Rana Regime [ Nepalese History & Politics ]

Brief Answer Questions

1. Who was Junga Bahadur Rana?

Junga Bahadur Rana was the first Rana Prime Minister of Nepal, who seized power in 1846 through the Kot Massacre. He established the hereditary Rana regime, ruling as an autocrat and reducing the monarchy to a figurehead, marking the start of over a century of Rana dominance.

2. Rana rule is called ‘family rule’. Why?

Rana rule is called ‘family rule’ because the Rana family monopolized political power. The position of Prime Minister was hereditary, passed down within the family, and key government roles were reserved for Rana relatives, ensuring their control over Nepal’s administration.

3. What do you mean by Kotparva?

Kotparva, or the Kot Massacre, refers to the violent event in 1846 where Junga Bahadur Rana orchestrated the killing of numerous nobles and political rivals in the Kot (armory) in Kathmandu. This allowed him to eliminate opposition and establish the Rana regime.

4. Mention any two effects of the Suguali Treaty on Nepal.  

Territorial Loss: Nepal lost large territories, such as Kumaon, Garhwal, and parts of the Terai, to British India.  

British Influence: The treaty permitted a British Resident in Kathmandu, increasing British oversight of Nepal’s affairs.

5. During the time of which Prime Minister were the Sati System and slavery system abolished?

The Sati system was abolished under Prime Minister Chandra Shumsher Rana in 1920, while the slavery system was abolished under Prime Minister Junga Bahadur Rana in 1856.

Short Answer Questions

6. Describe how Junga Bahadur Rana rose to power.

Junga Bahadur Rana rose to power through strategic manipulation and violence amid Nepal’s political instability in the 1840s. After the assassination of Gagan Singh, a key courtier, in 1846, Junga Bahadur exploited the resulting chaos. He organized the Kot Massacre, eliminating rival nobles and courtiers in Kathmandu’s armory. He then pressured the queen to grant him absolute authority, declaring himself Prime Minister and Commander-in-Chief. His rise relied on his military background, political cunning, and the elimination of opposition, establishing the Rana regime.

7. What circumstances were responsible for the emergence of the Rana regime in Nepal? Mention them.

Several factors contributed to the emergence of the Rana regime:  

Political Instability: Factional conflicts among nobles and a power vacuum in the 1840s created an opportunity for Junga Bahadur’s takeover.  

Weak Monarchy: Young and ineffective Shah kings allowed ambitious figures like Junga Bahadur to dominate.  

Kot Massacre: This 1846 event enabled Junga Bahadur to remove rivals and consolidate power.  

British Influence: Post-Sugauli Treaty, the British supported stability in Nepal, indirectly aiding Junga Bahadur’s rise.

7. Mention the sources of family conflict of Ranas.

The Rana family faced internal conflicts due to:  

Succession Disputes: The hereditary Prime Ministership sparked rivalries among family members over leadership.  

Marriage Alliances: Political marriages often led to tensions between different family branches.  

Wealth Distribution: Unequal allocation of land and resources among Ranas caused resentment and division.

Long Answer Questions

8. What is the Peace and Friendship Treaty of 1950? Highlight the key provisions of the Peace and Friendship Treaty.

The Peace and Friendship Treaty of 1950 is a bilateral agreement between Nepal and India, signed after the fall of the Rana regime and the advent of democracy in Nepal. It aimed to foster cooperation and mutual respect between the two nations.

Key Provisions:  

Sovereignty and Integrity: Both nations agreed to respect each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.  

Non-Interference: They pledged not to interfere in each other’s internal affairs.  

Trade and Commerce: The treaty encouraged free trade and economic collaboration.  

Defense Cooperation: It allowed for mutual assistance in defense against external threats.  

Freedom of Movement: Citizens could move freely across borders without passports or visas.  

National Treatment: Nepalese in India and Indians in Nepal were granted equal rights in residence, employment, and trade.

This treaty remains a cornerstone of Nepal-India relations, though it has been debated for its perceived unequal benefits.

9 Mention the causes of the rise and fall of Rana rule in Nepal.

Causes of Rise:  

Political Chaos: Infighting among nobles and a weak monarchy in the mid-19th century enabled Junga Bahadur’s ascent.  

Kot Massacre: The 1846 massacre eliminated opposition, allowing Junga Bahadur to seize power.  

British Backing: The British, seeking a stable buffer state, supported the Ranas after the Sugauli Treaty.  

Centralized Control: The Ranas reduced the monarchy to a ceremonial role, consolidating military and administrative power.

Causes of Fall:  

Internal Rivalries: Succession disputes and family conflicts eroded unity within the Rana regime.  

Democratic Awakening: Inspired by India’s independence, anti-Rana movements gained momentum in the 1940s.  

Economic Neglect: The Ranas’ focus on personal enrichment over national development fueled public discontent.  

1950-51 Revolution: A popular uprising, backed by King Tribhuvan and India, overthrew the Ranas, ending their rule in 1951.

10. “If there was no Rana rule in Nepal, from the point of view of development, Nepal would not have been limited as a third-world country”. Present your arguments in favor of the statement.

The argument posits that the absence of Rana rule could have propelled Nepal toward greater development, avoiding its third-world status. Supporting points include:  

Economic Progress: The Ranas prioritized personal wealth, neglecting industrialization and trade. Without them, Nepal might have pursued economic policies fostering growth.  

Education Access: The Ranas limited education to elites, stunting social development. An alternative regime could have expanded education, building a skilled populace.  

Infrastructure Growth: The Ranas built palaces rather than public infrastructure. A different government might have invested in roads, railways, and utilities, boosting connectivity.  

Political Inclusion: The autocratic Rana system suppressed participation. A more democratic governance could have improved accountability and development focus.  

Global Engagement: The Ranas isolated Nepal to maintain control. Without this, Nepal might have embraced international trade and aid, enhancing its economy.  

Social Equity: While some reforms occurred, the Ranas upheld feudalism. An alternative system could have reduced inequality, supporting broader development.

In summary, the Rana regime’s self-serving policies hindered Nepal’s progress. Without their century-long rule, Nepal might have achieved greater modernization and development, potentially altering its global standing.