Jean-Paul Desimpelaere: A second look at Tibet

After the events that took place in Lhasa in March, Tibet shot quickly back to the headlines around the world. At times it has been difficult to distinguish between facts and non-facts in both Chinese and Western media reports. But what is the real situation of Tibetans today? What are the territory's biggest challenges? Radio86 talked about these issues with tibetologist Jean-Paul Desimpelaere.

Desimpelaere served as co-administrator of the Belgium-China Association from 1982 to 1998. In 1985, he founded the Belgium-China travel agency, which he headed until 1998. He also contributed to research for a book written by his wife Elisabeth Martens, entitled "L’histoire du bouddhisme tibétain, la compassion des puissants" (History of Tibetan Buddhism, Compassion of the Empowered), published by L’Harmattan publications.

Today, Desimpelaere says that the last part of his career will be dedicated to Tibet, a place that has intrigued him throughout his professional life, and that he has traveled to with tourist groups on a number of occasions. Still now he makes it a point to go to Tibet ever one or two years with a small group of tourists or to conduct research in tibetology and sociology.

Radio86: You are an expert on Tibet. When did you make your first trip there?

JPD: In 1985, and the last time I went there was in August of last year.

R86: You've been back there on a number of occasions, for what reason? Tourism, association activities, or for situation checks?

JPD: A little bit of everything. In the name of tourism of course when I had a travel agency. But I've also had the chance to take part in research projects as well as a sports expedition with young Belgian alpinists who had a training camp, not on Mount Everest, but on the lesser known Shishapangma Mountain (8027 meters) on the Tibetan side. As for my research projects, I am mostly interested in the life of the local peasants: how their lives are improving and what difficulties they are faced with. Things have improved a lot over the last twenty years, but in the northern parts of the Qinqhai-Tibet Plateau, the situation of the people is affected by the climate, which is very inhospitable and dry. I've had the chance to talk to many farmers there and ask them how they are managing. The answers I get generally revolve around the complaints that there are too many animal herds in the area, too little grass for the cattle and that the area is turning into a desert… Things aren't very easy there.

R86: Have you witnessed an improvement or a degradation in the situation of the local people during your visits? Whether it be in terms of people's liberties, the infrastructure, the Tibetan culture, or economic development… what constitute the biggest changes that you personally have witnessed?

Solar panels generate power for lamps or a television when herdsmen take their animals to the plains to graze. (Image: Courtesy of Jean-Paul Desimpelaere)JPD: The most visible changes have taken place in the domain of economic development. Without a doubt. Anyone who has visited Tibet thirty years ago and returned there now would tell you that everything there has changed, like in the rest of China for that matter. The buildings are spanking new, even in the countryside! The number of schools and cars has multiplied manyfold and almost everything is readily available… Thanks to greenhouses, you can even buy vegetables there now. When I was there, there were no vegetables at all, people ate turnips and potatoes, and that was almost it. Nowadays the selection is much better. In Lhasa, people grow tomatoes, at an altitude of almost 4,000 meters!

R86: You have taken part in a number of different development projects. Do they help you to get a better picture of the situation of the local people in Tibet?

JPD: I have have participated in projects against desertification, for the construction of infrastructure facilities such as water distribution networks and other basic things. But also in projects concerning energy and electricity, such as the installation of a network of small power stations, and above all the distribution of solar panels, which are now becoming very popular in the region. The herdsmen who embark on four-month grazing journeys with their animals in the high plateaus now carry with them solar panels which allow them to generate electricity for lamps and sometimes even a television. These are big changes from the past, and more changes are taking place as we speak. Life inside houses has also changed. They are a lot more comfortable now, although the level of comfort varies from family to family. There are Tibetans who are well off and those who are impoverished. On one of my trips I was offered accommodation by a family who didn't even have chairs and who sat on the floor while they ate.

R86: Are the well-off Tibetans the ones who participate in the activities of the ruling party or what defines those who are most politically active?

JPD: No, I would simply say that the difference stems more from the growth of the market economy. For 30 years, China has allowed the creation of a free market economy, and thus the gap between the rural and urban areas has expanded, as has the gap between rich rural residents and the poor ones. The predicament of some people is explained by an unfavorable living environment, in places where the soil is bereft of nutrients, or by misfortune, like losing their spouse or not having children who would carry on their work. Those people become marginalized because the social services designed to eliminate poverty are not yet fully developed. The poorest peasants have for the last few years received government subsidies, but it is not enough. The money is barely enough to pay for the meat or barley that they produce themselves. But in any case, the government is starting to take more steps to narrow the gap between the rich and poor that has developed over the years.

R86: Is the same thing happening elsewhere in China?

JPD: Yes, pretty much so. The current five-year-plan contains a plan of action for reducing the wealth gap.

R86: Is the gap between the rich and poor significant?

JPD: Yes, but we can't say that there are a lot of poor people. At the same time, we cannot make a generalization by saying that all the very rich people in Tibet are members of the Communist Party, because in actuality it is not a fact. Who are the richest people in Tibet? A small-time entrepreneur who has had a stroke of good luck, when he, for example, started a transportation business with two trucks and worked hard day and night so that he could now manage a group of about 20 employees and 30 trucks from the comfort of his office. Those are the kinds of people who have managed to make their fortune in Tibet. Some merchants as well, who have succeeded in making profits when the market conditions were favorable.

R86: Could you tell us shortly about the relationship between China and Tibet?

JPD: The initial link was established in the era of the Chinese Tangs and Tibetan Tubos. The Tubos had established a very vast empire which extended across the vast Tibetan territory and even beyond. The Tangs had also a very large empire, which bordered that of the Tubos. Although the two sides waged war on each other, their neighborly existence was relatively harmonious. They signed peace deals and exchanged presents and princesses. But the peaceful coexistence only lasted for about two centuries, from the 17th to the 19th century. After the arrival of the Mongols, in the 13th century, things changed. The Mongols invaded all of Asia and even a large part of Europe, and also Tibet. I make it a point to say invaded, because they didn't just arrive kowtowing in front of the Tibetan lamas! But the Mongols allowed the Tibetan clergy to govern Tibet. This is why China now declares that “Tibet became a part of the Chinese empire during the Mongolian Yuan dynasty," because under Mongolian rule, Tibet became subservient to the Chinese empire. Subsequently, during the Ming dynasty from the 14th to the 16th century, Tibet's status became a little bit more ambiguous. The Ming dynasty rulers, if not provoked, left the Tibetans largely in peace and allowed to do as they pleased. The relationship took on a type of vassal-suzerain character.

Over the recent years, many new buildings have emerged in Tibet, improving living conditions. (Image: Courtesy of Jean-Paul Desimpelaere)Those who advocate Tibetan independence hold the view that that Tibet was never formally incorporated into the Chinese empire in the Ming dynasty. This is in fact open to debate. On the other hand, during Manchu rule in the 17th and 19th century, Tibet became one of the eighteen Chinese provinces, this is clearly visible from maps dating from that era. Tibet had to follow Chinese laws and regulations, although, in this case again, the local administrators in Tibet remained Tibetan. And at this point in time, the Dalai Lama held the political power in the territory. In the 17th century, the fifth Dalai Lama became Tibet's political leader, and the practice remained the same until the 20th century with the regents and other Dalai Lamas. At the beginning of the 20th century, - and this is something that those who defend Tibet's independence are quick to underscore - fifty years passed without Tibet having any dialog with the Chinese. During this time period, Han Chinese inhabitants were even banished from Tibet. But if we take a closer look at things, it is really the British presence on the territory that incited the Tibetans to declare independence. The British had set up colonies in Tibet and all along the Chinese coast, just as the French and Germans had... and Tibetans became pawns in that game. The now-exiled Tibetan government bases its claims of Tibetan independence on the situation of that time period. But it is like saying that "because Tibet is a colony, it is independent!" To me that seems like a flimsy justification of Tibet's independence. Then in 1951, the Red Army intervened. The communists wanted to restore the borders of the empire to what they were before the arrival of the Westerners. In 1912, the Chinese Republic had already contemplated taking the same action, but did not succeed because the country had been rendered too weak in the hands of the colonialists, by the Opium Wars and the subsequent concessions, etc.

R86: So in your opinion, did China conquer, invade or annex Tibet?

JPD: Whatever the case, China clearly indicated that it considered Tibet to be a part of its territory by sending troops to the area at a time when no Han Chinese were living there. The Chinese army came to Tibet, but to deem it as an "invasion" would be to take the perspective that Tibet was independent, which is debatable, because it may have been independent of China, but not of England. So there are some arguments that support the Chinese viewpoint, but on the other hand, they did send the army there in 1951.

R86: In a number of documents Tibet is presented as a slave or feudal regime. Could you elaborate on this? This model is also presented in the book you helped your wife write.

JPD: To say that it was a slave regime would be an overstatement. It was a feudal state quite similar to what we had in Europe in the feudal period, but with one major difference: in Tibet, the clergy played a much bigger role than here. 70 percent of the land belonged to monasteries, and that's a lot. This has never been the case in Europe. Here, the wars were fought between local lords, while in Tibet the supporters of the different schools of Buddhism clashed. The lords had a strong link with the Buddhist clergy because they sent their sons to the monasteries. So, Tibetan Buddhism was the basis of the entire society. This feudal theocracy remained in place for a long time (1,000 years) because the members of the Buddhist clergy constituted about 10 to 15 percent of the male population, which is a significant number. The serfs were attached to the monasteries or lords who owned hundreds of kilometers of land in important commercial and religious centers in their hometowns. Lhasa typifies a city from that period which was the center of religious, political and economic power. Serfs were attached to the land (owned by a lama or a lord) and could not move away. If they wanted to leave, they had to ask for authorization to do so and pay a tax. They were not compensated financially for their labor, but they were given small plots of land for their own use. There were slaves also, but they were a small minority, mainly servants who tended to the landowners' large private residences.

R86: Was this system in place until 1950?

JPD: Until 1959, actually. The Red Army arrived in 1951, but the accord concluded between the Communist Party and the Dalai Lama stipulated that the social structure remain unchanged. The communists wanted to implement social reforms with the Tibetan nobility, not against it. The Chinese government respected this engagement in the territories ruled over by the Dalai Lama, in other words, the Tibet Autonomous Region. But there were Tibetans living in the outer territories also, which were not included in any accords. In those places, the agrarian model took root in the 1950s. In 1956, there were clashes in these zones between monasteries and the Tibetan nobility. The biggest landowners took refuge in Lhasa, and bit by bit, the revolts spread to Tibet proper and erupted into a full-blown rebellion in 1959.

End of first part. The second part will focus on Tibetan geopolitics and Tibet's image in the media.

Elisabeth Martens and Jean-Paul Desimpelaere have co-authored the book "L’histoire du bouddhisme tibétain, la compassion des puissants" published by L'Harmattan publications.