Happiness not too far away 'from' Tibet
With all the turmoil and controversy that's been brewing in China's southwestern regions as of late, I find it somewhat ironic that this week has seen a self-motivated decision of an autocratic leadership to endow its people with the right to choose. And right next door, no less. I direct your attention to Bhutan.
This country is really an enigma, and is simply unknown to the vast majority of the world, given its size, location and policies toward tourism.
Known to its people as the Land of the Thunder Dragon, and often described as the last Shangri-La, Bhutan this week became a democracy. After just over 100 years of Royal rule, the people of Bhutan voted on Monday in parliamentary elections for the first time ever.
Bhutan is really an interesting story, and one that could call into question the CPC's theory about 'liberating a backwards people.' For those who aren't familiar with Bhutan, allow me to give you a somewhat brief synopsis of the country.
The Bhutanese people share a common ancestry with the Tibetans and the Nepalese.
Some archaeological evidence suggests that the region might have been settled around 4,000 years ago, but no one is really sure. Bhutan wasn't even really a country until the early 1600's when a Tibetan lama unified a collection of tribal states under one law. And in 1907 Bhutan became an absolute monarchy. From all accounts, the Bhutanese people were quite happy to be ruled by the monarchy. But despite this, the monarchy decided in 2005 to bring in a new constitution, and the vote by the people this week officially sealed Bhutan as the world's newest democracy.
Bhutan's whole mandate is happiness. In fact, this is a country that has developed a system to measure happiness. It's even got a term: Gross National Happiness. Though it's pretty difficult to define, it is a system that Bhutan uses to measure quality of life. Because Bhutan is made up predominantly of Buddhists and some Hindus, there is a very strong spiritual base. As such, back in 1972 the then-king decided that instead of focusing on economic development, his country would try to grow under a more holistic approach, something that flies in the face of the break-neck economic growth mandate Bhutan's giant neighbor to the north has undertaken. Still, Bhutan's economy is growing quite quickly. In 2006, Bhutan's Gross Domestic Product grew by 14 percent, thanks to the sale of Hydro electric power to India. And a survey done to calculate the Gross National Happiness in 2005 showed that 45 percent of Bhutanese were 'very happy,' 52 percent were just 'happy' and 3 percent were 'unhappy.' It's with this in mind that I consider the 'liberation' of Tibet by China.
Nobody came into Bhutan and messed with it. Nobody tried to 'help' it develop. The world left Bhutan alone. As a result, the some 700,000 people of Bhutan are now determining their own political future and - according to the GNH stats from that country - seem to be doing just fine.
What's done is done. No one can change what has happened with Tibet. But given what is happening next door in Bhutan, I can't help but wonder what things would be like if the Chinese government didn't decide to 'help' in Tibet some 50 odd years ago.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Happiness not too far away 'from' Tibet.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.zhongnanhaiblog.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-t.cgi/295

Anybody could enlighten me on the "liberation" of a kingdom not far from Bhutan by the largest "democracy" of this world not too long ago?
It is unfair to compare China with Bhutan. Bhutan is such a poor, small and backward country, and China is big, modern, and prosperous with great economy. What Bhutan can do is just the opposite of what China can do. Chinese are not ready for democracy because China must seek to feed all its people first. Bhutan people are ready and they can do it.
Gross national happiness? Give me a freaking break, the only people dumb enough to believe such obvious garbage are granola munching hippies high on god knows what.
Bhutan is home to...
1) actual ethnic cleansing in the form of driving people out of the country with the army as opposed to economic migrants moving in which the lamaists disingenuously term Genocide
2) Archaic religious laws that impose limits on personal dress and imprisons people for "desecration of sacred relics"
3) Political prisoners for those opposed to the King
4) Apartheid style discrimination against the non-Buddhist non-Bhot ethnic minorities limiting educational and economic opportunities.
5) Elections in which the royalist party wins %94% of the legislative seats.
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2008/02/01/bhutan17955.htm
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Election_a_sham_say_refugees/articleshow/2896222.cms
http://www.thetravelrag.com/docs/10137.asp
And just for the record, Bhutan's per capita income is actually lower than Tibet's.
cc: India, following Chinese example of annexing Tibet, did the same to Sikim.
A good lesson for both China and America. Reminds me of Rory Stewart's conclusion in "Prince of the Marshes".
Pierre,
Thanks. I am sure this event/fact hardly find its place in the western media. After all, the annexation must have been democratic.
I noticed that you didn't post my comment which highlighted just how farcical and ignorant your perception of Bhutan was.
@Jing:
Apologies for not posting your comment sooner. It somehow didn't make it on right away, and went unnoticed. You raise some very good points in this. And you are correct that Bhutan has its fair share of problems. But those same problems were created by a Kingdom that has shown its ability to give self-determination to its people. All I'm suggesting is that if the people of Tibet were able to choose their own path, perhaps they would have chosen to align themselves with China. Or maybe they wouldn't have. Historically speaking, I am just curious to see what would have happened if the 'peaceful liberation of Tibet' hadn't taken place.