Friday, September 10, 2010

A Decisive Debate

I just had a nice chat with a fellow Tibetan, who lives in Dharamsala. Our conversations apparently centered on last night's first unofficial Kalon Tripa candidates' debate held at TIPA. Mr. Gyaltso had attended the debate and he was overwhelmed and greatly excited . He said "last night's debate was phenomenal, since my arrival in India, I have attended so many functions and events in Dharamsala, but have never seen such  a tremendous  public interest and attendance. TIPA hall was packed and even the outside arena reached its full capacity. Of all the  candidates , I am most impressed by  Dr. Lobsang Sangay, and now thanks to this debate, I have made up my mind, as to whom I should vote".



The debate was telecast live by phayul website,and several hundred Tibetan people around the world were watching the same with rapt attention. As Mr. Gyaltso said earlier, this was a decisive debate, and each candidates' performance was distinctive and unique. This debate is not the first of its kind and nor it will be the last. But their performance on the stage may influence many independent voters. Those who have not made up their mind, such a debate was very telling and revealing. The opportunity to see and hear the potentional candidates' policy, plan and ambition for the highest executive post was exhilarating and encouraging. All the unofficial candidates proudly confessed , this was  indeed an historical debate, and a testament of  Tibetan democracy working in ful swing.
 I have watched the entire live show debate on Phayul website, and I am inclined to share my observation of each candidate's performance.http://www.rfa.org/tibetan/kalon-tripa-and-chithue-elections-2011/2011-kalon-tripa-canidtate-debate-at-dharamsala-09102010122425.html


1. Dr. Lobsang Sangay:
As the host announced, and  by sheer luck or good omen, Dr. Sangay was the first to be ushered on the stage and the first to make the opening remark through  a draw. The cheering crowd welcomed each speakers with great enthusiasm and support. Dr. Sangay's 3 minute opening remark was concise, well rehearsed and focused on unity, innovation and self-reliance as the three principles of governance by any exile Prime Minister. His projection of  himself as an agent for change was loud and clear. He has good sense of humour, that made him appear more approachable and people's person.

Debriefing: The opening statement was well received, mainly the message was clear and resonated with the masses and delivered with great vigour and assertion fluently without referring to  notes. The speech had three identifiable elements, an Introduction, body and conclusion.  The crowd's expectation of Dr. Sangay was high, by their show of support through thunderous clap. He passed the test and fulfilled their expectations. Several people  I spoke to agreed Dr. Sangay has a clear agenda and policy,  Mr. Gyaltso through my conversation said 80% of the people attended the debate were in favor of Dr. Sangay.His initial credibility as a strong candidates recieved  further boost at this event. For those people, who have seen and listen  first time to  Dr. Sangay,his left a first good impression and that matters. His responses to questions were also direct and exhibited clarity of thoughts and organization. The only weakness in his deliberations were repetitions of examples . Saying the same thing in verbatim, gives the impression of reciting by heart ,which is only discernible by those who listen to him critically. His concluding statement was the same as the one he delivered in Carlifornia. But in Dharamsala he is reaching out to a different audiences. He shared knowledge of international politics and affair, but how practical those information will come handy when he governs as an exile prime minister is something to be questioned?

2. Tethong T. Namgyal:
Tethong la's openning remark was general,  and no particular policy agenda was outlined. His speech focused more on the importance of the continuity of present exile  policy and reiterated  His Holiness the Dalai Lama's advocacy of peaceful means and democratic elections, that this will signal a break-though in exile politics to the Chinese government. He was pretty conservative and traditional  in his stand point and policy. He is cautious and non committed to any specific things. He is stoic and may keep the status que if elected.  The opening remark was not his best.  It is hard to assess if his messages were tailored to the particular audience. Mr. Gyaltso said that he has great expectations of Tethong T, Namgyal, but at the debate Tethong did show his bright side.

Debriefing: Tethong la's had a storied career but his own strength appears to be also his own weakness.
his message of uncertainty and noncommittal has received negatively  by the audience. Despite of his great political resumes and experiences, he is not sharing them with the public, which makes the audience wander and that undermines his credibility too.Tethong la, may think, "I will not say what I can do, my decades of working in exile community and goverment was proof of what I have done". However,when he is not assertive and vocal of his competency and experience, the audience meanwhile dig up his past  financial scandal during the tenure of his Kalon for department of finance, which was compelled to clarify . This was a disaster for Tethong la.

Tethong la didnt  respond to policy questions directly, and when audience insisted Tethong to be clear of what he is capable of. he drew a pessimistic picture of our exile status and its uncertainty, besides categorically said he is not going to promise anything. This willing nilly attitude would not impress the audience and his impression might have suffered at this debate. No matter what is the reality, Tibetan people needs optimistic and message of  hope. If the debate makes a difference in people's decision in voting, then Tethong la didnt win the debate, and his performance far short of  expectations.

3.  Penpa Tsering, exile parliament speaker.
 The speaker in his openning remark attempted to reveal his campaigning slogans. He demonstrated good understanding of exile establishments and set out with a clear policy statements, if he is elected Kalon Tripa.
Penpa la  was articulate and he got good score in his speech. With a good sense of humor that break the ice among the candidates and so was in the audience. He appears to be sincere and genuine in his approach and speech. He presented himself as a avid advocate of middle way approach and emphasized on the importance
electing (3) women kalons in the cabinet. Putting them in position of power should mean what is gender equality.
Debriefing:   His indepth knowldege of the Tibetan government setup and policy was a plus point.
As to the questions from the audience, he handled them deftly and answered well. His message that no matter who wins the election, they all should work together to strength Tibetan  struggle has highly appealed the audience, who cheered it thunderously. Penpa Tsering la is unassuming and unpretentious and cited His Holiness the Dalai lama as the guiding principles of all his actions. His weakness as a speaker is that he demonstrated some distracting mannerism during speech, when fielding to questions, he was fumbling with papers in his hand with eyes down, instead of direct eye contact, which is important. Good eye contact with audience project confidence and connections. At this debate, he might been seen as the underdog, but was a rising star, who has great potential and credibility.

4. Gyari Dolma: vice Chairman of exile Tibetan parliament.

She delivered a highly charged speeches, with no specific policy and plan, more of style than a substance. As in most of  her public address, she is carried away by emotion. She said she was running for the post, to test the truth of equality of man and woman. She also focused on her long years of working experience as MP and pur forth  some of the pressing issues required to address for the wellbeings of Tibetan in exile, especially newcomers. She too believed in the necessary of change, what doesnt work in exile government. Emphasizing her upbringing as a activists, she will remain as a activist and advocate of changes when elected PM, that is in her blood
Debriefing:   Gyari Dolma  is a well known figure, and she is influential and one of the foremost woman politician, who is influential and well connected with Indian politicians. She could capitalize on that strength to signal that she can do.
 
Debriefing:   Before the break, she told the announcer, that she can not come back after the break, so she apologized the audience for this incovenience. I thought that was very weird and odd, and unrespectful to the audience.  However, I saw her seated on the stages along with other candidates till to the end of the debate after the break. Maybe there was a change of something, which I dont know.
Gyari Dolma 's performance at this debate was more or less of what she used to be in other public address. She excited the crowd and moved by her consistency and courage to serve the Tibet issue. Understanding the power of public speaking, she needs to be little controlled emotionally. Emotional appealing should require careful thoughts and it should be ethical. She needs vocal variety, not speaking in the same level throughout. Her outburst of emotion, might be a expression of her strong feelings toward Tibet issues. But there is a time and circumstance to let out your emotions, not at all occasions.  

My final  observations of each of the candidates is , Lobsang Sangay stood out , Tethong T Namgyal underperformed, and Penpa Tsering well recieved and Gyari Dolma had great potential. It is a foregone conclusion that one from these four candidates will become the next exile PM.

No comments: