Jallianwala Bagh is a festering wound in the minds of indian nation .for cameron it is just a tourism spot?

David Cameron thanks keepers of Jallianwala Bagh memorial[for cameron it is just a tourism spot? ]

David Cameron thanks keepers of Jallianwala Bagh memorial

Rohan Dua, TNN Feb 21, 2013, 04.53AM IST

Tags:

• 
  
• Jawaharlal Nehru|
• Jallianwala Bagh memorial|
• Indian National Congress|
• David Cameron

AMRITSAR: For once, on Wednesday, Sukumar Mukherji, an austere looking man in-charge at the Jallianwala Bagh massacre site, looked content with his endeavour to preserve the massacre site.
"The 94-year-old wait has ended today. British PM David Cameron appeared apologetic for what our then colonial masters had done. There was remorse in his voice. The damage can't be undone but the British government's gesture is moving," said Mukherji.

Ever since the carnage, the Mukherji family -- living in the crumbling, falling-apart quarters of the massacre memorial -- has unflinchingly guarded and preserved this poignant site through a trust.
Even on Wednesday, there wasn't much assistance from the state or central government either to facilitate the condolence visit. Mukherji had to himself arrange the wreath and bouquets of roses for Cameron.
In the company of suit-attired towering embassy officials from England, he walked in his modest cotton overalls and nattily worn rubber slippers.
"My eyes welled up with tears when Cameron praised the trust's effort to preserve the site," said an emotional Mukherji.
As TV crews mobbed him, he looked uncomfortable at the sudden attention. Thrice, he read out the note from the visitor's book aloud and then smiled at his daughter standing beside him.
"My grandfather had moved to Amritsar in 1910, from the Hooghly district of West Bengal. When the massacre took place, he was pained to see that no one cared to save the martrys' memories. He approached the Indian National Congress to pass a resolution to acquire the land and the trust was formed," Mukherji recalled, showing the 1920 land record.
The land was purchased at a hiked up price of Rs 5.65 lakh in 1920, after Gandhi's appeal to the nation helped the trust collect the money. Mukherji's grandfather, Dr Shasthi Charan Mukherji, was appointed the first secretary of the trust, named the Jallianwla Bagh National Memorial Trust.
The museum has since continued to attract visitors and historians, giving the most palpable glimpse ever of the brutalities of the British Raj.
However, the family's own stay here has been ridden with poverty and a collective show of patriotism.
To preserve the heritage, the single room, for years has been shared between Mukherji's mother, wife and kids -- without the frills of a television set, air conditioner and decent lights. The members here still sleep on makeshift beds and cots, often in the company of pigeons and sparrows.
"We had rented a part of the building in 1974 to the Punjab National Bank to feed our family. We have survived on that," he said Mukherji.
The rent has increased only a trifle from Rs 11,500 to Rs 40,000 that barely fills the empty kitchens of the Mukherji family and the 14-member ancillary staff.

Rare Central grants have reached and been spent on the renovation work, most often drawing ire of some historians criticizing the resurrection work.
"I had proposed to the Central government the idea of introducing a nominal entry fee of Rs 2. However, that was dismissed by the Punjab government." he said.
Timeline: How Jallianwala Bagh Memorial came into existence
1919: Bengali freedom fighter Shasthi Charan Mukherji moves a draft for the trust
1920: Trust founded after a resolution passed by the Indian National Congress
1923: Land purchased after Gandhiji's appeal to the nation led to collection of Rs 5.35 lakh
1951: Jallianwala Bagh National Memorial Act passed by the government of India
1955: Design prepared by American architect Benjamin Polk
1961: President Rajendra Prasad inaugurated memorial on April 13, in the presence of Jawaharlal Nehru and other leaders
Grants given to Jallianwala Bagh Memorial
April 13, 1961 | Rs 10 lakh
May 2007 | Rs 22.98 lakh by PM Manmohan Singh
January 2009 | Rs 3.42 crore on sound and light show by ITDC


The JallianwalaBagh Massacre
The JallianwalaBagh massacre (also known as the Amritsar massacre), took place in the JallianwalaBagh public garden in the northern Indiancity of Amritsar on 13 April 1919. The shooting that took place was ordered by Brigadier-General Reginald E.H. Dyer.
On Sunday 13 April 1919, Dyer was convinced of a major insurrection and thus he banned all meetings. On hearing that a meeting of 15,000 to 20,000 people including women, senior citizen and children had assembled at JallianwalaBagh, Dyer went with fifty riflemen to a raised bank and ordered them to shoot at the crowd. Dyer kept the firing up till the ammunition supply was almost exhausted for about ten minutes with approximately 1,650 rounds fired. Official Government of India sources estimated that the fatalities were 379, with 1,100 wounded. The casualty number estimated by Indian National Congress was more than 1,500, with approximately 1,000 dead.
Dyer was removed from duty and forced to retire. He became a celebrated hero in Britain among people with connections to the British Raj. The massacre caused a reevaluation of the Army’s role in which the new policy became minimum force, and the Army was retrained and developed suitable tactics such as crowd control. Historians considered the episode as a decisive step towards the end of British rule in India.

FIRST EXPERIMENTS IN Bapus lab

 

---

FIRST EXPERIMENTS IN Bapus lab No other city is endowed with as much Gandhian heritage as Ahmedabad,thanks to Bapus first experiments with truth and the institutions he built here KOCHRAB ASHRAM | Bapus Bungalow Mahatma Gandhis first home in India when he came back from South Africa in 1915 was a bungalow at Kochrab in Paldi area of Ahmedabad.It was lent to him by Jeevanlal Barrister,a prominent lawyer,allowing him to set up his first ashram on May 20.He transformed it into an antithesis of everything Ahmedabad had stood for in those days.Here was a city of moneyed mill owners and professionals who lived a life of opulence.By stark contrast,the Satyagraha Ashram at Kochrab was defined by austerity. It was here that Bapu put into practice his ideas about brahmacharya,physical labour,Swadeshi and fight against untouchability.The most famous incident at Kochrab was Bapu admitting Dudabhai,an untouchable,and his family into the ashram despite protests from some of his own followers.This upset the neighbouring community and even the Vaishnav businessmen,who refused to fund the ashram.Bapu told the ashramites that if a boycott was declared and they were left without funds,they would shift to the untouchables colony.When the ashram did not have funds to last even a month,a car stopped at the ashram gates in the morning.A businessman expressed his desire to help Bapu and left Rs 13,000 the next morning,enough to sustain the ashram for a month.That was Ambalal Sarabhai,who ensured Bapus first venture in Ahmedabad does not go bankrupt. NAVAJIVAN TRUST | Power of Media After returning from South Africa in 1915,Mahatma Gandhi strongly felt the need for a newspaper that would spread his ideas.His followers,Shri Umar Sobani and Shri Shankarlal Banker,handed over their English weekly,Young India to him and Indulal Yagnik gave him control of his Gujarati monthly Navajivan Ane Satya.Under Bapus editorship,the first issue of Navajivan was published on September 7,1919.The first Gandhian Young India was published on October 8.Thus began a unique battle as Bapu tested the might of the written word against the Raj.By its third issue under Bapu,Navajivans readership had jumped from 600 to 6,000 and the small press in the old city at Khamasa could not handle the rush.Manahar Printing Press in a lane at the entrance of Chudiaul was bought for Rs 10,000.It was rechristened Navajivan Mudranalaya.During the Non-Cooperation Movement,the two publications became extremely popular.Bapus writings in Young India finally led to his arrest in 1922 and the famous sedition case. SABARMATI ASHRAM | Sants Abode Mahatma Gandhi shifted his ashram from Kochrab to the banks of the Sabarmati on June 17,1917.He had been looking for some barren land to try out farming,cow breeding and related activities.Also,the site was between the Sabarmati jail and a crematorium the two places that Satyagrahis end up at,Bapu believed.This became Bapus home till 1930 and served as one of the main centres of the Indian freedom struggle. Here,Bapu continued with his experiments with truth and also brought together a group of men and women who believed in non-violence.It was here that the rentio,a compact version of the charkha and the dhanush takli were developed.Research and training in khadi for Satyagrahis was also carried out once the Non-Cooperation Movement was suspended after violence at Chauri Chaura in Uttar Pradesh. Bapus Dandi March was launched from this ashram on March 11,1930.Bapu had said,My greatest creation in South Africa was Phoenix (Settlement).Without it there would not have been Satyagraha in South Africa.There could not be Satyagraha in India without this ashram (Sabarmati).I may be mistaken in this.If so I should be abandoned.I am going to tell the country not to evaluate me on the basis of Champaran or Kheda,but to consider me through this ashram Today,the ashram serves as a source of inspiration and guidance,and stands as a monument to Bapus mission in life.It draws thousands of visitors across the globe. GUJARAT VIDYAPITH | Learning it Right Gujarat Vidyapith has less than a decade to go before it completes 100 years of existence.And yet it has never wavered from Gandhian thought.Nothing begins at the Vidyapith without prayer and spinning the charkha every morning and the uniform is khadi for both students and teachers. Mahatma Gandhi started this institution on October 18,1920 at a bungalow behind at Kochrab Ashram.The bungalow was donated by Dahyabhai Mehta whose family lives in it today after the vidyapith shifted to a larger campus. Originally called Rashtriya Vidyapith,it was started as part of the Non-Co-operation Movement with the objective of preparing workers of strong character who could lead movements for the countrys development.Bapu remained its chancellor for as long as he was alive.Sardar Patel,first president of Independent India Dr Rajendra Prasad and former prime minister Morarji Desai were among the other chancellors after Bapu. By 1923,a number of schools and colleges were affiliated with the vidyapith and trained a small bunch students in graduation-level courses.Today,there are about 4,000 students enrolled right from primary school to post-graduate courses.Students from across the globe also come to study Gandhian thought.In 1963,the government declared it a deemed university,giving it a fair degree of autonomy. MAJOOR MAHAJAN SANGH | Love of Labour In February,1918,the 50,000-strong textile mill workers,showed the world how industrial disputes could be resolved amicably.It also led to the forming of the first labour union in Ahmedabad.Just three months before a violent labour unrest in Russia had led to the government being overthrown and the Communists coming to power. In Ahmedabad,the workers were led by Mahatma Gandhi,whose two companions Anasuya Sarabhai and Shankarlal Banker laid the foundation of militant but non-violent trade unionism in the country.For 22 days from February 22,1918 Bapu and his strong message of Ek Tek (one resolve) reverberated through the labour population.The weavers were on strike demanding a justified 35% hike in wages,but the mill owners were offering just 20%.Bapu would address meetings under a tree on the banks of the Sabarmati.Every evening,some 10,000 workers would take out a peaceful rally in the city.The strike ultimately succeeded after Bapu decided to fast unto death on March 12,1918. After the strike,mill-owner Ambalal Sarabhai and others suggested the formation of a union to represent the workers.Bapu was initially reluctant,but agreed once the workers said they would make the union self-sufficient by paying a part of their monthly salary.A large gathering was called at Anasuyas Mirzapur bungalow on February 25,1920.The union was called Majoor Mahajan Sangh with 16,400 members.The term mahajan was generally used for businessmen from the Brahmin and Bania communities and was added to the name to give respect to the labourers.Anasuya was declared lifelong president of the union. The Sanghs heydays came in 1978,when it represented 1.40 lakh workers of 65 mills.By the mid-1980 s there was a decline in the textile industry.In 2011,the union has just about 8,000 members. NAVI GUJARATI SHALA | Swadeshi Education Mahatma Gandhi believed British education was not informing the children about the Indian way of life.To create strong-willed freedom fighters and citizens of the future,he decided to form an education system of his own. The foundation of the first national school called Navi Gujarati Shala was laid in Daulatkhana in Khadia area.Bapu wrote its prospectus on January 18,1917.He replicated this model across the country,by opening more than 200 such schools. The education will be physical,intellectual and religious, he wrote in the prospectus.Children were trained in agriculture,hand-weaving,carpentry and using a blacksmiths tools as well.A l l t e a ch i n g was to be through Gujarati and most of it was oral during the first few years.The school was banned in 1932 after the B r i t i s h feared it was p re p a r i n g children for the freedom movement. A municipal school was operating here till some years ago but was shut down as it did not have enough students.The land is used for social functions,like marriages,now. JYOTI SANGH | Gender Bender Jyoti Sangh was started so that women,who had taken part in the 1930 Civil Disobedience Movement,remain in the freedom struggle even after the movement ended.Textile magnate Ambalal Sarabhais daughter,Mridula conceptualised the organisation run by women and for women on April 25,1934 after speaking to Mahatma Gandhi. Bapu laid its foundation in Mirzapur area of Ahmedabad.The organisation encouraged womens empowerment and economic self-sufficiency through education and vocational training.Mridulaben was keen that women become economically independent.Jyoti Sanghs Udyog Vibhag taught weaving,soap-making,hair oil manufacturing and furniture polishing.It also raised womens awareness on child marriages and domestic violence. In the inaugural address,Bapu suggested the members wear khadi and take to spinning.When the Quit India Movement was launched in 1942,Mridulaben established contact with the movement led by Jayprakash Narayan,Aruna Asaf Ali,Ram Manohar Lohia and others,and helped them financially.The organisation continues to help women in downtrodden areas even today. Bapu leading the evening prayers at the Sabarmati Ashram in 1930

Mahatma Gandhi Photo Gallery
1915 &1932

1  2  3  4  5  6

Mahatma Gandhi Photo Gallery
1915 &1932

Gandhi at the spinning wheel, Sabarmati Ashram, 1925
Charkha (spinning wheel) became the symbol of National Unity

Bapu's first ashram was shunned for letting in dalit

Paul John, TNN | May 20, 2013, 12.31 AM IST

RELATED

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 'Satyagraha' to be screened in South Africa
• 
  

AHMEDABAD: It was on May 20, 1915, that Mahatma Gandhi made Ahmedabad his home. A city-based lawyer, Jeevanlal, offered his bungalow in Kochrab village on the outskirts of Ahmedabad's walled city to Bapu on rent to start his first settlement. The Mahatma christened it 'Satyagraha Ashram.'


                                                              

Mahatma Gandhi Photo Gallery
1915 &1932

Satyagraha Ashram at Kochrab, Ahmedabad, founded May 25, 1915

 This fact is mentioned in Chandulal Dalal's book, 'Gandhiji ni Dinwari'. Bapu performed vaastu puja on this day at the Kochrab bungalow and settled there with some people.

Ahmedabad was Bapu's home in India after he came back from South Africa in 1915. It was from here that he wanted to launch the movement to free India from foreign rule and start his fight against untouchability. Bapu transformed the Ashram into an antithesis of everything Ahmedabad stood for in those days. Here was a city of moneyed mill owners and professionals who lived a life of opulence. In stark contrast, the Satyagraha Ashram at Kochrab was defined by austerity. Bapu put into practice his ideas about bramhacharya, physical labour, swadeshi and untouchability. The most famous incident at Kochrab was Bapu admitting Dudabhai, an untouchable, and his family, despite protests from some of his own followers.

This upset a neighbouring community and even Vaishnav businessmen who refused to fund the ashram. Bapu told ashram inmates that if a boycott was declared and they were left without funds, they would shift to the untouchables' colony. A car stopped at the ashram gates one morning when the ashram did not have funds to last even a month. A businessman expressed his desire to help Bapu and left Rs 13,000 the next morning which was enough for a month. That was Ambalal Sarabhai
 
 who ensured that Bapu's first venture in Ahmedabad does not go bankrupt.

Function to mark 99 years of Kochrab

On the occasion of the 99th year of the Kochrab ashram, a function is being organized at the venue to remember Bapu's firm resolve to win freedom. The event will see discourses by academicians on Mahatma Gandhi and his contemporaries including Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. City-based historian Rizwan Kadri will give a lecture and release two books one of which explores the subject of Mahatma and Tilak. An interesting incident mentioned in Kadri's book refers to August 1, 1920 when news of Lokmanya Tilak's death reached Ahmedabad. In his report on Tilak's funeral later published in 'Navjivan', Bapu wrote how a Muslim youth had jumped into Tilak's pyre and committed suicide.

BRITAIN AND TIBET 1900 -2013-[BRITISH INVASION ,MASSACRE OF TIBETANS AND LOOTING 1903]

BRITAIN AND TIBET 1900 -2013-[BRITISH INVASION ,MASSACRE OF TIBETANS AND LOOTING 1903]

David Cameron spells out British stance on Tibet

AFP | May 9, 2013, 04.06 AM IST

63

comments

0
inShare

Share More

A

A

READ MORE Tibet|Nick Clegg|Lama|Prime Minister|David Cameron

Britain does not support a Tibetan state independent of China, Prime Minister David Cameron said.

RELATED

• There is no religious freedom in Tibet
• 70 held in crackdown against self-immolation protests in Tibet
• Hopes of saving 83 Tibet miners wane
• China: Landslide buries 83 in Tibet gold mine area
• Dalai Lama offering cash sop to fiery protesters: Chinese official

LONDON: Britain does not support a Tibetan state independent of China, Prime Minister David Cameron said today, amid reports of Chinese anger at his meeting with the Dalai Lama last year.

Cameron told parliament that Britain respected China's sovereignty and ministers recognised Tibet as part of China.

Britain officials deny that Chinese anger at the meeting between Cameron and the Tibetan spiritual leader in May 2012 could scupper the Prime Minister's plans to visit China by the end of this year.

The Chinese government takes a dim view of ministers from foreign governments meeting the Dalai Lama, whom Beijing accuses of encouraging separatism and violence.

Cameron told lawmakers he had spoken to the Chinese Premier Li Keqiang and he hoped Britain could build a better relationship with China.

He said: "Let us be absolutely clear; this government has not changed the long-standing British policy towards China and Tibet. We do want to have a strong and positive relationship with China, which I believe is in our mutual benefit. The Chinese government is aware of our policy on Tibet. We recognise Tibet as part of China. We do not support Tibetan independence and we respect China's sovereignty. When I spoke to Premier Li recently, we both looked forward to both countries working very closely together in the months and years ahead."

The meeting between Cameron, deputy prime minister Nick Clegg and the Dalai Lama in London was part of the government's approach of seeking, "dialogue and discussion and gathering a wide range of viewpoints on issues of importance", a spokesman for Cameron said yesterday.

The spokesman added: "It is entirely reasonable for the Prime Minister to decide who he meets. The Chinese government always lobbies hard against any meetings between foreign governments and the Dalai Lama. We have made clear in advance to the Chinese government, that British ministers will decide who they meet and when they meet them." 

===================================================

British expedition to Tibet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The British Military Expedition to Tibet
British and Tibetan officers negotiating.
Date December 1903 – September 1904 Location Tibet Result British victory, treaty enforced, return to status quo.
Belligerents
British Empire British India	Tibet - administration in hands of local elites and not the Chinese Qing bureaucracy,[1] Tibetans, Kham fighters.
Commanders and leaders
James R. L. Macdonald Francis Younghusband	Dapon Tailing,commander at Gyantse Jong Thirteenth Dalai Lama
Strength
3,000 soldiers[citation needed] 7,000 support troops	Unknown, several thousand peasant conscripts[citation needed]
Casualties and losses
202 killed 411 other deaths	2000-3000 estimated [2]

The British expedition to Tibet began in December 1903 and lasted until September 1904. The expedition was effectively a temporary invasion by British Indian forces under the auspices of the Tibet Frontier Commission, whose purported mission was to establish diplomatic relations and resolve the dispute over the border between Tibet and Sikkim.^[3] In the nineteenth century, the British conquered Burma, Bhutan, and Sikkim, occupying the whole southern flank of Tibet, which remained the only Himalayan kingdom free of British influence.
The expedition was intended to counter Russia's perceived ambitions in the East and was initiated largely by Lord Curzon, the head of the British India government. Curzon had long obsessed over Russia's advance into Central Asia and now feared a Russian invasion of British India.^[4] In April 1903, the British received clear assurances from the Russian government that it had no interest in Tibet. "In spite, however, of the Russian assurances, Lord Curzon continued to press for the dispatch of a mission to Tibet," a high level British political officer noted.^[5]
The expedition fought its way to Gyantse and eventually reached Lhasa, the capital of Tibet, in August 1904. 

The Dalai Lama had fled to safety, first in Mongolia and later in China,

 but thousands of Tibetans armed with antiquated muzzle-loaders and swords had been mown down by modern rifles and Maxim machine guns while attempting to block the British advance. At Lhasa, the Commission forced remaining low-level Tibetan officials to sign the Great Britain and Tibet Convention (1904), before withdrawing to Sikkim in September, with the understanding the Chinese government would not permit any other country to interfere with the administration of Tibet.^[6]
The mission was recognized as a military expedition by the British Indian government, "which issued a war medal for it."^[7]

Contents 1 Background 2 Initial advance 2.1 The massacre of Chumik Shenko 3 The advance continues to Gyantse 3.1 The Mission under siege 3.2 Alarms and politics at Gyantse, and beyond 3.3 Storming of Gyantse Dzong 4 Entry to Lhasa 4.1 The Convention between Great Britain and Tibet (1904) 5 Conclusion to the campaign 6 Force composition 7 Aftermath 8 Subsequent interpretations 9 See also 10 Notes 11 Bibliography 12 External links

Background

Main article: Great Game

Col. Francis Younghusband

The causes of the conflict are obscure - historian Charles Allen has called the official reasons for the invasion 'almost entirely bogus.'^[8] It seems to have been provoked primarily by rumours circulating amongst the Calcutta-based British administration that the Chinese government, (who nominally ruled Tibet), were planning to give it to the Russians,^{[citation needed]} thus providing Russia with a direct route to British India and breaking the chain of semi-independent, mountainous buffer-states which separated India from the Russian Empire to the north. These rumours were confirmed seemingly by the facts of Russian exploration of Tibet. Russian explorer Gombojab Tsybikov was the first photographer of Lhasa, residing in it during 1900—1901 with the aid of the thirteenth Dalai Lama's Russian courtier Agvan Dorjiyev. 

 The Dalai Lama declined to have dealings with the British government in India

  and sent Dorjiyev in 1900 as an emissary to the court of Czar Nicholas II with an appeal for Russian protection. Dorjiyev was warmly received at the Peterhof and a year later, in 1901, at the Czar's palace in Yalta.
In view of these events Curzon's belief was reinforced that the Dalai Lama intended to place Tibet firmly within a sphere of Russian influence and end its neutrality.^[9] In 1903 Viceroy, Lord Curzon, sent a request to the governments of China and Tibet for negotiations to be held at Khampa Dzong, a tiny Tibetan village north of Sikkim to establish trade agreements. The Chinese were willing, and ordered the thirteenth Dalai Lama to attend.^{[citation needed]} However, the Dalai Lama refused, and also refused to provide transport to enable the amban, You Tai, to attend.^{[citation needed]} Curzon concluded that China had no power or authority to compel the Tibetan government^{[citation needed]}, and gained approval from London to send the Tibet Frontier Commission, a military expedition led by Colonel Francis Younghusband, to Khampa Dzong.
On 19 July 1903, Younghusband arrived at Gangtok, the capital city of the Indian state of Sikkim, to prepare for his mission. A letter from the under-secretary to the government of India to Younghusband on 26 July 1903 stated that "In the event of your meeting the Dalai Lama, the government of India authorizes you to give him the assurance which you suggest in your letter." From August 1903 Younghusband and his escort commander at Khamba Jong, Lt-Col Herbert Brander, tried to provoke the Tibetans into a confrontation.^[10]

 The British took a few months to prepare for the expedition which pressed into Tibetan territories in early December 1903 following an act of 'Tibetan hostility', which was afterwards established by the British resident in Nepal to have been the herding of some trespassing Nepalese yaks and their drovers back across the border.^[11]

 When Younghusband telegrammed the Viceroy, in an attempt to strengthen the British Cabinet's support of the invasion, that intelligence indicated Russian arms had entered Tibet, Curzon privately silenced him. 'Remember that in the eyes of HMG we are advancing not because of Dorjyev, or Russian rifles in Lhasa, but because of our Convention shamelessly violated, our frontier trespassed upon, our subjects arrested, our mission flouted, our representations ignored.'^[12]

The entire British force, which had taken on all the characteristics of an invading army, numbered over 3,000 fighting men and was accompanied by 7,000 sherpas, porters and camp followers. Six companies of the 23rd Sikh Pioneers, and 4 companies of the 8th Gurkhas in reserve at Gnatong in Sikkim, as well as 2 Gurkha companies guarding the British camp at Khamba Jong were involved. The British authorities had thought of the difficulty of mountain fighting, and so dispatched a force with many Gurkha and Pathan troops, who were from mountainous regions. Permission for the operation was received from London, but it is not known whether the Balfour government was fully aware of the difficulty of the operation, or of the Tibetan intention to resist it.^{[citation needed]}
The Tibetans were aware of the expedition. To avoid bloodshed the Tibetan general at Yadong pledged that if the British made no attack upon the Tibetans, he would not attack the British. Colonel Younghusband replied, on 6 December 1903, that "we are not at war with Tibet and that, unless we are ourselves attacked, we shall not attack the Tibetans".
When no Tibetan or Chinese officials met the British at Khapma Dzong, Younghusband advanced, with some 1,150 soldiers, 10,000 porters and labourers, and thousands of pack animals, to Tuna, fifty miles beyond the border. After waiting more months there, hoping in vain to be met by negotiators, the expedition received orders (in 1904) to continue toward Lhasa.^[13]
Tibet's government, guided by the Dalai Lama was alarmed by the presence of a large acquisitive foreign power dispatching a military mission to its capital, and began marshalling its armed forces.

Initial advance

Major Francis Younghusband leading a British force to Lhasa in 1904

The British army which departed Gnatong in Sikkim on 11 December 1903 was well prepared for the coming conflict due to its lengthy experience of service in Indian border wars. The commander, Brigadier-General James Ronald Leslie Macdonald, wintered in the border country, using the time to train his troops near regular supplies of food and shelter before advancing properly in March, and making over 50 miles before his first major obstacle was presented on 31 March at the pass of Guru, near Lake Bhan Tso.

The massacre of Chumik Shenko

A military confrontation on 31 March 1904 became known as the Massacre of Chumik Shenko. Facing the vanguard of Macdonald's army and blocking the road was a Tibetan force of 3,000 armed with primitive matchlock muskets, ensconced behind a 5-foot-high (1.5 m) rock wall. On the slope above, the Tibetans had placed seven or eight sangars.^[14] The Commissioner, Younghusband, was asked to stop but replied that the advance must continue, and that he could not allow any Tibetan troops to remain on the road. The Tibetans would not fight, but nor would they vacate their positions. Younghusband and Macdonald agreed 'the only thing to do was to disarm them and let them go'. This at least was the official version. The writer Charles Allen has also suggested that a dummy atrtack was played out in an effort to provoke the Tibetans into opening fire.^[15]

It seems then that scuffles between the Sikhs and Tibetan guards grouped around Tibetan generals sparked an action of the Lhasa General - he fired a pistol hitting a Sikh in the jaw. British accounts insist that the Tibetan general became angry at the sight of the brawl developing and shot the Sikh soldier in the face prompting a violent response from the soldier's comrades which rapidly escalated the situation. Henry Newman, a reporter for Reuters, who described himself as an eye-witness, said that following this shot, the mass of Tibetans surged forward and their attack fell next on a correspondent for the Daily Mail, Edmund Candler, and that very soon after this fire was directed from three sides on the Tibetans crowded behind the wall. In Doctor Austine Waddell's account, "they poured a withering fire into the enemy, which, with the quick firing Maxims, mowed down the Tibetans in a few minutes with a terrific slaughter."^[16] Second-hand accounts from the Tibetan side have asserted both that the British tricked the Tibetans into extinguishing the fuses for their matchlocks, and that the British opened fire without warning.

 However, no evidence exists to show such trickery took place and the likelihood is that the unwieldy weapons were of very limited use in the circumstances. Furthermore the British, Sikh and Gurkha soldiers closest to the Tibetans were nearly all protected by a high wall, and none were killed.^[17]

Tibetan Soldier at Target Practice

The Tibetans were mown down by the Maxim guns as they fled. "I got so sick of the slaughter that I ceased fire, though the general’s order was to make as big a bag as possible," wrote Lieutenant Arthur Hadow, commander of the Maxim guns detachment. "I hope I shall never again have to shoot down men walking away."^[18]
Half a mile from the battlefield the Tibetan forces reached shelter and were allowed to withdraw by Brigadier-General Macdonald. Behind them they left between 600 and 700 dead and 168 wounded, 148 of whom survived in British field hospitals as prisoners. British casualties were 12 wounded.^[19] During this battle and some to follow, the Tibetans wore amulets which their lamas had promised would magically protect them from any harm. After one battle, surviving Tibetans showed profound confusion over the ineffectiveness of these amulets.^[19] In a telegraph to his superior in India, the day after the massacre, Younghusband stated: "I trust the tremendous punishment they have received will prevent further fighting, and induce them at last to negotiate."

The advance continues to Gyantse

Past the first barrier and with increasing momentum, Macdonald's force crossed abandoned defences at Kangma a week later, and on 9 April attempted to pass through Red Idol Gorge, which had been fortified to prevent passage. Macdonald ordered his Gurkha troops to scale the steep hillsides of the gorge and drive out the Tibetan forces ensconced high on their cliffs. This they began, but soon were lost in a furious blizzard, which stopped all communications with the Gurkha force. Some hours later, exploratory probes down the pass encountered shooting and a desultory exchange continued till the storm ended around noon, which showed that the Gurkhas had by chance found their way to a position above the Tibetan troops. Thus faced with shooting from both sides as Sikh soldiers pushed up the hill, the Tibetans moved back, again coming under severe fire from British artillery and retreated in good order, leaving behind 200 dead. British losses were again negligible.
Following this fight at the 'Red Idol Gorge', as the British later called it, the British military pressed on to Gyantse, reaching it on 11 April.^[20] The town's gates were opened before Macdonald's forces, the garrison having already departed. Francis Younghusband wrote to his father; "As I have always said, the Tibetans are nothing but sheep." The townspeople continued with their business and the Westerners took a look at the monastic complex, the Palkor Chode. The central feature was the Temple of One Hundred Thousand Deities, a nine-storey stupa, modelled on the Mahabodhi Temple at Bodhgaya, the spot where Gautama Buddha first achieved enlightenment.^[21] Statuettes and scrolls were shared out between officers. Younghusband's Mission Staff and Escort were billeted in the country mansion and farmyard of a Tibetan noble family named Changlo, and 'Changlo Manor' became the Mission Headquarters where Younghusband could hold his durbars and meet representatives of the Dalai Lama. In the words of historian Charles Allen, they now entered 'a halcyon period', even planting a vegetable garden at the Manor while officers explored the town unescorted, or went fishing and shooting. The Commission's medical officer, the philanthropic Captain Herbert Walton, attended to the needs of the local populace, notably performing operations to correct cleft palates, a particularly common affliction in Tibet.^[22] Five days after he arrived at Gyantse, and deeming the defences of Changlo Manor secure, Macdonald ordered the main force to begin the march back to New Chumbi to protect the supply line.^[23]
Younghusband wanted to move the Mission to Lhasa and telegraphed London for an opinion but got no reply. Reaction in Britain to the massacre at Chumik Shenko had been one of 'shock [and] growing disquiet'. The Spectator and Punch magazines had expressed views critical of a spectacle that included 'half-armed men' being wiped out 'with the irresistible weapons of science'. In Whitehall, the Cabinet 'kept its collective head down'. Meanwhile, intelligence reached Younghusband that Tibetan troops had gathered at Karo La, 45 miles east of Gyantse.^[24]
Lt.Colonel Herbert Brander, Commander of the Mission Escort at Changlo Manor decided to strike against the Tibetan force assembling at Karo La without consulting Brigadier-General Macdonald, who was two days' riding away. Brander consulted Younghusband instead, who declared himself in favour of the action. Perceval Landon, correspondent of The Times who had sat in on the discussions observed that it was 'injudicious' to attack the Tibetans, and that it was 'quite out of keeping with the studious way in which we have hitherto kept ourselves in the right.' Brander's telegram setting out his plans reached Macdonald at New Chumbi on 3 May and he sought to reverse the action, but it was too late.^[25] The battle at Karo La on 5–6 May is possibly the highest altitude action in history, won by Gurkha riflemen of the 8th Gurkhas and sepoys of the 32nd Sikh Pioneers who had climbed and then fought at an altitude in excess of 5,700 m.^[26]

The Mission under siege

Meanwhile, an estimated 800 Tibetans attacked the Chang Lo garrison. The Tibetan war whoops gave the Mission staff time to form ranks and repulse the assailants, who lost 160 dead; three men of the Mission garrison were killed. An extravagant account of the attack, written by Lieutenant Leonard Bethell while faraway at New Chumbi, extolled Younghusband's heroism; in fact, Younghusband's own account revealed that he had fled to the Redoubt, where he remained under cover. The Gurkhas' light mountain guns and Maxims which would have been extremely useful in defending the fort, now back in Tibetan hands, had been requisitioned by Brander's Karo La party. Younghusband sent a message to Brander telling him to complete his attack on Karo, and only then to return to relieve the garrison. The unprovoked attack on the Mission and the Tibetans' reoccupation of the Gyantse Jong,^[27] though a shock, did in fact serve Younghusband's purpose. He wrote privately to Lord Curzon, "The Tibetans as usual have played into out hands." To Lord Ampthill in Simla he wrote that "His Majesty's Government must see that the necessity for going to Lhasa has now been proved beyond all doubt."^[28]
Following the 5 May attack, the Mission and its garrison remained under constant fire from the Jong. The Tibetans weapons may have been inefficient and primitive but they kept up a constant pressure and fatalities were an irregular but nagging reality; a fatality on 6 May was followed by another eleven in the seven weeks after the surprise attack on Changlo Manor. The garrison responded with its own attacks; some of the Mounted Infantry returned from Karo La, armed with new standard issue Lee-Enfield rifles pursued Tibetan horsemen, and one of the Maxims was stationed on the roof and short bursts of machine-gun fire met targets as they appeared on the walls of the Jong.^[29]
The attack on Changlo Manor seemed to spur the British and Indian Governments to renewed efforts and reinforcements were duly despatched. British troops stationed at Lebong, the 1st battalion of the Royal Fusiliers, the nearest British infantry available, were sent, as well as six companies of Indian troops from the 40th Pathans, a party from the 1st Battalion, the Royal Irish Rifles with two Maxim guns, a British Army Mountain Battery with four ten-pounder guns, and Murree Mountain Battery, as well as two Field Hospitals. Setting out on the 24 May 1904, the Royal Fusiliers joined up with Macdonald at New Chumbi, the base depot of the Tibet Mission, in the first days of June.^[30]

Alarms and politics at Gyantse, and beyond

Significant alarms and actions during this period included fighting on the 18–19 May when attempts were made to take a building away from the Tibetans between the Jong and the Mission post, which were successful. About 50 Tibetans were gunned down and the building was re-named the Gurkha House. On 21 May Brander's fighters set out for the village of Naini, where the monastery and a small fort were occupied by the Tibetans and were involved in significant fighting but were required to break off to return to defend the Mission which was under concerted attack from the Jong - an attack stifled by Ottley's Mounted Infantry. It was Dapon Tailing's, the Tibetan commander of the garrison at Gyantse Jong, last serious attempt to take Changlo Manor. On 24 May a company of the 32nd Sikh pioneers arrived and Captain Seymour Shepard, DSO, 'a legend in the Indian Army' reached Gyantse, commanding a group of sappers, which lifted British morale. On 28 May he was involved in an attack on Palla Manor, 1000 yards east of Changlo Manor. 400 Tibetans were killed or wounded. No more assaults were contemplated at this point until Macdonald returned with more troops and Brander concentrated on strengthening the 3 positions; the Manor, the Gurka House and Palla Manor, and re-opened the line of communication with New Chumbi.
By now the Commander-in-Chief in India, Lord Kitchener, was determined to see that Brigadier-General Macdonald should henceforth be in charge of the Mission at all times. The feeling in Simla was that Younghusband was unduly eager to head straight for Lhasa. Younghusband set out for New Chumbi on 6 June and telegraphed Louis Dane, the head of Curzon's Foreign Department telling him that "we are now fighting the Russians, not the Tibetans. Since Karo La we are dealing with Russia." He further sent off a stream of letters and telegrams claiming there was overwhelming evidence of the Tibetans relying on Russian support and that they were receiving a very substantial amount of it. These were claims with no foundation. Younghusband was ordered by Lord Ampthill, as acting Viceroy, to re-open negotiations and try again to communicate with the Dalai Lama. Reluctantly Younghusband did deliver an ultimatum in two letters, one adressed to the Dalai Lama and one to the Chinese amban, Manchu Resident in Lhasa, Yu-t'ai, though, as he wrote to his sister, he was against this course of action for he saw it as "giving them another chance of negotiating". On 10 June Younghusband arrived at New Chumbi. Macdonald and Younghusband discussed their differences, and on 12 June the Tibet Field Force marched out of New Chumbi.
Once the obstacle of Gyantse Dong was cleared, the road to Lhasa would be open. Gyantse Dzong was, however, too strong for a small raiding force to capture, and as it overlooked British supply routes, it became the primary target of Macdonald's army. On 26 June, a fortified monastery at Naini which covered the approach was taken in house to house fighting by the Gurkhas and 40th Pathan soldiers. Further, Tibetan forces in two forts in the village were caught 'between two fires' as the garrison at Changlo Manor joined the fight.^[31] On 28 June a final obstacle to assaulting Gyantse Jong was overcome when the Tsechen monastery, to the north-west, and the fortress that guarded its rear were cleared by two companies of Gurkhas, the 40th Pathans and two waves of infantry. Since the monastery had offered resistance it was considered fit to loot - several old and valuable thankas duly surfaced at Christie's later in the summer and were sold for high prices.
Tibetan responses to the invasion so far had comprised almost entirely static defences and sniping from the mountains at the passing column, neither tactic proving effective. Apart from the failed assault on Chang Lo two months previously, the Tibetans had not made any sallies against British positions. This attitude was born of a mix of justifiable fear of the Maxim Guns, and faith in the solid rock of their defences, yet in every battle they were disappointed, primarily by their poor weaponry and inexperienced officers.
On 3 July a formal durbar was held at the Mission and the Tibetan delegation told by Younghusband to clear out of the Jong in 36 hours. Younghusband made no effort to negotiate, though why talks could not take place while the Tibetans held the Jong was not clear. The more patient General Macdonald meanwhile, was subject to a campaign that sought to undermine his authority; Captain O'Connor wrote to Helen Younghusband on 3 July that, "He should be removed & another & better man-a fighting general- substituted ".

Storming of Gyantse Dzong

The Gyantse Dzong today

The Gyantse Dzong was a massively protected fortress; defended by the best Tibetan troops and the country's only artillery, it commanded a forbidding position high over the valley below. Macdonald engaged in a 'demonstration', a feint directed mainly against the western edges of Gyantse Jong which would draw Tibetan soldiers away from the southern side of the Jong which was to be the main objevt of the attack to come. An artillery bombardment with mountain guns would then create a breach, which would be stormed immediately by his main force. The ancient monastic complex at Tsechen, dating from the fourteenth century, was torched, to prevent its re-occupation by the Tibetans.
The eventual assault on 6 July did not happen as planned, as the Tibetan walls were stronger than expected. General Macdonalds plan was for the infantry to advance in three columns, from the south-west, the south, and south-east. Yet at the opening of the attack there was a near disaster when two columns blundered into each other in the dark. It took eleven hours to break through. The breach was not completed until 4:00 pm, by which time the assault had little time to succeed before nightfall. As Gurkhas and Royal Fusiliers charged the broken wall, they came under heavy fire and suffered some casualties. Gurkha troops climbed the rock directly under the upper ramparts, scaling the rock face as rocks rained down on them and misdirected fire from one of the Maxims hit more of these Gurkhas than Tibetan defenders above them.^[33] After several failed attempts to gain the walls, two soldiers broke through a bottleneck under fire despite both being wounded. They gained a foothold which the following troops exploited, enabling the walls to be taken. The Tibetans retreated in good order, allowing the British control of the road to Lhasa, but denying Macdonald a rout and thus remaining a constant threat (although never a serious problem) in the British rear for the remainder of the campaign.
The two soldiers who broke the wall at Gyantse Jong were both well rewarded. Lieutenant John Duncan Grant was given the only Victoria Cross awarded during the expedition, whilst Havildar Pun received the Indian Order of Merit first class (equivalent to the VC as Indian soldiers were not eligible for VCs until the First World War). Major Wimberley, one of the Medical Officers to the Mission, wrote that though he had seen the Gordons at Dargai he considered "the storming of the breach at Gyantse Jong by the Gurkhas a far finer performance."
Considerable pillaging took place at Palkor Chode, Dongtse and other monasteries after the fall of Gyantse Jong. Whatever General Orders and the Hague Convention of 1899 may have dictated looting seemed acceptable if the army felt it had been opposed in any way. According to Major William Beynon, in a letter to his wife of 7 July, some of the looting was oficially approved - claims by Dr Waddell, Brigadier-General Macdonald and his chief of staff, Major Iggulden that monastic sites were 'most religiously respected' look hollow.^[34]

Entry to Lhasa

The British made a triumphal procession to the Potala Palace.

On 12 July the Sappers pulled down the Tsechen monastery and fort and on the 14 July Macdonald's force marched east on the Lhasa road.

Amban Yu-t'ai with Col. Younghusband at Lhasa

At the Karo La, the Wide-Mouthed Pass that had been the scene of fighting two and a half months earlier, the Gurkhas skirmished with a determined group of Tibetan fighters on the heights to the left and right. Essentially however resistance faded before the advance and a policy of scorched earth was adopted - the Tibetans removed what food and fodder they could and emptied villages. Nevertheless troops could fish in the lakes and there were plenty of seagulls and redshanks. They passed along the shores of the Yamdok Tso, and reached the fortress of Nakartse, unoccupied except for a party of delegates from Lhasa. Macdonald urged Younghusband to settle the business but Younghusband would negotiate only at Lhasa. By 22 July the troops camped under the wall of another fortress, Peté Jong, deserted and in ruins, and Mounted Infantry pushed on ahead to seize the crossing at Chaksam, the Iron Bridge. On 25 July the army began to cross the Tsangpo in the wake of the Mounted Infantry - a feat that took four days to achieve.
The force arrived in Lhasa on 3 August 1904 to discover that the thirteenth Dalai Lama had fled to Urga, the capital of Outer Mongolia.^{[citation needed]} The Amban escorted the British into the city with his personal guard, but informed them that he had no authority to negotiate with them. The Tibetans told them that only the absent Dalai Lama had authority to sign any accord. The Amban advised the Chinese emperor to depose the Dalai Lama. The Tibetan Council of Ministers and the General Assembly did begin to submit to pressure on the terms as August progressed - except on the matter of the indemnity, which they believed impossibly high for a poor country to pay.^[35] Eventually however Younghusband intimidated the regent, Ganden Tri Rinpoche, and the Tsongdu (Tibetan National Assembly), into signing a treaty on 4 September, drafted by himself, known subsequently as the Convention between Great Britain and Tibet (1904). It was signed, again at Younghusband's insistence, at the Potala Palace. He wrote gleefully to his wife that he had been able to "ram the whole treaty down their throats".^[36]

The Convention between Great Britain and Tibet (1904)

The salient points of the Convention were as follows:

• The British allowed to trade in Yadong, Gyantse, and Gartok.
• Tibet to pay a large indemnity (7,500,000 rupees, later reduced by two-thirds; the Chumbi Valley to be ceded to Britain until paid).
• Recognition of the Sikkim-Tibet border.
• Tibet to have no relations with any other foreign powers (effectively converting Tibet into a British protectorate).^[37]

The size of the indemnity to be paid had been the most hard to accept for the Tibetan negotiators. The Secretary of State for India, St John Brodrick, had in fact expressed the need for it to be 'within the power of the Tibetans to pay' and given Younghusband a free hand to be 'guided by circumstances in this matter.' Younghusband raised the indemnity initially suggested -5,900,000- to the figure of 7,500,000 rupees, and further demanded for a British trade Agent, based at Gyantse, the right to visit Lhasa 'for consultations'. It seems that he was still following Lord Curzon's geo-political agenda to extend British influence in Tibet by securing the Chumbi Valley for Britain. Younghusband wanted the payment to be met by yearly instalments;it would take seventy-five years for the Tibetans to clear their debt and since British occupation of the Chumbi valley was surety until payment was completed, the Chumbi Valley would remain in British hands.^[38] Younghusband wrote to his wife immediately after the signing; "I have got Chumbi for 75 years. I have got Russia out for ever".^[39]
The regent commented that "When one has known the scorpion (meaning China) the frog (meaning Britain) is divine".^{[citation needed]}
The amban later publicly repudiated the treaty, while Britain announced that it still accepted Chinese claims of authority over Tibet. Acting Viceroy Lord Ampthill reduced the indemnity by two thirds and considerably eased the terms in other ways. The provisions of this 1904 treaty were revised in the Anglo-Chinese Convention of 1906 signed between Britain and China.^[40] The British, for a fee from the Qing court, also agreed "not to annex Tibetan territory or to interfere in the administration of Tibet", while China engaged "not to permit any other foreign state to interfere with the territory or internal administration of Tibet".^[41][42][43]

Conclusion to the campaign

The British mission departed in late September 1904, after a ceremonial presentation of gifts. Britain had "won" and had received the agreements it desired, but without actually receiving any tangible results. The Tibetans had lost the war but had seen China humbled in its failure to defend their client state from foreign incursion, and had pacified the invader by signing an unenforceable and largely irrelevant treaty. Captured Tibetan troops were all released without condition upon the war's conclusion, many after receiving medical treatment.
It was in fact the reaction in London which was fiercest in condemnation of the war. By the Edwardian period, colonial wars had become increasingly unpopular,^{[citation needed]} and public and political opinion were unhappy with the waging of a war for such slight reasons as those provided by Curzon, and with the beginning battle, which was described in Britain as something of a deliberate massacre of unarmed men. It was only the support given to them by King Edward VII that provided Younghusband, Macdonald, Grant and others with the recognition they did eventually receive for what was quite a remarkable feat of arms in taking an army in such a remote, high-altitude location, driving through courageous defenders during freezing weather in difficult positions and achieving all their objectives in just six months, losing just 202 men to enemy action^{[citation needed]} and 411 to other causes. Tibetan casualties have been estimated at between 2-3000 killed or fatally wounded.^[44]
Though Younghusband , through Curzon's patronage, ascended to the Residency of Kashmir following the Tibet campaign, the reality was that his judgement was no longer trusted and political deisions touchhing on Kashmir and the princely states were taken without his opinion being sought. Once Curzon's protection was gone, Younghusband had no future in the Indian political service. In 1908 the position he wanted, that of Chief Commissioner of the North-West Frontier Province, was handed to George Roos-Keppel, a man whose interactions with the people of the border regions were based on respect rather than the contempt which marked Younghusband's attitudes toward 'lesser breeds without the law'.

Force composition

The composition of the opposing armies explains a lot about the outcome of the ensuing conflict. The Tibetan soldiers were almost all rapidly impressed peasants, who lacked organisation, discipline, training and motivation. Only a handful of their most devoted units, composed of monks armed usually with swords and jingals proved to be effective, and they were in such small numbers as to be unable to reverse the tide of battle. This problem was exacerbated by the generals who commanded the Tibetan forces, who seemed in awe of the British and refused to make any aggressive moves against the small and often dispersed convoy. They also failed conspicuously to properly defend their natural barriers to the British progress, frequently offering battle in relatively open ground instead, where Maxim Guns and rifle volleys caused great numbers of casualties.
By contrast, the British and Indian troops were experienced veterans of mountainous border warfare on the North-West Frontier, as was their commanding officer. Amongst the units at his disposal in his 3,000 strong force were elements of the 8th Gurkhas, 40th Pathans, 23rd and 32nd Sikh Pioneers, 19th Punjab Infantry and the Royal Fusiliers, as well as mountain artillery, engineers, Maxim gun detachments from four regiments and thousands of porters recruited from Nepal and Sikkim. With their combination of experienced officers, well-maintained modern equipment and strong morale, they were able to defeat the Tibetan armies at every encounter.

Aftermath

The Tibetans were not just unwilling to fulfil the treaty; they were also unable to perform many of its stipulations. Tibet did not have any substantial international trade commodities, and already accepted the borders with its neighbours. Nevertheless, the provisions of the 1904 treaty were confirmed by a 1906 treaty Anglo-Chinese Convention signed between Britain and China. The British, for a fee from the Qing court, also agreed[CALL IT GREED] "not to annex Tibetan territory or to interfere in the administration of Tibet", while China engaged "not to permit any other foreign state to interfere with the territory or internal administration of Tibet".^[41][42]
In early 1910, Qing China sent a military expedition of its own to Tibet for direct rule. However, the Qing dynasty was overthrown in the Xinhai Revolution, which began in October 1911. Although the Chinese forces departed once more in 1913, the First World War and the Russian Revolution isolated the now independent Tibet, reducing Western influence and interest. Ineffectual regents ruled during the 14th Dalai Lama's infancy and China began to reasert its control, a process that culminated in 1950-1951 with the Chinese invasion of Tibet, its 'liberation' , by the Chinese People's Army.^[46]
The position of British Trade Agent at Gyangzê was occupied from 1904 until 1944. It was not until 1937, with the creation of the position of "Head of British Mission Lhasa", that a British officer had a permanent posting in Lhasa itself.^[47]
The British seem to have misread the military and diplomatic situation for the Russians did not have the designs on India, that the British foresaw and the campaign was politically redundant before it began. Russian arms in Tibet amounted to no more than thirty Russian government rifles and the whole narrative of Russian influence, and the Czars ambitions, was dropped. The defeats the Russians experienced in the Russo-Japanese war that began in February 1904 further alterd perceptions of the balance of power in Asia and Russian threat. The campaign had however, "a profound effect upon Tibet, changing it forever, and for the worse at that, doing much to contribute to Tibet's loss of innocence."

Subsequent interpretations

Chinese historians write of Tibetans heroically opposing the British out of loyalty not to Tibet, but to China.^{[clarification needed]} They assert that the British troops looted and burned, that the British interest in trade relations was a pretext for annexing Tibet, a step toward the ultimate goal of annexing all of China; but that the Tibetans destroyed the British forces, and that Younghusband escaped only with a small retinue.^[49] The Chinese government has turned Gyantze Dzong into a "Resistance Against the British Museum" promoting these views, as well as other themes such as the brutal life endured by Tibetan serfs who fiercely loved their Chinese mother country.^[50] China also treats the invasion as part of the its "century of humiliation" at the hands of Western and Japanese powers and the defence as a Chinese resistance, while many Tibetans look back to it as an exercise of Tibetan self-defence and an act of independence from the Qing dynasty as the dynasty was falling apart.^[51] The historian Charles Allen has remarked that though the Younghusband Mission did inflict 'considerable material damage on Tibet and its people', it was damage that paled into insignificance when compared 'to the invasion of Tibet by the Chinese Peoples's Liberation Army in 1951 and the genocidal Cultural Revolution of 1966-1967'.^[52]

Newer Post Older Post