[Answered] Examine the India-Bhutan relationship as a model for regional cooperation despite asymmetry. Justify how this partnership successfully avoids mistrust and antagonism in a challenging neighbourhood.

Introduction

Despite asymmetry—India’s economy nearly 250 times larger than Bhutan’s (World Bank 2023)—their ties remain conflict-free. The 2007 Treaty revision upheld sovereignty, showing how sensitivity, development partnership, and mutual trust shape durable regional diplomacy.

India-Bhutan: A Relationship Built on Trust, Not Dominance

Unlike India’s relations with some neighbours (Nepal, Maldives, Sri Lanka) that often oscillate between engagement and suspicion, India-Bhutan ties exemplify respectful asymmetry.

Key pillars:

1. Sovereign equality and non-interference: 1949 Treaty clause requiring Bhutan to be “guided by India” was removed in 2007. The revised treaty affirms “mutual respect for independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.”
2. Security cooperation without coercion: India assists Bhutan in defence training and border management. In Doklam 2017, India intervened to protect Bhutanese sovereignty and its own strategic interests after Bhutan sought support.
3. Development partnership rooted in Bhutan’s priorities: India finances major hydropower projects (Tala, Chukha, Punatsangchhu). Hydropower contributes 17% to Bhutan’s GDP and 30% to government revenues (Royal Monetary Authority 2022). Power import from Bhutan helps India meet clean energy targets (SDG-7).
4. Soft power and cultural connect: Shared Buddhist heritage, scholars’ exchanges, student scholarships. Exposition of Buddha relics from India in Bhutan (2024) reinforces civilizational diplomacy.

This aligns with India’s neighbourhood policy pillars: “Security and Growth for All in the Region (SAGAR)” and “Neighbourhood First.”

Why this partnership avoids mistrust? Lessons for South Asia

1. Transparency and demand-driven development: Projects are implemented based on Bhutan’s priorities—not Indian conditionalities—reducing suspicion of exploitation.
2. No interference in domestic politics: Unlike in Nepal or Maldives, India refrains from overt involvement in Bhutanese internal decisions.
3. Managing asymmetry with emotional intelligence: India practices what scholars call “asymmetry with sensitivity”—avoiding the temptation of big-power assertiveness.
4. Mutually beneficial interdependence: Bhutan earns revenue through power exports. India receives clean renewable energy.
5. Shared strategic perspective: Both remain cautious of China’s assertiveness in the Himalayas and prioritise territorial sovereignty.

Comparison with India’s relations with other neighbours

Bhutan shows that trust grows when power is exercised with restraint.

Way Forward

1. Diversify connectivity: rail links, digital payments integration, trade corridors.
2. Expand cooperation on climate and hydropower, making Bhutan a green energy hub.
3. Encourage people-centric diplomacy through education and tourism.

Conclusion

As Joseph Nye notes, “Power with others is better than power over others.” India-Bhutan ties illustrate respectful asymmetry, where trust, sovereignty, and shared values produce lasting regional harmony.