As much as I appreciate Bhutan's ideas around happiness and its style of sustainable development, I feel Bhutan being a tiny hilly country is what allows them to work. Add to that the gift of Hydroelectric power, which alone contributes 1/4th of government revenue, and was responsible for 14% of its GDP[1]. Its population is less than a million, where as even tier-3 towns in India have a couple of million people living there.
A large country, with a large population, has far fewer options other than supporting economic development at a scale.
Renewable energy is literally available everywhere and solar and wind are now cheaper than hydro in many places.
„Economic development“ can mean many things and there is a scenario where it supports the concept of „well being“ rather than actively undermining it, as it is happening in many places currently.
> solar and wind are now cheaper than hydro in many places.
It's not possible to run a country entirely on wind and solar, you need backup for when it isn't windy or sunny.
It is possible to run a country entirely on Hydro. The lake on a hydro electric dam will last for a while - in some cases several months - between needing to be topped up by rainfall.
yes, but as the top comment suggest the problem in large countries is that economic development isn't as localized. one project that improves the lives of 1 million people in buthan means that india needs 1000 such projects to bring the same improvement to all its people. do less, and the effect is less noticeable.
They also get a lot of support from India, including military protection, and primary trade/currency links as well as covering most of their diplomatic needs. It’s like how Lichtenstein relates to Switzerland.
Bhutan sovereignty is guaranteed by the fact that China (Tibet) also shares a border with Bhutan. It's a neutral place between the two powers. Although its ties are much closer to India (geographically, the flattest part is on its southern border with India--the location where Gelephu Mindfulness City will be located).
> support from India, including military protection
That protection is notional, and the expectation that China (their only other neighbour) is not really going to get aggressive about this peaceful tiny country, but then there’s Tibet as an example. So then why is it notional? If China were to get aggressive, we (India) will not be able to do jack about it because, hell, we couldn’t defend our own territorial claims and have been losing land to China, one outpost at a time. No, not only from the wars from decades ago, but also very recently — yeah, that means even after this omnipotent non-biological entity became our own version of the glorious leader.
> Tibet is an example of china protecting it from british/indian invasion at the request of tibetans. Funny how we don't hear about that part.
Have you actually spoken to Tibetan refugees who fled Chinese extermination before you arrived at this crazy world-view ? There were 100,000 of them in India at one point of time. Still ~60k presently. Suggest coming to India and talking to them. You will know what true brutality means.
> Lets stop pretending india is the good guy here. India ain't. It's just selfish interests on all sides.
India hasn't annexed and exterminated several hundred-thousand native civilians. China has. Will never claim that India is good, but an objective assessor can definitely know who are the bad guys regarding the conquest of Tibet.
> Have you actually spoken to Tibetan refugees who fled Chinese extermination before you arrived at this crazy world-view ?
"Extermination"? Why lie so egregiously. It just makes you look like an agenda driven clown. To you people does "Crazy world view" mean anything based in reality and facts.
> There were 100,000 of them in India at one point of time.
I've watched videos of tibetans complaining about racism/violence in india. Does that count?
> Still >70k presently.
Wonder why so many left india? How many tibetans are in china? Over 7 million. Have you talked to them? Wonder why 99% of tibetans chose extermination in china to "freedom" in india.
The chinese must be terrible at extermination because the tibetan population grew during the past century.
Edit:
Stop stealth editing your comment.
> India hasn't annexed and exterminated several hundred-thousand native civilians.
You are right. It's in the millions.
> China has.
But not tibetans.
> Will never claim that India is good
But you just tried. "India hasn't annexed and exterminated several hundred-thousand native civilians.".
> but an objective assessor can definitely know who are the bad guys regarding the conquest of Tibet.
I agree. Those objective assessor are called TIBETANS. You know the 99% who chose "extermination" in china over "freedom" in india.
> "Extermination"? Why lie so egregiously. It just makes you look like an agenda driven clown. To you people does "Crazy world view" mean anything based in reality and facts.
Agenda-driven clown ? Dear lord, How can you be this ignorant ? That number is actually on the lower scale. The Central Tibetan administration (govt in exile) gave the upper estimate at above one million. You can check several sources - including wikipedia. Hell, there are books written on the subject by several authors. Most third-party estimates at a few hundred thousand, however, if you keep the scope to the invasion and the subsequent crackdowns.
> How many tibetans are in china? Over 7 million. Have you talked to them? Wonder why 99% of tibetans chose extermination in china to "freedom" in india.
Yeah, importing Han Chinese and calling it population of Tibet is 100% nonsense. You are aware, I hope, that the census includes all residents living in TAR - regardless of ethnicity ?
> You are right. It's in the millions.
What are you smoking ? When did Independent India invade and kill millions ?
> I agree. Those objective assessor are called TIBETANS.
You mean the Han Chinese are objective assessors ? Ask a group of people outside of China please.
> Is it? Why would you try to undersell genocide? Are you some kind of monster? They did? And you don't believe it? I wonder why? You mean the people who have provably told lies for decades lied so much that even you refuse to believe it?
No, because that number includes death by famine caused by cultural revolution repression as well. The other figures point to hundreds of thousands and not millions as they limit themselves to the invasion and the subsequent brutal crackdowns. This was the the "stealth edit" that you complained about.
> The problem with agenda clowns like you is that you have to continuously lie. All it takes is just one instance of truth and your house of lies crumbles.
What is this "instance of truth" ? Please educate me ? Can you give non PRC sources ? We all know that China lies by default regarding Tibet. It is an automatic party reflex at this point.
I can quote not just the Tibet Government in exile, but also the Tibetan Centre for Human Rights and Democracy (TCHRD), the famous "Body Count" essay by Indiana University, the Independent conflict dataset, the Human Rights Watch, etc.
You continuously call me an "agenda clown", yet I am not sure what agenda do I have in simply stating that the Chinese invasion of Tibet included massive casualties of native civilians and refugee flight to other nations. This is proven fact.
> Keep making a laughing stock of yourself.
You should talk to Tibetan refugees who had their families killed by Chinese soldiers.
The basic problem is Salami Slicing is very difficult to protect against. And China is an expert at this and building infrastructure after point-by-point occupation which then defacto becomes part of their map. India should also do the same thing in return - but it requires way too much long term focus and investment for a democratic government.
The basic problem is PRC resolved 12/14 land borders (majority with concessions) and flipping Bhutan would make india the last holdout and the optics of that doesn't work in Indian favour. But Bhutan can't settle bilaterally since they are legally obligated to consider Indian security interests and being landlocked country with India as only feasible access abroad constrains Bhutan from true sovereign decision making. As in they could but they'd be stupid to piss off india especially when disputes invovle trijunction/chicken neck/strategic land. TBH PRC fine with ceding Doklam to Bhutan now (it's not that strategic anymore with how much PRC MIC has advanced), but it's far more useful as barginning chip to try to pressure India to settle broader border disputes with PRC, which India (at least populist Modi) can't because ceding territory is political suicide in democracy even if India gets >50%. Still the pressure point going to keep get pressed, salami going to keep getting sliced until India or Bhutan decides the opportunity costs of not security drama is worth settling. This isn't meant to malign/attribute blame to India (who just has a poor record settling borders, i.e. Bangladesh took 40 years, most of PRCs took 5-10), merely pointing out structurally/politically, it's much more difficult for India to settle border disputes with any loss via dialogue, after 50 years of getting nowhere, for PRC the only strategy left is to stir the pot.
> The basic problem is PRC resolved 12/14 land borders ...Still the pressure point going to keep get pressed, salami going to keep getting sliced until India or Bhutan decides the opportunity costs of not security drama is worth settling.
Yeah, this 12/14 number you picked out of the air will only work until China decides it is 12/30 next year and 12/50 the next decade. Kindly remember that China has expanded its international map. They have now formally put the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh as part of Chinese territory since 2023. A state which has a duly ELECTED native chief minister and also native representatives. A state that has China has decided to claim due to its natural resources and extensive biodiversity - which India, by constitutional law, is not permitted to exploit to protect natives and indigenous tribal communities. NONE of whom have any Chinese traditions. You should come to the state and check for yourself.
Citizens of the state with transit flights through China get harassed and bullied by Chinese officialdom, even after getting "no-objection" by the Chinese embassy at nation of departure.
How can you settle borders when one nation keeps expanding their formal map ?
12/14 PRC ratified landborder is like... the easiest thing to cross reference since they're internationally ratified treatsies and you know... that 14 land border hasn't change post war, like are 16/36 new countries just going to pop out of existence? Is India going to fragment to create all those new countries for PRC to claim?
Kindly remember PRC map has remained exactly what is since inherited from ROC, i.e. there has been zero new claims except what was under dispute for the past 70 years. Hell, AP claim dates back to 1914 not 2023, it's always been in PRC maps. This is 101 history / geopoltics. This here ahistoric understanding is exactly why India has so much problems settling borders with her neighbours vs PRC resolving 12/14th, making PRC the most successfull and benevolent (i.e. almost all with >50% concessions) in human history.
So can you settle borders with such a magnamous power? Hint 12/14 countries did, the 13th Bhutan wants to, India is the holdout. So the answer is, very easily, unless your populous is terminally ignorant of history and thinks being the 1/14h holdout isn't a sign that maybe PRC isn't the problem. Note how in table PRC settled most of her disputes in <10 years, India took ~40 with Bangladesh, at some point timepass mentality stops being excuse. And again it's not PRC whose not willing to settle, and provide MORE concessions, it's India who thinks it should get 100%, which is frankly not a serious position.
This is the easiest thing to cross-reference regarding expansion of their national map. Why should we "magnanimously" decide to give away land that India actually holds according to the 1914 treaty ? Why should we give away our eastern states ? None of them have Chinese ethnicity. They all have native elected representatives. Again - come and do a tour of Eastern Indian states such as Arunachal Pradesh - they don't speak Chinese, they have indigenous native tribes. Calling the area "South Tibet" is an absolute joke.
We will stick to the 1914 Treaty. We will not accept China's formal territorial expansion in 2023. Neither do other states like Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia (nearly a dozen nations) that have completely rejected the same.
PS: As a clear contradiction - even the Russian negotiations never got properly settled in your 12/14. China claimed the whole Bolshoy Ussuriysky island yet again. So even stuff that is settled needs to get re-settled once China expands its ambitions. What is the point ?
Again... what expansion? These 2023 map did not introduce ANY new claims. Old PRC maps has always claimed AP and AC, and if anything 9dash is down grade from 10/11dash from decades ago (when PRC ceded Tonkin to North Vietnam, because again PRC magnanamous). There is quite literally nothing new in this map except the tizzy it caused because PRC released it before ASEAN and G20 summit and parties have to protest or else it's tacit acceptance. Generic geopolitical messaging. Like nothing in it was new except Indian media trying to pretend they're new claims to useful idiot audiences who don't know 101 history.
1914 treaty doesn't apply to PRC because you know... they didn't ratify Simla and explicitly repudiated it. A country is not bound to a treaty it didn't sign. India's position of what they ratify between UK and somehow that applies to ROC/PRC/China which isn't party to it and explictly does not endorse is is frankly another unserious position. Like this is a territory dispute, it's not about the fucking people. People can be moved, land can't. You can squeeze all 1.4B people in there and say look how Indian it is and it wouldn't matter because the dispute is over land.
E: Bolshoy, it's called more retarded geopolitical drama, propaganda by western sources trying to drive wedge between PRC/RU for obvious reasons (i.e. you linking to lol Bonnie Glaser of ex CSIS China Power doing atlantacism propaganda at German Martial Fund). RU and PRC affirmed both sides adhere to common position on resolved border issue, and in 2024 PRC/RU did joint development on the island... you know because it was never an issue to begin with. The point is once India stops FUDDING around fake news and learn some history/media literacy 101, maybe there can be productive border ratification, again like 12/14 other countries instead of living under the delusion that there's a scenario where India gets 100 and PRC gets 0 because the British OKayed it. Again utterly unserious, borderline infantile position to think 100/0 split is feasible.
> The point is once India stops FUDDING around and learn some history/media literacy 101, maybe there can be productive border ratification, again like 12/14 other countries instead of living under the delusion...
Lol, what ? Are you saying that all the dozen nations are now happy with the post-2023 Chinese map and India is the sole loner and must educate itself ? Is it a delusion that Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, etc object to ~90% of the South China Sea now claimed, including EEZs up to 200 nautical miles away which also breaks UNCLOS - which China ratified.
PS: Even if we stick to your very strange position of ignoring international boundaries of past treaties because of current government objections, the China map did expand outside of "past claims" - it officially now covers the South China Sea as part of China's sovereign territory. India is not the only objector - as you falsely state.
No I'm saying nations party to SCS maritime drama always protest when PRC regularly asserts their territory, just like they do to each other, because that's customary geopolitical response. And it's 5, not a dozen, like you don't need to make up numbers, it's literally a handful.
With respect to land border, yes India is infact the sole loner that needs to educate itself. 12/14 other PRC land borders had no problem settling, again most with MORE PRC concessions. 1/14 Bhutan wants to settle but can't because India. That leaves only India who has this infantile notion that there is some fantasy world where borders can be settled in 100/0 Indian favour which is frankly medically retarded expectation only a child can have. Any proper history education will teach India only way to get 100/0 is loser in war and frequently not even then. So yes education away from that level of delusional magical thinking is apt.
SCS disputees also you know dispute with each other, everyone protests each other and with except of PH gets along fine with PRC. Also PRC position on SCS is legal under UNCLOS. Or rather not illegal. Or more technically correct, can't even be illegal. TLDR useful idiots believe PCA ruling is actual UNCLOS ruling when it's manifestly not (it's basically mock UN US+PH did on PCA stationary with anti PRC cosplayers). UN/ITLOS/ICJ/UNCLOS has no formal position on PCA ruling MEANING ITS NOT INTERNATIONAL LAW despite the heavy propaganda. Since PRC not party to optional arbitutaion clause, i.e. again no ratify no care, besides which UNCLOS cannot determine sovereingty claims so the idea PRC breaks UNCLOS is so retarded it's not even wrong since there is literally no mechanism in UNCLOS to rule PRC claims as illegal... hence PRC is in fact in compliance with her UNCLOS accession obligations.
PS: 1. No again this is history 101, PRC has always had 9dash, which it treats as domestic delimitations, it used to be 11 dash under ROC, i.e. it has always been part of past claims, for decades since post war. CHINESE (PRC/ROC) CLAIMS HAS OFFICIALLY ALWAYS COVERED SCS, PRC formally inherited claims from ROC when UN recognition switched and ROC claims proceeded that. I said India is the only LAND BORDER disputee, i.e. bilateral disputee, 1vs1 which should on paper be much simple negotiation, hence PRC able to ratify 12/14 land border in rapid negotiations. But somehow not Indian, and by extension Bhutan. Because clearly it's the other 12-13/14 who are outliers /s. SCS is a 5 party shitshow and much harder to resolve and everyone objects to eachothers overlapping claims, even then PRC ceding Tonkin to Vietnam makes PRC one of the better actors. So if you want to do the numberes, then 12/14+5, i.e. 12/19 PRC land+maritime disputees are solved, aka plurality. The 5/5 maritime cannot be solved bilaterally and will remain shitshow. The on paper low hanging fruit 2/14 land border is held up by India.
2. PRC is not ignoring past treaties, it's simply not fucking subject to treaties it doesn't sign. The very strange position is Indians believing a treaty between India and UK over Tibet that ROC EXPLICLITLY REPUDIATED AT TIME OF NOT SIGNING, I.E. ROC -> PRC DOES NOT APPROVE OF THIS TREATY AND EXPLICITY NOTIFIED PARTIES AT THE TIME, is somehow a valid treaty. Absolute toddler logic.
Unfortunately, our positions differ based on international boundaries ratified before independence. (Also, laughable that PRC sticks to ROC claims on one-hand, while it also simultaneously denies them on the other hand - aka Taiwan)
Let me address the major point that you bring up. PRC lays claim to 125,000 square KM - most of which is currently Indian territory. That is nearly ~8-10x of any other nation that China settled with - well, excluding ROC (Taiwan) - which China has also not "settled" with. Today, dozens of modern nations fit into 125,000 square KM of territory.
India does not need to "educate itself" - it has had over 20 rounds of talks with China recently and China has utterly not budged from claiming the FULL state (along with some adjacent territory too). It is not India, but China that is not willing to concede. If the dispute was merely ~10k sq KM, it would have already been solved. There are some very good reasons behind China's intractable position. This is extraordinarily resource rich territory that is utterly untapped by India due to constitutional protections offered to this state and its indigenous tribals. China, obviously, has no such protective obligations.
But for India, this state is populated by voters, native elected representatives and constitutionally protected indigenous tribes. There is utterly no way voters are going to even acknowledge being associated with China in any way, with utterly zero Chinese ethnicity present. Full ~120k sq km of a bio-diverse, resource-rich and populated-by-voters living in a democratic state for over 75 years, being utterly claimed by China is ridiculous and does not lend itself to any possible "settlement".
TW is not a territory dispute, it's a unsolved civil war, i.e. PRC is not intending to split territory with TW, like other disputes, TW is winner takes all.
What PRC claims from India is not what PRC actually wants. PRCs offered package swap deal with India for decades (and imo continues to be) with India was "east for west". PRC gets 40k sqkm Aksai China claims it currently defacto controls, basically empty land where no one lives. India gets Arunachal Pradesh, i.e. what India defacto controls, the state. AKA just formalize border at where both sides controls, there's no actual PRC interest in AP the state and the people, because is as you recognized ridiculous.
AP just barginning chip for "east for west" swap, same with PRC claims on Tawang that India + western media likes to play up as some Dalai + Tawang super combo to threaten PRC Tibet succession crisis. Reality is Tibet is no longer a restive region, it's been thoroughly securitized and PRC can print their own dalai lama and rule Tibetians as they see fit. It's just another pressure point because India taking 20 rounds of talks and 40+ years have gotten nowhere leaves no option but accept the status quo - which PRC doesn't want, they want to ratify borders - hence pile on pressure via salami slicing for India to accept package deal.
Ultimately I think PRC fine with "east for west". All China wants is their bit of tundra for G219 highway to connect Xinjiang and Tibet. They don't want some full Indian state and the people and the resources, because that's also logistically ridiculous. PRC is not going to go over the Tibetan plateau to mine untapped resources in AP when they have entire Tibetan plateau to mine.
TLDR Indian media keeps insinuating PRC wants all of AP when PRC doesn't, it just wants the border formalized at current occupation/administered areas (i.e. no mass people resettlement needed). Just ratify borders and stop encouraging tibetan exile shenanigans, same way India doesn't like Canada entertaining Khalistanis. no need to go back to pre dalai lama asylum hindi chini bhai bhai, but also no paitence to wait another 20/50/forever years.
I am aware its your last reply, but you are rather wrong on this point:
> TLDR Indian media keeps insinuating PRC wants all of AP when PRC doesn't, it just wants the border formalized at current occupation/administered areas
This is wrong. This was confirmed by China themselves. Latest Chinese actions included issuing Chinese names for towns, mountains and rivers in Arunachal Pradesh - continued assertion of demands, even after talks. This includes detainment of state citizens unless they acknowledge to be part of China and get a Chinese Visa. PRC most certainly wants Arunachal Pradesh and also apparently its citizens - can you point me to a single source otherwise ?
There was also no mention in any of the >20 recent talks - even in Chinese media - of any package swap of Aksai Chin for Arunachal Pradesh. Today PRC states clearly that all of Arunachal is "Zangnan" / "South Tibet".
Not confirmation, that's continued salami slicing sheninagans i.e. cartographic normalization and stapled visas instead of stamped visas to delegitmize AP citizenship. PRC will always rhetorically state AP is south Tibet because that's just how geopolitics works, you don't preemptively concede you don't claim something you claim even if said claim is to get something else because that weakens claim. PRC will always publically hold position all of AP is Tibet, i.e. maximalist bargaining position, until package swap is accepted first behind close doors because anything else weakens claim.
Package swap deals is not something offered in low level talks, it's leader to leader offer, i.e. Zhou Enlai to Nehru, Deng Xiaoping to Ghandi. Modi's been dipping meeting Xi (or vice versa if you want) until last year, right before trump2 and it's been rollercoaster geopolitics. Until India, PRC, US triangulation / dynamic becomes cleares and Xi/Modi relations normalize the only thing boundry talks do is what it always does, maintainence work with some progress towards normalize relations where high level boundary talks can start, as in actual formal settlement, not LAC management homework, i.e. we're past generals talking in tents to ministers meeting in capital, and maybe one day leaders discussing swap.
In the meantime, in addition to talks, the new normal PRC wants to set is to continue adding pressure via salami slice and rachet pressure because PRC isn't interested in settling for status quo (talks) where nothing happens, i.e. India wanting pre 2020 status quota ante, basically PRC perceives to be (decades of) deliberate stalling, so PRC will continue to add pressure so situation doesn't settle into unproductive status quo ante dynamic again. Bluntly it is better for PRC if PRC/India draws blood every once in a while to keep the pressure up because that might lead to earlier settlement than the alternative, drawing patrol routes and words which hasn't lead anywhere. Anything that can move the settlment clock forward.
E: alright really last reply, you can believe what you want. But ultimately, ask yourself, do you think PRC can invade and hold Arunachal Pradesh, through Assam Himalayas. Exceedingly unlikely, geographically logistics harder to sustain than TW. It's more trouble than it's worth.
I think size is also what prevents countries too. Not enough people and not enough GDP? Well, some projects might take more than the country’s available capital.
I was there a couple of months ago.
It's truly a beautiful and extremely calm place.
There's one quote from our guide that I remember: "We are a small nation. We watch what our neighbors are doing and pick what will work for us."
Another impression I got (and I may be totally wrong) - the locals genuinely love the royal family. There are pictures of the king, his wife, and children literally everywhere. As someone who grew up in a communist country and is familiar with seeing portraits of "beloved" leaders everywhere, this seemed like something totally different.
The people are very respectful - no one tries to sell you things or bother you in any other way.
Highly recommended destination. Hope it doesn't change anytime soon.
It wouldn't be regarded as complicated if Bhutan wasn't le wholesome misty buddhist paradise with happiness instead of GDP. Westerners love stories like that and don't want anything to tarnish it
The US which is not really a wholesome misty buddhist paradise is also involved in trying to kick out some people who arrived unofficially over the southern border and I think that is also regarded as complicated.
Compare it with hecking wholesome Israel-friendly petrostate of Azebaijan which conducted a full scale ethnic cleansing special operation just a couple of years ago and it went mostly unnoticed and wasn't regarded as complicated by western intelligentsia
I've been fascinated by Bhutan ever since reading "Beyond the Sky and the Earth". I wish them the best, but with the exodus of young people it's difficult to see long term success. The population is tiny. Will future growth only stem from tourism?
Tourism is not really a growth sector. There are too many hotels already, with hoteliers complaining they can't get bookings at a decent price because there's too much competition undercutting them, and tour operators demanding lower prices than is sustainable.
Truthfully, the GMC is Bhutan's best bet at growth. The idea is to attract foreign talent who can train and educate locals, so that it can act as an attractor for youths, and a flywheel for prosperity in the country.
It's because of that youth exodus (to Australia mainly) that the government is pushing for Gelephu Mindfulness City as place for innovation and new business opps. That's what the gov't officials directly argued when asked.
Yeah, investing it in bitcoin sure beats selling the power to India at bargain bin prices during summer time only to have to buy it back in winter time at premium rates. I think this really shows his majesty's wisdom and ability to think ahead (iiuc it was his decision to start mining bitcoins using green energy).
I don’t think Bhutan has ever had any relationship with the Dalai Lama, there Buddhism is derived from Tibetan Buddhism but is a different school. The article is weird to suggest that Bhutan has some sort of role in the future relating to Tibet Buddhism leadership, it’s much more likely to come from India.
The article doesn't suggest that Bhutan has a future in the leadership of Tibetan Buddhism, but that when/if Tibetan Buddhism gets more fractured because of disputes around lineage, then Bhutan can become globally important in the thought leadership of Buddhism more generally, or maybe more specifically Vajrayana Buddhism.
There are 4 main schools of Vajrayana Buddhism: Nyingma, Kagyu, Sakya and Gelug, and the Dalai Lama is head of just one of them - Gelug. They have independent teaching transmissions and succession lines. There's common misconception about Dalai Lama being a kind of a "pope" for Buddhism at all, or for the Diamond way (that means Vajrayana) Buddhism in particular, which is simply not true.
Having said that, it is of course unfortunate that the issue with two candidates, one of them "manufactured" by the PRC regime, is on the horizon and most likely will happen. Please note this already happened for the Kagyu lineage, where two Karmapa candidates emerged in 90s; interesting that after few decades the Chinese one admitted recently he's not the real one.
India as of today plays the Hindu ideas .. and downplays Buddhist followers ( mostly poor and downtrodden following footsteps of BR Ambedkar)
BJP which is ruling party for 3rd consecutive term is staunchly supporting Upper caste ( Brahmins).
TLDR: Buddhist leadership although is prophesised seems unlikely as of today. (However their Vippassana is worth giving a 10 day shot in todays chaotic world https://www.dhamma.org/en-US/locations/directory)
> BJP ... is staunchly supporting Upper caste ( Brahmins).
I'm curious what you mean by this. I've heard a wide range of opinions on BJP from NRIs, but that's one position I haven't been told before. My understanding was that BJP supports caste and village inclusivity in universities and professional fields to such an extent that some people from tier 1 cities even feel left out.
Buddhism in India grew in opposition to the Hindu caste system instead of spiritual change of thought. The current Indian government is loudly Hindu nationalist and prefers to minimise or even dismiss the diversity of Indian religious practices as well as pretend that the caste system is no longer present.
They and their supporters downplay Buddhist followers by pretending that the lived experiences of these Buddhist (on in general the non-hindu) don't exist.
I think to be fair what they were meaning is that it may emerge as the primary source of Tibetan Buddhism now Tibet is irreversibly compromised. Yes, I am aware of the different schools and how they squabble.
Is this propaganda or gross naivety? It’s a corrupt dystopian hellscape where people starve regularly, and are exiled. The forced smiling puts Disney Land to shame.
Why do you think you need a guide to go past a certain point? The only other country I know of where a guide is required is North Korea.
No offence to the author here but it reads like a wealthy WASP going to an “exotic” culture pointing out how “quaint” it is and how we can “learn so much” from their “way of living”.
Bhutan sounds cute, but I wonder what the reality is. The city sounds like another one of these globalist smart city projects like Neom in Saudi Arabia, or Rwanda's African showpiece. I'm sure said city will have cameras on every corner, and probably 15 minute city aspects.
I think he refers to Gelephu Mindfulness City. I read it differently, not as a generic globalist city but very much a middle ground between Bhutanese culture (deep Buddhist presence, it will maintain vernacular architectures codes throughout, no skyscrapers) and global capital attractiveness (special economic zone, some tax benefits but not a tax haven in any way, crypto adoption, etc.)
I didn't mean Bhutan in general. I was referring to Bhutan's new city project. It seems similar to new cities elsewhere, maybe even Auroville (or whatever it is called). Singapore is great in some ways, not so much in others. (It is arguable how democratic Singapore is, since its parliament has a lot of hereditary politicians in it, like Thailand or Greece.)
Bhutan has sold itself as a Shangri La for decades. Whether it is, is another problem. It seems all over the world the peasants are being herded into urban panopticons.
You can't imagine how insufferably smug everyone who lived there would be? Living lives all happy and nice and not horrible? Gosh, what a terrible place it must be!
The 15 minute city is sold as a place with amenities within easy. The reality will end up being forced to live within a small area in some kind of gated community with a curfew.
Besides which, where are these amenities nowadays? Small businesses were decimated by discriminatory lockdown enforcement. Physical libraries and community centres are being shut. As are bars and cafes. If there was a real 15 minute city, it's in the past. The internet is no substitute for in person interaction.
I’d argue that any sufficiently dense city is naturally a 15 minute city, and tens of millions of people (including myself) live in them. For example: in New York, Tokyo, London etc. one can feasibly access all the amenities they need within a “15-minute walk, bike ride, or public transit ride”.
The key thing is that these cities developed this way organically. There is nothing stopping me leaving my 15 minute radius if I want to, and I regularly do.
The suburbs aren't in most major cities. The idea of being stuck in that small area is nightmare fuel... Like Melbourne, Victoria telling that residents could not travel more than a few KM/miles away four years ago.
I get what you mean, it’s hard to retrofit/force this concept on low density, car dependent suburban sprawl.
But I’m not sure if I understand the conflation of 15 min cities and covid lockdowns? I don’t think any government would want its people to be permanently geofenced to 15 minute bubbles, this would absolutely kill commerce.
It's not a conflation at all, it's all coming from the same mentality. The rulers trying to work out what to do with the ruled. In the Middle Ages, peasants were limited in how far they could travel, what they could eat and which fuel they could use. There are people on top who would like to see that return, and we see signs of that returning.
Lockdown killed off a lot of commerce, and we're still paying it off. Whether it was necessary or unnecessary, it was mismanaged. Automation will take almost any job if it keeps proceeding this way, and so that means the masses will become of little use to the ruling class economically. There are several ways to address that problem. One is restricting their interaction and movement. Another would be to create artificial work just to keep them quiet. As for the other possibilities, they are pretty dark.
You’ve been reading/watching too much propaganda and disinformation, and are weirdly focused on COVID precautions that are long over. You should break out of whatever online communities you’re part of that consume this sort of nonsense.
Who decides what is "disinformation"? Oh yes, it's the same groups already running everything. Covid precautions are not long over. They are only three or four years ago and still affect global food prices. Some businesses are still struggling to pay off that shortfall if not bankrupted. It's also allowed the ruling class to use ever more scaremongering as a means of social control... And use the "misinformation"/"disinformation" labels to shut down public debate.
Also half the stuff they came up with was not scientific like allowing flights to continue while shutting small businesses.
By the way, most of what I am talking about is what I saw at street level. You couldn't be much radicalised by online activity. I got censored by Facebook for asking simply about the mental health cost effects of lockdown. Absolute disgrace. I knew several people who died from the isolation including one who drank himself to death.
Every place in the world is a mix of two things - the background and the foreground. The background is the natural stuff (terrain, greenery, water bodies, climate etc) and the foreground is the areas where people settled.
The people areas (houses, streets, work places) are dependent on the economic activity, prosperity and culture. And they look the same as any other place in the world with the same parameters.
Outside of people's areas, it depends on terrain (hill station), latitude (for climate) and greenery. Again for it looks the same as any other place in the world with the same parameters.
So, every place is a combination of these two things with different parameters. Sometimes, the foreground has dependencies on the background.
As much as I appreciate Bhutan's ideas around happiness and its style of sustainable development, I feel Bhutan being a tiny hilly country is what allows them to work. Add to that the gift of Hydroelectric power, which alone contributes 1/4th of government revenue, and was responsible for 14% of its GDP[1]. Its population is less than a million, where as even tier-3 towns in India have a couple of million people living there.
A large country, with a large population, has far fewer options other than supporting economic development at a scale.
[1]: https://thewire.in/world/south-asia/bhutan-hydropower-electr...
Renewable energy is literally available everywhere and solar and wind are now cheaper than hydro in many places.
„Economic development“ can mean many things and there is a scenario where it supports the concept of „well being“ rather than actively undermining it, as it is happening in many places currently.
> solar and wind are now cheaper than hydro in many places.
It's not possible to run a country entirely on wind and solar, you need backup for when it isn't windy or sunny.
It is possible to run a country entirely on Hydro. The lake on a hydro electric dam will last for a while - in some cases several months - between needing to be topped up by rainfall.
Batteries exist.
Heh, OP even described a battery in the form of a lake!
Batteries need to be manufactured or imported at expense.
yes, but as the top comment suggest the problem in large countries is that economic development isn't as localized. one project that improves the lives of 1 million people in buthan means that india needs 1000 such projects to bring the same improvement to all its people. do less, and the effect is less noticeable.
They also get a lot of support from India, including military protection, and primary trade/currency links as well as covering most of their diplomatic needs. It’s like how Lichtenstein relates to Switzerland.
Look what happened to Sikkim, when India annexed it. They have probably been reminded of that.
Interesting parallel. Does this reliance limit Bhutan's sovereignty in practice? What's the trade-off?
Bhutan sovereignty is guaranteed by the fact that China (Tibet) also shares a border with Bhutan. It's a neutral place between the two powers. Although its ties are much closer to India (geographically, the flattest part is on its southern border with India--the location where Gelephu Mindfulness City will be located).
Bhutan is also quite fierce against attempts to take it over. Their main hobby seems to be archery.
> support from India, including military protection
That protection is notional, and the expectation that China (their only other neighbour) is not really going to get aggressive about this peaceful tiny country, but then there’s Tibet as an example. So then why is it notional? If China were to get aggressive, we (India) will not be able to do jack about it because, hell, we couldn’t defend our own territorial claims and have been losing land to China, one outpost at a time. No, not only from the wars from decades ago, but also very recently — yeah, that means even after this omnipotent non-biological entity became our own version of the glorious leader.
> but then there’s Tibet as an example.
Tibet is an example of china protecting it from british/indian invasion at the request of tibetans. Funny how we don't hear about that part.
> If China were to get aggressive, we (India) will not be able to do jack about it
So doesn't that really means china is protecting bhutan?
> we couldn’t defend our own territorial claims and have been losing land to China,
It's not really your territorial claim. It's british territorial claims that india decided to take on for themselves.
Lets stop pretending india is the good guy here. India ain't. It's just selfish interests on all sides.
> Tibet is an example of china protecting it from british/indian invasion at the request of tibetans. Funny how we don't hear about that part.
Have you actually spoken to Tibetan refugees who fled Chinese extermination before you arrived at this crazy world-view ? There were 100,000 of them in India at one point of time. Still ~60k presently. Suggest coming to India and talking to them. You will know what true brutality means.
> Lets stop pretending india is the good guy here. India ain't. It's just selfish interests on all sides.
India hasn't annexed and exterminated several hundred-thousand native civilians. China has. Will never claim that India is good, but an objective assessor can definitely know who are the bad guys regarding the conquest of Tibet.
> Have you actually spoken to Tibetan refugees who fled Chinese extermination before you arrived at this crazy world-view ?
"Extermination"? Why lie so egregiously. It just makes you look like an agenda driven clown. To you people does "Crazy world view" mean anything based in reality and facts.
> There were 100,000 of them in India at one point of time.
I've watched videos of tibetans complaining about racism/violence in india. Does that count?
> Still >70k presently.
Wonder why so many left india? How many tibetans are in china? Over 7 million. Have you talked to them? Wonder why 99% of tibetans chose extermination in china to "freedom" in india.
The chinese must be terrible at extermination because the tibetan population grew during the past century.
Edit:
Stop stealth editing your comment.
> India hasn't annexed and exterminated several hundred-thousand native civilians.
You are right. It's in the millions.
> China has.
But not tibetans.
> Will never claim that India is good
But you just tried. "India hasn't annexed and exterminated several hundred-thousand native civilians.".
> but an objective assessor can definitely know who are the bad guys regarding the conquest of Tibet.
I agree. Those objective assessor are called TIBETANS. You know the 99% who chose "extermination" in china over "freedom" in india.
> "Extermination"? Why lie so egregiously. It just makes you look like an agenda driven clown. To you people does "Crazy world view" mean anything based in reality and facts.
Agenda-driven clown ? Dear lord, How can you be this ignorant ? That number is actually on the lower scale. The Central Tibetan administration (govt in exile) gave the upper estimate at above one million. You can check several sources - including wikipedia. Hell, there are books written on the subject by several authors. Most third-party estimates at a few hundred thousand, however, if you keep the scope to the invasion and the subsequent crackdowns.
> How many tibetans are in china? Over 7 million. Have you talked to them? Wonder why 99% of tibetans chose extermination in china to "freedom" in india.
Yeah, importing Han Chinese and calling it population of Tibet is 100% nonsense. You are aware, I hope, that the census includes all residents living in TAR - regardless of ethnicity ?
> You are right. It's in the millions.
What are you smoking ? When did Independent India invade and kill millions ?
> I agree. Those objective assessor are called TIBETANS.
You mean the Han Chinese are objective assessors ? Ask a group of people outside of China please.
[flagged]
> Is it? Why would you try to undersell genocide? Are you some kind of monster? They did? And you don't believe it? I wonder why? You mean the people who have provably told lies for decades lied so much that even you refuse to believe it?
No, because that number includes death by famine caused by cultural revolution repression as well. The other figures point to hundreds of thousands and not millions as they limit themselves to the invasion and the subsequent brutal crackdowns. This was the the "stealth edit" that you complained about.
> The problem with agenda clowns like you is that you have to continuously lie. All it takes is just one instance of truth and your house of lies crumbles.
What is this "instance of truth" ? Please educate me ? Can you give non PRC sources ? We all know that China lies by default regarding Tibet. It is an automatic party reflex at this point.
I can quote not just the Tibet Government in exile, but also the Tibetan Centre for Human Rights and Democracy (TCHRD), the famous "Body Count" essay by Indiana University, the Independent conflict dataset, the Human Rights Watch, etc.
You continuously call me an "agenda clown", yet I am not sure what agenda do I have in simply stating that the Chinese invasion of Tibet included massive casualties of native civilians and refugee flight to other nations. This is proven fact.
> Keep making a laughing stock of yourself.
You should talk to Tibetan refugees who had their families killed by Chinese soldiers.
The basic problem is Salami Slicing is very difficult to protect against. And China is an expert at this and building infrastructure after point-by-point occupation which then defacto becomes part of their map. India should also do the same thing in return - but it requires way too much long term focus and investment for a democratic government.
The basic problem is PRC resolved 12/14 land borders (majority with concessions) and flipping Bhutan would make india the last holdout and the optics of that doesn't work in Indian favour. But Bhutan can't settle bilaterally since they are legally obligated to consider Indian security interests and being landlocked country with India as only feasible access abroad constrains Bhutan from true sovereign decision making. As in they could but they'd be stupid to piss off india especially when disputes invovle trijunction/chicken neck/strategic land. TBH PRC fine with ceding Doklam to Bhutan now (it's not that strategic anymore with how much PRC MIC has advanced), but it's far more useful as barginning chip to try to pressure India to settle broader border disputes with PRC, which India (at least populist Modi) can't because ceding territory is political suicide in democracy even if India gets >50%. Still the pressure point going to keep get pressed, salami going to keep getting sliced until India or Bhutan decides the opportunity costs of not security drama is worth settling. This isn't meant to malign/attribute blame to India (who just has a poor record settling borders, i.e. Bangladesh took 40 years, most of PRCs took 5-10), merely pointing out structurally/politically, it's much more difficult for India to settle border disputes with any loss via dialogue, after 50 years of getting nowhere, for PRC the only strategy left is to stir the pot.
> The basic problem is PRC resolved 12/14 land borders ...Still the pressure point going to keep get pressed, salami going to keep getting sliced until India or Bhutan decides the opportunity costs of not security drama is worth settling.
Yeah, this 12/14 number you picked out of the air will only work until China decides it is 12/30 next year and 12/50 the next decade. Kindly remember that China has expanded its international map. They have now formally put the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh as part of Chinese territory since 2023. A state which has a duly ELECTED native chief minister and also native representatives. A state that has China has decided to claim due to its natural resources and extensive biodiversity - which India, by constitutional law, is not permitted to exploit to protect natives and indigenous tribal communities. NONE of whom have any Chinese traditions. You should come to the state and check for yourself.
Citizens of the state with transit flights through China get harassed and bullied by Chinese officialdom, even after getting "no-objection" by the Chinese embassy at nation of departure.
How can you settle borders when one nation keeps expanding their formal map ?
https://i.imgur.com/207ewHW.png
https://i.imgur.com/K9JRarz.png
12/14 PRC ratified landborder is like... the easiest thing to cross reference since they're internationally ratified treatsies and you know... that 14 land border hasn't change post war, like are 16/36 new countries just going to pop out of existence? Is India going to fragment to create all those new countries for PRC to claim?
Kindly remember PRC map has remained exactly what is since inherited from ROC, i.e. there has been zero new claims except what was under dispute for the past 70 years. Hell, AP claim dates back to 1914 not 2023, it's always been in PRC maps. This is 101 history / geopoltics. This here ahistoric understanding is exactly why India has so much problems settling borders with her neighbours vs PRC resolving 12/14th, making PRC the most successfull and benevolent (i.e. almost all with >50% concessions) in human history.
So can you settle borders with such a magnamous power? Hint 12/14 countries did, the 13th Bhutan wants to, India is the holdout. So the answer is, very easily, unless your populous is terminally ignorant of history and thinks being the 1/14h holdout isn't a sign that maybe PRC isn't the problem. Note how in table PRC settled most of her disputes in <10 years, India took ~40 with Bangladesh, at some point timepass mentality stops being excuse. And again it's not PRC whose not willing to settle, and provide MORE concessions, it's India who thinks it should get 100%, which is frankly not a serious position.
https://img2.chinadaily.com.cn/images/202308/28/64ec91c2a310...
https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2023/08/30/chinas-updated-map-and...
https://www.gmfus.org/news/unpacking-chinas-new-standard-map
This is the easiest thing to cross-reference regarding expansion of their national map. Why should we "magnanimously" decide to give away land that India actually holds according to the 1914 treaty ? Why should we give away our eastern states ? None of them have Chinese ethnicity. They all have native elected representatives. Again - come and do a tour of Eastern Indian states such as Arunachal Pradesh - they don't speak Chinese, they have indigenous native tribes. Calling the area "South Tibet" is an absolute joke.
We will stick to the 1914 Treaty. We will not accept China's formal territorial expansion in 2023. Neither do other states like Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia (nearly a dozen nations) that have completely rejected the same.
PS: As a clear contradiction - even the Russian negotiations never got properly settled in your 12/14. China claimed the whole Bolshoy Ussuriysky island yet again. So even stuff that is settled needs to get re-settled once China expands its ambitions. What is the point ?
Again... what expansion? These 2023 map did not introduce ANY new claims. Old PRC maps has always claimed AP and AC, and if anything 9dash is down grade from 10/11dash from decades ago (when PRC ceded Tonkin to North Vietnam, because again PRC magnanamous). There is quite literally nothing new in this map except the tizzy it caused because PRC released it before ASEAN and G20 summit and parties have to protest or else it's tacit acceptance. Generic geopolitical messaging. Like nothing in it was new except Indian media trying to pretend they're new claims to useful idiot audiences who don't know 101 history.
1914 treaty doesn't apply to PRC because you know... they didn't ratify Simla and explicitly repudiated it. A country is not bound to a treaty it didn't sign. India's position of what they ratify between UK and somehow that applies to ROC/PRC/China which isn't party to it and explictly does not endorse is is frankly another unserious position. Like this is a territory dispute, it's not about the fucking people. People can be moved, land can't. You can squeeze all 1.4B people in there and say look how Indian it is and it wouldn't matter because the dispute is over land.
E: Bolshoy, it's called more retarded geopolitical drama, propaganda by western sources trying to drive wedge between PRC/RU for obvious reasons (i.e. you linking to lol Bonnie Glaser of ex CSIS China Power doing atlantacism propaganda at German Martial Fund). RU and PRC affirmed both sides adhere to common position on resolved border issue, and in 2024 PRC/RU did joint development on the island... you know because it was never an issue to begin with. The point is once India stops FUDDING around fake news and learn some history/media literacy 101, maybe there can be productive border ratification, again like 12/14 other countries instead of living under the delusion that there's a scenario where India gets 100 and PRC gets 0 because the British OKayed it. Again utterly unserious, borderline infantile position to think 100/0 split is feasible.
> The point is once India stops FUDDING around and learn some history/media literacy 101, maybe there can be productive border ratification, again like 12/14 other countries instead of living under the delusion...
Lol, what ? Are you saying that all the dozen nations are now happy with the post-2023 Chinese map and India is the sole loner and must educate itself ? Is it a delusion that Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, etc object to ~90% of the South China Sea now claimed, including EEZs up to 200 nautical miles away which also breaks UNCLOS - which China ratified.
PS: Even if we stick to your very strange position of ignoring international boundaries of past treaties because of current government objections, the China map did expand outside of "past claims" - it officially now covers the South China Sea as part of China's sovereign territory. India is not the only objector - as you falsely state.
No I'm saying nations party to SCS maritime drama always protest when PRC regularly asserts their territory, just like they do to each other, because that's customary geopolitical response. And it's 5, not a dozen, like you don't need to make up numbers, it's literally a handful.
With respect to land border, yes India is infact the sole loner that needs to educate itself. 12/14 other PRC land borders had no problem settling, again most with MORE PRC concessions. 1/14 Bhutan wants to settle but can't because India. That leaves only India who has this infantile notion that there is some fantasy world where borders can be settled in 100/0 Indian favour which is frankly medically retarded expectation only a child can have. Any proper history education will teach India only way to get 100/0 is loser in war and frequently not even then. So yes education away from that level of delusional magical thinking is apt.
SCS disputees also you know dispute with each other, everyone protests each other and with except of PH gets along fine with PRC. Also PRC position on SCS is legal under UNCLOS. Or rather not illegal. Or more technically correct, can't even be illegal. TLDR useful idiots believe PCA ruling is actual UNCLOS ruling when it's manifestly not (it's basically mock UN US+PH did on PCA stationary with anti PRC cosplayers). UN/ITLOS/ICJ/UNCLOS has no formal position on PCA ruling MEANING ITS NOT INTERNATIONAL LAW despite the heavy propaganda. Since PRC not party to optional arbitutaion clause, i.e. again no ratify no care, besides which UNCLOS cannot determine sovereingty claims so the idea PRC breaks UNCLOS is so retarded it's not even wrong since there is literally no mechanism in UNCLOS to rule PRC claims as illegal... hence PRC is in fact in compliance with her UNCLOS accession obligations.
PS: 1. No again this is history 101, PRC has always had 9dash, which it treats as domestic delimitations, it used to be 11 dash under ROC, i.e. it has always been part of past claims, for decades since post war. CHINESE (PRC/ROC) CLAIMS HAS OFFICIALLY ALWAYS COVERED SCS, PRC formally inherited claims from ROC when UN recognition switched and ROC claims proceeded that. I said India is the only LAND BORDER disputee, i.e. bilateral disputee, 1vs1 which should on paper be much simple negotiation, hence PRC able to ratify 12/14 land border in rapid negotiations. But somehow not Indian, and by extension Bhutan. Because clearly it's the other 12-13/14 who are outliers /s. SCS is a 5 party shitshow and much harder to resolve and everyone objects to eachothers overlapping claims, even then PRC ceding Tonkin to Vietnam makes PRC one of the better actors. So if you want to do the numberes, then 12/14+5, i.e. 12/19 PRC land+maritime disputees are solved, aka plurality. The 5/5 maritime cannot be solved bilaterally and will remain shitshow. The on paper low hanging fruit 2/14 land border is held up by India.
2. PRC is not ignoring past treaties, it's simply not fucking subject to treaties it doesn't sign. The very strange position is Indians believing a treaty between India and UK over Tibet that ROC EXPLICLITLY REPUDIATED AT TIME OF NOT SIGNING, I.E. ROC -> PRC DOES NOT APPROVE OF THIS TREATY AND EXPLICITY NOTIFIED PARTIES AT THE TIME, is somehow a valid treaty. Absolute toddler logic.
Unfortunately, our positions differ based on international boundaries ratified before independence. (Also, laughable that PRC sticks to ROC claims on one-hand, while it also simultaneously denies them on the other hand - aka Taiwan)
Let me address the major point that you bring up. PRC lays claim to 125,000 square KM - most of which is currently Indian territory. That is nearly ~8-10x of any other nation that China settled with - well, excluding ROC (Taiwan) - which China has also not "settled" with. Today, dozens of modern nations fit into 125,000 square KM of territory.
India does not need to "educate itself" - it has had over 20 rounds of talks with China recently and China has utterly not budged from claiming the FULL state (along with some adjacent territory too). It is not India, but China that is not willing to concede. If the dispute was merely ~10k sq KM, it would have already been solved. There are some very good reasons behind China's intractable position. This is extraordinarily resource rich territory that is utterly untapped by India due to constitutional protections offered to this state and its indigenous tribals. China, obviously, has no such protective obligations.
But for India, this state is populated by voters, native elected representatives and constitutionally protected indigenous tribes. There is utterly no way voters are going to even acknowledge being associated with China in any way, with utterly zero Chinese ethnicity present. Full ~120k sq km of a bio-diverse, resource-rich and populated-by-voters living in a democratic state for over 75 years, being utterly claimed by China is ridiculous and does not lend itself to any possible "settlement".
E: last reply
TW is not a territory dispute, it's a unsolved civil war, i.e. PRC is not intending to split territory with TW, like other disputes, TW is winner takes all.
What PRC claims from India is not what PRC actually wants. PRCs offered package swap deal with India for decades (and imo continues to be) with India was "east for west". PRC gets 40k sqkm Aksai China claims it currently defacto controls, basically empty land where no one lives. India gets Arunachal Pradesh, i.e. what India defacto controls, the state. AKA just formalize border at where both sides controls, there's no actual PRC interest in AP the state and the people, because is as you recognized ridiculous.
AP just barginning chip for "east for west" swap, same with PRC claims on Tawang that India + western media likes to play up as some Dalai + Tawang super combo to threaten PRC Tibet succession crisis. Reality is Tibet is no longer a restive region, it's been thoroughly securitized and PRC can print their own dalai lama and rule Tibetians as they see fit. It's just another pressure point because India taking 20 rounds of talks and 40+ years have gotten nowhere leaves no option but accept the status quo - which PRC doesn't want, they want to ratify borders - hence pile on pressure via salami slicing for India to accept package deal.
Ultimately I think PRC fine with "east for west". All China wants is their bit of tundra for G219 highway to connect Xinjiang and Tibet. They don't want some full Indian state and the people and the resources, because that's also logistically ridiculous. PRC is not going to go over the Tibetan plateau to mine untapped resources in AP when they have entire Tibetan plateau to mine.
TLDR Indian media keeps insinuating PRC wants all of AP when PRC doesn't, it just wants the border formalized at current occupation/administered areas (i.e. no mass people resettlement needed). Just ratify borders and stop encouraging tibetan exile shenanigans, same way India doesn't like Canada entertaining Khalistanis. no need to go back to pre dalai lama asylum hindi chini bhai bhai, but also no paitence to wait another 20/50/forever years.
I am aware its your last reply, but you are rather wrong on this point:
> TLDR Indian media keeps insinuating PRC wants all of AP when PRC doesn't, it just wants the border formalized at current occupation/administered areas
This is wrong. This was confirmed by China themselves. Latest Chinese actions included issuing Chinese names for towns, mountains and rivers in Arunachal Pradesh - continued assertion of demands, even after talks. This includes detainment of state citizens unless they acknowledge to be part of China and get a Chinese Visa. PRC most certainly wants Arunachal Pradesh and also apparently its citizens - can you point me to a single source otherwise ?
There was also no mention in any of the >20 recent talks - even in Chinese media - of any package swap of Aksai Chin for Arunachal Pradesh. Today PRC states clearly that all of Arunachal is "Zangnan" / "South Tibet".
Not confirmation, that's continued salami slicing sheninagans i.e. cartographic normalization and stapled visas instead of stamped visas to delegitmize AP citizenship. PRC will always rhetorically state AP is south Tibet because that's just how geopolitics works, you don't preemptively concede you don't claim something you claim even if said claim is to get something else because that weakens claim. PRC will always publically hold position all of AP is Tibet, i.e. maximalist bargaining position, until package swap is accepted first behind close doors because anything else weakens claim.
Package swap deals is not something offered in low level talks, it's leader to leader offer, i.e. Zhou Enlai to Nehru, Deng Xiaoping to Ghandi. Modi's been dipping meeting Xi (or vice versa if you want) until last year, right before trump2 and it's been rollercoaster geopolitics. Until India, PRC, US triangulation / dynamic becomes cleares and Xi/Modi relations normalize the only thing boundry talks do is what it always does, maintainence work with some progress towards normalize relations where high level boundary talks can start, as in actual formal settlement, not LAC management homework, i.e. we're past generals talking in tents to ministers meeting in capital, and maybe one day leaders discussing swap.
In the meantime, in addition to talks, the new normal PRC wants to set is to continue adding pressure via salami slice and rachet pressure because PRC isn't interested in settling for status quo (talks) where nothing happens, i.e. India wanting pre 2020 status quota ante, basically PRC perceives to be (decades of) deliberate stalling, so PRC will continue to add pressure so situation doesn't settle into unproductive status quo ante dynamic again. Bluntly it is better for PRC if PRC/India draws blood every once in a while to keep the pressure up because that might lead to earlier settlement than the alternative, drawing patrol routes and words which hasn't lead anywhere. Anything that can move the settlment clock forward.
E: alright really last reply, you can believe what you want. But ultimately, ask yourself, do you think PRC can invade and hold Arunachal Pradesh, through Assam Himalayas. Exceedingly unlikely, geographically logistics harder to sustain than TW. It's more trouble than it's worth.
I think size is also what prevents countries too. Not enough people and not enough GDP? Well, some projects might take more than the country’s available capital.
Size isn’t everything: compare China to India.
I wish them luck, and success, because why not!
I was there a couple of months ago. It's truly a beautiful and extremely calm place.
There's one quote from our guide that I remember: "We are a small nation. We watch what our neighbors are doing and pick what will work for us."
Another impression I got (and I may be totally wrong) - the locals genuinely love the royal family. There are pictures of the king, his wife, and children literally everywhere. As someone who grew up in a communist country and is familiar with seeing portraits of "beloved" leaders everywhere, this seemed like something totally different.
The people are very respectful - no one tries to sell you things or bother you in any other way.
Highly recommended destination. Hope it doesn't change anytime soon.
Didn't Bhutan kicked out some people?
Yes, but it's complicated.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing_of_Lhotshampa...
It wouldn't be regarded as complicated if Bhutan wasn't le wholesome misty buddhist paradise with happiness instead of GDP. Westerners love stories like that and don't want anything to tarnish it
The US which is not really a wholesome misty buddhist paradise is also involved in trying to kick out some people who arrived unofficially over the southern border and I think that is also regarded as complicated.
The people Bhutan kicked out were native to that place though and were born there and had identity documents and passports there.
USA is not a one dimensional country
Compare it with hecking wholesome Israel-friendly petrostate of Azebaijan which conducted a full scale ethnic cleansing special operation just a couple of years ago and it went mostly unnoticed and wasn't regarded as complicated by western intelligentsia
> It wouldn't be regarded as complicated if Bhutan wasn't le wholesome misty buddhist paradise with happiness instead of GDP.
If that was the case, myanmar ( a buddhist country ) wouldn't be attacked mercilessly by the press/government/etc for their "deportations".
> Westerners love stories like that and don't want anything to tarnish it
Nobody cares. We'd turn against bhutan in an instant if the media/government/etc decided to turn against it.
I've been fascinated by Bhutan ever since reading "Beyond the Sky and the Earth". I wish them the best, but with the exodus of young people it's difficult to see long term success. The population is tiny. Will future growth only stem from tourism?
Tourism is not really a growth sector. There are too many hotels already, with hoteliers complaining they can't get bookings at a decent price because there's too much competition undercutting them, and tour operators demanding lower prices than is sustainable.
Truthfully, the GMC is Bhutan's best bet at growth. The idea is to attract foreign talent who can train and educate locals, so that it can act as an attractor for youths, and a flywheel for prosperity in the country.
Despite all that happiness push, young people still prefer more opportunities (and money) abroad.
It's because of that youth exodus (to Australia mainly) that the government is pushing for Gelephu Mindfulness City as place for innovation and new business opps. That's what the gov't officials directly argued when asked.
Interestingly, Bhutan is the fifth highest country in Bitcoin holdings.
https://bitbo.io/treasuries/countries/
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/economy/2025/4/14/bitcoin-king...
I guess it's something to use the hydroelectric power for.
Yeah, investing it in bitcoin sure beats selling the power to India at bargain bin prices during summer time only to have to buy it back in winter time at premium rates. I think this really shows his majesty's wisdom and ability to think ahead (iiuc it was his decision to start mining bitcoins using green energy).
I don’t think Bhutan has ever had any relationship with the Dalai Lama, there Buddhism is derived from Tibetan Buddhism but is a different school. The article is weird to suggest that Bhutan has some sort of role in the future relating to Tibet Buddhism leadership, it’s much more likely to come from India.
The article doesn't suggest that Bhutan has a future in the leadership of Tibetan Buddhism, but that when/if Tibetan Buddhism gets more fractured because of disputes around lineage, then Bhutan can become globally important in the thought leadership of Buddhism more generally, or maybe more specifically Vajrayana Buddhism.
There are 4 main schools of Vajrayana Buddhism: Nyingma, Kagyu, Sakya and Gelug, and the Dalai Lama is head of just one of them - Gelug. They have independent teaching transmissions and succession lines. There's common misconception about Dalai Lama being a kind of a "pope" for Buddhism at all, or for the Diamond way (that means Vajrayana) Buddhism in particular, which is simply not true.
Having said that, it is of course unfortunate that the issue with two candidates, one of them "manufactured" by the PRC regime, is on the horizon and most likely will happen. Please note this already happened for the Kagyu lineage, where two Karmapa candidates emerged in 90s; interesting that after few decades the Chinese one admitted recently he's not the real one.
Do you have a link to the Karmapa admitting he's not the real deal? I tried to google it but got nothing.
There is this: https://youtu.be/AdI4DMRFkm4
Although here he admits "he is not properly trained as previous Karmapas" that's not exactly the statement i claimed
There was also another one with a stronger statement, somewhere during covid, I need to dig more
India as of today plays the Hindu ideas .. and downplays Buddhist followers ( mostly poor and downtrodden following footsteps of BR Ambedkar)
BJP which is ruling party for 3rd consecutive term is staunchly supporting Upper caste ( Brahmins).
TLDR: Buddhist leadership although is prophesised seems unlikely as of today. (However their Vippassana is worth giving a 10 day shot in todays chaotic world https://www.dhamma.org/en-US/locations/directory)
> BJP ... is staunchly supporting Upper caste ( Brahmins).
I'm curious what you mean by this. I've heard a wide range of opinions on BJP from NRIs, but that's one position I haven't been told before. My understanding was that BJP supports caste and village inclusivity in universities and professional fields to such an extent that some people from tier 1 cities even feel left out.
> and downplays Buddhist followers
How does it downplay Buddhist followers?
Buddhism in India grew in opposition to the Hindu caste system instead of spiritual change of thought. The current Indian government is loudly Hindu nationalist and prefers to minimise or even dismiss the diversity of Indian religious practices as well as pretend that the caste system is no longer present.
They and their supporters downplay Buddhist followers by pretending that the lived experiences of these Buddhist (on in general the non-hindu) don't exist.
Do you have a source on how BJP downplays Buddhist followers?
I think to be fair what they were meaning is that it may emerge as the primary source of Tibetan Buddhism now Tibet is irreversibly compromised. Yes, I am aware of the different schools and how they squabble.
Is this propaganda or gross naivety? It’s a corrupt dystopian hellscape where people starve regularly, and are exiled. The forced smiling puts Disney Land to shame.
Why do you think you need a guide to go past a certain point? The only other country I know of where a guide is required is North Korea.
No offence to the author here but it reads like a wealthy WASP going to an “exotic” culture pointing out how “quaint” it is and how we can “learn so much” from their “way of living”.
[flagged]
Can you please not post in the snarky / flamey style to HN? It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.
You're welcome to make your substantive points thoughtfully, of course.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
[dead]
Bhutan sounds cute, but I wonder what the reality is. The city sounds like another one of these globalist smart city projects like Neom in Saudi Arabia, or Rwanda's African showpiece. I'm sure said city will have cameras on every corner, and probably 15 minute city aspects.
Weird comparison. Neom doesn’t exist, whereas Bhutan has been around for centuries.
It’s a unique place, not just an idea. Friendly people and a government that looks at more than GDP as a success metric.
I think he refers to Gelephu Mindfulness City. I read it differently, not as a generic globalist city but very much a middle ground between Bhutanese culture (deep Buddhist presence, it will maintain vernacular architectures codes throughout, no skyscrapers) and global capital attractiveness (special economic zone, some tax benefits but not a tax haven in any way, crypto adoption, etc.)
I didn't mean Bhutan in general. I was referring to Bhutan's new city project. It seems similar to new cities elsewhere, maybe even Auroville (or whatever it is called). Singapore is great in some ways, not so much in others. (It is arguable how democratic Singapore is, since its parliament has a lot of hereditary politicians in it, like Thailand or Greece.)
Bhutan has sold itself as a Shangri La for decades. Whether it is, is another problem. It seems all over the world the peasants are being herded into urban panopticons.
what’s wrong with a 15-minute city?
You can't imagine how insufferably smug everyone who lived there would be? Living lives all happy and nice and not horrible? Gosh, what a terrible place it must be!
How much was rent again?
It depends whether your happiness relies on someone else micromanaging every step of your life. Mine doesn't. Maybe yours does.
Everything's fine until the government enforced lockdowns start
The 15 minute city is sold as a place with amenities within easy. The reality will end up being forced to live within a small area in some kind of gated community with a curfew.
Besides which, where are these amenities nowadays? Small businesses were decimated by discriminatory lockdown enforcement. Physical libraries and community centres are being shut. As are bars and cafes. If there was a real 15 minute city, it's in the past. The internet is no substitute for in person interaction.
I’d argue that any sufficiently dense city is naturally a 15 minute city, and tens of millions of people (including myself) live in them. For example: in New York, Tokyo, London etc. one can feasibly access all the amenities they need within a “15-minute walk, bike ride, or public transit ride”.
The key thing is that these cities developed this way organically. There is nothing stopping me leaving my 15 minute radius if I want to, and I regularly do.
The suburbs aren't in most major cities. The idea of being stuck in that small area is nightmare fuel... Like Melbourne, Victoria telling that residents could not travel more than a few KM/miles away four years ago.
I get what you mean, it’s hard to retrofit/force this concept on low density, car dependent suburban sprawl.
But I’m not sure if I understand the conflation of 15 min cities and covid lockdowns? I don’t think any government would want its people to be permanently geofenced to 15 minute bubbles, this would absolutely kill commerce.
It's not a conflation at all, it's all coming from the same mentality. The rulers trying to work out what to do with the ruled. In the Middle Ages, peasants were limited in how far they could travel, what they could eat and which fuel they could use. There are people on top who would like to see that return, and we see signs of that returning.
Lockdown killed off a lot of commerce, and we're still paying it off. Whether it was necessary or unnecessary, it was mismanaged. Automation will take almost any job if it keeps proceeding this way, and so that means the masses will become of little use to the ruling class economically. There are several ways to address that problem. One is restricting their interaction and movement. Another would be to create artificial work just to keep them quiet. As for the other possibilities, they are pretty dark.
Why would there be lockdowns?
Disease, the environment, riots, the economy etc etc. So many potential excuses.
You’ve been reading/watching too much propaganda and disinformation, and are weirdly focused on COVID precautions that are long over. You should break out of whatever online communities you’re part of that consume this sort of nonsense.
Who decides what is "disinformation"? Oh yes, it's the same groups already running everything. Covid precautions are not long over. They are only three or four years ago and still affect global food prices. Some businesses are still struggling to pay off that shortfall if not bankrupted. It's also allowed the ruling class to use ever more scaremongering as a means of social control... And use the "misinformation"/"disinformation" labels to shut down public debate.
Also half the stuff they came up with was not scientific like allowing flights to continue while shutting small businesses.
By the way, most of what I am talking about is what I saw at street level. You couldn't be much radicalised by online activity. I got censored by Facebook for asking simply about the mental health cost effects of lockdown. Absolute disgrace. I knew several people who died from the isolation including one who drank himself to death.
Every place in the world is a mix of two things - the background and the foreground. The background is the natural stuff (terrain, greenery, water bodies, climate etc) and the foreground is the areas where people settled.
The people areas (houses, streets, work places) are dependent on the economic activity, prosperity and culture. And they look the same as any other place in the world with the same parameters.
Outside of people's areas, it depends on terrain (hill station), latitude (for climate) and greenery. Again for it looks the same as any other place in the world with the same parameters.
So, every place is a combination of these two things with different parameters. Sometimes, the foreground has dependencies on the background.