BHUTANESE REFUGEES: A HISTORICAL REVIEW

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 04 KATHMANDU 000758

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR SA/INS AND PRM/ANE, LONDON FOR POL/GURNEY, GENEVA
FOR PLYNCH, NSC FOR MILLARD

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/16/2014
TAGS: PREF PREL NP BT
SUBJECT: BHUTANESE REFUGEES: A HISTORICAL REVIEW

REF: A. NEW DELHI 2214


B. NEW DELHI 2127

C. 1992 KATHMANDU 7047

D. AMNESTY INTL REPORT 08/1994

E. HUM. RIGHTS WATCH 05/2003

F. 1991 KATHMANDU 6122

G. 1991 KATHMANDU 3936

H. 1992 KATHMANDU 631

I. 1991 KATHMANDU 7615

J. 1992 KATHMANDU 2347

K. 1992 CALCUTTA 1432

L. 1992 KATHMANDU 5030

Classified By: Ambassador Michael E. Malinowski for Reasons 1.5 (b,d).


1. (SBU) Summary. The history and complexity of the
Bhutanese refugee situation is worth recollecting in the
light of reliable documentation. The first Nepali-speaking
immigrants settled in Bhutan in the late 19th and early 20th
centuries at the invitation of the then-King of Bhutan in an
effort to cultivate the lowlands of Bhutan and prevent
Assamese and Bengalis from moving north into Bhutanese
territory. In 1958, the Royal Government of Bhutan (RGOB)
granted citizenship to these settlers. Thirty years later,
however, the RGOB severely restricted citizenship rights and
initiated a census in Southern Bhutan that resulted in the
classification of many ethnic Nepalis as non-nationals.
Widespread unrest with the new government policies began in
early 1990, culminating in mass demonstrations in September

1990.


2. (SBU) Summary Continued: The environment for ethnic
Nepalis became increasingly tense and uncertain with reports
of arbitrary arrest, accompanied by torture and rape, of
those who participated, or whose families participated, in
the demonstrations. By June 1991, UNHCR confirmed that 6,000
Bhutanese refugees had fled to Nepal, where the vast majority
had blended into ancestral villages. The flow of refugees
from Bhutan increased dramatically in the fall of 1991 and
continued through September 1992 when the population reached
67,500. Until January 1992, when UNHCR became directly
involved in refugee care and maintenance, the refugees
subsisted on local NGO assistance and charity. At that time,
the population suffered from poor health and sanitary
conditions with high rates of child mortality. A close
reading of the historical record of the last several decades
in Bhutan points to the inescapable conclusion that the
refugee problem is in fact the result of systematic ethnic
discrimination and forced expulsions. End Summary.


3. (U) Post agrees with Ref A recommendation that the U.S.
and other international observers should understand the
history and complexity of the Bhutanese refugee situation.
Upon review of State Department cables from 1990-1992 and
documents prepared by UNHCR, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty
International, the following review of the origins of the
refugee imbroglio is meant to contribute to that
understanding.

-------------- ---
Nepali Migration to Bhutan and Early Citizenship
-------------- ---


4. (SBU) The rulers of the Kingdom of Bhutan have always been
ethnically sensitive. Since India's annexation of Sikkim in
1975, Bhutan has been unique as a Tibetan ethnic and cultural
enclave south of the Himalayas. Small and vulnerable to the
much larger ethnic populations south of Bhutan, the Kingdom
has often reacted strongly to perceptions of threats from the
south. As a result, in the late 19th century, the King of
Bhutan appealed to the Nepali ruling family, the Ranas,
requesting ethnic Nepalis -- who were considered perhaps less
threatening than the Assamese or Bengalis due to their feudal
traditions and distance from Bhutan -- to settle in the
country's lowlands. Northern Bhutanese at that time were not
interested in settling in the uncultivated forests and
jungles of the south. As a result, numbers of Nepalis
migrated to southern Bhutan and, on their own, cleared and
cultivated the land. With this initial success, many more
Nepalis followed and settled peacefully in Bhutan. In 1958,
the King of Bhutan adopted the country's first Nationality
Law, which granted citizenship to all people with only two
conditions -- they must have resided in Bhutan for more than
10 years and must own agricultural land.

-------------- --
Citizenship Rights Restricted:
Census Discriminates Against Southern Bhutanese
-------------- --


5. (SBU) The RGOB received the first of two wake-up calls
raising fears of cultural and political annihilation when
India, by exploiting ethnic rifts between Nepalis and
Lepchas, annexed Sikkim in 1975. In 1977, the RGOB adopted
the Bhutan Citizenship Act, which raised the threshold for
citizenship to include, for the first time, cultural
requirements, such as spoken and written knowledge of the
Bhutanese language. All those granted citizenship were also
required to swear an oath of loyalty to the King of Bhutan
and to promise to observe "all the customs and traditions of
the people of Bhutan." The law also, for the first time,
discouraged Bhutanese citizens from marrying non-Bhutanese by
not granting citizenship to the spouse or their children.
The 1980 Marriage Act also denied certain facilities, such as
land and seed distribution and loans, to any citizen who
married a foreigner. The Act also refused promotion to any
government official who married a non-Bhutanese.


6. (C) The second wake-up call arrived in the late 1980s when
political unrest in Nepal laid siege to Nepal's monarchy and
autocratic Panchayat (partyless) government. By 1989, the
GON's acquisition of defensive security equipment from China
led to India's refusal to renew the overland Trade and
Transit Treaty, effectively imposing an embargo on the
country and causing fuel and commodity shortages. In 1991,
the one-party system collapsed and was replaced by a
multiparty government.


7. (SBU) Concurrently with these events, the RGOB adopted the
Bhutan Citizenship Act of 1985, which granted citizenship
only to those who were resident in Bhutan on or before
December 31, 1958, and whose names were registered with the
Ministry of Home Affairs. If a resident did not meet these
requirements, they could apply for naturalized citizenship
provided that certain conditions were met, including 20 years
residency, proficiency in speaking and written Dzongkha, a
"good moral character," and "no record of having spoken or
acted against the King, Country and People of Bhutan in any
manner whatsoever." The law also allowed the government to
strip citizenship arbitrarily from any naturalized citizen.


8. (SBU) In 1987, the RGOB initiated a census intended to
implement the 1985 Citizenship Act, resulting in the mass
de-nationalization of many ethnic Nepalis. The census was
implemented only in southern Bhutan. According to interviews
of refugees in 1991 and of southern Bhutanese in 1993, the
RGOB specifically required people to present land tax
receipts from 1958 to qualify as citizens (Refs C and D).
Many complained that it was not reasonable for the government
to expect barely literate peasants and farmers to have saved
tax receipts for thirty years. Although many of these people
held Bhutanese citizenship cards issued during the earlier
census in 1979, these cards did not qualify them for
citizenship status under the new law. In some cases, people
were denied citizenship because they had inherited land from
parents after 1958 and could not, therefore, demonstrate land
tax receipts in their own name from before 1958. Others
claimed that their evidence of citizenship was confiscated by
officials and that they were later labeled as non-nationals.
In January 1989, King Wangchuk decreed a "one nation, one
people" policy that required practice of Drukpa culture
through a compulsory dress code and the termination of Nepali
language instruction in schools (Ref E). These policies gave
rise to fears in southern Bhutan that those who were not
categorized as bona fide citizens in the census would be
forced to leave the country.

--------------
Political Unrest Leads to Mass Expulsions
--------------


9. (C) Unrest at government policies on national integration
and the census spread in southern Bhutan in early 1990,
culminating in a series of demonstrations throughout southern
Bhutan in September 1990. The first signs of violent
activities by government opponents reportedly occurred in
February 1990, involving extortion and stripping of people
wearing northern Bhutanese dress. Later, however, these
activities reportedly included more serious crimes, such as
murder and kidnapping with attacks directed at census
officers and other officials. As a result, the government
suspended schools and health services in southern Bhutan.
The government increased its security presence in Southern
Bhutan and sought to suppress the political demonstrations,
leading to cases of arbitrary arrest, accompanied by torture
and rape. In August 1991, one refugee woman explained to
EmbOff that she had fled Bhutan with her 14-year-old daughter
after her husband was arrested and they were both raped by
soldiers (Ref C). Reports of widespread rape of Nepali
ethnic women by Bhutanese troops was particularly prevalent
(Ref F). In early 1991, victims of these violations and
those who feared becoming victims began to flee from southern
Bhutan.


10. (C) The RGOB also began enforcing the results of the
census in mid-1991, leading to forcible expulsions of entire
families and, in a few cases, whole villages. In 1991-1992,
RGOB officials reportedly began classifying individuals as
non-nationals if they had a close relative who had
participated in the 1990 demonstrations or who had already
left Bhutan for Nepal. People who were classified as
non-nationals said that they were told by local government
officials to leave the country within a short time or pay a
fine or be imprisoned (Ref D). Many of them were also
required to sign "voluntary emigration" forms before leaving.
During a visit to the camps in August 1991, EmbOff learned
that 267 asylum seekers had arrived the day before, mostly
from the same village, reporting that a 16-man census team,
backed by a contingent of 50 soldiers, enforcing the census
had demanded that the village headman supply 10 women between
12 and 25 years of age to the group every night. When the
villagers refused, their homes were burned down and they
fled. Internal UNHCR reports at the time cited continuing
human rights violations and forced expulsions throughout 1991
and 1992.

--------------
The Flow of Refugees Into Nepal
--------------


11. (C) The first wave of refugees coincided with the
September 1990 demonstrations. Most of these people
reportedly fled to neighboring states of Assam and West
Bengal in India and to Nepal where they were able to
assimilate due to family ties. The first half of 1991
witnessed a steady trickle into Nepal of refugees without
family ties who settled in camps (Ref C). By June 1991,
UNHCR estimated that roughly 6,000 refugees had entered
Nepal, although most had blended into their ancestral
villages (Ref G) while the Nepal Red Cross, with UNHCR
financing, was supplying relief to 84 families (430 persons)
living on river banks in eastern Nepal. UNHCR was seeking
direct involvement in refugee care and maintenance, but had
been stymied by bureaucratic delays within the Government of
Nepal (GON). By August 1991, a new pattern of arrivals
emerged with whole families transiting directly to Nepal,
often on buses with written instructions from the RGOB to
proceed to Maidhar camp, the larger of the two refugee camps
in eastern Nepal at that time (Ref H).


12. (SBU) A rough timeline of refugee flows into camps is
outlined here with data from Embassy reporting. These
numbers do not include those who assimilated locally in India
and Nepal.

June 1991 -- 430 persons
September 1991 -- 3,000 persons
November 1991 -- 5,500 persons
January 1992 -- 14,000 persons
March 1992 -- 25,000 persons
June 1992 -- 40,000 persons
September 1992 -- 67,500 persons


13. (C) Conditions in the refugee camps remained inadequate
throughout 2001-2002. By October 1991, 26 deaths were
reported due to malaria and malnutrition. There were no
educational or recreation facilities available, and the
refugees survived on what little assistance they received
from international charitable organizations and local
charities in Jhapa District (Ref I). UNHCR was not able to
become directly involved in refugee care and maintenance
until January 1992, after the refugee population had grown to
14,000. Even as late as June 1992, UNHCR upgraded the
refugee situation to "emergency" status due to inadequate
sanitation and health facilities and a strong probability of
epidemic disease. The mortality rate for children under 5
years of age in the camps was very high with 19.3 deaths
daily per 10,000 children, due primarily to diarrhea and
malnutrition.


14. (C) In response to an RGOB claim that most of the
refugees had actually come from Assam and areas in Nepal, in
April 1992, the GON invited the RGOB to jointly screen the
refugees, but this offer was not accepted (Ref J). ConGen
Calcutta reported in May 1992 that there was little evidence
that any sizable portion of the Bhutanese refugees in Nepal
were actually Indian residents fleeing violence in Assam (Ref
K). The Embassy also reported strong evidence that the
overwhelming majority of refugees were coming from Bhutan.
According to the Lutheran World Foundation, UNHCR's main
implementing partner, in August 1992, vehicles bringing in
new refugee arrivals carried passenger lists stamped by the
RGOB containing names, ages, source villages and compensation
paid to passengers (Ref L). By September 1992, new arrivals
were down markedly, averaging below 100 per day from a height
of 300 per day in June 1992.

--------------
Comment
--------------


15. (C) It is clear from the most reliable contemporary
reports that the events leading to the mass exodus of ethnic
Nepalis from Bhutan in the early 1990s were ethnically
motivated. It is in the RGOB's interest to characterize the
expulsion of Nepali-ethnic Bhutanese in 1991-1993 as an
appropriate response to illegal immigration and unlawful
political agitation and violence. While it is certainly true
that ethnic Nepalis in Bhutan were a voice for change, the
situation was aggravated by laws and policies that required
conformity with majority (i.e., Tantric Buddhist) Bhutanese
culture and imposed second-hand citizenship status on ethnic
Nepalis. The methods and policies adopted by the RGOB are
not justifiable by international standards of the 21st
century.


16. (C) According to Ref B, the Bhutanese king suggested that
the establishment of UNHCR-run camps in Eastern Nepal
precipitated the outflow of refugees attracted by free food,
shelter and education. However, UNHCR did not become
involved directly until January 2002 when the population had
already reached 14,000. Moreover, the camps suffered from
poor nutrition and sanitation throughout 2002 -- hardly the
paradise described by the King. King Wangchuk also
questioned the screening process conducted by the GON and
UNHCR. However, first-hand accounts of officials
interviewing potential refugees, including Ambassador
Malinowski, who was DCM at the time, indicate very specific
and extensive information of systematic and widespread ethnic
discrimination forcing ethnic Nepalis to leave Bhutan. Post
hopes that this account will contribute to a fuller, more
nuanced understanding of the origins of the Bhutanese refugee
situation. End Comment.
MALINOWSKI