MWA-Based Dialogue (MWA-D: Social Creativity Strategy

According to SIT (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel & Turner, 1979), intergroup conflict and hostil­ity are embedded in social categorization, that is, in-group versus out-group. Categorizations guide human perceptions and behaviors.

Social creativity can take many forms, including recategorization and creating super­ordinate goals (Cuhadar & Dayton, 2011). According to classic experiments such as the Robber’s Cave Experiment (Sherif, 1966), when conflicting groups were provided with superordinate goals, they were able to reduce intergroup hostility and foster intergroup harmony. The MWA provides superordinate goals for Tibet and China to work together harmoniously. Inspired by Nagarjuna’s MWA- P, MWA-D seeks a genuine autonomy for all of Tibet within the federation of the PRC. It is a creative strategy of working with the PRC, not against it. This middle way solution is free of the two extremes or hard-line positions, namely, Tibetan independence and current sta­tus of Tibet (see Table 26.2). Explicitly stated, the superordinate goals concern the territorial integrity and security of the PRC and unique civilization of the Tibetan nationality. From a conflict resolution perspective, MWA-D has the elements of win-win approach because it is not based on intergroup categorization of us versus them. MWA-D does not seek Tibetan independence that perpetuates Sino- Tibetan intergroup hostility. Instead, it seeks genuine autonomy within the PRC that col­lapses intergroup boundaries to become one nation. Importantly, this recategorization can change the dynamics of Sino-Tibetan relation­ship and interaction.

MWA-D has the potential to resolve Sino- Tibetan conflict that has persisted for several decades. From an intergroup perspective, both China and Tibet will gain much from resolv­ing their conflict. Despite its economic power and military might, the PRC presently lacks legitimacy for their claim over Tibet in the international arena. Tibetans willingly joining the PRC will resolve their most important con­cerns relating to territorial integrity, national security, legitimacy of rule, and harmony. PRC will also gain high moral standing in the international arena that is crucial to becoming a super power nation. As for the Tibetans, by sacrificing their political requirements, they are expected to gain economic boost that matches their needs and freedom to preserve their unique civilization.

Culturally stated, Tibetans across the land of Tibet from Kham (Eastern Province) to Amdo (Northeastern Province) to U-Tsang (Central Province) speak Tibetan, wear Chuba (traditional dress), eat Tsampa (roasted barley flour), and largely follow Buddhism and Bon. Lhasa, the Capital City, is regarded as the spiritual apex of Tibetan Buddhists. From a social iden­tity perspective, these deeply shared group characteristics define Tibetan identity and civilization (Dorjee, 2006; Dorjee & Giles, 2009). In light of this, the memorandum seeks a single Tibetan administrative unit that oversees all the provinces of Tibet to preserve and further their unique civiliza­tion (Laird, 2006; Shakabpa, 1967; Stein, 1972). As things stand now, unlike other major minority nationals (i.e., Uyghurs and Mongols), Tibet is administered by the PRC under the divide and rule policy—most of the eastern and northeastern Tibetan prov­inces are included in Chinese provinces such as Sichuan (Dorjee, 2006).

For the most part, the memorandum specifies Tibetan aspirations and competen­cies in maintaining and promoting vari­ous aspects of their culture and civilization such as Tibetan religious traditions, educa­tion, health, and environmental protection.

In collaboration with the PRC, Tibetans want to design and implement policies that serve their needs in different areas such as education and health. The Tibetan diaspora have tremendous experiences in developing and implementing comprehensive traditional and modern education and health systems (Dorjee, 2006; Dorjee, & Giles, 2009). In the area of education, Tibetan children in Indian diaspora receive both Tibetan and modern education. Most educated Tibetans in Indian diaspora could write in and speak three lan­guages such as Tibetan, English, and Hindi. While respecting Chinese as the national lan­guage, Tibetans wanted to promote Tibetan language in Tibet. To further Tibetan lan­guage, CTA has recently developed a Tibetan system of education (Dorjee et al., 2011) that firmly grounds the young Tibetan generation in learning Tibetan language and culture. Genuine autonomy will enable Tibetans to design a comprehensive system, in collabora­tion with the PRC, responsive to the unique needs and conditions of the Tibetan people and region. For example, the Tibetan dias­pora in India has set up both traditional (e.g., Tibetan-Astro Medical Institute) and modern hospitals (e.g., Delek Hospital) to care for Tibetan and other patients’ medical needs. Tibetans can also use their traditional and modern methods to preserve their environ­ment, especially water resources that are essential to the survival of millions of people in Tibet, India, China, Vietnam, Thailand, and Cambodia.

Despite the win-win approach of the MWA-M, the PRC simply rejected the Tibetan memorandum alleging that it called for Tibetan independence, semi-independence or independence, in disguised form. At the ninth round of talk, to alleviate their doubts and misunderstanding, Tibetan envoys pre­sented to their counterparts the “Note on the Memorandum on Genuine Autonomy for the Tibetan People.” Its introduction reiterates that Tibetans are not seeking independence and separation but genuine autonomy within the federation of PRC following its principles on autonomy. Then, it clarifies the six com­petencies relating to the main concerns of the PRC and the Tibetans (see Sino-Tibetan dialogues at www.tibet.net).

From an intergroup perspective, the PRC’s main concerns are focused on status quo maintenance, but the Tibetans’ main concerns are focused on their sociocultural identity/ies maintenance (see Harwood & Giles, 2005). While acknowledging the PRC’s leadership, socialist system, the hierarchical structure of the Central Government and its national defense capability, and Chinese as the national language, Tibetans want to be the “masters of their own affairs.” Based on the PRC’s con­stitutional principles on autonomy, Tibetans want a single administration for all of Tibet to exercise genuine autonomy to protect and promote their culture and spiritual values. Previously, Premier Zhou Enlai, Vice Premier Chen Yi, and Party Secretary Hu Yaobang supported such a consideration. As things stand now, Tibet is administered under many autonomous regions and prefectures. Given their specific competencies, Tibetans want to govern themselves in a wide range of areas such as education, health, religion, and envi­ronment in collaboration with the Central Government and its organs. The Tibetan diaspora in India, as discussed previously, has demonstrated exemplary achievements in many of these areas integrating both the

Tibetan and modern fields of knowledge and practices. The PRC reacted negatively to the Note as they did with the MWA-M.