Tag: China

Posted on

578: CPC’S WEAPON OF INFLUENCE: THE UNITED FRONT WORK DEPARTMENT

 

Pic Courtesy Net

 

My Article published on the Indus International Research Foundation  Website on 10 Jan 25.

 

The United Front Work Department (UFWD) of the Communist Party of China (CPC) is a unique and critical apparatus in Beijing’s strategy for consolidating power domestically and projecting influence internationally. Its overarching goal is to consolidate the Party’s influence and ensure the CPC’s dominance by co-opting or neutralising entities that could challenge its authority. As one of the most significant arms of the CPC’s soft power machinery, the UFWD operates through a complex network of relationships, leveraging cultural, political, and economic channels to further the Party’s interests.

 

Origins and Evolution. The United Front concept originated during the CPC’s early years in the 1920s. Initially, it referred to the alliances formed between the CPC and other political groups, particularly the Kuomintang (KMT), to oppose foreign powers and imperialism in China. Mao Zedong later refined the strategy to forge alliances with non-Communist forces during the fight against Japanese occupation and the Chinese Civil War. The formal establishment of the UFWD occurred in 1942, with the aim of coordinating these alliances under the Party’s leadership. After establishing the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1949, the UFWD became instrumental in integrating non-Communist elites, ethnic minorities, and religious groups into the new socialist state. Its focus expanded further under Deng Xiaoping, who emphasised economic development and engagement with overseas Chinese communities as part of China’s modernisation efforts. Under Xi Jinping, the UFWD’s role has grown significantly, reflecting the CPC’s renewed emphasis on ideological control and assertive diplomacy. The UFWD now functions as a core mechanism for safeguarding Party dominance and advancing China’s strategic interests globally.

 

Key Objectives. The UFWD’s overarching mission is to consolidate the CPC’s power and influence. This mission can be broken down into three main objectives:-

    • Domestic Cohesion. Cultivate loyalty among non-Communist groups, including ethnic minorities (e.g., Tibetans and Uyghurs) and religious communities. Monitor and influence academic, professional, and civil society organisations to align with CPC policies. Promote “ethnic unity” and “religious harmony” under CPC-defined terms
    • Overseas Influence. Engage with overseas Chinese communities to foster loyalty to the CPC. Influence foreign political, academic, and business elites to advance China’s strategic interests.
    • Neutralising Opposition. Discredit dissidents, including activists, journalists, and exiled groups critical of the CPC. Counter perceived threats from foreign ideological, political, and religious movements. Discredit and marginalise groups critical of the CPC, such as Tibetan and Uyghur activists, pro-democracy movements, and Falun Gong practitioners.

 

Organisational Structure and Mandate. The UFWD operates directly under the CPC Central Committee, emphasising its importance within the Party’s hierarchy. It has specialised bureaus targeting specific groups, including ethnic minorities, religious organisations, intellectuals, businesspeople, and overseas Chinese. The regional branches replicate the national structure, ensuring its influence permeates all governance and society levels. The UFWD is also closely connected to various other entities, including the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), which serves as a key platform for engaging non-Party representatives.

 

    • Domestic Engagement. The UFWD liaises with non-Communist political parties, religious organizations, and intellectuals to ensure alignment with CPC policies. This includes co-opting influential figures through patronage, opportunities, and subtle coercion.
    • Ethnic and Religious Affairs. Ethnic minorities, particularly in sensitive regions like Tibet and Xinjiang, are a primary focus. The UFWD seeks to assimilate these groups while suppressing dissent. Religious leaders are co-opted to propagate Party-approved interpretations of faith.
    • Overseas Chinese Affairs. Diaspora communities are key targets. The UFWD fosters loyalty among overseas Chinese through cultural programs, business opportunities, and nationalist rhetoric, positioning them as unofficial ambassadors of Chinese interests.
    • International Influence. Beyond the diaspora, the UFWD cultivates relationships with foreign politicians, academics, think tanks, and media to shape global perceptions of China. This includes lobbying, funding academic programs, and leveraging Confucius Institutes.

Tactics, Strategies and Activities. The UFWD employs a diverse set of tactics to achieve its objectives. These tactics can be broadly categorized into co-optation, infiltration, and information operations.

    • Co-optation and Integration. The UFWD actively seeks to incorporate influential figures, such as intellectuals, religious leaders, and business magnates, into the CPC’s governance framework. This is often achieved through honorary titles, membership in advisory bodies like the CPPCC, or access to lucrative business opportunities. In regions like Tibet and Xinjiang, the UFWD promotes loyalty to the CPC by incentivizing compliance through economic development programs and cultural exchanges. The UFWD courts influential overseas Chinese figures, offering them prestigious roles in organizations like the All-China Federation of Returned Overseas Chinese.
    • Infiltration. The UFWD establishes or co-opts Chinese community associations, student groups, and cultural organizations abroad to serve as extensions of its influence. By funding research centers, think tanks, and academic programs, the UFWD shapes discourse on China-related topics. In some countries, UFWD-backed entities have been accused of funding political campaigns, lobbying policymakers, and embedding operatives in influential positions.
    • Information Operations. The UFWD promotes CPC narratives through Chinese-language media outlets and partnerships with foreign media organisations. The UFWD uses social media platforms to amplify pro-CPC narratives and suppress dissenting voices. It pressures foreign publishers, universities, and businesses to censor topics sensitive to Beijing, such as human rights abuses in Xinjiang or the status of Taiwan.
    • Ethnic and Religious Manipulation. Work to assimilate ethnic minorities into the dominant Han culture under the guise of promoting “unity.” Regulate and co-opt religious organisations to ensure they operate under state-sanctioned frameworks. In Xinjiang, the UFWD has played a central role in promoting the “Sinicisation” of Uyghur culture. This involves assimilating Uyghurs into the dominant Han culture through campaigns targeting religious practices, language use, and education. The UFWD’s policies in the region have drawn international condemnation for their role in facilitating human rights abuses.

International Concerns, Controversies and Criticisms. Many governments, especially in liberal democracies, have raised concerns about UFWD activities as political interference or soft power coercion. Some overseas Chinese communities feel pressured by UFWD-backed organisations to align with the CPC, even when their personal or political interests diverge. The UFWD’s activities have significant implications for international relations, particularly as they relate to sovereignty, free speech, and democratic integrity.

    • Erosion of Sovereignty. UFWD operations in foreign countries often blur the line between cultural exchange and political interference, challenging the sovereignty of host nations.
    • Interference in Domestic Politics. Accusations of UFWD-linked interference in elections and policymaking have surfaced in countries like Australia, Canada, and the United States. These include funding political candidates, infiltrating institutions, and spreading propaganda.
    • Suppression of Free Speech. By pressuring foreign entities to align with CPC narratives, the UFWD undermines open discourse on critical issues such as human rights and Taiwan.
    • Polarisation of Diaspora Communities. UFWD engagement with overseas Chinese communities can create divisions, as some individuals align with Beijing while others oppose its policies.
    • Human Rights Violations. The UFWD’s role in suppressing ethnic and religious groups, particularly in Tibet and Xinjiang, has drawn widespread condemnation. These policies are seen as part of broader efforts to erase cultural identities and enforce Han-centric nationalism.

 

Recent Developments and Responses. The UFWD has become increasingly active under Xi Jinping’s leadership, reflecting his broader emphasis on ideological control and assertive diplomacy. Initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the CPC’s global outreach have expanded UFWD’s activities worldwide, prompting intensified scrutiny and countermeasures from other nations. Governments in countries like the United States, Australia, and Canada have heightened monitoring of UFWD-linked organizations and individuals. Laws targeting foreign interference, such as Australia’s Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme, have been introduced to curb UFWD activities. Efforts to educate the public about UFWD tactics, including media campaigns and academic research, have increased. Supporting independent Chinese diaspora organisations helps counterbalance UFWD influence.

 

Conclusion. The United Front Work Department is a cornerstone of the CPC’s strategy for consolidating power and projecting influence. Through its multifaceted operations, the UFWD seeks to reshape global perceptions and align international actors with Beijing’s agenda. However, its activities also raise critical questions about sovereignty, freedom, and the boundaries of acceptable state behaviour in an interconnected world. Understanding the UFWD is essential for crafting informed and balanced responses, ensuring that engagement with China is both principled and pragmatic.

 

Please do  comment.

 

1014
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

Link to the article on the website:-

CPC’S Weapon of Influence: The United Front Work Department

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

References:-

  1. Joske, Alex. “The Party Speaks for You: Foreign Interference and the Chinese Communist Party’s United Front System.” Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), 2020.
  1. Carothers, Thomas, & Orenstein, Mitchell A. “How the Chinese Communist Party’s United Front Work Influences Europe.” Journal of Democracy, Vol. 32, No. 2, 2021.
  1. Lehr, Amy. “The United Front Work Department’s Influence Tactics in the United States.” Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), 2020.
  1. Zang, Xiaowei. “The Role of the United Front in Ethnic Relations in China.” Asian Survey, Vol. 56, No. 2, 2016.
  1. Hamilton, Clive. “Hidden Hand: Exposing How the Chinese Communist Party is Reshaping the World.” Journal of Contemporary China, Vol. 28, No. 118, 2019.
  1. Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI). “The United Front Work Department and its Global Influence.” ASPI Special Report, 2020.
  1. Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). China’s Influence Operations: A Macro Perspective. CSIS Reports, 2018.
  1. Wilson Center. United Front Work Department: Domestic and International Influence Operations. 2019.
  1. The Economist. “The Long Arm of the Chinese Communist Party.” October 2020.
  1. Foreign Affairs. “Beijing’s Coercive Charm Offensive.” February 2022.
  1. Reuters. “How China Uses United Front to Gain Influence Abroad.” June 2019.
  1. South China Morning Post (SCMP). “United Front Work Department: The CPC’s Influence Arm Abroad.” August 2021.
  1. Brady, Anne-Marie. Magic Weapons: China’s Political Influence Activities Under Xi Jinping. Wilson Center, 2017.
  1. Kerry, Brown. The Communist Party of China and the Future of China. Cambridge University Press, 2016.

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

Posted on

574: BOOK REVIEW: Pakistan – The Balochistan Conundrum, By Tilak Devasher

 

 

Review by: Air Marshal Anil Khosla (Retd) PVSM, AVSM, VM

Former Vice Chief of Air Staff, Indian Air Force.

 

Pakistan: The Balochistan Conundrum by Tilak Devasher is a comprehensive, meticulously researched examination of one of Pakistan’s most complex and troubled regions. As a former Indian civil servant with years of experience analysing Pakistan’s internal and external affairs, Devasher offers a deep dive into Balochistan’s conflicts’ historical, political, and socioeconomic underpinnings. He presents a multidimensional narrative that explores the impact of colonial history, resource distribution, ethnic and cultural tensions, and geopolitical influences on Balochistan’s struggle for autonomy within Pakistan.

 

At the heart of the book lies the question: what makes Balochistan so difficult to integrate fully into Pakistan? Devasher’s analysis identifies factors that have driven Balochistan’s longstanding conflicts and challenges. The province’s vast resources, geostrategic location, and distinct ethnic identity make it both a prized possession and a perpetual problem for Pakistan’s federal government. Devasher sheds light on the complex relationship between the Pakistani state and Balochistan, often marked by mistrust, resentment, and recurring conflict. His work argues that Islamabad’s policies toward the province have remained largely focused on control rather than integration, a stance that has left Balochistan in perpetual marginalisation.

 

Devasher begins by tracing the origins of Balochistan’s discontent back to the time of British colonial rule. As the British expanded their influence in the region, they established an essentially exploitative relationship with Balochistan, incorporating the region into their empire while suppressing local political structures. This legacy of exploitation and suppression left the Baloch people with an enduring distrust of centralised rule, a sentiment that has only deepened under Pakistan’s federal government.

 

Post-independence, Pakistan adopted a similar approach to Balochistan, perceiving it as a remote, resource-rich frontier rather than an integrated part of the country. According to Devasher, the forced accession of the princely state of Kalat in 1948 laid the foundation for the ongoing resistance movements in Balochistan. The book provides a detailed account of the four main insurgencies that have taken place in Balochistan since Pakistan’s creation, underscoring how each conflict has only worsened the province’s resentment towards Islamabad. Devasher’s narration explains how Pakistan’s failure to address the region’s core issues—economic deprivation, lack of political representation, and cultural autonomy—has kept the fires of rebellion alive for decades.

 

Balochistan is Pakistan’s largest but least developed province, and Devasher strongly argues that the province’s socioeconomic plight is at the core of its grievances. Despite being rich in natural gas, coal, copper, and gold, most of Balochistan’s population remains impoverished and lacks access to primary education, healthcare, and infrastructure. The exploitation of these resources has been another source of discontent, as Islamabad reaps the economic benefits while Balochistan’s people continue to live in poverty. Devasher’s work highlights the deep disparities in resource distribution, pointing out that most of the profits generated from the province’s resources go to the central government rather than the local population. This economic exclusion only deepened feelings of alienation among the Baloch people. The book also addresses the question of royalties, noting that the revenues from natural gas production, for instance, rarely benefit the people of Balochistan themselves. In Devasher’s view, the Pakistani government’s policies of resource extraction without compensation or reinvestment are an example of economic colonialism that has further alienated the Baloch populace.

 

Devasher’s critique extends to Pakistan’s heavy reliance on military intervention to maintain control over Balochistan. Since the inception of Pakistan, the government has treated the Baloch independence movement as a national security issue rather than a political or economic one. This approach, according to Devasher, has resulted in widespread human rights abuses, including forced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and a heavy military presence that has stifled civil life in the province. He brings forth testimonies and documented evidence from various sources to illustrate the brutality of Pakistan’s military tactics, highlighting how these methods have only fuelled further resistance among the Baloch people.

 

Devasher’s exploration of human rights issues is one of the book’s most powerful sections. He discusses the “missing persons” issue in depth, referring to the thousands of Baloch activists, students, and political leaders who have allegedly been abducted or killed by state security forces. This has led to what Devasher describes as a pervasive atmosphere of fear and oppression. He further explores the militarisation of Balochistan, showing how these repressive policies have created a sense of siege among ordinary Baloch citizens. By treating Balochistan as a security problem, Devasher argues that the Pakistani government has undermined its efforts to integrate the province, instead fostering an atmosphere of anger and resentment that has only served to strengthen separatist sentiments.

 

Another crucial element of Devasher’s analysis is Balochistan’s geopolitical significance, particularly its role in Pakistan’s relationships with Afghanistan, India, and China. Devasher notes that Balochistan’s location—bordering Iran and Afghanistan and close to the Persian Gulf—makes it a strategic asset for Pakistan. However, this same strategic significance has drawn external interest, especially from India and Afghanistan, which Pakistan accuses of supporting Baloch insurgents.

 

The book also covers China’s involvement in Balochistan through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a major infrastructural initiative that runs through the province. Devasher describes how the CPEC project while promising to bring development, has generated concerns among the Baloch over increased military presence, displacement, and lack of economic benefits for the local population. Devasher argues that while the CPEC may bring some development, it has also intensified fears that foreign powers exploit Balochistan’s resources without fair compensation to the local population. The geostrategic context adds further complexity to the Balochistan conundrum, as external involvement in the region creates additional pressure on Pakistan’s federal government.

 

In addition to political and economic issues, Devasher dedicates part of his analysis to the cultural and ethnic identity of the Baloch people. He discusses how the Pakistani state has attempted to impose a uniform national identity, one that prioritises Islam and disregards the distinct cultural heritage of the Baloch people. This attempt to assimilate Balochistan into a homogenised national identity has only heightened the Baloch people’s desire to preserve their distinct cultural and ethnic identity, adding to their resistance to centralisation.

 

Devasher argues that Pakistan’s policies have overlooked the Baloch people’s historical sense of autonomy and pride in their cultural identity. This aspect of Baloch identity is intertwined with their demand for greater independence and self-determination. Devasher presents an in-depth look at how cultural suppression has become a symbol of the broader political and economic neglect that the Baloch people face, arguing that this cultural dimension is a crucial yet often overlooked factor in understanding Balochistan’s resistance.

 

Pakistan: The Balochistan Conundrum is a profoundly insightful and compelling account of Balochistan’s struggle within Pakistan. Devasher combines historical perspective, human rights concerns, and geopolitical analysis to deliver a balanced and thorough examination of the region’s conflicts. His findings paint a sobering picture: unless Pakistan addresses the root causes of Balochistan’s grievances, its policies may continue to fuel instability and insurgency.

 

Devasher’s work ultimately suggests that the road to peace and integration lies not in military domination but in addressing the legitimate demands of the Baloch people, particularly in terms of economic inclusion, political representation, and respect for cultural identity. This book is a must-read for scholars, policymakers, and anyone interested in South Asian geopolitics, as it offers a clear-eyed look at a region that is both critical to Pakistan’s stability and emblematic of its internal struggles.

 

Your valuable comments are most welcome.

 

1014
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

 

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

 

Posted on

570: DRAGON TIGHTENS ITS GRIP: CHINA’S MILITARY PRESENCE GROWS IN LARUNG GAR

 

Pic Courtesy Net

 

My Article published on the EurasianTimes Website

 

Recent reports indicate a significant increase in Chinese military presence at Larung Gar Buddhist Academy, the world’s largest Tibetan Buddhist study center in Serthar County, Karze, within Tibet’s traditional Kham province, now part of Sichuan Province.  On December 20, 2024, approximately 400 Chinese military personnel were deployed to the academy, accompanied by helicopter surveillance, signalling intensified monitoring of the religious site. In addition to the military deployment, Chinese authorities reportedly plan to implement new regulations at Larung Gar in 2025. These measures include limiting residency for monks and nuns to 15 years, a significant departure from the traditional lifelong commitment to religious practice, and requiring mandatory registration for all religious practitioners. This move could potentially lead to increased surveillance and control over the religious community. There are also plans to reduce the number of residents, with reports indicating that Chinese students are being asked to leave the institution.

 

Larung Gar had previously faced crackdowns, notably in 2001 and between 2016 and 2017, when thousands of residential structures were demolished and numerous practitioners were forcibly evicted. These actions significantly reduced the academy’s population. The recent military deployment and impending regulations have raised concerns among Tibetan communities and human rights organisations, who view these actions as part of a broader strategy to suppress religious freedom and Tibetan cultural identity. This strategy, which includes measures such as mass demolitions, forced evictions, and increased surveillance, is seen as an attempt to weaken the influence of Tibetan Buddhism and promote the dominance of the Chinese state. The international community continues to monitor the situation closely, with calls for protecting religious freedoms and preserving Tibetan cultural heritage.

 

Historical Significance of Larung Gar

 

Tibet, often called the “Roof of the World,” is unique in global spiritual and cultural heritage. Its monasteries, prayer flags, and serene landscapes symbolise centuries of spiritual devotion and resilience. Among these sacred sites, Larung Gar, a sprawling Buddhist monastic community nestled in the remote Garze Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, has emerged as a beacon of Tibetan culture and religious practice.

 

Founded in 1980 by the late Khenpo Jigme Phuntsok, Larung Gar was established as a center for Tibetan Buddhist education and meditation. Unlike traditional monasteries, it welcomed monks, nuns, and lay practitioners from diverse backgrounds, fostering a unique blend of inclusivity and scholastic rigour that is now under threat. Over the decades, Larung Gar grew into the world’s largest Buddhist institute, with thousands of residents and visitors drawn to its spiritual teachings.

 

For Tibetans, Larung Gar is more than just a religious site; it symbolises cultural identity and resilience. The institute has played a crucial role in preserving the Tibetan language, traditions, and spiritual practices amidst external pressures, and the potential loss of this cultural heritage is deeply felt. Its vibrant community and serene surroundings embody the harmonious coexistence of spirituality and daily life.

 

Sinification as Chinese Statecraft

 

Sinification, the process of assimilating non-Han ethnic groups into Chinese cultural and political life, is a core component of China’s statecraft. Historically, this policy has been employed to consolidate power, integrate peripheral regions, and create a unified national identity. At its heart, Sinification seeks to promote the dominance of Han Chinese culture, language, and values across the diverse ethnic mosaic of China.

 

Historical Perspective. The concept of Sinification is rooted in China’s imperial history. Emperors of the Qin and Han Dynasties (221 BCE–220 CE) expanded China’s borders to include non-Han territories, such as Tibet, Mongolia, and Xinjiang, often through military conquest and colonisation. As these regions were integrated into the Chinese empire, local populations were encouraged or forced to adopt Chinese customs, language, and governance.

 

Revival. In the 20th and 21st centuries, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has revitalised Sinification as a statecraft strategy. Under Xi Jinping’s leadership, the policy has renewed urgency, particularly in ethnically distinct regions like Tibet and Xinjiang. The CCP’s current approach is multifaceted, involving economic development, cultural integration, and political control to align minority populations with mainstream Chinese identity.

 

Forced Assimilation. Sinification is often framed as a means of fostering national unity and economic development. By promoting the Chinese language and culture, the state aims to create a shared sense of belonging and erase historical divisions between Han and non-Han groups. This is evident in the promotion of Mandarin Chinese as the lingua franca and the construction of Chinese schools and cultural institutions in minority regions. China claims these measures are essential for cohesion and stability in a country with diverse ethnic and religious groups.

 

Identity Erasure and Assertion. However, the policy also raises profound questions about identity. For many non-Han groups, Sinification is perceived as a form of cultural erasure, undermining indigenous languages, traditions, and religious practices. The process often includes the relocation of Han Chinese citizens into minority areas, the suppression of native languages, and the promotion of Chinese cultural norms. In this context, Sinification becomes a tool not just for integration but for asserting Han Chinese dominance and defining what it means to be “Chinese.”

 

Rights Violation. For many minority communities, particularly Tibetans, Uighurs, and Mongols, this form of assimilation is seen as a violation of their cultural and religious rights. In Tibet, the destruction of monasteries, the restriction on Buddhist practices, and the imposition of the Chinese language in schools are all part of efforts to assimilate the population. Similarly, in Xinjiang, the Uighur Muslim population faces forced labour, mass surveillance, and the imposition of Chinese cultural norms, all of which threaten their distinct identity.

 

Resistance. Resistance to Sinification is a defining feature of its history. For many ethnic minorities, the push to preserve their cultural autonomy is seen as a response to the state’s encroachment on their way of life. In Tibet and Xinjiang, protests, both violent and nonviolent, have occurred in opposition to the erosion of religious and cultural practices. Tibetan Buddhist monks, Uighur Muslims, and other ethnic minorities continue to advocate for greater autonomy and the right to preserve their heritage.

 

China’s Policy in Tibet and Militarisation of Larung Gar

 

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has maintained a contentious relationship with Tibet since its annexation in 1950. Framing Tibet as an integral part of Chinese territory, the PRC has implemented policies aimed at assimilation and control. These measures include restrictions on religious practices, promoting Mandarin over Tibetan, and infrastructural projects that often undermine local traditions.

 

Beijing views Tibet’s governance as a territorial and ideological issue. The region’s strategic location, rich natural resources, and potential as a geopolitical buffer make it a priority. However, the persistence of Tibetan resistance within and outside Tibet challenges the PRC’s narrative of harmonious integration.

 

The growing military presence in Larung Gar is a microcosm of broader trends in Tibet. Over the past decade, Chinese authorities have intensified their control over religious institutions, citing concerns about separatism and social stability. In Larung Gar, this has manifested through mass demolitions, forced evictions, surveillance, and military deployments.

 

Mass Demolitions and Forced Evictions. In 2016, Chinese authorities launched a large-scale campaign to downsize Larung Gar, citing overcrowding and safety concerns. Bulldozers razed thousands of homes, displacing monks, nuns, and lay practitioners. Estimates suggest that over 4,000 residents were forced to leave, with many relocated to distant areas under strict surveillance. For those evicted, the loss was not merely physical but deeply emotional and spiritual. Larung Gar had been a sanctuary for many, where they could pursue spiritual growth and community. The demolitions disrupted this ecosystem, creating an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty.

 

Surveillance and Military Presence. In addition to physical restructuring, the Chinese government has ramped up surveillance in Larung Gar. High-tech cameras, facial recognition systems, and checkpoints have transformed the area into a heavily monitored zone. Military personnel conduct regular patrols, further intimidating the remaining residents.

 

This militarisation reflects Beijing’s broader strategy in Tibet, where technological and physical control mechanisms are used to suppress dissent and enforce ideological conformity. Larung Gar, once a hub of spiritual freedom, now operates under constant scrutiny.

 

Implications

 

The Chinese government’s actions in Larung Gar profoundly affect Tibetan culture and religion. Tibetan Buddhism, which emphasises non-violence, compassion, and self-realisation, starkly contrasts the state’s authoritarian approach. By targeting Larung Gar, Beijing is not only undermining a religious institution but also eroding a cornerstone of Tibetan identity.

 

Loss of Autonomy. Larung Gar’s forced restructuring represents a direct assault on the autonomy of Tibetan religious institutions. Decisions about monastic administration, community size, and daily activities are now subject to government approval, stripping the institute of its independence.

 

Cultural Assimilation. The destruction of homes and the dispersal of residents disrupt the transmission of Tibetan cultural and religious knowledge. Monastic education, which relies heavily on the community’s cohesion, has been severely impacted. Furthermore, the promotion of Mandarin and state-approved curricula over traditional Tibetan teachings accelerates cultural assimilation.

 

Psychological Impact. For many Tibetans, the militarisation of Larung Gar is a source of profound psychological distress. The presence of armed personnel in a sacred space symbolises the state’s disregard for their spiritual values. The fear of surveillance and the loss of communal bonds compounds this emotional toll.

 

Geopolitical Dimensions. The situation in Larung Gar has not gone unnoticed on the global stage. Tibet’s plight is a flashpoint in international human rights discourse, drawing attention from governments, NGOs, and advocacy groups. However, geopolitical considerations often complicate responses.

 

International Reactions. Countries such as the United States and members of the European Union have expressed concerns about human rights violations in Tibet, including the militarisation of Larung Gar. However, their responses are often tempered by economic and strategic interests in maintaining relations with China.

 

Strategic Implications for China. The militarisation of Larung Gar aligns with Beijing’s broader efforts to secure its western borders. By tightening control over Tibet, China aims to prevent unrest that could spill over into other regions or embolden separatist movements. However, this strategy risks fuelling further resentment and international criticism.

 

Conclusion. The growing military presence in Larung Gar represents a critical juncture for Tibet’s cultural and spiritual heritage. As the Chinese government tightens its grip, the world must grapple with the implications of this erosion of a sacred space. By standing in solidarity with Tibetan communities and advocating for their rights, we can honour the resilience of a people whose spirit continues to inspire across borders and generations.

 

Your valuable comments are most welcome.

 

Link to the article on the website:-

https://www.eurasiantimes.com/chine-deploys-troops-choppers-in-new/

 

1014
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

 

References:-

ANI, “China deploys hundreds of troops to Larung Gar, intensifies religious crackdown in Tibet”,

https://www.aninews.in/news/world/asia/china-deploys-hundreds-of-troops-to-larung-gar-intensifies-religious-crackdown-in-tibet20241228142304/

  1. Central Tibetan Administration, “Tibet’s Larung Gar Buddhist Academy Faces New Restrictions as Military Presence Increases”, 27 December 2024
  1. TIMESOFINDIA, “China deploys 400 troops. Choppers at Larung Gar in Tibet”, 28 Dec 2024.
  1. Elliot Sperling, “Larung Gar: China’s Expansion into Tibetan Religious Spaces”, Journal of Asian Studies.
  1. James Millward, “China’s Military Footprint in Tibet: The Expanding Role of the PLA” International Security.
  1. Anne-Marie Blondeau, “Sacred Spaces Under Siege: Tibetan Religious Sites in the Age of Chinese Military Expansion” Asian Ethnology
  1. Report, “China’s Crackdown on Tibetan Buddhism: Religious Freedom Under Siege” – Human Rights Watch, 2016
  1. Report, “The Military Presence in Tibet: China’s Use of Force in the Himalayan Region” – Amnesty International, 2017
  1. Tsering Shakya, “The Dragon in the Land of Snows: A History of Modern Tibet Since 1947”.

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

English हिंदी