UN: Jews can't live in Judea and Samaria, but 7.5 million Chinese can colonize Tibet

On August 30, 2017 Bloomberg reported:

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called on Israel to stop settlement construction in the West Bank[.] ... We believe that settlement activity is illegal under international law.

Why has Guterres never made similar statements about Tibet?


Tibetan students in New Delhi demonstrate at a U.N. Information Center (photo: R.T.Y Rohini).

In his five-point peace plan, the Dalai Lama called to stop Chinese colonization of Tibet.

When the newly formed People's Republic of China invaded Tibet in 1949/50, it created a new source of conflict.  This was highlighted when, following the Tibetan national uprising against the Chinese and my flight to India in 1959, tensions between China and India escalated into the border war in 1962.  Today large numbers of troops are again massed on both sides of the Himalayan border and tension is once more dangerously high.

The real issue, of course, is not the Indo-Tibetan border demarcation.  It is China's illegal occupation of Tibet, which has given it direct access to the Indian sub-continent.  The Chinese authorities have attempted to confuse the issue by claiming that Tibet has always been a part of China.  This is untrue.  Tibet was a fully independent state when the People's Liberation Army invaded the country in 1949/50.

Since Tibetan emperors unified Tibet, over a thousand years ago, our country was able to maintain its independence until the middle of this century.  At times Tibet extended its influence over neighbouring countries and peoples and, in other periods, came itself under the influence of powerful foreign rulers – the Mongol Khans, the Gorkhas of Nepal, the Manchu Emperors and the British in India.

It is, of course, not uncommon for states to be subjected to foreign influence or interference.  Although so-called satellite relationships are perhaps the clearest examples of this, most major powers exert influence over less powerful allies or neighbours.  As the most authoritative legal studies have shown, in Tibet's case, the country's occasional subjection to foreign influence never entailed a loss of independence.  And there can be no doubt that when Peking's communist armies entered Tibet, Tibet was in all respects an independent state[.] ...

Human rights violations in Tibet are among the most serious in the world.  Discrimination is practiced in Tibet under a policy of 'apartheid' which the Chinese call 'segregation and assimilation'.  Tibetans are, at best, second class citizens in their own country.  Deprived of all basic democratic rights and freedoms, they exist under a colonial administration in which all real power is wielded by Chinese officials of the Communist Party and the army.

Although the Chinese government allows Tibetans to rebuild some Buddhist monasteries and to worship in them, it still forbids serious study and teaching of religion.  Only a small number of people, approved by the Communist Party, are permitted to join the monasteries.

While Tibetans in exile exercise their democratic rights under a constitution promulgated by me in 1963, thousands of our countrymen suffer in prisons and labour camps in Tibet for their religious or political convictions[.] ...

The massive transfer of Chinese civilians into Tibet in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949), threatens the very existence of the Tibetans as a distinct people.  In the eastern parts of our country, the Chinese now greatly outnumber Tibetans.  In the Amdo province, for example, where I was born, there are, according to the Chinese statistics, 2.5 million Chinese and only 750,000 Tibetans.  Even in the so-called Tibet Autonomous Region (i.e., central and western Tibet), Chinese government sources now confirm that Chinese outnumber Tibetans.

The Chinese population transfer policy is not new.  It has been systematically applied to other areas before.  Earlier in this century, the Manchus were a distinct race with their own culture and traditions.  Today only two to three million Manchurians are left in Manchuria, where 75 million Chinese have settled.  In Eastern Turkestan, which the Chinese now call Sinkiang, the Chinese population has grown from 200,000 in 1949 to 7 million, more than half of the total population of 13 million.  In the wake of the Chinese colonization of Inner Mongolia, Chinese number 8.5 million, Mongols 2.5 million.

Today, in the whole of Tibet 7.5 million Chinese settlers have already been sent, outnumbering the Tibetan population of 6 million.  In central and western Tibet, now referred to by the Chinese as the "Tibet Autonomous Region", Chinese sources admit the 1.9 million Tibetans already constitute a minority of the region's population.  These numbers do not take the estimated 300,000-500,000 troops in Tibet into account – 250,000 of them in so-called Tibet Autonomous Region.

For the Tibetans to survive as a people, it is imperative that the population transfer is stopped and Chinese settlers return to China.  Otherwise, Tibetans will soon be no more than a tourist attraction and relic of a noble past.

Why has Guterres never complained about Chinese settlements in Tibet as he complains against Jewish settlements?

In a better analogy for the Arab-Israeli conflict, Israel plays the role of Tibet, and the dozens of Arab countries that surround it are like China.  The Palestinian Arabs serve as the spearhead of the dozens of Arab nations trying to engulf the world's only Jewish State (smaller than New Jersey) the same way gigantic China is trying to absorb Tibet.

Since Guterres is not planning to go to Tibet to condemn the Chinese presence there as illegal, he should not come to Israel to call for the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Judea and Samaria.

On August 30, 2017 Bloomberg reported:

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called on Israel to stop settlement construction in the West Bank[.] ... We believe that settlement activity is illegal under international law.

Why has Guterres never made similar statements about Tibet?


Tibetan students in New Delhi demonstrate at a U.N. Information Center (photo: R.T.Y Rohini).

In his five-point peace plan, the Dalai Lama called to stop Chinese colonization of Tibet.

When the newly formed People's Republic of China invaded Tibet in 1949/50, it created a new source of conflict.  This was highlighted when, following the Tibetan national uprising against the Chinese and my flight to India in 1959, tensions between China and India escalated into the border war in 1962.  Today large numbers of troops are again massed on both sides of the Himalayan border and tension is once more dangerously high.

The real issue, of course, is not the Indo-Tibetan border demarcation.  It is China's illegal occupation of Tibet, which has given it direct access to the Indian sub-continent.  The Chinese authorities have attempted to confuse the issue by claiming that Tibet has always been a part of China.  This is untrue.  Tibet was a fully independent state when the People's Liberation Army invaded the country in 1949/50.

Since Tibetan emperors unified Tibet, over a thousand years ago, our country was able to maintain its independence until the middle of this century.  At times Tibet extended its influence over neighbouring countries and peoples and, in other periods, came itself under the influence of powerful foreign rulers – the Mongol Khans, the Gorkhas of Nepal, the Manchu Emperors and the British in India.

It is, of course, not uncommon for states to be subjected to foreign influence or interference.  Although so-called satellite relationships are perhaps the clearest examples of this, most major powers exert influence over less powerful allies or neighbours.  As the most authoritative legal studies have shown, in Tibet's case, the country's occasional subjection to foreign influence never entailed a loss of independence.  And there can be no doubt that when Peking's communist armies entered Tibet, Tibet was in all respects an independent state[.] ...

Human rights violations in Tibet are among the most serious in the world.  Discrimination is practiced in Tibet under a policy of 'apartheid' which the Chinese call 'segregation and assimilation'.  Tibetans are, at best, second class citizens in their own country.  Deprived of all basic democratic rights and freedoms, they exist under a colonial administration in which all real power is wielded by Chinese officials of the Communist Party and the army.

Although the Chinese government allows Tibetans to rebuild some Buddhist monasteries and to worship in them, it still forbids serious study and teaching of religion.  Only a small number of people, approved by the Communist Party, are permitted to join the monasteries.

While Tibetans in exile exercise their democratic rights under a constitution promulgated by me in 1963, thousands of our countrymen suffer in prisons and labour camps in Tibet for their religious or political convictions[.] ...

The massive transfer of Chinese civilians into Tibet in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949), threatens the very existence of the Tibetans as a distinct people.  In the eastern parts of our country, the Chinese now greatly outnumber Tibetans.  In the Amdo province, for example, where I was born, there are, according to the Chinese statistics, 2.5 million Chinese and only 750,000 Tibetans.  Even in the so-called Tibet Autonomous Region (i.e., central and western Tibet), Chinese government sources now confirm that Chinese outnumber Tibetans.

The Chinese population transfer policy is not new.  It has been systematically applied to other areas before.  Earlier in this century, the Manchus were a distinct race with their own culture and traditions.  Today only two to three million Manchurians are left in Manchuria, where 75 million Chinese have settled.  In Eastern Turkestan, which the Chinese now call Sinkiang, the Chinese population has grown from 200,000 in 1949 to 7 million, more than half of the total population of 13 million.  In the wake of the Chinese colonization of Inner Mongolia, Chinese number 8.5 million, Mongols 2.5 million.

Today, in the whole of Tibet 7.5 million Chinese settlers have already been sent, outnumbering the Tibetan population of 6 million.  In central and western Tibet, now referred to by the Chinese as the "Tibet Autonomous Region", Chinese sources admit the 1.9 million Tibetans already constitute a minority of the region's population.  These numbers do not take the estimated 300,000-500,000 troops in Tibet into account – 250,000 of them in so-called Tibet Autonomous Region.

For the Tibetans to survive as a people, it is imperative that the population transfer is stopped and Chinese settlers return to China.  Otherwise, Tibetans will soon be no more than a tourist attraction and relic of a noble past.

Why has Guterres never complained about Chinese settlements in Tibet as he complains against Jewish settlements?

In a better analogy for the Arab-Israeli conflict, Israel plays the role of Tibet, and the dozens of Arab countries that surround it are like China.  The Palestinian Arabs serve as the spearhead of the dozens of Arab nations trying to engulf the world's only Jewish State (smaller than New Jersey) the same way gigantic China is trying to absorb Tibet.

Since Guterres is not planning to go to Tibet to condemn the Chinese presence there as illegal, he should not come to Israel to call for the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Judea and Samaria.