Bhutan is probably able to show to the world that their kings are still loved by people, particularly because it has a small population and it has been generally out of global influence. Remember, things like television broadcasting in Bhutan were started sometime in late 1990s.  With the internal media under government control (with king's relatives as government chiefs) and limited access to outside media, the situation might be very like the one in Nepal in the 1970s, so no wonder that the king is the undisputed leader. Also, negative aspects of rulers become known to the outside world only when a revolution starts within the country. In any case, the slow progress towards democracy may help the country retain its power structure for many years to come.

Of course, the king chose to remain under the Indian umbrella, and in return got the big power plant that made the small contry with 0.5M population the fastest growing economy in South Asia (probably in the world too), with a growth beyond 20%. Comparing with the case of Nepal, it might not have been difficult for the Bhutanese king to decide everything for his small population, but it would probably be difficult for a Nepalese king to agree to close his embassy in china and to make sure that a coronation ceremony be attended only by the leaders of the southern neighbour.  That said, it's however not at all acceptable that our power production remain below 500MW more than hudred years after the first commercial production, while there is a capacity for more than 40000MW.