AH TIBET, Rooftop of the World, Shangri-La, bastion of ancient superstition and favourite cause of the chardonnay socialist.

www.youtube.com/watch

Michael Smith's expletive-laden report is probably the closest thing we have to an objective report of the violence that put Tibet back on the front pages, and we don't see the Tibet of Kundun or The Art of Happiness. What we have on our hands is a cold civil war, far beyond my, and your, comprehension.

At the moment I'm going through the painful rigmarole of organising a trip on the Beijing-Lhasa train line, probably an impossible task given my profession, because I want to see this political powder keg firsthand. Clearly these peaceful monks aren't pacifists and clearly the Chinese have improved conditions in the forbidden kingdom.

After the riots Chinese and Western media, including blogging and "independent" sources, showed two valid but contradictory reports and the truth no doubt lies somewhere between. History will never forget the murder and horror heaped on Tibet during the Chinese Cultural Revolution, nor should we ignore Tibet's own 400-year civil war or the horrific poverty and suffering there before the PLA moved in to modernise Shangri-la. Today it remains a place governed by a hereditary god-king, and his personal castle, the Potala Palace, is an oasis of staggering wealth in a peasant country still living off the back of the yak.

We on the outside find it easy to wear T-shirts calling for freedom in Tibet, but consider what that actually means. What resolution do we hope for, a completely free Tibet with a flourishing democracy and liberal Hong Kong-styled economy? The people seem pleased with subjugation to the church, and a Chinese pullout would almost certainly see a return to reliance on aid and mass starvation. Not even the Dalai Lama, a man exiled by the communists for most of his life, wants full freedom, just increased autonomy. He knows Tibet can't survive on its own, and perhaps even recognises significant cultural links. Reliable figures show there may be as few as 660 million and as many as one billion Buddhists living and practising in greater China.

If there is any agreement to be reached, it's in that uncompromising Party line: "Tibet will always be part of China". Both leaders seem pretty happy to tow that line for the time being. Instead of holding lofty ideals, we have to be dour pragmatists and use our influence to encourage China to sit down at the table and talk.

Starting fires, turning our backs and stirring up the natives will only piss them off.

AP Interview: IOC president Jacques Rogge in ‘silent diplomacy’ with China on Tibet and rights

By STEPHEN WILSON, AP Sports Writer Mar 24, 8:56 am EDT

IOC President Jacques Rogg made the following comments

Rogge contested claims that the human rights situation in China has deteriorated since the IOC gave the games to Beijing in 2001.
“I dispute that, I challenge that,” he said. “Awarding the games to China has put China in the limelight and opened the (human rights) issues up to the world. Tibet, rightfully so, is on the front page. But it would not be on the front page if the games were not being organized in China.

Food for thought..!