Another year of the Iron Fist

QChen

China and Tibet
Another year of the Iron Fist

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13184714&source=hptextfeature

Feb 26th 2009
From The Economist print edition

If this is success, maybe China should look for an alternative

AFP

AS TIBETANS around the world this week marked the advent of the new year of the Earth Ox, many did so in a spirit of mourning rather than jubilation. The festival fell just before a bloodstained anniversary season: 50 years since the Chinese suppression of an uprising that saw the Dalai Lama, their spiritual leader, flee into exile in India with some 100,000 followers; 20 years since protests that led to the imposition of martial law in the capital, Lhasa; one year since ugly and murderous anti-Chinese riots in Lhasa that brought a sharp and lasting security backlash. The fact that so many troops are still needed, merely to prevent commemorative protests, suggests that China’s Tibet policy is in need of an overhaul.

China’s officials seem to be contemplating nothing of the sort. Indeed, they may believe things are going their way. A year ago Tibet seemed a real threat to China’s hopes of presenting the Beijing Olympics as an unblemished celebration of its achievements. As the Olympic torch was carried round the world, it was met from London to Delhi by protests against Chinese rule in Tibet. Yet the Olympics themselves passed with no serious protest or international boycott.

Since then Tibet has slipped down the international agenda. In her first overseas visit as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton recently stopped in Beijing to beseech China’s co-operation in fixing the world economy and stopping the planet from frying. In the apparent belief that China, oddly, will not pursue such aims out of its own self-interest, she forbore from harping on issues such as human rights and Tibet.

Chinese diplomats, meanwhile, are cock-a-hoop at a concession they wrung last October from Britain, whose government had hitherto been the only one not formally to recognise China’s “sovereignty” in Tibet, accepting instead only its “suzerainty” (ie, de facto control) over the region. Apparently unaware of the importance of the issue to both China and exiled Tibetans, Britain changed policy in a bland and obscure statement published on the internet. At talks with the Dalai Lama’s representatives in Beijing the following week, China, perhaps not coincidentally, hardened its position even further. The talks, in which China has never appeared sincere in offering any compromise to the exiles, now seem more futile than ever.

Himalayan clouds

Yet the refusal to talk to the Dalai Lama comes at a cost. This week, in both what China misleadingly calls the “Tibet Autonomous Region” and in adjoining provinces, security has been intense (see article). Foreigners have been kept out. Tibet has been closed. China can easily quash any protests by those foolhardy enough to mount them. But repression is hardly the way a successful, modern power wants to govern.

In 1959 the Dalai Lama’s escape from his homeland produced a myth: that he had conjured up a belt of cloud to hide his retinue from the Chinese air force. At the time, The Economist scoffed at this (see article). “The real cloud”, we argued, “was evidently the unity of the Tibetan people in their hatred of Chinese military rule.” Sadly, despite all the economic advances, despite the easing of Chinese policy after the Cultural Revolution, and despite (indeed, because of) the influx of Han Chinese into Tibet, that assessment remains largely true today. Sadly, too, the Chinese explanation for unrest remains unchanged: in 1959, as now, it was blamed on a “few reactionaries manipulated by foreign powers”.

The chief reactionary, of course, is the Dalai Lama himself, whom China still vilifies. It seems to believe that its Tibet problem will be solved with his passing. In fact, it is more likely to worsen. The Dalai Lama, unlike many of his followers both in Tibet and in a remarkably cohesive exiled population, accepts Chinese rule. He demands merely that “autonomy” should have substance. And for all China’s accusations against him, he has never wavered in his insistence that his followers pursue their aims peacefully. China may one day come to regret spurning his moderating influence.

wyd2008

If this is success, maybe China should look for an alternative

如果这是成功的，也许中国应该寻找一种选择。

AS TIBETANS around the world this week marked the advent of the new year of the Earth Ox, many did so in a spirit of mourning rather than jubilation. The festival fell just before a bloodstained anniversary season: 50 years since the Chinese suppression of an uprising that saw the Dalai Lama, their spiritual leader, flee into exile in India with some 100,000 followers; 20 years since protests that led to the imposition of martial law in the capital, Lhasa; one year since ugly and murderous anti-Chinese riots in Lhasa that brought a sharp and lasting security backlash. The fact that so many troops are still needed, merely to prevent commemorative protests, suggests that China’s Tibet policy is in need of an overhaul.

作为世界各地的西藏人本周标志着藏历新年的来临，许多人都在哀悼而不是庆贺。因为节日降临在血腥镇压一周年纪念日前：中国镇压叛乱，即达赖喇嘛, 他们的精神领袖 和100，000多的追随者流亡到印度）有五十年的历史了；而抗议者反对在拉萨首府强制实施戒严令有20年了；一年以来在拉萨发生的丑陋和残忍的反华暴动带来了尖锐和永久的安全反弹。事实上，拉萨仍然需要大量的军队防止纪念暴乱，这就表明了中国的西藏政策是需要调整的。

本人练习翻译文章，如有翻译错误的地方，希望高手能够帮忙指点~~~~先谢谢了~~~~
感觉翻译好难哈~~~挺费劲的！呵呵

杨威利

我接下去了，上面看了没大错，小问题不管了，辛苦啦

杨威利

中国政府似乎从未考虑此事。事实上他们相信可以按他们的方式解决问题。一年以前西藏看起来是对北京奥运-中国政府展示他们政绩的完美庆典的威胁。当奥运火炬在世界传递的时候，在伦敦它遇到了达赖关于中国统治西藏的抗议。随后的奥运会则没有受到认真的抗议和国际社会的联合抵制。

此后西藏则淡出了国际社会的视野。希拉里.克林顿在她第一次以国务秘书身份访问国外的时候。她在北京乞求合作共同对抗世界性经济问题和全球环境变暖。她古怪的相信中国会放弃利己主义停止追求自己的目标，所以她对西藏和人权问题不发一言。

喜马拉雅的云

现在，拒绝谈论达赖喇嘛付出了代价。这周，在中国政府表面宣称为“西藏自治区”的地方和相邻几省，情况十分紧张。外国人被拒绝进入。西藏被关闭了。中国政府可以轻易镇压任何敢于抗议的人。但是镇压不是统治现代人的方法。
1959年达赖喇嘛逃离他的家乡的时候制造了这样一个神话，他祈祷了一片云彩来掩藏自己的行踪，使中国空军无法追击。经济学家报最近嘲弄到：“真正的云彩，是西藏民众对中国军事统治的不满。”悲哀的是，尽管经济发展了，尽管中国的政策在文化大革命之后缓和了，尽管（事实上，因为）汉人大量流入西藏，上面的评论（经济学家报的评论）依然是大部分的事实。同样悲哀的，中国政府的官方解释依然和１９５９年一样：“不满是由于一小撮外国势力的操纵。”
反对者的首领，当时，是达赖喇嘛，他一直遭到中国政府的诽谤。看起来中国政府相信一切问题都会随着达赖喇嘛的死去而解决。事实上，很可能会更糟。达赖喇嘛，不像很多他国内外的追随者那样，他接受中国的统治。他所要求的不过是事实上的“自治”。关于中国政府指控他的那些主张，他从未动摇过坚持他的追随者应该和平追求他们的目标的主张。中国也许有一天会后悔无视他的节制作用。

杨威利

翻译结束，链接：http://bbs.m4.cn/thread-146654-1-1.html