The chasm between the old and the new school of thought within the Tibetan political community over the future of Tibet has been quite evidently expressed in recent years. The silence over the chasm by people in leadership only further infuriated the younger generation of Tibetan activist, who responded to the silence with a louder public call for a new approach to their call for independence. The call for a new approach got all the more louder as activists began to articulate their growing restlessness in highly public and visible platforms. This action was seen by analyst as a growing challenge to the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan leaders of the government in exile; and it was therefore only a matter of time before their silence was addressed.
The intervention made by Dalai Lama, the spiritual head of the Tibetans to convene a six-day public dialogue at Dharamsala to discuss the future of the Tibetans was a strategic ways to in effect address the chasm between the old and new generation of Tibetan activist. In the end, the 600 odd Tibetans who convened at Dharamsala recommended the continuation of ‘middle way’ approach of the Dalai Lama to the Tibetan parliament. In doing so, the convention in one voice proclaimed to protect their political identity and to ensure that the non-violent struggle of the Tibetans is upheld. While affirming the middle way, the convention send a strong message to China that if they do not respond positively to appeals for meaningful autonomy for Tibet, then the Tibetans will decide to pursue independence.
The convention was traditional diplomacy at its best, where the old power not only achieved in formulating a democratic consensus in support for continuation of the “middle way” but also succeeded in ensuring that the Dalai Lama was reaffirmed the mandate to be the “sole representative and leader of the Tibetan people.” This renewed mandate has stabilized the Dalai Lama’s negotiating power with China and he made it evidently clear to Chine when he pointed out on Sunday, “My trust in Chinese officials has become thinner and thinner.” The consensus arrived at by the Tibetan convention will have far reaching impact in how it negotiates its rights with India; and with the Dalai Lama stating that he is far from retirement, it has given the Tibetans the time to build new leadership while also safeguarding its political struggle without compromising on its commitment to a non-violent middle way.
There is no doubt the Tibetans are at a cross roads and their leadership was under tremendous pressure to find a new path and to define clearly its political position on the future of Tibet. And in one decisive intervention, it has addressed all these doubts and for sometime it is unlikely to find any critical public dissent from within. By confronting the difficult issues head on and by using traditional diplomacy and pragmatism of finding consensus in a highly polarized situation, the Tibetan political leadership has through a participatory and consultative process of dialogue found an inclusive answer with a greater sense of purpose and a definite direction to the future. While all the issues of contention may not have totally been resolved, it has for the time being enabled the Tibetans to renew a greater sense of nationalism and the urgency to find a solution.
There are lessons for the Nagas to draw out from this experience. Nagas too are in a state of crisis today and there strong and polarized points of views and with an uncertain future looming over the Naga people, the need for Nagas to define with clarity the direction of their future has become imperative and immediate. The method of consensus building through participatory dialogue chosen by the Tibetans is a worthy initiative; and an approach that does not contradict the Naga worldview. Is it therefore possible for the Nagas to convene a public dialogue in which all Naga stakeholders participate in a consensus building process that will focus on determining the direction in which the Naga people will follow and recommend the possible future options for the Naga political destiny? Unless Naga create opportunities to dialogue with each other, it is possible that the Naga will remain chained to their past.
