It’s all about the thin air. Thin is “in.”
It’s nothing to do with religion but land. If you look at a map of what was core “Han” China, it’s only maybe 1/3 the size of what China is today. Strip out Manchuria, inner Mongolia, Tibet, and Xinjiang, and China would be physically pretty small.
Give up claims to tibet, and China would be on a slippery slope to these other places. although Manchuria is IIRC only about 3% manchurian, Inner Mongolia about 20%, Tibet is now under 50% Tibetan, and not sure what Xinjiang is. Most of the population transfer has taken place since 1949, and in the case of Tibet since the mid 1980’s.
also there are resources to be had.
Xinjiang: 40% Han, 45% Uigur.
Tibet (the Automous Region, that is; historical Tibet is much larger): 92.8% Tibetan, 6.1% Han.
Inner Mongolia: 79% Han, 17% Mongol.
Manchuria – not an AR but three provinces:
Heilonjiang: 96% Han, 2.8% Manchu.
Jilin: 90.8% Han, 3.7% Manchu.
Liaoning: 83.9% Han, 12.8% Manchu.
In addition to what China Guy said, it might be worth noting that for at least some Chinese nationalists, their vision of China isn’t too far off radical Salafist nuts’ view of the Dar al-Islam. Just as the most lunatic fringe of radical Islamists might consider Spain “Muslim territory”, there seems to be a certain hyper-nationalistic strain in some circles of China that says, once part of China, always part of China.
So Tibet became dependant on Mongol patrons, these patrons were displaced or absorbed by Qing China, who then exercized a loose suzerainty. Qing China’s claims were inherited by the Chinese Republic, and then the Republic’s claims passed to the PRC. So, in the Chinese view, China can dispose of Tibet as it so wills. So for example China refused to acknowledge the British-Tibetan treaty that produced the McMahon Line in 1914, because they didn’t recognize Tibet’s independence and authority to negotiate such a treaty in the first place. China would go on to fight a brief ( and completely successful ) border war with India over that very issue in 1962.
In that context it might be worth noting that modern China is still smaller than the Qing empire at its largest extent. Never mind that those additions to “China” were mostly of very recent vintage.
- Tamerlane
So, the answer to the original question may be:
“Cage match.”
Didn’t one of the Chinese government’s hand-picked successor Lamas (don’t remember which one) defect a couple of years ago?
Tibet is a sensative subject and this is a public message board. At least on the board I take a real polatik stance. Also, there are a lot of websites on this subject that are blocked in China for whatever reason…
However, I believe that Tibet Autonomous Region number is incorrect. There was a specific policy with incentives to get Han Chinese to move to Tibet started in the 1980’s. What the result is I’m not sure.
For the non-TAR Tibetan areas such as much of Qinghai Province; Ganzi, Aba and Muli autonomous districts of Sichuan; Deqen autonomous district of Yunan, the Han Chinese percentage is likely to be 50%+.
Karmapa Lama and here is a news piece from the time. Search on the term and I’m sure you can find a lot of coverage including interviews with the Karmapa Lama himself.
Ever since I heard that I always wondered:
Remembering how the Chinese turned an emperor into a gardener, what then could be the result for succession if the government does release him and suddenly he says to his would be followers to take a hike?
I’m thinking Dalai Idol
The 10th Panchen Lama married and had a child so it’s not unheard of. There is currently a scrap over who is the true Karmapa Lama. Very Pope/Antipope…
I’m sorry…but your mountain nation is a total disaster! You will not get to choose where you are reincarnated if you don’t play to win. And your dress is horrid.
Lamas are larger than frogs!
According to Tibetans, he is still the Panchen Lama even if he turns his back on Tibetan buddhism. His soul would still be reborn after his death, and the search for the new reincarnate would begin.
It’s also possible that a boddhisatva, like one of the reincarnate lama’s, falls far from grace and reincarnates as a worm and has to go through hundreds or thousands to reincarnations to get back to a state of enlightenment.
Lama follower: Free Tibet!
Person in the crowd: But your leader says to forget it!
LF: Wait 70 years, he will agree then!
It seems to me like an scenario worse than the legendary “40 years in the dessert” one.
On the whole I do agree that Tibet should be free, but I think that in one more generation the influx of people from China will then make the idea to free Tibet to be an impractical one, IMO it may already be so.
So when he reincarnates, he will bring pie? 
:smack:
Sorry, the one that has only one “s” not this one:
“I’m sorry, Dalai, but that enthronement ceremony was so cabaret. Paula, sit down.”
Bumped.