Articles‎ > ‎

An Open Letter About the New York Times Article, Respectfully Addressed to Sikyong Lobsang Sangay

posted Jul 30, 2014, 5:43 PM by The Tibetan Political Review   [ updated Jul 30, 2014, 6:01 PM ]


July 25, 2014

Sikyong Lobsang Sangay
Central Tibetan Administration
Gangchen Kyishong
Dharamsala – 176215 HP, India

Dear Sikyong Sangay la:

The Tibetan National Congress was happy to see your lengthy profile in the July 19, 2014 New York Times. No doubt you agree that a vibrant Tibetan democracy depends upon the people asking questions of their elected representatives. As a result, we had four questions based on this article that we would like to respectfully pose to you.

The New York Times article discussed how, in 2013, you “told the Council on Foreign Relations that the goal was to see ethnic Tibetans installed as party secretary and in other important posts in the Tibetan autonomous region.” You were quoted in the article as saying, “We don’t question or challenge the present structure of the ruling party.”

Your new Partial Middle Way (no democracy, communist rule, unconstrained militarization) has been discussed elsewhere. However, you have never explained why your Partial Middle Way is compatible with the Middle Way, or why it is the right choice for the Tibetan people.

His Holiness still says that Tibet must be “governed by the popularly-elected legislature and executive through a democratic process”. The 2008 Memorandum calls for “the right of Tibetans to create their own regional government and government institutions and processes.”

1. How can genuine autonomy be achieved if the Chinese communist party stays in charge in Tibet?

2. Could you please explain your reasoning for abandoning the Middle Way’s goals of democracy and separate government institutions for Tibet?

3. Is the New York Times correct that you see the goal as installing more ethnic Tibetans in the current Chinese communist system?

You also told the New York Times, “I am a secondary voice, who will someday be a primary voice”. You currently hold the position of Sikyong, the highest position in the Tibetan exiled political leadership. We believe the Tibetan people would be interested in your future ambitions.

4. What are your plans, if you see your current position as only a secondary one?

May we again respectfully congratulate you on your profile in the New York Times. We would be honored to post your response to these questions on our website. Thank you in advance for your response.

In solidarity for the Tibetan nation,

The Executive Committee of
The Tibetan National Congress


English version originally posted at:

Tibetan version: