Of ballots and bombs
Tashi Wangdi wrote in Kuensel that the Bhutanese leaders in exile are behind the recent blasts the rocked the Himalayan kingdom ahead of the polls and intended to mean that all those fighting repatriation present a false façade outside.
Right at first, all leaders have condemned the blasts and stressed the need for peaceful solution of the southern and eastern Bhutan crises. No matter, the country is undergoing a transformation from an absolute monarchy to democracy, intention has not been so transparent and clear. There have been several appeals from the refugees to seek a peaceful solution, yet, the tyranny turned deaf ear.
In most cases, the Kuensel writers and the regime officials, blatantly state refugees are not Bhutanese. This is foolishness on their part. To take a sample, the joint verification team of their government has identified that about 75 percent of the refugees have valid documents to prove they are original Bhutanese.
The questions have already been raised about the motive of the government when it categorized child, who even does not have the image of his motherland, as a terrorist. Mr Wangdi, if you say what your government told is correct, can you produce proofs that all innocent children who left their country at a tender age, have done anything that harmed Bhutan, or criminal act in your word.
It is international practice that nationals who commit crimes are extradited from abroad to be punished under nation’s law. However, the Bhutanese regime termed them as terrorist and evicted them. This is illegal. Further, the kingdom has no such law to clamp anyone terrorist and punish anyone under terrorist tag. The actions are illegal.
Additionally, people simply cannot leave their place of residence to live in misery under cramped huts. Innocence and ignorance of the people to record the fear, threat and intimidation they faced while filling the Voluntary Migration Form have become the greatest asset for the regime to claim southern Bhutanese left voluntarily.
Wangdi claimed Bhutan’s democratic transition has been lauded globally. This is an silly assumption. The transition has been anxiously observed by the world, but not lauded. India, US and few others, who have interests to perch station in the kingdom to surround the growing world power China, have welcomed the government announced the transition. Yet, other than India, others have pointed at the sincerity of the government.
“Almost all democracies have revolutionary roots giving ours a unique status, inasmuch as it was gifted by a king to his people. It was intended to be a peaceful transformation, devolving power to the people.”
This is false claim. Bhutan does have experienced revolutions. The demonstrations in mid 1950s and in 1990 and 1997 were the reactions of continued suppression. Though, they have been subdued with bullets and bayonet, they put pressure on the regime to go liberal. Yet, the draft constitution has ample provisions that prove lack of power devolution to the people. The self-centered Bhutanese writers and politicos, who lack vision and experience of an open and democratic society, still think what they do is the democracy. Speaking against them meant rebellion or anti-nationalism.
Man by nature does not wish to die. Wangdi could evaluate himself why didn’t he go fighting against ULFA in the east if he was really patriot enough. As such, Wangdi and other Bhutanese who stand against voice of right to equality from south must at heart study why refugees taking asylum in Nepal have to penetrate into Bhutanese jungles with guns and grenades. I believe that violence is not the solution of any problem still I confess that people do not have the option to arm when their sincere appeals are not taken into consideration.
The diaries from the ULFA leaders have amply revealed their relation with King Jigme Singye. It is open secret that ULFAs were given asylum in the kingdom to evict southern Bhutanese. Jigme Singye is not a God and whatever he does cannot be endorsed with closed eyes. Wangi might have answers for me, who is terrorist: one who allies with a terrorist group or one who demands equality.
The other issue he raised was the independency of the kingdom. Nehru had asked and sponsored the regime to start development activities, Rajiv Gandhi advised to evict southern Bhutanese and Man Mohan Singh advised to change the form of government. Thousands of Indian military personnel have been stationed throughout the kingdom. The Indian intelligence operates in the kingdom (arrest of militant would have been impossible without information passed by the Indian intelligence). The government says, it will not establish diplomatic relation with permanent members of the UN and for saying so, king receives special guest of honor at the republic day parade. Chinese intrusion into the Bhutanese land becomes an issue at Indian parliament while Bhutanese government remains mum. Do all these indicate the independency of the kingdom?
The Bhutanese rulers and their supporters cannot spit at refugees while forgetting what mistakes they did if the country needs a peaceful transformation.