We, the Nepalese people cordially request the Indian government to return the missing Land of Nepal from the Sugauli Treaty of 1816 with the British. But, why is the Indian Government minimizing the demands of the Nepalese people?
The Sugauli Treaty insolently imposed by the East India Company demanded that the Nepali territory from Tista in the East to Kangada in the West. It would be appropriate and justifiable to consider the East India Company’s ulterior motive beforehand in invading Nepal at various eastern, southern and western lands. They had pre-planned objectives in spreading the colonial domination throughout the Indian subcontinent. To this end they covertly prepared themselves and launched war against Nepal. They succeeded to some extent in dominating the Gorkhali fighting patriots at great cost.
Under the cloak of intimidation, threat and coercion, the Treaty of Sugauli was concluded. It would be justifiable and helpful to discuss the mode and method of the British offensive aggression prior to assessing the validity, legality and occupation of the Nepalese territories by the British under threat, coercion and intimidation on the pretext of the so-called dictated Treaty of Sugauli. The sovereign craving of the people in restoring the illegally occupied territories to Nepal by the Colonial Power must be implemented. Taking all these customary and treaty provisions of the International law norms, NEPAL has a right to get back the ceded territories. Colonial Power, the British left India setting up new sovereign states that claimed sovereign statehood. Pakistan was one of them. The sovereign people of Nepal have every right to claim the lost territory of former Nepal. The outcome could be accepted as decided by the norms of State Practice and that of International Law.
Nepal and India have concluded the Treaty of Peace and Friendship on July 31st, 1950. Article 8 of this Treaty states: “so far as matters dealt with herein are concerned, this Treaty cancels all previous treaties, agreements, and engagements entered into on behalf of India between the British Government and the Government of Nepal.” It is evident that the British invaded and occupied the territories of Nepal to extend the Indian colonial Empire. In relation to the British India occupation of the Nepalese territories, this quoted Article also has nullified the retention and occupation of the Nepalese territories by the Republic of India.” -Former Nepalese army Gen. Dipta Prakash Shah (‘Nepal: Sugauli Treaty-1816 and the Breach of Recognized State Obligation,’ The Telegraph Nepal, weekly-2008-11-11).
From the beginning, we Nepalese people have been asking and demanding the lost Land of Nepal. Just after the establishment of democracy in Nepal-1950, national poet Madhav Ghimire wrote a national poem stating the greater territory of the country and our pride. “We had reached east to Tista-West to the fort of Kangada, to which imperialistic power where we surrendered?” Let it be noted that Yogi Naraharinath (great historical researcher) had said, “The Sugauli Treaty-1816 is fake.” He had filed a write petition at the Supreme Court (SC) demanding that the territory of Nepal’s lost land should be returned. The SC had dismissed the petition without any discussion. I have written in many newspapers that India should return the territory from Tista to Kangada with dignity. For national awareness, I have named my daughter Tista, who is now a scientist in Ronast, and my son Kangada who is a geologist working with hydro-power.
Before 1950, the nation was in the shackles of the dictatorial Rana-regime. After 1950, when the nation enjoyed an open political environment, foreigners, particularly India, openly entered Nepal to carry out their conspiratorial activities. That’s why the Democracy could not gain stability. In the name of helping Nepal to establish democracy she endorsed an unequal treaty in July, 1950. They promised the then rulers, Ranas, continued support for their regime. Four months later, she planned King Tribhuvan’s escape to New Delhi and kept Nepal under the influence of India through another document – the Delhi Agreement. Some of the points in the agreement were endorsed without the knowledge of the King.
In accordance to the agreement Nepali Army personnel were stationed at the gate of the Royal Palace and India’s Panjabi army personnel were stationed inside the palace for the security of the King. Indian national Govindanarayan Singh was assigned as the Chief Secretary to the King. Another Indian national Murdeshwor was appointed the Chief Secretary of the council of ministers. Another Indian Angkor was appointed as Nepal’s legal Advisor and Indian General Sharadanandan Singh was kept at Nepal Army’s headquarters. In the name of reforming the army the number of soldiers was reduced to 8000 from 18000. In the name of the security of Nepal, Indian army check-posts were established inside Nepal which was located in the northern border. Nationalist forces moved against Indian intervention, but the intervention continued unabated.
In 1960, King Mahendra had to take over due to danger looming over the country’s nationality. During 1961, and the China-India War, the Indian army established its camp at Kalapani in Mahakali, Western Nepal. To spoil the image of King Mahendra, some biased people say that it was the King who allowed the Indian army to stay at Kalapani, but no survey had been carried out until 1964. The situation was such that we could only rely on maps developed by foreigners. The Nepalese people have been openly opposing the Indian intervention and talking about this issue, not only in Mechi to Mahakali, but also to return Tista to Kangada. All Nepalese should delicately support this campaign. We are confident that Indian leaders will return the lost land of Greater Nepal as a good democratic-neighbor would.
Maoist chairman Prachanda has also started openly speaking against the injustice of the Sugauli Treaty. But how will this issue be resolved? Nothing will happen by pouring bitterness from our mouths. Nationality should be from within our hearts.
When the Maoist party was in power, they did not speak against foreign intervention and wide-spread corruption. When they were in power, their activities, attitude and talks were not of one nature. People say that leadership is identified when one is in power. The Maoists were the same, when they were in power, it was a matter of grief. They didn’t show any respect towards the nation, national identity or conventional beliefs.
In the 10th Bhadra issue of Rajdhani, Prof Dipak Gajurel wrote, “The Sugauli treaty that was signed in 1816 between Nepal and British India has been dismissed 59 years ago. The dismissal of the Sugauli treaty means Nepalese territory is automatically as before the war of 1841-1816 between Nepal and British India. The current territory of Nepal in between Mechi and Mahakali has been given to Nepal by Article 2 of the Sugauli treaty. After the dismissal of the Sugauli Treaty by the Treaty of 1950, our territory automatically remains as Tista in east, Satlaj in west and nearly to the Ganga River in the south. However the territory is still in the control of India. Nepal has gained from it. Since 1950 the treaty is still functional. Nepal should therefore gain back the territories of the east to Mechi, west to Mahakali and that to the south which are in control of India.”
Nepali scholar and Political analyst Bijayamani Dixit says “Jawaharlal Nehru, the PM of India had said that Nepal has made us proud by remaining a sovereign independent nation in Asia against British Empire reign (where the sun never sets.)” Similarly Mr Dixtit says “The British in India has promised to return the entire Nepalese territory to the then PM of Nepal, Jung Bahadur Rana, which was taken by the East India Company after the Sugauly treaty. In the mean time they returned four big districts in the western region termed as “Naya Muluk” and promised again to return all of the Nepal occupied territory before British rule. During the signing of the Peace and Friendship Treaty in 1923, Chandra Sumsheer had asked the then British Governor General of India to return the promised land. The British response was that it would be a great headache for the British as large population was moved to that area rather than take the income generated from those territories – Tista to Kangada and Sonpur, Gorakhpur (south). Later that amount was raised to five million. British India used to pay the sum (Rs 50 Lakhs) even after the independence of India. After the so called 1950 revolution in Nepal the payment as well as the issue of ownership of Nepalese occupied territories has stopped.”(May 31-2010, Janabhawana Nepali weekly)’
In the same regard, several nationalists including Prof Fanindra Nepal demanded the return back of lost parts (Tista to Kangada) of Nepal protesting in front of Indian Embassy in the occasion of Republic Day of India in 2009. These aggressive rebel voices were not raised without any reason. For 20 years, Phadindra Nepal has been fighting to return our lost-land. The efforts of Phanindra Nepal are praiseworthy.
India let not tease Nepal. I had a comment also published in the Indian Express Dec 2 of 2009, ‘The controversial Sugauli Treaty signed between the British East India Co and Nepal in 1816 that compelled Nepal to concede almost a third of its territory to the British colonial rulers of India. Respectfully, I hope, cordially Indian government should return the Nepalese LAND.’ India should not see Nepal with attacking sight. Nepal must not surrender to India in the sake of cooperation.
Senior journalist Debprakash Tripathi writes in Ghatana and Bichar on Aug 19th of 2009 (3rd Bhadra 2066- How long must the Nepalese people be passionate just by democracy (Loktantra) written in the paper? The representatives of nations call Nepal wherever they seek help. Seeking help for nothing is becoming a national belief and it is due to this that our international reputation is not being improved.
Pradip Nepal, UML’s Party leader writes in Gorkhapatra Aug 19th 2009 (3rd Srawan 2066) – “The Darjiling area in the east was taken in lease for temporary use by British Indian administrators. They used to pay Taxes (Morgase) to Nepal. After 1947, Darjiling became a part of the Indian Territory through Rana and later administrators of Nepal, though it was never a part of India historically. Indian ambassadors typically make addresses showcasing their supposed cooperation by sending billions of rupees to Nepal. But since 1950, they have hid the fact that India earns thousands of billions of rupees from forcefully controlled parts of Nepal. If India wants to be good neighbor then it must raise itself from this greediness.”
And it is our request India should ready to manage and control the open border between Nepal and India, from Tista to Kangada by fencing or construction of a wall along the border with consent of both the countries, and maintainenance of the 7-10 border points. But,the Indian side is not willing to listen to the voices of nationalists of Nepal.
Although it is late, Prachanda, the Maoist leader has opened the reality of Indian intervention (after Jun 20). “India should return the Nepali land. After India became free, that which had been lost after the Sugauli Treaty-1816 with the British ruler in India, and all other unequal treaties. The Sugauli Treaty is no more in existence after the British rulers quit India, and the treaty with them doesn’t exist.” As every corner of Nepal are unmanaged, it will be easier to control Nepal by India. How can a nation surrounded by traitors and foreigners be protected? So, we should return the missing land of greater Nepal.
We can mention an instance of Indian’s intention. Former Premier Kirtinidhi Bist writes (Rajdhani, 25th Aug.2009 “Nepal is now like a pilot-less airplane. The Indian ambassador is behaving like Viceroys in British India. Now it is necessary to understand Nepal’s situation and condition being by China and India. The nation’s identity should be maintained on the basis of cultures and traditions so that the nation would remain strongly united. Nepal needs a politician and a mature diplomat, also the country needs a national commitment to the welfare of the people and the sovereign existence of the nation. We must have courage to counter these larger and stronger countries, not tease them.”
The so-called republic, secularism and ethnic federalism issues are not the issues of Nepal. These agendas are foreigners conspiracies to collapse Nepal. In such case, there is no alternative to make Nepalese people and Army stronger. The Nepalese Army that was constituted from time of Pirthivi Narayan Shah (1755) can not remain for the sake of Nepal. Even the Supreme Court wouldn’t appreciate traitor leaders and foreigners. Those who are trying to politicize the court and national army are no doubt culprits. They should be punished and get out. The Nepalese people of the Kingdom of Nepal and those scattered globally wish that the nation will exist forever with the combined effort of the Kings, political parties and people. Nepalese democracy in which the King has been displaced has also been observed. Nepal can not survive without the King. The country must get an answer by the King and the people of the welfare of the people and the nation. Parliamentary democracy is our ultimate goal. This can be achieved with necessary amendments in the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal; 2047. The present constituent assembly can not formulate the new constitution. Even if it is formed, the nation won’t be saved.
Now let’s be strong and committed from every corner for the country’s existence against the foreigners intervention and Nepalese traitors.
