Beijing Wants a Monk In Marionette Strings

Faith longs for freedom; power demands control. This fundamental tension lies at the heart of Tibet’s spiritual struggle against China’s political ambitions. At its core, this is not simply a conflict over land or diplomacy. It is a battle for the soul of a civilization and the authority to shape its narrative.

Tibetan Buddhism, represented by the Dalai Lama, upholds inner awakening, ethical living, and the sacred continuity of spiritual lineage. These values can only flourish in an environment of freedom. In contrast, the Chinese state seeks to regulate belief, enforce obedience, and absorb Tibetan identity into its political and ideological framework. This is not only a cultural or religious conflict; it is an existential one.

As India continues to host the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan government-in-exile, it finds itself not only in a geopolitical dilemma but also in a civilizational role—standing for the enduring truth that spiritual freedom cannot be dictated by political power. This would shape the future of Tibet and sketch the Indo-China relations in the 21st century.

A Turning Point for Tibetan Buddhism

The title “Dalai Lama” combines the Mongolian word dalai, meaning “ocean,” with the Tibetan bla-ma, meaning “teacher,” symbolizing a guru with boundless wisdom and compassion. As the Dalai Lama turns 90, this milestone carries not only personal and spiritual meaning but also significant political weight. In 2011, he had said he would decide at this age whether the institution of the Dalai Lama should continue. That moment has now arrived, amid growing concerns over the future of Tibetan Buddhism and China’s increasing interference.

To reassure his followers, the Dalai Lama has affirmed that he will reincarnate and that the authority to recognize his successor lies solely with the Gaden Phodrang Trust, his non-profit body. This stance reinforces Tibetan religious independence and challenges China’s claim that it must approve the next Dalai Lama. His 90th birthday thus marks a critical juncture, highlighting the on-going tension between spiritual tradition and state control.

India’s participation in these celebrations, represented by the Minority Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju, who is himself a practising Buddhist, signals both cultural solidarity and subtle political messaging. It reflects India’s on-going engagement with the Tibetan exile community while carefully navigating its diplomatic relationship with Beijing.

External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal affirmed that India has always and will continue to uphold freedom of religion for all. Responding to the Dalai Lama’s recent remarks about the future of his spiritual institution, Jaiswal clarified that the Indian government does not interfere in matters of faith or religious belief, respecting the autonomy of spiritual traditions.

Territory Can Be Conquered, But Not Tradition

India firmly believes that the sacred tradition of identifying the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama is a deeply spiritual and cultural matter that should remain untouched by political interference, especially from external powers like China.

China objected to Kiren Rijiju’s statement urging India to handle Tibet-related issues with caution, warning that such remarks could hinder the improvement of India-China relations.

This reflects China’s ongoing attempt to assert control over Tibetan religious affairs.

However, India maintains that such spiritual legacies cannot and should not be reshaped by state power.

For India, protecting this tradition is not just about diplomacy—it is a stand for religious freedom, cultural continuity, and the right of a people to preserve their faith without coercion.

A Centuries-Old Tradition Now Navigates the Maze of Modern State Control

In 1995, the 14th Dalai Lama, based in Dharamshala, India, identified six-year-old Gedhun Choekyi Nyima as the 11th Panchen Lama, a crucial figure in Tibetan Buddhism tasked with recognizing the next Dalai Lama, but a few days later, Chinese authorities abducted him and his family, and his whereabouts remain unknown since, marking him as the world’s youngest political prisoner. Rejecting this selection, China installed Gyaincain Norbu as its own Panchen Lama later that year through the controversial Golden Urn lottery, viewing him as a state-approved figure while Tibetans see him as a Beijing puppet, a move to control Tibetan Buddhism and counter the Dalai Lama’s influence amid his 90th year and on-going advocacy for autonomy from Chinese rule since the 1950s.

If two individuals claim the title of Dalai Lama in the future, it could challenge China’s ability to influence global opinion. The international community would face the dilemma of choosing whom to recognise, while many Tibetans within China might not even be aware of an alternate Dalai Lama.

Analysts suggest that while China seeks a successor with enough legitimacy to be accepted, it also wants someone it can control. As Tibet expert Robert Barnett puts it, Beijing’s aim is to “turn the lion of Tibetan culture into a poodle.”

China has poured significant resources into developing the region, constructing roads and rail networks to promote tourism and strengthen its connection with the broader nation.

However, Tibetans in exile argue that this development has come at a cost which includes bringing increased military presence and government oversight, which they say has eroded their religious practices and personal freedoms.

The Chinese government considers Tibet an inseparable part of its territory and has branded the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader, as a separatist. Publicly displaying his photo or expressing support for him can lead to arrest and imprisonment.

The Dalai Lama’s Future Could Decide Tibet’s Fate and Challenge China’s Script

The Dalai Lama’s intention for his next reincarnation to occur outside Chinese-controlled territory holds both spiritual and political importance. It seeks to preserve the purity of Tibetan Buddhist tradition while resisting Beijing’s attempts to control religious succession.

If his successor is chosen from the Tibetan exile community in India, it would undermine China’s authority and cast doubt on the legitimacy of any Dalai Lama selected by the Chinese state, representing a significant setback for Beijing’s influence over Tibetan affairs.

Mandala Theory and India’s Strategic Outlook

While India and China have resumed high-level engagements, the Tibet issue may remain a deeply rooted point of contention. The Dalai Lama’s legacy, his future successor, and India’s stance on these matters will continue to test the boundaries of engagement between the two Asian powers.

From the Indian perspective, Kautilya’s Mandala Theory offers a timeless strategic lens to understand and manage the evolving relationship with China. It cautions against emotional or reactive foreign policy, advocating instead for a realistic, layered, and long-term approach based on geography, interests, and influence. In this framework, China is a natural and enduring strategic competitor, not just due to shared borders but because of its expanding footprint in India’s traditional sphere of influence.

The loss of Tibet as a buffer state and the presence of the Dalai Lama in India highlight a deep and symbolic fault line in the Indo-China relationship. While China views the Dalai Lama as a threat to its sovereignty, India sees his presence not only as a humanitarian responsibility but also as a form of strategic and moral leverage. Through this lens, India can project itself as a protector of spiritual traditions, freedom of thought, and cultural heritage—values that resonate across Asia and offer soft power advantages in contrast to China’s hard-line approach.

India should build concentric layers of alliances, especially with middle powers like Bhutan, Nepal, and ASEAN states, and with distant yet like-minded nations such as the U.S., Japan, and Australia. These alignments help India create strategic depth and prevent encirclement by China. Simultaneously, India must reaffirm its influence in the Himalayan belt, invest in economic and infrastructural ties with border states, and manage its internal unity, especially in regions close to the China border. The key lies in using both shakti (power) and neeti (strategy), backed by diplomacy, to shape the regional order.

Observing through this very prism of Mandala Theory, it can be concluded that India’s path forward is not just about confronting China; it is also about crafting a web of resilient relationships, asserting cultural legitimacy, and maintaining equilibrium in an increasingly contested neighbourhood.

BuddhismChinese President Xi JinpingDalai LamareligionsuccessionTibetWeb Exclusive