« Woman vs Man #2 | Main | Blog roundup »
June 25, 2003
So much to say, so little time...
Must be something in the water. There is so much in my mailbox and on the web that cries out to be blogged. Some days there is nothing (you are the pigeon) and some days there is too much to handle (you are the statue).
Well today I want to start with a rant. Think back to pre WWII. Think back to the arrogance of colonial powers making arbitrary (and inappropriate) decisions about colonies and "unimportant" countries. Think about the absolute and complete sheer-bloody-mindedness of a British Prime Minister giving away a country (I have made peace in our time). I'm not debating that he bought time, I'm not arguing that it was the wrong decision, I am arguing that he had no right to do that. It was the same after WWI and WWII where the victors decided not only the fate of the loosers but also the fate of anyone not big enough to stop them. After WWI, Australia asked why it was not included in the discussions and Britain responded that it would talk for Australia. The Prime Minister of the day pointed out that Britain could not speak for the Australian dead.
[Amateur historians might like to check out Digger History which points out that the Australian death rate of 145 per 1000 mobilized was higher than any other commonwealth country - mainly due to the British stuff-up at Gallipoli.]
What bought this rant up was the absolutely unbelievable headline on the BBC news site: India and China agree over Tibet. While it is good to know that the world's two largest (population) nations are talking, but what gives them the right to decide the fate of Tibet? China's "right" to include Tibet is exactly as legitimate as their claim to Taiwan, Korea (all of it), Japan, and all the other places that at some point in time were vassal states of China. This is arrogant nonsense. What do the people of Tibet want? I exclude the opinion of those who were shipped in by China to rig the question. If the question is asked only of those born in Tibet prior to the occupation by China, what would the answer be?
It is terrible to see that India, who managed to throw off the colonial legacy of the British is now adopting British style tactics in dealing with their smaller neighbours. Surely they can do better. As for China, it has been recalcitrant about Tibet all along and so maybe the expectation of sanity and honesty is not as well founded.
Posted by Ozguru at June 25, 2003 12:06 PM
Comments
Posted by: Paul Jané at June 25, 2003 12:06 PM
