Self immolation and Tibetan identity

I often go to Majnu Ka Tila after college it’s quite and not crowded, very unlike most of Delhi. It feels good to be there, specially the café at the very heart of ‘MT’ as we fondly call it! Even after having innumerable cups of coffee and the street side treat laping, I had never thought that the same place would one day turn out to be the home of a hero who sacrificed his life for his people, for his country and most importantly for ‘Freedom’. I am talking about Jhampel Yeshi, a 27-year-old Tibetan living in exile in India, set himself aflame at a protest on 26^th March 2012 in New Delhi against the forthcoming arrival of Chinese President Hu Jintao. It was at least the 30^th time a Tibetan had self-immolated this year alone, a shocking statistic. But as Yeshi’s fiery protest took place in India - rather than in Tibetan areas of China, where most of the immolations have occurred - it received more coverage by the press.

Yeshi died from his injuries a day later, prompting more demonstrations by Tibetans in India against what they consider the brutal Chinese occupation of their homeland. The Indian government, nervous about upsetting China, engaged in a full-on crackdown, arresting close to 300 Tibetans on an archaic colonial law that wards against such dissent.

Yeshi before self immolating left a poignant hand written note. He wrote, ‘the fact that the Tibetan people are setting themselves on fire in this 21st Century is to let the world know about their suffering.’ The number of Tibetan self immolations in China has crossed over thirty. But is the world listening?

Soon after the incident as usual the Chinese authorities put the blame on the Dalai Lama. The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hong Lei accused the Dalai Lama of ‘masterminding’ the series of self immolations. The Chinese officials also ‘complimented’ the Indian authorities for their ‘handling’ of the situation. Apart from officials, not many in India would be enthused to receive such a compliment!

And yet the Chinese refuse to take a second look at what is actually causing such unrest in Tibet. Areas inhabited by Tibetans are under harsh security cover. Many new road check points have been built and they are manned by heavily armed Para-Military Police. The Chinese have also instituted ‘monastic management’ plans in order to control religious life. About 21,000 Chinese officials have been deployed to ‘befriend’ Tibetan monks and dossiers have been created on most of the latter. In addition, over a million national flags and Mao portraits have been distributed; monasteries have to compulsorily hang Mao portraits. Such heavy handedness is causing great disaffection amongst the general Tibetan population.

Sadly for the Tibetans, apart from human rights activists, no country has spoken up for them or for their obvious suffering. When a Tunisian street vendor Mohamed Bouazizi self immolated in Tunis on 17 December 2010, he actually helped launch the so-called ‘Arab Spring’ which led to widespread changes in the Arab World. Unfortunately for Jamphel Yeshi, nothing similar seems to have happened in Tibet. Even when the Chinese occupied Tibet in 1950 and the Tibetans took their case to the UN, no major country including Nehru’s India supported their case. While most are demonstrably anxious about the goings on in Syria and critical of the killings of innocent civilians there, few if any are prepared to shed a tear for the hapless Tibetans.

The reasons are not far to seek. No one wishes to annoy the Chinese. The People’s Republic of China is a permanent member of the UN Security Council. It is the second largest economy in the world after the United States and of recent has also grown considerably in military might. Western countries which used to raise Tibet as an issue in their relations with China now also appear to overlook or bypass it when dealing with China.

On the eve of the anniversary of the failed 1959 Tibetan uprising, mass protests were launched by Tibetans and their support groups from their exiled capital Dharamsala, India. Hunger strikes, Candle light vigils, remonstrations and public anger were witnessed in every Tibetan community across the world.

Lobsang Wangyal, an exiled Tibetan entrepreneur living in India says, "Tibetans in Tibet have long said they are not happy under Chinese rule. The self-immolations are saying that they mean it. But the world is paying little attention. It gives a feeling that 30 Tibetans risking their lives is still not enough to make a point and as if more lives should be sacrificed." 

However, all is not lost for the Tibetans. With the evolution of the new media and social networking websites such as Twitter, Facebook, etc., the suffering of the Tibetans is now known worldwide. Millions all over the world who saw the self immolation of Jamphel Yeshi could not but have failed to be moved at the gruesome sight and at the plight of the hapless Tibetans. As more such self immolations take place, the revulsion for Chinese policies in Tibet will grow exponentially.

I for myself will continue going to Majnu Ka tila, to enjoy my cup of coffee and savour the spicy laping; but now MT will no t be the same old MT for me, from now on it is a sacred site where a benevolent soul like Jhampel Yeshi once resided. Bhod Rangzen!! *

* Bhod means TIBET, Rangzen means INDEPENDENCE, in Tibetan it means FREE TIBET.

(I had written this article exactly two years from now, and on the 2nd anniversary of the incident I am finally uploading it on my blog. MT will always have a special place in my heart, forever!)

Australian Film Festival at IIC – Film Review

The Tall Man

Written and Directed by Tony Krawitz, ‘The Tall Man’ is a documentary based on a book of the same name by Chloe Hooper. The documentary is a puzzle which takes the audience on a roller coaster ride to determine the truth behind the famous Cameroon Domadgee death in custody case.

An inebriated Cameroon was arrested one morning for swearing at Senior Sergeant Chris Hurley, and just an hour later he was found dead in the Palm Island police station. The police claimed that Domadgee died because he fell and slipped when entering the cell. Nobody cared to explain how he got such bad injuries by just falling: four broken ribs, a badly ruptured liver and condition as bad as after a car accident.

The documentary uses court transcripts, interviews with Doomadgee’s family and fellow residents and video footage of Hurley re-enacting his version of that day’s event. It also touches upon Palm Island’s colonial history where racism was widespread. 

The filmmaker plays fair by allotting almost the same time to Hurley’s supporters as he does to Domadgee’s. The local people of Palm Island would refer to Chris Hurley who was 6 ft 7 in. tall and weighed 115 kg as ‘The Tall Man’ (of the title) because of his giant physique. The documentary highlights the difficulty to bring him to trial, and his final acquittal makes us question the Judiciary. Krawitz couldn’t convince Chris Hurley to be in the film. The film ends with the results of the final investigation conducted in 2010, including an audio recording of Hurley’s statement.

Go Back to Where You Came From: Series 2

The documentary film shows us the lives of refugees and the difficulties they face trying to lead a normal life. The filmmaker tried a new genre of documentary film making i.e., a reality TV show format. This fresh approach makes us as an audience more interested, captivated and receptive. Refugees are vulnerable and prone to exploitation and violence. With no protection and no rights, they are completely helpless. This documentary does try and bring out the debate of asylum seekers in the open.

We were shown Episodes 2 and 3 from Season 1 of the documentary. It begins with a mini introduction of all the 6 participants – their names, ages, backgrounds and their opinion on the Australia's asylum seeker debate. Except one of the participants, all the rest shared a common hatred for refugees and this included an absolute racist (Raquel) and a complete Muslim hater (Adam). From being a part of  immigration raids in Malaysia, to living in a refugee camp in Kenya, from visiting slums in Jordan and going to war torn countries like Congo and Iraq – the participants do it all.

The film screening was followed by a discussion with filmmaker Rick McPhee. During which a woman said that the participants take more of our attention and sympathy than the refugees. Though she meant it otherwise, I felt that was the biggest advantage of the film. It worked well because, in order to win the asylum seekers debate in their favor, we need to convince people who are anti-refugees first. And the film does that easily, as it strikes a chord with especially such people and makes them think. They connect with participants who are challenged by the situations they are put in and change completely by the end of their journey. If the participants on the show could have a change of heart, so can other such people. The documentary gives us all a ray of hope.