Western Campaigners held after Great Wall-Beijing 2008 protest

I am very worried for the Canadians...China already has one Canadian in jail for life, they say he is a terrorist! Canadian consular officials never got access to him and he had no Canadian legal representation, in fact no Canadians were allowed at court.

I really wonder if China is ready for the Olympics from all perspectives -- human right abuses, environmental issues, etc. For one, I just read today that China is responsible for the extinction of a rare river dolphin, which, if confirmed, would be the first extinction of a large vertebrate for over 50 years. That's pretty bad reputation for an Olympics host country.

Is China a country much more flawed than the US or Japan? Do people in China deserve the right to host the Olympic Games without political interferences? And those from the US, UK and Canada think they know more about China and Tibet than people who live here? If you believe in the spirit of the Olympics, please support China and if you want to know the truth about China and Tibet, please visit the coutry, where changes and progresses taking place.

"I really wonder if China is ready for the Olympics from all perspectives -- human right abuses"

I could say the same about other past Olympic hosts, the Olympics has been hosted by some less than lovable regimes over the years. For example, Nazi Germany was the host in 1963, Russia hosted it in 1980. America also hosted it twice before the Civil Rights era. In fact, the only time that I recall it being stopped/moved due to human rights was in 1940, which shows just how bad things have to be for the IOC to react (hint, millions dead).

These days, the games are more about face than justice.

"Is China a country much more flawed than the US or Japan?"

The country, no, the Government, most certainly. The US, UK and Japanese governments are representative "of" the country, the Chinese government merely represents the country.

"I am very worried for the Canadians...China already has one Canadian in jail for life, they say he is a terrorist! Canadian consular officials never got access to him and he had no Canadian legal representation, in fact no Canadians were allowed at court."

Really? I'm sure glad that that kind of thing can't happen in a democratic Western country. I mean, I'm certain that everybody in Guantanamo bay gets full consular representation, a fair trial and independent legal representation.

Long story short, injustice is universal.

Why don't those darned American kids hang a giant sign on the Linclon Memorial to help free the Native Americans?

As far as I know no foreign activists (grassroots or CIA-sponsored like RSF) have protested in US during our hosting of 2007 Junior Olympics.

Hello, I'm really sorry for all those people who've been caught. They are fighting for other people causes. This is something I don't really understand but that I admire. Actually I heard a lot about the Tibet "invasion" but I'm not aware of what Tibetans are asking for. Are we ure that Tibet has the means to go through globalisation? Isn't Chinese help necessary?

"but I'm not aware of what Tibetans are asking for."

Most just want the Hans out so that they can live in peace and to be allowed to go on more or less as they have always done but maybe with more heat in winter and better clinics.

"Are we ure that Tibet has the means to go through globalisation? Isn't Chinese help necessary?"

What makes you think that Tibet wants to go through globalization? It's an alien concept to your average Tibetan farmer whose still getting to grips with the idea of that there is globe out there. Why inflict it on them. All that they need is food, shelter and health care, and to be left alone.

What China is doing isn't actually globalization, basically, China is looking to convert Tibetans into Han. It wants them to look like Han, speak like Han and to think like Han.

What I meant wasn't that Tibetans want to get into that global move bit they will have to. I guess that one of the main resource that "in case of independence" for Tibet will be the tourism. More and more occidental people visiting the country and importing new concepts and uses. Inexorably Tibet will be influenced and Tibetans will have their own idea about freedom and modernity. That insidious invasion is may be worst than military one, at least when its another country that's invading you the enemy is identified. In the second case you're your own enemy. The second point is about "with more heat in winter and better clinics." how can a country without natural richnesses, with a basic agriculture and hard climate can survive in this world???? On another hand china will never make Tibet more modern.

These American and Canadian kids are hypocrits.

They would not for a second think about decimating our own "establishted statehood" and "existing sovereignty" to give the Native Americans/First People their independence back.

But they will hang a sign in China demanding the Chinese do it.

Shouldn't we, as an embodiment of freedom and fairness, set a good example for the Chinese by giving back our stolen land first?

"They would not for a second think about decimating our own "establishted statehood" and "existing sovereignty" to give the Native Americans/First People their independence back."

Sadly, the world doesn't work this way. There are many established first world nations that are literally built on top of other nations whom they have since subsumed. American and Canada are merely two examples. Australia would be another. Right now there are many places around the world where the indigenous people have been forced either to exist in isolated encampments such as the Native American Indian reservations, or to integrate and loose their culture inside large cities built by immigrant peoples.

Even in the cases where foreigners have given land back to the natives (Africa with the end of European colonialism), they have often pulled out quickly and allowed the strongest local sources to rise to power at the expense of the everyday person, meaning that all that changed was the skin color of the dictator.

Of course, there are other examples too, take Okinawa for example. For all of America's yapping about self determination and freedom over Britain's colonies in Africa and India after WWII, after it liberated Okinawa from Japan it ruled over it itself for years, then it handed it right back to the Home islands. The local people weren't even given the chance to decide whether they wanted independence or autonomy.

"What I meant wasn't that Tibetans want to get into that global move bit they will have to."

Why would they have to? Sure, Tibet would benefit from more modern technology and medicine, but it really doesn't need multiplex cinema and Western chain stores on every street. Globalization is fine if your Western because it evolved from Western culture, but it isn't always suitable for Asians.

"I guess that one of the main resource that "in case of independence" for Tibet will be the tourism."

Tibet is too small to survive pure independence, what it needs is autonomy and the freedom to engage in its own culture without intervention from Beijing. Independence can come later. The British abandonment of Africa and India shows us that fast track independence often leads to warlordism and instability. I'm particularly concerned that if Chian were to pull out tomorrow, Western powes would rush in to exploit Tibet as a business opportunity (eg tourism), or that they would try to gain influence in Tibet in order to have an ally on China's borders. Which would be a mini cold war in itself.

That insidious invasion is may be worst than military one, at least when its another country that's invading you the enemy is identified.

Except that a China's occupation of Tibet is stripping the country of its culture by force. It's one thing to loose your culture by the back door and by your own hand, but it's another to have Han soldiers throwing people in jail for having pictures of their religious leaders.

"On another hand china will never make Tibet more modern."

China will make Tibet more industrialized.

"but it really doesn't need multiplex cinema and Western chain stores on every street" Those things are not a mean to get into Globalization, they're a consequence. I'm living in an African country and I can see by myself how Western way of life can give to our youth illusion of better life. Our youth is torn between that "Bright European Dream" and the reality of life in a third world country. How would they live on the european/american way in a country where the average wage per day is 2 to 3$. So we would have in Tibet 20% of the population living on that way, and having the means to do it.The other part would be too poor to do it and would still be under the siege. "Western powes would rush in to exploit Tibet as a business opportunity (eg tourism), or that they would try to gain influence in Tibet..." This is so true. And we would have all the international institutions claiming to the new "Independent Tibetan Monarchy" that the country needs more democracy. That their ancestral uses are antidemocratic, just because they're different from the Western conception of the Way of Life. Invasion can have many faces. Torture doesn't need to be physical.

These days, an inevitable consequence of globalization is "Western capitalism", and when you introduce Western capitalism to a state as small and underdeveloped as Tibet what you generally get are a lot of more powerful states and powerful companies marching in and telling the local people what to do.

For example, it is all well and good for Tibet to have bi-directional trade and investment links with the rest of the world, but Tibetan companies simply can't afford to set up overseas and the simply can't compete at the local level with large multinationals whom have much more experience and much more money to invest.

What would happen would be that foreign companies would set up shop in Tibet and use it as a source of cheap labor and as a market to expand into, while the native Tibetans would have to sit back and watch. In the end, these foreign companies would bring foreign ideas and when the companies became dominant so would the ideas that they brought. It's like with the native Americans, whose children wear blue jeans and sneakers brought to them by big Western companies, while the children of the white Americans don't wear native American dress or follow native American culture because no native American stores and networks don't exist to market it to them as a massed audience.

What Tibet needs is its own traditional way of life and its own traditional values, with a few more home comforts such as good clinics and hot running, and without foreign intervention and consumerism.

Tibet may be one of the most isolated countries in the world. One of those who can keep their very own culture out of the reach of Western influence. But they need also to abandon the "modern clinics and more heat in the winter" because you can't get the positive effects without th side effects. I guess that the only country in the third world that could do that was the "Yemen". But it's also a country where democracy is at a very low level "in the international standards". Now there's a choice to make: Do people want to stand true to their roots? In this case they'll have to close the frontiers and control who's getting into the country, who can buy pieces of land, and who can make business in there. Do people want to believe in the illusion of the western consumerism and "comfortable life"? Then we'd have a rush of "intervention and consumerism." and more.

Personally, I don't think that Tibet is ready for democracy as the West knows it. Put simply, the people look up to traditional sources of wisdom and like to be lead by them rather than to actively take a hand in leading themselves.

Really, Western democracy is only really necessary in complex society with many interwoven issues,views and people to be catered for. Tibet is a simple agrarian society with simple needs. It could quite happily manage under any non-despotic government, a monarchy or religious council, for example.

This is not to say that it should not eventually have a democratic government, but rather that the people would not use their vote in the way that you might expect.

Response to comments #7 & 12: Charles Liu has been awfully busy... I keep seeing his comments on story after story concerning the recent Students for a Free Tibet (SFT) protest. So to respond finally: First, Tibetans who make up a lot of the leadership of SFT have their own fight. And I personally know of non-Tibetan SFT activists who in addition to supporting Tibet, also campaign for justice for native/First Nations people in the U.S. and Canada. But handing the countries back to its' native human population by removing 335 million invaders isn't a possibility. Non-Tibetans supporting the Tibetan struggle isn't hypocrisy, it's solidarity and learning from history.

"handing the countries back to its' native human population by removing 335 million invaders isn't a possibility."

How about handing more power over to indigenous people For example, setting aside a percentage of Senate seats for native American people chosen by native Americans themselves to ensure them a say in government. Or granting them more affirmative action benefits. There are 350 million decedents of foreigners, shouldn't they pay their way by supporting the native people whom their ancestors crushed? Kind of like the reparations that Germany paid to France after WWI. $10 dollars a year each wouldn't hurt them, but it would pay for better schools on Indian reservations.

"justice forr native/First Nations" is not "independence" is it?

Nice try Han Shan. You don’t think you’d get called on this? Tenzin Khangsar has been part of SFT and Tibet Independence long before he hooked up with Harper:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/elections/fed2005/candidates/generated/24011 _CON.html

I'm sorry, but this is so friggin stupid. America has the most irritating habit of grandstanding and moralizing when it comes to everybody but us, and it gets so friggin tiring. Yeah, we know China is a communist dictatorship. SO WHAT? What the fuck does that have to do with us? I know it's bad, but they're going to have to sort it out for themselves. We have completely FUCKED UP Iraq, and yet we still do all this pompous posturing. Do this, do that! Remember in 1968 in Mexico City when those two black medalists stood with their fists raised, wearing black gloves, to protest the racism and discrimination in American society? They were suspended and banned from the Olympic village. America loves to criticize other countries but we can't stand it if we're criticized. The Olympics is just a bunch of stupid games held every four years. Jesus titty fucking Christ, just let them play the goddamn games without some dumbshit protest for once.