| Above: | Potala Palace, Lhasa |
| A True Story | ||
| A true account of a journey through Tibet. Tibet part of China? Think again... | ||
|
If politics is not your thing, then read no further. If you are interested in reading an eye witness account of a trip through Tibet, read on...
While you're here, give your opinion in my 'Reader Poll' or leave a message /question in my Guestbook. You might also want to take a look at my 'Tibet' page for photos and general info. while you're here and there's also my 'Lhasa Photos' if you want to have a look at more pictures. Please also see my 'Tibet Links and Forum' page for more web sites dealing specifically with the Tibet issue and for a Discussion Forum hosted by 'Buyhard for Tibet'. 'Tibet - Frequently Asked Questions' contains information commonly requested on travel to Tibet. After you've read the below, take a look also at the related documents on the Conference of Simla and the Seventeen Point Agreement. More information on Tibet can be found in the 'Background' section, including a 'A Brief History of Tibet', plus a little on Tibetan beliefs and the Dalai and Panchen Lamas. Don't feel you should go to Tibet with the Chinese there? Ladakh is an alternative destination, but read my 'Ladakh or Tibet?' page too.
If you've not time to read all the below, take a look at 'A Dissident's Story' - his brief story puts across what Tibetans feel in their hearts despite everything that has happened.
 |
 |
Don't get me wrong, I've nothing against the Chinese as people. But I cannot agree with their continued occupation of Tibet, a country that is so different in outlook and culture from China, that there is no way in my opinion, the two can be considered one and the same. Please understand that this article is not meant to reflect badly on China as a whole - I went to China three years before my 1998 trip to Tibet and their treatment of foreigners couldn't have been better. But I saw a different side to the Chinese when I was in Tibet and it is what I saw there that persuaded me to write this article.
Lhasa to Kathmandu - My Journey through Tibet
In July 1998, I visited Tibet with a party of ten other people, including one Irish woman, an American married couple, one Canadian, one Sri Lankan and five British nationals. I expected to see a country that devoutly followed their religion, but instead found towns that had grown up in size, due to an influx of Han Chinese labour (the Tibet article in Microsoft Encarta 2000 states that this was Chinese government policy), with salaries allegedly greater than their Tibetan counterparts. All the best jobs were reserved for the Chinese, for example, all the staff in the better hotels were Chinese.
As for that which was uniquely Tibetan, much had gone. It is true to say that the major monasteries have been restored (Sera, Ganden, Drepung near Lhasa and Tashilhunpo in Shigatse) and that new novice monks are now appearing there, however, there was a feeling that some were in the employee of the Chinese to make the monasteries appear fuller than they actually were. It is quite possible that these were nine to five workers, which went home to their families every evening. The main nunnery in Lhasa was slightly more convincing, with more of a feeling that the nuns there were the genuine article.
The primary cities of Lhasa and Shigatse are now predominantly 'Han Chinese', who form a majority of the Chinese population, with other sources reporting an influx of Hui Moslems - Chinese with Moslem beliefs. Away from these cities, even in small towns like Gyantse, the Chinese are erecting new buildings to encourage Chinese immigrants, at the expense of the more neglected Tibetan sections of these towns (these are easy to spot, normally with blue or tinted glass and writing on them only in Chinese).
Perhaps the worst example of change is the influx of some more dubious practices - prostitution in Chinese dominated areas is far more prominent. In a short walk through Shigatse town centre, we spotted six brothels, run by and frequented only by the Chinese, with no signs of Tibetans. There were plenty group jokes about the brothels, until we came to the last - the prostitutes were no older than their early teens. At this point, all the jokes stopped.
Also, in the countryside, there were many examples where the Chinese had brutally tried to destroy Tibetan culture (especially during the Cultural Revolution) - at Shegar, to the south of the town were the extensive ruins of a destroyed monastery. Back in Shigatse, the main palace ruins, again destroyed by the Chinese, can be seen on the ridge above the town.
 |
| Tashilhunpo Monastery in Shigatse
This survived the destruction of the Cultural Revolution. The main palace did not. |
There were other alleged incidents and strange happenings while we were there:
Police were supposed to have beaten up what may have been a bystander and dragged him away for reasons known only to them.
Chinese living only at most 100 metres from the Jokhang temple (the equivalent of Mecca to Tibetan Buddhists) when asked for directions, did not know where it was. I was present when this happened.
Tibetan children are not allowed to be educated in their mother tongue except in the first couple of years of their education, during which they must learn Chinese to progress. At secondary level, education is almost completely Chinese based. This can only be seen as an attack not only on their religion, but on their language also. As a result, some Tibetan families are sending their children over the Himalayan passes to receive an education in Tibetan, in the refugee camps run by the Tibetan Government in exile and other agencies.
The wages of the immigrant Chinese were, as I mentioned earlier, said to be greater than their Tibetan counterparts. I have been queried on this point and for this, I quote two sources. Firstly, I had a conversation with a Tibetan, who clearly stated that the Chinese were paid 'much more'. Secondly, Heinrich Harrer said in his book "Return to Tibet" (author of the original "Seven Years in Tibet") that in 1982, a wage scale was in evidence, with Chinese being paid the most, favored Tibetans being paid less and ordinary Tibetans being paid least of all. The comment made to me by the unnamed Tibetan seems to indicate that this apparent practice still continues. This appears to be to encourage more Chinese to move into Tibet.
In addition, television broadcasts appeared to be restricted to those from within China (correct me if I am wrong). In the more easterly provinces, it was possible to receive foreign broadcasts, some in English. I can testify myself to this, where on a previous visit to China in 1995, foreign language broadcasts could be received in Beijing and Xi'an and in the latter, it was possible to watch the English Premiership Football (Soccer) League live! These transmissions originated from Hong Kong and Japan. My own conclusions (subject to the following paragraph) are that the Chinese were trying to restrict the flow of information into Tibet from sources other than their own. I consider this a bit pointless, considering that facilities such as the Internet are readily available, if you know where to look in Lhasa (for example, the Barkhor Café).
Admittedly, I have heard since that the Chinese did cut off foreign cable broadcasts to the whole of China, six months after their introduction in 1994, thus the only broadcast sources of information were their own (again, the only problem with this is the availability of the Internet). It is also true to say that foreign signals could still be received, but only along the east coast of China. But my understanding from other tourists is that CNN and / or similar were still being received in Xi'an well after this date. This is well away from the east coast and transmissions were still not getting through to Tibet. The picture as regards television is a little confused and I honestly do not know what conclusions to draw here, though the attempts to control the flow of information clearly continue, despite the presence of the Internet.
As we left Tibet, two further incidents summed up what we had seen during our time there. Firstly, we were denied access to a reasonably comfortable if basic hotel at Zhang Mu on the border with Nepal, simply because our guide and driver were Tibetan. Before this was realised (the official reason given was that the hotel was full), two of us entered the hotel unhindered and used the toilet. There only appeared to be four people other than staff in the hotel, with the rest of the building (including a large restaurant area) apparently deserted.
Following this, we were then forced to use a Hotel called the Gyan Tsen (I admit I can't spell) opposite, which was without doubt the worst hotel I have ever stayed in (and I have stayed in some pretty bad hotels during my travels). We were told to use the 'clean' rooms at the back; it turns out that the front 'dirty' rooms were being used as a brothel. How is it that people (I refer to the girls plying their trade) can be lowered to this?
After that last night in Zhang Mu, the party was relieved to cross over the Nepalese border. At the other side, we felt at least a little closer to equals.
-----------------
Don't get me wrong, it wasn't all doom and gloom (I would describe much of what is happening as being to a degree in the background from the tourist perspective), I still had the trip of a life time while I was there, with the friendliness of some of the Tibetans evident by the sharp contrast to the noticeably more reserved behaviour of the Chinese. And the Potala Palace and the Jokhang were brilliant (see my 'Tibet' and 'Lhasa' pages for pictures and some less serious stuff).
Admittedly, not all that the Chinese have done is completely negative. Between the main towns at least, a decent road system is appearing, with mostly tarmaced roads now connecting Lhasa with Shigatse, Chengdu and Golmud, where before there were only rough tracks. A partially tarmaced road also connects Lhasa and Shigatse with the Nepalese border at Zhang Mu and Kodari (the 'Friendship Highway'), though this is subject to intermittent closure from landslides and erosion at many points along it's route.
Elsewhere, a network of gravel roads connects most of Tibet together now and within a few years, a railway that will be a feat of engineering will connect Lhasa with the Chinese rail network at Golmud. Lhasa's Gonggar airport, although basic, is superior to many I have been through, notably Beijing itself, the appalling, sometimes amusing chaos of Moscow's Sheremetyevo airport, the slum like conditions of Tashkent airport in Uzbekistan and the slow bureaucracy of Tribhuvan International Airport in Kathmandu.
But an alternative view can be taken of these. These improved links could bring increased prosperity to Tibet, but they could also be used to speed up the removal of Tibet's natural resources (for example, Tibet's mineral resources have become the object of Chinese attention - also, logging and deforestation in eastern Tibet was carried out on such a scale, that the absence of the former woodlands to soak up the rains lead to major flooding in the Yangtse river valley and from 1998 onwards, logging was stopped and the Chinese have had to start a programme of reforestation) and the movement of non-Tibetans to Tibet, such as the aforementioned Hui Moslems and the Han Chinese themselves. These links also help to tie Tibet ever closer to China, making it even more dependant on China for produce and resources not otherwise available in Tibet. Prior to 1950, Tibet's links to the south (India, Nepal and Bhutan) were the more important.
In general, medical and educational standards are also vastly improved, with western techniques replacing a Tibetan system based on traditional remedies and superstition. Education does give opportunities for people to advance themselves, but there is an anti-Tibetan bias, in that tuition in schools and higher education establishments, is carried out increasingly in Chinese as the pupil or student moves into older age groups. In the early 1980s, the Chinese promised to reverse this situation (Heinrich Harrer - "Return to Tibet"), but this has not happened. It appears that via education, the Chinese are trying to push to the margins the Tibetan language and make Mandarin Chinese the primary language of use within Tibet.
Opinions and Background
Why do all this? Perhaps to convince themselves that Tibet is, after all, a part of China, when they know in their heart of hearts, it isn't. Perhaps to make Tibet and the Tibetans more and more Chinese as time goes on. To increase their hold and influence over a people, a majority of which traditionally do not want the Chinese and do not want to be ruled from Beijing. The 1950 invasion and the following March 1959 putsch (when the Dalai Lama finally escaped) were resisted with what little the Tibetans had to offer (revolts against Chinese rule actually started two years earlier). The 1960's saw the Cultural Revolution and the mass destruction of many facets and icons of what went before, not just in Tibet but in China as well. In the face of this, guerrilla activity continued in Tibet until 1974, when the Dalai Lama ordered a cease-fire. It is said that rather than surrender, many of the Khampa Guerrillas who fought on for so long took their own lives. These are people that are supposed to regard themselves as Chinese?
 |
| Map of Tibet
The white area is that governed by Tibet prior to 1950, with the former provinces shown underlined. Shown also are the current Chinese provincial boundaries. The territory of Tibet was divided between Xizang (the Tibetan Autonomous Region), Qinghai (basically the former Tibetan province of Amdo) and the western part of Sichuan, with smaller portions forming parts of modern Yunnan and Gansu provinces. |
Alternatively, the reasons for the Chinese presence and activities may be more economic, in that they want access to Tibet's limited resources of raw materials, one example already quoted (see 'On the 'Positive Side'') being that the Chinese are busily stripping Tibet's remaining woodlands for wood and paper.
Their written languages also show significant differences. Although Chinese and Tibetan belong to the same language group (along with Burman or Burmese in Myanmar), the Tibetan language uses a modified Sanskrit script introduced by King Songtsen Gampo in the 7th Century, derived from that used in India and completely different to the Chinese system of writing. It was his conversion to Buddhism by his two wives, one Chinese and one Nepalese, that really began the spread of Buddhism in Tibet - yes, a Chinese wife (Tang princess Wen Cheng), but Tibet and China did effectively remain separate entities.
The Tibetans have always been a fiercely independent "warrior" race, their troops once reaching as far as the former Chinese capital of Chang'an (modern day Xi'an - home of the terracotta warriors), forcing tribute from the Chinese. Later they suffered invasions from different tribes of Mongols (1252, 1641, 1705 and 1717), who eventually themselves became Buddhists and gave the title of Dalai Lama (meaning 'Broad Ocean', inferring wisdom) to the first Dalai Lama.
The modern Chinese claim to Tibet dates back to the seventeenth century, when the Tibetans requested Qing (pronounced "Ching") assistance in expelling the Mongols, in return for accepting Qing overlordship. This situation did not last for long - the Tibetans were soon left to look after their own affairs once more. The last serious Chinese intervention seems to have been in 1784, when Chinese troops imposed the Peace of Kathmandu, following Gurkha incursions into Tibet. After this, the Qing government in Beijing basically ignored Tibet until 1910.
The Early 20th Century and the Conference of Simla 'Mess'
The early twentieth century saw two successive invasions, the first by the British (Younghusband, 1904), in which a trade agreement was forced on the Tibetans and the second by the Chinese in 1910, during which the British ignored a request for help from the Tibetans. After the removal of the Qing government in 1911, the new Republic of China declared Tibet, along with Mongolia and East Turkestan to be parts of China, but almost immediately independence was granted to Mongolia. The following year, the Chinese surrendered to the Tibetans after the Tibetans drove them out.
A small point that is missed by many arguments is that the Qing government was itself of Manchurian origin and came to control China when a Manchu army toppled the earlier Ming Dynasty. Thus the Chinese revolution of 1911 can be looked at as the removal of a Manchu government and technically the end of the occupation of China. As the Tibetans had accepted 'Qing' overlordship during the seventeenth century, the end of the Qing government meant the end of this overlordship agreement. China, coming out of a period of occupation had no basis for claiming Tibet as part of it's territory - the government with which this was agreed no longer existed.
The Conference of Simla (click on link for brief facts and text) that followed all this activity saw the British, Tibetans and Chinese (who sent their 'Tibet Pacification Commissioner' as their representative) attending as 'equal sovereign powers' (basically meaning each recognised the others as independent entities). A joint declaration was made by the British and Tibetan delegations in which Chinese 'suzerainty' (meaning 'overlordship') would not be recognised unless China signed the draft version of the Simla agreement, in which the 'greater borders', 'territorial integrity' and 'full autonomy' of Tibet was guaranteed. But there appears to be more than one text, with one effectively making Tibet independent and another giving the Chinese extensive control over Tibetan affairs - it is fair to say that the actual situation in the face of the different versions proposed is at best confused. In my opinion, the situation is a difficult to sort out 'mess'.
It is possible that the texts suggesting Chinese control may have been the set of proposals forwarded by China, with Tibet as nothing more than a province - this may have been an attempt at saving face after the Chinese defeat at the hands of the Tibetans in 1912. There is a suggestion that the Chinese representative at Simla, referred to as the 'Tibet Pacification Commissioner', was pressured into accepting a document he did not agree with - this infers the Chinese text was not that agreed upon and a more pro-Tibet document was forced upon him. If undue pressure was placed upon him, then indeed the situation he was put under was not fair, but nor was it fair to him for the Chinese side to send him on a 'face saving' mission after the defeat in Tibet.
Whatever the exact text 'agreed upon', the Chinese refused to ratify this agreement, disagreeing over the position of the border with Tibet and claiming that land was given to Tibet that actually belonged to China (possibly land now in the modern Chinese provinces of Sichuan, Gansu, Qinghai and a little bit of Yunnan). Even though the Chinese may have an argument as to the position of the actual border, with the Chinese failing to ratify the Simla agreement, the surrender document remains the active document and this makes Tibet a separate entity. The joint declaration can in my opinion effectively be ignored, due to the fact this does not include China in any joint agreement (here I disagree with other pro-Tibet websites). The surrender agreement and the end of Qing (Manchurian) rule do, something the Chinese can't ignore but choose to brush aside anyway.
During the years that followed, Tibet acted as an independent country. Yes, there was a Chinese representative in Lhasa. But there were also British (replaced by the Indians on Indian independence), Nepalese and Bhutanese diplomatic representatives with the same status - one representative from each of Tibet's nearest neighbours.
Another argument that is often used by the Chinese as a basis for it's argument that Tibet is Chinese, is an alleged statement by the Tibetan government during the early 1930's, that Tibet was indeed part of China. The wording that appears to have been used by the thirteenth Dalai Lama was "My greatest wish is for the real peace and unification of China". This was a time when control of China was divided between a number of warlords and the power of the nationalist government was much weakened, not least by the Communists who had begun an insurgency campaign during the 1920's. The wording of this statement does not mean that the Dalai Lama saw Tibet as part of China - without specific mention of the status of Tibet, the statement is thus meaningless in this respect.
The Chinese Invasion and After: the Dalai Lama or the Panchen Lama - Who's the Boss?
Tension remained with continuing clashes along the border and a further war in the late 1920's - the question that has to be asked here is why fight a war with a country you are supposed to be part of? This culminated in the invasion of Tibet in 1950 by the People's Liberation Army, during which the Tibetans tried to resist but were hopelessly overwhelmed by the Chinese. The Seventeen Point Agreement of Beijing on 23rd May 1951 was signed by a Tibetan Government which considered that it had no other choice - the legality of the document must be questioned, as it was signed under duress. During the 1950's, prior to the Dalai Lama's final flight to India in 1959, the Chinese repeatedly breached the terms of this agreement.
At the time of the invasion, the Chinese claimed that the Panchen Lama had invited them to 'reunify the motherland'. Whilst true power in Tibet was always centered around the Dalai Lama, the Chinese Communist Government chose to recognise the office of Panchen Lama as the senior authority instead - the ninth Panchen Lama expressed support for the Chinese and the tenth was born in China, factors which might have played a part in this decision.
The office of 'Panchen Lama' (meaning 'Great Teacher') was created during the reign of the fifth Dalai Lama, who unified Tibet under his control and bestowed the title of fourth Panchen Lama upon his tutor, placing him in Shigatse (the titles of first, second and third Panchen Lamas were given retrospectively to previous abbots of Tashilhunpo Monastery). The fifth Dalai Lama did declare that the Panchen Lama's spiritual powers were equal to his own, but secular control of Tibet remained in the hands of the office of the Dalai Lama. Whilst even some Tibetans regarded the Panchen Lama as holier than the Dalai Lama (even Heinrich Harrer in 'Return to Tibet' states that the Panchen Lama is higher in the Tibetan hierarchy), it is not clear how the Chinese got the idea that this might have extended to secular power also, though it is true that various Panchen Lamas did at times try to challenge the Dalai Lama's authority. The ninth Panchen Lama even pursued his own foreign policy with Britain and China, and his support for China led to him having to flee Tibet, fearing the revenge of the thirteenth Dalai Lama.
Despite this, it is to be noted that when a Dalai Lama passed away or was too young to govern, Tibet was not governed by the Panchen Lama, but by a regent acting on behalf of the young or yet to be reincarnated Dalai Lama in Lhasa.
The Cultural Revolution and Mao's policies are cited by the Chinese themselves as the reason for the destruction that was wrought, a period during which ordinary Chinese as well as Tibetans suffered greatly. But to blame the activities of the Mao period alone would be incorrect. Even though the mass destruction of icons of Tibetan culture have apparently all but stopped (i.e. destruction of monasteries and other buildings, including ironically the Panchen Lama's palace in Shigatse), those that voice opposition to the Chinese presence are still detained on a large scale with many facing varying levels of physical and mental abuse. If they are so sure that Tibet wants to be part of China, why do these activities continue?
As for the complicated events surrounding the disappearance of the eleventh Panchen Lama and his replacement with another child, these are issues best left to others to discuss - see my 'Tibet Links' page.
The Tibetans are a simple people who have not lost any of their devotion to the Buddhist religion. This is in sharp contrast to the consumerism and sometimes brutal rule of the Chinese, who continue to suppress the voice of the Tibetans, the main activity coming in the winter, when the tourists are not around.
This is not just happening in Tibet. In Xinjiang province (Chinese Turkestan in the far west of China), the Moslem Uighurs are enduring similar treatment. With China a growing power in world affairs, without a major change in policy by the Chinese, it is difficult to see a straightforward resolution to the problem. With the passing of each key Lama, the Chinese have installed their own Lama that is often different to that recognised elsewhere in the Tibetan speaking world. The Panchen Lama and Karmapa Lama (the third most powerful in the ancient Tibetan hierarchy) are key examples, where both have undergone a pro-Chinese education. If this policy is continued, with the passing of the current Dalai Lama, it is very likely there will be two candidates for his new incarnation. This could split the Tibetan movement between the two and with the opposition divided, the Chinese may be in a much stronger position.
But this policy has already backfired, when pro-Chinese elements selected and tried to educate the latest incarnation of the Karmapa Lama, who subsequently crossed the Himalayas and defected to the Tibetan Government in Exile (had other monks given him a more pro-Tibetan view of things?). As to what will happen with further selections of reincarnated Lamas, I don't know, but plenty more confusion can be expected with the rival incarnations and whether this does cause a split will depend on what Buddhists and Tibetans choose to believe. The Chinese may control the territory of Tibet, but as to winning over the hearts and minds of ordinary Tibetans, this is a different matter entirely as the following dissident's story shows.
To be fair to the Chinese, bar the latter incident in the hotel in Zhang Mu, the discrimination is not on racial lines. It tends to be those who oppose the Chinese Communist Party line and those who profess to views not along these lines (i.e. Tibetan self-determination) who face discrimination and possible arrest (you could say 'ideological discrimination').
I heard the story of one Tibetan who will remain nameless of his treatment - no times or dates, just the story. He had become involved in a pro-Tibet demonstration I believe in Lhasa some years ago which was as usual suppressed. He fled, crossing the Himalayas, reaching the refugee camps that are numerous in India and may have headed for McLeod Ganj in India, home of the Kashag Tibetan Government in Exile. What he did there is unclear, however, he became homesick and crossed the Himalayas back into Tibet.
Naturally, he was arrested by the Chinese police and the treatment he went through he did not go into. During his imprisonment, he went through a 'political re-education' programme. As he seemingly went through various degrees of political acceptability, he was relocated to work in a police station where he carried out menial tasks such as cooking and cleaning. He was finally released about two years after his arrest, when he was deemed politically safe. All this for expressing a political opinion.
And did this political education work? Put it this way, for someone who'd been re-educated to be a loyal Chinese citizen, in the few hours I had dealings with this person, it seemed uncanny he knew exactly who the monks were that were safe to give pictures of the Dalai Lama to.
The Tibetan's Children's Village Project (Dharamsala and McLeod Ganj)
[If you came here from the Dharamsala page, please click here to return.]
[If you came here from the Tibet Links page, please click here to return.]
I know on the 'Ladakh or Tibet' page that I said I felt that got more out of the earlier Tibet trip than the later Ladakh trip. However, one worthwhile thing I did on the Ladakh trip whilst heading towards Amritsar, was to visit the Tibetan's Children's Village (TCV project). To cut a long story short, the TCV project is about providing an education for Tibetan Children beyond Chinese influence. Even now, Tibetans send their children over the Himalayas (either over the high passes or - somehow - with tourists and visitors to Tibet) to be educated by the TCV project.
The campuses at McLeod Ganj and Lower Dharamsala are not the only one and there are other schools scattered around India. Money for these schools is raised by two main methods. Firstly, there is direct one-off donation. Secondly and preferred by the TCV project organisers, is sponsorship of one or more children throughout their education until they leave school (and later, the children are encouraged to write to their sponsors). Anyone can donate. The TCV project is completely dependant on such donations and they say that they still don't have enough resources. For example, in the words of the sponsorship director at the McLeod Ganj TCV, children still have to share books and those boarding have to share beds too.
Even here, the Chinese manage to get their say. I was told that the Chinese actually threaten the parents (how is unclear) of the children back in Tibet if they are not returned to schools there and children that choose to return after their education can face imprisonment. So much for freedom of where to have your children educated.
You can find out more about the Tibetan's Children's Village at http://tcv.org.in/.
A Final Word
I hope that Tibet will once again be a free nation, to determine their own affairs, a country I would then like to return to. The less dubious ideas that the Chinese have brought in, have destroyed what made Tibet special and in doing so, they have swept away something that can never be brought back. I believe that the Chinese have no place in Tibet, effectively an independent nation until the Chinese invasion of 1950. By reading this text, you are more than welcome to form your own opinions. I have visited both China and Tibet and I firmly believe that the two peoples cannot be regarded as one and the same.
I ask any Chinese people reading this to understand that this is not an attack on China as a country or yourselves as a people. I gained a lot of respect for China when I visited in November and December 1995 (Beijing, Chengde and Xi'an). It is only the policies of the Chinese Communist Party and Government I question in relation to the Tibet issue and the behaviour of a tiny, tiny minority of Chinese people who live and have lived in Tibet that I am raising issue with.
Many Regards,
Beef Sandwich.
The following related documents, including my opinions may also be of some interest:
For those who want more information on other websites or wish to have their say in the 'Buyhard for Tibet' Discussion Forum, please have a look at my 'Tibet Links and Forum' page or check out the 'Background' section for more on Tibetan history and culture. Also, don't forget to look at my 'Tibet' travel page for photos, a bit more information and some less serious stuff and 'Lhasa Photos' for yet(i) more pictures of Lhasa. Alternatively, ask me a question or send me a message using my Guestbook.
My 'China' page is located at 'http://mysite.freeserve.com/kathmandu/travels/index.html'.
|
|
|