The Karmapa conundrum

January 12: Beijing might have been more sophisticated than publicly to raise sovereignty issues in the context of the young Karmapa Lama ...

January 12: Beijing might have been more sophisticated than publicly to raise sovereignty issues in the context of the young Karmapa Lama finding refuge in India. His flight from Tibet, not his presence in India, raises questions about the extent of Chinese authority in Tibet and the challenge to it from Buddhist religious institutions and leaders. Those questions would have arisen wherever the boy lama sought refuge. His 8220;defection8221; would have been just as embarrassing for the Chinese leadership if he had surfaced in Europe or the US.

But the Chinese leadership does not seem to have thought this one through. In any case it has always been excessively sensitive about Tibet and the Dalai Lama in its dealings with India. So it is not surprising to find the Chinese leadership reiterating the principles of panchsheel and India8217;s stated position on Tibet at at this juncture.

Had India-China relations been warmer than they are it would not have been necessary to state the obvious. This suggests some reassurance is required. It may be wise to assert that India is as interested in Beijing in improving the bilateral relationship but must be left to decide the Karmapa issue taking into account many other important factors as well. Perhaps Beijing does not quite appreciate how complex is the problem presented by the boy lama turning up one morning. In finding a solution the Indian government must look for what is in the best interests of everyone concerned.

The India-China relationship is only one, albeit very important, factor. Others are the boy lama himself, the Kagyu sect, the Tibetan diaspora in India and India8217;s relationship with the Buddhist world. It will not be easy to balance all these interests. India must certainly be guided by humanitarianism but cannot ignore external and internal politics. Time and patience are required simply to resolve some of the mystery about the flight from Tibet. Was it voluntary? How much did the local Chinese authorities know about it? Is the boy lama, his adult sister or monks from Tsurphu monastery in Tibet answerable for his welfare? Furthermore, the impact must be considered of any decision not only on Indian domestic opinion but also on 1,50,000 Tibetans who rightly enjoy full freedom to express themselves.India has three options: hand the Karmapa back to Chinese authorities, give him asylum in India or allow him to seek asylum in another country.

Beijing8217;s oppressive policies are responsible for the alienation of Tibetans. No matter how vital the Karmapa is to China8217;s programme of pacifying the monasteries, to return the boy lama to China is an option India must not exercise. To do so would be to return him to a state of perpetual imprisonment. He must be given the sanctuary he seeks. To provide him a home in this country would accord with Indian traditions and most Indians would applaud such a decision. But the government needs to study carefully whether India can indeed afford to host a powerful Buddhist sect with deep internal conflicts and powerful links in the West or whether it would be better to help the Karmapa Lama find refuge elsewhere. In any case, it is high time that the West, which has actively espoused the Tibetan cause thus far, step in to help the Karmapa Lama.