Guwahati, July 2: On the landmark occasion of his 90th birthday, celebrated globally on June 30 according to the Buddhist calendar and again on July 6 per the Western calendar, the 14th Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, delivered a powerful declaration that shook Beijing to its core. Addressing followers and Tibetan Buddhist leaders in Dharamshala, he unequivocally announced that the exclusive right to recognize his future reincarnation rests solely with Tibetans and Buddhists, led by the Gaden Phodrang Trust—the Office of His Holiness the Dalai Lama—and firmly asserted that no external authority, particularly China, holds any legitimate role in this deeply spiritual and cultural process.
The swift and frenzied reaction from the Chinese government betrayed their anxiety. Within mere hours, Chinese officials and state-controlled media launched a full-scale propaganda offensive. The Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning rushed to dismiss the Dalai Lama’s announcement, asserting sternly that the reincarnation process “must follow the principles of domestic recognition, the ‘golden urn’ process, and approval by the central government, in line with religious traditions and laws.”
Chinese state media quickly amplified these claims, hastily assembling supposed “historical facts” to back Beijing’s authority. The China Daily, an official mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist Party, dutifully reported that the “golden urn lot-drawing system was implemented in 1793” to ensure the “sanctity and purity of the reincarnation process.” It further insisted that all reincarnations of Dalai Lamas and Panchen Lamas historically underwent either a golden urn selection or required explicit central government approval.
These media narratives, however, betray a profound vagueness and desperation. Each statement from Chinese officials and state media uniformly echoes the same rehearsed lines, claiming that the Dalai Lama’s reincarnation is “by no means merely an internal religious matter,” and arguing that it is not solely determined by a “unique predestined bond” as the 14th Dalai Lama maintains. Instead, they assert without elaboration that it reflects “national sovereignty, governmental authority, religious principles, and the sentiments of lay followers.”
Remarkably absent from Beijing’s orchestrated outcry is any acknowledgment of the overwhelming international support the Dalai Lama continues to receive—not just from Tibetans worldwide, but also from citizens inside China, including ethnic Tibetans enduring occupation. The global resonance of his recent announcement underscores that the Tibet cause far surpasses China’s carefully curated narrative of “historical facts.”
Chinese state media and aligned outlets outside China have repeatedly labeled supporters of Tibetan self-determination as the “Dalai clique” colluding with so-called international “anti-China forces.” Yet such inflammatory rhetoric fails to hide the glaring contradictions in China’s position. While Beijing insists upon a historically justified “golden urn” process, it remains deliberately silent about Tibet’s undeniable status as an occupied region, subjected for decades to systematic cultural suppression and Sinicization by the Chinese Communist Party.
Observers note that Beijing’s insistence on its version of history and Chinese legal authority over Tibetan spiritual matters rings hollow. China’s historical claims conveniently ignore how Tibetan spiritual leaders were traditionally identified by religious procedures within the Tibetan Buddhist community itself, with any external acknowledgment by imperial China often being nominal or symbolic at best.
The South China Morning Post, citing unnamed observers, characterized the Dalai Lama’s announcement as a “clear departure from past tradition,” predicting heightened tensions with Beijing. But what these observers and Chinese narratives omit is that the very traditions they claim to uphold are distorted by the occupation itself. China’s actions in Tibet—including promoting state-approved religious leaders, rewriting history textbooks, and forcibly assimilating Tibetan culture—undermine any claim to legitimate spiritual authority.
The Dalai Lama’s announcement, backed unanimously by leaders from all four major schools of Tibetan Buddhism—Nyingma, Sakya, Kagyu, and Geluk—clearly stated their rejection of Chinese interference, proclaiming, “We not only strongly condemn the People’s Republic of China’s usage of the reincarnation subject for their political gain, but will never accept it.”
China’s reaction to the Dalai Lama’s statement reflects deep-seated fear. Beijing is acutely aware that its carefully constructed narrative around the Dalai Lama’s succession is unraveling under scrutiny from an informed global audience, as well as from Tibetans inside Tibet who continue to revere their exiled spiritual leader.
The international community watches closely, with growing speculation of a scenario where two competing Dalai Lamas emerge—one chosen by Beijing, lacking legitimacy among the faithful, and another recognized by Tibetan Buddhists globally, embodying the authentic tradition and the aspirations of the Tibetan people.
Ultimately, the furious reaction from China underscores a profound truth: despite Beijing’s propaganda machine, the Tibetan cause, rooted deeply in resilience, spirituality, and global solidarity, remains far greater and more enduring than any fabricated narrative from the halls of power in China.
