GG 2002 Regional Geography of South Asia and the Himalayas

6. Tradition and Change in the Himalayas

The Historical Legacy

Throughout most of history, the Himalayas have been set apart from the rest of the world, their isolation maintained by high mountain barriers, fast-flowing rivers and deep gorges. To the north lay Tibet, which was able to maintain a policy of isolationism remote from the turmoil affecting the surrounding countries. Similarly, Nepal - isolated by the Himalaya to the north and the malarial forests of the Terai to the south - remained closed to foreigners. Nepal fought (and lost) a war with the British Empire in 1814 - 1816, but the British were unwilling to attempt to occupy such rugged territory, and left Nepal its own sovereignty. Tibet was invaded by a British expeditionary force almost 100 years later, but again was not occupied. Thus, both Nepal and Tibet (and Bhutan) escaped colonial occupation during the heyday of European empires - an almost unique situation.

The traditional isolation of the Himalayan countries was to change in the mid-20th C., when the isolation of both countries broke down. The contrasting stories of these two countries forms the topic of todayÕs lecture. We will also briefly consider recent changes in the Indian Himalaya.

Tibet

Tibet is outside of the area considered by this course, but the political changes there had repercussions in South Asia, so it is worth taking a detour to examine its history. Over the centuries, Tibet was an isolated society with a unique political system. The head of state was the Dalai Lama, who was also the head of the church, an elaborate form of Buddhism. Each Dalai Lama is believed to be the reincarnation of the previous one, and is recognised in childhood following a series of rituals, oracles, and tests. The first person to carry the title of Dalai Lama was a senior incarnate lama called Sonam Gyatso, who was given the title by the Mongol ruler Altan Khan in 1517. (Dalai Lama in Mongolian is ÔBroad OceanÕ) Sonam Gyatso posthumously bestowed the title on his two previous incarnations, so the first Dalai Lama actually became known as the Third. The title was a purely religious one for over 100 years, and full political leadership of Tibet by the Dalai Lama began with the Fifth (The Great Fifth) in 1642. True political power in Tibet lay elsewhere, however. The reincarnation system meant that there were large gaps between the death of a Dalai Lama and the coming of age of his successor. In this gap, rule was assumed by regents (who came from powerful families who headed a feudal system), who were unwilling to relinquish power when the time came. It is significant that, after the Seventh, no Dalai Lama survived into maturity until the Thirteenth (ÔThe Great ThirteenthÕ): all died young, assuring unbroken power for the regents. The 13th Dalai Lama narrowly escaped assassination attempts before going on to a long and successful rule, between 1895 and 1933. The present Dalai Lama is the Fourteenth. The power of the regents ensured that Tibet remained isolated from the outside world.

This abruptly changed in 1948, when China - under the new leadership of Mao - invaded Tibet. China had long claimed some degree of sovereignty over Tibet, but in practice this was something of a mutual arrangement, in which Tibet was autonomous in all but foreign policy, and because it had no interest in foreign affairs this seemed to be of no consequence. However, the new communist government in China exerted its authority, and Tibet was powerless to resist. Chinese troops occupied the country. The timing of the invasion probably owed much to the political change in India: China no longer had to fear the reaction of the British Empire. Tibet tried to appeal to Britain, India, and the UN, but without success. The Chinese invasion was justified as a ÔliberationÕ of the people from the unjust feudal system. There was some truth in this, since Tibetan peasants did occupy a very lowly position in Tibetan society. However, life under Chinese rule was worse for much of the population. Over the decade following 1948, there was an uneasy peace and Tibetan resentment against the Chinese presence gradually increased. This led ultimately to a rebellion in 1959. This was disastrous, and led to a severe crackdown by Chinese troops. Fearing for his life, the Dalai Lama fled to India with a large number of refugees.

The Dalai Lama was permitted to remain in India, and to establish a Tibetan Government in Exile at Dharamsala in Northern India. He has been an energetic spokesman for the Tibetan people, while maintaining his role as spiritual leader. Back in Tibet, successive waves of persecution resulted in the destruction of most of TibetÕs ancient monasteries, and severe punishment and massacres of Tibetan people which continues to the present. In the 1980s, liberalisation in China led to an opening up of Tibet, and an expansion of tourism. However, the crackdown on the growing democracy movement in China was accompanied by a hardening of attitudes in Tibet, and Chinese oppression there is still a fact of life. Large numbers of refugees still escape across the Himalayas into Nepal, and most ultimately settle there or in India.

Nepal

Unlike India and Tibet, Nepal has never been controlled by a colonial power. Nevertheless, it has undergone huge changes in the last half century. The country of Nepal as a single entity is very recent. Prior to the mid-18th Century, the territory of what is now Nepal consisted of about 50 independent states. Many of these consisted of a single valley in the Himalaya; the largest were based in the Kathmandu Valley, where the three city states of Kathmandu, Bhaktapur, and Pathan jostled for position. This changed in the 1750s when Prithvi Narayan Shah from the state of Gorkha (home of the now famous Gurkha soldier), about 100 km west of Kathmandu, began a campaign of absorbing neighbouring states. In 1768, after ten years of preparation, siege, and attack, he gained control of Kathmandu. Nepal's expansion continued, and at its height extended well beyond its present borders into what is now Garhwal (northern India) and Sikkim and Bhutan to the east. This expansion was halted by Chinese troops in Tibet, and by the British to the South in 1810. As part of the terms of ceasefire, the British reduced the area of Nepali territory, and absorbed Sikkim and the Indian Himalaya. The British had no wish to sustain expensive campaigns in mountain country against a fierce and independent people, so no attempt was made to absorb Nepal into the British Empire.

Prevented from expanding, the Nepali elites turned inwards. In the intriques of palace life, the Shah dynasty gradually lost power to its own ministers, drawn from another powerful family, the Ranas. The Ranas effectively ruled Nepal until 1950, and maintained a policy of strict isolationism until that time. Nepal remained essentially a medieval, feudal society, governed by a deeply conservative and self-serving elite.

Inspired by events in India, a popular uprising in 1952 led to a restoration of power to the Shah king, and a form of democracy. It was a very limited democracy, however, which was essentially a weak parliament steered by the King. The country did, however, end its isolation, and opened up to foreigners. Tourism was kick started by the ascent of Everest in 1953, and the economy of the country has come to depend to a large degree on tourism. Full democracy only came to Nepal in 1990, after a popular uprising and revolution. Parliamentary democracy is thus very new to Nepal, and the country has yet to settle down to a stable political system.
 

Rebellion, Royal Massacre and Emergency


Within the last year, Nepal has been facing a deepening crisis. The most shocking event was the massacre of the royal family, on 1 June 2001, which left King Birendra and seven of his immediate family dead. This event stunned the people of Nepal, who felt a deep love for Birendra, who they saw as a benevolent father figure who cared deeply for the country. Little news was released by the Palace, and initial reports claimed that the late king's son, Crown Prince Dipendra, had 'accidentally' shot his family, then shot himself. Dipendra was briefly monarch as he lay in a coma with severe bullet wounds. He died on 3 June. Later reports said that Dipendra had shot his family following a family argument over his desire to marry his girlfriend Devyani Rana.

The evidence that Dipendra committed the massacre seems irrefutable, but in Nepal there is widespread belief that he was innocent, and that the royal killings were engineered by Birendra's brother, Gyanendra, who is now king. This was not helped by the absurd nature of the earliest reports of the massacre. Journalists in Nepal who printed stories based on the rumours were arrested for treason, but the belief persists. The rumours of Gyanendra's role have been exploited by Maoist revolutionaries in Nepal, who wish to moblise popular feeling against the government and the king.

The royal massacre and change of king has also had further repercussions within Nepal. For the last five years, Maoist guerrillas have been co-ordinating a rebellion in Nepal, aimed at overthrowing the government and replacing it with a socialist one-party state inspired by Chinese communism. The Maoists have greatest support in the remote west of the country, where the control of central government is weak, and local officials often deeply corrupt. Problems of poverty and disease are also worst in these areas, which have not benefited from tourism, which has been focused into 'honeypot' areas, such as Annapurna and the Everest region. Maoists have over-run army posts and police stations, and have taken control of about 25% of the country. The Maoists have set up an alternative administration, including courts and schools, and enjoy wide popular support, although they have also resorted to robbery and extortion to raise funds.

While Birendra was king, he refused to send the army against the Maoists, believing it was wrong for Nepalis to fight each other. Since Gyanendra's succession, the situation has worsened. Maoist action, especially in Kathmandu, had already been stepped up in the first half of 2001. Following the massacre, unrest increased, and discussions between the government and the political wing of the Maoist movement broke down.   In November 2001, the Maoists launched a series of attacks on army positions and other targets killing over 100 people in 4 days of violence, and in response the king and government called a State of Emergency, branding the Maoists a terrorist organisation. The Army has launched a series of counter-attacks, while Maoists have continued their campaign, including military strikes, murder, robbery and extortion. Seven thousand people have died since the Maoists launched an armed struggle in early 1996 - two-thirds of them since peace talks broke down in November 2001. For comparison, this is far in excess of the death toll in the Israel-Palestine conflict over the same period.

In February 2002, Maoists launched two simultaneous attacks on government offices and the nearby airport at Achham in western Nepal, killing 76 policemen, 55 soldiers, an intelligence officer and four civilians. The attacks employed sophisticated weaponry, looted from Army stores in earlier strikes. Clearly, emergency powers and confrontation with the army have not diminished the rebels' ability to mount devastating and massive strikes. The latest news (Feb 2003) is that a cease-fire has been called which is being honoured by both sides. Apparently irreconcilable differences between Maoists and the government have prevented the resumption of talks, but at present there does appear to be better prospects of peace than at any time since the Royal Massacre.

The Maoists are preaching a form of world revolution long since vanished from most of the rest of the world. While their methods must be deplored, they clearly do have a constituency among the poorest in Nepal who have not gained from Nepal's brief experience of democracy. While injustices remain, terrorism and revolution will continue to find fertile ground.
 

Tourism in the Nepal Himalayas


Until the political upheavals of the 20th C., the Himalayas of Nepal were a truly isolated land. The high Himalaya had been settled only fairly recently, about 1600 AD, by the Sherpa people who originated in eastern Tibet. They brought with them Tibetan culture and their form of Tibetan Buddhism. The Sherpa economy was based on subsistence agriculture and herding of yaks, a form of cow adapted to high altitudes. The economy was revolutionised by the introduction of the potato in the 19th C., which allowed a dramatic expansion of the population. In the 1950s, Nepal was opened to outsiders, and the lure of the high Himalaya (especially the Khumbu Himalaya, where Everest is located) ensured that the Sherpa lands were visited by large expeditions of mountaineers, then trekkers. Ed Hillary (the first ascentionist of Everest, 1953) devoted much energy to education and health projects in the Khumbu. As part of this, an airstrip was constructed at Lukla, greatly increasing the ease of access to the region. This allowed large numbers of trekkers to visit, with increasing numbers each year: over 20,000 in 1998, and approx. 24,000 in 1999. Although traditional farming and herding activities still continue in the Khumbu, tourism has had a major impact and employs a large percentage of the population as guides, porters, and in providing accommodation. On the whole, this has brought prosperity to the region, but the benefits have been unequally distributed. The poorest tend to find poorly-paid employment as porters, while the wealthiest lodge owners enjoy a high standard of living and are able to travel abroad and send their children to school in Kathmandu or University in America or Europe.

The Sherpas are most famous as high altitude guides, accompanying climbers to the highest peaks. This is dangerous work, and many die each year. Even moderate altitude portering (3,000-5,000 m asl) is potentially hazardous.

India

The Indian Himalaya have tended to be less isolated than Nepal and Tibet, partly because of the British presence. The Indian Himalaya were explored earlier, largely by British adventurers sponsored by the East India Company or the British Government, who were interested in the strategic role of the Himalaya as a buffer between the British Empire and Russia. Since independence, the region has opened up even more, mainly as the result of road building and tourism. Roads were pushed through the region as part of IndiaÕs border disputes with China and Pakistan. The roads have brought greater prosperity to many, but have also had unfortunate consequences. E.g. the ancient pattern of sheep and goat herding. In Lahul, to the north of Manali, a traditional pattern of herding involved the annual migration of herders from high altitude pastures in the summer to low pasturage in the winter, crossing the 3,800 m Rhotang La. This is an incredible journey, taking many weeks, but increasingly heavy traffic on the roads makes this increasingly difficult, and fewer and fewer herdsmen are following this ancient pattern. In all parts of the Himalaya, the modern world is pushing tradition into more and more remote corners. Once-remote communities, such as those of Ladakh near the border between India and China, are on the itinerary of adventure tourism, which is destroying the very resource it seeks to enjoy.

Up to date news site:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2780127.stm

Back to course contents