By Dr. Hari Uprety
America, 2025
Science has widely established that human beings are born as rational and
conscious beings. From birth, every individual carries an inherent identity, whereas
citizenship is acquired later through the country of birth or by other legal means.
This distinction confirms that identity and citizenship are not synonymous
concepts. To understand this more clearly, it is important to distinguish between the
two.
Identity refers to the characteristics, values, or recognizability of a person or
object. In human life, identity is directly linked to originality and essence. Such
originality includes one’s lineage, customs, culture, language, religion, and related
attributes. Citizenship, on the other hand, refers to the legal status of being a citizen
of a nation-state. It is a certificate or legal recognition granted by a nation
according to its constitution, either by descent or through residency over a
specified period, entitling an individual to civic rights. In another sense, citizenship
is the legal right conferred upon an individual by the state, usually after reaching a
constitutionally recognized age.
Let us now turn to the essence of the matter. Human beings may be born in any
country of the world, and being born in a particular country should never be
considered a curse. National constitutions often provide pathways for individuals
born within a country to become citizens. The only difference lies in the legal
framework: some nations grant citizenship based on birth, while others grant it
after a specified period of residence. Consider a simple example. A person of
Tibetan origin resides in Nepal can acquire Nepali citizenship. This means that the
individual enjoys rights equivalent to those of other Nepali citizens, and their
children, born in Nepal, may obtain citizenship either by birth or descent. Although
they are Nepali citizens, they are not necessarily “Nepali” in terms of identity,
because identity is connected to originality—language, religion, culture, and
inherited traditions. These qualities endure throughout life. Such values and
characteristics cannot be stolen or confiscated, no matter how openly they are
displayed. In contrast, a citizenship certificate may be lost, stolen, or revoked,
requiring reissuance. Identity, however, is inherited at birth and remains until
death.
Having understood identity and citizenship conceptually, let us now discuss our
own identity and citizenship. Millions of people who speak the Nepali language,
practice Nepali culture, and follow Nepali traditions currently reside in countries
around the world. They have acquired citizenship in their respective countries only
after fulfilling constitutional and legal requirements, thereby exercising their civic
rights. Yet, their identity remains Nepali because identity is rooted in originality,
which carries its own intrinsic values and characteristics. Nepali-speaking
communities practicing Nepali culture can be found in Europe, America, Australia,
Canada, and many other regions. Regardless of where they reside, their cultural
values appear fundamentally similar. The only distinction is that they remain loyal
to the countries in which they live and abide by the constitutions and laws of those
nations.
At this point, I would like to discuss our own society and
community—specifically, Nepalis expelled from Bhutan who are now dispersed
across various countries around the world. Before discussing our identity, however,
it is necessary to briefly revisit history. Were our ancestors originally inhabitants of
Bhutan? Or, when and from where were they taken there? Understanding this
historical context is essential.
According to EthnoMed and author Maya Maxym, historical evidence suggests
that some Nepalis traveled from Kathmandu to Bhutan around 1620 during the
reign of Shabdrung Ngawang Namgyal to build a silver stupa for his father
(Maxym, n.d.; EthnoMed, n.d.). However, no official record exists of significant
Nepali migration to Bhutan until the beginning of the nineteenth century. Historical
records indicate that, from the mid-nineteenth century onward, Nepalis were
invited to settle in Bhutan. During this period, many of our ancestors migrated
from Nepal to Bhutan in search of employment opportunities and a better
livelihood, gradually establishing the southern region of Bhutan as their homeland.
Nepalis residing in southern Bhutan came to be known as Lhotshampa, a term still
used today (Hutt, 2003).
Historical evidence also suggests that Nepalis who migrated to Bhutan acquired
citizenship through legal provisions. From these ancestors emerged generations of
descendants who were born as citizens and lived in Bhutan for decades. The
historical records documenting this experience are extensive. However, around
1990, Bhutan experienced a wave of democratic movements, and under this
pretext, countless Nepalis were stripped of their homes, land, and citizenship
documents, eventually becoming refugees. Many spent decades in refugee camps
in Nepal, a historical reality widely acknowledged today (Hutt, 2003; Banki,
2013).
After understanding the history described above, it should not be difficult to
determine our identity. Being born in Bhutan was never a curse, just as being born
in any corner of the world is not a curse. Our language, culture, and originality do
not disappear regardless of where we live. Citizenship and the rights associated
with it, however, may be taken away by circumstances—as we ourselves
experienced in the past. Therefore, why should we hesitate to preserve the values
and characteristics of our identity? What prevents us from identifying as Nepali?
These are questions that deserve collective reflection.
At this point, another question may arise: How are we Nepali? To answer this, it is
useful to understand the contexts in which the word Nepali is used. Although I may
not claim to be a linguistic expert, I find it important to share what I understand.
The term Nepali is not exclusively connected to holders of Nepali citizenship.
Rather, its usage depends upon context and purpose. Linguistically, the term can
function both as a noun and as an adjective. For instance, when referring to the
language spoken by many Nepalis, the official language of Nepal, or ethnic
communities associated with Nepal, the term functions as a noun. However, when
describing something related to Nepal, made in Nepal, or residing in Nepal, it
functions as an adjective.
From this perspective, it becomes evident that we have always been
connected—and remain connected—to Nepali ethnicity, culture, language, and
heritage. Without doubt, this connection will continue for future generations. Every
human being naturally loves the soil where they were born, and such attachment is
meaningful. Yet identity is not tied merely to physical geography; it is linked to
originality and cultural essence. Therefore, while remaining loyal to the
constitutions and lands of the countries in which we now reside, it seems most
appropriate that we continue to preserve our Nepali identity—an identity rooted in
our language, culture, ethnicity, and originality. Doing so also honors the sacrifices
made in our historical struggle for language, culture, and identity, which ultimately
forced many of us into exile. Rather than becoming worshippers of foreign lands
across seven seas, true meaning in life may lie in becoming guardians of our own
cultural homeland—our language, traditions, and originality.
Suggested References
Banki, S. (2013). The Bhutanese refugees: Between verification, repatriation, and survival.
Journal of Refugee Studies.
Hutt, M. (2003). Unbecoming Citizens: Culture, Nationhood, and the Flight of Refugees from
Bhutan. Oxford University Press.
Maxym, M. (n.d.). Bhutanese Nepali (Lhotshampa) cultural profile. EthnoMed.