A top Chinese official has suggested that talks over Tibet could resume if demands to have the military and non-Tibetans pull out of Tibetan-inhabited areas were withdrawn by the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan religious leader.
Zhu Weiqun, Vice-Minister of the United Front Work Department of the Communist Party of China’s Central Committee, which represents Beijing in talks with the Dalai Lama’s representatives, said the two demands “opposed” the Chinese Constitution.
But a spokesperson with the exiled Tibetan administration in Dharamsala, who is familiar with the negotiations, told The Hindu that the Tibetan religious leader had, in fact, not demanded the two withdrawals. He had said he was willing to accept a solution within the limits of the Constitution, suggesting a way forward was possible.
Talks between the Dalai Lama’s representatives and Beijing have reached an impasse over differing interpretations of the limits of autonomy guaranteed under the Chinese Constitution.
Mr. Zhu called on the Dalai Lama to “rethink” the two issues. He said the Dalai Lama had “demanded” the withdrawal of non-Tibetans and the Chinese military from Tibetan-inhabited areas, which include the Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR), as well as parts of Sichuan, Gansu, Yunnan and Qinghai provinces.
“Those ideas all oppose the Chinese Constitution and the Law on Regional National Autonomy,” he said in an interview with the official Global Times newspaper. “[The Dalai Lama] should seriously rethink his ‘middle way’ plan and make thorough explanations.”
But Thubten Samphel, secretary of the department of information at the exiled Tibetan administration in Dharamsala, said the Dalai Lama “had not made demands” over the two issues. “His Holiness has clearly stated that he is willing to let the central government in Beijing handle defence and military affairs,” he said. “[Withdrawal of military] is a decision for the central government to make.”
He said the Dalai Lama only had “a vision to make Tibet a zone of non-violence and a sanctuary for environment protection.” While there were serious concerns on the migration of Chinese workers to Tibetan areas, there was “no demand” to have a “pull-out” of all non-Tibetans.
Mr. Samphel also reiterated that the Dalai Lama’s representatives had accepted a solution within the limits of the Chinese Constitution, in the memorandum submitted to Beijing last October after the last round of talks. Beijing rejected the memorandum on the grounds that some demands were unconstitutional. “We are basing our ideas fully on the rights given to minorities enshrined in the Constitution,” he said.
“We have made huge concessions. We are willing to let Tibet operate within the auspices of the Chinese Constitution. This is a reasonable settlement. The ball is now in the Chinese court.”
Mr. Zhu’s comments in the interview suggested that despite the many persisting differences, there was some common-ground after the last round of talks. He welcomed the Dalai Lama’s affirmation that he had no intention to seek independence and was willing to solve the issue under the Chinese Constitution. “What he said was good, but still far from enough,” said Mr. Zhu.
He said for talks to resume, the Dalai Lama had to stop “separatist activities”. The Tibetan religious leader maintains he does not seek separation, but genuine autonomy.
