NRB was a proposal put forth for discussion. In course, we received hundreds of comments and suggestions in online as well as in email. Some sent their verbal messages. The debate is going on. We sought few other parties and organization about their position but we are yet to get their response.
To answer few of the serious questions raised on NRB during the discussions, we have presented R. K. Dorji, chairman of Druk National Congress who was the first to support this idea, to answer our readers. Here it is:
1. Why do you feel the need of a Non Resident Bhutanese network?
R.K.Dorji: It’s not a question of whether I feel the need or not. It is the people who will have to decide whether they feel the need or not. Our people, both from within Bhutan as well as from the Bhutanese refugee community, are going to foreign countries in large numbers and many more could be them joining in the future. When such a large number of citizens begin to reside in foreign countries, the Diaspora coming together to establish an association to further their common interests is but a natural step. So when the idea came forth, we saw all logic in supporting the establishment of such an association.
2. What contribution should it make for strengthening democracy and national unity?
R.K Dorji: The NRB Association is conceived as a welfare organization for non-resident Bhutanese, and not as a political organization. It objectives should be to work for the common good of its members according to their wishes. But I think taking up rights issues is acceptable, because “rights” encompasses a wider field, from human rights to civil liberties and citizens’ privileges and facilities.
3. What are your bases of hopes that northern and eastern Bhutanese living abroad would embrace to this global network?
R.K Dorji: The NRB Association is for all the citizens of Bhutan residing abroad, and not a sectarian organization for northern, eastern or southern Bhutanese. Membership of NRB Association should be open to every Bhutanese residing abroad who wishes to and sees the need and the benefit to be a part of the organization. Membership should be, as with all welfare organizations, by choice and not mandatory.
4. How can we Bhutanese living abroad be able to stay outside NRN and NRI networks?
R.K Dorji: If you are neither a Nepali citizen nor an Indian citizen, I don’t see how you can qualify for the membership of the NRN or NRI. Even as far as the NRB Association is concerned, it’s an individual’s choice to want to be associated or not. One must find benefit in becoming a part of the Association to want to be a member, if one doesn’t, then I don’t see why one should.
5. One of the primary functions of the NRB would be to end bitter relations that exist between Bhutanese inside and in exile. What strategies, do you think, we need to rebuild this relation?
R.K Dorji: It is too premature to delve into this. It is up to the members to decide its mandate and strategies. But if and once people from both sides of the divide start becoming members after they find that it benefits them to do so, and thus come together for their common welfare, the likelihood of relations improving is but logical.
6. To what extent you party offers support for this network? How do you assure that it won’t be politicized?
R.K Dorji: My party has supported this idea of the formation of the NRB Association. It is for the members of the proposed NRB Association to strengthen it according to its mandate.
July 1st, 2009 at 2:47 pm
My comment here assumes that this discussion about “Non-resident Bhutanese” association/organization has been prompted more by the resettlement of Bhutanese refugees in many countries around the world, and less by the spread of Bhutanese currently “living” inside Bhutan who work and live abroad. I do assume that some people do have intentions to include the latter group as well in this new entity.
First: I think a platform even at the international level may be a good idea, but I have objections to using the term “Non-Resident Bhutanese” to describe the resettled Bhutanese refugees though, on various grounds:
1. The term “non-resident Bhutanese” implies that the person in question has moved away from Bhutan on his/her own, for economic or other adventurous reasons and lives abroad.
2. It is implicit that a “non-resident Bhutanese” carries with him/her the Bhutanese passport and can go back to Bhutan any time s/he wishes.
3. A non-resident Bhutanese enjoys the protection of the government of Bhutan when s/he is in need of protection.
4. The term “non-resident Bhutanese” implies that the person concerned has the privilege of citizenship of Bhutan.
Now, we refugees are Bhutanese and we call ourselves so, but we do not have the privilege of citizenship. I would prefer to call ourselves “Bhutanese in Exile” or even “Bhutanese Refugees,” but I would be against giving the Bhutanese government a cleaner chit by calling myself a “non-resident Bhutanese.’ Any word or phrase that describes us should covey our situation vis-a-vis Bhutan and its government, as opposed to the situation of those who travel back and forth from Bhutan but live abroad. This will change only when the Bhutanese government recognizes us as Bhutanese and gives us the option of returning to Bhutan as citizens, no matter whether we want to go back or not.
Even though literally correct, the term ‘non-resident’ has gained currency and a specific meaning to itself, and we should perhaps do some research to figure out what exactly the term would convey to the world. So, I suggest that we get our descriptive words and phrases right before we take this discussion further.
A caveat: We do not find “non-resident” associations/organizations of people who came here (the US) as refugees. There are no Non-Resident Vietnamese Associations, no Non-Resident Vietnamese Association, no Non-Resident Burmese Associations. On the contrary, you see Non-resident Nepali Association! Refugees who do not have the prospect do nto describe themselves as “Non-resident ”
Second: For welfare purposes, we would do well with organizations on a smaller scale than an international network (I am assuming that international is implied, because we already have a host of CBOs at the local and national level). An international network, if we have it, should focus more on the rights aspects.
So, a network, more in the image of, say, International Campaign for Tibet, is something I would think of, as opposed to the Non-resident Nepali Association.
Third: With due respects, we all appreciate the coming of this idea in the open, but given the reality of our experiences in the past, it would be best if this is not aggressively advocated by political groups and their leaders. Not that we don’t appreciate the contributions made by each individual and each organization, but at the moment, we can afford to be skeptical and wary of manipulation, even though there may be only good intentions behind the endeavour.
PS:
Please let us keep this discussion healthy and civil and see if we can get anywhere.
Editor:
Can you please edit the sentence in the post above (5th paragraph) which reads “Refugees who do not have the prospect do nto describe themselves as “Non-resident ” to “Refugees who do not have the prospect of free life inside Bhutan do not describe themselves as “Non-resident ”
July 2nd, 2009 at 2:18 am
The response of Shri R. K. Dorji, President of DNC, makes amply clear that NRB is a platform of Bhutanese people living outside the country whether they have gone abroad from the camps or inside the country. And also he makes it clear that it is a non-political organization that could come up with its own mandate and decide on the area of work it would like to focus. I do hope that it gave answers to those individuals who were concerned about politiciation of the platform. It also gives a perspective that NRB could potentially be a platfrom to rebuild bridges among the Bhutanese people both inside and outside the country which has been missing during the last 20 years. Now people in overseas countries are in touch with the relatives in Bhutan which was not the case in the camps. Thank you DNC President for your response! I suggest that APFA news take initiatives to present the views of other Bhutanese leaders and our well-wishers too.
Dev
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:58 am
R. K Dorjee is a real democrats who should be honored as Father of Democratic Movement in Bhutan. I agree and supports his view points on Non Residential Bhutanese Association.
Deepa Mishra
USA
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:47 pm
We became refugees due to “unknown circumstances”. Our people raised issues of multi-party Democracy as early as late 80s. (I assume earlier demand of democracy was not that serious). In the course of almost 18 years struggle both by people in exile and inside Bhutan, we are now witnessing democratic processes in Bhutan. It is all but natural that it is only the “time” that will ultimately give us justice.
Technically the term “Non Resident Bhutanese” may not sound logical at this time, but I am comfortable to embrace this term because I suppose that we are in the right direction. The reasons:
1.We have nothing to lose by embracing the term “Non-Resident Bhutanese”; if we aim for Moon will land at least in the Space.
2.We have no bad relation with people inside Bhutan. In the course of democratic process with democratic minded people in power, it will not be that big surprise when they allow us to return Bhutan who ever are willing (I am optimistic).
3.The people in exile have two choices: (a) to forget Bhutan and to live happily in the country of resettlement (b) To wait for dignified return; searching conduit (may be UN) in the mean time to convince RGOB that we are not bad guys; and for that NRB would be the best bargaining forum.
4.Every country has its own unique problems and thus non-residential status; so how about NRB issues not looked technically at par with NRI or NRN or any other countries? I think it takes time and ultimately we will achieve it.
5.Personally, I believe, the time has changed, RGOB of 1990s and our leaders have changed. The Bhutan is for the younger generation and the young monarch. So it is we the younger generation to opt flexibility—not hardliner stand like that of RGOB or our leaders of the past—vis-à-vis to our issues. So I don’t feel discomfort to give even “clean chit” if current RGOB allows me to return Bhutan with all dignity and honor.
PS: Friends, these are just my opinion, so please do not take it personal.
Parangkush Subedi
Graduate Student, Emory University
July 4th, 2009 at 1:03 am
Hari Acharya is very right that we should take some time to come up with the real word what we want to call.
Hari, you can visit my comments earlier which have echoed on what we have said.
Dev and Deepa Mishra, you seems to be more of laso Dasho to Rongthong Kinley Dorji than putting the perspective here. Keep out your emotion and put the context on what we should called this organisation. Please read hari’s comment and please suggest as to how we want to move ahead. Who does what will come latter. Right now, please think is it the time of any such institute? Should we form it now by few willing people or wait for few more years fro all to asettle in TCS and get correct connotation of the institute. This is because the thinking of people from the camp and after resettled will drastically change and they may prefer totally different institute or fully agree to what you are saying. At this time wait and research is better option
More will come from me later.
Parsu
July 4th, 2009 at 5:35 am
To know the term and its implication better, the following simple clarification may help:
A non-resident Bhutanese is a Bhutanese citizen who has migrated to another country, a person of Bhutanese origin who is born outside Bhutan, or a person of Bhutanese origin who resides outside Bhutan. Other terms with the same meaning are overseas Bhutanese and expatriate Bhutanese. In common usage, this often includes Bhutan-born individuals (and also people of other nations with Bhutanese ancestry) who have taken the citizenship of other countries.
July 5th, 2009 at 11:10 pm
Dear All,
I am writing my comments after reading what everyone has commented earlier, including my own, in the name of Non Residence Bhutanese (NRB), I put my suggestions as follows:
1 WE SHOULD DISCUSS THE NAME OF THIS INSTITUTE BEFORE WE MOVE FURTHER AND GET EVERYONE’S APPROVAL.
Should we call it NRB?
Should it be called Bhutanese Living Abroad (BLA)?
Should it be Bhutanese Diaspora Abroad (BDA)?
Should it be Bhutanese in Exile (BIE)?
Please let us come up with the name first and agree in it, it could be totally different from the above suggestion. Let every body put names first and agree.
Action: By all Bhutanese in exile and inside Bhutan.
Time: Final outcome by June 2010.
Responsible to coordinate:
Please form the committee of lead this. Anyone can be lead who does not represent any political or associated groups. Could be someone like RP Subba dai who has been writing very researched article about Bhutan? I think is a neutral person to coordinate through emails if he is willing.
How: Form the new goggle email group with the help of our journalist bhais and bainees for BNS and Apfanews. This is very important since there are many unknown people in present Bhutanese refugee google group and we cannot depend on confidentiality in this forum since this is read by all. There may be times, some things discussed first before bringing in the forum.
2 DISCUSS THE MAIN VISION, MISSION AND OBJECTIVE OF THE INSTITUTE BASED ON THE NAME
How: Share the ideas in the same email group and discuss each point dot by dot.
Time: Final outcome by 2011 June.
Who can lead the discussion?
The same person as in 1 or can form the small committee of members from all the places voluntarily through emails.
3 FINAL CONSTITUTION DRAFT AND OTHER DETAILS
How: By discussion with all
Time: End June 2112.
4 HOW TO REPRESENT ALL BHUTANESE AROUND THE WORLD?
One:
By choosing the representative from each country where people are settling.
Two:
By electing representative from each country from their community organisations who are serving as executives
Three:
By choosing anyone who may or may not be in the community organisation
Four:
Should be from the neutral background or declare apolitical or not affiliated to any groups for the interest of the organisation who may be in conflict with other groups
Five:
Anyone from inside Bhutan should also be allowed to be executive if the RGOB is becoming partner like other Non residence institutes.
5 SHOULD THIS INSTITUTE BE INDEPENDENT OF RGOB OR INCLUSIVE OF RGOB?
Discuss with the forum above whether RGOB is inclusive. If yes, what is the approach?
Should we demand our property back through this forum?
Should we fight human rights or democracy through this forum? Or we only seek return to Bhutan as non political in the goodwill as tourist or visitors on the invitation of the relatives and friends?
Should the people of Bhutanese origin with Bhutanese passport who can come and go to Bhutan become members? If yes, what is the difference between resettled refugees who are not allowed to go to Bhutan?
6 WHAT WE WANT FROM THIS FORUM?
One: Relation with Bhutan and its people! If so, how?
Two: Is it a lobbying forum for more freedom inside Bhutan? Or developing people to people relation inside Bhutan? Or helping Bhutan in Business and investments or projects to assist the common people in Bhutan?
7 HOW WE COORDINATE GLOBALLY?
Do we form this institute (eg NRB or BIE) in each country first and make a global representation?
Or we make one globally body and develop a branch in each country?
Or the Global executives advise each country to form and representatives in each countries?
Or we decide the number of executives in the global body and conduct vote in each country?
Should the general mass decide on the president or chairman or executive members elect the presidents and portfolio from the elected body?
8 IS IT THE RIGHT TIME OR WE WAIT FOR FEW MORE YEARS?
Many people who are the actual stakeholders and seniors and less literate Bhutanese have no idea about this discussion going on. Are we being fair to them? And many youth who have no internet access or have no knowledge are in complete dark. Many are settling and many more are in the process of settling and their priority is not this now. They will have first interest to resettle first, then think of such institute and decide to take part or not later on.
If we are moving and pushing the idea with the few willing ones, probably opportunist, are we becoming fair to all or are we giving them equal opportunities to be the fair stakeholders?
How we take the view of general mass in this particular regard? How we communicate people inside Bhutan? Are they free to discuss with us now? And will they in the present context?
Should we start talking to RGOB authorities both on personal and official basis? If so, should we stop advocating democracy and human rights inside Bhutan and say RGOB is our govt and we forgive the past action and offer the olive branch! or fight until the end to get our rights back?
Please let us put these points first before our personal interest and saying one is better than other to lead.
Hopefully, we may be ready to come up with something concrete by end 2013. I believe we are not in hurry to form something now and fail. We may explore the ideas now and debate until 2013 and see from there.
There will be two choices whether we ignore the mass and lead this organisation.
One that willing people will form one institute and advocate as per their views, or
other trying to include everyone with consensus until 2013.
The choice is ours
All the best
Parsu
Melbourne
Australia
July 6th, 2009 at 7:45 am
Dear All
NRB will have to be a generic orgranization like NRI or NRN. This will be for Bhutan, and the country will have to recognize it sooner or later. Since there is an open border between Bhutan and India, Between Nepal and India, there is a need to have a tacit support from the countries in the region to the constitution of NRB to avoid future complication. Ultimately, it will be the democratically elected parliament of Bhutan that will have to delve with NRB with proper understanding of regional sensitivities. There could be other organizations or platform which can work for the welfare of resettled refugees. NRB will be one organization with branches in countries where our peoples are resettled.
Other organizations which are formed for welfare of the refugee communities they will have to decide on their own whether or not they would support this concept and whether or not they would like to become part of the Bhutanee Diaspora. The role of the political parties will be inside the country to lobby the parliament for its recognition.
The execuitves of political parties cannot lead NRB as they are political activists, and they are not NRB. They can help in the preparation of ground works and provide support whenever necessary. At least this is how I understand on how the NRB will get evolve in the future.
Dev
July 6th, 2009 at 8:50 am
Parsu, I think your point No. 3 should be 2012 and not 2112.
July 12th, 2009 at 8:33 am
Dear Friend,
It is interesting to note the comments made by Mr. Hari and Mr. Parsu. I know it is the historical problems of the Bhutanese in naming the organization. The same thing happened while naming AMCC, there was a big verbal fight involve in 1996 before launching AMCC. The leaders were fighting for the correct form of the Nomenclature. Finally, there was nothing at the end, that just brought bad taste and severe political rivalry amongst the leaders.
Similar view points are coming up in regards to the nomenclature of NRB.
I don’t see any problem calling it NRB ,it simply means People of Bhutanese origin but staying out of Bhutan for many reasons. I see it is futile to bargain on this issue.
Why on earth Mr. Parsu is scared of the politically affiliated people. He is always talking about the neutral person, by the way, who are these neutral people? All human beings are political animals so why should one is allergic to politicians. Parsu, I guess , you are being unnecessarily soft with the RGOB, may be you yourself aiming for the political post. But now for sure, you are covering yourself with the false cover of neutrality.
Friends, politics is reality but some people play false politics for their selfish gain and I bet many politicians around the world live on false politics and with ill intension. But there are other politicians who are real political minded and were able to change the world, for instance, Mahatma Gandhi, his life was fully immersed with politics but not for his personal gain,but for the people. He even declined to be the first president of free India. Such should be the level of sacrifice, I expect from our leaders.
When can we achieve our goal? if we take a year to name the Organization alone. Does it really take such hell lot of time? 365 days to name the institution? Are we really achieving something if we take another 4 years(2013 as Parsu says) down the line just to established an organization? I m skeptical, I think given this resources and manpower, it should not take more than a year or two to constitute such an institution which is anticipated as the favorite forum for all the time to come, for the Bhutanese living abroad.
I feel NRB is not meant for the Bhutanese who are still inside the country, simply because they are still residing inside the country. But, if the NRB launches some developmental projects, provided, the RGOB cooperates, in that matter, then the people inside Bhutan will be immensely benefitted.
July 12th, 2009 at 6:30 pm
Having read so many comments in the forum on NRB, it made me want to express a few of my thoughts and opinions on the topic from the perspective of a college going Bhutanese student in the US. Our people seem to have a mixed reaction on whether or not NRB is a good platform for the Bhutanese diaspora, and if at all the nomenclature makes sense.
Some of us have expressed objection over the name ‘NRB’ because we don’t have the Bhutanese passport or that RGOB is not involved in the creation of the platform. In a very simple sense, even by dictionary standards, I think the name perfectly fits our case. Should we go about how NRNs or NRIs have defined who they are? . Just coz ‘NRN’ has outlined some criteria for non- resident Nepalese, does that mean we should stick to it? I think the terminology ‘Non resident’ implies beyond that.Doesn’t ‘Non resident’ simply mean people living outside their homeland? Now that we are spread across four continents, are we not ‘Non resident Bhutanese’ by default?I don’t think we should necessarily have a Bhutanese passport to qualify being a ‘Non resident Bhutanese’. As far as getting recognition from the RGOB is concerned, thats something for us to make it happen. How do i see ‘NRB’ as a better platform? For the past 18 years or so, we waited for a dignified return to our homeland. We lobbied the international community to pressurize RGOB to accept us as its citizen. Nothing happened. Is this the end? Are we homeless people? where does our root belong to? Shouldn’t our coming generations have answers to these? After all these years, by now we should know that trying to change RGOB’s stance via political and human rights platforms from exile is next to impossible. There should be a compromising point where both RGOB and the Bhutanese living abroad agree. Not everyone of us would go back and live in Bhutan permanently even if that is okeyed by the Bhutan government. Likewise, I am sure RGOB doesn’t want to tarnish its image any further as it is aware that with the resettlement the issue has become more of a headache than a solution. ‘NRB’ should come as a compromising platform for both the parties- RGOB and us. To me the formation of ‘NRB’ comes as the best bargaining platform with the RGOB. While we would have connections with our homeland, RGOB would equally benefit from our investments. Recognition of the ‘NRB’ platform by RGOB would also motivate us to approach a neutral path when speaking in the international forums about RGOB, ‘GNH’, and the Bhutanese refugee issue. Hope RGOB realizes this.
July 13th, 2009 at 3:52 am
Lokendra,
I apreciate your comment.
1 Let me make it clear that I am not interested in waht you fear for me leading or assumption of being the NRB leader. There are many platform I am already involved in making some small differences. More than me, it looks you are scared with people than the whole vision of would be NRB. Why cannot you read others comment on good and bad experiences people lhas made about the past and come up with ideas and suggestions rather than personal comments?
2 If the same people of different political party or established groups has to run the NRB and you do not think it is to do with people inside Bhutan, then why change the name, simply continue in one of the old name and we all will support it.
3 NRB is for people mostly settling out of Bhutan, Why did not the concept came 10 year ago and why it is pop in up now? The resettlement has not reached even 15000. There are many to come out and settle. Why cannot you wait and incorpate everyones view when atleat majority are their?
4 My whole point of opposing early naming and making decsions is to ensure that all people are well informed, and they speak up for themselves, not person like you and me who say them this good form them and that is not good form them.
At this time, even the resettled ones are struggling so hard with cultural shock, language problem and finding jobs, so what is rush now to decide something and impose on them? What significant achievement will NRB do except than forming and naming executives and dumping the constitution? Why cannot you read my comment above which says we start writing vision and objectives from now.
Please note the time frame, I have written is not my own, I have personally spoken to many people in Australia, New Zealand, US and Europe and, everyone suggested,it is too early to from and incorporate before the arrival of majority.
It looks to me that you are somehow more scared that someone will lead the NRB from other than your groups and you would allow the organisation to the new comers.
If the NRB is for whole Bhutanese diaspora, why few has to initiate without consulting atleast all the parties, groups, and factions within Bhutanese circle, where majority are still in Nepal.
5 if you are seeing I am soft with RGOB, that is up to you. But if you ever one day want to go to Bhutan or send you kids to Bhutan, the only step is to talk with them, you start now or after 30 years the process is same. In 18 years India never allowed various movement to march to Bhutan, and now how can you be realistic that you will do this from overseas unless you talk to them? Now even the previosu agenda will not work since you are settled in the democratic countries where human rights are highly respected. The only agenda you will have is those people remaining in the camp and to bring reforms inside Bhutan. On this, how relevant it will be for the respective govtr of our coutries to speak?
If they have not made any remarkable approach in last 18 years what basis they will have now? What can we do from over 7 seas to Bhutan? What is the rational of NRB? Forming some organisation for the sake of forming will not achieve anything. Thst why I am again and again asking is NRB going to be without RGOB or with RGOB? The whole concept and vision will then come up accordingly. Why cannot you put some light on this than pulling legs?
6 You should well understand the meaning of Non residence by definition and how it is functiuonong in case of other countries, unless we want to have a very different NRB.
7 The whole purpose of my commenting here is to contribute to the Bhutanese community anywhere outside or inside Bhutan. This does not need to take the leaders role in NRB. The only point here is that we have to respect everyone’s opinion on NRB nad I will always push for this, and not for who can lead or not lead.
8 Neutral person means let everyone know and understand the person, if someone from the old leadership would like to lead, then they have to start sending their vision and menifesto and make a appeal to the people to support through variosu media (Everyone should be mindful that it is not the red scarf you will receive from Palace, it is your interest and meaningful committment you have to deliver). Remeber, now the people are settling in the west and they have the right to choose the people they think they can trust.
I have simply asked suggestions on as to how we define and move ahead, not the sort of analyses that you are scared and making it personal agenda of of leg pulling mate!
I would have appreciated if you would comment on how we represet from all over the world and provide the structiral advise.
So much for now
Parsu
July 13th, 2009 at 4:00 am
Sorry for the spelling gaffs to all the readers in the above comment.
Thank you parsu
July 13th, 2009 at 4:06 am
Dear editors,
Can you please delete the earlier comment and release this one. many thanks.
Parsu
Lokendra,
I appreciate your comment.
1 Let me make it clear that I am not interested in what you fear for me leading or assumption of being the NRB leader. There are many platform I am already involved in making some small differences. More than me, it looks you are scared with people than the whole vision of would be NRB. Why cannot you read others comment on good and bad experiences people have made about the past and come up with ideas and suggestions rather than personal comments?
2 If the same people of different political party or established groups have to run the NRB and you do not think it is to do with people inside Bhutan, then why change the name, simply continue in one of the old name and we all will support it.
3 NRB is for people mostly settling out of Bhutan, Why did not the concept came 10 year ago and why it is pop in up now? The resettlement has not reached even 15000. There are many to come out and settle. Why cannot you wait and incorporate everyone’s view when at least majority are there?
4 My whole point of opposing early naming and making decisions is to ensure that all people are well informed, and they speak up for themselves, not person like you and me who say them this good form them and that is not good form them.
At this time, even the resettled ones are struggling so hard with cultural shock, language problem and finding jobs, so what is rush now to decide something and impose on them? What significant achievement will NRB do except than forming and naming executives and dumping the constitution? Why cannot you read my comment above which says we start writing vision and objectives from now.
Please note the time frame, I have written is not my own, I have personally spoken to many people in Australia, New Zealand, US and Europe and, everyone suggested, it is too early to from and incorporate before the arrival of majority.
It looks to me that you are somehow more scared that someone will lead the NRB from other than your groups and you would allow the organisation to the new comers.
If the NRB is for whole Bhutanese diasporas, why few has to initiate without consulting at least all the parties, groups, and factions within Bhutanese circle, where majority are still in Nepal.
5 if you are seeing I am soft with RGOB, that is up to you. But if you ever one day want to go to Bhutan or send you kids to Bhutan, the only step is to talk with them, you start now or after 30 years the process is same. In 18 years India never allowed various movements to march to Bhutan, and now how can you be realistic that you will do this from overseas unless you talk to them? Now even the previous agenda will not work since you are settled in the democratic countries where human rights are highly respected. The only agenda you will have is those people remaining in the camp and to bring reforms inside Bhutan. On this, how relevant it will be for the respective govt of our courtiers to speak?
If they have not made any remarkable approach in last 18 years what basis they will have now? What can we do from over 7 seas to Bhutan? What is the rational of NRB? Forming some organisation for the sake of forming will not achieve anything. Thats why I am again and again asking is NRB going to be without RGOB or with RGOB? The whole concept and vision will then come up accordingly. Why cannot you put some light on this than pulling legs?
6 You should well understand the meaning of Non residence by definition and how it is functioning in case of other countries, unless we want to have a very different NRB.
7 The whole purpose of my commenting here is to contribute to the Bhutanese community anywhere outside or inside Bhutan. This does not need to take the leaders role in NRB. The only point here is that we have to respect everyone’s opinion on NRB and I will always push for this, and not for who can lead or not lead.
8 Neutral person means let everyone know and understand the person, if someone from the old leadership would like to lead, then they have to start sending their vision and manifesto and make a appeal to the people to support through various media (Everyone should be mindful that it is not the red scarf you will receive from Palace, it is your interest and meaningful commitment you have to deliver). Remember, now the people are settling in the west and they have the right to choose the people they think they can trust.
I have simply asked suggestions on as to how we define and move ahead, not the sort of analyses that you are scared and making it personal agenda of of leg pulling mate!
I would have appreciated if you would comment on how we represent from all over the world and provide the structural advise.
So much for now
Parsu
July 14th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
Dear All,
NRB is a platform of all of us to take pride of. It is a platform that will be responsible to guide our society in overseas countries to become successful immigrants. The NRB should have its own website and publish all the achievements of our people and encourage them to do better. It should organize networking among our people so that they help each other to compete with the rest of the world.
Earlier, we have had been contended within the boundary of Bhutan. Now that is not the case. Nepal provided great deal of support to the Bhutnese refugees without that support we would have been begging in the street of Calcutta. NRB will have to establish itself in Kathmandu to work with the government of Nepal and should serve as informal ambassador of Bhutanese people.
We cannot delink with India because of our cultural or religious connection. There is a need to establish a mechanism for NRB to work with social or cultural organizations of India so that when our people visit India they face no undue difficulties. There is plenty fo work to be done outside the country before NRB establishes itself within Bhutan. We need have this organization sooner than later.
Elderly people resettled abroad would like to return to India or Nepal for cultural or religious reasons. Who will be talking on their behalf with the authorities in Nepal or India if they wish to stay longer? Normally, the visa expires within 90 days!
There are more urgent issues at hand, and NRB is needed to handle them. It would be difficult to handle these issues without the cooperation of the political parties in exile. The political parties in exile who have spent more than 20 years in exile have access to right places to help sort out these issues. In fact, the political parties will make NRB work easy if taken in right perspective.
NRB will have to be a organization like NRI and NRN. It must be able to establish working relationship with NRI and NRN. There is already a great deal of support comming from NRI and NRN to the resettled refugees. We need to strength it based on the organizational contact.
NRB will have to guide our people to succeed. Only Our success could buy our access to Bhutan and recognition by the parliament of Bhutan. We are not a useless people as perceived by Bhutan government. We are a hardworking people, and we will prove our worth.
To do that we have to organize ourself and work with in cooperation. So don’t think of excluding anybody. We have limited resources, we need to make optimim use of each and everyone if we aim to have a place wherever we are living or in the region.
Dev
July 14th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
My concern with “NRB” is not with what it means literally. We have been non-resident Bhutanese for the last 2 decades. It is more about the implied meaning of them term, the generally understood meaning of the term, and the currency the term has gained over the years. For examle, if you should look at the nature and the work of Non-Resident Nepali Association, it will perhaps be clearer: http://www.nrna.org.np
India has a Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs that looks after the interests of Non-Resident Indians. We do not yet have that kind of a connection to Bhutan. And I personally don’t think we will have, not anytime soon anyways. Forming an organization and being self-righteous about it is one thing. Selling the idea of that organization, gaining popularity and being successful requires that ‘others’ understand it correctly. Nuances matter. Implied meanings matter. Precedence matters. How our allies and our opponents may see it matter.
Calling ourselves NRBs and naming ourselves not only belittles but ignores our state of exile. As long as we are stateless, we should not really use descriptions that imply that we are accepted as belonging to somewhere. Our rush to start organizations, outdoing each other with gusto, rendered us incapable of putting a good enough fight for more than 20 years. We should debate more, and really try to do sincere research and accept what is right for us to do.
Mr. Subedi, there is no benefit in beating a dead horse, but I was involved in the formation of AMCC from the very beginning, even if at the periphery, and the naming exercise was more than a naming ceremny. It enabled us to explore the idea of what we wanted to do, how we were describing it, and what our fundamental approaches were. It was soul-searching, it was intense in the fact that we really debated more about what we were intending to do rather than the name itself. We can go ahead and name this new association whatever we want and it may not make a difference as to what it will exactly do. The difference lies in the soul-searching that is lost, in the introspection that is lost, in the sincere and intense debate about the intention/mission/vision/objectives of such an association that is lost, and possibly in the wrong messages the name sends to the world. There may not be much of a difference between Druk National Congress and Bhutan National Congress of yore, but there IS a fundamental difference in the message they each send to folks inside Bhutan. Need I say more?
Lawyers Committee for Human Rights in New York changed its name to Human Rights First a few years ago, after many years. International Committee of Lawyers for Tibet renamed itself as the Tibet Justice Center few years ago. The group I work for, Doctors of the World-USA renamed itself HealthRight International in February this year. None of these groups changed their activities significantly. Their missions remain the same. They needed a name that reflected correctly what they did and who they were. There is something to be said about a name and the description attached to a group, and it does deserve some debate and discussion.
I have seen our own Bhutanese folks folks meet one night, form an organization, name the office bearers, and register it the next day, only to go kaput in less than a month, without so much as sending out an email about the formation. I would suggest that we don’t do that.
July 17th, 2009 at 2:41 am
Dear All,
Unlike the case of NRI and NRN we are trying to reclaim our status as Bhutanese. It is not the government of Bhutan who will give. It will be us who will assert our rights of Bhutanese citizen. This platform will disilusion those people who believe that Bhutan political/refugee probelm is over. By accepting this platform we will be graduating from Bhutanese refugees to non-resident Bhutanese. I hope this clarifies the doubt why NRB is important for us as well as for Bhutan. Further clarification is not warrented here..
Dev
July 20th, 2009 at 7:16 am
Friends,
I like the way Mr. Hari and Mr. Parsu expressed their opinions on NRB, I even like the most, the way Mr. Dev and Gopal professed their opinions on the matter. Thank you all, but still I have some apprehension about the opinions of friends who think everybody need to come out of the camp in order to established the NRB. We can always consult the people wherever they are be it in the camp or United States.
Why should we wait for such a long time to start a good program. I don’t think NRB will solve the political agenda and establish vibrant democracy in Bhutan. I foresee it as the organization who works to meet the social, economical and spiritual needs of the Bhutanese people who are resettled all over the world.
Dr. DNS Dhakal ,pioneer in classifying this term and latter supported by Druk Nation Congress(DNC) led by Mr. Rongthong Kinley Dorji should come forward to express their opinions on this issues. (I invite both the leaders to clearly spell it functional aspects of NRB.) The political parties constituted in exile should always sphere head the political mission until and unless multiparty democracy is established in Bhutan.
I don’t think the NRB will in any way take the political standpoint to lock the horns with the RGOB. There are already acclaimed political Parties who want to fight until the last.
As Parsu said I don’t have any political mission or expectations from any of the said organizations/groups. I m a simple man just like to comments when I just feel it. I don’t want to influence anybody in this matter. And in any form I m not scared or interested in any of the portfolios in the said organizations. It is a strait comments from the observer point of view .Having said this Mr. Parsu I don’t have any intention to promote somebody or let down others. It is none of my business.
But I feel myself responsible to say” yes” to good things and” no” to oblivious act that I presumed.
Thanks
Lok
August 8th, 2009 at 10:09 am
i wish you all the best but you are all immigrants from nepal. so, apply for NRN.
PM, Bhutan
August 14th, 2009 at 3:46 am
The history will prove him wrong. Let us keep the Bhutanese identity intact, and the NRB is a challenge for Bhutan.
Dev
September 12th, 2009 at 11:06 pm
Mr.Jigme Thinley, you are immigrant from Tibet,so,you start your homeward journey to Tibet.
September 19th, 2009 at 7:13 am
?????????????????