Politics aside, however, in some of Russia's regions winter has been there since around mid-September. In Yakutia, for example: Russia's largest federal region, close to India in size, with a population of less than a million, though, home to the Northern Hemisphere's Pole of Cold, the land rich in natural resources, including diamonds, oil and gas.

On Sept. 15, Yakutsk-based journalist and blogger Bolot Bochkarev posted two Flickr slide shows of autumn in Yakutia - in Yakutsk and in Pokrovsk - on his blog, AskYakutia.com, and wrote this (ENG):

At my Flickr account I received a good question from an Australian user, tanetahi. In his comment to one of my first autumn pics he wrote:

Do people get depressed or complain much about the cold as you progress from summer to winter in Yakutsk, or is the severe climate just accepted as an inevitable part of life there?

My answer was “September and the early October are very depressive. No, we don’t complain about the upcoming cold. We just regret sunny summer days are over, and we have to prepare to the long winter.” That’s actually depressive. […]

One day later, Bolot was forced to update his autumn post:

[…] UPDATE: Sept 16, 2009, The first snowfall happened in southern Yakutia!!! That’s in Nerungri, Tommot, Aldan! It can mean one thing only.WINTER IS HERE!!! )))

In Yakutsk it is too chilly and muddy. I wish to have snow right now, because it would be warmer a little.

Some two months later, on Nov. 18, Bolot posted this note (ENG) on his Twitter page, @yakutia:

next week we gonna have the first -40c days in yakutsk. too early. hard to believe.

(-40 degrees Celsius is -40 degrees Fahrenheit.)

Earlier this month, Bolot re-posted photos of “Yakutsk in November” taken two years ago by photographer Björn Steinz. And there is also plenty of practical travel information on Bolot's blog, including a review of a Yakutsk hostel and a “description of the standard tour to the officially acknowledged coldest Siberian place” - Oymyakon - provided by “Semen Baishev, an Oymyakon-based travel enthusiast,” who “arranges all the travel program in the Pole of Cold for individual tourists and travel agencies’ groups.”

In addition to blogging at AskYakutia.com, Bolot runs YakutiaToday.com portal (ENG) (which includes, among many other things, an editor's blog), and contributes to ColdUnited.com, “an international online project […] dedicated to the cold and everything related to the cold.” At this latter venue, Bolot has recently shared his “Don’ts in Cold Weather” - and below are a few of them:

[…] 1. I don’t smoke outdoors, when the temp is below -20C. Breathing cold air is not good for my throat. Sorry, but I smoke. I am trying to cease smoking.

[…] 4. I don’t stay outdoors longer than 20-30 minutes, when it is cold, like -40C. Even in reindeer fur boots and super warm Arctic Canada Goose parka I will start feeling chill.

5. I don’t talk much by a cellphone outdoors either. I like expressing emotions and being heard (btw, when a mobile is frozen, the microphone and speakers work terrible, as low as it can be possible). If I do that, I can get cold. Again it is not good for my throat.

7. I don’t spare money on taxi at late night. I will pay 100-200 rubles for one ride rather than 14 rubles for the public transportation. Taxi brings me straight to home in a short span of time. In case with buses, it’s always a long waiting at bus stops, and unsafe… street hooligans, you know, tend to appear at nights. […]

Elsewhere in the Russian blogosphere, Yakutia has been recently featured on LJ user sergeydolya's blog (ranked #21 on Yandex Blogs portal). The blogger posted two photo reports (RUS), on Oct. 20 and 29: one from the diamond-mining town of Udachny (the name translates from Russian as “lucky”) and the other from a deer-hunting trip (which involved lots of waiting and looking around, some drinking, but no actual hunting, as the deer never showed up).

Finally, here is what Russian photographer Oleg Klimov wrote about turning ice into drinking water in Yakutia, in his Nov. 18 post (RUS), which includes three photos:

[photo]

Traditionally, the Yakuts use proper names for any significant natural phenomena. […] [The Lena River] is known as “Grandmother Lena” and has a status of a respected grandma, while the Russians have been traditionally referring to [the Volga River] simply as “mother Volga.”

Since the Yakuts live in the permafrost conditions, they are extracting water from frozen areas, too, and they are doing it today the same way they were doing it 200 years ago. Tap water is still a luxury here. The thing is, it is a very labor-consuming process to dig up water wells in permafrost and it is not profitable in the age of “black capitalism,” so water is produced from ice that's cut from the Lena River with a [Soviet-made Druzhba gasoline-powered saw] or with specialized sawing devices. One ton of ice costs 500 rubles [approx. $17]. A truck is capable of carrying some 3 tons [of ice], which is not enough to last the whole winter. Water produced from ice is valued nearly as much as mineral water, because, it is said, crystallization freezes off all possible types of bacteria and infection.

[photo]

In villages and outside Yakutsk, they begin to store this “mineral” water in autumn, when the ice is still not too thick. And it is being delivered like stacks of firewood along the banks of the lakes and tributaries of the Lena. You're walking down by the river and see: here's the ice that belongs to the family of the Ivanovs, and here's the Petrovs' ice, etc. The best ice comes from the running water. No one is stealing other people's ice. […] If you need water (drinking or for washing), head of the household takes a crowbar […], splits the thinner ice, carries it inside the house and places it into a special barrel, where ice slowly turns into water. If you spend a week living in such a house, it is possible to forget that it's the 21st century out there, but you also begin to feel as if you are part of the nature, which, actually, we still are. Even though not its best part…

[photo]

The National Geographic aired a documentary which named Bhutan, the tiny Buddhist kingdom as the world's last Shangri-La. It celebrated its mountains, glacial walls, alpine highlands and misty forests and mentioned “Bhutan is a Living Eden where respect for life, in all its many incarnations, endures like the land itself”.

Landscape of Bhutan. Image by Flickr user Jmhullot, used under a creative commons license

Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar at Real clear World said:

Bhutan has done many things to deserve its Shangri-La reputation. Its forest cover is a very high 72%, and it has pledged to keep this above 60 % for eternity.

Meanwhile, Nanda Gautam at Ex Ponto countered:

A new trend in the sphere of human rights violations is flourishing! In contrast to Bhutan’s development philosophy called ‘Gross National Happiness,’ which many delegations visiting Bhutan are proclaiming a ‘good lesson’, Bhutan also offers a bad lesson: strategic violence in the form of ethnic cleansing, a lesson the world powers will find difficult to deal with. The ordeal of Tel Nath Rizal reflects how the state’s violation of one person’s rights spilled over to affect an entire minority. The minority population has already been reduced dramatically.

Most of these writers, if not all, were not Bhutanese. So how is it that they came to view this small country – the size of Switzerland and a population of 600,000 – in such extremes?

The first group, the admirers, usually came from the west where capitalism has led to a way of life that may have equipped them with material contents, but left many with a gaping spiritual void. They are people seeking for things they do not find in their own cultures; yet find it elsewhere. Often in places like Bhutan – largely mysterious, exotic and peaceful. So when they find it, they tend to see only the things they want to see and find only the things they want to find.

But this also applies to the second camp, the ones who hate Bhutan. They have little or no understanding of the country’s geo-political situation. They don’t understand the history or the complex nature of the refugee problem; and they are either sympathizing with the cause, or they just need a cause.

For the first camp, the search for Shangri-la didn’t just happen; it has been ongoing since 1933 when James Hilton depicted a Shangri-la in his novel, Lost Horizon based on an article by Joseph Rock about his travels to the Tibetan borderlands. But more often than not, it is Hilton’s version that they are after thus refusing to see Bhutan as a country like any other – inhabited by human beings, with its share of problems.

Bhutan is far from being the Utopia despite its largely tranquil history. As a poor country Bhutan has its share of social problems and challenges and the biggest blight to its good reputation so far has been the issue of the refugees.

A nation-wide census in the 80’s found thousands of illegal settlers along the country’s southern borders. Most of these people were Nepalese people from Nepal and India who came to Bhutan seeking economic opportunities and utilize the large tracts of free agricultural land along porous borders. Free health and educational facilities were also an added attraction. At around this time, some Lhotsampas (Ethnic Nepali-speaking Bhutanese) who were educated by the Bhutanese government in overseas universities like Harvard and Cambridge returned to Bhutan nursing their own political ambitions.

Bhutanese refugees in Nepal. Image by Sudeshna Sarkar, ISN Security Watch

The problem came to a head when the Bhutanese government demanded all illegal settlers, leave the country. This decision was opposed by the ambitious Lhotsampa leaders who sympathized with the settlers and so mobilized protests against the Bhutanese government demanding democracy and overthrow of the monarch. The environment to nurse their political ambitions was extremely favorable. They galvanized the southern people’s discontent with violent protests in which they decapitated heads of two Bhutanese and planted them at a government office. The Bhutanese government who had never experienced anything like this cracked down and arrested many of the leaders while some escaped to Nepal.

What resulted was a situation where both sides accused the other of what unfolded. Lhotsampas claim that anybody who was Nepali-speaking was forced out of the country. As the Bhutanese Community of South Australia blog mentions:

From 1988, the human rights situation aggravated, when Royal Government enacted discriminatory policies to depopulate the Lhotshampas - Southern Bhutanese of Nepalese origin, predominantly Hindus.

The Royal government treats Lhotsampas as second class citizens. They are persecuted, discriminated and denied the most basics like access to education and health facilities. They are deprived of their cultural rights and are forced to adopt the cultural tradition, costume and language of the ruling elite. In the late eighties, the Royal Government adopted retroactive citizenship legislation and started to disenfranchise and depopulate the Lhotshampas. Tens and thousands of them were forcibly evicted, who ended up in the United Nations established refugees camps in Nepal. [..]

Having failed to see the possibility of repatriation, a vast number of Bhutanese refugees have accepted the offer given by Australia, Canada, Denmark, Netherland, New Zealand, Norway and United States for third country resettlement.

The Bhutanese government claimed that while some were asked to leave, many citizens left voluntarily under threats from their own leaders. Bhutan’s first democratically elected Prime Minister Jigme Y. Thinley wrote at Bhutannica:

The situation in the south is not a simple problem. Its causes are complex and perplexing as the resultant human drama that is unfolding before us. Just who is the victim or villain is a valid question. The answer must be sought with a deeper understanding of the problem. [..]

Among the villagers in' the south, every day is a nightmare. But their voice is not heard by the media, and their human rights appear not to be of any importance. Explanations by the Government are dismissed as propaganda and plain untruths. Even concrete evidence is seen as fabrications.

The Bhutanese feel that they have been betrayed by a people they had welcomed, in whom they had placed their trust and with whom they were willing to share a common destiny. But the general attitude of the Bhutanese toward their southern compatriots do not indicate any rancour.

The adoption of human rights is a convenient banner that the dissidents and the Nepalese supporters have raised before the international community. But their greater aim is to generate international sympathy for the dissident cause, which is to grab political power.

The story got complicated as the refugees arrived in Nepal. UNHCR set up camps for the Bhutanse refugees in which free food and stipend was given and in a few years the numbers rose from 5000 (1991) to 100,000. The handouts attracted many people other than Bhutanese to those camps as more than half of Nepal's population live on less than a dollar a day.

Ethnic cleansing is a very serious charge. People who make that accusation about Bhutan should visit the country and see that thousands of Nepali-speaking people still live and work there; that even before the crisis the Fourth King encouraged integration of the ethnic groups through inter marriage with special cash incentives. Many even hold very senior positions in the government.

So what is Bhutan? A ‘Shangri-La' or ‘ethnic cleanser'? Neither, is the answer. And it would be nice if people really stopped imposing their dreams of an Eden, or their disillusionment of failed political causes and ambitions, on this little Country.