Agreement On This Point

The seventh point: “The religious beliefs, customs and customs of the Tibetan people must be respected and the Lama monasteries protected.” 6 Third, 4th, 7th and 11th in the agreement The Tibetan delegation initially contradicted #1 reference to the “aggressive imperialist forces of Tibet”, but then acknowledged that there might be forces they did not know. Points #2 and #3 were asked about the importance of “local government”, although the importance of “national regional autonomy” was not discussed, as the Tibetan delegation felt that things would continue as before. The Delegation of Ngapois attempted to eliminate the guarantees of power for the Panchen Lama in points #5 and #6, but the Chinese delegation replied that the Panchen Lama and the Dalai Lama should be treated in the same way; Either they have guaranteed their power, or not. The Tibetans recognized the point. Fundamental differences over the #8, the dissolution of the Tibetan army, led to a promise to renegotiate the subject later. The most controversial point was #15 with regard to the creation of a military and administrative committee, with the Tibetan delegation believing that it disagreed with the position #11 on the Tibetan local government, which is itself carrying out reforms. Most of the other points were accepted without comment or with minor translation adjustments. In order to avoid embarrassing problems for the Chinese delegation, agreements with the Tibetan delegation on issues such as the maintenance of the Tibetan army should then be concluded in separate and secret agreements. [11] This page has deliberately left empty when printing the two-page summary of arguments, answers and points of agreement when it prints two-page summaries of arguments, answers and points of agreement. The arguments and responses presented in the next section are at the heart of this document.

9 Facts about the 17-point agreement between Tibet and China, s.-137, DIIR, 2001 The 17-point agreement is a very important historical document that reveals the true nature of Sino-Tibetan relations at this decisive turning point in the history of Tibetan independence. Although it was imposed on the Tibetan government by Communist China, it remains an important testimony that Tibet was never part of China before the agreement. The Chinese have certainly made new labels for Tibetans, but they are only personal seals on which the name of each delegate was engraved. Otherwise, there was no forged government seal. Part of the confusion is due to the fact that Ngabo had in his possession the seal of the governor of eastern Tibet, but that he decided not to use it. However, this label was not the official seal of the Tibetan government, so the non-use of the agreement did not reduce the validity of the agreement. In his autobiography, the Dalai Lama states that Tibetan delegates claimed that they had been forced to sign the agreement “under duress” … Their sense of coercion stems from China`s general threat to regain military force in central Tibet if no agreement is reached.

07. April 2021 by
Leave a comment