|
嘉日•洛珠
（达赖喇嘛特使）
2009年12月10日 华盛顿
2009年12月8日，中国媒体发表了统战部常务副部长朱维群就我们的和谈进程答记者问，引起了我的注意。
目前，我们正与中国领导人讨论下一轮对话，在这个特别的时刻，作此文章，让人迷惑。我个人认为，中国领导人同我们一样，希望接谈并愿意在磋商中，最终找到一条双方满意的解决西藏问题之路。
2006年2月的第五轮会谈中，中国方面清楚地表达了，认知达赖喇嘛尊者指出在中国宪法框架内解决西藏问题、不寻求独立的方针。这次会议的藏文记录显示，中国方面在谈到达赖喇嘛尊者时，使用了“Tamsangpo”（藏语：好，或者喜讯之意）：“好（喜讯），（达赖喇嘛尊者）希望以中华人民共和国宪法为基础解决问题。”
比较以往藏中会谈，我们把这次结果，看作一个重要的进展（尽管不是很引人注目）。因为中国方面，第一次承认了达赖喇嘛尊者不寻求独立，并在寻找双方都能接受的解决西藏问题的方法。自从2002年恢复对话以来，五年的时间里，我们一直强调对话本身的积极因素，而这个进展，是最好的证明。回到达兰萨拉后，我们就把这个精神转达了达赖喇嘛尊者。
同时，中方也提醒我们其它一些需要解决的问题。就我们而言，在声明中，我们表示了达赖喇嘛尊者有处理所有这些问题的意愿。为了确保取得突破性进展，我们甚至建议，可以双方磋商，公布一个明确的声明。但是，对我们的这个建议，中国方面没有任何回应。相反，2006年5月左右，当局开始加强了西藏的各种运动，其中包括大搞爱国再教育运动。也加大了辱骂达赖喇嘛尊者，限制群众的宗教活动的力度。
2008年藏区发生一系列示威抗议之后，我们进行了两次对谈和一次非正式会谈。在2008年11月第八次对谈时，我们递交了《有关全体藏人实现名符其实自治的建议》，清晰地表明了希望实现目前中华人民共和国宪法所赋予我们的基本权利。
中方立即定论，全盘否定了《建议》，甚至不看《建议》里提出的许多具体问题，更没有留下继续接触的任何希望。可是，达赖喇嘛尊者始终致力于推进对话，并鼓励我们需要一步步地、积极地再次接触中国领导人。
迄今为止，在对话的进程中，我方的态度都是积极的、主动的。而且，2002年恢复谈判，也是在我方的争取和努力下实现的。每一次都是因为我们的主动，开始了讨论进程。
2006年2月的会谈，并不是唯一的一次表明中国方面对达赖喇嘛尊者不寻求独立的认知。在深圳，2008年5月的非正式会谈中，尽管中方推出的“三停止”（停止分裂祖国的活动，停止暴力，停止破坏北京奥运会）直指达赖喇嘛尊者，但是，当我们驳回这些指控后，中方在2008年7月第7轮会谈中，把“三停止”修改为了“四不支持”（不支持破坏北京奥运会，不支持阴谋煽动暴力犯罪活动，不支持暴力恐怖活动，不支持寻求西藏独立的活动）。由“三停止”到“四不支持”，也表明，中国领导人非常清楚，并且承认了达赖喇嘛尊者并不寻求西藏独立。
近来的北京声明，使我想起一位中国教授的劝告。他在中共政府工作时，参与了西藏事务多年。他说，我们不应该期待中国领导人有如此政治上的胆略，摘掉强加给达赖喇嘛尊者的分裂主义帽子，尽管他们非常清楚地知道，分裂，其实和尊者无关。但是，这位教授还说，如果中方摘掉尊者头上的这顶分裂帽子，他们（中共领导人）就没有办法向中国民众交待近期实施的治藏政策和阻止达赖喇嘛尊者返回自己的家园。
一次又一次，中方提醒我们不要通过媒体透露谈判事宜，应该藏中双方直接面对面地交流。但是，我们发现中方却在通过选择媒体进行采访，制造越来越多的障碍。2008年7月第7轮对谈中，和“三停止”比较，“四不支持”尽管存在积极因素，但是，谈判一结束，甚至在我们还没有到达印度，向达赖喇嘛尊者汇报，中方就已召开了记者会，主观地全方位地进行了否定。
如果中国方面真正地想解决藏人的苦难处境，赋予他们在中国宪法中赋予的基本权利，以及相关法规中赋予少数民族的权利，我们愿意回到谈判桌上，达赖喇嘛尊者也会一如继往地致力于推动对话的进程。我们随时做好了接谈的准备。
（原件为英文，朱瑞译）
Statement concerning the dialogue process with China
Lodi Gyari
(Special Envoy of H.H. the Dalai Lama)
My attention has been drawn to an interview published in the Chinese media by Executive Vice Minister Zhu Weiqun of the Central United Front Work Department of the Chinese Communist Party on December 8, 2009 concerning our dialogue process.
We are currently under discussion with the Chinese leadership on the next round of dialogue and so the timing and content of this interview are perplexing. It is my understanding that the Chinese leadership is as desirous as our side in continuing a discussion, which we hope will ultimately lead to a mutually satisfactory negotiated solution to the Tibetan issue.
During our fifth round of talks in February 2006, the Chinese side clearly expressed appreciation of His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s position not to seek Tibetan independence and of seeking a solution within the framework of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China.
The Tibetan transcript from the recording of that meeting shows the Chinese side terming His Holiness’ position as a “Tamsangpo” (good or welcome news). It reads, “It is a welcome news that (the Dalai Lama) is showing a gesture by saying that he wanted to resolve the problem on the basis of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China.” We looked at this as a small but important progress in our dialogue process with our counterparts. We felt that for the first time the Chinese side was registering and taking due note of His Holiness’ position in finding a mutually acceptable solution. We have been highlighting the positive aspect in our dialogue process and this was one such developments from the Chinese side in the five years that had passed since the re-establishment of our contact in 2002. It was this spirit that we conveyed to His Holiness the Dalai Lama upon our return to Dharamsala.
At the same time the Chinese side drew our attention to various issues that needed to be resolved. On our part we stated the willingness of H.H. the Dalai Lama to address all these concerns in a statement. We even suggested that both sides have consultations on the formulation of the statement in order to ensure that it will have the desired result in achieving a breakthrough. There was no response from the Chinese side to this initiative of ours.
Instead, from around May 2006 the authorities began intensification of campaigns in Tibet, including launching of patriotic re-education campaign. There was increased vilification of the person of H.H. the Dalai Lama and restrictions placed on peoples’ religious activities.
Following the series of demonstrations in Tibetan areas in 2008, we had two rounds of talks and one informal session with the Chinese leadership. During the most recent 8th round held in November 2008 we in fact presented a Memorandum on Genuine Autonomy for the Tibetan People that clearly outlined the basic needs of the Tibetan people that can be fulfilled even under the present Constitutional provisions of the People’s Republic of China.
The outright rejection of the Memorandum by the Chinese side, without even looking into many of the points raised therein, did not leave any scope for further contacts. However, His Holiness the Dalai Lama continued to be committed to the dialogue process and impressed upon us the need to take steps to reach out once again to the Chinese leadership.
So far, it has been all our initiatives that have been the basis of any perceptible positive side to the dialogue process. It was at our initiative that contact was re-established and continued since 2002. Every time it has been our initiative that has started the process for the rounds of discussions.
The February 2006 meeting was not the only occasion when the Chinese side showed some positive development on His Holiness’ position. During the informal session in Shenzhen in May 2008, the Chinese side came out with “Three Stops” (stop separatist activities, stop violence and stop sabotaging the Beijing Olympic Games) directed at His Holiness. When we rejected these charges, the Chinese side came up (during the subsequent seventh round in July 2008) with “Four Not-to-Supports” (not supporting activities that would disturb the Beijing Olympic Games; not supporting plots inciting violent criminal activities; not supporting and concretely curbing violent terrorist activities; not supporting activity seeking Tibetan independence.) as a replacement saying that this was being done positively because they considered our point that His Holiness was not indulging in the activities mentioned in “Three Stops” (one of which related to independence). Therefore, changing from “Three Stops” to “Four not-to-Supports” was an indication that the Chinese leadership acknowledged that His Holiness was not indulging in Tibetan independence activities.
The recent statements coming from Beijing, therefore, reminds me of an advice given to me by a Chinese Professor who was involved with the Tibetan issue for many years while serving the Chinese Government. He said that we should not expect the Chinese leadership to have the political courage to remove the hat of separatism from His Holiness the Dalai Lama even though they clearly are aware that he is not working in that direction. The professor told me that if the Chinese side were to remove such a hat from him, then they would not be able to justify to the Chinese people their current policies in Tibet or on the return of H.H. the Dalai Lama to Tibet.
Time and again, the Chinese side has been the one that has been cautioning us from negotiating through the media. They contend that we should take things up directly and face to face. But we see it is the Chinese side that is increasingly coming up with obstacles presented through selective interviews to the media. During our seventh round held in July 2008, the Chinese side portrayed the “Four Not-to-Supports” positively in comparison to the “Three Stops.” However, after our meeting and even before we had reached India to brief His Holiness the Dalai Lama, the Chinese side went to the media and gave a totally negative message of their position.
We feel if the Chinese side is really serious in wanting to address the grievances of the Tibetan people and to provide them with the same rights that are provided for in the Chinese Constitution and the relevant statutes on minority rights, we should do that through our channel and across the dialogue table. His Holiness the Dalai Lama continues to be committed to the dialogue process and we are ever ready to continue the discussions.
Washington, D.C.
December 10, 2009
Exclusive
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
|
