The Bhutanese Refugee Problem and its Impact: A Case Study of Khudunabari Refugee Camp

Abstract

UNHCR’s founding mandate defines refugees as persons who are outside their countryand cannot return owing to a well-founded fear of persecution because of their race,religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group. Every country in the world has been affected by a refugee crisis. States directly involvedin war produce million of uprooted peoples in the last century alone. Other countriesuntouched by chaos themselves provide aid and shelter to the displaced. The roles havesometimes been reversed. Europe was flooded with refugees in the aftermath of twoworld wars, but later became a beacon of hope to other disenfranchised people. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, more then 100,000 Bhutanese were stripped of theirnationality and forcibly expelled. Nearly one-sixth of Bhutan’s population those of Nepaliethnicity was “ethnically cleansed” at that time, making Bhutan one of the highest percapita generators of refugees in the world. In 1993, Nepal and Bhutan had, in principle,agreed to categorize the Bhutanese refugees into four categories: genuine Bhutanese,Bhutanese who left the country willingly, Bhutanese with criminal backgrounds and non-Bhutanese. On December 22, 2003, the proposed terms of repatriation were made publicand the results of the verification process of the Bhutanese refugees living in theKhudunabari camp (population 12,000) were published. In a highly flawed process, only293 refugees were found to be bona fide Bhutanese citizens. At present over 106,000Bhutanese refugees have been languishing in camps in Nepal. This problem has becomeone of the most protracted and neglected refugee crises. Current highrate of population growth has meant increasing overcrowding of therefugees in the camps. Though a number of national and international relief organizations are involved in managing the camps, the refugees are subjected tovarious socio-economic, environmental, security and health problems. However, the problems are not limited within the refugee population; rather those are equallytroublesome to the people of surrounding host communities as well. Since theestablishment of refugee camps, the surrounding areas are affected from different aspectslike environmental pollution, social crime, security, deforestation, etc. Nevertheless, thetypes of the problems and their extent, causes and consequences to the refugees and thehost community sites are still yet to be explored, which are foremost essential as pre-requisites to design and implement appropriate intervention strategies. International recognition of the urgency to find solutions has been mounting within theframework of Working Group on Resettlement. At present there is a basically harmoniousposition among donors that includes the strategic use of resettlement and the potentialneed to internationalize the issue should bilateral talks produce no tangible results, asresettlement opportunities would not be open indefinitely. Within theBhutanese refugeecommunity, a perceptible change has been noted of an increasing openness to otherdurable solutions in addition to repatriation. In discussions with the refugee community,some members did not exclude the possibility of resettlement.