According to esteemed Tibetan scholar and Woodstock resident, Robert Thurman, “Our town should be in the lead in turning America away from a self-defeating war economy to a green sustainable economy, and so the conversion of the Woodstock plant of Rotron from war component making to purely peace-product manufacturing is of vital concern to all Woodstock taxpaying citizens, including myself.” 

From Woodstock Peace Economy introducing the Woodstock Forum: Building a Peaceful, Just and Sustainable Economy, August 15-19, 2009.

Related: Two Opportunities to Learn Peacemaking

1. It is not true that the world always has to be a mess and vale of misery. It can be beautiful and meaningful, and the human life form is a wonderful opportunity to reach the highest fulfillment imaginable.
2. The Buddha’s Noble Truth of Suffering means that life dominated by misknowledge will always be unsatisfactory, but that is not a final destination; it means that we can develop wisdom to eliminate misknowledge and then live free in bliss and share that bliss with others.
3. War and violence are not at all inevitable. When leaders and their people recognize this precious nature of human life in particular and all sentient life in general, they can definitely improve the nature of a society, can live sensibly and in harmony with nature and with one another. Being civilized means being wise, gentle, loving, and happy, and a society that enshrines those qualities is truly a civilization. There are definite examples of societies that have successfully cultivated a higher degree of gentleness, such as those of ancient India, Tibet, Mongolia, and China in certain flourishing periods.
4. The time we now live in is a unique moment when, due to science, technology, and the teachings of all the great religions, human beings could awaken to their true potential in larger numbers than ever before, and we really could realize the ancient dream of peace on earth, goodwill to all beings (not only humans).
5. Tibet is a special land, the highest “roof of the world”, and it is a shining example of what spiritual heights some members of a society can achieve when supported by a people who, in the main, have limited their greed for wealth and abandoned any admiration for violence and militarism. They once were successful militarists, and they became a peaceful people. They prove it can be done.
6. China has both sides in its history; it reached high points of civilization at times, and at other times it switched back into predatory savagery toward its own people and its neighbors. It was frequently violently conquered and then tended to imitate its conquerors. It is now caught up in imitating the Western ideological imperialism of Marxism, the physical imperialism of the Manchu empire, and the economic not-quite-post-colonial colonialist mentality of the not-quite-post-colonial Euro-American empires. It is also in the process of returning to its own soul, a soul of balance and harmony with humanity and nature, as it relearns its own deep ancient civilizational vision.
7. Therefore, it is not impossible that China, the waking giant, will quit its path of conquest empire and not seek to be a violent superpower, but will instead turn its great strength toward healing the overheated planet. It can listen to the Dalai Lama as one of the planet’s clearest voices of reason, peacefulness, and the wise intelligence we need to overcome the crisis we are in. It can free his people and return Tibet to being an environmental sanctuary, the water tower of Asia, the Switzerland of Asia. In turn, the Dalai Lama, now and in future incarnations, and his capable and creative free people can help the Chinese rekindle their spiritual energies and restore their civilized lives of harmony and fulfillment.
8. It is not that this or that leader will do it just now or just then. No one can be sure. But cultivating the vision of the possibility, how easy it would be, how beneficial to all sides it would be, this is one way of keeping hope alive and creating a powerful resonance that will eventually reach the hearts of those empowered to effect such positive change.
9. In our lifetimes, the Soviet Union withdrew from its imperial behavior and liberated Eastern Europe and even the Ukraine without a shot being fired. The South African apartheid regime gave up that vicious and miserable racist life without any further violence. Who can say realistically that China will not see its enlightened self-interest fulfilled in truly freeing Tibet from its cumbersome occupation and impractical and destructive colonization?
10. Therefore, it is our duty and obligation to cultivate hope. We can free our imaginations from being stuck in the expectation of failure. We can free any enemy from expecting that he or she cannot become a friend. We can follow the Dalai Lama and never give up. We live in hope, as the realistic way to live. We live therefore without bitterness, joyfully and happily, while vigorously opposing violence and injustice. It is our duty to strive to live so happily, that even if someone kills us, we will die happy!

Robert Thurman, professor of Indo-Tibetan studies at Columbia University, said that while the Dalai Lama had managed to perform both a political and religious role, it was his belief that the Tibetan people would benefit from more secular education and taking more personal responsibility. “He thinks that democracy is the best way for this. He has dealt with Chinese autocracy for more than 60 years and he has seen what that has done,” he said. Full article.

In the New York Times article entitled An Olive Branch From the Dalai Lama (August 6, 2008), Nicholas Kristof states, “One signal is this: For the first time, the Dalai Lama is willing to state that he can accept the socialist system in Tibet under Communist Party rule. This is something that Beijing has always demanded, and, after long discussion, the Dalai Lama has agreed to do so.” He quotes the Dalai Lama, “The main thing is to preserve our culture, to preserve the character of Tibet,” the Dalai Lama told me. “That is what is most important, not politics.”

This report is highly distorted. I am shocked by the sloppy and confused nature of the reporting and the interpretation from a journalist whose work I often admire. As some have observed, when China is involved, good people become unaware of the influence of the “anaconda in the chandelier.”

In response, Mr. Jin Canrong (China Daily (People’s Republic of China) August 21, 2008) in an article entitled “An Illusive Olive Branch from the Dalai Lama,” blasted the article from China’s side anyway. The state propaganda publication professed outrage that the Dalai Lama was “trying to negotiate through a journalist.” I am certainly disappointed by Mr. Kristof’s “illusive” article, and would like to clarify the underlying confusions.

First, the Chinese invaded Tibet in stages, 1949-1951, dividing it as they went into 12 parts, one Tibet Autonomous Region (which they now call “Tibet,” in the telling phrase “China’s Tibet”), and eleven “Tibet Autonomous Prefectures,” which they annexed during the 50’s and incorporated in other Chinese provinces. Actual Tibet (which the Dalai Lama calls “Tibet” as do all historical scholars) is defined by the 13,500 foot altitude line, which includes all six million Tibetans, living on the roof of the world. The Chinese annexed the Tibet Autonomous Region when the Dalai Lama fled in 1959, during an uprising occasioned by the Chinese intention to take him forcibly to Beijing and the Tibetan people’s fear of harm being done to him. Since then, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has totally controlled all Tibetans: the two thirds who live in the “Prefectures” and the one third who lives in the “Region.” It has destroyed over a million Tibetan lives, over six thousand Buddhist monasteries, taken billions of dollars of trees, desertified 35% of the high altitude grassland, raised the temperature of the glaciers several times faster than global warming has done and so damaged the headwaters of all of Asia’s major rivers, oppressed the Tibetan people by a highly armed military occupation and intensive colonization, and viciously attacked the Tibetan Buddhist language and culture to the point of committing cultural genocide. This is why the Tibetan people stood up in protest in March. In turn, this gave the CCP the excuse to intensify their brutal suppression, which persists and has now increased in Tibet. The CCP also persistently insults the Dalai Lama personally with extremist, cultural-revolution-style rhetoric.

In the midst of this deplorable situation, the Dalai Lama consistently calls for dialogue and reconciliation with the CCP. For over twenty years he has offered his “Middle Way Approach.” This plan insists on a nonviolent solution that gives the Tibetan people freedom under the genuine autonomy promised to ethnic minorities in the Chinese constitution. It gives the Chinese government legitimate sovereignty over the entirety of Tibet, something more secure than the de facto sovereignty they currently maintain through military occupation.

In light of the present situation, let us look again at Mr. Kristof’s interview with the Dalai Lama.

“For the first time, the Dalai Lama is willing to state that he can accept the socialist system in Tibet under Communist Party rule.” This statement is factually erroneous. The Communist Party has ruled for just short of 60 years. The Dalai Lama cannot accept their aim for cultural genocide, if not actual genocide. Through his “Middle Way Approach,” he could persuade his people to accept genuine autonomy under Chinese rule, rather than seek independence. The Dalai Lama is accepting that ultimate authority would rest with the government of China, the current Chinese Communist Party. His acceptance of “Communist Party Rule” is nothing new.

“This is something that Beijing has always demanded, and, after long discussion, the Dalai Lama has agreed to do so.” Beijing has not demanded any such acceptance of the Dalai Lama. The misleading implication here is that the Dalai Lama’s statement makes any difference to the CCP leadership. They have repeatedly stated that they do not recognize the Dalai Lama as representative of Tibet or the Tibetan people. They are not negotiating the future of Tibet with him. They have no problem about Tibet. They only want to discuss the Dalai Lama’s own personal future – Will be he repentant for all his crimes of separatism against the Motherland? Will he admit that Tibet has always and forever been an inalienable part of China? Will he stop “inciting” the Tibetans, so “happy” under Chinese rule, who protest Chinese occupation and resist “patriotic re-education?”

I would like to have the transcript of the “long discussion” Kristof mentions. He must have pressed the Dalai Lama very hard for the Dalai Lama to give up his reasonable position that Tibetans will not be happy until they are ruled locally by themselves and not by communist party bosses stationed in Tibet. Under the “one country two systems” in Hong Kong, local government is conducted by Hong Kong’s own people, in a partially democratic manner. However, all their decisions are controlled by Beijing, so they are ultimately under “Communist Party Rule.” Even with a democratic local government in Tibet, Tibet would be under ultimate “Communist Party rule.” The Dalai Lama has accepted this as realistic for over twenty years. Immediate communist party rule is too destructive to Tibetan culture, as proven by sixty years of experience. What Kristof is trumpeting as a “major new concession” is probably only that finally, the Dalai Lama agreed under pressure, to “consider” such a possibility. After all, the Dalai Lama has long called for dialogue without preconditions, so anything can be “considered.”

The Dalai Lama has always said that he personally cannot decide the fate of Tibet, anyway. Anything negotiated between his Government in Exile representatives and the Chinese, would have to be approved in a plebiscite by the Tibetan people themselves. So Kristof’s proclamation of a breakthrough is confused.

Finally, if Jin Carong responds to Kristof’s article by saying, “Talking through an American journalist’s mouth reduces the creditability of his message, and makes people wonder if the Dalai really desired to solve the problems or is it another PR smoking campaign on behalf of the West,” Kristof has only succeeded in continuing the Communist party’s fervor in maligning the Dalai Lama even when they say they are open to dialogue with him.

I just had the huge pleasure of spending three days with His Holiness the Dalai Lama at the Aspen Institute in Aspen, Colorado, with old friends and luminaries in the Tibet world. A sand mandala (sacred celestial mansion diagram) of Avalokiteshvara, the bodhisattva of universal compassion, was created and dissolved. Juniper incense offerings were made, Tibetan music was played, and lively discussions were conducted both about the current crisis in Tibet and about the long-term prospects for the survival of Tibetan culture and identity.

His Holiness was his usual jolly and insightful self, though at moments one could sense the deep stress he feels due to the covert “cultural revolution” still being waged by the Chinese government against the Tibetan identity, which is so deeply rooted in Tibetan Buddhist culture. Tibetans are still being beaten, arrested, tortured, and killed for having voiced their wish for freedom and unimpeded spiritual reunion with their Lama teachers.

In the midst of it all last Friday, Senator and candidate John McCain met with the Dalai Lama and expressed his sympathy for the Tibetan people and solidarity with the nonviolent and moderate offer the Dalai Lama continues to make to the Chinese government. Later in the day, a letter came from Senator Barack Obama, expressing regret that his travel schedule prevented him from meeting and honoring His Holiness and pledging his support for the Tibetan cause in terms of regaining their human rights and religious freedom.

These good will gestures are heartening to all who desire peace and justice for Tibetans. Why did both candidates want to meet with the Dalai Lama? I find myself wishing that the candidates would read my new book, Why the Dalai Lama Matters, so that they can better understand the incredibly high stakes in this Tibetan liberation struggle. The China-West (especially US, EU, Russia, India, and Japan) relationship is the most important relationship for the entire 21rst century. China is one of the most ascendant nations of the coming era. We must all welcome its rightful importance. But the world will never tolerate another conquering superpower. The European and Japanese empires have declined. The Russian and American “superpower” hegemonies are demonstrating their un-viability. The UN is still crippled by the five WW II victors’ wielding their vetoes. So China, India, Brazil, the Muslim world, and the main African powers will inevitably emerge. For global survival, they must not repeat the mistakes of previous empires and superpowers, but turn to a new concept of power, the power of interconnectedness, peacefulness, dialogue, a global meshing of mutual enlightened self-interests.