Published on Wednesday, October 17,2007 (The Kathmandu post)
For more than two decades, Bhutanese living at home and abroad have launched a political struggle to establish democracy and human rights in Bhutan. This fact is a bitter one for India and Bhutan as both have rejected the demand for democracy there.
When the people launched political movement in 1990, the Druk oligarchy clamped down on fundamental rights and evicted one-fifth of the population. For the past one and half decades, these refugees rendered homeless by the expulsion have been living in eastern Nepal under subhuman condition. There is no standard policy or law regarding the refugees, Nepal offered asylum to the evicted Bhutanese on humanitarian grounds. They have been facing the challenge of Druk oligarchy amid an uncertain situation, and have been seeking international support to establish democracy in Bhutan.
India has a very crucial role to play in bringing democracy to Bhutan and solving the refugee crises. However, it has remained completely different. Bhutan with India on its side has reduced bilateral talks with Nepal to a non-entity. Nepal and Bhutan had formed a joined verification team to authenticate the refugee at khudunabari and once the task was completed, Bhutan ditched Nepal.
The verification of the refugees started in 2001. The result was published on 2003, categorizing the refugees into:
(1) genuine Bhutanese,
(2) voluntarily migrated refugees,
(3) Non-nationals and
(4) criminals.
What was weird was that there were cases where members of the same family had been put in three different categories.
While the refugees in the camp kept their hopes live with each round of bilateral talks, many of us saw them as a futile exercise.
Most refugees believe that India has failed to play its part to resolve the issue, and actually taken sides with the Druk oligarchy. India could have helped the refugees to establish democracy through peaceful means but it has always cited the refugee problem as a bilateral matter.
India’s silence has annoyed the Nepali community. Nepal n may be unable to bring the Druk regime to the table, but the Nepali community must consider India’s stand as an anti-Nepal policy. There have been several instances of such actions. India has recently shown its concern over the refugee dead lock. It has said that it intends to bring both Nepal and Bhutan together. But refugees see India’s initiative as a dubious effort and will not have any thing to do with it. India could have solved the problem a decade ago. Why is India poking its nose into it now? India has debarred Bhutanese refugees from acquiring “refugee status”. Its role would be unambiguous if it continued to back the third country resettlement plan.
Nepal is currently undergoing a political transformation. Bhutan has taken advantage of Nepal’s fluid political situation. Let the extremely vulnerable individuals ( EVIs) as defined by the UNHCR resettle. The second lots of EVIs, numbering more than one hundred, have completed the entire process and are waiting for exit permits.
At one of the closed door meeting on the Bhutanese refugee problem held on July 3, foreign minister Sahana Pradhan said that Nepal had some reservations over the third country resettlement plan. But it could not keep the refugees as hostages to the situations for the next 17 years.
However, everything seems to be carried out on an ad hoc basis without following any concrete policy, and the process of third-country resettlement has stayed bogged down for a long time. In my view, it would be wise for Nepal to work on finding a long term solution to the refugee problem.
When the world is commending Nepal for providing asylum to hundreds of thousands of refugees on humanitarian grounds, why would it be reluctant to allow them to resettle in any third country of their choice? The sixtieth session of the UN general assembly in 2005 unanimously adopted the resolution on safeguarding the principles of refugee protection and upholding the rights of refugees. The Indian and Bhutanese prime ministers also endorsed it. The commitment expressed by India and Bhutan to the resolution on safeguarding the principles must have astonished the international community as Bhutan has branded the refugees as terrorists. In December 2006, Bhutan’s new king who succeeded Jigme Singye Wangchuk delivered 20-minutes long speech without once mentioning the refugees. He spoke about peace and tranquility, sovereignty and security of the nation. But he did not acknowledge the refugee problem. The concerns of the Bhutanese are the refugee problem, democracy and human rights. There are children in the countryside who have never been to school.
The feeling of being discarded and displaced is very much prevalent among the refugees. They have endured enormous torment, and are considering waging an armed struggle against the Druk oligarchy. If the tension is not defused in time, it may take a turn for the worse and drag Northeast India into a genocidal war.
Many refugees are ignorant of the third-country resettlement plan. They would be willing to take up the offer if the concerned authorities informed them about. No one denies that the security problem in the camps is serious. If information about the resettlement program is spread in the camps, the refugees may give up their
plans for an armed struggle against the Druk regime. In fact, any change in Bhutan must come through peaceful means. And I am sure the Druk regime realizes that the refugees will play a key role in bringing about any political change in Bhutan, no matter where they resettle.
Posted by: Ashok Gurung
E-mail:asokgurung@gmail.com
