As a frequent critic of South Africa’s abysmal approach to foreign policies both here in Africa and across the globe I was not surprised to see the latest brouhaha regarding the Dalai Lama. What it boils down to is this: The government has rejected a request for a visa from the Dalai Lama to attend a peace conference in Johannesburg this week, which is linked to World Cup 2010, because they feel this is not in the best interests of our country.
This refusal to afford the 14th Dalai Lama a visa flows directly or indirectly from the fact that the embassy of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in Pretoria purportedly called upon the government to do so and allegedly hinted at it harming bilateral relations. This in turn has set off Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu and former president FW de Klerk, who are embarrassed on account of having played a role in inviting the Dalai Lama to attend the conference.
Let’s all start off by climbing down from our high horses because as China’s main trading partner in Africa with about $6 billion being invested here in the last two years and the global crisis starting to pinch, the government would have been reckless to simply have ignored the request. I wonder what De Klerk’s National Party would have done if they had been placed in the same position by the US for example. I’m almost 100% sure that in these circumstances they would have bowed to external pressure just as quickly.
Of course Tutu has always been a fair-minded broker who has had the interests of fairness and justice at heart. No doubt he has been following the dispute between the PRC and the Tibetan government exiled in India, over the issue of independence. As far as the PRC is concerned — other than a tiny portion which forms part of India — Tibet has been part of China since the Yuan Dynasty. As far as they are concerned Tibet’s unique language and culture does not create a right to independence and that there are other groups, indisputably part of the PRC, who are also possessed of the same make-up as the Tibetans. Tibet claims that the Republic of China (ROC) government, which ruled China between 1912 and 1949 (now rulers of Taiwan), had no effective control over their territory. Britain (until 2008) and India in terms of a 1914 convention (not accepted by China) recognised some form of Chinese suzerainty over Tibet. India, however, was of the view that Tibet’s failure to formally claim its sovereignty once and for all during ROC rule was a mistake. In 1950 the PRC invasion of Tibet took place and in global terms Tibet is generally accepted to be part of the PRC.
As we are all aware Tibetans have not simply accepted this and in an effort to subdue this part of their population the PRC has been accused of human-rights violations.
In terms of the conference, which deals with human rights and looks towards 2010, particularly in light of having invited the Dalai Lama, South Africa has to come up with something better than just a blanket rejection. The PRC has just staged the Olympics and won’t be unaware of the diplomatic nightmare it can be to stage a major event. Accordingly instead of simply suggesting that it is not in South Africa’s interest to allow the Dalai Lama access, it would be more prudent to offer the PRC any conditions it would like to impose should the visa be granted. For example that South Africa is inviting the religious leader must not in any way be construed as involving itself in the domestic or independence dispute between the PRC and Tibet.
The Chinese premier has just returned from a visit to Africa and has made overtures to four countries outside of those with vast mineral resources. This continent is accordingly enjoying some sort of priority with the PRC. What is now required is to ascertain whether it is possible for China to accommodate South Africa without losing face or suffering damage as a result thereof.
It is very easy for everyone to jump up and down and scream foul on this one — just don’t lose sight of the fact that if the government doesn’t factor in the sentiments of a major trading partner the downside is far greater than if they were to snub a popular leader such as the Dalai Lama.
Suggestions please.
In order to apologies, South Africa should offer the Dalai Lama free citizenship as Canada did when they were placed in a similar situation. The banning of the Dalai Lama, an international icon of peace and compassion is disgraceful and flies in the face of our hard earned liberation which we fought for so long. Many died and even more were imprisoned – are we really going to give our Rainbow Nation away?
We must boycott the World Cup in SA if the Dalai Lama’s banning is not withdrawn.
http://hummingbird333.blogspot.com/2009/03/i-dont-even-have-tv.html
This debate has been most heartening and it is clear that vocal resistance to the South African government’s cynical pragmatism is growing.
This debate also gives internal expression to growing world opinion. Thirty years ago South Africa under the apartheid regime was often referred to as the polecat/skunk/muishond of the world. In other words, this country’s government’s policies morals stank to high heaven.
We had a brief respite with our small window of opportunity in 1994 to rid ourselves of opprobium and use wisely and constructively the adulation of the world under a leader of world stature. This was squandered very rapidly in the next 10-15 years though graft, corruption and destructive power politics.
The stench again begins to rise and the world that matters, and stood wide open to us, begins to withdraw. China has a good nose for smelly opportunities and stepped into the economic breach. It can easily outbid western arms suppliers and has no qualms about funding ruling juntas.
So, Traps, let’s be calm and relativise. We should not bite the hand that feeds, or rather that we increasingly will have to feed. Ons leef nog lekker, of hoe ?
Mr Trapido,
As a “specialist criminal attorney” what exactly do you advise your clients?
Following your own reasoning, have you penned this in the hope of attracting the well-heeled ex-cronies who are falling foul of Jake-the-Take’s manne and are due to be charged as clients?
If your son or daughter had been at Tienneman Square would your feelings be different?
If your son or daughter told you they were considering selling drugs or becoming a street-walker would purely mercenary considerations apply?
In realpolitik terms, if we lost our bilateral trade with China, how many jobs would we loose and how many (e.g. in clothing) would we regain?
Pastor Niemoller kept quiet when the Nazis came for he communists, Gypseys, Jews, etc because he was not one of them; when the Nazis came for him, there was no-one (not even Mickey Big-Trap) lef to speak up for him.
Hume wrote “For evil to succeed it is sufficient that good people do nothing”
A very wise attorney once pointed out that “when you do the right thing, you never have regrets”
Counsellor Trapido, try some introspection.
It is not as if the ANC has not made the same mistake before. When in exile they were funded by Christian Democrats (Britain, Scandinavia, USA), so they had to keep it a secret that their leaders were all communist and being trained secretly in Russia.
When Russia invaded Chezoslovakia some idiot congratulated Russia on behalf of the ANC. He was promptly fired, and it took O R Tambo a year to get the funding back.
The first goal of 2010, and as Tony Leon has said – SA has shot an own goal!
Having practiced Buddhism for forty years I have been very fortunate to have met and listened to the Dali Lama on numerous occasions.
I can only imagine his reaction to this bahula.
With his mischievous nature, sparkling smile and twinkling eyes, he would likely put his palms together, bow slightly forward and say: “May all beings be happy”.
Traps, you and Siphiwo desperately need a holiday to contemplate the meaning of life and how we’re all going to survive the escalating tsunami of the world’s ignorant.
@Traps you say vis-a-vis the Nats – I’m almost 100% sure that in these circumstances they would have bowed to external pressure just as quickly.
Exactly but the difference is that the Nats did not have a moral leg to stand on whereas we should have, and we did have in 1994, but the ANC government does not seem to know what morality let alone moral fibre, moral back bone or moral legs is or are.
More damning evidence could not exist for the total moral failure of this government.
I expect the fallout of this decision to be enormous, especially come the World Cup. Remember the Olympics debacle?
This will be much more intense.
Would anyone care to enlighten us why TAIWAN would go the same way as South Africa and also rule out a Dalai Lama visit, which was supposed to take place in December?
http://www.chinataiwan.org/english/News/NaT/200903/t20090325_855382.htm
Hmmm, from Biko to Motlanthe, how times change.
Michael, the comparison you make between the US and China, is a ridiculous one. In terms of human rights America has done far more good for the world than China ever has. Whenever there is a natural disaster the Americans are there helping out; no totalitarian regime, China included, has ever lent a helping hand to its brothers in their time of need.
That aside it’s important to note the following: this free debate could never happen in China.
With the exception of the debaters who support the action to ban the Dalai Lama, the rest would all be arrested, beaten, tortured, imprisoned and/or killed.
Traps,
You have lost all credibility. I didn’t see your name on the party list, but have you gained some posh clients for your practice. Lots of your ANC pals could probably use a lawyer.
Besides Tibet, I’m worried we’re selling out Africa to the highest brider, for the most guns to oppress the people under the incredibly stupid guise that China can’t do as much harm to this continent as those racist Europeans and those unilaterist Americans. Really? It’s like racial arguments being a front to get to the prize.
The difference is if a democratic society finds out about abuses in Africa, political heads roll. In other societies, people get squashed in Tienneman Square.
But moving along to current developments, it’s heartening to see The Honourable Health Minister Barbara Hogan speaking out on this one – in the interests of our collective health and well being. She’ll probably loose her job because she can’t shut her trap, and can’t be trusted to go along with these unhealthy practises.
And then onto The Honourable Government spokesman Themba Maseko’s admittion that government did not want jeopardise its bilateral and trade relations with China by being nice to the current Dalai Lama. That’s really nice, it’s like if the White House Press Secretary came out and said the United States of America invaded Iraq for oil, thus severelly constraining Middle East peace by giving Iran the credence to do what ever it likes – and that was wrong, necessating ‘change’.
Jack
That is a stupid question. China is threatening to invade Taiwan – they can’t give them any excuse.
Dont bother us now with Human Rights, for goodness sake we have a FIFA World Cup to organise. We’ll invite the Dalai Lama early in 2011 (sic)
@Lyndall Beddy
Yeah Lyndall, I was wondering how Jack couldn’t see the difference between Taiwan and South Africa in this context.
When Mandela was president China objected to him meeting with the Dalai Lama as well. Mandela ignored them – and nothing happened, except that the Dalai Lama and Mandela became friends.
Gordon Brown also ignored China and met with the Dalai Lama as well – at the house of the Archbishop of Canterbury.
The real point is our new communist party rulers don’t like the Dalai Lama and do like their Chinese buddies, so they were prepared to snub the Dalai Lama for their pals.
Dear Paolo,
You make a very interesting point, which nobody has yet made on the arms deal – “we bought inferior planes from the EU because the EU was a larger trading partner”. This is absolutely true – our $60m SAAB Gripens are notably inferior to the US made F-16′s in every respect, and should for F-16′s for some unlikely reason turn up in the region SA would have lost strategic advantage (even for providing cover for peacekeeping missions for instance). It’s a really odd decision – if SA truly were guided by Realpolitik, we would have bought US equipment regardless of our trading partners, as this would have been in our own best interests. The other amusement is our Gripen ‘toy fighters’ have 50% US content so should we have a fallout with the US, they could simply ground them by not providing spares (this would apply to 3rd party nations also). Kind of makes you wonder that we are guided by principle to our own detriment, and by Realpolitik to our own detriment also?
Dear Mark,
F-16′s: The airframes may be of an earlier design period but the aerodynamics of the US fighter are sufficiently advanced to give it an advantage over any European plane in the same class. In any case, the avionics are upgraded constantly to keep with the times. The real rivals to the Lockheed and Boeing stuff go by Sukhoi, and are made in Russia. But, they don’t have flashy cockpits, and where the lights work, they indicate engine failure.
The other planes – or specifically ‘plane’ – I was referring to is the Airbus A340-600 that South African Airways purchased in a massive fleet change. As it’s track record showed, the quad-jet A340 consistantly lost every battle against Boeing’s 777 twin – where it matters – which reads operating economics. Now that there are new aviation rules that allow virtually unristricted flights to just about anywhere for twin jets – largely based on the success of twin-engine jets like the 777 – does our (South African) contract to build gearboxes for Rolls-Royce Trent engines that power slow-selling A340′s and A380′s beat the over 20% fuel economy advantage the 777-300ER has over the A340-600 – besides greater loads it carries? I suppose my point is as government department with the assurance of tax payers, SAA failed to make a deal that was truly in tax payers interests – and the specific deal is yet another sign of this country selling out to the highest bidder.
Traps
Thank you. We cannot ignore our reality in pursuit of the holy grail, which is peace on earth and the rest of it. John Lennon had a song ‘Imagine’. We are still doing that.THIS IS REAL LIFE.
I am a Tibetan.since kindergarden our teacher used to make example leader like Nelson Mandela,Gandhi and Dr.Martin vision and their stuggle of human right and path to non violence.it been 50 years our stuggle under china regime.we still never give up for freedom stuggle and non violence path.today i felt sad that SA have forgotten too early thier stuggle from oppression.anyway i never give up my own path.my love and compassion to all.FREE TIBET.
Jampa
South Africans have not given up – our corrupt government has.
We will be demonstrating for you during 2010!