Conflict and Adaptation Tibetan Perspectives on Nonviolent Practice Lauren Pass Independent Research Project 2009 Emory University Tibetan Studies Program Acknowledgements It was not without the help of a wide range of people that this paper has come together as it is now. First and foremost I want to thank my research advisor Cynthia Gould for her guidance, advice, support, and enthusiasm throughout this project. Tawni Tidwell, Courtney Zenner, and Ani-la Kelsang Wangmo also played important roles, both directly and indirectly, in it's completion. All four of these women acted invaluably as my teachers, councilors, and friends, throughout this research project and beyond. I would also like to thank Professor José Cabezón, broadly, for sparking and nourishing my interest in Tibetan Buddhism, and specifically for his valuable recommendation of many textual sources. This paper would also not have been possible without the many Tibetans who took time and energy out of their days to speak to me and answer my many questions. These people include: Geshe Lobsang Yoenten and Geshe Kunjo Wangdu who provided extensive information on Buddhist Philosophy, Ngawang Woebar and Jahdor Phuntsok Wangchuk from GuChuSum as well as their secretaries Sonam and Rinchen for translating, Tenpa Samkhar from the Action Nonviolence Education Center and his kind and informative staff, Tenzin Dhardon from the Tibetan Women's Association, Chime Youngdung from the National Democratic Party of Tibet, Tenzin Choeying and Tenzin Choedon from Students for a Free Tibet, Tenzin Yangdon and Dhondup Dorjee Shokda from the Tibetan Youth 1 Congress, Karma Leksey from the Tibetan Center for Conflict Resolution, Sonam Dagpo from the Central Tibet Administration, and the unique and priceless voices of Lobsang Wangyal, Tenzin Tsundue and Lhasang Tsering. These people were more than generous with their time and resources and it was interacting with them that truly made this project a valuable experience for me. Last but not least, I extend great thanks to all of the many friends I made during my time in Dharamsala, who sent me home with innumerable priceless memories; and also to my family, who put up with and even supported my somewhat vexing decision to go study on the exact opposite side of the planet. Methods and Goals Research for this paper was conducted over a three week period of time in May 2009 in Dharamsala, India, where I interviewed 17 different Tibetans on their views regarding the Tibetan resistance movement, with specific attention being paid to the use of nonviolence. Given the length of time I had available, I did not attempt a broad survey of Tibetan opinions, but rather chose to focus on the individuals involved in running the various NGOs that actively participate in the resistance movement, as well as some prominent individual activists. The views displayed in this paper are therefore not a comprehensive collection, but are, I believe, representative of the main opinions held in the Tibetan community. In addition, I spent approximately three months in India and the U.S. doing textual research on the subject. The goal of this project is to explore the thought process of the Tibetan people with regard to the use of violence in the resistance movement. This paper does not address issues of independence versus autonomy or consider the effectiveness of the current resistance movement, although both of these topics were discussed during interviews. Instead, I seek to understand how the Tibetans perceive their use of nonviolent action, and the relationship between these views and Buddhist and Gandhian 2 philosophies. While a comprehensive overview of these philosophies is impossible within the scope of this paper, I have summarized what I find to be their main points as relevant to this topic. Introduction On March 10th 2008, protests occurring inside Tibet dominated the international news for the first time in many years. With the 2008 Olympic Games taking place in Beijing, the Tibetan took advantage of the extra international attention placed on China and chose to make the 49th anniversary of their Uprising Day a memorable one. Beginning in Lhasa, protests quickly spread all over Tibet, and continued on throughout the summer. Tensions were high and Tibetans, whose frustration had been long pent up, were finally coming out into the streets and voicing their anger and discontent. Having had little to no opportunities to openly act out since the late 1980s, the uprising quickly became the largest since 1959. The world watched as the events unfolded, and as the protests continued on, questions were raised regarding whether or not the Tibetans would turn violent. It seemed a shocking proposal, that those who are world renowned for their nonviolent and peaceful methods of resistance would suddenly turn so aggressive. A new level of frustration and anger was coming out that had previously been hidden, especially among the youth, who had not seen a real uprising in their life times. And again the question was raised, will these youth abandon the nonviolent legacy of the Tibetan people and turn towards violence? The western audience was nearly baffled by the idea. How could Buddhists ever condone the use of violence? The recognition of the Dalai Lama as a great nonviolent leader, and the emphasis placed on the nonviolent teachings of Buddhism, has led to an extrapolation of these ideals onto the Tibetan people as a whole. They are often viewed as peaceful, innocent, and devoted Buddhists, with few other traits being significantly recognized. The association is certainly understandable, as Tibetans have been 3 upholding a nonviolent struggle, and are devoted to the Dalai Lama. Indeed, Buddhism permeates nearly every aspect of the Tibetan society, from home life to politics, and it cannot be separated out from the Tibetan culture. However this is a simplistic view which leaves many other aspects of Tibetan history and society unaccounted for. Despite the prominence of Buddhism, the Tibetans have not been, and are not today, an exclusively nonviolent people. A look at Tibet history will reveal rugged tribes, warrior monks, government corruption, and territorial battles to name just a few happenings. While the Tibetan resistance today is nonviolent in nature, and has been for roughly the last 30 years, it began as a violent guerrilla resistance. From the early 1950s to the late 1970s, Tibetans all over Tibet fought valiantly against the Chinese invaders, despite all the odds against them. These were not radical, irreligious, exceptional people, but everyday Tibetans who considered themselves devoted Buddhist followers. A large portion of the freedom fighters were monks before they took up arms, and it was these men who formed the greatest leadership and support in the fighting. Rather than abandoning their religious beliefs to fight, these Tibetans saw their actions as ones of faith, fighting as protectors of the Buddha dharma, willing to sacrifice themselves for the sake of their Buddhist nation.1 The resistance ultimately was overwhelmed by the Chinese and forced to an end, but their legacy remains. While the use of violence was never supported by the Tibetan government or the Dalai Lama, and most Tibetans do not support their methods of resistance, they are still viewed as great national heroes. However, the emphasis placed on nonviolence today often causes this history to be overlooked, although their violent reaction is just as much a part of the Tibetan culture as the nonviolent ideals that have become so well known today. While protest methods have been by and large nonviolent since the end of the guerrilla movement, it would be a mistake to assume that Tibetans hold one unified view on the matter. The 1 Mikel Dunham, Buddha's Warriors: The Story of the CIA-Backed Tibetan Freedom Fighters, the Chinese Invasion, and the Ultimate Fall of Tibet (New Delhi: Penguin Books, 2004) 148-149. 4 complex philosophies upheld by His Holiness the Dalai Lama and Mahatma Gandhi promote an uncompromising view of nonviolence, an ideal that even they acknowledge can only be achieved by a high spiritual being. When considering the Tibetan resistance movement, it is often assumed that all the activists involved are dedicated to these ideals with unwavering effort. However, in reality, the ideals of the nonviolent philosophies are not easily applied to political struggles. The Tibetan people, left to grapple with such discrepancies, come up with a wide range of responses to the situation. The ideas surrounding the use of violence, and the thought process behind them vary considerably within the community. Buddhism is, without a doubt, the origin of nonviolent thought in the Tibetan context, and it remains prominent. But this does not mean that it is the only influence on Tibetan opinions, or that all Tibetans are devoted to its principles. There is no single statement that can encompass the “Tibetan” opinion of violence and nonviolence, as opinions vary widely from individual to individual, as one would expect of any topic of such complexity. Very few Tibetans fully adhere to or agree with all the specifics of Buddhist philosophy. At the same time, I have yet to encounter an individual who remains uninfluenced by Buddhist thought, regardless of the ultimate conclusions they come to. Tibetan actions in the freedom struggle grow out of Buddhist, Gandhian, and Western philosophies, as well as the consideration of practical issues. Within the community, one can find devout Buddhists as well as devout nationalists, and many who diverge from the rigidity of Buddhist doctrine in favor or a more secular and practical view of nonviolence. The growing secular nature of nonviolent views is now shifting the Tibetan resistance into a new stage of modern strategic thinking. Buddhism and Nonviolence When one plunges into the depths of Buddhist Philosophy, it is easy to become so entrenched in comprehending teachings on the nature of reality that one loses sight of the more everyday aspects of 5 the tradition.