Kishore Mahbubani makes the mistake of viewing Tibet's history, the recent uprising and the West's response through the prism of governments instead of people. The Tibetan people developed their own culture, society and political institutions over 1,000 years. There were virtually no Chinese living in Tibet when People's Liberation Army troops entered in 1949-50. The Tibetans will never view themselves as Chinese and are reacting to the effort by the Chinese government to turn their culture into a museum artifact.

The Tibetan people hardly enjoy meaningful autonomy. They have no say over policies adopted by Communist Party hard-liners, who ensure that political and cultural repression is greater in Tibet than elsewhere in China. Western governments, admittedly, offer only token help to the Tibetan people. The Western public, though, genuinely desires to see the people of Tibet and China enjoy freedoms the Communist Party denies.

Dennis Cusack

Berkeley

The writer is a member of the Tibet Justice Center and the author of "Tibet's War of Peace."

According to Mahbubani, China's claim to Tibet is, in part, based on its control over this area going back to the 13th century. Along this logic, Denmark could lay claim to a large chunk of Western Europe and Mongolia could insist on ownership over much of Eastern Europe.

Peter Weisbrod

Laguna Beach

Mahbubani's fanciful gloss of Sino-Tibetan history omits one major point: Tibet was independent from the fall of the Qing dynasty in 1911 until 1950, when China invaded. Whether or not Tibet was part of China dating back to the 13th century is irrelevant. Tibet was independent and wanted to remain independent, and the Chinese denied that.

To argue for Chinese sovereignty is a realistic viewpoint, but it should be recognized for what it is, a concession by the Tibetan people rather than a morally consistent position. (And, by the way, Tibet's current "autonomy" is a joke -- just look at the "re-education" policy being foisted on the Tibetans by Beijing.)

Brian Gygi

Richmond, Calif.

Smear tactics of GOP excoriated

Re "GOP makes a target of Obama," April 25

Do the Republicans still not get it? They have decided to begin attacking Barack Obama. Don't they understand that I don't want one presidential candidate telling me what a loser the other is? I want the candidates to tell me what they're going to do for this country. One GOP strategist said: "Hillary [Clinton] is a better target for us. But the more you see Obama in action, the better we're liking him." A perfect example of the GOP mind-set: If the person is a viable threat to the Republican candidate, launch a preemptive strike and try to convince the country that the Democrat is a loser. It's time to move on, people. I don't know about the rest of the country, but I can't handle another four years of war-mongering Republican leadership.

Daniel V. Shannon

Winnetka

Just listen to conservative pundits tout Clinton as the one who represents the best chance to beat John McCain. Why would dyed-in-the-wool conservatives push for such a choice? Clinton has poisoned the Democratic Party waters in her quest for the presidency by slander and the ridiculous math she offers to show her supposed commanding lead over Obama.

OPINION » One world? Obama's on a different planet By John R. Bolton The senator's Berlin speech was radical and naive. EDITORIALS|OP-ED|LETTERS				FROM THE BLOGS Opinion L.A. Opinion L.A. The best in Southern California opinion journalism, Monday through Friday Why should you pay for Fannie and Freddie? Fri, July 25, 2008 | 6:14:18 PM PDT Aren't the worst-case scenarios about the death of the dollar and irreperable... more » Bit Player By Jon Healey Bit Player Jon Healey on Hollywood's love-hate relationship with technology. A Paramount movie integrated into Sony web programming Fri, July 25, 2008 | 5:32:55 PM PDT This is so meta, I'm having trouble wrapping my brain around it. Today Bebo... more »