Skip to main content

When democracy becomes a performance: The Tibetan exile experience

By Tseten Lhundup* 
I was born in Bylakuppe, one of the largest Tibetan settlements in southern India. From childhood, I grew up in simple barracks, along muddy roads, and in fields with limited resources. Over the years, I have watched our democratic system slowly erode. Observing the recent budget session of the 17th Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile, these “democratic procedures” appear grand and orderly on the surface, yet in reality they amount to little more than empty formalities. The parliamentarians seem largely disconnected from the everyday struggles faced by ordinary exiled Tibetans like us.
Today, a large number of young Tibetans in exile are compelled to leave our settlements and migrate to other cities in India or abroad in search of better opportunities. Our settlements are marked by economic decline, limited educational resources, and healthcare systems that depend heavily on international aid. Yet the Parliament spent an entire week debating office budgets, rules for the national flag, emblem, and anthem, and passing symbolic resolutions. Can such resolutions alter China’s repressive policies in Tibet? Can they provide even a single well-equipped school for the children of Bylakuppe? Clearly, they cannot. At best, they create an appearance of activity—projecting to cameras and donor countries that “Tibetan democracy is functioning.”
Even more ironic is the repeated emphasis on “unity” during the session, while the deeper fractures within our exile community remain unaddressed. Regionalism, sectarian divisions, and even the occasional influence of religious oracles in political matters continue to persist. In such a context, one must ask: how can this system genuinely represent ordinary Tibetans living in southern settlements like Bylakuppe?
At a deeper level, the system itself suffers from structural limitations. In 1960, His Holiness the Dalai Lama initiated the establishment of the Parliament—an important democratic experiment in Tibetan history, intended to empower exiled Tibetans to govern themselves. However, more than six decades later, this “democracy” resembles a rootless tree. It has no sovereignty, no army, and no real economic independence. Its existence depends largely on the goodwill of the Indian government and international support.
The Parliament meets twice a year. On paper, it reviews budgets and questions ministers; in practice, it revisits the same themes repeatedly—condemning China, calling for dialogue, and approving funds—without producing meaningful change. The Middle Way Approach is treated as sacrosanct, yet it receives little attention from China. Elections are held every five years, but aside from the replacement of a few parliamentarians, the underlying issues remain unchanged.
This is not a rejection of democracy. What is troubling is the reduction of democracy to mere procedure. Exiled Tibetans are not abstract “voters”; we are living, breathing individuals. Our parents labour in tea plantations, and our youth often drift across foreign lands in search of survival and dignity. What we urgently need is a more practical and responsive system—one that prioritizes infrastructure in settlements, employment opportunities for youth, and the preservation of our cultural identity. Instead, we see parliamentarians in Dharamsala delivering lofty speeches about “global solidarity,” often detached from ground realities.
True democracy must enable grassroots voices to directly influence decision-making. It should not be overshadowed by factional interests or informal influences that dilute accountability. Without this connection between people and power, the system risks losing both its legitimacy and its purpose.
As we look toward the upcoming 18th Tibetan Parliament, there is a pressing need for fundamental reform. Without it, our so-called “democratic system” risks becoming an expensive illusion—one that sustains appearances while the Tibetan cause gradually weakens under the weight of endless meetings and resolutions. The future of the Snow Land cannot be left to a mirage.
I am Tseten Lhundup, a second-generation Tibetan exile born and raised in Bylakuppe. As an ordinary member of this community, I remain deeply concerned about the future of our democracy, the challenges confronting our settlements, and the urgent need for meaningful reform to advance the Tibetan cause.
---
*Based in Lugsung Samdupling Tibetan Settlement,  Periyapatna Taluk, Mysore District
Karnataka

Comments

TRENDING

Sardar made up his mind on Pakistan in Dec 1946 "before" Mountbatten's Partition Plan

By Hari Desai* One has to be extra cautious while dealing with the history of towering personalities of the Indian freedom struggle, especially that of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel (October 31, 1875 - December 15, 1950). Present-day politicians prefer to "pronounce” on his life and quote him according to their convenience like a blind person describing an elephant.

Insider plot to kill Deendayal Upadhyay? What RSS pracharak Balraj Madhok said

By Shamsul Islam*  Balraj Madhok's died on May 2, 2016 ending an era of old guards of Hindutva politics. A senior RSS pracharak till his death was paid handsome tributes by the RSS leaders including PM Modi, himself a senior pracharak, for being a "stalwart leader of Jan Sangh. Balraj Madhok ji's ideological commitment was strong and clarity of thought immense. He was selflessly devoted to the nation and society. I had the good fortune of interacting with Balraj Madhok ji on many occasions". The RSS also issued a formal condolence message signed by the Supremo Mohan Bhagwat on behalf of all swayamsevaks, referring to his contribution of commitment to nation and society. He was a leading RSS pracharak on whom his organization relied for initiating prominent Hindutva projects. But today nobody in the RSS-BJP top hierarchy remembers/talks about Madhok as he was an insider chronicler of the immense degeneration which was spreading as an epidemic in the high echelons of th...

If Maoist violence is illegitimate, how is Hindutva, state violence justified? Can right-wing wash off its sins?

By Swami Agnivesh* and Sandeep Pandey** There was major police action against Sudha Bhardwaj, Gautam Navlakha, Varvara Rao, Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira on 28 August, 2018. Before this police arrested Professor Shoma Sen, Adocate Sudhir Gadling, Sudhir Dhawle, Mahesh Raut and Rona Wilson on 6 June. Even before this Dr. Binayak Sen, Soni Sori, Ajay TG, Professor GN Saibaba and Prashant Rahi have been arrested and all these activists have been accused of having links with Maoists.