Foray into Tibetan history

Just finished reading an article on Tibetan military history by the ever-cynical though often insightful (in spite of his best intentions, apparently) Gary Brecher, who writes a column called The War Nerd for The Exile. Thought i'd pass it on in case anyone reading this is interested in the topic. Here's an excerpt on Britain's invasion of Tibet in the early 20th century:

Younghusband marched into Tibet in December 1903 with a force of Sikhs and Gurkhas—pretty scary mix, like rottweiler plus pit bull. And the Gurkhas were definitely the pit bulls in that pair. Sikhs are very tough but not blood-crazy. The Gurkhas were not only devoted lovers of knife-work, especially on POWs, but ancient enemies of the Tibetans. It didn’t take much to push them to a massacre. The Tibetans knew the British were dangerous and tried not to resist at all. But as the British force pushed farther and farther into Tibet, the local commanders decided to resist. That was a mistake. This wasn’t Tony Blair’s cool Britannia they were dealing with.

His comparison with the Chinese invasion, put in the historical contest of early Tibetan challenges to Chinese hegemony (going back to the first millenium AD), offers up some food for thought and basically lays to rest the premise that Tibet has, historically, been part of China and thus the current occupation by the Chinese govt/PLA just sets things right again at the higher elevations of the Asian continuum. Even if Brecher's account is full of falsehoods (which it may well be; i am - admittedly - no expert on this subject and am unlikely to acquire any expertise on it in either the near or distance future), i do not believe that rectifying the injustices of present day foreign occupations can be managed through a deep historical lens. In terms of finding a path to justice and reconciliation in Tibet in the 21st century, the present is the best we have to work with - and what's fair for the future. When native people talk about thinking of the seventh generation, they are referring to those yet to be born, not those who have already passed into the annals of history and the shifting sands of their bindings.