The Sugauli Treaty and the Evolution of Nepal–India Boundary Politics

Abstract

The Treaty of Sugauli (1816) is the main legal document which had shaped the boundary between Nepal and India and has continued to shape the boundary issues of the present day and the political relations among the two countries and also the administration of the boundary. The article investigates the treaty not only as a historical treaty negotiated and signed following the Anglo-Nepalese War, but also as a living legal-political agreement whose meaning shifts with the evolution of the sovereignty systems, cartographic methods and geopolitical dynamics of the region. The study examines the primary provisions of the treaties, boundary notes from both the colonial and postcolonial periods, official maps, diplomatic communications and a sampling of secondary sources in a qualitative historical-legal fashion to explore the construction, contestation and reinterpretation of boundary politics between Nepal and India over time. The paper holds that the Sugauli Treaty adopted a ‘boundary principle' which had 'territorially consequential' ramifications, but was ‘interpretatively incomplete' in such a way that scope was left for future discussions on river courses, watersheds and the location of key frontier points like the Kalapani-Limpiyadhura-Lipulekh area. It also demonstrates the shift from purely cartographic issues of boundaries to the issues of nationalism, state legitimacy, strategic geography and cross-border governance. The study underscores the significance of treaty interpretation in the current diplomatic claims and border disputes. The article locates the treaty in the broader context of the history of Nepal–India relations, and engages the broader scholarship on international boundary-making, postcolonial interpretation of treaties, and Himalayan geopolitics. The study postulates a process of durable resolution of Nepal–India boundary problems not only through historical clarification but also through the political will, institutional discussion and mutual recognition of legal evidence and geopolitical sensitivities.