Editorial: Cheers but No Warmth
…in the backdrop of Obama and Oterio’s remarks and the fact that the Dalai Lama’s ‘greater Tibet’ involves a considerable undisputed Chinese territory, a very calculated, careful US position can be read on the issue: it disapproves of Dalai’s ‘greater Tibet’, believes in his right to move anywhere as spiritual leader, and says nothing definitively about Tibet…
Hearing President Barack Obama admit Tibet as a part of China isn’t surprising. We highly expected this line of strategy when US Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs Maria Otero hinted at Tibet being one of the key issue of discussion between Obama and his Chinese counterpart Hu Jintao during the American President’s visit. Making US stand clear before the Dalai Lama’s visit to Tawang amid Chinese protest, Otero had then said that Dalai can, of course, travel anywhere to carry out the role of spiritual leader. Notably, Obama has favoured early resumption of dialogue between the Dalai Lama’s representatives and Beijing. In the backdrop of all this and the fact that the Dalai Lama’s ‘greater Tibet’ involves a considerable undisputed Chinese territory, a very calculated, careful US position can be read on the issue: it disapproves of Dalai’s ‘greater Tibet’, believes in his right to move anywhere as spiritual leader, and says nothing definitively about Tibet. In short, Obama has preferred not to take sides, something that might have gone unnoticed.
Last month when no meeting took place between Obama and the spiritual leader during latter’s visit to the US – an unprecedented event – and when Obama clarified yesterday that the US isn’t going to contain China, Obama seemed unduly favouring China while taking quite balanced stand though. The cheers in Beijing confirm that he is driving US interest in correct direction. And it is these cheers that point that even a neutral US position has a force of going in Beijing’s favour. The position that the US doesn’t seek to impose any system of government on any other nation is no less American allowance to the communist country, especially when it’s busy heralding democracy in certain parts of the world.
Obama’s concession to China is fathomable. And it goes beyond the popular conception that Beijing is a needed ally for the US at the time of recession. Washington has other objectives on its priority list, too. Washington would like climate change talks in Copenhagen next month to end with success, an ‘immediate operational success’ as Obama puts it. It’s not possible without India and China agreeing to present conditions. If Obama could appease China enough to agree on climate change agreement, New Delhi can be forced to fall in line. Furthermore, China’s undervalued currency yuan is a matter of concern for Obama administration which it wants Beijing to raise to make Chinese exports relatively more expensive. To dismay of the US, China wouldn’t budge an inch on its position of climate change and Jintao has already shown cold shoulders to raise the currency. It’s quite riveting that the US recognizes rising Chinese clout and shows a noticeable degree of submission, but Beijing has not greeted the Washington with the same enthusiasm and warmth. Perhaps, Beijing understands Obama administration’s policy to the core.
