Obama to skip Tibet while talking about human rights in Asia

US President Barack Obama [ Images ] would skip the mention of Tibet [ Images ] when he talks about human rights situation in Asia and the countries he is visiting on his maiden Asia trip, a US official has said. "He (Obama) will not mention Tibet (in his speech). He will, of course, mention our commitment to the rights and freedoms that we believe all people should have, and I'll leave it at that," Ben Rhodes, Deputy National Advisor for Strategic Communications told reporters in Tokyo, where Obama is travelling right now.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/world/27498-obama-skip-tibet-while-talking-about.html

Obama is scheduled to deliver a major policy speech on Asia when he addresses some 1500 people in Tokyo on Saturday. Myanmar would also figure prominently in his speech,Rhodes said. Traditionally Myanmar and Tibet have been the two major human rights issue for the US in the past several years. After Obama did not meet the Dalai Lama [ Images ], during the latter's recent visit to Washington, the first US President not to do so in more than a decade, his administration has been accused of downplaying the Tibet issue before his visit to China.

The White House, meanwhile, has denied this. "I mean, all I would say is that we remain committed to the rights of Tibetan people to achieve their own human rights and their cultural identity. Our position on that is very clear and very strong,"Rhodes said."The President will look forward to the opportunity to meet with the Dalai Lama to discuss this and he has said he will raise this issue as well as -- and attempting to make progress on this with the Chinese and Tibetans," Rhodes said.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=27498

Meanwhile, the International Campaign for Tibet today called on Obama to use the opportunity of next week's summit in China to focus on Tibet's future and to dismiss attempts by Beijing [ Images ] to manipulate US policy. On November 6, the South China Morning Post had reported that the Chinese government is asking the Obama Administration to state that "Tibet is part of China's territory and the US opposes Tibetan independence." "President Obama's engagement with Chinese leaders
should be consistent with established US policy and his desire for forward movement in the Tibetan-Chinese dialogue," vice
president of International Advocacy at the International Campaign for Tibet, Mary Beth Markey said.

It is the policy of the US that "the Tibet Autonomous Region and Tibetan autonomous counties and prefectures are part of the People's Republic of China." "The request from the Chinese government is not a matter of semantics but part of a concerted Chinese strategy to deflect international support for a resolution to the Tibet issue by seeking legitimacy for its claim to Tibet," said Markey. "President Obama should urge Chinese leaders to look to the future, as the Dalai Lama has done, and work purposefully toward a resolution that meets the aspirations of both the Tibetan and Chinese peoples," Markey said.

The International Campaign for Tibet said an Obama Administration statement, that Tibet is a part of China's territory, could be interpreted as recognition of Chinese sovereignty over Tibet prior to the 17 Point Agreement between the Tibetan and People's Republic of China governments (1951). A statement that the US opposes Tibetan independence could be interpreted as foreclosing any question of the past or future independence of Tibet in principle, it said.
Lalit K Jha in Washington

__________________
http://www.scoopthemock.co.in/
An Online Mock test site

http://scoop-thejob.blogspot.com/

There are many Indians who beleive than in conflict with china .US will help India.but now it look's to me that Obama is reducing USA 's status and already have accepted China's supremacy

Kanwardeep ji

The US policy stated here regards Tibet. I personally think that President Obama is on the wrong track as regards Tibet.

However, US foreign policy is so complex that one should not generalize from the position of the US on Tibet to the US foreign policy toward India as a whole. Again, I personally believe that the US has not been the brightest star with regard to this issue. But there are so many angles to this problem -- many of which do not get expressed in the mass media.

And the US the mass media is too stupid to pick up on when it actually hears pro-India policies explained. Another personal opinion, the media (print and electronic) in the US is mentally challenged as a group -- there are a few exceptions. To get to the bottom of things any one individual has to do a lot of digging.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=27498
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=27498

One thing you will not hear because of Pakistan. You will not hear a plain-spoken and clear endorsement of India. That is because Pakistan is a nuclear ammunition dump on the cusp of exploding. To keep it from exploding a lot of "players" in the region have to be juggled about. So the average person is not going to know what the actual US foreign policy commitments in fact are given any single issue pertaining to the region.

An excellent article. And thanks. It almost makes sense to start a thread or several threads on US policy toward India because I myself have a lot of questions. Why not go for it?

I would like to know from the people living in India if the Indian Govt has ever protested against the annexation of Tibet by China.If yes, then what was China's reaction? If not, then why not?

Tejwant Singh

I am not generalising US on policy Tibet as US foreign policy towards China but still By not meeting dalai Lama and now silence on Tibet shows China's strength.US is neither a friend of China or India neither it is enemy.US is only with the country where their own benefit lie.
Even In second world war US did not enter unless they were attacked by Japan.Infact
What i read is that in German soviet war they were planning to help Nazi's incase soviet was winning and help soviet incase nazi's are winning.

Indians Did not protest annexation of Tibet because of stupidity of Nehru
who accepted that tibet was a part of china but still India gave refuge to lots of tibetans Including Dalai lama.You can visit tibetans refugee colonies in India where they freely practice whatever they want

Kanwardeep ji

That is how foreign policy works for most countries most of the time. It is called "realpolitik" as described by Bismark in the 19th Century. Foreign policy is about self--interest.

Its true that this the way Foreign policy worked but as a most powerful country USA has greater responsibilty .They should not forget Human rights' children' right women's right o/w what's the point Giving lecture's to other's.
Imagine If tibetans have been muslims then entire muslim world would have been helping them along with many powerful countries helping them possibly USA and they too had been blowing themselves killing chinese.This world shows again and again that by remaining peaceful you are not going to get anything.

Kanwardeep singh ji

You are right. The US has a greater responsibility. And one of those duties is not to upset the politics of the region to the point where there is war fare and military activity on every side of India's borders.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=27498

China has a deep water port in Pakistan. India is surrounded by China on every side. We don't know what kinds of discussions have occurred between the US and India about this either. India can't fight a war on every front and still make economic progress.

Am going off line again. But thanks for the interesting discussion.

Yes india cannot fight war with China but China too cannot afford bad relations With USA ,they are their biggest customers of manufactured products.Also like India China too have to feed 1.4 billion people and USA has too much surplus grain.so USA is far more powerful than China .By not meeting Dalai lama and not raising tibet human right issue Obama is showing submissive attituide , not a sign of World's most powerful country