Tibet

[Red Shadow]

I tibetani sono lo 0,3% della popolazione cinese. I tirolesi ad esempio sono lo 0,5% di quella italiana. Se dovessimo dare l'indipendenza anche alle parrocchie...hai voglia. Scoppiano tre guerre mondiali. Perchè tutti si lamentano del Tibet ma nessuno osa lamentaresi per Porto Rico, le Hawaii, la Crsica il galles, la scozia ecc.
Poi bisogna vedere i cinesi queando l'EPL è entrato in Tibet l'ha chiamata invasione? A me non sembra. Come si può invadere il proprio paese?

[Red Shadow]

noto che la maggior parte della gente con cui ho parlato alla domanda chi te lo ha detto che il Tibet deve essere indipendente, alla fine si capisce che glielo ha detto Hollywood, la cosa singolare è che questa gente difende un infame regime schiavista come quello del Dali Lama.
da www.antiwar,com

Tibetan-Chinese Are Not American Indians

By Bevin Chu, December 3, 1999

(Selected from Antiwar.com)

Bevin Chu is an American architect of Chinese descent registered to practice in Texas. Currently living and working in Taiwan, Chu is the son of a retired high-ranking diplomat with the ROC (Taiwan) government. His column, "The Strait Scoop," now appears Fridays at Antiwar.com.

(more information by Bevin Chu)

HISTORY ACCORDING TO HOLLYWOOD

Humanitarian Interventionists and Benevolent Global Hegemonists, most of whom lack even a rudimentary understanding of China's long and complex history, share a particularly nasty trait. Many of these Globocops imagine because they have downloaded a few pages of separatist propaganda from tibet.org, and shed a tear or two while watching "Seven Years in Tibet," that qualifies them as China experts. They believe this qualifies them to pass judgment about whether China "deserves" to remain intact or be forcibly Balkanized by the World's Only Remaining Superpower. Their attitude rivals that of the most contemptible 19th century imperialists.

I have seen Mel Gibson's "Braveheart" once in the theater and several times on cable, and I never cease to be deeply moved by what screenwriting teachers term "a good story, well told." The same holds true of Neil Jordan's political biography "Michael Collins," about the famous, or infamous Irish revolutionary of the same name.

I do not however assume merely because I have enjoyed a well scripted and well produced two hours of entertainment that I have necessarily learned anything substantive about English, Scottish or Irish history. I retain enough presence of mind to recall Hollywood's record of playing fast and loose with historical facts, motivated by either commercial considerations or the filmmakers' political biases.

I certainly do not leave the theater convinced of either the rightness or wrongness of Scottish secession. Instead I remain scrupulously neutral. The issue of Scottish secession is one for the English and the Scots to settle between themselves. Why should I, who am neither an Englishman nor a Scots, behave like a damned busybody and stick my nose into something which is none of my business?

Now if only the Globocops would have the decency to do likewise after watching "Kundun" or "The Wind Horse."



CHINA'S WEST IS NOT THE AMERICAN WEST

One especially disturbing aspect of the Tibet crusade in America is that Hollywood, academia, New Agers and the Washington establishment have drawn patently misleading parallels with American history. These comparisons of European immigrants to Han Chinese, and American Indians to Tibetan Chinese, have led to a grotesque collective misunderstanding.

This dangerously egocentric, even narcissistic way of experiencing the world may get America into deep foreign policy hot water. In fact, it has. When such historically irrelevant parallels are drawn what non-Chinese get is worse than ignorance. What non-Chinese get is the illusion of understanding.

Unfortunately most of what is readily available in English on the web regarding contemporary Tibet is predictable PC orthodoxy. The few rebuttals which are available in English are summarily dismissed by the intellectual orthodoxy as not credible simply because they are posted by Chinese or ethnic Chinese sources and do not support the "correct" conclusions.

Tibet is a region of China. It has been since the 13th century. Obviously one needs to refer to Chinese history and Chinese historians to learn about it. Most of that data is obviously going to be in Chinese. Yet it is only virulently anti-China Tibetan secessionist propaganda written in English which is automatically accorded the status of unassailable truth. The China bashers' attitude reeks of colonialist arrogance.

Far better to not know anything, and retain the humility that accompanies such ignorance, than to imagine that one knows all one needs to know to pass moral judgment and demand military intervention. As the old saw goes, "the problem isn't what people don't know, it's what they know that just ain't so."



TIBETAN CHINESE ARE NOT AMERICAN INDIANS

For example, projection of "collective guilt" over the mistreatment of American Indians is with little doubt the psychological root of most pro- Dalai activism. Unfortunately the pro-Dalai faction has confused its own internal psychology with a foreign nation's history. Just because they feel "liberal guilt" about America's Indian minority does not mean that China's history actually conforms to their internal guilt and historical misunderstanding. This is why so many western sympathizers of Tibetan independence are taken aback, stunned even, when they discover that most Tienanmen pro-democracy leaders do NOT support, and in fact vehemently oppose Tibetan and Taiwan independence. The sympathizers' projection has been so extensive that they are trapped in a "virtual reality" of their own making.

The relationship between majority Han-Chinese and minority Tibetan-Chinese does NOT historically parallel that of European-Americans and Native Americans. The territory of modern China includes Tibet not because "the Han-Chinese conquered Tibetan-Chinese" the way European-Americans conquered American Indians and Hawaiians. (E.g., "Dances with Wolves").

Instead both Tibetans and Hans were conquered by the Mongols under the leadership of Genghis Khan and grandson Kublai Khan in the 13th century. When the Mongol or Yuan Dynasty collapsed a century later, it was supplanted by a Han-Chinese dominated Ming Dynasty, which inherited jurisdiction over the Mongol empire, including the Tibetan region. This is how Tibet, and of course Mongolia, became part of China.

Those who insist on "victim-victimizer" dichotomies might be tempted on leap to yet another equally simplistic conclusion, that "both Tibetans and Hans were victims of Mongol aggression." This ignores the fact that both "victims" and "victimizers" subsequently intermarried extensively, not under duress, but of their own volition, rendering the issue of victimization moot and irrelevant. The bottom line is that Tibet was not "invaded" or "annexed" by China in 1959. Because by then the Tibetan region had been part of China for seven centuries, five centuries longer than these United States of America have even been in existence. One does not "invade" or "annex" what is already one's own territory. Beijing dispatched troops to prevent secession by the serf-owing elite which objected to the abolition of slavery, not to implement annexation. Hardly the same thing.

One can argue the merits or demerits of secession, but that is another issue entirely. Rather than debate the issue honestly however, the Dalai Lama and his Hollywood camp followers prefer to lie about history. They are counting on popular ignorance of the details about exotic and distant Cathay and Shangri-la, calculating that the general public will believe whatever is fed them if it is presented in a convenient and satisfying Manichean "good versus evil" framework.



REDS, NOT RED HERRINGS

The false equation of Tibetan-Chinese with American Indian has predictably led to the false attribution of racist motivations to Beijing's abolition of serfdom and crushing of Tibetan secession. Beijing's Tibet policies are being falsely equated with everything from Nazi genocide of Jews to Nato's allegations of Serbian "ethnic cleansing."

If one is determined to force the Chinese experience into an American mold, one could perhaps equate the militarily powerful Mongols with one of the aggressive, nomadic tribes such as the Comanche, and Tibetans and Hans with less aggressive, agrarian tribes such as the Hopi or Navahoe. The point is that all of China's major ethnic subcultures are native Chinese, including so-called Hans.

Now that communism is dead, sympathizers of the Dalai Lama, many of whom were sympathizers of Mao Zedong, seem to have forgotten what communism was all about. Communism was a political ideology obsessed with economic equality. Communism adjudged who was good and who was bad on the basis of its fatally flawed economic theory. To communist true believers the relevant question was to which economic class do you belong. Are you a capitalist victimizer or a proletarian victim? Ethnicity to communism was always irrelevant.

The Chinese Communists were no exception. They committed their atrocities because they were fanatical radical egalitarians, "coercive egalitarians." The Lamaist theocracy was targeted because it engaged in the economic exploitation of Tibet's serfs.

When Red Guards vandalized monasteries in Tibet they were doing precisely the same thing to Zen Buddhist monasteries, Taoist monasteries, Christian churches, Jewish synagogues all over the rest of China. They were not doing anything so narrowly parochial as singling out the Tibetan subculture for "cultural genocide." Rather they were motivated by disgust for what they perceived as vestiges of unjust economic systems throughout China.

The Dalai Lama's allegation that Chinese Communist violence against Tibet's serf-owning elite was racially motivated ethnic cleansing is a red herring. Chinese Communists were evil because they were coercive egalitarians. Chinese Communists were never racist.



IF THIS BE GENOCIDE, MAKE THE MOST OF IT

In fact if the Chinese Communists had really been racially motivated, they could have deliberately and cynically left Tibet's Ancient Regime in place.

Traditional Tibet's theocracy imposed a policy of "er xuan yi" (from two choose one) and "san xuan ER" (from three choose two) on the Tibetan people. They dragooned enormous numbers of hapless Tibetan boys into the priesthood , where they would remain celibate for life. This draconian policy resulted in an alarming decline in Tibet's population in recent centuries.

Adherence to a religious practice of strict celibacy led to the eventual extinction of the Shaker sect in America. Chinese Communist Party failure to intervene in China's Tibetan region would have, by default, abetted a similar process of Tibetan self-extinction. CCP intervention has instead led to a population increase. Beijing emerges an unlikely hero in this respect. Yet Beijing is ritually and reflexively accused by self-styled do-gooders of "genocide," both "cultural" and racial. Ironies abound.



GENGHIS KHAN AND WILLIAM OF NORMANDY

The fifty-six officially acknowledged ethnic groups in China, including but not limited to Tibetan-Chinese, Moslem-Chinese, Mongolian-Chinese, Manchurian-Chinese, and Han-Chinese, would be more instructively compared with certain ethnic groups in the west and not others. The relationship between Mongolian-Chinese and Han-Chinese, and Manchurian-Chinese and Han-Chinese in particular, parallels that between English of Norman descent and English of Saxon descent following the Norman Conquest.

What made me think of this was a corny old Hollywood movie which I had seen before, but which just ran again on cable here in Taipei - "The Black Rose, " 1950, starring Tyrone Power, Jack Hawkins and Michael Rennie.



THE BLACK ROSE

The hero, Walter of Gurney (Tyrone Power) is the illegitimate son of a Saxon Lord denied his inheritance and birthright by the Norman King Edward (Michael Rennie.) Embittered, Gurney abandons England, which he feels is no longer his country and journeys to the middle-east, joining Kublai Khan's army which is about to invade China. He meets the title character "The Black Rose" who is not a flower, but a woman named Maryam, a teenager played by an 18 year old actress who didn't look a day over 13. Tyrone Power and sidekick Jack Hawkins rescue her from life as a concubine in Kublai Khan's harem. She falls in love with the hero and a typically chauvinistic 1950's type relationship follows in which he treats her like a mere "wench."

At the beginning of the film the Tyrone Power character vows undying enmity for intolerable Saxon victimization under Norman rule. By the end of the film however he is reconciled to a future in which Saxons and Normans live together in peace. What is intriguing to me is how the events in Britain and China occurred at very nearly the same time, the 12th century, making the Marco Polo-ish linkage chronologically consistent and unintentionally underscoring the parallelism, at least for me.

The aspect of the film that intrigued me was not the pyscho-sexual "Lolita" subplot, but the Norman-ruled Britain parallel to Mongol-ruled China. Let me stress that the historical parallel with China was not something the filmmakers intended, but merely a connection I made in my own mind.



NORMANS AND SAXONS, MONGOLS AND HANS

Both settings are virtually clichés in swashbuckler action adventure movies. Just as "The Black Rose" and countless Robin Hood related tales center on the conflict between Norman conquerors and Saxon conquered, so countless Taiwan and Hongkong swordfight swashbucklers set in the Southern Sung dynasty and late Ming dynasty deal with Mongol and Manchu conquerors and Han conquered.

Just as these once powerful animosities are "ancient history" in modern Britain, so they are in modern China. Is there any Anglo-Saxon Englishman alive today who actually nurses animosity toward "Normans" for the Battle of Hastings? Is there any "Han" Chinese (good luck finding a "pure" Han Chinese by the way) alive today who actually nurses animosity toward "Mongols" or "Manchus" for the fall of the Sung and Ming dynasties?

Remember the British commander during the Gulf War? He was Sir General Peter de la Billiere. Remember the writer/director of the Emmy award winning British mini-series "Prime Suspect"? She was Lynda LaPlante. Do westerners agitating for Tibetan/Uyghur/Mongolian independence realize why these prominent British subjects have French names?

Remember the pajamas clad student leader of the Tienanmen protest movement who demanded and got a conference with Li Peng? He was Wu ER Kai Xi, a Uyghur. Do westerners agitating for Tibetan/Uyghur/Mongolian independence realize why he and millions of Chinese have Tibetan, Uyghur, Mongolian names ?

Americans and Europeans who know nothing of Chinese history, yet shrilly demand that Tibet, Xinjiang, or Mongolia be carved out of China, do not realize how crazy and laughable their demands are. Imagine modern day Chinese wringing their hands and criticizing Britain for imposing the Anglo- Saxon tongue on Englishmen of Norman-descent, characterizing that as "cultural genocide?" Should Englishmen with Norman surnames secede from England? Crazy? Laughable? You bet. If only they knew how crazy and laughable.

The animosities between Normans and Saxons were quite powerful at the time, as they were between Mongol and Han and Manchu and Han. Yet Normans and Saxons did not form separate kingdoms, nor did Mongol, Manchu and Han. If putting behind historical grievances and intermarrying was possible and desirable for Normans and Saxons in Britain, why do western acolytes of the Dalai Lama deem the identical process of reconciliation and integration undesirable for Hans and Tibetans in China? Their sanctimony is both historically ignorant and morally inconsistent. If their folly weren't so widespread, and hence, destructive, it wouldn't even deserve the time and effort needed to rebut it.



AMERICA WAS NOT THE WORLD'S ONLY MELTING POT

Modern China looks ethnically homogeneous not because of "Aryan racial purity," but because of millennia of what Ku Klux Klansmen and neo-Nazis denounce as "mongrelization of the races." China ranks among the most "mongrelized" nations in the world. Even China's so-called "Han" majority is in fact comprised of numerous Asiatic tribes which began intermarrying as early as the Shang dynasty.

Jews who emigrated to Kaifeng one thousand years ago are so thoroughly assimilated they are indistinguishable from "native" Chinese. Jews in Europe and even America remain physically distinct due to incomplete assimilation.



TIBET IS PART OF CHINA, GET OVER IT

Tenzing Gyatso, aka the Dalai Lama, rather than rejecting his identity as a Tibetan-Chinese and demanding Tibetan racial purity along the lines of his Nazi mentor, SS Captain Heinrich Harrer, should instruct his band of reactionary theocrats huddled in Dharamsala to forsake their quixotic dream of "restoring" a "Shangri-La" that never existed, return to Lhasa, and shoulder to shoulder with fellow Chinese, help illiterate serfs they once exploited become the Andy Groves and Bill Gates of the 21st century.

China Threat theorists, meanwhile, should get over their obsession with "dividing and conquering" China. Their insistence on seeing the Chinese people not as fellow human beings, but as an insidious "Yellow Peril" to be exterminated, merely reveals their own paranoia and racial bigotry.

[ulver81 (POL)]

Di come il tibet sia ridotto ad una disneyland(hotel tibet 5 stelle,linea ferroviaria in mezzo ad un paesaggio prima mistico e incontaminato,negozietti squallidi,,,ecc),Ormai andare a Lhasa e lo stesso che andare in qls grande citta cinese,stessi edifici ruffiani(per mostrare il progresso),stessi negozietti,stessi burocrati che controllano tutto(HAN)....

....

Questo è l'aspetto penoso di tale situazione: ossia la modernità del capitalismo "globalizzante" (da cui il governo di Pechino non è esente, ma anzi, sostiene..) che annienta qualsiasi forma di cultura tradizionale.Ma ciò sarebbe accaduto lo stesso se in Tibet avessero trionfato il Dalai Lama con la cricca dei Silons e il supporto indiano e statunitense...Anche il Bhutan è un supermarket della spiritualità a stelle e strisce.
Qualsiasi potenza impone la propria presenza del proprio gruppo etnico predominante:basti pensare i milioni di Han inviati nel Sinkiang e in Tibet come supporto...Più o meno la stessa strategia attuata dai russi sin dai tempi dell'impero, fino all'Unione Sovietica per quel che riguardava le cosiddette periferie.A tal proposito basta leggere tra i tanti lo scritto di Mao, "Direttive del comitato centrale del partito comunista cinese sulla linea del lavoro nel Xizang (Tibet)" del 1952......

[Answer]

riguardo a questa frase cosa potete dirmi? :

La Cina governò quello che rimaneva del Tibet con la forza e la repressione. Con la Rivoluzione Culturale vennero uccisi circa 1,2 milioni di tibetani, 6.254 monasteri distrutti, circa 100.000 tibetani nei campi di lavoro e deforestazione indiscriminata.


sono realmente queste le cifre?se non fossero questo mi potreste dare del materiale che neghi il contrario soprattutto sul numero di morti?grazie

[Rikycccp]

riguardo a questa frase cosa potete dirmi? :

La Cina governò quello che rimaneva del Tibet con la forza e la repressione. Con la Rivoluzione Culturale vennero uccisi circa 1,2 milioni di tibetani, 6.254 monasteri distrutti, circa 100.000 tibetani nei campi di lavoro e deforestazione indiscriminata.


sono realmente queste le cifre?se non fossero questo mi potreste dare del materiale che neghi il contrario soprattutto sul numero di morti?grazie

"Già ho vissuto una volta quella vita prima," ha detto Wangchuk, un ex schiavo di 67 anni con indosso i suoi vestiti migliori per il suo pellegrinaggio annuale a Shigatse, uno dei luoghi più sacri del buddismo tibetano. Ha detto che adorava il Dalai Lama, ma ha aggiunto, "non posso essere libero sotto comunismo cinese, ma la mia vita è migliore di quando ero uno schiavo."
Nel sostenere il rovesciamento cinese della teocrazia feudale del Dalai Lama non devo approvare ogni cosa fatta circa il ruolo cinese nel Tibet. Questo punto è capito raramente dagli odierni aderenti della Shangri-La nell'occidente.

Il censimento ufficiale del 1953 sei anni prima dell’arrivo dei cinesi, aveva registrato l'intera popolazione del Tibet, stabilendo la cifra di 1.274.000 abitanti.

Altre valutazioni avevano conteggiato circa due milioni di tibetani abitanti il paese.

Se i cinesi avessero ucciso 1.2 milioni, città intere dell'inizio degli anni 60 e parti enormi della campagna, effettivamente quasi tutto il Tibet, sarebbe stato spopolato, trasformato in un enorme campo di concentramento, pieno di fosse comuni e cimiteri, di cui però non abbiamo trovato prove. La forza militare cinese nel Tibet non era abbastanza grande come numero, non avrebbe potuto sterminare materialmente tutta quella gente anche se avesse speso tutto il proprio tempo e attività, senza fare nient’altro. Le autorità cinesi ammettono

" errori" nel passato, specialmente durante la rivoluzione culturale 1966-76 quando le persecuzioni religiose raggiunsero un'alto livello sia in Cina che nel Tibet. Dopo la rivolta verso la fine degli anni 50, furono migliaia i tibetani incarcerati. Durante il “grande balzo in avanti”, la collettivizzazione dell’agricoltura, la coltivazione forzata del grano furono imposte ai contadini, a volte con effetti disastrosi. Verso la fine degli anni 70, la Cina aveva ottenuto la completa pacificazione della situazione nel Tibet "ed ha provato a modificare e correggere alcuni errori commessi durante i due decenni precedenti."

da http://www.resistenze.org/sito/te/po/ci/poci5m21.htm

[Red Shadow]

riguardo a questa frase cosa potete dirmi? :

La Cina governò quello che rimaneva del Tibet con la forza e la repressione. Con la Rivoluzione Culturale vennero uccisi circa 1,2 milioni di tibetani, 6.254 monasteri distrutti, circa 100.000 tibetani nei campi di lavoro e deforestazione indiscriminata.


sono realmente queste le cifre?se non fossero questo mi potreste dare del materiale che neghi il contrario soprattutto sul numero di morti?grazie

Quello che scritto quella frase è un ignorante totale. La versione stragista colloca il 1,2 milioni di morti nella rivolta del 1959 e non nella Rivoluzione Culturale.

[Red Shadow]

nvasione” del Tibet e tentativo di smembramento della Cina
Questo paese “felice” e “libero”, questo “paradiso” viene trasformato in un inferno dall’”invasione” cinese. Le mistificazioni non hanno mai fine. Ha realmente senso parlare di “invasione”? Quale paese aveva riconosciuto l’”indipendenza” del Tibet e intratteneva con esso relazioni diplomatiche? In realtà, ancora nel 1949, nel pubblicare un libro sulle relazioni Usa-Cina, il dipartimento di Stato americano accludeva una mappa di per sé eloquente: con tutta chiarezza sia il Tibet che Taiwan vi figuravano quali parti integranti del grande paese asiatico, impegnato a porre fine una volta per sempre alle amputazioni territoriali imposte da un secolo di aggressioni colonialiste e imperialiste. Naturalmente, con l’avvento dei comunisti al potere, cambia tutto, comprese le carte geografiche: ogni falsificazione storica e geografica è lecita se essa consente di ridare slancio alla politica a suo tempo iniziata con la guerra dell’oppio e di avanzare cioè in direzione dello smembramento della Cina comunista.
È un obiettivo che sembra sul punto di realizzarsi nel 1959. Con un cambiamento radicale rispetto alla politica seguita sino a quel momento, che l’aveva visto collaborare col nuovo potere insediatosi a Pechino, il Dalai Lama sceglie la via dell’esilio e comincia ad agitare la bandiera dell’indipendenza del Tibet. Si tratta realmente di una rivendicazione nazionale? Abbiamo visto che il Dalai Lama stesso non è di origine tibetana ed è costretto ad imparare una lingua che non è la sua lingua materna.

Domenico Losurdo

[zhanghe]

Red SHadow
gli articoli che posti hanno tutti un difetto di base che a mio modo di vedere ne pregiudica l attendibilita,sono scritti da cinesi...
vai in Tibet e cerca di parlare con dei tibetani e poi,con materiale di prima mano giudica.Tu fai riferimento troppo ad autori e ne assumi il loro punto di vista,sii piu critico.
Riguardo al Tibet,su you tube di manifestazioni di giovani tibetani rifugiati in india ne trovi.Sono i difensori del temibile regime dei Lama?MA non ti suona un po grottesco?
Se fossi stato in una prigione cinese o in un laogai sapresti che di situazioni infernali in Cina ve ne sono a bizeffe
Poi alcune domande=.
-Se i cinesi hanno liberato i tibetani dalla schiavitu dei lama allora perche vi sono state8 e iogni tanto vi sono ancora) rivolte sedate nel sangue?In tibet ma anche in Xinjiang
-Se i tibetani non approvavano la politica schiavista(,.,) del Dalai LAma perche molti ancora lo ricordano con nostalgia e sfoderano la sua foto ogni volta che Hu o qlc altro pezzo grosso visita il Tibet?
-il tibet faceva parte della cina sotto i mongoli,ok ma
Gengis odiava i cinesi Han e nella scala sociale vennero da lui posti all ultimo gradino.Dalle cariche pubbliche piu importanti gli Han vennero tenuti lontani(quello che succede ora ma all incontrario),prima venivano mongoli,tibetani,turchi,indiani e straieri vari e poi Han,quindi
molti storici cinesi si stanno ancora dibattendo se la dinastia mongola puo essere considerata una dinastia cinese.
Dopo questa parentesi il Tibet mantiene rapporti con la Cina in termini di tributi,da qui ad annetterlo ci passa Mao Ze Dong...

[zhanghe]

Red SHadow
gli articoli che posti hanno tutti un difetto di base che a mio modo di vedere ne pregiudica l attendibilita,sono scritti da cinesi...
vai in Tibet e cerca di parlare con dei tibetani e poi,con materiale di prima mano giudica.Tu fai riferimento troppo ad autori e ne assumi il loro punto di vista,sii piu critico.
Riguardo al Tibet,su you tube di manifestazioni di giovani tibetani rifugiati in india ne trovi.Sono i difensori del temibile regime dei Lama?MA non ti suona un po grottesco?
Se fossi stato in una prigione cinese o in un laogai sapresti che di situazioni infernali in Cina ve ne sono a bizeffe
Poi alcune domande=.
-Se i cinesi hanno liberato i tibetani dalla schiavitu dei lama allora perche vi sono state8 e iogni tanto vi sono ancora) rivolte sedate nel sangue?In tibet ma anche in Xinjiang
-Se i tibetani non approvavano la politica schiavista(,.,) del Dalai LAma perche molti ancora lo ricordano con nostalgia e sfoderano la sua foto ogni volta che Hu o qlc altro pezzo grosso visita il Tibet?
-il tibet faceva parte della cina sotto i mongoli,ok ma
Gengis odiava i cinesi Han e nella scala sociale vennero da lui posti all ultimo gradino.Dalle cariche pubbliche piu importanti gli Han vennero tenuti lontani(quello che succede ora ma all incontrario),prima venivano mongoli,tibetani,turchi,indiani e straieri vari e poi Han,quindi
molti storici cinesi si stanno ancora dibattendo se la dinastia mongola puo essere considerata una dinastia cinese.
Dopo questa parentesi il Tibet mantiene rapporti con la Cina in termini di tributi,da qui ad annetterlo ci passa Mao Ze Dong...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyZXk567ego

[zhanghe]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4tBsEjv1LM

hollywood....