To the Editor:
We are writing you on behalf of the Chinese Students and Scholars Association at Tufts regarding an article that was published on March 28. It was entitled "Olympic Hurdles" and was authored by Sudeep Bhatia and Peter Radosevich. We are deeply concerned that the Tufts Daily published an article that contained statements based on fabricated information. We feel obliged to point out that there are major factual mistakes in the part written by Bhatia.
In his first sentence, Bhatia makes a statement that is fundamentally false and has not been confirmed by any reliable sources. Citing no source, Bhatia states that "more than a hundred Tibetans have died over the past two weeks." Bhatia then claims that "beyond Tibet, thousands of journalists, writers and other proponents of free speech lie imprisoned in China's jails," giving the impression that the "more than a hundred Tibetans" were fighting for "freedom of speech" and "have died" because of the Chinese government's actions.
What is the source of this information? Bhatia has distorted the fact that what happened in Tibet in the past two weeks was not a peaceful protest, but a planned, deadly violent riot against innocent people. During that deadly riot, Tibetan Chinese rioters used violence against unarmed Han and other ethnic Chinese citizens, robbing their money, burning down their properties (at least five young girls were burned to death) and beating up pedestrians in the streets with stones and knives. At least 18 were beaten to death and, several hundred were injured by these so-called peaceful protesters. These numbers could be found in any major U.S. and international media, such as the New York Times (March 15, 2008). The excessive media coverage made it apparent who were the victims and who were the perpetrators. It is unacceptable for the author to sell an obvious anti-China propaganda based on ungrounded statements.
On top of these severely biased statements, Bhatia uses fake "evidence" to support an unrelated thesis. What the Tibetan Chinese rioters pursued was "Tibet independence" rather than "free speech." Without providing a sound argument, Bhatia writes, "Tufts students take a stand now ... pressuring China to change its policies and improve the way it treats its citizens." Such "blow the coals" words are not going to be helpful to civic activism on Tufts' campus.
It is irresponsible for Bhatia to make groundless statements to the general public. We hope the Tufts Daily will publish this open letter. It is our obligation to exercise freedom of speech and share our perspectives on this matter with the Tufts community. Thank you.
Yibling Li
Doctoral Student, on behalf of the Tufts Chinese Students and Scholars Association
