First, his plan for Tibetan autonomy goes well beyond religious affairs and veers close to separatism. Tibet has been part of China since the Manchu dynasty. There is no more reason China would accept a loosening of its ties with Tibet than we would accept West Australian autonomous status within the Australian federation.
Second, his definition of Tibet includes parts of Yunnan and Sichuan provinces – because they have Tibetan minorities. The Chinese cannot see this as anything other than an attack on their territorial integrity, their very sovereignty. It is an outrageous claim. It is designed to antagonize the Chinese.
His strategy is to keep coming here and forcing his presence on Canberra, presumably to generate ill-feeling between us and the Chinese. The Prime Minister is under no obligation to see him, no more than she would to accept a courtesy call from the Archbishop of Canterbury if he insisted on being here every 18 months. No, the case for not seeing the Lama is stronger: behind the self-effacing shuffle and the grins he has a mischievous agenda in pursuit of theocratic power.
Reinstating a theocracy over Tibet in opposition to China – and the UN and the entire world recognize Chinese sovereignty in Tibet – is not remotely a matter of Australian interest. Sorry, but the PM has a full agenda and other priorities.”