There are two political debates regarding the relationship between Tibet and China. The first debate concerns whether Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) and parts of neighboring provinces that are claimed as political Tibet should separate themselves from China and become a new sovereign state. Many of the points in this political debate rest on the points which are within the second debate, about whether Tibet was independent or subordinate to China during certain periods of its history. China has claimed control over Tibet since the 13th century, though this has been contested. All countries today officially recognize Tibet as part of the People's Republic of China and do not acknowledge it as an independent state. While Tibetan independence advocates argue Tibet had periods of de facto independence, Chinese control was solidified in the 1950s. Today, Tibet is officially designated as the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) within the People's Republic of China.
It is generally believed that Tibet was independent from China prior to the Yuan dynasty (1271–1368),; and Tibet has been governed by the People's Republic of China (PRC) since 1959.; ; ;
The nature of Tibet's relationship with China in the intervening period is a matter of debate: The PRC asserts that Tibet has been a part of China since the Mongol-led Yuan dynasty.; ; The Republic of China (ROC) asserted that "Tibet was then definitely placed under the sovereignty of China" when the Qing dynasty (1644–1912) ended the brief Nepalese invasion (1788–1792) of parts of Tibet in c. 1793.; . Both cite the ROC's position paper at the 1914 Simla Conference. The Tibetan Government in Exile asserts that Tibet was an independent state until the PRC invaded Tibet in 1949/1950. A number of outside scholars maintain that Tibet and China were ruled by the Mongols during the Yuan dynasty, treating Tibet and China as separate realms under a common rule.; ; Some others regard Tibet as "part of a Mongol-ruled Chinese state".Grunfeld. A.T., Reassessing Tibet policy, Foreign Policy in Focus, 2005 Many scholars maintain that Ming China (1364–1644) possessed no administrative control in Tibet,; while some scholars indicated that Imperial Chinese superiority continued after Yuan and lasted until Qing.Petech, Luciano, China and Tibet in the Early 18th Century, 1950, p250 Tibet was part of the Chinese Empire, "an appendage of". "part of". "subordination of Tibet to China". or at the very least subordinate to the Manchu-ruled China during much of the Qing dynasty. in contrast, claims that the Qing had little control over Tibet and compares Tibet with the Vatican. Many scholars maintain that Tibet, from 1912 to 1951, enjoyed de facto independence "independent state", "international legal status" was "independent state". "border between the two countries" of China and Tibet in 1917. ; "practically independent" from 1912, 419 "accepted the suzerainty of the Communists" in 1951. with no formal international recognition.Clark, Gregory, In Fear of China, Cresett Press, 1968, p38 Others believe that the 1914 Simla Convention formally recognized Chinese suzerainty over Tibet.Grunfeld, A. Tom, The Making of Modern Tibet, M.E. Sharpe, 1996 p67, "[In Simla] Tibet gave up territory and switched suzerains from China to Britain. It certainly did not achieve "independence" – unless the state of independence is judged solely by the right to sign treaties with other nations. Moreover, the treaty...put Lhasa on record as being willing to admit to de jure Chinese suzerainty."Grunfeld, A. Tom, The Making of Modern Tibet, M.E. Sharpe, 1996, p275, n53, "Tibet's independence was so lacking that during one session of the conference, when the Tibetan delegate was ill, Sir Charles Bell represented Tibet."
Presently, the 14th and current Dalai Lama is not in support of Tibetan separatism, and has advocated Tibetan autonomy under Chinese sovereignty instead. His approach is known as the "Middle Way" in which has been officially adopted by the 4th session of the 12th Assembly of Tibetan People's Deputies on September 18, 1997. In 2005, the 14th Dalai Lama emphasized that Tibet is a part of China, and Tibetan culture and Buddhism are part of Chinese culture.
Background
Since the 13th century, Tibet has been under the suzerainty of non-Tibetan rulers, first under the Mongols and later under Chinese authority, with autonomous status within China since 1720. The Tang-Tibet treaty of 821, often cited for recognizing Tibetan sovereignty and territorial integrity, has not been honored by any Chinese government since that time.
From the 19th century onwards, foreign powers have consistently recognized Tibet as part of China in all diplomatic agreements, which accorded China the sovereign right to negotiate and sign treaties related to Tibet. Despite minor exceptions, no country has formally recognized Tibet as a sovereign nation over the past two centuries.
The political authority of the Dalai Lamas in Tibet was influenced by external powers, with the title "Dalai" originating from the Mongols. Since the 18th century, Chinese authorities have overseen the selection of the Dalai and Panchen Lamas.
Current international context Between 1911 and 1951 Tibet was free of the paramountcy of the Republic of China and functioned as a de facto independent entity. However it did not receive the de jure international recognition of a legal status separate from China.Melvyn C. Goldstein (with Cynthia M. Beall), Nomads of Western Tibet — The Survival of a Way of Life , University of California Press, 1990 , (Historical background): "while Tibet was loosely subordinate to China for several hundred years prior to 1911, between then and 1951, it functioned as a de facto independent political entity, although it never received de jure international recognition of an independent legal status separate from China." Today's Tibet is internationally recognized as part of China.Barry Sautman, "Cultural genocide" and Tibet , in Texas International Law Journal, ` April 2006, reproduced at allbusiness.com: "every state in the world recognizes that Tibet is part of China, and no state deems Tibet a colony."Jennifer M. Brinkerhoff, Digital Diasporas: Identity and Transnational Engagement, Cambridge University Press, 2009, (Introduction): "[...] the United States continues to recognize the Tibetan Autonomous Region as part of the People's Republic of China." It is not listed in the list of countries and territories to be decolonized published in 2008 by the UN, and China is not mentioned among the administering powers.Martine Bulard, "Chine-Tibet, des identités communes" [China–Tibet, common identities], reproduced on Planète Asie from Monde Diplomatique, 30 April 2008: "Rappelons que les Nations unies n’ont jamais inclus le Tibet dans les pays à décoloniser (avant comme après 1971 – date du remplacement de Taïwan par la Chine populaire) et qu’aucun pays n’a reconnu le « gouvernement » tibétain en exil et donc la possibilité d’une indépendance." ["Remember that the United Nations has never included Tibet in the countries to be decolonized (before and after 1971 – when Taiwan was replaced by the People's Republic of China) and that no country has recognized the Tibetan "government" in exile and therefore the possibility of independence."] No country has recognized the Tibetan government in exile as the legitimate government of Tibet.Dalaï-lama, Sofia Stril-Rever, Appel au monde , Éditions du Seuil, 2011, p. 1942 (eBook) : "À ce jour, le gouvernement tibétain en exil n'est reconnu par aucune chancellerie." ["To date, the Tibetan government in exile is not recognized by any chancellery."]
Views of Chinese governments
The government of the People's Republic of China contends that China has had control over Tibet since the Yuan dynasty (1271–1368).
In 1912 the Imperial Edict of the Abdication of the Qing Emperor was issued in the name of the Xuantong Emperor, providing the legal right for the Republic of China (which previously ruled mainland China from 1912 until 1949 and now controls Taiwan) to inherit all territories of the Qing dynasty, including Tibet. The cabinet-level Mongolian and Tibetan Affairs Commission had existed and was in charge of the administration of Tibet and Outer Mongolia regions from 1912. The commission retained its cabinet-level status after 1949, but no longer executes that function. On 10May 1943, Chiang Kai-shek asserted that "Tibet is part of Chinese territory... No foreign nation is allowed to interfere in our domestic affairs". He again declared in 1946 that the Tibetans were Chinese nationals.The last of the Tibetans By Ian Buruma The Mongolian and Tibetan Affairs Commission was disbanded in 2017.
In the late 19th century, China adopted the Western model of nation-state diplomacy. As the government of Tibet, China concluded several treaties (1876, 1886, 1890, 1893) with the British Indian government touching on the status, boundaries and access to Tibet. Chinese government sources consider this a sign of sovereignty rather than suzerainty. However, by the 20th century British India found the treaties to be ineffective due to China's weakened control over the Tibetan local government. A British expeditionary force invaded Tibet in 1904 and mandated the signing of a separate treaty directly with the Tibetan government in Lhasa. In 1906, an Anglo-Chinese Convention was signed at Peking between Great Britain and China. It incorporated the 1904 Lhasa Convention (with modification), which was attached as Annex. A treaty between Britain and Russia followed in 1907. Article II of this treaty stated that "In conformity with the admitted principle of the suzerainty of China over Tibet, Great Britain and Russia engage not to enter into negotiations with Tibet except through the intermediary of the Chinese Government." China sent troops into Tibet in 1908. The result of the policy of both Great Britain and Russia has been the virtual annexation of Tibet by China. China controlled Tibet up to 1912. Thereafter, Tibet entered the period described commonly as de facto independence, though it was recognized only by independent Mongolia as enjoying de jure independence.
In the 2000s the position of the Republic of China with regard to Tibet appeared to become more nuanced, as expressed in the opening speech to the International Symposium on Human Rights in Tibet on 8September 2007 by the then ROC President Chen Shui-bian (an advocate of Taiwan independence), who stated that his offices no longer treated exiled Tibetans as Chinese mainlanders.'President Chen Shui-bian's Remarks at the Opening Ceremony of the 2007 International Symposium on Human Rights in Tibet' Sep 8, 2007
Legal arguments based on Tibet's historic status
The position of the People's Republic of China (PRC), which has ruled mainland China since 1949, as well as the official position of the Republic of China (ROC), which ruled mainland China before 1949 and currently controls Taiwan,For the PRC's position, see State Council's whitepaper Tibet – Its Ownership and Human Rights Situation , 1992 and Beijing Review's 100 Question about Tibet , 1989; for the ROC's position, see Government Information Office's online publication is that Tibet has been an indivisible part of China de jure since the Yuan dynasty of Mongol-ruled China in the 13th century,Grunfeld, A. Tom, Reassessing Tibet Policy , 2000 (also in PDF file ) comparable to other states such as the Kingdom of Dali and the Tangut Empire that were also incorporated into China at the time.