Tibet Debate, Dalai Lama and Dilemma

Tibet issue has been on global agenda for many years, and yet western countries are still strongly behind Dalai Lama government in exile. There are foreign involvement in their activities on the ground of their own political hidden agenda.

1. British invasion 1904-1911
The authorities in British India renewed their interest in Tibet in the late 19th century, and a number of Indians entered the country, first as explorers and then as traders. Treaties regarding Tibet were concluded between Britain and China in 1886,1890,and 1893, but the Tibetan government refused to recognize their legitimacy and continued to bar British envoys from its territory. During "The Great Game", a period of rivalry between Russia and Britain, the British desired a representative in Lhasa to monitor and offset Russian influence.
At the beginning of the twentieth century the British and Russian Empires were competing for supremacy in Central Asia. To forestall the Russians, in 1904, a British expedition led by Colonel Francis Younghusband was sent to Lhasa to force a trading agreement and to prevent Tibetans from establishing a relationship with the Russians. In response, the Chinese foreign ministry asserted that China was sovereign over Tibet, the first clear statement of such a claim.
On July 19, 1903, Younghusband arrived at Gangtok, the capital city of the Indian state of Sikkim, to prepare for his mission. A letter from the under-secretary to the government of India to Younghusband on July 26, 1903 stated that "In the event of your meeting the Dalai Lama, the government of India authorizes you to give him the assurance which you suggest in your letter." The British took a few months to prepare for the expedition which pressed into Tibetan territories in early December 1903. The entire British force numbered over 3,000 fighting men and was accompanied by 7,000 sherpas, porters and camp followers.

The Tibetans were aware of the expedition. To avoid bloodshed the Tibetan general at Yetung pledged that if the British made no attack upon the Tibetans, he would not attack the British. Colonel Younghusband replied, on December 6, 1903, that "we are not at war with Tibet and that, unless we are ourselves attacked, we shall not attack the Tibetans".
Despite the mutual agreement, the British expedition did kill large numbers of unprepared Tibetan soldiers and civilians. The biggest massacre took place on March 31, 1904, at a mountain pass halfway to Gyantse near a village called Guru. Colonel Younghusband tricked the 2,000 Tibetan soldiers guarding the pass into extinguishing the burning ropes of their basic matchlock rifles before firing at them with the Maxim machine guns and rifles. The Tibetan casualties, according to Younghusband’s account, were "500 killed and wounded." Others have claimed that the Tibetan casualty was as high as 1,300.
According to the British, their intention was to disarm Tibetan soldiers who were being surrounded. The slaughter was triggered by the Tibetans who fired the first shot. But the accounts of those who pulled the triggers make it clear that the British had the intention of killing as many as possible. “From three sides at once a withering volley of magazine fire crashed into the crowded mass of Tibetans,” wrote Perceval Landon. “Under the appalling punishment of lead, they [the Tibetans] staggered, failed and ran…Men dropped at every yard.”

The British soldiers mowed down the Tibetans with machine guns as they fled. "I got so sick of the slaughter that I ceased fire, though the general’s order was to make as big a bag as possible," wrote Lieutenant Arthur Hadow, commander of the Maxim guns detachment. "I hope I shall never again have to shoot down men walking away."
In a telegraph to his superior in India, the day after the massacre, Younghusband stated: "I trust the tremendous punishment they have received will prevent further fighting, and induce them to at last to negotiate."

When the British mission reached Lhasa, the Dalai Lama had already fled to Urga in Mongolia, Younghusband found the option of returning to India empty-handed untenable, so he proceeded to draft a treaty unilaterally, and have it signed in the Potala by the regent, Ganden Tri Rinpoche, and any other Tibetan officials he could gather together as an ad hoc government. The Tibetan ministers whom Younghusband dealt with had apparently, unknown to him, just been appointed to their posts. The regular ministers had been imprisoned for suspected pro-British leanings and it was feared they would be too accommodating to Younghusband.
A treaty was concluded which required Tibet to open its border with British India, to allow British and Indian traders to travel freely, not to impose customs duties on trade with India, a demand from British that Lhasa had to pay 2.5 million rupees as indemnity and not to enter into relations with any foreign power without British approval.

The Anglo-Tibetan treaty was accordingly confirmed by a Sino-British treaty in 1906 by which the "Government of Great Britain engages not to annex Tibetan territory or to interfere in the administration of Tibet. The Government of China also undertakes not to permit any other foreign State to interfere with the territory or internal administration of Tibet. Moreover, Beijing agreed to pay London 2.5 million rupees which Lhasa was forced to agree upon in the Anglo-Tibetan treaty of 1904.
In 1907, Britain and Russia agreed that in "conformity with the admitted principle of the suzerainty of China over Tibet" both nations "engage not to enter into negotiations with Tibet except through the intermediary of the Chinese Government."
(source: wikipedia)

Note:
1904 -1911

China was still under Manchu or Qing Dynasty. It was just after Boxer Rebellion, and China was at the weakest in history where many foreign countries has occupied China territories with the excuses of free trade, including forced import of opium planted in British India. It was after Opium War,British took over Hong Kong, and many treaty ports were forced to open for opium trade. Taiping Rebellion ended in 1864, but Dr Sun Yat-sen has started the Chinese revolution movement from Japan. Manchu China has no defense power at all, politically and financially they are weak,and they were facing the internal threats of reform movement, and revolution. It seems that the British invasion of China(and Tibet), only end when Dr Sun overthrown the Manchu and formed Republic of China in 1912, which included all races of China, including Manchu, Han, Hui, Tibetan,Mongol and other minorities. The new nation, Republic of China, is recognized by the world,including USA,British,Japan, India and many countries in the world. The formation of new nation formally put Tibet as part of new China, whatever the dispute and historical background is not meaningful after the formation of new China in 1912, it is formal.


2. 1912-1949: de facto independence

The Dalai Lama returned to Tibet from India in July 1912 (after the fall of the Qing dynasty), and expelled the Amban and all Chinese troops. In 1913, the Dalai Lama issued a proclamation that stated that the relationship between the Chinese emperor and Tibet "had been that of patron and priest and had not been based on the subordination of one to the other." "We are a small, religious, and independent nation," the proclamation continued. For the next thirty-six years, Tibet enjoyed de facto independence while China endured its Warlord era, civil war, and World War II. Some Chinese sources argue that Tibet was still part of China throughout this period. Tibet continue in 1913-1949 to have very limited contacts with the rest of the world and Lhasa is for foreigners the prohibited city.
(source: wikipedia)

13th Dalai Lama only returned from India in 1912, after formation of new China. Proclamation was made in 1913,legally it has no effect. China was at warlord war(at the initial stage of nation formation, civil war(between communist and Kuomintang) and WW2(Japan invasion). They have no resources and time to look at Tibet. Tibet was at the dark age and the worst human right violation under 13th Dalai Lama.In 1950, it was reported by the west mass media,"the invasion of Tibet" in 1950 and the subsequent Seventeen Point Agreement, the PRC asserted control over Tibet. Legally there is no invasion as Tibet is still part of China, and there is only change of government from capitalist to communist. One month later, on 17 November 1950, Jetsun Jamphel Ngawang Lobsang Yeshe Tenzin Gyatso (born Lhamo Döndrub) was formally enthroned as 14th Dalai Lama, at the age of fifteen(a young boy).

Note 1: 13th Daila Lama passed away in 1933, and 14th Daila Lama was "formally enthroned" in Nov 1950, legally there was no Dalai Lama between 1933-1950.
Note2: Dalai Lama literally means ocean teacher, Lama is teacher,and Dalai is a Mongolian word for ocean. It was reported that the title was bestowed by Mongolian ruler Atlan Khan(1507-1582), a foreign ruler from Mongolia. The first official Dalai Lama , Sonam Gyatso was invited by Atlan Khan in 1571 to spread Tibetan Buddhism to Mongolia, which later become a state religion. Sonam Gyatso was an Abbot at the Drepung Monastery who was widely considered one of the most eminent lamasor teacher of his time. Although Sonam Gyatso became the first lama to hold the title "Dalai Lama" as described above, since he was the third member of his lineage, he became known as the "Third Dalai Lama." The previous two titles were conferred posthumously upon his earlier incarnations. The 4th Lama Yonten Gyatso (1589 – 1616) was a foreigner, who is a Mongolian , the grandson of Atlan Khan.The Fifth Dalai Lama Lozang Gyatso, with the support of Gushri Khan (1582-1655), a Mongol ruler, united Tibet under the control of the Gelug school of Tibetan Buddhism(Yellow hat sect). Gushri Khan become the overload of Tibet. The Mongol army in Tibet and Tibetans loyal to the Gelugpa are said to have forced monks of some Kagyu monasteries to convert to the Gelug school in 1648. The 6th Dalai Lama Tsangyang Gyatso(1683-1706) was a non-Tibetan, a Monpa from India. From the history, it was clear that the Mongolian influence was strong and Dalai Lama can be a foreigner, not necessary Tibetan. What is the political implication for the historical fact? Is Dalai Lama a political system or merely social/religion system? Can a political system accept foreigner as their political leader? If it is a political system, what is the political right of other sects of Tibetan Buddhism, which spread among the countries? Please also ponder on how the Mongol's influence on Dalai Lama system....

Note3: The introduction of teacher reincarnation or reincarnation of Dalai Lama was in 1283, when Karma Pakshi(1203-1283)of Black Hat Sect of Tibetan Buddhism wrote a will to locate his reincarnation after his death. Other sects including Yellow Hat sect followed the teacher reincarnation system. The succession of Dalai Lama is based on Buddhism belief of reincarnation, a religion concept. Is it a political concept or religion concept? If it is a political concept, is the political succession system acceptable by advocates of democracy and human right?(Then, the west should abandon democracy and its election system).

Note4: Yuan Dynasty (元朝)where China was ruled by Mongol lasted from 1271-1368. Han Chinese retook China and form Ming Dynasty(明朝) from 1368 to 1644. Qing Dynasty(清朝)formed by Manchu took over from 1644-1912 until the formation of new modern China, Republic of China(中華民國) in 1912. Chinese communist won the civil war over Kuomintang, and took China in 1949 as People Republic of China(中華人民共和國).

Note 5: China's political administration system of occupied territories was totally different from the west, mainly based on their culture on Confucianism. They allow the culture of their captured territories to flourish and even adopt some of their culture. Some of the citizens of captured territories were even accept to serve in Chinese military and government. The west , who based basically on power and control , cannot understand the system. The Chinese system was better than totality control of the west, Arab, Mongol and Ottoman. Looking at Middle east, America, Africa where the nations and people conquered by the stronger nation were either killed or assimilated , or forced to accept the conqueror's religion or culture. The conqueror had direct control and did not accept the culture of the people they colonized, the people of occupied territories lost their identity through time e.g Arabization, Turkization, Romanization. Chinese political administration was different, they allowed the people they captured to keep their identity, indirect control by tributary ally system where the country concern was given some form of freedom to administrate their country, even administration power, and their identity still remained e.g. Korea, Vietnam, Tibet, Mongol, some of the occupied people were admitted into their government or military. Many of the occupied territories gradually adopt the culture based on Confucianism, there were intermarriage of the people, but their identity still remained. They did not use force after occupation to assimilate the people of occupied territories. Thailand also adopt the same system over their occupied territories e.g Kedah, Kelantan , Trengganu. The west cannot understand. Which system is better? the Asian still have strong identity, unlike the Europe, Middle East, Africa, some of early civilization was lost, some languages lost, some religion lost, some culture lost, some people also lost in history...If China was to behave like the west , some of the small country today in Asia will have lost in history....The understanding of sovereignty was totally different from the west before modern China was formed in 1911.

Noe 6: The Dzungars, a nomadic tribe from Mongol,invaded Tibet in 1717.They soon began to loot the holy places of Lhasa, which brought a swift response from Emperor Kangxi of Qing Dynasty in 1718; but his military expedition was annihilated by the Dzungars, not far from Lhasa. A second, larger, expedition sent by Emperor Kangxi expelled the Dzungars from Tibet in 1720 and the troops were hailed as liberators. They brought Kelzang Gyatso with them from Kumbum to Lhasa and he was installed as the seventh Dalai Lama in 1721. Qing made the region of Amdo and Kham into the province of Qinghai in 1724,and incorporated eastern Kham into neighbouring Chinese provinces in 1728.The Qing government sent a resident commissioner (amban) to Lhasa.
If Tibet is not part of China, why Qing Manchu(a non-Han, non-Tibetan race) sent a large armies to save them?

Note7: A rebellion against the Chinese occupation was led by noblemen and monasteries and broke out in Amdo and eastern Kham in June 1956. The insurrection, supported by the American CIA, eventually spread to Lhasa. It was crushed by 1959. During this campaign, tens of thousands of Tibetans were killed and the 14th Dalai Lama and other government principals fled to exile in India(source: wikipedia). It was the beginning of the political ambition of 14th Dalai Lama?


3. CIA(USA) involvement(1957-1969)

Between 1957 and 1969 the CIA armed, financed and helped to train Tibetan guerrillas who operated, first inside Tibet, and later after the Dalai Lama's escape to India in 1959 from a base in Mustang, a remote corner of northwestern Nepal. This project, code-named ST CIRCUS, was one of the CIA’s longest running covert operations. The withdrawal of the CIA's support in 1969 was as abrupt as its initial involvement was unexpected: the Tibetans had simply fit into America's larger policy of destabilizing or overthrowing Communist regimes, and when that no longer applied, they were abandoned.

With unique archive footage and exclusive interviews with former resistance fighters and surviving CIA operatives, The Shadow Circus: The CIA in Tibet reveals for the first time this hitherto unknown chapter in Tibet's recent history. Presenting a tale that is both heroic and tragic, full of sad ironies and unexpected twists that overturn all preconceptions about both Tibet and the CIA.
(source: http://www.asianamericanmedia.org)

In October 1998, The Dalai Lama's administration acknowledged that it received $1.7 million a year in the 1960s from the US Government through the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and also trained a resistance movement in Colorado (USA). When asked by CIA officer John Kenneth Knaus in 1995 whether the organisation did a good or bad thing in providing its support, the Dalai Lama replied that though it helped the morale of those resisting the Chinese, "thousands of lives were lost in the resistance" and further, that "the US Government had involved itself in his country's affairs not to help Tibet but only as a Cold War tactic to challenge the Chinese.
(source: wikipedia)

Note:
1957-1969
The Chinese Communist took over China in 1949. USA supported General Chinag Kai-shek who had moved to Taiwan. The period was after the Flood of Dongting Lake in 1954, where 40,000 deaths. China was under their own Hundred Flower Campaign(1956-1957) and Great Leap Forward Campaign(1958). The cultural Revolution begin in 1966. These were all internal campaign. China split with Russia in 1963, and border dispute with India in 1962(problem left by British colonist after their invasion of Tibet). It was also the most difficult time in the reign of People Republic of China or communist China, where they were going through internal power struggle and purity cleaning of the communist party. All Chinese people suffered during this period, all races including Han, Tibetan....especially cultural revolution. The human right violation was to all subjects under their rule under the different campaign, especially cultural revolution, the communist rule.

The UK and USA are two of the superpowers from the west, which are located far from East Asia,at the time China was financially and politically weak, what are their purpose of invasion and direct involvement in Tibet? The answer is clear.

Third-party views on Tibetan sovereignty
Parts of Tibet were temporarily captured by the Chinese and became territories of the Tang dynasty (618–907 AD).[83] Around 650, the Chinese captured Lhasa.[84]

Most scholars outside the PRC say that during the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644), Tibet was an independent region outside Ming control.

According to historian Zahiruddin Ahmad, since at least the 18th century, when the Qing Government was setting up its local government structure and promulgated laws for the governing, Beijing has, in the words of a foreign missionary who witnessed, had "absolute dominion over Tibet"[85].

Tibetologist Melvyn C. Goldstein writes that England and Russia formally acknowledged Chinese authority over Tibet in treaties of 1906 and 1907; and that the British invasion of Tibet stirred China into getting more directly involved in Tibetan affairs and working to integrate Tibet with "the rest of China."[86]

F. Spencer Chapman questions the validity of China's purported authority in deposing the Dalai Lama twice in the early 20th century, noting that, at the same time China "deposed" the 13th Dalai Lama, it claimed sovereignty not only over Tibet, but also over Nepal and Bhutan.[87]

The "Patron-Priest" relationship (Tibetan: chöyön; Wylie: mchod-yon) held between the Chinese court and the Tibetan lamas has been subjected to varying interpretation. The 13th Dalai Lama, for example, knelt, but did not kowtow, before the Empress Dowager and the young Emperor while he delivered his petition in Beijing. Chinese sources emphasize the submission of kneeling; Tibetan sources emphasize the lack of the kowtow. Titles and commands given to Tibetans by the Chinese, likewise, are variously interpreted. The Chinese gave the 13th Dalai Lama the title of "Loyally Submissive Vice-Regent", and ordered to follow China's commands and communicate with the Emperor only through the Chinese Amban in Lhasa; but opinions vary as to whether these titles and commands reflected actual political power, or symbolic gestures ignored by Tibetans.[88][89] The kneeling before the Emperor followed the 17th-century precedent in the case of the 6th Dalai Lama.[90]

Thomas Heberer, professor of political science and East Asian studies at the University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany, wrote: "No country in the world has ever recognized the independence of Tibet or declared that Tibet is an 'occupied country'. For all countries in the world, Tibet is Chinese territory."[91]

Other tibetologists write that no country publicly accepts Tibet as an independent state,[92][93][94][95] although there are several instances of government officials appealing to their superiors to do so.[96][97] Treaties signed by Britain and Russia in the early years of the twentieth century,[5][98] and others signed by Nepal and India in the 1950s,[99] recognized Tibet's political subordination to China. The Americans presented their view on 15 May 1943:

"For its part, the Government of the United States has borne in mind the fact that...the Chinese constitution lists Tibet among areas constituting the territory of the Republic of China. This Government has at no time raised a question regarding either of these claims".[39][100]

The 1994 U.S. State Department report to Congress declares:

"Historically the U.S. has acknowledged Chinese sovereignty over Tibet. Since at least 1966, U.S. policy has explicitly recognized the Tibet Autonomous Region...as part of the People’s Republic of China. This long-standing policy is consistent with the view of the entire international community, including all China’s neighbors: no country recognizes Tibet as a sovereign state. Because we do not recognize Tibet as an independent state, the U.S. does not conduct diplomatic relations with the self-styled 'Tibetan government-in-exile'."[101]

The US government recognizes Tibet as part of China, but the US Congress has at times expressed a different perspective, calling Tibet an occupied country.[102]

In 2008, European Union leader Jose Manuel Barroso stated that the EU recognized Tibet as integral part of China:[103][104]

"I have confirmed that the EU is attached to the territorial integrity and unity of China, and that naturally applies to Tibet" [105]

In October, 2008, the British government clarified their official position on Tibet's status:

"Our ability to get our points across has sometimes been clouded by the position the UK took at the start of the 20th century on the status of Tibet, a position based on the geopolitics of the time. Our recognition of China’s “special position” in Tibet developed from the outdated concept of suzerainty. Some have used this to cast doubt on the aims we are pursuing and to claim that we are denying Chinese sovereignty over a large part of its own territory. We have made clear to the Chinese Government, and publicly, that we do not support Tibetan independence. Like every other EU member state, and the United States, we regard Tibet as part of the People’s Republic of China". [106]

(source:wikipedia)

What is the past human right record of Dalai Lama of Tibet 1912-1949?.

Is he a religion figure or political figure, the global perception of his dual role is blur....as a religion figure, Tibetan Buddhist(various sects) has a large followers from Han Chinese people,even from oversea. There is a big Tibetan Buddhist Temple in Beijing , there are temple in over China, and Chinese areas in oversea. As political figure, the Chinese people known the past human right violation records,and cannot accept Dalai Lama as political leader. He played a dual personality at his own global political platform. Sympathisers with the Chinese position highlight statements by the government of the People's Republic of China that, prior to 1959, 95% of Tibetans lived in 'feudal serfdom', and cite cases of abuse and cruelty in the traditional Tibetan system(source: wikipedia).....The 14th Dalai Lama may not experienced the hardship and bitterness of his people as a slave, as he was proclaimed the reincarnation of 13th Dalai Lama at the age of two.

The world is silence....despite having strong evidences in historical books, documentary films.....why? The acceptance of 14th Dalai Lama as religion leader or political leader, they are confused at the Dalai Lama's dual personality.....at the same time the west also played their dual personality, diplomatically support that Tibet is part of China, but politically support the Tibet government in exile and Dalai Lama, what is the ultimate motive of the hypocrisy. The answer is clear.

.... Despite the documentary evidences and historical fact, the support of the Dalai Lama is still active. What is their actual agenda, until the desperate stage of using Olympic games as weapon in 2008? A study of history will revealed that it was all the political games of the superpowers. They have their own political problems in their country, their own human right records despite advocating for human right. Tibet is like Scotland of UK, Hawaii of USA; if China is provoking the Scotland and Hawaii for independence, what will be the responses form both UK and USA? The respect of law and treaties,the recognition given to the Republic of China in 1912.....are they, as advocate of law and democracy still adhere and recognize the law and treaty?

To change history is to return America back to Red Indian, Alaska back to Eskimo, Hawaii back to native Hawaiian.... the world's political border will be recreated..... how about that? it will be interesting to see what happen......forget about global warming, H1 N1.... let all nations start all over again.....

Who create global political tension? we should know very well how the superpower played their political games, their hidden agenda are all classified information now, but when the records open,all will be shocked of their involvement and the lies behind heir masks. Just like Opium War(China), South East India, Middle East, Vietnam, Iraq.... all the hidden agenda and human right records will be open.....why don't they talk about human right at that time?

I hope the understanding of Tibet history, will reduce another global tension point in the world. Please read the history with open mind. Chinese history is not straight forward, it has been ruled by various races,Mongols, Manchu, Han in ancient time; there were small kingdoms formed by various races, there were wars. Some survived, some disappeared. There were stateless nomad tribes from outside who come to China, and stayed. There are cultural assimilation,inter-marriage and religion assimilation in view of the silk route in ancient time, there are more than 50 races in China. Chinese nation formation cannot be based on racial ground alone. The superpower are anticipating on the breakup of China based on racial and religion ground ; they perceived China as their potential threats. Look at political history of Middle East, North East India, Burma; the policy of divided the races into smaller nations, created inter-racial conflicts, provide empty promises and support the war, to let them involved in their ambition of nation formation. The superpower with colonist mentality(or cowboy mentality) can still go on with their hidden agenda without notice by the world. They, the outsiders continued to debate on the Tibet issue, they are in dilemma on the issue;and yet the decision maker of the future should be China and Tibetan in China, not the outsiders....

Another global political games....local innocent people suffered.

We just prayed for world peace and let us focus on more urgent global agenda. All followers of religion should preached peace and not war and violence. Let not politician alone lead this world, they have failed the people in the past. The politician should served the people under the democracy concept, not their own personal agenda, locally or globally, in whatever platform they are....who care about their political agenda, we ordinary people just simply want to live in this borderless world with peace......

Documentary by National Geography



Li Ao's lectures on Tibet ownership Part 1-6
The lectures was given by Taiwanese historian,social commentator, Li Ao(李敖), he is famous for speaking out without fear and favor. Li Ao was credited for his contributions to the democratic movement in Taiwan between the 1960s and 1980s. In the 1960s, he was the editor-in-chief of Wenxing (文星), a magazine that promoted democracy and personal freedom. He was jailed by the Kuomintang government for more than five years (from 1972 and 1976, and again from 1981 to 1982) after helping a pro-Taiwan independence political prisoner, Peng Ming-min, escape to Japan in 1963. Ironically, Li Ao had a long history of being an advocate of reunification. Throughout the 1970s, Li Ao received much international attention for his imprisonment. He was highlighted by Amnesty International as one of the three most important political prisoners in Taiwan in 1974.

After his release, Li Ao continued to publish magazines and newspapers, criticizing the government. Ninety-six of his books were banned in Taiwan before 1991. In the 1980s he also sponsored other numerous anti-Guomintang magazines. For further detail about his profile, please refer to wikipedia under his name.

The video are the lectures by Li Ao on the history of Tibet supported with documentary evidences. Only Part 1 is with English sub-title, other parts regretfully without English sub-title.

Part 1


Part 2


Part 3


Part 4


Part 5/6


Part 6/6






Related articles & video:

1. 《西藏往事》 Part 1-9, documentary by CCTV,http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3HGExIR7s4
2. 西藏农奴的故事 Part 1-5, by CCTV, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfDB99GAi4w
3. Tibet 1900-1959 Documentary - Part 1 / 6, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jT9wrS01ME
4. The past of Tibet, Part 1-3, by CCTV, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF7vm9HXwEs
5. History of Tibet, www.wikipedia.org
6. Tibet, www.wikipedia.org
7. 14th Dalai Lama, www.wikipedia.org
8. Li Ao, www.wikipedia.org
9. Serfdom in Tibet controversy, www.wikipedia.org
10. A History of Modern Tibet, 1913-1951: The Demise of the Lamaist State(1991), Melvyn C Goldstein, University California Press. This book claimed to be neutral, but it is "drawing from a wealth of British, American, and Indian diplomatic records; first-hand-historical accounts written by Tibetan participants; and extensive interviews with former Tibetan officials, monastic leaders, soldiers, and traders".
Note: Readers need to know the background of the authors for any books on Tibet to form a unbiased views. Difficult to find English books on Chinese views, but they are the one with the support of historical records and documentary evidences.