2016 was celebrated as the bicentenary of diplomatic ties between Nepal and the United Kingdom. Officially, diplomatic relations between the two countries are said to have begun in 1816, the year Nepal signed the Sugauli Treaty with East India Company.
The nine-article treaty was not signed between two sovereign states; rather, it was between the sovereign nation of Nepal and an economic entity, the East India Company. Article One of the treaty states: “There shall be perpetual peace and friendship between the Honorable East India Company and the King of Nepal.”
The East India Company formally relinquished control over India in 1858, when its rule was replaced by the British Crown. The first official treaty between Nepal and Great Britain was signed only in 1923. Known as the Treaty Between the United Kingdom and Nepal, it was signed in Kathmandu on 21 Dec 1923. The first article of the seven-article treaty states: “There shall be perpetual peace and friendship between the Governments of Great Britain and Nepal, and the two Governments agree mutually to acknowledge and respect each other’s independence, both internal and external.”
In this sense, the 1923 treaty is the only agreement signed between two sovereign nations. Yet, the Sugauli Treaty continues to be regarded as the benchmark of diplomatic ties between the two countries.
Interestingly, the narrative is different when it comes to China. The treaty signed on 2 Oct 1791, known as the Treaty of Betrawati, presents notable parallels with the Sugauli Treaty. First, both treaties were signed in the aftermath of war. The Betrawati Treaty was concluded 24 years before the Sugauli Treaty, the former following China’s victory over Nepal, and the latter resulting from British victory. Second, neither treaty was signed directly between official state actors, though state authority was clearly referenced in both. In Article One of the Betrawati Treaty, China is explicitly mentioned: “That China should henceforth be considered as father to both Nepal and Tibet, who should regard each other as brothers.”
Similarly, the British government is referenced in Article Seven of the Sugauli Treaty, which states: “The Rajah of Nipal engages never to molest or disturb the Rajah of Sikkim in the possession of his territories; but agrees, if any difference shall arise between the State of Nipal and the Rajah of Sikkim, or the subjects of either, that such differences shall be referred to the arbitration of the British Government, by which award the Rajah of Nipal engages to abide.”
From Nepali perspective, both treaties represent subjugation—one in terms of political hierarchy and the other through the loss of nearly one-third of its territory. Yet, this remains the reality of history, and there is no alternative but to acknowledge it.
This year marks the 70th anniversary of Nepal-China diplomatic ties, formally established on 1 Aug 1955 in Kathmandu. Unlike its relations with the United Kingdom, Nepal and China do not recognize 1792 as the beginning of formal diplomatic relations. This discrepancy calls for deeper debate and clearer interpretation. If Nepal-UK diplomatic ties are considered to have begun in 1816, why should Nepal–China relations not be acknowledged as starting in 1792? Conversely, if 1955 is accepted as the official starting point of Nepal-China ties, why is 1923 not similarly recognized as the true beginning of Nepal–UK diplomatic relations?
Historically, Nepal-China relations date back to the seventh century during the reign of Narendradev. However, no formal written documents from that period exist. The earliest documented diplomatic agreement dates to 1792. Therefore, this should be considered the formal beginning of Nepal-China diplomatic ties.
If diplomatic agreements concluded during China’s monarchical era are deemed inapplicable to the People’s Republic of China, then why should Nepal accept the same logic, given that the 1955 Nepal-China treaty was signed under Nepal’s own monarchy, led by King Mahendra? It would serve the interests of both countries to recognize 1792 as the first documented instance of formal diplomatic engagement.
