Riporto l’articolo con cui “Payul” ha dato ieri la notizia.

PV

TYC re-elects President Tsewang Rigzin for second term

Phayul[Sunday, August 08, 2010 21:02]

By Phurbu Thinley

DHaramsala, August 8: Tsewang Rigzin was on Sunday re-elected as president of the Tibetan Youth Congress for the second consecutive term here at the concluding day of its 14th General Body Meeting.

Heading TYC since September 2007, Mr Tsewang’s new term will now extend through August 2013. He served as the president of the Portland/Vancouver regional chapter of the TYC before first being elected as the president of the TYC during its 13th GBM in 2007.

“As the newly elected president of the Tibetan Youth Congress I once again want to declare and reiterate my unyielding faith in the restoration of Tibet’s lost independence,” Mr Tsewang said in delivering his acceptance speech.

“In working for the cause of Tibet, we must not and cannot afford to forget the supreme sacrifices being made by brave Tibetans inside Tibet,” he said.

Founded in 1970, the Tibetan Youth Congress is the largest NGO in the exile Tibetan community seeking complete independence for Tibet, a radical position opposed to the ‘Middle Way’ approach as proposed by the Dalai Lama and adopted as an official policy by the Tibetan Government-in-Exile.

Mr Tsewang also repeatedly appealed members both at the central and regional levels to continue to show resolute determination and sincerity to work towards the cause of Tibet and its people.

“It is my earnest appeal here today to all the members not to let partisan feelings and individual differences to come in the way of organisation’s larger goal of regaining Tibet’s independence,” he said.

Describing TYC as an indispensable organisation for the Tibetan freedom struggle, Mr Tsewang said its members must not fail the trust and confidence placed by so many Tibetans both in and outside Tibet in the organisation’s work.

His appeal echoes the rifts that have surfaced within the working of the organization’s central executive members, both during the previous and current executive body.

Elected for a term of three years, the executive body, called the Central Executive Committee (CENTREX), supervises the entire functioning of TYC, provides guidance to the ‘Regional Working Committees’ and represents TYC in all national and international forums.

Over 170 executive members from 47 regional chapters based in Bhutan, India and Nepal, and members representing chapters in United States, Canada, Taiwan and Europe took part in the seven-day general body meeting, which began on August 2.

The GBM is the highest decision making body of TYC. The body elects not less than ten members for the central executive body.

Mr Tsewang and his newly elected team members will begin their new term next month.

Dhondup Lhadar, who is curretnly serving as the organisation’s general secretary, was elected to serve as the new Vice President in the next executive body. Tenzin Choekyi, a former TCY CENTREX member and a member of Dharamsala RTYC, was declared elected as the new General Secretary.

The General Body Meeting also re-elected Tenzin Norsang, Tenzin Yangzom, Penpa Tsering and Kunchok Yamphel, who are currently serving as the organisation’s Joint Secretary, Secretary for International Affairs, Organisation Secretary and Public Relation Officer respectively.

Tenzin Dolma of Delhi RTYC, Yeshi Tharchen of Deckyi Ling (Dehradun) RTYC, and Jigme of Varanasi RTYC are other newly elected CENTREX members.

The CENTREX members are normally required to work in TYC’s head office based here in Dharamsala, the seat of the Tibetan Government in Exile and hometown of the exiled Tibetan leader, the Dalai Lama.

PV

Seven Deadly Misrepresentations

By Tenpa Gapshi

1) Rangzen advocates and the rangzen movement is the cause of the division within the Tibetan society

That is a huge misconception and unfortunately a common mistake. First of all, I don’t really see a divide in our community as the word might usually insinuate and as one would expect from two fundamentally divergent points of views. And the reason why there isn’t much animosity other than the usual deprecation of each other’s position is the exalted position of Kundun who not only commands the love and respect of all people concerned but also the unquestioning trust that he is doing it with the purest intention. Yet another factor is the general consensus that most people still support the Rangzen movement but owing to their reverence for Kundun, and more importantly, out of faith in Kundun, they dare not disagree publicly. Now coming back to the question of the cause for this ‘divide’ within our movement, one only needs to go back to declaration of Independence on June 20th, 1959 at the border by the then Kashag overseen by H.H the 14th Dalai lama and the subsequent 30 years of Tibetan government’s official stance to throw some light on this dubious claim. Rangzen had been, and rightfully so, the official position of TGIE from the very beginning and there was no ‘division’ within the Tibetan people at that time, at least not on that front. It was only in 1987 with the introduction of the five-point peace proposal and the subsequent Strasbourg Proposal when the Tibetan movement started having two very divergent approaches. Of course, five-point peace proposal was followed by a slew of equally bizarre sounding terms such as ‘Zone of Ahimsa’, ‘Genuine Autonomy’, ‘Meaningful Autonomy’ and so and so forth as if changing the words around would make the difference. Be that as it may, coming back to the assertion at hand, in a logical sequence of things, Middle-path philosophy is the one which created the ‘division’ in the Tibetan movement and thereby Rangzen proponents, having never strayed from the original path cannot be guilty of the charge.

2) Rangzen is a fool’s dream and Middle-path at least has a shot

In all honesty, more than anything, I would say Middle-path approach created confusion and total lack of direction, in fact creating total apathy for the movement itself. Its main focus seem to be to appease china at any cost without regard for historical facts, logic, or current reality and instead end up muzzling our own movement, disorienting our youth, blacklisting our intellectuals, and blaming the failure of their policies on Rangzen advocates. If only we hadn’t insulted this and that Chinese dignitary and if only we hadn’t demonstrated during the Olympics, we would have found a much more receptive audience in China which will somehow translate into more meaningful dialogue and better understanding between the parties. Eight fruitless talks, needless felicitations, embarrassing pronouncements from our exalted offices and we are still in the quagmire that we started from and China has barely moved an inch or rather they have regressed now that TGIE has legitimized their claim over Tibet. It should be quite evident now that they have no reason or the intention to resolve anything in Tibet and they would be just happy to keep up the charade while bidding their sweet time until H.H passes away and then as far as they are concerned, the issue of Tibet is effectively nullified. No amount of obsequiousness and kowtowing will result in them granting us any special status within China because they know as long as the people of Tibet exist as a separate race and entity, the Tibet issue will never be resolved and China will never have legitimacy over Tibet. They will only be satisfied when Tibet becomes like Manchuria, fully occupied by Han nationals and totally dominated in every aspect of life and identity. This dream of having an autonomous Tibetan area with Tibetan majority is just a dream, much like Rangzen might appear to Middle-Pathers. So, if both paths are dreams, why not dream bigger where you wouldn’t have to lie, wouldn’t have to cringe every time our Prime Minister mentions Tibet as an internal matter of China, and we would at least have dignity and the unity of Tibetan people.

3) Living under China is actually beneficial to us

Now this is a spurious claim which seem to be a natural offshoot of the Middle Path stance where you have already decided Middle-way is the correct course and now are simply engaged in superfluous attempts at trying to spruce up poetic reasons for the merits of the predetermined position and thereby end up making bizarre and illogical claims almost to the point of absurdity. Living under China is beneficial to us? How is that working for us so far? Is this part of the same myth some clever pundits once espoused that once we increase trade relations with China, and the living standards of the Chinese people improve, they will have no choice but to open up the country to democratic ideals. Now, instead of a contained China, we have a more organized dragon with the proverbial tight financial hold on the world’s economic balls. Most people who hold this view seems to think it is a revolutionary idea and we would be somehow hoodwinking China into elevating our nation too. Wait, that would not be our nation anymore, it would be the Chinese nation. We would share in the natural might of a world power, have a permanent seat in the exclusive security council, and be a nation to be reckoned with. Not only that, we would be also affixing our chupa sashes on this financial windfall and catapulting ourselves in their meteorite ascent, all the while trying to hold on to our braided hair. They will also point that the world is getting smaller and smaller and it is an interdependent world and no nation is free to make independent decisions without adversely affecting itself. Europe has formed its own union to compete in the world economy and it only makes sense that such amalgamation would be the norm rather than the exception in the future and we would be simply evolving in that direction in a sense. From a distance, it sounds almost inviting, doesn’t it? Almost like a Utopian concoction where the benign and brotherly assistance from China would catapult Tibet from the feudalistic nightmare into an egalitarian society of mutual respect and cooperation. Where did I hear this before? Oh, that’s right, isn’t this what China has been saying for the last 50 years and we are still oppressed in our own nation and slowly edged out to the fringes of the great egalitarian Chinese society, to the quaint corner of our own cities by Chinese migrants fully backed the Chinese government, relocated to bunkers from the our beloved green pastures and open fields. What most of these geniuses fail to observe is the first clause of that argument which is that it is not one of free will but rather of one nation forceful and brutal occupation of another and the continued oppression of the indigenous people with the ruthless abandon of the Nazi. This particular argument is akin to saying as long as you are getting raped why not try at least to enjoy it. Sometimes, we tend to get too carried away in our earnestness to please, to be the best noblest harmless race on the planet, which we unintentionally end up exhibiting Stockholm syndrome of the acute kind.

4) Tibetans can’t compete in the global economy

This is yet another tickle-down logic which directly stems from the belief that we would be much better off under China due to its economic might and moreover Tibetans are not educated enough, not savvy enough, and not mature enough to handle trade and commerce. If you wait long enough, you will come to realize this is the same arguments used for not granting full democracy to the exile populace. Interesting, isn’t it? First question is why? Why do we have to compete at all? And even if we did compete, why do we have to measure ourselves with mighty nations like China, US, Europe and India? Why can’t we consider ourselves successful for at least having a nation to live in freely, practice whatever religion one desires, pray to any god or gods you wish, and not have to languish in prisons for having the audacity to ask for one’s basic fundamental rights as a people and as a nation. Bhutan is enjoying its gross domestic happiness. Small Tiny nations all enjoy corresponding and resplendent economy based on its natural resources. Tibet has a vast amount of natural resources that is much more than a little country like us needs; we have a huge tourism capacity that alone could more than fill the national coffers. Now add to that, if we declare our country as a zone of peace, conservation, and harmony, we not only have created a sustainable future for our people but for all of humanity. And that is not too hard to do because we have been doing that well way before it became trendy in the 20th century. But the main issue isn’t really that, now, is it? The issue is that we don’t have any confidence or faith in our own abilities and in that of our own people. We are so battered down, been harangued all our lives about what we cannot achieved, been told that we do not deserve to same rights as other people due to the famous and invisible red R in the middle of our foreheads, that we naturally assume it must be true for all Tibetans. Tibetans are natural businessmen and we have a pretty good record of trading with our neighbors like India, Nepal, Bhutan, and China and in any case we wouldn’t have survived without trade. What I am saying is this, we will learn what needs to be learnt and we will become successful in business and trade too. We don’t have to be the best, we just need to hold our own and of that I am very confident in our people.

5) We have a democratic Government

No, we don’t. We have something that resembles a democracy but is not really one in actuality. We cannot have a democracy without a party system. This partyless democracy is really a guise of one party controlling the major decisions and letting people fetter around in a pretend democracy. In such a system, there is nobody to take the initiative on major issues nor another to keep it honest. That would explain why there is such disconnect with the leadership and the populace and most of time all we can do is just throw our hands in the air in bewilderment. We still have some people with two votes and that in itself is a mockery of democratic ideals. It is very basic. That is probably the reason why I can’t seem to be able to make up my mind about the Kalon Tripa election. I don’t deny that what we have right now is much better than what we used to have and is a major step up. But Jamyang Norbu has already written an extensive piece on exile democracy and I don’t have anything extra to add onto that and direct people to peruse his excellent articles on his blog. Although, I must say that on this front, most do agree that we do not have a full functioning democracy at this stage, BUT, here comes caveat, we are not ready for it. It would create discord and disunity in exile that is not going to help our cause. I don’t see how that would be any more damaging than giving up our rightful case for an independent country. There is nothing we can do at this point that is going to screw it up any worse. And who decides when we are ready for democracy? If history has taught us anything, it is that once an institution or a group is in power, they are very, very reluctant to let it go. Moreover, wouldn’t the exile society be the perfect place to really experiment with real democracy? We don’t have to worry about a real state with its various headaches such as military, public safety, national economy, infrastructures etc. and can safely experiment with this ‘new’ system in incubation? This would actually be a perfect place to test it out while Kundun is still alive and he will be there to do a reset if need be. Moreover, I believe, with respect to provincial representation, party system will systematically allow people to group according to ideas rather their locality and although that won’t guarantee an amicable relationship, it would at least take us away from our age-old rivalry and that would be an improvement.

6) Religion and politic mixture is unique and good

If it was so unique and good, what are we doing in exile? Nobody wants to ask this question. It is the confluence of religion and politics that naturally made us vulnerable in the first place. It resulted in closing our society to the outside world and putting it in suspended growth and then having to wake up to the rude realities of the modern world. There is a reason why all democracies are adamantly against the involvement of the church in the political arena. Look at the history of Europe and the involvement of the church in the Middle Ages if you desire to get a glimpse of it and look at the current states with religious heads in power like Iran to understand what it does to a society. Our own history with Buddhism, although not as gory and tyrannical as was practiced in some other faith, hasn’t been pretty either, with suppression of Bon, inter-faith scuffles settled with the use of foreign powers, effete governments which rely on the God to make the decisions, opportunistic regents and the political stagnation resulting from the demise of one head to the discovery of the next reincarnation and the subsequent grooming needed to be deemed ready to head the nation. Many unfortunate accidents have happened even to Dalai lamas who drew the ire of incumbent warlords or who just happened to put a damper on the ambitions of power to be. The wheels of monastic power were so absolute even the great 13th couldn’t do much to improve it during his time and as soon as he passed away, everything reverted to the same old ways. We already have two Panchen Lamas and we are heading toward a future with two Dalai Lamas. With the Chinese propaganda machinery at work and the willingness of the western nations to suspend their beliefs for trade and our own inherent weakness for not making a scene, that future is almost a foregone conclusion. The only way to effectively nullify the two prong Chinese attack is to remove the target altogether. If Kundun completely separates the Church from the secular activities while he is alive and effectively passes the torch to the secular government, China would no longer have the political punch behind the appointment of the next Dalai Lama. That is not to say Kundun would not be a mainstay in Tibetan way of life as that would be impossible and ultimately I believe it would prove to be spiritually beneficial too as it would no longer have to be dragged into the dirty streets of politics. I am not saying the introduction of Buddhism was bad or that it didn’t do anything useful for our nation. Nothing of the kind. I honestly think Tibet provided the perfect place for the complete teaching of lord Buddha to be preserved and the natural harshness and desolateness of the plateau provided the cocoon that it desperately needed. But the degree to which it consumed the whole nation and the resultant shunning of the material world, be it in scientific endeavors, research and keeping abreast of the political development, scientific breakthroughs, military strategy, etc, led the Tibetan nation to the state that it is in today. Religion must be separated from politics to save both the nation and the peerless teachings of the Buddha.

7) Ngabo is a patriot

If Ngabo is a patriot, then Hitler is a misunderstood bully. I know this topic has been beaten to death, resurrected, and then beaten to death again, but I needed one more point to make it seven and in any case, I just can’t let this go. I know most people, across the board, whatever their political affiliation, don’t really believe that he is a patriot. Although, some of the creative ones once again try to muddy the water by appealing to the sensible side of you and wonder if we really know everything about Ngabo. There might be some things he might have secretly done which only the highest of the highest officials in TGIE are privy to and we shouldn’t rush to label somebody this or that. In any case, he is shoved aside as a pathetic person of no importance and we are better of not talking about him. I would be fine to do just that if not for the proclamation from the highest office of TGIE that he is a bona fide patriot. That rightfully drew scorns from many intellectuals, both Tibetan and long time non-Tibetan Tibet advocates, that it wasn’t a pretty picture on the blogs and Internet. What education is supposed to do at first is teach you how to think, analyze the evidence, and come to an informed position. Most of the time, you do not have all the facts nor do you need it as it would be just redundant. Some people seem to be struck playing the devil’s advocate in perpetuity and although it is useful in the beginning, it becomes a vicious logical loop in itself and does not lead to independent thinking and the objective end up not about determining the truth anymore but to create an alternate position to everything. And moreover, having formed an opinion, you should be willing to consider other pertinent facts and evidence that hasn’t been divulged yet. I don’t need to go into details as to why I think he is a traitor as there have been extensive write-up on this subject and as of now, there have been no official explanations as to why he is considered a patriot against such overwhelming evidence to the contrary. That should be a big tell tale sign. It is clear to everyone, such bizarre declaration from TGIE, is yet another obsequious gesture, yet another medieval tongue-out head-scratching routine, which as usual, gets no acknowledgement or kudos from the Chinese government.

These are some of the thoughts running through my head and are deliberately brief and by no means attempt to suggest a scholarly presentation. Any criticisms, affirmations, or other overlooked ideas will be most welcomed and appreciated. I also wanted to squash two other ancillary misrepresentations that couldn’t fit with the other Seven. One is that Chinese media will use such essays (I highly doubt mine will fit the bill but they have been using Jamyang Norbu quite a bit) and point out that Exile community is fractured and not democratic. I say their communist thuggery type of governance is a total joke and is similar to a blind criticizing someone who only has nearsightedness. Besides, the very fact that we can openly write about our disagreements show that we are far more progressed than they can ever dream of. Another one is the annoying proclamation that if you are against Middle Way then you are automatically against Kundun. That is a vicious statement and a hurtful one. Just because we disagree on some of the points doesn’t make Rangzen supporters against Kundun. There are many bright and energetic young Tibetans, especially in various NGOs, who love and respect his holiness but still support the Rangzen movement. I would like to think of it more like a disagreement between parents and offspring where love, respect, and gratitude for Kundun shall never diminish. Bod Gyalo!

Anything less than Independence… niente di meno della completa indipendenza. Da questa parola d’ordine potrebbe ripartire la lotta per la libertà del Tibet. Speriamo venga accolta.

P.V.

To Ms Nirupama Rao Foreign Secretary, Government of India

Your Excellency,

We are a group of young Tibetan artists, intellectuals, writers, translators and activists living in Dharamsala. Some of us are born and raised in India while others have escaped from Tibet and since then living on this side of the Himalayas. We welcome you to Dharamsala as you arrive with the fresh rain of monsoon.

When Tibetans first sought asylum in India following the footsteps of our leader His Holiness the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan freedom struggle was in its formative phase; there was neither the international awareness nor was there political education and understanding within the Tibetan community. It was the kindness of India and her people who opened the doors of their homes to us and we made it our second home.

Today, after 50 years of being in exile, Tibetan youngsters grow up in India like most young Indians with modern education and outlook, but we are always aware of our identity and responsibilities towards our struggle and our leader His Holiness the Dalai Lama. It is partly because of India’s support to our cause that the Tibetan struggle not only survived the difficult period but got resurrected to this level of international awareness and confidence within the struggle. We are grateful to the government and people of India. Please accept our deepest gratitude.

The Tibetan struggle is not just to find a temporary arrangement for the exile Tibetans to return home, but to seek a long-term interest for the survival of the Tibetan people and the nation. And therefore whatever may be the policies being held by His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the exile government; we believe very strongly that the goal of the struggle cannot be anything less than Independence. Only an independent Tibet can guarantee the survival of the Tibetan people, our culture and the nation. The 2008 uprising in Tibet is a clear public mandate that the Tibetans in Tibet are willing to even die, but not live under Chinese colonial rule.

We understand that His Holiness the Dalai Lama – the Buddha that he is – is guided by his universal concern and therefore he has not been insistent for the independence of Tibet, and the exile government’s policy seeking autonomy within China is bound by its relationship with the Government of India which still supports the One China policy.

The difference in the political stands between His Holiness and us doesn’t divide us on our principled belief in Nonviolence. The Tibetan freedom struggle is based on the Buddhist principles of nonviolence, and when we hit the streets with our direct action campaigns we are inspired by Mahatma Gandhi’s Satyagraha.

We understand that the Government of India is dealing with People’s Republic of China as a neighbour today. We are also aware that the Indian government still holds its decades old policy on Tibet saying: “Autonomous Region of Tibet is a part of the People’s Republic of China”, and that has not been reviewed all these time while there is a mounting Chinese military, political and environmental pressures on India.

Between the 1947 founding of Indian independence and 1949 Chinese invasion of Tibet, India and Tibet shared two years of friendly relationship as independent nations. So long as China continues its occupation of Tibet India will never be able to solve its border issues amicably with China. Therefore we urge you to take this petition to the Government of India - our plea for a review of India’s policy towards Tibet. Only by recognizing the historical independence of Tibet – with whom the Himalayan borders were decided through bilateral treaties – can India validate its legal and historical claim over its Himalayan states which have been challenged time and again by the People’s Republic of China.

We the younger generation Tibetans see in India a significant role she can play in re-establishing the independence of Tibet and maintain a brotherly relationship with future Tibet.

We wish you a very pleasant stay in Dharamsala.

Namaste

Tenzin Tsundue

Lukar Jam

Shingza Rinpoche

Lobsang Yeshi

Lungrik Gyal

Phuntsok Wangchuk

Karma Sichoe

Tenzin Choeying

Karma Choekyi

Tenzin Choedon

Tenzin Chokey

Buchung D Sonam

Tenzin Nyinje

Namlo Yak

Yungdrung Tsering

Tenzin Norkey

Tseten Gya

Zung Zhuk Kyi

Drukbey

Pema Choedon

Kalsang Rinchen

Riprendo, dal sito di “Rangzen Alliance” (www.rangzen.net), questo interessante ed approfondito articolo di Christophe Besuchet sulla questione tibetana. L’autore è da oltre 30 impegnato a sostenere la causa dell’indipendenza del Tibet, è stato l’editore della rivista Lungta, uno dei fondatori del Tibet Support Group, Switzerland e, dal 1994 al 1999, ha collaborato all’Amnye Machen Institute di Dharamsala. Attualmente è il vicepresidente della sezione Svizzera di “Rangzen Alliance”.

I temi toccati da Christophe, di cui anche io e molti dei partecipanti a questo blog abbiamo più volte discusso, sono di estrema attualità nel delicatissimo momento storico che sta attraversando la vicenda tibetana. In modo particolare oggi che siamo in pratica alla vigilia dell’elezione del nuovo primo ministro del governo tibetano in esilio, vale a dire un appuntamento realmente fondamentale per l’universo della diaspora.

Spero che gli amici che frequentano questo sito non mancheranno di intervenire su quanto scrive Christophe Besuchet nell’articolo che segue.

PV

Engaging in selective hearing

By Christophe Besuchet

The Rangzen Alliance (www.rangzen.net)

July 3, 2010

With Dharamshala’s foreign policy being shaped almost exclusively by Beijing’s hide-and-seek strategy, anticipating its next move can be safely done through a simple reading of China’s public statements. One of these was made in early June in Oslo and most likely will be regarded as a “key” announcement by the Tibetan government-in-exile. It came from the new Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Fu Ying, who declared during a lecture on China’s development at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs that the door for Tibet talks always was open and that there was sincerity from the Chinese side to continue the dialogue.

What is doubly interesting about Fu’s statement — or troubling, depending on your perspective — is the coincidence: not only did it happen on the exact day the Task Force was meeting in Dharamshala for the twenty-second time,[1] but also during a three-day visit to Norway by Penpa Tsering, the Speaker of the Tibetan Parliament-in-exile, who attended Fu Ying’s lecture.

Considering how enthusiastic Dharamshala is about any “positive” signs sent by the Chinese regime, the Vice Foreign Minister’s declaration must come as a relief. This at least is what came out from Penpa Tsering, who met Fu Ying after the lecture. According to him, she seemed to be “sincere” and her move “could be a possible positive shift” to continue the dialogue.[2]

Personally, I find it tragic that after twenty-two years of fiasco, there still could be some Tibetan leaders and officials who believe in Beijing’s “sincerity” and desire for talks. After all, everything has proved them wrong. What frightens me the most is that these advocates of a dialogue gradually have become completely hermetic to alternate advice, no matter where it comes from. Their stubbornness now is proportional to their failures; the more Beijing shatters their hope, the more they are convinced of its values.

Indeed, for some time, the Tibetan government-in-exile seems to have chosen to disregard advice and opinions that it itself had asked for. As a reminder, in November 2008, the Dalai Lama called for a special meeting “to understand the real opinions and views of the Tibetan people.”[3] Although the vast majority of opinions gathered from Tibetan communities abroad were in favor of following the Dalai Lama’s guidance, the final recommendations presented by the delegates insisted on a specific validity point: to “stop sending envoys and to pursue complete independence or self-determination if no result comes out in the near future.”[4] Now, I don’t want to sound sarcastic, but I’ve heard this “near future” stuff just too many times in my twenty-five year involvement with Tibet’s struggle for independence; I tend to find it rather nauseating.

Then, nine months after this special meeting, a Sino-Tibetan Conference was held in Geneva under the auspices of the International Fellowship of Reconciliation. This time, the Tibetan government-in-exile wanted to get the opinion of the Chinese intelligentsia. Though the conference echoed discordant opinions and included some pro-independence Chinese intellectuals such as Cao Changqing, author of “Tibetan People’s Right to Independence,”[5] only one Chinese speech was made available on the conference’s web site. This was a lecture from Yan Jiaqi, probably the Dalai Lama’s best Chinese friend. Yan Jiaqi was the former political advisor of Zhao Ziyang during the 1980s and was one of the leading intellectuals supporting the student movement in 1989. Now, guess what Yan Jiaqi had to advise? That “representatives and delegations should no longer be dispatched for further negotiations.”[6]

So, what are we supposed to make of Dharamshala’s deaf ear? In terms of political choices, it is most disturbing that “positive signs” from a brutal regime that never bothered to keep its word are given more considerations than the true aspirations of the Tibetan people or, for that matter, the advice of a high-ranking Chinese advisor with a solid insider’s experience. Why the hell did Dharamshala call these people if their opinions have no value?

But, beyond delegates’ recommendations and intellectuals’ advice, in fact beyond anything else, the Tibetan government-in-exile should seriously reconsider the true aspirations of the Tibetan people. Despite the fact that much has been undertaken to tailor and manipulate public opinion and give a semblance of support for the Dalai Lama’s policy, the picture is pretty clear: for most Tibetans, in occupied Tibet or in exile, the Middle Way is a dead end that benefits only Beijing.

For many years now, in addition to being forced to witness the disgraceful surrender and dismantling of their nation, the Tibetan people also have been sternly instructed to strive toward a “conductive atmosphere for negotiations” and to refrain from any anti-Chinese activities, with the declared intention of showing “the world that all Tibetans can stand united when it comes to our fundamental cause.”[7]

Naturally, these measures have infuriated many people, especially when the Prime Minister made an appeal in October 2002 urging Tibetans and Tibet supporters not to demonstrate during Jiang Zemin’s visit to the United States,[8] a call reiterated in April 2006 for Hu Jintao’s visit.[9] Other attempts were made by the Dalai Lama to tame public opinion, such as appeals not to demonstrate against the Olympic Games and the Torch Relay, or not to proceed with the March to Tibet, but to no avail; much to the chagrin of the Tibetan leadership, ordinary Tibetans refused to pay attention to these pleas and demonstrated by thousands all over the world.

In fact, right from the beginning, the Tibetan people showed little support — and even less enthusiasm — for the Dalai ai Lama’s efforts toward a reconciliation with China. In the late 1970s, long before the disastrous Strasbourg Proposal was issued, long before this surrendering policy was referred to as the “Middle Way Approach,” the rapprochement aimed by Dharamshala already had been heavily condemned by Tibetan intellectuals and activists.

By 2005, however, grassroots discontent became so widespread and embarrassing that the Tibetan government decided to launch a “massive public awareness campaign on the Middle-Way Approach of His Holiness the Dalai Lama”. Not surprisingly and to avoid any form of real debate, Prime Minister Prof. Samdhong insisted on reminding everyone at the campaign launch that as long as the leadership of the Dalai Lama remains “there may not be any change in the policy of the Middle-Way Approach,” and that the exiled Tibetan community “must demonstrate a conspicuous majority support for the Middle-Way policy.”[10]

But imposing capitulation and submission is not without consequences. One cannot ban nationalist slogans from public events, stop hunger strikes,[11] prevent demonstrations against Chinese leaders,[12] outlaw actions against Beijing’s propaganda machine, attempt to enforce political orthodoxy in literature,[13] and expect a genuine desire of reconciliation[14] without facing the risk of being accused of treason.

Dharamshala is about to face a major crisis if nothing is done to change the course of events. At present, the legitimacy of the government’s policies relies almost exclusively on the faith and loyalty shown by the vast majority of Tibetans toward the Dalai Lama. Without him, the Tibetan government will be in no position to defend the actual policy of appeasement and surrender. The inevitable passing away of the Dalai Lama won’t bring an end to the Tibetan struggle, as many believe, but it definitely will bring serious damage to Tibet’s governmental institutions if the status quo is sustained.

Forget about the Chinese Vice Foreign Minister’s declaration; her words are worth nothing but disillusion. Forget also about foreign governments’ support for dialogue; their relations with China are far too beneficial to hope for any kind of objectivity. Let’s look ahead. It’s time for a major shift in Dharamshala’s foreign policies, a rebranding of the Tibet issue and a call for a nationwide civil disobedience campaign. It’s high time to put independence back on the agenda.

NOTES

[1] “Two-day meeting of Task Force begins.” CTA, 8 June 2010, http://bit.ly/abGndT

[2] Tenzin Tsering, “Chinese Vice FM says door for Tibet talks open, meets Tibetan Parliament Speaker.” Phayul, 8 June 2010, http://bit.ly/d9Qunw

[3] “Special General Meeting on Tibet to be Convened in November.” CTA, 15 September 2008, http://bit.ly/cpYHof

[4] “Recommendations of the First Special General Meeting Convened Under Article 59 of the Charter.” CTA, 22 November 2008, http://bit.ly/arJzMP

[5] Cao Changqing, “Tibetan People’s Right to Independence.” Rangzen Alliance, 10 March 2009, http://bit.ly/9KHuEB

[6] “Address by Mr. Yan Jiaqi,” International Sino-Tibetan Conference, 6-8 August 2009, Geneva, Switzerland, http://bit.ly/aNkclu

[7] “Strong Peaceful Activism Needed for the Resolution of Tibet Issue, Says Kalon Tripa.” CTA, 1 June 2005, http://bit.ly/cPfjIS

[8] “Message from the Kalon Tripa’s Desk.” CTA, 1 October 2002, http://bit.ly/c4bsx1

[9] “Kashag: No Protests During Hu’s America Visit.” CTA, 4 April 2006, http://bit.ly/9nOYOA

[10] “Massive Awareness Campaign on Middle-Way Approach Kicks-Off.” CTA, 17 August 2005, http://bit.ly/9FK6IM

[11] “Letter from the Kashag to the three Hunger Strikers.” CTA, 1 May 2004, http://bit.ly/czYAR0

[12] “Kashag: No Protests During Hu’s America Visit.” CTA, 4 April 2006, http://bit.ly/9nOYOA

[13] “Tibetan PM advises “middle way” in literature too.” Phayul, 31 August 2009, http://bit.ly/11zsRU

[14] “I can’t wait to be a Chinese citizen, says the Dalai Lama.” The Sunday Times, 18 May 2008, http://bit.ly/d7q5DW

Riporto di seguito la Presentazione del Dalai Lama e un mio breve testo che accompagna le splendide fotografie dell’amico Molinari.

P.V.

Presentazione del Dalai Lama

Cinquant’anni fa in Tibet, la dura e inflessibile repressione militare cinese e i disordini che si diffusero in tutto il paese portarono circa centomila tibetani a fuggire e cercare rifugio in India. Il generoso sostegno che ricevemmo ci fece capire che non avremmo dovuto dedicare tutto il nostro tempo alla ricerca dei bisogni materiali, ma che potevamo anche dedicarci alla protezione (salvezza, preservazione) della nostra religione, cultura e alla nostra più profonda identità tibetana. Da un lato diciamo spesso che il nostro futuro giace nelle mani dei nostri bambini, ma dall’altro lato dobbiamo prende atto del ruolo importante delle generazioni più vecchie nell’insegnare e dare un esempio. E’ così che i nostri valori morali fondamentali come l’amore e la compassione, la pazienza e la gentilezza sono stati trasmessi alle generazioni successive.
Il fotografo italiano Alessandro Molinari ha sviluppato un progetto fotografico al fine di ricordare alcuni dei
membri più anziani della comunità tibetana, persone che erano giovani nel 1959, prima che questa generazione e le sue voci vengano perdute. Alcuni di loro sono stati qui in esilio per cinquant’anni; alcuni altri ci hanno raggiunto solo dopo aver sopportato una lunga prigionia in Tibet, avendo commesso null’altro crimine tranne quello di essere ciò che erano: tibetani. Ognuno ha avuto il proprio ruolo e, nonostante le privazioni subite, i loro ricordi sono privi di rabbia: questo è un omaggio alla compassione, che rappresenta il nucleo della cultura e dei valori che noi tibetani ci sforziamo di mantenere vivi.
Il XIV° Dalai Lama

Lo sguardo di una generazione preziosa

Verso la libertà

La notte del 17 marzo 1959, Tenzin Gyatso, il XIV Dalai Lama del Tibet,  fu costretto a fuggire dal Paese delle Nevi a causa del precipitare della situazione politica.  Il “Prezioso Protettore”, come i tibetani chiamano il loro più alto rappresentante, era nato a Takster, un villaggio del Tibet settentrionale il 6 luglio 1935, in una famiglia di piccoli contadini. Quando aveva poco più di due anni venne riconosciuto come la XIV incarnazione e nel 1940 fu portato a Lhasa dove, come tutti i suoi predecessori, ricevette una accurata educazione religiosa. All’inizio degli anni ‘50 l’incalzare dei drammatici avvenimenti che l’invasione cinese del Tibet aveva messo in moto, lo costrinse ad assumere le sue responsabilità politiche a soli sedici anni. Nel 1959, dopo che la tensione tra tibetani e cinesi era sfociata in una lunga serie di sanguinosi scontri e disordini, il giovane Dalai Lama dovette fuggire da Lhasa poiché i generali di Pechino volevano farlo prigioniero. Dopo un viaggio difficile e pericoloso durato quasi due settimane, il Dalai Lama raggiunse finalmente il confine indiano. Al termine di una vasta pianura c’era un arco di bambù eretto in segno di benvenuto vicino al quale si trovavano sei militari di origine gurka dell’esercito di Nuova Delhi. Era arrivato in Assam e il governo dell’India gli aveva concesso asilo politico. Per la precisione era il tardo pomeriggio del 30 marzo 1959. Il Prezioso Protettore stava iniziando quella vita da profugo che dura ancora oggi.

Mentre in Tibet la repressione cinese si abbatteva come un maglio sulla civiltà e sulla popolazione tibetana, il Dalai Lama veniva accolto in India da imponenti manifestazioni popolari di solidarietà e simpatia e da una più diplomatica cortesia del Primo Ministro Jawaharlal Nerhu. Dopo circa un anno trascorso nella cittadina di Mussurie, a Tenzin Gyatso e al suo seguito il governo indiano offrì una spartana sistemazione nel piccolo villaggio himalayano di Dharamsala (nello stato dell’Himachal Pradesh) che dal 1960 è la residenza ufficiale in esilio del Dalai Lama.

L’essenziale è stato salvato

La fuga del Dalai Lama ebbe una imprevista ripercussione in Tibet. Quando si sparse la notizia che il Prezioso Protettore era riuscito a raggiungere sano e salvo l’India, decine e decine di migliaia di tibetani decisero a loro volta di fuggire. Arrivavano stremati, malati, distrutti da viaggi di settimane, a volte di mesi. Non avevano potuto portare niente con sé e necessitavano di tutto. Cibo, abitazioni, cure mediche. Erano uomini, donne, laici, monaci, vecchi, bambini. Fuggivano dall’imprigionamento e dalle deportazioni che i cinesi riservavano agli oppositori. La cifra esatta di questo drammatico esodo non si conosce e non si conoscerà mai. Stime ufficiose parlano di circa centomila profughi che giunsero in India tra il 1959 e di molte migliaia che non ce l’avevano fatta ed erano perite durante il cammino. E molte continuavano a morire anche dopo essere arrivate.  Si trattava infatti di persone, che non solo erano prive di qualsiasi cosa ma si ammalavano e morivano nelle condizioni climatiche e igieniche indiane, così diverse da quelle del Tetto del Mondo. Inoltre non parlavano alcuna lingua che non fosse il tibetano.

Se l’atteggiamento politico del governo di Delhi nei confronti del Dalai Lama venne da più parti criticato in quanto ritenuto troppo cauto, l’aiuto umanitario che fu concesso ai profughi riscosse invece l’ammirazione del mondo. Un paese povero, come era a quei tempi l’India, trovò la voglia e la capacità di aiutare persone ancora più povere. Certo si trattò di aiuti elementari, ridotti all’indispensabile. Però ci furono e rappresentarono una scelta generosa. Venne immediatamente creata una Commissione d’aiuto ai profughi, e furono aperti due grandi campi di raccolta: Missamari vicino Tezpur e Buxa Duar, nel Bengala occidentale, nei pressi del confine bhutanese. Nei campi venivano forniti i primi soccorsi ai rifugiati, un minimo di assistenza medica, un posto letto in baracche appositamente allestite e abiti nuovi. Per consentire ai tibetani di guadagnare qualcosa, sulla base di un progetto elaborato congiuntamente dal Dalai Lama e da Delhi, furono organizzate delle squadre di lavoro, i road workers, adibite alla costruzione di nuove strade. Era un’attività a cui partecipavano sia uomini sia donne, e veniva pagata quasi niente, ma era anche il primo passo verso lo stabile inserimento in India dei rifugiati, sui quali ricadeva l’onere e l’onore di mantenere in vita almeno gli aspetti essenziali dell’antica e nobile cultura del Tibet, che il genocidio cinese tentava di annientare sul Tetto del Mondo.

All’inizio si dovette affrontare il problema degli insediamenti. Qualcuno propendeva per raggruppare tutti i profughi in una valle dell’India settentrionale. Altri, tra cui il Dalai Lama, pensavano che fosse meglio dislocare i profughi in differenti località. Tra l’altro non sarebbe stato facile trovare una località in grado di ospitare quasi centomila persone. Alla fine prevalse l’idea del Dalai Lama e quindi sorsero, più o meno contemporaneamente, alcune decine di insediamenti. I più grandi, nell’India meridionale, furono quelli di Mungod e Bylakuppe; mentre al nord i principali, oltre a Dharamsala, erano Mussurie, Darjeeling, Dalhausie. Fuori dall’India circa diecimila profughi si stabilirono in Nepal, quasi tremila in Bhutan, duemila in Sikkim.

Per quanto riguardava l’aspetto economico, fu deciso che tendenzialmente gli insediamenti avrebbero dovuto puntare all’autosufficienza ma per aiutarli nell’immediato venne costituito un Fondo Assistenziale del Dalai Lama che assicurò gli interventi più urgenti. Inoltre il governo indiano finanziò una parte dei progetti di assistenza. Infine un aiuto considerevole, anche se sempre al di sotto delle necessità che erano immense, arrivò da governi o enti privati esteri (specialmente occidentali). Con queste risorse si cercò di garantire una rete minima di assistenza ai vari campi profughi ed alle diverse istituzioni che nascevano, prima fra tutte quelle che si occupavano dell’infanzia.

Un discorso a parte va fatto per i monasteri. Essendo l’asse portante della cultura tibetana, il mondo dei profughi ha dedicato una cura particolare al tentativo di ricostruire in India e nei paesi himalayani i principali monasteri delle differenti scuole di pensiero. E il tentativo è riuscito, poiché tutte le tradizioni del Tibet sono in pratica presenti nell’esilio. Ovviamente i monasteri sono stati ricostruiti su scala ridotta, sia per quanto riguarda il numero dei monaci sia la dimensione degli edifici. Ma degli insegnamenti dei differenti lignaggi, sia buddhisti sia bon (l’antica religione del Paese delle Nevi), quasi nulla è andato perduto.

L’incontro con il mondo

Fino agli anni ’60 dello scorso secolo, solo pochissimi studiosi, viaggiatori e diplomatici avevano avuto la possibilità di conoscere direttamente la civiltà tibetana. Agli occhi del mondo esterno il Tibet aveva da sempre costituito una sorta di miraggio, un frammento di un’epoca remota giunto incontaminato fin quasi alle soglie del Duemila. Ancora oggi sovente si è soliti guardare a questa nazione attraverso le lenti deformanti di uno stucchevole stereotipo. Si pensa a quello sterminato Paese (grande quasi quanto l’Europa occidentale) come ad una sorta di mitica Shangrilà. Uno spazio fuori dal tempo, un luogo di fiabe e di leggende dove i santi volano nell’aria e tutti sono felici. Personalmente non credo che questa immagine del Tibet sia mai stata vera. Fino all’invasione cinese del 1949-50, pur esprimendo un livello di coesione sociale e culturale forse unico al mondo, il Tibet era pur sempre un luogo terreno e non un paradiso. Certo la stragrande maggioranza della popolazione era felice di vivere come aveva sempre vissuto. Certo le grandi università monastiche erano riuscite a perpetuare nei secoli veri e propri tesori di saggezza asiatica. Certo una minoranza di yogi, meditatori e maestri spirituali poteva esplorare le profondità più nascoste della mente e dei mondi interiori. Certo la selvaggia bellezza dei territori si integrava armoniosamente con gli stili e le proporzioni della locale architettura. Tutto questo è sicuramente vero, ma è altrettanto vero che la società tibetana aveva i suoi limiti, le sue contraddizioni, le sue ingiustizie, i suoi aspetti da modificare.

L’arrivo in India di decine di migliaia di profughi tibetani rese di colpo accessibili frammenti fondamentali della civiltà tibetana. Fu come se una scheggia, piccola ma di enorme rilievo, della tradizione che prima dell’annessione cinese abitava il Tetto del Mondo fosse stata scagliata al di là dell’Himalaya. In quei territori indiani molto più raggiungibili degli impervi altopiani del Tibet, un tempo proibiti prima per volere del governo di Lhasa e poi di quello di Pechino. All’improvviso quanti erano disposti a recarsi in India e/o negli stati himalayani potevano conoscere di persona alcuni autorevoli esponenti di quel, fino ad allora “misterioso”, Cuore dell’Asia.  Sia che si trattasse di elevate figure spirituali dell’universo spirituale sia di semplici esponenti della società civile, il mondo poté finalmente incontrare un significativo spaccato dell’antropologia tibetana.

Nel corso degli anni l’universo dei profughi è riuscito a organizzarsi nell’esilio. Quelle decine di migliaia di donne e uomini che avevano scelto di abbandonare tutto per rimanere fedeli alle proprie radici e alla propria identità, hanno saputo con intelligenza e ingegno creativo raccogliere tutte le loro energie e costruire una microsocietà in grado non solo di preservare, ma addirittura di accrescere, uno dei più preziosi patrimoni culturali di questo pianeta. A partire dalla prima metà degli anni Sessanta dunque, comincia all’estero il lavoro per salvare l’essenziale della civiltà tibetana. Chi più chi meno, tutti gli insediamenti si sviluppano e pian piano riescono ad assorbire buona parte di coloro che erano impiegati nei lavori più duri e usuranti. Soprattutto i centri d’artigianato divengono in alcuni casi dei buoni investimenti e assolvono alla duplice funzione di assicurare un minimo di decoro economico e preservare la tradizione artistica del Tibet. Nel contempo anche le scuole prendono a funzionare abbastanza bene e l’infanzia tibetana dell’esilio (settore che ha anche goduto di aiuti stranieri) riesce a studiare secondo particolari programmi scolastici decisi dal governo del Dalai Lama che consentono agli allievi sia di conoscere la propria tradizione sia di penetrare anche gli aspetti fondamentali della cultura contemporanea.

E se questo è vero in generale per l’intero arcipelago degli insediamenti, lo è ancora di più per Dharamsala, che da molti anni ormai i profughi sono soliti chiamare la “Piccola Lhasa” perché vi risiede il Dalai Lama ma anche per la presenza di alcune prestigiose istituzioni nate nel corso degli anni. Il 17 maggio 1960, Tsering Dolma sorella maggiore del Dalai Lama, aprì una nursery per 51 bambini tibetani che in poco tempo divenne, con il nome di Tibetan Children Village, il maggior centro scolastico dell’intero universo dei rifugiati. Sempre nel 1960 si gettarono le basi per l’importante Tibetan Institute of Performing Arts, dedicato alla preservazione del “Lhamo”, il tradizionale teatro del Tibet. Un anno dopo, su iniziativa di Yeshe Donden uno dei più rinomati medici tibetani, fu aperto il Tibetan Medical Institute che in breve riuscì non solo a preservare la millenaria medicina tibetana ma a farla anche conoscere in numerose nazioni straniere. Nel 1971 venne inaugurata, alla presenza del Dalai Lama, la Library of Tibetan Works & Archives, un Istituto che ha raccolto i testi che si erano salvati dalle distruzioni cinesi ripubblicando in tibetano, e a volte anche in inglese, quelli principali. Oggi la Library of Tibetan Works & Archives  è un punto di riferimento fondamentale per tutti coloro che si interessano della religione e della società del Tibet.

Così, nel volgere di poco più di un decennio, Dharamsala è divenuta la capitale del Tibet in esilio e i tibetani, salvando l’essenziale della loro cultura, sono riusciti in una impresa che nel 1959 nemmeno i loro più convinti estimatori avevano ritenuto possibile.

Tibet: quale futuro?

Oggi, all’inizio degli anni Dieci del Secondo Millennio, la diaspora tibetana è arrivata alla quarta generazione di nati in esilio. Nel corso di questo lungo e drammatico cinquantennio molte altre migliaia di profughi hanno continuato a fuggire dal Paese delle Nevi per trovare rifugio in India. Nel Tibet occupato alle violenze, alle distruzioni, al genocidio del periodo allucinato della cosiddetta Rivoluzione Culturale è subentrata una repressione meno evidente e plateale ma non certo meno pericolosa. Il potere cinese, a partire dal 1980, ha cominciato a consentire la ricostruzione di numerosi monasteri distrutti (anche se i luoghi di culto rimangono sotto lo stretto controllo del governo di Pechino che stabilisce regole e normative), il soffocante regime poliziesco si è leggermente allentato, alcuni elementi del tradizionale stile di vita tibetano sono oggi tollerati da Pechino. A fronte di questi modesti cambiamenti positivi però si deve ricordare che attualmente in Tibet l’immigrazione cinese ha raggiunto picchi allucinanti rendendo, a Lhasa e in molte altre aree, i tibetani una insignificante minoranza rispetto ai nuovi coloni han. Lo sfruttamento intensivo del turismo, in modo particolare quello interno alla Cina, sta alterando in modo preoccupante i delicati equilibri degli stili di vita tibetani. E, cosa ancor più grave, tutti i generosi sforzi del Dalai Lama per trovare una soluzione pacifica, equilibrata e soddisfacente per tutti, al problema tibetano sembrano essere naufragati di fronte alle rigide chiusure della nomenklatura di Pechino. In questa situazione quindi, adesso come ieri, alla pattuglia dei rifugiati tibetani in India e negli stati himalayani spetta l’onere di mantenere in vita l’autentica cultura del Tibet e con essa la speranza che un domani questa possa tornare a vivere e fiorire in un Paese delle Nevi finalmente di nuovo libero.

L’inesorabile scorrere del Tempo, questo ineludibile tiranno delle nostre  esistenze, sta conducendo al limitare della vita gran parte di coloro che nel lontano 1959 fuggirono dal Tibet per cercare rifugio in India. Pian piano queste persone stanno avvicinandosi al termine della loro esistenza terrena. Sulla base di questa consapevolezza, il fotografo (e mio caro amico) Alessandro Molinari ha sentito l’urgenza di recarsi più volte in diversi insediamenti tibetani dell’India settentrionale per fotografare e filmare i volti di alcuni di questi questi eroici testimoni e protagonisti di una delle più tragiche pagine della storia del Novecento asiatico e ascoltarne le storie. Il risultato è uno straordinario reportage, una eccezionale testimonianza della tragedia tibetana che dovrebbe interrogare tutti coloro che hanno a cuore valori quali la dignità e la libertà dell’essere umano. I volti, gli sguardi, le espressioni che l’obiettivo di Alessandro Molinari è riuscito a catturare in queste immagini, rappresentano una testimonianza viva e diretta di un mondo che, così come lo avevano conosciuto e vissuto quelle donne e quegli uomini, non esiste più. Distrutto, annichilito, spazzato via da una tempesta terribile e devastante. Ma è anche un mondo che i soggetti fotografati da Molinari hanno continuato a fare vivere nello spazio insondabile della memoria e del ricordo. Un mondo che grazie alle loro testimonianze è stato possibile trasmettere alle nuove generazioni di tibetani. E quindi, resi immortali dall’obiettivo della macchina fotografica, questi “Volti del Tibet in Esilio”, rappresentano nel medesimo tempo una testimonianza preziosa di una pagina fondamentale della storia del Tibet e la consapevolezza che l’essenziale sia stato salvato. Che la millenaria civiltà tibetana stia superando anche questa difficile scommessa con la Storia.

Piero Verni

La questione tibetana, le mille culture dell’India, il fascino dei paesaggi himalayani, il buddismo in otto documentari.

Giovedi 27 e Venerdi 28 maggio al

Filmstudio

Via degli Orti d’Alibert 1/c-Roma (Trastevere)

www.filmstudioroma.com

tel. 334 1780632

Calendario delle proiezioni

Giovedi 27 maggio

ore 18.00

I CAMPA di Mario Gianni col.,.28’ / commento in italiano LA PASHIMINA DEI NOMADI di Mario Gianni col., 26’, vers. orig. con sott. in italiano ore 19.30 WAYS TO A VOID di Theo Eshetu; col., 58’, v.o.

ore 21.00

LADAKH / IL CENTRO DEI PASSI di Gaia Ceriana e Marina Colonna (Italia, 1977-1979, col., 91’, commento in italiano)

LADAKH (1977-2007- Parte seconda) di Mario Gianni (Italia, 2007, col., 28’, vers. orig. con commento in italiano)

Venerdi 28 maggio

ore 18.30

IACO’S TALE / BEYOND ARUNACHAL PRADESH di Gaia Ceriana (Italia, 2009, col., 66’, vers. orig. inglese)

ore 20.00

ROAD TO TIBET (In marcia verso il Tibet) di Manfredi Manera e Ankur Roy Chowdhury ( Austria 2008 col., 53’, vers. orig. inglese)

THE ROAD TO FREEDOM (In marcia verso il Tibet- Parte seconda) di Karma Chukey, Piero Verni e Mario Cuccodoro (Francia, 2009, col., 23’, vers. italiana )

SEGUE INCONTRO CON GLI AUTORI E CON LHAKPA ,TIBETANO IN ESILIO IN AMERICA IMPEGNATO NEL FREE TIBE WORLD TOUR.