Memorandum has full support of exile parliament

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Tibet Sun
By Lobsang Wangyal
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

File Photo: The ninth session of the 14th Tibetan Parliament in exile gets underway. (Photo: The Tibet Post)

Dharamsala – The Tibetan parliament-in-exile expressed full support to the proposal for future of the Tibetan plateau presented to the Chinese leaders by the envoys of the Dalai Lama in October last year.

Conducting two days of deliberation in a specially organised meeting attended by three former prime ministers and ministers of the Tibetan government-in-exile and the two envoys of the Dalai Lama, the members of the parliament unanimously supported the Memorandum on Genuine Autonomy for the Tibetan People.

After the failure of the 1988 Strasbourg proposal to resolve the Tibetan issue, the memorandum was presented to the Chinese leaders on 31 October 2008 at the eighth round of talks in Beijing. Nine rounds of talks have been held between the envoys of the Dalai Lama and Chinese leaders since the two sides renewed contact in September 2002.

However, there have been some reservations about the memorandum among the exile Tibetan community, questioning if the proposal was that of the Dalai Lama. Some have expressed dissatisfaction about the content of the proposal, saying too much concession has been made.

The Dalai Lama issued a statement on 8 March to the parliament in which he stated that there seemed to be disagreement to the memorandum; that the morandum was not presented to the parliament prior to the presentation to the Chinese leaders; and, that the memorandum was not his original idea.

He, therefore, asked the members to discuss the matter so that it could become clear and transparent, and that the general public may not have to live in doubt.

He further stated that should the parliament have a different opinion and aspiration, a plan for its implementation should be brought forward.

In an opinion poll conducted among the exiled Tibetans in 1997, 64 percent empowered the Dalai Lama to determine the future course of action of the Tibetan struggle. The parliament adopted a resolution to entrust him discretionary power on 18 September 1997. This discretionary power has since remained valid, and the Dalai Lama continued with his “Middle-Way” approach seeking autonomy for Tibet, not independence.

Those who have expressed dissatisfaction with the memorandum had presumed that it came from Samdhong Rinpoche, the prime minister of the exile government, not from the Dalai Lama.

Samdhong Rinpoche, in his clarifications, said that he had not influenced the Dalai Lama, had never deceived him and will never do so in the future.

Former minister Tenzin Geyche Tethong said presuming the memorandum was not the Dalai Lama’s idea is similar to demeaning him. He also suggested that the members of the parliament should adopt a resolution to clear off the erratic situation.

Another former minister Rinchen Khando said that those who would like to fight for an independent Tibet, they could do so. Do-ngag Tenzin, also a former minister, asked the members of the parliament to be more responsible.

The members of the parliament convened a meeting in the afternoon in two groups. Members in both the groups had unanimously resolved to empower the Dalai Lama once again to determine the future course of actions for Tibet.

The members also stated that they recognise the memorandum was drawn and presented to the Chinese leaders in line with that discretionary power he was entrusted with. The members, while seeking apologies for past misconduct, further resolved that they would discharge their duties with sincerity and honesty without factionalism.

The final of the resolution will be passed on the last day of the ninth session of the current parliament on 20 March.

Unlike the Strasbourg proposal, the memorandum has withdrawn the clauses such as ‘democratic system of government’. The memorandum accepts the “Three adherences” as stipulated by the Chinese leaders, that the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party, the socialism with Chinese characteristics; and the Regional National Autonomy system are not being challenged.

However, Beijing maintains that the memorandum contravenes the constitution of China as well as the “Three adherences”. Tibetans believe that the Tibetan people’s needs, as set out in the memorandum, can be met within the framework and the constitution of China and that these proposals do not contravene or conflict with the “Three adherences”.

Tibetans insist that the form and degree of autonomy proposed in the memorandum is consistent with the principles on autonomy in the constitution of China.