As the 29th anniversary of the disappearance of the 11th Panchen Lama, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, approaches, the United States has called upon China to disclose his current location and ensure his well-being. The Panchen Lama holds immense significance in Tibetan Buddhism, ranking second only to the Dalai Lama himself.
The US State Department, through spokesperson Matthew Miller, emphasized the urgency of the situation, noting that Gedhun Choekyi Nyima was taken into Chinese custody at the tender age of six, along with his family, on May 17, 1995. Since then, he has not been seen in public, making him one of the world’s youngest political prisoners.
Despite the official announcement of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima as the 11th Panchen Lama by the Dalai Lama on May 14, 1995, Chinese authorities have promoted a state-selected figure, Gyaltsen Norbu, to serve as a proxy Panchen Lama, aligning with the Communist Party’s interests.
The US State Department underscored its support for the Tibetan people’s rights, including their religious, cultural, and linguistic identity. It reiterated the importance of allowing Tibetans the freedom to select, educate, and venerate their spiritual leaders without government interference, in line with international commitments.
Moreover, the Central Tibetan Administration, based in Bharat, echoed these sentiments, demanding credible information regarding the well-being and whereabouts of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima.
They urged China to release him, along with his family, and Chandrel Rinpoche, who has also been in captivity.
Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, after his abduction, was given the official name Jetsun Tenzin Gedhun Teshi Trinley Phuntsok Pal Sangpo. Meanwhile, Gyaltsen Norbu, the state-appointed Panchen Lama, continues to represent Chinese interests, serving as a mouthpiece for the ruling Communist Party.
Responding to mounting international pressure and calls for transparency, China is urged to provide immediate answers regarding Gedhun Choekyi Nyima’s situation and to uphold its commitments to human rights and religious freedom.
Comments