When a delegation of U.S. Congressmen met the 14th Dalai Lama at Dharamshala in India in June 2024, it triggered speculation over whether the Indian government was signaling a new tough position on the Tibetan question vis-à-vis China. The meeting comes at a time when Sino-Indian and Sino-U.S. relations have frayed significantly. Days later, the Dalai Lama underwent knee surgery and on July 6, he turned 89, underscoring the Tibetan spiritual leader’s declining health and advancing age, and that the Tibetan movement is nearing enormous changes and challenges when he passes on.
In an interview with The Diplomat’s South Asia Editor Sudha Ramachandran, Amitabh Mathur, co-founder of DeepStrat, a think tank in New Delhi, shares his insights into the complex processes involved in finding the successor to the 14th Dalai Lama. Following his retirement in October 2014 as special secretary of the Research & Analysis Wing (India’s external intelligence agency), Mathur was appointed adviser on Tibetan Affairs in the federal Ministry of Home Affairs (September 2015-September 2018). In this role, he forged a close relationship with the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan government-in-exile and Tibetan religious and political leaders.
The democratic leadership of the Tibetans in exile should be supported, he said, and not for any geopolitical aims: “India’s support to the Tibetans… is in the nature of its policy to help sustain and nurture the unique Tibetan culture and practice of Tibetan Buddhism, which China is trying to obliterate.”
A delegation of U.S. Congressmen met the Dalai Lama at Dharamshala recently. Why did the Indian government allow them, especially when India’s relations with China are tense?
The short answer to the question would be, as stated by the spokesman of India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), that His Holiness the Dalai Lama (HHDL) is a revered religious leader, an honored guest who has the complete liberty to meet anyone he wishes to. Visits by U.S. State Department officials, senators, congressmen and other notables from various countries have been taking place unimpeded for many years, often facilitated by the government of India. Different U.S. State Department Coordinators for Tibetan issues over the years have met the Dalai Lama at least six times in Dharamshala — the last being in May 2022, when Uzra Zeya called on him.
It does seem, however, that the visit of the bipartisan delegation of U.S. members of the Congress to meet His Holiness and elected leaders of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) in Dharamshala is a departure from routine visits of the past. The visit took place at a time when both U.S.-China relations and India-China relations are at a low point. Not only was the delegation officially hosted, but subsequent meetings with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, and National Security Advisor Ajit Doval suggested a nod to the message the delegation came to convey. Some interpreted it as going beyond India’s positions on matters pertaining to the Tibet issue.
The purpose of the delegation was to apprise the Dalai Lama of the “Promoting a Resolution of the Tibet-China Dispute Act,” which had been passed with bipartisan support both in the Senate and House. Commonly referred to as the “Resolve Tibet Act,” it was subsequently signed into law by [U.S.] President Biden on July 12.
Features of the act question Beijing’s claim that Tibet was always a part of China and enjoin U.S. government public diplomacy to counter China’s misinformation to this effect. It calls upon China to initiate a dialogue, unconditionally, with the Dalai Lama or his representatives or the democratically elected leaders of the Tibetan community for a negotiated agreement on Tibet. The Act further endeavors to collaborate with other nations to achieve the negotiated settlement.
The visit seems to have been carefully choreographed. The composition of the bipartisan delegation was interesting. Led by Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Mike McCaul, it included among others, co-author of the act Congressman Jim McGovern and Nancy Pelosi, former speaker and a longstanding Tibet supporter and China baiter.
The delegation could easily have saved itself the bother of flying across to Dharamshala to meet the Dalai Lama and instead met him in the U.S. as he was in any case scheduled to reach New York in a few days for knee surgery. The impact perhaps then would have been much less than made by its highly publicized meetings and statements made in Dharamshala, the exile capital of Tibet.
Though a public platform was provided to the U.S. delegation, official statements on the meetings with Indian leaders merely referred to “discussions on bilateral strategic partnership.” Nevertheless, India is seen to have signaled its loss of patience with China’s intransigence in efforts to end the standoff along the Line of Actual Control as the disputed Sino-Indian border is known, following its unprovoked military incursion in 2020 into the Ladakh sector, and other pinpricks in Arunachal. The signal to Beijing seems to be that we will not respect your sensibilities if you do not respect ours.
Considering the stand taken of late by the Indian government on relations with Taiwan and the South China Sea dispute, it does seem to point to a more aggressive posture towards China and a more proactive stance on Tibet. The Tibetans seem to have interpreted it like that. Whether this indicates Indo-U.S. convergence on moves regarding Tibet remains to be seen.
Tibetan poet and refugee activist Tenzin Tsundue protests across from Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao’s hotel room in Bangalore, India, 2005.
Credit: Wikipedia/ Nick Gulotta
Is India using the Tibet card? Has it worked?
To my mind, there is nothing like the Tibet card. And it would be deeply offensive to the Tibetans to think they are mere pawns on the diplomatic chessboard.
India’s support to the Tibetans or the occasional public expression of it is in the nature of its policy to help sustain and nurture the unique Tibetan culture and practice of Tibetan Buddhism, which China is trying to obliterate. Right from the beginning, in the early 1960s, India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru recognized that the Tibetan struggle was a civilizational one and made available all facilities and assistance to the Dalai Lama in preserving it.
India does not believe in any such card and thus the question of using it does not arise.
Why has PM Modi not met the Dalai Lama?
It is not entirely correct to say there has been no meeting between Modi and the Dalai Lama. In an interview in July 2019 with the Indian magazine The Week, the Dalai Lama disclosed he had met the PM in 2014 itself. He went on to say he had written to congratulate Modi on his victory in the 2019 Lok Sabha polls and received a “very good reply.”
Campaigning during the recent general elections, Modi revealed he frequently engages in discussions with His Holiness, who he describes as a “stalwart of our rich heritage.” Given his public greetings to the Dalai Lama on his birthdays and most recently to wish him a speedy recovery from his knee surgery, one can say the Indian Prime Minister has not shied away from his contacts with the Dalai Lama.
It also needs to be known that there is constant communication between the government of India at the highest official levels with not only the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) but also with His Holiness and his key aides.
Central ministers and chief ministers especially of the northeastern states, who are also practicing Buddhists, meet the Dalai Lama and frequently engage with the CTA. In the Indian Parliament, there is an inter-party parliamentary group that engages with CTA and members of the Tibetan parliament in exile.
However, I do agree that there could be more public meetings between the Dalai Lama and top Indian political leaders. Honoring and respecting religious leaders is part of our cultural tradition. It would also send the right signal to those Tibetans, very few to my mind, who from time to time need reassurance that there has been no dilution of India’s support to their cause.
Who will succeed the 14th Dalai Lama is a very important matter that will determine the future of the Tibetan movement. Yet there is no clarity on the selection process. Why? What process is the Dalai Lama and the CTA considering?
The single most important question in every Tibetan’s mind is what will happen after the 14th Dalai Lama is no more. The Dalai Lama was historically both the spiritual and the political head of Tibet. Although he gave up his temporal responsibilities in 2011 to a democratically elected government, he is still perceived by the rest of the world to be its leader, and indeed the embodiment of the Tibetan government. As such, he continues to be the driving force for the Tibetan government, both in India and in the wider world.
All hopes and aspirations of the Tibetans in Tibet and in exile are centered around the exceptional personality of the Dalai Lama. Devotion and loyalty to him is because of the Tibetans’ deep faith in the institution of reincarnation, unique to Tibetan Buddhism, and the religious preeminence of the Dalai Lama. Naturally, there is anxiety as to what will happen to the institution, the future of the Tibetan community in India and the Tibetan struggle. The anxiety is further compounded by China’s declaration that it will select the reincarnation of the 14th Dalai Lama.
The Dalai Lama is yet to clear the air on the subject of his succession or reincarnation. He has spoken of various possibilities, from discontinuing the “feudal anachronism,” to reincarnating in a free country, to being reborn as a woman, or opting for emanation (manifesting in another body) in his lifetime, rather than reincarnation.
Dalai Lama’s most authoritative statement remains the one made in 2011 when he warned China against meddling in the subject of his reincarnation. He declared that at the age of 90 (he has just completed 89) he would consult with High Lamas of Tibetan Buddhism, the Tibetan public, and other concerned people who follow Tibetan Buddhism. More importantly, the Dalai Lama said that if it is decided that the institution must continue and there should be reincarnation, it would be the responsibility of the Gaden Phodrang Trust to follow his written instructions and carry out the search and recognition, which should be as per tradition.
It is not in the public domain whether the Dalai Lama has given such instructions on the search process and related matters. Given the fact that China will anoint its own protege in the Potala Palace, it is important that the processes are formalized in a manner to withstand manipulation and interference by the Chinese government and others with vested interests.
In 2019, Ogyen Trinley Dorje, the 17th Karmapa and head of the Karma Kagyu school of Tibetan Buddhism, wrote an open letter saying the Chinese policy on the Dalai Lama’s reincarnation and its repercussions must be investigated. He expressed worry about attempts being made from within and outside Tibet to arbitrarily recognize the reincarnation of Lamas without any regard for traditional Tibetan systems and adopting dubious means.
Interestingly, however, the process of consultation that the Dalai Lama has spoken about seems to have been done in 2019. There were separate meetings of (a) past and present CTA officials, (b) representatives of Tibet’s support groups and (c) religious leaders of all four schools of Tibetan Buddhism, important lineages including the Bön. All unanimously resolved the Dalai Lama must reincarnate.
What do you foresee happening after the passing of the current Dalai Lama?
China is waiting for the Dalai Lama to die. It seems to have a strategy in place to deal with his death, both inside and outside Tibet. It will use the occasion to assert its right to choose the next Dalai Lama through a lottery using the Golden Urn as prescribed by Chinese emperors, thereby affirming its claim that Tibet has always been under China. The method was introduced after Nepal invaded Tibet in 1791, and Tibetans sought help from the Chinese emperor to drive them out.
The Chinese claim is dubious, as barring the case of the 11th Dalai Lama, in all other cases, the choice was made through traditional religious methods. In any case, it is solely the decision of a person to decide when and where he will be reborn. This cannot be decided by atheist communists who do not even believe in the unique concept of reincarnation.
Having selected its candidate, China can be expected to have him recognized by its own Panchen Lama, and ensconce him in an elaborate ceremony on the throne in the Potala Palace. To sow division amongst Tibetans, the choice will in all likelihood be endorsed by some Gelugpas, the Dalai Lama’s school of Tibetan Buddhism, who worship the Dorje Shugden deity, a practice that the Dalai Lama has disallowed. Of the many important monks in this group is the reincarnation of Trijang Rinpoche, the junior tutor of the Dalai Lama, who actively supports the activities of the Shugden Group.
China also expects, in the absence of the towering personality of the Dalai Lama, the head of the CTA will not be able to draw the same international support or even unite the Tibetans in exile. It anticipates, in the changed circumstances with drying up moral, political, and financial support, the CTA will become ineffective, and should it become so, it will turn into a liability for the Government of India.
Thus, it is important to have a strategy for strengthening the democratically elected political leadership.
Despite some shortcomings, the CTA has established itself as the political representative of the Tibetans the world over. It has also successfully coordinated with Tibet advocacy groups in recent years to engage with the world. Credit for the enactment of the Resolve Tibet Act can rightly be given to the synergy between the International Campaign for Tibet and the CTA. The more difficult challenge before it would be to keep the Tibetans united and pursue an agreed political line. At the moment, however, it looks unlikely the Chinese government will agree to engage with it.
Via its Tibet Support and Policy Act 2019, the U.S. has declared that the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama is his business and that of the Tibetan religious leadership. Anyone interfering in the process would be sanctioned. All eyes are now expectantly looking to New Delhi to make a similar statement.
The other important aspect to be remembered is that there is likely to be a substantial gap between the death of the current Dalai Lama and the installation of the next, who will even then only be a child. And the gap will become longer by the time he comes of age. He will need the support of all heads of the four major schools of Tibetan Buddhism and high-ranking lineage holders. In the vacuum that will follow it is imperative that the heads of such lineages are united and on board. In this, crucial will be the role of the 41st Sakya Trizin, a revered religious leader, and Ogyen Trinley Dorje, the 17th Karmapa.
The young Karmapa, who fled to India from Tibet in January 2000, left India in 2017, unhappy at the way he was treated. Unlike prominent young tulkus born in exile, he was born in Tibet, recognized by the Chinese and the Dalai Lama, and enthroned in his traditional seat in Tsurphu, Tibet. Unlike others, he has also lived in Tibet. The 17th Karmapa is loyal to the Dalai Lama, is charismatic, and his popularity cuts across sectarian lines. His presence in India would be of great advantage to all concerned and all efforts should be made to convince him to return to India.