Although largely unnoticed in a region and world beset by massive turmoil and crises, the Himalayan state of Bhutan in recent months nevertheless received unusual attention not only in the region, but from wider international community.

Although largely unnoticed in a region and world beset by massive turmoil and crises, the Himalayan state of Bhutan in recent months nevertheless received unusual attention not only in the region, but from wider international community.

The first occasion for the focus was a surprise military operation in late 2003 over several weeks conducted by its king against camps of foreign militants designated as foes and attackers of the neighbouring Indian states of Assam and North Bengal.

More recently, European Commissioner for Aid and Development Poul Nielsen also visited the kingdom, where the European Union assists and conducts a number of projects aimed primarily at development of the country’s agriculture or forestry sector.

Bhutan is one of the smaller states of a region dominated by larger neighbours such as India, China, Pakistan and Bangladesh and is also a member of the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). The country is also one of the poorest countries on earth, with a population of slightly more than one million. While its economy has been largely dominated by the traditional agriculture sectors, it has also acquired a reputation in recent years for its attraction of affluent Chinese tourists interested in not only its natural resources, but its gambling casinos. But its economic relations and trade have been largely dominated by India.

The military operations came following years of hesitation and of pressure by India requesting action against three Indian insurgent groups that were said to have entrenched themselves in the forests of the kingdom’s border.

The relatively short and somewhat surprising military campaign by the small Bhutanese military against entrenched camps of Indian guerrilla fighters on their territory was a major turning in a long and complex regional issue. And there was some concern in the aftermath that there could be a regrouping of the rebels either in Bhutan or Bangladesh, Burma or Nepal and a resurgence in coalition with Bhutanese Maoist dissidents of Nepalese origin.

The action, although anticipated and inevitable to a large degree, was said by one prominent Bhutanese visiting Europe recently, to “have been a bolt out of the blue,” underlining the fact that it was the was the first war involving the country since the Anglo-Bhutanese war of 1865.

Regional sources also suggested that the action could be considered part of a regional anti-terrorist drive, in part in the framework of a Regional Convention on Suppression of Terrorism signed by member countries of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) in 1987. Under its provisions, members are obliged to extradite or prosecute terrorists. But, it has also been pointed out, it also should be seen in the context of changing political conditions in Bhutan touched off partly by the relations between Bhutan and minorities in southern Bhutan. In connection with this situation, human rights organisations and aid donors, including the European Union, have begun imposing severe pressure and conditions on the country related to its treatment of Nepali-speaking southern Bhutanese.

The King has also reacted to press for improvement of democratic structures. The drafts of a first constitution and a new penal are said to be ready. These developments have been said to have increased tensions and clashes between the ruling Drukpas and other ethnic groups and within the ruling elites.

The Indian rebels from Assam and North Bengal, which were the targets of the Bhutanese military operations, had established some 30 camps and infrastructure in jungles and forests, with an estimated total population of some 3000 including non-combatants during the past 10 years. The small Bhutanese kingdom had long hesitated in the face of Indian appeals to dislodge the rebels, initially pleading ignorance of the rebel presence out of concern that Indian military could also seize the occasion to encroach into Bhutan. Later, Bhutan undertook protracted negotiations with the various rebel groups, which were marked largely by frustration and deception as the rebels dismantled camps only to replace them by others. In more recent years, the rebel presence became so brazen as to defy the Bhutanese neglect.

Following years of such attempts, a showdown clearly was seen as building up in mid-2003 as King Wangchuk visited New Delhi in September 2003 and was reported to have been “very firmly” told what was expected by the Indian leadership. Although the King told the National Assembly that “India had given its assurance that the Indian army would not come into Bhutan,” the Assembly debated and hesitated as preparations built up.

But what some regional sources suggest is that the ruling elite in the country was finally moved to take military action in part by the establishment in April 2003 of a Bhutan Communist Party which circulated statements in both Bhutan and Nepal advocating “smashing the monarchy” and creating a “true and new democracy.” This movement is regarded as having a large pool of discontent to draw on from the estimated 100,000 ethnic Nepali refugees expelled from the country over a decade ago. It has also launched some low-intensity terrorism inside Bhutan.

Some observers have drawn other relationships between the insurgents targeting Bhutan and those emanating from India, with the most apparent being a growth in arms trafficking between the two. It was also underlined that the Indian rebels incursion into the southern regions coincide with the expulsion of the Nepali-speaking refugees from some of the same areas over 10 years earlier.

Part of the military effort might be interpreted as being aimed at establishing more secure control of these regions.

The visit by EU Commissioner Poul Nielson from March 15 to 18, his third in recent years, also dealt partly with issues of political stability and reform in the country and region as well the EU aid projects and programme there. Referring specifically to these related issues, Nielson told the Kuensel newspaper of the urgency of solving the problem of displaced persons in Nepal. The newspaper quoted him as saying he was worried the refugee camps in Nepal could become a breeding ground for extremism, especially with the violence in Nepal and the region. “I now have the view that it is urgent to go forward and solve the problem.” He added that “This is a recipe for political instability, to put it mildly, and this is a shared problem for all three countries, Bhutan, Nepal and India. We remain committed, from the European Commission and the EU, to assist in the repatriation or resettlement of these people.”

He praised the “fantastic experiment” of reforming the political system and discussed economic, finance, trade, agriculture and foreign policy issues with individual ministers as well as with the King and Prime Minister. He also visited and discussed some of the individual aid projects, including the Bashochu hydropower project in Wangduephodrang and the Institute of Traditional Medicine Services, both of which are assisted by the EU, which has provided of €15 million in aid for Bhutan in the 2002-2006 period. Among other key issues were membership of the country to the World Trade Organisation and diversification of trade, which has traditionally been heavily focused on India.