Illusions of Shangri-la

These domestic demonstrations were largely ignored by the media, as were similar events in dozens of other countries.

In the Tibetan capital Lhasa, however, far lower numbers drew sharp attention to themselves by beating up and stabbing unarmed police and members of the Han Chinese 5 per cent ethnic minority, setting buildings on fire and destroying motor vehicles.

A jaundiced observer might ask whether, in terms of media attention, the Tibetan separatists' violence proved more efficacious than the anti-war movement's law-abiding, peaceful approach.

But a moment's reflection or time spent watching BBC coverage of events in Tibet would have revealed that the guiding principle for Britain's Establishment voice was political.

As a dutiful defender of the British government's imperialist wars, it has no interest in spotlighting the most consistent critics of this strategy, while it spares no effort to join international attempts to embarrass and put pressure on China in the run-up to the Beijing Olympic Games.

Industrial pollution, democratic shortcomings and injustices associated with the rapid modernisation process are cited without any recognition that, just 60 years ago, China was a backward, internationally scorned country beset by feudal structures and warlords.

The 1949 revolution offered the means of overcoming this backwardness, but, despite huge progress, much still remains to be done.

Tibet, which became part of China seven centuries ago in the wake of Kublai Khan's establishment of the Yuan dynasty in 1271, benefited hugely from the revolution.

Not only did it welcome the introduction of state education, health care and other basics of modern society but the old feudal order was overturned. Despite efforts by Hollywood actors such as Richard Gere and other apologists for Tibetan separatism, who peddle Shangri-la images of a society at peace with itself, the reality was gruesomely different.

Land was dominated by a combination of feudal lords and rich monasteries, with the bulk of the people consigned to serfdom.

Lords, whether of the lama or temporal variety, had the power to tax their subjects, torture, blind or mutilate them as a means of punishment, rape them and control their freedom of movement.

Even the Dalai Lama has had to concede since he fled Tibet in 1959 that people's treatment at the hands of his land-owning supporters was horrible.

The Dalai Lama himself was reported as accepting three years ago that Tibet is part of China and declaring that he seeks only regional autonomy.

If that is so, he should condemn the murderous attacks of those who claim to be his supporters and stop misleading the world with claims that Han Chinese are swamping Tibet and destroying its culture.

Cultures evolve, especially when they come into contact with others, as a result of improved links, such as the Qinghai-Tibet "railway on the roof of the world."

The Dalai Lama should come to an accommodation with Beijing to allow him to return home in his religious capacity but to end his role as a symbol of separatism and counter-revolution.