KATHMANDU – King Prithvi Narayan Shah (PN Shah), the founder of Nepal, was a great political leader cum military commander, visionary, and strategist, unparalleled in contemporary South Asian history, who successfully transformed his dreams into a reality. In retrospect, it is beyond current generation’s imagination that a young king of one of the weak states then – Gorkha, could dare to embark on such an insurmountable task of unification.
He led the military unification campaign from the front by putting his own life at risk, keeping the house in order, effectively dealing with the powerful British East India Company (BEC), and laying the solid foundation for greater Nepal. His overarching theory was power maximization through territorial gains, consolidating military power, social harmony, and maintaining amity and balance with the powerful neighbors.
Prithivian Trinity:
The main mantra behind his grand success in national unification was the importance he placed on the ‘trinity’ among the leader (government), the peasants (people), and the soldier (army). The art of maintaining a continuous balance and harmony among these three elements under the protracted war situation was a key to his success. This can be termed as ´Prithivian Trinity’.
Many world leaders were forced to conclude the war due to lack of people’s support and desire. People provide youths, morale, and logistics support for sustaining protracted war efforts. Now, Russia is hiring mercenaries and North Korean troops to sustain its three-year-long war effort against Ukraine. President Putin’s inability to enlist enough Russian youths to keep the war going reflects the vitality of the people’s active support needed to sustain the war.
The important role played by the ‘Prithivian Trinity’ in the Nepal unification campaign can be traced to the work of Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz on military theory. He theorized three levels of trinity or triad, in his book ‘On War’ posthumously published in 1832.
Among them, a paradoxical trinity comprised of the tendencies of the people, the commander, and his army, and the government was the primary one. His trinity is known as Clausewitz’s Paradoxical Trinity. He argued that it as a complex adapting system as the behavior of each element in the system is unpredictable. PN Shah demonstrated art of managing behavior and inter-relationships among these elements of the trinity to keep the military campaign going. The modern theory of civil-military relations is rooted in this trinity. Similar to the European states, PN Shah has also provided an ideological notion and leadership skills for the formation of the Nepali state.
Theory of Self Reliance:
PN Shah was a proponent of a self-reliant and export-oriented economy. He ordered to prevent the entry of foreign businessmen, imposed restrictions on the wearing of foreign clothes, and then encouraged weaving cloths in the country. Thus he wanted to stop cash outflow and create jobs at home. The United States America’s ‘Make America Great Again’ (MAGA) and India´s ´Make India´ campaign also aim to enhance self-reliance and boost their domestic industries.
Had Nepal not been self-reliant on basic commodities, the seven-decade-long military campaign and embarking on war-fighting against the powerful BEC would absolutely not possible. Self-reliance strategy is one of the best survival strategies for small and weak states, particularly in situations of great power competition and rivalry for power maximization and domination. Nepal’s increasing economic and political dependency on external power (s) has put Nepal into an increasingly vulnerable situation.
‘Yam between Two-Stone’ Approach
Nepal´s geostrategic position portrayed then as a ´Yam between two-stone´ by PN Shah has not lost its relevance. However, the theory is not free from criticism. Some scholars have argued that the ‘yam theory’ is an outdated idea that actually came out of the buffer mentality, and now it is high time to transform the country into a land-linked status.
One could argue that this approach needs to be comprehended in their wider academic connotation and strategic consequences. By this approach, PN Shah meant Nepal is a ‘small kingdom’ surrounded by two ‘big and powerful Empires’ (Baadshaha) – British and Chinese, which is still the case in geopolitical sense. The ‘Yam’ obviously mean weak and vulnerable, hence prone to be squeezed from both sides for failing to put them in the right balance. This approach is still proving to be consequential.
His thoughts on the need to maintain friendship with both Empires have always been the best way forward for Nepal’s enduring survival, stability and prosperity. He, however, cautioned that the southern Empire is astute. Time has proven this as more threats and challenges have emerged from the southern direction in Nepal’s history of two and half centuries. Nepali rulers failing to understand and embrace this geopolitical reality in an evolving geopolitical context have often met with unpleasant setbacks. The fall of various political systems and lately the Shah Dynasty are great examples of this. After the end of WW II and the withdrawal of the British raj from India, yet another stone – the United States, entered as a third Empire (Third neighbor) thereby making Nepal practically situated between ‘three boulders’ (great powers) as the legacy of British Empire was carried forward by independent India. Various governments under the republic system are ostensibly struggling to balance their relations with these three great powers (stones) and maintaining domestic political stability.
Societal Centric Security Approach:
His main ideas was to unite all Hill Hindu principalities to defend their common culture, tradition, and freedom by forming a wider and united front. According to Dibya Upadesh, he portrayed Nepal as a ‘real Hindusthan’ and people were inspired to practice their traditional culture (kul dharma). He intended to make the country a ‘core state’ of Hinduism. In a way, the unification campaign had a bearing with the expanding British Empire and potential cultural dominance. Preservation of rich cultural heritage and freedom were organizing ideology of Prithivi Narayan Shah.
Maintaining harmony and unity among the diversified communities was equally important to effectively deal with the external powers in a war situation. Realizing this complex domestic situation vis-à-vis growing external threats, he crafted an idea of Char barna chhatis jaat ko sajha fulbari (common flower garden of four casts and 36 races / ethnicity) to keep the people united and focused on national dream and goals. The integrity and enduring security of his newly formed state was not possible without maintaining social harmony and unity.
Fast forward to current situation, national anthem of federal republic of Nepal carries the same social meaning and spirit with the words – Sayeun Phul ka Thunga Hami Eutai Mala Nepali (we are one garland make up of hundreds of flowers). There has been continuous efforts from different quarters to destabilize the social structure, norms and values. His societal security approach provides a foundation for internal stability, unity and survival. His ideas about national unity is reflected in Article 51 and 267 of the Constitution of Nepal.
His vision, thoughts, and strategy documented in the seminal Dibya Upadesh provide ideological foundations for state survival, economic prosperity, foreign relations, geopolitics, and societal security. A closer look and interpretation of his thoughts and strategies would provide a great lessons for policy maker and strategists.
(Dr. Silwal is a retired Major General and currently teaches in Department of International Relations and Diplomacy, Tribhuvan University)
