Bhutan after the polls

Tukoji R. PANDIT

Bhutan must be a truly unique country, something more than an idyllic nest high on the Himalayas.

At a time when foreign troops have to be sent to bring ‘democracy’ to defiant autocracies and dictatorships of various hues here is a tiny country where most people are still figuring out why their monarch wants to give them an unknown, untested and even unwanted commodity called ‘democracy’.

Why should a popular and revered monarch give up his powers when nobody asked him to do so?

Ancient style

It may well be that the chaos that democracy has spread in the oldest democracy in the region, which also happens to be largest democracy in the world, scares the simple Bhutanese who have made some determined efforts to preserve their ancient style of living and culture by measures such as restricting the entry of television and the Internet and foreign tourists into their land.

The Bhutanese were puzzled by their king’s decision to abdicate in favour of his son in 2006 and now he is handing over most of the powers he enjoyed to elected representatives of the people to push the tiny kingdom on an uncharted course.

They have been quite content to live with their ‘Gross National Happiness’ (GNH) instead of grappling with problems that multiply Gross Domestic Product-the benchmark for measuring economic prosperity.

Free education

The Bhutanese did not need democracy to give them free education and healthcare. Most villages in Bhutan, still among the least developed countries, have water and electricity. The life expectancy of the Bhutanese is 66 years, a far cry from 40 just a decade ago. All very impressive.

But despite reservations about democracy, the Bhutanese did seem to enjoy their maiden brush with democracy by registering nearly 80 per cent turnout at their first ever general election that elected members to the lower house of the national assembly.

The polls were conducted in a peaceful and orderly manner, something that has become unthinkable in much of South Asia where no major election is complete without some violence and rigging.

By the standards of polls in democracies, the fact that only two parties were participating in the polls in Bhutan does look unusual. The European Union observers were quick to point out that the Bhutanese voter had a very narrow choice. EU expressed the hope that future polls will offer a wider choice to the electorate.

Even with the restricted choice before them, the Bhutanese voter proved to be remarkably shrewd and well aware of the potential of the ballot. The results gave Druk Phuensum Tshogpa 44 of the 47 seats of the lower house of parliament.

The People’s Democratic Party could muster only three seats. To the outside world such a vast gap between the two parties would arouse suspicion.

Actually, there was nothing much to distinguish the two parties from each other. Their election manifestos were very much alike. Both parties are fiercely loyal to the monarchy.

There is probably one difference that has not drawn much attention. The People’s Democratic Party is headed by Sangay Ngedup, who was trounced in his home constituency by a schoolteacher. But it was not a straight defeat of a candidate.

Sangay Ngedup

Sangay Ngedup happens to be the brother- in- law of King Jigme Singye Wangchuck, who had abdicated in favour of his 28-year-old son, Jigme Khesar Namgyal Wangchuck. Sangay Ngedup had served the government well as minister, holding various portfolios like agriculture, health and education.

By all accounts he did not look like a losing candidate.Perhaps he had to pay for a subterranean wave of anger that had built against his father who was said to be an ordinary farmer in the central Punakha valley.

His fortunes started to change rapidly after he married off his four daughters to King Jigme Singye Wangchuck. Local farmers have alleged that they were forced to sell their land at knockdown rates to him.

Bhutan is not a country where the ordinary people are given to protesting loudly. They may be proud of their GNH but have to face some of the typical problems of the region like unemployment, crime-and drug addiction.

But the Bhutanese have been careful in airing their grievances and are hesitant when it comes to expressing resentment against the elite.

For such people the dawn of democracy must have been a special blessing as it helped them convey their anger in no uncertain terms to a relative of their beloved monarch through the ballot.

A land-grabbing royal relative might have been shown his place but the Bhutanese embrace for democracy would have been more widely hailed if a minority section had not been so unfairly treated in the past.

Nepalese

The reference is to the ethnic Nepalese most of whom were forced out of Bhutan to go into exile in Nepal over a decade ago. The Nepalese account for nearly a sixth of the 600,000 population of Bhutan-a sizeable minority, obviously.

The Nepalese were driven away as they were not accepted as Bhutanese citizens. Nepal was not at all happy to receive them.

Ever since their eviction from Bhutan, these ethnic Nepalese have been living in refugee camps in Nepal where life is miserable. What angers the ethnic Nepalese more is that the world, particularly the neighbours in South Asia, including India, have taken little interest in sorting out their problems.

Bhutan stubbornly refuses to address problem of the ethnic Nepalese; Nepal does not want them; India cannot persuade either Bhutan or Nepal to mutually resolve the ethnic Nepalese problem.

Police clearance

Though the just-concluded polls did see nine ethnic Nepalese elected to the national assembly, most ethnic Nepalese allege that they are treated as second-class citizens.

They have to get police clearance for promotion at their place of work and many other things like getting a passport or official permission to start a small business.

The world beyond South Asia is too pre-occupied with problems of its own creations. The US was reported to have offered back in 2006 to take 60,000 of these ethnic Nepalese. It is not known how many of them have been able to reach the American shores. But the ‘generous’ offer of the Americans will not solve a problem that can be best solved only by the leaders of Bhutan.

Syndicate Features