China's Panchen Lama pledges loyalty to the Communist Party in a meeting with Xi
The man picked by Beijing as the second highest figure in Tibetan Buddhism pledged adherence to the ruling Communist Party 's dictates Friday during a rare face-to-face meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, state media reported.
Gyaltsen Norbu, who is rarely seen in public, met behind closed doors with Xi Jinping in Zhongnanhai, the government compound in the center of Beijing, about 3,700 kilometers (about 2,300 miles) from his home monastery of Tashilhumpo, high on the Tibetan steppe.
Gyaltsen Norbu, 35, said he would 'firmly support the leadership of the Communist Party of China, and resolutely safeguard the unity of the motherland and national unity,' the Xinhua News Agency reported.
The Chinese government appointed Gyaltsen Norbu as the Panchen Lama of Tibetan Buddhism in 1995 at age 5 after followers of the Dalai Lama recognized a different boy, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, as the Panchen's incarnation.
That boy and his family disappeared in 1995 in what the U.S. government has alleged was an abduction by the Chinese government, and the Dalai Lama, 89, has refused to recognize the Chinese-appointed Panchen Lama.
The Chinese government says Gedhun Choekyi Nyima is now a college graduate living a private life and working at a stable job, while producing no evidence.
The Chinese-appointed Panchen Lama was quoted Friday by Xinhua as saying that he would 'contribute to promoting national unity and progress, systematically promote the sinicization of religion in China, and promote the modernization of Tibet."
Xi's government uses the term 'sinicization' to mean that all religions including Christianity and Islam must take their orders from the Communist Party, reduce their non-Chinese aspects and limit their role in society.
Xi was quoted as telling the Chinese government's Panchen that he should continue Tibetan Buddhism's 'strong sense of community for the Chinese nation, systematically advancing the sinicization of religion in China, and promoting the modernization of Tibet.'
Last month, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a statement marking the 30th anniversary of the disappearance of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, saying he and his family had been abducted by the Chinese government.
'Chinese authorities should release Gedhun Choekyi Nyima immediately and stop persecuting Tibetans for their religious beliefs,' Rubio's statement read.
The position of Panchen Lama is especially sensitive since he is expected to take part in the recognition of a new Dalai Lama and serve as his tutor, a religious process that the officially atheist Communist Party is determined to control.
The meeting Friday also reflected Xi's focus on economic and political stability within China's borders, where an economic slump has raised concerns of anti-government outbursts and control over minority groups is an overwhelming obsession.
China claims Tibet has been part of China for centuries, but many Tibetans say they were effectively independent for much of that time and that Beijing is now seeking to destroy their human rights, language and Buddhist culture.
The Dalai Lama fled into exile in India in 1959 after an abortive uprising against Chinese forces and has long been vilified by Beijing as a separatist. The government denies his traditional right to recognize reincarnated lamas.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
No more leprechaun economics: Ireland's tax swindle is finally ending
Donald Trump has sent Ireland to the naughty step. Once the altar boy of American commerce, Dublin now finds itself blacklisted alongside China, Germany and Vietnam, each a prime candidate for tariffs and sanctions. The offence? Running a surplus with the United States. On the face of it, the complaint seems petty. One country sells more than it buys. So what? But Ireland's problem, like the others on Trump's list, is that its surplus rests on a creed that has fallen out of favour. As offshoring hollowed out Middle America, the old Clinton mantra 'It's the economy, stupid' has begun to sound rather less clever than it once did. That, at least, is the mood in Trump's Washington. And judging by his campaign-trail fixation with the word tariff, many Americans agree: a reckoning is overdue. Ireland offers a particularly inviting target. Its surplus owes less to tangible exports than to tax gymnastics. A pill is made in Ireland for 50 cents, sold to a sister company (also in Ireland) for €10, and then shipped to the global market at the same price. The profit is booked in Dublin, while tax collectors elsewhere are left out of pocket. The trick doesn't stop there. Intellectual property is shifted to Irish subsidiaries, global sales are routed through Irish entities, and profits vanish into low or no-tax jurisdictions. Together, these sleights of hand form what we're invited to call the Irish economic miracle – a miracle that, by one estimate, deprives other countries of nearly $20 billion a year in tax revenue. The question being asked in Washington is: who benefits? Ireland, clearly. One in every eight euros of its tax revenue now comes from US firms. That's a fivefold increase since 2010, driven by Ireland's famously 'competitive' tax regime. It accounts for a large slice of a €150 billion bilateral surplus. When Irish Taoiseach Micheál Martin visited the Oval Office in March, Trump put it plainly: 'We do have a massive deficit with Ireland, because Ireland was very smart. They took our pharmaceutical companies away.' It's hard to argue with the logic. Ireland has been undeniably clever at attracting American capital. Spending it is another matter. Much of the money sits on Irish books without generating the economic activity one might expect. The state's coffers may be overflowing, but the windfall is narrowly concentrated. Public spending, as ever, has been handled with something shy of brilliance. From roads and hospitals to housing and energy, the services most visible to the public have seen little improvement, despite years of surging revenues. Meanwhile, resources have been channelled into more headline-friendly ventures: a €350,000 bike shed outside parliament; a vast new hospital project already among Europe's most expensive; and billions annually to accommodate asylum applicants – most of whom, the government has conceded, are economic migrants. The miracle, it seems, left little room for prudence. As every lottery winner learns, easy money tends to breed excess. But with full coffers, Ireland could afford to paper over the cracks. Meanwhile, American tech and pharma giants have flourished. Apple, Microsoft, Pfizer and others have routed billions through Ireland, to the delight of shareholders and pension funds. If Trump moves to close loopholes or impose tariffs, these are the interests he'll have to console ahead of the midterms. The losers, predictably, are the American workers left behind by the long, slow flight of industry and tax revenue. Worse off still are the countries quietly drained by Ireland's magic act. The sums involved are vast. The structures that move them are so complex they can feel impossibly abstract. But the consequences are not. According to modelling by the Universities of St Andrews and Leicester, this tax loss has deprived more than 100,000 children of school attendance and some 1.1 million people of access to basic sanitation. Quibble with the methods if you like, but the core truth is hard to deny: when profits are rerouted, people are short-changed. Not that Dublin seems overly troubled. Only last month, Ireland's Taoiseach declared: 'Ireland earns its living from an open and fair approach to world trade.' The most pious nations often turn out to be the most artful. Ireland rarely misses a chance to sermonise on Gaza, climate justice, or whichever cause currently allows it to cast itself as Europe's moral compass. But as La Rochefoucauld noted, hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue. And by that measure, Ireland has paid handsomely.
Reuters
7 hours ago
- Reuters
China to send vice premier He Lifeng to Britain for US trade talks
SHANGHAI, June 7 (Reuters) - China's foreign ministry said on Saturday that Chinese vice premier He Lifeng will visit the United Kingdom between June 8 and June 13. The first meeting of the China-U.S. economic and trade consultation mechanism will be held with the United States during this visit, the ministry said. He led the Chinese side in the first round of trade talks in May. President Donald Trump said on Friday that U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer will represent Washington in the talks.
The Guardian
12 hours ago
- The Guardian
As US retreats, is there a ‘soft power' opportunity for UK?
The US is retreating from international cooperation, cutting support for free media abroad and reducing financial aid. Russia and China are spending up to £8bn on their global media activities to boost their influence. Amid these global tensions, the UK government recognises the dangers of a western retreat – but is struggling to fund a response. With such huge shifts in world politics, it is no wonder that some politicians fear the west is losing the 'soft power' battle – a phrase coined by the academic Joseph Nye in the 1980s to describe the ability to influence other nations through attraction and persuasion rather than coercion. While it may seem a frustratingly abstract concept, recent world events suggest its use has very real consequences. China was viewed favourably by 29% of people studied across 18 countries in 2021. After huge soft power efforts, the figure has now increased to 40%, according to a study by the BBC and Tapestry Research. The study separately surveyed a group across 10 countries made up of people involved in business decisions. Among that group, China's favourability had increased from 39% to 51%. It found that watching CGTN or RT, the respective state broadcasters of China and Russia, made viewers more favourable to those countries. Meanwhile, Donald Trump has been defunding independent media overseas such as Voice of America, known for delivering independent journalism to countries with restricted press freedoms. Overseas aid is being targeted. Over a longer period, Britain's traditionally potent soft power has been misfiring. 'The UK's soft power has been in decline roughly since Brexit, for the last 10 years, but we're still a top-tier player,' said Jonathan McClory, an expert on soft power who recently authored a report on the issue for Labour Together, a thinktank with close ties to Downing Street. 'We haven't managed to establish a compelling narrative of who we are and where we're going since Brexit … We've got a proper change in government, which gives the opportunity to do that. We have a willing audience, but we have to say what it is we're good at and act accordingly,' McClory said. UK ministers have recognised the urgency of the situation and also realise the opportunity for Britain's economy in fostering stronger international ties. The government set up a soft power council earlier this year and populated it with figures from across media, education, defence and beyond. It was a widely welcomed initiative, plugging in soft power to the top of government. A formal strategy is expected to follow this autumn. However, there is also a conflict at the heart of government. It is clear to most insiders that even the best-designed strategy will require funding. Key soft power institutions are struggling to cope with financial pressures, most notably the BBC World Service, the British Council and universities. Members of the newly formed soft power council are treading carefully, conscious that many ministers are sympathetic to the need for funding but have a tough task in securing it from the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, who is facing a myriad of pressing demands. Tristram Hunt, the director of the Victoria and Albert Museum and a member of the council, said: 'There is an importance in a growing age of autocracy to have that voice [of liberal, democratic values] heard. Budgets are strained and it's hard. We can't pick up all the slack left by a retreating America. But if we believe in these values, it's important to be on the front foot with them as far as we can.' Others on the council are more bullish, arguing that the US retreat creates a strategic opening for Britain. 'We have this incredible opportunity,' said Neil Mendoza, who served as a culture commissioner under the previous government. 'You have a threat on the one hand but also this opportunity because America has withdrawn. It is also cheap as chips – and can work in close partnership with hard power. Why wouldn't you invest in soft power?'
