ovr.news

Archaeology, rediscovered knowledge, the past opening up

Nepal revisits 1923 treaty, reflects on independence

kathmandupost.com · 17 September 2026
Nepal revisits 1923 treaty, reflects on independence
Photo: kathmandupost.com

Summary and headline written by AI from the source article. How we work

In Nepal, Tika Prasad Dhakal edited a book collecting essays about the 1923 treaty between Nepal and Britain, prompting reflection on Nepal’s diplomatic history.

Dhakal began researching the treaty after noticing it received little attention in discussions of Nepali history, despite its importance in formally recognizing Nepal’s independence.

He and other scholars presented early versions of their research at a centenary conference in 2023, leading to the publication of ‘State and Craft: Readings on the 1923 Nepal-Britain Friendship Treaty.’ Dhakal argues the treaty’s first article, explicitly recognizing Nepal’s independence, was crucial given Britain’s global power at the time. He also notes the treaty helped shape international perceptions of Nepal, presenting it positively to Europe and the West.

The choice to name the treaty a “Treaty of Friendship” was deliberate, intended by Chandra Shumsher to establish an equal relationship after years of ambiguity following the Treaty of Sugauli. Dhakal believes Nepal can learn from this history, emphasizing the importance of institutionalized diplomacy, preserving options for maneuver, and maintaining strong relationships. He suggests focusing on continuous engagement and mutual trust in addressing ongoing issues with neighboring countries, rather than relying on temporary political gestures.

He also points out Britain supported Nepal’s application to join the United Nations in the 1950s, affirming Nepal’s independence on the international stage.

Was this worth your time?
Read on kathmandupost.com
Surfaced by the Discovery lens — one of the vital signs ovr.news reads.
How we evaluated this

More in Discovery

Browse all Discovery articles

What made it worth it?

What's wrong with this article?