By Alden C. Mayfield
Isn't it nice to see such nations as Australia, Britain, Canada, the EU, New Zealand, the U.S., and others urging China to show self-restraint on disenfranchised Tibetans.
However, it isn't surprising that these nations didn't threaten any Olympic boycott, economic sanctions or military action.
Why is it that these former (some present) colonial powers are reluctant to condemn China? Perhaps it is the billions tied up in contracts with China Inc.? Or China is a rising military superpower that other nations are afraid of her?
Why are these nations calling for self-restraint when they know China will violently suppress this latest Tibetan headache? A plausible scenario is that these Western nations are suffering from the historical disease known as CTS: Colonial Tibet Syndrome.
If these former (present) colonial powers condemn China, they would undermine their own colonial policies toward their own indigenous peoples; they would embolden their indigenous groups' struggle for political self-determination.
For many years, Australia, a former British colony, has been oppressing the Aborigines. Aborigines were not even considered humans let alone worthy of any recognition. Indeed, all their land was forcibly taken from them without any compensation or hope for the future.
Despite its ``historic" apology to the Aborigines, their basic lives haven't changed under ``white" Australian rule. If the Aborigines violently protested for their land and self-determination, they'd be crushed just like the Tibetans. No doubt about it.
Not surprisingly, New Zealand has been following the same racist path as Australia in brutally suppressing Maori indigenous groups. I'm sure these Kiwis would show great self-restraint if their indigenous groups violently demanded their land back.
During her imperial greatness, Great Britain controlled much of the globe and instigated much of its present troubles. It treated indigenous populations much like China is treating the Tibetans.
For example, Britain brutally controlled India and crushed any protests from the inferior ``savage'' Indian race. In fact, the colonial legacy of ruthlessly controlling the local ``savage'' population was pioneered by Britain in Africa, India, Asia, Canada, New Zealand and Australia.
There are countless incidents on Britain flexing her imperial muscles in Africa and Asia. Therefore, if Britain supports Tibet, it will undermine her former colonies present indigenous peoples' policies.
The apartheid regime in South Africa was whole-heartedly supported by many European nations, including Israel, which is illegally occupying Palestinian land. Oh, remember the Falkland Islands?
``Oh Canada, Our Home and Native Land,'' sings the Canadian National Anthem. Historically, Canada is not an indigenous ``white'' peoples' home and native lands as Canadians have confiscated these land from the ``savage'' Indians on the ``Doctrine of Discovery'' premise, which is the colonial justification for killing and stealing other peoples' land without compensation or justice.
Despite the signing of many treaties, Canada has placed natives on (apartheid) reservations with third-world living standards waiting for monthly rations. Now, if any Indian reservation violently protested for the return of their land, they would be silenced like the Tibetans.
There wouldn't be any talk of showing self-restraint. As such Australia, Canada, like China, is still illegally occupying native-Indians land. This is the rationale behind these Western nations' muted criticism of China.
Similarly, European colonial history is complicit in the brutal colonial project of controlling indigenous land. For instance, France had colonies in Africa, Asia, Canada and like its Canadian, Australian, and American brothers, followed the same indigenous population policy.
To be sure, France and others still claim islands in the Pacific and the Caribbean. France has no reason to condemn China since it has a history of savagely suppressing revolts in Algeria.
More could be said of Belgium, Germany, Spain, Portugal, Holland and other colonial interests in Africa and Asia. If it were not for restless natives in Asia, the Dutch, French and Portugese would still be in control.
If it were not for the restless Africans, Africa would still be in the hands of racist Europeans. Therefore, there is still hope for Tibet and other indigenous populations seeking political self-determination.
Finally, the U.S. has a sad history of suppressing native Indian revolts. It took the British and U.S. colonial powers hundreds of years to suppress Indian revolts and their legitimate land claims and political self-determination.
Instead the U.S. transferred mass native-Indian populations (thousands died in the process called the ``Trail of Tears'' ― more than the World Trade Center, 9/11) in order to control them and their land. One only needs to look at the historic ``Wounded Knee'' massacre to see that China and the U.S. have kindred hearts.
Hundreds of Indian children, women, pregnant women, elderly, infirm, and others were brutally murdered by the U.S. Army. These American soldiers were treated as heroes and were given the Congressional Medal of Honor for slaughtering Indian babies.
Therefore, the U.S. has no interest in sparking the flame of freedom in the hearts of Indians (or Tibetans) living on reservations. If the U.S. condemns China for suppressing Tibetan aspirations for political self-determination, it is basically acknowledging that its Indian policy is equally wrong.
Despite the historical fact that Tibet has never been part of China, she must use force in implementing its colonial rule. And despite the historical fact that Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the U.S., and other nations are still illegally occupying indigenous lands, it is imperative that these nations encourage Chinese self-restraint.
Even if these purported harbingers of justice and freedom criticize China, they have no moral authority as China is well aware of their dark colonial history in dealing with indigenous populations. Isn't it any wonder China scoffs at the U.S. government's annual human rights report?
Alden C. Mayfield is an indigenous person from Alberta, Canada. He has been teaching English as a foreign language in Korean universities for 11 years. He was recently professor of English at Hallym University.