|
Druk National Congress - Political Organisation of Bhutan |
|
Human Rights |
BHUTAN TODAY
BHUTAN TODAY
(FOR
PRIVATE CIRCULATION ONLY) JANUARY –
FEBRUARY 2003
BHUTANESE PREDICAMENT OR MENEAVORIBILITYReproduced below is a critical analysis of the Bhutanese political and refugee imbroglio written by Mr. Ravi Nair, Executive Director of the South Asian Human Rights Documentation Center (SAHRDC) Bhutan: The Chickens are coming home to roost It is an old truism that human rights violations in a country act as an early warning system when assessing the political health of a society. As in medical diagnosis, cures are easily available in the early stages. The international community largely ignored the human right violations in Southern Bhutan in the early nineties. India chose to look the other way when ethnic Nepalese of Bhutanese citizenship were forcibly evicted and connived with the Bhutanese by shepherding the refuges into Eastern Nepal. Nepal and Bhutan do not have a contiguous border. This failure to read the tea leaves is now proving costly to both Bhutan and India. Human Rights perspectives are not only ethically correct but in the long run also create the conditions where long term solutions are possible. Nestling
between India and China, the tiny Kingdom of Bhutan has defacto lost
much of its sovereignty in the last decade. It only remains to be
seen as to how long the transmutation from defacto to dejure loss of
sovereignty will take. Much of the blame squarely rests on the shoulders of the present King Jigme Singhye Wangchuk. Not having either the political sagacity or diplomatic skills of his father, he has led Bhutan to a situation where its very existence is now in question. The
latest situation is of the King’s own making. Starting with an
ill-conceived policy of discrimination, harassment and finally
forcible eviction of over a hundred thousand of his subjects of
Nepalese extraction, he depopulated large parts of Southern Bhutan.
Not satisfied, he then went on to take on the Sarchops, who are his
ethnic cousins in Eastern Bhutan. Selling Shangri La to a gullible
western audience was not too difficult but the hard-nosed reality of
his geopolitical situation has yet to dawn on him. The
whole Eastern watershed area of the Himalayas has been in a state of
demographic flux for centuries. In the last hundred years, the
population explosion has led to land hunger of a kind experienced in
few parts of the world. The depopulated areas of Southern Bhutan
were only too inviting to many ethnic insurgent groups living in the
contiguous areas on the Indian side of the border. The
first to move in were the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA).
The ULFA is fighting for an independent Assam. Initially buying off
local Bhutanese officials, they were able to consolidate their
presence before Thimphu, on the prodding of New Delhi woke from its
lotus eating slumber. The indigenous Bodo peoples who live on both
sides of the Indo Bhutan border soon also had their armed fractions
setting up on the Bhutanese side of the border. Of late, the Koch
Rajbansis, another indigenous peoples group, have also dug in with
their Kamtapur Liberation Organisation (KLO). Eyeing all this
territory for the asking, where the Bhutanese King presides over a
state apparatus which is more make believe than real, both armed
factions of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN) led by
Muivah and Khaplang have also been partaking of the sanctuary on
offer. The ULFA and the National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB) shifted their primary bases to Bhutan from Bangladesh in 1997-98. An increasing approximation in the relationship between New Delhi and Dhaka after Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League came to power in Dhaka in June 1996, led to the signing of the Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord on 2 December 1997 between the insurgent Jana Samhati Samiti (PCJSS) of the Hill peoples of the Chittagong Hill Tract (CHT) and the Government of Bangladesh. New Delhi exerted pressure on the PCJSS to sign the CHT Accord. The Government of Bangladesh subsequently reciprocated the Indian gesture by arresting Mr. Anup Chetia, Secretary General of the ULFA on 21 December 1997 in Dhaka. As Dhaka mounted pressure on the Indian insurgents, ULFA and NDFB shifted their bases to Bhutan. Bhutan gradually found itself entangled in what was primarily India’s internal conflict as ULFA used Southern Bhutan as sanctuary to conduct raids across the border in India. However, the involvement went further. Many Bhutanese officials connived in and promoted the ULFA presence in Southern Bhutan for pecuniary benefits. In a rare press statement on 6 July 2000, the Royal Government of Bhutan (RGOB) confirmed that the ULFA was transferring funds using Bhutan’s diplomatic bag facilities. Two junior employees of the Protocol Division of the Bhutanese Foreign Ministry, Wanchuk Dorji, a grade 15 employee, and Lhaba Tshering, a grade 17 employee were sacked and legal proceedings initiated. Police investigations revealed that they had sent about US $38,000 and Indian Rs 300,000 using the diplomatic bag facility between January and July 1996. Two other government employees and two private individuals have been sentenced by the district court in Samdrup Jongkhar to life imprisonment and five years imprisonment respectively for dealings with the ULFA. India has continued to exert diplomatic pressure on Bhutan to expel the Indian insurgent groups. In addition, India has been training the Royal Bhutan Army in counter insurgency warfare and has provided sophisticated arms to deal with the insurgents. India also has regularly suggested holding of joint military operations in Southern Bhutan to flush out the ULFA and NDFB. The only operation so far done jointly have been in a three-kilometer radius of the India Bhutan border, but this has yielded little result. In its July 2001 session, the Bhutan National Assembly, chaired by King Jigmye Singhye Wangchuk, expressed serious concern about the presence of the ULFA and NDFB. "The ULFA headquarters, used by their leaders and military commanders, must be moved out of Bhutan," the King was quoted in Kuensel, the mouthpiece for the Palace in Thimphu. The Bhutanese National Assembly resolution adopted warned that the Bhutanese Government would not agree to any more meetings with the ULFA insurgent leadership on vacating their camps in the kingdom. The
NDFB, a tribal rebel group in Assam, has seven camps inside Bhutan.
It is reported that the Kamtapur Liberation Organization (KLO), had
set up two bases inside the tiny Buddhist kingdom. The ULFA signed an agreement with the Bhutanese Government in June 2001 to close down four of its nine camps in the Himalayan kingdom, besides reducing the number of cadres by December 2001. In November 2001, Mr. Aurobindo Rajkhowa, the Chairman of ULFA also met the King in the Bhutanese capital Thimpu to discuss this issue. However, there has been little or no evidence that ULFA has honored its commitments on one side or on the other side, any efforts by the Royal Bhutanese Army to enforce compliance. After the refusal to move out, the Bhutanese King, Jigme Singye Wangchuck reportedly met the Chairman of the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) Mr Aurobindo Rajkhowa, and political advisor, B Borgohain, for about an hour on 15 and 16 February 2002 at the Phakupang camp of the ULFA in South Bhutan and requested the ULFA to leave Bhutan. The ULFA leaders reportedly promised the King that they would discuss the issue amongst themselves. The Indian Attitude New Delhi has shown remarkable restraint but indications are that the patience of the Pundits of South Block or more importantly their counterparts in the Indian security establishment is wearing thin. The Indian Government continues to mount diplomatic pressure on Bhutan. On 4 August 2002, India's External Affairs Minister Mr. Yashwant Sinha visited Thimphu. The visit of the Foreign Minister was followed by that of the Chief of Staff of the Indian army, General S Padmanabhan from 25-27 September 2002. Bhutan has so far rejected all offers of conducting joint military operations. Any joint initiative involving operations from the Southern districts to the inner districts of central Bhutan involving Sarbhang, Chirang, Dagana, Wangdiphodrang, Tongsa, Bumthang, Shemgang, towards further east in the districts of Samdrup Jhongkhar, Pemagatshel, Tashigang, Mongar, Tashiyangtshi, Lhuntshi would have serious domestic implications for a King and monarchy, which is less than popular in these areas. It is reported that 14 out of the 18 districts will be affected by any joint military operations by Indian and Bhutanese forces. Bhutanese Government sources accept that at least 80,000 people would need to be evacuated, relocated and funds mobilized for their well being in preparation for an armed conflict. While Indian Defence and Home Ministry officials continue to suggest holding joint military operations, Bhutan is wary of the idea. Bhutan is only too aware that India has failed to find military solutions to its insurgency problems. There is no guarantee that the insurgents will be flushed out through a single operation. This may prolong Indian military presence in Bhutan raising questions about its sovereignty, in addition to possible human rights abuses during military operations and its concomitant fallout on polity in Bhutan. New Delhi has been circumspect in all enquiries concerning joint Indo Bhutan military operations, as it is aware of the wider concerns of the international community on this count. However, New Delhi’s dilemma relates to the realization that Thimphu is not in effective control over Southern Bhutan and that this area is being used as a springboard for insurgency activities in an area where the geographical link between the Indian heartland and North Eastern India is at best tenuous. Bhutan has dealt with the Indian insistence on the issue of joint military operations by hoping that the nightmare that it finds itself in will go away if it procrastinates long enough. The nightmare, however, is only too real. Bhutan’s attempted flirtation with Beijing and earlier discussions to explore the possibility of allowing Beijing to open a diplomatic representation in Thimphu has also not won it friends in New Delhi. Beijing however, has been conscious of New Delhi’s concerns and has been doing any legwork, gingerly. New Delhi is also concerned that the Maoists in Nepal may soon cast their eyes and influence on Southern Bhutan. The fear that the infectious Maoist virus may infect the Bhutanese refugees in Eastern Nepal is a recurring worry shared by Kathmandu, New Delhi and Thimphu. Elements in the security establishment in New Delhi have been putting forward the thesis that a pre-emptive and unilateral military operation in Southern Bhutan may be necessary sooner than later. It would be a shot across the bows of the new political dispensation in Bangladesh, which has once again been playing host to sundry insurgent groups from India’s North East. This may also help New Delhi flex its muscles for domestic political consumption when a pre-emptive military operation into Pakistan administered Kashmir is not easy, given the possible nuclear spin-off of such an exercise. Bhutan
not having any historical memory of its own has however been
reminded that the last time it allowed cross border raids into
British India in the 1770s, it lost the strategic area of the Duars.
This time it may not just be Southern Bhutan that it loses but its
existence and the make believe world of Shangri La and Xanadu that
the King and his courtiers live in. - Human Rights Features BNDP wants aid clubbed with refugee repatriationTHE KATMANDU POST Kathmandu, February 17, 2003 KATHMANDU, Feb 16 : Bhutan National Democratic Party (BNDP) on Sunday, demanded that donor countries and agencies club assistance with resolution of the protracted Bhutanese refugee crisis. The call comes in the run-up to the Bhutan Aid Group meeting in Geneva, Switzerland on February 18 and 19. R B Basnet, President of the BNDP also referred to the concerns raised at the 2000 Thimphu meeting of the donors. The meeting had, among other things, stressed the need to sort out the refugee crisis by identifying "a durable solution." However, the Druk regime had not taken any positive steps. "BNDP urges all donor countries and aid agencies to ensure that commitment of assistance is made conditional to speedy resolution of the refugee problems and protection of human rights in Bhutan," BNDP president R B Basnet told reporters in the capital on Sunday. The party has also issued a call to India since she is not only the largest donor with annual assistance running over Rs.8 billion but also an influential nation in the region, to help sort out the refugee imbroglio which has worsened into a humanitarian crisis. "India has moral responsibility to help find a lasting solution," Basnet further said, adding, "Should the renewed bilateralism fail to deliver any results, Bhutanese political parties would be left to group together and launch a satyagraha movement". He also reiterated the party’s long-standing demand that all bonafide Bhutanese nationals should be repatriated. This coincides with speculations that the Druk regime may take back only a small percentage of the refugees. He also demanded that citizenship status must be guaranteed prior to repatriation and that UN agencies like UNHCR should oversee the entire exercise. Basnet also dwelt at length on the need to involve international community in the monitoring of human rights situation in Bhutan, in the absence of any institutional guarantee. Moreover, he has also suggested that the Druk regime must initiate dialogue with parties in exile, grant clemency to their leaders, ensure cultural, linguistic and religious pluralism and protection of the landed properties of those who had fled the country. While Basnet sounded cautious on the latest round of Nepal-Bhutan talks, a refugee activist Rakesh Chhetri flayed the same saying, "It is ploy to win over the donors for the time being. It should have been held after the Geneva meeting." Since the Druk regime has been systematically usurping the landed properties and homesteads of all those who were thrown out of the country after 1990 and handing over the same to others within Bhutan, BNDP leaders have strongly demanded that the government must refrain from such nefarious activities. Additional demands include paying out compensation to all who lost moveable and immovable assets and reinstatement of civil servants who had to flee Bhutan on political grounds. Meanwhile a report from Damak in Jhapa said children of the refugees from all the seven camps initiated a five-day agitation to impress upon donor countries and agencies to club assistance with resolution of the refugee crisis. They have demanded that the Druk regime be given one-year time to sort out the festering crisis, which goes back to 1990. The demands put up by them include categorization into two groups as against four, repatriating the verified refugees from Khudnabari camp and immediate resumption of the verification process. Thousands of children participated in the demonstration rally.
|