the pictures shot by western tourists during the “riot” were nothing short of racist attacks and murders of innocent civilians.

Holy dangling modifier, DC Loser!

Living here (here is China), I'm puzzled as to the Chinese reaction to Western media coverage of the violence in Tibet. I mean, have any Chinese considered that the reason Western reporting has been sloppy is that all foreign journalists have been ordered out of Tibet? Chinese critics are trying to have their cake and eat it too.

A point my friends and I have been making when talking about the topic is that China is actually hurting itself by limiting foreign media coverage, since most of the footage (Chinese and foreign alike) seems to suggest that the Tibetan side has spilled more blood. Chinese may dislike this: but no one will believe the Chinese side's account if only the Chinese side is doing the reporting. And I've seen the Chinese side's reporting on CCTV, where the body count almost never includes dead Tibetans.

Moving on to the point of Dave's post, one of the reasons I think the US shouldn't jump into any one position on the Tibet issue is that the rioting and protests feel like a replay of Kosovo: an aggrieved minority engages in ethnic violence against the majority (and other minorities) with the hope of inviting a disproportionate response from the majority and, in turn, an international intervention against the majority. In this case, I highly doubt that Tibetans wanted the West to attack China militarily, but certainly the Olympics must've seemed a tempting target.

I think the US position ought to be that ethnic violence is simply unacceptable and call on both sides to peacefully resolve the matter. In other words, what we're doing now is about right.

My opinion here on my blog

Emigré