| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 815.55 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
Movements and campaigns with the goal to restore ceded territories of Nepal, which were
lost after the Anglo-Gurkha War (1814-1816) through the Sugauli Treaty in 1816, have
been now and then traceable in the modern history of Nepal. More significantly, due to the
incorporation of a revisionist clause in all post-1962 constitutions of Nepal, one may
understand that perhaps there is an official willingness to claim Nepal’s ceded territories
back from India. This reinforces the idea that the territorial ambition, perhaps, is not only
limited to a small-scale campaign, but has a larger scope. Interestingly, inspite of the
official incorporation of the revisionist clause in Nepal’s Constitutions since 1962, there
has not been any attempt to formalize the claim peacefully. Considering, as argued by the
activists of Greater Nepal, that the 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship nullified the
Sugauli Treaty, the absence of a peaceful claim is questionable and mysterious. Therefore,
the aim of the dissertation is to understand why Nepal’s political authorities did not
formalize a peaceful territorial claim in the post-1950 period. The major two objects of the
dissertation are the rationality and the prospects of formalization of a peaceful claim to the
ceded territories of Nepal. Through a systemic analysis i.e., analyses of political, social,
personality and international systems in the post-1950 period, I explore the rationale that
might have prevented the claim. To that purpose, an in-depth analysis of the revisionist
clause was carried. Finally, by empirically gathering policy-makers’ consensus (mainly of
Nepal’s four major political parties), I look at the prospect of peacefully formalizing
territorial claims.
Description
Dissertação apresentada à Universidade Fernando Pessoa como parte dos requisitos para a obtenção do grau de Mestre em Ciência Política e Relações Internacionais
