Regime Watch: Beijing

Columnist Nicholas Kristof has an interesting op-ed in the May 15 New York Times on Tibet’s “Terrified Monks.” Kristof tosses Beijing a few bones of appeasement such as his odd claim of “Tibetan brutality,” but overall the piece paints a grim picture of Beijing’s brutish occupation of Tibet, and is all the more interesting because, according to Kristof:

I sneaked through these Tibetan areas in Gansu and Qinghai Provinces, eluding the troops by taking a local car with curtains pulled over the windows, and it became clear that the recent anti-Chinese protests spread across a larger area in traditional Tibet than is sometimes realized.

Let’s start with the “Tibetan brutality.” According to Kristof:

Chinese citizens have been understandably outraged by anti-Chinese rioting by Tibetans in Lhasa in March. Tibetans burned 1,000 Chinese-owned shops (a few with people inside them) and savagely attacked or stoned ordinary Chinese citizens, even a child of about 10. The Dalai Lama and pro-Tibetan Westerners were far too leisurely about condemning Tibetan brutality, and America came across as hypocritical for apparent indifference when the victims in Tibet were Chinese.

Actually, for far too long, many Chinese and many of the Westerners who routinely appease Beijing have been far to leisurely about condemning Chinese brutality. That said, Krisof writes confidently about how “savagely” Chinese were attacked and stoned by Tibetans…confidently enough that he must be pretty sure of the accuracy of those statements. Yet later in his piece Kristoff writes:

Last month, the Chinese authorities ushered a group of journalists here on a tightly scripted tour to show that Labrang was calm — and then 15 monks rushed up to the group. One was crying, and all said that their human rights were being systematically violated.

After the reporters left, those who joined that peaceful protest were imprisoned, beaten and in some cases subjected to electric shock torture, the monks here say. That is impossible to confirm, and Tibetan versions of events are sometimes exaggerated.

So the Monks’ claims of what can only be described as “savage” and “brutal” beatings and torture are not only impossible to confirm (which is probably largely true) but also subject to exaggeration. But if this is so, then wouldn’t the claims of savage attacks on Chinese by Tibetans that Kristof notes also be, if not impossible, at least difficult to confirm and subject to exaggeration? After all, as Kristof notes, Western media coverage of the events in Tibet has been “tightly scripted” by Beijing.

Point is not to question whether some Tibetans-having lived a lifetime under the boot heel of a communist regime-might turn to violence, but rather that if a New York Times writer is going to be skeptical of the claims of beatings and torture by Tibetan Monks, then he should at least be willing to question claims about “Tibetan brutality” that might generate directly from the regime in Beijing, or that are passed along by China’s state-run media (which are, after all, one in the same).

That quibble aside, Kristof’s piece is a compelling read, as he continues:

Yet few will ever hear about the harsh crackdown unfolding here in the ancient Tibetan region of Amdo. Although there was some rioting here in Xiahe, and some attacks on the police and burning of police vehicles elsewhere, most of the demonstrators were peaceful. But even where protests were entirely peaceful, the repression has been merciless.

Whole thing here.