Tibet, Protests, Crackdowns and the Olympics

It is interesting to read the diverse coverage of the Tibetan protests across various media. The more or less certain facts are that there are 2 separate protests: the violent ones in Lhasa and around the world (following the Olympic Torch it seems), and the peaceful ones across the plateau.

There is apparently now a split in the movement for autonomy in Tibet. There are those who still follow the Dalai Lama's middle way, who are protesting peacefully. Then there are those who believe that change can only come by violent means. The Chinese government allege that even the violent protests were instigated by the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan government in exile. It is hard to see evidence to support this claim, but it is understandable how the Chinese government seems to equate the violent and non-violent protests.

Violent protests are morally reprehensible because of the loss of life, limb and property. Non-violent is causes none of this. Why then does the Chinese government not distinguish between the two types of protests?

The crux for the Chinese government, and most Chinese people, is what the protests are aimed at. The concept behind the protests is to hurt the China's standing just before the Olympics. The 2008 Beijing Olympics was meant to be a debutante ball for China as it joins the international community. Granted there are many Chinese policies that ought to be reviewed, but rationally we cannot expect all the things we believe to be unseemly to change at once, and China has made progress in the period approaching 08-08-08. As such, it is not unreasonable to for the Chinese to believe that all and sundry are using the Olympics, the crowning achievement of China's modernisation, to pressure it make changes to situations they are not pleased with. Think of Spielberg's withdrawal on account to Sudan, and now protests everywhere trying to ambush the bearer of the Olympic Torch.

This is really not an article about the morality of violent protests, but much less ambitious. Simply, it is highly politically inexpedient to protest at this hour. Viewed in isolation, the cause for Tibetan autonomy can be advanced by protesting prior to the Olympics. Beijing might make changes to smooth things over before the Olympics. The problem with such thinking is that Beijing has a limited amount of tolerance to make changes at any point in time. With all the pressure Beijing is already facing on a plethora of issues which it has responded positively to before the Tibetan protests, one might infer that they were reaching their limits.

We should also note that violent protests within its borders is something Chinese political thought views as anathema. There is still a very real fear that the Middle Kingdom will break up into Warring States again.

With these things in mind, it is highly foreseeable that the Beijing would react with extreme prejudice. This actually did not quite happened, as many observers were surprised by Beijing's muted response. But clearly, the crackdown has intensified as protests have continued.

In a nutshell, the protests were probably meant well, ignoring the evils of violent protests. However, it was politically a bad move.