Recent Developments from 1980s to Present Day
By the 1980s, the government judged, they claim rightly, others claim wrongly and illegally, that there was a widespread illegal immigration of people of Nepali origin into Bhutan. This despite Bhutan having invited Nepali immigrants to open up and help cultivate its fields early last century. It also accused the ethnic Nepalis (called Lhotshampas) of a lack of integration into the political and cultural mainstream of the country. For their part, the Lhotshampas (by now several generation born in Bhutan) wanted to retain their Hindu culture in a country ruled by Buddhists. The government accuses the 'immigrants' (a misnomer considering most Lhotshampas were several generations Bhutanese, and considered themselves Bhutanese, not Nepali) of knowing very little of the culture of Bhutan arguing also that most could not understand any one of the local languages including Dzongkha (the King's own language and culture). Lhotshampas disagree, claiming they only wanted to be able to practice their Hindu ways in peace and without being chastised by the ruling government and army. Perceiving this growing dichotomy as a threat to national unity, the Government promulgated highly disciminatory directives in the 1980s that sought to preserve what it considered as Bhutan's cultural identity (based in Buddhism and distinctly not Hindu) with its controversial "one nation, one people" policy. The government claims it was a unifying measure, "benign and constructive" however detractors argue that it was ethnically and religiously exclusive and disciminatory, and further than those not adhering to the government's enforced cultural values were targeted, often violently, by the government and its army. The government implied that the 'culture' to be preserved would be that of the northern Bhutanese, not the southern (where the Lhotshampas mostly resided - a situation reflecting the fact that it was the Bhutanese government that originally invited nepali settlers to live in Bhutan generations ago to help open up and cultuivate the land in the south). This 'one nation, one people' policy therefore required citizens to wear the attire of the northern Bhutanese in public places and reinforced the status of Dzongkha as the national language. Nepali was discontinued as a subject in the schools keeping in line with the status of the other languages of Bhutan, none of which are taught.
Such policies were criticized by human rights groups as well as the Lhotshampas, who perceived the policy to be directed solely against them. From the perspective of the ruling Bhutanese, the issue was one of preserving a Himalayan Buddhist culture and way of life (which, it argues, has been completely destroyed in nearby Sikkim, it says by an onslaught of over immigration by ethnic Nepalis). The Lhotshampas (again, they are not, as Bhutan claims Nepali 'immigrants' as most were born in Bhutan going back generations) claim that the Bhutanese are clinging to power at the expense of human rights, pluralism, and democratic principles. However many in Bhutan see Lhotshampas' cry for pluralism and democracy as an excuse to overwhelm and take over a lightly populated Bhutan - however the Lhotshampas have never made any claims to power other than to be fairly represented and be allowed to continue their Hindu culture.
Simmering tensions were heightened in the late 1980s, when the government conducted a census exercise. The basis for the census findings was the 1958 'cut off' year, the year that the Lhotshampa population had first received official Bhutanese citizenship (before then, there was no need for paperwork and passport like identification as the borders between Bhutan, India and Nepal were fairly porous). Those individuals who could not provide proof of residency prior to 1958 (remembering many just didn't have it in the first place, despite being born in Bhutan) were adjudged to be illegal immigrants. This was implemented through the 1985 Citizenship Act. A delicate period in the development of the Government and protests by Lhotshampa democratic parties, spurred on this act which stated that only those who could show they had resided in Bhutan since 1958,through proof of documents prior to 1958, would be deemed citizens of Bhutan. Given many were poor farmers and land workers, many could not offer such proof. This act led to the increased activity of numerous groups to protest against what was seen as an injustice against Lhotshampas.
With Lhotshampas mobilising into protest groups and marching on government offies, the government set about systematically threatening the groups, particularly leaders, but also anyone who supported the Lhotshampas' protests. Lhotshampas claim they were threatened, abused, violently attacked, held at gunpoint, raped and in some cases murdered without inquiry. There is proof of many being taken away from their family homes and tortured and threatened, being forced to sign voluntary migration forms before being forced along with their families over the border. Their homes were either destroyed or appropriated by friends and family of the ruling government.
The government claims there was no systematic abuses, and that the Lhotshampas chose to leave in protest - although this is highly unlikely as neighbouring India refused to allow them to reside there, and Nepal considers Lhotshampas refugees and citizens of Bhutan; it does not regard Lhotshampas as Nepali and affords them little or no rights within Nepal. Thus seven refugee camps were set up in Nepal, although the Nepali government maintain that the refugees belong in Bhutan.
The issue remains unresolved today, with Bhutan unwilling to repatriate refugees. The refugees offer ownership of the national citizen identity cards as proof of citizenry. The government contends that there has been widespread forging of these documents.
The crisis of the people in the camps causes some tension between Bhutan and Nepal and is the glaring issue in Bhutan's international relations and human rights record.
In 1998, King Jigme Singye Wangchuck introduced significant political reforms, transferring most of his powers to the Prime Minister and allowing for impeachment of the King by a two-thirds majority of the National Assembly. In late 2003, the Bhutanese army successfully launched a large-scale operation to flush out anti-India insurgents who were operating training camps in southern Bhutan.
In 1999, the king also lifted a ban on television and the Internet, making Bhutan one of the last countries to have introduced the television. In his speech, he asserted that the television was a critical step to the modernization of Bhutan as well as a major contributor to the country's Gross National Happiness (Bhutan is the only country to measure happiness) but warned against the misuse of the television that may erode traditional Bhutanese values.
A new constitution has been presented in early 2005 (download from here), which will be put up for ratification by a referendum before coming into force. In December 2005, King Jigme Singye Wangchuck announced that he would step down as King of Bhutan in 2008. King Wangchuck said he would be succeeded by his son, the crown prince Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck. A group comprised of ethnic Nepalese claiming to be Bhutanese exiles, have criticized the constitution saying that the king is trying to overshadow the refugee problem in the country by introducing "limited democracy".
