A Book Review on

“Nepal: Strategy for Survival”

Submitted to: Submitted by:

Faculty Name: Indivar Poudel Name of the Student: Bhumika Shah
Department of International Relations& Diplomacy Roll No: 19
Tribhuvan University Semester: First
Batch: Ninth
Leo E. Rose was an emeritus professor of Political Science at the University of California,
Berkeley who completed his PHD in Nepali History in 1959. Rose was interested in studying
South Asian history including Sikkim. Rose has published other works on Nepali Politics and
history including ‘Democratic innovations in Nepal’.
Rose in ‘Nepal: Strategy for Survival’ writes about Nepal’s foreign policy dating from 1770 to
1970. He notes the limited number of alternative policies that were feasible for a country like
Nepal and the consistent choices that the decision makers were given in the provided
circumstances. This study analyzes and interprets the main characteristics of Nepal’s foreign
policy and relations with its neighboring states from a historical perspective chronologically. It
depicts the congruent relations Nepal had in regards to India and China which set space for the
non-alignment policy opted by King Mahendra. Nepal’s geopolitical situation too has made it
adopt a different perspective on survival in comparison to its huge neighboring powers.
Nepal’s political decision-making or foreign policy issues have been widely affected by the
physical setting, the ethnic and cultural mosaic and the historical backgrounds of its neighboring
countries since centuries. Within the 100 air miles between the Gangetic Plains and the Tibetan
Plateau, seven specific zones: The Terai, the Mahabharat range, the mid-montane region, the
Himalayan range along with the high mountain valleys of the Inner Himalayas can be
distinguished in Nepal. Nepal has shared defined boundaries with the neighboring states
topographically demarcated in several treaties and on ground.
Nepal is dominated by Caucasoids and Mongoloids, leading to cultural and political ties between
India and Nepal. India has had relations with Nepal for 2500 years, while China-Nepal relations
started to blossom in the 7th century.
The 16th and 17th centuries saw two kings of Nepal, Ram Shah and Pratap Malla, take
advantage of internal chaos in Tibet to gain control of the border pass areas. A treaty was signed
that granted joint authority between Nepal and Tibet in the Kuti and Kerong areas. The
Kathmandu 'Raja' also minted coins called 'Mahendramalla' which were in use in Tibet for over a
century. These developments made China an important player in the Himalayan area politics.
Nepal had been severely affected by external economic influences especially those that are
affected by India, which somewhat contradicts Nepal’s ‘independent foreign policy’. Owing up
to Nepal’s geopolitical, cultural and historical factors, Nepal’s commerce was 90% reliant on
India.
The author talks about the practice of confrontation politics in the Himalayan areas which dated
from 1770 to 1845 AD. Nepal adhered to gaining authority in the trade system with Tibet. Prithvi
Narayan Shah was on the verge of the unification campaign when he took the control of the
central Himalayan area. In 1769, the relations of Nepal with India and Tibet were at a low owing
to the internal conflict between the kings of Nepal. Prithvi Narayan Shah wanted Kathmandu as
the entrepot of Trans-Himalayan area to gain virtual monopoly on the trade between India and
Tibet. In 1770, the relations with Tibet worsened and Tibet halted the minting of coins from the
Malla kings as they exploited the metals to finance war against Prithvi Narayan Shah. After the
conquest of Kathmandu, Prithvi Narayan Shah tried to initiate talks to restart the minting of coins
according to the prescribed ratio but the Tibetan insisted for compensation of the coins by the
Shah Raja which wasn’t acceptable to him. Prithvi Narayan Shah had good relationship with the
then leader of Bhutan, Deb Raj Desi Shidariva. Prithvi Narayan Shah was aware about the
British influence in the hills and so, disagreed to become the route of trade between Tibet and the
Company. The British soon approached Bhutan which ultimately dethroned Prithvi Narayan’s
ally and he suggested the Panchen lama to mediate the situation. The expansionist campaign of
Nepal was still prevalent and remained in continuity even after the death of Prithvi Narayan
Shah.
A treaty was later signed between Nepal and Tibet which lulled tensions between the two states
in regards to the coinage question and the authority over the Kuti and Kerong areas. The British
showed relentless efforts to reach a reproachment with Nepal by initiating free trade with Nepal,
discontinued withholding of revenues which eventually set grounds for the 1792 treaty of
commerce between Nepal and British-India. The regency of Bahadur Shah marks the first Nepali
Tibetan war where Nepal captured four districts bordering Tibet as the demands of Nepal were
paid no heed. It was only after the Chinese intervention that the negotiation for the 1789 treaty
took place.
The forward policy adopted by Bahadur Shah was widely opposed by a certain faction of the
Darbar as the implementation of the 1789 treaty failed miserably. This incident led to the
bitterness in the Nepali- Tibetan relations ending up in a war where Nepal was at risk of war with
China. China became adamant in invading Nepal during this time and strived to garner support
from the countries bordering Nepal. The War ended after a treaty was signed that didn’t turn out
to be humiliating or catastrophic in regards to Nepal and the disaster averted. Nepal maintained
it’s borders intact through terms of settlement over the years. The position of the Company
during the war was neutral at best since they could not afford to offend Peking and on the other
hand, they had just signed the 1792 treaty of commerce with Nepal.
In 1793-95 the British’s main objective was to persuade Kathmandu to adhere to the treaty, settle
boundary disputes between the Company and Nepal and observe the government, religion and
customs of the Nepalis, and enquire about the trade between Tibet and Nepal. The British side
also intended to establish a residency in Nepal. These incidents denote the Company’s interest in
the internal situation of Nepal.
In 1794, a political faction in Nepal invoked Chinese interference in respect to the dismissal of
Bahadur Shah from the office for the first time. However, the Chinese have refrained from any
kind of interference in the domestic politics of Nepal. This is the sole reason why there has little
to no influence of China in Nepalese politics. Nepal’s foreign policy centers around the
counterbalance of relationships between British and Chinese over the years. At times when
British-Nepali relations have turned critical, Nepal has relied on the support of the Chinese and
vice versa. The Chinese have stayed aloof from this also due to the financial expenses it had to
deal with during the 1788-92 period.
The Anglo-Nepali war of 1814-1816 was a major event in Nepal's history. The dismissal of
Bahadur Shah was seen as a setback to the Britishers as they relied on him to promote their
interests. Nepal was also involved in provoking Indian states for an anti-British movement.
Nepal appealed to Lhasa for financial assistance, but to no avail. Other neighbors stayed
reluctant as they weren’t willing to risk war with the Company. The Sugauli treaty was signed
between the two countries, but China remained uninvolved due to their view of Nepal as an
outside power.
The rise of Jang Bahadur redefined Nepal’s foreign policy towards British India and China. He
was inclined more towards the British side as China had declined in power comparatively. In
1853, he confronted Tibet on the objectives and goals of Nepal. As a result of the violation of
Nepali traders, border disputes and higher custom duties on imports led to the war between Tibet
and Nepal which the author describes as an act of provoked aggression. Jang Bahadur intended
on extending his influence in the internal affairs of Tibet and this opportunity advanced when he
assisted six mountain guns to Tibet. The war with China ended up killing 700 men. In spite of the
wars that took place, Nepal was well aware about the fact that a peaceful settlement has to be
done if the expenses were to be avoided. Jang Bahadur also sought agreement with Lhasa to
claim virtual monopoly over the trans-Himalayan trade. This would assure Nepal’s authority in
the border districts of its neighbors.
In mid-1857, northern India emerged in an anti-British movement. Jang Bahadur provided
military assistance to Britishers to settle the protests, but it didn't bring back the results he
expected. In 1860, the British revived their interest in the trans Himalayan trade, which
threatened Nepal's virtual monopoly over the area. The successors of Jang Bahadur were strongly
anti-British and relations with China were prioritized over British. Tibet was struggling to
establish itself as an independent power, so Nepal sought to protect its remaining in the trade
system.
Nepal again was determined to mend its relations with the Company. British asserted of Nepal’s
independence during this period when China claimed Nepal to be ‘vassal’. Nepal earlier
supported Chinese in order to maintain counterbalance between China and British India.
However, Chinese derogatory remarks felt damaging to the national independence and honor.
Nepal realized the need of a treaty with the British recognizing Nepal’s independence as a
sovereign power and thus, in December 21, 1923, a treaty was signed on the same. The author
describes Jang bahadur and Chandra Shamsher as great nationalistic heroes as they devised
policies according to their time and took maximum benefits however that was plausible.
The independence of India in 1947 gave birth to a new foreign policy in Nepal as the Ranas
fretted that their regime would be accommodated under the Indian government. A diversification
policy was introduced which meant that Nepal would seek to maintain diplomatic relations with
countries beyond its neighboring vicinity. Nepal planned to establish relations with the United
States, China, Tibet, France, Netherlands, Belgium and the like. Nepal also applied for the UN
membership during that time but only received it in 1955. The Ranas built a standstill agreement
with India where India would retain the agreements of the 1923 treaty and Nepal would
recognize India’s status as the successor of the British regime. Soon after India seemed ecstatic
to reform Nepal’s constitutional provisions and this was just the beginning of India’s efforts in
interfering in Nepal’s internal situation.
In 1950, Chinese troops attacked Tibet and the Anti Rana movements in Nepal escalated. Nepal
and India didn’t bother about the developments in Tibet as China warned of intolerance of
involvement of any third party. Nepali congress launched an armed struggle and King Tribhuvan
took a political asylum in India. Nehru’s Middleway approach aimed at the survival of the
monarch and throne of the king, however India’s main motive was to influence political reforms
in Nepal. The Rana regime officially ended after a compromise between the Ranas and the
Nepali congress under the supervision of King Tribhuvan was made. The interventions by the
Indian government were at its peak after this period when the Indian ambassador would
personally intervene and affect the processes of the government. Nepal has been cautious about
its relations with China after China claimed Tibet on historical grounds which posed a threat to
Nepal’s territory. However, the Chinese maintained their stance as per the treaty of 1856.
Nepal and China’s relations were based on Panchshila after King Mahendra accessed to throne.
Mahendra emphasized on ‘equal friendship with all’ over ‘special relations with India’ in his
foreign policy. In 1956-57 Nepal didn’t vote with India in the UN general assembly which set
Nepal’s independent status in the international arena and also successfully hosted its first major
international event. King Mahendra was keen on establishing relations with other countries
countervailing force to both India and China. The diplomatic relations of Nepal had increased
from 5 to 24. After the first elected government, Nepali congress came in power. BP Koirala’s
objectives on the foreign policy was to form equal friendship with all and to utilize the UN
membership to its full potential. Chinese relations with Nepal turned bitter once more when
Chinese claims on Mt. Everest was brought into the table, however Nepal took a stand against
the remark as it was a matter of national sentiment. Soon after the Mustang incident followed,
these incidents can be seen as China’s displeasure on growing relations of India and Nepal again
after the Government of Nepali congress formed. The royal coup of December 15, 1960 was
addressed as the setback for democracy by the Indian government which also showed their
dissatisfaction on the dismissal of the Koirala ministry. The coup wasn’t much of significant
matter to the Chinese side, whatsoever. King Mahendra built stronger ties with China during that
time along with building relations with Pakistan. India ultimately imposed an economic blockade
on Nepal which was uplifted as a result of tensions in India China borders. Later in 1963 to 1970
Nepal’s foreign policy was based on the ‘Politics of balance’ as the king realized that
jeopardizing relations with India would result in the threat to national integrity and security. It
could not be unseen that Nepal’s economy was heavily reliant on the Indian economy. Nepal’s
policies still center around diversification of its political and economic relations with the outside
world, even though its geopolitical and economic elements bring restraint to its objectives. Nepal
has also refrained from associating itself with organizations that put its non-alignment policy to
test.
Conclusion and Observations:
The major theme of this study is the existence of various factors that have more or less prevailed
continuously for the past two centuries leading to the change of foreign policy of Nepal from
time to time depending on the circumstances and the approaches taken by the leaders, changing
governments and their responses to the external influences and challenges. Nepal’s difficult
topographic and geographic situation has acted as a catalyst to discourage efforts to improve and
facilitate access into the region. Nepal’s national identity problem existed since a long time
which is why Nepal debuted in the international stage. It has always been crucial for Nepal to
differ from India on cultural and political grounds. King Mahendra focused on diversification,
non-alignment and ‘equal friendship with all’ as part of his foreign policy. The non alignment
policy allowed Nepal to act equally with both of its neighbors and held no special ties with either
of them. Nepal’s role as a buffer zone brought linkage between the two ideologically distinct yet
friendly powers.
Nepal has been an independent country since its very existence yet due to its geopolitical
challenges has to rely on its two powerful neighbors. Over the years, Nepal has tried to balance
its diplomatic ties with both of the countries without jeopardizing relations with the other, hence
the policy of diversification and non-alignment was born as part of Nepal’s foreign policy. Nepal
has been successful in maintaining its sovereignty despite the challenges by confiding in its
neighbors depending on the circumstances. The leaders of the country have used aggression and
peaceful settlement as a tactic to avert any major disasters in the country and therefore
safeguarding Nepal’s independence, sovereignty and security.
References:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/abs/nepal-
strategy-for-survival-by-leo-rose-berkeley-university-of-california-press-1971-pp-310-1000/
B96BDD84466B73A76B5F4C2D805E30A8
https://archive.nepalitimes.com/news.php?id=939