A Game Of Power Politics

Landlocked Bhutan is under pressure from guerrilla attacks in the Terai, illegal squatters in the Himalayas, and the turgid propaganda war waged from the eight camps in Nepal for people who say they are Bhutanese nationals of Nepalese origin who have been driven out of their land of adoption. But the real challenge is to Indias stability and security.

The nineteenth century British called this region the Belgium of Asia and the Asian Balkans. The upsurge there reminds me of the American strategy of paying billions of dollars to the Shah of Iran to foment unrest among the Iraqi Kurds so that Saddam Husseins crack battalions were tied down and could not be deployed against Iran. It is for Gujrals government to ascertain whether countries in our neighbourhood that are adversely interested in India and have money for mischief, have not taken a leaf from Henry Kissingers book on coups and conspiracies.

Not for a moment am I blaming Indias 10 million ethnic Nepalese. Whether they came with the land or are the demographic overspill from their mountain kingdom, these steadily loyal people are not the cause of the problem. They could be its innocent symptom. Somewhere along the way, some of them have unwittingly become entangled in a game of power politics whose aim is to keep Indias northern marches permanently on the boil.

Why, I wonder, does the United Nations High Commission for Refugees spend $14 million a year on the camps in Nepal, when the inmates cannot even substantiate their provenance? Why do Japan and several European countries donate to the same cause? I am curious, too, about the identity and real motivation of the western non-governmental organisations that have rallied to such a distant cause that is minor in terms of major crises in Rwanda or Zaire, and remote from the grave social and economic problems that afflict, say, France and Germany. What is most intriguing is that the leaders of a poverty-stricken refugee community, claiming to be displaced and dispossessed, never seem to lack the funds and organisation needed to roam the globe, playing upon the international conscience to mobilise money and sympathy for them.

The homeless everywhere deserve consideration. We in India have seen too many waves of humanity on the move, too much suffering caused by dislocation, to be impervious to the plight of men, women and children with nowhere to go, with nothing to eat.

But, on home ground, the astute Bhutanese divide the 91,000 or more inmates of the eight camps into four categories:

Genuine Bhutanese nationals of Nepalese origin who have emigrated to Nepal, voluntarily or under rebel pressure.

Ethnic Nepalese who lived in Bhutan, some for even two generations, but did not qualify for citizenship under the 1958 Nationality Act or the 1985 Citizenship Act.

Nepalese settlers evicted from north-east India, beginning with the first batch of 5,000 thrown out of Meghalaya, and including about 80,000 from Assam

Nepals own local poor. When the kingdoms first camp was opened in 1991 with only 234 occupants, it was an open invitation to those without food or shelter, especially since there was no screening process in the beginning (a desultory process was started in June 1993), and all comers were assured of hospitality.

The two Himalayan kingdoms have been engaged since then in a tortuously futile minuet. A five-a-side joint committee for verification set up two years ago has still not got down to the nitty-gritty, largely because Nepal has been trying to involve a third party in the verification process and demanding a commitment to observe international norms and standards.

In danger of being overrun by illegal immigrants of another race and religion, and its Buddhist polity and Drukpa identity obliterated, Bhutan will not agree to either. Driglam Namzha, the Bhutanese code of ethics, prescribes dress, language and culture, but as always, economics underlies the cultural rationale.

Nepal has South Asias highest growth rate, much higher probably than even the officially admitted 2.3 per cent. Bhutan boasts the regions lowest population density. In fact, it is the only South Asian country with a negative growth rate. Movement from the congestion of one to the wide open spaces of the other was only to be expected, even without the precedent of sustained encouragement by the British who sought Nepalese settlements to reinforce the border against Tibet and China. In more recent times, swarms of illegal immigrants have hacked down Bhutans forests to plant lucrative cash crops like orange and cardamom.

Exposed when Bhutans first ever census was conducted in 1988, they have been on the rampage ever since. The 720-km open border with India is an invitation to murderous guerrilla raids that have, in turn, exposed Bhutan to some well-intentioned and some obviously partisan global strictures.

But though April saw another abortive bilateral meeting between Bhutan and Nepal, May has been good to the dragon kingdom. Bhutan has just been re-elected for another three-year term to one of UNHCRs six Asian seats, supported by 48 of the 54 countries that comprise the UN Economic and Social Commission. India and Bangladesh attracted 51 votes each, and Sri Lanka 49. For Bhutan under siege, this is a signal achievement. It implies that, at the highest level, it has been exonerated of charges of repression.

But, mysteriously fuelled and financed, the ethnic problem continues. It is a threat certainly to Bhutans sovereign identity, but potentially it is a greater source of concern to India which is faced with the peril of permanent destabilisation along a long and sensitive border.