The House of Wangchuck---Monarchy of Bhutan

First picture: The current King of Bhutan; second picture: the Fifth and Fourth Kings of Bhutan

My Politics and Societies in South Asia course has led me to learn more about South Asian countries, who are neighbours of China but have nevertheless often being ignored by us. For instance, I viewed an interesing video on youtube about the tiny buddhist kingdom of Bhutan, which can be a great introductory document to learn more about 'the last Shangarila'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcoQjoZ6toI&feature=fvst

The ruling monarchy in Bhutan is the House of Wangchuck, the youngest monarchy in the world which declared their rule only in 1907, the time when China would soon abolish her monarchy. The majority of Bhutanese are descendants of Tibetan buddhists and their main language is Dzongkha, a branch of Sino-Tibetan language system.

The current King of Bhutan is Jigme Khesar Namgyal Wangchuck, the fifth Dragon King (or 'Druk Gyalpo' as they call in Bhutan). He is the eldest son of the much revered Jigme Singye Wangchuck, who modernized Bhutan and coined the term of 'Gross National Happiness' in place of GDP. In 2006, King Jigme Singye Wangchuck abdicated his throne in favor of his son, who was 26 years old then, thus making the latter the youngest head of state worldwide. By that time, the fourth King also declared that Bhutan would begin to hold elections in 2008, which rendered this Himalayan kingdom 'the youngest democracy in the world'.

A King giving up his absolute power for democracy and reform in a world when despots cling to their power all sounds like fairytale, however, Bhutan is not a country without problems. The fear that they might one day be encroached by India and meet the same destiny as Sikkim made the Bhutanese government extremely racist. In the 80s, it is said that thousands of ethnic Napalease who had lived in Bhutan for decades were expelled from this country. They had nowhere to go but to seek refugee in Nepal.

Such xenophobia of Bhutan made me think of the depiction of an imagined Shangarila by the Chinese poet Tao Yuanming （陶渊明）(AD 365~427). In the final part of his story, the fisherman who found the Shangarila by chance brought others to the spot of his discovery, however, they could never find the entrance to that world again. This can be interpreted as that Shangarila never exists, or if it ever exists, is extremely xenophobic.

Reading the story of Bhutan has also led me to think of Tibet and to see the problem of Tibet from a new insight, as the Bhutanese culture is a branch of Tibetan culture and Bhutan itself means 'the end of Tibet'. I cannot stop thinking that if Tibet had not been 'liberated' by the Chinese PLA and Dalai Lama always retained his rule there, Tibet would become very much like Bhutan: a sacred land of Buddhism, which might not be bad. However, once the mistake has been done, there is no going back. Tibet can never become independent for the simple reason that if it claimed independence, the Dalai Lama would impose similar policies as the Fourth King of Bhutan did: to expel all Han ethnics from Tibet, who had already settled there for decades. Such is the anachronism and tragedy of history: to choose the lesser of the two evils once you have wronged. However, there might be a win-win solution in future when the debate on Tibet would be no longer a taboo, that Dalai Lama would come back while Tibet still remain to be part of China with more autonomous power. But as long as the debate on this issue remains to be a taboo, there would never be a solution.