Why Tibet’s self-immolations must stop?

Why Tibet’s self-immolations must stop?

Clarifications: 

- Tibetan self-immolations are result of China’s atrocious, insensitive and failed policies in Tibet.
- Are self-immolations natural reaction of Tibetans to China’s atrocious policies and rule in Tibet, or is it well-meaning strategy by Tibetans to highlight their genuine sufferings and suppressed aspirations under Chinese rule?  My limited understanding of the issue points to the latter, which will be the basis of my reasons behind the assertion “why self-immolations must stop”.
- The main reason behind this assertion is based on believe that self-immolations (now with more than 40 cases) did not capture enough international attention and reactions.

Reasons why self-immolations must stop:

- Tibet’s self-immolations have not captured the imaginations of international community, the way it did in the case of Arab spring. Why?
- Because self-immolations in other parts of the world became a catalyst or reason behind the rise of movements such as Arab spring, India’s Mandal Commission agitation etc. In other words self-immolations created movements, which captured international attention and concerns. Tibet’s self-immolations, despite tremendous courage and sacrifice, did not result in any apparent political or social movements or uprisings. At the most, Tibet’s self-immolations created more self-immolations.
- In 2008 Tibet uprising, the killings of hundreds of Tibetans at the hands of Chinese authority resulted in the international hue and cry over the abuse of human rights and atrocities in Tibet. So, Chinese state was directly accountable to the deaths of those Tibetans. There was a clear and apparent case of abuse of human rights and illegality in the act of Chinese state. In the case of self-immolations, Chinese state did not directly cause those deaths, as they were results of self-immolations. Thus, international community, though sympathetic to Tibetans, could not directly hold Chinese state accountable for those deaths. At the most, an indirect causal relation could be attributed to China’s illegitimate rule in Tibet.
- Why Tibet’s self-immolations did not create larger movements within China? In Arab states, there was a general atmosphere ripe for democratization, pan Arab sense of brotherhood and shared aspirations to overthrow dictatorships. In the case of Tibet’s self-immolations, despite few supporting statements from Chinese intellectuals, majority of the mainland Chinese people did not really share a sense of brotherhood and concerns for Tibetans. Further, general conditions within larger Chinese society at the moment may not be ripe for democratization and political reforms.
- International Law argument: Unlike in the case of 2008 killings, Tibetan self-immolations are not enough for international community to cross the boundary Sovereignty (at least notionally) and condemn Chinese acts.
- Thus it seems to me that international community acts (or reacts) either to those instances of apparent killings as a result of uprising or when there are large movements or uprisings as a result of self-immolations. Sadly, in the case of recent Tibetan self-immolations, neither of these two situations had taken place.
- Therefore, if self-immolations are well-meaning strategy (which I think it is) by Tibetans to highlight their genuine concerns and aspirations under 50 years of Chinese rule, then I’m afraid it seems that the strategy did not result in what it set out to do. Therefore, self-immolations must stop. I did not use “must be stopped” because I don’t know who is really capable (whether morally or legally) of stopping these acts from taking place.