The United States and China in Power Transition - Strategic Studies ...

equivocally that he does not seek separation or independence
of Tibet from China; he respects the Chinese
constitution; he does not challenge the leadership of
the CCP, the PRC central government, and its socialist
system. 190
Chinese officials, however, are unreasonable.
They have shown their “historical limitations” (历史
局限性) in their peremptory dealings with the Dalai
Lama. Chinese officials see that the Dalai Lama’s proposed
highly-autonomous Tibet is nothing more than
a state in a federalist system like that of the United
States. They accuse the Dalai Lama of attempting to
undermine the Chinese political system. The Chinese
leaders are unfortunately still stuck in the mindset of
China’s outdated tradition of “central dictatorship”
(中央集权). They dogmatically refuse to accept that as
China’s economic and political changes continue, the
CCP and Chinese government will have to become
more democratic and decentralized eventually; and a
key change will be that China’s provinces and cities
will have governors and mayors chosen by the people
from below but not appointed by the central government
from above. When that change takes place,
China’s provinces and cities will become more autonomous,
although they may not be as independent
as U.S. states and cities. The Dalai Lama’s proposal
is right on target. But the tragedy is that he is ahead
of the Chinese leaders in embracing democracy, and
his proposal for a highly-autonomous Tibet comes at
a wrong time and at a wrong place. In China, unfortunately,
it is still a crime just to advocate these ideas.
Chinese officials are also unreasonable in the way
that they do not even seem to care that the Dalai Lama
could pass away eventually and his leaving could
create a whole host of new issues that would further
167