Resistance to change is a common theme around the world in times of political and social unrest. From the unwillingness of President Lyndon B. Johnson to put an end to the Vietnam War to Hosni Mubarak’s more recent attempted refusal to step down as president of Egypt, stubbornness has proved dangerous to global socio-political stability. Important to the progression of peace and justice is the ability to recognize global trends of change and adapt to them. One nation that is doing exactly that is the South Asian country of Bhutan. As the rest of the world seems to be doing all it can to hinder progress and maintain out- dated policies, Bhutan felt the winds of political change and decided to transition from an absolute monarchy to a multi-party democracy in early 2008.

Bhutan is a small land- locked country bordered by China to the north and In- dia to the east, west, and south. It has managed to remain an independent Buddhist nation despite influence first from the British Empire and then India. Early groundwork for democracy in Bhutan began in 1953, when King Jigme Dorji Wangchuck established the country’s first legislature, a 130-member National Assembly. The road to democracy, initiated by the monarchy itself, included a mock election on April 24, 2007 to acclimate the population to the electoral process. The first actual democratic election in Bhutan was held on March 24, 2008. But how might a population that has known nothing but happiness under an absolute monarchy come to terms with such an extreme political shift? In the United States, Americans are accustomed to democracy because it has been developing for over 200 years. Bhutan, however, is only now making the transition.

The head of Bhutan’s first democratically elected government, Prime Minister Jigme Thinley, was confident that democracy would succeed in Bhutan. But Bhutan’s citizens did not share his optimistic opinion. In an article from the Council on Foreign Relations, Thinley writes, “The people were not keen on bringing the kind of change that, in their eyes and in their mind, could not be very different from what they saw in the world at large and in particular in our neighboring countries in South Asia. In many of the countries, democracy had failed or was in the process of failing, and leading to tremendous upheavals, strife among the people.” For this reason, Bhutan’s transition to a Western-style democracy was met with some trepidation from a population accustomed to their nation’s benevolent monarchy and Buddhist tradition.

But what does democracy mean for Buddhism in Bhutan? Religion is so closely linked with the Bhutanese monarchy that one could not exist without the other. This connection was not ignored in the drafting of Bhutan’s new constitution. Article 2 dictates that the dual powers of religion and politics shall be unified in the person of the king, “who, as a Buddhist, shall be the upholder of the Chhoe-sid,” the dual system of governance characterized by the sharing of power between the religious and political heads of the country. While the king’s power is mainly symbolic, his influence is seen throughout the new democratic system. As democracy has taken hold in Bhutan, the Bhutanese have recognized the benefits of the new system and have adapted to them admirably. This transition should be a model for the rest of the world, not just for nations interested in developing a democracy of their own. Individuals should also note the benefits, as demonstrated by Bhutan’s example, of being open to necessary change. Only with change can essential progress be made, and a combination of the two will ultimately aid in the attempt to create and maintain global socio-political stability.