With the Maoist terror extending across virtually the whole of Nepal, otherissues plaguing the country have tended to be brushed under the carpet. Underthe shadow of this neglect, at least some of these have been compounded by theenveloping troubles, and the problem of the refugees from Bhutan is one amongthese.
During his three-country visit in October 2004, covering Bhutan, India andNepal, the US Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Migration andRefugees, Arthur E. Gene Dewey had expressed Washington's increasing concernover the deteriorating situation in the refugee camps in Nepal's easternDistrict of Jhapa. Quoting reports, Dewey said, "Nepali Maoists haveinfiltrated in camps," and further urged India to play a more pro-activerole in resolving the refugee question before it turns into an intractablesecurity issue.
Earlier, on June 2, 2004, Royal Nepalese Army (RNA) forces had conducted acordon-and-search operation in a Bhutanese refugee camp, Beldangi-I, on atip-off that suspected Maoists were holed up in the camp, and subsequentlyarrested six refugees for their connections with the Maoists. Security forceshad also seized some arms from the camp, and also found many refugees missingfrom their designated camps. These missing refugees were suspected to havejoined the Nepali Maoists' People's Liberation Army (PLA).
Over 105, 000 Bhutanese Refugees reside in seven camps in the eastern Districtsof Nepal since the ethnic exodus that followed implementation in Bhutan of theCitizenship Act of 1985 and the subsequent nation-wide Census of 1988.Protesting against the results of the Census, which had identified a large'non-national' population believed to be illegal Nepali immigrants living in thesouthern part of Bhutan, and thought to be quantitatively 'diluting' theBhutanese population in that region, some of the 'illegal immigrants' wereinvolved in an unprecedented spate of attacks on human and institutional targetsin late 1989 and early 1990. These incidents were followed by the forcefuleviction or distress migration of a majority of the Nepali population from thesouthern Bhutan region, eventually confining them to designated camps in Nepal.
Since then, the refugee issue has been one of great contention between theGovernments of Nepal and Bhutan. Though a process for their repatriationcommenced in 1993, there has been little forward movement over the intervening14 years. After 15 rounds of Ministerial Joint Committee (MJC) meetings, theJoint Verification Committee (JVC) had categorized some 12,000 refugees.However, this process was also stalled when the refugees attacked the Bhutaneseverification officials at the Kudunabari camp in Jhapa on December 22, 2003,reportedly for the 'provocative and derogatory conditions' being imposed forrepatriation, and after refugees demanded that their properties be restored tothem in their homeland in Bhutan.
With world powers and the international organizations expressing renewedinterest in refugee repatriation process, the potential threat they constituteto the host state has also come into focus. Analysts suggest that such a threathas three dimensions: social security, economic security, and politicalsecurity, and point to the following circumstances:
- The inherent tensions among the various refugee groups or refugees and the local populations - competition for scarce economic resources - have security implications for the host country.
- Refugees' involvement in organized criminal activities increase law and order problems.
- Refugees' assertion and growing influence over local politics, and competition between political parties to win over their support could add to existing irritants.
- The refugees' pursuit of their 'armed struggle' against their home state (Bhutan) will affect the relations between the host country and the country of origin.
These threats are, at present and at worst, incipient. However, the threat ofan armed struggle by the refugees against their home state is growing visibly.The emergence of a Maoist party in Bhutan - the Bhutan Communist Party -Marxist-Leninist-Maoist) (BCP-MLM) - which distributed a pamphlet announcing itsbirth on April 22, 2003, and urged all the 'victimised' citizens of Bhutan tojoin a 'people's war' to overthrow the Bhutanese monarchy and establish apeople's republic sent alarm bells ringing across Bhutan.
The pamphlet was signed under an alias, 'Vikalpa' ['Alternative'], on the'authority' of the Central Organizing Committee of the BCP-MLM, and propoundedthe traditional strategy of 'protracted war' as their party's programme to takeover villages and encircle the towns in Bhutan. In a Press Release on June 30,2004, BCP-MLM Central Organizing Committee 'incharge', Vikalpa, indicted theBhutan King and his Government for their 'insincerity' in the repatriationprogramme and asserted that "the communal policy of the ruling elite hasbrought forward the maximum chances of clash between variousNationalities."
Further, the Release called on 'all the freedom lovers' to join the 'NewDemocratic Revolution'. The BCP-MLM has also criticized the 'Sikkimization' ofBhutan and charged their Government of 'selling out' to India on vital issues.There is evidence that the BCP-MLM was set up with the active support andcollaboration of the Communist Party of Nepal - Maoist, as well as Indian Maoistgroups, and the language and content of their various declarations closelyreflects the perspectives of their mentors.
Aware that the large number of frustrated youth in the Refugee Camps in Nepalcould constitute a strong recruitment pool, the BCP-MLM has been insistentlyraising the issue of their repatriation to their home state. Bhutan authoritiesfirmly believe that Nepalese Maoists are behind efforts to extend the network ofLeft Wing extremist terror into neighbouring states, particularly Bhutan. TheSpeaker of the Bhutan Assembly, Ugen Dorje, had claimed in July 2004 that 2,000refugees had joined the 'Maoists Army'. The numbers may well be exaggeratednumber - and observers in the region put the realistic number at under 200 -but, given the recent trajectory of Maoist movements in the region, thesedevelopments are a matter for serious concern for a small and peaceful countrylike Bhutan.
The seven refugee camps of Nepalis from Bhutan, moreover, are located in theeastern region of Nepal, where the Nepali Maoists have constructed a strongbase, and their power had been demonstrated in a major attack in the mid-easternregional district Bhojpur during March 2003. The cumulative successes of theNepal Maoists will certainly act as a magnet to a proportion of the refugees inthe area, and this constitutes a potential threat to both the host and the homecountries.
On the repatriation front, after the long process of discussions and meetings,both Bhutan and Nepal have agreed to categorize these refugees in the campsunder four heads:
1. Bhutanese forcibly evicted,
2. Bhutanese voluntarily migrated,
3. Non-Bhutanese and
4. Bhutanese with anti-national and criminal records.
The Bhutan Government has tended to resist all repatriation because most of therefugees are of Nepali origin, and this is seen as creating a 'demographicimbalance' in areas of the thinly populated country, as well as a threat to theMonarchy. While growing international pressure has forced Bhutan to accept theidea of repatriation of some refugees, non-Bhutanese and Bhutanese withanti-national and criminal records will certainly be excluded, accounting for asizeable and potentially volatile chunk of the refugee population. Bhutan alsofears that the repatriated groups may be 'infected' by the Nepalese Maoists, andthat they would include a significant representation of radical sympathizers whowould bring the 'peoples' war' to Bhutan. On the other hand, Nepal, among thepoorest and currently deeply disturbed, countries in the world argues that itcannot be expected to bear the burden of this additional population.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the major supporterof the refugee camps, is gradually cutting off its assistance, drasticallyaffecting the support programmes, especially education projects. Growingunemployment and scarcity of resources in the refugee camps has led to tensions,even clashes, with the local population in the recent past.
Significant strategic threats also emerge from the current situation,compounding the many strong anti-establishment insurgent movements that plaguethe whole region - Nepal, Bhutan and India's Northeast. After Bhutan's militaryoperation against the bases of Indian insurgent groups - ULFA , the KamtapurLiberation Organisation (KLO) and the National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB)- in the dense forest areas in South Bhutan, the country has just begun toreturn to a state of normalcy.
Any significant population movement at this time has the potential todestabilize and endanger all three countries. Intelligence reports suggest thatseveral youth from the refugee camps had been trained by the ULFA, and the KLOis believed to have been instrumental in formation of the BCP-MLM, and hadmediated its contacts with the Nepali Maoists. There is a complex and unstablemix here, and, while humanitarian considerations demand continuous relief to therefugees in Nepal, the relocation of 100,000 persons in a region deeplyafflicted by multiple insurgencies, at this point of time, cannot be expected tohave a positive impact on the potential for peace.
P.G. Rajamohan is Research Associate, Institute for Conflict Management.Courtesy, the South Asia Intelligence Review of the South Asia TerrorismPortal
