Belgium bows to China and denies Dala Lama visa

[Craig]

I normally don't do this folks but I have been a supporter of the Free Tibet movement for three decades:

Belgium refuses entry to the Dalai Lama

[London] Belgium has prevented the Dalai Lama from applying for a visa following massive pressure from the Chinese Government. The Dalai Lama was due to appear in Brussels before 300 delegates from around the world at the 5th International Conference of Tibet Support Groups from 11 to 14 May 2007.

It is reported that Belgium's decision has come prior to Prince Philippe's upcoming trade meetings with Chinese counterparts.

"It is shameful that the Belgian government, a state member of the EU and a country with a long democratic tradition is willing to
sacrifice its own values and take orders from a repressive regime. It is a worrying sign that democratic governments who are meant to protect human rights, freedom and justice, easily trade these values for economic interests," said Yael Weisz-Rind, Director of Free Tibet Campaign.

Free Tibet Campaign urges the Foreign Ministry in Brussels to publicly apologise and to immediately rectify their decision.

It's time to take action , folks, and phone a protest to the Belgian Embassy nearest to you.

Copy the Text below, and email to the two ministers at the given email addresses, and do your bit for freedom.
_______________________________________________________

Dear Minister Karel De Gucht (Minister for Foreign Affairs) : [e-mail]

Dear Didier Donfut (State Secretary for European Affairs) : [e-mail]

We have learnt that His Holiness the Dalai Lama will not be attending the TSG Conference this Friday (11th May) due to the Belgian government's unwillingness to have him present at the Conference. This follows strong pressure from China on Belgium not to allow His Holiness to attend the Conference and in connection with the upcoming Belgian trade delegation (16th - 26th June 2007) to China led by the Belgian Crown Prince Philippe.

The Tibetan Government in Exile has put a press statement on the Dalai Lama not being able to participate in the TSG Conference. Attached below and on this website: www.tibet.net/en/prelease/2007/090507.html

In the name of the basic democratic values and human rights, I wish to express my amazement and rejection of such flagrant submissiveness to the Government of China´s attempt to violate with total impunity another basic human and democratic right and try to hide or manipulate its responsibilities in the Tibet issue.

For the government of Belgium to blatantly bow to China in this way and deny the Dalai Lama, an internationally renowned religious leader and a former Nobel laureate, freedom of speech is nothing short of an outrage. If this is the way all so-called democracies will start to behave when bullied by China, the future for human rights around the world, let alone in Tibet, looks very bleak indeed. And to think that China was awarded the 2008 Olympic Games. Has no-one the courage to stand up to this oppressive regime?

Although the decision by the Belgian government to block His Holiness' participation will no doubt cast a cloud over the forthcoming Conference, everybody that had planned to attend the Conference will be in Brussels with a stronger voice. Through the participation in the Conference, we will together be able to demonstrate our continued determination to continue the struggle and to collectively denounce this shameful decision by the Belgian Government.

In the name of the dignity of our democratic and European values and that of the Belgium Government that you represent we ask you to reconsider this decision and give a credible solution to what will only be a source of scandal and mistrust to your independence.

Yours sincerely.

[Deleted]

I went looking for a article on the Dalai Lama's thoughts on the situation in Tibet (because I hate involving myself in any conflict without understanding the aims of both sides) and I must say, I agree wholeheartedly with the principles of his campaign.
Especially this part, which could be equally applied to all nations.

"It is not enough, as communist systems have assumed, merely to provide people with food, shelter and clothing. The deeper human nature needs to breathe the precious air of liberty. However, some governments still consider the fundamental human rights of its citizens an internal matter of the state. They do not accept that the fate of a people in any country is the legitimate concern of the entire human family and that claims to sovereignty are not a license to mistreat one's citizens. It is not only our right as members of the global human family to protest when our brothers and sisters are being treated brutally, but it is also our duty to do whatever we can to help them."

Particularly as the Chinese have no valid claim to sovereignty.

I think causes like this are very pertinent to the values we hold, thanks for highlighting the issue Craig. I'll definitely send some emails.

[littleraven]

Personally I know little about Tibet beyond the obvious, or indeed the motivations of the Chinese towards it. They didn't seem to get much from Tibet in terms of resourses as far as I know of, so why do they feel the need to occupy it?

[Deleted]

littleraven said:

They didn't seem to get much from Tibet in terms of resourses as far as I know of, so why do they feel the need to occupy it?

Good question.

The only reason I've come across is arms development and deployment, Tibet has some of the worlds largest uranium deposits and occupying it gives provides China with a border with Burma, India, Bhutan, Nepal and Kashmir.

There could be other reasons, but as there's never beena focus on economic development of the region I can't think what it would be either, so I'm assuming it's purely strategic.

[littleraven]

Interesting, the Uranium deposits themselves would easily justify the course of action from the miltary perspective.

The borders are not necessarily the motivation, because the greater the lenght of a border the greater the length of borders to be defended, it can be very useful to have countries inbetween creating a buffer.

[Craig]

China invaded Tibet as part of its initial revolutionary expansion. In practical terms they had a huge army with nothing to do so they gave it a short, easy war to keep it busy.

The Tibetan army was tiny, poorly armed and very inexperienced. Despite that they put up a valiant, though short-lived, resistance. In the aftermath hundreds of thousands of people, nuns and monks were massacred, displaced or sent to internal re-education centres (forced labour or death camps).

Since that day the Chinese have subjected the Tibetan people, and especially their monks and buddhist institutions to near-genocidal oppression. Millions of Chinese immigrants have been granted access to all the best land and key posts in all the new communist institutions.

The Chinese have been continuously infuriated by the Dalai Lama. Not just because of his refusal to submit to their illegal occupation, but also because they cannot characterise him as a terrorist. He has been been resolute in his stance of passive resistance, as have his followers. The fury in Beijing when he received the Nobel Peace Prize almost had China withdrawing from the UN.

It is increasingly obvious that the western powers regard Tibet as an embarrassment that they ignore at every opportunity in their quest to woo China's industrial might and huge potential markets. A real example of capitalist greed overcoming international ethics.

This latest episode, where a liberal democratic European power has submitted to China's outrageous demands out of economic pragmatism, means that China will now be encouraged to continue its oppression in Tibet and wherever exiled Tibetans and their supporters gather.

The Chinese Government now knows that the EU will do nothing to jeopardise relations with them, even if it means millions of Tibetans living in a state that is more repressive than Kim Jong-Ils North Korea.

I thought that China winning the Olympics was the lowest point in our western willingness to accomodate their genocide, I was wrong. This is a sad day.

[Deleted]

littleraven said:

The borders are not necessarily the motivation, because the greater the lenght of a border the greater the length of borders to be defended, it can be very useful to have countries inbetween creating a buffer.

Good point. I suppose given the nature of their history that Tibet wouldn't make a very good buffer if it wasn't under their control though.