This is not a wonder, if you think positively. In India, the nearest of all our alliance, the Gandhis-Nehru lineage should always come in the front. In Nepal, it is for the Koiralas. In Bangladesh, the privilege goes to Seikh and in Pakistan, the Bhuttos and their relatives.
All in all, the Maldives is for Gayoom and in Sri Lanka the god has given the authority to rule to country to the Bandaranayakes. The US is for Bushes against the Iraqi Ahmadijijad.
When you play the powers, it is always among the one family versus the other. Bushes quashed Saddams in Iraq. In Pakistan, the Bhuttos are always targeted by military regimes. In India, the Gandhis fall prey to Tamils and Gothes. In Nepal, the fight is between the Koiralas and the Shahs
In our case, the devolution of power has begun, yet in the same line being practiced in the countries I mentioned. It is by words, the campaign to empower the people, and in practice, to empower the relatives. As you empower you relatives, and as you remain above them, you would in no excuse amass the powers. After all this is a new form of democracy to centralize power in one’s hand with devolution of power to family members.
The nearest of the royal family JYT and SN has been announced the leaders to take over the responsibility of the state authority. For years, they had been in the power, they had ruled the country. When democracy comes, words have changes, system pretended, people in the authority have not changed, and the techniques of ruling will not change. Bhutan would get such a vibrant democracy next year that the rulers of a democracy will be dictating the country in the same way they did for the last one century.
It is not the system that works. It is the practitioners who operate the system. Unless, rulers change along with the system, the governance would never change. If you look at the Chinese example, the system had not changed prior to the death of the Mao. India made progress after 1947 because both the system and the rulers changed.
What can you expect in Bhutan? It is a new bottle with old wine. It is a marketing strategy, in a form of branding. The producers do not care of the health of the consumers rather the ways to make products attractive. Democracy in Bhutan has come in a form of brand, a new brand with much attraction. Yet the components have not been changed. When you taste, may be after 2008, you would certainly know the ingredients are the same.
This is the pervasive and most notorious form of capitalism. Every one expects, two extremisms should end – capitalism and communism. Long live the democratic socialism.