The passage of the Promoting a Resolution to the Tibet-China Dispute Act, also known as the Resolve Tibet bill, by the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on Tuesday last week, to be sent to the US Senate for a vote, marks a pivotal moment in international relations, one that could significantly influence the geopolitical landscape of Asia, particularly affecting India’s stance on Tibet.
This act, which has garnered substantial bipartisan support, underscores the unresolved conflict between Tibet and China, and asserts that Tibet’s legal status is to be determined in accordance with international law. For India, the act serves as a reaffirmation of US support for the Tibetan cause, mirroring India’s longstanding position of providing asylum to the Tibetan government-in-exile and the Dalai Lama. This alignment between US policy and India’s historical stance could bolster New Delhi’s diplomatic leverage in its negotiations with China, especially concerning border disputes and regional sovereignty.
The act’s emphasis on the unresolved status of Tibet — a region that shares an extensive and contested border with India — might prompt a recalibration of diplomatic relations in the region. It could lead to increased solidarity among nations that recognize the significance of a peaceful resolution to the Tibet-China conflict, potentially forming a united front that advocates for the rights of the Tibetan people.
By advocating for dialogue and a peaceful resolution to the Tibet-China conflict, the act aligns with India’s interests in maintaining regional stability. India’s proximity to Tibet and the historical ties between the two regions mean that any escalation of tensions could have direct implications for India’s security and its efforts to maintain peace along its borders.
The act’s provisions to counter disinformation about Tibet could indirectly support India’s narrative against unfounded territorial claims by China. By authorizing actions to counter such disinformation, the act not only defends the historical and cultural identity of Tibet, but also reinforces India’s sovereignty over regions like Arunachal Pradesh, which China claims as South Tibet (藏南).
The emphasis on resolving the Tibet issue in accordance with international law might inspire similar approaches to other disputed territories. This could be advantageous for India, which has consistently advocated for a rules-based international order to address its border disputes with neighboring countries.
While the Resolve Tibet bill is a significant step, its true impact would depend on the subsequent actions taken by the US and other international players. The responses from China and India would also play a crucial role in shaping the future of the region. The situation remains dynamic, and the geopolitical implications would continue to unfold over time. As the world watches, the act could serve as a catalyst for change, promoting the rights of the Tibetan people and encouraging a peaceful resolution to one of the longest-standing conflicts in Asia.
Khedroob Thondup is a former member of the Tibetan parliament in exile.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS