Dalai Lama’s ‘Middle Way’ has failed - An Interview

Daily News and Analysis[Wednesday, May 07, 2008 13:18] Tuesday, May 06, 2008 3:41:00 AM
Venkatesan Vembu

Former member of CIA-funded Tibetan guerrilla force tells DNA

HONG KONG: In 1962, Jamyang Norbu dropped out of school to enlist with a Tibetan guerrilla force, funded by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), to fight for Tibetan independence from China. That rag-tag army ran out of steam – and funding – when the US mended ties with China in 1972, but more than three decades after he laid down his arms, Norbu is still, well, ’sticking to his guns’. Today, the journalist-theatreperson- novelist-blogger is one of the most passionate and articulate – and controversial - spokespersons for the Tibetan cause. His fierce defence of his independent position has at times led him to criticise Tibetan government-in-exile officials in Dharamsala and, on occasion, even the Dalai Lama.

In a telephone interview with DNA from his home in Monteagle, Tennessee, Norbu fleshes out his criticism of the Dalai Lama’s ‘Middle Way’ on Tibet (which favours ‘genuine autonomy’ for Tibet, not ‘independence’). Excerpts:

Q: Do the talks between the Dalai Lama’s envoys and Chinese officials in Shenzhen on Sunday represent a ‘moral victory’ for Tibetans?

A: I don’t think it’s any kind of victory - moral or otherwise. These are not ‘talks’ in the sense of two parties getting together to discuss a problem and making incremental progress. This is a case of Imperial China berating its subject-nations, saying they’ve been bad boys and should behave better. These ‘talks’ are only an opportunity for China to work themselves out of a likely boycott of the Olympics by world leaders.

Q: If it’s as open-and-shut as that, why did the Dalai Lama send his envoys?

A: That’s what all Tibetans want to know: they feel it’s just a political ploy. For Dharamsala, however, it’s an act of desperation. There’s now a very strong voice among Tibetan people, especially among young people… A lot of them, who are coming out of Tibet into exile, are not so reverent of the Tibetan government-in-exile. They are now saying that the Tibet government’s policy – and the Dalai Lama’s ‘Middle Way’ approach – is a failure. The Dalai Lama in some ways is desperate. He doesn’t comprehend the nature of modern politics – and I don’t think he has an understanding of totalitarian regimes.

Q: In your view, what is wrong with the ‘Middle Way’ approach?

A: I think it’s a complete failure. I believe in Gandhian non-violence, but I believe that non-violence has, to some extent, be confrontational. It cannot be an excuse for not doing anything. The ‘Middle Way’ approach is more like a begging bowl approach – asking China and world leaders to do something about Tibet. It does not confront China with the wrongs it is doing in Tibet and putting it in the hot seat. China is susceptible to this, because the Chinese brand of tyranny is to take the moral high ground by maintaining that they are on the side of good. It’s completely invalid, and that’s something Tibetans can use to shatter the self-image of the Chinese. The Dalai Lama and the Tibetan government don’t understand this.

For instance, the uprising in Tibet since March is a huge lesson for China. For the first time, every Chinese now knows there is a ‘Tibetan issue’; they’ve now seen the Tibetan national flag. It’s a good starting point…

Q: But hasn’t it also whipped up Chinese nationalism and made it harder for any concessions to be made?

A: This ‘nationalism’ is a reaction, but who is it against? Deep down it’s against the Communist Party. The Chinese people don’t have a choice about whom to demonstrate against, but their anger is in a sense born of the shame at how the world views them. In China, a lot of people recognise the tremendous inequities in society. This so-called nationalism can easily turn against the regime.

Q: You once took up arms for Tibetan independence. Is there a risk of the movement returning to radical ways?

A: I’m completely against terrorism. It’s not just counter-productive, it destroys your entire campaign because the same message can be used against you when you’re in power… It spawns a vicious cycle, as in Pakistan.

I’ve been discouraging people against armed insurgency, but I’m not a Gandhian in the absolutist spiritual sense… I favour an approach where even when you use non-violent methods, they must be action-oriented, and to an extent confrontational. There is, of course, a price to pay, but you pay it anyway.

Tibetans realise that China is not going to give them anything; in a way, it’s all or nothing. They also feel that the regime - no matter how impressive - is fairly frail. There’s tremendous nervousness in the regime: if one person says ‘Down with the Communist Party’, it sets the cat among the pigeons. On that level, there’s a huge immaturity in China.

© 2005-2008 Diligent Media Corporation Ltd. All rights reserved.

See comments on this story [here]

There is a lot of dialog surrounding the “Middle Way” approach that HH Dalai Lama has taken these many years. Finally, China has a weak point that can be exploited to bring the continuing plight of Tibet’s people. They want Autonomy, they are not asking for independence. China has historical ties to this region, this is not contested. China’s Communist Party has imposed a Communist Agenda upon a deeply religious people that deliberately opposes their faith. Communists make it quite clear that the Tibetan religion holds no value and deserves no respect or consideration. Human rights is the first casualty of this philosophy. Violence to make a point and subdue faithful followers, shows that China fears religion. Buddhists are not evangelists. They do not threaten other’s beliefs like Christianity or Islam does. Buddhist do not impose their dogma upon the unwilling. This is why it is so frustrating that China treats these faithful Tibetans the way they do. They can brag all they want about the material contributions they have made for the Tibetan Plateau, but the cost was human rights.

China is the unwilling party at the mediation table. It is putting on a show. Humility is not part of China’s Communist vocabulary and the outcome will be suspect. China’s paranoia and their new position as a world economic power are not compatible.

Wiki: Deprogramming refers to actions that attempt to force a person to abandon allegiance to a religious or political group. Methods and practices typically involve violent kidnapping and coercion.

Ted Patrick, one of the pioneers of deprogramming, used a confrontational method:

“When you deprogram people, you force them to think…But I keep them off balance and this forces them to begin questioning, to open their minds. When the mind gets to a certain point, they can see through all the lies that they’ve been programmed to believe. They realize that they’ve been duped and they come out of it. Their minds start working again.”

Political and Religious CULTS are the target of deprogrammers. Someone has to care a lot to implement deprogramming. It is expensive. The sad truth that there are so many cults, where does one start and another begin? Both extreme political wings in America consider the each other ‘brainwashed’. Both extremes take steps to ‘deprogram’ the other. Taking sides is risky … it all depends who frightens you the most. One side wields ‘god’ as the weapon of choice. Another side wields the ‘devil’ as the weapon of choice. Heaven and hell belong to the most charismatic of the bunch.

America is accused of being sheep. Why is that. Our minds are programmed by marketing gurus. Our pockets are emptied into the coffers of big business, because that is how ‘free enterprise’ works. Create a need where ther is none and sell it!

Political marketers sway voters through fear. History has demonstrated over and over how that works, maybe that is why America’s history I.Q. is so lacking. That made it easier for politicians to spin events into justifying their actions … before the internet. Good or bad, right or wrong, the internet has opened the uncensored part of the world to other views. There are internet scam and internet revelations. Most smart surfers can distinguish the truth just by researching. There will always be those who only seek information that supports their personal delusion.

So, can we assume that all religions are cults? Are all politicians marketers for powerful enterprise? At least most politicians must answer to their voters at the end of their term.

Wiki: Some anthropologists and sociologists studying cults have argued that no one has yet been able to define “cult” in a way that enables the term to identify only groups that have been identified as problematic.

In the 1960s and 1970s deprogramming was the fashion for parents to rescue their children from cult mind control. Today, with religious extremism and more sophisticated mind control techniques, this practice is being used by both sides of an issue.

Today we see extreme religious sects using children to satisfy god’s sexual plan. Children from the extremist wing of LDS will be the focus for child psychologists. We see powerful Chinese Government try to wring the Dalai out of his monks. China tries to reeducate, or deprogram Tibetan Monks. Question, could deprogrammers have made a difference at the Waco disaster? Can deprogrammers help returning Iraq and Afghanistan PTSD victims? Can deprogrammers help America’s sheepish compliance to the false, supreme being called currency? The church of ‘Gotta Have It” has made Americans into consumer sheep. Picture how Americans will behave when the lights go out … oh, yes, Katrina was a sneak preview.

Is George W Bush the real Manchurian Candidate? Is George the one most vulnerable to the mind control expertise Cheney learned during his darker days? Is Cheney the Cult Leader for the PNAC agenda?

Can George W Bush ever be ‘deprogrammed?

Do we really care at this point? Only if we seek to punish treason and conspiracy …

Cross posted on BlueBloggin

Intelligence Daily states ” … this is the man