SIKKIM OBSERVER Saturday May 18-24,
2013
Guv, CM stress on democracy, development on State Day
(Left) Governor BP Singh pays his respects to Lhendup Dorji Kazi, Sikkim’s first chief minister, during the State Day in Gangtok on Wednesday.
Gangtok, May 17: Governor BP Singh and Chief Minister Pawan Chamling focused on ‘democracy’
and ‘development’ in the former kingdom, which became a part of the Indian
Union nearly four decades back, during their ‘State Say’ messages yesterday.
During a function held here
to celebrate the annual ‘State Day’, the Governor praised the Chief Minister
for ushering in an era of “peace and prosperity” and providing “good
governance.”
He said this is possible
because of communal harmony in the State.
“Democracy means good governance and giving ample
opportunity in the State and the Chamling government has been exemplary in this
field, the Governor said, according to an official release.
In his State Day message, the
Governor said, the Sikkimese people “made a choice” for “democracy” in 1975 to
merge with India. He added, “This wise choice of our people has found
expressions in expansion of our education, in freedom of speech, in freedom of
opportunity, and in installation of institutions of democracy from Panchayats
to Legislative Assembly to Parliament.”
He added, “The fact that this choice for
democracy was peacefully made and since promoted bears testimony to the fact
that the people of Sikkim fully understand the gains of democracy, which, in
all during nearly four decades has not failed them.”
The Chief Minister said the
State has attained “commendable progress under the democratic dispensation.”
“The collective decision to
embrace democratic form of governance was largely due to yawning socio-economic
divide in the people resulting in mass clamour for democracy,” Chamling said.
Chamling added after the
merger, the State “has moved ahead by leaps and bound in all spheres of
development.”
While not mentioning his
mentor and former chief minister NB Bhandari, the Chief Minister said,
“it may be emphasized that
government formed and conducted immediately after the appointed day till the
early 1990s was almost an extension of the feudal governance treating people as
subservient to the wishes of the people in power.”
He said that only after the
formation of the ruling Sikkim Democratic Front government on December 12,
1994, the people have become “the fountainhead of all power in a democracy” in
the former kingdom.
As part of the celebrations
the LD Kazi (Sikkim’s first chief minister – 1975-1979) award was conferred to
BB Mishra and CB Rai.
Anti-merger leader and former
minister Sherab Palden and pro-merger leader NB Khatiwada were conferred with
Sikkim Sewa Ratna.
The Sikkim Sewa Samman award
was given to 21 people from different walks of life for their contribution in
their respective fields. (see page 4)
Darjeeling is the heart of Bengal: Mamata
 |
| Mamata Banerjee with Bimal Gurung in Darjeeling on Wednesday. |
Darjeeling, May 17: Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee says Darjeeling is an inalienable part
of Bengal. She said that development of Darjeeling should be the main focus and
there should not be politics around it
In a stark message to the
Gorkha Janmukti Morcha, which is agitating for a separate state out of
Darjeeling, Chief Minister Mamata on Wednesday said in the presence of Bimal
Gurung, GJM chief, that the hills were an indivisible part of West Bengal and
that she wanted peace to reign in the region.
"Darjeeling is the heart
of Mother Bengal," she said at a programme where Gurung was present.
"I want Darjeeling to
remain in peace, failing which, tourism a major revenue earner for the hills
will suffer. Let there be development in Darjeeling which is part of
Bengal," she said announcing a slew of development projects including
infrastructure development, a national daily reported.
She said that development of
Darjeeling should be the main focus and there should not be politics around it,
while urging the people living in Darjeeling to remain alert against those
trying to create provocation to disrupt peace.
"Conspiracies to strain
our relation will not work. I want to build a bridge a between the hills and
the plains and for that we will work together," she said asserting that
she had a cordial relationship with the people of Darjeeling and the GJM.
Mamata arrived in Darjeeling on Tuesday on a three-day visit.
She held a meeting earlier in
the day with the GTA officials and attended a government function to announce
development schemes for the region.
Banerjee's meeting with the
GJM leadership was considered crucial especially after the relation between the
two had nosedived earlier this year.
Boycott of ‘State Day’ will continue till political
rights are restored:NASBO
.jpeg) |
| Kaloen |
Gangtok, May 17: In a significant move, the National Sikkimese Bhutia Organisation
(Art. 371F) has decided to boycott the annual ‘State Day’ functions till such
time the Centre honours its commitment made to Sikkim and abides by the
provisions of Art. 371F of the Constitution of India, which provides special
status to Sikkim and the Sikkimese people.
In a statement, NASBO
President Sonam Lama Kaloen, has demanded restoration of the political rights
of the three ethnic communities of Sikkim through seat reservation in the
Sikkim Legislative Assembly.
Until the political rights of
the Sikkimese people are restored the ‘State Day’ will be observed as ‘Black
Day’, NASBO in a statement said.
“The observation of the State
Day is irrelevant and an insult to the solemn commitment made by the Indian
government in safeguarding the socio-politico and economic tights and interests
of the Sikkimese people during Sikkim’s annexation in 1975 by her own
protecting power,” NASBO said.
“Until and unless the
political rights of the Sikkimese Nepalese community is fully restored back in
the Sikkim Legislative Assembly or that of the Sikkimese Bhutia Lepchas’
political rights are safeguarded, until and unless the Sikkimese dharma lineage
of Mahaguru Padmasambhava is preserved and protected and until and unless the
ever fading significance of Article 371 F is protected,” posterity would only
regard the “State Day as ‘Black Day’,” NASBO said.
“We shall boycott the State Day celebration
till such time both the Indian and Sikkimese government acknowledges and
incorporates the significance of Article 371 F for all purpose, till the
political rights of the Sikkimese people are adequately restored, or else, the
posterity would only regard the State Day as ‘Black Day’,” the statement said.
The organization also called
on the people to elected a strong chief minister, who will be able to safeguard
the “rights and interests” of the Sikkimese people.
Bhandari to revive Assembly seat issue after SSP
revival
Gangtok, May 17: Former Chief Minister NB Bhandari, who was recently removed from the
post of Congress president in the State, has decided to revive Sikkim Sangram
Parishad (SSP), a regional party formed by him on May 24, 1984.
Bhandari had gone to Delhi to
find out the legal status of the SSP with the Election Commission. On his
return, Bhandari said the SSP is still a ‘registered’ party with the Election
Commission and would be revived soon.
He said the decision to
revive the party was taken on May 8 last week. This day is significant as on
this day the Chogyal of Sikkim and leaders of three political parties of Sikkim
signed a historic agreement with the Government of India on May 8, 1973. The
‘tripartite’ agreement safeguarded the political rights of the Sikkimese
people, Bhandari told Sikkim Observer
on his return from Delhi.
He said former Prime Minister
Indira Gandhi respected the “distinct personality” of Sikkim and wanted to
restore the political rights of the Sikkimese people through seat reservation
in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly. He said he intends to focus on seat
restoration in the Assembly.
Significantly, SSP’s main
political issues during its formation were: constitutional recognition of
Nepali language, grant of Indian citizenship to ‘left out persons’ and Assembly
seat reservation.
Two of its demands have been
met; only the seat issue is left. “Besides reservation of seats for Sikkimese
Nepalese, we want seats to be reserved in the Assembly for Sikkimese
Bhutia-Lepchas only,” Bhandari said.
Meanwhile, Bhandari has been
replaced by Kunga Nima Lepcha as SPCC President, who also visited Delhi after
his appointment. Lepcha, who urged the party high command to retain Bhandari,
said the AICC has also been briefed on corruption cases against Chief Minister
Pawan Chamling by the CBI.
Lepcha said he was hopeful of
a “positive response” from the party high command on the CBI issue. He also
wants Assembly polls, due early next year, to be held under President’s rule. Old
settlers of Sikkim: should we reject or embrace them?
Jigme N Kazi
Firstly, let me at the outset
plainly and very categorically state that I fully support and endorse any
economic incentives, including income tax exemption, and political safeguards given to old
settlers in Sikkim. I do this without any political or personal motive. Barring
a few months in 2008 when some of my friends and I tried to bring some sanity
into Sikkim politics I have been out of politics since I quit the field after
three and half years in August 2004. Let me reiterate: I do not intend to
return to politics nor write seriously on political matters in Sikkim. Throwing
pearls before swines is now a thing of the past though, as you know, old habits
die hard!
It is no use arguing on who came first to
Sikkim and hold futile debate/discussion on the original inhabitants of this
land. The fact is that when the Kingdom of Sikkim came to an end in 1975 there
were four communities living in this mountainous region. Over the years, the
first three groups – Lepchas, Bhutias and Nepalese – managed to get the
‘ethnic’ tag and the other – basically the plainspeople – were bracketed in the
purnao byapari category.
The fourth community is now described as
‘old settlers’ and contrary to popular perception they are not confined to the
people from the plains. Hill people from Nepal, Bhutan, Tibet and Darjeeling,
who have settled in Sikkim down the decades but failed to acquire ‘Sikkim
Subject Certificate’ (valid identity document possessed by bonafide Sikkimese),
also come under the category of ‘old settlers.’
In this column I do not wish to lay out the
legal and constitutional justifications for supporting the old settlers. This
may be done later if required. Legal and constitutional matters are secondary.
The first approach to settle and get a general consensus on the matter is to
view it from a more humane and historical angle.
The former Kingdom of Sikkim,
ruled by the Chogyals (dharmaraj)
since 1642, remained isolated till the British appeared in the scene in early
19th century. The period between 1835, when the British East India
Company ‘persuaded’ the Chogyal to gift away Darjeeling, to Darjeeling’s
virtual annexation in 1860, saw a gradual increase in the composition of
Darjeeling’s population. Till then Darjeeling’s population consisted mainly of
Lepchas, Bhutias and Limbus. Sikkim’s own population had the same mix.
The composition of Sikkim’s population
drastically changed after the British forced itself into Sikkim in late 1880s,
leading to John Claude White being appointed Sikkim’s first Political Officer
in 1889. Sikkim became a British protectorate in 1890. Native opposition to the
huge influx did not help as the British encouraged more influx under its
‘divide and rule’ policy.
Britain’s invasion of Tibet through east
Sikkim in the first decade of the 20th century encouraged more
outsiders to settle in Sikkim. More people settled in Sikkim after India’s
independence in 1947 for obvious reasons. The signing of the Indo-Sikkim Treaty
in 1950 and the gradual takeover of Tibet by China from 1950s and particularly
after 1959 witnessed even more people, including Tibetan refugees, coming to
Sikkim and settling here. While more new settlers came and settled here after
the 1973 political turmoil Sikkim witnessed increasing influx after it became a
part of India in 1975.
These are the facts of
history which cannot be denied. The Sikkimese political leadership believes
that though Sikkim became an integral part of India New Delhi acknowledged the
former kingdom’s unique history and polity and gave enough constitutional and
political safeguards to protect its special status.
Though Sikkim’s distinct
identity within India has been unfortunately diluted down the decades it is a
fact that even the political rights of majority Sikkimese Nepalese, who were
considered one of the three ethnic communities (the other two being Lepchas and
Bhutias) by the Chogyal and later acknowledged by New Delhi, were initially
safeguarded. With their political rights gone (Assmbly seat reservation) and
their community divided on casteist lines the Sikkimese Nepalese are now
feeling the heat. They apprehend being reduced to a minority in the near
future.
These trends are worrying
factors not only for the Sikkimese Nepalese but also for the minority
Bhutia-Lepchas of Sikkimese origin. For the sake of our own survival we ought
to stick together. If we fail to live together in peace and harmony we will
surely be vastly outnumbered in the near future.
Just as the Bhutia-Lepchas
once feared being outnumbered by the Nepalese, the Sikkimese Nepalese today
feel the same with the plainspeople, who not only come in great numbers but
have the added advantage of being more skilled in labour, trade and business.
And along with this they have the money power, too. Here we are not talking of
the old settlers from Bihar and Rajasthan but the new breed of people who
represent big business houses and corporates. Unlike us they have no feeling
for Sikkim and the Sikkimese people.
It is said that of Sikkim’s
six lac odd population the ‘Sikkim Subjects’, who possess genuine Sikkim Subject
Certificates, are less than three lacs. In such a situation isn’t it
politically, socially and morally a correct thing to side with the old settlers
and give them a sense of security and belonging before we, too, become insecure
and homeless in our homeland? We ought
to take this dictum more seriously before it is too late: divided we stand,
united we fall. (Talk Sikkim)
Editorial
SANGRAM OR PARISHAD
The Tiger Is Out
Of The Cage
Nar Bahadur
Bhandari’s unceremonious exit from power in May 1984 propelled him to launch
Sikkim Sangram Parishad (SSP) on May 24 in the same year. Luckily for him the
Assembly polls were just round the corner and he contested both the lone Lok
Sabha seat from Sikkim in November –December 1984 and the Assembly polls that
followed in March 1985 and won. The former chief minister’s rebellious and defiant
reaction to his abrupt removal from the post of Sikkim Pradesh Congress
Committee President recently and his likely decision to float a regional party
will undoubtedly change the course of Sikkim politics. Bhandari has already
indicated his willingness to revive the SSP. Names and symbols really do not
matter in Sikkim politics; only individuals and issues attract the Sikkimese.
One can understand
how relieved Bhandari is in being relieved of his responsibilities in the
Congress party. The man who was once looked upon as an anti-merger hero of the
Sikkimese has always felt very uncomfortable in the company of the party that
annexed the former kingdom. “I threw away the flag of the party that ate my
country,” is how Bhandari reacted to the news of his removal from party
president. When Bhandari’s Sikkim Janata Parishad ousted the Kazi Government,
which was responsible for the ‘merger’, and formed the government in October
1979 he played with Sikkimese sentiments and was successful. He used the Nepali
card to return to power in March 1985. If he really wants to succeed this time
he has to strike a fine balance between Sikkimese and Nepalese sentiments.
Reach out to China, via Sikkim
By SUNANDA K. DATTA-DAY
It must be nearly 40 years since I
made my way to Nathu-la, the pass at 14,400 ft that is supposed to be one of
three Himalayan trade routes between India and China. It was a different world.
Sikkim was a monarchy then and India and China bitterly critical of each other.
My travelling companion, Prince
Wangchuck, was an engaging youth full of fun and promise. Now revered by
legitimists as the 13th consecrated Chogyal of Sikkim, he is a 60-year-old
recluse lost in meditation in some Nepalese sanctuary.
Wangchuck had a smattering of
Mandarin. “Ni hao ma … How are you?” he asked the Chinese soldier on the other
side of the barbed wire beyond the crudely painted “India Wall”. The man stared
at us in surly silence. Wangchuck repeated the question. Again, there was no
reply. Finally, when he yelled, “Ni hao ma?” a third time, the Chinese sentry
grunted “Wo hen hao, xiexie… I am well” in an angry tone that suggested the
opposite.
India probably hoped that China’s
willingness to trade through this gap in the Himalayas implied acceptance of
Sikkim’s status as an Indian state. For China did not reciprocate when India
acknowledged Chinese sovereignty over Tibet in the 2003 “Declaration on
Principles for Relations and Comprehensive Cooperation” between India and
China. An American scholar, David Scott, points out in Sino-Indian Territorial
Issues: The Razor’s Edge?, “the text shows a one-way agreement, one-way
obligations and one-way concessions”. As for the complacent claim of implicit
Chinese acceptance of Indian sovereignty, Scott warns “that was implied rather
than explicit, de facto rather then de jure.” As if to bear out Scott’s doubts,
China contested Indian control of the 2.1-sq-km Finger Area tract in northern
Sikkim five years after the Declaration.
Delivering the K. Subrahmanyam
Memorial Lecture, “China in the Twenty-First Century: What India Needs to Know
About China’s World View” in New Delhi last August, Shyam Saran, former
national security adviser, observed that although China handed over maps during
Wen Jiabao’s 2005 visit “showing Sikkim as part of India… recently, some
Chinese scholars have pointed out that the absence of an official statement
recognising Indian sovereignty leaves the door open to subsequent shifts if
necessary.”
Even the ostensible commercial rationale
for reopening Nathu-la (ironically, on the Dalai Lama’s birthday, July 6, 2006)
doesn’t appear to have been realised. Traditionally, trade between Sikkim and
Tibet was conducted along 13 routes. The British preferred Nathu-la because of
its gentler gradients and shorter distances (54 km from Gangtok, 520 km to
Lhasa). Its closure in 1962 together with all the other passes marked the end
of an era in history. The only person permitted for 44 years to cross the
barbed-wire frontier at Nathu-la was a Chinese postman with an Indian military
escort, who would hand over an empty mailbag to his Indian counterpart in a
building at the border.
The closure sounded the death-knell
of Kalimpong in West Bengal, once the meeting place of kalons (ministers) from Sikkim,
Bhutan and Tibet and the nerve centre of the Tibet trade. More than 10,000 men
were employed in sorting mounds of dirty white, grey or black wool from Tibet
into neat bales for export to Britain and the US. Thousands more provided
fodder and maize for mules, and exotic entertainment for their masters enjoying
a 10-day respite from the privations of a bleak and dangerous road. The daily
turnover of more than `400 million persuaded the State Bank of India to open a
branch in Kalimpong.
Apart from wool and Kuomintang silver
dollars, the caravans brought yaks’ tails, musk, borax, curios and Chinese
rice. They took back cement, kerosene and all the manufactures of Indian
factories. A car for the Dalai Lama was dismantled and carted up piece by
piece. Indian officials turned a blind eye when rations and equipment for Mao
Zedong’s forces, including jeeps from Kolkata, were similarly exported and
reassembled at a factory at Phari on the Tibetan plateau.
Two new marts were set up at
Sherathang in Sikkim and Rinqingang in Tibet under the 1991 Sino-Indian
memorandum of understanding. But only local people can use the marts. However,
Sikkim can now import several new items including readymade garments, shoes,
quilts and blankets, carpets and Tibetan herbal medicines. The earlier list was
restricted to 15 items like wool, cashmere goat, yak tails, sheep skins, horses
and salt. Traders complained these items were of little value. “Who wants yak
tails nowadays?” they asked.
The original export list of 29 items
(including clothes, tea, rice, dry fruits and vegetable oil) has also been
expanded to include processed food, flowers, fruits and spices, and religious
products like beads, prayer wheels, incense sticks and butter oil lamps. The
Sikkimese would like much more relaxation. They say the restriction to locals
only encourages Rajasthani traders to operate benami through Sikkimese front
men.
Two other passes — Gunji in
Uttarakhand and Shipki in Himachal Pradesh — have also been opened. But the
total trade isn’t even an infinitesimal fraction of the $66 billion bilateral
trad. It makes no dent in India’s $23 billion trade deficit. Smuggling is rife
through Nepal and, to a lesser extent, some north-eastern states.
But even if neither the political nor
the economic argument for reopening the three passes has been fulfilled, it
doesn’t mean they should be closed again. On the contrary, more passes should
be opened and imaginatively administered on both sides of the border to
encourage the human contact that is now sadly absent from Sino-Indian
relations.
Back in Gangtok after many years, I
couldn’t visit Nathu-la again. Severe hailstorms had blocked the road. (The writer is a senior journalist,
columnist and author- The Asian Age)
Sumin villagers forced to part with
ancestral land by power developers: NASBO
Gangtok, May 17: Power developers in Sumin Busty in East
Sikkim are forcing local residents, including monks, to give away their
ancestral land for power projects.
The National
Sikkimese Bhutia Organisation (NASBO) has alleged that the plight of the people
of Sumin, who are being “forcefully” coerced by officials of Madhya Bharati
Company Ltd. to part with their ancestral land, was recently reported to the
East District Magistrate. However, “it appears that the matter is put to the
administrative dustbin thereby lending the innocent lay and monk community to
the hitherto mental agony of all sorts, almost every day,” NASBO said in a
press statement.
It said monks
and lay people of the village have approached NASBO chief Sonam Lama Kaloen and
Sikkim Bhutia-Lepcha Apex Committee chief Tseten Tashi Bhutia to act on the
matter on their behalf.
The said
company, which is developing the Rongnichu Hydro Electric Project in the area, “is
forcefully imposing acquisition of the private land of the local monk
community,” the release said.
39th ‘STATE DAY’
The Indian takeover of a Himalyan Kingdom
"Sikkim's merger was necessary for Indian
national interest”
Sudheer Sharma looks back at
how a Himalayan kingdom lost its sovereignty.
King Palden Thondup Namgyal,
the Chogyal of Sikkim, was in his palace on the morning of 6 April, 1975 when
the roar of army trucks climbing the steep streets of Gangtok brought him
running to the window. There were Indian soldiers everywhere, they had surrounded
the palace, and short rapid bursts of machine gun fire could be heard.
Basant Kumar Chhetri, a 19-year-old guard at
the palace's main gate, was struck by a bullet and killed-the first casualty of
the takeover. The 5,000-strong Indian force didn't take more than 30 minutes to
subdue the palace guards who numbered only 243. By 12.45 it was all over,
Sikkim ceased to exist as an independent kingdom.
Captured palace guards, hands
raised high were packed into trucks and taken away, singing: "Dela sil, li
gi, gang changka chibso" (may my country keep blooming like a flower). But
by the, the Indian tri-colour had replaced the Sikkimese flag at the palace
where the 12th king of the Namgyal dynasty was held prisoner.
(L to R) Kewal Singh (Indian Foreign Secretary),
Chogyal Palden Thondup Namgyal, K.S Bajpai (Indian Political Officer)
and Karma
Tobden (Deputy Secretary to the Chogyal) during the signing of the Tripartite
Agreement of May 8th, 1973, in
Gangtok.
"The Chogyal was a great believer in
India. He had huge respect for Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. Not in his
wildest dreams did he think India would ever swallow up his kingdom,"
recalls Captain Sonam Yongda, the Chogyal's aide-de-camp. Nehru himself had
told journalist Kuldip Nayar in 1960: "Taking a small country like Sikkim
by force would be like shooting a fly with a rifle." Ironically, it was
Nehru's daughter Indira Gandhi who cited "national interest" to make
Sikkim the 22nd state in the Indian Union.
In the years leading up to
the 1975 annexation, there was enough evidence that all was not well in
relations between New Delhi and Gangtok. The seeds were sown as far back as
1947 after India gained independence, when the Sikkim State Congress started an
anti-monarchist movement to introduce democracy, end feudalism and merge with
India.
"We went to Delhi to talk to Nehru about
these demands," recalls CD Rai, a rebel leader. "He told us, we'll
help you with democracy and getting rid of feudalism, but don't talk about
merger now." Relenting to pressure from pro-democracy supporters, the 11th
Chogyal was forced to include Rai in a five-member council of ministers, to
sign a one-sided treaty with India which would effectively turn Sikkim into an
Indian "protectorate", and allow the stationing of an Indian
"political officer" in Gangtok.
(L to R) Kewal Singh (Indian Foreign Secretary),
Chogyal Palden Thondup Namgyal, Kazi Lhendup Dorji Khangsarpa and
BS Das (Chief
Executive) in Gangtok during the signing of the Government of Sikkim Act 1974,
which made Sikkim an
Associate State of India.
As a leader of international
stature with an anti-imperialist role on the world stage, Nehru did not want to
be seen to be bullying small neighbours in his own backyard. But by 1964 Nehru
had died and so had the 11th Chogyal, Sir Tashi Namgyal. There was a new breed
of young and impatient political people emerging in Sikkim and things were in
ferment. The plot thickened when Kaji Lendup Dorji (also known as LD Kaji) of
the Sikkim State Congress, who had an ancestral feud with the Chogyal's family,
entered the fray.
By 1973, New Delhi was openly supporting the
Kaji's Sikkim State Congress. Pushed into a corner, the new Chogyal signed a
tripatrite agreement with political parties and India under which there was
further erosion of his powers. LD Kaji's Sikkim State Congress won an
overwhelming majority in the 1974 elections, and within a year the cabinet
passed a bill asking for the Chogyal's removal. The house sought a referendum,
during which the decision was endorsed. "That was a charade," says KC
Pradhan, who was then minister of agriculture. "The voting was directed by
the Indian military."
India's "Chief
Executive" in Gangtok wrote: "Sikkim's merger was necessary for
Indian national interest. And we worked to that end. Maybe if the Chogyal had
been smarter, and played his cards better, it wouldn't have turned out the way
it did."
It is also said that the real
battle was not between the Chogyal and Kaji Lendup Dorji, but between their
wives. On one side was Queen Hope Cook, the American wife of the Chogyal and on
the other was the Belgian wife of the Kaji, Elisa-Maria Standford. "This
was a proxy war between the American and the Belgian," says former chief
minister, BB Gurung. But there was a third woman involved: Indira Gandhi in New
Delhi.
Kazi Lhendup Dorji Khangsarpa being sworn in as the
first Chief Minister of Sikkim by Governor B.B. Lal at the Raj
Bhavan, Gangtok,
on 16th May 1975.
Chogyal Palden met the
24-year-old New Yorker, Hope Cook, in Darjeeling in 1963 and married her. For
Cook, this was a dream come true: to become the queen of an independent kingdom
in Shangrila. She started taking the message of Sikkimese independence to the
youth, and the allegations started flying thick and fast that she was a CIA
agent. These were the coldest years of the Cold War, and there was a tendency
in India to see a "foreign hand" behind everything so it was not
unusual for the American queen to be labeled a CIA agent. However, as Hope
Cook's relations with Delhi deteriorated, so did her marriage with the Chogyal.
In 1973, she took her two children and went back to New York. She hasn't
returned to Sikkim since.
Then there was Elisa-Maria,
daughter of a Belgian father and German mother who left her Scottish husband in
Burma and married LD Kaji in Delhi in 1957. The two couldn't have been more
different. Elisa-Maria wanted to be Sikkim's First Lady, but Hope Cook stood in
the way. "She didn't just want to be the wife of an Indian chief minister,
she wanted to be the wife of the prime minister of an independent Sikkim."
With that kind of an ambition, it was not surprising that with annexation,
neither Hope Cook nor Elisa-Maria got what they wanted.
Meanwhile, in New Delhi,
Indira Gandhi was going from strength to strength, and India was flexing its
muscles. The 1971 Bangladesh war and the atomic test in 1974 gave Delhi the
confidence to take care of Sikkim once and for all. Indira Gandhi was concerned
that Sikkim may show independent tendencies and become a UN member like Bhutan
did in 1971, and she also didn't take kindly to the three Himalayan kingdoms,
Bhutan, Sikkim and Nepal, getting too cosy with each other. The Chogyal
attended King Birendra's coronation in Kathmandu in 1975 and hobnobbed with the
Pakistanis and the Chinese, and there was a lobby in Delhi that felt Sikkim may
get Chinese help to become independent.
In his book on the Indian
intelligence agency, Inside RAW: The
Story of India's Secret Service, Ashok Raina writes that New Delhi had
taken the decision to annex Sikkim in 1971, and that the RAW used the next two
years to create the right conditions within Sikkim to make that happen. The key
here was to use the predominantly-Hindu Sikkimese of Nepali origin who
complained of discrimination from the Buddhist king and elite to rise up.
"What we felt then was that the Chogyal was unjust to us," says CD
Rai, editor of Gangtok Times and
ex-minister. "We thought it may be better to be Indian than to be
oppressed by the king."
So, when the Indian troops
moved in there was general jubilation on the streets of Gangtok. It was in fact
in faraway Kathmandu that there were reverberations. Beijing expressed grave
concern. But in the absence of popular protests against the Indian move, there
was only muted reaction at the United Nations in New York. It was only later
that there were contrary opinions within India-Morarji Desai said in 1978 that
the merger was a mistake. Even Sikkimese political leaders who fought for the
merger said it was a blunder and worked to roll it back. But by then it was too
late.
Today, most Sikkimese know
they lost their independence in 1975, and Siliguri-bound passengers in Gangtok
still say they are "going to India". The elite have benefited from
New Delhi's largesse and aren't complaining. As ex-chief minister BB Gurung
says: "We can't turn the clock back now."
.jpeg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
