2008-08-10T01:03:00.001-07:00

Tenzing Tashi Y. Khangsar

Topic 'TIBET IN SINO-AMERICAN RELATIONS.'

Contents Page No
Introduction 2
Tibet in US. China Policy (1940s – 1970s) 3
-CIA involvement. 4

-Tibetan Issue In the UN. 6
-US Withdraws Support. (Turning point) 6
Tibet in US China Policy (1970s- 1980s) 7
Tibetan back in Sino US policy (1987- 2007) 9
-Developments during Bush Presidency and Administration (1989 to 1992) 10
-Developments during Clinton's Administration (1993-2001) 11
-Developments during G.W. Bush Administration.( 2001 – current ) 13
Conclusion. 15

Bibliography and References 18

Introduction.

17^th Oct 2007, while President Hu Jintao was being confirmed as the party secretary for yet again another term during the 17^th National Congress of the CCP held in Beijing, another event in yet another Congress was being held at the same time in Washington DC. Thousands of Tibetans and Tibetan supporters cheered as His Holiness The 14^th Dalai Lama was being awarded the Congressional Gold Medal, the highest civilian honor the US legislature can bestow upon an individual. Following this event right after a month, China outrageously rejected the entry of US aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk into the Port of Hong Kong, which since years has been permitted annually during the Thanksgiving break^¹. Many speculate this as a gesture from China towards US awarding the congressional medal to Dalai Lama (Chinese government regards him being a separatist as well as a traitor) while others blame it upon as an act of confusion.

US currently chairs itself as the sole super power while China expeditiously progresses towards a potential future super power. Hence prevalence of peace and prosperity in the future is very much reliant upon the Sino American relationship. Since the end of the cold war, the last two decades has witnessed growing tensions between United States and China and the Tibetan issue has been one of the keystones of this growing contention. Why is this apprehension over Tibetan so crucial and how has it attained such a position? Why has US started paying so much attention in Tibet despite the Chinese denigration that Tibetan issue is completely a Chinese internal affair? In order to answer these questions, it necessary to investigate into the past Sino-American relationship, analyze the latent reasons for this growing tension over Tibet and to further envision what role could the Tibetan issue take part in the future process and maturity between Washington and Beijing.

Tibet in Sino U.S Relationships (1940s -1970s)
For centuries Tibet has been regarded as the forbidden kingdom. Unheard to the West, this mysterious place, often referred as Shangri-La until the 1940s, wasn’t of much interest to United States. Conversely, with the outbreak of 2^nd World War things changed dramatically. May 12^th 1942, China then was in a state of turmoil. On one side of the coin, it was gripped by the civil war that had erupted since 1930s, and on the other side, it was threatened by the brutal Japanese invasion on then so called 'Republic of China'. Thousands of miles away, President Roosevelt had approved the project FE2 led by Captain Tolstoy and Lieutenant Brooke Dolan II. A mission whose exclusive intention was to move across Tibet seeking allies and discovering enemies, locating strategic targets and surveying the territory as a future possible activity.^² This peculiar interest in Tibet principally emerged because the Burma Road, the only remaining overland route then used by the military from South Asia into China, had been cut by a Japanese thrust^³. Following the attack on Pearl Harbor by the Japanese, Washington was keen on setting up an Air Force base in order to support the Chinese resistance against the Japanese. For Washington, the only way it saw to win the Cold War was by having as many allies as possible and to erase any trace or movement of the Communist. Although United States was the closest ally to Kuomintang and its prime supporter, by late 1940s, witnessing that KMT was gradually loosing its foothold in Mainland, in 1948, the first ever in the history of Tibet, both the US and British Embassy in Hong Kong issued visas to a group of five Tibetan trade delegation on their Tibetan passport despite the bitter opposition from KMT^⁴. While US had funded KMT since 1930s, yet when faced against its own interest in Cold War, Washington didn't hesitate to even go against the will of their own allied force. In a letter to the British Embassy dated December 1950, Washington stated that it “believes Tibetan people has the same inherited right as any others to have the determining voice in its political destiny”^⁵ and US recognizing as Independent Tibet “should developments warrant”.^⁶US already knew that even the Nationalist regarded Tibet part of Republic of China. Hence granting visas on Tibetan documents, in spite of the criticism from KMT, then the ruling power in China was in recognition of Tibet as a Sovereign State of its own. Similarly, when the mission headed by Tolstoy under the project FE-2 was sent to Tibet, US didn't seek the permission of Nationalist Government to travel. Such acts demonstrates Washington's recognition of Tibet as a free sovereign state albeit the fact that Washington knew KMT already claimed Tibet as a part of Republic Of China. Washington’s eagerness to help the Tibetans resist the Chinese so as to maintain its defacto independence was in its own interest. With the out break of Korean War in 1950, Washington was more concerned about its own involvement in Cold War as it then feared that Communism might spread across Tibet and then across Asian subcontinent. Hence for the US, strategically Tibet was potential place which could act as a barrier towards the spread of Communism due to the harsh geographical conditions to access. Unknowingly, Tibetans had also joined the Cold war that was brought up by US^.

CIA involvement.
“We have arrived safely. Next time, please drop us fifty yards down stream because there was a house near by with dogs who barked at us when we landed last night. We are well. We have cached our parachutes and are off to buy a horse to go to Lhasa tomorrow”^⁷ This was the message received on the morning of 7^th December1957 in Washington. The ones who send this message were just only a few miles away from the spot where a US. Air force B-24 Liberator had crashed fourteen years ago, while transporting supplies to its allied forces in China. Its American crews were forced to parachute into Tibet by accident, but the American trained Tibetans dropped from the second plane were on a mission to support their country men's resistance against the Chinese^⁸.

Following the communist victory over Kuomintang in 1949, Radio Peking on the New Year's Day 1950, announced that “the task of the People's Liberation Army for 1950s was to liberate Taiwan, Hanan and Tibet^⁹. By September 1949, the red army had started marching into Tibet and the signing the Seventeen Point Agreement by the representatives of the Dalai Lama and Chinese officials in Peking on May 1951officially reunified Tibet back to the motherland giving Peking full control over Tibet's Foreign affairs and Defense, while letting Tibetans govern their Religious and Political Internal Affairs. Washington sensing the gravity of the situation as it tried to persuade The Dalai Lama who was in Yatung at that time to repudiate the agreement. By accepting Tibet as a part of China, for Washington, this would not only lead to disbanding it’s plan for setting up Air force base camp, but it also meant that it would be more intricate to hence contain the Communist besides meddling with the on going Korean war. In the past the US used KMT to contain the Communist, now it was the South Koreans against the North and by early 1957, the first group of Tibetan to be trained under the US had already been dispatched^¹⁰.
Tension between PLA and the Tibetans grew and by 1956, there was constant fighting between the PLA and Tibetan resistance movement headed by Chushi Gangdruk ( four rivers and six mountains ).These fighters from eastern Tibet were causing trouble for the Red Army whose numbers kept on growing in Tibet but by 1958, the CIA had thus undertaken a full scale commitment to support the Tibetan resistance.^¹¹ Nevertheless, by 1959, PLA had control over most of Tibet forcing Dalai Lama to flee to India. Washington has already proposed to Tibetan government in Lhasa in 1951 that His Holiness should seek asylum in one of the Buddhist countries rather than returning to Tibet. “Based on proximity to Tibet in a country sympathetic to Buddhism was for India, followed by Thailand, and finally Ceylon. If none of those three were acceptable, the US would be glad to receive him and a small group of followers both as an eminent religious dignitary and “head of state”.^¹²
From 1959 till early 1970s, U.S government not only refused to recognize Chinese sovereignty over Tibet, but also gave a lot of assistance to Tibetans living in India. In 1964, Washington approved a healthy price tag of $1,735,000 which was to keep the political concept of an Autonomous Tibet and principally to build resistance against any political developments inside.^¹³ Washington decided to grant monthly subsidy of $15,000 to Dalai Lama and his entourage as a political force active in India^¹⁴, and in terms of military support between 1956 and 1969, US made numerous airdrops of materials to the Tibetan resistance movement which had by the 1960s moved up to a new base in Mustang, Nepal. Trainings were provided to them in Camp Hale in Colorado in terms of Guerrilla warfare and they were later parachuted back.

Tibetan Issue in the UN.
After setting up diplomatic relations between US and Tibet in 1948, Tibetans raised up their issue in UN in 1950. Though this was proposed in UN, yet it was postponed on India's pursuance towards US and UK. India then had good relations with Soviet Union and Nehru had even proposed during the UN session to grant the UN seat to Beijing^¹⁵. During one of the debates on 1961 U.N. Resolutions, the US delegate referred to the Chinese as “foreign oppressors” in Tibet.^¹⁶ Raising Tibetan issue in the UN and supporting Taiwan's presence in U.N as Republic of China was one sole strategy of U.S in isolating and containing China and stopping it from receiving official recognition in UN. Although the Tibetan resolution never actually placed it self comfortably in the UN, yet even if it had, Soviet as a Veto Power would then have definitely enacted against it being close allies to PRC.

US Withdraws Support. (Turning point)
By 1969, China and Soviet Union were boiling in turmoil trying to settle down the border disputes with Soviet threats of invasion. For Washington this was an opportunity to further broaden this rift and to gain China's support. However, in order to do so it first needed to refrain from containing China. In 1969, CIA abruptly completely abandoned the Tibetan resistance movement and closed its chapter on project code-named ST Circus, whose sole purpose was to aid the Tibetan resistance fighters. This change in CIA policy was unexpected by the Tibetans who by then were well fitted into American Policy towards destabilizing or overthrowing Communist. Right after that, PRC replaced Taiwan's seat in the United Nations 1971^¹⁷.
Following the abandoning of the Tibetan resistance movement by late 1974, US had even cut off the subsidy that it had been covertly paying the Dalai Lama in maintain himself and his government.^¹⁸ 1970s was a big turning point as Tibetans suddenly started loosing all the support it was getting from U.S. Washington even changed its political stand and recognition of Tibet. In 1978, the US government stated unequivocally for the first time that Tibet was a part of PRC, without mentioning the autonomy scrutiny link^¹⁹. US change is Tibetan policy can be regarded as the one of biggest the breaches in US foreign policy. The same United States that had once urged Dalai Lama in 1951 to seek asylum in India or any of the neighboring countries, given assistance in order the resist the Chinese suddenly deserted them leaving themselves on their own. Tibetan issue was no longer any significance of US policy towards containing the Soviet Union as it now had China by its side. China's two long decades of detoriating relationship with US was revised with President Nixon's visit to China in 1972^²⁰. This embarked a new development in the US strategy towards the Cold War. China had joined U.S towards combating the Soviet Union. Soviet Union had formerly been PRC's biggest ally since the formation of communist party in 1924. Abandoning its former ally and making a new path with US, was a big revolutionary step which had consequences felt both by Soviet Union as well as the Tibetans, who had always looked upon America as its strongest supporters.

Tibet in US China Policy (1970s- 1980s)

After the official declaration by Washington that it Tibet was a part of PRC, hopes within the Tibetans for a long time remained dead until Deng Xiaoping's economic and social reforms took place in 1978. In an unofficial manner, Den Xio Ping decided to have talks with Tibetan Government in Exile after almost 17 years of silence. On August 1^st 1979 the first fact delegation left from New Delhi for official talks and between 1979 till late 1980s, four fact finding delegations had met with Chinese representatives.^²¹Den Xiaoping had openly declared that anything was possible besides the Tibetan issue over independence being raised. Surprisingly, during all these negotiations, Washington didn't take any part in it. In 1950s and 1960s, US interfered in every issue discussed over Tibet. Now, when the negotiations had begun after these two decades of no communication with Chinese, US paid no interest into it. This overtly displays that US primarily served its own interest by keeping silent over the Tibetan issue. Meanwhile, Sino American relationship was getting much stronger since the reforms initiated by Deng Xio Ping which was somehow integrating Chinese economy more into the world economy. With Sino-US strategy working towards containing the Soviet threat, the Tibetan issue which was once on top of US forum, had slowly disappeared and lost in the mist.

Following the market oriented reforms led by Deng Xio Ping; Beijing realized that opening Tibet to tourism would promote economic development. In 1984, Beijing decided to spend $215 million on developing tourist facilities and by 1986, 30,000 visitors spent $40,000 million in Tibet.^²². These reforms advertised to the world that China was changing. However the huge economic boom occurring in China as well as Tibet by spreading the red carpet towards tourist and the world led to spread of other issues, especially human rights violations. Obviously, before 1980s, the only agenda well known about Tibet was its struggle. Nevertheless, Deng should have realized that by opening Tibet, not only would it aid towards Chinese economic boom, but also towards the outside world's scrutiny. However, then, this didn't affect the Sino US relationship as these were largely ignored considering to be irrelevant towards developing their strategic objective, to combat Soviet threat. China's massive abuse of human rights during the later Maoist era was largely ignored, denied or excused by most Americans^²³ Whether it was human rights or any other issue, for US, then the only prime priority was Sino American Alliance.

By mid 1980s, Sino Soviet relationship once again started strengthening. Political contacts and trade increased and after Mikhail Gorbachev came to power in March 1985, Sino Soviet relations yet again revitalized. For PRC this move meant an end to the long rivalries with its big brother and Beijing gladly welcomed it, but for United States, it was a set back. Witnessing this bonding between Beijing and Moscow, and foreseeing its break down in 1991 which would eventually end of cold war, Sino US strategy towards combating Soviet threat would no longer be needed. Also realizing that US no longer would need PRC's cooperation and witnessing China’s booming economy by the nearing end of the Cold War, Washington started changing its position. In the past, it was the Nationalists, Tibetans and the Koreans to combat the Communist. With rising Sino US relations in early 1970s, U.S abandoned its old ties and made new ties with China towards combating Soviet, and now when Soviet no longer posed any threat, it was China's turn. And in order to contain China, United States already had spotted its weakness.

Tibetan back in Sino US policy (1987- 2007)

After almost two decades of non interference in Tibetan issue, Tibet was back on the US agenda. Seeing that Tibetans had already abandoned their fight for independence, U.S started using a different strategy to raise the Tibetan issue against PRC. In June 1987, the US Congress passed a bill declaring Tibet as an occupied country and endorsing many of the claims about the Tibetan history and the situation claimed by The Dalai Lama and his followers.^²⁴ Erratically, this Act states against US policy in 1978 when President Jimmy Carter recognized Tibet as a part of China. The amendment accused China of having imposed its rule over Tibet by military force since 1949 causing political instability, imprisonment and wide scale famine, resulting in the deaths of more than a million people.^²⁵ PRC retorted to this by denying all the charges. Following that year, on September 21, 1987 His Holiness the Dalai Lama for the first time was invited to US where he presented a Five-Point Peace Plan in order to solve the Tibetan problem to the US Congress (further Congress passed a resolution in 1988 to support this act^²⁶.In this, he made an unprecedented declaration that he under this plan would recognize China's sovereignty over Tibet such that it would be met with withdrawal of Chinese forces from Tibet and that Tibetans would be allowed to enjoy a higher degree of Autonomy. Chinese repulsively responded to Congress by stating it in interference in Chinese internal affairs and denounced His. Holiness the Dalai Lama as a separatist. Simultaneously, on May 1987, representatives Gilman and Rose introduced H.R2476 in US Congress condemning China's human rights abuses in Tibet which was preceded by brutal oppression of the large scale Tibetan demonstration for the first time ever since 1959.^²⁷ Since then, Humans rights abuse has been the core tool used towards Containing China.

Developments during Bush Presidency and Administration (1989 to 1992)
1989 was a big transition in Sino American relationship as 1969 had been for Tibet. The Tiananmen Square massacre on June 4^th not only awakened the world, but also flaunted the repressive side of China which had taken cover behind the curtains of economic and market reforms. This served as a platform to further contain China by sanctioning a series of tough economic sanctions, an end in the arms trade, suspension of financial credits and economic aid etc. Condemnation of PRC's Human rights abuse by US Congress had already been enacted in March that year when Hu Jintao, then the newly appointed party's TAR General Secretary had imposed martial law in Tibet prior to martial law in Tiananmen Square^²⁸. Beijing had already warned Washington about its interference in its internal affairs and added to think carefully about the over all interest of safe guarding Sino US. Relations^²⁹. Further more to the add to the aggression of PRC, His Holiness the Dalai Lama received the Nobel Peace Prize on Dec 10^th following that year. Although, the PRC since 1987 had retaliated that US intervention in Tibet issue was more an intervention into PRC's internal affairs, after the post Tiananmen Era, even after constant re- emphasis upon the above declaration, U.S intervention didn't halt. On March 23^rd 1990, after the Senate and the House passed a joint resolution urging the President to proclaim May 13 1990 as a National Day in Support of the Freedom and Human Rights in China and Tibet^³⁰, China had to remove the Martial Law was put on Tibet since March 1989. Following that year, on March 23^rd 1990, a joint resolution was granted to admit 1000 Tibetan refugees legally into US as a part of US immigration Act of 1990 on humanitarian bases. ^³¹ For United States, 1000 official Tibetans immigrating legally wouldn't' be of any burden, but such an act would not only raise more awareness about Tibetan struggle in US, but also more support for Tibetans. This was what Washington must have actually for. Similarly despite the PRC's opposition, US H.R 2621 granted $1.5 million in assistance to support Tibetan refugees while at the same time, US Government decided to sell 150 F-16 to Taiwan, which hadn't had any substantial aid or military trade with US since the 3^rd US. China communiqué in 1982^³². Recalling that in 1974, U.S stopped all the financial funding it gave to His Holiness to maintain and manage the Tibetan Government in Exile chiefly stating that Tibetans were then self reliant and s elf sufficient. But now after almost two decades later, when the Tibetans were actually now even more self reliant and self sufficient than before, once again funding started, but this time, in the form of humanitarian aid. In 1991, for the first time, The Dalai Lama met President Bush in the White house which was the first official reception by a U.S president. After almost one and half decade of silence, for the Tibetans, these steps taken by U.S was a big sign of hope but in reality they should realize that this act was just to agitate PRC and follow is policy of Containment. When time comes to refrain from containing China or when Washington sees its interest in being friendly with PRC, US would again back down as it did during 1970s.

PRC since then realizing and comprehending how US foreign policy of engagement and containment works, had also changed its foreign policy. After the replacement of TAR Governor Dorjee Tsering by hard liner Gyaltsen in June 1990, PRC started producing White Papers on Tibet in order to justify its current stance and its occupation over Tibet as placed by US Congress ^³³. Further due to all the political pressure exerted on China, China even signed the Nuclear Non proliferation Treaty in 1992 primarily as gesture in order to gain support and trust that it had lost from other countries, especially the US, after 1989. For China, it had envisaged that in order to have good relations, to ameliorate trust from other countries and if it soughed to become more economically and politically stable, then it had to have U.S support. The economic sanctions and possible moves towards containing China in early 1990s must have conveyed the message to Beijing from Washington that US was still the utmost preeminent country in the Era of Post Cold War.

Developments during Clinton's Administration ( 1993-2001)
The rift in the Sino American relations after the Tiananmen Square incidence started changing after Clinton's administration came to power. In May 1994, China was re granted the MFN (Most favored nations). Granting it would mean that China is treated in US trade relations in the same manner as US treat their ‘Most Favored Nations’ as trading partners^³⁴. However, this was made on the condition of seven principles amongst which one of them was “preserving Tibet's distinct cultural and religious heritage”.^³⁵ Following that, efforts made during the Sino American summits of 1997 and 1998, led to Beijing entry into world trade organization where the US took the lead amongst the WTO's contracting parties in order to grant membership to Beijing^³⁶. On June 26 1998, during Clinton's visit to Shanghai, he declared that U.S didn't support Taiwan's independence nor two China or one China, or just one Taiwan^³⁷. While, on the other hand, Washington was still careful not step back on backing up Taiwan and Tibet issue. During Clinton's presidency, Dalai Lama met with Clinton more than three times and officially received pledges for continued U.S support on Sino/Tibetan talks^³⁸. On October 7^th, U.S S2554 and HR.5254 introduced to establish a U.S special envoy on Tibet^³⁹. Under this act, U.S would be able to specifically monitor the human rights abuse in Tibet (a very clear intervention in China's internal affair as put by Beijing's Ministry of Foreign Affairs). Similarly in March 1996, after PLA's provocative military exercise in the coast of Taiwan, two US. Aircraft carrier battle groups were deployed in the Taiwan area which was previously preceded by Taiwan's President Lee Teng-hui visit to Cornell University.^⁴⁰. One obvious change noticed in U.S attitude is exhibited in Washington's interest in the negotiations taking place between Tibetan Government in Exile and Beijing. For the first time, Washington encouraged Beijing to continue on with negotiations with Tibetan delegates in contrast to its long silence over all the four delegation meetings with Chinese officials in early 1980s. Then, Washington hadn't even uttered a word about it, and now all of the sudden after two decades it started impulsively encouraging China towards negotiations. During 1980s, Washington saw its own benefits in remaining silent and now when that no longer applied, Washington had altered its stance.
However, from the Chinese perspective,Clinton's presidency fructified the Sino American relations. Strong developments in diplomatic relationships (Visits by the two presidents of the the countries and summit meetings in 1997 and 1998) took place. The world also witnessed other developments and ties between Washington and Beijing. By 1995, the US. Trade deficit with China, which had mounted steadily since 1983, was $34 billion, according to US. Statistics and was continuing to climb.^⁴¹ This has to be largely accounted for the Re granting the MFN status. Washington still followed its policy of check and balance towards China yet for Beijing, with the growing trade interdependency, Clinton's administration was very rewarding witnessing the normalization that occurred in the Sino US relations after 1989 despite the confrontation over Taiwan issue in 1996.

Developments during G.W. Bush Administration.( 2001 – current )
Sino American relationship since Bush Administration has been fairly smooth despite the April 1^st 2001 incidence when a Chinese F-8 fighter Jet crashed after colliding with a US. Reconnaissance plane leading to the bead of the Chinese pilot.^⁴² Since then until now, Sino American relationship has matured and grown fairly strong. Secretary of State Collin Powell, in a remarkable 2003 statement, declared that the US-China relations were the best they had ever been since Nixon's visit in 1972^⁴³ From 1970s till 1980s, when Sino U.S relations were getting stronger; U.S completely abandoned the Tibetan issue until 1987 when it was yet again reemerged to contain China. However, now when Sino American relationship have already considerably stabled, technically, the Tibet issue should have died away as it did during 1970-1980s. However surprisingly, Tibet and human rights issue are still on forum of U.S foreign policy. This policy of containment is still being followed primarily for US own gain. With China's booming economy which had maintained an annual average rate of 8-10%, “US leaders are unsure if this process would see China as emerging as a friend or a foe of United States”^⁴⁴. According to US. Trading census in 2007, China is US second largest trading partner, with bilateral trade last year of over $330 billion^⁴⁵. Similarly according to Peoples Daily Online, China is now Japan's largest trading partners. Hence, economically China's strong ties with U.S, Japan, Australia serves as a big boost towards Chinese current foreign policy. US is also alerted witnessing China's growing dominance in South East Asia. Since the era of cold war, U.S has been the lone preeminent super power in South East Asia with strong political and military alliance with Japan. China's lead in the series of Six party talks since 2001 held in Beijing to diplomatically solve the North Korean issue over nuclear empowerment, clearly demonstrates that China is now a responsible country, working hard towards gaining more trust from the rest of the Asian countries in order to replace U.S preeminence in South East Asia. Hence, although the economic interdependency in trade has drawn both countries towards each other yet at the same time; it has also signaled U.S who fears Chinese presence as competition. Hence, efforts to contain China still is amongst the top priorities in U.S foreign policy. Following the 2001 incidence, President Bush had constantly raised the issue over religious freedom in Tibet. In 2002, he formally met with Dalai Lama for the first time since his presidency and again met him in 2004. In 2006, U.S Congress decided to award His Holiness with The US Congressional medal on Oct 2007, same time when The PRC will be having their 17^th NPC in Beijing. These moves towards Tibet and its issue publicly demonstrates U.S support for Tibet. Surprisingly, Beijing unlike during Clinton's presidency, when China simply condemned U.S intervention without any formidable action, since late 1990s, instead reacted to all these moves openly. In 2002 China rejected the entry of U.S. warship destroyer Curtis Wilbur to dock in Hong Kong,^⁴⁶ which was a straight forward reply from PRC over formal visit from Dalai Lama with Bush. In 2004, China again followed the same scheme and “refused to allow the U.S. submarine City of Corpus Christi to dock in Hong Kong right after President Bush met with Dalai Lama. These are violations of maritime law, but China gave no explanation”^⁴⁷and can be rightly be interpreted as a cold gesture from PRC over Bush meeting with Dalai Lama. It's evident that China now no longer quietly takes any US initiative towards generating more awareness about Tibet and its human rights issue. After the Taiwan's issue in 1996-97, China instead has started taking an initiative towards countering U.S support to Taiwan or Tibet by other means besides just declaring it as interference in its internal affairs. China's discontent was again displayed when in 2006, the Congress decided to award Dalai Lama with the Congressional medal, on “26 Oct 2006 a Chinese 160-ft Song Class diesel-electric attack submarine suddenly surfaced near the Kitty Hawk, totally surprising the U.S. Navy. The Chinese submarine slipped past a dozen U.S. submarines and warships that were supposed to protect the carrier. (On 10 November 07, a Chinese submarine did it again to the Kitty Hawk, this time near Okinawa.”^⁴⁸ These repeated occurrences are not accidents as they precisely occur right after US intervenes or supports Tibetan cause. China is indirectly declaring to US that it doesn't approve the U.S interference and its support for Tibet by raising human rights issue or by awarding Dalai Lama the congressional medal.
This change in China's attitude towards being more bold in retaliating U.S interference in Tibetan issue compared to its 1990s could possibly be because China is now no longer the country it used to be then. Economically and well as politically, China is much stronger. Beijing realizes that China's strong ties with U.S, Japan, and Australia will also serve as a big boost towards Chinese current foreign policy. With the current developments and Chinese reactions towards U.S interference, U.S should realize that enacting its policy of engagement and containment in the future wouldn’t be easily acceptable to PRC and it would become more and more difficult as China integrates more into the world market gaining more respect from other countries.

Conclusion.
Ever since Clinton's administration came to power, Sino American relationships have been taking a different shape and Tibetan issue has been directed a lot of focus in every Sino American discussion. The significance of Tibetan issue in Sino US foreign relationship is clearly articulated by President Jiang's statement during 1998 Beijing Summit meeting that “as long as the Dalai Lama can publicly make a statement and a commitment that Tibet is an inalienable part of China and that he recognizes Taiwan is a province of China, the doors are open to dialogues and negotiations.” For PRC, anything is within range besides the issue of Independence for Tibet. Even the official position of Washington is that Tibet is a part of China and this has remained unchanged. However, human rights issues and freedom of religion are two of the core aspects of Tibetan issue which is now the source of contention between Beijing and Washington. For Dalai Lama and his exile government, one of the core demand is a higher degree of Autonomy and that TAR (Tibetan Autonomous Region should encompass a greater territorial region which includes incorporates parts of Xinjiang, Sichuan, Qinghai, Gansu. And for the Washington, even though Bush stated that he supports human rights and religious freedom, in hidden reality, Washington sees Tibet is one of core tool towards containing China. History reveals how tactfully U.S used Tibet as a base of harassing and containing China during the early era of Cold War. When U.S no longer needed Tibet's issue in its foreign policy towards containing China, it just disregarded Tibetan issue. Clearly, U.S in early 1950s must have seen Tibet's defacto independence as a potential base for combating Soviet and Communist treat, but by 1959 when Dalai Lama had taken asylum in Tibet, its supported Tibetan troops just in order to gain more information about China (China then was completely enclosed) and to harass the Chinese by creating instability in the region. It never had plans to support the Tibetans to seek independence. The troops were commanded and trained to attack the Chinese at the border but were never commanded to infiltrate inside^⁴⁹. If Washington really did want to aid Tibet to seek independence, then why didn't it lay down a full scale war, sending troops into Tibet, to defeat and remove to communist regime as it did during the Korean War? The Tibetans were just used as tools in the cold war and discarded when they no longer served Washington’s purpose. And now raising the Tibetan issue after the end of Cold war is yet again just another tactic following its policy towards containing China.
On the whole, stimulated by visualizing China as a potential competitor as well as a rival, there is a big prospect that in the recent years to come by, U.S government interest in issues over Tibet might further grow as particularly, in issues regarding human rights issue and religious freedom in order to play a safe game by not directly interfering as interference would mean damaging its relations with Beijing which currently is beneficial for United States. However, how long is Beijing going to withstand Washington's intervention in Tibet and Taiwan? The recent display of discontent especially over the congressional medal awarding to Dalai Lama by rejecting port boarding to U.S navy vessels and Chinese submarine surfing near U.S navy warships clearly indicates indirect warning to United States. Although at this moment, PRC's PlA isn't comparable to the U.S military yet it’s still poses as a potential threat to U.S security. Sooner or later, examining China’s booming economy China will rise as a super power. Similarly, it’s normalizing its relationship with other Asian countries especially with Japan (U.S strongest ally) which potentially means ‘‘replacing U.S preeminence in South East Asia''. Where will the Tibetan issue be then? In the future, if Sino US relations remains the same and the pressure keeps growing on U.S about China's rise as a global super power, Tibetan issue and human rights abuses will continue to serve, or even stronger as a potential tool for U.S as Tibet did during the cold war.

Tenzing Tashi Y. Khangsar

Bibliography
Books-

1-Murray Hiebert, The Bush Presidency: Implications for Asia ( New York:Asia Society Asian Update, January 2001)
2-John F. Avedon In Exile from the land of Snows – HarperCollins Publishers,Inc,10 east 53^rd street, NY 10022.
3-John K. Knaus Orphans of the cold war Public affairs ( Public affairs, 250 West Street, Suite 1825, NY 10107
4-Robert G.Sutter Chinese Foreign Relations (Power and Policy since the Cold War) Rowman and Littlefield
Publishers. INC.4501 Forbes Boulevard, Suite 200, Lanham, Maryland 20706.
5-Susan.LShirk. China 'Fragile Superpower Oxford University Press. INC. 198 Madison Avenue NY-10016.
6-China in the world economy (Washington D.C:Institute for International Economics,1994),p.p 73-79
7-Susan S. Kim Chinese foreign policy faces the new millennium.Westview Press 5500 Central Avenue. Boulder.CO-80302
8-Tsepon W.D Shakapa Tibet A Political History Yale University Press 1967.
9-Cao Changching and James D. Seymour Tibet Through the Dissident Chinese Eyes 1997 M.E Sharpe.INC 80 Bussiness Park Drive, Armonk, New York 10504.

Papers and Articles

1-Colin Mackerras China's ethnic minorities and globalization 2003 Routledge
2-Office of Strategic Services (OSS), background report, September 30,1943,NARA RG226,E 092, Folder 39.
3-Guangqiu Xu The United States and the Tibet Issue Asian Survey, Vol 37. No -11 ( Nov 11^th 1997), pp. 1062-1077
3-FRUS (1950): China, vol (1983), Vol VII, Vol XXX,China
4-“A Tinderbox in Tibet inflames US.China Relations.” Business Week, October 1987,
5-“China Rebuffs Tibet Bills By US.” Beijing review.March 27. 1989.
6- World News journal. A Chinese Newspaper following the collision of a Chinese Jet fighter and a US. EP-3 spy plane. May 2001.
Websites and Webpages, Journals. ( Date accessed)

-http://www.tibet.com/Proposal/countdown.html accessed 9^th Feburary 2008.

http://www.eda.gov/xp/EDAPublic/NewsEvents/Speeches3/baruah/Speech092407SKBIEDCChina.xml accessed 7^th Feb 2008

http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/4838 accessed 9^th Feburary 2008

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp

?Page=/ForeignBureaus/archive/200711/INT20071128b.html accessed 8^th Feb 2008

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=3925963 accessed 7^th Feb 2008,

1Website http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=3925963 accessed Friday 8^th Feb 2008.

2Office of Strategic Services (OSS), background report, September 30,1943,NARA RG226,E 092, Folder 39.

3John K. Knaus Orphans of the cold war Public affairs ( Public affairs, 250 West Street, Suite 1825, NY 10107 (4)

4Ibid .p.p- 44-45

5Guangqiu Xu The United States and the Tibet Issue Asian Survey, Vol 37. No -11 ( Nov 11^th 1997), pp. 1062-1077

6FRUS (1950): China, vol (1983),p.p 1693-95.

7John K. Knaus Orphans of the cold war Public affairs ( Public affairs, 250 West Street, Suite 1825, NY 10107 (1)

8Ibid. pp-2

9John F. Avedon In Exile from the land of Snows – HarperCollins Publishers,Inc,10 east 53^rd street, NY 10022.

10FRUS1948 ,Vol VII, pp 766-773

11John K. Knaus Orphans of the cold war Public affairs ( Public affairs, 250 West Street, Suite 1825, NY 10107 (154-155)

12Ibid. pp. 90-91

13Memoradum for the special group, January 9, 1964, document 337, FRUS 1964-1968, vol XXX,China.

14Guangqiu Xu The United States and the Tibet Issue Asian Survey, Vol 37. No -11 ( Nov 11^th 1997), pp. 1062-1077

15John K. Knaus Orphans of the cold war Public affairs ( Public affairs, 250 West Street, Suite 1825, NY 10107 .

16Guangqiu Xu The United States and the Tibet Issue Asian Survey, Vol 37. No -11 ( Nov 11^th 1997), pp. 1062-1077

17 “A Tinderbox in Tibet inflames US.China Relations.” Business Week, October 1987.

18John K. Knaus Orphans of the cold war Public affairs ( Public affairs, 250 West Street, Suite 1825, NY 10107 (310)

19 “A Tinderbox in Tibet inflames US.China Relations.” Business Week, October 1987, p.p 53.

20Susan S. KimChinese foreign policy faces the new millennium.Westview Press 5500 Central Avenue. Boulder.CO-80302

21http://www.tibet.com/Proposal/countdown.html accessed 9^th Feburary 2008.

22“A Tinderbox in Tibet inflames US.China Relations.” Business Week, October 1987, p.p 53.

23Susan S. KimChinese foreign policy faces the new millennium.Westview Press 5500 Central Avenue. Boulder.CO-80302

24 Colin Mackerras China's ethnic minorities and globalization 2003 Routledge

25Guangqiu Xu The United States and the Tibet Issue Asian Survey, Vol 37. No -11 ( Nov 11^th 1997), pp. 1062-1077

26Ibid..pp.1077.

27John F. Avedon In Exile from the land of Snows – HarperCollins Publishers,Inc,10 east 53^rd street, NY 10022.(p.p 420)

28John F. Avedon In Exile from the land of Snows – HarperCollins Publishers,Inc,10 east 53^rd street, NY 10022.(p.p 422)

29“China Rebuffs Tibet Bills By US.” Beijing review.March 27. 1989.

30Guangqiu Xu The United States and the Tibet Issue Asian Survey, Vol 37. No -11 ( Nov 11^th 1997), pp. 1070-1072

31John F. Avedon In Exile from the land of Snows – HarperCollins Publishers,Inc,10 east 53^rd street, NY 10022.

32John F. Avedon In Exile from the land of Snows – HarperCollins Publishers,Inc,10 east 53^rd street, NY 10022.

33Ibid..p.p 253

34Susan S. KimChinese foreign policy faces the new millennium.Westview Press 5500 Central Avenue. Boulder.CO-80302

35John F. Avedon In Exile from the land of Snows – HarperCollins Publishers,Inc,10 east 53^rd street, NY 10022.

36Susan S. KimChinese foreign policy faces the new millennium.Westview Press 5500 Central Avenue. Boulder.CO-80302

37Guangqiu Xu The United States and the Tibet Issue Asian Survey, Vol 37. No -11 ( Nov 11^th 1997), pp. 1062-1077

38John F. Avedon In Exile from the land of Snows – HarperCollins Publishers,Inc,10 east 53^rd street, NY 10022

39Ibid. p.p 427

40 In reports published in Robert G.Sutter Chinese Foreign Relations (Power and Policy since the Cold War) Rowman andLittlefield Publishers. INC.4501 Forbes Boulevard, Suite 200, Lanham, Maryland 20706.

41China in the world economy (Washington D.C:Institute for International Economics,1994),p.p 73-79

42Front Page of World News journal. A Chinese Newspaper following the collision of a Chinese Jet fighter and a US. EP-3 spy plane. May 2001.

43Susan.LShirk. China 'Fragile Superpower Oxford University Press. INC. 198 Madison Avenue NY-10016.

44Murray Hiebert, The Bush Presidency: Implications for Asia ( New York:Asia Society Asian Update, January 2001)

45http://www.eda.gov/xp/EDAPublic/NewsEvents/Speeches3/baruah/Speech092407SKBIEDCChina.xml accessed 11^th Feb 2008.

46http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=/ForeignBureaus/archive/200711/INT20071128b.html (accessed10^th Feb 2007)

47http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/4838 accessed 16^h Feb 2008

48http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/4838 accessed 12^th Feb 2008

49In notes from 'Buddha's warriors ' by Mikel Dunham

Tibet in Sino Amercian Relationship