The first session of the 2nd
Parliament of the Kingdom of Bhutan began yesterday which was Wednesday, 11th
September, 2013. The Parliament of Bhutan constitutes of 3 entities: His
Majesty the King, the National Assembly and the National Council. However, in
terms of royal position and due deference, the King is actually the crown of
the Parliament. His Majesty is received in traditional procession ceremony and
formally welcomed by the Speaker of the Parliament. After that the leader of
the Ruling Party cum Prime Minister, the leader of the Opposition and the
Chairman of the National Council offers to the King, the People and the Nation
their heartfelt submissions of tributes, hopes, fears and grievances if any.
His Majesty the King graced the
occasion but did not address the Parliament. However, both the Speaker and the
Prime Minister recalled parts of the royal thoughts on the 2nd
Parliament that was expressed some time back to an audience consisting of newly
confirmed cabinet members and PDP Party MP Elects in the Throne room. The event
was later telecast by BBS TV as part of news broadcast. Such royal thoughts
cannot be strictly construed as a substitute for a formal address to the 2nd
Parliament unless we contemplate a Parliament without an Opposition Party and
National Council.
His Majesty also graced the live
telecast opening session of National Council in the afternoon of 11th
September, 2013 and chose to address the House as well as the Nation. He called
upon Bhutanese of all walks of life to endeavour to handover a better
positioned Bhutan to their next generation. I felt it was a clear royal call to
all Bhutanese to strengthen the sovereignty of Bhutan through everyday efforts
of framing policies, executing development activities, legislating laws,
promoting national aspirations through cohesive social harmony and economic
resources usage, etc..
The Speaker gave a forward
marching address. It looks like he is determined to play a non-partisan
dignified role as the Speaker of the 2nd Parliament. And the Prime
Minster also spoke as Head of the Bhutanese Government, not on Party lines. I,
however, differ with his summation to the effect that the successful process of
2nd Parliamentary Elections have convinced political experts that
democracy has taken firm root in Bhutan.
The General Election part of the
2nd Parliamentary process was successful only in the sense that a
conclusion to winners and losers among 94 candidates were declared by Election
Commission. And 47 secured Parliamentary employment for 5 years. In general,
the General Election was distasteful and Bhutanese from the highest peak to the
lowest bottom of the well lost out. Bhutan and Bhutanese cannot deem success in
a situation where one political force called upon the nation to submit to India
because Bhutan is totally dependent on India for economic survival and the
other political force faulting the result of the election to action or
non-action of the Throne or Throne affiliated Agencies. I do not think that it is necessary for
Bhutan to develop a façade of democratic system to enslave the nation to the dictate
of powerful India or defile the Institution of Monarchy which for over 100
years, served as the gravitational force that held Bhutan to its independent
orbit among the nations of the world. Apart from this one small but definitive disagreement,
I applaud the Prime Minister for his keenness to look forward.
The Opposition Leader’s address
sounded quite heavy and my take was different from Kuensel’s conclusion of
‘seeking forgiveness and conciliatory’. It was definitely not a provocative
call nor was it seeking forgiveness. In fact as thankful as I am to Kuensel for
always providing more details and information, I really wish it is possible to
review the texts of the addresses delivered by the Prime Minister and the
Opposition Leader just as that of the Speaker and the Chairman of NC. The
National Assembly website had only the Speaker’s address, the Cabinet
Secretariat website was blank and so were the websites of PDP and DPT. And
whilst DPT office did not answer the phone, PDP said it did not have a copy of
PM’s address. Without a secondary chance to review the text in full, I had to
rely on what I could recollect from the replay of event at BBS Channel 2. I
felt that Lyonpo Pema Gyamtso outlined DPT forward stand and also called for
sanitization of election process to strengthen democracy.
The Chairman of National Council
illustrated the pivotal and enduring role of the Institution of the Bhutanese Monarchy.
He pointed out the transitory roles of parliamentarians and political parties and
that the real national and most reliable force of national unity was
represented by the royal person. I feel that it is a fact of Bhutanese sovereignty
that even in the era of democracy, the role and responsibility of the Monarch has
increased. The King of the Kingdom of Bhutan is a neutral authority in Bhutanese
politics and yet cannot remain passive to political changes and trends because
the people in general look up to the throne for guidance.
All in all, the Opening Sessions
of the Parliament and the National Council were dignifying and successful.
Food for Parliamentary
thoughts
Development grants from India
The total outlay of 11th
Five year plan is Nu. 213 B. Out of this, India has agreed to fund 45 B rupees.
In addition the present government asked for 5 B rupees as Stimulus fund which
partly comprise of handouts committed to during General Election such as old
age benefits etc. In the first 5 year democracy, the government asked for 6 B
rupees in addition to the initial 28 B grant earmarked from India as part of
total 10th Plan outlay of Nu. 148 B. So India’s committed grant for
10th Plan was 34 B and for 11th Plan is 50 B Rupees.
Out of the 34 B, India is yet to
release 4 B even though Bhutan has already invested over 2 ½ B from its own
resources and struggling to raise further funds to complete the 4 B development
activities part of which has spilled over into the 11th Plan period.
The delay in the release of committed 4 B rupees is aggravating the rupee
crisis that is plaguing the Bhutanese economy.
Since there is considerable delay
in releasing the balance 4B Rupee out of the 34B grant committed for the 10th
Plan, it is possible that there will be a ripple effect delays in releasing the
grants for the 11th Plan which began from 1st July, 2013.
India is also facing economic crisis of its own. Such constrains faced in grant
releases need to be taken as national reminders that Bhutan must not lose sight
of self-reliance as we travel the next five year journey. I suppose the
Parliamentarians would be relieved to know of India’s generous commitment for
the 11th Plan and at the same time remain conscious of guiding the
nation towards more revenue generating policies.
What tantamount to mutual Security Interests?
Bhutan is deeply dependent on
Indian assistance. A major part of our development fund is provided by India.
Our Army is fully funded by India. Even then can we say that India and Bhutan
has mutual national security interests? I refer to Kuensel issue of 3rd
September, 2013 regarding understandings reached between India and Bhutan
recently at New Delhi to quote, “The two sides reaffirmed the trust and
confidence between the two countries and their mutual security interests”.
I thought over this claim but
somehow it is difficult to really fathom the wisdom of mutual national security
interests either with India or China. Bhutan shares international boundary with
both India and China. Therefore if there is a security threat to the Kingdom of
Bhutan, it has to originate from one of the giant neighbours. Therefore how
could Bhutan have mutual security interests with either neighbours who are the
only possible source of direct national security threat to Bhutan?
On the other hand, are we talking
of a new understanding with India i.e. a Security Pact like NATO countries or
an Indian Security Umbrella for Bhutan like USA for South Korea, Japan,
Philippines, New Zealand, Australia, Israel etc.. I feel that teaming up with
India or China for national mutual security interests is altogether a different
proposition from having bilateral diplomatic ties, trade and close dependent
economic ties with India or later some limited peaceful ties with China.
Both Security Pact and Security
Umbrella would be a road to doom for Bhutan. Such an understanding would unnecessarily
make Bhutan a part of China-India possible border confrontation. In terms of
Bhutan’s sovereign security, Bhutan cannot afford to have mutual security
interests with any country especially China and India who are immediate
neighbours and has a history of animosity towards each other.
At one time there was a belief
that if China invaded Bhutan, India would come to Bhutan’s rescue. But now we
have to be more realistic. The days of blatant invasion are over. Even the
super power America is reworking its intention to conduct a surgical strike
against Syria. China will not invade Bhutan and if it does, all India can do is
attempt to quickly occupy Southern Eastern territory of Bhutan which is more
accessible to India than China. So Bhutan has nothing to gain and everything to
lose in forming a Security Pact.
So if Bhutan adopts the present
trend of publicly expressing its need to have mutual national security
interests with India then such a stand could be interpreted as Bhutan siding
with India in the China-India border disputes. Such a mis-step will not do much
good for India because Bhutan is in no position to shift regional power balance
and on the other hand would place Bhutan’s sovereignty in grave danger. Bhutan
does not pose any threat to China or India and therefore it is important to
maintain the past state of benign neutrality instead of declaring or choosing
sides for security reasons.
In matters of national security
for a small nation, the most advisable course is first have a distinct
demarcated international boundary and after that tread gradually to develop
peaceful and mutually beneficial ties. Presently Bhutan has international
border issues with both China and India. Indo-Bhutan relationship is very sound
and strong. And there is a need to dispel mistrust with China. Bhutan has never tried to play off China
India card. It never made sense and it can never work. The mutual national
security interests of Bhutan, China and India is to respect each other’s right
to peaceful co-existence as independent sovereign nations and develop peaceful
socio-economic relationship.
Sir, I agree with your comment on security pact with India and its implications. I quote Kuensel on OL's statement in the Parliament where he mentions “We’re concerned about the progress of the border talks with China after the 21st round recently, and are ready to contribute to help resolve the long-standing issue.” From this, it appears that the border 21st round of border talks did not go well. However our media coverage and the information to public is silent. There is no transparency and we are kept in the dark. Today we discuss about RTI but the public at large is kept uninformed on such important issues. It is high time somebody explained how Kula Kangri and Gangkar Phuensum are no longer ours. The more we fall into Indian ambit the more and we are losing. Sometimes I feel the grant assistance of India is at the cost of our land. Also what is the present status of annual payment for the annexed Duar areas which we used to receive?
ReplyDeleteLooks like we are (Bhutanese public)going to face more unpleasant surprises in the future. No wonder the proposed RTI act has too many conditions/restrictions which virtually makes it impossible to obtain any meaningful information.
ReplyDeleteWe have lost enough land to India and now we are losing more to the Chinese.
ReplyDeleteHere is an article by someone who know something about India.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.opinion-maker.org/2013/08/india-a-super-power-dream/
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteHere is an article by someone who know something about India.
India a super power dream