Bhutan's Military Action against Indian Insurgents

Mazumdar, Arijit

doi:10.1525/as.2005.45.4.566

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The operation earned the 'admiration of the government of India' towards Bhutan, and a strengthening of the bilateral relations between the two countries, which in turn beget increased assistance from India. 54 Putting aside the importance of aid, however, Bothe further argues that in Bhutan the process of 'constitutionalization … tends to reposition the monarchy in a concrete, dignified and elevated position of power'. 55 This argument falls in line with Huntington's view that modern monarch's only initiate democracy when it serves their interests.…”

Section: Bhutan's Transition To Democracymentioning

confidence: 99%

Why monarchy persists in small states: the cases of Tonga, Bhutan and Liechtenstein

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Monarchical rule is said to have become anachronistic in a modern age of legal rational orders and representative institutions. And yet, despite successive waves of democratization having usurped their authority across much of the globe, a select few monarchs remain defiant, especially in small states. This stubborn persistence raises questions about the application of Huntington's "King's Dilemma" in which modern monarchs are apparently trapped in a historical cycle that will ultimately strip them of meaningful power. Drawing on in-depth historical research in three small states that have sought to combine democratic and monarchical rule-Tonga, Bhutan and Liechtenstein-we argue that, contra Huntington, monarchs in small states are neither doomed to disappear nor are they likely to be overwhelmed by the dilemma posed by modernist development. The lesson is that the size of political units is a critical variable too often overlooked in existing studies. Modern monarchs, Samuel Huntington famously argued, face a fundamental dilemma. 1 On the one hand, to promote social, cultural and economic development monarchs must centralise power. On the other hand, such reforms create a new cadre of elites whose political participation threatens to undermine their authority. By delaying modernist reform in favour of traditionalism the monarch can retain authority. But, stymieing progress increases the risk of popular revolt. As a result, Huntington argues, a peaceful transition from absolute monarchy to an electoral regime is virtually impossible. The modern monarch is caught in a perpetual trap that

show abstract

Section: Bhutan's Transition To Democracymentioning

confidence: 99%

Why monarchy persists in small states: the cases of Tonga, Bhutan and Liechtenstein

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Kharat 1999, 1) Bhutan lies sandwiched between its two mighty neighbours, India and China. (Mazumdar 2005, 566)…”

Section: Asymmetrical Inbetweenness As a Givenmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Where Is Bhutan?” The Production of Bhutan's Asymmetrical Inbetweenness in Geopolitics

Kaul¹

2021

J of Asian Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, I interrogate the exhaustive “inbetweenness” through which Bhutan is understood and located on a map (“inbetween India and China”). I argue that this understanding naturalizes a contemporary geopolitics with little depth about how this inbetweenness has shifted over the centuries, thereby constructing a timeless, obscure, and remote Bhutan that is “naturally” oriented southward. I trace how the construction of Bhutan's asymmetrical inbetweenness is nested in the larger story of the formation and consolidation of imperial British India and its dissolution, and the emergence of post-colonial India as a successor state. I identify and analyze the key economic dynamics of three phases marked by commercial, production, and security interests, through which this asymmetrical inbetweenness was consolidated. Bringing together sources from different disciplines and archival work, this account also challenges some of the dominant historical scholarship on Bhutan in each phase. I conclude by emphasizing that critical work at the intersection of geographical/political/historical contingencies is important to the subalternizing of geopolitics, which recognizes the myriad ways in which dominant powers have shaped both the geopolitical environment as well as knowledge-making that has constrained small states.

show abstract

“…In Bhutan, the state-led Driglaham Namzha movement (revival of traditional Bhutanese culture) has led to the expulsion of Bhutanese of Nepali origin, and the government has refused to accept those that wish to return (Hutt 2003;Kharat 2004, 178-180). India has sought cooperation with these states to relinquish support for insurgents using their territory, and, with the exception of Bangladesh, all have complied (Lall 2006;Mazumdar 2005;Pant 2007). For example, military cooperation between India and Bhutan has become increasingly significant since Assamese and Boro insurgent groups from the Northeast were discovered sheltering in the forests of southern Bhutan in the late 1990s (Chaudhuri 2003;Lama 2004).…”

Section: Contradictory Politics Of Counter-insurgencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Vision 2020 or re-vision 1958: the contradictory politics of counter-insurgency in India's regional engagement

McDuie‐Ra

2009

Contemporary South Asia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bhutan's Military Action against Indian Insurgents

Cited by 6 publications

References 2 publications

Why monarchy persists in small states: the cases of Tonga, Bhutan and Liechtenstein

Why monarchy persists in small states: the cases of Tonga, Bhutan and Liechtenstein

“Where Is Bhutan?” The Production of Bhutan's Asymmetrical Inbetweenness in Geopolitics

Vision 2020 or re-vision 1958: the contradictory politics of counter-insurgency in India's regional engagement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About