THE DALAI LAMA'S SUCCESSION AND THE TIBETAN FLAG

The Tibetan Flag

In the 1990s, during an interview with Phuntso Tashi Takla, the Dalai Lama’s brother-in-law who was in charge of the Tibetan leader’s security when the latter visited China in 1954-55, the Tibetan official told me that on some occasions, Mao Zedong came himself to the Dalai Lama’s residence [in Zhongnanhai]. During one of the several discussions that the Dalai Lama and Mao Zedong had, they were talking on some subject, when Mao [suddenly] said: “Don’t you have a flag of your own, if you have one, you can hoist it here [on the Guest House].” Takla was surprised to hear Mao Zedong speaking of the flag of Tibet. The Chairman’s statement had (and still has today) incalculable implications for the so-called minorities in China. 

The Dalai Lama’s translator, Phunsok Wangyal (alias Phunwang) relates the same incident in his memoirs: “One day, Mao unexpectedly came to visit the Dalai Lama at his residence [Guest House]”… During their conversation, Mao suddenly said, "I heard that you have a national flag, do you? They do not want you to carry it, isn't that right?" Phunwang further recalled: “Since Mao asked this with no warning that the topic was to be discussed, the Dalai Lama just replied, that Tibetans have an army flag. I thought that was a shrewd answer because it didn't say whether Tibet had a national flag. Mao perceived that the Dalai Lama was concerned by his question and immediately told him, "That is no problem. You may keep your national flag." The Chairman added that in the future the Communist Party could also let Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia have their own flag. He then asked the Dalai Lama if it would be fine for him to host the national flag of the People's Republic of China in addition to the Tibetan flag. Phunwang says that the young Lama nodded his head and said ‘yes’: “I was amazed to hear this” later wrote Phunwang. This is still worth pondering upon, what is the place of the minorities in modern China?

The Double Tragedy

The last months of 1950 witnessed a double tragedy: the Dalai Lama and his people lost their independent country and India lost a border, which had been peaceful for centuries. Despite the presence of the Dalai Lama in the free world and his continuous efforts to find, in a non-violent manner, a reasonable solution to the Tibetan issue, no great progress has been achieved. As for the Indian border, it has never been so tense, particularly in Eastern Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh. On November 7, 1950 (five weeks before his passing away), Sardar Patel, the Indian Deputy Prime Minister, wrote to Prime Minister Nehru. Sardar Patel strongly suggested (among other things): 

• A military and intelligence appreciation of the Chinese threat to India both on the frontier and internal security
• An examination of our military position and such re-disposition of our forces as might be necessary
• An appraisement of strength of our forces
• A long-term consideration of our defence needs
• The question of Chinese entry into the UN
• The political and administrative steps to strengthen our Northern and North-Eastern frontier.
• Improvement of our communication, road, rail, air and wireless in these areas and with the frontier outpost.

Seventy-four years later, India is still facing the same issues, but in a far more exacerbated manner. In this regard, the first step that India could take is to stop speaking of the ‘the Sino-India border’, but instead call the Northern boundary as the Indo-Tibet border; let us not forget that for centuries it has been the border with Tibet. Further, India should use the names of all localities in Tibet in a correct transliteration of the Tibetan original names and not in a sinicized way. Many other steps could be taken in a similar vein.

The Dalai Lama's Succession

The Dalai Lama's succession is a subject which concerns India as the religious leader took refuge in this country in March 1959 and lakhs of his followers (which include the Himalayan population) live in India today. Whether the Dalai Lama decides not to reincarnate (which is doubtful), or to take a new body or else to 'emanate' during his own lifetime into a young child, Delhi and the people of India are personally and politically concerned. While the ‘political’ succession has been taken care of in 2011, when the Dalai Lama decided to relinquish his temporal power and have an elected leader running the Tibetan government’s affairs, the ‘spiritual’ succession remains a problem.

Returning to Tibet as the 15th Dalai Lama under the present circumstances is not viable, it can therefore be discarded as a place of rebirth; in any case the Communist authorities have already planned his 'return' through Communist party regulations and China is bound to have its own candidate who will be a Communist first, before being a religious leader in an atheist regime.The best bet for the succession would be a ‘return’ in India, where he would be most welcome by both the people and the government (even if Delhi does not say so openly, to not upset China). 

The choice is then between a reincarnation and an emanation; the latter seems more adapted to a modern system of governance which can’t afford a gap of 20 years or so in leadership. The Tibetan leader will ultimately have to take the call. In the meantime, China has already prepared to have its own 15th Dalai Lama. In July 2007, the party-State announced the 'State Order number' or 'Management Measures for the Reincarnation of Living Buddhas in Tibetan Buddhism. The 14 articles of the Regulation effectively control the system of reincarnation. India should note this and act according to its own interests.

These remarks were presented by Mr. Claude Apri at the Global Conference for New Sinology (GCNS), 2024.