The CIA's secret war in Tibet

"The CIA's Secret War in Tibet," which was published in 2002. This is a respectable illustrated publication written by direct participants in the events. It transpires that there were training camps for Tibetan guerrillas in Colorado, and the CIA made inroads into Tibet with aviation support. CIA operatives also arranged for the Dalai Lama's escape through the Chinese border. The authors of the book conclude that the CIA was preparing a rebellion in Tibet, having established complete control over the "resistance movement."

Obama-Dalai Lama meeting creates dilemma in U.S.-Chinese relations


The Dalai Lama's meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is probably the most interesting part of his visit to Washington D.C. because the Department of State is involved in concrete politics, even if the spiritual Tibetan leader is largely a symbolic figure and does not concern himself too much with Tibetan emigration.

On the eve of this meeting President Barack Obama had to do the least interesting part of the work. He had to receive the Dalai Lama as a bow to etiquette and exchange routine phrases with him for about an hour. Both admitted for the umpteenth time that Tibet is part of China (has anyone doubted that?), both expressed themselves for the preservation of Tibet's unique identity (who would object to this?) and so on and so forth. Everything went as usual - the Dalai Lama has been to the White House more than once.

It was clear that the United States and China will not seriously quarrel over Tibet although masses of people, especially in the United States, waited with bated breath whether the American Nimitz aircraft-carrier will be allowed to enter the Fragrant Harbour, that is, Hong Kong on the day of Obama's meeting with the Dalai Lama. Previously, the Chinese authorities would not allow American warships to enter their ports in such cases. This time it was an aircraft-carrier, a symbol of American might. Will the Chinese ban it from entering the port? Not yet, it passed another mile and another, and finally made its way into the port. Sino-American relations will also follow their road, being complicated but important at the same time. .

Tibet is an issue in bilateral relations albeit its role is far from what the unenlightened public may think. In January the Chinese authorities held one more round of talks with the representatives of the Tibetan emigration. The talks were not very productive although this is an iffy statement. At least, it was interesting for the Tibetans living outside Tibet that the autonomous region is entering a new stage in its development although even now Tibet looks much better than 10 years ago. The new stage will cost about $60 billion (some states in the U.S. would be certainly happy to get the sum that Beijing has allocated to Tibet). It's not that Beijing is emphatically against the Diaspora's participation in this work. This is all about the terms.

If the United States orients the Tibetan emigration to work against China, this is not a trifle. This is why Beijing is so nervous about the Dalai Lama's ceremonial visits to the White House. This is why it is so closely following specific moves made by the Department of State in this direction. Beijing is trying to understand what influence is exerted on Tibetans there. After all, the Dalai Lama's views on the inseparability of the destinies of Tibet and China are well known. But he is 75 years old. What if the Tibetan emigration splits into moderate and extremist groups? In fact, the split has already occurred but for the time being all Tibetan emigres are trying not to demonstrate it.

Is Beijing overreacting to Washington's attempts to take part in this process? It depends. A context can be interpreted very extensively: any bureaucrat from the State Department who speaks its jargon should appreciate this phrase. It is used when the situation is being assessed in the context of half a century.

Tibet and China were united during the Mongolian Yuan Dynasty. They have represented one state for more than 700 years. This state is more than three times older than the United States. True, Tibet's geographic location has made it inaccessible, quite autonomous and colorful and this will never change. However, as the same meeting in the White House bears out, nobody disputes the existence of China's national borders. This is a requirement of international law, the UN Charter, etc. But the situation was different half a century ago.

The CIA's role in the events of 1959, when the Dalai Lama left Tibet, followed by tens of thousands of his compatriots, is not very well known. In 1959 (during the Great Leap, Mao Zedong's first destructive experiment) the Chinese authorities seemed to think that the unrest of dalai lamas was a strictly domestic affair. They were scared that Tibetans, who had received modern education for the first time in Tibet's history, started returning to the autonomy and eventually led it to rebellion. They had to introduce Chinese troops into the region.

However, Beijing is sometimes wrong. There is a book "The CIA's Secret War in Tibet," which was published in 2002 (I learned about it in the Expert magazine). This is a respectable illustrated publication written by direct participants in the events. It transpires that there were training camps for Tibetan guerrillas in Colorado, and the CIA made inroads into Tibet with aviation support. CIA operatives also arranged for the Dalai Lama's escape through the Chinese border. The authors of the book conclude that the CIA was preparing a rebellion in Tibet, having established complete control over the "resistance movement."

Later on, the CIA worked with the emigration. There was a report to the effect that the Dalai Lama administration admitted receiving annual $1.7 million subsidies from the CIA in the 1960s. Part of this money was designed for funding guerrilla operations against Chinese authorities. No doubt, there is more information about this.

An extensive context means that in the late 1950s--early 1960s the United States did not recognize China and did not have official relations with it. In effect, it was engaged in subversion against China. It was doing the same as regards Cuba. Later on it went to war in Vietnam... It was only after President Richard Nixon's visit to Beijing in 1974 that a new stage of world history was launched.

There is nothing surprising in the fact that Beijing remembers this past. It's another matter that the past never comes back.