Bhutan: An Introduction

Since February 1990, the government of Bhutan has reported anti-national activity and terrorism in southern Bhutan. Early accounts were mild, such as harassment of people wearing the national dress. Charges soon became more serious, such as the beheadings of government and census officials recounted by Amnesty International.[107] Since that time, government publications and the government newspaper Kuensel have kept up a steady barrage of accusations and graphic photos of victims, almost all of whom are ethnic Nepalis.

The crimes now attributed to terrorists cover a wide range, from robbery to murder to destruction of government facilities and bridges, though simple robbery is still the most commonly reported crime.[108] Other crimes attributed to terrorists are more unusual, such as Kuensel's report that "[a]nti-nationals felled and stole more than 200 hardwood trees from the Jhari Forest Plantation, Samchi, on February 2, 1993."[109] While some reports of anti-national activities are credible, virtually no crime in southern Bhutan is not attributed to terrorists. Amnesty International concluded "what seem[] ordinary criminal acts [are] reported as being the responsibility of 'anti-nationals' despite the apparent lack of evidence to confirm that political opponents of the government, rather than common criminals, were responsible."[110] Further, some terrorist charges are simply not credible. For example, Amnesty International "concluded that the individual crimes for which [the six prisoners of conscience] were held responsible were all committed... six or more months after they were detained."[111]

Bhutan charges that " [m]ost of the terrorist raids are being carried out by terrorist groups sent from the refugee camps in Nepal."[112] There are numerous cases of persons registered in the camps being arrested in Bhutan and charged with terrorism.[113] Refugees do not deny violence in southern Bhutan, but claim it is carried out by security forces or common criminals taking advantage of the situation in southern Bhutan. Some villages are nearly empty and the remaining families are isolated and vulnerable. In some cases, refugees report Assamese criminal gangs from India who hire a local southern Bhutanese guide to identify the remaining families likely to be rich targets. Others attribute individual attacks to personal revenge against informants. Some claim that refugees simply return to see relatives.

In most cases, the only evidence of terrorist connections is the reported confession of captured perpetrators, which are dubious given the conditions of detention documented above. Still, given the earlier documented political motives of some crimes, it is definitely probable that some of the reported crimes are politically motivated. Independent verification of terrorist charges has not been possible since access to southern Bhutan is limited. For example, Bhutan did not allow Amnesty International to visit Chirang district in southern Bhutan "for security reasons"[114] and denied a request to visit Bhutan from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.[115] Objective assessment of the extent of anti-national activity in southern Bhutan and alleged political motivations behind acts of violence will not take place until wider access to southern Bhutan is allowed.

Southern Bhutan Today

As mentioned above, southern Bhutan is not accessible to the outside world and descriptions of current conditions come from recent arrivals to the camps in Nepal and government publications. Needless to say, these tell divergent stories. The focus of Bhutanese government reports is on anti-national activities. Kuensel and the debates of the National Assembly give the impression of growing popular sentiment against the southern Bhutanese, but these sources may reflect official bias.

Refugees report that arrests have decreased or changed in nature. Such a conclusion is confirmed by Dubble's random sample of victims, showing a peak in arrests in 1990 and 1991 (see above). It is not known how many prisoners are still held. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has been allowed to visit some, but not all, places of detention in Bhutan since January, 1993. Prisoners released in 1993 report "conditions in those prisons visited by ICRC during 1993 have improved."[116]

A common theme among the stories of new arrivals includes being arrested without charge for a short period and forced to do intense labor. Victims are then released, after being told to emigrate or they will be re-arrested for longer periods. Having personally experienced arrest, and aware of the more pronounced abuse suffered by earlier victims, most " choose" to leave. For some such a decision is reinforced by feelings of isolation in near empty villages. Those who relied on community irrigation schemes or cash income from occasional employment with a rich neighbor cannot maintain their old ways and have added incentive to join their communities in exile.

The government reports that 60 schools have reopened in southern Bhutan.[117] HUROB claims that only 24 have reopened and those only for "children of security forces, government officials, National Assembly members, and other persons of influence."[118] If true, the current situation would be a continuation of the earlier officially announced policy of the government by which "schools will only admit the direct children of the government employees, security forces and public officials in active service."[119]

The National Assembly in 1992 debated 16 proposals for the resettlement by northerners of land vacated by southern Bhutanese.[120] These proposals were partly justified as a counterpoint to an unsuccessful plan two years earlier to provide incentives to southern Bhutanese who settle in the north. The assembly resolved to develop a suitable resettlement plan, coordinating with all concerned departments. Resettlement of the lands vacated by fleeing southern Bhutanese would be a major complication to any future repatriation.[121]