The Snow Lion and the Dragon: China, Tibet, and the Dalai Lama

Rating:
Summary: An excellent survey of the "Tibet Question".
Review: I have to take issue with a previous review. The reviewer questions first whether it is a genuine historical study, and second suggests the work has racist notions. To the first question, Goldstein cites historians (including, yes, E.Sperling) who are trained in both Tibetan and Chinese source material. Second, the reviewers claim that treating the Qing and Yuan Dynasties as different (than, say, the Ming) is racist, commenting, "Are America [sic] with black/native American/and [sic] Hispanic president [sic] and congress [a] legitimate American government?" This ignores of course the fact that the United States is a democracy while Qing and Yuan China were Chinas ruled by alien conquerors. Perhaps a small difference? Both the PRC and the Republic of China (Taiwan) claim the political boundries of the Qing State (except the PRC recognizes the Republic of Mongolia while the Republic of China does not); so we ask, is this a legitimate claim? Goldstein is interested in the claims of both the Tibetan Government in Exile and the PRC for Tibet, and he has written an excellent introduction.

Rating:
Summary: Goldstein makes clear the political realities of the Tibet Q
Review: In our own time, Tibet has been a de facto province of China since 1951. Where was the moral character of the U.S Congress and the executive branch of our government when China began its pacification of Tibet? Goldstein gives the American public (at least those who bother to read serious work) a dose of morale corruption that our government lives by, and a sense of the complexity of international affairs, which we as a people, have always played a bit to lightly.

Rating:
Summary: A book that will broaden our minds about the Tibet issue.
Review: There is no easy solution to an issue as complicated and intricate as the "Tibetan Problem". As much as I abhor the human right abuses in Tibet (which the author does too, apparently), I agree with Prof. Goldstein that the Chinese are really those who hold the trump card. I believe that if the exile government were to accept some sort of comprimise that will actually allow them to work INSIDE Tibet, their chance of achieving a genuine autonomy and preserving the Tibetan culture will be much enhanced, at least from a long term perspective. Important as the much publicized demographical change in Tibet is, one cannot neglect the elements of materialism that is continuously being brought into Tibet. As a friend of mine from China pointed out half mockingly, all that the communists have to do is to build more entertainment establishments to promote indulgence of sense pleasure among the younger generation. That in itself will be a huge blow to the preservation of a genuine Tibetan culture. Thirty years from now, if the exiled are still in exile, the situation will be grim. Time will be running out on a peaceful solution -- China will be substantially stronger, the nationalistic pride of an average Chinese will be stronger, the frustation of the Tibetans who support arm struggle will no more be contendable, and the Dalai Lama will probably no longer be there to represent a voice of peaceful struggle which will anyway have its credential debunked by then. As Prof. Goldstein pointed out, many opportunities for continuous negotiation had been squandered by misjudgement and misperception on both sides, I pray that when the door of negotiation is reopened, more subtantial results will be made.