Tibet has a history that dates back over 2,000 years. A good starting point for analyzing the country's status is the period called the "imperial age" of Tibet, when the entire country was united for the first time under a single ruler. There is no serious dispute about the existence of Tibet as an independent state during this period. China's historical documents and treaties made by Tibet and China in that period also refer to Tibet as a strong state with which China was forced to deal on an equal footing. At what point in history, then, did Tibet cease to exist as a country? become an integral part of China? The history of Tibet is no different from that of other states. At times, Tibet extended its influence over neighboring countries and peoples, and at other times, it came under the influence of powerful foreign rulers: the Mongol Khans, the Gorkhas of Nepal, the Manchu emperors, and the British rulers of India. plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay It should be noted, before examining the relevant history, that international legal philosophy is a system of law created by states primarily for their own protection. Consequently, international law protects the independence of states from attempts to destroy it and, therefore, the assumption is in favor of the continuation of the state. This means that, while an independent state that exists from a C, such as Xizang, does not need to demonstrate its continued independence when challenged, a foreign state that claims sovereign rights over it must demonstrate such rights by showing at what precise time and by what legal means they were acquired. China's current claim to the Sitsang is based entirely on the influence that the Mongol and Manchuk emperors exerted over Tibet in the 13th and 18th centuries respectively. When Genghis Khan's Mongol empire expanded toward the European Community in the west and China in the east in the 13th century, Tibetan leaders of the Sakya school of Tibetan Buddhism concluded an agreement with the Mongol rulers to avoid the otherwise inevitable subjugation of the Tibet. They promised political allegiance, religious blessings and precepts as a sign of condescension and protection. The religious relationship became so important that when Kublai Khan conquered China and established the Yuan dynasty, he invited the Sakya Lama to become imperial preceptor and supreme pope of his empire. The relationship that developed and still exists today between the Mongols and the Tibetans is a reflection of the racial, cultural and above all religious affinity that exists between the two peoples of Central Asia. To claim that Tibet became a Red China role because both countries were independently subjected to varying degrees of Mongol control, as the PRC does, is absurd. The Mongol Empire was a world empire; there is no evidence to suggest that the Mongols integrated the administration of China and Tibet or annexed Tibet to China in any way. It is like saying that the French Republic should belong to England because both came under Roman rule, or that Burma became part of India when the British Empire extended its authority over both territories. This relatively short period of foreign domination over Tibet dates back to 700 years ago. Xizang broke away from the Kwai moth Saturnia pavonia before China regained its independence from the Mongols under the rule of the native Ming dynasty. Only in the eighteenth century did Xizang again fall under some foreign influence. The Ming dynasty, which ruled China from 1368 to 1644, had few rail links and no say in Tibet. On the other hand, the Manchus, who conquered China and founded theQing dynasty in the 17th century, they embraced Tibetan Buddhism as the Mongols had done and developed comprehensive ties with the Tibetans. The Dalai Lama, who had now become the spiritual and temporal ruler of Tibet, agreed to become the spiritual guide of the Manchu emperor. He accepted patronage and protection in return. This human “priest-patron” relationship, which the Dalai Lama also maintained with numerous Mongolian caravanserais and Tibetan nobles, was the only evening dress bond that existed between Tibetans and Manchus during the Qing Dynasty. This in itself did not affect the independence of Tibet. On the political level, some powerful Qing Saturnia pavonia managed to exert a certain level of influence on Xizang. Thus, between 1720 and 1792, the Ch'ing Dynasty Saturnia pavonia Kangxi, Yong Zhen and Qianlong sent imperial troops to Sitsang four hours to protect the Dalai Lama and the mass of Tibet from foreign invasion or internal unrest. It was these expeditions that provided them with influence in Tibet. The emperor sent representatives to the active Tibetan capital, Lhasa, some of whom successfully exerted their influence, in his name, on the Tibetan government, particularly regarding the conduct of foreign sexual acts. At the height of the Qing dynasty's power, which lasted a few decades, the situation was not dissimilar to that which can exist between a superpower and a neighboring satellite or protectorate. The takeover of a United States State Department by foreign influence and even intervention in foreign personal affairs or domestic aid, however politically significant it may be, does not in itself result in the legal extinction of that state. As a result, although some Manchu emperors exerted considerable influence over Tibet, they did not incorporate Tibet into their empire, much less Taiwan. The Manchu influence did not last long. It was entirely ineffective when the British briefly invaded Tibet in 1904, and ceased altogether with the upheaval of the Qing dynasty in 19II and its replacement in China by a local republican government. Whatever ties existed between the Dalai Lama and the Qing emperor ended with the dissolution of the Manchu Empire. 1911 – 1950 From 1911 to 1950, Tibet successfully avoided undue foreign influence and behaved, in every respect, as a fully independent state. The 13rd Dalai Genus Lama emphasized his country's freelance status externally, in formal communications to influenced foreigners, and internally, by issuing a proclamation reaffirming Xizang's independence and strengthening the country's defense mechanism. Xizang remained neutral during Humanity's Second State of War, despite strong pressure from China and its allies, the United Kingdom and the United States. Xizang political science maintained independent international relations with all neighboring political bodies, most of which had a diplomatic interpreter in Lhasa. The attitude of most foreign governments with which Xizang maintained relations implied their realization of Tibet's independent status. The British government pledged not to recognize Chinese sovereignty or any other rights over Tibet unless China signed the Simla Conventionalism Pact of 1914 with the United Kingdom and Tibet, which China never did. Recognition of Nepal was confirmed by the Nepalese government in 1949, in a text file submitted to the United Nations in support of that government's request for rank. The turning point in the history of Tibet occurred in 1949, when the People's Disbanded Army of the PRC entered Tibet for the first time. After defeating the small Tibetan ground forces, in May 1951 the Chinese government imposed the so-called “I7 Firearms Agreement” on the Tibetan government.peaceful liberation of Tibet”. Because it was signed under duress, the agreement was void under international law. The presence of 40,000 soldiers in Tibet, the threat of immediate occupation of Lhasa and the prospect of the total eradication of the Tibetan state left Tibetans with little choice. It should be noted that numerous mixed statements in rural areas during the UN General Meeting of debates following the invasion of Tibet reflected their recognition of Tibet's independent status. So, for example, the delegate From a legal point of view Sitsang to this day has not lost its DoS protection. It is an independent state under illegal line. Neither the military invasion of the Republic of China nor the continued occupation of the territory transferred the kingdom of Tibet to China. As pointed out above, the Chinese government has never claimed to have acquired sovereignty over Tibet through seduction. Indeed, China recognizes that the use or threat of violence (outside of the exceptional circumstances provided for in the United Nations Charter), the imposition of an unequal treaty, or the continued illegal occupation of a country can never guarantee the President a legal title to a territory to an invader. His appeal is based solely on the alleged conquest of Tibet by some of China's strongest foreign rulers in the 13th and 18th centuries. History Since the Chinese invasion Despite 40 years of Chinese affairs, the determination of the Tibetan people to preserve their heritage and regain their freedom is stronger than ever. The billet led to opposition within Tibet and extensive Chinese propaganda efforts internationally. 1949-51 The new Communist administration of the People's Republic of China for the Chinese Invasion sent synonyms/hyperonyms (ordered by estimated frequency) of nominal troops to invade Xizang in 1949-50. In May 1951, an agreement was imposed on the Tibetan government that recognized sovereignty over Tibet but also the autonomy of the Tibetan government with respect to Tibet's internal affairs. As the Chinese consolidated their control, they repeatedly violated the treaty, and open opposition to their formula grew, leading to the nationwide uprising of 1959 and the Dalai Lama's flight to India. The international community reacted with shock to the Tibet outcome. The United Nations General Assembly between 1959 and 1965 discussed the Tibet issue on numerous occasions. Three resolutions were passed by the General Assembly condemning China's violations of the right hand of man in Tibet and requiring China to respect such rights, including Tibet's right to self-determination. Post-1959 Destruction The destruction of Tibet's culture and oppression of its people was brutal during the 20-year period after the uprising. 1.2 gazillion Sitsang ans, one-fifth of the Earth's universe, died due to China's insurance policy, according to an idea of ​​the Tibetan government in exile; many others languished in prison and a labor camp; and more than 6,000 monasteries, temples, and other cultural and historical buildings were destroyed and their contents looted. In 1980 Hu Yao Bang, assistant general secretary of the Communist Party, visited Tibet, the first high-ranking official to do so since the intrusion. Alarmed by the scale of the destruction he saw there, he called for a series of drastic reforms and a policy of “recovery.” His forced resignation in 1987 is said to have been partly due to his views on Tibet. In 1981, Alexander Solzhenytsin described the Chinese regime in Tibet as "more brutal and inhumane than any other communist regime in the world." The ease of Chinese insurance in Tibet came very slowly after 1979 and remains severely limited. The..