Nepal – the country of the Buddha and the Mt. Everest

Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without – Buddha

ISSUES OF THE GREATER NEPAL: HISTORICAL REFERENCE AND LEGAL QUESTIONS

Posted by Ram Kumar Shrestha on June 13, 2010


By Shastra Dutta Pant, PhD

1. Political Situation of the Eastern Society
The eastern administration system was decentralized with Rajauta, Raja, Maharaja, and Badamaharaja ruling villages and states respectively as per the norms of Dharma Rajya. State was not concerned to planning and development, which was a common feature of entire south Asian region. There were more than 565 principalities in the present India alone. Nepal too did have over six dozen Rajya and Rajauta, called Bayeese and Chaubise.
Because of the loose union of eastern system, Europeans started colonizing those principalities, taking advantage of the weak political situation. Considering the importance of eastern philosophy, culture and Dharma, King Prithivi Narayan Shah tried to unify Nepal. In those days, Nepal was divided into small kingdoms and kingships.
2.    Objective of the unification:
Prithvi Narayan Shah was a farsighted king and so he decided to galvanize small states into a strong nation with a view to saving Nepal from being one of the colonies of Britain. He did have full support of all right thinking intellectuals and patriots of the time.
3.   Unification campaign
Prithvi Narayan Shah unified the major principalities into one country, especially important for business with Tibet after the victory over Nuwakot in 1744, Sindhupalchowk, Kabhrepalanchowk, and some kingdoms located to the eastern part of it in 1748 A.D. Immediately after the unification of Makawanpur and Simrongad, he unified Bara, Parsa, Rautahat ,and Sindhuli Gadhi in 1762. Then, relationship of Gorkha kingdom was established with Government of East India Company. The capital from Gorkha to Kathmandu was shifted in 1868 A.D. After the unification of the Kathmandu Valley, Prithivi Narayan died at the age of fifty three in 1775 AD, while he was planning to annex Chandandi and Vijayapur.
Prithivi Narayan Shah was a visionary person. During the reign of Pratap Shah, the son of Prithvi Narayan Shah, three states like Dang, Kapilbastu and Chitwan were merged into Nepal. Similarly, Lamjung, Tanahu, Palpa, Parbat, Upper Nuwakot, Garahu, Stahu, Bhirkot, and Kaski were conquered in 1785. Then, Makawnpur, Parsa, Bara, Rautahut, Sarlahi, Mahotttari, Dhanusa, Siraha, Saptari, Sunsari, Morang, Jhapa, Sindhuli, and Udayapur were annexed.  In 1769 AD, Jajarkot agreed to absorb its kingdom into Gorkha. Pratap Shah died at the age of twenty five in 1777 A.D. after the absorption of the Chitwan Valley of Tahahun. Five years after his demise, Koshi, Lamjung, and Tanahun, including Chaubise kingdoms were galvanized into Nepal in 1789 A.D after the absorption of all the Baise Kingdoms (Twenty two principalities), located in the western part of the Kali Gandaki. Then, Salyan, Palpa and Mustang were annexed.  The Army of Gorkha got victory over Kumau in 1790 A.D. Pradhumna Shah became the ruler of the nation on condition of  paying Rs. 5000 yearly tribute.
The southern border of Nepal extended up to Allahabad  after the absorption of Palpa Kingdom, including the Terai sector of Butwal taken by the king of Palpa from the king of Awadh on lease in 1801. In 1806 A.D., the army of Gorkha absorbed all the small kingdoms like Sirmudh, Hindur and Besahar lying across the Gadhwal and the Satalaj River. In this way, Nepal had intention of acquiring the nearest port of Karahchi and the hilly regions such as Nainital, Almodha, Gadhwal and Deharadun across the Satlaj River.
The dominance of Nepal and the East India Company prevailed in the northern and southern parts of India respectively. Meanwhile, the Company Government intended to sign new treaty to resolve new issues as the earlier policies became useless.  On the contrary, Nepal rejected to sign the new treaty. Consequently, war broke out between Nepal and the Company Government for about two years (1814-16). The dream of Nepali kings to found a country as long as the Himalaya Ranges by absorbing the territories lying across Tista and Kangada remained unfulfilled.  Resultantly, even the Kasmir Valley could not be kept under control.
Greater Nepal
During the forty-six year’s unification campaign from 1768 to 1814, 2100 km length of Nepal from Tista in the east to across the Satlaj River in the west was established. John Pemwal called the then greater Nepal as a belt of territory, which was the most beautiful, the most inaccessible and traditionally the most fragmented in Asia.
The total area of Nepal was 204, 917 sq. km. The Sugauli Treaty reduced Nepal into 147; 141 sq. km. Nepal’s territory still left to India is 63,776 sq. km. India has to return this territory, the proof of which is discussed hereafter. Moreover, Nepal had to abandon its plan of making a single Himalayan Range by absorbing Brahmaputra and the Jammu Kasmir Valley across Tista and Satalaj respectively.
British-India gave back some territories, located in the mid and western Terai as per the terms and condition. In this way, the Shah Kings with their great effort enlarged small Gorkha kingdom from 250 sq. km. to 500 times greater Nepal during their seventy years’ arduous effort.
As per the term and conditions of the Sugauli Treaty, some areas located in the east-west and southern parts were on lease temporarily. Later, Nepal would get back gradually. The area kept on lease had occupied more than 64,000 sq. km. .  The treaty had fixed the Tista and the Mahakali River as border in the east and west respectively. The Company Government had only activated its administrative activities in between Mechi and Tista, thinking that Nepal would again advance towards the east. In fact, greater Nepal, the real Nepal, of which land has been kept haughtily by India as done by Iraq to the case of Kuwait calling it its 19th state. One needs to analyze the history of Nepal and India and the treaties and understandings held between the two countries to understand how the above- mentioned land absorbed by India belongs to Nepal.
Indo-Nepal War
British-India declared war in 1814 A.D. to annex Nepal into its territory. The British troop deployed in Morang, Bara & Parsha had to embrace defeat. Then the British troops attacked Jiatgargh fort in Butwal but it was defeated by Nepalis troops. Therefore, they could not dare to attack Palpa. In 1814, British General Gillespie was forced to flee from Nalapani. However, later Nepali troop led by Balbhadra had to return from Nalapani due to internal political crisis of Nepal that resulted in the treaty of Sugauli.
The Sugauli Treaty
1. In 1814, British India Government, known as Company Government, all of a sudden invaded Nepal. The British got victory over the plain area, whereas Nepal over the hilly area. Two years after intense war, two countries signed Sugauli Treaty in a place called Sugauli on December 2, 1915. The detail account of the treaty is mentioned on Annex -3.
Although war ended after the sign of Sungawli Treaty, Nepal had to lose its large territory. Nepal unwillingly agreed to temporarily give the lost territory to the Company Government and to sign the treaty provided that it would not wage war with the view to expanding further territory.
British hoodwinked Nepal in terms of giving back its lost territory until it quitted India in 1947. Similarly, the present Indian Government – successor of British India – has turned its deaf ear to this issue. The British left India without resolving the issues of the territory of Gowa, Daman, Dyuk, Jammu, and Kashmir, Laddakh, Hyderabad and other Nepali territory. Later, India forcibly absorbed remaining territory. India had made an attempt to forcibly absorb Jammu-Kashmir and controversial territory with China.
But India could not annex two powerful countries China and Pakistan. The British had clearly delineated the boundaries of Sri-Lanka, Bangladesh, Sikkim and Pakistan except Nepal.  Still, the half of the total Nepalese territory lies in India. We call the greater Nepal including our lost territory lying in India. The area of greater Nepal had expanded up to the Ganges plain in the south and the Tista River in the east The origin of the Satlaj River – the far eastern one out of five rivers closer to Lahore, Amritsar- was the western border of Nepal.
2. The Sugauli Treaty was brought into practice after Nepal had made ratification on the letter of exchange on March 4, 1816. (See annex-3.1.  ) Nepal had to get back its lost territory from India as per the term and conditions of the Sugauli Treaty and the treaties signed after 1950. British-India absorbed Nepalis territories like Darjeeling, Kumau, Gadwal, Kangada, and some northern parts of the Ganga River after the practice of Sugunli Treaty. Therefore, Nepal has legal right over its lost territories. Hence, the first duty of every Nepali is to found unified Nepal by integrating its lost territories. No one will be nationalist if he/she twists the sense of this issue. Until and unless Nepal becomes strong, there will be neither the guarantee of security nor the well being of Nepalis.
3. As per the term and conditions of the Section 3 of the Sugauli Treaty, British-India absorbed following territories into present India. (a) Entire Terai region between the Kali and the Rapti River, (b) all the Terai region except Butwal between the Rapti and Gandaki River, (c) The Terai belt between Gandak and Kusaha and (d) the Terai belt between Mechi and Tista.  Before and after the Sugauli Treaity, other similar types of treaties were signed. Consequently, East India Company had returned lost territory of Nepal  as per the term and condition of the Section 3(a), (b), (c) and (d) of the Sugauli Treaty. The return territories were Kanchanpur, Kailali, Bardiya, Banke, Taulihawa, Rupandehi, Nawalpur, Parsa, Bara, Rautahat, Sarlahi, Dhanusa, Mahottari, Siraha, Saptari, Sunsari, Morang, and Jhapa.
Nepal has not got back all the lost territories as per the condition of the treaty. The above-mentioned districts are only the some parts of the territories to be returned. If we get back all the lost territories, Gorakhpur, one of the northern cities of India, will fall in Nepal. Moreover, Nepal’s eastern border will reach by the border of Bangladesh. On these grounds, Nepal legally has to get back its territories, which recently fall in different states of India. The legal basis to get lost territories back to Nepal is the correspondence, agreement and treaty ratified between Nepal and the then East India Company, British-India Government, and British Government. Some evidences on behalf of Nepal are discussed below.
Problem for Return Nepal’s Lost Territory
The map of greater Nepal is safely kept at national museum, Chhauni in Kathmandu. According to this map, half of the total territory of Nepal lies in India. India has forcibly kept this territory under its grip. Kuwait could become independent from Saddam Hussein because of the support of the western countries like USA. But no nation raises voice against the injustice of India over Nepal. Sunguali Treaty and the letter of exchange between Nepal and India should be interpreted in light of India’s bullying attitude and its colonial mindset. It is equally necessary to analyze 1950’s treaty to understand problems resulted from the open border.
New Issues of Unified Greater Nepal
During the reign of King Prithivi Narayan and Bahadur Shah, the petty rulers used to rule principalities like district governor. The principalities were unified and then greater Nepal was founded. The total area of greater Nepal was three times bigger than present Nepal. Nepal and East India Company signed Sugauli Treaty after the two years’ war in 1914-1916. As per the term and conditions of the treaty, Nepal lost its larger territory. However, India must have returned Nepal’s lost territory as per the terms and conditions of different agreements held after the Sugauli Treaty. The territory lying between Mahakali and Satlaj River and west of Satlaj i.e. Kangada, where Sansar Chand used to rule, belongs to Nepal.  Similarly, Sikkim and Asam were also the parts of unified Nepal. The unification campaign initiated by Prithvi Narayan Shah was neither attack on independent states, nor the war for loot and bloodshed. Therefore, Nepal’s unification campaign can not be compared with western colonization. The principalities were the earlier eastern territories of Nepal. Because of loose union, the principalities were in statelessness state. Later, The principalities such as Kathmandu, Patan, Bhaktapur, Kitipur, Pyuthan, Parbat, Galkot, Kaski, Palpa, Tanahun, Lamjung, Gorkha, Isma, Dhurkot, Arghakhanchi (Argha, Dhurkot, Khanchi and Gulmi), Gaharaun, Painyu, Tanahu, Bhirkot, Tanahu, Bhirkot, Nayakot, Dhor, Jajarkot, Musiket, Rising, Ghiring, Tarki, Achcham, Rukum, Salyan, Rolpa, Dang, Bajhang, Dullu, Dailekh, Bajura, Jumla, Mustang, Kumau, Gadwal, Bijayapur, Chaudandi, Wallo Kirant, Pallo Kirant, Majh Kirant, Makwanpur, Parsa, Bara, Rautahat, and Sarlahi were unified and made one nation. These days, some people not understanding the real history of Nepal give the slogans of communalism in the name of various separatist organizations like Khambuwan, Limbhuwan, Khaswan, Newakhala, Mithila Mukti Morcha, Karnali Mukti Morcha, and Mankakhala. These regional organizations have got support from India too. It is essential for Nepalis people to avoid such headstrong and get involved in the restoration of greater Nepal.
Evidences for the left Nepali Territory to be returned to Nepal Nepal has abundant historical evidences to claim greater Nepal. For instance, in 1959, Mr. Nehru, the former Prime Minister of India, paid his visit  to Nepal and agreed to amend  trade treaty of 1950. He also agreed to remove Indian check post from Nepal. Nehru quotes, “Dehradun, Kumau and Nainital, Simla are the territories of Nepal which were once captured by the British.” Author E.C. Kojl in “Brief Dictionary of Darjeeling” writes, “All these territories belonged to Nepal.
1. Peace and amity treaty was held between India and Nepal on July 31, 1950 (See annex 1 for Detail). The Section 8 of the treaty ramified into ten sections has cancelled all the treaty letters, letter of agreement prior to the Sugauli Treaty. The Section 8 of the treaty says, “So far as the claims made here are concerned that the treaty letter dismisses all the previous letter of treaty, letter of agreement and letter of promise signed between the Government of Nepal and British Government on behalf of India.” India became independent from Britain in 1947. Present Government of India is the successor of British India. The Indian Government, a sovereign government, has full right whether to accept fully or partially the act, rule, agreement, and treaty, signed by colonial British-India. By exercising the same right, India has dismissed the Sugauli Treaty by signing peace and amity treaty with Nepal on July 31, 1950. The dismissal of this treaty suggests that the territory prior to the Sugauli Treaty customarily belongs to Nepal. Still, India has to give the lost territory back to Nepal willingly. If India denies, Nepal must make a claim in International Court of Justice.
2. Tri-lateral re-agreement among Britain, India and Nepal for the continuation of Gorkha Regiment was held eight month after the independence of India on August 9, 1947 when Bir Shamsher was the ruler of Nepal. Immediately after the independence of India, the agreement made by the Company Government with Nepal had been customarily functionless. The main reason of tri-lateral treaty again was to continue the Gorkha Regiment in India. These evidences substantiate that the territory prior to Sugauli Treaty belongs to Nepal.
Similarly, the map of Nepal prior to the Suganli Treaty kept in national museum, Tahachal, the British Library of Britain British Museum, the Library of University of London Senate House, Shahi Geographic Society Library and Public Record Office also shows that India must return lost territories to Nepal.
3. The Section 6 of Sugnuli Treaty states “The king of Nepal never suffers the king of Sikkim or never violates the peace.” This section makes it clear that Nepal wanted to absorb the Nepali settlement in Sikkim. If Company Government had not created obstacle, the eastern border of Nepal would have been fixed upto Arunachal of India. The British Army had the experience of war in the plain area, whereas the Nepalis in hilly area. The British signed the Sugauli Treaty evasively to prevent Nepal from galvanizing Sikkim, Assam and other states. Also, the aim of the inclusion of Section -6 in the Sugauli Treaty means not to allow Nepal to move a head of the eastern part of the Tista River. The section 6 shows that the eastern border of Nepal is the Tista River before or after the agreement on the Sugauli Treaty. The Section 6 was included in the treaty to preserve Sikkim from the encroachment of Nepal. If the territory between Mechi and the Tista had lied in present India, it would not have been necessary to mention the Section 6. Now, India has fixed Mechi River the border of Nepal.
4. The constitution formed after the independence of India has not mentioned that the Mechi-Tista falls in Indian Territory. Indian in accordance with the Article 1 (3) (C) of its constitution has not included this area including Darjeeling. India can’t absorb that left territory into it because of the term and conditions of its constitution and the Article 4(2)(B) of the constitution of Nepal. Subash Ghising, the chairman of Gorkha Hill Council registered writ petition (C) 704 (1994) in Supreme Court of India in 1994, claiming that Mechi-Tista territory is not incorporated in the Indian constitution. He made correspondence to the prime minister, home minister and other state ministers to include Mechi-Tista sector in Indian constitution.
4.1 Writ was registered in the Supreme Court of Nepal to establish the right over the lost territories – Testa, Kangada and the Ganges Plain – after the dismissal of letter of agreements including the Sugauli treaty held between Nepal and East India Company in accordance with the Section 8 of 1950 peace and amity treaty. Because of the grave nature of the issue, Bar Association made decision of forming an ‘Amicus Query’. It is yet to decide. Rest will be discussed later.
4.2 The other sates to be absorbed by India can be united in India in accordance with Article 1 (3) c of the constitution of India. But Darjeeling is not the state earned by India.It is like Kuwait of India.
The front warns that if it is delayed, on the one hand Nepal will forward its claim, on the other the unity and national integrity of India will fall in pitfall as northern – eastern states including Sikkim and Assam being affected. This warning has attacked the silence.
4.3. The Titaliya Treaty between East India Company and Sikkim, the letters of treaty between British-India and Nepal regarding the return of the western Terai have justified that Darjeeling is inseparable area of Nepal. Similarly, the treaty held between East India Company and Bhutan on April 4, 1779 and the latest treaty of August 8, 1849 also justify that the territory from Mechi to Tisti lies in Nepal.
The above-mentioned documents also substantiate that the lost territories of Nepal were on lease as to the case of Britain which had taken Hongkong on lease with China.
4.4 As per the terms and conditions of the treaty held between the Government of Britain and Sikkim on March 28, 1861, between Nepal – Britain on December 21, 1923 and the articles 8 of Indo-Nepal’s 1950′s treaty, the inhabitants of Darjeeling (Gorkha Land) accepted that Darjeeling belonged to Nepal. They instead of asking for separate state accepted that Darjeeling was the inseparable part of Nepal.
4.5 India after its independence but before July 31, 1950 has not made any agreement so as to justify the Sugauli Treaty. 1950′s treaty dismissed all the agreements held with British India prior to its practice. These evidences substantiate that the territory prior to the Sugauli Treaty belongs to present Nepal. The then Home Minister of India informed all the related state governments about this issue on March 11, 1992. A democratic country should not violate the norms of international law and the constitution openly.
5.1. Forty four years after the Sugauli Treaty, Nepal and British India Government singed a treaty with three sections on Nov. 1, 1860. The Section 2 of the treaty says, “The British Government declares that the whole low lands lying between Grokhpur district and the Rapti River, and the whole low lands lying between the Kali and the Rapti river belonging to the Rajahs of Nepal prior to the Sugauli treaty and later to the British Government will be returned to be the sovereignty of the Royal of Nepal”. As per the term and condition of the Section 2 of the Sugauli Treaty, India should have gradually returned the lost territory to Nepal.
5.2 India had made decision to return the territories to Nepal on November 1, 1860. In order to identify the total area of the territory, Nepal has to search for the map and border pillars prior to the Sugauli Treaty. India must agree to construct No Man’s Land and pillar at the same place.
6. Why is the absorption issue of the territories mentioned on the sub-section A to D of the Section (4) of the Sugauli Treaty with British India repeated on the Section (5) of the same treaty? In Section (5), it is mentioned that the Rajah of Nepal has agreed even in future not to take any interest or concern with territory or the inhabitants residing west to the Kali River for his successor. It shows that territories lying the west to the Kali River should have been returned to Nepal after they quitted India.
7. British-India forced Nepal to sign the Sugauli Treaty, fearing that hill area war trained Nepali troops would expand their kingdom from the Brahmaputra River in the east to Paminr in the west. The objective of the Sugauli Treaty was to discourage Nepalis to make war so that they could not expand their kingdom the east of Testa and the west of Satlaj.
8. The Section (8) of 1950 amity and peace treaty nullified the Sugauli Treaty. Therefore, Nepal has right over Darjeeling and other lost territories prior to the Sugauli Treaty whether there had been the Section 8 of 1950′s treaty or the treaty itself.
9. The Sugauli Treaty was not ratified even after the ratification of the treaty with Sikkim. It proves that without the ratification of the understandings and treaties held with the British are naturally invalid. India’s not giving validity to every treaty without ratification but the Sugawli Treaty is itself paradoxical.
10. The phrase ‘in perpetuity’ was mentioned in the Hongkong Treaty signed between Britain and China In fact, the phrase ‘in perpetuity’ suggests the practice of the treaty until the signatory head of the state dies. In the case of a nation, the term in perpetuity gives the sense of the expiry of the treaty between two agreed countries after one hundred years. The term ‘in perpetuity’ is also included in the Sugauli Treaty held between Nepal and British India. Surprisingly, the Sugauli Treaty has not been expired even almost two hundred year after.  If the British had continued to rule India, the Sugauli Treaty would have been dismissed. Consequently, Nepal would have got back all its lost territories. However, taking the advantage of destitution, and size of Nepal, India to date has not given back those territories.
11. In perpetuity refers to a kind of land on rent. The term ‘rent’ means the monthly taken amount. If something is taken for five to ten years, it is called lease. But if it is for a century, it will be called in perpetuity.
12. Company Government had promised to pay yearly two lakh rupees in return for the land taken on lease in accordance with the Section (4) of the Sugauli Treaty held in 1818. The Company Government continued to pay till 1860. The tribute amount was cut off after Nepal got back its some lands lying in the Terai belt. Later, India Government did not pay back the remaining amount. So, India should have given back the remaining lands to Nepal since then.
13. In 1972 Rana Bahadur Shah, Nepal and Jonathan Dancan, the representative of the Company Government signed a trade treaty with seven sections. The Section (5) of the treaty says, “If any border dispute arises between two counties, the boundary will be delineated on the basis of just and right principle”. But India has not followed the spirit of the Section (5) in practice.
14. After the treaty of 1792, a new treaty containing 13 articles was signed in 1801 A.D. The section 7 of the treaty says– “From now Nepal need not provide the company government the elephant which it has been providing annually”. Then Nepal ceased to provide elephant. The British Government again showed dishonesty by not providing Nepal with the 2 lakh rupees tributes as mentioned in the Sugauli Treaty. The present India has to pay Nepal the total sum of Rs.2 lakhs as a yearly tribute, including its interest from 1860 to date. And also India has to pay the compensation of the territory, which it has grabbed from 1947 to the present day.
15. According to the section 9 of the same treaty, India in perpetuity gave the possession of its Praganna district (Vijayapur district) to Swami Rana Bahadur Shah, the then king of Nepal, who was passing ascetic life in Kashi (Vanarashi to keep 200 Nepali armies and to maintain his daily expenses. India took back the territory after the demise of the king, but it did not give back Nepali territory, taken under the same provision, that is, in perpetuity. If India does not want to return Nepal’s territory, Nepal must get right to possess Vijayapur district again. If India wants to establish its democratic image continuously, it must abandon its colonial tendency.
16. The trilateral treaty (Nepal – India – Britain) of August 9, 1947 about Grokha Batallion also cancelled and renewed all the earlier treaties held between Nepal and India. But India does not want to ratify the treaties to incessantly keep Nepalis territory in its grip.
17. Britain and Nepal signed a very important treaty with 10 sections on October 30, 1950 A.D. It is written on the preface of the treaty that both countries have been maintaining peaceful, friendly and amiable relationship since 1815 but the Kathmandu Treaty of December 21, 1823 is not applicable because of the recent establishment of the two independent states India and Pakistan. Both Nepal and Britain signed new treaty and agreed on the following section.
The section 8 of the Treaty says,” By the date of the agreement of this treaty, the treaty signed between the United Kingdom and the Government of Nepal before and in Kathmandu on December 21, 1923 will be cancelled”. The chief motive to sign this treaty is to give back the Nepali territory annexed into India.
19. During the rule of British, Darjeeling was not the part of India. The British had temporarily taken the administration of Darjeeling in their hand with a view to preventing Nepal from taking control of eastern sides of Darjeeling. The efforts of 1907, 1917, 1929, 1934, 1941 and 1943 to make Darjeeling a separate administrative sector  can be taken as its example. On the basis of this fact, the 1947’s Darjeeling Committee of the then Unified Indian Communist Party (ICP) had provided the Indian Constitutional Assembly with the decision of constituting independent ‘Gorkhasthan Nation’ by integrating Darjeeling, and Sikkim in Nepal. This document elucidates the article 1 and 8 of the above-mentioned 1950 Peace Treaty. In 1817, the above-mentioned Titaliya Treaty transferred this territory to Sikkim. In 1835, British again took control of Darjeeling alone. In 1861, when the British cancelled all the prior treaties with Sikkim, the Titaliya Treaty was also cancelled.
The case of the restoration of greater Nepal is similar to the proposed union of Korea, of Soviet Republics, and of China. Therefore, the proposal of the restoration of greater Nepal is neither new nor unusual nor against international law, treaty and agreement.
Why did not Nepal Make a Formal Claim?
Why did not Nepal claim its territory immediately?  Why not soon after the 1950 treaty?
1. Why did the Ranas agree to sign the Sugauli Treaty though they were nationalists? Why did they ignore the rule of British-India and independent India over Darjeeling zone though it was Nepal’s territory? Why didn’t they go to ask for their territory before the British quitted India on January 26, 1947? All of these questions are subject to intense meditation, analysis and investigation.
More than poor economic condition, internal duel, clash and enmity were the main reasons for not continuing the ward with the British started in 1815. “When own brothers fight each other, the third party seeks benefit,” this Nepali saying would be sufficient to leave this matter. Ranas signed the Sugauli Treaty bluntly. The person who had gone Sugauli with the right to sign the treaty had also realized that this Treaty was very reprehensible. Therefore, he and his off springs were ashamed to return to Nepal for 200 years.
Besides, Nepalis people organized movement against Rana rule in the 1940s. Ranas themselves indulged in to internal familial conflict, and then they split themselves too. Some Ranas were involved in underground organizations against the Rana rule itself. 2. The Ranas did not intend to return lost territories, fearing that the number of educated people would be increased and thus their rule would run at risk.  Ranas didn’t want to establish educational institutions in Nepal, thinking that the educated people would put the demand of their fundamental rights. Therefore, the Ranas remained reluctant and did nothing to regain the Nepali territory. Consequently they lost their 104 years reputation as nationalists.
3. The people, who brought political change in Nepal in 1950, gave priority to the power and post. They never thought about nation and national integrity. Same tendency can be seen even today.  For instance, during Panchayati Regime, foreign border posts were removed, the feeling of nationality was boosted, but no effort was made to regain the lost territories. After 1989, foreign encroachment reached its climax. No political parties showed their interest to prevent Nepal from the foreign interference. All the political parties maintained double standard. They were worried about how go to power by making India happy. All the political leaders were concerned to their vested interests. After 1990, they practiced to maintain Royal standards, to eat Royal food and to speak Royal language.
4. The political leaders, who reached power after 1950, termed the Ranas the vassals and sycophant of the British. But they were involved in anti-nationalistic activities and undemocratic practices.
5. The political leaders of Nepal have not made any attempt to restore greater Nepal. Instead, they are split into different factions.
6. No educated persons, representatives, political leaders and their parties, and social organizations of Nepal ever raised voice for the restoration of greater Nepal. Nepali Congress and Sadvawana party even tried to suppress the voice of nationalists. Many intellectuals viewed that all the national parties did not want to make India unhappy, fearing that India might not help reach them in power. Nepalis people also have the same perception towards the political leaders. Leaders’ treatment to India is more than the hospitality given to a fellow nation.  . However, the former Prime Minister Kirtinidhi Bista and the late former Prime Ministers Tanka Prasad Achary, Marich Man Singh, and Narendra Prasad Rijal never surrendered to India. For instance, Mr. Marich Man Singh made Nepal dependent on 91 daily uses items out of 128. Nationalist intellectuals like Shree Balkrishna Neupane, Shree Ramji Bista, Shree Shyam Prasad Dhungel, and Shree Puskar Lal Upadhya had filed a writ on Ashad 31, 2054 in the Supreme Court asking to direct the government for maintaining legitimacy over the lost territory of Nepal. The Supreme Court giving verdict says, “This issue should be mentioned in the treaty because it is a serious matter, for the help of the court amicus curiae should be formed, selecting some advocates from Nepal Bar Association” . This verdict of the Supreme Court clarifies the internal belief that the politicians should create public opinion. Everybody, who extended this matter up to this limit, and Suvas Ghising of Darjeeling Mukti Morcha who took this issue to the Supreme Court of India, deserve our gratitude. When Suvas Ghising tried to come to Nepal with this issue, some nationalists prevented him from coming to Nepal, fearing that India could deploy military force in Nepal by inciting Ghising. For these various reasons, Nepal did not put a formal claim over its lost territory. Now, it is time for Nepal to claim its lost territories because the world community is also in its favor.

Source: THV

Advertisements

32 Responses to “ISSUES OF THE GREATER NEPAL: HISTORICAL REFERENCE AND LEGAL QUESTIONS”

  1. bhuban simkhada said

    k rajya bharat andhobhkata bha a ra hamro gumeko bhumi namgne ho bhane ke janta le nai afno gumeko desko ada hissa lina kehi garna sakidaina ra?

  2. gaurab simkhada said

    If state do not take its responsibility then can not neplese people go to UN or intenrnational court to get its land back according to sugauli treaty. If it can be done then lets us go to that place from where our land can be taken.

  3. Dr Shashra Dutta Pant is a high caliber intellectual but he is missing the old history of Nepal. Nepal is the country of Great Manu,Rama & Prince Vatsharaaj Shahi( Jumla)were all world emperors.Manu was Chhatrapati of 7 continent & Rama also same but the great emperor of Jumla Shree 5 Bali Raaj Shahi also became world emperor when his son Vatsharaaj killed the world conqueror Taimur Lung at Haridwar on 1404
    & without knowing this history, how can we understand the real Nepal? There are very good dedicated people like Dr. Pant, secretary Ram Kumar Shrestha. Before these people there were people like Yogi Naraharinath, Balkrishna Pokhrel & so many but the depth actual history is comming out from the articles of journalist & an inhabitant of Jumla Shree Prem Kaidi & without knowing all this we can not creat an independent actual Nepal, it is my idea & hope all good writers will be gathered & first understand the real history & then fight for the actual Nepal.

    • vineet singh said

      ooHHHH my GoD
      so much ancient history
      lolzz that also contradicts with the facts :p
      common every great civilization has fallen not because some body destroyed it ..
      they have fallen because of there internal conflicts
      same goes with Nepal people want power no matter how many lives destroyed

  4. Ganesh katuwal said

    May I post it on wikipedia? plese allow me to post it…

  5. Govinda said

    Stupid idea. Even if India agrees to conduct a referendun in those areas that some are claiming to be Nepalese territory, for sure the vote will go in the favour or India. Claim based on sugali treaty has become meaningless. Real thing is that, if the rulers of Nepal (Ranas) at the time when British left india had made a claim then perhaps British would have given those places to Nepal. Now it is just waste of time and effort unless Alimighty miracles.

    Good luck to the proponents of Greater Nepal. Unfortunately I am not with you.

    • Ramesh said

      Are you aware abot int’l law? According to int’l law it is possible. And main thing is that India could not keep helpful and good relationship with neigbouring countries. It is giving trouble to all despite its own lots its internal problems. To be out of its unnecessary problems as well we need Greater Nepal so that we will not have Indian boarder in 3 directions.

      • vineet singh said

        very well said Govinda 🙂

        dear Ramesh for you i just wonna say
        65% export of Nepal goes to India and 57% import comes from India to Nepal
        do you really think that Nepal gonna go for lolzz your so called “International Law”
        more then 50% nepal economy depending upon India
        i guess that wont happen until and unless Nepal finds some one better then India to do business with

  6. […] Kumar Shrestha ISSUES OF THE GREATER NEPAL: HISTORICAL REFERENCE AND LEGAL QUESTIONS:https://ramkshrestha.wordpress.com/2010/06/13/issues-of-the-greater-nepal-historical-reference-and-le… January 6 at 4:09pm […]

  7. DIBYADARSHI NEPAL said

    GREATER NEPAL IS MY BIRTH RIGHT AND I WILL HAVE IT. MA EKLAI BHARAT SANGA LADNA SAKSHAM CHU. I AM ALSO ONE OF THE SO CALLED INDIANS.I WILL MAKE USE OF BIOTECHNOLOGY

    • vineet singh said

      thats very sweet of you !! so called Indian
      but seriously mate do ya know about it before this i mean India never discloses this thing because it can
      disturb its communal harmony ..lolzz
      its not even in there school history text book that some thing with Nepal even existed apart from Gurkha as a ethnic community and Nepali as the regional language
      they say Nepal never come under any ruler or empire from out side .. and we said ok .. we never question that why ????

  8. vineet singh said

    mero daji bhai haru ,,
    i guess you people have seen only the thing in east
    .. do you people know the things in west of earlier greater nepal i guess no ..
    people coming from home land (Nepal) in search of better future are exploited .. to there max .
    no one really care for nepalese in india .. we have given lots of life for the country (India)
    but still they think gurkhas are good watchman they cant see us in good position ..
    the word “gorkha” we say with honour is used to abuse people !!
    how much do we have to prove ourself .. we are also human . we have the right to live freely .
    .. sorry to say but no one really care bout your greater nepal thing in world diplomacy..
    they got other issues they love to care bout but not nepal
    any how if we want the GREATER NEPAL then we have to grab it by force ..
    as the pakistan did with kashmir and china with ladakh
    are you people willing to have greater nepal and go against INDIA???

    • Nepali kt said

      why all should care about our Nepal? we NEPLEASE care about our greater Nepal.U dont know how does it feel when a citizen knows that his/er contry’s teritory is captured by their neighbouring country which legally belongs to them.what would u do if it was ur country instead of ours.lets think of it by putting u in this place. what would u do.would u say to all of ur people to “DONT WASTE UR TIME ON THOSE STUPID MATTER.”in my opinion u will never do such things if u have any love 4 ur state. so u better not to say anything about those matters.It is our greater issue not urs.so u better not 2 poke ur nose on it

      • vineet singh said

        hey KT i really donno bout other people but i care coz my ancestors were from nepal

        people trying to create gorkha land or wht eva in east but wht bout western regions of greater nepal (i.e. garwal , kumaun ,, kangra, shimla , bhagsu region ) do ya guys forgot bout it

        any how KT the thing is its been more then 60 yrs INDIA got its independence that time nepalese govt was so help less that it cant even take its own regions that was taken by Britishers who were giving back state to original kings and queens ..when they were living india

        now the thing is INDIA is such a big economy and NEPAL is just a small mountain nation i mean you nepali govt cant even take care of nepalese refugese from bhutan ,,,lolzz INDIA is way to go sweety

        you know what is the reputation of nepali in northen and western part of india ” nepali manchey chaukidar ra khet ma tamatar lagauna lai mattey ramro ho .. ” no body cares bout NEPALS glorious past

        people here think nepal is country of illiterates and labors and to some extent it is true

        please donn get me wrong but nepal is way way to go for asking its original area ..

  9. in august 14 indain’s independent day so we must raise voice for the complete nepal i.e. (GREATER NEPAL)

  10. Dibyadarshi nepal said

    brother the independence day is on 15th. don’t worry i’m gathering masses here in darjeeling. Soon we will have a nation of our own. Sikkim would again be independent.

  11. Dibyadarshi nepal said

    if any1 thinks how i know so much about nepal inspite of being an indian then the answer lies in my pride of being a gorkha. india cannot resist my attack as i know all the secrets and weaknesses of the indian army. now i’m just 17 years old. But i have power to disintegrate india just now.

    • rajk said

      You cannot be a Gukha!You are a traitor!!!!Why did you not teach some of your secrets to the Nepali Army?Maybe they could have resisted the Maoists better!!BTW we around GRs in Indian Army.Around 35000-40000 men.The Indian Army is 1 MILLION strong and we are not even talking about the air-force and other forces.There are no exclusive gorkha formations in artillery,armour,mech inf,signals etc.You must be an unemployed lout with nothing else to do

      • Raj Kumar Rai said

        Do u know about India? Which neighboring country is happy with India? India is giving trouble to all neighboring countries. Nepal had good carpet market in Europe and Indian made duplicate carpet and did export to those European market writing “Made in Nepal” . The same story happening with pashmina. India making fake Lumbini. India is the “Emperor of fake”. Do u know about the force about China and Pakistan?

      • vineet singh said

        kiddos these days lolzz
        gorkha in army ” jai maha kali aayo gorkhali ”

      • rajk said

        @Rajkumar Rai,

        Frankly I have little idea about the carpets issue!But,surely all Europeans cannot be that big fools that they will keep on buying duplicate/fake stuff against original Nepali products if they happen to be superior.BTW the world wide master of fake,duplication and reverse engineering is China!!

        Pakistan’s force we know very well!!!!That is if you can call it a force!We broke it in half and in it foolish attempt to free Kashmir by dubious means, Pakistan itself has gone bankrupt and stable.
        Presently China and India do not have open conflict and there is peace between us since 1967. The Indo-Chinese border is well suited for good defense.

  12. Bill Bahadur Gurung said

    All Nepalese must know about the Greater Nepal and our rights. I am ready to die for my motherland Nepal. India never ever can fight to us.

    • rajk said

      India will never fight Nepal as there is simply no reason or cause to do so.

      • vineet singh said

        lolzz ya !! why should INDIA fight NEPAL lol
        nepal got nothing good in it
        infact if INDIA capture nepal then india has to start develop ment all from beginning …why ?? coz nepal hasnt even started any thing
        hope for the new govt to make NEpal more prosperous

  13. NIRaJ said

    i think the Idea of greater Nepal is never gonna work , becz u pic u hav it’s look like i will also be a part of greater nepal but who wants to go with u nobody in india even in nepal apart from few thousand people know it ,if voting will be done all will vote in favour of india . because the place which is poorest in asia hav litracy rate around 35% no industry .. only mountain and natural beauty is not enough to live.. i visted nepal lots of times MERO VICHAR MA RANASHAHI RAMRO THIO .. AJI NEPAL MA DEVELOPEMENT CHHAINA.. TOURIST PANI KAM BHAI RAHE KO CHHA.. BUSINESS , FACTORY HARU BAND BHAII RAHE KO 6 YO HAAL MA GREATER NAPAL BARE MA SOCHNA MURKHTA BHAYO ..
    NEPAL KASIRE AAGADI BADHYO TASKKO BARE MA SOCNA JAROORI 6.

  14. Murali said

    If I assume all info on this article is true then ,Many parts of Greater Nepal are highly objectionable. If Nepal King extended their rule in India before British, It doesn’t mean it belong to Nepal. Its like imperialism. Claiming of Ganges plains are too far. Sikkim was a separate kingdom they joined India after referendum. Bangladeshi say Assam is part of Great Bengal and send tons of illegal immigrants to get it. India union is like European union but it has high central power.If British annexed Nepal it must have been part of India they didn’t do coz the land was mountainous so not worth for a company. As these regions existed part of India for more than 50 years, the only way is if people chose Nepal in a referendum. Its like if Mexico claims California. It seems like work of China to turn Nepal anti India.

  15. Dibyadarshi Nepal said

    HEY, HOW DARE YOU CALL ME A TRAITOR! i was born and educated in darjeeling so i belong to darjeeling which is a part of greater nepal and not india. i love darjeeling more than i do love myself. If we look into the world history ADOLF HITLER belonged to Austria but he loved germany just because he belonged to the german race, similarly i love nepal because i belong to the nepali race. talking about the indian strength, i think there are many soldiers in the indian army who belong to nepal or the nepali race,all i need to do is kindle in them the pride towards their race. and when none could do anything to me while i stayed in one of the imp. mil. stations of the eastern command for a year then what can india do to me when i am inaccessible now. ha ha ha….

  16. A PROUD NEPALI said

    I LOVE MY COUNTRY….
    PROUD TO BE A NEPALI….
    All i want to say is that its all our fault that we are not getting what is ours….
    See the current situation of nepal… see the behaviour of nepalese people and see the behaviour of so called nepali leaders…
    We are failing to maintain peace, security and unity in just mechi to mahakali and in the current nepal-indo border…
    And wishing and talking to get greater nepal ???

    i mean, come on ! what’s the use of greater nepal if the situation continues… what’s the use of it even if india gives all our teritory back as we can’t take good care of what we have ????

    I’m not a traitor neither i support INDIANS…
    BUT see yourself, proud nepalese, each of you have 80 % of indian things in you… do you love nepali film to indian films ? which brand of mobile do you like and from which country ? Which salt do you use ??? urghhh…. Damn ! it feels like hell…..

    SO FIRST BE SURE WE DONT LOSE OUR CURRENT TERITORY AND OTHER ISSUES LIKE BUDDHA THAT WE HAVE, BE SURE THAT WE ALL NEPALESE ARE UNIFIED, BE SURE THAT WE ALL NEPALESE LOVE OUR CURRENT NEPAL, BE SURE THAT OUR LEADERS ARE GOOD ENOUGH TO LEAD, BE SURE WE ARE PROUD TO BE A TRUE NEPALI…

    ONLY THEN TALK ABOUT GREATER NEPAL…..

    JAYA NEPAL

  17. we dont need telling about this.history tell us about it.people cant resovle it.only history and media can resolve it.only god knows it.

  18. Pretty! This has been ann extremely wonderful article.
    Many thanks for providing these details.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: