Penpa Tsering, sikyong (president) of the Dharamshala-based Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), has plans to expose the growing Chinese belligerence along the Indian border. The hawkish leader of the Tibetan government-in-exile has ordered his ministry of state security to prepare a report on the activities of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in the Tibetan plateau, which he plans to present to the Chinese embassy in Delhi.
At the same time, Tsering wants the Indian government to have a structured policy for Tibetans living on the frontline in the Himalayas. He wants them to be settled in the empty stretches in the far-flung areas, which he says can help detect and prevent PLA intrusions like the one that happened in the Galwan valley.
Speaking exclusively to THE WEEK, Tsering, who was born and raised in a Tibetan settlement in Bylakuppe in Karnataka, said his first task as sikyong was to restart the Sino-Tibetan dialogue.
Excerpts from the interview:
Q/ How true are the reports about China inducting Tibetans into the PLA to fight the Indian Army on the Himalayas?
A/ First of all, [China needs to] trust the Tibetans to put weapons in their hands. If there is no trust, they can also fight back. I know of earlier attempts to recruit people from the Qinghai province to serve in the military in East Turkestan (Xinjiang). But I don’t trust the Chinese to recruit Tibetans to their army and send them to the Indian border, because Tibetans have too much respect for India.
India is the land of Aryabhata and we have a guru-chela (teacher-disciple) relationship. Tibetans feel they are an extension of Indian culture. It is only the food and clothing that come from China; the inner peace and spirit is derived from India.
So, I believe it is Chinese propaganda. As the Special Frontier Force (SFF, consisting of Tibetan soldiers) is on the Indian side, the Chinese are trying to send a message that Tibetans will be fighting each other, which is absolutely false.
Q/ How do you see the role of Tibetans as the first line of defence on the border?
A/ Tibetans have always played an important role in defending India’s borders—whether it was the Bangladesh war, the Kargil war or the skirmishes in the Galwan valley. Earlier, it was not known, but now the role played by the SFF is well documented in the media. We are very proud of them. India gave us a home to stay; for those of us who were born here, it is our first home. I feel the Indian government can prepare a structured policy for ordinary Tibetans living on the frontline in far-flung stretches, because they continue to play the role of defenders of the Himalayas. It is not easy terrain, but their perseverance and commitment is exemplary.
Q/ What are your main objectives as sikyong?
A/ My first objective is to restart the Sino-Tibetan dialogue. Second, we want to reach out to governments around the world. Third, we want to maintain close relations between the Tibetan diaspora and the CTA.
Q/ Have you been approached by the Chinese government to restart the dialogue?
A/ It is a fact that the Tibetan situation cannot be resolved without talking to the Chinese government. There are some feelers from those who claim [to be close to Communist Party of China], but we prefer an official channel of communication. We have been taken for a ride for too long.
Guiding light: The Dalai Lama with lamas at the Tibetan Religious Conference | Aayush Goel
Some people claim to have contacts and they claim to be the best channel to reach out to the Chinese leadership, but we have to check their credibility. Till we reach a resolution with the Chinese government through a “middle-way approach”—based on non-violence and a negotiated, mutually beneficial, lasting solution for Tibet—we will be focusing a lot more on understanding the reality of the situation inside Tibet.
If you analyse how China deals with Uyghurs or with Hong Kong, you will see it is probably the only country that spends more money on internal security than external security, which is symptomatic of the relationship between the rulers and the ruled. There is a trust deficit.
We are planning to make a representation to the Chinese government explaining why the policies and programmes being implemented in Tibet are not helpful to China as a state and also for the Tibetan people.
Q/ What is the situation in Tibet?
A/ Before 2008, we used to receive about 2,500 to 3,500 Tibetans every year. This has decreased because of the restrictions in Tibet. Many agents who brought Tibetans, over the Himalayas through Nepal, have been caught and imprisoned. Incentives are being offered to (betray) those who are fleeing. Last year, only five people came. There was also the pandemic. This year, nine people, including two children, have left Tibet. But they may not have much information on what is happening, as they might not have had exposure outside their pin code.
Before the trade war and China’s belligerence on the border, Chinese communication app WeChat was heavily used by Tibetans to communicate with families inside Tibet. Now only those who can afford to use VPNs (virtual private networks) get through. But they still need to be careful not to say anything sensitive, otherwise their relatives inside Tibet will suffer.
Electronic surveillance has increased and hi-tech gadgetry is deployed to track movements, so any political activity will be caught at once. Recently we heard Chinese authorities are forcing families to remove prayer altars from homes and school children are banned from going to monasteries.
The latest information is that Chinese officials are visiting Tibetan families to ask them if they have relatives outside China. Those contacts are being shared with consulates in different countries to call on the Tibetans. So, the control is not just within China, but going beyond its borders to control Tibetans in exile.
Q/ How is the international community responding to your concerns?
A/ The United Nations is willing to listen to us. The world has seen the Uyghurs getting harassed, so even if we do not have complete evidence, the UN understands that many lives are at stake.
I will travel to the US in January and the idea is to work with like-minded countries. I am also looking forward to establishing relationships with new governments like Germany. We are also seeing a slight turnaround in European and African mindsets about viewing China as an intruder. China has been using carrot-and-stick and divide-and-rule policies in European countries.
There is a lot of concern about China’s ‘United Front’ operations (aimed at “co-opting and neutralising sources of potential opposition to the Communist Party”) extending beyond China’s borders and even meddling with domestic affairs of other countries, influencing media houses and financial and educational institutions.
Q/ Is it true that the number of Tibetan monks in monasteries is declining?
A/ The numbers are dwindling. Earlier, of the 40,000 monks and nuns in India, Nepal and Bhutan, about 58 per cent were Indians and 42 per cent Tibetans. Today, the numbers suggest that 65.5 per cent are Indians, mostly from the Himalayan region, sharing similar culture and traditions, and 33.5 per cent are Tibetans. Around one per cent are non-Tibetans and non-Indians. So, no new Tibetans are joining Tibetan monasteries and institutions. But Tibetan Buddhism remains vibrant since it does not belong only to Tibetans.
Q/ Is there any plan to integrate the Tibetan settlements in India?
A/ There are around 1.3 lakh Tibetan refugees in India, Nepal and Bhutan. Of these, around 55 per cent are in India. Eventually, the integration of the Tibetan settlements has to happen, and it is going to be a tough job. People have built houses in different places and asking them to move will be difficult. We will not force anyone to move, we are only creating opportunities to move from a vulnerable community to more compact communities. Around 4,000 refugees still do not have homes. I am travelling all over to understand people’s needs.
Q/ Prime Minister Narendra Modi greeted the Dalai Lama on his 86th birthday this year. Will they meet soon?
A/ The Dalai Lama has to decide when he will start meeting the public officially again. Since he loves human relationships so much, he will definitely be looking forward to (meeting people).
His Holiness is keen to meet the prime minister again and have engagements with Indian universities to see how India’s ancient wisdom can be combined with modern education and contribute to peace and harmony.
Q/ Do you think India needs to state its position publicly on the reincarnation of His Holiness?
A/ Some day, India will have to make its position clear. Since His Holiness lives here and even the United States has recognised the absolute authority of His Holiness and Tibetans to select the Dalai Lama’s reincarnation, New Delhi will have to voice its opinion.
Q/ For the first time, a political crisis hit the Tibetan government-in-exile. Does it not threaten unity?
A/ I took the oath of office on May 27, before the crisis. New members of parliament were supposed to take oath on May 30, but 22 members did not take oath (as per law) and there was a crisis that went on for four months. We have a system that is neither presidential nor parliamentary. It is unique in itself since we are an exiled administration. The charter does not mandate the executive to override the competency of the parliament or the judiciary. As a Buddhist, I believe nothing is permanent. So, the question was how long will it take to resolve this? We were not keen that the parliament would cause concern to His Holiness, but ultimately they wrote to him and he had to intervene and resolve it.
Q/ Are you proposing any changes in running the exiled government?
A/ I believe if there has to be unity, there has to be unity at the top. I have not only reached out to the Tibetan Supreme Justice Commission (apex judicial authority of the CTA) but also to independent bodies, the public service commission, the auditor general’s office and the civil society.
The idea is to systemise our functioning so that irrespective of the changes in individual leadership, the system remains strong. When an individual becomes more important than the organisation, it sounds the death knell of the institution itself. We have promised transparency and we want to institutionalise accountability and responsibility.