By Bishnu Luitel, United States of America

On October 10, 2024, Bhutanese King Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck embarked on a 10-day visit to Australia, accompanied by Queen Jetsun Pema and several members of the royal family. The visit seemed to symbolize the continuity of strong diplomatic relations between Bhutan and Australia, as the latter had been assisting Bhutan for years. However, for those exiled Bhutanese, victims of King Jigme Singye Wangchuck’s ethnic cleansing policies in the 1990s, the king’s visit sparked a glimmer of hope. The day before the visit, on October 9, 2024, a member of the Australian Parliament raised the issue of Bhutanese refugees expelled by the Bhutanese government, adding weight to a long-standing concern about human rights violations in Bhutan.

Although the Bhutanese government had consistently promoted its slogan of “Gross National Happiness” since 2008, it was viewed by many as a deceptive narrative. In this context, King Khesar’s tears—whether genuine or insincere—triggered questions about the royal family’s attitude toward the expelled Bhutanese population. While King Khesar urged the Bhutanese diaspora in Australia to return to Bhutan and contribute to their homeland, he remained silent on the fate of those forcibly exiled in the 1990s who still languish in refugee camps, deprived of basic human rights.

If King Khesar aspires to be remembered as a genuine reformist and a democratic leader, he must address several critical issues: the unconditional release of political prisoners held since the 1990s, the safe and dignified return of Bhutanese refugees still living in Nepalese camps, the revision of discriminatory census laws, and the reinstatement of the Nepali language in Bhutanese schools, among others.

Bhutan’s democratic system, often described as a “gift from the king,” has never prioritized the protection of its citizens’ fundamental human rights. The government continues to suppress free speech, impose restrictions on language and culture, and maintain control over all media channels. The situation for Nepali-speaking Bhutanese, who make up a significant portion of the population, remains dire. Since 1989, their language has been banned in schools, and publications in Nepali have ceased, effectively erasing their cultural and linguistic identity within Bhutan.

The king’s tear, whether it represented genuine emotion or a calculated performance, leaves many questioning the sincerity of his commitment to democratic reform. To the refugees and those still fighting for their rights, it seemed more like the tear of a crocodile—an insincere display that failed to address the real issues.

On September 1, 1971, Bhutan became a member nation of the United Nations. Although Bhutan signed the UN Declaration on Human Rights, the Bhutanese citizens have not experienced human rights, women’s rights, or fundamental rights to this day. There is no freedom of speech or freedom to write in Bhutan. There are no organizations related to human rights. Everything is under the control and domination of the government. There are some radio, FM, and TV channels, but they are all engrossed in praising the king and the government.

In terms of radio, there is a Bhutan Broadcasting Service (BBS). The government’s official mouthpiece, the “Kuensel” newspaper, is published weekly. However, it is available only in English and Dzongkha. The publication of “Kuensel” in the Nepali language has been completely banned since 2002. In 1989, Bhutan implemented the “One Nation, One People” policy, which displaced the Nepali language taught in southern schools from the curriculum. For a few years, about 300 copies of the Nepali “Kuensel” were still printed. However, in 2002, the government ceased its publication, claiming there were no readers for the Nepali “Kuensel.”

In this way, Bhutan’s oppressive government has silenced the voices of the 45% of Lhotshampas whose mother tongue is Nepali and the approximately 85% of Bhutanese citizens who communicate and conduct business in the Nepali language. Since 1989, children born to Nepali speakers do not even know the Nepali language. They only use it as a spoken language at home. In offices and workplaces, there is a requirement to speak in Dzongkha. The Nepali language no longer exists in written form in Bhutan. It only exists as a spoken language.

If one wants to eliminate the existence of any ethnic group, they must restrict the use of its language and culture. It is well known that Bhutan has imposed a complete ban on the language and attire of Nepalis to erase their identity. A clear example of this is the complete ban on the Nepali language and attire since 1989, and twelve years later, imposing strict restrictions on the publication of Nepali newspapers under the pretense of having no readers. This is essentially an attempt to eradicate the identity of the Nepali ethnic group from the soil of Bhutan.

The identity of any person is defined by their language and culture. As long as a language and culture exist, the identity of that ethnicity cannot be eradicated. Language and culture are the roots of any ethnic group. If the roots are cut, the tree will surely wither. Bhutan has not just cut the roots of Nepalis; it has uprooted them and made sure they will never grow back. This is a grave crime committed by the Bhutanese government against its citizens.

For the people living in the remote areas of Bhutan, the only program broadcasted is the Lhotshampa program from that single radio station. Aside from a few limited entertainment programs, most of the broadcasts consist solely of news praising the government. In the villages of eastern and northern Bhutan, access to newspapers for the general public is almost nonexistent. The weekly Kuensel newspapers are printed in Thimphu and take fifteen to twenty days to reach the villages. Some villagers have never even seen what a newspaper looks like. Bhutanese citizens have been completely deprived of their minimum right to receive information.

Bhutanese ministers often claim that Bhutan’s democracy is a gift from the benevolent king. Since 2008, every year at the United Nations General Assembly, the Bhutanese Prime Minister has reiterated this. On September 24, 2024, at the Future Summit held continuously for a week in New York City, Bhutanese Prime Minister Tshiring Tobgay also mentioned this. However, the main issue is not what kind of democracy exists in Bhutan or whose mercy it has come under, but whether the Bhutanese people have received justice. Additionally, the fact that heads of state from relevant countries did not address some of the complex problems in their countries has severely damaged the dignity of the country and the natural sentiments of its people.

Around 100,000 Bhutanese who were persecuted and driven out by the state in 1990 have been resettled in America. Representatives of the Bhutanese government seem to smile as the world community, unaware, believes the misleading slogans of “national happiness” and “democracy bestowed by the king.” It is possible that in the future, representatives of the Bhutanese government will continue to present the same false narrative to the children of those who were driven out. In this way, Bhutan has spent forty years planting seeds of lies at the United Nations General Assembly. And unless there is deep investigation, it cannot be said that for another thirty to forty years, such falsehoods will not continue.

On the other hand, during the same General Assembly, there was not a single word exchanged about the Bhutanese refugee problem between Nepal’s Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli and Bhutanese Prime Minister Tshiring Tobgay. The silence on the Bhutanese refugee issue, which Nepal has endured for forty years, clearly indicates a secret understanding between these two countries. Today, about 7,000 Bhutanese refugees in eastern Nepal are still hoping to return home. They have given up resettlement in the hope of returning to their country. There is no discussion or debate regarding freeing them from their refugee-like condition. The two leaders merely conducted formalities as if they were unaware.

Why did the Nepali Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli not raise the issue of refugees in front of the American representatives and other representatives of the seven countries that have accepted Bhutanese refugees by resettling them? This raises questions about whether the Bhutanese government successfully executed its plan to expel its citizens under various pretenses during the 1990s, while the Nepali government has confined some refugees to camps, turning some of its citizens into Bhutanese refugees and extorting millions. Nepal must engage with the Bhutanese government to establish judicial clarity and find a permanent solution for the genuine Bhutanese refugees in Nepal’s refugee camps.
Meanwhile, instead of shedding tears over the happy lives of Bhutanese in well-off Australia, it would be far more meaningful for the king to focus on the problems of the citizens who have been made refugees.
Now let’s discuss the Mega City project a little. The name “Mega City” or “Mindfulness City, Gelephu” is quite beautiful. Was the area chosen by the king for Gelephu Gewog and its surrounding flat lands completely empty land or land without settlements? How densely populated were the villages in that project area of about 1,000 square kilometers? Have donor nations and multi-millionaire companies ever asked Bhutan this question before investing in the project? If anyone is interested in this subject, it is essential to understand this matter well.

In 1985, the Bhutanese government introduced a census policy, backdating it to consider 1958 as the base year, and initiated a flawed census in 1988. The primary aim of that census was to ethnically cleanse southern Bhutanese, as evidenced by categorizing members of the same family into seven classes and forcibly separating them. Those classified into classes two and seven were given immediate orders to leave the country. The so-called census team only classified those in the first class as pure Bhutanese. Those classified in classes three, four, five, and six were denied any government benefits and privileges. Not only that, their citizenship certificates, business licenses, and driver’s licenses were confiscated, rendering them undocumented refugees within the country. Those in the first class were forced into labor, servitude, and slavery.

The conspiratorial census fragmented thousands of families. Distressed and persecuted citizens appealed to the king against the government’s discriminatory laws. After no hearings were conducted, the people protested against the government’s discriminatory policies with slogans and marches. The Bhutanese king declared martial law in southern Bhutan, labeling the people’s protests as treason, rebellion, and terrorism. Thousands of southern Bhutanese were imprisoned and tortured. In 1990, dozens of southern Bhutanese citizens who were arrested remain imprisoned to this day, with many dying in jail, and no records of their cases have been maintained.

The king’s plan to construct Mega City on the lands from which southern Bhutanese were cleared using military force in 1990 raises the question of whether there is public consent and consultation regarding the project. In fact, there is no space for the people’s opinion or views in Bhutan. The king’s command is considered supreme. The people are treated like sheep, goats, and livestock, to be used as the government sees fit. Today, those very oppressed southern Bhutanese, who have shed blood and sweat to cultivate rice fields, betel nut gardens, coconut, cardamom, and orange orchards, are witnessing the construction of the king’s “Mindfulness City Gelephu” on top of their dreams’ graves. It remains to be seen how successful this plan will be.

The current country is in an economic crisis. There are no jobs in the country. Opportunities are virtually nonexistent. Young educated people are leaving the country in search of opportunities, jobs, and a bright future. The king met with thousands of Bhutanese who went to Australia in search of those very opportunities, jobs, and bright futures. He urged them to return to the country with education, skills, and knowledge. However, in various royal assemblies held across different states and cities in Australia, he did not allow citizens who were resettled after being expelled in the 90s and those who came through Nepali refugee camps to participate. In some assemblies, he addressed the audience with emotion, shedding tears. However, whether the king’s emotion and tears were genuine or not is something only the audience present at the royal assembly would know.

But such emotion and tears from the king have never been shown toward the citizens who have been waiting to return to their homeland for 35 years. These citizens have given up their happiness, prosperity, and bright futures abroad. One cannot compare the display of emotion and tears to the sacrifices and feelings of citizens. If some citizens of the same country are favored while others are neglected, such injustice can lead to backlash one day. The value of citizens’ lives is worth much more than mere display of tears. A country is not just a mound of soil surrounded by political borders; a country is its people. There can be a country without a king, but there cannot be a country without its citizens.

It must be understood that there is no respect or prestige for a king without citizens or subjects. Therefore, the Mega City project being constructed on the ruins of the dense settlements built by southern Bhutanese, who have shed blood and sweat, as well as the graves of citizens who were killed and turned to ashes by the state after 1990, may potentially become a backlash against the Bhutanese king in the future.

Support the New Americans magazine to continue to serve our community with precise news that affect the new American, immigrant and refugee community. https://paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=8LHFS78NRNJJY&source=url