The US position on Tibet has gone back and forth over the last 100 years, as China has gone from Imperial China to Nationalist China to Red Communist China to developing China. Generally when China is an ally we favor Chinese control of Tibet and when China is an enemy we prefer Tibetan independence. Modern China is a rival, but a main trading partner and the situation has been soft-pedaled ever since Nixon.
http://2007.tibetmagazine.net/en/policyp.htm
Historically, the U.S. has subordinated its policy on Tibet to what it considered a larger strategic interest. We have territorial disputes with China over North Korea, Taiwan, and the South China Sea and Tibet comes in lower on the priority list. One reason is that China feels very strongly that Tibet has been a part of China for centuries and they will give Tibet back to the Dali Lama when the United States gives South Dakota back to the Sioux.
The Chinese called upon Obama not to meet with the Dalai Lama, but Obama ignored them. The Dalai Lama is a realist and he is seeking more autonomy for Tibet, not independence. Obama also reiterated the US position that Tibet is part of China and that the United States does not advocate Tibet independence.
Obama reiterated his "strong support for the preservation of Tibet's unique religious, cultural, and linguistic traditions and the protection of human rights for Tibetans in the People's Republic of China".
The Dalai Lama stated that he is "not seeking independence for Tibet" and hopes that dialogue between his representatives and the Chinese government will resume.
Obama offers 'strong support' for Tibet rights in Dalai talksClick to expand...
