Obama refuses to meet with Dalai Lama this week in an attempt to curry Chinese favor. This doesn’t sound good on the surface at all. I’m taking the article with a grain of salt (being Brit Press and all). Another troubling sign is that the headline contradicts the article itself. The meeting isn’t canceled, but postponed. I will however be agreeing with basso (?) if Obama really does end up refusing to meet with the Dalai Lama because China demanded it. There’s concessions/compromise and there’s abandoning human rights. What China is doing in Tibet is horrific and deserves to be universally denounced, not swept under the rug. It is not a good sign that Obama is postponing the meeting. Whatever his political motivations, I have no problem with Bush’s public embrace of the Dalai Lama—a departure from previous Administrations’ private discussions. If Obama meets with him in private, I’ll probably grumble a bit but deal with it. If he refuses outright or indefinitely postpones I’m gonna be ticked. I’m not to the level of the Beastie Boys or anything, but China’s treatment of Tibetans is disgusting.
Lost in the inflammatory (and misleading - the meeting hasn't been canceled, merely postponed) headline is this quote: and this: Call me crazy, but freeing Tibet doesn't really matter all that much if it's turned into a charred cinder shortly thereafter by nuclear holocaust.
I guess the question is whether you think China's turning Tibet into a charred cinder hinges on whether or not Obama meets with the Dalai Lama. Considering previous President have been and they haven't started Armageddon over it yet, I don't think they would. Let me be clear: I am not an Obama hater. I can't think of a single foreign policy decision he/Clinton has made that I disapprove of. I don't disapprove of postponing the meeting either. I can see the need to maintain protocol and meet with a nation's leader before you meet with other minor leaders in that country -- I would expect the same respect wrt foreign leaders meeting with Obama before they go to a governor. I certainly think that the article linked was biased. If I didn't adequately express my skepticism (for instance by pointing out the headline inconsistency that you also highlighted), please allow me to reiterate it now. All I am saying is that there is a difference between postponed and cancelled, and if Obama blows him off forever I won't be happy about it. Bad move IMO.
Indicative of Obama's "compromise" strategy. Nice to have a balanced and pragmatic president although you have to wonder, if America's back was against the wall, how would the B-O react? I'm not feeling particularly strong leadership from him on pretty much any issue.
how is china only treating tibetan's "disgusting"? everybody is treated "disgusting" in china. come on now, you should know that equality is real.
No excuse for Obama. He is a fraud. I know no chance a guy like dennis kucinich would have been elected, but obama is not about change more of the same old same old.
I never said it was only the Tibetans. Condemning Hitler's treatment of Jews doesn't mean you approved of his treatment of Gypsies. This is a chance to stand up for basic human rights, and Obama is not standing up. He is acting very wishy washy and I don't like it.
i thought everyone in china already has the basic human rights... food, shelter etc. you are talking about additional rights. now, that's something foreign in china regardless what government it is.
Obama and the Dalai Lama agreed that postponing the meeting is in the best interest of both parties, and suddenly you think he is sort of condoning China's treatment of Tibet? That's a neat assertion you made there.
Wasn't he blasted for "offending China" by imposing tire tariffs? The President can't please anybody.
Why does the Dalai Lama have a monopoly on the defense of human rights in Tibet? Are we talking about human rights or sovereignty?
So now you're making assertions based not on what the Dalai Lama says, but on what you think that he's actually thinking. Okay.
Do you know what happen at Tibet before the communist party took over and why communist party have to take over? If you are so bothering by this issue, instead of getting all your info from CNN. why don't you pay a visit to tibet and see by yourself. Not trying argue anything, just my 2 cents.
The Dalai Lama is nothing more than a PR piece that groups have to pay homage to. Tibet will never get independence - the real question is if Tibetan culture can survive long enough in the future to be more than what Native American culture became. Engaging China is probably wiser than antagonizing her. I would think the Dalai Lama communicated this to Obama.
The Dalai Lama is not just a religous leader. He is a self-proclaimed head of government in exile. Hence he should be treated as a political figure. Meeting with a political figure bears consequences politically. As China continues to grow and becomes more assertive internationally, it will become more and more difficult for western politicians to meet with Dalai Lama or his successor in TGIE in the future.
For a president of the United States concerning the human rights in China: 1. "standing up" should be much much much more than a half-hour meeting with a foreign monk who has absolutely zero or negative influence on China. 2. Why does the president of the United States have to worry about the state of China? 3. Obama refused to be an actor in an irrelevant show? big deal. 4. Who the hell know the price for the "show" is gonna be if China acts up?
