India opposes Bhutan’s diplomatic ties with China
Shamsuddin Ahmed
Bhutan is the only one of China’s 14 neighbours with which it does not have diplomatic relations. In fact, ‘big brother’ India has been preventing Bhutan exercising its sovereign right despite the fact that1949 Indo-Bhutan Friendship Treaty was revised in 2007 placing them on a substantially more equal footing. “Bhutan to be guided by India in regard to its external relations” has been replaced by “cooperate closely with each other on issues relating to their national interests.” But the will of big brother prevailed.
Nevertheless, China is looking to expand its diplomatic influence in Bhutan and to win over the small neighbour from India’s orbit. Analyzing the post-June (2013) election in Bhutan, Firstpost staff writer said that India’s relationship with Bhutan has so far endured. “But India’s efforts at promoting coercive commerce diplomacy with its ‘last friend’ in South Asia may have had the effect of cutting even that stable relationship adrift – and into the waiting arms of China, which is looking to expand its diplomatic influence in Thimphu.”
Delhi’s crude diplomacy
Days before the second democratic parliamentary election in Bhutan in June last, India suddenly withdrew all subsidies on cooking gas and kerosene that it had been supplying to the Kingdom, sending prices soaring. This has given rise to protests from within Bhutan. In fact, India was looking to fuel people’s discontent against the government. Delhi favoured opposition People’s Democratic Party (PDP) in winning the election defeating the ruling Peace and Prosperity Party. Its henchman Tshering Togay of PDP was installed as prime minister replacing Jigme Thinley. A royal relative, Thinley was groomed for the position by former King Jigme Wangchuk. He has been heading the Peace and Prosperity Party since introduction of parliamentary democracy. Some commentators were critical of Indian actions as “meddling” in Bhutan’s internal affairs.
Indian subsidy withdrawal was no doubt intended to overthrow Prime Minister Jigme Thinley for his orientation of the country’s foreign policy towards China. Thinley had a meeting with Chinese Premier Wen Jibao at the World Summit in Rio when the latter expressed China’s readiness to open diplomatic ties with Bhutan and solve their border disputes. Following their discussions, Chinese vice Foreign Minister Fu Ying travelled to Thimphu marking the highest-level diplomatic engagements between the two countries. This appeared aimed at accelerating steps to establish diplomatic ties. Shortly after that Bhutan imported 20 buses from China, which was seen in India as strengthening of Thimphu’s commercial relationship with China at the cost of India. Delhi was angered and a section of Indian press commented that Thimphu has no business doing business with Beijing.
Raising hydropower tariff
India was also unhappy with Thinley for his pressing for hike in tariff from the hydropower generated from the Chukha project in Bhutan. Most of the electricity produced in the project is taken away by India at a low price. India refused saying that the tariff hike proposal was unwarranted. Political commentators in Bhutan resent what they see as India’s “overlordship” over internal affairs of their country. Writing in his blog, political analyst Wangcha Sangley wondered: “Why do Indian media and politicians want to castrate Bhutan for the most harmless effort to improve ties with China? Just the other day, I heard a rumour of a bureaucrat of India chastising Bhutanese leadership of being “dishonest”. What the hell is that suppose to mean? Which national leaders and governments bare its soul to another nation? We are not paid sex workers that benefactors need to know when our eyelashes and asses move and in which direction.” He urged the Indian leaders and the media to treat Bhutan as a friend, not a pawn to be manipulated.
Meanwhile, a Chinese tabloid known for its hard-line views has hit out at India for interfering in Bhutan’s elections and attempting to prevent the recently developing ties between Thimphu and Beijing.
China concerned
Liu Zongyi, a scholar of strategic affairs at the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies (SIIS), a well-known think-tank, writing in the tabloid alleged New Delhi influenced the outcome of the June election. It manifested Delhi’s anxiety over China’s recent overtures to Bhutan. “India won’t allow Bhutan to freely engage in diplomacy with China and solve the border issue,” said the article which was also carried by Global Time of China. He noted that former Indian ambassador to Bhutan Pavan K. Varma was forced to resign due to his failure to prevent Bhutan developing relations with China. Varma’s successor V.P. Haran, who was the acting ambassador to Nepal followed carrot-and-stick policy and played a big role in the Tshering Togay’s election victory in Bhutan.
When the concepts of protectorates and client states are dying, the Indian-Bhutan relationship seems to be unique. The leadership of Bhutan was worried about the colonial attitude of India.
New Delhi’s overt influence and manipulation of election results in Bhutan was meant to send blunt signals to its other weak neighbours to understand that where strategic issues and national interests are concerned it wouldn’t tolerate anyone or any country stepping across what she unilaterally demarcates as the red line.
Holiday
Shamsuddin Ahmed
Bhutan is the only one of China’s 14 neighbours with which it does not have diplomatic relations. In fact, ‘big brother’ India has been preventing Bhutan exercising its sovereign right despite the fact that1949 Indo-Bhutan Friendship Treaty was revised in 2007 placing them on a substantially more equal footing. “Bhutan to be guided by India in regard to its external relations” has been replaced by “cooperate closely with each other on issues relating to their national interests.” But the will of big brother prevailed.
Nevertheless, China is looking to expand its diplomatic influence in Bhutan and to win over the small neighbour from India’s orbit. Analyzing the post-June (2013) election in Bhutan, Firstpost staff writer said that India’s relationship with Bhutan has so far endured. “But India’s efforts at promoting coercive commerce diplomacy with its ‘last friend’ in South Asia may have had the effect of cutting even that stable relationship adrift – and into the waiting arms of China, which is looking to expand its diplomatic influence in Thimphu.”
Delhi’s crude diplomacy
Days before the second democratic parliamentary election in Bhutan in June last, India suddenly withdrew all subsidies on cooking gas and kerosene that it had been supplying to the Kingdom, sending prices soaring. This has given rise to protests from within Bhutan. In fact, India was looking to fuel people’s discontent against the government. Delhi favoured opposition People’s Democratic Party (PDP) in winning the election defeating the ruling Peace and Prosperity Party. Its henchman Tshering Togay of PDP was installed as prime minister replacing Jigme Thinley. A royal relative, Thinley was groomed for the position by former King Jigme Wangchuk. He has been heading the Peace and Prosperity Party since introduction of parliamentary democracy. Some commentators were critical of Indian actions as “meddling” in Bhutan’s internal affairs.
Indian subsidy withdrawal was no doubt intended to overthrow Prime Minister Jigme Thinley for his orientation of the country’s foreign policy towards China. Thinley had a meeting with Chinese Premier Wen Jibao at the World Summit in Rio when the latter expressed China’s readiness to open diplomatic ties with Bhutan and solve their border disputes. Following their discussions, Chinese vice Foreign Minister Fu Ying travelled to Thimphu marking the highest-level diplomatic engagements between the two countries. This appeared aimed at accelerating steps to establish diplomatic ties. Shortly after that Bhutan imported 20 buses from China, which was seen in India as strengthening of Thimphu’s commercial relationship with China at the cost of India. Delhi was angered and a section of Indian press commented that Thimphu has no business doing business with Beijing.
Raising hydropower tariff
India was also unhappy with Thinley for his pressing for hike in tariff from the hydropower generated from the Chukha project in Bhutan. Most of the electricity produced in the project is taken away by India at a low price. India refused saying that the tariff hike proposal was unwarranted. Political commentators in Bhutan resent what they see as India’s “overlordship” over internal affairs of their country. Writing in his blog, political analyst Wangcha Sangley wondered: “Why do Indian media and politicians want to castrate Bhutan for the most harmless effort to improve ties with China? Just the other day, I heard a rumour of a bureaucrat of India chastising Bhutanese leadership of being “dishonest”. What the hell is that suppose to mean? Which national leaders and governments bare its soul to another nation? We are not paid sex workers that benefactors need to know when our eyelashes and asses move and in which direction.” He urged the Indian leaders and the media to treat Bhutan as a friend, not a pawn to be manipulated.
Meanwhile, a Chinese tabloid known for its hard-line views has hit out at India for interfering in Bhutan’s elections and attempting to prevent the recently developing ties between Thimphu and Beijing.
China concerned
Liu Zongyi, a scholar of strategic affairs at the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies (SIIS), a well-known think-tank, writing in the tabloid alleged New Delhi influenced the outcome of the June election. It manifested Delhi’s anxiety over China’s recent overtures to Bhutan. “India won’t allow Bhutan to freely engage in diplomacy with China and solve the border issue,” said the article which was also carried by Global Time of China. He noted that former Indian ambassador to Bhutan Pavan K. Varma was forced to resign due to his failure to prevent Bhutan developing relations with China. Varma’s successor V.P. Haran, who was the acting ambassador to Nepal followed carrot-and-stick policy and played a big role in the Tshering Togay’s election victory in Bhutan.
When the concepts of protectorates and client states are dying, the Indian-Bhutan relationship seems to be unique. The leadership of Bhutan was worried about the colonial attitude of India.
New Delhi’s overt influence and manipulation of election results in Bhutan was meant to send blunt signals to its other weak neighbours to understand that where strategic issues and national interests are concerned it wouldn’t tolerate anyone or any country stepping across what she unilaterally demarcates as the red line.
Holiday
Last edited:
Another gem from the Jamati Lungi Brigade 
