Wary of China, Russia says no to Dalai visit

[Markus]

NEW DELHI: In yet another manifestation of China’s might, Russian diplomats have met their Chinese counterparts in Delhi to assure Beijing that Moscow won’t allowthe Dalai Lama to visit Russia "under the present circumstances". Stating that the spiritual leader’s activities had acquired a political tinge, Russian officials said their advice to the Dalai Lama was to improve relations with China and refrain from political activities.

The Russians were pushed into damage-control mode after Beijing was said to have been offended by an alleged remark by Russian ambassador to India Alexander Kadakin that Russia may issue a visa to Dalai Lama. The Chinese, however, had not registered any official protest. The Russian embassy denied that any such remark had been made by the ambassador.

The Russians have attributed the confusion to a "mistake" in the transcript of an interview which Kadakin gave to an agency recently, on a visit to Himachal Pradesh. "The Russian foreign minister has made it clear that Russia treasures strategic partnership with China and has no intention of damaging it. For this reason, Russia’s advice for the Dalai Lama is to improve relations with Beijing and stay away from politics," said a Russian embassy official in Delhi.

"If he chooses to pay a pastoral [religious] visit, there should be no problem. But he will have to look differently on the purpose of his visit first. For now, a visit by the Dalai Lama or a visa for him is out of the question," he added.

According to the Russian embassy, its diplomats have met the Chinese embassy councillor in Delhi to brief him on the Russian position and provide him with the authentic text of Kadakin’s interview.

The Dalai Lama has visited Russia several times, the last one being in 2004, to the traditionally Buddhist dominated areas of Kalmykia near the Caspian Sea. However, with Moscow being excessively keen on building good relations with Beijing, it has since refused to issue visa to the Tibetan leader.

Only last month, Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov criticized Dalai Lama for his "provocative" stand.

Source: Wary of China, Russia says no to Dalai visit - India - The Times of India

 

[Dr.Evil]

Why are the chinese so afraid of the Peace Loving old man - Dalia Lama

He is a great man.

 

[xuxu1457]

Why are the chinese so afraid of the Peace Loving old man - Dalia Lama

He is a great man.

Why are the Indian so afraid of the Peace Loving men - Maoist

They are great men.

 

[Dr.Evil]

Why are the Indian so afraid of the Peace Loving men - Maoist

They are great men.

Maoists are peace loving ? That's a Chinese definition of peace loving.

Maoists who takeup arms and kill people.

 

[xuxu1457]

Maoists are peace loving ? That's a Chinese definition of peace loving.

Maoists who takeup arms and kill people.

Dalai is peace loving ? That's a Indian definition of peace loving too.

Dalai who was a master of slaves 50 years ago.

 

[Dr.Evil]

Dalai is peace loving ? That's a Indian definition of peace loving too.

Dalai who was a master of slaves 50 years ago.

Did he or his followers takeup arms and kill innocent people.

Mao was a butcher and killed many more millions by his stupid cultural revolution.

Mao's followers or Maoists are butchers.

 

[xuxu1457]

Did he or his followers takeup arms and kill innocent people.

Mao was a butcher and killed many more millions by his stupid cultural revolution.

Mao's followers or Maoists are butchers.

Like what Israel did to the rescue fleet,In others eye ,they are Rescue fleet,but In Israel's eye they threaten the safety of Israel;Maoist and Dalai are at the same place ,so put you own focus on your own business~~

 

[Markus]

Why are the Indian so afraid of the Peace Loving men - Maoist

They are great men.

Xuxu - It is an insult to humanity to even compare the Maoists terrorists operating in India with Dalai Lama. It shows that you have no sympathy or remorse to the hundreds of innocent Indian civilians and soldiers killed by the maoists recently.

India is a peace loving country and for us Dalai Lama will always remain "great" in our eyes. We respect him for the path of non-violence that he taken to achieve his goals. We see him having great resemblance with Mahatma Gandhi.

He is "not so great" in Chinese eyes for reasons quite obvious from your posts.

 

[applesauce]

Xuxu - It is an insult to humanity to even compare the Maoists terrorists operating in India with Dalai Lama. It shows that you have no sympathy or remorse to the hundreds of innocent Indian civilians and soldiers killed by the maoists recently.

India is a peace loving country and for us Dalai Lama will always remain "great" in our eyes. We respect him for the path of non-violence that he taken to achieve his goals. We see him having great resemblance with Mahatma Gandhi.

He is "not so great" in Chinese eyes for reasons quite obvious from your posts.

psh the Maoist as you call them are violent yes but the root cause of their existence is the poor and backwards regions of India,

and the Dalai lama peaceful? that's only a lie put up by the western world, facts are he ruled Tibet back at a time when china was weak and he ruled with absolute power much more so than the totalitarian regime in Beijing, not only that when the Chinese "invaded" as the west puts it, he was perfectly happy about it as Beijing at the time did not change the local politics immediately and he thought he could keep all the power in fact there plenty of pictures of him and the Panchen Lama meeting Mao and other Chinese leaders, he certainly wasn't against Chinese rule then. and on to the peaceful part, the dalai lama instigated armed rebellions against Chinese rule after changing his mind about working with the Chinese leaders in Beijing, yes armed rebellions now what part of that makes him so different from the Maoist? both take up arms against who they say is their oppressor. and on top of that our supposed "friends" India, at the time(50's) not only allows the CIA to recruit Tibetan guerrillas from within India to fight the Chinese but also takes in this wanted man and allows him to set up his exiled government in India thus also proving Indian lies about friendship(did i mention the forward policy was happening at the same time?)

and before you say he only wants "autonomy" his idea of autonomy is that Tibet is once again under his thumb and no PLA troops or equipment can be placed in the area and for any Han or other Chinese peoples wishing to move to the area they must explicitly seek his permission of course this he says is all in accordance with Tibetan culture which the Chinese, by opening up the area and building infrastructure and improving livelihood, is destroying.

 

[RobbieS]

psh the Maoist as you call them are violent yes but the root cause of their existence is the poor and backwards regions of India,

and the Dalai lama peaceful? that's only a lie put up by the western world, facts are he ruled Tibet back at a time when china was weak and he ruled with absolute power much more so than the totalitarian regime in Beijing, not only that when the Chinese "invaded" as the west puts it, he was perfectly happy about it as Beijing at the time did not change the local politics immediately and he thought he could keep all the power in fact there plenty of pictures of him and the Panchen Lama meeting Mao and other Chinese leaders, he certainly wasn't against Chinese rule then. and on to the peaceful part, the dalai lama instigated armed rebellions against Chinese rule after changing his mind about working with the Chinese leaders in Beijing, yes armed rebellions now what part of that makes him so different from the Maoist? both take up arms against who they say is their oppressor. and on top of that our supposed "friends" India, at the time(50's) not only allows the CIA to recruit Tibetan guerrillas from within India to fight the Chinese but also takes in this wanted man and allows him to set up his exiled government in India thus also proving Indian lies about friendship(did i mention the forward policy was happening at the same time?)

and before you say he only wants "autonomy" his idea of autonomy is that Tibet is once again under his thumb and no PLA troops or equipment can be placed in the area and for any Han or other Chinese peoples wishing to move to the area they must explicitly seek his permission of course this he says is all in accordance with Tibetan culture which the Chinese, by opening up the area and building infrastructure and improving livelihood, is destroying.

Correct me if I am wrong, but for all this talk about DL ruling Tibet with an iron fist - Wasn't he really a kid when he escaped to India? You mean a kid was responsible for all the tyranny? And even if you were correct, that kid sure has undergone a transformation now that he's revered the world over as a messiah of peace!

 

[applesauce]

Correct me if I am wrong, but for all this talk about DL ruling Tibet with an iron fist - Wasn't he really a kid when he escaped to India? You mean a kid was responsible for all the tyranny? And even if you were correct, that kid sure has undergone a transformation now that he's revered the world over as a messiah of peace!

nope he was about 24 or so in 59' when the rebellion started

and who says a "kid" cant be ruthless?
some are certainly insane and capable of emotionless murder there are police files and examples in every country

and even if i am correct you said he has now changed?
again it is debatable if he's changed or if his status in the west is the product of western media who has never clearly reported what he represents and what he has done in the past.

but again the problem isnt his personality its what he wants for tibet which is absolutely not up for debate to the chinese leaders i have given examples such as no PLA in tibet and basically closing off tibet once more.

and also i have said in his idea of autonomy he would once again be effectively king of Tibet and i make this clear he is no champion of democracy, remember the castes system in india, thats basically what we wants with the priestly order on top and him the leader of that order of course, doesn't sound too much like a man fighting oppression for his people now does he?

and further more the debate about losing Tibetan culture, Tibetans as a minority have much more rights than the Han peoples of china, rules like one-child policy does not apply to them, they still practice their religion in Tibet just fine. and the other complaint is the Han peoples moving in, well its one country after all, on one hand the west complains about the people having no freedom to move about the country yet in this case the hypocrites complain people have too much freedom to move where they want. its not like the Han moving in causes them to be unable to continue their religion not only that they have preferential treatment in getting into universities and getting jobs and you still hear of complains that they cant get equal opportunity from western media well their partially right not equal it is in fact in their favor. and the image western media paints where majority of common Tibetans hate Beijing and worship the dalai lama? that is basically a lie, some of the priestly order sure do worship and follow the dalai lama but the common folks has no problems, why should they they now have money and means to feed them selves and beyond that have opportunities to go elsewhere, to the east perhaps and live a life that would not have been a choice otherwise. and thats the important thing, you hear the chinese government say this but its true and important. the development of tibet has move people out of poverty and improved lives.

 

[jbond197]

^^^
But then now he is not in China and probably won't be travelling to China anytime soon to create any kind of trouble for you so why his travel to any other countries hurt China so much?

China has its own clout and everyone knows it but why you are you spending so much energy running after the country whereever he visits. Do you think he will single-handedly conspire against you by allying with the country he is visiting? The question remains what exactly are your concerns?

 

[Sino-PakFriendship]

I am not anti-Dalai

But Tibet is Chinese nuclear interest!

Arguement is in dead loop.

Because we have common interest.