नागरिक संवाद : सुरु कहिले?

• 19 Jun 2015
• शुक्रबार ४ असार, २०७२
• सुबोधराज प्याकुरेल
• 0 Comments

 0  3 Google +0  0  1

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5

(0 votes)

आजको युग सञ्चारको युग हो। सञ्चारले सूचना दिन्छ। सूचना नै पहुँचको आधार हो। यसकारण सञ्चारको युग भन्नुको खास मतलब हो– सार्वजनिक पहुँचको युग। अबको युगमा उर्दी फरमान जारी गरेर चल्दैन। यो बहुलवादको युग हो। औपचारिक संस्थाहरूले मेरो फलानो क्षेत्रमा मैले प्रक्रिया पुर्याीएर गरे पुग्छ भन्ने जमाना गयो। ज्ञानका विविध फाँटका अनेक विद्वान् हुन्छन्। पहिले खास वास्ता नगरिने कैयन् विषय अब मध्यनजर नगरीनहुने भएका छन्। वातावरण, जलवायु परिवर्तन, अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय कानुनी अधिकार, जातीय, लैङि्गक, भाषिक, सांस्कृतिक अधिकारमात्र होइन, अब विस्तारै संसार इन्टरनेटको अधिकार क्षेत्र प्रवेश गर्दैछ। कुनै पनि फाँटमा काम गर्नेले मैले सबै बुझेको छु नभन्ठाने हुन्छ। किनकि एउटामात्र विषयको आधारमा अबको आधुनिक जीवन चल्नेवाला छैन। त्यसैले राजनीति पनि एउटा खास दर्शनको भरमा चल्नेवाला छैन।

पुराना पोथाहरूको समयानुकूल आधुनिकीकरण गरिएको छैन भने त्यसले काम दिनेवाला छैन। बिग्रिएको, कमजोर कडीमा झट्टै ध्यान जाने सञ्चारको विशेषता हुन्छ। भाषिक वा आकर्षित हुने अनेक तत्वका बारेमा ख्याल नपुगेको, मन्थन र सहकार्य नगरिएको कुनै पनि प्रस्तावना अधुरो अपुरो बनेर तिरष्कृत हुने खतरा आजको युगमा प्रशस्त छ। सञ्चार आमनागरिकको हातहातमा पुगिसकेको छ। हरेक नागरिक सञ्चारकर्मी हुन्। विद्युतीय सञ्चार तीव्र वेगमा छ। सञ्चारकर्मीहरू पनि त्यही दबाबमा छन्। जनता पहिले आफूलाई, आफ्नो दैनिकीलाई हेर्छन् र त्यसका आधारमा सही गलत खुट्याउँछन्। त्यसैले यथेष्ठ नागरिक संवाद आजको सार्वजनिक जीवनको मूल तन्तु बनिसकेको छ। फेसबुक, टि्वटरजस्ता सञ्जालमा मन लागेको कुरा निमेषभरमा सञ्चार गरिन्छ। थोरै शब्दमा धेरै संवाद आजको युगको सञ्चारको अर्को विशेषता हो।
नेपालमा वैशाखमा भूकम्प गयो। सेना र प्रहरी १० मिनेटमा परिचालित भए। भोलिपल्टदेखि नागरिकहरू आफ्नो ठाउँ छाडेर दूर–दराजका ठाउँमा राहत बाँड्न दौडिए। अहिले देखियो ८०–८५ प्रतिशत राहत र झन्डै शतप्रतिशत उद्धारको काम राज्यपक्षबाट भयो तर जनताले सरकार देखेनन्। ‘पख्लास् नेता आउलास् यता' भनेर धम्क्याउनेहरूको भिडियो भाइरल भए। जनताले सरकार के गर्दैछ भन्ने चालै पाएनन्। न मन्त्रीले आफैँ भने, न सञ्चारमाध्यमलाई बताए। हामी देख्छौँ– संसारका नेताहरू एकाबिहानै आफ्नो दैनिकी बताउँछन्, आमनागरिकसँग वार्तालाप गरेजस्तो विद्युतीय सञ्चार गर्छन्। उनीहरूका ब्लग, टि्वटर, फेसबुकमा हजारौँ, लाखौँ झुम्मिन्छन्। आमजनताको राय बु‰न यस्ता साधनको भरपुर उपयोग भएको देखिन्छ। भारतका प्रधान मन्त्रीको वाचाल तरिका अहिले विश्वमै चर्चित छ। उनी जहाँ जान्छन्, त्यहाँको भाषामा समेत उनको टि्वट अनुवाद भएर आउँछ।
लोकतान्त्रिक चरित्र परिपक्व भएका मुलुकमा सरकारी निर्णय गर्नुअघि नागरिक संवादका लागि प्रोत्साहन गरिन्छ। संसद्को विचाराधीन विषयमा संसदीय समितिहरूले र अन्य सरकारी निकायले विश्वविद्यालयलगायत अन्य विज्ञ समुदायमा छलफलका लागि पठाउने चलन छ। संसदमा मन्त्रीहरूले मात्र होइन, सांसदहरूले पनि फलानो विषयमा नागरिकको सरोकार यथेष्ठरूपमा किन आएन भनेर प्रश्न उठाउने गर्छन्। शीर्षस्थ मानिसले आफैँ सञ्चार गरेको पनि पाइन्छ। नेपालमा नरेन्द्र मोदीको निजी टि्वट पढ्नेहरू प्रशस्त छन्। सञ्चार जगत्ले यस्ता सञ्चारलाई उल्लेख गर्ने चलन नेपालमा पनि थालिएको छ। हामीकहाँ डा. बाबुराम भट्टराई र यदाकदा शङ्कर पोखरेलको टि्वट सञ्चार जगतले उल्लेख गरेको पाइन्छ। हालसालै डा. नारायण खड्काले आफ्नो फेसबुक बन्द गरेको सूचना फेसबुकमार्फत जानकारी पठाउनुभयो। हुन त उहाँ अनावश्यक लखेटाइबाट वाक्क दिक्क भएर त्यस्तो निर्णयमा पुग्नुभएको हो भन्ने कुरा उहाँले आफैँ दर्शाउनुभएको छ तर खासमा यथेष्ठ नागरिक संवाद गर्न नसक्दा अथवा अपुरो संवादका कारण यस्तो परिस्थिति उत्पन्न भएको हो।
हामीकहाँ सञ्चारका आचारसंहिता स्पष्ट छैनन्। सञ्चार भन्नाले सार्वजनिक प्रयोजनका लागि गरिएको निजी सञ्चारसमेत पर्छ भन्ने संहितालाई सार्वजनिकरूपमा अभिव्यक्त गर्दा ख्याल गरेको पाइन्न। लोकतन्त्र भनेको अभिव्यक्तिको स्वतन्त्रता त हो तर गाली बेइज्जतीको स्वतन्त्रता होइन। मानव अधिकार भनेको नैसर्गिक सम्मान त हो तर राष्ट्रिय स्वाभिमान र अखण्डताको विरोध गर्ने अधिकार होइन। एउटाको सम्मान गर्न अर्काको अपमान गर्ने छुट कुनै पनि दर्शन र कानुनले दिँदैन।
हाम्रो नागरिक संवादमा खट्केको एउटा गम्भीर प्राविधिक पक्ष पनि छ। हाम्रो भाषाको कम्प्युटर इन्जिनियरिङ अथवा कम्प्युटर अनुकूलन भएको छैन। यदि इन्जिनियरिङ गरिएको हुन्थ्यो भने भाषिक शुद्धता त हुन्थ्यो नै, त्यसबाहेक तथ्याङ्क प्रशोधनलगायतका विषय पनि आफ्नै भाषामा अर्थात्् लिपिमा गर्न सकिन्थ्यो। कम्प्युटर इन्जिनियरिङ गरिएका भाषामा हाम्रो भाषाको कुरा कम्प्युटरले अनुवाद पनि गरिदिने थियो। एक समान व्याकरण र लिपि भएका अनेक भाषाको उही नियमले एकसाथ विकास गर्न सकिने थियो। अहिले प्रस्तावित नागरिक परिचयपत्रको काम अङ्ग्रेजीमा गर्नुपर्ने थिएन। कतिपय विषयमा सरल ढङ्गले सञ्चार गर्ने मामिलामा विज्ञहरूले यो कठिनाइ भोगिरहेका छन्। अङ्गेजीमा ल्याङ्ग्वेज डोमिन इन आइसिटी भनिने यो काम नगरी विद्युतीय सरकार इ गभर्नेन्स सम्भव छैन।
मनोवैज्ञानिकहरूलाई थाहा छ, चाहेको विषयमा आफ्नो भाषामा अभिव्यक्त गर्न नपाउँदा मानिसमा आहारिस र रिस बढ्छ। यदि भाषिक इन्जिनियरिङ गरियो भने हामीले बोलेको कुरा स्वतः अक्षरमा छापिन्छ। अङ्कलाई कम्प्युटरले अक्षरमा अनुवाद गर्न सक्छ। सरल ढङ्गले देवनागरी लिपिमा स्मार्ट कम्प्युटर, ट्याब्लेटहरूमा टाइप गर्न नमिलेकाले पनि होला हाम्रो देशका ठूलादेखि सामान्यजनले समेत नागरिक संवादबाट टाढा रहनुपरेको। धेरैले अङ्ग्रेजी अक्षर भनिने रोमनमा अथवा युनिकोडमा लेखेको पाइन्छ। युनिकोड त एकआपसमा जसोतसो संवादका लागिमात्र हो। तर नागरिक परिचयपत्र तयार गरिरहेको हाम्रो सरकारले हाम्रो भाषाको कम्प्युटर अनुकूलनतर्फ सोचेको पाइएको छैन। सूचनाको अधिकारको व्यवस्था गरिसकेको नेपालले सूचनामा पहुँच पुर्या्उनका लागि भएका सरकारी वेबसाइटहरूलाई अन्तरक्रियात्मक बनाउने र हरसम्भव जानकारीलाई अद्यावधिक गरिहाल्ने संस्कार बसाल्नु जरुरी छ। अति गोप्यबाहेकका सबै अभिलेख सार्वजनिक सर्भरमा राखिदिने हो भने नागरिकले आवश्यक जानकारी त्यहीँबाट लिनेछन्। सवाल जवाफ गर्नुपर्ने बाहेकका सूचनाका लागि सूचना अधिकृतकहाँ धाउनुपर्ने छैन। सङ्कटका बेलामा सूचनाले कस्तो भूमिका निर्वाह गर्दोरहेछ भन्ने कुरा यसपटकको भूकम्पमा सरकार चलाउने र पत्रकारिता गर्नेहरूले राम्रोसँग अनुभव गरेका छन्।
नागरिकबीच आपसी संवादको परिमाण बढ्यो भने उनीहरू एकापसमा नजिक हुन्छन्। असल कुरा आममानिससम्म पुग्छ। सरकारले सजिलै तत्वबोध गर्न पाउँछ। विचार निर्माताहरूका लागि ज्ञान प्रशोधन गर्ने र निष्कर्षमा पुग्ने काममा यसले सहजीकरण गरिदिन्छ। सरकारले भरपर्दो इन्टरनेट सुविधा देशका कुनाकाप्चासम्म पुर्या उने र नेपालीबाट थालेर क्रमशः सबै राष्ट्रिय भाषाहरूको कम्प्युटर अनुकूलन गर्ने काममा थप ढिलाइ गर्योम भने हामी हाम्रो भाषिक महत्वबाट विल्कुल पछाडि पर्नेछौँ। सबैजसो आधुनिक अभिलेख र प्रणाली अङ्ग्रेजीमा राखिसकेपछि त्यसको चलनमा अभ्यस्त भइसकेको समाजलाई पूर्णतः राष्ट्रिय भाषामा फर्काउन अप्ठ्यारो हुनेछ। विदेशी भाषाको भर पर्नु भनेको अन्ततः नागरिक संवाद र पहुँचबाट टाढा पुग्नु हो। आशा गरौँ, यति गम्भीर विषयमा निर्णयकर्ताहरूको ध्यान पुग्नेछ।

- See more at: http://www.nagariknews.com/opinion/story/40056.html#sthash.O5XcJ5Q1.dpuf

Nepal perspective: Bhutan through a Looking Glass

Monday, April 20, 2015 12:39 PM The Telegraph Nepal.

HEADLINEVIEWSNATIONALEDITORIALSSECOND IMPRESSIONFIVE QUESTIONSCOMMENTARYINTERNATIONALANALYSISGALLERY

1

Madhukar SJB Rana,

Professor South Asian Management Institute/ Former Finance Minister

Background:

 I have known Bhutanese people from my school days in Darjeeling District from 1949-58; this extended to, in my adult days, as follows: friendship with Lendup Dorji, 1971-78, while exiled in Kathmandu; travels, between 1973-76, to Kolkata and Bangladesh engaged in trade and transit matters while serving with National Trading Ltd.; in CEDA/TU days, engagement with think tanks from Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka to promote South Asian regional cooperation; working with the UNCTAD in Laos and Afghanistan,1979-82; frequent interaction on the UN ESCAP Committee on Land Locked Counties; participation as adviser and/or delegate to various SAARC Summits,1985-2003; close interaction with Bhutanese refugee leaders in Kathmandu during the 1990s; reading newspaper article on Bhutan, logging on to Google for information and, not least, watching Druk TV not infrequently.  

 Purpose:

The aim of this article is to show how successfully a small power, the Kingdom of Bhutan, is able to survive and, yet, project its modern international image underscored, I hypothesize, by lessons drawn from Singapore and Nepal. 

Introduction:

In the 17th century battles between Bhutanese and Tibetans were a commonplace. The first Tibet war was fought in 1627 supported by Mongols. Interestingly, Portuguese Jesuits entered Bhutan and offered firearms and a telescope with additional offers of their services. It was declined. 

In 1616,Shabdrung Rimpoche, Ngawang Namgyal, a Tibetan lama warrior of Drukpa Kagyud Sect, founded the state of Bhutan as a single nation from the many warring fiefdoms. Based on Buddhism, he endowed Bhutan with a unified Drukpa Buddhist codified laws with which the local lords could be central controlled. 

Shabdrung Rimpoche died in 1651 but, for fear that new state of Bhutan would disintegrate, it was kept a state secret for the  fifty four years! Bhutanese were told that he went on a religious retreat and so his son was called upon to rule. 

 Apart from warring with Tibet supported by Mongols, Bhutan invaded Sikkim in 1680. Further, Bhutan gains the status of an overlord country over Cooch Bihar, who had sought its help to repel Mughal encroachment in 1730. These facts prove that Bhutan was a significant Himalayan regional power with expansionist ambitions.  It fought two major defensive wars with Tibet (1710 and 1730) and two with British East India Company (1774 and 1884-86), and there was a short conflict with Nepal in present day Jhapa District.

This overlordship was lost when, in a dispute over succession to the throne of Cooch Bihar, the Bhutan nominee was rejected with the rival for the succession being supported by British troops. 

Thereafter, in 1772, a British expeditionary force expels Bhutanese garrisons out of Cooch Bihar and, as a result, Cooch Bihar becomes a British East India Company dependency. Interestingly, now Bhutan seeks help from Tibet for military support, which went unattended. 

In 1774  Bhutan signs a Peace Treaty with the British East India Company: Bhutan was forced to return to its pre-1730 borders, and permit the British to harvest its timber resources. 

In the 19th century, relations with the British were not cordial. Border tensions were growing. Between 1841-42 the British East India Company annexed Bhutan-controlled Asaam Duars and, further, Britain regains control of Bengal Duars, which the British had turned over to Bhutan in 1784. The two Duars were formally ceded to Britain in 1865 under the Treaty of Sinchula when Bhutan lost the Duars War.

A civil war ensues, from 1870-1875, when two rival claimants to power— one pro Tibet, Governor of Paro, and the other the pro British Governor of Tongsa. The pro British Governor of Trongsa, Ugen Wangchuk, consolidates power by crushing his rivals and seeks closer relations with British India thenceforth. 

Bhutan is, until 1907, a theocratic state under the Shabdrung which ended when Ugen Wangchuk (1907-26) is elected as King of Bhutan to commence the system of absolute monarchy

In 1910, the Treaty of Punakha amends the Treaty of Sinchula wherein British India Empire pledges not to interfere in the internal affairs of Bhutan. However, it was to be the custodian of Bhutan’s foreign policy. The Bhutan-India Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1949 inherits the letter and spirit of the 1910 Treaty of Punakha. 

In 1926 his son, Jigme Wangchuk (1926-52), is made a hereditary ruler and only  later crowned as king following a coronation ceremony in 1927. In 1931 the 7th Shabdrung dies and, thereafter, no more recognition to that institution is rendered by the King of Bhutan. In 1965 there was an unsuccessful attempt to assassinate King Jigme Dorji Wangchuk.

 In 1947 while attending the Maharaja’s Durbar in Delhi, by virtue of the proactive policy of PM Jigme Palden Dorji, Bhutan obtains princely state status from Britain.

Government of India, in 1949, agreed to recognize Bhutan as a sovereign independent state provided it accepted India’s guidance over its foreign policy. Its defense was controlled by India. The British had not recognized it as such. It was only in 1971 that Bhutan was admitted into the UN.

Forward:

Given the geo political reality following India’s independence Bhutan chooses a policy of splendid isolation from India. However, pursuant to Mao Tse Tung’s successful people’s revolution and subsequently the Five Finger pronouncement in 1949— claiming Arunachal, Bhutan, Lhadak, Nepal and Sikkim as part of China— India takes the lead to break Bhutan’s splendid isolation from it with direct political interference in its internal affairs. 

With Tibet fully occupied by the Chinese in 1950, Nehru invited King Jigme Dorji Wangchuk (ruled from 1952-72; father of King Jigme Singay Wangchuk, who ruled from 1972 until his abdication in 20  in favor of his son the  present King Jigme Keshar Namgyel Wangchuk,) to Delhi and demanded that Bhutan be opened up for development and also it establish an army training camp. He managed to do this by using the Nepalese settlers.

Nehru created, in 1952, the Bhutan State Congress (BSC) party led by D B Gurung, a family with whom the British had a close association through their relatives living in Darjeeling. This party was also supplied with Nepalese living in the borders of Assam, Bengal and Nepal. It is believed that G.P. Koirala was serving as Nehru’s agent.

The BSC party sought to grant Nepalese in Bhutan citizenship rights. It managed, funded by India, a satyagraha in1952  that actually started in Patgaon, Assam using Nepalese migrants from Assam, Bengal and Nepal.

However, the satyagrah movement was brutally crushed, with around 27 people--none  from within Bhutan itself —being killed under the leadership of Commissioner of South Bhutan, the main actor Julendra Bahadur Pradhan: father of Om Pradhan, former minister in the Royal regime of King Jigme Singye Wangchuk, father of the  present King. 

 In 1958, 100% Nepalese were granted full citizenship and accorded the title of  Lhotsampas. Again, in the same year King Jigme Dorji was required to establish a 103 member National Assembly of which 16 or 15% of seats were allotted to were Lotsamapa population. Thus Nehru had developed a strong constituency in Bhutan amidst the Nepalese. Together with it, Bhutan also agreed to start economic development planning upon the visit of Nehru to Bhutan in 1958. To meet the protocol arrangements, Jigme Palden, elder brother in law of the King, was made Prime Minister of Bhutan.

1961-66 the First Five Year Plan was formulated with pressure from India to do so. Its main purpose was to build strategic roads within Bhutan. Thus all roads connecting China border were completed during the first five year plan, both planning execution done by DANTAK, border road organization of the Indian Army. These were the Thimpu-Phuntsoling Highway (180 km); Tongsa-Gylmphu Highway (150 km); Tashigaon-Samdrup Zongkhar Highway (200 km).

With PM Palden Dorji as in-charge of the developments, his influence increased within the country and outside. It is believed that he had established informal contact with King Mahendra  and had used platform of Colombo Plan for networking with English speaking world, notably the Great Britain, Australia and USA. Through Nepal he had also established contact with China, which was considered before 1958 as an option for alignment as partner for socio-economic development cooperation.

He even embarked upon 'Hollywood diplomacy' when Palden's brother, Lendup Dorji, invited Shirley MacLaine as guest in 1963. She wrote the popular book "Don’t Fall Off the Mountain”, which further helped to put Bhutan on the global social map. (Recall that Chogyal of Sikkim has been married to the New York socialite Hope Cook in 1963 who accelerated suspicions when she elevated herself from Princess to Queen). India’s concerned were heightened when PM Jigme invited Senators from US and MPs from UK to collectively visit Bhutan as state guests. The increasing role of the Dorji family in Bhutan’s affairs became India’s security concern.

It is believed that Indian security agencies advised Nehru to convince the King to get rid of his brother in law who was working on fomenting protest against the King, and the PM had built his constituency in South Bhutan by using the lavish development support from India, which he had been using from his base in Kalimpong.  PM Palden Dorji was assassinated in 1964 by royal body guard who upon investigation revealed his link with Brigadier Chabda Namgyal Dorji, considered to be close relative and confidant of the Wangchuck family. Brigadier Namgyal Dorji was found guilty and publicly exterminated while the King was in Switzerland undergoing treatment. Lendup Dorji then took upon the role of his brother serving as acting PM without prior approval of the King. He fled later to Nepal for political asylum fearing King’s wrath upon return.

Developments in Sikkim between 1965-70 are significant as India suspects that Sikkim’s Queen Hope is a CIA agent with an agenda to spearhead the Pan Himalayan federation between the Kingdoms of Bhutan, Nepal and Sikkim. This comes at a time when King Mahendra is at the peak of his popularity in Nepal with the entry of China and Russia massively into Nepal for infrastructure building and industrialization. 

India was not happy with this situation and it had its agent working to foil any attempt to forge the pan-Himalayan relationship among the three Himalayan Kingdoms. Obviously, for India the strategy was a break in the geographical sovereign continuity. Merger of Sikkim was an option that India was toeing which became a reality in 1975.

The King of Bhutan perhaps perceived this soon after assassination of PM Dorji. Perhaps he missed the able leadership of his prime minister but started engaging the Indian contacts to arouse Chinese fear from the northern border.

Smartly, King Jigme Dorji initiates contact with China to help pressurize India. Frequent incursions into Bhutan increased from the north, and there were cases where Bhutanese army personals were kidnapped by the PLA, detained for some days in the border post and return to Bhutan unharmed. This was clearly a pressure tactics to prove support to Bhutan King to convince India the need for Bhutan joining the UN. Much of the lobbying was done during the time of PM Lal Bahadur Sastri but real movement on the issue started after Indira Gandhi became the Prime Minster of India.

A couple of major events were taking place during the time in the region. India was increasing its grip in Sikkim by fomenting turmoil in Sikkim. The administration and security of Sikkim had already come in the hands of India. Indira Gandhi was also planning action in East Pakistan, with aim of creating an independent country now called Bangladesh. Her fear of China running in aid of Pakistan from across the Himalayas was high, and Bhutan was considered a soft belly via Chummy Valley. She wanted to pre-empt it by securing Bhutan the UN membership. For the sake of bigger objective India sponsored Bhutan’s membership to the United Nations. Much of the policy and dealing at the UN was handled by Indian bureaucrats on behalf of Bhutan during the initial period.

Indira Gandhi had become bold, the success of action on East Pakistan and merger of Sikkim into the Indian Union. She had instructed RAW, which was created by Mrs Gandhi in 1971, to come up with plan to annex Bhutan and disintegrate Nepal by creating an Independent Madhesh.  A remnant political leader of Bhutan State Congress, Debi Bhakta Lamitarey ( or Lamichaney) , was contacted to work with Indian security agencies to foment turmoil in Bhutan. It might be appropriate to recall that King Birendra’s proposal of Zone of Peace in 1974 proposal and India’s refusal to sign the separate treaty for trade and transit for Nepal happened in the light of above development.  

Indira Gandhi lost the general election in 1977. With Janata govt in power 1977 all small sates of South Asia got a breathing space and it was then when academics, led by Sardar Tarlok Singh mooted the notion of South Asian regional cooperation underscoring the legitimacy of all South Asian nations. It was, then, that Bhutan took the proactive initiative to have its embassy in Dhaka in 1978. And the King himself ventured to attend the NAM Summit in Havana in 1979.

On his return to India in Bombay he gave a press briefing that he would like to revise the perpetual treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1949. Seeing all these regional developments (which includes the liberalization of the Sri Lankan economy under President Jaywardene, the World Bank’s interest in Maya hydro projects harnessing the Himalyan waters and  also King Birendra’s call for regional cooperation over water resources to include China) Indira Gandhi was quick to react saying, at the time of the general election campaign of 1980, that " even a Liliputian Bhutan has become a security threat for India"

Indira Gandhi won in the general elections but changed the Bhutan strategy and told the King that she would support him in every way to make for a strong, independent Bhutan. It is thus it joined WB, IMF and ADB and was allowed to have diplomatic relations with Kuwait. 

In the meantime, however, she also instructed RAW to come up with a plan to execute a final assault on Bhutan to make it completely beholden to India. She used emotional diplomacy using the family ties between the Wangchuck and Nehru family introducing Rajiv Gandhi, her son, as trusted friend and adopted relationship. She also invited the young king as chief guest of the republic day parade in 1982. As a proof to trusted relationship, Indira Gandhi allowed Bhutan to begin bilateral boundary negotiations with China in 1984. Indira Gandhi served as motherly figure for King Jigme Singe Wangchuck and Rajiv Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi became much more than family friends.

 While that cozy relationship was building trust at the highest level, RAW was working with Subash Ghising to foment political turmoil in Darjeeling District. The movement in Darjeeling started after Rajiv Gandhi became the Prime Minister of India. Subash Ghising had close rapport with Rajiv Gandhi and RAW’s interlocutor Inderit Khullar was guiding Ghising in the violent activities. The Gorkhaland agitation had two objective to achieve. One, to snap the communist party’s hold in the sensitive region with landmass connection to China. And two, to build psychological fear of the Bhutanese royalty on the increasing influence of Lhotsampa population in Bhutan.

The Gorkhland agitation was settled with creation of Gorkha Hill Council which has no meaningful say on administration of the district. It is just eyewash for the public but managed to squeeze out the communist party from the sensitive area. But it did help to mould the thinking of the King Jigme Singhe Wangchuck to check the rising cultural influence of Nepali population in Bhutan. Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and King Jigme Singye Wangchuck spend three days in Bhumthang valley, some 200 KM from the capital city. The Kuensel had reported that the two leaders had discussions on many issues; no aids were allowed to attend.

Curiously, soon after the meeting, Bhutan came with the policy of Bhutanization program and census re-enumeration exercise, targeted both to Lhotsampa population. Bhutan decided to make compulsory wearing of national dress even in the villages, drop the teaching of Nepali language in school, and some 17000 Lhotsampas were declared non-nationals falling into category 2 to 7. An appeal to the king to redress these grievances turned out later to be the seed of mass demonstration in 1990 and eventual creation of refugee problem in Nepal.

Indira Gandhi created RAW but Rajiv Gandhi served as the conduit to implement its agenda in the region, During his time IPKF were posted in Sri Lanka, the infamous 1989 Treaty of Peace and Friendship was sent to King Birendra to accept as a new treaty to replace the 1950, orchestrated the demise of the Panchayat regime in Nepal by instituting the blockade in 1989, and cajoling the creation of Bhutan refugee problem. It is hard to say what would have happened in the region if Rajiv Gandhi had survived the wrath of Tamil militants and again became prime minister of India. Definitely, he had many plans under his sleeves, which could have changed the political boundary of many nations.

 Given all the above developments, and seeing where Bhutan stands now-- a proud, politically stable nation with a robust multi party parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarchy-- the kings of Bhutan can be judged as astute nationalists, who sought to preserve the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Kingdom at all cost.

The king of kings is, to my mind, is Jigme Singe Wangchuk, father of the present Monarch, for his astute geo political sagacity and statesmanship. He is also the originator of the internationally recognized development soft power-- calling for Gross National Happiness nourished by a Green Economy. He has succeeded in raising Bhutan’s per capita income as the second highest in South Asia after Maldives. This is no small feat by any measure. He has also created a modern bureaucracy that has learnt to respect the rule of law that is rapidly being professionalized fully grounded on meritocracy, free from political machinations. 

Former king Jigme Singe Wangchuk is, to me, the most successful nation builder and strategist in the annals of modern South Asian history. He commendable achievements fully deserves an international peace prize for securing global support to solve the refugee problem, engaging China on the resolution of the boundary issue, playing proactive role for regional and sub regional cooperation; and, not least, for laying a solid foundation for sustained economic growth and development geared towards rapidly attaining the status of a middle income economy. 

telegraphnepal.com

Post your Comment here

TERMS OF USE:The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any persons) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).

Top of Form

·         Name :          

·         Email :           

Comment:


Security Code

·         Enter the text above 

I agree

Bottom of Form

Comments

·         Posted on - 2015-04-19    by     mana ranjan josse

·         Interesting on first, quick reading. Substantial comments only possible after careful scrutiny. I find it difficult to accept Bhutan as fully sovereign when, by the Indo-Bhutan Treaty of 1949 (signed, of all places, in Darjeeling) she chooses to be guided by India as far as her external relations go, as also for defence. Also, it ought to be mentioned, for the record at least, that while one Indian official, Harishwar Dayal, signed on behalf of GOI, on the Bhutanese side, it had to have the signatures of seven officials! In other words, one Indian = seven Bhutanese! I tell-tale equation, what? In Nepal's case, as you know, the two individuals who signed the 1950 Treaty were the Indian Ambassador and the Nepali Prime Minister. It might have been useful, too, to mention that while Darjeeling originally belonged to neighbouring Sikkim, Kalimpong was Bhutan's.

·         Posted on - 2015-04-18    by     Birat Simha

·         Excellent article. While Bhutan's economic development is laudable, let us not overlook (a) it is a semi-sovereign state with foreign policy and defence under Indian control; (b) the creation of the Bhutanese-Nepalese refugees, with Indian complicity, is nothing to be lauded.

Commitments of SAARC summits: An analysis

Commitments of SAARC summits: An analysis

Md. Joynal Abdin

The Daily Financial Express on May 20, 2010

The 16th SAARC Summit held on 28-29 April 2010 in Thimphu, Bhutan. South Asian people got another declaration on economic cooperation, poverty alleviation, environmental safety, cultural bonds, scientific excellence, fighting terrorism, security of small states, increasing standard of living, and unique regional stand in the international forums from SAARC leaders. These declarations are the most important documents of the willingness of our leaders for development of South Asia. We got 709 commitments from our leaders, Among these 86 commitments are directly or indirectly related to trade and development. Now, it’s time to evaluate them.

1st SAARC Summit was held in Dhaka, Bangladesh on 7-8 December 1985. The article 4 of the Dhaka declaration described that the achieving the goals of SAARC it needs to accelerate the process of economic and social development in member countries through the optimum utilisation of their human and material resources.

In second SAARC summit held in Bangalore, India on November 17, 1986 the article 4 was repeated and that it identified some fields of cooperation, exchange of ideas, experience and technology as well as goods and services, which utilise and enhance the productive capacity of each of the countries and build their collective self reliance in article 3 & 5. But a major shortfall of that declaration was that it did not identify implementing national body in each country.

The 3rd SAARC Summit held in Katmandu, Nepal on November 4, 1987 took the group a step forward by fixing modalities for studies to be carried out for cooperation in the areas of trade, manufacturing and services. Leaders of that summit emphasised on timely completion of the task.

Demand for closer connection among the SAARC people saw a breakthrough through VISA exemption system, stated in article – 15 of 4th SAARC Summit held in Islamabad, Pakistan on 31st December, 1988. Article 26 of 4th SAARC declaration made another stride by conceiving the idea of WTO trade regime in South Asia.

The 5th SAARC Summit held in Male, the Maldives on 21-23 November, 1990, did not discuss trade related issues although article 15 sought funding for regional project. However, article 21 called 2nd ministerial meeting for talks on economic cooperation.

In the 6th SAARC Summit held in Colombo, Sri Lanka on 21st December 1991 article 4 stated the need for dotting priorities of their respective national economies. The leaders felt, for the further development of their economies, the importance of securing less restrictive trading and marketing opportunities for their products, more extensive technology and resource transfers, debt relief and access on favorable and more concessional terms to resources from multilateral financial institutions. They agreed to keep an open dialogue on these aspects through mutual consultations. Though the decision took place earlier it has not been implemented until now. Other major outcomes of 6th SAARC summit were the establishment of the Committee for Economic Cooperation, and formulating SAARC Fund for Regional Projects (SFRP).

Article – 14 of 7th SAARC Summit held in Dhaka, Bangladesh on 11th April 1993, emphasized the need for liberalising trade as early as possible through a step by step approach. The leaders underscored that this should be done in such a manner that all countries in the region could share the benefits of trade expansion equitably. The framework Agreement on SAARC Preferential Trading Arrangement (SAPTA) was finalised in the same summit.

The 8th SAARC Summit held in New Delhi, India on 2-4 May 1995. Article 13 & 14 of the declaration hoped that SAPTA would be in action within shortest possible time and it happened. Article 48 of the same summit gave us another hope by endorsing the establishment of three windows –South Asian Development Fund with the merger of SAARC Fund for Regional Projects and the SAARC Regional Fund and social development and infrastructure development. But till now we are in dark about performance of these windows.

Article 17 of the 9th SAARC Summit held in Malé, Maldives on 12-14 May 1997 agreed that the efforts to enhance trade and economic co-operation in the region would be further strengthened by initiating specific steps to promote and protect investment, increase complementarities in economic activities of member states and other measures supportive of promotion of SAARC joint ventures. After 13 years we still do not see any active step to implement this article.

Article 19 of the same summit states: “The governments noted that inadequate communications facilities amongst the member states were a major hindrance to closer economic co-operation. They stressed the importance of developing infrastructure and adequate communication networks among member states to reinforce the process of economic co-operation. In this regard, they highlighted the need for the simplification of complex documentation procedures and transactional software to facilitate economic interaction across the region”. But, until now, Bangladesh does not have direct shipping line with many SAARC countries. Transit & transshipment issues are till being debated. So, problems have been identified, but we are not taking active steps to solve them, It means we are not willing to activate SAARC as a successful regional grouping.

In 11th SAARC Summit declaration held in Katmandu, Nepal on 4 to 6 January 2002 article -7 gave new directions “recognizing the need to move quickly towards a South Asian Free Trade Area, the heads of state or government directed the council of ministers to finalize the text of the Draft Treaty Framework by the end of 2002. They also directed that in moving towards the goal of SAFTA, the member states expedite action to remove tariff and non-tariff barriers and structural impediments to free trade. They were also instructed to conclude the meeting of the inter-governmental group on trade liberalisation for the Fourth Round of Trade Negotiations under SAPTA as early as possible as per the decision of the Tenth SAARC Summit in Colombo”.

The 12th SAARC Summit held in Islamabad, Pakistan on 4-6 January 2004 declared another millstone in its article – 3 “We reiterate our commitment made at the 11th SAARC Summit at Katmandu in January 2002 for the creation of a South Asian Economic Union. In this context, we underline that creation of a suitable political and economic environment would be conducive to the realization of this objective”. But after 6 years of the promises there is no sign of making the Economic Union a success. To implement this article each member country should establish an independent commission to deal with the SAARC integration issues and coordinate among the ministries to facilitate the process. Otherwise a SAARC Secretariat can transform into SAARC parliament to make the integration happen.

Some more important issues were discussed in the 12th SAARC summit these are regional energy sharing, transportation, transit and connectivity, public private sector cooperation, joint venture project in SAARC region, harmonization of standards, simplification of custom procedures, as well as cooperation among the central banks, united effort for promoting tourism in South Asia. But none of the issues are resolved though these are the prerequisites for regional economic cooperation leading to integration.

13th SAARC Summit was held in Dhaka, Bangladesh on 12 – 13 November 2005. The Article -15 of this declaration said: “They reiterated the need to strengthen transportation and communication links across the region for accelerated and balanced economic growth. They directed further measures aimed at trade liberalization, as provided for in the SAFTA Agreement. They noted with satisfaction the ongoing SAARC Regional Multimodal Transport Study to enhance transport connectivity among the Member States. The Heads of State or Government agreed to undertake trade facilitation measures, including transit among SAARC countries, on the basis of understanding among concerned countries, for enhancing intra-regional trade and other economic activities. They noted the Indian proposal in this regard. They agreed to study the proposal by India for daily air service facility by designated airlines, on a reciprocal basis and without prejudice to existing rights, to all the SAARC Member States and also the proposal to extend fifth freedom rights to designated airlines from the Member States, both intermediate and beyond, within the SAARC region on a reciprocal basis” should be implemented as soon as possible to achieve projected outcome from SAARC.

Connectivity, energy crisis, and need for implementing SAFTA accordingly, trade facilitation; regional hydroelectric grid, gas pipeline etc were discussed in 14th & 15th SAARC summits. But there was no mention of implementing agency, monitoring body, intra country coordinating committee. As a result all these good ideas may not be materialised or suffer long delay.

However, the article -5 of latest 16th SAARC summit held in Thimphu, Bhutan on 28-29 April 2010 stated: “The Leaders agreed that the scope and substance of cooperation had expanded to diverse fields, providing a firm basis for genuine partnership. However, a number of these had not translated into meaningful and tangible benefits to the people. They, therefore, highlighted the need for more efficient, focused, time-bound and people-centric activities and called for appropriate reflection of all the SAARC decisions into the national policies and programmes of member states. They resolved that the Silver Jubilee Year should be commemorated by making SAARC a truly action-oriented by fulfilling commitments, implementing declarations and decisions and operationalizing instruments and living up to the hopes and aspirations of one fifth of humanity”. Now is the time to implement all the SAARC declarations effectively with a time bound limit as stated in the above article.

We have to strengthen SAARC for quicker integration of the region, because integrated South Asia may be more resourceful than any other region in the world including the European Union.