Revolutions and counter revolutions in Nepal
Yuba Nath Lamsal
Revolution is a festival and counter revolution is a funeral for radical and revolutionary people anywhere in the world. Revolution is a rupture from the old system for which all accepted rules and norms are to be violated to spearhead revolution. But counter revolutionaries dub it as a criminal act and terror and use every possible means to suppress the revolution. The history of modern political development is thus a history of revolution and counter revolution. Nepal’s chequered history, too, is characterized by the long struggle of revolutionaries and counter revolutionaries.
Revolution is a festival and counter revolution is a funeral for radical and revolutionary people anywhere in the world. Revolution is a rupture from the old system for which all accepted rules and norms are to be violated to spearhead revolution. But counter revolutionaries dub it as a criminal act and terror and use every possible means to suppress the revolution. The history of modern political development is thus a history of revolution and counter revolution. Nepal’s chequered history, too, is characterized by the long struggle of revolutionaries and counter revolutionaries.
Although Nepal’s history goes long back to prehistoric era,
the real political history begins with the unification process initiated during
the time of Shah king Prithivi Narayan Shah. In the short history of
little less than 250 year since mid 18th century, Nepal has seen and experienced many erratic political developments, tumults and turbulences at different intervals of Nepal’s rough and tumbled
history marked by internal feuds and intrigues, killings and conspiracies often between the groups and factions inside the Royal Palace and the corridor of power.
little less than 250 year since mid 18th century, Nepal has seen and experienced many erratic political developments, tumults and turbulences at different intervals of Nepal’s rough and tumbled
history marked by internal feuds and intrigues, killings and conspiracies often between the groups and factions inside the Royal Palace and the corridor of power.
The concept of nation state had not evolved and was only in
the process of germination. The power was in the hands of the monarch and used
to be exercised by the king’s kin and loyalists. During those
early days after Nepal’s unification, Nepal’s power and politics were virtually under control of three families—Shah, Thapa and Pandey. Since Shahs were in the center of power as kings belonged to this
clan, the palace tried to balance these two family groups often propping one against the other in order to maintain their supremacy in power. This palace maneuvering turned nasty for the personal gains due to conflict between the royalties, which was reflected in administrative and military structure and psychology, too. This gave rise to a height of conspiracy in political corridor of Nepal that culminated in Kot Massacre and paved the way for Jang Bahadur Rana to rise in power and Rana’s family rule in Nepal.
During the period of heightened internal feud, several noted personalities including Bhimsen Thapa, Mathbar Singh Thapa, Damodar Pandey were killed, several jailed or sent on exile. This period
proved to be a costly for Nepal’s political development and institutionalization of political system. The internal feud and fight put a brake on the unification process of Nepal, on the one hand and
also paved a ground for external interference of Nepal, on the other. This was also reflected in the Anglo-Nepal war of 1814-16 as one group was in favor of pursing the war, while other suggested to give in to the British and live in peace even by relinquishing some of Nepal’s territories to the expansionist British imperial power. Nepal’s house was divided over the issue of war that naturally had psychological
impact on the morale of Nepal’s fighting force. Even during the time of Sugauli Treaty that ended the war, there was distinctly two sets of opinion in Nepal. One group advocated only temporary truce with the British and wanted to re-launch offensive against the British once rainy season would begin hoping that the unfavorable season would give upper hand to the Gorkha soldiers. Amidst feud and fight, the principal power in Kathmandu chose to sign a peace deal with the British by ceding a sizable chunk of Nepal’s territory to the British rulers. And this is how the Sugauli Treaty was concluded.
The Sugauli Treaty was Nepal’s roll back from its expansionist and unification campaign. This is perhaps the biggest national humiliation in the history of Nepal that gave further factional feud and conspiracy in
the royal court of Nepal. Out of the conspiracy and factional feud in the palace and low morale of the people, Jang Bahadur rose to power through the Kot Parva that changed the course of Nepal’s politics. The Kot Parva was, in modern political lexicon or interpretation, a counter revolution. The unification campaign and war with the imperial power were historic necessity, which, in other words, can be called
revolutionary initiatives. The Sugauli Treaty and Kot Parva marked a roll back from these historic initiatives and campaigns. Thus, Kot Parva was a kind of counter revolution that tried to turn the clock of
history backward.
Rana regime was a family oligarchy in which power was concentrated in the limited people even within the ruling clan. Ranas who were not close relatives or loyalist to the person in power were spared to enjoy the fruit of power. There was great deal of disgruntlement among general citizenry against the Ranas and even the Ranas who were not close to the Prime Ministers, were also not happy with the
system. Jang Bahadur developed a system of class in the Rana clan and only the A class Ranas were privileged to enjoy and exercise power. B and C class Ranas were denied of the ruling privileges, who later joined with the general people against the Rana system. Mahabir Sumsher and Subarana Sumsher alike belong to this rebel group of Rana members, who formed a party in exile ( India) to launch movement against the family oligarchy, which was later merged with the party of BP Koirala to create the Nepali Congress. From political point of view, Rana period was a national humiliation and a period of political repression.
early days after Nepal’s unification, Nepal’s power and politics were virtually under control of three families—Shah, Thapa and Pandey. Since Shahs were in the center of power as kings belonged to this
clan, the palace tried to balance these two family groups often propping one against the other in order to maintain their supremacy in power. This palace maneuvering turned nasty for the personal gains due to conflict between the royalties, which was reflected in administrative and military structure and psychology, too. This gave rise to a height of conspiracy in political corridor of Nepal that culminated in Kot Massacre and paved the way for Jang Bahadur Rana to rise in power and Rana’s family rule in Nepal.
During the period of heightened internal feud, several noted personalities including Bhimsen Thapa, Mathbar Singh Thapa, Damodar Pandey were killed, several jailed or sent on exile. This period
proved to be a costly for Nepal’s political development and institutionalization of political system. The internal feud and fight put a brake on the unification process of Nepal, on the one hand and
also paved a ground for external interference of Nepal, on the other. This was also reflected in the Anglo-Nepal war of 1814-16 as one group was in favor of pursing the war, while other suggested to give in to the British and live in peace even by relinquishing some of Nepal’s territories to the expansionist British imperial power. Nepal’s house was divided over the issue of war that naturally had psychological
impact on the morale of Nepal’s fighting force. Even during the time of Sugauli Treaty that ended the war, there was distinctly two sets of opinion in Nepal. One group advocated only temporary truce with the British and wanted to re-launch offensive against the British once rainy season would begin hoping that the unfavorable season would give upper hand to the Gorkha soldiers. Amidst feud and fight, the principal power in Kathmandu chose to sign a peace deal with the British by ceding a sizable chunk of Nepal’s territory to the British rulers. And this is how the Sugauli Treaty was concluded.
The Sugauli Treaty was Nepal’s roll back from its expansionist and unification campaign. This is perhaps the biggest national humiliation in the history of Nepal that gave further factional feud and conspiracy in
the royal court of Nepal. Out of the conspiracy and factional feud in the palace and low morale of the people, Jang Bahadur rose to power through the Kot Parva that changed the course of Nepal’s politics. The Kot Parva was, in modern political lexicon or interpretation, a counter revolution. The unification campaign and war with the imperial power were historic necessity, which, in other words, can be called
revolutionary initiatives. The Sugauli Treaty and Kot Parva marked a roll back from these historic initiatives and campaigns. Thus, Kot Parva was a kind of counter revolution that tried to turn the clock of
history backward.
Rana regime was a family oligarchy in which power was concentrated in the limited people even within the ruling clan. Ranas who were not close relatives or loyalist to the person in power were spared to enjoy the fruit of power. There was great deal of disgruntlement among general citizenry against the Ranas and even the Ranas who were not close to the Prime Ministers, were also not happy with the
system. Jang Bahadur developed a system of class in the Rana clan and only the A class Ranas were privileged to enjoy and exercise power. B and C class Ranas were denied of the ruling privileges, who later joined with the general people against the Rana system. Mahabir Sumsher and Subarana Sumsher alike belong to this rebel group of Rana members, who formed a party in exile ( India) to launch movement against the family oligarchy, which was later merged with the party of BP Koirala to create the Nepali Congress. From political point of view, Rana period was a national humiliation and a period of political repression.
Ranas were, rightly or wrongly, of the view that their hold
on power would be ensured with support from the British colonial rulers in
India. The British withdrawal from India in 1947 came as a shock to Rana who
thought that their days were numbered unless they took some alternative
approach to appease the new government in Independent India. In the meantime
the democratic movement in Nepal had been slowly picking up momentum. Contrary
to efforts made by the Rana rulers
to garner support of the Independent India for their despotic regime, the Indian politicians openly sided with the people of Nepal and extended their moral and material support to Nepali people in the
movement for democracy. Around that time or in 1949, China was also liberated and People’s Republic of China was established through a revolution under the banner of Communist Party of China led by Mao Zedong.
Encouraged and inspired by new political developments in both the neighbors—India and China, Nepali people rose for their rights and democracy that culminated in 1951 by overthrowing the century old
Rana’s family oligarchy and establishing multi-party democracy with people’s civil and political rights. This event marked an end of one chapter of Nepal’s political history and heralded a new era of
democratic dispensation.
The 1951 political change was definitely a revolution, perhaps, first of its kind in the history of Nepal. This political change opened new avenues and opportunities in the political arena and other sectors.
This also marked a new era in Nepal’s foreign policy. With the establishment of democratic dispensation, Nepal made a break from its India-centric foreign policy and started diversifying international relation and foreign policy. From every point of view, the 1951 revolution was a point of departure for Nepal’s democratic development.
to garner support of the Independent India for their despotic regime, the Indian politicians openly sided with the people of Nepal and extended their moral and material support to Nepali people in the
movement for democracy. Around that time or in 1949, China was also liberated and People’s Republic of China was established through a revolution under the banner of Communist Party of China led by Mao Zedong.
Encouraged and inspired by new political developments in both the neighbors—India and China, Nepali people rose for their rights and democracy that culminated in 1951 by overthrowing the century old
Rana’s family oligarchy and establishing multi-party democracy with people’s civil and political rights. This event marked an end of one chapter of Nepal’s political history and heralded a new era of
democratic dispensation.
The 1951 political change was definitely a revolution, perhaps, first of its kind in the history of Nepal. This political change opened new avenues and opportunities in the political arena and other sectors.
This also marked a new era in Nepal’s foreign policy. With the establishment of democratic dispensation, Nepal made a break from its India-centric foreign policy and started diversifying international relation and foreign policy. From every point of view, the 1951 revolution was a point of departure for Nepal’s democratic development.
Despite its far-reaching impact and importance, the
post-revolution developments were not encouraging and inspiring. Instead, the
period of one decade after the 1951 political change was marked by heighted
instability, uncertainty and political chaos due mainly to feudal intrigues and
ugly political maneuvering by the kings in collusion and collaboration with the
loyalists of deposed Rana rulers against the newly established dispensation and
the political actors. Following a long reactionary rehearsal of propping one
group against the other by the kings and their henchmen, a real drama was
staged in1960 by late king Mahendra in which the king dissolved the elected
government, put its prime minister behind bars and trampled democracy. This was
counter revolution that shocked and saddened democracy-loving people both at
home and abroad. As a result Nepal had to be under king’s absolute regime for
almost three decades.
But Nepalese people continuously revolted against this
counter revolution only to succeed in 1990 that restored the multi-party system
once again. However, the king’s adventure did not end even then and again
staged a coup in 2003 and imposed his direct rule in 2005. Despite multiple
tricks and tactics applied by the monarch to maintain his authoritarian regime,
people not only forced the king to bow down restoring the multi-party system
but also abolished the monarchy itself because by that time people had already
been convinced that democracy in Nepal would not take its root as long as
monarchy remained in place. Now we have republican democracy but it is still in
the process to be formally institutionalized in the absence of promulgation of
a new constitution. Even now monarchists and rightist reactionaries are trying
to revive their lost laurels under different ploys and pretexts. But the people
are aware and cautious that republican set up is here to stay forever and
people would not allow any kind of reactionary design to succeed.
Comments
Post a Comment