Himalayan Times (1950)

July 16 1950

Seven

It is in keeping with the religious
tradition that the Panehen Lama came
to be recognised as Tibet's Spiritual head
and the Dalai Lama the temporal head,
the former being scripturallv superior
to the latter. Most of Tibet's landed and
tattle property are owned by the Lamas
and that at least partially explains the
long standing fend between the two lama-
heads which also lias been the lee way
(or the the excuse) for intervention by
foreign powers.

TIBET'S LINK WITH CHINA

But since the 7th Century A. I),
after King Gam-pn of Tibet had offered
tributes to the Court of China's Tang
Dynasty, Tibet has been regarded a part
of China. Tibet is linked with China
geographically, anthropologically and
culturally. Both the Tibetan and the
Han (whence are the Chinese) belong to
the same family of tribes. And according
to Sir Charles Bell (in his book 'Tibet,
Past and Present") the present civilisa-
tion of Tibet sprung principally from
Chinese culture and to a lesser degree
from the Indian. Tibet has been within
the orbit of China as an autonomous
province. Chinese Emperors and Kings
have never interfered with Tibetan affairs.
If not due to any other factor, Tibet'b
peculiar geographical situation ensured
for her the country's autonomy
under China, till of course the British
(in the opening of the 20th Century)
and later the dictatorial-minded Chiang
Kai-shek started active intervention.

PERFIDIOUS ALBION

The British imperialists had always
been casting greedy looks at Tibet. It
was during the rule of the notorious
Lord Curzon that an expeditionary force
was despatched from India to Lhasa.
Taking advantage of the Russo-Japanese
oonflict, Lord Curzon ordered in 1904
the marching of British troops under the

command of Francis Ynunghusband who
reached the Tibetan capital Lhasa with
a brigade of troop3. Militarily weak and
peace-loving Tibetans, the British knew,
would not and could not offer any
resistance. Under the threat of the
bayonet, the British imperialists extracted
certain favourable trade and political
terms from Lhasa. This intervention,
denounced then b^C/tinpboll Barmerman
id the House of Commons as a dangerous
and dishonest piece of British imperialism,
sought to ignore suzereinty over Tibet
and to superimpose its own rapacious
rule.

Lord Curzon browbeat the Tibetans
to obtain rights of commerce, trade and
travel in Tibet as also of stationing
British troops as Gyautse and Chumbi
Valley and imposition of British Officers
at Yatung. Not only this. The British
also extracted a payment of indemnity
to the tune of the ^600,000 for the
expenses of the British expedition. By
other provisions of the so-called theaty
between Tibet and Britian, the latter
virtually sought to reduce Tibet to the
status of a British colony by making
Tibet's territorial/ and political rights
subservient to the expanding interests
of British finance-capital.
CHINA REFUSES TO RECOGNISE
TREATY
China, of course, did not accept
the validity of the Anglo-Tibetan treaty.
The two, therefore, took opposing sides
in the internal feuds between Dalai Lama
and the Panchen Lama, the former with
the British and the latter with China.

By 1907, the British and Czarist
Russia tried to dispose of Tibetan affairs
in their own way by which the two
powers sought to give Tibet an "indepen-
dent" position both the parties "pledging"
to respect her territorial integrity and
to abstain from interfering in Tibet's