Political reasons behind the ambiguity of the treaty of Punakha

Abstract

The 1910 Treaty of Punakha between the British and Bhutanese remains a problem for scholars and diplomats because the agreement did not unambiguously clarify Bhutan’s status in relation to the Empire. Starting from a 1906 letter from Ugyen Wangchuck to the Viceroy of India, the paper analyzes the position of the Government of India regarding the future of the Anglo-Bhutanese relationship. With that letter, the Bhutanese seemed to accept British supremacy. Sir Louis Dane suggested proceeding in this direction. Charles Lennox Somerville Russell, however, was more cautious and asked to listen to the opinion of John Claude White. The latter interpreted the letter as “a complimentary one.” In this context, the paper takes into consideration a letter from Francis Younghusband with which Lord Minto himself agreed. According to Younghusband, keeping the friendship with Bhutan alive without intervening in national politics could positively impact the relationship with Tibet. Therefore, the paper attempts to elucidate the Treaty of Punakha by hypothesizing that the advice expressed by Younghusband motivated, at least in part, the ambiguous wording of the agreement.