Middle Way Approach	Rangzen Approach (Independence)
1. Non-Sovereignist/non confrontational.	1. Sovereigntist/confrontational.
2. Interdependency principle	2. Zero sum approach.
3. Practically seeks to tackle Tibet’s immediate and most important priority issue – Population transfer policy/ demographical changes resulting in marginalization of Tibetans in Tibet.	3. Notionally seeks to tackle this immediate problem without regard to its practical side.
4. Conforms to the positive international legal principles and norms. (eg. territorial integrity, political independence, state sovereignty etc)	4. Disregard to these legal principles and norms. Seeks to invoke an idealist notion of international law especially right of people’s to self-determination.
5. Internal self-determination/self-government. (self-determination within modern human rights rubric)	5. External self-determination. (self-determination either within the decolonization mandate or Marxist-Leninist nationality theory of national self-determination)
6. Constitutional approach (national) by conforming to the norms and principles of international law.	6. Extra constitutional or stacking claims within international legal processes without conforming to the norms and principles of positivist international law.
7. Mutually beneficial approach.(Nyi-Phen)	7. Seeks to claim sovereignty through historical claims.
8. Conforms to the nationality theory and policy.	8. Conforms to the concept of nationalism.
9. Inclusive approach, methodology and understanding.	9. Stress on the exclusivity of claims to sovereignty based upon exclusive national characteristics and historical legitimacy.
10. More futuristic or forward looking in approach without taking into account past historical and legitimate claims to the statehood and sovereignty.	10. Making claims to sovereignty principally on the basis of historical and legal legitimate claims to statehood.
11. Cultural autonomy.	11. Political and territorial independence.
12. Conciliatory in approach.	12. Undoing historical wrongs and injustices.
13. Support and acceptance from international community.	13. Highly unlikely to receive such support unless China’s state sovereignty itself becomes questionable, or in case of dissolution of state or any other inconceivable circumstances.
14. Methodology: dialogue and negotiations.	14. Methodology: internationalization of Tibet issue and seeking international intervention in Tibet.