Well Tibet was in and out of various Chinese dynasties a number of times, plus it was it's own empire for quite some time. The whole area (western and southern China, plus Tibet) swirled in and out of various dynasties, but the people there are not Chinese, ethnically. The western peoples are Kazhaks, Uyghurs, Uzbeks, Turkmen and the like (there's even "Celtic" blood in them). The southern and south eastern peoples are more closely related to the Lao, Thai, Vietnamese and Cambodian peoples than stock standard Chinese. Your "typical" Chinese are the Han, which are a people of the northern plains and coast.
Anyway, I agree with you with the use of monetary policy as an instrument of international policy. It needs to be reigned in and done in such a manner as to leave it in no uncertain terms that the general populace is fed up with the nonsense that has gone and and won't tolerate it any further.
That's why Miss Suzuki's plea was laudable, but also why it was flawed. She didn't have the life experience at the time to know any better. Now she does (or should, she's 30 now) but why hasn't she gone on and really pushed the issues further??. There's no real opposition to what's happening at present and what attempts there are to do something or make things known are just half-hearted and piecemeal at best. What organisation there is, is non-organised and doesn't have the clout to do anything but feign importance and mouth platitudes. In order to get things done, it's going to take a "grassroots" change and much more "political" organisation and nous. Quite frankly, the likes of Peter Garrett and Co just didn't cut it, and still don't.
