4 ms·

It's a bit more complicated than that. Tibet was internationally recognized as part of China - not as an independent country. After the Chinese revolution of 19

It's a bit more complicated than that. Tibet was internationally recognized as part of China - not as an independent country. After the Chinese revolution of 1911, China fell apart, and Tibet became de facto independent. But that occurred throughout China, as various warlords took control of different parts of the country. China was in turmoil (the Japanese invasion and near-constant civil war) until 1949. Once the country had a strong central government, that government immediately tried to reassert its authority over the territories that were de jure part of China, including Tibet. You can think of this what you want, but it's not at all similar to invading a country in the other side of the world.

toss1 5y ago
Right, not at all similar - China is not only invading, it is claiming it for itself, purposefully erasing Tibetan culture and religion, and claiming the resources for itself, all against the will of the Tibetean people. The fact that there was some prior recognition is quite irrelevant. Should the EU nations claim their pre 1911 boundaries against the will of the people living there, by force? Should the Lenape Native Americans whose predecessors sold Manhattan to the Dutch be able to reclaim it by force? How about the Dutch? Your argument is sophistry, and nothing but inane justification for an authoritarian and expansionist regime. Moreover while that regime repeatedly proclaims that no one should interfere in the internal affairs of other nations, it feels completely free to interfere and claim other nations, including, Tibet, Taiwan, and Hong Kong (yes it was leased and returned, but they are already violating the terms of the return). This is not a regime to defend.