By Bart Qian Posted: 04/27/2012
A young street vendor Mohamed Bouazizi set himself on fire to protest against the hardships and inequalities he faced daily in Tunisia, which became the catalyst to the Tunisia uprising and eventually lead to the Arab Spring. Hardly anyone, including Bouazizi, could have predicted the change his single sacrifice has brought to the world, but what if the number of self-immolations is 33? On the other side of the world, this is exactly what Tibetans are doing in protest against the limitations on religious and cultural freedoms imposed by the Chinese government. In the past year, there were a total of 33 Tibetans who burned themselves to death, most of whom were in their twenties.
On April 18th, BBC published a news article, “Self-immolations Shake Tibetan Resolve” by Sue Lloyd-Roberts, where she essentially applauded the extreme protests inside Tibet and deemed the non-violent protests as ineffective because the acts attracted international attention and increased Tibet’s visibility. She concluded the article with “Now, Tibetans in Tibet are asserting themselves and those in exile can only respond with candles and prayer.” However, even though self-immolation increased Tibet’s problem’s visibility, the act is counter-productive and leads to more suppression from the Chinese government.
When international actors start to pressure the Chinese government, the Chinese government will impose stricter rule upon Tibet, and this is a vicious cycle. Granted, this act attracted more international actors, like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, to pressure the Chinese government to engage in dialogue with the Tibetan community and its leaders, but the Chinese government condemned the protests as acts of terrorism. In Chinese culture, “face,” or reputation, is very important and these acts in Tibet are considered a disgrace, especially when the Chinese government is trying to expand its influence. Therefore, in reaction to questions from Western media and to global attention, the Chinese government confiscated and destroyed physical evidence from self-immolation and imposed more strict regulations on Tibet. The paradox is, will these strict regulations foster more self-immolations?
Many have argued that self-immolation is necessary to force the Chinese government to react and to change its policy toward Tibet, but there are plenty other alternatives that leave self-immolation as the last resort. Former President Jimmy Carter once commented on the China-Tibet issue saying the problem should be left to Chinese and Tibetan people to decide which direction to go. However, most people’s opinions depend on limited resources or are influenced by propaganda. According to the Dalai Lama, “1.3 billion Chinese people have every right to know the reality, whether good or bad. They must know. They can judge what is right and what is wrong.” When I asked one of my friends if they have noticed the banner hung at Asbury Circle about the Tibetan self-immolation, she had no idea about the self-immolations and was surprised that “33 Tibetans burnt themselves in Emory?” Thus, engaging in personal dialogues between Chinese and Tibetans will foster more understanding on each side.
When I first met Ngawang Norbu and Sangpo Lodeo, two Tibetan monks who came here under the Emory-Tibet Science initiatives, we agreed that is necessary to initiate meetings between Chinese students and Tibetans to share stories and experiences. After several meetings, many Chinese students were shocked at the dangerous processes Tibetans had to go through to escape, and the risks they faced; on the other side, Ngawang commented, “Dialogue opens the door for better relationship and more harmonious society.” This dialogue has greater impact in the future, because when Chinese students tell their friends and families and Tibetans tell their fellow Tibetans, the two groups will gradually understand each other.
A couple weeks ago, Muslim Student Association (MSA) and Hillel co-hosted an art gala, and I must applaud Emory’s liberal environment for providing this kind of opportunity; when we try to get to know each other on a personal level, tensions do not matter. Therefore, I encourage everyone to withdraw stereotypes and promote tolerance. Only when we hear stories from different perspectives can we form our own opinions and make our own judgments, and the dialogue is a starting point for mutual understanding. On the contrary, in terms of self-immolation, what’s the difference between 33 and 34 other than the number?
Bart Qian is a college sophomore from Shenyang, China.
