|
As for the parliamentary election, yet another situation is emerging. When the Dalai Lama first established a democratic parliament in Dharamsala, decisions were based on the opinions of the Dalai Lama. In the past decades, the parliament has been following the path laid out by the Dalai Lama, and thus, further endorsing the Dalai Lama’s decisions. To date, even though the Tibetan Youth Congress has frequently opposed the moderate stance of the Dalai Lama, members of the Youth Congress have not dared to voice their opposition within the parliament. At the very most, Youth Congress members have dwelled upon peripheral issues, or complained about the ineptitude of officials. It is apparent that the Dalai Lama has been annoyed by the constant bickering with the parliament. In fact, on a number of occasions, the parliament has closed sessions without coming to resolutions about what the Dalai Lama has referred to as “small issues.” We have no way of knowing whether or not the Dalai Lama still advocates moving toward a Western style democratic system. Nonetheless, the Dalai Lama can certainly see that promoting democracy has given rise to ceaseless disputes within Tibetan society. Another particularly frightening prospect is that once the current Dalai Lama passes away, no leader will be capable of gaining control. Therefore, the democratic system will tear the Tibetan community apart.
Even though the Dalai Lama has, at times, chosen the wrong path and acted upon selfish concerns, as the leader of the Tibetan people, he should not sit back and watch as matters deteriorate even further. The Dalai Lama can see that he will not be able to control the parliament in the future. Moreover, he will not necessarily have the complete obedience of the democratically elected Premiere. Thus, he is looking for a way to get a handle on the situation. As mentioned previously, the Sde-srid system was set up during the time of the 5th Dalai Lama. The Sde-srid acted at the behest of the Dalai Lama. We believe that a return to Sde-srid system could be the Dalai Lama’s final ploy to deal with public opinion. The Sde-srid system was perpetuated for many decades after the death of the 5th Dalai Lama. Thus, restoring the Sde-srid system would be a brilliant way to kill two birds with one stone. On the one hand, the Dalai Lama could use the Sde-srid to override the electoral system and maintain his theocratic authority. In other words, the restoration of the Sde-srid system would represent the Dalai Lama’s distrust of the democratic process. On the other hand, by reinstating the Sde-srid system, the Dalai Lama could resolve of the problem of finding a suitable leader after he passes away. As discussed above, the format of this round of democratic elections in Tibetan communities should be applauded. However, the motives behind these elections are another matter. The Dalai Lama knows that Western democratic procedures are not suited to the current circumstances of the Tibetan exile community. Moreover, he has long been aware that the development of democracy would eventually lead to the questioning of his authority. This being the case, why has he continued to insist upon democratic reform? Actually, the Dalai Lama faces his own difficulties. It is well-known that many countries have elevated the status and voice of the current Dalai Lama as a way to counterbalance the power of China. In other words, without the backing of international political forces, the Dalai Lama would just be another unknown leader of a community in exile. Thus, the Dalai Lama must gain the good graces of western nations by continuing to enthusiastically promote democracy. By doing so, the Dalai Lama can also highlight China’s lack of democracy and utter disregard of human rights. |