China Wants to Choose the Next Dalai Lama. Why India Must Take a Stand

Dalai Lama's reincarnation debate isn't just about tradition, but about control: of Tibet, religion, and narrative.

What should be a matter of spiritual introspection and tradition has now morphed into a geopolitical contest. 

(Photo: PTI/Altered by The Quint) 

As we mark the 90th birthday of His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, the global Buddhist community and the international political establishment are once again drawn into a contentious issue that has simmered for decades: the reincarnation of the next Dalai Lama.

What should be a matter of spiritual introspection and tradition has now morphed into a geopolitical contest, with the People’s Republic of China insisting on its authority over the process and the Tibetan spiritual leadership asserting its independence.

At the heart of the matter lies a fundamental clash between faith and authoritarian politics, between religious freedom and the coercive power of the modern nation-state.

For India, which has long hosted the Tibetan Government-in-exile in Dharamshala and is home to the Dalai Lama himself, this moment offers both a diplomatic challenge and a moral obligation. As the inheritor of a long civilisational ethos of pluralism and a democracy committed to freedom of belief, India must reaffirm its principled support for the Tibetan cause, even as it navigates a complicated relationship with Beijing.

A Tale of Occupation and Exile

The story begins in 1950, when the Chinese People’s Liberation Army entered Tibet, claiming to “liberate” it from feudal theocracy. By 1951, the so-called "Seventeen Point Agreement" had formalised the annexation of Tibet into the People’s Republic of China.

Though the Chinese government promised autonomy and respect for religious traditions, the reality was far bleaker: mass arrests, suppression of monastic life, destruction of religious texts and artefacts, and the reengineering of Tibetan identity.

The tipping point came in 1959, when a massive uprising against Chinese rule was brutally crushed. The Dalai Lama fled to India with thousands of followers, crossing into Arunachal Pradesh and eventually settling in Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh, where he established the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), often referred to as the Tibetan Government-in-exile. Since then, India has been the moral and physical refuge for the Tibetan people, allowing their religion and culture to survive.

The current dispute revolves around who has the authority to identify the 15th Dalai Lama. Traditionally, the process involves spiritual visions, sacred rituals, and consultations with oracles, conducted by Tibetan lamas following centuries-old customs. The 14th Dalai Lama himself was recognised in 1940 through such a process at the age of four.

Reaffirming this stance, the Dalai Lama stated that the process of his reincarnation will not only continue, but may even be initiated during his lifetime to ensure its spiritual sanctity and continuity.

Tradition vs Control

Beijing has insisted that the process must be conducted using the "Golden Urn," a Qing dynasty relic which it claims gives the process historical legitimacy. The urn was introduced in 1793 by Emperor Qianlong, ostensibly to curb corruption in the selection of reincarnated lamas. While it was occasionally used, it was never the sole or primary method for determining succession.

In 2011, the Dalai Lama preempted China’s moves by announcing that the Gaden Phodrang Trust, a spiritual foundation headquartered in Zurich, Switzerland, would be responsible for the reincarnation process. He categorically stated that the Chinese Communist Party, being an atheist regime, has "no legitimacy or authority" in matters of reincarnation. 

Beijing predictably rejected this position. Most recently, China's Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Mao Ning, reiterated that the reincarnation must follow the golden urn procedure and be approved by the Chinese state. China’s ambassador to India, Xu Feihong, declared that the Dalai Lama “does not have the authority,” asserting that the tradition “predates him and belongs to the Chinese state.”

This is not simply about tradition, but about control: of Tibet, of religion, and of the narrative.

India’s Quiet Balancing Act

The Dalai Lama’s warnings are not hypothetical. In 1995, he identified Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, a six-year-old boy, as the 11th Panchen Lama, the second most important figure in Tibetan Buddhism. Days later, the boy disappeared and has not been seen since. In his place, China appointed Gyaincain Norbu, a boy of their choosing, who is widely regarded as a puppet.

This move effectively allowed Beijing to install its religious figurehead while silencing the authentic lineage. The Panchen Lama incident serves as a chilling precedent for what could occur with the Dalai Lama.

India’s role in this unfolding drama is unique. As the sanctuary for the Tibetan diaspora and the Dalai Lama himself, New Delhi has offered a safe haven, while carefully avoiding provocation. Over the years, India’s approach has oscillated between principled idealism and cautious pragmatism. However, recent developments have revealed a growing dissonance within India’s own establishment.

In 2018, reports emerged that the Modi Government had advised Indian officials to avoid attending events marking the Dalai Lama's 60th year in exile, presumably to avoid tensions with China. At the same time, Indian civil society and the judiciary have repeatedly reaffirmed the right to asylum and religious freedom for Tibetan refugees.

Most recently, Union Minister Kiren Rijiju, speaking in Dharamshala for the Dalai Lama’s 90th birthday, unequivocally stated that only Dalai Lama or his institution has the authority to determine his successor, an assertion that directly contradicts Beijing’s stance. However, the Ministry of External Affairs swiftly distanced itself, asserting that India does not take a position on matters of religious belief. Rijiju later clarified he was speaking “as a devotee,” not on behalf of the government. 

This divergence between a minister’s moral clarity and the official diplomatic caution underscores the tightrope India continues to walk: supporting Tibetan spiritual sovereignty without overtly provoking China. Despite the MEA’s distancing, Tibetan leaders, including President Penpa Tsering, welcomed Rijiju’s remarks, asserting that they reflect the sentiment of both the Indian government and its people.

India must now evolve a more assertive position, not necessarily by confrontation, but by moral clarity. Supporting the Dalai Lama's right to determine his own reincarnation is not an act of political aggression; it is a reaffirmation of India’s civilisational values and democratic commitments.

Possibility of Two Competing Dalai Lamas

The issue has global resonance. In 2020, the United States passed the Tibetan Policy and Support Act, which states that the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama must be left solely to Tibetan Buddhists and that any attempt by China to interfere would invite sanctions. Other democracies, including the European Union, have echoed similar sentiments.

The reincarnation controversy is, at its core, a battle over religious sovereignty in an age of state overreach. It also reflects the larger Chinese strategy of assimilating minority cultures—be it the Uyghurs in Xinjiang, Christians in underground churches, or Tibetan Buddhists. This is not merely about governance; it is about erasing identities that don’t conform to Han-majoritarian nationalism.

As the 14th Dalai Lama ages, the probability of two competing Dalai Lamas, one recognised by Tibetans and another anointed by Beijing, becomes more real. This duality would confuse believers, split the Tibetan Buddhist world, and provide China with a means to weaken the Tibetan resistance from within.

Such a split is not without precedent. The Catholic Church once experienced a schism with two popes. The Sunni and Shia split in Islam has defined centuries of sectarian politics. The creation of two Dalai Lamas would be Beijing’s greatest strategic victory, a way to undermine the spiritual unity of the Tibetan people without firing a bullet.

Moral Courage Over Military Might

India and the global community must not remain passive in the face of this unfolding crisis. What lies ahead is not a call for military deterrence, but for principled and moral leadership.

Just as India extended sanctuary to the Dalai Lama in 1959, it must now extend unwavering support in safeguarding the integrity of his reincarnation, an act rooted not in geopolitics but in the defence of spiritual sovereignty.

1. India should publicly and unequivocally affirm the Dalai Lama's exclusive authority to determine his reincarnation, and recognise the Gaden Phodrang Trust as the legitimate custodian of that sacred process.

2. New Delhi must work closely with like-minded democracies, the United States, the European Union, Japan, and others, to forge a diplomatic consensus that pre-empts and delegitimises any Chinese-appointed successor.

3. India must intensify cultural, academic, and policy engagement with the Tibetan community in exile, ensuring the vitality of Tibetan traditions through educational initiatives, research grants, and institutional partnerships.

To some, the reincarnation debate may appear arcane or symbolic. In reality, it cuts to the heart of a profound struggle: the right of a people to preserve their faith, their identity, and their historical continuity in the face of authoritarian erasure. The 15th Dalai Lama, whoever he may be, will inherit not only a spiritual mantle but the heavy political burden of representing a community that has withstood invasion, exile, and suppression.

As the world’s largest democracy and a civilisational state grounded in pluralism and dharma, India possesses both, the legitimacy and the responsibility to lead the global defence of religious freedom. This includes raising the issue at multilateral platforms such as the United Nations Human Rights Council and the Global Buddhist Summit, reframing it not as a bilateral dispute with China, but as a universal concern for human dignity and cultural autonomy.

Ultimately, this is not merely a matter of foreign policy, but a moral test of India’s democratic ethos. By defending the sanctity of the Dalai Lama’s reincarnation, India will reaffirm its 1959 promise to the Tibetan people and cement its place as a beacon of moral leadership in an increasingly illiberal world. The quiet revolution of compassion, truth, and resilience that His Holiness has long embodied deserves nothing less.

(Amal Chandra is an author, political analyst and columnist. He tweets @ens_socialis. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)