Why the Dalai Lama’s Visit Angers the Chinese
Shelley Hawks on Tibet, and how Avatar fits in
In the face of thunderous disapproval from the Chinese government, President Barack Obama met with the Dalai Lama, the exiled spiritual leader of Tibet, for an hour on February 18. Although the conversation was condemned in China Daily as “instigating a potentially destructive downward spiral in relations,” the world’s largest and third-largest economies remain joined at the hip, with $366 billion in mutual trade and $755 billion in Chinese-held U.S. Treasury bills. China’s holdings of U.S. Treasuries reportedly have increased more than tenfold over the last decade.
The two Nobel Peace laureates met in the White House Map Room, not the Oval Office. The setting was a signal to the Chinese government that this was not a diplomatic visit and that the Dalai Lama has no official standing in Tibet. Such symbolic gestures are crucial to our favorable relations with China, says China expert Shelley Hawks, a College of General Studies assistant professor of social science.
BU Today: Is the media blitz about Obama meeting with the Dalai Lama overblown?
Hawks: No. The Tibet issue is extremely sensitive. If Obama had met with the Dalai Lama in the Oval Office, that would be affording him the dignity of a head of state. It was important for the president not to impinge on the national sovereignty issue, which China cares so much about. Before the Communists, in imperial China, ceremony was a way to reinforce hierarchy, and it’s still crucial, even though in the United States we’re much more informal.
Is Tibet more sensitive than our relationship, and billions in arms sales, to Taiwan?
Tibet and the Dalai Lama issue is far more sensitive. When it comes to Taiwan, we’ve had a bipartisan foreign policy since the ’70s, and we’ve developed a middle position, committing ourselves to supplying defensive weapons. It’s a delicate diplomatic situation, but the sale of weapons to Taiwan is the status quo and shouldn’t anger the Chinese government. With the Dalai Lama, adhering to the status quo is more complicated, and Obama must make the gesture of supporting Tibetans’ right to religious freedom while keeping the visit low-profile.
What about fears that angering China may cause it to oppose U.S. sanctions against Iran and North Korea because of their nuclear development, or to thwart our efforts on climate issues?
All of these issues are in doubt. China is watching us to see what kind of respect and cooperation we extend to them. I think Obama has stepped very carefully and hasn’t done anything to endanger U.S.-China relations in the long run.
Does China hold the cards here?
China is an economic superpower and is changing its world profile. It’s absolutely critical that we remain engaged. Obama’s got it right; he’s engaged in China, but he’s asserting the U.S. commitment to religious freedom. He must welcome a visit by the Dalai Lama. And he must show respect to China.
You visited Tibet in 2007. What were your impressions?
I led a group of 25 BU students, most from CGS, to Tibet in late May, when there was a festival honoring the Buddha’s birthday. Pilgrims were pouring into Lhasa, and we toured monasteries with native Tibetans. All of us fell in love with the land, but we’re not alone. The Chinese love Tibet too. It’s become a popular destination for Chinese tourists.
Has Chinese tourism made the Chinese more aware of ethnic Tibetans’ struggle for religious freedom?
There is an increase in progressive sentiment toward Tibet within China. There have been recent petitions, including a constitutional initiative drawn up by some Chinese legal scholars that recommended policy shifts in Tibet, and said that the Tibetan riots of March 2008 expressed some legitimate grievances, albeit violently. It emphasized how Tibetans have been marginalized by the increasing population of Han Chinese, who Tibetans believe are given more job opportunities.
How did the Chinese government respond?
The president of China, Hu Jintao, is considered an expert on Tibet. From 1988 to 1992 he was Communist Party chairman in Tibet, and his handling of student demonstrations there convinced the late Party leader Deng Xiaoping to promote him. He wants to increase China’s role as a superpower, but he knows and cares about Tibet.
Do you see the Tibetan situation changing?
I think most Tibetans would accept a compromise. The exiled Dalai Lama is 74 years old, and it’s hoped that he could make a visit to Tibet in his lifetime — that would be a very positive sign. And I saw some positive interactions between Han Chinese and Tibetans. But important policy shifts are needed to end the rancor created by differences in opportunity, and religious issues. Monasteries are open, but many Buddhist monks have left Tibet. These problems are very complicated, with no dramatic improvement in store in the near future.
How would you gauge Chinese feelings about the Dalai Lama and Tibetan autonomy?
Ordinary Chinese might distrust the Dalai Lama, because all Tibetans regard him as sacred and he does have immense power. It’s an emotional and polarizing issue for Chinese. They argue about it, it’s troubling, but Chinese and Tibetans must continue talking. Tibet has a magical feeling, and I think most Chinese dream of visiting there, but they also adamantly feel that both Tibet and Taiwan are part of China.
How do the Chinese feel about the United States?
People feel that the American government and its people are too critical of the way Tibet has been handled. They point to America’s treatment of Native Americans and our takeover of Hawaii. But it’s interesting that the Hollywood movie Avatar is incredibly popular in China. The theme of a deeply spiritual people who live their lives in nature, confronted by a military force to extract their minerals, resonates for Chinese, because their country has been industrialized so rapidly, rural land is disappearing, and the environment has suffered so much. But Tibet is one place that’s still untouched. The sky is so blue, the air is clean, and there’s a sense that Tibet deserves to be preserved. I think most Chinese people feel that Tibet is deeply spiritual and a refuge for nature.
Susan Seligson can be reached at sueselig@bu.edu.
Comments & Discussion
Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English. Statistics or facts must include a citation or a link to the citation.