Why is China scared of Tibet?

Nov 2010
7,890
Border of GA and AL
#1
I was on another thread and a thought occurred to me. Why does China refuse to grant Tibet autonomy? Do they fear Tibetans or is it something else? Does Tibet have valuable minerals? What exactly does autonomy mean? This issue confuses me. Would someone mind explaining the problem to me in an unbiased way?
 
Dec 2009
11,340
Ozarkistan
#2
Paranoia is de rigueur in geopolitical "strategy". The absence of long-term adaptive benefit (societies and the global village also evolve according to Darwinian principles) of such paranoia is ignored.
 
Jun 2011
274
West Hammond, IL, USA
#4
If I am forgetting correctly:
In WWII, in the midst of important allied talks in May 1943, allied strategy in asia was almost derailed because of Chinese demands on Tibet.

TM
 
Jul 2009
9,769
#5
1. China has limited natural resources in terms of its longer term industrial potential. The "near abroad" of the Chinese heartland, mostly including Tibet, is the expansion zone of a Chinese imperial imperative. It must expand its control of this near abroad or wither away economically. Mongolia is another example, as is the central Asian geography inside (as well as outside) Chinese borders. So is the hubub over ocean territories that China insists "belong" to China.

China has economic disadvantages in numerous categories - those are outside the scope of this thread.

2. Strategic denial of Tibet, and of its resources, to others - (read India). Strategically, the closer to India the PLA can place military capability, the more - and the earlier - it can exert force in its interests.

3. An example of Chinese imperialism is that Tibetan culture is another inferior and unworthy culture in the Chinese view. They are not Chinese. Supression of that culture, and Chinese colonization of Tibet has been an ongoing political goal. It makes control more effective.

That is pretty much it. Cultural and economic imperialism. And strategic necessity.
 
Last edited:
Likes: prashanth
Feb 2011
9,998
Cumbernauld Scotland
#6
Every nation has to try to justify themselves when they invade a country by getting rid of the countries culture and traditions by stifling it. Then tell the world that they are doing the best for Tibet by bringing modern technology.
 
Likes: prashanth
Feb 2011
6,380
#7
The better question is, why is Tibet in the spotlight? Why not put the focus on Sichuan? Here's a video from the American government before China became communist.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tOtVQ7cNWY"]‪(01) Why We Fight: "Battle of China (ca. 1944) 1/5‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

So it seems to me Tibet was seen as a part of China when China was an ally. Now if the Nationalists won the Civil War, no doubt it would be the Soviets using Tibet to push China's buttons with the same complaint: Sure, life expectancy and literacy rate rose a couple fold, electricity/running water are introduced, while slavery is banned, but just think of the steep price in local culture.

Well, that's called capitalism. Ironic, isn't it?
 

Tulun

Ad Honorem
Nov 2010
3,767
Western Eurasia
#8
I was on another thread and a thought occurred to me. Why does China refuse to grant Tibet autonomy? Do they fear Tibetans or is it something else? Does Tibet have valuable minerals? What exactly does autonomy mean? This issue confuses me. Would someone mind explaining the problem to me in an unbiased way?

i thought Tibet already has autonomy, Tibetan is official in local level and they like other ethnic minorities enjoy some priviliges, affirmative action in school admission and exemption from one child policy as far as i know...
 

mingming

Ad Honorem
Feb 2011
4,742
Los Santos, San Andreas
#9
i thought Tibet already has autonomy, Tibetan is official in local level and they like other ethnic minorities enjoy some priviliges, affirmative action in school admission and exemption from one child policy as far as i know...
That's true for all ethnic minorities in China.
 

Similar History Discussions