The Question of Tibet and the Politics of the “Real”

This chapter considers the question of Tibet, how the debate is defined, and who sets its parameters. In recent years a considerable amount of ink has been spent attempting to sort through the issues: the history, controversies, exaggerations, charges, and countercharges (e.g., Barnett 2001; Dodin and Rather 2001; Goldstein 1997, 1995, 1994, 1989; Grunfeld 2000, 1996, 1987; Sautman 2003; Sautman and Eng 2001; Shakya 1999; Smith 1996). One strategy is to reduce the question down to its essential elements: to free it of the emotions that cloud it and the propaganda that shrouds it, and especially to retrieve it from its expropriation as a human rights and populist issue (e.g., Goldstein 1997; Sautman 2003).