NRB was a proposal put forth for discussion. In course, we received hundreds of comments and suggestions in online as well as in email. Some sent their verbal messages. The debate is going on. We sought few other parties and organization about their position but we are yet to get their response.
To answer few of the serious questions raised on NRB during the discussions, we have presented R. K. Dorji, chairman of Druk National Congress who was the first to support this idea, to answer our readers. Here it is:
1. Why do you feel the need of a Non Resident Bhutanese network?
R.K.Dorji: It’s not a question of whether I feel the need or not. It is the people who will have to decide whether they feel the need or not. Our people, both from within Bhutan as well as from the Bhutanese refugee community, are going to foreign countries in large numbers and many more could be them joining in the future. When such a large number of citizens begin to reside in foreign countries, the Diaspora coming together to establish an association to further their common interests is but a natural step. So when the idea came forth, we saw all logic in supporting the establishment of such an association.
2. What contribution should it make for strengthening democracy and national unity?
R.K Dorji: The NRB Association is conceived as a welfare organization for non-resident Bhutanese, and not as a political organization. It objectives should be to work for the common good of its members according to their wishes. But I think taking up rights issues is acceptable, because “rights” encompasses a wider field, from human rights to civil liberties and citizens’ privileges and facilities.
3. What are your bases of hopes that northern and eastern Bhutanese living abroad would embrace to this global network?
R.K Dorji: The NRB Association is for all the citizens of Bhutan residing abroad, and not a sectarian organization for northern, eastern or southern Bhutanese. Membership of NRB Association should be open to every Bhutanese residing abroad who wishes to and sees the need and the benefit to be a part of the organization. Membership should be, as with all welfare organizations, by choice and not mandatory.
4. How can we Bhutanese living abroad be able to stay outside NRN and NRI networks?
R.K Dorji: If you are neither a Nepali citizen nor an Indian citizen, I don’t see how you can qualify for the membership of the NRN or NRI. Even as far as the NRB Association is concerned, it’s an individual’s choice to want to be associated or not. One must find benefit in becoming a part of the Association to want to be a member, if one doesn’t, then I don’t see why one should.
5. One of the primary functions of the NRB would be to end bitter relations that exist between Bhutanese inside and in exile. What strategies, do you think, we need to rebuild this relation?
R.K Dorji: It is too premature to delve into this. It is up to the members to decide its mandate and strategies. But if and once people from both sides of the divide start becoming members after they find that it benefits them to do so, and thus come together for their common welfare, the likelihood of relations improving is but logical.
6. To what extent you party offers support for this network? How do you assure that it won’t be politicized?
R.K Dorji: My party has supported this idea of the formation of the NRB Association. It is for the members of the proposed NRB Association to strengthen it according to its mandate.
R. K Dorjee is a real democrats who should be honored as Father of Democratic Movement in Bhutan. I agree and supports his view points on Non Residential Bhutanese Association.
Deepa Mishra
USA
Hari Acharya is very right that we should take some time to come up with the real word what we want to call.
Hari, you can visit my comments earlier which have echoed on what we have said.
Dev and Deepa Mishra, you seems to be more of laso Dasho to Rongthong Kinley Dorji than putting the perspective here. Keep out your emotion and put the context on what we should called this organisation. Please read hari’s comment and please suggest as to how we want to move ahead. Who does what will come latter. Right now, please think is it the time of any such institute? Should we form it now by few willing people or wait for few more years fro all to resettle in TCS and get correct connotation of the institute. This is because the thinking of people from the camp and after resettled will drastically change and they may prefer totally different institute or fully agree to what you are saying. At this time wait and research is better option
More will come from me later.
Parsu
Dear All,
I am writing my comments after reading what everyone has commented earlier, including my own, in the name of Non Residence Bhutanese (NRB), I put my suggestions as follows:
1 WE SHOULD DISCUSS THE NAME OF THIS INSTITUTE BEFORE WE MOVE FURTHER AND GET EVERYONE’S APPROVAL.
Should we call it NRB?
Should it be called Bhutanese Living Abroad (BLA)?
Should it be Bhutanese Diaspora Abroad (BDA)?
Should it be Bhutanese in Exile (BIE)?
Please let us come up with the name first and agree in it, it could be totally different from the above suggestion. Let every body put names first and agree.
Action: By all Bhutanese in exile and inside Bhutan.
Time: Final outcome by June 2010.
Responsible to coordinate:
Please form the committee of lead this. Anyone can be lead who does not represent any political or associated groups. Could be someone like RP Subba dai who has been writing very researched article about Bhutan? I think is a neutral person to coordinate through emails if he is willing.
How: Form the new goggle email group with the help of our journalist bhais and bainees for BNS and Apfanews. This is very important since there are many unknown people in present Bhutanese refugee google group and we cannot depend on confidentiality in this forum since this is read by all. There may be times, some things discussed first before bringing in the forum.
2 DISCUSS THE MAIN VISION, MISSION AND OBJECTIVE OF THE INSTITUTE BASED ON THE NAME
How: Share the ideas in the same email group and discuss each point dot by dot.
Time: Final outcome by 2011 June.
Who can lead the discussion?
The same person as in 1 or can form the small committee of members from all the places voluntarily through emails.
3 FINAL CONSTITUTION DRAFT AND OTHER DETAILS
How: By discussion with all
Time: End June 2112.
4 HOW TO REPRESENT ALL BHUTANESE AROUND THE WORLD?
One:
By choosing the representative from each country where people are settling.
Two:
By electing representative from each country from their community organisations who are serving as executives
Three:
By choosing anyone who may or may not be in the community organisation
Four:
Should be from the neutral background or declare apolitical or not affiliated to any groups for the interest of the organisation who may be in conflict with other groups
Five:
Anyone from inside Bhutan should also be allowed to be executive if the RGOB is becoming partner like other Non residence institutes.
5 SHOULD THIS INSTITUTE BE INDEPENDENT OF RGOB OR INCLUSIVE OF RGOB?
Discuss with the forum above whether RGOB is inclusive. If yes, what is the approach?
Should we demand our property back through this forum?
Should we fight human rights or democracy through this forum? Or we only seek return to Bhutan as non political in the goodwill as tourist or visitors on the invitation of the relatives and friends?
Should the people of Bhutanese origin with Bhutanese passport who can come and go to Bhutan become members? If yes, what is the difference between resettled refugees who are not allowed to go to Bhutan?
6 WHAT WE WANT FROM THIS FORUM?
One: Relation with Bhutan and its people! If so, how?
Two: Is it a lobbying forum for more freedom inside Bhutan? Or developing people to people relation inside Bhutan? Or helping Bhutan in Business and investments or projects to assist the common people in Bhutan?
7 HOW WE COORDINATE GLOBALLY?
Do we form this institute (eg NRB or BIE) in each country first and make a global representation?
Or we make one globally body and develop a branch in each country?
Or the Global executives advise each country to form and representatives in each countries?
Or we decide the number of executives in the global body and conduct vote in each country?
Should the general mass decide on the president or chairman or executive members elect the presidents and portfolio from the elected body?
8 IS IT THE RIGHT TIME OR WE WAIT FOR FEW MORE YEARS?
Many people who are the actual stakeholders and seniors and less literate Bhutanese have no idea about this discussion going on. Are we being fair to them? And many youth who have no internet access or have no knowledge are in complete dark. Many are settling and many more are in the process of settling and their priority is not this now. They will have first interest to resettle first, then think of such institute and decide to take part or not later on.
If we are moving and pushing the idea with the few willing ones, probably opportunist, are we becoming fair to all or are we giving them equal opportunities to be the fair stakeholders?
How we take the view of general mass in this particular regard? How we communicate people inside Bhutan? Are they free to discuss with us now? And will they in the present context?
Should we start talking to RGOB authorities both on personal and official basis? If so, should we stop advocating democracy and human rights inside Bhutan and say RGOB is our govt and we forgive the past action and offer the olive branch! or fight until the end to get our rights back?
Please let us put these points first before our personal interest and saying one is better than other to lead.
Hopefully, we may be ready to come up with something concrete by end 2113. I believe we are not in hurry to form something now and fail. We may explore the ideas now and debate until 2113 and see from there.
There will be two choices whether we ignore the mass and lead this organisation.
One that willing people will form one institute and advocate as per their views, or
other trying to include everyone with consensus until 2113.
The choice is ours
All the best
Parsu
Melbourne
Australia
Mr. parsu – I really feel disappoint with your thought and comments over Rangthong . His answers clearly showns NRB doesn’t take any political paths nor democratic move . We really appreciate his thought and i appreciate whoever brought the issue . Time has come for us to unite and move with one issue . I donot see any political on NRB . Your question are all political and i think you are taking NRB – political rather then a commom plate form .
Parsu daju is correct, we need to have enough discussion before we decide the kind of institute we are aspiring for.Below is my openion on the type institute and its possible ” nomenclature” to encompase Bhutanse living around the world.
MY OPINION:
We became refugees due to “unknown circumstances”. Our people raised issues of multi-party Democracy as early as late 80s. (I assume earlier demand of democracy was not that serious). In the course of almost 18 years struggle both by people in exile and inside Bhutan, we are now witnessing democratic processes in Bhutan. It is all but natural that it is only the “time” that will ultimately give us justice.
Technically the term “Non Resident Bhutanese” may not sound logical at this time, but I am comfortable to embrace this term because I suppose that we are in the right direction. The reasons:
1.We have nothing to lose by embracing the term “Non-Resident Bhutanese”; if we aim for Moon will land at least in the Space
2.We have no bad relation with people inside Bhutan. In the course of democratic process with democratic minded people in power, it will not be that big surprise when they allow us to return Bhutan who ever are willing (I am optimistic).
3.The people in exile have two choices: (a) to forget Bhutan and to live happily in the country of resettlement (b) To wait for dignified return; searching conduit (may be UN) in the mean time to convince RGOB that we are not bad guys; and for that NRB would be the best bargaining forum.
4.Every country has its own unique problems and thus non-residential status; so how about NRB issues not looked technically at par with NRI or NRN or any other countries? I think it takes time and ultimately we will achieve it.
5.Personally, I believe, the time has changed, RGOB of 1990s and our leaders have changed. The Bhutan is for the younger generation and the young monarch. So it is we the younger generation to opt flexibility—not hardliner stand like that of RGOB or our leaders of the past—vis-à-vis to our issues. So I don’t feel discomfort to give even “clean chit” if current RGOB allows me to return Bhutan with all dignity and honor.
PS: Friends, these are just my opinion, so please do not take it personal.
Parangkush Subedi
Graduate Student, Emory University
There is no harm if debates are done in healthy manner. All we are looking/expecting for is collection of openions and that way we build up roads for future use. I know some are very clear about NRB,some don’t want to listen to and many have mixed feelings.
I don’t see any one bad by bringing this topic for discussion. But I also feel why those same people with red tag on them have to raise this issue and come up for discussion. Are they at the verge to extinct so they can not live without some issue in their hands.We may miss these animals very soon around us.
I like to put some reasons why I can not be a part of NRB.Plese correct this chap if really heading in wrong direction.
(1) US. Govt. put xxx on my nationality which means stateless.
(2) I don’t have pass port issued by the Govt. of Bhutan.so I can’t do back and fore.
(3)NRB is a status approved by the RGOB we can’t just play around.
(4)I don’t want to be a member of NRB which is not approved by the GOvt. of my country.
(5)I am happy with what iam today because RGOB didn’t kill too many people when southern Bhutanese were instigated opposing the policies of Govt.Think of a muslim nation,we would not have lives today if our King JSW practice religion other than Buddhisum.
(6)I don’t believe or trust red taged folks.They are good for non reliable Bhutanese ( sitll it is NRB)
(7)We already have a national plateform ABA (Association of Bhutanese in America)
(8)I don’t like to be political and politicized without knowing politics.
Regards
utam
Parsu doesn’t know anything about Bhutanese refugee issue. He did not live in the camp. He did not suffer as many did in the camp. He is an opportunist. He went to Australia on government scholarship and may be found it better in Austrilia, and sought asylum. He is just learning about politics and want politicized every issue like our leaders did in the past. He want to shit in the plate he ate.
I think no one is as dubious as he might think. Simply compare his own comment with that of Rongthong’s and see how immature he is. People are talking about broader platform to encompass people from within and refugee and Parsu is proposing a sectarian platform. Not good at all.
Why Kancha again attack Parsu on his personal affair? He already cleared about his status. Why we are not concentrating on our discussion rather then personal issue? It is just wastage of our time
The refugee issue was in Nepal. Though I may not have suffered but all my family members did including we have sacrifised the family member when you were dreaming about the movement.
Now, what it has got to do with living in refugee camp and not living there to help settle in west. Your personal attack notion of you have to be a refugee to volunteer to help Bhutanese abroad is a seed to new racial discrimination.
I request you to think from the point of view Bhutanese settling in the west and how they can be helped, and not making political jargon and support one or other party. Before you comment, read ll the comments in the forum and put up your points to contribute on NRB or anything.
As long as there are persons like you to attack people on jealousy, the Bhutanese diaspora will find hard to consolidate as one community. Why cannot your eyes see others who are from the camp commented more harshly on Rongthong and Dr. Dhakal.
You also see like RGOB that if northern does any crime it is ok but if ltshompa did a small thing , it is a big issue and penalise them. I see no different in you treating others (not from the camp) like RGOB did to nepalese who are now in.
I conclude that your level of thinking is no different from RGOB that you are segregating Bhutanese Nepalese as living in the camp and not living in the camp.
When will you ever change if at all you will?
parsu
One thing iam not cleared about the discussion, Still do we need to involved political parties in this dicussion. In my openion as a political party involvement shall spoil the soup. Individual input and particepant shall enrich the whole.
Absolutely this in not a time for throwing any judgement on any issue relating anyone, but any contribution is highly appreciated in terms of volunteerism and helping to form a strong community in the west. One thing we must be cleared by now that we can not be consolidated.
We have fallen further again in the country we settled, we divided into Bhutanese and Nepali, this controversial topic holds equal numbers of population on both sides and probably those who had high interest in third country settlement of IOM and UNHCR will never go back to Bhutan and this is an odd topic for them. Younger generation who shows interest in the movement have very less knowledge about Bhutanese movement. Check this video recently posted in the google groups..what he says about “driglam Namzha”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJGLIV8ErL4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eu2U-Sq2lFw
so don’t say Mr. Deo Sharma is wrong…..In the same way Mr.Parsu has missed a sweet part of refugee camps that is what people bring up now and then again and and again.But I feel fortunate to have Mr. Parsu in our circle today. Congratulation on all good things you have done in Australia. You have lots of potential you can move on.
Thanks, utam