TRADE DIPLOMACY IN SINO-INDIAN RELATIONS

Date: July, 2006

Background to Indo-Tibet Trade through Sikkim

   After the conquest of India in mid-18^th century, the British penetrated into the Himalayas to find a way to China through Tibet. The initial intention of the East India Company for securing a way to the Celestial Empire was purely commercial though political ambitions would inevitably follow commercial ventures. The British soon found that Sikkim, not Nepal or Bhutan, offered the shortest and easiest route to Lhasa via Chumbi, a narrow valley which lay between Sikkim and Bhutan, and which, prior to 1890, was a part of Sikkim.

   After the annexation of Darjeeling from Sikkim by the British Government in India in 1860 Sikkim gradually came under greater British influence. To safeguard its interest in the eastern Himalayas John Claude White was appointed the first Political Officer in Sikkim in 1889. White first came to Sikkim in 1887, when he led the British forces from Darjeeling to Gangtok and forced the Chogyal (king) to abdicate his power. White formed his Sikkim State Council and took over the administration while the king was kept under house arrest.

  Road -building in Jelep La (10,877 ft) region in East Sikkim, which connects Tibet with Kalimpong in North Bengal, started soon after 1873 when John Ware Edgar, Deputy Commissioner of Darjeeling, was directed to investigate the possibility of re-establishing British trade with Tibet. Kalimpong was then a major trading center for trade with Tibet through Jelep La.  In 1886, when the Macaulay Mission obtained Chinese assent to conduct a mission to Lhasa, road and bridges were built up to Kupup near Jelep La. But due to opposition from the Tibetan side the Mission failed to proceed to Lhasa.

  The signing of the Anglo-Chinese Convention in Calcutta on May 17, 1890 marked a new era in Sikkim’s tumultuous history. The Convention, while making Sikkim a British Protectorate, also demarcated the present border of the former kingdom, which was founded in 1642 under the first Chogyal, Phuntsog Namgyal. The signing of supplementary agreement, Trade Regulations in 1893, led to the establishment of a trade mart at Yatung in Chumbi in 1894.

   It was during this period the British Government put pressure on the Tibetans to accept  Chinese ‘suzerainty’ over Tibet. The 1890 Convention and the 1893 Trade Regulations were ways in which the British sought to impose Chinese domination over Tibet for its own self-interest. However, when the British Government realized that Tibetans stubbornly refused to acknowledge China’s authority over Tibet and blocked the entry of British forces at the border it started direct negotiations with the Tibetans, leading to the signing of the Lhasa Convention in 1904. The Convention, while ratifying the 1890 Convention and 1893 Trade agreement, established two more trade marts at Gyantse and Gartok in Tibet.

   Road-building continued in the eastern border region adjoining Chumbi during the fateful Younghusband’s military expedition to Lhasa in 1905. Six years after Britain forcefully tried to extend its powers beyond the Himalayan frontiers the Chinese overthrew the 270-year-old Mind dynasty and in 1911 established a Republic in China. The rest is history. Both China and Tibet have much to thank Chogyal Thutob Namgyal and the Sikkimese for its tough resistance against British imperialism during this crucial period which witnessed the end of Britain’s expansionist policy in Asia.

   Border trade with Tibet, however, continued during this period and even after India’s independence in 1947, the Communist party’s takeover of China in 1949, and subsequent occupation of Tibet by China in 1959. It came to an abrupt end only in 1962 after the Sino-India conflict. The resumption of border trade with Tibet through Nathu La earlier this month  after forty-four years was indeed a historic event.

People-to-People Contact

   More than trade and commerce emphasis ought to have been given to people-to-people contact on the opening day of the resumption of the traditional trade route with Tibet through Nathu La (14,500 ft) on July 6, 2006. The peoples, particularly those residing in Sikkim and Tibet, have been forcefully separated for nearly half a century by outside powers and the historic occasion could have provided an ideal opportunity, though symbolic, for people to greet each other in a more humane and meaningful atmosphere. But this opportunity was lost forever as more attention was paid to officials, traders, mediapersons and the men in uniform. Apart from increased commercial activities and economic development the Sikkim Chief Minister, Pawan Chamling, while opening the historic Silk Route along with the Chairman of Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR), Champa Phuntsok, spoke of the need to re-kindle “emotional bonding of the peoples of the two countries.” Hopefully, this important aspect of Sino-Indian relations will be kept in mind in future interactions.

   What was more unfortunate was that even trading, the main activity in the present context, could not take off after the historic event as Indian traders did not possess the mandatory import-export code numbers (permanent account number – PAN). Even the quarantine center, required under the trade agreement, was found to be locked on the trade mart at Sherathang on the Indian side of the border. As a result, the first two truckloads of animal products brought over from China on July 11 were returned much to the disappointment of the Tibetan traders. These lapses cannot be condoned so easily as mere “bottlenecks” and “teething problems” as greater issues such as national security are also at stake as we embark on a new journey into Sino-Indian relations.

   When trade flourished through this route before 1962 conflict Sikkim was a Buddhist kingdom ruled by the Chogyals, whose ancestors originally came to Sikkim from eastern Tibet in the 13^th century. Besides the three ethnic communities – Lepchas, Bhutias and Nepalese of Sikkimese origin – Sikkim has a fairly sizable population of Tibetans and Chumbipas, Dopthapas and Tromopas, who are originally from Chumbi.

Trade and Tourism

   More than trade, tourism offers better scope for people-to-people contact and speedy economic development in this part of the world, which is yet to be explored. Both the Chinese Ambassador, Sun Yaxi, and Sikkim Chief Minister hinted on introduction of a bus service between Lhasa and Gangtok in the near future. Yaxi, who was present in Nathu La on July 6, went on to say that the possibility of starting a Lhasa-Gangtok bus service has been discussed at the highest level by the two countries. While Lhasa is 460 km from Nathu La  the distance between Kolkata to Gangtok is 497 km. The Ambassador also pointed out that development of tourism would follow once the trade links are firmly established.

   The Sikkim Chief  Minister, who recently paid a month-long visit to Europe to study the prospect of developing Sikkim as a major tourist destination, said “Since Sikkim is located centrally at the Buddhist circuit, which includes Bhutan, Nepal, Lhasa, Myanmar, and Arunachal Pradesh and Bihar, the State is undoubtedly going to be one of the most fascinating places.”  Besides tapping the enormous tourism potential in the region the “historic” resumption of the traditional trade route is aimed at “turning this route into the cultural highway that brings cradles of ancient civilization closer.”

   His Holiness the Dalai Lama came via Nathu La (meaning listening ears) in 1956 to attend the 2500^th Buddha Jayanti celebrations in India and two years later in 1958 India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, who had a fascination for the hills and hill people, travelled through Nathu La and Chumbi to enter the landlocked kingdom of Bhutan on a horseback. In the 8^th century, Lord Padmasambhaba, locally referred to as Guru Rinpoche (Precious Master) and widely regarded as the Second Buddha, established Buddhism in Tibet, Nepal, Bhutan and Sikkim. It is, therefore, befitting that this ancient route to Tibet, be reopened on Guru Rinpoche’s day (Tse Chu – 10^th day of 5^th month in Tibetan lunar calendar) and the Dalai Lama’s 71^st birthday. It would be a great occasion if the Tibetan spiritual leader was to return to his homeland via Nathu La when the Chinese Government formally gives assurances on his demand for ‘genuine autonomy’ for Tibet and invites him back to where he belongs.

   The opening of the Beijing-Lhasa railway service on July 1, a week before the resumption of the Nathu La trade route, seems significant. In due course, Shigatse, a major commercial center south of Lhasa, and Yatung, which fall on Lhasa-Nathu La route, will have rail links from the Chinese side. If relations between the two Asian giants improve then there is the distinct possibility of reopening trade routes with Tibet through Lachen and Lachung in North Sikkim and also Jelep La, an alternative route to Tibet near Nathu La. Both West Bengal and Sikkim stand to benefit if the Jelep La route is reopened. Says the Chinese Ambassador, “Border trade is a way of resolving the outstanding issues between India and China”. The two countries would surely open up more trade routes when relations deepen through frequent interactions.

Local Aspirations and Strategic Location  

   The recent decision to construct two-lane highway between Gangtok and Nathu La (distance 53 km and two hours drive) at an estimated cost of Rs 200 crores by the Border Roads Organization (BRO) and the construction of 608 km road network along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) from Ladakh to Arunachal Pradesh, passing through Sikkim, are all positive indications of the building up of a closer and more friendly ties between India and China. Besides facilitating better road network in the entire Himalayan frontier road construction on LAC has been prompted by strategic considerations. India wants to strategically counter the Chinese build-up of road and rail links along the border in Tibet and be prepared to meet any eventuality. What happened after Hindi-Chini-bhai-bhai euphoria in the fifties cannot be forgotten so easily even if both India and Chinese aspire to let bygones be bygones. While a note of optimism has indeed been struck on Sino-Indian relations New Delhi needs to tread cautiously in dealing with contentious issues in the coming days.

   More than anything else both the countries need to give top priority to local concerns raised by people of Tibet and Sikkim. The Sikkim unit of the Indian National Congress (INC) objected to resumption of Indo-Tibet border trade through Sikkim before fulfilling the long-pending demand on restoration of the political rights of bonafide Sikkimese. The Sikkim Bhutia-Lepcha Apex Committee (SIBLAC), an umbrella organization of the State’s indigenous Bhutia and Lepcha tribals, has also harped on the same issue. Sikkim Pradesh Congress Committee President and former chief minister (1979-1994), Nar Bahadur Bhandari, once close to the late Chogyal, always maintained that India had violated assurances given to the Sikkimese during the ‘merger’ era in the 1970s, when it abolished seats reserved for bonafide Sikkimese belonging to the three ethnic communities in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly in 1979, four years after Sikkim’s absorption into the Indian Union. The apprehension over the increasing influx of non-Sikkimese and non-Tibetans in Sikkim and Tibet respectively are major issues which need to be taken seriously.

   Both India and China need to respect the hopes and aspirations of the Tibetans and Sikkimese if the two countries want to come together in a more lasting and meaningful way. For more than guns, cannons and diplomacy it is the faith, trust and goodwill of the people which will act as a catalyst for speedy economic development and formidable bulwark against any outside aggression.

  Even if both China and India have formally and symbolically accepted their political authority over Tibet and Sikkim they need to pay heed to what Charles Bell, Political Officer of Sikkim and a close friend of the 13^th Dalai Lama, once said: “…from India’s point of view, a happy Sikkim as buffer state would be of greater advantage than an unhappy Sikkim in India on one of her future international boundaries of great importance, which would be of disadvantage, indeed a danger to India.” This applies to Tibet, too.

 

 

SIKKIM CRICKET ASSOCIATION FELICITATES SIKKIM HERMONITES

Revival of Murray Cup and Kalooram Thirani tournaments proposed

Sikkim Hermonites Association President, SP Lamba, being felicitated by Sikkim Cricket Association President, Tika Subba, and ruling Sikkim Krantikari Morcha MLA, B. Khatiwada. 

At a colourful function of the Sikkim Cricket Association (SICA) at Pakyong’s  Amba village, East Sikkim, yesterday (May 8, 2023), on the occasion of its 36^th Anniversary, SICA President Tika Gurung, while felicitating Sikkim Hermonites, said great progress and achievement in the field of cricket in Sikkim has been partly due to the firm foundation laid by Sikkim Hermonites in the ’80s and ’90s through the annual Murray Cup Cricket Tournament.

   The felicitation citation read: “The Sikkim Cricket Association would like to felicitate and honour you for your great contribution and dedication for the Sikkim Cricket.” The SICA “expresses deep gratitude for your selfless contribution to the association since its inception in 1987. Your tenacity and resilience saw us through the early and challenging years of limited funding, infrastructure and manpower.”

   While thanking SICA, Sikkim Hermonites Association (SHA) President SP Lamba, said, “By honouring us today on this special day we believe that the Sikkim Cricket Association has rightly acknowledged the role of the Sikkim Hermonites in laying a firm foundation to the cricket culture in Sikkim. We are grateful and thankful to the newly-formed Sikkim Cricket Association team led by its President, Mr. Tika Subba, for inviting us and honouring us on this special occasion.”

   Soon after the formation of the Sikkim Hermonites Association in 1984 one of our major engagements was the starting of the annual Murray Cup Cricket Tournament.

   Lamba pointed out that the Murray Cup Cricket Tournament in Sikkim was initiated by Sikkim Hermonites in early 1980s “in memory and honour” of Darjeeling’s Mount Hermon School Principal, Mr. Graeme A. Murray. He said Murray “was an outstanding personality in Darjeeling” and Mt. Hermon Principal from 1964 to 1979. “Mr. Murray was not only a great cricketer himself but also taught cricket to most of the Sikkim Hermonites who took part in the Murray Cup,” SHA President added.

   “Sikkim Cricket Association has done much for development of cricket in Sikkim in the past so many years and decades. It still has many miles to go before cricket becomes as popular as football in the State. If given the opportunity the Sikkim Hermonites Association is ready and willing to help the Sikkim Cricket Association on this matter,” Lamba said.

   He said, “In the interest of further development of cricket in Sikkim we would like to propose the revival of the Murray Cup and Kalooram Thirani Memorial Cricket Tournament in Sikkim.”

   Ruling party MLA from Rhenock, East Sikkim, B. Khatiwada was the Chief Guest on the occasion. He said he would do his best to persuade the State Government to help with infrastructure development at the recently-formed Amba Cricket Academy.

   The 36^th Foundation Day celebration was organized by SICA in collaboration with Pakyong District Cricket Committee and Amba Cricket Academy.

 

 

 

THE INDIAN BETRAYAL OF SIKKIM

   No one is asking for restoration of the monarchy in Sikkim. Not even the minority Buddhist Bhutia-Lepcha tribals, whose chogyals (kings) ruled Sikkim for more than 300 years, are looking for the return of their kingdom unjustly and abruptly taken over by its protecting power, India, in 1975.

   However, having seen democratic India’s misrule through its ‘agents’ in the former (himalayan) kingdom since the ‘merger’ questions are being raised on what kind of person Sikkim’s last ruler of the Namgyal Dynasty really was. The picture painted by Indian politicians and officials and pro-merger mediapersons and writers in India of the 12^th Chogyal, Palden Thondup Namgyal, being a villain and a ruthless ruler who suppressed the people for his own betterment is gradually receding even as politically-conscious political leadership among the youths are rediscovering how Sikkim was ruled during the Chogyal era and rejecting New Delhi’s version of how things were and should be.

   As in the past, Sikkim’s 36^th State Day ‘celebrations’ on May 16 (2011) was a ritual affair. People, by and large, are now well-aware of what really took place during the Indian-backed agitation that began in Sikkim in early 1973, leading to the fake Assembly  elections in early 1974, and the so-called ‘referendum’ in early 1974. These well-planned and carefully orchestrated events led to Sikkim’s ultimate absorption into the Indian Union in April-May, 1975.

   With the Chogyal under house arrest from 1975 to 1979-80, his personal Sikkim Guards forcefully disbanded by the Indian army, and pro-Sikkim, anti-merger political leaders imprisoned (emergency was declared in India soon after the ‘merger’) or under constant watch by the Indian authorities and the pro-India Kazi Government in Gangtok, the Sikkimese people had nowhere to turn to and lived in constant fear and tension.

Their ultimate victory came when the Sikkim Parishad party led by Nar Bahadur Bhandari, former chief minister and presently the Sikkim Pradesh Congress Committee President, trounced pro-merger Kazi Government in the first Assembly polls held in Sikkim after the takeover in October 1979. That Bhandari failed to keep his de-merger promises made to the people before the Assembly elections is a sad and unfortunate chapter in Sikkim’s contemporary political history.

   Tired of the constant betrayals by the political leadership in Sikkim, Duk Nath Nepal, a former Communist and an anti-establishment writer and critic, has lashed out against those who have betrayed the Sikkimese people. “In the last 35 years, politicians have won and the people have lost,” Nepal said here last week.

    Declaring his new political outfit, Sikkim Liberation Party (SLP), Nepal (42), Chief Convenor of the party, said despite political parties since the ‘merger’ capturing almost all seats in the 32-member Assembly (Chief Minister Pawan Chamling’s ruling Sikkim Democratic Front, which has been in power for the fourth consecutive term since 1994, has all 32 seats in its kitty) the Sikkimese people have become refugees in their own homeland. He said ‘real democracy’ is yet to come to the State.
   “In the last 35 years while those in power plundered the land, Sikkimese people have become unprotected and helpless,” Nepal said, while adding, “There is a large section in Sikkim which has not enjoyed democracy in the past 35 years. Democracy has been kidnapped, leaving the people always craving after democracy.”

   In a memorandum sent to the Union Home Minister on State Day (May 16, 2011), Nepal warned that if New Delhi continues to neglect gross violation of democratic rights, rampant corruption in the administration, and fails to keep promises made to the Sikkimese during the merger as reflected in Article 371F, which gives special status to Sikkim and safeguards the ‘distinct identity’ of the Sikkimese, the people would be forced to adopt a “different course” of action to shape their future.

   With the objective of preserving Sikkimese unity and identity, Bharat Basnet, a senior Congressman who was recently expelled from the Congress party for his alleged “anti-party” activities, recently formed the Sikkim Solidarity Forum for Gorkhaland, and has now demanded that all ‘Sikkimese Nepalese,’ who were ‘subjects’ of the Chogyal in the former kingdom and possess “Sikkim Subject Certificate”, a valid document held by bonafide Sikkimese belonging to the three ethnic communities – Lepchas, Bhutias and Nepalese – be included in the State’s scheduled tribes list.

   New Delhi’s ‘divide and rule’ policy adopted by the established in Sikkim has not only fragmented the closely-nit Sikkimese society carefully nurtured down the ages, it has also posed a great danger to the future survival of Sikkimese in the land of their origin. Presently, the Sikkimese Nepalese are divided into four factions – scheduled castes, other backward classes (Rais, Gurungs etc), tribals (Limbus and Tamangs), and others (Bhahuns, Chettris and Newars).

   Briefing reporters here recently, Basnet said the objective of including all Sikkimese Nepalese in the ST category is to fight for restoration of their reserved Assembly seats in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly and preservation of the ‘distinct identity’ of Sikkimese Nepalese, who were former citizens of the kingdom of Sikkim. Incidentally, the Chamling Government has also demanded that all ‘Sikkimese Nepalese’ be included in the ST list.

    However, former minister KN Upreti has opposed Basnet’s demand for ST status for Sikkimese Nepalese. He believes that only under Article 371F of the Constitution, which reflects the provisions of the historic May 8, 1973 tripartite signed between the Chogyal, Government of India and leaders of three major political parties in Sikkim, would preserve Sikkim’s “distinct identity.”  In a press statement, Upreti said, “Inviting the provisions of the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution to get tribal status neither gives us protection nor preserves our distinct character.”

   Politically, Sikkim’s distinct character was reflected in the composition of seats reserved for the three ethnic communities in the House during the Chogyal era. Representative form of government began in 1953 when Sikkim held its first elections to the Sikkim Council (the Council was later replaced by Sikkim Assembly), where seats were reserved for the minority Bhutia-Lepchas as well as the majority Sikkimese Nepalese.

   The abolition of 16 seats reserved in the Assembly for Sikkimese Nepalese by the Chogyal four years after the ‘merger’ in 1979 and the gradual dilution of the political rights of the Bhutia-Lepchas through inclusion of more non-Sikkimese in the definition of “Bhutia” in 1978 is not only seen as a great betrayal of the Sikkimese people but also an unfortunate development that will ultimately lead to the death of the Sikkimese dream of a “distinct identity within the Union.

(Period: May 15, 2011)

 

 

 

Dilution of Article 371F

I have accepted the death of my dream

By Jigme N. Kazi

“It will be too late to talk about Article 371F when battle tanks roll down Nathula pass and non-Sikkimese occupy seats of power in Mintokgang (CM’s official residence) in the near future.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Having retreated to my small corner – the fourth estate – after quietly bidding adieu to my two-and-half-decade-long struggle to fight for the common cause of all Sikkimese I reluctantly accepted the offer to give a piece of my mind during a day-long seminar  organized in Gangtok on January 28, 2010 by an enthusiastic group of young people who work under the banner of All Sikkim Educated Self-Employed & Unemployed Association.

   The topic was “Article 371F” – a dead horse which still needed more flogging! – and many of those who were present and actively participated in the debate-cum-discussion were distinguished personalities in Sikkim’s social, political and intellectual circles.

   Anti-merger veteran and former Chief Minister and President of the Sikkim unit of the Congress party, Nar Bahadur Bhandari, was there. His former Lok Sabha MP, Pahalman Subba, often regarded as the grand-old-man of Sikkim politics, who has fallen out with both Bhandari and his former colleague, the ‘Mandal Messiah’, Chief Minister Pawan Chamling, was there.

(L to R) Jigme N. Kazi, N. B. Bhandari, P. M. Subba and K. N. Upreti at the seminar on Art 371F in Gangtok on Jan 28, 2010. 

    Former Minister and senior Congress leader, Kharananda Upreti, the man who accompanied Ram Chandra Poudyal during the famous hunger strike at the lawns of the Palace in Gangtok in early April 1973 that led to the Indian-backed agitation, which culminated in the signing of the historic 8^th May Tripartite Agreement of 1973,  ultimately leading to the ‘merger’ in 1975,  was also present.

   Among the younger politicians present at the seminar were Padam Chettri, who only very recently took over the State unit of the BJP as its President, Biraj Adhikari, President of Sikkim National People’s Party, which still demands restoration of Sikkim’s pre-merger “Associate State” status, former Communist leader and now the Convenor of Matri Bhoomi Suraksha Sanghathan, Duk Nath Nepal, and former Minister and Convenor of Sikkim Bhutia-Lepcha Apex Committee (SIBLAC), Tseten Tashi Bhutia, who is regarded as one of the few vocal leaders of the minority Bhutia-Lepcha tribals.

   Conspicuously absent from the scene were representatives of the ruling Sikkim Democratic Front, which often claims that it has restored democracy and removed fear psychosis in Sikkim after Bhandari’s dictatorial rule (1979-1994). The truth is Pawan Chamling is now faced with the same charges levelled by dissidents within his ruling elite.

    Yesteryears’ ‘revolutionary’ and one of the valiant soldiers of ‘democracy’, R. C. Poudyal, suddenly turned ill and failed to come! With his absence Poudyal missed a great opportunity to stand side-by-side, shoulder-to-shoulder with sons and daughters of Sikkim to save what is left in order to pass it on to the generations of Sikkimese yet to come.  Others were invited but fear of what may happen to them if they come chose not to grace the occasion.

    Let them live on hope and die in despair. There is no space for spineless walking corpses, who are neither black or white and who will surely fade away into nothingness, to mingle with honourable defenders of the Sikkimese cause during the time of crisis when the need of the hour for unity and solidarity, despite personal and political differences, has never been felt so much.

   Added to this unique and historic gathering representing the multi-faceted Sikkimese society were Nagrik Sangarsha Samiti Coordinator and prominent critic and member of the old business community, Prem Goyal, Affected Citizens of Teesta (ACT) activists, Gyatso Lepcha and Mayalmit Lepcha, former District Collector, S. P. Subba, and former police officer, Jiwan Pradhan.

   I not only offered my heartiest congratulations to the organizers of the 10-hour-long marathon session but also salute those who spoke out their mind and warmed our hearts and hopes. Together we made history on January 28, 2010, two days before the 28^th death anniversary of the late Chogyal of Sikkim.

   I was certainly the odd man out as I did not belong to any political or non-political grouping. The organizers created the right mood for Sikkimese from all communities and from all walks of life to speak their heart out on an issue that is dear to them for a very long time. That the speakers, mindless of who they were and what positions they held,  spoke eloquently and with conviction and emotion on a wide variety of subjects on one-point theme – Article 371F – is indeed a rare treat for any viewers.

   With tears in my eyes and heart full of burden I made my stand clear. “I have no wish to dethrone anyone or help anyone to get the top job. This is mainly because I have gracefully and very reluctantly accepted the death of my dream,” I told the gathering.

   I made it plain that the casual and directionless manner in which the political leadership among the majority Sikkimese Nepalese tackled the Assembly seat issue in the past so many years led to the death of my dream of a united Sikkim, where all people live in perfect peace, harmony, freedom and prosperity and where the country’s security concerns were fully safeguarded.

   New Delhi ought to realize by now that security, particularly in Sikkim, depends on the loyalty of its people, not just territorial acquisition whether by force or consent. I took a dig as I often do when the opportunity arises on those who often make the right noises but the wrong moves: “I quit everything when some of my friends and former colleagues who are educated, have some political experience and feel for Sikkim and the Sikkimese could not look beyond Chamling and Bhandari despite the pressing need to stand firm and pursue our common objectives.”

   I warned that activities of agents of division and disunity actively serving New Delhi, which seems least concerned about what is happening in Sikkim besides pumping huge amount of funds (and perhaps taking some back on the quiet) to its former Protectorate keeping the people perpetually drugged with power and money, will not only finish Sikkim and the Sikkimese people but greatly and surely endanger the country’s territorial integrity.

   Didn’t I make it clear in my book, “Sikkim for Sikkimese – Distinct Identity Within the Union” (published in Feb 2009) why Sikkim is facing a crisis of our own making: “Phony revolutions led by fake revolutionaries and democrats have created a system that thrives on lies, deceit and corruption. We are all victims of the ‘democracy’ that we longed for in1973 and 1993.”

   We may blame the Centre for the gradual erosion of our special status and dilution of our distinct identity. But we, too, are responsible for failing to look after our long-term interests and live up to the hopes and aspirations of our people.

    My message during the seminar was sharp and incisive: “It will be too late to talk about Article 371F when battle tanks roll down Nathula pass and non-Sikkimese occupy seats of power in Mintokgang (CM’s official residence) in the near future.”

(I had sent this piece to The Statesman but I don’t think it published it. However, it was published in my Sikkim Observer.)

 

 

 

“SIKKIM FOR SIKKIMESE”

NO SEAT, NO VOTE

‘Merger’ was conditional

   “It is not right and proper to marginalize the original inhabitants of Sikkim or the three ethnic communities politically and economically through inclusion of other groups within the definition of ‘Sikkimese’….

   While others fought the elections we fought for our people. We were not concerned with who wins or loses in the polls; our main concern was that if the Assembly seats were not restored to us in the near future we would be the ultimate losers and the electoral process would then become a meaningless ritual as the Sikkimese people would have no future to look forward to.”

  The 12-hour hunger strike by Sikkimese representatives at the ‘BL House’, Gangtok, on October 2, 1999. (Left to Right) Tenzing Namgyal, Jigme N Kazi, Nima Lepcha, Pintso Bhutia, KC Pradhan and Gyamsay   Bhutia.   

 “Despite trying circumstances in the last years of the Namgyal Dynasty, Chogyal Palden Thondup Namgyal never gave up. He never surrendered. Why should we despair and yield ourselves to forces that wish to erase us from the face of the earth? The Chogyal lost everything – his kingdom, his power, his flag and finally his own family. And in the last days of his life he was betrayed by his friends, supporters and those whom he trusted and confided in. And yet he struggled on and never gave up for he believed in a cause worth fighting and dying for – a cause much greater than life itself. History is not always written by the conquerors but sometimes by its victims and followers of those whose lives are a testimony of courage, honour, patience and sacrifice.

   For the true Sikkimese, May 16, 1975 heralded the end of an era and perhaps the beginning of a new struggle to preserve ‘Sikkim for Sikkimese’; but, this time, within the bounds of India, a great nation ruled by petty politicians and corrupt bureaucrats. This was an ideal that inspired me and shaped the course of my life ever since I returned to my native land at the end of 1982 after nearly twenty years.

   To aim high, think big and struggle for a worthy cause – for unity, identity and a common destiny for all people in Sikkim – was the agenda that I had set for myself both in my profession and later on in politics. Anything less than that was totally unacceptable to me and not worth the risk, toil and the endless struggle that lasted for more than two decades.

   By the end of 1999 – the last year of the 20th century – I felt a certain sense of restlessness and impatience that I hadn’t experienced before. I needed and wanted to step out of the narrow confines of my profession and free myself to openly and directly place my views to the outside world on certain issues of public interest which were close to my heart and which guided my professional and political outlook for a long, long time.

   Journalism does not allow you to mingle personal feelings and political inclinations with professional duties. The respect that I had for my profession had one disadvantage – it became a wall between me and my people. While freeing me in some ways it also enslaved me. I could not remain in the cage any longer – I needed and wanted to come out and set myself free. I could not and would not allow my precious dream to die in the hands of petty politicians without getting personally and politically involved in the struggle towards achieving my goals.

  Even if I face defeat my effort and struggle to pursue my dream would be worthwhile. I will not feel guilty of playing it safe and shying away in my neat little corner when the ideal thing to do was to come out in the open and take your stand - come what may!  Those who knew me well, respected me, and had great faith and trust in my capacity and commitment had no doubt about the honesty of my heart and the righteousness of my cause that drove me to place my case to the outside world.

   It was US President Theodore Roosevelt who once said: “The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena - whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood...who knows the great enthusiams, the great devotions - and spends himself in a worthy cause - who at best if he wins knows the thrill of high achievement - and if he fails at least fails while daring greatly - so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory or defeat.”

   In the autumn of 1999 I found myself in direct confrontation with the political establishment on issues that were close to my heart for a long time. You either take a stand and live out your dream or just talk about it, write about it but actually do nothing about it and spend the rest of your days regretting for not having spoken up and making your stand clear to the whole wide world. The fact is you are what you do and not what you want to do. The road to hell is certainly paved with good intentions. Our leaders who preach and do not practise should know where we are heading.

   In mid-September 1999, I, as the Chairman of the Organisation of Sikkimese Unity (OSU), supported a call for boycotting the ensuing Assembly elections in the State, scheduled for October 3, 1999. Though I had written about it earlier we actually did not make any plan to take such a radical step on the Assembly seat reservation issue. It just happened – quite spontaneously and to my great delight! The boycott call given by the Sikkim Bhutia-Lepcha Apex Committee (SIBLAC) – the apex body of the indigenous Bhutia-Lepchas in the State – was in reaction to the betrayal of people’s trust by the combined political leadership of the State and the Centre on the Assembly seat issue.

   The 1999 Assembly polls was the fifth Assembly elections in Sikkim since the arbitrary, undemocratic, unjust and abrupt abolition of Assembly seats reserved for the three ethnic communities in 1979. Not only were the political parties in the State fooling the people on the seat issue the Centre also refused to respond favourably and timely on the demand for restoration of the political rights of the Sikkimese people as per assurances given to them during the merger, which are reflected in the historic Tripartite Agreement of May 8, 1973 and Article 371F of the Constitution.

   The boycott call on the Assembly and Lok Sabha polls was given on September 12, 1999 when the SIBLAC held an impressive rally in the State capital. Former General Secretary of Denzong Yargay Chogpa, Tashi Fonpo – a Bhutia – and former President of NEBULA (an organization for Nepali, Bhutia and Lepcha unity) – Nima Lepcha – were elected ad-hoc convenors of the SIBLAC before the rally.

   The SIBLAC also called for a one-day token hunger strike on October 2, a day before the polling date which was also a public holiday in India to celebrate the birth anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi, widely revered as the ‘Father of the Nation.’ The decision to hold the rally, boycott the polls and stage a one-day hunger strike was decided by both the SIBLAC and OSU although the apex committee of the Bhutia-Lepchas, by virtue of its influence and popularity among the minority community, played a leading role in the given situation.

   While demanding restoration of their political rights as per the historic May 8, 1973 Tripartite Agreement and Article 371F of the Constitution, the newly-formed body also expressed its resentment against political parties such as the ruling SDF and opposition Sikkim Sangram Parishad (SSP) for fielding non-Sikkimese Bhutia-Lepchas (BLs) from the 12 reserved seats meant for ‘Sikkimese’ BLs. The SIBLAC appealed to all BL candidates – intending to contest the ensuing polls – to boycott the polls to register their protest. It also appealed to the Sikkimese Nepalese to support its demand on restoration of their political rights.

   Apart from the OSU, prominent among the BL and tribal organizations, which participated in the rally calling for poll boycott, were Lho-Mon Chodrul, Sikkimese Unity Joint Action Committee, Sikkim Tribal Women Welfare Association, Sikkim Lepcha Association and Denzong Gyalrab Sungkyab Tsodyo.

   The ‘Newar Guthi’, the premier social organization of the Newar community in the State, was the first Nepali organization to support the SIBLAC’s demand on seat reservation in the Assembly. The Newar Guthi President and former chief secretary of Sikkim, Keshab Chandra Pradhan, while expressing his appreciation and support for the stand taken by the SIBLAC, urged the minority community to demand inclusion of Sikkimese Nepalese in the list of Scheduled Tribes in the State. In a letter dated September 16, 1999 to the SIBLAC, Pradhan said if this demand was met it would not only lead to declaration of Sikkim as a ‘Tribal State’ but seats in the Assembly would also be restored to the Sikkimese Nepalese. The former chief secretary said the Newar Guthi “is consistent of the view that the provision of Article 371F, which imparts distinct identity to three ethnic communities in the State, is being gradually diluted during the last twenty years.”

   The Newar Guthi President emphasized the need “to reweave the fine Sikkimese fabric and bring about a trust, amity and goodwill among sections of the community so vital in this sensitive border State. This was in fact the basic spirit and objective behind the Article 371F when it was initially framed.”

   Supporting the SIBLAC’s call for poll boycott, the OSU on September 15, 1999, made a public appeal demanding “withdrawal of nomination papers filed by bonafide Sikkimese and other candidates who are contesting the coming elections on October 3.” The OSU’s Press statement further added: “Politicians and political parties have been given 20 years to restore the political rights of the Sikkimese people.  They have failed miserably. They should now not be given another chance to fool the people. They should take a break and leave it to the people to decide their future course of action on the seat issue.”

   The sudden revolt amongst the minority BLs and their decision to boycott the polls was prompted by the SSP and SDF’s decision to field Sherpa candidates from Rakdong-Tintek constituency in East Sikkim, which is one of the 12 Assembly constituencies reserved for ‘Sikkimese Bhutia-Lepchas’. The Constitution (Sikkim) Scheduled Tribes Order of 1978 includes Sherpas, traditionally regarded as belonging to the Nepali community, within the definition of ‘Bhutia’ in Sikkim. The Representation of People Act 1980, while referring to the 1978 Scheduled Tribes Order, permits Sherpas and other scheduled tribes in Sikkim, listed in the ’78 Order, to contest from the 12 reserved seats meant for ‘Sikkimese Bhutia-Lepchas.’ This is because the new entrants to the ST list in the State fall within the definition of ‘Bhutia’ in the 1978 Order.

   The clubbing of 8 communities such as Chumbipa, Dopthapa, Dukpa, Kagaty, Sherpa, Tibetan, Tromopa and Yolmo within the definition of ‘Sikkimese Bhutia’ has been opposed by the indigenous Bhutia-Lepchas, who are against further dilution of their original identity and erosion of their political rights. It may be pointed out that the BLs are not against the eight communities being referred to as ‘Bhutia’ as elsewhere in the Himalayan region some of these communities are clubbed - and rightly so - under the broader category of ‘Bhutia’.

   The objection raised by Sikkimese Bhutia-Lepchas is that these communities cannot fall under the traditional definition of ‘Sikkimese Bhutia’ – the emphasis is on the word ‘Sikkimese’ and not ‘Bhutia.’ For instance, many people in the region, particularly the Nepalese, refer to Tibetans and Sikkimese Bhutias as ‘Bho-te’. Sometimes the Tibetans from Tibet are referred to as ‘Chin-Bhote’ and Bhutias from Sikkim as ‘Sikkimey Bhote’, meaning Bhutias from China (Tibet) and Bhutias from Sikkim respectively. Hence, the emphasis on the above context is on one’s nationality, territory and origin and not religion, language or community.

   The same argument may be brought forward while defending the unique and distinct identity of the ‘Sikkimese Nepalese.’ Sometimes the expression ‘Nepali of Sikkimese origin’ is used to distinguish between ‘Indian Nepalese’, ‘Sikkimese Nepalese’ and Nepalese from Nepal. It must be borne in mind that one of the basic criteria for grant of citizenship is one’s origin. Therefore, in both cases it is not right and proper to marginalize the original inhabitants of Sikkim or the three ethnic communities politically and economically through inclusion of other groups within the definition of ‘Sikkimese’.

   The Sikkimese people have been very generous, open and broadminded in dealing with non-Sikkimese residing in the State. What they expect in return is to view the present situation in a more positive way and display some amount of care and concern towards the growing feeling of insecurity and apprehension amongst bonafide Sikkimese for their very survival in the land of their origin. The Sikkimese people do not want to become refugees in their own homeland.  In every country or continent governments enact laws and frame rules to protect their own citizens. Why should the Sikkimese people be expected to always accommodate each and every individual who come to Sikkim and in the process risk losing their own rights, interests and identity.

   Open revolt broke out within the SSP when the Bhutia-Lepcha leadership in the party challenged Bhandari on the choice of BL candidates for the October Assembly elections. Bhandari’s decision to give party ticket to former Health Minister O.T. Bhutia from the Rumtek constitutency (reserved for BLs) in East Sikkim led to the resignation of three prominent BL leaders – Nima Lepcha, R.W. Tenzing and Sonam Lachungpa – from the SSP. What made matters worse was Bhandari’s renomination of the sitting SSP MLA, Mingma Sherpa, from Rakdong-Tintek constituency in East Sikkim, which was reserved for the indigenous Bhutia-Lepchas. 

   Former minister and BL heavyweight Sonam Tshering, who was expecting the SSP ticket from his home constituency of Rakdong-Tintek, was ditched at the last moment and this deeply hurt BL sentiments. The BLs expected Bhandari to seize the opportunity and honour his commitment on the Assembly seat issue but they felt let down again. Till the nomination of party candidates the SSP was doing extremely well in its poll campaign. Bhandari himself was pretty certain that he would make a comeback.

   The fact that the SSP chose only two Lepcha candidates from the 12 reserved seats of the BLs made matters worse. The Bhutias, too, felt let down as Bhandari selected only lightweights who were loyal to him. Gradually, a similar pattern also began to emerge in the choice of BL candidates in the ruling party. There, too, BL stalwarts were ignored or eliminated from contesting the polls through devious means.

   My editorial in the Observer (Sept 25-29, 1999) reflected the mood within the minority community: “Not only were the Lepchas thoroughly disgusted with the discriminatory way in which the SSP leadership distributed party tickets, even the Bhutias, who had a major share, were disillusioned. The SDF was expected to capitalize on Bhandari’s failure but when it, too, fielded a Sherpa candidate from Rakdong-Tintek, doubts and apprehension among the BLs surfaced. Furthermore, fielding of 4 Sherpa candidates from Ralong, where SDF stalwart, D.D. Bhutia, is contesting also sent conflicting signals to the people.”

   I reiterated the importance of the political leadership in the State to allot party tickets to bonafide Sikkimese from the three ethnic communities to contest from the 32 seats in the Assembly. If we genuinely and sincerely believe in our declared policy on the Assembly seat issue then it should be reflected in the choice of our candidates. Until the Assembly seat issue is resolved to our satisfaction major political parties, which demand restoration of the political rights of the Sikkimese people as per Article 371F of the Constitution, must field bonafide Sikkimese BLs from the 13 seats, including the lone reserved seat of the Sangha, and bonafide Sikkimese Nepalese from the 17 general seats and the 2 seats reserved for the Scheduled Castes in the State.

   Any deviation from this stand in the name of political expediency would be harmful for preservation of Sikkimese unity, identity and communal harmony. The need to view the October 1999 Assembly polls from this perspective was emphasized in the OSU’s appeal on August 26, 1999, when the entire State observed the annual Pang Lhabsol festival, worship of Khangchendzonga, the Guardian Deity of Sikkim:

   “Two decades and six years back the Sikkimese people signed a historic pact on May 8, 1973. Leaders of three major political parties, representing the three ethnic communities of Sikkim – Lepchas, Bhutias and Nepalese – signed the Tripartite Agreement on May 8, 1973. The signing of this historic Agreement, which reflected the will of the Sikkimese people, was witnessed by the Chogyal of Sikkim and representatives of the Government of India, who were also signatories to this accord. The 1973 Agreement fully protected the political rights of the bonafide Sikkimese people. The Government of Sikkim Act 1974 and Article 371F of the Constitution, which provide special status to Sikkim, reflect the spirit of the May 8 Agreement and the Kabi-Longtsok pact.

   On this historic day of Pang Lhabsol (August 26, 1999), being observed as Sikkimese Unity Day, let us renew our pledge to foster peace, unity and harmony. Seven centuries back in the latter half of the 13th century our ancestors swore eternal blood-brotherhood pact on this day. The Guardian Deities of Sikkim and the Sikkimese people, who belong to the three ethnic communities, were witnesses to this historic oath-taking ceremony”.

   The appeal added: “This treaty of peace, unity and harmony among the Sikkimese people remained intact over the centuries till two and half decades back when the Kingdom of Sikkim became a part of the Indian Union in 1975. As we enter the next millennium let us not only look back to where we have come from but let us look forward and renew our pledge for a common destiny.

   There can be no better way to preserve our unity and identity without the fulfillment of our demand for restoration of our political rights which were taken away prior to the first elections after the merger. The Sikkimese people have the right to preserve their distinct identity within the framework of the Constitution as enshrined in Article 371F.”

   I placed on record that since the Assembly seat issue had the support of the people it cannot be ignored so easily: “Restoration of the Assembly seat reservation of the three ethnic communities in the State have been raised by the combined political leadership in the State in the past two decades. In the four consecutive Assembly elections the Assembly seat issue has been a major political issue of all major political parties in Sikkim. In this election, too, the seat reservation issue continues to be a major political issue. But despite having given top priority on the issue by successive state governments the Centre has failed to concede to this long-pending demand of the Sikkimese people. Inspite of the Centre’s delay in meeting the just demand of the people there is the need for us to work unitedly to achieve our common objective for restoration of our political rights.”

   The need for the political leadership in the State to genuinely and sincerely respect the sentiments of the people and implement its policies on the seat issue, pending the final resolution of the demand, was also stressed: “Pending the disposal of the seat reservation demand it is the political leadership in Sikkim which must respect the sentiments of the people on the issue. Those who genuinely believe in the fight for restoration of the political rights of the Sikkimese people ought to field bonafide Sikkimese candidates in the 32 Assembly constituencies and the lone Lok Sabha seat.”

   I reiterated: “It is not too late to take a principled stand on the basic political rights of the people. Let us not trample upon the sacred rights of the people in our blind pursuit for power. There is no better way to convince the Centre and the people of Sikkim of our genuineness on the seat issue than rigidly implementing what we have in mind on this vital issue in the coming elections. The time has come for each one us to make our stand loud and clear on the issue. The allotment of seats to various candidates by the political leadership in the State will be taken as an outward indication of our inner conviction. In the process each individual politician and their parties stand to gain or lose from the stand they have taken.”

   Was it only me who was taking the seat issue so seriously? I begin to think over this and wondered without pausing for an answer. In June 1999, four months before the Assembly polls, I highlighted the need to take radical steps on the seat issue if it still remained unresolved. Captioned ‘No Seat, No Vote’, the Observer’s editorial, dated June 5-11, 1999, stated:

   “Mere reiteration of the seat issue demand on special occasions becomes only a symbolic ritual which our politicians are good at. Lack of concrete strategy to meet the demand reflects the political will of the political establishment…That the abolition of the basic political rights of the Sikkimese took place four years after the controversial ‘merger’ suggests that New Delhi blatantly violated the terms of Sikkim’s integration with India…If perceived closely none of the 32 seats in the House and the two seats in the Parliament are reserved exclusively for Sikkimese. This indeed is a blatant act of betrayal. Because of this non-Sikkimese have found a place in the House much to the detriment of bonafide Sikkimese who are largely Sikkimese Nepalese.”

   I even hinted on the need to boycott the polls if New Delhi remained adamant on preserving status quo on the seat issue: “The political leadership in the State needs to take the seat reservation issue more seriously. Mere adoption of this basic demand in their party resolution and manifesto will not do. This demand has been raised at appropriate fora for nearly 25 years now. If the Centre fails to act positively on this vital demand then the Sikkimese people need to do some rethinking.”

    I added: “Erosion of Sikkim’s distinct identity within the Union through violation of ‘merger terms’ cannot and should not be tolerated any longer. If political parties fail to get this demand met then the Sikkimese people may resort to the last option of boycotting Assembly and Lok Sabha polls in the State. Democracy provides an opportunity to the people to exercise or not to exercise their franchise. If the need arises the Sikkimese people can send empty ballot boxes to New Delhi during the elections. By doing this they will not only be merely implementing the oft-repeated slogan – ‘No Seat, No Vote’ – but would have also sent the ultimate message to the Government of India.”

   The OSU leader and former minister of the L.D. Kazi Government (1974-1979), K.C. Pradhan, submitted a ‘7-Point Charter of Demand’ to the President of India in July 1999, demanding formation of a high-level committee to look into “the seat reservation issue before the situation gets out of hand.” Pradhan - perhaps the key figure and the main leader of the Nepalese during the merger era - who was also one of the main signatories to the historic May 8, 1973 Tripartite Agreement, warned: “Continued violation of the terms of merger and deprivation of the political rights of the Sikkimese people cannot be tolerated any longer.” He sent an ultimatum on the seat issue: “The basic political rights of the Sikkimese people must be restored before April 2000 when Sikkim completes 25 years as an Indian State.”

   Pradhan added: “I have from time to time made several representations to the concerned authorities in Delhi and Gangtok about the deteriorating political situation in the State but so far the plight and problems of the Sikkimese people have been ignored. Unfortunately, Delhi continues to ignore my warnings. If the situation is not handled carefully and timely Sikkim will head towards political uncertainty at the dawn of the next millennium. This is neither in the interest of the Sikkimese people nor the nation’s security interests in the region.”

   Pradhan’s stand on the seat issue is consistent with the OSU’s views on the said issue. As early as January 1998, I – as OSU Chairman – made a Press statement urging the Centre to restore the seats by April 2000, when Sikkim completes 25 years as a State of India: “Merger with the world’s largest democracy twenty-three years ago would be meaningless if the Sikkimese people are deprived of their fundamental and constitutional rights.”

   I pointed out: “Ever since the merger in 1975 political leadership in the State has been constantly harping on the need for the Centre to respect and honour the ‘terms of the merger’ but the authorities in Delhi are yet to respond positively and decisively on major issues that concern the Sikkimese people…We have waited for more than two decades for restoration of our political rights and this cannot go on forever. By the turn of the century Sikkim will complete 25 years as part of the Indian Union. The Centre must immediately initiate moves to restore Assembly seats for the Sikkimese and the legal and constitutional process on this issue should be completed by the end of 1999.”

   Pradhan’s 7-Point demand included revision of voters list on the basis of 1974 electoral rolls – which had names of only ‘Sikkim Subjects’, delimitation of Assembly constituencies, and safeguards for ‘other Sikkimese’, meaning those other than ‘original Sikkimese’ residing in the State such as members of the old business community and others.

   My last call before the October 1999 Assembly polls on the seat issue featured in the editorial of the Observer, dated September 18-21, 1999, and captioned “Total Revolution” – ‘No Reservation, No Election’: “It is significant to note that the BL Apex body has now urged the larger Sikkimese Nepalese community to back their demand and give them the much-needed support. Wounded by the failure of the political leadership among the Nepalese community to respect their political rights, pending the finalization of the Assembly seat issue, the BLs have now turned towards the Sikkimese Nepalese people themselves and others to come to their aid. In a democracy, it is the majority community which must rule but protections and safeguards must be provided to the minority community. In their lust for power the political leadership in Sikkim are (is) forgetting and ignoring the just demands of the people and are (is) deliberately trampling over their political rights and thereby hurting the sentiments of the people. No political party in the State has the mandate to further divide the people, dilute their political rights and cause social disharmony and political instability in this strategic border State.”

   The editorial added: “It is now up to the Sikkimese people to come forward and respect the sentiments of their brothers and sisters in distress. The BLs are confident that their hope placed on the larger community will get the right response. But while the BLs desire and expect support from the Sikkimese Nepalese they must also realize that the majority community, too, are in a fix and are demanding restoration of their reserved seats in the Assembly and should be prepared to fight unitedly for restoration of the political rights of all Sikkimese.

   Time is running out and the Sikkimese Nepalese cannot now afford to pin their hopes on the politicians for their long-term interest. There are no easy answers to the political uncertainty faced by the Sikkimese masses. By calling for boycott the BLs have shown that elections are no solutions to the political crisis faced by the Sikkimese people. Making representations to the concerned authorities, be it in Gangtok or New Delhi, is not enough. For the past 20 years various social and political organizations have rightly demanded restoration of the Assembly seats for the Sikkimese people.”

   The editorial concluded: “Memoranda after memoranda have been submitted on the issue but what has been the net result of all these endeavours? While political rhetoric on the issue continues the seat issue is yet to be resolved. Any further violations of the terms of the merger cannot and must not be tolerated any longer. By keeping the issue perpetually pending the political leadership, in collaboration with New Delhi, are gradually leading the Sikkimese people to political suicide…There cannot be more articulate and eloquent way of expressing the total sense of frustration and resentment over the continued violation of the merger accord and abuse of the people’s mandate than to take a firm step on the issue and boycott the coming elections in the State.”

   Though our appeal for total boycott of the polls was serious and genuine we were aware of the fact that the appeal – made at the last moment – would not be well received by political parties which were totally engrossed in the poll process. This was quite understandable although they should realize by now the importance of adopting a strong stand on the seat issue if they are at all serious about the future of Sikkim and the Sikkimese people.

   Our stand at that stage was symbolic but the message and the spirit in which we chose to adopt this stand would be welcomed by the people. And yet we were delighted when the Congress (I) candidate, Tseten Lepcha, from my own home constituency of Lachen-Mangshilla, North Sikkim, withdrew his nomination papers in response to our appeal. Lepcha may have played his cards well during the polls and killed many birds with one stone but his gesture was significant and appreciated by the people.

   He told reporters that in view of the pre-poll developments on the seat issue he felt it was his bounden duty not to take part in the polls in order “to protest, to express our deep anguish and to prove that if the need arises, the Lepchas are prepared to make the supreme sacrifice to fight for our cause.” It is also significant that these words come from the son of a former MLA from the tribal-dominated north district, Tasa Tingay Lepcha, who earlier contested and won from the Lachen-Mangshilla constituency. Majority of voters in this constituency, which had a sizable number of Limbus, were BLs.

   Just days before the scheduled date of the proposed hunger strike on October 2, 1999, the OSU and SIBLAC formed the Sikkimese Nepalese Apex Committee (SNAC) in Geyzing, West Sikkim. The new body was formed at a joint meeting of the OSU and SIBLAC and was chaired by K.C. Pradhan. Buddhilal Khamdak, a young and educated Nepali from the Limbu community in West Sikkim, was made the SNAC’s Convenor. The newly-formed body supported the seat issue demand raised by the SIBLAC and OSU and urged the two organisations to support the demand on restoration of Assembly seats of the Sikkimese Nepalese.

   On October 2, while the rest of the nation celebrated the 130th birth anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi (Gandhi Jayanti), the Sikkimese people – represented by SIBLAC, OSU and SNAC – sought the blessing of the ‘Father of the Nation’ and the Guardian Deities of Sikkim in their struggle on restoration of their political rights. The 12-hour hunger strike by six representatives of the three ethnic communities at the ‘BL House’ in Gangtok on October 2 symbolically ushered in a new phase in the fight for restoration of the political rights of bonafide Sikkimese belonging to the three ethnic communities.

Four members of the SIBLAC – two convenors (Nima Lepcha and Pintso Bhutia), Vice-Convenor Tenzing Namgyal, and a woman representative (Gyamsay Bhutia), the SNAC Advisor K.C. Pradhan and myself as OSU Chairman took part in the historic one-day hunger strike on October 2, 1999.

   We had actually chosen the premises where the ‘Statues of Unity’ are installed for the venue of the one-day hunger strike. Located in the heart of the capital at the northern end of the Mahatma Gandhi Marg – the main market area in the capital – this venue would have been the ideal place to begin a prolonged and intensive campaign on the seat issue. However, the State Government refused to allow us to use this place. In fact, it asked us to call off the hunger strike and the boycott call.

   In a letter to the SIBLAC, dated September 17, 1999, Chief Secretary Sonam Wangdi said redressal of grievances should be done through participation in the electoral process and pointed out that boycott of elections “is the last action to be taken as the final resort when all other means have failed.” The Chief Secretary simply could not see that we had resorted to this method as “all other means”, including the electoral process, in the past two decades failed to achieve the desired result. We ignored the government’s plea and went ahead with the hunger strike.

   However, it must be placed on record that if it hadn’t been for the OSU the hunger strike and boycott call may have been put off. Pradhan and I tactfully and very firmly exerted enough pressure on the SIBLAC leadership, which was dithering on the issue at the last moment when they were under extreme pressure. Even if the SIBLAC had backed off at the last moment the OSU and SNAC would have certainly continued with the mission. No amount of tactics and pressure would work on Pradhan and me and on this we were very confident.

   As planned, we held the hunger strike on October 2 to remind the world that we were determined to struggle on till our demand on restoration of our political rights were met. While others fought the elections we fought for our people. We were not concerned with who wins or loses in the polls; our main concern was that if the Assembly seats were not restored to us in the near future we would be the ultimate losers and the electoral process would then become a meaningless ritual as the Sikkimese people would have no future to look forward to.

(Ref: The Lone Warrior: Exiled In My Homeland, Jigme N. Kazi, Hill Media Publications, 2014, Sikkim Observer and Blog: jigmenkazisikkim.blospot.com.)