Issue of exiled Bhutan versus hunt for a universal panacea
The repatriation agenda of the exiled Bhutanese seems to have come to a standstill. It has become like not scrubbed clotted cream at the bottom of a boiling pan. Revivification of the agenda that is at the verge of extinction is a continuous call of the exiled Bhutanese. They are languishing for no other option but an unconditional repatriation. While assimilation in the camped soil is not their desire, third country settlement is a distant and dismal wish.
Problems come and go: it's a phenomenon that entraps a person, society or a nation. Every problem is followed by a solution; be it minute or colossal. The problem, however, has to be identified and the tendons assembled to come up with a concrete solution. As far as the issue of exiled Bhutanese is concerned, it has been taken very casually. Solving a problem is not an easy task. If creating it is assumed to be an easy task, solving the same is, without a grain of doubt, a Herculean task. Struggle to get an answer, at times, dries the plasma in one's body. Looking at this long existing crisis, one's mind tends to recall the words of W. B. Yeats: "Fascination of what is difficult has dried the sap of my veins, and rent spontaneous joy and natural content out of my hearts."
The government of Bhutan, the creator of the problem, has to uproot the grass and clear coppices to get the aroma of a long-lasting solution- a 'durable' solution. It has been noticed that the government of Bhutan has been projecting a false text to the outside world and trying to count on the efforts that it has instantly been trying to find a solution. Solving a difficult problem is not everyone's cup of tea. If wishes were horses beggars would certainly ride. But the reality is otherwise.
It is high time that the government of Bhutan realized the intensity of the problem. A problem becomes more complicated to solve with the passage of time. A cat runs being chased by a mongrel. It stops, turns back and purrs at the chaser when it finds difficulty to escape. And, that is the apex of the situation to decide who would be the winner. Is it honourable on the part of the dog to surrender to the cat who is prepared to fight back for the sake of the feline kind? It would be a worthwhile move on the part of the dog to welcome the cat for a compromising deal in the budding stage so that each party gets its share in sito.
That the government of Bhutan has created the problem and it is trying to go through rigmarole in bringing out a meaningful solution. It is trying to show to the international community that it has taken all efforts in materializing a solution to the problem. It is, in reality, trying to make itself a subject of a world-wide laughing stock. The superficial pretence of the government of Bhutan throws one's memory to the cryptic words of Hannes Alfven where he has said, " If a problem is too difficult to solve, one cannot claim that it is solved by pointing at all efforts made to solve it."
It is true that Bhutan has dilly-dallied in the formulation of an amicable solution, raisons d'etre unknown. However, the tolerant and stoical exiled Bhutanese are positive on their part and awaiting with their fingers crossed and tongues rolled for honourable and dignified repatriation. Thanks to the government of Nepal who has been initiating an unconditional repatriation of these people with honour and dignity. Encouraging third country settlement of the exiled Bhutanese means 'sale' of people of Nepali origin which has a direct repercussion on the government of Nepal.
Government of India has been a silent observer as of now with regard to this scenario. It has been sitting on the fence and watching the drama taking its own course. While the largest democracy in the world can create wonders if it wishes [that is what the exiled Bhutanese expect], it seems to have preferred to remain neutral. The stolid watch of the largest democracy does not only depict the biased base towards the issue but also marks its act as slipshod.
Bhutan is a grain engulfed by two large pods, viz; India and Nepal. Bhutan seems not to know the exact solution. All it has in her mind is to dismantle camps with no repatriation. The eclipse has to be sidelined and the giant, India, can only do it. It is noteworthy to visualize the words of T. S. Elliot which pronounce, "Between the idea and reality and between the motion and the act, falls the shadow," at this juncture. The government of India should, in line with the government of Nepal, step the feet in to the gap and take care of the 'quest' for the shadow. The problem of exiled Bhutanese will, otherwise, remain a problem as it was in the early nineties.
Now that these people rest their hopes entirely on UNHCR and Nepal government. It is understandable to see the fatiguing wrinkles on the face of UNHCR. It has, no doubt, been working with a commitment till date to amicably solve the problem. The exiled Bhutanese are, however, in a limbo to hear a final word from UNHCR and Nepalese authority declaring it as an unconditional repatriation. UNHCR should use such a modus operandi that does not open the Pandora's box. UNHCR, all said and done, deserves accolades for its continued humanitarian support in heading towards a balanced and fair solution. What can the UNHCR do in the light of the Bhutanese context?
Host country assimilation and the third country resettlement are applicable to those who had been the victims of natural disasters such as famine, earthquakes, Tsunamis, spread of epidemics, political events as wars and ethnic strife and violence like the Albanians living in Germany. These two tools of a durable solution to the refugee crisis may suit to those in other parts of the world for they are the victims of such disasters that they do not have places to call home nor land to cultivate on return; thus, no ways and means of survival if they are repatriated.
However, as far as Bhutanese issue is concerned, the two alternatives are not the components of a durable solution and they shall never compromise with the deep – rooted desires of the Lhotshampas. Bhutanese are neither the war victims, victims of natural hazards nor of the ethnic strife and tensions. They are purely victims of the 'deprived rights' and one can never deny for they are universal.
On assimilation
Nepal has its own problems. There are already thousands of landless people, war victims and the internally displaced people. This strategy of solving the problem of exiled Bhutanese would not only mean an additional burden to Nepal but also be a plus point to the Bhutanese despotic regime. The government of Bhutan will be encouraged to evict the remaining Lhotshampas, who are more than two lakhs. If the exiled Bhutanese in questions are to be assimilated for the sake of a durable solution, what would happen if the remaining Lhotshampas in Bhutan enter Nepal? If exiled Bhutanese are to be assimilated in Nepal, could there be anyone who has ever thought of people of Nepali origin living outside Nepal?
On third country settlement
There may not be single country in the world free of crisis. Each country has its own domestic problems existing for long. Third country settlement will result in differences in life-styles, religious beliefs and so on. There, certainly, will be conflicts with regard to the "Right of an Individual". There will be vast difference between the life styles of the exiled Bhutanese and the inhabitants of EU member countries, USA or Canada. The status and life styles will be non-compatible. The exiled Bhutanese are mostly farmers who require land to plough and cultivate. Is there enough space or is it possible terrace the land into paddy fields? It is imperative to take into account the language too. In the name of third country settlement, is it only the life-minded ones who are to be taken care of? If so, what would be the likely fate of the octogenarians and nonagenarians, children and the women who do not have similar ideas and interest back at the camps? Would depriving those qualify the word 'durable'? However, these would be possible if the exiled Bhutanese were the victims of natural hazards, wars or ethnic tensions and strife and if they need to be rescued. This is, but, not applicable in the case of exiled Bhutanese.
Repatriation is the only solution
The exiled Bhutanese have their permanent assets back in Bhutan. They will not have a problem since they are mostly farmers. After they are repatriated there lies no possibility of civil war for the Bhutanese in general have been struggling jointly for a change in the system. Repatriation would further mean a provision of security directly or indirectly to the Bhutanese as a whole and to those who are leading suffocating lives under the tyrant's regime till date. It would also provide a threat to other absolute rulers in the world who had been for years hatching plots to evict their citizens imitating Bhutanese techniques. This would also be an exemplary reward and justice the world is giving to the deprived ones universally. Repatriation would also explain the very fact that the assistance provided by the donor agencies and other parties concerned haven't gone to the drains.
If the solution to this problem is delayed, the frustrated youths in the camps as well as those inside Bhutan will burst the 15-year old silent suffering. No one can possibly imagine and severity of silence breaking. If the youths in camps, in unison with those inside the country, burst out the silence, will they be termed as 'terrorists'? It will be disgraceful for the tyrannical regime to call them so. They would take that as the last resort to own their lost landed properties and inborn rights. Those who ignored the silent sufferings and peaceful demonstrations till today will be answerable to the immeasurable havoc to the supposedly created when the silence breaks. That would not, the, be a problem of Bhutan alone; instead, it would be the greatest threat to South Asia.
However, there lies an apparent problem in resettling the repatriated exiled Bhutanese in their respective homesteads, for the lands are already allocated to the Bhutanese of from other parts of the country. In order to avoid the probable disputes arising in between the new settlers and the repatriated one, the new-settlers should be evacuated to their original places. And, for this, the UN can play a pivotal role in helping the government of Bhutan to create a conducive atmosphere. India's role in assisting repatriation is far-reaching. Just a pro-repatriation nod from Indian side would solve the issue amicably. Thus getting rid of the endurance of living hell in the camps in Nepal and elsewhere. If India can extend help to other countries in the restoration of democracy, wouldn't her silence with regard to the Bhutanese issue mean a threat to Bhutan to be virtually captured to be an additional state of the largest democracy of the world? All the parties concerned should focus their attention on repatriation as a durable solution to the exiled Bhutanese.
(Based in Thimphu, Sharma is former lecturer in one of the colleges in Thimphu, resigned very recently)