|
The Tibetan sovereignty debate refers to two political debates. The first is whether the various territories within the People's Republic of China (PRC) that are claimed as political Tibet should separate and become a new sovereign state. Many of the points in the debate rest on a second debate, about whether Tibet was independent or subordinate to China in certain parts of its recent history. It is generally agreed that China and Tibet were independent prior to the Yuan dynasty (1271–1368),〔Wang and Nyima (1997) p.20. Sperling (2004) p.21〕 and that Tibet has been ruled by the People's Republic of China (PRC) since 1959.〔Sperling (2004) p.17. Shakya (1999) p.90. Latourette (1964) p.419. Spence (1999) p.500.〕 The nature of Tibet’s relationship with China in the intervening period is a matter of debate. The PRC claims that Tibet has been a part of China since the Yuan dynasty.〔Wang and Nyima (1997) p.20. Grunfeld (1996) p.256. Sperling (2004) p.10.〕 The Republic of China (1912–1949) (ROC) claimed that "Tibet was placed under the sovereignty of China" when the Qing dynasty (1644–1912) ended the brief Nepalese rule (1788-1792) from parts of Tibet in c. 1793.〔Sperling (2004) pp.6,7. Goldstein (1989) p.72. Both cite the ROC’s position paper at the 1914 Simla Conference.〕 The Tibetan Government in Exile claims that Tibet was an independent state until the PRC invaded Tibet in 1949/50.〔Sperling (2004) p.21〕 Some Western scholars claim that Tibet and China were ruled by the Mongols during the Yuan dynasty,〔Feigon (1996) p.58. Gernet (1972) pp.369, 384. Goldstein (1997) pp.3, 4.〕 that Tibet was independent during the Chinese Ming dynasty (1368–1644).〔Goldstein (1997) pp.4,5. Feigon (1996) pp.63-64,〕 and that Tibet was ruled by China〔Latourette (1964) p.253 "an appendage of". Gernet (1972) p.481 “part of”. Goldstein (1989) p.44 “subordination of Tibet to China”.〕 or subordinate to the Qing〔Sperling (2004) pp.27-29〕 during much of the Qing dynasty.〔Feigon (1996) pp.86,88,90, in contrast, claims that the Qing had little control over Tibet and compares Tibet with the Vatican.〕 Some Western scholars also claim that Tibet was independent from c. 1912 to 1950,〔Shakya (1999) p.4 "independent state", 90 "international legal status" was "independent state". Feigon (1996) p.119 "border between the two countries" of China and Tibet in 1917. Goldstein (1997) pp.30-37 Chapter titled “Interlude: De Facto Independence”. Latourette (1964) pp.333 "practically independent" from 1912, 419 "accepted the suzerainity of the Communists" in 1951.〕 although it had extremely limited international recognition. ==View of the Chinese governments== The government of the People's Republic of China contends that it has had control over Tibet since the Yuan dynasty (1271–1368).〔(History of Tibet )〕 The government of the Republic of China, which ruled mainland China from 1912 until 1949 and now controls Taiwan, had a cabinet-level Mongolian and Tibetan Affairs Commission in charge of the administration of Tibet and Mongolia regions from 1912. The commission retained its cabinet level status after 1949, but no longer executes that function. On 10May 1943, Chiang Kai-shek asserted that "Tibet is part of Chinese territory... No foreign nation is allowed to interfere in our domestic affairs".〔(''The Issue of Tibet in China-US Relations During The Second World War'' )〕 He again declared in 1946 that the Tibetans were Chinese nationals.〔(''The last of the Tibetans'' ) By Ian Buruma〕 The Republic of China still claims sovereignty over Tibet and Mongolia in its constitution. In the late 19th century, China adopted the Western model of nation-state diplomacy. As the government of Tibet, China concluded several treaties (1876, 1886, 1890, 1893) with British India touching on the status, boundaries and access to Tibet.〔(The ''Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XIV. Published 1912: Tibet'' )〕 Chinese government sources consider this a sign of sovereignty rather than suzerainty. However, by the 20th century British India found the treaties to be ineffective due to China's weakened control over the Tibetan local government. The British invaded Tibet in 1904 and forced the signing of a separate treaty, directly with the Tibetan government in Lhasa. In 1906, an (Anglo-Chinese Convention ) was signed at Peking between Great Britain and China. It incorporated the 1904 Lhasa Convention (with modification), which was attached as Annex.〔〔(Convention Between Great Britain and China Respecting Tibet (1906) )〕 A treaty between Britain and Russia (1907) followed.〔(Convention Between Great Britain and Russia (1907) )〕 Article II of this treaty stated that "In conformity with the admitted principle of the suzerainty of China over Tibet, Great Britain and Russia engage not to enter into negotiations with Tibet except through the intermediary of the Chinese Government." China sent troops into Tibet in 1908. The result of the policy of both Great Britain and Russia has been the virtual annexation of Tibet by China.〔 China controlled Tibet up to 1912. Thereafter, Tibet entered the period described commonly as ''de facto'' independence, though it was not recognized by any country as enjoying ''de jure'' independence. In the 2000s the position of the Republic of China with regard to Tibet appeared to become more nuanced as was stated in the following opening speech to the International Symposium on Human Rights in Tibet on 8September 2007 through the pro-Taiwan independence then ROC President Chen Shui-bian who stated that his offices no longer treated exiled Tibetans as Chinese mainlanders.〔('President Chen Shui-bian's Remarks at the Opening Ceremony of the 2007 International Symposium on Human Rights in Tibet' Sep 8, 2007 ) 〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Tibetan sovereignty debate」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|