|
Democracy is said to be a product of revolution. For Bhutan, the Himalayan kingdom of just over 700,000 people, democracy however, did not develop organically. Instead, on the 17th of December 2005, the 4th King Jigme Singye Wangchuck, announced to his stunned subjects that he would abdicate the throne in favor of his eldest son, and that general elections would be held in 2008.
The transition to a multiparty democracy was the last of a series of reforms spearheaded by King Wangchuck that saw Bhutan come a long way from its beginnings as a Buddhist sanctuary in 1616. Created by a Tibetan monk for the specific purpose of shutting out the rest of the world, the hermetic kingdom had remained impervious to the changing world until Tibet was invaded by China in the 50s. Suddenly aware of the vulnerability of his nation, King Wangchuck implemented a careful program of modernization that saw his people embrace the kind of material progress that most western countries take centuries to achieve. Bhutan had no public hospitals or schools until the 1950s, no paper currency, roads or electricity until several years after that and no diplomatic relations with any other country until 1961. King Wangchuk’s most celebrated reform however, came in 1998 when he pioneered a new way to measure quality of life called Gross National Happiness (GNH); an indicator that he soon defined as his nation’s guiding principle. GNH, easily Bhutan’s most recognizable export concerns economic self-reliance, protecting the environment, the preservation and promotion of Bhutan’s culture, and good governance in the form of a democracy.
Bhutan is no more than an infant democracy at this point in time, and although the newly elected Bhutan Peace and Prosperity Party’s policy aims are analogous to the former king’s mission i.e. to optimize Gross National Happiness, it is entirely possible that Bhutan will soon navigate uncharted political and social waters. King Wangchuck was the linchpin for modernization and perhaps in the near future with a different leader, Bhutan will discard its progressive agenda in favor of a more insular one possibly even reverting to a monarchy. After all, in the 2008 elections, many voters (and even politicians) admitted they preferred monarchy to democracy. “His Majesty is like our father. We all prefer our father,” Karma Tsheweng, a 35-year-old mechanic, told reporters in the capital, Thimphu.
That being said, it is unlikely that Bhutan will discard its new goals so soon; its GNH-centric governance has proven successful with Bhutan now being one of the fastest growing economies in the world as well as one of the happiest: in 2007, a widely cited study ranked Bhutan 8th out of 178 countries in ‘Subject Well-being.’ Bhutan’s burgeoning confidence is evident: from the 28th-29th of April 2010, Bhutan hosted the Sixteenth Summit of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC); an honor they had thrice refused on the basis of their country’s (previously) inadequate infrastructure. Bhutan’s ability to balance ostensibly conflicting goals has certainly set an example to many of its bigger and better developed neighbors. Countries like China and India whilst enjoying economic growth and prosperity have been plagued by corruption, environmental concerns, and political instability.
For Bhutan, the wheels of ‘progress’ are turning furiously as Bhutan embraces a new identity grounded both in ancient and modern values. And yet, some feel they are turning too fast. Bhutan is a society that has developed in near total isolation for hundreds of years. To thrust foreign customs and ideals onto such a society will inevitably create disequilibrium. In this sense, Bhutan serves as a cautionary tale to other developing countries. In June 1999, Bhutan became the last nation in the world to allow television access to its people. Four years on, Bhutanese are beginning to accuse television of smothering their culture, of promoting a world that is incompatible with their own, and of breeding values and behavior that is harmful to Bhutanese society.
It is still too early to tell whether Bhutanese society will remain resilient against the many problems that plague third world countries such as exploitation by foreign multinationals, the erosion of local traditions and values and other problems created in the wake of a globalizing world. But for the time being though, the Land of the Thunder Dragon serves as an example to other developing nations that it is possible to embrace progress without comprising too much on the traditional values and ideals that give a nation its identity. 
Zan Gilani is a legal analyst and has been covering issues on the political economy for a decade. He specializes in civil and national jurisprudence in the South Asian region.
|
Show/hide comments
Show/hide comment form
