Although I support UmayLam but in this interview, regarding the Panchsheel agreement between India and China, the agreement could be deemed automatically nulled when India and China fought a war in 1962. Moreover, regarding United Nation charter of countries respecting the territorial integrity of other countries, what is Russia doing Ukaraine? Does that follows the spirit of UN charter?
He's playing tooo safe & not radical enough with any issues which concerns us and I feel like he's gonna take us Tibetan for a ride just like Obama. What is his achievements since he took office? It's time we ask serious questions...
if umey lam is beneficial 4 tibetan living in tibet then let them fight for it. but tibetan living outside tibet wants freedom. so that Chinese militiry and people which are more than tibetan living , go back to their own country. so that when we go for vacation , we don't have to go Chinese embassy for a visa. so that Chinese language will not become official language in tibet. the list go on and on. tibet is a country and Chinese changed it into state of China and ur umey lam or middle way is supporting on that.
---UmmaiLam and ZhiwaiLam is the Middle Path to benefit both the Chinese and Tibetans in order to reach out to the Chinese for obtaining human rights for Tibetans--- not sure what it means. Leaders of freedom struggles and fighters for human rights have used words like Satyagraha or struggle through non-violent means without giving up or compromising on basic human rights issues. This is political history. Surrender and compromise are not successful political strategies--generally. So Dr Lobsang Sangay's equating of Middle Path with Peaceful Path with political philosophy does not clarify the issues but many Tibetans seem to like his stump speeches. Dr Sangay is of course well educated and a great public speaker but I find some of his analyses troubling. One factoid: The Tibetan delegates in late 1970s met with Chinese national leaders. After adopting UmaiLam the delegates were relegated to department heads of United Front etc to make the point that China would make no concession. If UmaiLam was a successful giving up of Rangzen and embracing of UmaiLam (applause from the Tibetan establishment) then I hope there will be a monitoring of Autonomy for Tibetans--which was the genesis of UmaiLam. Can Dharamsala at least go for the lowest expection--the rights and autonomy guaranteed under the 17-point Agreement? I hope the Voice of Tibet will do an analysis of Taiwan, PanchSheel, etc., the conflation which the good Doctor loves.
Although I support UmayLam but in this interview, regarding the Panchsheel agreement between India and China, the agreement could be deemed automatically nulled when India and China fought a war in 1962. Moreover, regarding United Nation charter of countries respecting the territorial integrity of other countries, what is Russia doing Ukaraine? Does that follows the spirit of UN charter?
He's playing tooo safe & not radical enough with any issues which concerns us and I feel like he's gonna take us Tibetan for a ride just like Obama. What is his achievements since he took office? It's time we ask serious questions...
if umey lam is beneficial 4 tibetan living in tibet then let them fight for it. but tibetan living outside tibet wants freedom. so that Chinese militiry and people which are more than tibetan living , go back to their own country.
so that when we go for vacation , we don't have to go Chinese embassy for a visa. so that Chinese language will not become official language in tibet. the list go on and on. tibet is a country and Chinese changed it into state of China and ur umey lam or middle way is supporting on that.
Gangjong
---UmmaiLam and ZhiwaiLam is the Middle Path to benefit both the Chinese and Tibetans in order to reach out to the Chinese for obtaining human rights for Tibetans--- not sure what it means.
Leaders of freedom struggles and fighters for human rights have used words like Satyagraha or struggle through non-violent means without giving up or compromising on basic human rights issues. This is political history. Surrender and compromise are not successful political strategies--generally.
So Dr Lobsang Sangay's equating of Middle Path with Peaceful Path with political philosophy does not clarify the issues but many Tibetans seem to like his stump speeches.
Dr Sangay is of course well educated and a great public speaker but I find some of his analyses troubling.
One factoid:
The Tibetan delegates in late 1970s met with Chinese national leaders. After adopting UmaiLam the delegates were relegated to department heads of United Front etc to make the point that China would make no concession.
If UmaiLam was a successful giving up of Rangzen and embracing of UmaiLam (applause from the Tibetan establishment) then I hope there will be a monitoring of Autonomy for Tibetans--which was the genesis of UmaiLam. Can Dharamsala at least go for the lowest expection--the rights and autonomy guaranteed under the 17-point Agreement?
I hope the Voice of Tibet will do an analysis of Taiwan, PanchSheel, etc., the conflation which the good Doctor loves.