would have been abolished at some point (claims the 14th Dali lama) and that through Chinese aggression 1.2 to 2 million Tibetans have been killed by the Chinese, as well as Tibet’s Buddhist religion.


Who is correct: History shows that no Chinese empire before Yung has had any control or territory into the nation of Tibet, infact the Tang and Song dynasty fully recognized the country of Tibet. Next the Yung Empire was Mongolian; by that notion the Mongolians should have a right to China. The Chinese claim the Ming have control over the Tibet state; there is no historical documentation or evidence to support this, also any maps of the time show the Tibet state as incorporating more of the Ming empire then of the proposed Tibetan state (So maybe Tibet should claim more of Chinese territory) Next the issue of the Qing, the People’s republic of china claim that the Chinese people have sovereignty over Tibet during this period most notable the han Chinese. O.K the People’s Republic of china needs to stop censoring the world for one second and learn its own history; The Qing empire was Manchu Chinese not Han Chinese, unless the nation of Manchuria comes up from the dead and Conquers china then and only then will they have any rights over the Tibet state. Officially both the now republic of china (Know called Taiwan to not piss of the PRC) and Tibet we’re granted independence after the Xinhai revolution. Even if you take away all the historical record, and the U.N officially recognizing the country. The people’s republic of china are not the inheritors of the state, the PRC is not the descendant of the past Chinese governments and thus do not have any claim over Tibet especially not in the realm of inheritance.

Next, this entire Liberating Tibet is pure Chinese Propaganda. The 17 point agreement was not peaceful signed by the 14th Dali lama (Unless you call Mao and his armies threating to kill you and your people peaceful) not to mention that once signed the Dali lama even said in India he was forced too. Next the PRC says the Tibet people “all” support the communist party and love the PRC. Then explain to me that from the very day of Chinese occupation of Tibet to 1959 there was protest and people of Tibet demanding that the Han Chinese leave (Not to mention they still want independence) in independent Tibet, over 6,000 monasteries served as school, most we’re destroyed by the PRC army. Any school claim to be rebuilt by the Chinese was built on the backs of Tibet labor and then they People’s Republic claims the schools are unqualified to teach the Tibetan language, culture, and or history.

The Chinese also claim their occupation has helped the Tibet people achieve education and gave land to the Tibet serfs, the land they gave was not to the Tibetan people but to the Han Chinese people which have the full beaunfiets of the education system which has led to tens of thousands of Tibetan students fleeing to India to achieve a fair education. China also claims that it has improved the living conditions of the country; yeah tell that to the 1.2-2 million Tibetans who have been killed (Officaly) by the Chinese. Not to mention Hu Yaobang has quoted “ Since our occupation of Tibet its living conditions have gone down considerable under Chinese rule”

The Chinese people also claim the Tibet people now have the same rights and privileges of the Chinese people……………wait what rights? The Tibet people have been trying to get a tibet person elected into a government position in their own country since the occupation and the Chinese have rejected them all “for not being trustworthy enough” and it suppresses all non-communist Tibetans and engage in torture. The Chinese have also been destroying and killing off the Tibet’s Buddhist sect, and now claim to have the right to choose the next Dali lama which the Tibet people do not get the right to do, but wait china I thought Tibet was a wonderful land of human rights since you occupied them.

Even Mao Zedong admitted that Tibet was an independent country when he passed through the border regions of Tibet remarking “ This is our only foreign debt, and some day we must pay the Tibetans for the provisions we are obliged to take from them….via force”

The continuation of the Chinese occupation of Tibet will only lead to more deaths and abuse of Han Chinese on the Tibet people, FREE TIBET. (Not to mention if China has a right over Tibet then Mongolia has a right over China)

Your views below: Now Please state your argument for a Free or occupied Tibet, and or Other.

That's why monks are setting themselves on fire right?/sarcasm

Tibet is now a part of China and China has ruled over the region for half a century now. So it shall stay Chinese.

My argument was not that it will or will not, but rather is it? and it is. Though We suck china's dick so much we will never do anything to get them mad.

Czechoslovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, and Hungary were controlled by Austria for over how many centuries and they are now independent countries. Does Austria still have legitimate claims to have control over these countries?

This is the same as saying the European nations whom settled with Native Americans have now been dominant over them for hundreds of years, therefore, Native Americans no longer resemble their own people.
I don't agree, this may come to a peaceful resolution, but it doesn't seem like the Western world cares much. They have too much of a boner for the Middle East and their resources.

I know how to solve this problem, implant oil into the grounds in Tibet, and when the United States knows of it, they will help for ten years, until all of the oil is gone.

And then will move to Africa to collect all of there oil in the name of DEMOCRACY.

My opinion on the matter is this, Did China have a right to invade? Of course not. Do I want an independent Tibet? God no. China isn't a place known for its civil liberties but at least they don't have outright slavery like Tibet did, and probably still would had they not been occupied. The Dalai Llama can say they probably would have abolished it at some point all he wants, that doesn't make it right. He's just saying that to suck up to foreigners.

China not having slavery, you do know that right now china is the center of slavery in the world and is one of the worst places of civil liberties and rejection of even the most basic of human rights, and Of course the Dalai Llama has to suck up to foreigners its the only way to get acceptance for the independence of Tibet but as of right now the people of the world are so deep in Chinese pockets they will never go for it. Also alot of nations even in the 1950s had slavery, the slaves in the country we're very minimal and there was starting to get reform to abolish it.

Eventually it would have been abolished by international intervention, I doubt any modern society would get away with that.

Are you saying that Tibet doesn't deserve to be free just because it had slavery when it was independent. The Tibetan culture is effectively being destroyed by the Chinese. I would rather they be independent and have slavery than their culture be effectively destroyed. Plus, some foreign power would probably support Tibet and encourage human and civil rights in Tibet if it becomes independent.

All in all, China occupying tibet is only causing another problem, where we could have less of a problem dealing with slavery, which is culturally outdated at this point and will be abolished regardless of idealistic views on the subject.

@Viking: I said myself that China is bad on the whole freedom concept. I'm just saying Tibet is worse. Slavery is the worst affliction that could ever happen to anyone.
@Battalion: There is so much slavery still in the world today it makes your post laughable. Have you ever eaten chocolate? A slave probably harvested it (picked? I'm not sure who cocoa beans are made)
Poet: I would rather slavery be abolished. I guess it's a different point of view.

The funny part about slavery is even thought it is outlawed in every country in the world, at no point in the world has there ever been more slaves. There are more slaves working in the united states at the moment then during the pre-civil war, which thought thats alot no country comes close to China or North korea with there camps and slave workers.

EDIT: there is a reply button for a reason.

I'm saying that slavery is better than an entire culture getting destroyed. I don't support slavery in any way, shape, or form but I like it better than culture destroying.

The argument can be made that slavery increased with Chinese occupation.

Oh yes, because slaves in Sierra Leone harvest cocoa from their diamond mines.

The Dalai Lama, having been internationally recognized, and an intellectual human being, might realize this and abolish slavery. I don't know if you understand that you're basically calling every other nation, other than your own, stupid, but you are whether you agree with me or not.

Well I didn't want to replay to 3 different posts, I feel it would make mine too long. Also, we seem to have very different definitions of slavery.

Like I said, that's where we disagree.

@battalion: how?

Ok I'll admit my definition was slightly different from that but I still affirm my stance. People in China and especially the US are not property.