दुवै देशद्वारा निगरानी गरिने सीमा अतिक्रमणको विरोध:-


कान्तिपुर संवाददाता

इलाम, पुस २७ - सीमा अतिक्रमण विरोधमा संघीय लोकतान्त्रिक राष्ट्रिय मञ्चको लिम्बूवान भोलेन्टियर्सले आइतबार पशुपतिनगरमा प्रदर्शन गरेको छ । करिब तीन सयको संख्यामा रहेको समूहले मार्चपाससहित अतिक्रमण विरोधमा नाराजुलुस गरेको थियो ।
जुलुसपछि फाटकमा आयोजित कोणसभामा बोल्दै भोलेयन्टियर्सका कार्यबाहक संयोजक फक्तालुङ योङहाङ र केन्द्रीय सदस्य थाम्सहाङ लावतीले अतिक्रमित भूमि फिर्ता नभए जस्तोसुकै आन्दोलन गर्ने चेतावनी दिए ।

श्रीअन्तु-८, गुफापातल र पशुपतिनगर, पुलखोलामा सीमा अतिक्रमणको समाचार सार्वजनिक भएपछि राजनीतिक दल, विद्यार्थी संगठनलगायतले कडा विरोध जनाउँदै तत्काल अतिक्रमति क्ष्ाेत्र खाली नगरे कडा कदम चाल्ने चेतावनी दिएका छन् ।

एमालेको प्रजातान्त्रिक राष्ट्रिय युवा संघले प्रेस विज्ञप्ति जारी गर्दै सीमा अतिक्रमणको निन्दा गरेको छ । जिल्ला संयोजक जितबहादुर राई र सचिव सन्तकुमार तामाङद्वारा हस्ताक्षरित विज्ञप्तिमा भारतको हस्तक्षेपकारी नीतिको विरोध गरिएको छ ।

सीमा अतिक्रमणप्रति अनेरास्ववियु जिल्ला कमिटी इलामले ध्यानार्कषण भएको जनाएको छ । युनियनले प्रमुख जिल्ला अधिकारीमार्फत प्रधानमन� ��त्रीसमक�� �ष ज्ञापनपत्र पठाउँदै अतिक्रमण समस्याको दीर्घकालीन समाधान खोज्न आग्रह गरेको छ । जिल्ला सचिव नवराज शंकरद्वारा हस्ताक्षरित ज्ञापनपत्रमा अतिक्रमणको पछिल्लो संस्करणविरुद्ध डटेर सामना गरिने जानकारी गराइएको छ ।

श्रीअन्तु-८, गुफापातल क्षेत्रमा भारतीय पक्षले नेपाली भूमि र दसगजा क्षेत्र मिचेर एसएसबी क्याम्प राख्न थालेपछि जिल्लास्थित सरकारी कार्यालयले पनि चासो देखाएका छन् ।

दुवै देशका स्थानीय अधिकारीले दिनहुँजसो यस क्षेत्रको निरीक्षण गरिरहेका छन् । स्थानीयस्तरका सरोकारवाला दुई देशकै सरकारी निकाय पनि आपसमा छलफल गर्ने पक्षमा छन् । 'भारतीय पक्षको वन विभाग छलफल गर्न इच्छुक देखिएकोे छ,' पशुपतिनरस्थित इलाका प्रहरी कार्यालयका प्रहरी निरीक्षक नवराज मल्लले भने, 'सोमबारलाई उनीहरूले नेपाली पक्षलाई बोलाएका छन् ।'

नेपाली पक्षबाट सुरक्षा निकाय, प्रशासानिक फाँट, वन कार्यालय, नापीलगायत सरकारी कार्यालयले त्यहाँ निगरानी बढाएका छन् । भारतीय पक्षबाट पनि वन विभाग र सुरक्षा निकायको टोलीले शुक्रबार त्यहाँको स्थलगत निरीक्षण गरेको थियो । जिल्लास्थित सरकारी निकाय पनि गुफापातल, पशुपतिनगरको पुलबजारलगायत सम्पूर्ण सीमा क्ष्ाेत्रमा देखिएको समस्या समाधन हुनुपर्नेमा लागिपरेको छ ।

'७२/५ के ४ नम्बरको पिल्लरले सीमा इंकित गरेअनुरूप एसएसबी क्याम्प नै दसगजा क्ष्ाेत्रमा पर्ने प्रस्ट भएकाले विज्ञको टोलीले तत्काल सीमा निर्धारण गर्नुपर्छ,' वन कार्यालयका हरिनारायण चौधरीले भने ।

गुफा पातलमा ११ रोपनीभन्दा धेरै जमिन मिचिएको नापी शाखा इलामले प्रारम्भिक निष्कर्ष निकालेको छ । सो स्थानमा भारतले हाल रहेको अस्थायी क्याम्पलाई स्थायी बनाउन खुट्टीसमेत गाडेको छ । त्यस क्ष्ाेत्र आसपास पहिले भारतले वृक्षरोपण गर्दा स्थानीयले उखेलेर फालेका थिए । 'त्यहाँ रहेका बिरुवाको संरक्षण हाल भारत पक्षबाट भइरहेको छ,' पशुपतिनगरका बासिन्दा मिलन क्षेत्रीले भने, 'क्याम्प रहेनजिकैबाट भारतले सुरुमा बाटो बनाए पनि पछि नेपाली भूभाग भनेर रोकेको थियो ।'

Sunauli Border shutdown called off:-

Kantipur Report

BHAIRAHAWA, Oct 21 - Nepal-India border at Sunauli that was shut down as protest against the abuse of Nepalis by Indian security personnel and custom officers opened Tuesday.
The border shutdown was called by six organisations in Sunauli in Rupandehi district to protest extortion, loot and abuse of Nepali passengers by the Indian officials deputed at the border check-point and custom office from 7-8 this morning.

After an agreement was reached to hold talks between high officials of bordering two districts of Nepal and India, the shutdown was called off.

However, the protestors have demanded to stop manhandling, loot and extortion of Nepali passengers and businessmen at the border and demolition of a building constructed by the Indian police, encroaching the no man’s land in the Dasgaja area.

Indian Polices gang raped two Nepali women:-

Policemen in Indian state of Uttar Pradesh (UP) gang-raped two of the six Nepali women taken into custody from Gorakhpur railway station last Tuesday evening, the Kathmandu Post reported Saturday. The women were on their way to New Delhi from where they hoped to fly to a Gulf country for employment.

According to the report, five UP policemen took the women, who had reached Gorakhpur via Sunauli border town together with two Nepali youths, to Mallika Hotel situated near the station for ';interrogation'; and later raped them.

Inspector General of Police in Gorakhpur area Harish Chandra Kasyap told the Post that the two guilty policemen have been suspended and action has been initiated against them. He said action will be taken against three other policemen involved in the case.

The Post also quoted M.P Sharma of Nepali Janadhikar Security Committee that the policemen had threatened to kill anyone who would dare to make public the incident and also demanded Rs 30,000 for the release of the women.

nepalnews.com

Indian Encroachment Threatening Nepal';s Sovereignty:-

According to official records, Nepal covers a total area of 147,181 Sq km. But in reality, the territory of Nepal is gradually shrinking thanks to increasing encroachment by India that has put the sovereignty of Nepal at stake.

The reports prepared by Buddhi Narayan Shrestha renowned border expert after thorough survey make it evident that India has encroached about 59,970 hectares of Nepali territory at 54 points in 21 districts adjoining India in the east, west and South. But if the areas affected by the unilateral activities of our southern neighbor such as construction of dams and irrigation projects are considered as encroachment, which according to researcher Phanindra Nepal, we should, the number increases to 85 points.

Among the encroached areas, the much disputed Kalapani-Limpiyadhura area with 372 sq km (37,800 hectares) is the largest chunk of Nepali territory encroached by India. The encroachment started right after the India-China border war of November 1962. After facing defeat, the Indian army set up a camp inside Nepal';s territory of Kalapani to keep an eye on Chinese activities. But now, they claim the area belongs to India.

The Treaty of Sugauli (1816) has clearly mentioned that the River Mahakali is the borderline of Nepal-India. The crux of the issue in dispute is the determination of the origin of the river Mahakali. ";The maps of 1850 and 1856 prepared by the Survey of India with the participation of Nepalese authority clearly states that the river originates from Limpiyadhura, 16 km northwest of Kalapani, which proves that Kalapani belongs to Nepal,"; says Shrestha.

But the Indian side refuses to accept those maps as proof. They say that the map prepared by them in 1875 should be considered as proof as it was scientifically prepared. But what is remarkable is that the map does not have Nepal';s certification. According to the map, the river Mahakali';s origin is Lepulek.

In recent times, the Tribeni-Susta situated on the east of Narayani River in the mid-southern part of Nawalparasi district is the most tense area owing to encroachment.

Just a few weeks ago, some Indians invaded Nepali territory in Susta and burnt down all the sugarcane.

About two months ago, over 1000 Indian villagers backed by Indian Border Police Force (Seema Sashastra Bal) SSB had forcibly entered Nepalese territory in Susta. They completely destroyed the sugarcane in about 10 hectares of land and also manhandled men and women.

According to locals of Susta, such incidents are rampant in the area. Sometimes, they send Bihari miscreants to chase away Nepalis from their homes while sometime the Indian police cross the border and manhandle Nepalis on the pretext that they are searching for Munna Khan, an Indian gangster, who was once used by the Indian side to create disorder in Susta, says Shrestha.

Nepali farmers initiated the ";Save Susta Campaign"; to safeguard Nepalese territory but how long can they stop the Indian side is the question. They say they appealed to Nepalese authorities several times to take necessary action but the authorities are turning a deaf ear to them.

Experts say the changing course of the Narayani River is the main reason behind the dispute. Over the decades, the Narayani River has been changing its course toward the Nepalese side in the west, and the Indians have been trying to capture Nepalese territory. India has so far grabbed about 13,500 hectares of Nepalese land because of this.

The other most talked about point of dispute is Mechi. India';s disapproval of Masonry Pillars popularly known as Junge Pillars as the main boundary pillars had sparked the Mechi Border dispute.

The map published in January 1818, right after the Sugauli Treaty, shows the Junge Pillars as the main boundary pillars. More importantly, history is evidence that British had erected those pillars as monuments of the Nepal-India border.

But the Nepal-India Joint Technical Border Committee adopted the Persian Map (Urdu script) of 1874 as the reference material, which was provided by the Indian side.

Because of the Nepali side';s wrong decision accepting the Persian Map as the basis of demarcation, a total area of 1630 hectares of land has fallen on the Indian side.

Why does India encroach Nepal';s land?
Experts are of the view there could be multiple reasons why India eyes Nepali land.

If Phanindra Nepal is to be believed, India wants Kalapani area primarily to keep an eye on the Chinese, Pyaratal for its biological diversity, and a large part of terai land for agriculture,"; says Nepal. He also says it cannot be ruled out that a power and water hungry India is eyeing Nepal';s rivers.

Shrestha also believes that the main reason for encroachment is that India wants to meet the demand for settlement and agriculture for its ever growing population.

What needs to be done to stop encroachment and solve dispute?
According to Shrestha the issue can no longer be solved though bilateral meetings as India is not paying heed to Nepal';s point of view. ";The issue must be taken to the United Nations as India is not responding to Nepal';s call for bilateral meeting,"; says Shrestha.

But Phanindra Nepal is of the view that lack of sincerity and patriotism are the main drawbacks of the Nepali side while negotiating with their Indian counterparts. He also says collective effort is needed to face the Indian side strongly. ";Because of the news carried by the media, government deployed security personnel in Susta area on 28 October,"; he adds that media should carry border dispute news more frequently.

Besides, civic society must also pressurize the government to take necessary steps soon, he adds.

But we are virtually doing nothing to stop the encroachment and to resolve the existing dispute. Researchers like Shrestha and Nepal say there are so many such points where not even one security personnel has been deployed to guard our territory and citizens.

Altogether, 27 Nepal-India Joint Technical Level Boundary Committee meetings have been held in the last 25 years but they have not yielded any result yet.

Nepaleyes tried to get comments from concerned government officials on the outcomes of those meeting and what the Nepali bureaucracy was planning to do to resolve the dispute, but none them could be reached despite repeated attempts.

newsblaze.com ...

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=QdRP9Aj-8sk

 

Indian encroachment Nepali border in "village Susta", Mid western Southern Terai of Nepal.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=ilumoC9FSYs

Strike for Indian encroachment Nepali border in "village Susta"

Mofokers



                                 __fu(k__
                                 __fu(k__                                     copy & paste
                                 __fu(k__                                     this if you hate
                                 __fu(k__                                     Dhoties
__fu(k__   __fu(k__  __fu(k__   __fu(k__
__fu(k__   __fu(k__  __fu(k__   __fu(k__
__fu(k__   __fu(k__  ..............   __fu(k__
__fu(k__   __fu(k__  ..............   __fu(k__   __fu(k__
                                                  __fu(k__   __fu(k__

Greater Nepal Movement

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=1yolHbomP-Y

 

What is all about Movement Greater Nepal?

Answer below..... Support Great Nepal Movement.

 

Greater Nepal Movements Part-1 (interview):-

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=1yolHbomP-Y

 

Greater Nepal Movements Part-2 (interview):-

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=d1c2M3YWNkM

 

 Documentry "Greter Nepal" around the world:-

watch documentry on below link

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=I5MtJU2_uZs

 

 

 

'Greater Nepal' sounds good..'Naya Nepal' nepal also had sounded equally good..and today we see our country and countrymen in agony!!yo ta sab bhanne kura na ho!

and yeah i hate DHOTIS!!!

Indian encroachment Threatening Nepal's Sovereignty and invasion Nepal's borders:-

India has placed tight restrictions on the disputed border region of Kalapani, following a protest march by Nepali students to highlight Kathmandu's claim to the area, India's ambassador to Nepal, K.V. Rajan said Sunday.

"The area has always been restricted for foreigners. This time, however,
India restricts the gathering of a large number of people in the area," Rajan
told AFP.

"Political gatherings have been restricted."

Nepalese sources claim India troops have been stationed at Kalapani, an
arid mountainous region 415 kilometres (259 miles) northwest of here, since
the Indo-China war in 1962.

On Friday, about 60 members of the left-wing All Nepal National Free
Students' Union (AANFSU) marched on Kalapani, claiming the territory belonged
to Nepal and urging the removal of Indian soldiers there.

The Indian embassy said in a statement that New Delhi had no soldiers in
the area, but added that India's claim to Kalapani was "acknowledged by
successive British, Indian and Nepali governments."

"There is no Indian army at the border but there is only an Indo-Tibetan
Border Police post in the area," the statement said.

"However, India has now agreed to remove the Indian troops positioned (at
the border post) if it is proved that the land belongs to Nepal."

"Two meetings of the Joint Working Group on the boundary comprising of
experts working on historical facts has already taken place," it said.

Kalapani is on the juncture of Nepal's borders with Tibet and India.

The English daily The Kathmandu Post has reported that maps drawn by
British India in 1837, 1854 and 1905 "clearly shows that Kalapani lies inside
Nepal since the area is situated east of the Mahakali river, which lies at the
far western border of Nepal."

"Since then Indo-Nepal joint map has not been drawn," it said.

Punya Prasad Oli, a former director general of the department of land and
survey, also said maps prepared by India prove Kalapani belongs to Nepal.

The general secretary of the Nepal Communist Party-Marxist and Leninist Bam
Dev Gautam said his party was prepared to launch an "armed struggle" if
necessary to drive out the Indian troops, while the main opposition Nepal
Communist Party-United Marxist and Leninist described India's claim as "a
serious matter."

Kalapani belongs to Nepali territory by Technical Land Survery of Nepal and India.  But India build a Indian Army Camp inside Nepal, Kalapani.

 

How can i study more about, the boders and treaty with india and china, if i want to know more? can anyone help.

http://www.nepaldemocracy.org/documents/index.htm

This is the best site for all Nepalese who wants to study and research about Nepali Treaties.

The Treaty of Segowlee between Nepal & East India Company (British):-

2 December 1815

Treaty of Peace between the Honourable East India Company and Maha Rajah Bikram Sah, Rajah of Nipal, settled between Lieutenant-Colonel Bradshaw on the part of the Honourable Company, in virtue of the full powers vested in him by his Excellency the Right Honourable Francis, Earl of Moira, Knight of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, one of His Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council, appointed by the Court of Directors of the said Honourable Company to direct and control all the affairs in the East Indies, and by Sree Gooroo Gujraj Misser and Chunder Seekur Opedeea on the part of Maha Rajah Girmaun Jode Bikram Shah Bauder, Shumsheer Jung, In virtue of the powers to that effect vested in them by the said Rajah of Nipal,—2^nd December 1815.

WHEREAS war has arisen between the Honourable East India Company and the Rajah of Nipal, and

WHEREAS the parties are mutually disposed to restore the relations of peace and amity which, previously to the occurrence of the late differences, had long subsisted between the two States, the following terms of peace have been agreed upon:

Article 1^st

There shall be perpetual peace and friendship between the Honourable East Company and the Rajah of Nipal.
                                                       

Article 2^nd

The Rajah of Nipal renounces all claim to the lands which were the subject of discussion between the two States before the war; and acknowledges the right of the Honourable Company to the sovereignty of those lands.

Article 3^rd

The Rajah of Nipal hereby cedes to the Honourable East India Company in perpetuity all the under-mentioned territories, viz.—

Firstly, The whole of the low lands between the Rivers Kali and Rapti.

Secondly, The whole of the low lands (with the exception of Bootwul Khass) lying between the Rapti and the Gunduck.

Thirdly, The whole of the low lands between the Gunduck and Coosah, in which the authority of the British government has been introduced, or is in actual course of introduction.

Fourthly, All the low lands between the Rivers Mitchee and the Teestah.

Fifthly, All the territories within the hills eastward of the River Mitchee including the fort and lands of Nagree and the Pass of Nagarcote leading from Morung into the hills, together with the territory lying between that Pass and Nagree. The aforesaid territory shall be evacuated by the Gurkah troops within forty days from this date.

Article 4^th

With a view to indemnify the Chiefs and Barahdars of the State of Nipal, whose interests will suffer by the alienation of the lands ceded by the foregoing Article, the British Government agrees to settle pensions to the aggregate amount of two lakhs of rupees per annum on such Chiefs as may be selected by the Rajah of Nipal, and in the proportions which the Rajah may fix. As soon as the selection is made, Sunnuds shall be granted under the seal and signature of the Governor-General for the pensions respectively.

Article 5^th

The Rajah of Nipal renounces for himself, his heirs, and successors, all claim to or connexion with the countries lying to the west of the River Kali and engages never to have any concern with those countries or the inhabitants thereof.

Article 6^th

The Rajah of Nipal engages never to molest or disturb the Rajah of Sikkim in the possession of his territories; but agrees, if any differences shall arise between the State of Nipal and the Rajah of Sikkim or the subjects of either, that such differences shall be refereed to the arbitration of the British Government by whose award the Rajah of Nipal engages to abide.

Article 7^th

The Rajah of Nipal hereby engages never to take or retain in his service any British subject, nor the subject of any European and American State, without the consent of the British Government.

Article 8^th

In order to secure and improve the relations of amity and peace hereby established between the two States, it is agreed that accredited Ministers from each shall reside at the Court of the other.

Article 9^th

This treaty, consisting of nine Articles, shall be ratified by the Rajah of Nipal within fifteen days from this date, and the ratification shall be delivered to lieut.-Colonel Bradshaw, who engages to obtain and deliver to the Rajah the ratification of the Governor-General within twenty days, or sooner, if practicable.

DONE at Segowlee, on the 2^nd day of December 1815.

PARIS BRADSHAW, LT.-COL.,P.A.

Received this treaty from Chunder Seekur Opedeea, Agent on the part of the Rajah of Nipal, in the valley of Muckwaunpoor, at half-past two o'clock p.m. on the 4^th of March 1816, and delivered to thim the Conterpart Treaty on behalf of the British Government.

DD. OCHTERLONY,
Agent, Governor-General

---

Memorandum for the approval and acceptance of the Rajah of Nipal,
presented on December 8, 1816

ADVERTING to the amity and confidence subsisting with the Rajah of Nipal, the British Government proposes to suppress as much as possible, the execution of certain Articles in the Treaty of Segowlee, which bear hard upon the Rajah as follows:

With a view to gratify the Rajah in a point which he has much at heart, the British Government is willing to restore the Terai ceded to it by the Rajah in the Treaty, to wit, the whole Terai lands lying between the Rivers Coosah and Gunduck, such as appertained to the Rajah before the late disagreement; excepting the disputed lands in the Zillahs of Tirhoot and Sarun, and excepting such portions of territory as may occur on both sides for the purpose of settling a frontier, upon investigation by the respective Commissioners; and excepting such lands as may have been given in possession to any one by the British Government upon ascertainment of his rights subsequent to the cession of Terai to the Government. In case the Rajah is desirous of retaining the lands of such ascertained proprietors, they may be exchanged for others, and let it be clearly inderstood that, notwithstanding the considerable extent of the lands in the Zillah of Tirhoot, which have for a long time been a subject of dispute, the settlement made in the year 1812 of Christ, corresponding with year 1869 of Bikramajeet, shall be taken, and everything else relinquished, that is to say, that the settlement and negotiations, such as occurred at that period, shall in the present case hold good and be established.

The British Government is willing likewise to restore the Terai lying between the Rivers Gunduk and Rapti, that is to say, from the River Gunduk to the western limits of the Zillah of Goruckpore, together with Bootwul and Sheeraj, such as appertained to Nipal previous to the disagreements, complete, with the exception of the disputed places in the Terai, and such quantity of ground as may be considered mutually to be requisite for the new boundary.

As it is impossible to establish desirable limits between the two States without survey, it will be expedient that Commissioners be appointed on both sides for the purpose of arranging in concert a well defined boundary on the basis of the preceding terms, and of establishing a straight line of frontier, with a view to the distinct separation of the respective territories of the British Government to the south and of Nipal to the north; and in case any indentations occur to destroy the even tenor of the line, the Commissioners should effect an exchange of lands so interfering on principles of clear reciprocity.

And should it occur that the proprietors of lands situated on the mutual frontier, as it may be rectified, whether holding of the British Government of of the Rajah of Nipal, should be placed in the condition of subjects to both Governments, with a view to prevent continual dispute and discussion between the two Governments, the respective Commissioners should effect in mutual concurrence and co-operation the exchange of such lands, so as to render them subject to one dominion alone.

Whensoever the Terai should be restored, the Rajah of Nipal will cease to require the sum of two lakhs of Rupees per annum, which the British Government agreed to advance for the maintenance of certain Barahdars of his Government.

Moreover, the Rajah of Nipal agrees to refrain from prosecuting any inhabitants of the Terai, after its revertance to his rule, on account of having favoured the cause of the British Government during the war, and should any of those persons, excepting the cultivators of the soil, be desirous of quitting their estates, and of retiring within the Company's territories, he shall not be liable to hindrance.

In the event of the Rajah's approving the foregoing terms, the proposed arrangement for the survey and establishment of boundary marks shall be carried into execution, and after the determination in concert, of the boundary line, Sunnuds conformable to the foregoing stipulations, drawn out and sealed by the two States, shall be delivered and accepted on both sides.

EDWARD GARDNER
Resident

---

Substance of a Letter under the Seal of the Rajah of Nipal,
received on December 11, 1816

After compliments :

I have comprehended the document under date the 8^th of December 1816, or 4^th of Poos, 1873 Sumbat, which you transmitted relative to the restoration, with a view to my friendship and satisfaction, of the Terai between the Rivers Coosa and Rapti to the southern boundary complete, such as appertained to my estate previous to the war. It mentioned that in the event of my accepting the terms contained in that document, the southern boundary of the Terai should be established as it was held by this Government. I have accordingly agreed to the terms laid down by you, and herewith enclose an instrument of agreement, which may be satisfactory to you. Moreover, it was written in the document transmitted by you, that it should be restored, with the exception of the disputed lands and such portion of land as should, in the opinion of the Commissioners on both sides, occur for the purpose of settling a boundary; and excepting the lands which, after the cessions of the Terai to the Honourable Company, may have been transferred by it to the ascertained proprietors. My friend, all these matters rest with you, and since it was also written that a view was had to my friendship and satisfactions with respect to certain Articles of the Treaty of Segowlee, which bore hard upon me, and which could be remitted, I am well assured that you have at heart the removal of whatever may tend to my distress, and that you will act in a manner corresponding to the advantage of this State and the increase of the friendly relations subsisting between the two Governments.

Moreover I have to acknowledge the receipt of the orders under the red seal of this State, addressed to the officers of Terai between the Rivers Gunduk and Rapti, for the surrender of that Terai, and their retiring from thence, which was given to you at Thankote, according to your request, and which you have now returned for my satisfaction.

Substance of a Document under the Red Seal, received from the
Durbar, on December 11, 1816

With regard to friendship and amity, the Government of Nipal agrees to the tenor of the document under date the 8^th of December 1816 or 4^th Poos 1873 Sumbat which was received by the Durbar from the Honourable Edward Gardner on the part of the Honourable Company, respecting the revertance of the Terai between the Rivers Coosa and Rapti to the former southern boundary, such as appertained to Nipal previous to the war, with exception of the disputed lands.

Dated the 7^th of Poos 1873 Sumbat

Treaty with Nipal—November 1, 1860

DURING the disturbances which followed the mutiny of the Native army of Bengal in 1857, the Maharajah of Nipal not only faithfully maintained the relations of peace and friendship established between the British Government and the State of Nipal by the Treaty of Segowlee, but freely placed troops at the disposal of the British authorities for the preservation of order in the Frontier Districts, and subsequently sent a force to co-operate with the British Army in the recapture of Lucknow and the final defeat of the rebels. On the conclusion of these operations, the Viceroy and Governor-General in recognition of the eminent services rendered to the British Government by the State of Nipal, declared his intention to restore to the Maharajah the whole of the low lands lying between the River Kali and the District of Gorukpore, which belonged to the State of Nipal in 1815, and were ceded to the British Government in that year by the aforesaid Treaty. These lands have now been identified by Commissioners appointed for the purpose by the British Government, in the presence of Commissioners deputed by the Nipal Darbar; masonry pillars have been erected to mark the future boundary of the two States, and the territory has been formally delivered over to the Nipalese Authorities. In order the more firmly to secure the State of Nipal in the perpetual possession of this territory, and to mark in a solemn way the occasion of its restoration, the following Treaty has been concluded between the two States:

Article 1^st

All Treaties and Engagements now in force between the British Government and the Maharajah of Nipal, except in so far as they may be altered by this Treaty, are hereby confirmed.

Article 2^nd

The British Government hereby bestows on the Maharajah of Nipal in full sovereignty, the whole of the lowlands between the Rivers Kali and Raptee, and the whole of the lowlands lying between the River Raptee and the District of Gorukpore, which were in the possession of the Nipal State in the year 1815, and were ceded to the British Government by Article III of the Treaty concluded at Segowlee on the 2^nd of December in that year.

Article 3^rd

The boundary line surveyed by the British Commissioners appointed for the purpose extending eastward from the River Kali or Sardah to the foot of the hills north of Bagowra Tal, and marked by pillars, shall henceforth be the boundary between the British Province of Oudh and the Territories of the Maharajah of Nipal.

This Treaty, signed by lieutenant-Colonel George Ramsay, on the part of his excellency the Right Honourable Charles John, Earl Canning, G.C.B, Viceroy and Governor-General of India, and by Maharaja Jung Bahadur Rana, G.C.B., on the part of Maharajah Dheraj Soorinder Vikram Sah Bahadoor Shumshere Jung, shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall be exchanged at Kathmandoo within thirty days of the date of signature.

SIGNED and sealed at Kathmandoo, this first day of November, A.D., one thousand eight hundred and sixty corresponding to the third day of Kartik Budee, Sumbut nineteen hundred and seventeen.

G. RAMSAY, LIEUT. COL
Resident at Nipal
CANNING
Viceroy and Governor-General

This Treaty was ratified by His Excellency the Governor-General, at Calcutta, on the 15^th of November, 1860.

A.R.YOUNG
Deputy Secretary to the Government of India

Source: www.nepalicongress.org.np

Greater Nepal is not impossible! or Possible!  

Phanindra Nepal, Lecturer Patan Multiple Campus

 

He is at the moment a Lecturer at the Patan Multiple Campus in Lalitpur, Nepal.

He is considered to be a reservoir of knowledge and a commanding authority as regards the “Greater Nepal” theory to which he prefers to call a Movement.

 

Mr. Phanindra Nepal is working as a secretary to the Border Concern Civil Forum. Mr. Nepal is concurrently the chairman of “Unified Nepal National Front” as well.

He has several books to his credit and many thought provoking articles which have been published in several national and international newspapers.

 

He is also the author of books entitled “The ABC of Greater Nepal” and “Nepal-Tista to Sutlej”. He has also edited a book on “The reality of Indian encroachment in Susta”.

Last week, we met this nationalist at a seminar and approached for an interview to which he readily agreed-Below the results-ed.

 

TGQ1: How you Mr. Nepal have been assessing the overall political events unfolding in the country more so after the September Kathmandu explosions? Who could have been behind such blasts? The Terai outfits? The Maoists? Or some unknown groups? Your comments please!

Mr. Nepal: There could be no second opinion that the incidents were inhumane however, the Nepali experience of last decade(s) suggest that it is not that we should take them very seriously but the motive with which the explosions have been carried out must be mulled over seriously. To add, in the aftermath, the two Terai outfits had already taken the responsibility, however, the war of words between the Maoists and the Nepal Army alleging each other for their involvement in the incident suggest that the conflict may entangle further in the days ahead. And it cannot be out rightly negated that if the problem persists for long it may have some negative impact on the Nepali politics as well.

However, I suspect RAW behind this heinous act as it has the majority or better say an overwhelming say in the Nepali politics. It is also known to all that it is only India and India alone that benefits more by keeping Nepali politics in a fluid/fragile and unstable state. And as politics continue to be fluid and unstable, economic activities cannot take its desired course thus the country becomes poorer and poorer. The result is thus what India desires from Nepal.

It is also likely that forces who do not want CA polls in November this year may be behind the explosions. And the reason behind the Terai Groups claiming the responsibility could have been a ploy to provoke the Pahade people to attack the Terai people in Nepal, finally, paving way for India to send its army in Nepal in the name of protecting the Indian migrant community here. This also proves why India has deployed a huge contingent of security personnel along the Indo-Nepal border of late. It is comprehendible why the deployment is not merely to curb terrorist activities but instead India needs as well some plausible reasons such as to protect its citizens in Nepal and thus that would be the mere pretext to enter into the Nepali Territory.

As yet it is only due to the tolerance and intelligence exhibited by the Pahade community living in the Terai, such Indian designs has been averted.

Nevertheless, what Nepal could do is to control the Nepal-India border to stop the arms trade, the arms that are being used against the Pahade community.

 

TGQ2: As we understand, you had been advocating the theory of “Greater Nepal” for long time in the past? Has the theory died a premature death or you continue in your initiatives for the same? What sort of response you received from the Nepali intellectuals during your campaign? And also tell us what was the response from the other camp?

Mr. Nepal: My association with the “Greater Nepal” movement is more than a decade and a half long. I can tell you that “Greater Nepal” was not a matter of discussion in the past, now it has become a major issue in the country’s national level politics- inviting various levels of serious discussions in the Nepali academic sector and beyond. Thus there is no point in saying that the theory has died a premature death. And this issue will continue to survive as long as Nepal does not get its lost territory back-lost because of the Sugauli Treaty.

I can also assure you that the Nepali politics that is presently divided in various fronts will one day be united in favor of “Greater Nepal”. It is also true that each and every Nepali share the pain deep inside their hearts because of the Sugauli Treaty. This pain will continue until we get our deserved rights back. And “Greater Nepal” is the objective of my life and I hope that it will come true during my life time itself if the nationalists co-operate me in my endeavor.

We are trying to move ahead with the motive of transforming the demand for “Greater Nepal” into a movement. In the process, various types of comments have come up, both positive and negative. Some say that India will never give our territories back but I question unless we formally demand how can they give us? It is said that unless an infant cries even the mother sometimes forgets to give the milk her own child.

Talking of our intellectuals now, they are more content with the party tags they shoulder. It is a matter of shame that intellectuals here toe a party demand, thus the movement for “Greater Nepal” does not, let me admit, at present suit to any party line. Just think, our leaders who even do not impart a single word in protest against continuous land encroachment by the Indian side, how would they demand the return of our illegally occupied lands by the Indian side? And the so called intellectuals would also not dare to cross the party line but recently some independent thinkers have come up in support of our movement. A great encouragement for us indeed!

It is for sure that the Indian side fears the movement for “Greater Nepal” originating from the Nepali soil. This has indeed become a matter of headache from them. They fear one day this movement may drag international attention which it would ultimately. If we get our lost territories back, Nepal’s eastern periphery can extend up to Bhutan and Bangladesh. This implies that the Indian controlled eastern states will finally detach themselves from the Indian Union-the colonial offshoot of British Raj. Thus the separatist groups waging movement for independence such as NAGA, ULFA, BODO and others in India could benefit from the movement of “Greater Nepal”.

Finally, India will have only one option left and that is to shape a treaty with Nepal to take Darjeeling in lease and Nepal in return could ask for extending its territory up to the Bangladeshi Border.

I now feel that the Eastern states in India are thus nearing their Independence.

 

TGQ3:  Media reports say that Indian side has been constantly encroaching upon our lands in different parts of the country. However, the political parties, radical communists included, do not utter a single word in favor of their own country? How you take their silence?

If so then, should we demand the outright abrogation of the Sugauli Treaty of 1815? Given the fact that India is expanding her territories by intruding our lands, would it be a befitting response to India if we talk of the abrogation of the Sugauli treaty?

Mr. Nepal: The frequent media reports that the Indian side is encroaching upon our land are not at all fabricated events. In reality, the Indian side has been exceeding all the limits and there is not a single adjoining district in Nepal that has not faced continues Indian encroachment, to say the least.

To boot, we have lost almost 372 Square Kilometers in Kalapani area where the Indian military has a camp since Indo-China war of 1962 wherein India embraced a shameful defeat. More over, our territorial claims reach up to 17 Kilometers far from Kalapani. Add to this, some 20, 000 BIGHAS( approximately 13,000 plus hectares in metric system) of Nepali lands have been currently under Indian occupation in SUSTA area in Nawalparasi district. The list might go long of such encroachments in different parts of this country.

More perplexing is the response from the Nepali side. More so, the silence exhibited by the political parties and the so-called Maoist revolutionaries’ included is indeed surprising. This surprising silence is more intriguing. For me, silence is a sign of agreement or acceptance. Thus, I am forced to conclude that they have provided their positive nod to this Indian act of threatening our sovereignty. Which is also a proof that India itself is not abiding by the clauses of the Sugauli Treaty thus there is no point that the Nepalese alone should go by the clauses of the treaty. Thus India reminds us time and again that the Sugauli treaty is no more valid as they continue to intrude our territory. 

In reality, the treaty became null and void right on 14^th August 1947. Had we been smart enough to get back the lands that we loosed through the treaty of Sugauli during the 14 to 15^th August, the entire lost lands of the Nepal would have been in our possession since then. But we failed. The fact is that from 14 till 18^th August, 1947, the lands which we lost under Sugauli treaty could have been secured. To be precise, Darjeeling was under the command of Pakistan and a Pakistani flag was fluttering there till 18^th of August*. (Read Status of ceded land of Darjeeling and Leasehold of Kalingpong by Rukesh Mani Pradhan) For the Pakistanis, they took over Darjeeling for it was an area that was adjoining East Pakistan then. But India became suddenly sensitive to this Pakistani overtures and instantly took hold of Darjeeling forcibly in order to secure its attachment with the Northeast which incidentally adjoined East Pakistan then.

Though India commands authority in Darjeeling in the East and Kumaon Garhwal in the West, however, the right of Nepal to claim these lands remains sovereign and valid till to date. Nepal, logically, can even now demand those lands from India. To me India which believes in expansionism and the one who enjoys sadistic pleasure in grabbing others’ property and money are similar both in content and nature.

 

TGQ4: Many academics in Kathmandu see the influence of India in our internal affairs and that too in a brazen manner.

Do you see such influence in Nepali politics by India or it is just a rumor only? If yes, then why India is dictating its terms and conditions on practically each and every political issues? Is our leadership that weak not to withstand the extraneous pressures? Your comments please.

Mr. Nepal: There is not only the Indian influence in Nepali politics but there is clearly an intervening Indian role in our internal matters. It is not just a matter of gossip but not to say so would be improper in effect.

Recently, the Indian ambassador to Nepal Shiva Shankar Mukherjee celebrating the Indian Independence day in Kathmandu said that “November 22 CA elections” must be conducted at any cost. Similarly, in 1992 the arrival of Chandra Shekhar and his remarks made at Ganeshman’s residence about King Birendra heralded a new era for India’s naked intervention in Nepali politics which continues even to day which is there for all to see.

Indians want those political parties in Nepal to succeed that serve well their objective to impose their directives frequently through their handpicked political men.

In reality, the Indians act as a mentor and thus reprimand our leaders and our leaders consider themselves fortunate to be their slaves.

The Indian mindset is such that they consider it their inherent right to interfere into our internal matters and this has become possible only because our leadership readily accepts such interference. Some times I also feel that India is not to be totally blamed. We have several examples of our own leadership publicly admitting their Indian lenience. Therefore, our politics is much weaker than our own perception. There is no National Agenda and Rigidity over any issue that warrants national attention. They are merely pawns at the hands of foreigners. Until and unless we have leadership a la “Mir Jaffar and Lendhup Dorje”, Nepal will remain ever as an Indian colony or at best a Protectorate.

We need such leadership that is more responsible to its own citizen and the country. Nepalese leadership should fear the wrath of its own citizen rather than fearing India.

Unless our leadership gets rid of the mindset that without India’s blessings they cannot acquire influential positions in Nepal, the Indian will continue to influence, interfere and intervene into our politics.

 

TGQ5: After the restoration of parliament by the King, what prompted the Seven Party Alliance along with the Maoists to bring in the new citizenship bill?

Mr. Nepal: For me it was a move to threaten the very sovereignty of Nepal as a nation state as a whole. As the restored parliament passed the citizenship act the provision for granting citizenship to any one born in Nepal was accepted thus India benefited the most which meant that India gained through its citizen’s acquiring Nepalese citizenship. In a few years time the situation will be such that the population of the Nepali of Nepali origin will be dominated by the Nepali of the Indian origin, thus real Nepalese will be in minority in their own homeland. Which also implies that now on the Indian Immigrants who now have the Nepali citizenship could influence greater say in Nepali politics. Finally, the Indian design of seeing Nepal becoming Bhutan first and Sikkim later is taking a formal shape.

And I also foresee a final standoff between the Indian migrants and the real Nepali population in Nepal very soon. Thus, to save our independence we must fight.

* Pakistan's flag fluttered in Darjeeling at the "Planter's Club" presently a hospital

2007-09-12 10:50:47

 

 

 

Historical shape and boundries of Nepal

What is Sugauli Treaty ?*

 

Buddhi Narayan Shrestha**

 

1.                  Background:

The border treaty signed between the then government of East India Company and Nepal on March 4, 1816 is known as the Sugauli Treaty. The result of the treaty was that Nepal lost almost one-third of its territory on the east, south and west. Students of history know it well why and how the treaty took place. But it would be beneficial for others as well to know the historical background of the country. Late King Prithvi Narayan Shah unified the small fiefdoms / principalities and created a big and powerful Nepal. His descendents continued with the unification and expansion of the country. The East India Company government could not bear Nepal spreading out and becoming stronger. So, they resorted to trickery and deceit in the battles of Nalapani, Jaithak and Makawanpur to defeat the Gorkhalis and forced Nepal to counter-sign in the Sugauli Treaty.

 

2.                  Unequal Treaty:

Sugauli Treaty is known as an unequal treaty. Because any treaty is meant to give both the sides more or less equal or equitable benefits even if one side get a little more benefit and the other a little less. But Nepal suffered only losses because of the treaty while the British India gained a huge territorial advantage. The British got the facilities of corridor in the east and in the west, also it got all the facilities and benefits. No provision of facility and concession was made for Nepal. The territory of Nepal that had been unified and expanded to Teesta in the east, Kangara Fort in the West and nearly to the confluence of Ganga and Jamuna in the south, was curbed on all the three sides. So far as the international treaty is concerned, any treaty should be done on the basis of equality, mutual goodwill and understanding, but the British forced Nepal into the treaty under compulsion and duress. Therefore, experts on international treaty view that Nepal may not be forced to recognize the Sugauli treaty as a sound treaty.

 

3.            Sugauli Treaty was not signed willingly by Nepal:

1.      The British East India Company prepared the draft of the treaty with the signature of Lieutenant Colonel Paris Bradshaw on December 2, 1815. It was sent to Nepal with a 15-day ultimatum for counter-signature and asked to return it to them. Nepal did not like the terms and conditions of the treaty, so it did not sign within that period. The British then spread rumour that they were launching attack on the capital, Kathmandu, and even carried out troop movement to show Nepal that it was serious. When Nepal thought that the attack on the capital was inevitable, it was forced to accept the treaty.

2.      As it was a treaty imposed on Nepal, the King and high ranking officials did not want to sign it. But as Nepal was under duress to accept its terms, Chandrashekhar Upadhyaya, who had accompanied Pandit Gajaraj Mishra to the British camp at Sugauli, put his signature on March 4, 1816 and gave it to them.

3.      As Nepal had signed the treaty under coercion after 93 days against the 15-day ultimatum, the treaty came into effect from that day.

 

4.            Validity of the treaty:

1.      Article 9 of the treaty says that the treaty shall be approved by the King of Nepal, but there is no record of the treaty being approved by King Girwana Yuddha Bikram Shah.

2.      The British had feared that Nepal might not implement the treaty signed on March 4, 1816 by Chandrashekhar Upadhyaya. Therefore, Governor General David Octerloni, on behalf of the British Government, ratified the treaty the same day and the counterpart treaty was handed over to Upadhyaya.

In this way, the treaty, which was signed by Chandrashekhar Upadhyaya for Nepal and by Parish Bradshaw for the Company Government, was approved only by Governor General Octerloni. As the treaty was not approved by the King of Nepal, there can be question and curiosity on the legality of the treaty.

 

5.      Effect of the treaty on Nepal:

         There are both direct and indirect consequences of the treaty on Nepal

         1.   Direct consequences:

                                 i.      Before the treaty, the border of Nepal was extended from Teesta in the east to Kangara Fort in the west. The east-west length of Nepal was 1,415 kilometres and the total area was 267,575 square kilometers. Similarly, the distance from Teesta to Sutlej was 1,373 and the area was 204,917 square kilometers.

                               ii.      But the treaty reduced the average east-west length to 885 kilometres and the total area of Nepal is confined to 147,181 square kilometers between the Mechi and the Mahakali Rivers.

                              iii.      This way the treaty cut-off the wings on the east and west and receded its area on the south, losing almost one-third of its total area.

                             iv.      Nepal was forced to give up not only its western front but also the Mechi to Teesta area on the east, where there was no war. In the treaty, it was mentioned that the aforesaid territory shall be evacuated by the Gorkha troops within 40 days from this date.

                               v.      What was more spiteful of the British was that it entered into Titaliya Treaty with Sikkim on February 10, 1817 (11 months after Sugauli Treaty), and gave the land it had snatched away from Nepal to Sikkim.

 

Read full Report by Buddhi Narayan Shrestha.

go to website....

http://www.geocities.com/sugaulitreaty/nepal

 

Greater नेपाल मोभमेन्त के हो?

Greater nepal मोभमेन्त भनेको - nepal को ईतिहासमा सुगौली सनधी मार्च ४, १८१६ मा हुनु भन्दा पहिला nepal को सीमना पूर्वमा टिस्ता नदी र पछचिममा सुत्लेज नदी समम थियो। यो सुगौली सनधी नेपाल र ब्रिटिश(अङ्रेज) बिच भएको थियो तर ब्रिटिश ले ईन्डिया छोडदा, सनधी पनि खारेज (रददा) हुन्थ्यो, तर नत ब्रिटिश ले दिए, नत ईन्डिया ले दिए, नत नेपाल भरस्तचार राजनैतीक पार्टीहरुले माग गरे। तर अब नेपाली हरु सचेत हुँदै गये कुरा भुझदै गये। Greater नेपाल मोभमेन्ट को माग भारत लाई हो... पहिलको nepal को सीमना हरु ईन्डिया ले nepal लाई फिर्ता गर्नु हो। यो पोस्सिब्ले छ, यो सजिलो छैन। यो नसकिने चै होइन।