A very important dynamic shaping Tibetan political identity has been interaction with Western audiences. The role of the West can be examined as within rather than outside the Tibet question by looking at the theme of Western representations of Tibet and its interface with Tibetan (trans)national identity. Scholars like Lopez (1998) show that Tibetans are "prisoners of Shangri-la"-constrained by their image as a religious, peaceful, exotic, and idyllic community. The dominant representation of Tibetans in the West in the early twenty-first century is as peaceful, nonviolent, religious, spiritual, compassionate, and close to nature. A corollary to this representation is the idea that the inherently good-natured Tibetans are victims of forced modernization brought about by Chinese rule. The emphasis is both on the uniqueness of the Tibetan culture and on its universal relevance.
Exotica Tibet, presenting Tibetans as victims, has helped mobilize many non-Tibetans for the "Save Tibet" cause. The Tibet movement, referring to the transnational efforts made on the part of Tibetans and their non- Tibetan supporters to demand the right of self-determination for the Tibetan people, has gained some high profile support, including Hollywood stars, U.S. Congress members, and members of European parliaments. The worldwide network of Tibet Support Groups (TSG) is unique in this respect (see Ven-turino 1997). They include organizations focusing on a wide range of themes-Tibetan Buddhism, human rights, spreading awareness about the situation in Tibet, and demand for independence (rangzen is the term used for this). The presence of support for Tibet is particularly significant in the virtual world where most of the Internet sites related to Tibet are pro-Tibetan. In fact, there is an increasing realization within the Tibetan diaspora of the possibilities offered by the Internet as a means for disseminating information and mobilizing support. Though the motives of participants in the Tibet movement vary, [63] what seems to unite them is a broadly defined Tibet cause. When the Tibetans went in exile they found that "Tibet" already existed in the Western imagination, and given their limited options, they conformed to that image in order to gain support (see Lopez 1998). Tibetans, Tibetophiles, and Tibetologists all have contributed to the romance of Tibet-to Exotica Tibet-which paradoxically renders problematic the struggle for independence from Chinese occupation. Moran, on the basis of his study of Tibetan diaspora in Nepal, warns against an Orientalist valorization of Tibetans, for "there is also the danger that if Tibetans fail to deliver the uni-dimensional spiritualized goods, there is no basis through which to approach them except through scorn" (2004, 6-7). Even though Western patronage offers an important source of symbolic and economic capital for individual Tibetan refugees, it remains precarious (see Prost 2006).
The support of the "Free Tibet" movement is often based on the supposed cultural uniqueness of Tibetans rather than on the recognition of the political right to self-determination. Richard Gere, the Hollywood actor, uses the analogy of David and Goliath to offer hope to the Tibetans and reminds them, "You must maintain that sense of uniqueness and that genuine cultural commitment to nonviolence. If you pick up arms and become like the Palestinians, you'll lose your special status" (in Schell 2000, 56). As Baird recognizes in the New Internationalist (1995) special issue on Tibet, the romantic image has hampered the Tibetan struggle for self-determination: "If Tibetans are presented as a dreamy, unrealistic people, obsessed with religion, their struggle is unlikely to be taken seriously by a world driven by more secular values. Their demand for independence will be seen as pie-in-the-sky and their ability to rule themselves will be open to question" (1995, 1).
However, rather than paint Tibetans as victims, we can view the Shangri-la image in a different light. Exotica Tibet is not only restrictive of options but is also "a soft power resource that can be manipulated to get attention and to get some access to the stages of world politics" (Magnusson 2002, 211). For instance, Klieger (1997) argues that Tibetans have been active in the creation and presentation of their own identity. [64] Not only have they participated in portraying an image of themselves to outsiders but their self-perception too has been a result of this self-reflexivity. Calling this conscious and selective presentation of self "Tibetan hyperreality," he writes: "Tibetan hyperreality is created from a conscious and selective presentation of self to an audience with highly conditioned expectations. Tibetan culture as currently presented in most Tibetan cultural centres in the West is idealized, homogenated and pasteurized. It has… remarkably allowed the perpetuation of Tibetan identity despite the vicissitudes of exile" (ibid., 67).
In the process of strategically deploying their culture to the Western audience for mobilizing political support, Tibetans have redefined and reconstructed Tibetan culture and identity. The Dalai Lama-led government-in-exile self-consciously makes representations of reflexive, politicized notions of culture and identity that are dependent upon the globalized production of institutions and the flow of cultural resources made possible through the onslaught of modernity (see Huber 2001; McLagan 1997; see also Shakya 2001). Not only have they embraced modern technologies such as the Internet (see McLagan 1996) to promote their cause [65] but they have also projected their culture as being compatible with universalizing discourses such as environmentalism, (world) peace, and nonviolence. Representations, politicized culture, and an interaction with a Western audience affect the "domestic" and "international" politics of the Tibetan elite in the diaspora. In their search for outside support, the Tibetan elite have been learning the language of international politics dominated by the Western powers (see Frechette 2002; Kolas 1996).
"We live in a nationalised world" and we tend to see the world with a "nationalising eye" (Cubitt 1998, 1). Recognizing the dominance of nationalism as a source of legitimacy in contemporary international politics, for example, the Tibetan government-in-exile has molded its expositions on Tibetan identity accordingly. Though "Old Tibet" had elements of natio (Lopez 1998, 197-98), Hobs-bawm's protonationalism (Dreyfus 1994), and what Smith calls eth-nie, a modern sense of nationhood was absent (Ekvall i960, 382). Tibet as a nation is not a historical reality but a product of post-exilic imagination. [66] The Western influence can also be seen in the evolving cultural and political discourses, including the structure of the government-in-exile. In fact, the Dharamsala establishment has been moving toward democratization (see Boyd 2004) for gaining legitimacy in the West. These developments may be explained in terms of an image-building exercise, steps taken toward keeping up with the times, response to pressures from within the refugee community, and finally, the Dalai Lama's personal initiative.
In complying with dominant representational regimes, Tibetans are following tactics common to many groups who try to counter their relative powerlessness by negotiating within the dominant representational regimes and selectively appropriating favorable aspects. All third world resistance groups have to "negotiate both the post-cold war reframing of global politics and the lingering traces of Western post-colonial fantasies about their country and culture" (Bishop 1998, 123; see also Bishop 2000). Gandhi's adoption of the Orientalist trope of spiritualist Indians, feeding it into a wider political struggle against British imperialism as well as social evils within the Indian society, is a good example.
[63] "The Tibet cause has attracted an exceptionally diverse group of people, some of whom see their activities on behalf of the cause as connected with Buddhist belief and practice, while others are concerned with human rights, opposing communism, and a range of other motivations" (Powers 2000, 3). Among this range of other motivations, New Age Orientalism is prominent. Though often New Age and Western Buddhism are conflated, mostly by their critics, they are quite distinct. Even when criticizing the Western states for betraying Tibet, some supporters adopt a haughty view of a superior Western way of being. For example, Berkin in his book "about a lost state" mentions British imperial policy and weak and market-hungry Western states as part of the cause, but then talks about how the question of Tibet is also about "a clash of values; between western democracy and oriental absolutism" (2000, xv).
[64] Klieger further argues that diasporic Tibetan identity formation is a result of ideological convergence between the Western Shangri-la image and the self- perception of Tibetans: "[a] collision has occurred between the Occidental paradigm of an Eastern paradise, Shangri-La, and an indigenous utopia which constructs a distanced, sacred Tibetan homeland upon the established Shambhala, Mt. Meru, Mt. Potala and divine rule mythology" (1997, 61).
[65] Though the odds are stacked against Tibetans in the real world, in the virtual world the situation is radically different. An overwhelming number of Web sites on Tibet are pro-Tibetan. I searched for "Tibet" on 15 February 2001 using Google.com/. Out of the first one hundred links, only three were not connected to the Tibet movement. A similar search on 6 August 2006 yielded thirty-eight out of the first fifty links that were directly connected with the Tibet movement (the rest were either travel-related sites or pro-China sites). To a certain extent, Tibet Online, which claims to serve as a virtual community space for the Tibet movement, succeeds in its aim of leveling the playing field by leveraging the Internet's ability to harness grassroots support for Tibet's survival (About Tibet Online 2006).
[66] This is not to deny that elements of modern nationalism had started to emerge inside Tibet as early as 1913 when the thirteenth Dalai Lama's proclamation upon his return from exile showed a clear "awareness of Tibet as a distinct country, defined by its culture and history" (Dreyfus 2002, 40). Further, popular movements against the Chinese during the 1950s, including the "Four Rivers, Six Ranges" (chu bzhi gang drug), asserted distinct nationalism defined in opposition to Chinese occupation (see Shakya 1999).