Resettled Bhutanese Refugees
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Copyright© 2016 by SAAPE All Rights Reserved. However, the texts from this report may be reproduced, republished and circulated for the purpose of advocacy, campaigning, education and research with due acknowledgement to the source. We appreciate getting informed prior to any kind of use of this material and receiving a copy of the published document whenever possible. No part of this report may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any forms or by any means for resale or other commercial purpose without prior written consent of SAAPE. Published by South Asia Alliance for Poverty Eradication (SAAPE) Secretariat 288 Gairidhara Marg, Gairidhara, Kathmandu, Nepal Telephone :977-1-4004976, 4004985 Email: [email protected] Website: www.saape.org Authors Dr.Bhampa Rai Karma Dupthob Country Issues: Bhutan Refugee crisis Introduction Bhutan a small Himalayan kingdom at North latitude of 26°45’ to 28° 10’ and east longitude of 88° 45’ to 92° 10’, is landlocked by China in North and India in south. It has area of 38,394 sq. km( was estimated to be 47,000 sq km until recently). It has population of 760,000(2015 estimation). Home to several ethnic communities, Bhutanese population is broadly categorized into three ethnic groups based on regions they live. The Ngalong (some historians also refer as Ngalop), from Tibetan Stock inhabiting western region of country dominate the political and economic spheres of the country. The Sharchop, belonging to Indo-Burman Stock and believed to be the oldest inhabitants in country inhabit in eastern region. Ethnic Nepali belonging to Indo-Aryan stock is newest settler in Bhutan and predominantly live in southern stretch. 16 % Naglong, 25 % Nepali origin and 45 % Sharchop and other smaller group comprised the population. The political entity of country was founded by Tibetan Refugee, Zhabdrung Nagwang Namgyal in seventeen century. He instituted theocratic form of government in country and it lasted for 257 years. The Wangchuck Dynasty under the powerful war lord Ugyen Wanguck was established only in 1907 with the help of British India. After 1947, independent India replaced British India and Bhutan enjoys very special friendly relationship with India. Bhutan became the member of U.N.O. in 1971. Bhutan has deliberately avoided the power play of the world powers by not having diplomatic relations with any of five permanent members of the security council of U.N.O. The mystic image of Bhutan is of a land where Gross National Happiness is more important than the Gross National Product. This soft image has captured international attention and Bhutan is seen as a pioneering country where peoples’ happiness is more important than material and political interests. However, the ground reality in this last Shangri-La is very different, in the early 1990s, the Royal Government of Bhutan evicted one sixth of its population comprising people of ethnic Nepali origin compelling them to refugee status in eastern Nepal. The case of Bhutanese refugees though typical is fraught with complexity as it involves issues pertaining to demographics, security, migrations, human rights and democracy. The Bhutanese government deprived Bhutanese of Nepali origin of their citizenship besides confiscating everything. The politically intended debate on demographic imbalance equation, migrant threat to the national security and sovereignty of nation became aggressively assertive in public discourse. The people of Himalaya enjoyed freedom of movement through porous borders and have a history of economic migration. India-Bhutan Friendship treaty of 1949 which was revised in 2007 permitted the freedom of movement to the subjects of India and Bhutan in each other territories. The precedence was followed when the Indo-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship, 1950 was signed. The Bhutanese government has used this to assert that the majority of Bhutanese refugees in Nepal are economic migrants and that Bhutan itself is the victim of such migration. The absence of laws protecting the rights of refugees in the South Asian combined with the geostrategic location of Bhutan placed the Bhutanese refugee issue on the backburner for the decades. None of the countries from South Asia have signed the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Refugee Protocol that ensures refugee protection. However, this has not deterred India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka from offering asylum to a considerable number of refugees. Bhutan, ironically, gives asylum to thousands of Tibetan refugees who flew after Tibetan uprising in 1960s and 1989. The Bhutanese refugee issue is intertwined with the Bhutanese movement for democracy and human rights. In 2008, Bhutan embraced ‘planned democracy’ by adopting a written constitution pushing active monarchy to constitutional role and introducing government elected through universal adult franchise. Since then Bhutan has conducted two successful elections based on multi-party politics. In the same year, the UNHCR along with eight core countries (US, England, Denmark, Canada, Norway, New Zealand, Netherland and Australia) initiated the Third Country Resettlement and started to take refugees from Nepal. As a result, over a hundred thousand Bhutanese refugees have resettled in eight countries so far. As of now, approximately 15,000 Bhutanese refugees are housed in eastern Nepal. However, UNHCR states some 8,000 refugees are likely to remain in camps as they are either not willing to resettle in a third country or are ineligible for the programme. Thus an unanswered question lingers on the fate of remaining refugees. More importantly, it asks, who will deliver justice to those families who were uprooted from their ancient homes? Refugee issue became the front page news only when Europe faced the refugee crisis of her own. In 2015 the picture of a drowned Syrian refugee child on the shores of Europe moved the hearts of many global leaders who displayed their compassion and Europe and Canada particularly have welcomed Syrian refugees with open arm. The terrorist attacks in Paris in November 2015 and in Brussels in 2016 however reversed most of the generosity generated in the early part of 2015. Now, the EU has struck deals with Turkey to stop the refugees from entering Europe. The refugees are human beings and deserved the ‘human rights’. The world must address the fundamental reasons for the refugee crisis in first place. The protracted Bhutanese refugee issues had been being neglected without sympathy and attention until 2007. History of Lhotshampa in Bhutan Bhutanese of ethnic Nepali origin are called Lhotshampa . Though the word literally means southerner, it is now used as a politically correct term of addressNepali speaking population. Some historians state that Newari artisans from Nepal were brought by Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyal to build aChhorten (Stupa) for his father Tenpai Nyima at Cheri in Thimphu valley in the first part of the 17th century,aKing Ram Shah of Gorkha and Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyal were said to be on good terms.Before the Treaty of Sinchula in 1865, from left bank of Teesta (in India) in the west to right bank of Dhansiri river in east, all eighteen duars were under Bhutan. There was no restriction migration of Nepali from Kalimpong, Sikkim and Duars. Druk Desid Jigme Namgyal, father of First King Ugyen Wangchuck even issued Kashog (decree) on 11th month of Bhutanese Bull Year ie, 1877 A.D. to Mr. Dhanbir Burathoki to settle Gorkha (Nepali) in Dzongsharpa, Samchi ( South west Bhutan). However, the large scale of Lhotshmapas settlementoccurred in the south western part of the country in 1904 at the behest of Kazi Ugyen Dorji Gonzim( Chamberlian), after he received the Kasho(decree) from the then Tronsa Penlop Ugyen Wangchuk. The southern settlement was established with both economic and political objectives. It acted as a buffer between Bhutan and the encroachments of British India besides supplying the cash tax to Trongsa Penlop treasury. In 1903, British diplomat Charles Bels writes about the presence of 14,000 Nepalis on the Torsa River bordering India. In 1932, captain C.J Marris observed some 60,000 strong population of Nepalis in Bhutan. The history of Lhotshampa settlement in Bhutan is older than the history of monarchy which came into being in 1907. Genesis of Bhutanese Refugee Crisis The genesis of the Bhutanese refugee phenomenon was not the result of one sudden action or policy by the Government nor for that matter, of any dissident counter action. Its roots cause lies in the illiberal attitude of a defensive evolving Drukpa community and their inability to accept the existence of a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-lingual society. The peace in country had returned after the establishment of Wangchuck dynasty in early twentieth century. Thereafter, country followed deliberate self-imposed isolation policy until 1952. The majority among the Drukpa community practice Mahayana Buddhism while the Lhotshampa communities practiced Hinduism. The clash of traditions, customs and religions had been simmering from the reign of the Third King, Jigme Dorji Wangchuk. In fact, the converting of non-Buddhist Nepali of southern Bhutanese to Buddhism was discussed back in the first session of National Assembly in 1953. Southern Bhutanese for a first time formed a political party "Jay Gorkha" in 1947 under direction of Sahabir Rai demanding institutionalization of democracy in Bhutan. That party was brutally crushed by regime and Mahasur Chhetri, one of the leaders of the movement was assassinated few years later. Even after demand of "Jai Gorkha" the situation within the country remained unchanged. The Bhutan State Congress was formed by a group of Lhotshampa ‘refugees’ led by D.B Gurung, D.B Chettri and G.P Sharma at Patgaon, Goalpara district of Assam (India) in 1952. The congress demanded the abolition of feudal system, civil and political rights and democratization of administration and closer ties with India. The congress claimed that 64 percent of the population of the country was made up of Nepali speaking people and therefore merited a larger share of political and economic rights.