blank
pic
Current Events & Commentary
p
Home


Understanding the nature of any protest is vital in order to ensure that the nature of the response is appropriate. Violent and hard-handed responses to ethnic, religious or national movements have proven countless times to only incite further resentment and hatred. By simply treating protestors as criminals, arsons and murderers, and by denouncing their widely-revered spiritual leader, the Chinese Communist Party is threatening to exacerbate the divide between Beijing and Tibetans, as well as between Beijing and a great number of China's numerous other minority groups. Until the Chinese Communist Party acknowledges the discontent among many of its minority groups, it will inevitably see many more situations similiar to those in Lhasa as these groups become aware of  the public attention in the West to the recent events. Attempts to covertly continue using the same confrontational responses that were successful in repressing any dissent under previous leaders (notably Chairman Mao and Deng Xiaoping) will prove more and more difficult in the era of instant communications.

The Western Perspective
By contrast, my trouble with the Western media's take on the riots has been that the majority of reports have neglected to provide a balanced account of the known facts. Instead, as if reporting on polling numbers, they have focussed on the number of deaths and contrasting statements produced by either the Chinese government or Tibetan leadership in exile. Little effort has been made to explain the actual known events of violence, and many disparate linkages have been drawn. This has contributed to a severe misunderstanding of the actual events, as well as promoted irrational and reactionary responses, which has done nothing but promote further division between China and the West.

Although many details are not clear, it is known that individuals within the riots had intentions of violently attacking symbols of Han Chinese living and working in Tibet. The vandalism and arson of Han-owned shops led to a significant loss of property and the loss of many innocent lives. These were not retaliatory acts targeting security forces, police or the army, but simply shameless acts of violence and murder.
My Research
Book Reviews
Recommended Reading
Links
Contact
M.A. Thesis
Current Events & Commentary
  Tibet Riots (30 March 2008)
email:  . ph: canada
The Western media has chosen not characterize these actions as such. In my view, most reports of the violence have implied that the riots were a response to military or police action, which incited violence. Lots have layed sole blame on the Chinese government (see Maclean's April 7, 2008 edtion).  Or, in the most misleading reports, likened the riots to the pro-democracy marches witnessed earlier this year in Burma or made comparisons between the riots and the Tiananmen Massacre of 1989. Those situations were significantly different in that the protesters involved in both Burma and Tiananmen were completely unarmed and of little to no violent threat to the government. Yet, in both cases, military force was used by governments on their own unarmed citizens. In contrast, the crackdown in Lhasa was a response to violent acts on behalf of the protestors.
It is impossible to know exactly how the violence began; however, the evidence that there were members within the protests that had pre-meditated attacks, and the wilful participation by many others in taking out aggression on Han Chinese living in Lhasa is reprehensible and I do not believe the Western media has portrayed it as so. My highlighting this media bias should not in any way be construed as support for the methods used by government forces in response to the protesters, nor as justification for the consequent refusal to allow independent (foreign) media into the region. My concern is that the Western media's inherint tendency to critique any statements or actions made by the Chinese government, while reporting endliess unconfirmed reports from Tibetan support and exile groups will only further entrench divisions between Tibetans and Han Chinese. Moreover, many Tibetan support groups pursue counter-productive policies such as boycotts, or sanctions, in their dream of establishing an independent Tibet and shaming the Chinese government. Increasing support for such policies does nothing to benefit Tibetans and only encourages Beijing to be more recluse in their dealings with minority groups and other issues of human concern.
continued
m