Jump to content

Treaty of Chushul

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Treaty of Chushul
Treaty of Chushul (1842)
Signed17 September 1842 (Assuj 2, 1889 B.S.)
LocationLadakh
Effective17 September 1842
Full text
Treaty of ChushulatWikisource

TheTreaty of Chushul,[1]or theDogra–Tibetan Treaty of 1842,[2] was apeace treatysigned between theTibetan governmentofGanden Phodrang(then aprotectorateofQing China) and theDograrajaGulab SinghofJammu,under thesuzeraintyof theSikh Empire,following theDogra–Tibetan war(1841-1842). It was signed inLehin September 1842 restoring thestatus quo ante bellum,[3]and for respecting the "old established frontiers" betweenLadakhandTibet.[4]The treaty is often referred to as the "Treaty of Chushul", perhaps in recognition of the last battle of the war which took place nearChushul.

History[edit]

The able Dogra generalZorawar Singh Kahluria,who, after the conquest ofLadakh,attempted to extend its boundaries in order to control thetrade routesinto Ladakh under the leadership ofGulab Singh,theRajaofJammu.Even though Zorawar Singh's campaign to westernTibetsaw some initial successes and temporally occupied parts of Tibet, the campaign suffered a major defeat atTaklakot(Purang) and Zorawar Singh was killed. The Tibetan forces then advanced on Ladakh, but were subsequently defeated by the Dogra forces nearChushulin 1842 after Dogra reinforcements arrived fromJammu.At this time both sides decided to negotiate in order to end theDogra–Tibetan war(also known as the Sino-Sikh war).

On 17 September 1842, the Treaty of Chushul was agreed inLehbetween the Dogras and the Tibetans, executed by an exchange of notes which embodied the duties given to each other by both parties. Thus, the Tibetan and Chinese authorities assumed the responsibility of theKashmirgovernment, and the Tibetan government undoubtedly assumed the responsibility of the Kashmir government. TheTibetannote, incorporating the concessions made by the Dogras, was handed to Gulab Singh's representatives. ThePersiannote, describing the Tibetan concessions, was presented to the Tibetan officials.[5]Three versions of the treaty, including a Tibetan-language treaty in the possession of the Kashmir Government, a Persian-language treaty in the possession of theLhasaauthorities, and a treaty document obtained by the agents of the Raja ofBushahr,basically matched with each another even though they had some textural variations.[6]

This treaty was signed within three weeks of the capitulation of the army of theQing dynastyatNanking(Nanjing) and the signing of theTreaty of Nankingon 29 August 1842 which ended theFirst Opium War.The First Opium War (1839–1842) was fought between theBritish Empireand the Qing dynasty of China, and the British defeated the Chinese by 1842 using technologically superior ships and weapons. The Qing dynasty, as the suzerain of Tibet, was apparently unable to conduct atwo-front warat this time.[7]But the agreement reached in September 1842 brought Zorawar Singh's ill-fated yet ambitious Dogra adventure into western Tibet to an abrupt end.[6]Although the Dogras tried to appeal to the British for help during the Dogra–Tibetan war, the parties who fought the war reached the agreement and signed the treaty without any British involvement.[8]

The resulting Treaty of Chushul was a simple document with three articles that restored thestatus quo ante;only the second article stating that "in conformity with ancient usage, Tea and Pashm shall be transmitted by the Ladakh road" could be excepted because it was supposed to give Gulab Singh a monopoly of the shawl wool export trade, the main objective of his campaign in western Tibet.[8]The terms were also summarised in theLadakh Chroniclesas follows. Tibet recognised that Ladakh was annexed to theSikh Empire,and the Sikh Empire relinquished the ancient Ladakhi claim to western Tibet. Both the sides would remain within their own territories. BiennialLopchak missionswould go on as before. Ladakhi merchants would be allowed to travel toRudok,Gartokand other places in Tibet and the Tibetan merchants fromChangtangwould be allowed to go to Ladakh.[9]

The texts of the notes also stated that the "old, established frontiers" between Ladakh and Tibet would be respected, although the texts did not specify their alignment.[10]The Ladakhi king and queen were to be allowed to live in Ladakh peacefully, and it is the Ladakhi king that would send the biennial Lopchak missions to Lhasa rather than the Dogra regime. All trade between the two regions was to be conducted according to "old, established custom".[4]According to some sources, since the treaty between Gulab Singh and the Tibetans did not bind the former's suzerain, a supplementary treaty with similar provisions was concluded between the Governor of Kashmir (representing the Sikh Empire inLahore) and officials from Lhasa in the name of their suzerain, theEmperor of China.[4][neutralityisdisputed]

TheBritish defeat of the Sikhs in 1846resulted in the transfer of theJammu and Kashmirregion including Ladakh to the British, who then installed Gulab Singh as theMaharajaunder their suzerainty. In March 1856, apeace treatybetween the Tibetans and theKingdom of Nepal,known as theTreaty of Thapathali,was signed inNepalfollowing theNepal–Tibet War (1855–1856),with the approval of the ChineseAmban.[11]Clause 4 of the treaty freed the remaining Sikh prisoners-of-war still held in Tibetan captivity whom were captured in 1841.[12]This clause was included in the treaty at the behest of Gulab Singh of Kashmir to free the remaining prisoners.[13]

No text appears to have been officially transmitted to the British during the time when the Treaty of Chushul was signed, although the Raja of Bushahr received a version of it. The British did not receive the official text of the treaty until 1889, when the situation on the Sikkim-Tibet border prompted them to closely study the relations between the protectorates and Tibet. CaptainHenry Ramsay,the British Joint Commissioner at Leh, then drew up a document whose terms were essentially the same as those of the ruler of Bashahr, although they seemed to indicate a greater degree of Tibetan influence in Ladakh affairs than the British Indian government had suspected. Before 1900, the British Indian government had not yet decided whether this treaty in any way affected its position vis-à-vis the supremacy of Kashmir.[8][14]

Sino-Indian border dispute[edit]

The Treaty of Chushul came into discussion in the 1960s in the context of theSino-Indian border dispute.The government ofIndiaused the treaty to counter the Chinese contention that the border between Ladakh and Tibet had never been delimited. The Indian position was that the reference to "old, established frontiers" meant that the border had been delimited. The Chinese argued that, even if it had been delimited, there is no guarantee that it was the same as the Indian claimed boundary.[15]It appeared that the British did not consider the Treaty of Chushul a boundary treaty that defined the border of Ladakh in the 19th century, because they started asking China to start negotiations to determine the border as soon as they added thestate of Jammu and Kashmirtotheir empirein 1846. However, they later gave up because Qing China did not respond to the request for reasons of its own.[16]

According to the Indian government, Tibet signed the treaty with Ladakh in 1842 which it considered a boundary treaty, suggesting that the Chinese government previously recognized Tibet's right to conduct foreign relations alone and deal with its own border issues. On the other hand, the government ofChinaacknowledged the existence of the 1842 Treaty of Chushul, but said China had not actually authorised Tibet to sign a border treaty with another country. The Indian government responded that China was involved in the signing of the treaty because the 1842 treaty "was signed by representatives of both theDalai Lamaand theEmperor of China".Although the argument appears to have shown that the Chinese government" signed "the 1842 treaty and allowed Tibet to participate in it in the presence of Chinese representatives, China believed that it was not at all a proof that China had delegated Tibet a general power to independently conclude border agreements with neighbouring countries.[17]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Malhotra, Red Fear (2020),pp. 68–69;Gardner, The Frontier Complex (2021),p. 92; Cai, Congyan; Rasilla, Ignacio de la (2024).The Cambridge Handbook of China and International Law.Cambridge University Press. p. 945.ISBN9781009050418.; Guo, Rong xing (2015).China's Regional Development and Tibet.Springer. p. 5.ISBN978-981-287-958-5.
  2. ^ Fisher, Rose & Huttenback, Himalayan Battleground (1963),p. 61; Choudhury, Trade and Politics in the Himalaya-Karakoram Borderlands (1996),p. 30; Marshall, Julie (2004),Britain and Tibet 1765–1947,Routledge, p. 568,ISBN9781134327850
  3. ^Huttenback, Gulab Singh (1961),p. 487.
  4. ^abcFisher, Rose & Huttenback, Himalayan Battleground (1963),p. 56.
  5. ^Fisher, Rose & Huttenback, Himalayan Battleground (1963),pp. 55–56.
  6. ^abRaghav Sharan Sharma (2017).The Unfought War of 1962: An Appraisal.Taylor & Francis. p. 242.ISBN9781351056366.
  7. ^Malhotra, Red Fear (2020),pp. 68–69.
  8. ^abcLamb, British India and Tibet (2018),pp. 103–105.
  9. ^Fisher, Rose & Huttenback, Himalayan Battleground (1963),p. 55.
  10. ^Willem Frederik Eekelen (2013).Indian Foreign Policy and the Border Dispute with China.Springer Netherlands. p. 165.ISBN9789401765558.
  11. ^Nepal: Strategy for Survival.University of California Press. 2023. p. 117.RetrievedAugust 26,2023.
  12. ^"Treaty Between Nepal and Tibet, March 1856".Political Treaties of Tibet (821 to 1951)(PDF).Department of Information & International Relations (DIIR) - Central Tibetan Administration. 1990.4. Chouthon Kura (Article Four): The Government of Gorkha is to withdraw its troops from the occupied territories of Kuti and Kerong and Jhung and return to the Tibetans the sepoys, sheep, and yaks captured during the war, when the conditions of the treaty were fulfilled. The Tibetans, in return, are also to give back to the Gorkhali cannons and also the Sikh prisoners-of war who had been captured in 1841 in the war between Bhot and the Dogra ruler.
  13. ^McKay, Alex (2003).Tibet and Her Neighbours: A History.Edition Hansjörg Mayer. p. 139.ISBN9783883757186.
  14. ^Routledge Library Editions: Tibet.Taylor & Francis. 2021. p. 56.ISBN9780429806100.
  15. ^Ahmad, Tibet and Ladakh (1963),pp. 55–56.
  16. ^Noorani, India–China Boundary Problem (2010),p. 180.
  17. ^Byron N. Tzou (1990).China and International Law: The Boundary Disputes.ABC-CLIO. p. 94.ISBN9781573569415.

Bibliography[edit]


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Treaty_of_Chushul&oldid=1231175678"