Question Author
Thanks Terambulan, that was very interesting, but the Simla document that it refers too is a very contentious one.
It was signed on behalf of Tibet by a Russian national upon whom the Dalai Lama had not conferred any plenipotentiary status, it was never published in Tibetan nor was it ever ratified.
Could a French diplomat sign a treaty in our name, without Parliament's approval and still be called legal or valid?
Also how different was the status of Tibet with regard to the other states (nations?) in Imperial China?
China had a feudal system of warlords all loyal to the Emperor, but not necessarily to one another.
China never gave up it's claim on Tibet it was just to busy fighting itself, the Japanese and itself again to assert it's control over it. Indeed even Taiwan (or Formosa as it's sometimes called) claims to have jurisdiction over Tibet, it's probably the one thing Taiwan and China agree on is Tibetan compliance to Beijing's political authority.